Strategy Your selection policy.

[Footypie32]

I always find the weekly 'Changes' threads fascinating. Everybody has a different idea on who should be dropped and who should come in and why. And, as always, this brings about heated debate. So, I thought I would start a thread and get people to voice their philosophies on selection.

A few questions to get things started:

How many games do you like to give new players, before giving them the chop? Do they need to perform immediately or do you give them a few games to settle in?

Likewise for experienced players coming back from injury.

Do Star players need to prove themselves in the reserves before getting the call up, or do they come straight back in?

Do you like to see players dropped after one poor game or do you give them a few games before they become under pressure?

Do you prefer to reward the team after a win and not make forced changes or do you think you should always be looking for options to better the side?

Do you believe in resting players or should you always be looking to play your best team?

Do you believe in 'Horses for Courses' or do you play your 'best' team no matter who the opponent?

Over to you, AFC Board...

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Good thread.

Main one for me is that form is temporary, class is permanent. Absolutely hate a revolving door.

Also think players need to be judged on their games against the best opposition, when stakes are at their highest and when games are on the line.

 

[earlsta]

Need to get as many games into Milera and Crouch, BOB, Atkins McGovern, Charlie, Hartigan, Lever, etc as soon possible and fast.

Who goes out? Who knows because everyone in the team is performing so it's a tough choice. But we need to make the decision as to where we are taking this list. Ideally we want Walker, Sloane, Talia, Eddie and Jacobs to be there when we challenge for a flag.

We need to get as many games into the players that we think will be invaluable to us during our flag tilt, I'd include Lyons in there too because he's very good depth. I'd say rotate the players around, Knight has to get games too. Enable Thommo to have a rest for CEY or Lyons etc, not against top 4 teams though.

Oh and then there's Menzel, Gore and Hampton too, lol. Our depth in the midfield/HBF is pretty flash right now. Hampton is one I'm keen on, hes a jet and if Nathan Wilson (who?) (gun 65m drop punts hbf) wasn't on GWS's list then Hampton would have played a lot more, absolute smooth mover but needs to work on his kicking efficiency.. If he improves that then look out because Curtly will turn heads.

In the end, premierships aren't really won with 22 players, it needs a full squad to play their role, 28-30 players will need to play their role. But we need to dump games into our youngsters fast because they need the important (total games) experience to stand up in massive finals games, we can't afford to wait until Eddies 33-34 and slowing down.

 

[Kickin_Goals]

Well I would find a whipping boy or two and rail on until they get dropped celebrate a few weeks before finding a new one and so on and so on until profit.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Good idea, it will bring out the inner coach in a few.

My policy is entirely flexible depending on the condition of the squad. Ultimately the aim at all times is to select the best 22.

Do Star players need to prove themselves in the reserves before getting the call up, or do they come straight back in?
If its only been two to three weeks out maximum then yes they should come back in. A star player is a proven performer. If its been longer and the team has been performing alright on the field I do think a star player needs to just get that run in the legs so a game or two in the rezzies is not a bad thing. For example if Tex has a month out and the Crows are winning then he should have a run in the rezzies. The exception to this obviously whether the squad has other injuries, depth is an issue and we need to role the dice for a win as results have not gone our way.

Do you like to see players dropped after one poor game or do you give them a few games before they become under pressure?
If the players are injured and players aren't performing in the rezzies to demand a spot then yes, players should be given every chance to redeem a bad game. However if injuries are minimal, depth of the squad is looking good and players are performing in the rezzies then unfortunately team balance and what players can bring to the table, supersedes the injustice of being dropped after one bad game. This is flexible based on the goal of the squad, a young player needs game time and dropping them in a rebuilding faze is not a smart strategy.

Do you prefer to reward the team after a win and not make forced changes or do you think you should always be looking for options to better the side?
If the option is available to make the team better via the inclusion of a star player or horses for courses based on the next opponent should always be a consideration. If you consistently just reward a side that wins then its a recipe to be bitten on the arse by complacency. However, morale is an issue and changes from winning sides need to be made correctly.

Do you believe in resting players or should you always be looking to play your best team?
Resting players is a recipe for disaster if not done correctly. The only time it can be done with any confidence is a full squad to select from IMO. Unless players are struggling to meet KPI's via their running patterns on a GPS or have been carrying a faint injury I see no need to rest players. Its just flirting with form.

Do you believe in 'Horses for Courses' or do you play your 'best' team no matter who the opponent?
If you have a full squad to select from its almost mismanagement to not take a horses for courses approach sometimes. Their usually is just one top team that is either very small or very tall. In some cases its wise to take an extra running player in or take in an extra tall. If injuries prevent that approach then its best available 22 at all times.

 

[Scorpus]

Main one for me is that form is temporary, class is permanent. Absolutely hate a revolving door.

Totally agree. We need to get our best players in the side and get as many games into them as possible.

I also think a younger player should be afforded more chances to 'prove themselves' than a senior player, so underperforming younger players should stay in the side for a few games more than a senior player should.

I don't like the idea of dropping an average player (eg. Cheney) for someone that doesn't play that role or position (eg. Milera or Henderson) even if the person coming in is a 'better player'

 

[Scorpus]

Do Star players need to prove themselves in the reserves before getting the call up, or do they come straight back in?

Do you like to see players dropped after one poor game or do you give them a few games before they become under pressure?

Do you prefer to reward the team after a win and not make forced changes or do you think you should always be looking for options to better the side?

Do you believe in resting players or should you always be looking to play your best team?

Do you believe in 'Horses for Courses' or do you play your 'best' team no matter who the opponent?

Over to you, AFC Board...

Do Star players need to prove themselves in the reserves before getting the call up, or do they come straight back in?
Star players should come straight back in unless they've been out for 6+ weeks

Do you like to see players dropped after one poor game or do you give them a few games before they become under pressure?
Players should stay in the team for a few matches after a poor game, unless they have a history of inconsistency or poor performances.

Do you prefer to reward the team after a win and not make forced changes or do you think you should always be looking for options to better the side?
You should play the best team possible, so if a star player was out injured, they should come back in even if they are replacing someone who was decent in a win.

Do you believe in resting players or should you always be looking to play your best team?
Don't rest players under any circumstances. If they're injured, they don't play. Otherwise they play.

Do you believe in 'Horses for Courses' or do you play your 'best' team no matter who the opponent?
Always play the best team and rely on your structures to win. I'd only add or remove one key defender in the event that a team is very short (eg. one key forward) or very tall (eg. 3-4 key forwards).

 

[fabs33]

How many games do you like to give new players, before giving them the chop? Do they need to perform immediately or do you give them a few games to settle in?

I believe in setting expectations that reflect the age and experience of players. The older they are and the more experience they have, the more I expect from their performances. The only exception I make is for the players over 30 who have given the club great service, and even then I believe there is a minimum standard that even they have to uphold. So for young players still starting I have a great deal of tolerance for their inconsistency and the mistakes they make. On the other hand guys who have been around for a while and give us inconsistent average performances at the best of times I have no tolerance for, guys like VB for example.

As for the other stuff I think it varies on the individual's talent and fitness, who else is competing for the same position, and who we're facing.

 

[Anzacpaul]

At the moment, my main strategy is not wanting to play people who I don't think add to the team, or where I think someone else could be doing an equal job with potential to be better.

For example DMack. Yes I know he's been seen with the footy a lot more the last few weeks, but I don't think anyone would deny that he's lucky to have played 150 games of AFL football. Brouch should come back in this week, and I don't really feel like anyone else should be dropped for any other reason then I posted above, which for me means Mackay goes for him. Lyons has shown a bit and although i'd rather Milera or Cameron in for him, I'm willing to give him a go for a bit longer as he hasn't spudded it up, and I'd probably rather those two a bit further up the ground.

It's a good problem to have when you have talent waiting in the 2's and is often the cause of great argument as everyone has a different opinion on what would improve the side

 

[MRB37]

At the moment, my main strategy is not wanting to play people who I don't think add to the team, or where I think someone else could be doing an equal job with potential to be better.

For example DMack. Yes I know he's been seen with the footy a lot more the last few weeks, but I don't think anyone would deny that he's lucky to have played 150 games of AFL football. Brouch should come back in this week, and I don't really feel like anyone else should be dropped for any other reason then I posted above, which for me means Mackay goes for him. Lyons has shown a bit and although i'd rather Milera or Cameron in for him, I'm willing to give him a go for a bit longer as he hasn't spudded it up, and I'd probably rather those two a bit further up the ground.

It's a good problem to have when you have talent waiting in the 2's and is often the cause of great argument as everyone has a different opinion on what would improve the side

The problem with dropping D-Mac is he's often leading the team for pressure acts around the middle of the ground. Replacing him means we really need someone with a bit of quickness and hardness to still do that, which is where Charlie needs to come in, I think.

 

[Bovo]

My selection philosophy is simple.
1 - Assess the last few games and how each of the players have contributed. You can't always drop a player who has had a single bad game because everyone has one from time to time. When a player consistently does not make the grade then you need to look at change.
2 - Look at how the team is playing in the SANFL. Similarly it needs to be over a few games. 1 amazing game out of four shows potential but not consistency. Replacements should only occur if player in SANFL > player who needs to be dropped....otherwise it is no more than changing the deck chairs on the titanic.
3 - Look at who we are playing next. Compare the risk of being able to play your game plan against the risk of needing to get the right match ups. Sometimes worrying about the opposition too much takes away from what we may want to do and negatively affects our game. Likewise ignoring an obvious concern can be just as costly.
4 - Always pick to win games. Sounds silly but in reality we can all get caught up on players we want in or want out. This definitely allows many to lose sight of our goal. A winning team brings about a winning culture which is quite contagious.
5 - If finals are not realistic, look to the future and blood the guys that will make the game plan a reality.

 

[FR0GGY]

Hide VB's magnet somewhere just before selection meeting.

 

[1970crow]

The problem with dropping D-Mac is he's often leading the team for pressure acts around the middle of the ground. Replacing him means we really need someone with a bit of quickness and hardness to still do that, which is where Charlie needs to come in, I think.

Is Dmac's role at the stoppage to be like a goal keeper to ensure that the opposition don't clear the area straight throught the contest under no pressure. He gets very little ball in there but I'm not convinced he's meant to. It's almost like we back our ball winners to go head to head with an extra opponent hunting the ball and have Mackay ensuring pressure us applied if we they try and cut through us. I probably need to watch a couple of replays though, just something I thought made sense in real time.

On the OP, my selection policy is based on a premiership being more valuable than a few extra games won over the course of 3-4 years. To that end a talented kid or a player yet to reach their peak gets a game ahead of those who have proven that their average output isn't clearly ahead of the less experienced player. If we drop a couple of games by a few points because these 1 or 2 players gave us 10% less than a VB or Wright, then I'm not convinced that matters in the long run.

On returning from injury, I think it very much depends on the injury and duration. There's no simple answer, but I don't think that any player must return via SANFL, although a tune up and a bit of match conditioning shouldn't be seen as a knock on even the best of our squad.

Less experienced players should be given greater latitude than experienced guys to find a bit of touch if things aren't exactly going their way. But confidence is a key issue, so we need to trust the coaches to know when enough us enough.

I think we should always be looking to improve the team regardless of last weeks result. To be a genuine contender we need unlucky players missing out, Lyons for B Crouch this week is a perfect example. A 3 point loss can be a more powerful performance than an 8 goal win. I think this is sometimes forgotten.

Players should be rested if it's going to improve their form for a period following their breather. It's part of the grand plan and seeing a premiership as the bigger picture than a few % points. Obviously it depends on the opposition and the form of the replacement player, but if you can't beat a team near the bottom at home because you've rested a couple of guys, then you'd need to be asking yourself how serious a chance you were at winning the flag in the first place. We've been bereft of genuine long term thinking in our footy dept and especially at selection for years.

 

[1970crow]

Hide VB's magnet somewhere just before selection meeting.

I'm predicting you won't be happy this week.

 

[dogs105]

The problem with dropping D-Mac is he's often leading the team for pressure acts around the middle of the ground. Replacing him means we really need someone with a bit of quickness and hardness to still do that, which is where Charlie needs to come in, I think.

Pressure acts only count as relevant if you like the player.....

 

[CIDA]

I feel like another simple mantra is that if they're not going to push you to your next premiership, they shouldn't be in the 22.

 

[GreyCrow]

How many games do you like to give new players, before giving them the chop? Do they need to perform immediately or do you give them a few games to settle in?

3 at a minimum unless they are really stinking it up.

Likewise for experienced players coming back from injury.

Subject to how long they are out injured. ie Brad Crouch I would bring back in after 2 weeks. This current stint concerns me as I also think his body is catching up , so would have played him in the SANFL. Surface plays a small part of my thinking ie hard grounds or large grounds. But ultimately Thompson has a hand injury he is straight in

Do Star players need to prove themselves in the reserves before getting the call up, or do they come straight back in?

See above

Do you like to see players dropped after one poor game or do you give them a few games before they become under pressure?

Depends on the experience and class of the player. Class is subjective but experience is a body of work already shown. So you should know with an experienced player if it is a blip or a slide off the cliff. If it is a less experienced player but shows class I would persist. If it is a player I designate as fill in then if there is a fill in ready then yes I would consider it.

Do you prefer to reward the team after a win and not make forced changes or do you think you should always be looking for options to better the side?

Reward

Do you believe in resting players or should you always be looking to play your best team?

I think there can come a time when someone who is carrying a niggler may be able to be rested against an opposition team that all your instincts say should be beaten ie I would have dropped Dangerfield for the Melbourne game last year as it was obvious he was injured , this game led into the bye so he would have had 2 weeks rest.

Do you believe in 'Horses for Courses' or do you play your 'best' team no matter who the opponent?

Column A Column B. Someone posted the Hawthorn strategy of playing the system , the system if it is strong enough should beat anyone and cover any losses of players ie another soldier up . I think you play your best team 90% of games. There will be one or 2 players brought in at times to play against certain teams. This also covers whether I play injured players on a certain ground or at a certain time