Coach Men's Senior Coach: Brad Scott

[HirdyLannister]

This isn't a coach problem since these white flag waving second half of the season performance has been happening under the last three coaches.

It's time for us not to sack a coach and be ruthless at the club, if not we'll be stuck in pergatory.

 

[Nicholas61]

Nervous that he may be having the final say in upcoming drafts.

 

[Zephyr Effekt]

Not a fan of his versatility/flexibility mantra on development.

Has the whole jack of all trades master of none vibe to it.

 

[yodellinhank]

It is certainly a judgment week for sure. Up until recently I could go along with him backing the senior guys and only having a small sample of young players because we where winning games and playing with effort for most of the games even if the execution has not been that flash. It is actually fork in the road time. He backed them again this week hoping to get a response and it ended up being a big pile of shit. Pressure is now on him.

I have been prepared to wait and see. For me it has always been about what he does at the end of this year now they have had a year to look at the football department and a year to start working on what they have seen as being wrong as a whole but the time is here . He has backed the old warriors . He has had the best part of a season to give the older blokes on the list a go and see where they are at. It is time to make a statement.

I know most think it is a load of crap that match sim is a big part of selection but when I have watched it you do learn a few things. When Wright or Caddy beat Hayes in match sim then you sort of get why he is not getting a run at it. When Bryan can not beat Goldstien in one on one contests or the tap work you see what they see. When Menzie has more impact around the footy than either Davey . That is what has been happening. Roberts being pulled aside to run through what he should be doing most match sims.

This is what happens behind the scenes. You could say that they should just bite the bullet and see at some stage but if you can not beat blokes on our list in a specific role then what can I say. The VFL has been a shit fight of errors most of the season as well so it is hard to see system.

The time has come. They have a number of players on long term deals who are not producing. They have several veterans who need to be put out to pasture and they need their shit together before we get to the Tasmanian drafts. It is now make or break for Scott / McPherson / Rosa and Vozzo . If they have a poor draft / fa / trade period this year we will be ****ed for another 8 years. Maye more.

And I fear they'll continue to sit on their hands this off season. Consolidate what we've got, 8 year plan.

 

[FootyGuru]

We also must remember it’s a coaches job to win games. It’s on the list management to set the direction of the club. If there are available more senior guys available in must win games they will get picked. A coaches mindset changes when current season is done, developing younger guys who can win games next season then comes into play. I’m not sure anyone at the club thinks this season is done.

 

[jdstorm]

basing selection on match sim seems insane to me.

It defines the criteria for playing afl only needing to be margainally better then Essendons VFL side which isn’t even a good VFL team.

That’s different to the start of the season where the baseline to be selected was effort.

This change in philosophies seems to perfectly mirror the back half fade-out.

Edit: Also given Essendon hasn’t won a final in 20 years just assuming seniority makes someone more likely to help you win football games is I think very naive.

 

[ant555]

And I fear they'll continue to sit on their hands this off season. Consolidate what we've got, 8 year plan.

Maybe and we will have another failed build but it will not be part of the last 4 failed builds where there where always common denominators involved. This will be a totally fresh **** up.

 

[ant555]

basing selection on match sim seems insane to me.

It defines the criteria for playing afl only needing to be margainally better then Essendons VFL side which isn’t even a good VFL team.

That’s different to the start of the season where the baseline to be selected was effort.

This change in philosophies seems to perfectly mirror the back half fade-out.

It is a part of selection and like I said depends where you are at in your journey . Not all. Part.
Are you telling me that if Bryan can not beat Goldstein in any part of the game in match sim it should not be a factor in Bryan not getting a game until he can do more. Same with Hayes struggling to beat Peter Wright despite Hayes knowing the game plan and the fact that Wright is so far out of form that some bloke in the crowd could nearly beat him should not be a factor ?

You can not build a reliable system with players just doing their own thing either. That would be selecting the team based on the stats page. I have heard Hodge talk about the early Clarkson days where the young blokes simply had to get on board with the game plan . How many Richmond and Melbourne supporters continually questioned the selections and coach in the 5 or 6 years leading into their eventual success ?
This is not just my opinion. It has come from talking to many coaches of various levels . The common thing has been you start with players who can understand the game plan and then you move in better players who understand the game plan.

You will get situations where there will be players who struggle because they are not up to it output wise but it is the starting point.

Not saying they have got all the selections right. They have not and now we are at a stage where we have lost 5 of the last 7 and the effort and just gone out the window things change a bit .

 

[jmoo wan]

I have not been involved with high performance in football so it could be different but I have played, coached and managed high performance in two different sports (basketball and ultimate frisbee) and match sim is not a reliable indicator of match performance and never has been.

can you do match sim in ultimate frisbee?

 

[ant555]

I have not been involved with high performance in football so it could be different but I have played, coached and managed high performance in two different sports (basketball and ultimate frisbee) and match sim is not a reliable indicator of match performance and never has been.

How many blokes do you need on the same page to win at basketball or frisbee ? I am not saying match sim is the be all and end all but when you want to start something from scratch it is more of a factor than later on when you have the system and leadership bedded down to an extent. How would your basketball go if even 3 blokes on your roster could not play the way you wanted them to for whatever reason ? Football you are looking at trying to get 18 blokes on the field to work in the same way for as long as possible .

 

[Nifft]

can you do match sim in ultimate frisbee?

 

[ghostdog]

https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/07/...ind-brad-scotts-bombers-ultimate-humiliation/

Footy Fix: The glaring stats and damning coaching blunders behind Brad Scott's Bombers' ultimate humiliation​

Tim Miller​

What in God’s name was that?​

​

Going into their clash with St Kilda, Essendon’s finals hopes were already hanging on a razor-thin wire.​

​

Two and a half hours later, that wire had been slashed to ribbons and the Bombers sent plummeting into the abyss – and in about as embarrassing, undignifying fashion as it is possible to do so.​

​

At the time of writing, they remain in the eight – though any notion that they will remain that way for much longer, even if results do go their way on Sunday, is a foolhardy one. For all they achieved in the first half of the season, this is not a side worthy of September action.​

​

In many ways, this was a capitulation greater than any of the losses the Dons endured at the end of last year to crash out of finals contention. Some of those losses, including an infamous one against GWS, were bigger; but none had quite as much on the line, or had victory quite as achievable, as this one. Inconceivable as it may seem to look at the scoreboard, the Bombers were favourites for this game, and relatively comfortable ones.​

​

It’s among the most insipid performances I’ve seen from a team for whom the stakes could scarcely have been higher.​

​

Deciphering what went wrong is an easy task – in one word, everything – but what’s more eye-opening is how it went wrong. And that answer lies somewhat with the Saints, who were damaging, energetic, tactically shrewd and excellently coached by Ross Lyon to ruthlessly target all their opposition’s weaknesses; but primarily, it lies in the Bombers, their shortcomings, Brad Scott’s inability to paper over them, and just like for the last two decades, how quickly the whole facade falls apart at the slightest provocation.​

​

Let’s start with the obvious one: controlling the football. Scott’s Bombers in 2024 have remained a high-marking team; only St Kilda took more than them in 2023, and this year they ranked fourth heading into the round. This leads to an equally high disposal count, ranking fifth for disposals in 2023 and outright first 12 months later.​

​

Most of these touches come in the back half, where the Bombers are patient, content to shift the ball from side to side, and regularly have their best midfielders – read: Zach Merrett – pushing into space around half-back to take pressure-relieving marks and retain possession. Once opportunity strikes, they go and they go fast: but they are confident enough in their ball use to bide their time, sometimes for frustratingly long period.​

​

The key difference this year, though – or at least, what the key difference was until recently – has been the Bombers’ shifts in denying the opposition possession. In 2023, Dons games were uniformly high-mark, high-disposal matches, meaning they sat tenth for disposal differential and eighth in marks. This year, that was up to second and third.​

​

The answer is partly pressure, partly a higher and more aggressive press, facilitated by the arrival and early-season impact of Jade Gresham as a sprightly half-forward designed to make defenders nervous, and partly more support in midfield for Merrett. In 2023, just three Bombers on-ballers – Merrett, Darcy Parish and (from limited games) Will Setterfield – averaged more than 20 disposals a game. 12 months on, Jye Caldwell and Sam Durham have been added to that trio, with Caldwell an in-and-under, hard-tackling machine and Durham an eye-catchingly explosive attacking stoppage force good enough defensively to tag some of the game’s biggest stars and hurt them offensively.​

​

All this has meant a drastic reduction in how much ball the opposition gets, and with Essendon’s numbers still high, they can have an overwhelming majority of time in possession, crucial given their forward line is still questionable and their backline increasingly leaky. In 2023, 18 times in 23 games they conceded more than 350 disposals; they did it just nine in their first 18 games this season before St Kilda, for the first time in 2024, put 400 on them on Saturday.​

​

It’s a similar story with marks: 14 times in 2023 the Bombers gave up more than 100 marks, down to just three before their Saints horror show.​

​

It’s worth mentioning all this because when Scott said, to much derision from Bombers fans, that his team are ‘infinitely better’ in 2024 than 2023, he’s right.​

​

The problem, though, is twofold: one, to play in this way requires a level of fitness in ensuring defensive coverage that the Bombers seem to still lack, and two, that there’s no Plan B if things go against them.​

​

Against the Saints on Saturday, the Bombers actually won both the clearance and the inside 50 count: but their eagerness to handball their way out of trouble from stoppages and eventually emerge into space was shut down by the Saints’ fierce pressure, and all too often they bombed aimlessly to a forward line whose two leading goalkickers this year are the mid-sized lead-up markers Kyle Langford and Jake Stringer.​

​

This is not a forward line like North Melbourne’s when Scott was in charge during their two preliminary finals a decade ago, when there was Ben Brown, Drew Petrie and Jarrad Waite to kick to in such situations: Peter Wright is woefully out of form, and all the experiment with Sam Draper and Todd Goldstein as twin rucks with one serving as a makeshift key tall is proved that neither are cut out for it.​

​

Until recently, the Bombers overcame that deficiency by being more targeted with their kicks, looking to hit leading forwards rather than bomb aimlessly: this year, Langford is the AFL leader for marks on the lead. That’s mostly why, despite minimal aerial presence, they sat fifth in the AFL after Round 19 for marks inside 50.​

​

To defend these long, aimless bombs was manna from heaven for the Saints: Josh Battle did as he pleased and plucked four intercept marks, Callum Wilkie two to go with four spoils, as St Kilda allowed Essendon just seven marks inside 50 all match – three during the 20-minute second quarter window in which the Bombers had their only period of control.​

​

Then, when the ball was inevitably turned over, the Bombers looked for all the world like a team knackered. Where once this team fiercely guarded its territory, ranking fourth-best in the league for inside 50 differential (behind, it’s worth noting, three of the league’s most powerful midfields in Brisbane, Sydney and the Western Bulldogs), this side was simply incapable of guarding space; nor doing anything to restrict the Saints’ most damaging ball-users.​

​

The mark numbers are staggering: the Saints took 149 of them at Marvel Stadium, the third-highest number for the season behind Brisbane (twice!) – 129 of them were contested. ​

​

And as if you needed more proof that once the ball was out of their control they couldn’t win it back, the Saints scored nine of their goals directly from intercepts – and early in the last quarter, had won 26 intercept possessions in their defensive 50, with precisely zero turnovers from them.​

​

Across the first 13 rounds of the season, the Bombers scored an entirely reasonable 36 points fewer than their opposition from turnovers – their strength at scoring from stoppages covered that weakness, while their flaky, Jordan Ridley-less defence justified it.​

​

But with Ridley back, that number swelled to -36 across the five weeks preceding Saturday’s horror show, and must have swelled even more now.​

​

Knowing their best bet against the Bombers’ fragile backline was to move the ball quickly and precisely, the Saints experimented with Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera playing much higher up the ground than usual – his four inside 50s were second-most for the Saints behind Mitch Owens. And going at 87.1 per cent disposal efficiency and having a hand in six scores, that move paid dividends.​

​

But the Bombers had no plan to stop him – with Matt Guelfi, their best defensive forward, out injured, the Dons had no one, and used no one, to put the clamps on the Saints’ most dangerous players.​

​

Individually, the effort wasn’t there either: if someone can explain why Essendon thought it was fine to leave Wanganeen-Milera on his own in an acre of space right on 50 in this incident, let me hear it.​

​

That’s where the lack of a plan B comes in: the Bombers have, over the past month and a half, had no recourse in stopping the opposition on a run.​

​

Geelong devastated them in a last-quarter rout after three tough quarters; Adelaide piled on nine goals in a row in the second term last week; Melbourne booted five goals in 12 minutes to kill a close match at the MCG.​

​

Now that the Saints have done the same, it’s about time to ask the question of Brad Scott what his fallback is; it doesn’t have to be a shifting of the magnets, but it does have to be something tactical to try and stop a rot.​

​

His team can be asked the same questions, too. Where was the Essendon Edge, the hard-nosed, uncompromising aggression that the Dons employed earlier in the season, and which set the tone for opponents to expect a hard and tough contest against them? Not to say that a heavy bump on Jack Steele or picking a fight with Wanganeen-Milera would have solved anything, but it would at least have given St Kilda something to think about, and showed them that the Dons weren’t just going to sit back and take being walked all over.​

​

All this is why the Bombers conceded 20 marks inside 50 to the Saints – add to that some uncharacteristic accuracy in front of goal from Ross Lyon’s team, and you’ve got all the ingredients for a flogging.​

​

The list goes on and on of the Bombers’ flaws that were ruthlessly exposed by St Kilda.​

​

Having remade a powerful midfield with the addition of Caldwell and Durham to provide pace and toughness previously hard to come by in a Dons on-ball brigade, Darcy Parish’s return in the same team as Dylan Shiel muddled the mix again. Neither are quick, nor great users; the result was that Durham, arguably behind only Merrett as the Bombers’ best midfielder this year, attended a third of the game’s centre bounces, as did Caldwell.​

​

Jake Stringer attended more than two-thirds, a move that reeked of desperation considering it was about double the attendance rate he’s had over the last month and a half: an injection of speed was certainly what the Dons needed, but with so many midfield options ineffective elsewhere it only lessened the impact actually winning a clearance could have.​

​

The lack of pressure was evident – in the 12 minutes it took the Saints to blow the game to smithereens in the third quarter, the pressure rating read 238-137. You don’t need me to tell you which team was which.​

​

Is it fatigue? Is it lack of leg speed? Is it plain and simple giving up? Everyone has a different opinion; but what can’t be denied is that Bombers were simply outworked, outhunted, outrun and outcoached on a disastrous Saturday afternoon.​

​

And with their season all but shot, just one question remains: where on Earth do Essendon go now?​

https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/07/...ind-brad-scotts-bombers-ultimate-humiliation/

Excellent analysis.

 

[Vindicater]

can you do match sim in ultimate frisbee?

Yep. You primarily play in lines (offence and defence the traditional format) against opposition so your match sim is line against line in practice.

 

[jdstorm]

It is a part of selection and like I said depends where you are at in your journey . Not all. Part.
Are you telling me that if Bryan can not beat Goldstein in any part of the game in match sim it should not be a factor in Bryan not getting a game until he can do more. Same with Hayes struggling to beat Peter Wright despite Hayes knowing the game plan and the fact that Wright is so far out of form that some bloke in the crowd could nearly beat him should not be a factor ?

You can not build a reliable system with players just doing their own thing either. That would be selecting the team based on the stats page. I have heard Hodge talk about the early Clarkson days where the young blokes simply had to get on board with the game plan . How many Richmond and Melbourne supporters continually questioned the selections and coach in the 5 or 6 years leading into their eventual success ?
This is not just my opinion. It has come from talking to many coaches of various levels . The common thing has been you start with players who can understand the game plan and then you move in better players who understand the game plan.

You will get situations where there will be players who struggle because they are not up to it output wise but it is the starting point.

Not saying they have got all the selections right. They have not and now we are at a stage where we have lost 5 of the last 7 and the effort and just gone out the window things change a bit .

I think you can 100% select a team based on the stats page and do very well.

The trick is working out what stats to read and what stats matter.

if your doing stats correctly the stats should tell you if players are filling/understanding their roles within the system.

Then judging a player’s effectiveness based on how they performed as a function of the system.

I know Essendon and Carlton were both hiring a data scientist 2 years ago to head up/be their data team. Which previously by the content of the job adds seemed non existent roles.

Scott likes to be data driven by how he talks in his pressers but the whole data science job is about being someone who is curious and asks the right questions. Essendon clearly isn’t doing that

 

[ant555]

https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/07/...ind-brad-scotts-bombers-ultimate-humiliation/

Footy Fix: The glaring stats and damning coaching blunders behind Brad Scott's Bombers' ultimate humiliation​

Tim Miller​

What in God’s name was that?​

​

Going into their clash with St Kilda, Essendon’s finals hopes were already hanging on a razor-thin wire.​

​

Two and a half hours later, that wire had been slashed to ribbons and the Bombers sent plummeting into the abyss – and in about as embarrassing, undignifying fashion as it is possible to do so.​

​

At the time of writing, they remain in the eight – though any notion that they will remain that way for much longer, even if results do go their way on Sunday, is a foolhardy one. For all they achieved in the first half of the season, this is not a side worthy of September action.​

​

In many ways, this was a capitulation greater than any of the losses the Dons endured at the end of last year to crash out of finals contention. Some of those losses, including an infamous one against GWS, were bigger; but none had quite as much on the line, or had victory quite as achievable, as this one. Inconceivable as it may seem to look at the scoreboard, the Bombers were favourites for this game, and relatively comfortable ones.​

​

It’s among the most insipid performances I’ve seen from a team for whom the stakes could scarcely have been higher.​

​

Deciphering what went wrong is an easy task – in one word, everything – but what’s more eye-opening is how it went wrong. And that answer lies somewhat with the Saints, who were damaging, energetic, tactically shrewd and excellently coached by Ross Lyon to ruthlessly target all their opposition’s weaknesses; but primarily, it lies in the Bombers, their shortcomings, Brad Scott’s inability to paper over them, and just like for the last two decades, how quickly the whole facade falls apart at the slightest provocation.​

​

Let’s start with the obvious one: controlling the football. Scott’s Bombers in 2024 have remained a high-marking team; only St Kilda took more than them in 2023, and this year they ranked fourth heading into the round. This leads to an equally high disposal count, ranking fifth for disposals in 2023 and outright first 12 months later.​

​

Most of these touches come in the back half, where the Bombers are patient, content to shift the ball from side to side, and regularly have their best midfielders – read: Zach Merrett – pushing into space around half-back to take pressure-relieving marks and retain possession. Once opportunity strikes, they go and they go fast: but they are confident enough in their ball use to bide their time, sometimes for frustratingly long period.​

​

The key difference this year, though – or at least, what the key difference was until recently – has been the Bombers’ shifts in denying the opposition possession. In 2023, Dons games were uniformly high-mark, high-disposal matches, meaning they sat tenth for disposal differential and eighth in marks. This year, that was up to second and third.​

​

The answer is partly pressure, partly a higher and more aggressive press, facilitated by the arrival and early-season impact of Jade Gresham as a sprightly half-forward designed to make defenders nervous, and partly more support in midfield for Merrett. In 2023, just three Bombers on-ballers – Merrett, Darcy Parish and (from limited games) Will Setterfield – averaged more than 20 disposals a game. 12 months on, Jye Caldwell and Sam Durham have been added to that trio, with Caldwell an in-and-under, hard-tackling machine and Durham an eye-catchingly explosive attacking stoppage force good enough defensively to tag some of the game’s biggest stars and hurt them offensively.​

​

All this has meant a drastic reduction in how much ball the opposition gets, and with Essendon’s numbers still high, they can have an overwhelming majority of time in possession, crucial given their forward line is still questionable and their backline increasingly leaky. In 2023, 18 times in 23 games they conceded more than 350 disposals; they did it just nine in their first 18 games this season before St Kilda, for the first time in 2024, put 400 on them on Saturday.​

​

It’s a similar story with marks: 14 times in 2023 the Bombers gave up more than 100 marks, down to just three before their Saints horror show.​

​

It’s worth mentioning all this because when Scott said, to much derision from Bombers fans, that his team are ‘infinitely better’ in 2024 than 2023, he’s right.​

​

The problem, though, is twofold: one, to play in this way requires a level of fitness in ensuring defensive coverage that the Bombers seem to still lack, and two, that there’s no Plan B if things go against them.​

​

Against the Saints on Saturday, the Bombers actually won both the clearance and the inside 50 count: but their eagerness to handball their way out of trouble from stoppages and eventually emerge into space was shut down by the Saints’ fierce pressure, and all too often they bombed aimlessly to a forward line whose two leading goalkickers this year are the mid-sized lead-up markers Kyle Langford and Jake Stringer.​

​

This is not a forward line like North Melbourne’s when Scott was in charge during their two preliminary finals a decade ago, when there was Ben Brown, Drew Petrie and Jarrad Waite to kick to in such situations: Peter Wright is woefully out of form, and all the experiment with Sam Draper and Todd Goldstein as twin rucks with one serving as a makeshift key tall is proved that neither are cut out for it.​

​

Until recently, the Bombers overcame that deficiency by being more targeted with their kicks, looking to hit leading forwards rather than bomb aimlessly: this year, Langford is the AFL leader for marks on the lead. That’s mostly why, despite minimal aerial presence, they sat fifth in the AFL after Round 19 for marks inside 50.​

​

To defend these long, aimless bombs was manna from heaven for the Saints: Josh Battle did as he pleased and plucked four intercept marks, Callum Wilkie two to go with four spoils, as St Kilda allowed Essendon just seven marks inside 50 all match – three during the 20-minute second quarter window in which the Bombers had their only period of control.​

​

Then, when the ball was inevitably turned over, the Bombers looked for all the world like a team knackered. Where once this team fiercely guarded its territory, ranking fourth-best in the league for inside 50 differential (behind, it’s worth noting, three of the league’s most powerful midfields in Brisbane, Sydney and the Western Bulldogs), this side was simply incapable of guarding space; nor doing anything to restrict the Saints’ most damaging ball-users.​

​

The mark numbers are staggering: the Saints took 149 of them at Marvel Stadium, the third-highest number for the season behind Brisbane (twice!) – 129 of them were contested. ​

​

And as if you needed more proof that once the ball was out of their control they couldn’t win it back, the Saints scored nine of their goals directly from intercepts – and early in the last quarter, had won 26 intercept possessions in their defensive 50, with precisely zero turnovers from them.​

​

Across the first 13 rounds of the season, the Bombers scored an entirely reasonable 36 points fewer than their opposition from turnovers – their strength at scoring from stoppages covered that weakness, while their flaky, Jordan Ridley-less defence justified it.​

​

But with Ridley back, that number swelled to -36 across the five weeks preceding Saturday’s horror show, and must have swelled even more now.​

​

Knowing their best bet against the Bombers’ fragile backline was to move the ball quickly and precisely, the Saints experimented with Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera playing much higher up the ground than usual – his four inside 50s were second-most for the Saints behind Mitch Owens. And going at 87.1 per cent disposal efficiency and having a hand in six scores, that move paid dividends.​

​

But the Bombers had no plan to stop him – with Matt Guelfi, their best defensive forward, out injured, the Dons had no one, and used no one, to put the clamps on the Saints’ most dangerous players.​

​

Individually, the effort wasn’t there either: if someone can explain why Essendon thought it was fine to leave Wanganeen-Milera on his own in an acre of space right on 50 in this incident, let me hear it.​

​

That’s where the lack of a plan B comes in: the Bombers have, over the past month and a half, had no recourse in stopping the opposition on a run.​

​

Geelong devastated them in a last-quarter rout after three tough quarters; Adelaide piled on nine goals in a row in the second term last week; Melbourne booted five goals in 12 minutes to kill a close match at the MCG.​

​

Now that the Saints have done the same, it’s about time to ask the question of Brad Scott what his fallback is; it doesn’t have to be a shifting of the magnets, but it does have to be something tactical to try and stop a rot.​

​

His team can be asked the same questions, too. Where was the Essendon Edge, the hard-nosed, uncompromising aggression that the Dons employed earlier in the season, and which set the tone for opponents to expect a hard and tough contest against them? Not to say that a heavy bump on Jack Steele or picking a fight with Wanganeen-Milera would have solved anything, but it would at least have given St Kilda something to think about, and showed them that the Dons weren’t just going to sit back and take being walked all over.​

​

All this is why the Bombers conceded 20 marks inside 50 to the Saints – add to that some uncharacteristic accuracy in front of goal from Ross Lyon’s team, and you’ve got all the ingredients for a flogging.​

​

The list goes on and on of the Bombers’ flaws that were ruthlessly exposed by St Kilda.​

​

Having remade a powerful midfield with the addition of Caldwell and Durham to provide pace and toughness previously hard to come by in a Dons on-ball brigade, Darcy Parish’s return in the same team as Dylan Shiel muddled the mix again. Neither are quick, nor great users; the result was that Durham, arguably behind only Merrett as the Bombers’ best midfielder this year, attended a third of the game’s centre bounces, as did Caldwell.​

​

Jake Stringer attended more than two-thirds, a move that reeked of desperation considering it was about double the attendance rate he’s had over the last month and a half: an injection of speed was certainly what the Dons needed, but with so many midfield options ineffective elsewhere it only lessened the impact actually winning a clearance could have.​

​

The lack of pressure was evident – in the 12 minutes it took the Saints to blow the game to smithereens in the third quarter, the pressure rating read 238-137. You don’t need me to tell you which team was which.​

​

Is it fatigue? Is it lack of leg speed? Is it plain and simple giving up? Everyone has a different opinion; but what can’t be denied is that Bombers were simply outworked, outhunted, outrun and outcoached on a disastrous Saturday afternoon.​

​

And with their season all but shot, just one question remains: where on Earth do Essendon go now?​

https://www.theroar.com.au/2024/07/...ind-brad-scotts-bombers-ultimate-humiliation/

Makes some good points . Coach has made some mistakes for sure but you do at the start of a build. Clarkson had changed a part of what he did a few times before they got to 2008 . Difference was he had the cattle to do it . We do not . Scott has made mistakes but the list is a bunch of front runners with limited ability in a lot of areas.
I can tell you what it is.
Lack of speed. Lack of drafting endurance runner. Lack of players preparing themselves well year and and year out . Total lack of real hard edge leadership on field and off field. Average drafting. A little bad luck.

 

[ant555]

I think you can 100% select a team based on the stats page and do very well.

The trick is working out what stats to read and what stats matter.

if your doing stats correctly the stats should tell you if players are filling/understanding their roles within the system.

Then judging a player’s effectiveness based on how they performed as a function of the system.

I know Essendon and Carlton were both hiring a data scientist 2 years ago to head up/be their data team. Which previously by the content of the job adds seemed non existent roles.

Scott likes to be data driven by how he talks in his pressers but the whole data science job is about being someone who is curious and asks the right questions. Essendon clearly isn’t doing that

Again it is Part of what you need.
You will never agree with me as you think the list is okay and that a forward line with Wright and Langford and Stringer and co can be okay.
The list is average and has more holes than Swiss cheese. The coach may be making a few errors but the list is the major factor.

 

[masoncox_]

I’ve just had enough
Over there crap

 

[Vindicater]

How many blokes do you need on the same page to win at basketball or frisbee ? I am not saying match sim is the be all and end all but when you want to start something from scratch it is more of a factor than later on when you have the system and leadership bedded down to an extent. How would your basketball go if even 3 blokes on your roster could not play the way you wanted them to for whatever reason ? Football you are looking at trying to get 18 blokes on the field to work in the same way for as long as possible .

I understand your point but the counter point to that is that the players doing the right thing match Sims are falling down against real opposition. In a development year we should be blooding guys and giving them shots at the level. They will learn alot more from good film analysis of a match than any feedback they can get from a practice match.

And although it is super annoying as a coach, there are players who need the intensity of real games to rise to the level and there are the opposite types who wilt once the real games begin while looking world beaters on the practice field. Being a coach is working out which players are which and which are the much more preferable 'train as you play' types.

 

[Nifft]

There's a rot at the club. It's not the coach's fault. We can only fix this by turning over the players that are causing the issue. Time to sweep the broom through the list even if it means turning over half the players in the next couple years.

Maybe Brad isn't the answer. Maybe he won't take us to a premiership. But we haven't had a successful coach in more than 20 years, and no other coach is going to be successful at our club until this rot is removed. Some of the players are entitled... work out which ones and get rid of them. All of them.

 

[ant555]

I understand your point but the counter point to that is that the players doing the right thing match Sims are falling down against real opposition. In a development year we should be blooding guys and giving them shots at the level. They will learn alot more from good film analysis of a match than any feedback they can get from a practice match.

And although it is super annoying as a coach, there are players who need the intensity of real games to rise to the level and there are the opposite types who wilt once the real games begin while looking world beaters on the practice field. Being a coach is working out which players are which and which are the much more preferable 'train as you play' types.

We will never agree. Did you start your systems from scratch out of interest ?
One bloke who I talk to works at Melbourne and he explained their list build and how they used players early on that would not have got a game 5 years later simply because they had the system buy in at the start.
I will continue to believe the info I get from coaches and assistants who have worked in systems at various levels that have won premierships.
Do not doubt you have experience in other sports .

 

[FootyGuru]

If we played Roberts, Hayes, Bryan Davey next week and we lose, guarantee we see the same negative hyperbolic comments we see all over this board anyway.

 

[Agronomus]

Agree on the ruck. There are no options that say we should trade him this year. I have been critical of Bryan and his Wright level of physical presence around the ground but he is signed for next year so we should just use him. If they both flop then find the next bloke.

What possible reason is there not to play Bryan in a development year more than once?

 

[Vindicater]

We will never agree. Did you start your systems from scratch out of interest ?
One bloke who I talk to works at Melbourne and he explained their list build and how they used players early on that would not have got a game 5 years later simply because they had the system buy in at the start.
I will continue to believe the info I get from coaches and assistants who have worked in systems at various levels that have won premierships.
Do not doubt you have experience in other sports .

Yeah all good. I started this convo by saying that I have no history with football at that level so was not sure if it is a football wide thing to rely on match sim or an Essendon thing.

For Ultimate we have started from scratch with Australian representative teams but at club level your systems are generally in place and evolve as player personal changes from year to year.

Basketball wise I worked as part of the management team so was not involved in coaching but I rarely saw them do full game practice during the week. Mostly they did skills work and small drills based around particular things they wanted to adapt/fix for the next opponent.

 

[CBombers17]

Our guys would smash Frisbee sims

 

[andleanback]

I would have traded Parish before the last contract so you know I am not against that .
Reid I can live with his last contract year.
I will go further.
Stringer is expendable.
If there was another ruck choice I would trade Draper.

I would trade Draper and bring in someone like pittonet for a few years. Someone who can play consistent footy week in week out.