Vdubs
Hall of Famer
That is an evidence-based claim though, you must agree.
Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III
- Thread starter catempire
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
That is an evidence-based claim though, you must agree.
This can't be right - everyone knows Chris Scott is the best coach in the AFL and has been for over a decade.Have they forgotten Leon Cameron exists ??
Think your views are very outdated and not with modern football at all. Has even been made public why Menzel was dropped from the team last year that he doesn’t add that extra element to his game of pressure. His very 1 dimensional how he goes about it. If he plays much like a deep key forward. If he isn’t kicking goals then his spot is in trouble. Games are all about team structures and playing your part which requires a lot of flexibility with what you do.
Like I said we have one of the best midfields in the AFL and also one of the poorest forward lines in the AFL. Dsngerfield can play forward to an AA standard.
It’s all about team balance and what works best as a whole not the individuals best spot.
Need to look st the bigger picture with that.
Let me be clear also when I say positions I don’t even see it as your a HF flanker your a back flanker your a forward pocket etc I mean as a whole they need to add a lot more dimensions and qualities to their game now.
If your a small medium forward, you need to have the ability to also impact around a contest and stoppage up the ground with pressure and run + carry and get into defensive fifty to chop out. If you don’t and all your good for is crumbing goals then you will find yourself playing VFL.
The Ronnie burns small forwards and the goal square full forward are no longer existing.
But there is also evidence to the contrary
You’ve turned the original discussion of players being played out of position to players needing a lot more dimensions and qualities to there game. It is what it is.
So you also think it was the correct call to drop Menzel?
I guess the tigers are also outdated. How dare they play there players in the same positions and not move them around. They need to get with the times!
Richmond plays there forwards up the ground and around the contests pressuring and impacting at the stoppages.
Name for me this Richmond small forward who doesn’t do that?? Even riewoldt plays up the ground
Do you not think this is a reason his stocks aren’t very high? He hasn’t got clubs clammering for his services. He doesn’t add any other element if he isn’t kicking goals.
I haven’t changed any discussion, you just think in a very outdated way of positions and the magnet board. That concept doesn’t exist at AFL level anymore. I was always talking about what they contribute in terms of flexibility and adapting to multiple roles. I don’t view it in terms of forward flanker half forward flanker etc. if you look at AFL now it’s just a big structured 18 man group all working in synergy around a ball. Nothing is really broken up anymore
Thanks for telling me how I think. The original discussion was players out of position, ie Taylor Forward instead of back. That is a positional change whether you think it's just a big structured 18 man group or not. Out of position and adding 'strings to bows' is two different things.
Your original quibble was Dangerfield up forward.
You then contrasted us with Richmond who apparently don't truck with that kind of nonsense despite Martin frequently playing as a deep forward.
Then cue pages of pointless and unnecessary back and forth. Crazy was closer to right, whether you like it or not.
Why are you answering a question with a question? He kicked 40 goals last season (3rd highest) and was our leading goal scorer early this year before the injuries (Currently 2nd highest). You talk about how important certain guys are to our structure, well Menzel is one of them. Look at Hawkins goal numbers when Menzel is in the team as opposed to not. He's not really the best player to use to get your point across and you'd have to think that his injury history played a big part in clubs not 'clammering for his services' given the number of years he was chasing.
You obviously blindly agree with every decision Scott makes so it's really pointless trying to have a sensible conversion with you.
If you go back to my original post I had a few examples. Danger forward was one of them. I said we were playing Danger forward for extended periods without being able to win centre clearances so it was a waste. When Martins forward they actually deliver the ball to him.
Richmond don't truck with nonsense of moving backs forward and so on. Anyway, wasted enough time.
On this we can agree.
This response shows to me you just don’t get how footy works anymore, where your situated on a magnet board and your position is as meaningful as toilet paper. You play your role for the team as instructed by the coaches which is about the entire game plan. Positions are just that, a magnet board placement and a starting rule for Centre bounces. Outside of that it means nothing.
Hawkins and riewoldt can be named as FF and spend the entire game running up and down the wing to suit the game plan. Does this mean they are more a FF or a winger despite named a FF?
Positions mean very little anymore the way footy is now played, its all about your contribution to the team, and you need a lot more strings to your bow now in AFL to make it compared to the one dimensional players of the 70’s-80’s.
Hawthorn Geelong and Richmond are the prime examples of premiership teams that have flexible adaptive sides with players who can add many different elements to the game and adapt where needed.
So why didn’t other clubs come chasing after him for 1 year contracts?? Why did no other club in the league want him despite kicking 40 goals?? Imagine the benefit to a team chasing a flag. Because he doesn’t add enough elements to his game that are now expected of forwards and required for medium forwards. It really just proves my point how a guy can kick 40 goals and yet still be dropped and not wanted on the market.
Haha I play club footy now mate. You’ve totally changed the topic. Enough already
makes sense why you have more simplistic views that match that level.
Agreed, not much more I can say.
Righto hero
Parsons in. O'Connor in.
Does the MC or Scotty have a policy of having at least 1 spud in the team each week?
Does the MC or Scotty have a policy of having at least 1 spud in the team each week?
Well you've listed 2 right there
Bit harsh on the MC and Scotty from youWell you've listed 2 right there
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
