Universal Love David Teague

Remove this Banner Ad

Our team has been playing a basic attacking gameplan but has no plan b defensive game structure to fall back on.

Can't identify when the opposition are on top and change our structure. So we give away big leads and let the opposition have big leads.

Something to develop over the off season.

We will not improve until we develop a defensive game structure which involves playing with more numbers behind the ball, going one on one at stoppages and holding the ball up and wasting time when the opposition have pushed heavy numbers inside our 50.

We need to have that plan up our sleeve. Need to be quick to identify when to implement it. That has to come from our coaching box and on field leaders.

There is a fair bit of development to go for this team as a whole.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

We need to review every line but obvious ones looks like Cameron Bruce and Barker out.

Our assistants are so underwhelming compared to when you see Collingwood, Hawthorn and Geelong. You can’t but see why they are always there about.

I’d like us to bring in Robert Harvey (Coll) and Scott Burns (hawks) to our club. Both have had great coaching experience at successful clubs and could help Teague Massively
 
smashbox gill said:
We need to review every line but obvious ones looks like Cameron Bruce and Barker out.

Our assistants are so underwhelming compared to when you see Collingwood, Hawthorn and Geelong. You can’t but see why they are always there about.

I’d like us to bring in Robert Harvey (Coll) and Scott Burns (hawks) to our club. Both have had great coaching experience at successful clubs and could help Teague Massively
Click to expand...

I've mentioned this before. I feel it may also impact our ability to recruit top line players. Just wonder how often the meet our coaching group,not know who any of them are and decide against us.

Would love Luke Hodge.

I think Teague is a decent coach but has some ways to go in developing the gameplan and leadership out there. Tactics are crap, there's no alternative in our gameplan and leadership, are we calling it on the field?

Sometimes we need to play the Teague way and sometimes the Bolton way. We need to get this right.
 
jj1978 said:
He has Barker whom he persists with because after 100 years as an assistant coach he think he (Barker) might be good at it eventually.
Click to expand...

From what I can understand Barker has all the qualifications under the sun from an academic point of view, but we all know that doesn't necessarily translate to a good coach.

We are going to finish the season about where most expected us to it still feels like a poor season.
 
BlueVision said:
From what I can understand Barker has all the qualifications under the sun from an academic point of view, but we all know that doesn't necessarily translate to a good coach.

We are going to finish the season about where most expected us to it still feels like a poor season.
Click to expand...
barker is the leon cameron of assistant coaches.
 
smashbox gill said:
Director of Coaching: Ross Lyon/Mark Williams/Brad Scott
Senior Assistant/Midfield Coach: Robert Harvey
Stoppages Coach: Dean Solomon
Forward Coach: Scott Burns
Backline: Amos
Click to expand...
The unknown in any assistant coach wish list is what sort of shape we're in financially during/post covid. Remembering how many staff we let go ourselves and that we basically made bugger all from gate receipts.
 
Doro said:
The unknown in any assistant coach wish list is what sort of shape we're in financially during/post covid. Remembering how many staff we let go ourselves and that we basically made bugger all from gate receipts.
Click to expand...
Surely we should have more dosh to pay assistants... with the cap on non playing staff Hawthorn are paying Clarko 1million, we surely can't be paying Teague more than 400K, so we have 600K in reserve to bolster up some better qualified assistants.
 
jj1978 said:
Surely we should have more dosh to pay assistants... with the cap on non playing staff Hawthorn are paying Clarko 1million, we surely can't be paying Teague more than 400K, so we have 600K in reserve to bolster up some better qualified assistants.
Click to expand...
The only thing I'm sure of is that the AFL and our club have taken a massive financial hit due to covid-19. We haven't walked between the raindrops.
 
Doro said:
The unknown in any assistant coach wish list is what sort of shape we're in financially during/post covid. Remembering how many staff we let go ourselves and that we basically made bugger all from gate receipts.
Click to expand...
I also cant believe we let rid of Playfair over some of our assistants. He was forwards coach during sydneys premiership era. Even if he took a step back into a line coach he would have been better than Barker/Bruce
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Don Pyke has to be given another shot IMO.

Got a pretty average team to a Grand Final, then for obvious reasons the Crows collapsed over a few years and he was scapegoated.

Bring in Ross Lyon as an assistant coach or get him to oversee the coaching group, but change things up and bring some further accountability to our squad.
 
gbatman said:
Here is where I feel David Teague has to evolve the team's gameplan...

Blues need to adopt a more modern game plan. Something that is sometimes David Teague and sometimes Brendan Bolton, depending on the situation. That is when do we attack and when do we defend. At the moment we are all attack.

This is why we can come back from 30 points down and win but it's also why we find ourselves losing games from 20 or 30 points up or finding ourselves 30+ points down in the first place. It's all to do with our one paced move forward get it inside 50 quickly game style.

We have high inside 50s but we turn it over a lot inside 50 and we aren't scoring a lot from our inside 50s. I think this stat is skewed a lot by the way we play. Some teams don't have high inside 50s but win games because they hold the ball up a fair bit and control the pace of the game. They know that when they are playing a team who is being defensive that going inside 50 will likely result in a turnover so they delay the inside 50 entry, give the midfield time to setup defensively and rest and control the pace and momentum of the game which we don't do. That's how good sides hold a lead. By preventing/delaying their opposition's comeback tactics which they do by defending harder and pushing numbers back. A tactic which teams use to good effect against us.

We can score heavily when the game is open and the opposition are playing attacking football. We struggle badly when the opposition play defensively and push players back. Problem is teams either know this and use defensive tactics against us from the start or we get a lead, get on top of a team and they do it then.

I know this and the opposition know this, a big reason why teams do that to us, we are fodder for good intercepting defencive teams because we go in there quick and we aren't great kicks. Going inside 50 quick is great but if it's turned over the opposition are presented with a quick rebound opportunity as we won't be setup defensively behind the ball as well as we could be.

This quick inside 50 quick out that we get caught up in is exhausting to the defence/midfield, they are always moving. Mids and backs get to rest when the ball is in our forwardline and staying there. They can stand on an opponent or in a zone and take a spell.

Our one paced game style where we go forward as quick as we can and go inside 50 without hesitation gives us a high inside 50 and high turnover count. Our bad kicking gives us a high inside 50 turnover stat as well so it's probably not a stat that screams we should be scoring more, it's just how we play.

Watching some good sides and how they handle defensive tactics is interesting. Essendon V Geelong the other week was a good one. Geelong scored heavily early then Essendon went defensive so Geelong slowed the game up. We get 30 odd points up and just keep banging it in inside a crowded 50 as quick as we can and it keeps coming out as quick as we got it in there.

Good teams recognize that their forwardline is being flooded. They realise there is no value going inside 50 quickly if all the players are already in there so what can a team get out of that situation? It's usually easy to chip the ball around outside the 50, give players a rest and just hold things up, then go long and deep. If it's turned over then you should be able to defend that as you should be rested and setup behind the ball. Should be able to stop the opposition rebounding quickly or turn it over.

Why it's good to hold things up and delay the kick inside 50 when the opposition are crowding our forwardline is to delay the potential opposition comeback and stop their momentum but also to give our players a rest and allow our players outside the 50 to rest and setup defensively. Going inside 50 quickly all the time, if it's coming out it's coming out to a midfield that is likely not setup defensively properly and is not getting a rest. This high pace footy makes us vulnerable to being run over later in games as with the West Coast game.

Our loss to Hawthorn is one of many examples where we played hard attacking footy and built a good lead. Hawthorn did what well coached sides do and they went defensive after we dominated and built a good lead. More midfield pressure, push numbers back, look to intercept the ball and rebound. This is when we should have realised this, slowed the game up and kicked the ball around a bit, let them push everyone inside our forward 50 and chip it around a bit and delay our forward entries.

The other concerned with our tactics is that it makes it easy to crowd and outnumber us forward. It's good to hold numbers forward but if our forwards are all ahead of the ball then so are the defenders and the extra defenders.

Some teams push numbers hard defensively and it opens up the forward line. Extra numbers in defence, forwards pushed further up the ground. No one is in the forward line. Bolton played this way a lot which was fine but we were constantly left with no one to kick to forward. Problem with this tack is the forwards must be able to push hard back to position and must read the game and time this right. If they can do that then they can find themselves in an open forward line.

I don't think we do this well. Either because our forwards aren't good enough at pushing forward hard enough, perhaps too tall and carrying too many giants at times or because we don't implement hard defensive presses often or at all.

A good example of this is how often do we see in our games, we dominate play, we go inside 50 into a super crowded forwardline 5-8 times, don't score, the opposition get one break away and go inside 50 once into an open forwardline and score. Happens a lot.

I like our gamestyle when the game is open and even and both sides are playing an even game between defending and attacking but our tactics don't work against teams who implement good defensive structures and game styles. Collingwood is another game where we were beating them so the implemented defensive structures, Moore must have take a heap of intercept marks and they just rebounded hard against us. Should have been able to recognize their change of tactics and slowed that game down and made sure they couldn't rebound effectively.

I like Teague, I like our game style but it's just one half of a successful game style. He talked about adopting and adapting the game style along the way and this is the second half of the puzzle. We learn to adjust our tactics and that must come from the players on the field at the time and we make finals this year easily.

Yes go hard, keep forward closer to home and get it inside 50 quickly but when conditions change then react to that, play boring slow footy and hold things up, control the pace and turn these comeback losses and blown away early issues into wins.

What I would like to see is us get a lead, see the opposition flood and go defensive then us slow things up and hold that lead longer and make it hard for them to move the ball forward. I would like to see us implement defensive tactics to be supre hard to score against, have less inside 50s but to still score and still have options when we break away and start going forward. To use defensive tactics to open the forward line up. I want to see awareness of situations and see us adjust our game style accordingly.

Hopefully that's the next part of the chapter and that is next to come.
Click to expand...

I'd hire you to be our coach.

Why is Teague so stubborn to employ different tactic during the game?
Surely he is a smart enough coach with experience to realise what is happening during games and how to react. But all I see is nothing...
Just no changes, nothing happens.
 
Kernafides said:
In true carlton fashion we're back to culling coaches. Yes Teague can improve...he's what 20 odd games into his senior coaching career. Yes we all got excited by finals but we're not ready yet. Fact remains we improved quite a bit this year.
Click to expand...
Fact is we still failing in the same areas.
Round 1.. 9 goals down b4 we got our act together and got it back to 15 pts..had more ball and inside 50s
This has been the same most of the season and not 1 inch of improvement not 1 inch..thats what the coaching panel needs to answer to
Teague has not been grilled yet..but season over now is the time to review all..and he needs to answer fir a side who go missing in patches of games every week and give up numerous goals..who even when they dominate games carnt get scoreboard reward.
Fact is we fell apart against ordinary sides..hawthorn swans crows giants and a depleted cwood.
At the very least Teagues needs to answer for these.
 
I have been ridiculed for saying this, but David Teague is no different to Reece Shaw.

They are both apprentice senior coaches.

We should not have been so reactive in appointing him after a couple of wins last year when our rigid game style was freed up. It is NOT an accurate representation of future performance looking at you (thylacine- poster on here)

Brett Ratten should have been given another crack, a well respected Carlton Legend who did his apprenticeship at another club after being sacked originally.

Or dare I say it Ross Lyon, I can’t remember one of his teams giving up a 6 goal momentum switch week after week.

Piss poor management.
 
skadoosh said:
Teague doesn't seem to be the type of coach to give a spray or be able to instill some passion into our team before they go out and play...or is it just me?
Click to expand...
It seems that way.

Great coaches generally have a very hard edge that keeps the players themselves on edge and playing on edge. They know they can't get away with poor efforts.

Too many get away with it under Teague.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 
gbatman said:
Here is where I feel David Teague has to evolve the team's gameplan...

Blues need to adopt a more modern game plan. Something that is sometimes David Teague and sometimes Brendan Bolton, depending on the situation. That is when do we attack and when do we defend. At the moment we are all attack.

This is why we can come back from 30 points down and win but it's also why we find ourselves losing games from 20 or 30 points up or finding ourselves 30+ points down in the first place. It's all to do with our one paced move forward get it inside 50 quickly game style.

We have high inside 50s but we turn it over a lot inside 50 and we aren't scoring a lot from our inside 50s. I think this stat is skewed a lot by the way we play. Some teams don't have high inside 50s but win games because they hold the ball up a fair bit and control the pace of the game. They know that when they are playing a team who is being defensive that going inside 50 will likely result in a turnover so they delay the inside 50 entry, give the midfield time to setup defensively and rest and control the pace and momentum of the game which we don't do. That's how good sides hold a lead. By preventing/delaying their opposition's comeback tactics which they do by defending harder and pushing numbers back. A tactic which teams use to good effect against us.

We can score heavily when the game is open and the opposition are playing attacking football. We struggle badly when the opposition play defensively and push players back. Problem is teams either know this and use defensive tactics against us from the start or we get a lead, get on top of a team and they do it then.

I know this and the opposition know this, a big reason why teams do that to us, we are fodder for good intercepting defencive teams because we go in there quick and we aren't great kicks. Going inside 50 quick is great but if it's turned over the opposition are presented with a quick rebound opportunity as we won't be setup defensively behind the ball as well as we could be.

This quick inside 50 quick out that we get caught up in is exhausting to the defence/midfield, they are always moving. Mids and backs get to rest when the ball is in our forwardline and staying there. They can stand on an opponent or in a zone and take a spell.

Our one paced game style where we go forward as quick as we can and go inside 50 without hesitation gives us a high inside 50 and high turnover count. Our bad kicking gives us a high inside 50 turnover stat as well so it's probably not a stat that screams we should be scoring more, it's just how we play.

Watching some good sides and how they handle defensive tactics is interesting. Essendon V Geelong the other week was a good one. Geelong scored heavily early then Essendon went defensive so Geelong slowed the game up. We get 30 odd points up and just keep banging it in inside a crowded 50 as quick as we can and it keeps coming out as quick as we got it in there.

Good teams recognize that their forwardline is being flooded. They realise there is no value going inside 50 quickly if all the players are already in there so what can a team get out of that situation? It's usually easy to chip the ball around outside the 50, give players a rest and just hold things up, then go long and deep. If it's turned over then you should be able to defend that as you should be rested and setup behind the ball. Should be able to stop the opposition rebounding quickly or turn it over.

Why it's good to hold things up and delay the kick inside 50 when the opposition are crowding our forwardline is to delay the potential opposition comeback and stop their momentum but also to give our players a rest and allow our players outside the 50 to rest and setup defensively. Going inside 50 quickly all the time, if it's coming out it's coming out to a midfield that is likely not setup defensively properly and is not getting a rest. This high pace footy makes us vulnerable to being run over later in games as with the West Coast game.

Our loss to Hawthorn is one of many examples where we played hard attacking footy and built a good lead. Hawthorn did what well coached sides do and they went defensive after we dominated and built a good lead. More midfield pressure, push numbers back, look to intercept the ball and rebound. This is when we should have realised this, slowed the game up and kicked the ball around a bit, let them push everyone inside our forward 50 and chip it around a bit and delay our forward entries.

The other concerned with our tactics is that it makes it easy to crowd and outnumber us forward. It's good to hold numbers forward but if our forwards are all ahead of the ball then so are the defenders and the extra defenders.

Some teams push numbers hard defensively and it opens up the forward line. Extra numbers in defence, forwards pushed further up the ground. No one is in the forward line. Bolton played this way a lot which was fine but we were constantly left with no one to kick to forward. Problem with this tack is the forwards must be able to push hard back to position and must read the game and time this right. If they can do that then they can find themselves in an open forward line.

I don't think we do this well. Either because our forwards aren't good enough at pushing forward hard enough, perhaps too tall and carrying too many giants at times or because we don't implement hard defensive presses often or at all.

A good example of this is how often do we see in our games, we dominate play, we go inside 50 into a super crowded forwardline 5-8 times, don't score, the opposition get one break away and go inside 50 once into an open forwardline and score. Happens a lot.

I like our gamestyle when the game is open and even and both sides are playing an even game between defending and attacking but our tactics don't work against teams who implement good defensive structures and game styles. Collingwood is another game where we were beating them so the implemented defensive structures, Moore must have take a heap of intercept marks and they just rebounded hard against us. Should have been able to recognize their change of tactics and slowed that game down and made sure they couldn't rebound effectively.

I like Teague, I like our game style but it's just one half of a successful game style. He talked about adopting and adapting the game style along the way and this is the second half of the puzzle. We learn to adjust our tactics and that must come from the players on the field at the time and we make finals this year easily.

Yes go hard, keep forward closer to home and get it inside 50 quickly but when conditions change then react to that, play boring slow footy and hold things up, control the pace and turn these comeback losses and blown away early issues into wins.

What I would like to see is us get a lead, see the opposition flood and go defensive then us slow things up and hold that lead longer and make it hard for them to move the ball forward. I would like to see us implement defensive tactics to be supre hard to score against, have less inside 50s but to still score and still have options when we break away and start going forward. To use defensive tactics to open the forward line up. I want to see awareness of situations and see us adjust our game style accordingly.

Hopefully that's the next part of the chapter and that is next to come.
Click to expand...

Brilliant analysis.
 
plentyblckie said:
In 17 of the 27 games Teague has coached, we have conceded a run of 5 or more goals
Click to expand...

That stat will only get worse if Covid-19 is still around next year.

The big issue that many are failing to discuss is our inability to train full match simulation and integrate everyone into a single team drill to practice our structures.

As it stands, I believe they can only practice in groups of 8 or so, which means they can't practice team structures the way they would in a normal season.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Universal Love David Teague

Similar threads

Aphrodite
News David Parkin Apprenticeship Program Launched
Replies
11
Views
1K
Aphrodite
Aphrodite

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top