Essendons Strengths & Weaknesses

Remove this Banner Ad

benno87 said:
I feel this season could go eiher two ways for Essendon, either they struggle immensly through the loss of a few senior players (Hird the obvious one) and Sheedy and the natural cycle of rebuilding their list which happens to coincide with a fresh coach and they could find themselves with some more high draft picks next year and a long season.

Or, they could surprise me and many others, and push for finals and enjoy an improvement from their younger core. If Fletcher, Michael, Lucas and Lloyd all play over 18 games they will always be competitive, these 4 are sensational bookends, Lucas and Lloyd especiall are the most dangerous CHF/FF combinaion in the league, but I feel it'll be tthat 2nd tier that needs to lift.
Click to expand...

good post
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Why do you think its a good post?

He sat on the fence without making a call at all. He said that their four bookends are vital. And said that their second tier players had to lift, with no predictions about whether they would or could lift. All pretty obvious stuff.
Click to expand...

Timmy's example of a good post.
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Strengths:

Unflinching belief in themselves.

Weaknesses

Belief is unfounded.
Click to expand...
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Why do you think its a good post?

He sat on the fence without making a call at all. He said that their four bookends are vital. And said that their second tier players had to lift, with no predictions about whether they would or could lift. All pretty obvious stuff.
Click to expand...

what's wrong with that?

I know you're probably disappointed he acknowledged that there's some chance we could get improvement from our young players and middle tiers and surprise people, but it's a rational assessment to say it could go either way.

I think that's a lot better an analysis than ones that say "Bombers are crap, going to finish last, no midfield, and their coach is crap".

I've asked the question 3 times in this thread to those that made the comment on why the coach is a negative, based on his actions as an AFL coach, and not one of them has responded. Funny that. Easy to sling, not so easy to justify.

At least the post you've referred to has made a reasonable, rational analysis. It's not sitting on the fence to acknowledge there are a number of scenario's that could pan out.

I'm optimistic personally, but I'm not going to say we're definitely going to make the finals. It could go either way based on a number of factors.
 
Magic17 said:
Beat you last time up.:p

Sans Hird your team is shaping for the spoon big time.
Click to expand...

can i ask you a serious question and no trolling here. do you honestly think we will win the spoon..

imo as long as no more then two of fletcher mal lloyd and lucas have major injuries its impossibly for us to win the spoon..

in all seriousness if we feild those four players for around 18/22 of the matches in 2008 (which is not unlikely at all) do you think we will win the spoon
 
bomberstomake8 said:
can i ask you a serious question and no trolling here. do you honestly think we will win the spoon..

imo as long as no more then two of fletcher mal lloyd and lucas have major injuries its impossibly for us to win the spoon..

in all seriousness if we feild those four players for around 18/22 of the matches in 2008 (which is not unlikely at all) do you think we will win the spoon
Click to expand...
The people who are writing Essendon off in 2008 are going to be in for a shock. I cannot see where they will fall down this year. They have a group of young guys that should really step up like Davey, Ryder , Jeta ,Winderlich , Laycock and a few others . plus Stanton will be the standout for them, he is a gun . The guy I am really looking forward to watching is young David Myers - will be a future star of the club.
Looking forward to seeing them against us this year, atleast they will give us some decent competition.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Slattery_20 said:
That last bit is why I'm not so worried about Sheeds' departure
Against the more organised sides - NM, Collingwood, Hawthorn - we were hopeless
Whereas we showed we could compete with good sides - WCE & Geelong - who relied more on individual players than a relentless team effort

As for the rucks, Laycock is a giant wildcard
Could be a fantastic ruckman, once he gets some consistent gametime. His 07 was about 50 times better than his 06, if he does the same again then look out
Click to expand...

I think the main difference between the sides you went well against and the sides you struggled against came down to the options available for the sides adn the one-on-one contests in key positions.

I think in recent years Essendon has struggled against us because when we go forward we use our flanks as much as we do the corridor, it is a weakness against teams with good flankers and not so hot key defenders but I think the bombers weakness in recent years has been the flanks.

As good as Geelong have been they rely a lot on the centre corridor for the scoring opportunities. When you played us Petrie kicked 1 goal and Hale kicked 1 goal yet you still haemorrhaged 18 goals largely to those playing on the flanks and the midfield.

I think that largely comes from being on the back foot a lot in games in the middle of the ground and I get the impression the bombers seem to generate a significant amount of the midfield possessions on the defensive side of the midfield and across half back. You often see guys like Fletcher or other defenders up near the top in disposals and turnovers in that region of the ground hurt a lot more than the middle of the ground.

Everyone in our midfield had sensational stat numbers against the Bombers, guys like Rawlings who is a tagger had 35 disposals, Harris who is an in and under player got 31 disposals, etc.

It is a similar story against the Hawks who ran amok in the midfield in the second game against them, in the first I think you just got nailed by a rampaging Franklin but the real difference in the end was conceding 6 goals to Dixon and Boyle who played the flanks.

You will probably find similar patterns with the teams you lost against where you would have expected a better performance given how well you did against strong corridor sides.

Bombers need to tighten up in the middle and in the defensive flanks to take a significant step forwards. It is very much doable but you need the younger players to step up. That is the unknown element.
 
Tas said:
I think the main difference between the sides you went well against and the sides you struggled against came down to the options available for the sides adn the one-on-one contests in key positions.

I think in recent years Essendon has struggled against us because when we go forward we use our flanks as much as we do the corridor, it is a weakness against teams with good flankers and not so hot key defenders but I think the bombers weakness in recent years has been the flanks.

As good as Geelong have been they rely a lot on the centre corridor for the scoring opportunities. When you played us Petrie kicked 1 goal and Hale kicked 1 goal yet you still haemorrhaged 18 goals largely to those playing on the flanks and the midfield.

I think that largely comes from being on the back foot a lot in games in the middle of the ground and I get the impression the bombers seem to generate a significant amount of the midfield possessions on the defensive side of the midfield and across half back. You often see guys like Fletcher or other defenders up near the top in disposals and turnovers in that region of the ground hurt a lot more than the middle of the ground.

Everyone in our midfield had sensational stat numbers against the Bombers, guys like Rawlings who is a tagger had 35 disposals, Harris who is an in and under player got 31 disposals, etc.

It is a similar story against the Hawks who ran amok in the midfield in the second game against them, in the first I think you just got nailed by a rampaging Franklin but the real difference in the end was conceding 6 goals to Dixon and Boyle who played the flanks.

You will probably find similar patterns with the teams you lost against where you would have expected a better performance given how well you did against strong corridor sides.

Bombers need to tighten up in the middle and in the defensive flanks to take a significant step forwards. It is very much doable but you need the younger players to step up. That is the unknown element.
Click to expand...

2 reasons you always beat us: Firrito and Harris play awesome against us for some reason
 
SS_Fury said:
Good:
Forward line: Lucas, lloyd, davey, gumby, Jetta, Reimers, to come on in the future....still very decent.

Not too bad:
Backline: fletcher, michael etc are all good backmen. The only problem is they arent getting any younger and replacements are needed very soon.

Not so great:
Mids: Lack speed and can turn it over.

GAMEPLAN: Cant comment yet because its going to be new under knights. Their old gameplan wasnt too bad, i didnt think it was too much chip, chip sort of stuff. Essendon has always managed to get 1-outs with lloyd for the lead which has always worked well.

The list: Promising youngsters like Gumby, Jetta, Ryder, Davey, Reimers, Myers, Dempsey....have a lot of indigenous talent which can be exciting to watch, however many aboriginal players tend to be patchy in terms of their brilliance.

OTHER: Bombers must like WA talent ;)...nah they will be fine with the addition of a couple of extra years of smart recruiting. Do that correctly and they will challenge for the flag in about 5 years imo.

KEY: Must recruit quality backmen, ruck and mids in the future. The forward line isnt getting any younger either, but Gumby etc may be able to fill this hole quicker than a backline and midfield which are needed much more urgently.

Looking forward to....: A new coach, a new style and new gameplan under someone other than sheedy. If i were a bombers fan i would be curious if nothing else just to see how the players respond to someone and something foreign to them. Remember most of them only know sheeds as a coach and have never had anyone else at AFL level. Knights may be the breathe of fresh air needed. Or a dud. We will find out.
Click to expand...
Mate, you give quite a positive insight into our list, and then come out and say you think we will be challenging for a flag in 2012!?! If every team recruited well and made good decisions they could challenge for a flag within 3 years. Port for example. Odd analysis to be quite knowledgeable, then think we will challenge for a flag in 2012 at the earliest:confused:
We have drafted in recent years to cover the gaps that will be formed from the retirement of our older players. Seeing them develop if the interesting part. If they all develop as expected then all positions are covered. Obviously things dont all turn out as hoped, but if the recruiters can get most things right, we will be challenging for a flag soon enough. We need our younger KPP to come on quicker then normal to cover the losses of our superstar veterans.
 
Tas said:
I think the main difference between the sides you went well against and the sides you struggled against came down to the options available for the sides adn the one-on-one contests in key positions.

I think in recent years Essendon has struggled against us because when we go forward we use our flanks as much as we do the corridor, it is a weakness against teams with good flankers and not so hot key defenders but I think the bombers weakness in recent years has been the flanks.

As good as Geelong have been they rely a lot on the centre corridor for the scoring opportunities. When you played us Petrie kicked 1 goal and Hale kicked 1 goal yet you still haemorrhaged 18 goals largely to those playing on the flanks and the midfield.

I think that largely comes from being on the back foot a lot in games in the middle of the ground and I get the impression the bombers seem to generate a significant amount of the midfield possessions on the defensive side of the midfield and across half back. You often see guys like Fletcher or other defenders up near the top in disposals and turnovers in that region of the ground hurt a lot more than the middle of the ground.

Everyone in our midfield had sensational stat numbers against the Bombers, guys like Rawlings who is a tagger had 35 disposals, Harris who is an in and under player got 31 disposals, etc.

It is a similar story against the Hawks who ran amok in the midfield in the second game against them, in the first I think you just got nailed by a rampaging Franklin but the real difference in the end was conceding 6 goals to Dixon and Boyle who played the flanks.

You will probably find similar patterns with the teams you lost against where you would have expected a better performance given how well you did against strong corridor sides.

Bombers need to tighten up in the middle and in the defensive flanks to take a significant step forwards. It is very much doable but you need the younger players to step up. That is the unknown element.
Click to expand...
We seem to fail - big time fail - against teams that run in numbers & launch from half back
Hawks, Pies, Port in particular fit this model, the teams we were worst against last year (in terms of the fight we showed in the game, not necessarily the numbers on the scoreboard)
Which s***ts me no end, coz I don't think we should do so much worse - although 2007 proved that all 4 were good teams - than against WCE or Geelong. I could cop competitive losses, but we were pathetic in both Pies games, against you guys, and v Port
Sheedy hadn't beaten North for about 6 years, seems similar with the Hawks, and I think the last time we beat Port was in 2004. Just no answers. He'd lost his formerly legendary ability to adapt, he became a follower not a leader. If we came into a game with a set plan and it came off - early in the year, against Sydney, against WCE, against Geelong to a certain extent - we were a good side. But some weeks we just had nothing & looked lacklustre - incredibly infuriating, when you know the 22 players are capable
 
Slattery_20 said:
We seem to fail - big time fail - against teams that run in numbers & launch from half back
Hawks, Pies, Port in particular fit this model, the teams we were worst against last year (in terms of the fight we showed in the game, not necessarily the numbers on the scoreboard)
Which s***ts me no end, coz I don't think we should do so much worse - although 2007 proved that all 4 were good teams - than against WCE or Geelong. I could cop competitive losses, but we were pathetic in both Pies games, against you guys, and v Port
Sheedy hadn't beaten North for about 6 years, seems similar with the Hawks, and I think the last time we beat Port was in 2004. Just no answers. He'd lost his formerly legendary ability to adapt, he became a follower not a leader. If we came into a game with a set plan and it came off - early in the year, against Sydney, against WCE, against Geelong to a certain extent - we were a good side. But some weeks we just had nothing & looked lacklustre - incredibly infuriating, when you know the 22 players are capable
Click to expand...

Very good summation.

If you look at the round 5 pies game after both teams had a 4 day break Sheeds brings in Bradley and Bolton in a game at the G where we have struggled for run. :confused: Absolute madness!!!

Tactically we've been behind for a few years now. Disclipline, one percenters, sheparding had all gone to pieces.

Sheeds got complacent after 2002 and thought our stars would turn it on and get him somewhere.

The BF community is bagging Knights but the discipline he is enforcing at training is fantastic so hopefully you see the team work a lot harder without the ball.
 
Very good forward KPP players, and a good little crumber. Need more avenues to goal though - a couple of forward flank types.

Midfield lacks class, one of the weaker ones. I don't rate ours much higher but think we are more forward in our redevelopment in this area. Interested to see how Myers goes, I would have preferred Palmer though myself. But the best picks are usually ones where risks are taken.

Defense is also fairly weak. Mal is past it, Dustbin is good offensively but can't/doesnt even attempt to contain the guns, and the rest seem to be no namers. McPhee makes a massive difference when he is in form marking everything in sight floating across half back.

Gumbleton, Ryder, Jetta and co have futures but dont look like they will plug any gaps, just do a moderate job of filling in once Dustbin/Lucas/Lloyd are gone. Ryder might be good or better than Dustbin but Gumbelton is nowhere near what Lloyd was at that age from memory.

Knights I reckon is an ordinary selection for coach - Id say that if we picked him.

I could be wrong but the Bombers are in for a couple of lean years, in fact I feel you did well to still dominate a lot of the Melbourne clubs even up to 05/06 thereabouts.
 
Lockyer24 said:
Gumbelton is nowhere near what Lloyd was at that age from memory.
Click to expand...

I know what you're trying to say... but here's a pic of Lloyd @ the beginning of his career:

s_lloyd.jpg


As we know, he's now a frigging tank.

Gumby's only played a handful of games, in his first season, and will naturally take longer to develop, given his frame.

I don't think you could say Lloyd was more advanced than him after one year. All KPP take time to develop.

Given teh above picture, I'm fully ****ing drooling to see what Gumby is like in 5 years. Anyone who says he will just be "stop-gap" is ****ing dreaming!
 
Lockyer24 said:
Very good forward KPP players, and a good little crumber. Need more avenues to goal though - a couple of forward flank types.

Midfield lacks class, one of the weaker ones. I don't rate ours much higher but think we are more forward in our redevelopment in this area. Interested to see how Myers goes, I would have preferred Palmer though myself. But the best picks are usually ones where risks are taken.

Defense is also fairly weak. Mal is past it, Dustbin is good offensively but can't/doesnt even attempt to contain the guns, and the rest seem to be no namers. McPhee makes a massive difference when he is in form marking everything in sight floating across half back.

Gumbleton, Ryder, Jetta and co have futures but dont look like they will plug any gaps, just do a moderate job of filling in once Dustbin/Lucas/Lloyd are gone. Ryder might be good or better than Dustbin but Gumbelton is nowhere near what Lloyd was at that age from memory.

Knights I reckon is an ordinary selection for coach - Id say that if we picked him.

I could be wrong but the Bombers are in for a couple of lean years, in fact I feel you did well to still dominate a lot of the Melbourne clubs even up to 05/06 thereabouts.
Click to expand...
The irony from a Pies fan. Your defence is full of no-namers too. What a joke for a Pie fan to come out and call our defenders no-name players. Michael didnt get a full pre-season last year but did this time around and I expect him to improve from last season. Wont get back to his best but shall be serviceable nonetheless.
How can those 3 players you named in Jetta, Gumbleton and Ryder not plug any gaps? When Lloyd/Lucas retire Gumbleton is going to fill in for them. He'll most likely be our CHF for the next 10 years if he turns out as expected. Ryder could be used in a variety of plces from CHB, Ruck or as Goodes type player. Jetta will eventually play in the midfield, but until he builds up the required engine, he'll be up forward on the flanks or in the pockets.
We may well put McPhee up in a forward flank role also as he could be very damaging there. McVeigh could play there also so that covers the area of concern you brought up. Id prefer McVeigh to play through the midfield this year though. Midfield is certainly an area to improve for the Bombers, but we have recruited many mid's over the past few years so it isnt a case of having to recruit more, but rather get good game time into the up and coming midfielders. We have an abundance of talented midfielders ready to explode.
How can Knights be an ordinary selection at this point, when he hasnt had a chance to prove himself?:confused:
 
bomba4eva said:
How can Knights be an ordinary selection at this point, when he hasnt had a chance to prove himself?:confused:
Click to expand...

none of those bagging Knights have had a whimper to say about Ratten - a man who is also inexperienced, and has lost every single AFL game he's ever coached.

I find that hypocrisy quite amusing
 
Lockyer24 said:
Very good forward KPP players, and a good little crumber. Need more avenues to goal though - a couple of forward flank types.

Midfield lacks class, one of the weaker ones. I don't rate ours much higher but think we are more forward in our redevelopment in this area. Interested to see how Myers goes, I would have preferred Palmer though myself. But the best picks are usually ones where risks are taken.

Defense is also fairly weak. Mal is past it, Dustbin is good offensively but can't/doesnt even attempt to contain the guns, and the rest seem to be no namers. McPhee makes a massive difference when he is in form marking everything in sight floating across half back.

Gumbleton, Ryder, Jetta and co have futures but dont look like they will plug any gaps, just do a moderate job of filling in once Dustbin/Lucas/Lloyd are gone. Ryder might be good or better than Dustbin but Gumbelton is nowhere near what Lloyd was at that age from memory.

Knights I reckon is an ordinary selection for coach - Id say that if we picked him.

I could be wrong but the Bombers are in for a couple of lean years, in fact I feel you did well to still dominate a lot of the Melbourne clubs even up to 05/06 thereabouts.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't be called a supporter then :thumbsdown:

Again, more pages of dribble with people knowing nothing about another club. Go directly to page 3 for a read. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200 :rolleyes:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Essendons Strengths & Weaknesses

Similar threads

sthmelb_dimmies
Essendon exers finals record
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Grockadoc
Grockadoc
SSSSSS
Player Watch Former Essendon players who have won a finals before Essendon - Best 18 edition
Replies
24
Views
1K
SSSSSS
SSSSSS
CharlieMortdecai
Carlton, Essendon, North - the triumvirate of mediocrity
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
Bunk Moreland
Bunk Moreland
Taper
Roast Essendon in no mans land
33 34 35 36 37
Replies
915
Views
43K
Clark G
C
Mordecai
Who will escape the ladder vortex first? Hawthorn, Essendon or Collingwood?
Replies
3
Views
238
Mordecai
Mordecai
faible
Toast Essendon ruckman Todd Goldstein passes 10,000 Career Hitouts
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
windyhill
windyhill
Gavin Excell
Essendon vow enough is enough
34 35 36 37 38
Replies
935
Views
43K
Orange crush
Orange crush

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top