Rumour Future of the club (Bevo, board, assistant coaches, football department)

[Timewillcome]

A few posters before are mentioning the run home and what team turns up still a risk. For him to stay we need to win the most of those 50/50 (potentially dropping Geel or Syd away).

I like what I see about him at the moment and it feels there is a significant shift in the approach. Seeing Bevo in the media and on football programs is unusual so good signs that these appearances are happening.

Keeping it together for more than a few weeks has been the issue of late so its still wait and see.

I'm almost turned around, feels very 2015 atm.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

A lot of luck comes into any success a team enjoys. It will depend when we get to play teams, all teams have their down periods, including Sydney who were flogged by Richmond.

 

[Anja_Nees]

A lot of luck comes into any success a team enjoys. It will depend when we get to play teams, all teams have their down periods, including Sydney who were flogged by Richmond.

We got Richmond and West Coast very much at the right time, but got Hawthorn, Melbourne and Essendon at the wrong time.

You hope it all evens out but some clubs get lucky overall and some don’t.

 

[Doggies7]

We got Richmond and West Coast very much at the right time, but got Hawthorn, Melbourne and Essendon at the wrong time.

You hope it all evens out but some clubs get lucky overall and some don’t.

Although wasn't a great time for us either, we got the Pies at the right time also without Pendles, De Goey, Mihocek, Elliot etc rather than in the earlier rounds when they were humming a bit more.

 

[Anja_Nees]

Although wasn't a great time for us either, we got the Pies at the right time also without Pendles, De Goey, Mihocek, Elliot etc rather than in the earlier rounds when they were humming a bit more.

Definitely a bit lucky in that sense (even though they have no excuses). GWS as well - great start to the year and spluttered a few weeks when we got them.

It’s a long season.

 

[Martyn_30_]

This season has been a dismal failure compared to what? Why? Fact or opinion?

I get people don't like Bev, but can we at least not use totally unsubstantiated hyperbole.

This is not pro or anti Bev.

Some of us see the list with potential but lacks experience across the board and what we are wanting to see is improving despite obstacles such as injuries and suspensions. There is a fair chunk of us that are now seeing this and are happy with how we are heading though that may not mean significant finals.

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

If by the end of the season the side finished where it currently is it would be the second worst season under Beveridge is how it’s been a dismal failure so far. It’s not a team that lacks experience across the board there hasn’t been a game this year where the team has been inexperienced, every side has young players. If the team continues recent form they can go deep in the finals which is my main point that it’s not a list that should be going 50/50. My big fear is that consistently since the premiership the side has had these bounce back periods where things are looking on track just to get comfortable and serve up bottom four footy out of nowhere.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[grassman75]

Although wasn't a great time for us either, we got the Pies at the right time also without Pendles, De Goey, Mihocek, Elliot etc rather than in the earlier rounds when they were humming a bit more.

Not sure we were that lucky - missing Naughty, Libba, Ed, JJ, etc…we were just better than them. Their injury list is way overstated, most of them are VFL players only. I think i count 6 that are walk up starts to their best 22 and we had 5 of those out too

 

[grassman75]

If by the end of the season the side finished where it currently is it would be the second worst season under Beveridge is how it’s been a dismal failure so far. It’s not a team that lacks experience across the board there hasn’t been a game this year where the team has been inexperienced, every side has young players. If the team continues recent form they can go deep in the finals which is my main point that it’s not a list that should be going 50/50. My big fear is that consistently since the premiership the side has had these bounce back periods where things are looking on track just to get comfortable and serve up bottom four footy out of nowhere.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

So what do you say about Melbourne? An almost 100pt flogging at the hands of Freo…is that a bottom 4 performance? It’s blood hard to keep morale an motivation up the whole season. I think we’ve done pretty well - only the Dees really got us of the back of an extra game in the legs, the rest has been us with poor kicking. 3 losses under 10pts. That’s what kills you

 

[VitalDread]

 

[CarnTheScray]

View attachment 2010087

Thanks. Tried to screenshot it last night but Kayo blocks it out.

 

[dogwatch]

View attachment 2010087

Do they really need a sexy looking quadrant? I’m not sure what this tells us that percentage doesn’t.

 

[CarnTheScray]

Do they really need a sexy looking quadrant? I’m not sure what this tells us that percentage doesn’t.

Gives it visual representation. Easier to look at rather than manually count each teams PF and PA on your phone.

 

[Sharpiesadog]

King was running with this premiership quadrant stuff in 2016. We weren’t in it.

 

[CarnTheScray]

King was running with this premiership quadrant stuff in 2016. We weren’t in it.

17 of the last 19 premiers have been in the quadrant. Think we were one of the two. Not sure who the other one was but no doubt that other team still finished in the top 3 on the ladder.

But anyways 2016 will almost never be replicated. We were a top 4 side destroyed by injuries.

 

[BEaston]

Do they really need a sexy looking quadrant? I’m not sure what this tells us that percentage doesn’t.

Percentage alone doesn't tell you the teams' strength (or weakness) of attack and defence.

Two teams could both have a percentage of 120% but one is offence heavy, while the other is defence heavy. The graph indicates that.

 

[BEaston]

King was running with this premiership quadrant stuff in 2016. We weren’t in it.

It's not a prediction tool.

It's just a snapshot of teams' points for/against at a certain point in time.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

King was running with this premiership quadrant stuff in 2016. We weren’t in it.

It used to be a points for and points against (at least 100 points for and less than 85 points against) before they realised that overall scores were going down, so no team would enter the quadrant. So now they've just replaced it with ranking.

As pointed out by many, while the visualisation might be pretty or help people, the information gained is hardly insightful- either that learning teams that score a lot and concede few might be good teams (duh) or that we are incapable of reading a team's percentage that represents the same thing (duh). What passes for complexity in analysis in the AFL media is shockingly low.

 

[dogwatch]

Gives it visual representation. Easier to look at rather than manually count each teams PF and PA on your phone.

This is how consultants get $2000 a day, telling busy executives what their base-grade clerk could tell them.
Or a few moments of their own time looking at a simple set of 18 numbers.

Percentage alone doesn't tell you the teams' strength (or weakness) of attack and defence.

Two teams could both have a percentage of 120% but one is offence heavy, while the other is defence heavy. The graph indicates that.

Yes that's true but if one team averages 120 against 100 pts each week and the other 84-70 points each week and both are winning roughly the same number of games it shouldn't really matter. The reality is that there is a reasonably close correlation between top percentages and top scoring averages (points for).

I just think it's a crude guide that is prettied up to dazzle the public that it's something deep, meaningful and well researched. You could use any number of measures. For instance in the last 25 years only two premiers (us in 2016 and Richmond 2019) have not been in the top 4 of percentages at the end of the H&A. So that's a more reliable measure than King's Quadrants.

 

[Next Waiting]

I've have enjoyed, and will continue to enjoy, trotting out the "he's lost the players line" for all the rival coaches who lose badly during the year. Goodwin - he's lost the players. Kenny, ****...they've all lost the players. It's a catch all line that brain dead germalists will gravitate towards.

I think about Bevo and this very narrative that has been run against him from time to time over the last year or two. I think of pretty clear cut cases where a coach has actually lost the players. Neeld and Richardson in recent times. I think about this whole notion of losing and presumably keeping or finding players.

But I come to thinking about what is the role of the coach here. Does the coach need to keep or find the players, and vice versa, or does the coach need to facilitate the players finding each other.

It looks to me like this is what has happened to our team since the Hawks game. They have found each other. How many times I previously complained that Bont and Libba carried this team with a level of intensity and commitment that seemed beyond their colleagues. But I can't make that complaint recently. There has been a shift, but it looks like a shift in the commitment of the players to each other.

Contrast with Melbourne. It looks like it's gone the other way.

 

[BEaston]

Yes that's true but if one team averages 120 against 100 pts each week and the other 84-70 points each week and both are winning roughly the same number of games it shouldn't really matter. The reality is that there is a reasonably close correlation between top percentages and top scoring averages (points for).

I just think it's a crude guide that is prettied up to dazzle the public that it's something deep, meaningful and well researched. You could use any number of measures. For instance in the last 25 years only two premiers (us in 2016 and Richmond 2019) have not been in the top 4 of percentages at the end of the H&A. So that's a more reliable measure than King's Quadrants.

Yes the trend line on the graph will always go bottom left to top right and correlate with percentage. But I think it is useful/interesting to see if teams sit above (defensive team) or below (attacking team) that trend line. It shows the league in a simple snapshot.

It's clear on the graph what it's displaying. Yes it's simple, not sure how it could dazzle anyone.

I don't think we need to be pulling down what little actual analysis we have in the media (as simple as it is). Then all we'll be left with are the idiotic talking heads like Cornes et al.

 

[Golden_6]

What does seems to annoy me about the club is the consistent slow starts year on year. Other than 2021, we seem to start off very slowly over the first 6 rounds before kicking into gear.

This season seems to be following a similar pattern to 2019, 2020, 2022 & 2023 where we start off poorly, play some good footy and sneak into the 8 (or just miss). These individual sides are totally different but why does this keep happening?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

But anyways 2016 will almost never be replicated.

I wouldn't want it to be. Our next flag and the run up will also be unique and will piss off an entirely new set of opposition fans

 

[my plums]

I wouldn't want it to be. Our next flag and the run up will also be unique and will piss off an entirely new set of opposition fans

Gonna win it from 8th this year

 

[Sentinel]

I've have enjoyed, and will continue to enjoy, trotting out the "he's lost the players line" for all the rival coaches who lose badly during the year. Goodwin - he's lost the players. Kenny, ****...they've all lost the players. It's a catch all line that brain dead germalists will gravitate towards.

I think about Bevo and this very narrative that has been run against him from time to time over the last year or two. I think of pretty clear cut cases where a coach has actually lost the players. Neeld and Richardson in recent times. I think about this whole notion of losing and presumably keeping or finding players.

But I come to thinking about what is the role of the coach here. Does the coach need to keep or find the players, and vice versa, or does the coach need to facilitate the players finding each other.

It looks to me like this is what has happened to our team since the Hawks game. They have found each other. How many times I previously complained that Bont and Libba carried this team with a level of intensity and commitment that seemed beyond their colleagues. But I can't make that complaint recently. There has been a shift, but it looks like a shift in the commitment of the players to each other.

Contrast with Melbourne. It looks like it's gone the other way.

Earlier in the season there were murmurs of Bontempelli being discontent. Would love to know, if that was true at the time, whether this has also turned around.

 

[dogwatch]

Yes the trend line on the graph will always go bottom left to top right and correlate with percentage. But I think it is useful/interesting to see if teams sit above (defensive team) or below (attacking team) that trend line. It shows the league in a simple snapshot.

It's clear on the graph what it's displaying. Yes it's simple, not sure how it could dazzle anyone.

I don't think we need to be pulling down what little actual analysis we have in the media (as simple as it is). Then all we'll be left with are the idiotic talking heads like Cornes et al.

Not saying they shouldn't do any analysis. Just wishing they could be a bit more thoughtful or imaginative.
The ABC sports writers put out good examples of that every now and then.