List Mgmt. Geelong’s looming list profile crisis (it’s not what you think)

[My Tilly]

Bookmark my post Daz and we'll look at it again in 3 years if you like. I like Parfitt but he'll be a B/B+ grade mid.

Btw, Enright showed a lot early doors. Bartel also showed great signs albeit he needed time to develop.

I agree and I'm a Parfitt fan.
My hope is that he becomes a very similar player to Prestia. I think once Selwood retires, and Dangerfield begins playing more time up forward, he will take big strides and become the player some had hoped for.

 

[cats_09]

Exactly. He was miles ahead of where Tim Darcy ever was by 100 games.
Who is a slower burn than 100 games?

Shouldn't you also bring age into the 100 games?

Menegola just made the AA team for the first time and he's only played 82 games - so he actually achieved that feat quicker than Scarlett. But when you break down his career:
- turned 28 before the start of this season
- was delisted by 2 teams
- earned a spot on the list of a third team by working hard at the next level down
- when he was 24, the same age Scarlett was in his first AA year, Sam played 8 games & pretty sure not many considered him AA quality

Cam Guthrie just earned his first AA blazer after 178 games - if we go back 100 games or say 2015, how many had him as a future AA player?

Mathew Stokes played 189 games for us - until witnessing his 2013 & 2014 seasons, how many genuinely thought he'd be able to play at the levels he did those years?

Some players will take longer to reach their full potential or peak - it's not necessarily as easy as how many games they've played as some will take longer or more maturity to reach those levels

 

[Spazz Cat]

Shouldn't you also bring age into the 100 games?

Menegola just made the AA team for the first time and he's only played 82 games - so he actually achieved that feat quicker than Scarlett. But when you break down his career:
- turned 28 before the start of this season
- was delisted by 2 teams
- earned a spot on the list of a third team by working hard at the next level down
- when he was 24, the same age Scarlett was in his first AA year, Sam played 8 games & pretty sure not many considered him AA quality

Cam Guthrie just earned his first AA blazer after 178 games - if we go back 100 games or say 2015, how many had him as a future AA player?

Mathew Stokes played 189 games for us - until witnessing his 2013 & 2014 seasons, how many genuinely thought he'd be able to play at the levels he did those years?

Some players will take longer to reach their full potential or peak - it's not necessarily as easy as how many games they've played as some will take longer or more maturity to reach those levels

Yeah age for sure. Obviously Menegola, Stewart, Stokes, Pods etc are different. They weren't normal draftees which what we are actually talking about.
They were mature agers and you expect far more from the start (That's the point of getting them) and don't expect the ceiling to be as high.
And if they don't get there quickly (The Big O, Abbott etc) they are gone quicker.
Also Stokes, Menegola went to another level but they were still good enough before they did anyway.
I count Guthrie's first proper year as 2013 and he was already excellent.
That's why so many were frustrated with how he performed for 3 seasons.
You knew that he had the talent.

 

[Down at K Park]

I think we tried most things with Murdoch. Just didn't happen.
Still hope he does well at the Suns if he's still there.
I think it was Cat Empire that made an excellent point that people just wont accept.
It doesn't matter if even we had Wojo back in his prime, the ball use out of defence is by design. It's what we want.
Doesn't matter if we play Clark, Murdoch or any other player there. They're not going to go fast.

Don’t you love it when we get hemmed in around half back, and continually kick backwards and sideways, until we eventually turn it over while kicking to a pack on the wing

Riveting football

 

[Turbocat]

Shouldn't you also bring age into the 100 games?

Menegola just made the AA team for the first time and he's only played 82 games - so he actually achieved that feat quicker than Scarlett. But when you break down his career:
- turned 28 before the start of this season
- was delisted by 2 teams
- earned a spot on the list of a third team by working hard at the next level down
- when he was 24, the same age Scarlett was in his first AA year, Sam played 8 games & pretty sure not many considered him AA quality

Cam Guthrie just earned his first AA blazer after 178 games - if we go back 100 games or say 2015, how many had him as a future AA player?

Mathew Stokes played 189 games for us - until witnessing his 2013 & 2014 seasons, how many genuinely thought he'd be able to play at the levels he did those years?

Some players will take longer to reach their full potential or peak - it's not necessarily as easy as how many games they've played as some will take longer or more maturity to reach those levels

The reason why so many finger strokes are tapped... its not precise. Age plays a part , games play a part ..but what type of games ...in the old days reserves was good enough ..Haw were legendary guys like Tuck and Dippa played seasons upon season in the two's ... then there is body type and background.
How many games did Blitz play before him playing in our VFL side.

General rule for a kid drafted at 18 .... 50-80 games , 20-23 ..starts to see what you have. ... but id also say if you do not have the ability to do the athletic demands then the games and the age mean zip . I call them dry wells. Whether thats play on SWells is a half truth... but you spend all the effort to dig a hole and then its dry. A lot of very good locla footballer just didn't have that extra physical ability. Its why we see time given to Blitz and MOC rather than 100's of local kids.

So if Charlie Constable gets to a club where he is played for 3 years ... what will he be? Prismall thought we held him back but found Ess no easy gig either.

 

[Whit3y]

Based now using the rear view mirror or back in 03 you sat there and said " yup Jimmy has the Norm, Brownlow and 300 games in him."

Sorry if I call BS - but that aside, it makes the point that players take time to develop - and it seems especially longer with us as they are pushed out for older players and made to wait their go ( right or wrong). They just need more time - BMac and Neeldy talk about it all the time on KROCK - it takes time for players to get better in systems etc. Il trust their takes on it. Now.. we nened to keep what we have ( Narkle, Chook, Cocky et al) and keep them pushing up.

GO Catters

I still think we should have kept Cowan and the Hyphen. All they needed was more time

 

[And_ROOS]

Don’t you love it when we get hemmed in around half back, and continually kick backwards and sideways, until we eventually turn it over while kicking to a pack on the wing

Riveting football

Bet this week we are fast and dashing off half back, 45 rebound 50s and we look like a Premiership team until the PF when Scotty goes back to slowball.

 

[Down at K Park]

Bet this week we are fast and dashing off half back, 45 rebound 50s and we look like a Premiership team until the PF when Scotty goes back to slowball.

Haha probably. Semi final specialists.

 

[Mr Meow]

And how has that panned out when we reach the finals against good pressure teams? We struggle to even score 50 points most times.

We are nothing but flat track bullies who can score well in low pressure regular season games. When finals come round and the pressure gets cranked up we go to water, and can’t score. Cause our game plan is overly defensive and not built to handle high pressure.

I actually agree that this has been true in a number of finals but I disagree a bit on the last too that it was a lack of scoring chances; rather conversion.

At least four of Friday night's behinds should have been converted, so 9.8.62 - with 20% less game time that works out to 77 points which for a finals game is fine.

The Richmond prelim of 9.12.66 was a bad night in front of goal again, at the very least should have been 12.9.81 - minus Duncan and Hawkins.

My more recent fear is not actually a stilted game plan resulting in a lack of scoring opportunities. It's more that we are completely losing our bottle in the key moments in front of goal.

Some of the accuracy issues have been present in other finals failures as well (someone had a nice stat for it, versus expected scores) and basically 2/3 times when our accuracy is above 45% Geelong have won finals under Scott. And 45% is not high at all. The 10 game run at the back end of 2019 where we went W-L-W-L etc, the major difference between that and the 10-1 to start the year was going from the most accurate team in the comp to the least accurate (by far). This is a serious technical or mental issue, but I'd argue the opportunities themselves are still being created.

 

[catempire]

I actually agree that this has been true in a number of finals but I disagree a bit on the last too that it was a lack of scoring chances; rather conversion.

At least four of Friday night's behinds should have been converted, so 9.8.62 - with 20% less game time that works out to 77 points which for a finals game is fine.

The Richmond prelim of 9.12.66 was a bad night in front of goal again, at the very least should have been 12.9.81 - minus Duncan and Hawkins.

My more recent fear is not actually a stilted game plan resulting in a lack of scoring opportunities. It's more that we are completely losing our bottle in the key moments in front of goal.

Some of the accuracy issues have been present in other finals failures as well (someone had a nice stat for it, versus expected scores) and basically 2/3 times when our accuracy is above 45% Geelong have won finals under Scott. And 45% is not high at all. The 10 game run at the back end of 2019 where we went W-L-W-L etc, the major difference between that and the 10-1 to start the year was going from the most accurate team in the comp to the least accurate (by far). This is a serious technical or mental issue, but I'd argue the opportunities themselves are still being created.

Superb

 

[TheYid]

Don’t you love it when we get hemmed in around half back, and continually kick backwards and sideways, until we eventually turn it over while kicking to a pack on the wing

Riveting football

Yep. Our game plan has been figured out. Tigers hemmed us in on the 40mtr mark in our own backline and pretty much ended it - now everyone is doing it.

 

[Turbocat]

I actually agree that this has been true in a number of finals but I disagree a bit on the last too that it was a lack of scoring chances; rather conversion.

At least four of Friday night's behinds should have been converted, so 9.8.62 - with 20% less game time that works out to 77 points which for a finals game is fine.

The Richmond prelim of 9.12.66 was a bad night in front of goal again, at the very least should have been 12.9.81 - minus Duncan and Hawkins.

My more recent fear is not actually a stilted game plan resulting in a lack of scoring opportunities. It's more that we are completely losing our bottle in the key moments in front of goal.

Some of the accuracy issues have been present in other finals failures as well (someone had a nice stat for it, versus expected scores) and basically 2/3 times when our accuracy is above 45% Geelong have won finals under Scott. And 45% is not high at all. The 10 game run at the back end of 2019 where we went W-L-W-L etc, the major difference between that and the 10-1 to start the year was going from the most accurate team in the comp to the least accurate (by far). This is a serious technical or mental issue, but I'd argue the opportunities themselves are still being created.

yeah I post that we probably need a certain number of scroing shots as well obvious 2 goals 1 behind is no good

 

[Cataholic]

I actually agree that this has been true in a number of finals but I disagree a bit on the last too that it was a lack of scoring chances; rather conversion.

At least four of Friday night's behinds should have been converted, so 9.8.62 - with 20% less game time that works out to 77 points which for a finals game is fine.

The Richmond prelim of 9.12.66 was a bad night in front of goal again, at the very least should have been 12.9.81 - minus Duncan and Hawkins.

My more recent fear is not actually a stilted game plan resulting in a lack of scoring opportunities. It's more that we are completely losing our bottle in the key moments in front of goal.

Some of the accuracy issues have been present in other finals failures as well (someone had a nice stat for it, versus expected scores) and basically 2/3 times when our accuracy is above 45% Geelong have won finals under Scott. And 45% is not high at all. The 10 game run at the back end of 2019 where we went W-L-W-L etc, the major difference between that and the 10-1 to start the year was going from the most accurate team in the comp to the least accurate (by far). This is a serious technical or mental issue, but I'd argue the opportunities themselves are still being created.

I reckon our consistent failure in finals is a mental issue, which in turn creates the technical issues that then worsen the situation, leading to greater anxiety, leading.......and on it goes

 

[Turbocat]

I reckon our consistent failure in finals is a mental issue, which in turn creates the technical issues that then worsen the situation, leading to greater anxiety, leading.......and on it goes

There is a style of play thats easier to perform when stressed ..but there is that acclimatisation of performing when stressed. At time we look like a driver from a country town plonked in the middle of melb traffic. Now e know one can get used to it ..but if you only do it once a year the first day you will not feel comfortable.

Its got to that Monkey stage now .... I think it may have something to do with the way we prepare for our H&A games ... its OK trying to be relaxed and calm etc ..but I think we should have more high stress games to prepare for finals mental pressure. To often we play on and go round the corner etc etc ... I can remember think about this before Mooney had his issues , he and SJ had an assist comp ..but it gave Moons a way to cop out. ... and Hawkins only a couple of weeks ago played from in the square ..and I though at the time ..bad practice. As it was it barely escaped gettimg touched.

Even the mids .. I think occasionally it would be good to get used to being amped up ..how we do that not sure...but a kep part of Thompsons mantra was to play in a finals sustainable manner. Too often we almost look shell shocked by the upped tempo ..once twice maybe but ..its beyond that , way back in 2016 was enough for me the way we started against the Swans.

 

[caitsith01]

Every year, every team loses/delists/trades young players. It doesn’t mean anything more than a mutual agreement that they are not really going to fit into the teams plans going forward. And every year, teams draft and trade in new young players. It doesn’t mean a thing about culture or a nurturing environment.

That being said, if a player is not good enough to break into the best 22 due to capability, form or injury, and they want to leave because of this reason, that’s really on them, not on the club.

Surely the players you'd expect us to be delisting are Kennerley, Brownless, Jenkins, not largely untried juniors with obvious potential.

 

[BORIS332]

Wtf. We scored 42 points. 42.

That is f all.

But keep living in your little fairy land where points are worth as much as goals

These scott apologists just keep getting more deluded with every mounting finals loss.

Is 100 points in a final enough for you? The emoji in your post suits you.

 

[Down at K Park]

Is 100 points in a final enough for you? The emoji in your post suits you.

Yes cause 100 isn’t f- all like 42 is. Not sure what your point is. You preferred us scoring 42 and not 100?

Nice try at point scoring, but all you did was prove my point.

 

[BORIS332]

Yes cause 100 isn’t f- all like 42 is. Not sure what your point is. You preferred us scoring 42 and not 100?

Nice try at point scoring, but all you did was prove my point.

Your original argument, if you even remember, was that our game plan doesn't allow us to score in big games. So my point is, you're wrong. Not that you'll ever accept that.

 

[Down at K Park]

Your original argument, if you even remember, was that our game plan doesn't allow us to score in big games. So my point is, you're wrong. Not that you'll ever accept that.

One game against a team of spent witches hats doesn’t prove anything. Against real pressure our scoring dries right up. Years of results in finals prove that. It’s there in black and white. Watch our score be significantly lower this week against a worthy opponent. Pies were exhausted and they were already checked out.

 

[catempire]

It must be amazing to be able to convince yourself you’re right when the evidence supports you and still right even when it undermines you. Must be such a satisfying state of existence.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

One game against a team of spent witches hats doesn’t prove anything. Against real pressure our scoring dries right up. Years of results in finals prove that. It’s there in black and white. Watch our score be significantly lower this week against a worthy opponent. Pies were exhausted and they were already checked out.

I've seen this sentiment pop up a fair bit since Saturday night, but I can't work it out - why were Collingwood so spent/exhausted? They had a bye heading into the finals like every other team.

 

[Commando]

I've seen this sentiment pop up a fair bit since Saturday night, but I can't work it out - why were Collingwood so spent/exhausted? They had a bye heading into the finals like every other team.

7 day turnaround from Perth too
Not 5 or 6
They were up and about that’s for sure

we deserve credit where it’s due

 

[PhatBoy]

Don’t you love it when we get hemmed in around half back, and continually kick backwards and sideways, until we eventually turn it over while kicking to a pack on the wing

Riveting football

I love it on the nights it works. Which is most of them.

 

[Down at K Park]

I've seen this sentiment pop up a fair bit since Saturday night, but I can't work it out - why were Collingwood so spent/exhausted? They had a bye heading into the finals like every other team.

The west coast game had them on a huge high. No one game them a chance of winning. Lloyd on footy classified reckons they spent too much time celebrating the win.

Buckley knew within a few minutes they just weren’t switched on and looked tired, or unfocused or whatever you want to call it.

It happens from time to time after big wins for some teams. We have been guilty of it too.

 

[PhatBoy]

I seriously get the impression that because the Pies were 8th, not 2nd or 3rd, some people think that somehow it took more out of them physically going and beating the West Coast.

Like its a bigger physical effort for a mediocre team to win a tough match than it would be for a good team to win one.

They had a bye, went to Perth, won a good game and played exceptional footy, then went straight back east, same as Victorian teams have been doing for 33 years.