Strategy Geelong 2017 Midfield

[Art Vandelay_]

According to fanfooty, GWS are indeed a younger list if your talking the 44 senior players.

GWS average forward line age is 24 years, 8 months (Johnson adds on three years to the average given he's 34).
Geelong average forward line age is 24 years, 8 months.

GWS average midfield age is 24 years, 10 months.
Geelong average midfield age is 26 years, 5 months.

GWS average back line age is 26 years, 2 months.
Geelong average back line age is 27 years, 10 months.

The difference between their list compared to ours, you can take out some of their older players and it won't effect the team like it would to us.
Johnson is a luxury to their side just as he was to ours in his last season at Geelong as his absence was not felt all that much.

https://www.bigfooty.com/news/2016/11/how-experienced-is-your-afl-club-in-2017/

Was just after the draft periods too.

 

[CF]

Nice to see you back btw......seems to have been a while..

Thanks David, looks like my one post caused a bit of a furor. That's why I don't post anymore, and I don't use an alias either, which some people seem to think. Have a great 2017, to all my old Geelong friends.

And, if I gave anyone a card 5 years ago, don't you think it's time you got over it?

 

[Spazz Cat]

I can only hope we don't repeat 2016 where our midfield was Paddy & Joel or nothing. A few guys need to step up this year and play better, not fold like a deck of cards when decent pressure is applied.

I noticed every time Guthrie played well the team seemed to play well.
When he went through a form slump in the middle of the year we seemed to struggle. Both Sydney games he didn't play well either.

 

[CF]

I noticed every time Guthrie played well the team seemed to play well.
When he went through a form slump in the middle of the year we seemed to struggle. Both Sydney games he didn't play well either.

We had some shockers last year really. Losses to bottom teams where the mental application wasn't there for some reason. I'll never forget that awful game against Richmond where it took Paddy to win it for us in the last quarter IIRC. I think we do have a good team overall, and I hope this year the guys will gel a bit more than they did in 2016, and the mental fade outs will be less severe. The joys of being a Geelong supporter. LOL.

 

[cynical]

We need to structure up the forwardline better and then make sure players play their roles.

Eg Dangerfield and Selwood are inside mids, their job is to win the ball and give it off to outside mids who have better disposal.

Dangerfield in particular should not just be winning the ball and punting it long to Hawkins he should be giving it off sideways to Duncan/Motlop/Cowan/Guthrie when available as they are outside mids with better disposal.

I'd also have more small forwards and then have Dangerfield/Selwood rest a lot more forward.

Winning premierships is what matters not finishing top 4 and winning brownlows.

 

[Partridge]

No other team found it easily exploitable, and neither did Sydney in the second half. The sky isn't falling, and our midfield will worry most if not all teams this year. Take the emotions out of the loss and it's just a game we started too slowly, understandable with one game in the past four weeks under our belt, right?

Not understandable when it's the most important game of the year, with a Grand Final berth at stake. Particularly when the coach says they're aware of the opposition's fast starts and will be ready for them:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...y-for-faststarting-swans-20160920-grk8gq.html

"There is only so much you can do physically [in training], but I don't have any doubt that going into a prelim final, against one of the best teams in the comp, that we won't be underprepared mentally for the fierceness of the contest," he said on Tuesday."

I'm guessing that's probably what rankles as much as anything. Not that they lost, but the manner of it.

 

[catempire]

Not understandable when it's the most important game of the year, with a Grand Final berth at stake. Particularly when the coach says they're aware of the opposition's fast starts and will be ready for them:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...y-for-faststarting-swans-20160920-grk8gq.html

"There is only so much you can do physically [in training], but I don't have any doubt that going into a prelim final, against one of the best teams in the comp, that we won't be underprepared mentally for the fierceness of the contest," he said on Tuesday."

I'm guessing that's probably what rankles as much as anything. Not that they lost, but the manner of it.

Indeed. But makes it easy for me to accept we were just not good enough.

 

[dazbroncos]

Thanks David, looks like my one post caused a bit of a furor. That's why I don't post anymore, and I don't use an alias either, which some people seem to think. Have a great 2017, to all my old Geelong friends.

And, if I gave anyone a card 5 years ago, don't you think it's time you got over it?

Good to see you CF

Go Catters

 

[Spazz Cat]

Not understandable when it's the most important game of the year, with a Grand Final berth at stake. Particularly when the coach says they're aware of the opposition's fast starts and will be ready for them:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...y-for-faststarting-swans-20160920-grk8gq.html

"There is only so much you can do physically [in training], but I don't have any doubt that going into a prelim final, against one of the best teams in the comp, that we won't be underprepared mentally for the fierceness of the contest," he said on Tuesday."

I'm guessing that's probably what rankles as much as anything. Not that they lost, but the manner of it.

Got a mate who's still giving me shit at work. "Yep we're ready. Yep"

 

[Scottland2007]

Got a mate who's still giving me shit at work. "Yep we're ready. Yep"

I've got a quote for your mate at work. "you people, all of you.... All of you, leave Spazz Cat alone".

 

[Ricketz]

Not understandable when it's the most important game of the year, with a Grand Final berth at stake. Particularly when the coach says they're aware of the opposition's fast starts and will be ready for them:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...y-for-faststarting-swans-20160920-grk8gq.html

"There is only so much you can do physically [in training], but I don't have any doubt that going into a prelim final, against one of the best teams in the comp, that we won't be underprepared mentally for the fierceness of the contest," he said on Tuesday."

I'm guessing that's probably what rankles as much as anything. Not that they lost, but the manner of it.

Well if momentum works for the bulldogs, the lack of it works against us. Scott was doing a presser, like all his others. What he says and what he thinks are not likely to be the same thing.

I have coached and played a few finals and I almost choked when that comment came out. If you can't expect a player with one game in four weeks to come back with full match fitness during the season proper, you can't expect an entire team to do it just because it is finals. It is unrealistic. I predict the bye week will be pulled within the next five years as the AFL watch top four sides continue to struggle to win premierships.

 

[Shai]

If you don't believe the finals bye was a factor, how well did Cats & Giants do in that next game..?

 

[Spazz Cat]

I've got a quote for your mate at work. "you people, all of you.... All of you, leave Spazz Cat alone".

I'll give that go just before I go in and fill out my stress leave forms.

 

[pussygalore]

MIDFIELD MIGHT

Yeah early start when I read hawks will miss the 8 and cats have a top 2 mid so a checked to see if the number crunchers agreed they didn't cant say I agree but they have more research ability.
I would say

GWS
WB
SYD
COLL
GEELONG
strictly midfield groups plus we have two half ruckmen

CHAMPION DATA ranks the midfields for the 2017 season.

1 Collingwood

2 GWS Giants

3 Western Bulldogs

4 Richmond

5 Sydney

6 Port Adelaide

7 St Kilda

8 Geelong

9 West Coast

10 Fremantle

11 Adelaide

12 Hawthorn

13 Essendon

14 Gold Coast

15 Brisbane Lions

16 Carlton

17 North Melbourne

18 Melbourne

I have lost total credibility for Champion Data. Not worth the paper it's written on by there so called experts.

It should be printed on 3-ply paper and renamed from Champion Data to Quilton because I'll be wiping my bum with there analysis.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

We need to structure up the forwardline better and then make sure players play their roles.

Eg Dangerfield and Selwood are inside mids, their job is to win the ball and give it off to outside mids who have better disposal.

Dangerfield in particular should not just be winning the ball and punting it long to Hawkins he should be giving it off sideways to Duncan/Motlop/Cowan/Guthrie when available as they are outside mids with better disposal.

I'd also have more small forwards and then have Dangerfield/Selwood rest a lot more forward.

Winning premierships is what matters not finishing top 4 and winning brownlows.

I don't see this at all in the game plan we had in 2016. We where actually the number one side in the AFL for marks inside 50 for most of the year, if not all of the year. This doesn't suggest we had a game plan of bomb it long to Hawkins. We had a very good game plan around forward line entry and versatility.

 

[Ricketz]

Pur

I don't see this at all in the game plan we had in 2016. We where actually the number one side in the AFL for marks inside 50 for most of the year, if not all of the year. This doesn't suggest we had a game plan of bomb it long to Hawkins. We had a very good game plan around forward line entry and versatility.

Our conversion rate for i50 entries would be where the concern is. Our press locked it in, but it spent a lot of time bouncing around the 50 meter arc. Better delivery would have meant fewer inside 50's with the ball coming back to the centre more often for a bounce where we are strong. In the air we are also strong, but our crumbers were not able to be as effective imo.

 

[Vdubs]

What's that got to do with anything?

Everything, actually

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Pur

Our conversion rate for i50 entries would be where the concern is. Our press locked it in, but it spent a lot of time bouncing around the 50 meter arc. Better delivery would have meant fewer inside 50's with the ball coming back to the centre more often for a bounce where we are strong. In the air we are also strong, but our crumbers were not able to be as effective imo.

Is there a stat for this or are you stating just off what You observe? Like I stated in my first post, we are or where for the majority of the season the no1 side in the AFL for marks inside forward fifty. This would have common sense suggest that we are very effective moving the ball forward, or you would think such a ranking would be virtually impossible to achieve as no1 in the competition if we were not effective moving the ball into our fifty.

 

[Shai]

Is there a stat for this or are you stating just off what You observe? Like I stated in my first post, we are or where for the majority of the season the no1 side in the AFL for marks inside forward fifty. This would have common sense suggest that we are very effective moving the ball forward, or you would think such a ranking would be virtually impossible to achieve as no1 in the competition if we were not effective moving the ball into our fifty.

Was it not conversion that was the major issue..?

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Was it not conversion that was the major issue..?

If your talking about kicking for goal then I agree this was an issue. I don't see how our structure moving into our forward line was an issue tho, we created lots of marks inside fifty to give ourselves chances.

I think we did get caught out in many games tho with our poor transition from the backline into the forward line. It was too predictable and easy to cut off further ahead of play and plan a turnover from. We need a more dynamic style of play which has the potency to suck a lot of sides more into an aggressive style of defending rather than sitting back flooding and waiting to rebound us.

Teams often structured up very defensively well ahead of the field specifically across half back and their defensive side of the centre square and put our precision slow movement game plan under duress when we hit a wall.

I like a lot about the way we moved the ball and especially the way we defended. I would like to see a lot more flexibility in the way we move the ball, a bit more run and carry and sideways ball movement added into the equation to try and have a smoother flow moving the ball from centre square to half forward especially. Too many occasions we did short passes forward from our centre square and got ourselves in a roadblock looking up ahead. More to do with movement and flow from the contest than anything, try and get that good mix of when to short pass and hold and when to roll the dice and run it. Don't think we had the eb and flows of it right last year.

 

[catempire]

Our conversion rate for i50 entries would be where the concern is.

It must have got better as the year went on. I could have sworn we rated terribly for goals/i50 earlier in the year. By the end we ranked 6th (if my quick calcs are right).

 

[Ricketz]

Is there a stat for this or are you stating just off what You observe? Like I stated in my first post, we are or where for the majority of the season the no1 side in the AFL for marks inside forward fifty. This would have common sense suggest that we are very effective moving the ball forward, or you would think such a ranking would be virtually impossible to achieve as no1 in the competition if we were not effective moving the ball into our fifty.

I haven't found full season stats for goal conversions, but mid season we were only converting around a quarter of our entries inside 50 to goals, which was middle tier, whilst our i50 differential was number 1 in the league. We took 351 marks from 1367 i50 entries for the season, which is also around 25% conversion. In the context that we were also ranked number 1 for i50 marks, (I would need better numbers than these to be sure of the following conclusion), those stats tease that there is fair room for improvement converting i50's to both marks and goals.

 

[Ricketz]

It must have got better as the year went on. I could have sworn we rated terribly for goals/i50 earlier in the year. By the end we ranked 6th (if my quick calcs are right).

With Menegola and Scooter coming in to the mids in the second half, improvement was on the cards. I would hope we continue to see improvement this year through proper pre-seasons and natural progression of our second tier mids. It is the main reason I am confident we will have a better chance at a flag this year than last year. That, and a speedier backline...

 

[RegHickeyStand]

The prelim in particular showed that we left too little to too few
Danger and Sel carried us.. if no one else came along for the ride we were in strife

They didn't carry us. If they had carried us, we would have got somewhere.

Reminds me of the comments when Gazza had 25+ possies in the first half in the Collingwood final 2010 when we got smashed. Supporters were saying "He's the only one keeping us in the game!". I would have laughed, but I was too busy crying.

We need a functioning effective midfield that can run both ways and can get it to the outside players who can find a forward. Enough times to win.

 

[TEDDY24INC]

Everything, actually

In the context of his argument, nothing