Geelong - OLD AND GAWN

[Oh Darling]

13 - 1 are pretty good stats for a team who have been "old and gone" all year.

By "pretty good stats" do you mean... "Stats don't show the real story".

You are right... your win/loss record stats look pretty good for a side that is nowhere near a 13-1 side. It should be 10-4 in reality. Never mind you're going to chalk up your 2nd loss next weekend

 

[RegHickeyStand]

When you were peeking, and we were just warming up, you beat us by 3 points in a controversial game. Well down, but still something to be worried about.

What peaking?

Where are all the record breaking thrashings against weaker teams that points to us peaking? I think the GC were ahead of us at half time. We cruised against the Bulldogs.

Carlton, Essendon, West Coast have done that. They have all put their foot to the metal. But a lot of critics complain that Geelong hasn't really set the world on fire as we went 13-0. I agree. We have only got up for one game this season, and that's it.

We haven't even worked toward peaking yet. But watch this space over the next few weeks. You will see it begin next week, win or lose.

 

[barmy44]

30th post?****you geelong FLOG'S make me laugh You lost...Deal with it,Thought you were invincible....Well guess what? You're not LMFAO

wow. i said we were beaten by a better team on the night. it has been dealt with. no geelong supporter thinks we are invincible. what hasnt been dealt is that you spent your saturday night posting moronic insults half in lower case half in upper case exclusively in threads about geelong. grow up, man. get a life, or a job.

ill say it once more, for your benefit: essendon were far better than geelong last night and deserved to win.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

By "pretty good stats" do you mean... "Stats don't show the real story".

You are right... your win/loss record stats look pretty good for a side that is nowhere near a 13-1 side. It should be 10-4 in reality. Never mind you're going to chalk up your 2nd loss next weekend

We haven't set the world on fire this year.

No huge wins against bottom teams, like your side has done.

Yet we have beat the top 4 sides 4 times. And in the only match we really got up for - the Collingwood game - we should have beaten them by 6 goals. Played all over them.

So, think about it. The only explanation is the opposite of what most ppl think: Geelong has been playing within itself, and hasn't started peaking yet.

 

[stoner]

Amusing thread. Cats flogs are really starting to shit themselves.

Would have been easier for them to accept their fate at the end of last year, but their hopes were cruelly raised again by stringing together a spate of maggot assisted, lucky wins over injury-hit sides.

The unexpected added pain makes watching their demise all the more......funny

 

[STC]

Amusing thread. Cats flogs are really starting to shit themselves.

Would have been easier for them to accept their fate at the end of last year, but their hopes were cruelly raised again by stringing together a spate of maggot assisted, lucky wins over injury-hit sides.

The unexpected added pain makes watching their demise all the more......funny

Is that all you've got? What does it say about Collingwood, Carlton and Hawthorn (x2) that these supposedly top 4 sides couldn't beat our ageing hack side?

Like seriously, I've never seen a dumber troll attempt in my life. We're 13-1. Why would we be worried? I'd be more worried if we won every game - a reminder that we're not invincible is a good thing.

 

[Churros]

Amusing thread. Cats flogs are really starting to shit themselves.

Would have been easier for them to accept their fate at the end of last year, but their hopes were cruelly raised again by stringing together a spate of maggot assisted, lucky wins over injury-hit sides.

The unexpected added pain makes watching their demise all the more......funny

I suspect you must have been feeling the same when your mob lost to Adelaide? And us twice?

Must feel good being beat twice by underachievers, hey?

 

[Churros]

I've heard many times, from many geelong supporters here, including yourself, that the geelong of 2010 are no longer. This is an all new geelong. Now you're talking about 3 season? Which is it? Because if those three seasons are relevant, then last season must be equally relevant, and come Sept, you pussies will be bang in trouble.

I'd like to know how you came to that figure. BTW, we weren't at our best either, but you'll probably continue to ignore that. At least for the next 2 months anyway.

Why would Fiddlestix ignore that? Judging on his past posts aimed at you, he has been trying to tell you that Collingwood isn't the only one that can improve. I haven't read one where he's written that Collingwood can't improve or will stick to the same form throughout the whole year.

And I'm sure by "all new Geelong" he meant to say that this season is an improvement on the 2010 season. Obviously, not everything has changed, but our players are still capable of winning another premiership like they did in 07 and 09.

 

[stoner]

Is that all you've got? What does it say about Collingwood, Carlton and Hawthorn (x2) that these supposedly top 4 sides couldn't beat our ageing hack side?

Like seriously, I've never seen a dumber troll attempt in my life. We're 13-1. Why would we be worried? I'd be more worried if we won every game - a reminder that we're not invincible is a good thing.

Not trolling mate - everyone knows Collingwood are going to do in two years what you haven't been able to achieve in 5 years 'domination'.

Have a good look at some of the shit you flogs post. We're still 13-1; we only lost by 4 points; but if you win by less than a kick, everyone should bow down to the 'all conquering Geelong'. A touch of humility wouldn't go astray. Easily the least knowledgeable, arrogant group of supporters going around.

 

[Bosk]

I don't see why Geelong would be worried about the future when they have outstanding young talent like Tom "Double Whopper" Hawkins and Travis "Big Game Player" Varcoe.

 

[Churros]

I don't see Geelong every week so I had to go by stat rankings:


J Hunt Scarlett Milburn
Mackie Taylor Enright
Selwood Bartel Corey
Chapman Vardy Johnson
Duncan Podsiadly Stokes

Ottens Ling Kelly

Varcoe Wojcinski Menzel T Hunt(S)


Emer: Christensen Hawkins Lonergan (Mooney?)

With kids on the interchange it's around 27yrs, if Mooney comes good you guys will be pushing 28yrs come finals time which would be unthinkable historically..

Our Premiership team was 24.1yrs

How the **** did Lonergan and Christensen get emergency? And how Josh Hunt and Vardy are ahead of them?

Lonergan is doing outstanding this year. Christensen is probably one of our best young guns.

Not blaming you, but the stats are extremely inaccurate.

 

[KissmeRobbo]

How the **** did Lonergan and Christensen get emergency? And how Josh Hunt and Vardy are ahead of them?

Lonergan is doing outstanding this year. Christensen is probably one of our best young guns.

Not blaming you, but the stats are extremely inaccurate.

Ok that's the kind of info I need to tweak the team with, so who is the relief ruckman/forward if no Vardy?

And I thought Josh Hunt was your first pick BP, did you mean T Hunt?


You've also been rotating your older players which makes it harder to pin down a 22, I'd say the 26 players above pretty much cover it and depending on the mix it's between 27yrs and 28yrs

 

[BadFish]

By "pretty good stats" do you mean... "Stats don't show the real story".

You are right... your win/loss record stats look pretty good for a side that is nowhere near a 13-1 side. It should be 10-4 in reality. Never mind you're going to chalk up your 2nd loss next weekend

When you say 'in reality' do you actually mean something else? because in threality we are 13 - 1.

look
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_ladder

See.

I think you are right we may chalk up our second loss next weekend. Will I be worried if we do? No, because 13 - 2 (in reality) is still pretty impressive for a bunch of old crocks ready for retirement.

 

[Churros]

I don't see why Geelong would be worried about the future when they have outstanding young talent like Tom "Double Whopper" Hawkins and Travis "Big Game Player" Varcoe.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know teams couldn't have bad players. They're horrible. But Hawkins did really well in the last VFL game (3 goals). And why would Varcoe be called a big game player? He's just simply inconsistent. It has nothing to do with who we play. He stepped up in the Adelaide game.

Why you didn't point out the likes of Selwood, Taylor, Christensen, Menzel, Vardy, Duncan, Hunt, Simpson, Gillies, Cowan, Motlop, Guthrie, Hogan and Brown who have already proved themselves young guns is far, far, far, far, far beyond me.

Mackie, Lonergan, Bartel, Kelly, Byrnes, Johnson and Stokes still have at least another 5 years in them too.

So yes. Our future is looking bright. As said by a large amount of people involved in the media and several AFL coaches including our own.

 

[Churros]

Ok that's the kind of info I need to tweak the team with, so who is the relief ruckman/forward if no Vardy?

And I thought Josh Hunt was your first pick BP, did you mean T Hunt?


You've also been rotating your older players which makes it harder to pin down a 22, I'd say the 26 players above pretty much cover it and depending on the mix it's between 27yrs and 28yrs

Although he is a dud of a forward, Hawkins is actually a pretty impressive ruckman. And Mark Blake is a beyond impressive tap ruckman, but horrible anywhere else, and both have been named by everyone our worst players. I don't blame them, but both are good in the ruck.

I'll go Hawkins (because of experience), Dawson Simpson then Mark Blake (because he'll probably go to St Kilda next year).

 

[KissmeRobbo]

Although he is a dud of a forward, Hawkins is actually a pretty impressive ruckman. And Mark Blake is a beyond impressive tap ruckman, but horrible anywhere else, and both have been named by everyone our worst players. I don't blame them, but both are good in the ruck.

I'll go Hawkins (because of experience), Dawson Simpson then Mark Blake (because he'll probably go to St Kilda next year).

The 22 above are the players that have played 10 or more games, the other 4 emergencies have played less than 10 games.. that's probably the easiest way to do it but it leaves you without a relief ruckman/forward..

nobody else has played 3 or more games so it's really that squad of 26 unless someone comes out of the blue

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Premiership window:
24yrs - 26yrs

Geelong top 22:

27.3Yrs

As it is more about attrition this season with the interchange bench having a big impact on how the game pans out, do you think that it would advantage older more seasoned players and disadvantage younger sprint, sprint setups?

The Carlton team of 1995 was one of the most dominant premier teams of the past 30 years. Average age, nearly 27.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/games/1995/030919950930.html

Also Essendon 2000 were well over 26, and Brisbane in 2003 when they pumped Collingwood were 26 and 264 days.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/games/2003/041920030927.html

It seems that the best, strongest teams over the past 30 years have in fact been older teams.

 

[KissmeRobbo]

As it is more about attrition this season with the interchange bench having a big impact on how the game pans out, do you think that it would advantage older more seasoned players and disadvantage younger sprint, sprint setups?

The Carlton team of 1995 was one of the most dominant premier teams of the past 30 years. Average age, nearly 27.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/games/1995/030919950930.html

Also Essendon 2000 were well over 26, and Brisbane in 2003 when they pumped Collingwood were 26 and 264 days.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/games/2003/041920030927.html

It seems that the best, strongest teams over the past 30 years have in fact been older teams.

Yeah but you can't find a single team that was over 27 let alone closing in on 28.. that's what I meant historically.. you'll have to set a record I reckon

Not sure on the attrition thing, we were far younger than St Kilda last year and we drew the GF so it still comes down to the day.. all I know is Mick is pretty happy with Butters in that department..

 

[Pluggeroo]

A few have been waiting a little while to trawl this thread out!! Must have been bloody frustrating to put it back on ice each week; each month. Oh well milk it as much as you want. We had a shit game, our possession count was the worst we had since 2006 and we went down by 4 pts. Didn't come to play until the last 10 minutes of the game.

If only that were true. The Bumbers beat you last night. Sitting there on you high horse, sanctimoniously assuming that your mob of ponces "had a bad night", never for one moment recognising that you were simply beaten by a bunch of duds. This has been a long time coming. Finally the mediocrity that is Geelfog footy has been picked off by a team that was "on", albeit lowly essendon!!!

Big deal. Would rather be where we are than 16 other clubs.

On aggregate you would rather be 2nd???

 

[Pluggeroo]

If Geelong are rubbish because they lost to Essendon without Watson, what does that make those teams who were beaten by a side who lost to Essendon without Watson?

Punching above your weight, mate.

Thats just a poor poor response!

 

[KissmeRobbo]

This is the prelim stats from last year

Collingwood Attribute Geelong
188.3cm Height 187.5cm
90.1kg Weight 91.0kg
24yr 1mth Age 27yr 7mth
80.0 Games 133.1

 

[BadFish]

Yeah but you can't find a single team that was over 27 let alone closing in on 28.. that's what I meant historically.. you'll have to set a record I reckon

Not sure on the attrition thing, we were far younger than St Kilda last year and we drew the GF so it still comes down to the day.. all I know is Mick is pretty happy with Butters in that department..

And historically what precedent is there for this group of players to set a record?

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Yeah but you can't find a single team that was over 27 let alone closing in on 28.. that's what I meant historically.. you'll have to set a record I reckon

Not sure on the attrition thing, we were far younger than St Kilda last year and we drew the GF so it still comes down to the day.. all I know is Mick is pretty happy with Butters in that department..

St Kilda's gameplan is pure failure. It wasn't age last year.

Usually older teams don't win because, like Essendon in 2000-1, they can't afford to keep all their key players, or their older players go downhill quickly. Losing Ablett proved a boon for our salary cap problems. Also the younger players don't come on quick enough. But ours have. Much like yours did last year. Scarlett and Milburn and Wojo are still playing great. Scarlett had a stinker last night, but that's just one game. He has been playing great

 

[KissmeRobbo]

And historically what precedent is there for this group of players to set a record?

There is none if you go too close to 28yrs, even a little over 27yrs will be an amazing effort.. it just doesn't happen

 

[KissmeRobbo]

Usually older teams don't win because, like Essendon in 2000-1, they can't afford to keep all their key players, or their older players go downhill quickly. Losing Ablett proved a boon for our salary cap problems. Also the younger players don't come on quick enough. But ours have. Much like yours did last year. Scarlett and Milburn and Wojo are still playing great. Scarlett had a stinker last night, but that's just one game. He has been playing great

All that is true but I still can't find one of your new young players in the top 20 rankings bar Duncan:

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/tr-geelong-cats

and losing Ablett wasn't just a shocker because he was the best player in the league but he was also one of your youngest players which exacerbates your age problem