Analysis How did we go to GF to this garbage in less than 3 years

[King Elvis]

I’m sure it’s a factor - but I suspect a lot of it is just not wanting to waste your career at such a shambolic Organisation.

At present, the Crows are last for inside 50 differential, centre clearance differential and stoppage clearance differential. It's left their back six exposed far too often.

Campo’s legacy

 

[feenix67]

I’m sure it’s a factor - but I suspect a lot of it is just not wanting to waste your career at such a shambolic Organisation.



Campo’s legacy

Kind of... bit of LMC too though. Did we have the "run from behind" plan to shield against our slow lazy midfield? Sure seems that way doesn't it.

 

[Tex200]

Except there's no evidence to suggest that Hugh, being a late starter, won't still be a contested ball beast in 2023, and we got fu** all picks for him anyway. Meanwhile we kept two blokes who can't get near it, who ironically both had higher trade value.

Make no mistake, the exodus is about TPP and contract mismanagement, that's becoming very clear to me now.

HG is a story of chronic list mismanagement. Sign on a Cat B rookie, pay him and for his development for almost 2 years. Then invest 50 games, then right when he’s about due, trade him for peanuts because he wanted 3 years and we’d only offer 2. Mind boggling.

No surprise he sits #8 in the AFL for clearances and #3 for tackles. I’d love to know what Matt Rowell thinks about having Hugh in the stoppages with him?

Stupidity

 

[xazos79]

Oh and didn't we just show the rest of the world with the total crap that was the Gibbs shemozzle ?

The gibbs trade infuriates me. I was dead set against it. Absolutely stupid in foresight and even worse in hindsight. Ugh......

 

[Scorpus]

The Crows went from top to bottom in three years — this is how it happened

The Adelaide Crows went from the cusp of greatness to cellar dwellers in just a few years. Cody Atkinson and Sean Lawson take a look at what went so wrong.

www.abc.net.au

The stats on us using an 8-6-4 setup 30% of the time at center square work is absolutely damning, far higher than any other team in the competition.

It's likely the reason why players like Rory Laird went from gun to complete shit.

It also suggests Lever is an underrated defender. I said earlier we should have kept Lever so we didn't need to draft McAsey but some on this board thought that was ridiculous

 

[relapse]

The stats on us using an 8-6-4 setup 30% of the time at center square work is absolutely damning, far higher than any other team in the competition.

It's likely the reason why players like Rory Laird went from gun to complete sh*t.

It also suggests Lever is an underrated defender. I said earlier we should have kept Lever so we didn't need to draft McAsey but some on this board thought that was ridiculous

That pretty much confirms a theory that most of us had for a while now that the 6-6-6 rules has nullified Laird as a player.

The moment that Laird had to become more responsible defensively and not be able to run loose in the back line he's never been the same player.

Also I wouldn't read too much in Lever's stats, he would have only played about 15 games for Melbourne out of about 50 possible games since he's been there so you can't really gauge too much from that.

 

[Vader]

HG is a story of chronic list mismanagement. Sign on a Cat B rookie, pay him and for his development for almost 2 years. Then invest 50 games, then right when he’s about due, trade him for peanuts because he wanted 3 years and we’d only offer 2. Mind boggling.

No surprise he sits #8 in the AFL for clearances and #3 for tackles. I’d love to know what Matt Rowell thinks about having Hugh in the stoppages with him?

Stupidity

He didn't want 3 years, he wanted 4 - and it was a non-negotiable for him (financial security reasons). Adelaide's List Manager would have been read the riot act if he agreed to that contract, on top of all the other long-term contracts he'd already stuck us with.

HG would be great to have in our team right now. The risk of being forced to keep him on the list in 2022 & 2023 though was just too high.

 

[Tex200]

He didn't want 3 years, he wanted 4 - and it was a non-negotiable for him (financial security reasons). Adelaide's List Manager would have been read the riot act if he agreed to that contract, on top of all the other long-term contracts he'd already stuck us with.

HG would be great to have in our team right now. The risk of being forced to keep him on the list in 2022 & 2023 though was just too high.

Well he signed a 3 year deal with GCS so it couldn’t have been too much of a deal breaker

 

[WaynesWorld19]

HG is a story of chronic list mismanagement. Sign on a Cat B rookie, pay him and for his development for almost 2 years. Then invest 50 games, then right when he’s about due, trade him for peanuts because he wanted 3 years and we’d only offer 2. Mind boggling.

No surprise he sits #8 in the AFL for clearances and #3 for tackles. I’d love to know what Matt Rowell thinks about having Hugh in the stoppages with him?

Stupidity

The trading of Hugh Greenwood was exactly the right call .....the trading of Keath was entirely the wrong call, able to play back and forward, whilst McAsey developed

I'd suggest we could have contracted Keath too, if we weren't paying the wages of Betts and Jenkins

 

[Vader]

The stats on us using an 8-6-4 setup 30% of the time at center square work is absolutely damning, far higher than any other team in the competition.

It's likely the reason why players like Rory Laird went from gun to complete sh*t.

I still don't buy that 6-6-6 has anything to do with Laird's form collapsing. 6-6-6 only applies at the centre square. It means that we're no longer able to start Charlie Cameron off the back of the square and have him sprint through the middle, hoping for a quick F50 entry, as we did in 2017. It doesn't mean that we can't flood numbers back during general play, which is when the majority of the opposition's F50 entries occur.

That pretty much confirms a theory that most of us had for a while now that the 6-6-6 rules has nullified Laird as a player.

The moment that Laird had to become more responsible defensively and not be able to run loose in the back line he's never been the same player.

How, precisely, has 6-6-6 done this? I could buy what you're selling if 6-6-6 applied at every stoppage, or for the entire game. It doesn't. It only applies at centre bounces. The rule forces Laird to be accountable for the first 30 seconds after a centre bounce, after which time there's no reason why our other players can't have flooded back into defence as they did before.

6-6-6 has hurt us offensively. It's had **** all impact on us defensively, and it's certainly not responsible for Laird's loss of form.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Well he signed a 3 year deal with GCS so it couldn’t have been too much of a deal breaker

4 years at a lower wage or 3 years at a higher salary .....I'd suggest the latter was sold to Greenwood, which given the age profile of the GC list made perfect sense

It was about total $$$$

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I still don't buy that 6-6-6 has anything to do with Laird's form collapsing. 6-6-6 only applies at the centre square. It means that we're no longer able to start Charlie Cameron off the back of the square and have him sprint through the middle, hoping for a quick F50 entry, as we did in 2017. It doesn't mean that we can't flood numbers back during general play, which is when the majority of the opposition's F50 entries occur.

How, precisely, has 6-6-6 done this? I could buy what you're selling if 6-6-6 applied at every stoppage, or for the entire game. It doesn't. It only applies at centre bounces. The rule forces Laird to be accountable for the first 30 seconds after a centre bounce, after which time there's no reason why our other players can't have flooded back into defence as they did before.

6-6-6 has hurt us offensively. It's had **** all impact on us defensively, and it's certainly not responsible for Laird's loss of form.

Zero to do with Lairds form ......Laird was good at mopping up ...now he's defending first, because the midfield can't apply any pressure at all

Study his kicking patterns .....his preferred range is 20-35 mtr kicks ....now he's blasting most kicks high & long
Is that gameplan .....I doubt it, he does fall apart a bit when pressure is applied, and did the same last season

 

[Weiterbot23]

The gibbs trade infuriates me. I was dead set against it. Absolutely stupid in foresight and even worse in hindsight. Ugh......

SOS really played Reid year in year out

 

[Mutineer]

SOS really played Reid year in year out

Go away...

Post shit like that on your own board not here.

 

[Mutineer]

Well he signed a 3 year deal with GCS so it couldn’t have been too much of a deal breaker

My understanding was it was 3 years with a trigger clause for a fourth?

 

[Tex200]

The trading of Hugh Greenwood was exactly the right call .....the trading of Keath was entirely the wrong call, able to play back and forward, whilst McAsey developed

I'd suggest we could have contracted Keath too, if we weren't paying the wages of Betts and Jenkins

Ha - I’m directly opposite. Keep HG while Jones and McHenry developed in the middle. Need that bigger defensive body. Rowell must be loving it

 

[Scorpus]

I still don't buy that 6-6-6 has anything to do with Laird's form collapsing. 6-6-6 only applies at the centre square. It means that we're no longer able to start Charlie Cameron off the back of the square and have him sprint through the middle, hoping for a quick F50 entry, as we did in 2017. It doesn't mean that we can't flood numbers back during general play, which is when the majority of the opposition's F50 entries occur.

How, precisely, has 6-6-6 done this? I could buy what you're selling if 6-6-6 applied at every stoppage, or for the entire game. It doesn't. It only applies at centre bounces. The rule forces Laird to be accountable for the first 30 seconds after a centre bounce, after which time there's no reason why our other players can't have flooded back into defence as they did before.

6-6-6 has hurt us offensively. It's had **** all impact on us defensively, and it's certainly not responsible for Laird's loss of form.

I think you're underestimating the impact.

With 8-6-4 it means we were usually starting with 7 defenders on the field, one forward (Cameron) in defence and four forwards, plus six mids. Our teams from 2017 usually included 8 defenders we rotated (Brown, Laird, Kelly, Talia, Hartigan, Lever, Smith and Mackay).

With 6-6-6 it means if we want to shift to a 7-6-5 setup, we'd have to start a mid in the forward line, and a defender in the middle, so they can rush back into position. That really hurts us, we can't just put these players on the wing at a center bounce and expect the same output as a genuine midfielder we'd normally put there. We have to be much more careful with rotating players onto the field to try and execute 7 in defence while also retaining structure for center stoppages.

I think the impact is much more than just the 30 seconds you are referring to. I haven't seen us put defenders on the wing at center bounce often enough to say we are trying to get 7 in defence (with defenders, not mids) immediately in games

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Ha - I’m directly opposite. Keep HG while Jones and McHenry developed in the middle. Need that bigger defensive body. Rowell must be loving it

Still reckon, and I've been laughed at on this board since his drafting .....Doedee to the midfield

We don't have anyone currently in the midfield mix with elite agility and/or sidestep

 

[Interloperer]

I still don't buy that 6-6-6 has anything to do with Laird's form collapsing. 6-6-6 only applies at the centre square. It means that we're no longer able to start Charlie Cameron off the back of the square and have him sprint through the middle, hoping for a quick F50 entry, as we did in 2017. It doesn't mean that we can't flood numbers back during general play, which is when the majority of the opposition's F50 entries occur.

If you're using loose/extra defenders to shut the game down, then sure 6-6-6 makes little difference. You just force a stoppage as soon as possible and have players shift back while the game is stopped.

If you want to do something interesting/attacking with the extra players in the back half then you are completely screwed. Which is how, at his best, was how Laird was used.

 

[GrommoT]

Except there's no evidence to suggest that Hugh, being a late starter, won't still be a contested ball beast in 2023, and we got fu** all picks for him anyway. Meanwhile we kept two blokes who can't get near it, who ironically both had higher trade value.

Make no mistake, the exodus is about TPP and contract mismanagement, that's becoming very clear to me now.

I'm not sure about the "late starter, later footy career" effect - maybe adding a few years might be feasible but while they weren't playing footy before switching, they would have still been exercising/working hard as bballers/cricketers which would still exact a toll on their bodies.

The exodus may well be TPP/list related but maybe they saw the writing on the wall so gave players like Dougie, Hugh, Keath, etc games to hopefully get some form and trade value? Before covid, they might have thought this year was going to give plenty of opportunities for our youth to get games.

 

[Tex200]

Still reckon, and I've been laughed at on this board since his drafting .....Doedee to the midfield

We don't have anyone currently in the midfield mix with elite agility and/or sidestep

Agree - midfield or even forward.

The reality is we just don’t have enough talent that we can afford to have him floating across half back.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Agree - midfield or even forward.

The reality is we just don’t have enough talent that we can afford to have him floating across half back.

I think McAsey can play Doedee role across HB .....not big enough yet for a KPD role

 

[Vader]

If you're using loose/extra defenders to shut the game down, then sure 6-6-6 makes little difference. You just force a stoppage as soon as possible and have players shift back while the game is stopped.

If you want to do something interesting/attacking with the extra players in the back half then you are completely screwed. Which is how, at his best, was how Laird was used.

And.... no. 6-6-6 meant that we weren't able to have someone like Cameron come screaming in off the back of the centre square, as we did in 2017. However, that was never Laird's role.

We're currently spending 80% of the game with 10+ players in our D50, because our midfielders are incompetent (to put it kindly) and incapable of winning a contest, resulting in the opposition banging in repeat I50s end-on-end until they finally score a goal. If you've got 10+ players in your D50 for 80% of the game, then 6-6-6 is a complete non-factor - which it is.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

 

[Vader]

I think you're underestimating the impact.

With 8-6-4 it means we were usually starting with 7 defenders on the field, one forward (Cameron) in defence and four forwards, plus six mids. Our teams from 2017 usually included 8 defenders we rotated (Brown, Laird, Kelly, Talia, Hartigan, Lever, Smith and Mackay).

With 6-6-6 it means if we want to shift to a 7-6-5 setup, we'd have to start a mid in the forward line, and a defender in the middle, so they can rush back into position. That really hurts us, we can't just put these players on the wing at a center bounce and expect the same output as a genuine midfielder we'd normally put there. We have to be much more careful with rotating players onto the field to try and execute 7 in defence while also retaining structure for center stoppages.

I think the impact is much more than just the 30 seconds you are referring to. I haven't seen us put defenders on the wing at center bounce often enough to say we are trying to get 7 in defence (with defenders, not mids) immediately in games

6-6-6 has an impact on the way we setup at centre bounces. No argument there. Laird has to be accountable if the opposition get a fast break out of the centre, before our midfielders can flood back and fill the holes.

However, if there's no fast break, then our midfielders can & do flood back into defence (given that the opposition invariably win the clearance and go into attack). We're currently spending 80% of the game in our defensive half, with 60% of that time in our D50, with 10+ players inside the D50. 6-6-6 has **** all impact 30 seconds after the centre bounce.