Opinion Matthew Nicks: Adelaide's Coach (Part 2) - Full Support of the Board

[Danger in Texas]

How could Soligo show more as a pure midfielder at training when, if he was still a year away from the transition, he'd be playing other roles at training?

When you look at how most teams have developed their best mifielders, they've been given key roles in their 3rd season. Proper inside midfield, 20+ touch stuff. Not pissing around on the fringes.

Take Caleb Serong. Averaging 26 touches and 6 clearances in his third season. Tom Green was spending significant inside time in his 2nd season and in his fourth he was practically their best mid. Will Day, fourth season goes in and dominates. Crouch AA in his 4th season back in the day.

That's not even counting the guys that played in the midfield straight away like Bailey Smith, Matt Rowell, Sam Walsh, etc.

These timelines are not years away for our players. They are right now.

Up to the coaches. Really, he should be trialled in the middle quite a lot in training (as should many of our younger players), but a high-pressure game environment is a completely different kettle of fish

As I said above, I'd say a lot of it would be up to Burgess, as well. If he believes a player is ready from a fitness perspective, put him in the deep end. If not, give him a bit more time

 

[WaynesWorld19]

You think those three park in the middle and our next generation can fight over whatever scraps remain. Ok

If you read my post, I expressly warned against this

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Who is Tex keeping out? Our best young forward prospects are already playing forward in the AFL side

Pedlar Rachele and Soligo are all playing midfield too

Their numbers will go up next year

Pedlar and Rachele literally had 25-30% midfield tank this year and Soligo is working on his size and strength , already looks more ready .

All these guys have got it but it’s a slow burn . Gary Ablett junior , petracca etc took 3-4 years to play predominantly midfield

Rare cases of freak kids that can do it straight away , Pedlar has just had his first full season at any level including juniors for 4 years

If Matt crouch doesn’t make our midfield better he will get dropped and play sanfl , that’s what he’s mostly done in last 12 months until he came in and appeared to make us better ( I was not expecting it )

It’s a long season , a long list of players will get opportunities

 

[Scorpus]

Up to the coaches. Really, he should be trialled in the middle quite a lot in training (as should many of our younger players), but a high-pressure game environment is a completely different kettle of fish

As I said above, I'd say a lot of it would be up to Burgess, as well. If he believes a player is ready from a fitness perspective, put him in the deep end. If not, give him a bit more time

Well yes, it is up to the coaches and it will be very interesting to see what they do.

Do they hold back our younger players because they don't trust a 3rd year player could actually be a good midfielder, and so play Crouch? Or do they hand over the reigns and back them in?

We can't do both. We can't have Crouch playing as a pure mid (because we all acknowledge he can't play anywhere else) while also playing Soligo, Rachele, Pedlar, etc. as pure mids. There isn't the space in the team for that.

Personally I'm not of the belief that what Crouch offered last year was elite. I don't think the difference between the output of Crouch and the output of a third year Rachele/Soligo would be all that significant

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

If you read my post, I expressly warned against this

You can't have it both ways

If Rachele, Soligo, Pedlar, Rankine... are getting increased stints in the middle then something has to give

Are you suggesting now that we won't select Crouch at all?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

You can't have it both ways

If Rachele, Soligo, Pedlar, Rankine... are getting increased stints in the middle then something has to give

Are you suggesting now that we won't select Crouch at all?

I've got no idea how the season will play out .....all I know is every Club is looking to inject speed & more speed into their midfield

Maybe the extra pace will have to be midfield coverage from the Wings ....some Clubs are playing wings wide, some are bringing them more inside

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Well yes, it is up to the coaches and it will be very interesting to see what they do.

Do they hold back our younger players because they don't trust a 3rd year player could actually be a good midfielder, and so play Crouch? Or do they hand over the reigns and back them in?

We can't do both. We can't have Crouch playing as a pure mid (because we all acknowledge he can't play anywhere else) while also playing Soligo, Rachele, Pedlar, etc. as pure mids. There isn't the space in the team for that.

Personally I'm not of the belief that what Crouch offered last year was elite. I don't think the difference between the output of Crouch and the output of a third year Rachele/Soligo would be all that significant

You’re right re next year , it might not be much different next year and if Rachele tank is better I could see him pushing out crouch in midfield and crouch playing sanfl

Soligo too

I doubt Rachele tank will get thru a full season at more than pinch hit level though , there might be some weeks he can play predom midfield but not all

Soligo for me might be more ready to do it regularly with his running ability and energy levels

 

[Jeffcrowe]

You can't have it both ways

If Rachele, Soligo, Pedlar, Rankine... are getting increased stints in the middle then something has to give

Are you suggesting now that we won't select Crouch at all?

I strongly doubt crouch plays 23 games

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Well yes, it is up to the coaches and it will be very interesting to see what they do.

Do they hold back our younger players because they don't trust a 3rd year player could actually be a good midfielder, and so play Crouch? Or do they hand over the reigns and back them in?

We can't do both. We can't have Crouch playing as a pure mid (because we all acknowledge he can't play anywhere else) while also playing Soligo, Rachele, Pedlar, etc. as pure mids. There isn't the space in the team for that.

Personally I'm not of the belief that what Crouch offered last year was elite. I don't think the difference between the output of Crouch and the output of a third year Rachele/Soligo would be all that significant

Also I reckon we can do both as it’s an incredibly long season and there will be form , injury and energy/ load drop offs

Players will take their midfield chances when ready

 

[FR0GGY]

I have no issue with crouch getting significant time in the middle if he continues his form from the end of last year.
Not a fan of playing players in a hybrid midfield forward role and im not sure it really happens with the best mids around the league.

 

[John Who]

Pedlar Rachele and Soligo are all playing midfield too

Their numbers will go up next year

Pedlar and Rachele literally had 25-30% midfield tank this year and Soligo is working on his size and strength , already looks more ready .

All these guys have got it but it’s a slow burn . Gary Ablett junior , petracca etc took 3-4 years to play predominantly midfield

Rare cases of freak kids that can do it straight away , Pedlar has just had his first full season at any level including juniors for 4 years

If Matt crouch doesn’t make our midfield better he will get dropped and play sanfl , that’s what he’s mostly done in last 12 months until he came in and appeared to make us better ( I was not expecting it )

It’s a long season , a long list of players will get opportunities

I think Crouch stays in the team at the start of 2024, and we’ll continue to tinker with more game time and different combos in the midfield with our forward/mid hybrids. Whichever kid seems to dominate the most, will likely get the full time mid role in a few years once Laird/Crouch no longer can do a job in there. I don’t think it’s all that important who gets how much game time in the midfield, as long as the team is making progress up the ladder, and everyone improves from 2023.

Also, some of the best midfielders can also play well up forward - Roo, Goodwin, McLeod, Voss, Akermanis, Dusty, Bont etc.
Good players are good no matter where they play.

 

[PeterSalt]

I have no issue with crouch getting significant time in the middle if he continues his form from the end of last year.
Not a fan of playing players in a hybrid midfield forward role and im not sure it really happens with the best mids around the league.

Kinda like Taylor Adams .. too good not be in 1sts .. but not in the preferred midfield rotations. Shoehorned into a HFF with the odd burst in the mid field

Gets injured, misses GF, leaves Collingwood to get a role in his preferred position at Sydney

Right now, I'm ok with the likes of Pedlar and Rachelle playing forward if Crouch gives us more in the middle. And later if structurally, through injury, or whatever, they can perform in a variety of roles the better off longer term we'll be

 

[Pugsley]

C’mon

The apricot slice is strong, Colonel.

 

[1970crow]

Well we shouldn’t have contracted him

But most people were wanting us to

Can’t win really

If he plays like he did end of last year and compliments our midfield he’s in for mine , if he doesn’t and our midfield suffers he plays sanfl

I’m sure that’s how it will work

He won’t reinvent as a half forward , wing or half back . We have better ones and we might have better mids too soon enough

If it was me, I’d have re-signed him and cashed in on Laird’s trade value. Only need the one of them, but given that was never going to happen, I’d have not extended Crouch, despite his 2 game end of season form. I don’t make decisions on players’ value during contract years, let alone contract fortnights. Is a special case though, 2nd year back off a 12 month groin though, so that does complicate it a bit.

 

[adelaidecrows]

Again - this is unprovable.

We've got no way of knowing what would have happened with someone else in the side.

Of course, the selection of a better performing player other than Sloane doesn't necessarily guarantee a win but the way I interpret the criticism of Sloane's selection is that it isn't putting our best available side on the park which in turn would have given us the best chance to win.

 

[Mostyn]

You saw Sloane play and how Pedlar played when he came on right?

Come on mate, time to let your Sloane/Nicks defence go, this is just a ridiculous post.

You can say you disagreed with the decision, but it's impossible to prove what would have happened with a different selection.

 

[George Kramer]

You can say you disagreed with the decision, but it's impossible to prove what would have happened with a different selection.

But in this case it’s not. Sloane sucked. Pedlar replaced him and didn’t.

Sloane sucking is 100% confirmed, it’s a known. Pedlar playing well is 100% confirmed, it’s a known.

Your whole theory is just bulldust. If a player is selected and sucks, that’s confirmed. The only unknown is if the other player would have been better, which given the other guy sucked anyway, doesn’t matter, the selected player didn’t perform and that’s what they are selected to do.

Going by your theory you’re defending Andy Ottens selection in the 2017 GF despite how slow we were up forward.

 

[Pugsley]

You can say you disagreed with the decision, but it's impossible to prove what would have happened with a different selection.

Sloane is cooked. Pedlar is the future.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Of course, the selection of a better performing player other than Sloane doesn't necessarily guarantee a win but the way I interpret the criticism of Sloane's selection is that it isn't putting our best available side on the park which in turn would have given us the best chance to win.

Are you saying ...the selectors on selection night said "we know we're not selecting a side to give us the best chance to win" .....but we like player "X"

 

[George Kramer]

Are you saying ...the selectors on selection night said "we know we're not selecting a side to give us the best chance to win" .....but we like player "X"

Comprehension issues again Wayne.

He’s saying the selectors judgement is off and we haven’t put our best side out there because they’ve chosen the wrong player.

 

[Mostyn]

But in this case it’s not. Sloane sucked. Pedlar replaced him and didn’t.

Sloane sucking is 100% confirmed, it’s a known. Pedlar playing well is 100% confirmed, it’s a known.

Your whole theory is just bulldust. If a player is selected and sucks, that’s confirmed. The only unknown is if the other player would have been better, which given the other guy sucked anyway, doesn’t matter, the selected player didn’t perform and that’s what they are selected to do.

Going by your theory you’re defending Andy Ottens selection in the 2017 GF despite how slow we were up forward.

The only thing that is confirmed with Pedler is that, when he came on and played part of the game when some of the heat had died off, he did well.

I've already said there can be errors when risks are taken - such as Massie or Otten.

But what this board means when we complain about selections is that the club has picked a whipping boy you don't like over some unproven player you do.

 

[Mostyn]

Comprehension issues again Wayne.

He’s saying the selectors judgement is off and we haven’t put our best side out there because they’ve chosen the wrong player.

Except there can't be proof that a different player would have played better, because they didn't play in the same circumstances.

It's absolutely fine to say you think they would have, but it's unprovable.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

If it was me, I’d have re-signed him and cashed in on Laird’s trade value. Only need the one of them, but given that was never going to happen, I’d have not extended Crouch, despite his 2 game end of season form. I don’t make decisions on players’ value during contract years, let alone contract fortnights. Is a special case though, 2nd year back off a 12 month groin though, so that does complicate it a bit.

Yep I had him done and didn’t want him retained after the melb game

Was impressed with how he worked with Dawson after that

Not unhappy he was re-signed in the end , competition for spots will drive standards

He’s genuine competition now when I thought he was done

 

[WeeBlake]

The only thing that is confirmed with Pedler is that, when he came on and played part of the game when some of the heat had died off, he did well.

I've already said there can be errors when risks are taken - such as Massie or Otten.

But what this board means when we complain about selections is that the club has picked a whipping boy you don't like over some unproven player you do.

It’s not just that. If an established player plays terribly, and deserves to be dropped, and isn’t, we can say that was a bad decision, purely on the basis of selection integrity and getting games into kids in a rebuild.

Eg Sloane this year v Essendon in Melb with finals on the line was amazingly terrible. Truly spectacularly terrible. Picked again v GWS and fails again.

 

[FR0GGY]

If it was me, I’d have re-signed him and cashed in on Laird’s trade value. Only need the one of them, but given that was never going to happen, I’d have not extended Crouch, despite his 2 game end of season form. I don’t make decisions on players’ value during contract years, let alone contract fortnights. Is a special case though, 2nd year back off a 12 month groin though, so that does complicate it a bit.

Was it not 7 pretty reasonable games?