Opinion Matthew Nicks: Adelaide's Coach

[adelaidecrows]

Why do you think development is out the window? Don't you think that the 15 players with 75 games or less experience in the 22 are still developing? We have all seen their continued growth this year.

and 50% of the list in the Sanfl doesn't count?

 

[adelaidecrows]

So most of your jumping up and down is because Nick's hasn't played 2 or 3 basically untried players this season, when we have had a 95% healthy uninjured list.

Start of the year Pedler, Michalanney, Rankine were all new to the crows AFL 22.

It's been a strange year with virtually no injuries to cover. As soon as Doedee went down, Worrell stepped in. Not Hinge back, Crouch to the middle.

what part of 21 players have played just about every game is confusing. Not another single mid table side in the competition does that regardless of injuries. Its like you all forgot the term 'omitted' exists. Im arguing the lack of development opportunities handed out is seriously a concern when we are only mid table and we have clear deficiencies in the midfield and we have mids sitting in the Sanfl being ignored. Many of you argue 'well they aren't getting their 500000 touches in a single Sanfl game so they cant be any good and not performing so why gift them a game'

My counter to that is 'Can't fly like an eagle if you hang around turkeys'

The Sanfl comp not only allows players to get away with things they can't at AFL level, it relies too heavily on the top up players winning their positions and making AFL level game plan decisions when looking to pass the ball.

The other question is player management

Soligo, McHenry, Murphy, Sloane, Michalanney, Pedlar, Thilthorpe, Fogarty are all players struggling right now and failed horrendously in the Essendon game.

Thilthorpe - first full season and could be seriously fatiguing, struggling to impact games
Fogarty - yes delivery is an issue but has been struggling to impact games, maybe has an underlying injury or fatigue from all the contests.
Michalanney - His numbers have declined in the second half of the season. First AFL season in a tough position probably could do with load management.
Soligo - Probably so run into the ground his numbers have become inconsistent throughout the second half of the year.
Pedlar - First full season and his numbers are dropping away, probably could do with a rest.
Murphy - had a good run mid season but has fallen away and is struggling to break free into space. Could be fatigue.
McHenry - Should have been dropped weeks ago. Good sub but honestly.
Sloane - Whats wrong with load management? Probably half the issue is he is unable to fully recover by the next game. We rested Walker, maybe not a bad thing to rest up a week.
Sholl - Inconsistent but not the worst problem we have.

Thats 9 players out of the 22 that played on the weekend. We aren't going to win games of footy too often if nearly half the side is falling off statistically due to things like carrying injuries (a possibility), form and fatigue etc.

Berry could have easily come in and rotated through the tiring midfield
Cook or Nank would have come in with energy.
Himmelberg - although not a long term solution could have rested Thilthorpe or Fogarty in the North or Eagles games.
Schoenberg could have come in earlier to help rotate out and rest the younger players.
Borlase could have come in earlier to rest up Michalanney

Sometimes development actually includes REST and recovery.

 

[1970crow]

If we only required toughness at the contest then we would pick McHenry day in day out and draft more like him.

Without biased whipping boy glasses, what DOES sholl bring to the table? Elite endurance to run all day? Not a bad trait. Saves some rotations for those who are building fitness and gets Sholl into space more. He has a pretty good kick. Seems to lower the eyes rather than bomb long.

That extra fitness allows a certain other wing/mid to relax on the bench a fair bit during his hopeless first halves.

 

[1970crow]

Welcome aboard .....hope you contribute a lot more

We’ll be league leading for our word to paragraph stat if he does.

 

[1970crow]

Nicks: "How did you smoke us twice in a row here?"

Cameron: "The GWS midfield was more than 1 player deep"

Nicks: "Oh"

Cameron - “Mate, there’s more to winning the midfield battle than being ahead in the clearance stat”

Nicks aloud - “ok, fair call, good advice”.
Nicks to himself - “what an idiot, no wonder he got the arse”.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Interesting that Nicks sought out Leon Cameron earlier in the week to talk about how they smoked us twice in a row here.

That’s like sourcing an electrician to ask how you got your dick stuck in the toaster

 

[adelaidecrows]

Have been sitting here for years reading the views of the masses (according to those on here anyway). What concerns me is negativity. It is like "we need another hospital but not in my backyard" syndrome. Was looking at the names of the coaches of the 18 clubs yesterday and in my view, I prefer Nicks to at least 6 of the current coaches. I would prefer him over Sam Mitchell (appointed because he is a club favourite), Gold Coast coach (whoever is in the chair this year), Voss (was a great player but still has to prove himself - like Nicks), Beveridge (seems to be going backwards quickly given the cattle he has), Longmuir (no better than Nicks so why change - better the devil you know than the one you don't), Simpson (had the cattle to win a premiership and now without that he is really struggling). Kingsley has the squad but also still to prove himself. Unfortunately, coaches who can guide teams to premierships do not grow on trees. I believe we are heading in the right direction. We win at home, lose away. To me, I feel that there are those in the team who do not believe that they can win away. I saw stats yesterday showing the difference in performance player by player between play at home and playing away. That is a mental thing, not a gameplan thing. Maybe a shrink is what we need???

Welcome!

Lots of good points. But cant we strive for a better coach and not settle for one that is the 7th worst?

 

[adelaidecrows]

thought you were going to have a crack at the lack of paragraphs.

Me, I'm the worst. lol. Im learning to reign it in myself.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I'm reserving my judgement on Nicks to season's end... as our season could easily go very North or South.

Liking change of game style this season but not liking player management & lack of rotations.

 

[adelaidecrows]

I'm reserving my judgement on Nicks to season's end... as our season could easily go very North or South.

Liking change of game style this season but not liking player management & lack of rotations.

Serious question;

Were you as surprised as I was at the data of lack of player management and rotations? That blew me away at just how bad it was, especially in comparison to other teams.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Serious question;

Were you as surprised as I was at the data of lack of player management and rotations? That blew me away at just how bad it was, especially in comparison to other teams.

Not surprised as I have been calling for more rotations all year!

Makes even more sense when you have a young side, but also for older players like Sloane to keep them fresh.

My biggest disappointment.

 

[John Who]

Welcome!

Lots of good points. But cant we strive for a better coach and not settle for one that is the 7th worst?

I think it really depends on whether our trajectory improves further over the next 12 months. Bringing in a new “better coach” doesn’t guarantee better results. Just like a smarter teacher doesn’t guarantee better results.

 

[John Who]

So most of your jumping up and down is because Nick's hasn't played 2 or 3 basically untried players this season, when we have had a 95% healthy uninjured list.

Start of the year Pedler, Michalanney, Rankine were all new to the crows AFL 22.

It's been a strange year with virtually no injuries to cover. As soon as Doedee went down, Worrell stepped in. Not Hinge back, Crouch to the middle.

I honestly think another issue why we haven’t tried much rotations right now, is due to the fact we’re making a good fist at competing to make the Finals. My hunch is that the 28 or so players that have been the mainstays this year are the best current team to compete as well as we possibly can if we do make it to the Finals.

If we weren’t competing as well as what we have been so far, and with poorer results, I think there would have been a much greater chance of more player rotations in selection.

 

[MRB37]

I honestly think another issue why we haven’t tried much rotations right now, is due to the fact we’re making a good fist at competing to make the Finals. My hunch is that the 28 or so players that have been the mainstays this year are the best current team to compete as well as we possibly can if we do make it to the Finals.

If we weren’t competing as well as what we have been so far, and with poorer results, I think there would have been a much greater chance of more player rotations in selection.

They didn't do it in the 2nd half of last year when we weren't a chance to make finals.

 

[John Who]

They didn't do it in the 2nd half of last year when we weren't a chance to make finals.

I honestly can’t remember what happened with the selections last year. I’m just trying to state a possible rationale with the lower rotations particularly in the recent weeks.

I guess another way of looking at it if stating a hypothetical. If we do make the Finals, do we prefer:

• lower rotations so the structures, personnel and gameplan will remain more clear?
• higher rotations with more fiddling of structures/personnel coming into a Finals game?

 

[adelaidecrows]

I honestly can’t remember what happened with the selections last year. I’m just trying to state a possible rationale with the lower rotations particularly in the recent weeks.

I guess another way of looking at it if stating a hypothetical. If we do make the Finals, do we prefer:

• lower rotations so the structures, personnel and gameplan will remain more clear?
• higher rotations with more fiddling of structures/personnel coming into a Finals game?

You know we aren't going to win a premiership this year right?

Anything less means rotations is acceptable. If we were top four, no or minimal rotations is acceptable. But minimal fatigue and general player management in a mid table team is inexcusable.

 

[GreyCrow]

I honestly can’t remember what happened with the selections last year. I’m just trying to state a possible rationale with the lower rotations particularly in the recent weeks.

I guess another way of looking at it if stating a hypothetical. If we do make the Finals, do we prefer:

• lower rotations so the structures, personnel and gameplan will remain more clear?
• higher rotations with more fiddling of structures/personnel coming into a Finals game?

I would prefer a better mix. My first thought is fatigue can be an issue and you are also relying on everyone playing at a high level longer

Having more options allows you to set up for the team you are playing without getting stuck on ' our team can beat your team ' thinking and not adjusting either at selection or on game day.

 

[John Who]

You know we aren't going to win a premiership this year right?

Anything less means rotations is acceptable. If we were top four, no or minimal rotations is acceptable. But minimal fatigue and general player management in a mid table team is inexcusable.

But the thing is, Finals and top 4 is still up for grabs! I don’t think anyone is that optimistic for a premiership this year. But when a young side is a chance to make the Finals, the selection policies need to be more strict. We also need to be mindful that if a young kid jumps in, and doesn’t perform as well, it could do more psychological damage for that player as well as the team morale.

I’m not saying I know what’s the right number or who should be coming in, but I can see it’s sort of a complicated situation more than meets the eye.

 

[adelaidecrows]

But the thing is, Finals and top 4 is still up for grabs! I don’t think anyone is that optimistic for a premiership this year. But when a young side is a chance to make the Finals, the selection policies need to be more strict. We also need to be mindful that if a young kid jumps in, and doesn’t perform as well, it could do more psychological damage for that player as well as the team morale.

I’m not saying I know what’s the right number or who should be coming in, but I can see it’s sort of a complicated situation more than meets the eye.

If we win the premiership I will more than happy to admit i was wrong. For now though based on the evidence in front of us, it appears we have been negligent.

 

[John Who]

I would prefer a better mix. My first thought is fatigue can be an issue and you are also relying on everyone playing at a high level longer

Having more options allows you to set up for the team you are playing without getting stuck on ' our team can beat your team ' thinking and not adjusting either at selection or on game day.

I’m not opposing to this line of thinking regarding increasing the new selections. Just trying to point out it’s not quite clear because of the predicament we’re in, some chance of making the Finals, have competed well with the top teams, is it still the time to tinker too much with the selections?

 

[MRB37]

But the thing is, Finals and top 4 is still up for grabs! I don’t think anyone is that optimistic for a premiership this year. But when a young side is a chance to make the Finals, the selection policies need to be more strict. We also need to be mindful that if a young kid jumps in, and doesn’t perform as well, it could do more psychological damage for that player as well as the team morale.

I’m not saying I know what’s the right number or who should be coming in, but I can see it’s sort of a complicated situation more than meets the eye.

It shouldn't matter if they're young or not. We have players in the side who have not and do not perform when the heat gets turned up in a game. They still get selected despite their numerous failures because we eventually get an easy matchup they shine in and we use that as an excuse to keep them in. I'm sure that's great for morale too.

The ONLY selection policy should be you perform or you're out. That is not the policy Nicks is using, form is irrelevant and if you're in his circle of trust then you're safe as houses and if you're not in it then you won't get a chance until the obvious is smacking Nicks so hard in the face he has no choice but to eventually relent and make a change.

 

[1970crow]

I honestly can’t remember what happened with the selections last year. I’m just trying to state a possible rationale with the lower rotations particularly in the recent weeks.

I guess another way of looking at it if stating a hypothetical. If we do make the Finals, do we prefer:

• lower rotations so the structures, personnel and gameplan will remain more clear?
• higher rotations with more fiddling of structures/personnel coming into a Finals game?

it's not a possible reason, it's the sole reason. We select to win or minimise losses each week, nothing more, nothing less. We don't look further ahead and we never trade out current for future. Never have.

 

[conVINCEd]

We did roll Rachele and Pedlar through the middle in Q1 against the Bombers and they smacked us.

Sholl needs to GTFO though.

 

[adelaidecrows]

It shouldn't matter if they're young or not. We have players in the side who have not and do not perform when the heat gets turned up in a game. They still get selected despite their numerous failures because we eventually get an easy matchup they shine in and we use that as an excuse to keep them in. I'm sure that's great for morale too.

The ONLY selection policy should be you perform or you're out. That is not the policy Nicks is using, form is irrelevant and if you're in his circle of trust then you're safe as houses and if you're not in it then you won't get a chance until the obvious is smacking Nicks so hard in the face he has no choice but to eventually relent and make a change.

So much Sanderson with Nick's combined with the selection policies of Craig as a bonus.

On CPH2371 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Soggy2112]

Yeah, we're a young team. Why are we still the youngest team or close to it in Year 4 of our rebuild?

Because we’re still phasing out the older, experienced players as you should in a rebuild. Dumping them all at once is a bad idea.

Players out:

2020: Atkins, Crouch, Hartigan, Gibbs, Knight

2021: Kelly, Mackay, Talia, Lynch

2022: Frampton, Brown, Davis

Every year we’re still getting rid of age/experience and bringing in youth/inexperience. As you’re supposed to.

The key point is are the core young players getting up to that 50-150 game mark they need to be to contend.

Jones - 72
Berry - 39 (has stalled, year 4 will be the key)
Thilthorpe - 39 (is on track)
Rachele - 29 (is on track)
Pedlar - 20 (is behind the eight ball but given his injuries I think he’s now on track)
Soligo - 32 (is on track)
Michalanny - 16 (is on track)
Rankine - 64
Worrell - 10 (is a concern, need to leave him in long term)
Schoenberg - 51 (I doubt he makes it, but we will know soon either way)
Murray - 44 (is on track)
Fogarty - 72
Sholl - 53
Butts - 57

Looking at that list, we are on track to be in the right age/experience bracket to contend in 2025.

Whether the talent/coaching is good enough is another question.