AFL Autopsy RND 4: Dons Demolished

[yodellinhank]

It is not one size fits all and the balance is fine. You also do not want to be Carlton or North.
The best way for the kids to shine is actually play along side a bunch of more experienced players.

Those sides sure as shit don't want to be Essendon.

 

[brain taylor]

Completely disagree, what benefit does Goldstein provide our future if we play him all year only for him to retire at the end of the year? Surely Bryan starting 2025 with an extra 15-20 games at senior level is better?

I want to expose Bryan to the big dogs, let him get bashed up, see how he responds, build resilience if he doesn't then he's probably not cut out for elite league footy.

i see your point but i reckon goldy being out there is good for draper and the younger mids/fwds. probably the only instance where i’d say we should be playing the much older guy though.

 

[Milanista28]

I did want to reply to this part as I did not earlier.
It is total rubbish.
If it was the case he would be pumping us up for finals and not formatting an 8 year plan for the younger blokes on the list and he would also not continual in saying it is about building an elite system first before you look at the next step.

You genuinely think we aren't desperate to win now?

You can believe what the club says, I struggle to reconcile what we say vs what we do. We err on the conservative side all the time, the experienced bloke gets the nod over the inexperienced regardless of actual form.

Shiel won't need to smash the door down, he'll play 4 quarters and get in.

 

[ant555]

Tsatas is a good example then. Didn't attack the contest last week so deemed not ready to play. Can he play to a 'decent' level though? If you compare Tsatas to most of our guys last night he should surely get a run next week. Perkins out might see that happen now anyway.

In comparison with both Rozee and Butters' first years though;
Rozee: avg 15 disposals, 4 tackles
Butters: avg 14 disposals, 2.5 tackles
Tsatas: avg 16 disposals, 2.75 tackles

If 'decent' is the metric, I reckon he's decent enough to develop in the 1s, especially since we know we're not playing for sheep stations.

Not in my view.
Did Port allow either blokes to sheep dog contests and be selective about what they would do ? Did their captain have to pull either aside and question their commitment ? And finally did either miss more than half a season before they where drafted and then in their first year ?. No !
The fact Tsatas has been able to do what he has of the preparation he has had shows he same some real ability.
Sometimes blokes just need some VFL time.
Redman played 2 & 3 games in season 1 and 2. Ridley played 3 & 6 games.
If you are wanting to be Essendon Edge then you need to have players attempting to be that. That was the issue with Tsatas. Not that he was no good at it. It was he was not attempting to play the style.

 

[Chief Hopper]

I read a lot of negative stuff about Essendon but I think its an over reaction. Last year Port finished 3rd despite a banged up FF and a banged up FB and a banged up ruckman. Port have fixed all those problems in the off season and in my opinion are still a top 4 side. Essendon finished 11th last season I don't have a clue if you have a better team this year but it's quite reasonable for a mid table team to get a belting from a top 4 team. Who is your mid field run with player because I could not identify him last night. Someone shirt fronted Rozee and despite my distaste for that level of physicality it pays off just ask Maynard from Collingwood.

That a bit of reasoning to put things into perspective.

Port has a strong classy team that potentially will go top 4. Any team that plays and loses against a much better team is going to look bad and any deficiency's will show up more glaringly. Dons held it for longer against Sydney but there is still a gulf to be crossed.

 

[BrunoV]

I did want to reply to this part as I did not earlier.
It is total rubbish.
If it was the case he would be pumping us up for finals and not formatting an 8 year plan for the younger blokes on the list and he would also not continual in saying it is about building an elite system first before you look at the next step.

It may well be rubbish but what coach actually talks up finals prospects? That's suicide and he's much too smart for that.

But what do you point to as the clear evidence that Scott isn't selecting a team for now? Other than his worlds what do we point to satisfy ourselves that a sustainable finals brand will be in play in 2 years time? Where is the improvement in game style and how are we shaping a team around a group of players that looks like they belong in finals? Is that Gresham and Duursma? How does getting slower and less phyical help? Moving Durham from a wing inside, where he's not a natural mid and wasted there?

I'm happy to dig up the list of junk list management that has occurred since 2020, much of it under Scott's watch.

Reid and Cox only play because there isn't another options, don't they? Guelfi, Heppel, Goldstein play each game they are fit to play.

The kids that play play because they are in the best team, don't they?

 

[ant555]

Those sides sure as s**t don't want to be Essendon.

Does not change the fact that they screwed themselves by sweeping almost everyone out and Carlton are now only hitting their stride with a coach that preaches culture and a number of FA acquisitions to plug the gaps.

 

[ant555]

It may well be rubbish but what coach actually talks up finals prospects? That's suicide and he's much too smart for that.

But what do you point to as the clear evidence that Scott isn't selecting a team for now? Other than his worlds what do we point to satisfy ourselves that a sustainable finals brand will be in play in 2 years time? Is that Gresham and Duursma? Where is the improvement in game style and how are we shaping a team around a group of players that looks like they belong in finals? Moving Durham from a wing inside, where he's not a natural mid and wasted there?

I'm happy to dig up the list of junk list management that has occurred since 2020, much of it under Scott's watch.

Reid and Cox only play because there isn't another options, don't they? Guelfi, Heppel, Goldstein play each game they are fit to play.

The kids that play play because they are in the best team, don't they?

That may be a bit hard given he arrived at the end of 2022 and had limited involvement in what we did during FA and draft in 2022. Happy to go with 2023 when he was in control.

 

[BrunoV]

That may be a bit hard given he arrived at the end of 2022 and had limited involvement in what we did during FA and draft in 2022. Happy to go with 2023 when he was in control.

He wasn't in control in 2022 but he's the reason we took Tsatas?

 

[ant555]

You genuinely think we aren't desperate to win now?

You can believe what the club says, I struggle to reconcile what we say vs what we do. We err on the conservative side all the time, the experienced bloke gets the nod over the inexperienced regardless of actual form.

Shiel won't need to smash the door down, he'll play 4 quarters and get in.

Being desperate to win. No I do not. The fact the message has continually been "building and elite system " and "there are no short cuts in doing that " is not desperate. To build an elite system you play old blokes and young blokes and you keep turning the list over along the way.

Scott won't risk Essendon's long term success over 2024 burst

“I think it’s really, really important that you build culture over time...”

www.sen.com.au

 

[ant555]

He wasn't in control in 2022 but he's the reason we took Tsatas?

No it is not. He did not pick Tsatas out. He had not watched him. In fact he had watched hardly any under 18 footy as he was working on other stuff in the AFL. It is a total furphy. The only link is he wanted a player style that could give him power and speed from stoppage. RFK and others told him that was Tsatas. He was happy to go with it.

 

[Zach Package]

Yeah, I'm not sure that it's the coach's fault. We started well and that's when the team was following the plan. It all went south in Q2 when we had plenty of the play but failed to convert. Menzie's poster sticks in my mind as a turning point.

Every time Port went forward they scored - were 7:1 at one point. You've got to think our lack of mental toughness contributed to the capitulation. And it's not such a bad thing that the coach leaves it to the players to respond.

I said in the game day thread that we were tested and found wanting. Each player now has a clearer picture of where he's at when it comes to the review than if the coach tried to stem the flow by changing things on match day. I can see why Brad didn't make any changes - it's the sink or swim mentality. Worsfold did it too. It's part of teaching players how to take responsibility, both for themselves and for the team.

You need to be able to pull those strings against good sides though.

We will win our fair share of games against the bottom and middle third sides taking care of ourselves and committing to the contest, we’ve already shown that against the Hawks and Saints, but when you’re playing the big boys you have to play a big boy game and it needs to be a little bit more nuanced than ‘Essendon edge for 4 quarters = win’.

Rozee got super, super hot, super quickly so you send Caldwell to sit on him. Port mids went back shoulder to push our mids under the feet of the rucks and then use the space away from the circles, so we go back shoulder and give them a different look. Langford was made essentially a non factor due to lack of supply so maybe you put him higher on Aliir or Houston and challenge them in a bit of a different way.

We’ve now played 2 games against that top 6 and been able to match it for a total of about 3 and a half quarters. Now that oppositions know what we are trying to be, the next challenge is not completely packing it in whenever our one wood is taken from us.

 

[BrunoV]

No it is not. He did not pick Tsatas out. He had not watched him. In fact he had watched hardly any under 18 footy as he was working on other stuff in the AFL. It is a total furphy. The only link is he wanted a player style that could give him power and speed from stoppage. RFK and others told him that was Tsatas. He was happy to go with it.

And our list manager wanted Philipou, didn't he?

How is that not Scott picking Tsatas?

Is it better that he never saw Tsatas play?

 

[Milanista28]

Being desperate to win. No I do not. The fact the message has continually been "building and elite system " and "there are no short cuts in doing that " is not desperate. To build an elite system you play old blokes and young blokes and you keep turning the list over along the way.

Scott won't risk Essendon's long term success over 2024 burst

“I think it’s really, really important that you build culture over time...”

www.sen.com.au

And I don't think we're turning over as much as we can.

Roberts and Hayes should play next week.

Hardwick made 7 changes after a bad week, some youngens as well.

We were horrendous last night, I hope we lay the blame for that performance at the feet of some senior players at selection.

 

[ant555]

And I don't think we're turning over as much as we can.

Roberts and Hayes should play next week.

Hardwick made 7 changes after a bad week, some youngens as well.

We were horrendous last night, I hope we lay the blame for that performance at the feet of some senior players at selection.

Well we will see what changes he does make now the VFL is up and running and we have had our first horror game.

 

[bombadeer]

That performance left me feeling edgy.

 

[ant555]

And our list manager wanted Philipou, didn't he?

How is that not Scott picking Tsatas?

Is it better that he never saw Tsatas play?

Our list manager did not have a say on it. As I have said 500,000 times last year the draft was RFK making the call. The list manager never said he 100% wanted Phillipou. It came down to two. They went with Tstats. It had nothing to do with Scott other than him wanting a burst player which could have been either.
I would have gone the other way. I still have question marks on Tsatas but this was not a Scott decision and if I find the article I will post it as there is one out there where he specifically says he will have no role to play in that draft as he does not have the insight.

 

[Mercurial89]

Not in my view.
Did Port allow either blokes to sheep dog contests and be selective about what they would do ? Did their captain have to pull either aside and question their commitment ? And finally did either miss more than half a season before they where drafted and then in their first year ?. No !
The fact Tsatas has been able to do what he has of the preparation he has had shows he same some real ability.
Sometimes blokes just need some VFL time.
Redman played 2 & 3 games in season 1 and 2. Ridley played 3 & 6 games.
If you are wanting to be Essendon Edge then you need to have players attempting to be that. That was the issue with Tsatas. Not that he was no good at it. It was he was not attempting to play the style.

I get this is a bit more philosophical than just right and wrong way to do something.
However,
I think you can understand It's a bit much to accept that the only guy who is out of the side for not attacking the footy is the young kid.
That he is the only one that the captain has questioned commitment of.

This side is full of guys who have been around much longer than him who pick and choose when they go. They don't get dropped after a game for it, they are the ones who have not been committed to the AFL lifestyle.

The fact he is a kid with no experience of what is actually required and how to act is why him being the poster boy for hey your not playing the right way you can play 2s, when we have guys who have spent 150 games of being mediocre footballers who have not achieved anything in their careers "leading the club out of this mess" is backwards for a lot of people.

Many people feel youth should lead the way into the future and to be honest in some respects I agree.
In others yes if there is an injury you put the senior guy in for a bit of stability early (the Hep situation).

 

[ant555]

I get this is a bit more philosophical than just right and wrong way to do something.
However,
I think you can understand It's a bit much to accept that the only guy who is out of the side for not attacking the footy is the young kid.
That he is the only one that the captain has questioned commitment of.

This side is full of guys who have been around much longer than him who pick and choose when they go. They don't get dropped after a game for it, they are the ones who have not been committed to the AFL lifestyle.

The fact he is a kid with no experience of what is actually required and how to act is why him being the poster boy for hey your not playing the right way you can play 2s, when we have guys who have spent 150 games of being mediocre footballers who have not achieved anything in their careers "leading the club out of this mess" is backwards for a lot of people.

Many people feel youth should lead the way into the future and to be honest in some respects I agree.
In others yes if there is an injury you put the senior guy in for a bit of stability early (the Hep situation).

Lets get this right. It was not about not attacking the footy. He dogged a few contests and his captain called him out on the ground. There was just as much Merrett in this decisions as there was Scott. It was bad. Until last night we had not really been not attacking the footy and even last night they did to start with. We will see what this week brings before I judge what the selection standard will be this year.
Tsatas may be a chance to get back as he went back, played his natural spot and attacked pretty much every contest with as much forces as he had.

 

[BrunoV]

Our list manager did not have a say on it. As I have said 500,000 times last year the draft was RFK making the call. The list manager never said he 100% wanted Phillipou. It came down to two. They went with Tstats. It had nothing to do with Scott other than him wanting a burst player which could have been either.
I would have gone the other way. I still have question marks on Tsatas but this was not a Scott decision and if I find the article I will post it as there is one out there where he specifically says he will have no role to play in that draft as he does not have the insight.

It had nothing to do with Scott, other than him chosing the player type which was to choose the player.

 

[sameolds33]

You need to be able to pull those strings against good sides though.

We will win our fair share of games against the bottom and middle third sides taking care of ourselves and committing to the contest, we’ve already shown that against the Hawks and Saints, but when you’re playing the big boys you have to play a big boy game and it needs to be a little bit more nuanced than ‘Essendon edge for 4 quarters = win’.

Rozee got super, super hot, super quickly so you send Caldwell to sit on him. Port mids went back shoulder to push our mids under the feet of the rucks and then use the space away from the circles, so we go back shoulder and give them a different look. Langford was made essentially a non factor due to lack of supply so maybe you put him higher on Aliir or Houston and challenge them in a bit of a different way.

We’ve now played 2 games against that top 6 and been able to match it for a total of about 3 and a half quarters. Now that oppositions know what we are trying to be, the next challenge is not completely packing it in whenever our one wood is taken from us.

I don't disagree with any of these coaching moves . I also wondered about why Langford was not used more effectively. But, given, Port's change up to go man on man and the inability of our players to go with them - and lose their heads in the process - I think that making those coaching moves would have papered over the cracks rather than fixing the problem.

The bigger lesson (for want of a better word) is resilience and self reliance both individually and as a team. I don't think that this match was a coaching lesson from Port.

 

[ant555]

It had nothing to do with Scott, other than him chosing the player type which was to choose the player.

Both of them where considered burst players.

 

[ant555]

I will bring up my old chestnut. Inability to mark the footy down the line. With Port going man on man and not giving us any attacking space we where always going to be in trouble.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

watch the first quarter. We played really well.

I like your thinking.

 

[Zach Package]

I don't disagree with any of these coaching moves . I also wondered about why Langford was not used more effectively. But, given, Port's change up to go man on man and the inability of our players to go with them - and lose their heads in the process - I think that making those coaching moves would have papered over the cracks rather than fixing the problem.

The bigger lesson (for want of a better word) is resilience and self reliance both individually and as a team. I don't think that this match was a coaching lesson from Port.

It was a good lesson to get and came at a good time. Getting smashed in a facet we thought we were going to be able to hang our hat on for the entire year hopefully deflates a few egos and let’s them know they are on the right track but have a lot of work to do.

This was no where near the level of uncompetitiveness we saw at the end of last year, they put in, they just got mauled for their troubles.