Team Rd 1

[Elite Crow]

And so will out lack of success and mediocrity.

We lost too much experience for them not to be in the beginning. Then it comes down to form

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Neil himself admits he doesn't trust or back young players. I cannot believe people argue otherwise. Neil has already sunk your argument - "Can you imagine what we'd look like without them?" Remember? He is scared of a list without experience. He will always go for the older, safe option. He has barely ever put a senior player back into the SANFL.

Yes we have a young list now but that is only because we have squeezed every last drop we could out of Neil's beloved oldies, to the point that they all finished last season on crutches. He kept them as long as he could.

We saw later in the season when Father Time did what Neil didn't have the balls to do, that we in fact looked pretty damn good without the oldies. The Geelong game was comfortably our best game for the year. Of course, within a matter of weeks Davis (who had owned Mooney) was booted out of the team and Walker (who kicked 4 goals against Matthew Scarlett in a low scoring night game) was gone too. The beloved oldies were rushed back in and we reverted to the familiar garbage we had dished up earlier in the season.

Stevens battling early in the season with the effects of concussion... Doughty battling with a persistent knee injury... were they given time away to get themselves right? No. We couldn't possibly do that as all we had in the cupboard were youngsters. So we forced them back out there, they each turned in half a season of the worst football ever delivered by a Crows footballer, and our season sunk without trace. Not their fault mind you, they clearly weren't right and it wasn't until the second half of the season that they regained form.

Neil's got fewer beloved oldies to cling on to now which only means that he will hug the likes of Doughty, Reilly, Stevens and Symes even tighter to his ample bosom. They will play every game, regardless of form or fitness.

 

[cmndstab]

Neil himself admits he doesn't trust or back young players. I cannot believe people argue otherwise. Neil has already sunk your argument - "Can you imagine what we'd look like without them?" Remember? He is scared of a list without experience. He will always go for the older, safe option. He has barely ever put a senior player back into the SANFL.

Let's be fair here - this comment was not about Stevens and Doughty and players of that ilk. He was talking about the likes of Goodwin, McLeod, Edwards (and Burton, but why he thought of Burton in the company of the other three names is a separate issue again...) who were far from our worst players. He was dead right in his comments - replacing those players with players out of our best 22 would have made us even worse than the team that failed to win a match for six bloody weeks.


alex - once we remove all the fluff from your argument, the crux of it is that you don't think players can put runs on the board without actually being in the side to start with, because we don't actually reward SANFL form (or at least, not enough). It's a fair argument, although your arbitrary time-frames seem a bit strange (where on earth did this three year rebuild come from??)

The thing is, we clearly do reward SANFL form. The issue is with who gets dropped to reward those players. My opinion is that the younger players should get the nod over the senior players unless they are performing significantly worse, since from an equal footing you'd expect them to have a higher ceiling. The club's opinion appears to be that for line ball decisions we back experience because they've proven capable in the past.

There have been very few cases of a young player burning it up in the SANFL without being rewarded with a game for us, though. Walker in 2008 is really the only one that comes to mind. The issue has been that bringing in a young player has often meant another one has dropped out. That's the part I'd like to see evened up, though not to the extent many on here seem to want.

 

[Crow-mo]

Ha ha pathetic.

So what do you want the club to do this year? Bottom out and just play everyone under the age of 25? Compete for finals?

how about they perform like you might expect for a team that's supposedly been rebuilding since 2007, with a squad that was meant to be good enough to contend in 2010?

how about we take a consistent track for assessing our progress, and don't keep changing the rules and lowering expectations so we can pretend our coach (entering his 8th year in charge) hasn't had long enough.

we're good enough to contend or we're not, if we're not (and we ain't) why the **** not, and if we are why lower expecations so another moderate to mediocre year can be hailed as ground breaking?

the only thing pathetic is clutching at straws like they're mothers milk.

 

[Crow-mo]

No point in bottoming out now.... Just not sure what your expectations are?

what's this supposed to mean? that we shouldn't have a strategy, we should just cross our fingers and hope?

if we're not going to genuinely, flag possibility, contend in the next 2/3 seasons we should be blowing it up. quite obviously.

because we have taken a particular route for a while now, and if its not working, we need a new plan.

not no plan at all.

 

[Crow-mo]

Considering there are only 5 players left on the list from before Neil Craig took over (Johncock, Stevens, Rutten, Reilly & Doughty), I'd suggest that the rebuilding has gone on quite nicely while you've been looking elsewhere...

Do you honestly believe that the team has not been rebuilt? Seriously? What rock have you been living under for the last 5 years?

quite nicely? its gone shithouse, unless you think we are contenders.

or does turnover = successful rebuild now?

if we carry on from 2009, with performances like we expected for 2010, then we can say the rebuild was a success. if we continue to go backwards... well even you have to put your cheerleading pom poms away.

 

[Crow-mo]

So, you wanted him to replace 35 players inside 3 years - an average of 12 new draftees per year. Right....

You want him to replace 17 of 22 players in the senior team inside 3 years, Right...

You want players to magically reach 100 games in 3 years, when there are only 22 H&A games (plus finals) per season. Right.....

We had 2 shots at glory - 2005 & 2006. We choked fair & square in 2005. In 2006 we won a club record 16 consecutive games, before a shocking run of injuries towards the end of the season put paid to our best chance of winning a flag since 1998.

Since then, the rebuild has been going on while you looked the other way or deliberately chose to ignore it.

did 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 happen or was that a mirage? 'cause your acting like they didn't.

or how about
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011 - to be seen.

stop with the walter mitty delusions about there not being enough time.

 

[Crow-mo]

Doughty would be in Collingwood's best 22 if he were on their team list. Stevens, probably not.

questionable.

 

[Crow-mo]

Didn't Walker have a ripper year in the SANFL and couldn't crack the side..

Didn't Phil Davis have credible performances in the SANFL but really shine when brought up to AFL level?

Didn't he shine at AFL level only to be dropped back to the SANFL again when arguably more experienced players were not yet contributing?

We just seem unwilling to allow some specific players to develop by staying in the top level side. But at the same time have a 'team security' concept here role players who have 'served their time' get higher selection priority. The balance on these philosophies is not yet optimal IMO.

Given some players aren't even allowed to play their AFL positions in the SANFL, I am not sure how much weight the form argument really holds.

 

[Crow-mo]

Let's be fair here - this comment was not about Stevens and Doughty and players of that ilk. He was talking about the likes of Goodwin, McLeod, Edwards (and Burton, but why he thought of Burton in the company of the other three names is a separate issue again...) who were far from our worst players. He was dead right in his comments - replacing those players with players out of our best 22 would have made us even worse than the team that failed to win a match for six bloody weeks.

lets be fair here, the fact that we were still ever reliant on these guys in 2010 is a massive failure of our succession plan. diabolical, car crash failure.

since when does gravy become the roast beef?

 

[AFC979810]

how about they perform like you might expect for a team that's supposedly been rebuilding since 2007, with a squad that was meant to be good enough to contend in 2010?

how about we take a consistent track for assessing our progress, and don't keep changing the rules and lowering expectations so we can pretend our coach (entering his 8th year in charge) hasn't had long enough.

we're good enough to contend or we're not, if we're not (and we ain't) why the **** not, and if we are why lower expecations so another moderate to mediocre year can be hailed as ground breaking?

the only thing pathetic is clutching at straws like they're mothers milk.

We haven't been 'rebuilding' since 2007. We made the finals in 2007, 2008 and 2009 - rebuilding teams don't make the finals 3 years in a row.

As far as 2010 goes - everyone inside and outside the club thought we would contend in 2010 after our stellar performance towards the end of 09. We took a gamble in keeping the older guys on the list in going for one more roll of the dice and it obviously failed...

For someone who thinks they are such an intellectual powerhouse - I cannot understand how you don't grasp the concept of how cyclical success in the AFL is.

As to your question 'Why the **** aren't we good enough' - it is because we have a very young list now.

 

[Crow-mo]

We haven't been 'rebuilding' since 2007. We made the finals in 2007, 2008 and 2009 - rebuilding teams don't make the finals 3 years in a row.

well this is rather transparent. you don't recall the need to re-tool to make the next push for a flag, by "re-freshing and renovating" the list? you didn't hear all the public statements from the club about it? don't worry everyone else did.

For someone who thinks they are such an intellectual powerhouse - I cannot understand how you don't grasp the concept of how cyclical success in the AFL is.

I don't think I need concern myself with all the things you cannot grasp.

As to your question 'Why the **** aren't we good enough' - it is because we have a very young list now.

Now? I imagine you also cannot grasp how this is not a random thing you suddenly wake up to one day and find beside the bed.

 

[sliver member]

rebuilding teams make the finals three years in a row. collingwood did 2006,2007,2008 after finishing 15th in 2005 and we weren't rebuilding in 2007 just have a look at team that play hawthorn in the finals.

 

[AFC979810]

rebuilding teams make the finals three years in a row. collingwood did 2006,2007,2008 after finishing 15th in 2005 and we weren't rebuilding in 2007 just have a look at team that play hawthorn in the finals.

Collingwood made the preliminary final in 2007 (losing by 5 points to eventual premiers) and also made the prelim in 2008.... If thats rebuilding I want to rebuild every year....

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Let's be fair here - this comment was not about Stevens and Doughty and players of that ilk. He was talking about the likes of Goodwin, McLeod, Edwards (and Burton, but why he thought of Burton in the company of the other three names is a separate issue again...) who were far from our worst players. He was dead right in his comments - replacing those players with players out of our best 22 would have made us even worse than the team that failed to win a match for six bloody weeks.

I know. And? We saw later in the season what we were like without Goodwin, McLeod, Edwards and Burton. And it wasn't quite the train wreck Neil was waking up in cold sweats about. In fact we were much better.

Transfer to 2011 and Neil will be in an equal tizz about the prospect of lining up without Doughty, Reilly, Stevens and Symes.

What Neil SHOULD have realised from 2010 is that just because kids like Henderson, Walker, Davis, Sloane, Jaensch... are in the team does NOT mean that we will curl up our toes and surrender. 2010 should have been a massive wake up call for him.

 

[Allefgib]

Let's be fair here - this comment was not about Stevens and Doughty and players of that ilk. He was talking about the likes of Goodwin, McLeod, Edwards (and Burton, but why he thought of Burton in the company of the other three names is a separate issue again...)

WRONG!!!!!

That IS the issue mate.

Think about it.

 

[Allefgib]

Given some players aren't even allowed to play their AFL positions in the SANFL, I am not sure how much weight the form argument really holds.

And its a different style and quality of player. Some guys will shine brigther in the AFL than they ever will in the SANFL. That was one of the implications of my points on Davis. He wasnt a stand-out performer at SANFL (by all reports - I should be honest and say I've never seen his actual play there). In th AFL side he really showed he belonged and needed to keep being played and developed there. Had a string of scalps (defenisvely) and got dumped not long after....

 

[cmndstab]

I know. And? We saw later in the season what we were like without Goodwin, McLeod, Edwards and Burton. And it wasn't quite the train wreck Neil was waking up in cold sweats about. In fact we were much better.

Transfer to 2011 and Neil will be in an equal tizz about the prospect of lining up without Doughty, Reilly, Stevens and Symes.

What Neil SHOULD have realised from 2010 is that just because kids like Henderson, Walker, Davis, Sloane, Jaensch... are in the team does NOT mean that we will curl up our toes and surrender. 2010 should have been a massive wake up call for him.

We were much better, but it was not really because we'd been able to get rid of our "big 3.5". If they had continued (or in the case of Burton, started) to play good footy later in the year and everything else was equal, we'd have been just as much improved, possibly more so. The difference between rounds 1-6 and rounds 12-22 was far from simply losing those four players.

I don't think that Craig believes that having kids in means we have to give up. I do think he believes, quite rightly, that moving players on while they're still performing without a ready replacement causes short term pain. Whether this short term pain is necessary for long term gain is still up in the air.

WRONG!!!!!

That IS the issue mate.

Think about it.

You mean that he held Burton in that company? (Any, by extension, holds the likes of Doughty and Stevens in the same company?) Because frankly I'm not quite sure why Burton was held in that company but I don't believe it extends to the other players.

I could be wrong, but I reckon that Doughty and Stevens are no different than Massie or Torney in the club's eyes. They're best 22 players, but they're not the superstars that McLeod, Goodwin and Edwards (and apparently Burton...) were.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Gee wizz, this was a fun read.


http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/adelaide-crows-tipped-to-keep-coach/story-e6frecj3-1225988104689

THE Adelaide Football Club has given its strongest indication yet that Neil Craig will be reappointed.

Chief executive Steven Trigg said Craig's future would be resolved before the season's end. He said the coach retained the board's full confidence, despite missing the finals last year for the first time since 2004. "I would be very surprised if he wasn't coaching us beyond 2011," Trigg said.

and the most entertaining part of the article was....

"In hindsight (it) will be very beneficial to our club and our playing group," he said. "Everyone got tested . . . our board got tested, I got tested as the senior coach, our playing group got tested."

Oh bloody hell, I'm guessing he's saying it was a......yes....a learning experience in different words.

 

[Elite Crow]

How can our CEO talk about re-signing the coach after a shocking year before a ball has been bounced?

What has the coached achieved to warrant this blind faith?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I don't think that Craig believes that having kids in means we have to give up.

I think that is exactly what he believes.

He sees playing youngsters as a blow to our culture, describes it as 'gifting games' and akin to tanking for draft picks, something that goes completely against his philosophy.

Malthouse sees it as a necessary and positive step towards building a premiership team.

 

[Mismatched]

how about they perform like you might expect for a team that's supposedly been rebuilding since 2007, with a squad that was meant to be good enough to contend in 2010?

how about we take a consistent track for assessing our progress, and don't keep changing the rules and lowering expectations so we can pretend our coach (entering his 8th year in charge) hasn't had long enough.

we're good enough to contend or we're not, if we're not (and we ain't) why the **** not, and if we are why lower expecations so another moderate to mediocre year can be hailed as ground breaking?

the only thing pathetic is clutching at straws like they're mothers milk.

Exactly.

We've been renovating, rebuilding, whatever for long enough. We've been supposedly planning for life after the "Big 4" (Ricciuto, McLeod, Goodwin and Edwards) since Craig took over in '05. We've made our bed, its now time to lie in it. 2-3 years ago, the consensus was that 2011 would be our year. The likes of van Berlo, Knights, Vince, Porplyzia, Tippett, Walker, Mackay, Dangerfield, Otten and co would be ready to take over. Now we're making excuses again. Enough excuses its time to deliver.

Craig's had 6 and a half years at the helm, Bomber Thompson and Malthouse have shown that it can be worthwhile giving a coach time to deliver a premiership. However, Craig'd want to be knocking pretty hard on the door of the Top 4 in 2011 if he's to convince the board that he's worth giving this chance to.

lets be fair here, the fact that we were still ever reliant on these guys in 2010 is a massive failure of our succession plan. diabolical, car crash failure.

since when does gravy become the roast beef?

In actual fact, how reliant were we on them? With all four in the side we slumped to our worst losing streak ever. Burton played his last game in Rd 7, Edwards in Rd 11, McLeod only played one game after Rd 11. After Rd 11, our win-loss record was 6-5, as opposed to 3-8 before. In our final 4, (without any of those guys, inc Goodwin) games we beat Brisbane in Brisbane, St Kilda at home and lose to the Bulldogs by 8 points and Collingwood by 3. Clearly the sky didn't fall down.

How can our CEO talk about re-signing the coach after a shocking year before a ball has been bounced?

What has the coached achieved to warrant this blind faith?

C'mon, what else is Trigg going to say? "Well actually we're having knife cleaned and sharpened as we speak"? Of course he's going to support Neil, boards will always be right behind their coaches, right until they stab them in the back. Its a bit like how our PM had more chance of lining up at FF for the Bulldogs than becoming Prime Minister.

What should be noted is that Craig's last contract extension came well over a year before his contract was due to run out and yet this time they're waiting it out a lot longer. That tells me that the confidence of the Board in Craig is slipping.

My guess is, similar to Ayres, is that they'll give him half a year to prove he's the man to lead us for the next couple of years and if he can't show that, its see ya later alligator.

Also worth noting is that a contract between the Crows and Craig is pretty meaningless, neither would hold the other to the contract. If the board decided it was time to go, Craig would leave without a fuss.

 

[cmndstab]

I think that is exactly what he believes.

He sees playing youngsters as a blow to our culture, describes it as 'gifting games' and akin to tanking for draft picks, something that goes completely against his philosophy.

Malthouse sees it as a necessary and positive step towards building a premiership team.

I think he sees it as gifting games and all of that when the youngsters don't warrant their spot in the side, and I agree with him. Kids should not be playing until they've earned a spot.

The issue is that "you have to earn your spot" is an adjudication, not something binary. There is no universal measure for "earning your spot". I agree with the general sentiment here that the Crows make earning a spot in the best 22 too hard. That's what I see as the problem, that we demand too much before we give significant chances. That we make earning your spot too high a mountain to climb. I don't think the mentality that you need to earn your spot before you get selected is wrong itself, though.

 

[sliver member]

Collingwood made the preliminary final in 2007 (losing by 5 points to eventual premiers) and also made the prelim in 2008.... If thats rebuilding I want to rebuild every year....

2008 they made the semi finals. if you have a look at they 07 premilinary final side the senior guys were clement, buckley, rocca, medhurst, burns,o'bree, walkein how many were playing in 2010 for collingwood?

the younger guys were o'brein, thomas,pendleburly, swan, cloke, clarke,goldsack, and all these guys expect marty clarke played in the premiership. i

this shows you can rebulid and make the top four and five while bringing thorugh young guys so they can have enough experience in four and five years to lead the team and possible win the premiership when the older guys have retired.

this is what craig is doing and collingwood is a good example in that it can work but we will take longer.

 

[sliver member]

Exactly.

Craig's had 6 and a half years at the helm, Bomber Thompson and Malthouse have shown that it can be worthwhile giving a coach time to deliver a premiership. However, Craig'd want to be knocking pretty hard on the door of the Top 4 in 2011 if he's to convince the board that he's worth giving this chance to.


Mark thompson took 8 years to win a premierhsip and after seven years people were calling for his head

mick malthouse took 10 years to win a premiership and already had two chances to win a premiership in his reign at collingwood.

neil craig is doing a better job than most coaches in the afl.