The Worsfold coaching situation mega-thread, part 2

[Masto]

Some trueth.
We were also forced to clean out some quality experienced playes with Cuz. This was not planned and list managers could not plan for it.

That said our drafting has failed us.

EG - shuey and shep can kick, so can stephenson. they are all very new players.

Swift, Ebert and masten can not kick and never will - they are turnover kings not up to AFL standard. They are also slow thinkers. We had a period of criminal draft selections from woodhouse. In addition, woodhouse has not drafted a small foward leaving an obvious list structure problem. This has hurt us as much as cuz. It shuld be called the woodhouse spoon.

We now need time to clean out the drafting blunders. sad but true.

This will need fresh faces in the coaching team to build energy.

Yeah because no player ever improves after age 20, cut them all now

 

[The Third Nipple]

Surely Woosha by now would be almost looking for a new job.
I don't really understand why nothing's happened yet.
We are looking like a really weak club ATM- Coaching wise

Losing has become acceptable to us

 

[Marlin01]

I think we were pretty good tactically, last night. We were always going to struggle. We kept Pearce, Ebert and Rhodan, who I consider Port's most dangerous players, reasonably quiet and forced the game into an arm wrestle that we nearly pinched. I thought we were lacking runners, but we were able to finish the game strongly, which would suggest the rotations were done well.

 

[Father Jack]

No coach should be able to survive the past three years if the club in question has any pride in its performance whatsoever.

 

[Geoffe_Miles]

Because they had established players ready to catch the load once it fell off the lot you mentioned's backs (That's what she said?).

We chose to get rid of ours, because they were never going to lift us to a premiership, we cleaned out. If we hadn't done, we'd be languishing around 10th for around 3 consecutive seasons.

The fact is Collingwood's next generation of players was vastly superior to ours.

I am not sure wat distinction you are drawing here. We lost a number of quality players from our glory days 4-5 years ago, mostly due to retirement. Collingwood have also lost a similar quantity and quality of players in this period. The point is that just because you had a couple of years at the top and then lost a few players from that period over the next 5 years it does not make winning a wooden spoon inevitable.

 

[Avalor]

Losing has become acceptable to us

Did it look to you last night that losing has become acceptable? It's not only us supporters who are hurting, they players are too. I'd say gutted after the last 2 weeks. It just hasn't been our year for a number of reasons and I wouldn't list Woosha as one of them. Sometimes, things are just meant to be but we'll be stronger for it down the track.

 

[Bestbird]

I am not sure wat distinction you are drawing here. We lost a number of quality players from our glory days 4-5 years ago, mostly due to retirement. Collingwood have also lost a similar quantity and quality of players in this period. The point is that just because you had a couple of years at the top and then lost a few players from that period over the next 5 years it does not make winning a wooden spoon inevitable.

I don't think anybody is happy that we have finished last.

But the fact that we had the 2nd youngest overall list at the start of the season meant we really needed our key players in form and uninjured to be more competitive. Unfortunatley that hasn't been the case this year so we have ended up playing with a team full of rookies and only a handfull of experienced players.

How we have got to this position can be questioned

We may have been better served by using a Sydney type strategy of sacrificing some early draft picks for established players to have a better balanced list, but the club has put faith in youth instead.

This is probably why the club is muting that pick 4 may be traded if a suitable star player can be lured to the club. Similar to how Carlton chased Judd after being in a similar position to us a few years ago.

 

[Brewster_]

No coach should be able to survive the past three years if the club in question has any pride in its performance whatsoever.

Quoted for truth.

Teams can't always be at the top, but 16 wins over the last 3 seasons, that can never be acceptable.

 

[Geoffe_Miles]

I don't think anybody is happy that we have finished last.

But the fact that we had the 2nd youngest overall list at the start of the season meant we really needed our key players in form and uninjured to be more competitive. Unfortunatley that hasn't been the case this year so we have ended up playing with a team full of rookies and only a handfull of experienced players.

How we have got to this position can be questioned

We may have been better served by using a Sydney type strategy of sacrificing some early draft picks for established players to have a better balanced list, but the club has put faith in youth instead.

This is probably why the club is muting that pick 4 may be traded if a suitable star player can be lured to the club. Similar to how Carlton chased Judd after being in a similar position to us a few years ago.

What you are saying gets repeated ad nauseum by some people on here even though it is a gross distortion. We are one of the youngest teams - yes. We are not way, way, way younger than every other team as is constantly suggested by some on here. We are just towards that end of the spectrum and the teams that are at that end of the spectrum with us are not playing as badly as we are. They are not totally uncompetitive most weeks as we are. Simply wanting to blame this whole thing on youth is a total cop out. Hawthorn won a flag two years ago with one of the youngest lists in the comp.

The mistake that was made was not making the hard call on players like Selwood, Embley, Rosa and Lynch years ago that they were not going to be good enough to step up and we should have traded them while we could get something and before we wasted more investing more games in them. If we had we might have another 3 or 4 quality young players approaching the 40 game mark now rather than those useless crabs. We refused to regenerate the list after 2007 by trading some over rated players out for some more draft picks.

Worsfold thought then, and still thinks now, that you if you sit there long enough and apply enough faith that you can turn pig shit into jam. That all you have to do is just keep backing them and if it appears that what you are doing isn't working it just means you haven't backed them hard enough for long enough. He reminds me of a demented old woman i met once who lived alone and believed that if she prayed hard enough enough and long enough for it every day that God would give her a new washing machine and she would just wake up one morning and it would be sitting there. She was nuts and so is Worsfold.

That was the mistake. Not that we didn't trade enough draft picks for players. I would not have been in favour of that then and i am not in favour of it now. If you want to see examples of the folly of trying to buy your way out of trouble by trading picks for players when you are at the bottom of the ladder have a look at the tortured recent histories of the dockers and Richmond - the two clubs with the most tragic record in the last 15 years. That strategy simply doesn't work. One player does not transform all the other crabs in the team into winners.

The thing that makes Sydney's strategy work is that they go for undervalued younger players. They get players they think can be quality second tier players on the cheap. They don't go trading their first round picks for 27 year olds.

 

[Quinz]

What you are saying gets repeated ad nauseum by some people on here even though it is a gross distortion. We are one of the youngest teams - yes. We are not way, way, way younger than every other team as is constantly suggested by some on here. We are just towards that end of the spectrum and the teams that are at that end of the spectrum with us are not playing as badly as we are. They are not totally uncompetitive most weeks as we are. Simply wanting to blame this whole thing on youth is a total cop out. Hawthorn won a flag two years ago with one of the youngest lists in the comp.

Last week we were about a year younger per player than any other team. And of the bottom six in terms of age last week, only one of them won- Carlton, who were playing on of the other six in Essendon.

We're certainly not less competitive that the other teams at our end of the ladder. In case you missed it, Richmond lost by almost 100 points, their 9th 50+ loss this year. Essendon had their worst loss of the season, and their 6th 50+ loss of the year. Both have a greater losing margin than us.

Didn't this conversation go the same way last week? We aren't really any better or worse than other teams around our position. They are just as often pathetic as we have been.

 

[GO EAGLES]

What you are saying gets repeated ad nauseum by some people on here even though it is a gross distortion. We are one of the youngest teams - yes. We are not way, way, way younger than every other team as is constantly suggested by some on here. We are just towards that end of the spectrum and the teams that are at that end of the spectrum with us are not playing as badly as we are. They are not totally uncompetitive most weeks as we are. Simply wanting to blame this whole thing on youth is a total cop out. Hawthorn won a flag two years ago with one of the youngest lists in the comp.

The mistake that was made was not making the hard call on players like Selwood, Embley, Rosa and Lynch years ago that they were not going to be good enough to step up and we should have traded them while we could get something and before we wasted more investing more games in them. If we had we might have another 3 or 4 quality young players approaching the 40 game mark now rather than those useless crabs. We refused to regenerate the list after 2007 by trading some over rated players out for some more draft picks.

Worsfold thought then, and still thinks now, that you if you sit there long enough and apply enough faith that you can turn pig shit into jam. That all you have to do is just keep backing them and if it appears that what you are doing isn't working it just means you haven't backed them hard enough for long enough. He reminds me of a demented old woman i met once who lived alone and believed that if she prayed hard enough enough and long enough for it every day that God would give her a new washing machine and she would just wake up one morning and it would be sitting there. She was nuts and so is Worsfold.

That was the mistake. Not that we didn't trade enough draft picks for players. I would not have been in favour of that then and i am not in favour of it now. If you want to see examples of the folly of trying to buy your way out of trouble by trading picks for players when you are at the bottom of the ladder have a look at the tortured recent histories of the dockers and Richmond - the two clubs with the most tragic record in the last 15 years. That strategy simply doesn't work. One player does not transform all the other crabs in the team into winners.

The thing that makes Sydney's strategy work is that they go for undervalued younger players. They get players they think can be quality second tier players on the cheap. They don't go trading their first round picks for 27 year olds.

The problem with your logic is that you are to

lazy for instance to pick up a video of a game last year say or early this year and look at MacKenzie, Schofield for instance and why they looked better in general last night.

They are bigger around the hips and shoulders.

A a true Eagles supporter I go to the effort of sussing out what we need on the park, whether it is a type of player or a type of physique on the player.
It is physically impossible to do what Shuey did last night unless you can do what he can.

Coach cannot do a thing about it. So if we have no players to waltz around the opposition we just get caught.

Nothing anyone can do about it, because the opposition is trying to stop us at all costs.

 

[Bestbird]

Last week we were about a year younger per player than any other team. And of the bottom six in terms of age last week, only one of them won- Carlton, who were playing on of the other six in Essendon.

We're certainly not less competitive that the other teams at our end of the ladder. In case you missed it, Richmond lost by almost 100 points, their 9th 50+ loss this year. Essendon had their worst loss of the season, and their 6th 50+ loss of the year. Both have a greater losing margin than us.

Didn't this conversation go the same way last week? We aren't really any better or worse than other teams around our position. They are just as often pathetic as we have been.

Interesting to see how much experience counts

This weekend teams

Geel 132
WBD 123
St K 115
Coll 112
Sw 106
Haw 101
Bri 91
Fre 83
Mel 80
Kng 78
Car 72
PA 72
Ess 60
Ric 59
WCE 59


Swap Carlton for Brisbane and it is a pretty good reflection of the AFL ladder.

 

[Bestbird]

The mistake that was made was not making the hard call on players like Selwood, Embley, Rosa and Lynch years ago that they were not going to be good enough to step up and we should have traded them while we could get something and before we wasted more investing more games in them. If we had we might have another 3 or 4 quality young players approaching the 40 game mark now rather than those useless crabs. We refused to regenerate the list after 2007 by trading some over rated players out for some more draft picks.

If you took those players out of last nights team we would have had only 1 player over the age of 24

 

[Mattman93]

It is physically impossible to do what Shuey did last night unless you can do what he can.

Good point.

 

[Geoffe_Miles]

Last week we were about a year younger per player than any other team. And of the bottom six in terms of age last week, only one of them won- Carlton, who were playing on of the other six in Essendon.

We're certainly not less competitive that the other teams at our end of the ladder. In case you missed it, Richmond lost by almost 100 points, their 9th 50+ loss this year. Essendon had their worst loss of the season, and their 6th 50+ loss of the year. Both have a greater losing margin than us.

Didn't this conversation go the same way last week? We aren't really any better or worse than other teams around our position. They are just as often pathetic as we have been.

That must be why we are winning the spoon by the length of the straight - because we are just as competitive as all the other bottom 8 teams. The team that wins the spoon is the worst team. The team that wins it by the length of the straight is by far the worst team. And the team that finishes on 4 wins when you can say categorically that they weren't tanking (because there is nothing to tank for), well that is just utterly humiliating and very, very rare. When did anybody play this badly before for a whole season without tanking being a part of it?

This cherry picking of stats that goes on with the pro-Worsfold crowd is ridiculous. Just because you can highlight/cherry pick some games where Richmond, Melbourne and Essendon (whose results can be attributed to internal disarray as Knights has effectively been sacked) got belted does not mean that we are all in the same basket. Look at it over a period of time like say a whole season or several seasons. All 3 of those clubs are have won significantly more games this season than we have and all are showing very strong signs of improvement in categories other than just wins and losses than what we are showing such as their intensity, tackling, disposal, discipline, organisation etc. We are going backwards and they are going forwards. Do you think their is any Richmond or Melbourne fan in the country who would rather our season or our list than theirs?

And even if you could make an intelligent case that there are other clubs in just as dire straight as us that does not prove that Worsfold is not part of the problem at our particular club.

 

[Geoffe_Miles]

If you took those players out of last nights team we would have had only 1 player over the age of 24

I'm fine with that because none of those blokes are AFL standard players. If you are over 24 and have played more than 100 games and you can't contribute more than the next best 17-21 year old on the list then their is no place for you at the club. If your in your prime and you are a worse option than the majority of the young players in the 22 then there is just no hope and no point in persisting with you.

Even in parts of games where we have played well against certain sides it's blokes like Strijk, Stevens, Scott Selwood, Shuey that ignite us and do the damage, not these so called senior players and team leaders. They are not good enough and they can't be given a spot purely on the basis that they are over 24 when they don't contribute and are just no good. Lets look reality in the eye and admit the truth and strip things back to a sound foundation and rebuild from there. If that means a team of all under 24's i am fine with that as long as every player in their has a go.

 

[dajesmac]

I am not sure wat distinction you are drawing here. We lost a number of quality players from our glory days 4-5 years ago, mostly due to retirement. Collingwood have also lost a similar quantity and quality of players in this period. The point is that just because you had a couple of years at the top and then lost a few players from that period over the next 5 years it does not make winning a wooden spoon inevitable.

The difference between our situation and Collingwood's is that we decided to completely clean out our list and push for youth. Has Collingwood done that?

 

[Bestbird]

I'm fine with that because none of those blokes are AFL standard players. If you are over 24 and have played more than 100 games and you can't contribute more than the next best 17-21 year old on the list then their is no place for you at the club. If your in your prime and you are a worse option than the majority of the young players in the 22 then there is just no hope and no point in persisting with you.

Even in parts of games where we have played well against certain sides it's blokes like Strijk, Stevens, Scott Selwood, Shuey that ignite us and do the damage, not these so called senior players and team leaders. They are not good enough and they can't be given a spot purely on the basis that they are over 24 when they don't contribute and are just no good. Lets look reality in the eye and admit the truth and strip things back to a sound foundation and rebuild from there. If that means a team of all under 24's i am fine with that as long as every player in their has a go.

I think you will find that Rosa, Selwood & Embley are all highly likely to be top 10 in our f & B. (Rosa and Embley were both in the top 5 player rankings wise last night)

To say they are not AFL standard shows a lack of respect IMO to those players and the club.

 

[new breed]

Mark Neeld is out of the running for the Port Coaching Job ... ..

The Sunday Times today are saying West Coast Powerbrokers who ever they may be have Neeld at the top of their list to recruit as a Assistant coach and with Woosha in possibly the twilight of his West Coast tenure , would be in line for the Top job at West Coast !

Neeld is Collingwoods midfield coach and is evidently the one that West Coast are showing some interest in !

 

[Crimson King]

Mark Neeld is out of the running for the Port Coaching Job ... ..

The Sunday Times today are saying West Coast Powerbrokers who ever they may be have Neeld at the top of their list to recruit as a Assistant coach and with Woosha in possibly the twilight of his West Coast tenure , would be in line for the Top job at West Coast !

Neeld is Collingwoods midfield coach and is evidently the one that West Coast are showing some interest in !

Didn't the article also mention that Sumich and Metropolis were going to be axed?

 

[new breed]

Didn't the article also mention that Sumich and Metropolis were going to be axed?

Yes Said Suma's future uncertain also that Mick Malthouse has recommended Neeld to the club !

Neeld seems a ideal age and could be suited to West Coast in the long term with Woosha maybe handing over after 2011 !


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Neeld

 

[Avalor]

In the half-time segment of the Collingwood game, they showed Neeld going over video footage with Pendlebury - telling him what he was doing well and what he needed to be aware of at the stops - was very impressive, I thought. I hope we do get him.

 

[Patron]

yer would love to swap him for sumich. the so called forward coach who has given us such structures/strategies as bomb it to lynch superstars and see what happens and the always successful bomb it to lecras as high as possible the small superstar he might do something.

 

[CursoryMercenary]

Pretty sure I included Neeld in my list of potential coaches for 2011, Alan Richardson is also on that list and is on our radar too.

 

[Denton52]

Mark Neeld is out of the running for the Port Coaching Job ... ..

The Sunday Times today are saying West Coast Powerbrokers who ever they may be have Neeld at the top of their list to recruit as a Assistant coach and with Woosha in possibly the twilight of his West Coast tenure , would be in line for the Top job at West Coast !

Neeld is Collingwoods midfield coach and is evidently the one that West Coast are showing some interest in !

Finally some foresight shown by the club and an admission that we've spent 2-3 years building the most out-dated ordinary midfield in the competition.

Burns was a waste of time. He did pretty much call out Worsfold early on by saying he wanted LeCras in the middle but no...Worsfold was confident plodders could get the job done.

At least someone high up isn't fooled by the 'Stats say we win clearances BS' that pops up.