Review Vent/Autopsy thread vs Adelaide

[Morris Major]

I think it was 2008. You're reffering to his 300th?

07 was better, kicked 8 against Geelong

 

[Running Dog]

i have total faith in macca as a coach

Short term pain, long term gain.

I don't. Even if in the short term he is a good mentor who can instil a solid game plan into a bunch of youngsters who will hopefully play a lot of footy together, you still have to play the game in front of you. In the long term, McCartney needs strategic insight into how a game can unfold, and to me he is no tactician. He doesn't seem to know how to influence a game, or change things around, or take a few risks. Not that this is the sole reason for some sub-standard performances, but it's all very well to construct a team. How do you deploy it effectively in the prevailing conditions is what a coach needs to ask, and in the long term McCartney won't be the one to take a solid team forward, notwithstanding his best mentoring efforts.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I wonder how he managed to get all those premierships then, admittedly in the lower league. I can't believe he's worked in footy for so longer, in senior positions or working with senior coaching staff, and not picked up some idea of strategy. He is more than just a mentor, that's just the stage he is at with this group.

 

[TedDougChris]

I wonder how he managed to get all those premierships then, admittedly in the lower league. I can't believe he's worked in footy for so longer, in senior positions or working with senior coaching staff, and not picked up some idea of strategy. He is more than just a mentor, that's just the stage he is at with this group.

While I think the team selection on the weekend was wrong (Team selection is a completely different issue here - if it was likely to pour down, why select Cordy, why not make a late change ?), what the hell was he expected to do to change the game ??

We were winning the ball, tackling hard, winning the clearances - and then using it terribly and not spreading well !!! Jones should have been playing further up the ground (between 30 - 80 m out and just running between these spots), but what other options did we have ? Cordy - slower than Jones. Gia - slower than everything. Stringer - not fit enough yet. Tutt - played less than 10 games, first game back for the year. Dahl - cannot be everywhere at once.

We don't have the depth of experienced, talented players that allows the coach to pull a rabbit out of a hat.

There are 3 stages of development in a football side IMO. Getting the football (midfield) - we have got this covered, although I'd like to see the balance between inside and outside mids improve. Kicking a score (forwards) - this is where our current focus is, and needs to be. Defending against the opposition (defence).

In our successful days, we had the first two, but not the third. We were the highest scoring team, but also conceeded the most of the Top 4 sides, which is why we fell short of the GF.

We are trying to get systems and structures into our play. We've clearly set standards for contested football that everyone needs to meet, even Tutt and Vez are finally getting the message.

Once we get everyone fit and ready and playing to instructions, then we can look at getting creative. But with the hand we've been dealt, I'm not sure what else we could have done on the weekend ?

 

[DylanW]

What's the story with Griffen? looking at weeks?

 

[Morris Major]

Just FYI, just some stats on experience if you take away Minson Morris Cooney Griffen Gia Boyd Cross (140+ games)

15 players
25.4 average games (down to 20.7 if you take away Picken)
17 median (16 without Picken)

 

[josh the gent]

Meh, rebuilds are tough - a lot of people on here seem to blame the coach, etc.

WTF is he supposed to do, until the players get more experience / pre-seasons into them.

I am actually happy with how our team is shaping up, this season is all about seeing little signs, etc. We have quality prospects in all the right places, just need 1 more quality KPF and 1 more quality outside mid, and we have our list...

Future team - all these players have shown signs repeatedly. Add Boyd as that KPF, and we get scary good in the forward line.

Fwd:
Talls: Jones, Cordy, xxxx
Meds: Stringer
Smalls: Dahlhaus, xxxx (Hunter maybe)

Mids:
Inside: Libba, Wallis, Clay Smith, Stevens
Outside: Macrae, xxxx, xxxx

Defs:
Talls: Roughead, Talia
Meds: Young, xxxx
Smalls: JJ, xxxx

Rucks: Campbell

That team will wind up being awesome, but they need time, games, and pre-seasons. Unfortunately we can't really rush it, so expect more beatings.

 

[Morris Major]

Future team - all these players have shown signs repeatedly. Add Boyd as that KPF, and we get scary good in the forward line.

Reckon Minson and Griffen should still be around to be part of that future team, maybe (hopefully) even Cooney if his knee allows him to. What about Lower (25)? Picken (26)?

I like what you're saying though, we will panic against a well drilled opposition until the pups get more experience. Macca has the team on the right track and they need time to mature, can only really judge when the group has a minimum 50~60 odd games across the board.

 

[DogDays]

can only really judge when the group has a minimum 50~60 odd games across the board.

Not the 17 games they currently have... i'd hazard a guess even GC would average more?

 

[Werewolf]

I like what you're saying though, we will panic against a well drilled opposition until the pups get more experience. Macca has the team on the right track and they need time to mature, can only really judge when the group has a minimum 50~60 odd games across the board.

Agree with this. Plus if you look at the results of wet weather games, there are a lot of blowouts when there is a mismatch in experience to begin with (e.g. Collingwood 159 def Port 21 in 2011). We are currently a rubbish wet weather team (not that we're brilliant when it's dry).

Just as well the backline held up well, nearly every defender broke even or won his position (except for whoever was on Dangerfield ). That at least prevented a complete demolition!

 

[Morris Major]

Not the 17 games they currently have... i'd hazard a guess even GC would average more?

Their core group are at 30-40 games, which makes sense since they were all drafted in 2010. To be honest we're not too different from GC or GWS considering our spread of young players and experienced players, there's a massive hole in the middle, and it doesn't help when guys like Murphy Higgins and Griffen picked up injuries.

 

[Butane]

Weekend stats

Adelaide
Average age = 24
Average Games = 67.4

Bulldogs
Average age = 24.5
Average Games = 73.6

**** that. I can handle being young as a reason why you lose but I can't handle that excuse when you get flogged by a younger team.

Sorry Macca but if we get done by a younger team again and I hear youth mentioned as a reason I'll spew up!

 

[Igloo]

Weekend stats

Adelaide
Average age = 24
Average Games = 67.4

Bulldogs
Average age = 24.5
Average Games = 73.6

**** that. I can handle being young as a reason why you lose but I can't handle that excuse when you get flogged by a younger team.

Sorry Macca but if we get done by a younger team again and I hear youth mentioned as a reason I'll spew up!

Refer to dogwatch 's post on the previous page as to why this isn't as bad as it looks.

 

[TedDougChris]

Weekend stats

Adelaide
Average age = 24
Average Games = 67.4

Bulldogs
Average age = 24.5
Average Games = 73.6

**** that. I can handle being young as a reason why you lose but I can't handle that excuse when you get flogged by a younger team.

Sorry Macca but if we get done by a younger team again and I hear youth mentioned as a reason I'll spew up!

Has been covered elsewhere, but I think the age demographics really skew the results... If you look at the 30+ aged players, I think we have a much higher number, similar with the 18 - 22 aged players, it just balances out around the same..

We were done on the weekend for lack of run, lack of skill and a completely disfunctional forward line. These are the areas we need to focus on.

 

[TedDougChris]

Refer to dogwatch 's post on the previous page as to why this isn't as bad as it looks.

Beat me to it.....

 

[dogwatch]

Weekend stats

Adelaide
Average age = 24
Average Games = 67.4

Bulldogs
Average age = 24.5
Average Games = 73.6

**** that. I can handle being young as a reason why you lose but I can't handle that excuse when you get flogged by a younger team.

Sorry Macca but if we get done by a younger team again and I hear youth mentioned as a reason I'll spew up!

I suggest you read this before you spew up:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/vent-autopsy-thread-vs-adelaide.1000529/page-9#post-27887412

Basically our small group of older players (140 games and above) are distorting the averages. Here's another stat:
Average age of youngest 12 players on Sunday:

Adelaide - 21.92​

WB - 21.00​

Average games of least experienced 12:

Adelaide - 25.5​

WB - 15.92​

​

Adelaide is a young side but not as young as our list. Don't get sucked in by overall averages without looking at the distribution.

 

[Butane]

Whoops, totally missed dogwatch's post.

 

[Butane]

I get the distribution of the games in uneven but even Adelaide played 11 less than 50 gamers yesterday. That's actually really high by itself, and they flogged us!

14 players under 50 games is an extremely pathetic effort from the list management going back years. The Gold Coast had 15 players like that on the weekend and they've been around for 3 minutes. Nothing we can do about that now I guess though. Just rock up and get feed the same bullshit until we fall in to some luck and pick up a few more Stringer and Macrae's. Wait 5 more years and try again at the flag.

 

[TedDougChris]

I get the distribution of the games in uneven but even Adelaide played 11 less than 50 gamers yesterday. That's actually really high by itself, and they flogged us!

14 players under 50 games is an extremely pathetic effort from the list management going back years. The Gold Coast had 15 players like that on the weekend and they've been around for 3 minutes. Nothing we can do about that now I guess though. Just rock up and get feed the same bullshit until we fall in to some luck and pick up a few more Stringer and Macrae's. Wait 5 more years and try again at the flag.

I don't think it will be that long Butane, but there will be more pain to come.

We've clearly got a reasonable midfield/centre square group, although inside mid heavy. We don't need Boyd and Cross in there to be competitive - which is good. I don't think we have the balance of the side correct (which reflects badly on recent drafting, trading and development) as we are clearly short on outside runners up to AFL standard. What I'd give for an Eagleton right now.... Roughead is developing into an accomplished defender, Pearce and JJ are showing improvement, Goodes was a good pickup and apparently Talia kicked a 50m plus goal in the 2's... Whether he was trying to pass to someone is currently unclear...

As I've said elsewhere, we've seen glimpses and improvement in a number of players this year, and while it's clearly a work in progress, I'm hoping well see continued improvement over the remainder of the year.

The number of under 50 game players also reflects the injuries of last week, losing Higgins and Murphy. Next week could be worse if Griff is also out.

 

[stefoid]

You can't defend and attack simultaneously.

To defend you need to be close to your opponent. To attack effectively you need to be away from opponents.

Seems like Mac has us concentrating on defence to such an extent that we don't/cant attack effectively because we are never free of an opponent.
Which means we turn the ball over and have to defend again.

We spend the whole time winning the ball, turning it over and trying to get it back without the mental/physical break that maintaining possession and kicking goals provides.

death spiral...

 

[dogwatch]

Just to add to the last couple of posts ...
The distribution on its own doesn't explain why we were utterly flogged yesterday. You need to look at drafting pre-2010 (there's another thread discussing this) and I suppose injuries to key players do play a part. Once you've taken those into account you can maybe start looking at coaching and development differences.

If it was just the age distribution thing we should have been pretty competitive. While the individuals competed hard most of the day the scoreboard says we weren't competitive at all.

 

[TedDougChris]

You can't defend and attack simultaneously.

To defend you need to be close to your opponent. To attack effectively you need to be away from opponents.

Seems like Mac has us concentrating on defence to such an extent that we don't/cant attack effectively because we are never free of an opponent.
Which means we turn the ball over and have to defend again.

We spend the whole time winning the ball, turning it over and trying to get it back without the mental/physical break that maintaining possession and kicking goals provides.

death spiral...

Good point, but there is balance. The real knock on us going back a few years was that we couldn't/wouldn't defend. We preferred to attack. We scored more heavily than anyone else in the competition, but conceded more than any other top 4 side... That only gets you so far. There was a stat a few years ago that the top defensive side (conceded the least score) had made the GF for 8 million years in a row ****

I think Macca has gone too far the other way - and that is also with recruiting. I know why we've gone down that path and I understand. But for all Hrovat and Smiths work and talent, I'd reallly love some outside run at the moment... When you look at our side, we have Griff, Cooney, Dahl and then... Macrae ???

**** - disclaimer. I can't remember the stat, when it was from or what the overall result was - so there may be slight exaggeration here.

 

[TedDougChris]

Just to add to the last couple of posts ...
The distribution on its own doesn't explain why we were utterly flogged yesterday. You need to look at drafting pre-2010 (there's another thread discussing this) and I suppose injuries to key players do play a part. Once you've taken those into account you can maybe start looking at coaching and development differences.

If it was just the age distribution thing we should have been pretty competitive. While the individuals competed hard most of the day the scoreboard says we weren't competitive at all.

I think the individual stats tell a different story. I think we were ok with contested ball, tackles and clearances, but just didn't use the ball very well. Whether that's skills, wet weather, pressure, a combination of the above or just random luck.... I also think we were cruelled by the umpires, not having any impact on the result, just preventing us from making it a contest for longer....

I don't think we picked the right team for the conditions, or structured up for it very well...

 

[StringyDog]

I think Macca has gone too far the other way - and that is also with recruiting. I know why we've gone down that path and I understand. But for all Hrovat and Smiths work and talent, I'd reallly love some outside run at the moment... When you look at our side, we have Griff, Cooney, Dahl and then... Macrae ???

I know people are crying out for outside run and it is clearly affecting how the team is playing but if you are looking at long term gains you need to get all the other areas right first as outside mids are generally the fastest to bring on and have an impact when you look at the general development timeframe;

Rucks 6-7 years
KP 5-6 years
Inside Mids 4-5 years
Outside Mids 2-3 years

Of course you get freaks that buck the trend and we have one in Libba, hopefully we can get another in next draft as we simply don't have those outside runners on list that are good enough so he has to work with what he has got.

 

[DogDays]

I think the individual stats tell a different story. I think we were ok with contested ball, tackles and clearances, but just didn't use the ball very well. Whether that's skills, wet weather, pressure, a combination of the above or just random luck.... I also think we were cruelled by the umpires, not having any impact on the result, just preventing us from making it a contest for longer....

I don't think we picked the right team for the conditions, or structured up for it very well...

I'd suggest part of it is experience too (and this includes Goodes), at the higher level there is less time for correct disposal and we got hammered for it on Sunday. As our players become more experienced and are able to "week in, week out" cope with the pressure and demands of AFL football our disposal will improve.