Strategy What are we going to do about centre half forward?

[vinum coupe]

What about the old Dwayne Russell / Gavin Exell setup?
I.e. start Brown and Hawkins right next to each other, and tell them to play close to each other all game.

I know the game has changed, but it might actually help our forward 50 entries with regards to leading lines and space in other areas of the 50..
I don't know. Just throwing it out there.

 

[Partridge]

What about the old Dwayne Russell / Gavin Exell setup?
I.e. start Brown and Hawkins right next to each other, and tell them to play close to each other all game.

I know the game has changed, but it might actually help our forward 50 entries with regards to leading lines and space in other areas of the 50..
I don't know. Just throwing it out there.

Watching how sides set up their 50 is an engineering problem all by itself. There are obviously good reasons why they don't have players set wider on the flanks and so on, but I'm betting 99% of footy fans are unaware of them. Even with Russell and Exell, Exell's best form in 1989 was when he was sole full forward and Russell wasn't in the side.

They've got to take a deep breath and make a commitment one way or the other. We almost certainly are going to get some more frustrating games that will have players burnt in effigy. But we might find a good player or two in a few months' time if we persist.

 

[vinum coupe]

It would be interesting to hear SJ being interviewed on the subject.
I've got no doubt that he is the architect of the inside 50 structure and ball movement into it.

And then also hear what he thinks about the way Brown is working within that structure.
Who knows, his role might actually be to create space for Hawk.

 

[Partridge]

It would be interesting to hear SJ being interviewed on the subject.
I've got no doubt that he is the architect of the inside 50 structure and ball movement into it.

And then also hear what he thinks about the way Brown is working within that structure.
Who knows, his role might actually be to create space for Hawk.

It's where it gets very frustrating for us, because this is where our knowledge just stops. We really have no clue about that.

What was surprising in Scott's press conference was his demeanour while discussing Brown, he really wasn't bothered at all. Almost like he's happy with what he's doing right now. No doubt he would want more - more touches, more marks and hopefully more goals. But you didn't get the impression that he wants him out, so as you say - who knows.

All I want Saturday night (presuming he plays) is - lead Mitch, chase Mitch, lead Mitch, chase Mitch.

 

[ninjacat]

If Blitz was just a <little> bit better at goal kicking, he would be perfect for the role. He can run up and down the ground all day better than Riewoldt.

 

[Footy Smarts]

CHF is clearly an issue for us. But we should keep a few things in mind.

1) We've won premierships with really questionable key forwards before. I mean in 2011 we basically had our current forward line and got the job done once Pods went down and in 2007 and 2009 we had a solid Mooney assisted by a fairly ordinary player. The importance of key forwards is generally over-rated. Looking at recent premiers and it's very rare for a premiership team to contain 2 gun key forwards. Much more often it's a case of solid talls assisted by a very good midfield and small forward group.

2) We're 3-0. We're winning games while not playing our best which is vital. If we keep going on this direction we'll at least put ourselves in the frame to be there when the whips are cracking.

The most important thing to realise is that this isn't something that can be solved overnight. It also doesn't need to be solved overnight. If we can keep collecting wins then we can get ourselves in a position to get top 4 and then work on solving it for finals.

Right now Brown's our best option. He might not be the best bet for this year but he's shown enough to suggest he's got a bright future. We should be playing him and helping him along. Would I pick him in a final right now? Probably not but if we can get him to 25-30 games then there's a really good chance things will click.

I think we don't realise quite how lucky we are. We've got a bunch of kids running around week in week out giving us way less than what they should be producing in 2-3 years time. Yet we're winning. We've got to back in our development to eventually produce a very good player. Right now Brown looks our best hope and clearly the club rates him. The last thing we want to do now is start throwing players around willy-nilly just to try and find the magic solution to our CHF problem. The magic cure doesn't exist and in trying to find it we're likely to just hurt ourselves in other areas. Give Brown time, give Kersten time, give Walker time. And rejoice in the fact we look like we'll be ultra-competitive despite this weakness and, if our previous development is anything to go by, it's likely at least one of them will turn into a really good AFL player.

 

[dazbroncos]

CHF is clearly an issue for us. But we should keep a few things in mind.

1) We've won premierships with really questionable key forwards before. I mean in 2011 we basically had our current forward line and got the job done once Pods went down and in 2007 and 2009 we had a solid Mooney assisted by a fairly ordinary player. The importance of key forwards is generally over-rated. Looking at recent premiers and it's very rare for a premiership team to contain 2 gun key forwards. Much more often it's a case of solid talls assisted by a very good midfield and small forward group.

2) We're 3-0. We're winning games while not playing our best which is vital. If we keep going on this direction we'll at least put ourselves in the frame to be there when the whips are cracking.

The most important thing to realise is that this isn't something that can be solved overnight. It also doesn't need to be solved overnight. If we can keep collecting wins then we can get ourselves in a position to get top 4 and then work on solving it for finals.

Right now Brown's our best option. He might not be the best bet for this year but he's shown enough to suggest he's got a bright future. We should be playing him and helping him along. Would I pick him in a final right now? Probably not but if we can get him to 25-30 games then there's a really good chance things will click.

I think we don't realise quite how lucky we are. We've got a bunch of kids running around week in week out giving us way less than what they should be producing in 2-3 years time. Yet we're winning. We've got to back in our development to eventually produce a very good player. Right now Brown looks our best hope and clearly the club rates him. The last thing we want to do now is start throwing players around willy-nilly just to try and find the magic solution to our CHF problem. The magic cure doesn't exist and in trying to find it we're likely to just hurt ourselves in other areas. Give Brown time, give Kersten time, give Walker time. And rejoice in the fact we look like we'll be ultra-competitive despite this weakness and, if our previous development is anything to go by, it's likely at least one of them will turn into a really good AFL player.

There are some MONSTER teams developing quietly in the bottom 8 right now and we must be developing talent with what we have on the list currently. Because in 2 years time those monsters will be colossal beheamoths smashing everything insight and you are gonna need every 100 game 24 year old with a bit of skill you can get your hands on to even be competitive. Its as much about the future as it is now...

Go Catters

 

[Footy Smarts]

There are some MONSTER teams developing quietly in the bottom 8 right now and we must be developing talent with what we have on the list currently. Because in 2 years time those monsters will be colossal beheamoths smashing everything insight and you are gonna need every 100 game 24 year old with a bit of skill you can get your hands on to even be competitive. Its as much about the future as it is now...

Go Catters

Absolutely. We've just got to make sure we do it better than them and going by our recent history I'll back us in.

 

[Two Planks]

I was a Taylor to CHF fan but have now changed my mind.

Hawkins with Bartel, Burbury, Murdoch, Varcoe and 1 of the big ruckman is a great set up. The way we are moving the ball around with short passing I doubt we need another big target. Hawkins without Brown looked great in the last quarter on the weekend. Would like to try this set up on going.

 

[Claude Balls]

Keep it up lads. Eventually one of you'll will strike upon the answer and we'll see it put in place the very next round (i.e. the MC will read it too).

Just like when I started a thread prior to the 2009 season stating I thought James Kelly should be moved to the backline

 

[Pivo]

Keep it up lads. Eventually one of you'll will strike upon the answer and we'll see it put in place the very next round (i.e. the MC will read it too).

Just like when I started a thread prior to the 2009 season stating I thought James Kelly should be moved to the backline

If we're waiting 5 years then we just go down the stick with Brown and then draft a key position type option.

That's it, end thread.

 

[bulletproof]

Good thread VC.

I reckon rather than going for an imperfect solution, I wonder if we need a traditional CHF at all.

I like the idea of a number of small and talls all rotating through there, Blicavs, Mcintosh, Murdoch, Bartel, Taylor, keep the forward line fluid and clear space for Hawkins, move the ball quickly and look for leading targets. As I said in another thread Murdoch is far stronger over head than Brown anyway, so we are not losing much by going for the more mobile options.

Brown, Kersten and Walker are the more traditional options, but none are ideal for the role for different reasons. I think we'll see Walker pretty soon nonetheless.

I reckon Bartel is part of the problem in the forward structure, thought we looked better with him behind the ball on Saturday. He moves into Hawkins' space all the time.

 

[Pivo]

I always thought Lynch was a half forward flanker myself. They will need a second key forward; the game hasn't changed that much. We had one all of 2 weeks ago and looked ok.

Well, I'm not as young as I used to be so the mind may be playing tricks on me but I seem to recall a brief period in the mid 90s(??) where we went in with Lynch as the CHF (I think it was the year he managed to string a few consecutive games together).

Happy to be corrected (and I don't think it happened too often) but I honestly remember there being a handful of games where we tried it (and it had a bit of success with it).

He was a good player too, cruelled by injury.

 

[bulletproof]

Murdoch is an interesting player, I'd like to find a way to utilise his talents more. Not sure if he is not a smart player or he is being marginalised by the system, but he is not in the game enough. I keep thinking this kid has the tools to destroy a side one day but he is just not quite putting it together. Maybe it is blind faith but I think he is a player, who if used well, could become something quite special.

 

[Claude Balls]

If we're waiting 5 years then we just go down the stick with Brown and then draft a key position type option.

That's it, end thread.

But Kelly played defence that very year!

 

[The Casey Cat]

Don't need to do anything necessarily. Hawkins has played a lot of good footy as our sole big bodied key forward. The current set up with Hawkins plus Brown, resting McIntosh and types like Bartel, Varcoe, Murdoch, Burbury, GHS (and Kersten in the future) playing around them is plenty given good enough supply.

 

[Pivo]

But Kelly played defence that very year!

Ya don't say. I really don't remember that.

Based on this evidence it seems clear to me you are the man to nut out this quandary.

 

[Partridge]

Murdoch is an interesting player, I'd like to find a way to utilise his talents more. Not sure if he is not a smart player or he is being marginalised by the system, but he is not in the game enough. I keep thinking this kid has the tools to destroy a side one day but he is just not quite putting it together. Maybe it is blind faith but I think he is a player, who if used well, could become something quite special.

I think it's just reinforcement of what we're probably very slow to realise, and to a degree unwilling to accept - inexperienced players simply don't get large numbers of possessions. They just don't.

Look at all the following players, who we all expect (more or less) to start doing more:

Caddy - 45 games - averages 15.1 touches per game.
Smedts - 27 games - averages 11.3 touches per game.
Blicavs - 25 games - averages 10.5 touches per game.
Murdoch - 22 games - averages 10.8 touches per game.
Vardy - 21 games - averages 7.8 touches per game.
Brown - 13 games - averages 9.9 touches per game.
Horlin-Smith - 13 games - averages 14.3 touches per game.
Walker - 10 games - averages 8.3 touches per game.

That doesn't even include Burbury, McCarthy or Sheringham, who are even less experienced. It shows pretty clearly that no matter whether this board loves them or loathes them, hardly anyone gets 10 touches or more a game until at least 20 games have been played. In any position. It's pretty obvious why getting games into a player is to almost more important than anything, because real consistent output just doesn't happen instantly.

It makes Horlin-Smith's stats in particular look very good too. I'd be curious to analyse the first 20 games of Corey, Bartel, Ablett, Mooney et al and see how they compare.

 

[allrighty]

What about Rivers at CHF?

Good thought, though I prefer your avatar as a mobile CHF. Trouble is he may get smashed up too much in the big packs. I think our competitive advantage is Harry so as much as he would be great, I'd leave him at CHB and restrict his forward moves to pinch hitting. Though you could rotate Dawson and HMac up forward and use Jimmy at CHF to draw either the ball or players away from the bigguns.

 

[allrighty]

The other thing we are not doing well is getting guys behind the pack goalside. The ball falling behind the pack is being cleared easily too often.

 

[Claude Balls]

Ya don't say. I really don't remember that.

Based on this evidence it seems clear to me you are the man to nut out this quandary.

That's more like the kudos I envisaged when I shamelessly blew my trumpet earlier

Although in doing so I did shrug responsibility in this case...

 

[allrighty]

I'm not sure we really need goals from CHF, but we do need a good leader.

Yes I thought during the game the other day we were lacking an organiser up forward. Perhaps because the moment Maxwell (gag) came back on he started pointing about and giving all sorts of directions to the Woods backmen. So as CHF I then go back to Jimmy or Jared who could do this, whereas Blitz and Murder are way too inexperienced, as are kids like Kersten.

Oh Dan, Dan where are you?

 

[allrighty]

Keep it up lads. Eventually one of you'll will strike upon the answer and we'll see it put in place the very next round (i.e. the MC will read it too).

Just like when I started a thread prior to the 2009 season stating I thought James Kelly should be moved to the backline

Whilst I admire your suggestion and agreed at the time (like mine for the Dees to appoint Peter Jackson as CEO about 2 months before they did [PS I had to get that one in!]) the other thing is that if you wait long enough everything possible will eventually happen. So maybe you just got lucky and it happened more quickly.

Whereas my suggestion was of course hugely astute and not arsey at all.

 

[Claude Balls]

Whilst I admire your suggestion and agreed at the time (like mine for the Dees to appoint Peter Jackson as CEO about 2 months before they did [PS I had to get that one in!]) the other thing is that if you wait long enough everything possible will eventually happen. So maybe you just got lucky and it happened more quickly.

Whereas my suggestion was of course hugely astute and not arsey at all.

You mean if you make the suggestion early enough the MC will have a better chance of seeing it in time? Yes, very true

 

[FredLeDeux]

You mean if you make the suggestion early enough the MC will have a better chance of seeing it in time? Yes, very true

Probably safest to use the catman 71 system; when something comes to pass, claim you predicted it, regardless of the inconvenient fact that you actually predicted the exact opposite. Most times, nobody will be bothered checking. It was just bad luck for him that someone did, but them's the breaks.