Opinion Which direction to take from here?

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

I have no hesitation in saying he'd do better than Scott right now.

But that's not really saying anything dramatic at all.

He's the best in the comp by a fair stretch at present.

In his last two competitive games as a coach, Clarko has made the two AFL premiership coaches before him look utterly clueless.

Chris Scott sits alongside all the other coaches at present (Kenny aside, perhaps) in copping one heck of a football lesson from AC at this stage.
AC is currently the best. But it helps to have a great team at your disposal.

The Cats beat every side they played for 100s of games, and flogged most of them regularly as well.
And Bomber T just sat in the box eating sandwiches! ;)
 
Depends on how you see the retirements panning out?

2015: Kelly, Enright, SJ (Caddy, Guthrie, Motlop)
2016: Lonergan, McIntosh, Bartel (God only knows, Stanley/Vardy, Hyphen)
2017: Rivers, Mackie, Stokes (Who knows?, Bews/Thurlow, Murdoch/McCarthy)

It doesn't help that the three really bright young talents who should be hitting their straps right now are Christensen, Menzel and Vardy. That would have been ideal, but those circumstances are really beyond our control.

There's no way McIntosh should go beyond this year. You're also using players in the current lineup. Who will replace those few you've listed? So we are replacing 200-300 gamers with, 100 or less, then replacing those guys with players with less than 10-15 games?

I'm also unsure stokes will last that long either, rivers is also a long bow to draw continuing another year.

More holes than a Swiss cheese factory.

Then throw in Menzel, Cowan. By then Harry is 31-32.

So turning over a third of the list in about 3 years, without ready considering those who just aren't up to AFL standard.
 
Last edited:
If you had Bews or Smedts or any other young player playing instead of Bartel or Kelly- I'd say the 3 goals or single goal would've blown out to 5 and 3. Yes, they were pretty much cooked by the end of the season but I consider that an error on the part of the MC or perhaps the failure of other players to meet expectations and thus more workload on the shoulders of the older players.

Maybe, maybe not. We simply don't know and can't know that.

Rewarding VFL form is one thing but giving a younger player the red carpet treatment over an older player who has played one poor game in a losing team that was soundly trounced, just because he is younger, is something else entirely. Would Gore have been any better than Bartel or Kelly yesterday? I would say 'probably not'.

Not like you TC, I never said anything about the red carpet treatment, I said form should be rewarded. Horlin-Smith got dropped - correctly - and played a very good game doing exactly the kind of role we need. Winning contested possessions and clearances. He's young too. I'd bring him for Kelly in a heartbeat. Gore is yet to debut, so obviously he's an unknown quantity. Blease could be a useful replacement for Stokes though. Sure it's riskier, but he's much younger and much quicker. Has some senior experience too.

Those two players were in the top third of players in votes per game in our B&F last year. Bartel was ranked 2nd at the halfway mark and 3/4 mark of the season. Enright, whose head has also been called for after yesterday and who is also the wrong side of 30, was among our best 5 players in his last 8 games played (as voted by our coaches) and ranked 6th in votes per game overall.
In our first NAB game vs the Gold Coast, Bartel and Kelly were in the top 5 Cats players as ranked by AFL.com.au. Bartel topped the Fantasy points in both NAB 1 and 2 and got 22 possessions in half a game in NAB 3.

How many have called for Enright's head? I certainly said that if he offers multiple repeat performances like yesterday he should be dropped, and I stand by that. He was terrible yesterday and criticism is entirely warranted.

As for the last sentence, sure pre-season form is encouraging, but it's just that. No matter how highly they were ranked in the NAB Cup, they found yesterday the real thing against Hawthorn is slightly tougher. Both were obliterated (they had plenty of mates of course).

No matter how much we'd like to ignore it, for Bartel, Kelly, Stokes, and Enright (at least), they're on the downhill slide now. It's just a fact. They aren't going to roll the clock back and play like they're 25. We can either acknowledge, and start thinking about contingencies fast, or completely ignore it and stay deluded. I know what I'd prefer the club do. We'll find out as the season goes on which is correct.
 
There's no way McIntosh should go beyond this year. You're also using players in the current lineup. Who will replace those few you've listed? So we are replacing 200-300 gamers with, 100 or less, then replacing those guys with players with less than 10-15 games?

I'm also unsure stokes will last that long either, rivers is also a long bow to draw continuing another year.

More holes than a Swiss cheese factory.

Then throw in Menzel, Cowan. By then Harry is 31-32.

So turning over a third of the list in about 3 years, without ready considering those who just aren't up to AFL standard.
I am using ones in the current lineup, who we have put games into over the last three years - because that is what succession planning is. You don't replace club leaders with rookies, you replace them with players who are establishing themselves as top-line AFL players with several seasons under their belts. Of all the players I mentioned, Guthrie has played the most games with 65.

These players are then replaced with rookies like Gregson, Cockatoo, Jansen, Gore &etc.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Erk- :oops: you're right.
They missed the finals.
And that was the flag WE gifted them before their time- or so it is written :(
Have to admit it, but as I missed the 63 GF by virtue of a year, (I was 7) Hawthorn, in my history as a Geelong supporter, SEEMS to have our measure in the BIG scheme of things. (Dare I say - when it counts??)
Big statement given our recent 11-0, but really only 1 of those wins was emphatic and it happened to be the 2011 final!
 
Gee that 2009 draft has hurt us. :(:(

Imagine Menzel, Duncan, Christensen, Vardy, Cowan, Laidler, all in our side and with the physical freedom and experience that their draft peers like Fyfe/Martin/Talia/Jetta/Carlisle/Gunston now have.

:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

That has affected us immensely. If Menzel and Vardy had remained fit, Christensen had stayed and Cowan was able to show some of potential we would be in a far better position than we currently are.
 
That has affected us immensely. If Menzel and Vardy had remained fit, Christensen had stayed and Cowan was able to show some of potential we would be in a far better position than we currently are.
I spent most of the past 2 seasons explaining my feelings that Geelong is way too hampered by IFFY players.
If only..
If only...
If only.......
 
I spent most of the past 2 seasons explaining my feelings that Geelong is way too hampered by IFFY players.
If only..
If only...
If only.......

Murdoch, Smedts, Horlin-Smith, Simpson, Walker, Thurlow, Kersten, Bews, Hartman, McCarthy, Lang, Cockatoo, Gregson ..... :rolleyes:
 
I am using ones in the current lineup, who we have put games into over the last three years - because that is what succession planning is. You don't replace club leaders with rookies, you replace them with players who are establishing themselves as top-line AFL players with several seasons under their belts. Of all the players I mentioned, Guthrie has played the most games with 65.

These players are then replaced with rookies like Gregson, Cockatoo, Jansen, Gore &etc.

I am so glad we've had this discussion.....

So we replace 8 players in two years, all veterans, with players already in the team. Then replace those with 8 untried players with no experience.

Wasn't that my point.
 
The 2009 draft could have been the miracle that delivered us the fourth flag - probably in 2013. But maybe the football gods thought we had our fair share. The Menzel-Christensen-Vardy situation is probably my only source of Geelong related sadness over last decade. 2008 doesn't even hurt like seeing unfulfilled young talent.
 
I am so glad we've had this discussion.....

So we replace 8 players in two years, all veterans, with players already in the team. Then replace those with 8 untried players with no experience.

Wasn't that my point.
Three years.

And I think your alternative scenario was dealing with a situation where we've already gotten rid of all them, which is a case of replacing 8 players all at once. One involves easing players into the team through roles like tagging, the backline and half-foward, the other involves throwing them straight at the coalface without any guidance. They're not all Selwoods.
 
Maybe, maybe not. We simply don't know and can't know that.



Not like you TC, I never said anything about the red carpet treatment, I said form should be rewarded. Horlin-Smith got dropped - correctly - and played a very good game doing exactly the kind of role we need. Winning contested possessions and clearances. He's young too. I'd bring him for Kelly in a heartbeat. Gore is yet to debut, so obviously he's an unknown quantity. Blease could be a useful replacement for Stokes though. Sure it's riskier, but he's much younger and much quicker. Has some senior experience too.



How many have called for Enright's head? I certainly said that if he offers multiple repeat performances like yesterday he should be dropped, and I stand by that. He was terrible yesterday and criticism is entirely warranted.

As for the last sentence, sure pre-season form is encouraging, but it's just that. No matter how highly they were ranked in the NAB Cup, they found yesterday the real thing against Hawthorn is slightly tougher. Both were obliterated (they had plenty of mates of course).

No matter how much we'd like to ignore it, for Bartel, Kelly, Stokes, and Enright (at least), they're on the downhill slide now. It's just a fact. They aren't going to roll the clock back and play like they're 25. We can either acknowledge, and start thinking about contingencies fast, or completely ignore it and stay deluded. I know what I'd prefer the club do. We'll find out as the season goes on which is correct.
I apologise for slipping in a few 'over the top' analogies, Partridge, and replying to some other posters comments while I was replying to what I quoted of yours.

You are perfectly right- you never said "red carpet treatment" but that's how I interpreted the phrase "reward form" in your post that I quoted.
I'm trying to say that a player playing well in VFL is not necessarily better than a senior player whose position he is aiming to take. To play him after one or two good performances in the VFL- just because he has played well AND is younger- is what I would call the red carpet treatment. We don't know if he is sticking to the game plan, obeying coaches' instructions, meeting expectations, etc. This is why we have coaches and a Match Committee who do team selections each week.


Regarding Enright- there are a few posts along the lines of 'too old, too slow', 'should not have gone on', etc. I haven't gone back to check if these posters are the usual Negative Nellie suspects here on BF- quite possibly they were. I just wanted to highlight his 2014 form as being good enough to have been retained- regardless of his 300 game target. That wasn't in regards to anything particular that you've said - apart from the "are they on the right side of 30" point you made about Bartel and Kelly- it was more just an add-on to the B&F info I dug up on B&K, to highlight his recent value to the team.
Yes, if it all goes pear-shaped and their form becomes ordinary over a stretch of a few games, we SHOULD be expecting these players to be dropped. Right now, after one poor game - in which the whole team was down (apart from a small handful)- I don't see any need to hit the red button on the ejection seat just yet on any of these 3 veterans.

Apologies for the long-winded reply. I think I covered most of the points I was trying to make.
 
The 2009 draft could have been the miracle that delivered us the fourth flag - probably in 2013. But maybe the football gods thought we had our fair share. The Menzel-Christensen-Vardy situation is probably my only source of Geelong related sadness over last decade. 2008 doesn't even hurt like seeing unfulfilled young talent.
Peter Riccardi retired just one year short of a flag. (Yes, I know he was cooked).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Opinion Which direction to take from here?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top