The new sides

[plugger66]

Might sound like an opposition forum thread but I think its Saints related. Last night we had no right to beat GC. They have all these picks who are now the right age to become a dominant side. GWS aren't far behind and we were some bad umpiring decisions, and an injury to Rooy away from beating both.

I suppose the point of this thread is that there is more to sides than just good picks. Yep these sides will still eventually be very good sides but high draft picks doesn't mean they will win the next 8 flags between them. They still need to be well coach, they still need to be developed and probably more importantly the players need to want to be at that club and play as a team. We being a real footballing side will improve to be a good side even with the lesser picks because we will want to play as a team. The reason we wont win a flag in 6 years time wont be because GWS and GC are unbeatable it will be we aren't good enough. Im not saying that will happen but there is no reason at all to be scared of GWS or the GC for the next 10 years.

[Sainter_Dad]

Pluggs, Good to see you got up on the right side of the bed!!!

Welcome back from the dark side.

One of these day I would love to meet up and have a lively discussion.

[plugger66]

Im always on the right side of the bed but if we play well im always on a high and if we play like crap then I say so, It was great to be at the game last night but I don't recommend the no sleep and get the first flight home idea. Especially when you basically haven't stopped drinking for the last 20 hours.

[gringo]

Yeah I said something similar recently, that the new sides might struggle this year if they think that progression just comes from turning up. This is going to be controversial but I actually think our young Saints in the early 2000s was after the Milne Montagna case. It was like the spot light was shone on the whole team and they had to do something to show that they weren't just high picks. Port Adelaide had the terrible tragedy of losing John Mc carthy. Sometimes teams need a huge tectonic shift or a punctuating event to refocus themselves.

I think the new team ironically might be the comparison point to strive beyond for teams like us and the Dogs. Mooney and others have talked a lot over the years of motivating themselves with all the good media we got about the list we put together.

[seano1]

I think gws are by far the better of those sides..suns have Blighty behind the scenes and I think badly managed where by gws have had a lot more brains behind that club and have picked up better older guys to help guide the young ones and maybe better draft picks when they were setting up the club .

[gringo]

I think gws are by far the better of those sides..suns have Blighty behind the scenes and I think badly managed where by gws have had a lot more brains behind that club and have picked up better older guys to help guide the young ones and maybe better draft picks when they were setting up the club .

Yeah no doubt GWS have a better group of players so far but they still need to get the motivation up. It's hard with no real fan pressure or history and being removed from the melbourne spotlight. I saw a friend who's brother plays for GWS last week and heard some stories of how its a party up there because no one is watching. They are better behaved when in Melbourne...well except for Greene.

[Goose is king]

I read that Eade said that was a vast improvement on their game against Melbourne.
Now I was away over the Easter break and saw no football but if they were worse than that against Melbourne they have some real troubles.

[happy feet]

Might sound like an opposition forum thread but I think its Saints related. Last night we had no right to beat GC. They have all these picks who are now the right age to become a dominant side. GWS aren't far behind and we were some bad umpiring decisions, and an injury to Rooy away from beating both.

I suppose the point of this thread is that there is more to sides than just good picks. Yep these sides will still eventually be very good sides but high draft picks doesn't mean they will win the next 8 flags between them. They still need to be well coach, they still need to be developed and probably more importantly the players need to want to be at that club and play as a team. We being a real footballing side will improve to be a good side even with the lesser picks because we will want to play as a team. The reason we wont win a flag in 6 years time wont be because GWS and GC are unbeatable it will be we aren't good enough. Im not saying that will happen but there is no reason at all to be scared of GWS or the GC for the next 10 years.

I think what you're saying can be summed up by an old saying........" a champion team will beat a team of champions" .

[matrix]

opp forum

[bergholt]

I read that Eade said that was a vast improvement on their game against Melbourne.
Now I was away over the Easter break and saw no football but if they were worse than that against Melbourne they have some real troubles.

All they needed to do was kick better, in the first three quarters they missed a lot of gettable goals. Four of those getting converted would have put them in front in the last quarter, then it's anyone's game. They look pretty toothless up forward and a bit soft down back but through the middle they're pretty good.

[Sainter_Dad]

I read that Eade said that was a vast improvement on their game against Melbourne.
Now I was away over the Easter break and saw no football but if they were worse than that against Melbourne they have some real troubles.

All they needed to do was kick better, in the first three quarters they missed a lot of gettable goals. Four of those getting converted would have put them in front in the last quarter, then it's anyone's game. They look pretty toothless up forward and a bit soft down back but through the middle they're pretty good.

As was highlighted by the commentators, their poor kicking was largely bought about by our pressure, either by footsteps, or by shallow entries into the fifty. These guys are not naturally poor kicks, no pressure and they will usually get the 45 - 50 metre goals, but kick a few points, start doubting yourself and feeling the pressure and the goal mouth becomes very skinny.

Evidence of this is no more proven than last week, we were in a position to win it in the last 5 minutes, but the pressure caused us to spray 3 gettable goals.

Just as poor kicking is bad football, maniacal pressure is good football.

[stevie]

Suns have gone backward since last year but not sure exactly why.
They do miss Dixon up fwd with Lynch as they had no other real options.
Abletts impact on the game was virtually zero so that must b worrying

our pressure was manic at times and some of the younger Suns had no answer to it

[gringo]

At the end of the day we pressured them out of it. They rely too much on Ablett and need a KPF like Bruce and they would be very good.

[jonesy]

Ablett looks as if he's going at about 50%,he's just a good player atm, not the freak he's been for 6-7 years. I can't see them winning a flag, to much emphasis on Ablett.

GWS have built a better list, it's just up to us Vic clubs to raid them. Who wants to play in front of 600 supporters every week like they do, they don't have a real football club feel,and have no crowd support even when they play at home, don't underestimate how big a factor that can be on a group

[Dis Believer]

Actually I heard a discussion on the radio yesterday with Gill MacLachlan that ties into this whole theme of teams and picks. The broad discussion was about free agency and the cycle of being up and down the ladder. One of (Liam Pickering or Craig Hutchinson) the SEN hosts pointed out that at the turn of the millennium and throughout the first decade, teams like us and the Hawks and others had been able to put lists together through the draft and rise up the ladder, and Gill added that over (roughly) that ten year period that nearly every team in the comp had reached at least as far as a prelim final.

They then moved on to express their confusion why this cycle had seemingly stopped this decade, with teams seemingly being "stuck" as "cellar dwellers". Their hypothesis is that it is to do with off-field spending. I was gob-smacked that they don't understand the true reason (or they won't say it) - the entry of two new teams and the consequent gorging of top end talent from the draft. The cycle was to build a list, have a tilt, drop back down, get access to top end talent and rebuild a list for another tilt. Anyone who has bottomed out since 2010 until last year has not had the upside of access to top picks.

As a consequence, teams like us, Melbourne, Bulldogs etc have had to become MUCH better in how we identify and recruit young talent. We've built better organisations but still with the history, culture and established infrastructure of over a century as a club. A young guy walks into our club for the first time and is absorbed into a foundation VFL/AFL football club.

A young guy walks into the GWS/Gold Coast and he enters into an AFL endorsed and sponsored experiment.

[The Redeemer]

I think gws are by far the better of those sides..suns have Blighty behind the scenes and I think badly managed where by gws have had a lot more brains behind that club and have picked up better older guys to help guide the young ones and maybe better draft picks when they were setting up the club .

So because the Suns have Blight, that is a bad thing?

You think they are badly managed? Why?

[saintsRrising]

I very much agree with the OP that there is a lot more to beeing a good team than just talent and/or potential.

Our first two opening games our work-rate has been very good and manic.

Defensive game very good. Offensive game in Round 1 was let down with some poor disposal and decision making at times. Round 2 we executeda lot better and more directly.

Both or our opponents looked at times to just be in cruise mode.

[gringo]

Actually I heard a discussion on the radio yesterday with Gill MacLachlan that ties into this whole theme of teams and picks. The broad discussion was about free agency and the cycle of being up and down the ladder. One of (Liam Pickering or Craig Hutchinson) the SEN hosts pointed out that at the turn of the millennium and throughout the first decade, teams like us and the Hawks and others had been able to put lists together through the draft and rise up the ladder, and Gill added that over (roughly) that ten year period that nearly every team in the comp had reached at least as far as a prelim final.

They then moved on to express their confusion why this cycle had seemingly stopped this decade, with teams seemingly being "stuck" as "cellar dwellers". Their hypothesis is that it is to do with off-field spending. I was gob-smacked that they don't understand the true reason (or they won't say it) - the entry of two new teams and the consequent gorging of top end talent from the draft. The cycle was to build a list, have a tilt, drop back down, get access to top end talent and rebuild a list for another tilt. Anyone who has bottomed out since 2010 until last year has not had the upside of access to top picks.

As a consequence, teams like us, Melbourne, Bulldogs etc have had to become MUCH better in how we identify and recruit young talent. We've built better organisations but still with the history, culture and established infrastructure of over a century as a club. A young guy walks into our club for the first time and is absorbed into a foundation VFL/AFL football club.

A young guy walks into the GWS/Gold Coast and he enters into an AFL endorsed and sponsored experiment.

Yeah a lot more than spending. Free agency means the teams like St Kilda Dogs and melbourne lose players and the top teams gain a free hit. Along with the first round of draft picks for about 5 years being severely compromised from the expansion teams. The dogs lost Harbrow and Ward who were up and coming and got compensated but we lost the best of our top end talent. Both have an effect on infield output. They are trying to hide from the real issues because they haven't got a plan.

The Dogs are playing a risky game spending huge money luring Boyd but the only way they can compete is to pay double of what anyone else will. The Dees are topping up like a finals side. I prefer our slow steady build myself.

[FQF]

Eventually GC will get the game plan, the coach, the buy-in and the balance. I think it's inevitable that they it will eventually click with all that talent at their disposal. Rocket is a good coach too.

But you need all of the above and not just junior talent.

Jack Martin looks a freak.

[remboy]

Might sound like an opposition forum thread but I think its Saints related. Last night we had no right to beat GC. They have all these picks who are now the right age to become a dominant side. GWS aren't far behind and we were some bad umpiring decisions, and an injury to Rooy away from beating both.

I suppose the point of this thread is that there is more to sides than just good picks. Yep these sides will still eventually be very good sides but high draft picks doesn't mean they will win the next 8 flags between them. They still need to be well coach, they still need to be developed and probably more importantly the players need to want to be at that club and play as a team. We being a real footballing side will improve to be a good side even with the lesser picks because we will want to play as a team. The reason we wont win a flag in 6 years time wont be because GWS and GC are unbeatable it will be we aren't good enough. Im not saying that will happen but there is no reason at all to be scared of GWS or the GC for the next 10 years.

Really good point. I used to have this discussion with non Saints supporters 5 years ago when they said we were only on top because of our early picks. I just told them if that's the case why aren't Richmond, Freo, Melbourne and the Bulldogs up the top given tgey've had as many early picks and priority picks as the Saints.

[Sainternist]

we were some bad umpiring decisions, and an injury to Rooy away from beating both.

Plugger, I am shocked you have called out the umps for making bad decisions. You're normally the first on here to defend them. So in your eyes they really did make some howlers against GWS?

[Bunk_Moreland]

we were some bad umpiring decisions, and an injury to Rooy away from beating both.

Plugger, I am shocked you have called out the umps for making bad decisions. You're normally the first on here to defend them. So in your eyes they really did make some howlers against GWS?

P66 can speak for himself however he has posted since last week that the umpires made telling decisions.

He just didn't buy the corruption talk

[plugger66]

we were some bad umpiring decisions, and an injury to Rooy away from beating both.

Plugger, I am shocked you have called out the umps for making bad decisions. You're normally the first on here to defend them. So in your eyes they really did make some howlers against GWS?

P66 can speak for himself however he has posted since last week that the umpires made telling decisions.

He just didn't buy the corruption talk

Exactly. They make 15% mistakes a week on average but they aren't just making them against us. We just happened to have the bad rub last week. Unfortunately it was a close game. We might get the good rub but be that far behind no one notices. Anyway lets just somehow win our next 2. Apart from Essendon, are there 2 better sides to beat?

[bergholt]

Anyway lets just somehow win our next 2. Apart from Essendon, are there 2 better sides to beat?

I actually have trouble caring about Collingwood at the moment, they're just boring. I'll be happy for the next couple of months if we beat Carlton though.