But seems MV/MC are reluctant to change much at all.... It's time they started being a bit less tunnel visioned.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 11:02:54 am
If you read that article carefully it's a mess of rudderless dribble. If they spent more than 5 minutes putting that together, they were clearly interrupted.
I have no issue with changes, but if anyone can come up with King and Montagna's preferred / suggested 22 after reading that, they deserve a medal.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Bluesers on April 07, 2025, 11:52:34 am
So you're in favour of keeping things as they are, not changing anything around? Interesting...
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 11:57:58 am
So you're in favour of keeping things as they are, not changing anything around? Interesting...
I'm in favour of the right thought process leading to the right action. If changes will make things worse, then why bother ? I'm not saying they will, but I cannot see how an approach of "hey what does this button do?" is going to help us. The right action may simply be allowing the players and coaches to rectify the issues.
John Kennedy Sr has, through no fault of his own, ushered in a very questionable policy that doing something is better than doing nothing. Except if you have no clue, then the action can make things worse.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Lods on April 07, 2025, 12:00:17 pm
I think one issue is that while there may be some merit in some of the changes they suggest, in a number of cases (Williams) it's returning players to positions they played previously.
The other one is that they obviously haven't see our VFL side in action. ::)
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Bluesers on April 07, 2025, 12:24:30 pm
So you're in favour of keeping things as they are, not changing anything around? Interesting...
I'm in favour of the right thought process leading to the right action. If changes will make things worse, then why bother ? I'm not saying they will, but I cannot see how an approach of "hey what does this button do?" is going to help us. The right action may simply be allowing the players and coaches to rectify the issues.
John Kennedy Sr has, through no fault of his own, ushered in a very questionable policy that doing something is better than doing nothing. Except if you have no clue, then the action can make things worse.
That's fine, but obviously so far this season allowing the coaches to rectify things hasn't been working, I didn't take everything they said literally, I read it as just trying something different, which so far in 25 they really haven't tried to think outside the square, as they believed rightly or wrongly that based on recent history our existing available squad has the skills, gameplan and experience to get it done. But we all know how that's working out so far. I'm just not sure that current coaches mc or whoever have enough lateral thinking to make something work. It's quickly approaching the point where there's nothing to lose and everything to gain from trying something different - whatever that is.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 12:35:41 pm
That's fine, but obviously so far this season allowing the coaches to rectify things hasn't been working, I didn't take everything they said literally, I read it as just trying something different, which so far in 25 they really haven't tried to think outside the square, as they believed rightly or wrongly that based on recent history our existing available squad has the skills, gameplan and experience to get it done. But we all know how that's working out so far. I'm just not sure that current coaches mc or whoever have enough lateral thinking to make something work. It's quickly approaching the point where there's nothing to lose and everything to gain from trying something different - whatever that is.
The only principle the MC should be following is to pick the best 22 to win a game of footy. If your starting point is something else (we need to change things up, we need to think laterally etc) you have already committed yourself to a dogma, which then becomes self realizing.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Bluesers on April 07, 2025, 01:29:22 pm
That's fine, but obviously so far this season allowing the coaches to rectify things hasn't been working, I didn't take everything they said literally, I read it as just trying something different, which so far in 25 they really haven't tried to think outside the square, as they believed rightly or wrongly that based on recent history our existing available squad has the skills, gameplan and experience to get it done. But we all know how that's working out so far. I'm just not sure that current coaches mc or whoever have enough lateral thinking to make something work. It's quickly approaching the point where there's nothing to lose and everything to gain from trying something different - whatever that is.
The only principle the MC should be following is to pick the best 22 to win a game of footy. If your starting point is something else (we need to change things up, we need to think laterally etc) you have already committed yourself to a dogma, which then becomes self realizing.
That's a bit simplistic imo. Things aren't working atm. Agreed? Do we really know what are the issues? No we don't. We can only guess based on what we can actually see, mostly on game day. For whatever reasons right now, there seem to be some problems - either it's game plan, player cohesion, coach disconnect, lack of confidence, or a combination, and it's frustrating the supporter base, and all they care about is results. Supporters pay the bills and they want to see success and at the very least things starting to turn for the better. We've been teased, given undelivered 'promises' and starved of success for decades. And we are all experts at what the team should be doing better, so why aren't they doing it? Cmon Blues, Lift! :)
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: kruddler on April 07, 2025, 01:54:18 pm
That was a complete load of bollocks. Summed up brilliantly by this....
Quote
“Adam Cerra is just a nice player. He’s played over 57 games now for Carlton, polled Brownlow votes in four games and he’s had big coaches votes in four games.
“I’d maybe move him out of the midfield and move him to halfback and become like a Josh Daicos, (because) he’s not really getting the job done.
So he's gone to the trouble to look up not only how many games he's played but how many games his polled votes in (not an easy task, nor something that actually matters) but clearly hasn't watched enough of him to know that his disposal by vote is not a strong point, so distrubuting from halfback is a bad idea.
He also wants to move Walsh to half back.
...and talks about us looking after Cripps.....but....
Who is left in the middle?
If you are picking a team with an unlimited playing list, sure, you can make some of these changes. But saying this stuff to get a rise out of people without actually looking at if it can be done with personnel available is either designed for clickbait, or is borne out of ignorance. Either way. Credibility zero.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 02:14:42 pm
That's a bit simplistic imo. Things aren't working atm. Agreed? Do we really know what are the issues? No we don't. We can only guess based on what we can actually see, mostly on game day. For whatever reasons right now, there seem to be some problems - either it's game plan, player cohesion, coach disconnect, lack of confidence, or a combination, and it's frustrating the supporter base, and all they care about is results. Supporters pay the bills and they want to see success and at the very least things starting to turn for the better. We've been teased, given undelivered 'promises' and starved of success for decades. And we are all experts at what the team should be doing better, so why aren't they doing it? Cmon Blues, Lift! :)
Yes, but this post is a bit of a reveal. As supporters we can't see behind the scenes. The only thing we have is game day (and even then I'm not sure fans are particularly observant - see the article below). In order to appease fans, the club must be seen to be doing "something", because then the club looks proactive, and satisfies the fans. Never mind a thought process that figures out the best method to move forward, fans must see "something" in order to be appeased. This is precisely the type of thinking that leads clubs into strife.
And I would suggest some things are working : our ability to restrict opposition scoring, our ability to stay in games, and be in winnable positions late. It's not all doom and gloom. Bear in mind that these positives are present even though we're not performing well, and some players look out of sorts.
The only principle the MC should be following is to pick the best 22 to win a game of footy. If your starting point is something else (we need to change things up, we need to think laterally etc) you have already committed yourself to a dogma, which then becomes self realizing.
That's a bit simplistic imo. Things aren't working atm. Agreed? Do we really know what are the issues? No we don't. We can only guess based on what we can actually see, mostly on game day. For whatever reasons right now, there seem to be some problems - either it's game plan, player cohesion, coach disconnect, lack of confidence, or a combination, and it's frustrating the supporter base, and all they care about is results. Supporters pay the bills and they want to see success and at the very least things starting to turn for the better. We've been teased, given undelivered 'promises' and starved of success for decades. And we are all experts at what the team should be doing better, so why aren't they doing it? Cmon Blues, Lift! :)
No, thats not simplistic.
its a trouble shooting methodology. When something is not working or not functioning correctly, you need to assess what is wrong, and then using the information and resources at hand, take the appropriate action to fix it.
I.e. you have a car, that is not firing on all cylinders.
Do you A. Replace its tyres? B. Change is oil? C. Do nothing and hope it comes good? D. take it to the mechanic to get it sorted?
All of the above are doing something, even if you choose C, that is something. Its not inaction. Depending on the car, C might involve stretching its legs on a freeway, because if its a Diesel, it might need to burn off the Diesel particulates filter, and that will correct the issue.
Thing is, we are seeing coughing and spluttering and people are saying change the spark plugs, when an oil change might be more appropriate (car analogies have their limitations).
When push comes to shove, you could do all 5 of the above actions and only thing you achieve is costing time, and money, and it might simply be that you had a bad batch of fuel and once you top up with new fuel, or even go through the tank, you can do nothing and it would be fine.
Our club doesnt need change, it needs the opposite. It needs continuity and to work through this mire. Come game day, there is going to be one forced change through Cowan.
the rest, need to be done on their merits. On that game, Moir should go out of the side, but here is the kicker. Selection isnt solely about game day performance. is his prep any good? How is he going at training? Did he have a bad day at the office? If you have a bad day at the office do you get demoted? Or are you allowed to redeem yourself? You dont go instantly to a performance management plan either, it usually takes a few goes to get there.
We could make no change, and see a dramatic turnaround, or we could bring in 4 players, and perform the same, and eek out a win. Everyone is down on form, that isnt really debateable, and the only way you turn form is by playing yourself into form.
IMHO, I would consider what Durdin did putting his hand up for selection subject to how the training goes this week. You don't leave someone like Harry Mckay in the twos for long, unless he needs the pressure release more than anything else, so he might be the other one you bring in particularly with a soft kill coming up against West Coast. It might be what he needs to turn it around. I would not necessarily be removing Young from the side at this point, but it might be time to if Harry comes back.
For mine there are two speeds. Are they up to the level? We have about 30 players who are capable. Are they currently performing? No, the majority of them are not, which is why you cant roll through the changes. The reasons are wide and varied, but the youngsters are not hitting the ground in a team humming a long, which means they are being placed under increased pressure. The damage done to their belief, is intangible. We dont need that. We need this process to be easier for them, not harder. That means keep playing the senior bodies. Their form will turn. They will get better the longer they play for. The shame in it, is Moo was one of the ones performing and of course, thats where we cop an injury from, not the crappy end of the team that isnt firing.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: shawny on April 07, 2025, 02:34:18 pm
Nathan buckley summed us up well this morning by saying our list is not good enough to play the modern game for 120 minutes. We can compete for a half but then we fall away as we dont have the cattle that are capable of covering the ground at speed when teams apply the pressure. And opposition teams know it and play us accordingly. In other words we are not good enough. full stop!
We can all think by moving players around changing the coach dropping players etc is the answer but if the list is not capable longterm we are just sugarcoating a turd. We need major changing to the list to try and catch back up to the leading pack or we will drop further next year.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 02:48:19 pm
I suspect our issues are more around flaky skills and struggling to handle pressure and changes in momentum from the opposition. Although I will say, that phrase "sugarcoating a turd" is a beauty. Big up.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: shawny on April 07, 2025, 03:26:05 pm
I suspect our issues are more around flaky skills and struggling to handle pressure and changes in momentum from the opposition. Although I will say, that phrase "sugarcoating a turd" is a beauty. Big up.
exactly paul. Unable to execute skills under pressure is generally a symptom of a C-D grade footballers and you cant win a flag with to many of those sorts. Our list is built around contested footballers but we have a major drop off in players that you can rely on to be clean by hand and foot which is critical areas needed to reach the top.
How many years have we said why is our forward entries so bad - skills and decision making under pressure are again traits the better players have in spades.
How many in our list hits targets on a regular basis.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Lods on April 07, 2025, 03:52:16 pm
One of the problems we're facing is we are being judged in the moment. And that's fair. The question is..."Is what Carlton are producing at present the best they are capable of?"... and I reckon the answer to that is an emphatic "no"
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Shakin77 on April 07, 2025, 04:00:32 pm
Just grabbing the low hanging fruit with no insight or analysis at all. Pretty much what First Crack is.
Cerra is not Josh Daicos. Half back isn't he role. Daicos is more of a winger, Cerra an inside mid. It's not a good move
We would like to get Saad further up the ground? Well dere. He is our only real attacking option off half back so sides drag him deep. Hawks have Weedle, Amon, Sicily, D'Ambrosio who can all attack. To be fair all of backline can kick so you can add Scrimshaw and Battle. We have tried McGovern and Hollands and both don't have the composure.
Z Williams I agree should go to half back. He just doesn't offer enough as a small/medium forward. Silvagni is one of very few that looks at home in the back half. That looks to have worked, so I don't get the desire to move him.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 04:07:25 pm
One of the problems we're facing is we are being judged in the moment. And that's fair. The question is..."Is what Carlton are producing at present the best they are capable of?"... and I reckon the answer to that is an emphatic "no"
McGovern,Saad, Curnow and Boyd are actually pretty gold field kicks. Cripps has a pretty decent handball. And that's for starters. The problem is that they all seem a little off at the moment. No one seems at their best, except maybe De Koning.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 07, 2025, 04:25:38 pm
We dont have the leg speed and kicking skills the teams at the pointy end do, simple as that and it won't improve this year. Defensively we are reasonably solid as me manage to hold teams to low scores. The problem is we cant seem to score enough points to beat the opposition at the moment, this can change if: - Charlie and Harry can get motoring - We can improve delivery to them. I think we can forget about small fwds performing for us, we dont have the cattle in this dept. The players have been consistent in their messaging in various interview that they feel they are better than what they showing at the moment. They have 20 odd weeks to show us.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 07, 2025, 04:58:59 pm
If you read that article carefully it's a mess of rudderless dribble. If they spent more than 5 minutes putting that together, they were clearly interrupted.
I have no issue with changes, but if anyone can come up with King and Montagna's preferred / suggested 22 after reading that, they deserve a medal.
https://youtu.be/w_StteLzedo
Vision and numbers presented are pretty damning. Watch De Koning let a runner waltz straight passed him without even looking like attempting to tackle. I think some of the changes suggested are worth trying if nothing else as a circuit breaker. They are tweaks really.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Thryleon on April 07, 2025, 05:05:50 pm
LOL that is the worst experts comment ive ever seen. Get everyone out of there and bring in a bunch of players that wont see any impact....
Haynes, Young, Cowan, Docherty, Mcgovern, Saad, Jack Silvagni, Cerra to a half back line, Walsh to a half back line...
This is the most hair brained scatter gun approach to team management I have ever heard of.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Professer E on April 07, 2025, 05:37:08 pm
Zac Williams is a big NO for me in defence, and Friday night showed why. Hard no.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 05:46:51 pm
https://youtu.be/w_StteLzedo Vision and numbers presented are pretty damning. Watch De Koning let a runner waltz straight passed him without even looking like attempting to tackle. I think some of the changes suggested are worth trying if nothing else as a circuit breaker. They are tweaks really.
Fair enough, but I've given my thoughts on the Fox/ Murdoch house style many times before, so no need to repeat them here. You can frame, cherry pick and edit a set of clips to present many perspectives. I'm certainly not suggesting everything is hunky dory, but they don't present a balanced view IMO.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Bluesers on April 07, 2025, 05:48:13 pm
So I guess then if we can beat Weagles this week by a goal or two then all the naysayers will be right, and those who think we need a few tweaks will be not so right. This week should tell us a lot about what expect for the rest of the season.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on April 07, 2025, 05:51:34 pm
We dont have the leg speed and kicking skills the teams at the pointy end do, simple as that and it won't improve this year. Defensively we are reasonably solid as me manage to hold teams to low scores. The problem is we cant seem to score enough points to beat the opposition at the moment, this can change if: - Charlie and Harry can get motoring - We can improve delivery to them. I think we can forget about small fwds performing for us, we dont have the cattle in this dept. The players have been consistent in their messaging in various interview that they feel they are better than what they showing at the moment. They have 20 odd weeks to show us.
We have more basic problems and thats players short stepping , pulling out of contests and tackling like schoolboys. Other coaches wouldn't tolerate such poor commitment but our standards are so much lower...
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: kruddler on April 07, 2025, 06:42:52 pm
So I guess then if we can beat Weagles this week by a goal or two then all the naysayers will be right, and those who think we need a few tweaks will be not so right. This week should tell us a lot about what expect for the rest of the season.
I don't think its quite as black and white as that. If we play the same this week against the eagles that we have played in the first 4 weeks.....we probably win anyway.
The last 3 weeks have been against finals bound opposition.
We should win. Even if we don't. It doesn't really change anything.
There isn't a whole lot we can do in-season to drastically alter our trajectory this year. Our list is basically set (with 1 mid-season player change at this stage) so we just have to suck it up, hope to get less injuries and plan from there.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 07, 2025, 06:43:54 pm
We have more basic problems and thats players short stepping , pulling out of contests and tackling like schoolboys. Other coaches wouldn't tolerate such poor commitment but our standards are so much lower...
All of what you say is true, the approach from the coaches to managing the results has not been how things would have been dealt with in the past that's for sure. The problem is there are no ready to go (like for like or otherwise) replacements breaking the door down. We saw Moir come in and do very little. Really, other than Hollands and Mackay when they are ready and perhaps Boyd and OKeefe (if we were desperate), there is nothing else.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 07, 2025, 06:45:19 pm
https://youtu.be/w_StteLzedo Vision and numbers presented are pretty damning. Watch De Koning let a runner waltz straight passed him without even looking like attempting to tackle. I think some of the changes suggested are worth trying if nothing else as a circuit breaker. They are tweaks really.
Fair enough, but I've given my thoughts on the Fox/ Murdoch house style many times before, so no need to repeat them here. You can frame, cherry pick and edit a set of clips to present many perspectives. I'm certainly not suggesting everything is hunky dory, but they don't present a balanced view IMO.
The persons employer means nothing to me.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: PaulP on April 07, 2025, 06:51:40 pm
Just grabbing the low hanging fruit with no insight or analysis at all. Pretty much what First Crack is.
Too many footy shows at the moment, all need to make noise. Make an opinion based on a couple of clips of vision and then state it as fact. then the other shows pick up the theme then run with it. they all think they are US opinion shows now (colin cowherd, steven a smith etc)
A few on this thread have made great points saying this. none of the "experts" watch carlton as closely as we do. And, yes, some of them have access to "data" - but we know how misleading this can be
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Milhanna13 on April 08, 2025, 10:30:52 am
One of the problems we're facing is we are being judged in the moment. And that's fair. The question is..."Is what Carlton are producing at present the best they are capable of?"... and I reckon the answer to that is an emphatic "no"
McGovern,Saad, Curnow and Boyd are actually pretty gold field kicks. Cripps has a pretty decent handball. And that's for starters. The problem is that they all seem a little off at the moment. No one seems at their best, except maybe De Koning.
I tend to agree with this. we have known for a couple of years now that we lack a little bit of class on the outside. but i dont think its as bad as ALL the talk shows have now jumped on. all of a sudden we have the worst kicking/disposal team of all time. this wasnt an issue half way thru last year (with much the same list) - but now a few guys are down on confidence, and its now a major issue
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Lods on April 08, 2025, 10:59:15 am
A few on this thread have made great points saying this. none of the "experts" watch carlton as closely as we do. And, yes, some of them have access to "data" - but we know how misleading this can be
I would also assume that covering all the AFL games the experts do, that they have little time to have a look at VFL games and see what's available as replacements, and who is in form.
They would only go on exposed form from last year...so they would say things like "Why is Binns not getting a game?" because he pushed hard with big possession numbers last year, not knowing his form at present dosen't warrant it.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 08, 2025, 01:25:53 pm
Just grabbing the low hanging fruit with no insight or analysis at all. Pretty much what First Crack is.
Too many footy shows at the moment, all need to make noise. Make an opinion based on a couple of clips of vision and then state it as fact. then the other shows pick up the theme then run with it. they all think they are US opinion shows now (colin cowherd, steven a smith etc)
A few on this thread have made great points saying this. none of the "experts" watch carlton as closely as we do. And, yes, some of them have access to "data" - but we know how misleading this can be
I dont necessarily agree with some of the above Mil. I'll pose to you that many of "us" watch the Carlton with the navy blue goggles on. I reckon the good analysts watch all teams without biased, you can tell who these one are. I happened to be with the brother of one the TV analysts last week actually who shared with me the power of work his brother does watching every game pouring over the stats and tactics to arrive at what is presented.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on April 08, 2025, 02:44:14 pm
Too many footy shows at the moment, all need to make noise. Make an opinion based on a couple of clips of vision and then state it as fact. then the other shows pick up the theme then run with it. they all think they are US opinion shows now (colin cowherd, steven a smith etc)
A few on this thread have made great points saying this. none of the "experts" watch carlton as closely as we do. And, yes, some of them have access to "data" - but we know how misleading this can be
I dont necessarily agree with some of the above Mil. I'll pose to you that many of "us" watch the Carlton with the navy blue goggles on. I reckon the good analysts watch all teams without biased, you can tell who these one are. I happened to be with the brother of one the TV analysts last week actually who shared with me the power of work his brother does watching every game pouring over the stats and tactics to arrive at what is presented.
You don't have to be an analyst to work out we are 0-4 and got knocked over by a kiddie team in Richmond rnd 1 and were made to look like schoolboys vs Southport in the VFL. Of course the footy shows are going to pick us apart and we deserve it. The vision doesn't lie and the analysts just highlight what we already know...
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: kruddler on April 08, 2025, 03:20:09 pm
You don't have to be an analyst to work out we are 0-4 and got knocked over by a kiddie team in Richmond rnd 1 and were made to look like schoolboys vs Southport in the VFL. Of course the footy shows are going to pick us apart and we deserve it. The vision doesn't lie and the analysts just highlight what we already know...
Everyone is dancing around the obvious though.
Identifying issues is easy.
Nobody has come up with a viable option to fix them though.
Kings suggestion of moving our midfield to the backline doesn't solve an issue....and it actually creates another one.
Everyone can point the finger.....some will be right. Thats the easy part though
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: ElwoodBlues1 on April 08, 2025, 05:34:02 pm
You don't have to be an analyst to work out we are 0-4 and got knocked over by a kiddie team in Richmond rnd 1 and were made to look like schoolboys vs Southport in the VFL. Of course the footy shows are going to pick us apart and we deserve it. The vision doesn't lie and the analysts just highlight what we already know...
Everyone is dancing around the obvious though.
Identifying issues is easy.
Nobody has come up with a viable option to fix them though.
Kings suggestion of moving our midfield to the backline doesn't solve an issue....and it actually creates another one.
Everyone can point the finger.....some will be right. Thats the easy part though
Voss started the moving players to different roles and we should go back to what worked. We don't have the list or talent to get cute with too many team changes. Our problems are woeful list management and a coach who struggles with tactics. Not a good combo and one that can only be fixed or started to be fixed at seasons end imo.Sacking coaches won't achieve anything mid season...
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: kruddler on April 08, 2025, 07:22:37 pm
Nobody has come up with a viable option to fix them though.
Kings suggestion of moving our midfield to the backline doesn't solve an issue....and it actually creates another one.
Everyone can point the finger.....some will be right. Thats the easy part though
Voss started the moving players to different roles and we should go back to what worked. We don't have the list or talent to get cute with too many team changes. Our problems are woeful list management and a coach who struggles with tactics. Not a good combo and one that can only be fixed or started to be fixed at seasons end imo.Sacking coaches won't achieve anything mid season...
As i said, identifying the problem is easy. I've been shouting from the rafters to anyone who would listen.....and not many did....that our list management has been poor. Our drafting/trading in the off-season was poor......for many years, but especially this year with the Jagga trade retread inclusions.
None of this is fixable mid-year. None of this should fall on the coaches head. None of this SHOULD persist into 2026 if we do the right thing in the off-season THIS time.
Until then, we suck it up.
Personally, Silavgni is doing well down back. Kemp had a decent game up forward. However, i think we are better off with Kemp back (quicker and more agile than SOJ) and Silvagni forward (smarter and makes things happen).
I don't mind Ollie in defence. There's not too many other changes from last year.
What changes should/could we make this year?? Haynes should be fighting for a spot with McGovern and Kemp down back for 3rd tall. Young if good enough should be given some time to settle down back in a last ditch effort to fill that hole. Otherwise, give Lemmey a go down back. I know he's been training forward, but we NEED a back. Harry should be trialled at CHB. His field kicking is good. He won't have to worry about the yips, or getting triple teamed up forward. He can follow an opponent around all day and push and shove without worrying about the little man in his head. Boyd should be trialled forward if they refuse to play him down back. Fogarty and Durdin if they are so good at pressure should be played in defence. Give Motlop and Moir time one-out from the goal square to generate some shots on goal.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Lods on April 08, 2025, 11:15:08 pm
Voss started the moving players to different roles and we should go back to what worked. We don't have the list or talent to get cute with too many team changes. Our problems are woeful list management and a coach who struggles with tactics. Not a good combo and one that can only be fixed or started to be fixed at seasons end imo.Sacking coaches won't achieve anything mid season...
As i said, identifying the problem is easy. I've been shouting from the rafters to anyone who would listen.....and not many did....that our list management has been poor. Our drafting/trading in the off-season was poor......for many years, but especially this year with the Jagga trade retread inclusions.
None of this is fixable mid-year. None of this should fall on the coaches head. None of this SHOULD persist into 2026 if we do the right thing in the off-season THIS time.
Until then, we suck it up.
Personally, Silavgni is doing well down back. Kemp had a decent game up forward. However, i think we are better off with Kemp back (quicker and more agile than SOJ) and Silvagni forward (smarter and makes things happen).
I don't mind Ollie in defence. There's not too many other changes from last year.
What changes should/could we make this year?? Haynes should be fighting for a spot with McGovern and Kemp down back for 3rd tall. Young if good enough should be given some time to settle down back in a last ditch effort to fill that hole. Otherwise, give Lemmey a go down back. I know he's been training forward, but we NEED a back. Harry should be trialled at CHB. His field kicking is good. He won't have to worry about the yips, or getting triple teamed up forward. He can follow an opponent around all day and push and shove without worrying about the little man in his head. Boyd should be trialled forward if they refuse to play him down back. Fogarty and Durdin if they are so good at pressure should be played in defence. Give Motlop and Moir time one-out from the goal square to generate some shots on goal.
Yep Rather than dropping players try some positional moves. It probably needs to be done in a staged manner rather than all at once I agree with most of the options. They're worth a try. One thing I would like to see is Boyd playing wing/half forward. He's one of the few players I feel confident about with the ball in his hands. But not too far forward. We need him picking out our forwards on the lead.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 09, 2025, 07:01:06 am
They don't because the blokes kicking in drop it on their heads. Or they pick out the opposition backs....and our guys have to turn around and defend. They're inaccurate or kick long and hope. Now if you had a couple of players like Boyd picking you out (instead of taking most of the kick-ins), you'd be leading all over the shop.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 09, 2025, 12:54:12 pm
They don't because the blokes kicking in drop it on their heads. Or they pick out the opposition backs....and our guys have to turn around and defend. They're inaccurate or kick long and hope. Now if you had a couple of players like Boyd picking you out (instead of taking most of the kick-ins), you'd be leading all over the shop.
Ill say to you the ball gets bombed because the fwds are stagnant and in packs or in a crowded fwd line. Good fwds read the ball carrier (whether it be a centre clearance or a run from the HB or the wing) and get on their bike, the ball carrier puts in the hole for them to run onto. Good fwds do their work early and quick. Our fwds dont lead anywhere near enough, our fwds (IMO) are not well coached.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Lods on April 09, 2025, 01:24:28 pm
They don't because the blokes kicking in drop it on their heads. Or they pick out the opposition backs....and our guys have to turn around and defend. They're inaccurate or kick long and hope. Now if you had a couple of players like Boyd picking you out (instead of taking most of the kick-ins), you'd be leading all over the shop.
Ill say to you the ball gets bombed because the fwds are stagnant and in packs or in a crowded fwd line. Good fwds read the ball carrier (whether it be a centre clearance or a run from the HB or the wing) and get on their bike, the ball carrier puts in the hole for them to run onto. Good fwds do their work early and quick. Our fwds dont lead anywhere near enough, our fwds (IMO) are not well coached.
There are probably three aspects to the problem...and yes, it is to a large extent on the coaches, but also the players...and once again the available talent.
The first one is structure...our forward line doesn't possess it at present because our key strengths in Curnow and McKay aren't there or down on form.
The second one is the fact that our small forwards are either defensive. or lacking in ability to be damaging on the scoreboard.
And the third one is our entry into the forward line, and that's a two part issue...the stagnancy you mention and the accuracy of our mids in terms of spotting up and hitting the forwards.
We often find our forwards making good position only to be ignored or missed.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Gointocarlton on April 09, 2025, 02:23:40 pm
There are probably three aspects to the problem...and yes, it is to a large extent on the coaches, but also the players...and once again the available talent.
The first one is structure...our forward line doesn't possess it at present because our key strengths in Curnow and McKay aren't there or down on form.
The second one is the fact that our small forwards are either defensive. or lacking in ability to be damaging on the scoreboard.
And the third one is our entry into the forward line, and that's a two part issue...the stagnancy you mention and the accuracy of our mids in terms of spotting up and hitting the forwards.
We often find our forwards making good position only to be ignored or missed.
All valid points Lods. Surely the fwd group (ie all the blokes who were a chance to be in the fwd line) has just come off a pre-season working on positioning, structures, patterns, set plays, connection with team mates up the ground. Surely the coach of the fwds has some clue about the above and has worked on it with them?
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: cookie2 on April 09, 2025, 04:05:58 pm
We have pondered these same questions for many seasons now but the answers seem to continue to be elusive.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Lods on April 09, 2025, 04:14:36 pm
There are probably three aspects to the problem...and yes, it is to a large extent on the coaches, but also the players...and once again the available talent.
The first one is structure...our forward line doesn't possess it at present because our key strengths in Curnow and McKay aren't there or down on form.
The second one is the fact that our small forwards are either defensive. or lacking in ability to be damaging on the scoreboard.
And the third one is our entry into the forward line, and that's a two part issue...the stagnancy you mention and the accuracy of our mids in terms of spotting up and hitting the forwards.
We often find our forwards making good position only to be ignored or missed.
All valid points Lods. Surely the fwd group (ie all the blokes who were a chance to be in the fwd line) has just come off a pre-season working on positioning, structures, patterns, set plays, connection with team mates up the ground. Surely the coach of the fwds has some clue about the above and has worked on it with them?
You would hope the coaches would be on top of it.. I have a bit of an issue with the "one soldier out, one soldier in" philosoph of some coaches, because every player brings different strengths and weaknesses to the different lines. Connection and structure depend a lot on consistency of personnel. It'd be interesting to have a look at how many players we've rotated through the forward line in the first four weeks.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Milhanna13 on April 14, 2025, 08:26:01 am
Too many footy shows at the moment, all need to make noise. Make an opinion based on a couple of clips of vision and then state it as fact. then the other shows pick up the theme then run with it. they all think they are US opinion shows now (colin cowherd, steven a smith etc)
A few on this thread have made great points saying this. none of the "experts" watch carlton as closely as we do. And, yes, some of them have access to "data" - but we know how misleading this can be
I dont necessarily agree with some of the above Mil. I'll pose to you that many of "us" watch the Carlton with the navy blue goggles on. I reckon the good analysts watch all teams without biased, you can tell who these one are. I happened to be with the brother of one the TV analysts last week actually who shared with me the power of work his brother does watching every game pouring over the stats and tactics to arrive at what is presented.
yeah, fair point. i am sure there are a few analysts that do the work (always thought king and montanga were pretty good). but there a number (especially the journos, dressed up as experts), that just parrot what others say and present it as facts\
then there are the tv heads that stand in front of clips that someone else has put together, and pretend that a 10sec clip explains a whole 120min game...
some are good, but there are just too many and all feel the need to have a strong opinion
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: Baggers on April 14, 2025, 09:27:33 am
I dont necessarily agree with some of the above Mil. I'll pose to you that many of "us" watch the Carlton with the navy blue goggles on. I reckon the good analysts watch all teams without biased, you can tell who these one are. I happened to be with the brother of one the TV analysts last week actually who shared with me the power of work his brother does watching every game pouring over the stats and tactics to arrive at what is presented.
yeah, fair point. i am sure there are a few analysts that do the work (always thought king and montanga were pretty good). but there a number (especially the journos, dressed up as experts), that just parrot what others say and present it as facts\
then there are the tv heads that stand in front of clips that someone else has put together, and pretend that a 10sec clip explains a whole 120min game...
some are good, but there are just too many and all feel the need to have a strong opinion
Yep, Cranium. But it's the nature of the beast, with so many footy shows there must be heaps of fluff and padding... and throwing in some controversial stuff to sucker us in; get them thar clicks happening.
Personally, I limit the shows I watch to the opinions of those who've played or coached the game, well. Except for G Whateley, who is a serious analyst of our game with the articulation to make his point, sharply and clearly. I find the progs with more 'in depth' analysis preferable to those that are more entertainment based.
Like you I'm very interested in the insights/perspectives from King and Montagna... they look below the fluff and seek to explain 'why.' I like that. And they're objective. I like that, too. I also like Browny - keeps it simple; carves the issue to the bone. Gets right to it.
Title: Re: Well said
Post by: northernblue on April 16, 2025, 11:20:45 am
The couch crew are always insightful and Rewaldt is growing on me. 360 is better without Robbo, what’s the story with him going ?