|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
Post subject: | |
|
the point is really well made. we thought we were a young side and as a result, a dynasty was brewing.
2 failings in that analysis.
First, our success was a least in part borne of a game plan that no one could stop (with cattle specifically developed to execute that game plan - hence why Blair, Leigh Brown, Brent Macaffer and Chris Dawes looked so good for that brief period). If Geelong hadnt of figured it out in 2011 (AND we werent so banged up in the end), we could have had 2 flags to show for it because fully fit, we were about 10 goals better than everyone else that year too. Part of our demise resulted from the relative ineffectiveness of our game plan with increasing effect from 2012 and on.
Second. although we were young overall, we were made up of an old core and a young core. The older part of the core was pretty important in taking us from top 4 to premiers. Long term success is built around a core of same age guys playing 6 or 7 years together in theoir prime (see the cats and the Hawks and the Swans). you have older and younger additions, but the core should be middle aged. we had a lot of 22 and under and a lot of 27 and older in 2010 IIRC.
So those two things being overlooked is part of the reason why we thought dynasty, when instead we got a one hit wonder (again!).
Of course these two factors dont stop Nathan buckley from being blamed for the fact that we arent still premiers every single year! _________________ Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005 Location: Bendigo
|
Post subject: | |
|
E wrote: | the point is really well made. we thought we were a young side and as a result, a dynasty was brewing.
2 failings in that analysis.
First, our success was a least in part borne of a game plan that no one could stop (with cattle specifically developed to execute that game plan - hence why Blair, Leigh Brown, Brent Macaffer and Chris Dawes looked so good for that brief period). If Geelong hadnt of figured it out in 2011 (AND we werent so banged up in the end), we could have had 2 flags to show for it because fully fit, we were about 10 goals better than everyone else that year too. Part of our demise resulted from the relative ineffectiveness of our game plan with increasing effect from 2012 and on.
Second. although we were young overall, we were made up of an old core and a young core. The older part of the core was pretty important in taking us from top 4 to premiers. Long term success is built around a core of same age guys playing 6 or 7 years together in theoir prime (see the cats and the Hawks and the Swans). you have older and younger additions, but the core should be middle aged. we had a lot of 22 and under and a lot of 27 and older in 2010 IIRC.
So those two things being overlooked is part of the reason why we thought dynasty, when instead we got a one hit wonder (again!).
Of course these two factors dont stop Nathan buckley from being blamed for the fact that we arent still premiers every single year! |
Exactly. List had major issues in 2010, not the least was the ageing heroes in the squad, many of whom didn't even make the GF sides. The quantum and development of the <22 players in that team wasn't sufficient to offset the lose of ageing senior players.
Don't have an issue with the regeneration of the list. It's either evolve or stagnate and I don't think our list turnover is too much different from any other team in the league. |
|
|
|
|
Joel
Joined: 23 Mar 1999 Location: Mornington Peninsula
|
Post subject: | |
|
E, you have it completely spot on with that post.
I watched part of the first 2010 GF on the weekend. It's amazing so many players have left, but when there were a lot of players also in the older bracket.
I think we just assumed that those blokes would be replaced naturally and we'd be okay. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
E wrote: | the point is really well made. we thought we were a young side and as a result, a dynasty was brewing.
2 failings in that analysis.
First, our success was a least in part borne of a game plan that no one could stop (with cattle specifically developed to execute that game plan - hence why Blair, Leigh Brown, Brent Macaffer and Chris Dawes looked so good for that brief period). If Geelong hadnt of figured it out in 2011 (AND we werent so banged up in the end), we could have had 2 flags to show for it because fully fit, we were about 10 goals better than everyone else that year too. Part of our demise resulted from the relative ineffectiveness of our game plan with increasing effect from 2012 and on.
Second. although we were young overall, we were made up of an old core and a young core. The older part of the core was pretty important in taking us from top 4 to premiers. Long term success is built around a core of same age guys playing 6 or 7 years together in theoir prime (see the cats and the Hawks and the Swans). you have older and younger additions, but the core should be middle aged. we had a lot of 22 and under and a lot of 27 and older in 2010 IIRC.
So those two things being overlooked is part of the reason why we thought dynasty, when instead we got a one hit wonder (again!).
Of course these two factors dont stop Nathan buckley from being blamed for the fact that we arent still premiers every single year! |
Spot on E looking back at how the team has transpired since we won the flag at 2010 in hindsight.
However I can't blame those for feeling a dynasty was a real possibility after 2010. After all I thought we were on the verge of one as well and our team was unbeatable for most of the 2011 season. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Mossi
Joined: 20 May 2002 Location: Vittorio Veneto TV Italy
|
Post subject: | |
|
E wrote: | the point is really well made. we thought we were a young side and as a result, a dynasty was brewing.
2 failings in that analysis.
First, our success was a least in part borne of a game plan that no one could stop (with cattle specifically developed to execute that game plan - hence why Blair, Leigh Brown, Brent Macaffer and Chris Dawes looked so good for that brief period). If Geelong hadnt of figured it out in 2011 (AND we werent so banged up in the end), we could have had 2 flags to show for it because fully fit, we were about 10 goals better than everyone else that year too. Part of our demise resulted from the relative ineffectiveness of our game plan with increasing effect from 2012 and on.
Second. although we were young overall, we were made up of an old core and a young core. The older part of the core was pretty important in taking us from top 4 to premiers. Long term success is built around a core of same age guys playing 6 or 7 years together in theoir prime (see the cats and the Hawks and the Swans). you have older and younger additions, but the core should be middle aged. we had a lot of 22 and under and a lot of 27 and older in 2010 IIRC.
So those two things being overlooked is part of the reason why we thought dynasty, when instead we got a one hit wonder (again!).
Of course these two factors dont stop Nathan buckley from being blamed for the fact that we arent still premiers every single year! |
Spot on E! I reckon if we didn't loose Reid Dids and Jolly to injury at the end of 2011 we would have murdered Geelong (Hawkins and Ottens dominated) . 2011 was the peak period for that great list and unfortunately we have nothing to show for it! MM did take in an out of form Dids where he would have been better of playing Goldsack forward on Mackie. Enough said!
Looking forward its going to be fantastic watching this next list come together and we will get glimpses of what they can do, and more importantly see if Bucks game plan is up scratch for the next tilt. I remember some games back in 2007 when the team showed "something"! Sure the missing links were Ball and Jolly but the team had the foundations to go for the silverware. A hardnut Captain - General of our defence, an unreal footballer in Swan, a Rolls Royce ditributer of the ball in Pendles, The A future Australian CHB in Reid. A marking machine in Coke Two X men in Dids and Thomas and a lot of hardworking players to fill the gaps. No matter how strong the Cats, Saints, Dogs, Wet Toast and Hawks were, we could see the team building and it was exciting! See you all in 2015, go Pies! |
|
|
|
|
SuperSwede
Joined: 05 Aug 2014 Location: Stockholm
|
Post subject: | |
|
nomadjack wrote: | St Kilda has 9... |
From their last grand final winning side ? _________________ Hating Carlton makes my Life worthwhile |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
Post subject: | |
|
bump - with a chuckle for some of the content towards the end.
PS: David, you arent allowed to exercise your mod powers about old emails - even though i was a little harsh on you above. _________________ Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
Post subject: | |
|
Oh I wouldn't bet on that |
|
|
|
|
mudlark
Joined: 19 Mar 2002 Location: Maroochydore Qld
|
Post subject: | |
|
HAL wrote: | Do you often use a computer there? |
The dog ate my homework. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
10). Nick Maxwell
11). Luke Ball
12). Heritier Lumumba (formerly Harry O'Brien)
13). Dayne Beams
All updated now! _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
Post subject: | |
|
Jezza wrote: | 10). Nick Maxwell
11). Luke Ball
12). Heritier Lumumba (formerly Harry O'Brien)
13). Dayne Beams
All updated now! |
thanks Jezza! _________________ Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
Member 7167
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008 Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
Post subject: | |
|
E wrote: | the point is really well made. we thought we were a young side and as a result, a dynasty was brewing.
2 failings in that analysis.
First, our success was a least in part borne of a game plan that no one could stop (with cattle specifically developed to execute that game plan - hence why Blair, Leigh Brown, Brent Macaffer and Chris Dawes looked so good for that brief period). If Geelong hadnt of figured it out in 2011 (AND we werent so banged up in the end), we could have had 2 flags to show for it because fully fit, we were about 10 goals better than everyone else that year too. Part of our demise resulted from the relative ineffectiveness of our game plan with increasing effect from 2012 and on.
Second. although we were young overall, we were made up of an old core and a young core. The older part of the core was pretty important in taking us from top 4 to premiers. Long term success is built around a core of same age guys playing 6 or 7 years together in theoir prime (see the cats and the Hawks and the Swans). you have older and younger additions, but the core should be middle aged. we had a lot of 22 and under and a lot of 27 and older in 2010 IIRC.
So those two things being overlooked is part of the reason why we thought dynasty, when instead we got a one hit wonder (again!).
Of course these two factors dont stop Nathan buckley from being blamed for the fact that we arent still premiers every single year! |
Great post E.
At the start of tyhe 2010 season I had little expectation of being premiers. I was wrong and when we won I celebrate long and hard.
At the beginning of 2011 I had high expectations and this was reinforced throughout the home and away season as it seemed that we could win games at times with a quarter of good footy. The exception was Geelong and they beat us three times. The loss of the Grand Final was an abject disappointment when considering our expectations. That said we went into that game undermanned, with a coach that seemed to be focused on himself and with injured players against a team that had beaten us twice earlier in the year. |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
Bump.
14). Alan Toovey
15). Brent Macaffer
_________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pa Marmo wrote: | E wrote: | Pa Marmo wrote: | David wrote: | Bugger! Got here too late!
Looks like this was a fun thread... |
It was David, unfortunately I got embroiled in a mental war with an anonymous vowel who was completely unarmed. We got snipped by he mods and probably rightly so, it got a bit unsavory, was having a bad day at work, haha. |
How are things down on the packaging floor at the peanut butter factory? Sounds like moral is a bit low, just like the quality of your posts. |
Thought you blocked me you loser, and for the record, I run a 300 employee cold storage facility for the largest protein producer on the planet, i probably pay more tax than you earn, not that really matters. |
R u still paying your taxes chicken boy? _________________ Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
piedys
Heeeeeeere's Dyso!!!
Joined: 04 Sep 2003 Location: Resident Forum Psychopath since 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
E wrote: | R u still paying your taxes chicken boy? |
Only 2 posts from Ma Parmo in 2016.
cue: crickets chirping... _________________ M I L L A N E 4 2 forever |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|