| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: Collingwood 2 GamePlans |  |
|
We seem to have a Good GamePlan and a Shit GamePlan.
The Good one is what we saw vs Cats and Giants. More Free Flowing and Tacking the Game On. More 1v1 in Defense. Ball Movement lot faster
The Shit One(The 1 we See More) is where we Go Backwards and Sideways most of the Time. Ball Movement is Terrible and goes no where. We play that Stupid Zone Defense. That what we saw vs Blues and Bomber.
Bucks needs to stick to the Good GamePlan and not his Shit one
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
 |
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
This is not to do with coach. This is to do with the opposition and then in turn our players.
The first quarters against Sydney and GWS, and the four quarters against Geelong have one thing in common, the lack of pressure put on us by the opposition. Under basically zero pressure in these 6 quarters, we were able to execute our skills better, make smarter decisions, hit the shorter lead up targets and hence put scores on the board.
In the other 26 quarters in 2017, the opposition has put us under pressure and under this pressure we are unable to execute our skills to the same level, as when we are under no pressure from the opposition. When this pressure comes, our decision making also becomes poor and the result is we hit the scoreboard less.
The other factor is the pressure means we kick long inside 50, rather than hit the short lead up target. As, our forward is young and lacking another key forward, the bomb kick inside 50 is not working and we currently do not have the crumbers to capitalise when the ball hits the ground.
Thus, the moral of the story in the short term is our young team needs to learn how to execute their skills and make better decisions under the intense pressure of the opposition. The moral of the story in the long term is that we need to develop another key forward or recruit one from another team and we also need players like Kirby and Daicos to develop into excellent crumbers. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Dave, I get what you're saying.
All teams are trying to move the ball quicker and slow down the oppositions ball movement at the same time.
I can guarantee we are trying to move the ball quickly but on most occasions this year, the opposition has just been better at slowing us down, than we have been at moving it quickly.
When you strip it all back, the team that forces the opposition to either move the ball laterally or backwards, is usually dominating the game.
Quite simply, we need to have a better organised defence that forces the opposition to slow down their movement into their forward half.
We also require a better skill level that allows for far less breaks in the chain when we move the ball quickly from half back.
Who you choose to blame for our clubs inability to execute these basic ingredients for success, is for another topic.. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | We also require a better skill level that allows for far less breaks in the chain when we move the ball quickly from half back.
Who you choose to blame for our clubs inability to execute these basic ingredients for success, is for another topic.. |
I agree with that. Our Lack of Skills does hurt us by Turning the Ball Over when we do try and move it fast and that can make us look slower.
Skills and Decision Making needs to Imporve
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mooretreloar wrote: | This is not to do with coach. This is to do with the opposition and then in turn our players.
The first quarters against Sydney and GWS, and the four quarters against Geelong have one thing in common, the lack of pressure put on us by the opposition. Under basically zero pressure in these 6 quarters, we were able to execute our skills better, make smarter decisions, hit the shorter lead up targets and hence put scores on the board.
In the other 26 quarters in 2017, the opposition has put us under pressure and under this pressure we are unable to execute our skills to the same level, as when we are under no pressure from the opposition. When this pressure comes, our decision making also becomes poor and the result is we hit the scoreboard less.
The other factor is the pressure means we kick long inside 50, rather than hit the short lead up target. As, our forward is young and lacking another key forward, the bomb kick inside 50 is not working and we currently do not have the crumbers to capitalise when the ball hits the ground.
Thus, the moral of the story in the short term is our young team needs to learn how to execute their skills and make better decisions under the intense pressure of the opposition. The moral of the story in the long term is that we need to develop another key forward or recruit one from another team and we also need players like Kirby and Daicos to develop into excellent crumbers. |
Yes, this is exactly what I see as well. Experience will fix it, I suppose, but I thought we had built enough experience by the end of last year, so this year has been a bitter disappointment. It does not help that even our (relatively) experienced players make poor mistakes - Adams, Blair, Howe, Fasolo being some common culprits that spring to mind.
I think Buckley has probably run out of time, but I am strongly of the belief that coaches do not generally make success, players do. The best coaches can look very ordinary when their players do not execute properly.
Many posters write as though there is no opposition out there, and they see only our side. In truth, how we play is at least as much a function of the opposition's style of play as any difference that we bring to the game.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Surely the coach bears some degree of direct responsibility. It cannot be solely the players responibility: it is not mutually exclusive. Depite youth, inexperience per se, lack of time together it defies logic to suggest the coaches aren't directly responsible. Who else is responsible for practicing under pressure?
At the same time the players bear responibility too
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
derkd
Joined: 29 May 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | Surely the coach bears some degree of direct responsibility. It cannot be solely the players responibility: it is not mutually exclusive. Depite youth, inexperience per se, lack of time together it defies logic to suggest the coaches aren't directly responsible. Who else is responsible for practicing under pressure?
At the same time the players bear responibility too |
I would add to this by saying that if you look over the last four to five years of threads on here, the consistant complaint of posters has been the poor quality of disposal at key moments. Here we are years on still bemoaning the sane thing.
Yes the players are not free of blame...but their are some seriously talented footballers on this list...the question at some point has to be askes...Is it the game plan they are being asked to play:
- Too complecaited or does not make sense in high intensity games.
- Just flat out does not work.
- being taught poorly
or all of the above.
It strikes me as very all or nothing . And so far in 6 years we have seen nothimg to suggest a consistant period of success.
One thing I notice about the great coaches. .they also tend to be great teachers. ..Clarkson was a teacher by trade before coaching. Does Buckley have the skills toget his game plan to an easy to understand manual?
_________________
"To know nothing of events before your birth, is to forever remain a child" - Cicero (Roman Lawyer/Senator) 46 BCE. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Sanderson was brought to Collingwood with a focus on ball movement and transition ( documented )
It just looks to me as though the players are being made to learn to much to soon. Chris Scott said recently that teaching players quick ball movement from a transition is the hardest thing to teach and get right.
We look like a team that hasn't got the foundations set in place but we have got ahead of ourselves and are focussing on the final piece of the puzzle before we are ready.
Roos built the Dee's from the backline and now they are moving the ball quicker. Bolton is building the Blues on defence first. They are now becoming hard to score against.
Three / four years later at Collingwood and we still get to many easy goals scored against us.
It's time to go back to basics and get our scores against numbers down and when that's right, you can begin to add the icing on top.
It can happen quick. The Eagles did it experimenting with that spiders web zone defence and were rubbish in the first year and played good finals footy the following year.
I just think we are a club who has currently overrated where it truly sits in the scheme of game plan evolution and its list profile.
That's my rant. |
|
|
|
|
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | Surely the coach bears some degree of direct responsibility. It cannot be solely the players responibility: it is not mutually exclusive. Depite youth, inexperience per se, lack of time together it defies logic to suggest the coaches aren't directly responsible. Who else is responsible for practicing under pressure?
At the same time the players bear responibility too |
You can practice as much as you want at training, but you will never fully replicate game conditions. Some players have the ability to execute under pressure, some don't. Young players are given time and understanding to develop this attribute, however if in time they don't, they will not be playing AFL football.
You may remember the old coach placed an emphasis on recruiting big game players. Big game players execute under pressure and given the age of our list presently, we do not have enough big game players. These players take a team on their own backs and bring them home.
From watching our side, in my view, the following players will be big game players when they are fully developed, Adams, Treloar, Moore, Elliott and Maynard. De Goey is showing signs and I am hoping he gets there too. |
|
|
|
|
inxs88
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
|
| Post subject: Re: Collingwood 2 GamePlans | |
|
| Dave The Man wrote: | We seem to have a Good GamePlan and a Shit GamePlan.
The Good one is what we saw vs Cats and Giants. More Free Flowing and Tacking the Game On. More 1v1 in Defense. Ball Movement lot faster
The Shit One(The 1 we See More) is where we Go Backwards and Sideways most of the Time. Ball Movement is Terrible and goes no where. We play that Stupid Zone Defense. That what we saw vs Blues and Bomber.
Bucks needs to stick to the Good GamePlan and not his Shit one |
I love your succinct simplicity Dave! Let's get you in the Coaches Box this weekend mate!
_________________
I love the Pies, hate Carlscum |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Saturday Games pretty much Proved what I was saying
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Dave The Man wrote: | | Saturday Games pretty much Proved what I was saying |
Yep and it also proves no matter how good your game plan is, its hard to execute it if the opposition don't allow you the ball ( in the first qtr ) |
|
|
|
|
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
So Bucks goes.... "Right boys, let's get out there and run with the shit game plan 1st and see how we go"..... 30 minutes later.... "Nut, the shit game plan isn't working, let's try the good one now boys" ..... 30 minutes later... "Yep, that's better!"
Thanks Dave, I needed a laugh mid swing! That'll habe me randomly chuckling for the rest of the day😎
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | Sanderson was brought to Collingwood with a focus on ball movement and transition ( documented )
It just looks to me as though the players are being made to learn to much to soon. Chris Scott said recently that teaching players quick ball movement from a transition is the hardest thing to teach and get right.
We look like a team that hasn't got the foundations set in place but we have got ahead of ourselves and are focussing on the final piece of the puzzle before we are ready.
Roos built the Dee's from the backline and now they are moving the ball quicker. Bolton is building the Blues on defence first. They are now becoming hard to score against.
Three / four years later at Collingwood and we still get to many easy goals scored against us.
It's time to go back to basics and get our scores against numbers down and when that's right, you can begin to add the icing on top.
It can happen quick. The Eagles did it experimenting with that spiders web zone defence and were rubbish in the first year and played good finals footy the following year.
I just think we are a club who has currently overrated where it truly sits in the scheme of game plan evolution and its list profile.
That's my rant. |
You also have to look at each player involved in the transition as well. Every player involved in the transition could get it right, but for one player who doesn't get to position, or is too slow to get to position, or is not accurate in getting the ball from hand or foot to the next player in the transition. The result is a turnover with the ball coming back the other way and a goal to the opposition. That's the problem I see with the team at the moment. Without trust in each other, players lose confidence, even those who are doing the right thing, but their heads drop when they see a player doing the wrong thing and then the whole team plays poorly. It comes back to the coach who brings players into the club and selects the team. Get the mix of players wrong, or promote players too early in their career, the performance of the team goes belly up. You only have to look at Hawthorn who go from premiers to a bottom four side after they lose a couple of key players. |
|
|
|
|
BEAMER09
Joined: 10 Apr 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I thought there was only one game plan - Ed's Side by Side...
_________________
COLLINGW09D |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
