Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Sat Jul 19, 2025 1:58 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 11:15 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 7:17 am
Posts: 17381
Location: the Yarran's fertile shores
Something dawned on me last night.

That "Collingwood boat" we've been bragging about not being in

(ie, the "crash" from a couple of seasons of over-performance)

well.. yeah.. we're in THAT SAME BOAT... except we got in it a different way.

WE'RE IN THE SAME BLOODY POSITION AS COLLINGWOOD!!!!

Lets look at Collingwood:
- bottomed out in 99
- recruited, ostensibly, youth from the draft, and workhorses like Freeborn, Steinfort, Jarrod Molloy, et.al.

Collingwood, in their brief foray into respectible footy, had a good even team of triers filled to the brim with confidence and spirit, and were lead by a few truly brilliant players. They had a simple no-nonsense game plan, and a few players who were in limbo (Ben Johnson, Shane Wakelin (circa st.kilda days), Presti etc etc) stood up and took steps in the right direction

After 2003, Malthouse realised that his experienced triers were good enough to get there but not to win it for him, and blokes like Molloy, Betheras, Freeborn, Steinfort etc etc were pushed out the door, and Mick turned to the players drafted to support the brilliant players he had.

However, in 2004, a few injuries to key players derailed them... and the spirited professionals on his list weren't there anymore, and their performance in the drafts were poor, and early picks like Cole were only serviceable, and unable to stand up beyond trying to beat their own player. Their simple gameplan was figured out, and they crashed. .. now more injuries, and further reliance on their recent draft picks, who are little more than serviceable, have them in serious trouble. Now, I'm sure Mick would regret cutting all of Rupe/Scotland/Freeborn at the same time..... but ultimately he was right to do it.. as he had to come to terms with their list eventually. but, perhaps, he might have traded a bit differently (ie, Stevens), and more slowly pushed them out.

Now Collingwood have to, pretty much, start from scratch. Many of their top group are getting on a bit, and they've got to look for a whole new wave of player from early picks.

Just like Malthouse is taking heat for performances this year, a few questions need to be asked of our illustrious leader.

Carlton, bottomed out in 2002 and realised a lot of changes needed to be made.

Similar to Collingwood, who had first round picks etc, but wasted them.. we find ourselves now with a team with little young talent to utilise.

Our strategy was to recuit a whole "middle bracket" workhorse division of the list, to do the Rupe/Steinfort/Freeborn kind of roles. We made that decision at the expense of some mid-late draft picks.

We also, unlike Collingwood, recruited a gun midfielder, to add to the superstar factor.... a little similar to Mick's development of Licuria into a top-liner in Malthouses' time.

The result: a bit of success. A significant improvement last year, and a Wizard cup premiership. Certainly not top-4 finishes or grandfinal appearances, but... enough to warm supporter hearts somewhat.

In footy, when you have a spiried coach and a group of players with their heads switched on, you can find some success through effort. Thats what we've found. Blokes like Bannister doing good jobs on top players (Buckley) from time to time, Morrell rising to a job in defence, or kicking a couple up forward.... etc etc..... it drove Collingwood into 2 grannies that, on-paper, they had no right to even sit in the stands for.

But, now, a couple of things have gone wrong. A couple of injuries to key players (ie, KEY DEFENDERS, which, good or not, we have only 2 of!!!), a decline in spirits and performances in our middle tier after a full-on push for pre-season silverware, and the necessity for a couple of youngsters who've not been developed until now (Davies, Simpson etc etc) and we're in trouble.

Our workforce of triers are looking HAT. We'll see a massive chop again this year, and 95% of the players chopped will be his projects from other clubs, while blokes like Davies and Simpson are still in limbo.

Collingwood are giving gametime to players like Ben Davies and David Fanning. They might turn out to be crap (who knows?) but at least Collingwood won't die wondering now on good talent.

Trading for Chambers and Longmuir with our late picks will ultimately only have cost us a couple of punts on youth. Both might be ok, but they'll never touch a premiership cup.

The giddy taste of 10 wins took Pagan's eyes off the truth.

We could, conceivably picked a Jesse D Smith with those picks. And, frankly, he'd probably be in the side if he were on the list.

12 months ago we were wondering why Kevin Sheedy would let McGrath and Bannister go. Well, now we know. He could see their limitations, 18 months before we could.

We're in the same boat. Struggling for young players "standing up", not enough development into young players, who either can't be developed above the level they're at, or aren't getting the right direction.

Our gameplans have been figured out.

Beat Carlton = swallow Fev's space and wait for the mistakes.
Beat Collingwood = force them to play 1 on 1 in the back and invariably overcome them with talent, and swamp their good mids who lack support.

And now, the future is clear for both.
A very low finish to this year, and a massive chop. For us, the chop will come from the imported lot, who just weren't smart decisions. They were meant to be stand-ins for our very raw kids for a couple of years. Well, now they'll be gone, and how raw kids are still bloody raw.

Collingwood are playing their raw kids now. They have more of them than us... so they'll have more to look at. We have a couple, and some on the rookie list who must be praying for injuries. I wonder if the match committee are secretly hoping they can give time to Smith/Becker/Setanta etc? Of course they're not, because they keep picking Bannister and Johnson etc etc.

Bentick was picked 4 weeks too late. Simpson should not be dropped EVER. Davies has to come in and be given a job on someone to learn accountability. Walker needs a gig in the middle.

Scotland should be picked last in the team, if at all. If he's injured or secretly has OP or something to let him off the hook, leave him out indefinitely until he's over it.

Of course, none of this will happen, because our coach seems to have blue-collar fever.

We've paid out on Collingwood for 18 months. We've ridiculed their failure while revelling in our own mediocre successes.

Now, we're eyeballing them in the same rowboat.

And, from what I can see, they'll overtake us because they're turning to their questionable picks and putting time into them. Chris Egan will look himself in the mirror this morning and say "you know what Chris? you belong here, and you'll make a big splash if you keep this up". Jordan Russell will be looking at himself wonder how much better a kick, or how much quicker than 80% the list he needs to be to get a game.

There is bugger all point now picking players who are certain to be delisted.

This isn't about Tanking. This is about correcting poor decisions made last year and the year before. We should be in a position of Davies having 30 games in him now, and having a look at some of the 6 kids we picked in the 2003 draft to see if any of them have it.

We cannot tank when our team is so poor. I call this "justice".

So, lets yuck it up at Collingwood's expence all we want. But I wonder who'll be laughing when Chris Egan is kicking goals against us in his 20th game, while Russell is still learning the run of play in his first, second or third, and a player with flashes of brilliance like Justin Davies is delisted because he's the obvious choice, without ever really being taught the game.

Collingwood's poor management has them in last place. But their tide is now, slowly, on the turn. Ours is still rock bottom.

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 11:24 am 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm
Posts: 63509
Dammit Tyrant....I was all set to hang shit on your premise, but when I read it........

It made sense.

You've hit the nail on the head, I'm afraid.

I just hope that a) we turn it round quicker than they do, and b) do it better than they do.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 11:29 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:43 am
Posts: 5175
Location: Corner of Queen and Collins
Good post Tyrants. i'm not used to you making sense.

Just one clarification - to me, Pagan also knew of the limitations of the players we traded for. The trades were for 2 purposes; 1) clear out the previous senior players who Pagan disliked / disrespected and 2) the power of the second chance. Carlton had no other option. WE could have used our picks in teh 60's for something else, but I think they knew that we would not have a 22-24 year old bracket to compete for the next 5 years. The onus was put on all those guys to see who could play. I for one think that McGrath will be OK, he'll still be on the list. Scotland was worth a punt, and at the moment it looks bad but he'll turn it around.

Johnson, Clarke, Mott, Kenna, were cheap, and worth a shot.

If we hadn't have picked those guys, we would have a whole list of 18-19 year olds and would be getting pumped each week.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:21 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
Tyrant,

The penny has not dropped yet.

This is how football is these days, when the time comes to strike you need to strike because before you know it you come back to the field very quickly. Why is Collingwood any different to Brisbane, Essendon* or Port Adelaide? Adelaide won two flags with a list that was not to different to Collingwoods!

What you can learn from all of them is that when you have the talent to be up in the top 4 you need to make the most of your opportunities.

You say Carlton bottomed out in 2002 and similar to Collingwood wasted draft picks. Which draft picks did they have to waste? If we are similar to Collingwood which draft picks did Collingwood lose when they were at the bottom of the ladder?

We don't need to learn from any other club, we need to learn from ourselves. Build a team and strike when the irons hot. Most clubs will have a 2-4 year window of opportunity to get a premiership and then before you know you come back to the field.

Essendon* got 1, Port got 1, Brisbane got 3 premierships. StKilda, West Coast, Geelong and probably Melbourne must strike within 3-4 years because if they don't they will be swapping positions with us.

That is how it is. That is how the AFL want it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:28 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm
Posts: 63509
jbee wrote:
You say Carlton bottomed out in 2002 and similar to Collingwood wasted draft picks. Which draft picks did they have to waste? If we are similar to Collingwood which draft picks did Collingwood lose when they were at the bottom of the ladder?


I think it's fairly obvious that while they wasted draft picks, we are in the same position because we had them taken from us. Either way, the 2 clubs end up with nothing to show as a result of draft season. Tomato/tomato....

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:36 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
KK,

The whole topic is about learning from Collingwood. We had no first round draft picks to waste. Put Goddard, Wells, Brock McClean in that team plus another decent uncontracted player and see how the future looks.
A hell of a lot better than it is now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:40 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm
Posts: 63509
Yes. I agree 100%. But waste picks, or not use them at all, then all you end up with is squat. Wasted draft picks = players delisted after 2 years. No draft picks = no high quality players at your disposal 2 seasons later, seasoned and ready for AFL-level footy.

Same shit, different smell.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:54 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 21078
Location: Missing Kouta
The Tyrant wrote:
And, from what I can see, they'll overtake us because they're turning to their questionable picks and putting time into them. Chris Egan will look himself in the mirror this morning and say "you know what Chris? you belong here, and you'll make a big splash if you keep this up". Jordan Russell will be looking at himself wonder how much better a kick, or how much quicker than 80% the list he needs to be to get a game.

I know you're not bagging Russell but given they're a similar size is this picture a reason we opted for Russell instead of Egan? The kid will probably get a fine for this and also has already been disciplined by the club.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 12:56 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:43 am
Posts: 5175
Location: Corner of Queen and Collins
I don't think anyone doubted Egan's ability as a forward, but Russell's selection was more about fixing our midfield for the future. Of all the holes we have on our list, midfield is the most important notwithstanding the views of others.

... prepares for an argument....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 1:05 pm 
Offline
formerly Josh Kaplan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:19 pm
Posts: 2187
another superb post Tyrants. I think we'll find when finals comes completely out the equation for us this year, a massive push by some sections of the MC to simply play the Russels, Hartletts, Hats et al.

"Again Tyrants has displayed both his absolute genious and copious amounts of sense in this post.. a victory for clear thinking." Quote at bottom of blurb.

Josh Kaplan, model.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 1:07 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
Stop pissing in his pocket and get him to answer my questions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 4:37 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am
Posts: 4827
We would not have picked Brock Mclean becuase we dont go for hard nose ball winners with beef on their bones.....we overlook players like that...t
Goddard is no superstar and would have been handy but doesnt win games...
Wells was probably the biggest loss becuase his dispoal and freaky skills may have won us some games but he wouldnt have stopped Robertson kicking six or been able to handle Barry Hall or stop Joel Corey or Ablett etc etc....we needed key position players who win games...

I agree with Tyrants but have been saying the same things for a while now...Collingwood have Rocca, Buckley and Richards out...if we had Fevola, Stevens and French out we would be crying foul and looking for injury excuses...list wise they have better talls than us.
Malthouse is prepared to play youth and gamble...we are conservative and backward in team selection.....

They could gamble on Egan becuase they have Tarrant, Rocca, Fraser, Cam Cloke, Travis Cloke, Walker as key position players to rotate and experiment with......we have Fevola, Whitnall, Hartlett and rookie listed Sentanta...we should have gone with a big KPP at No 9 instead of Russell or Egan....my view is you fix the spine first and then fix the rest......how many wingers/flankers win you games....how many CHF's win you games....?

Agree with Jessie Smith...should have been taken with a late pick and not Longmuir......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 4:54 pm 
Offline
formerly Josh Kaplan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:19 pm
Posts: 2187
JBEE, youve done it again!
Quote:
You say Carlton bottomed out in 2002 and similar to Collingwood wasted draft picks. Which draft picks did they have to waste? If we are similar to Collingwood which draft picks did Collingwood lose when they were at the bottom of the ladder?

We don't need to learn from any other club, we need to learn from ourselves. Build a team and strike when the irons hot. Most clubs will have a 2-4 year window of opportunity to get a premiership and then before you know you come back to the field.

Essendon* got 1, Port got 1, Brisbane got 3 premierships. StKilda, West Coast, Geelong and probably Melbourne must strike within 3-4 years because if they don't they will be swapping positions with us.

That is how it is. That is how the AFL want it.

we didnt waste any in 2002 Jbee..coz we didnt have any in the first few rounds to waste. is that the answer youre looking for?

what a trivial point you make, one that ignores the broader contention by a big margin.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 5:09 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
So what you are telling me is that we are not similar to Collingwood because we had no draft picks.

Those of you who think Goddard is no good, which player would you rather have on our list:

Goddard OR

Bannister, Bentick, Bowyer, Chambers, Clarke, Davies, Johnson, McGrath, Prendegast, Scotland, Sporn or Wiggins.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 5:12 pm 
Offline
formerly Josh Kaplan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:19 pm
Posts: 2187
mate...
in regards to 2002, the final result was that us, LIKE COLLINGWOOD when they started their downward slide, DIDNT (for whatever reason) make the mkost of their picks.. this is the point Tyrants was making..

the premise wasnt to get into a debate with what happened to the picks we didnt use, just merely evidence of the first bit of evidence to juxtapose our situation to collingwoods. hat.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 5:27 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:41 pm
Posts: 63509
jbee wrote:
So what you are telling me is that we are not similar to Collingwood because we had no draft picks.

Those of you who think Goddard is no good, which player would you rather have on our list:

Goddard OR

Bannister, Bentick, Bowyer, Chambers, Clarke, Davies, Johnson, McGrath, Prendegast, Scotland, Sporn or Wiggins.


the problem I now see with Goddard, even if he switched over to us tomorrow, it would take the rest of this season, plus all of the next to a) get him fit, and b) de-program him from all the new agey brainwashing bullshit Cornflakes has subjected him to and turn him into a decent player.

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 5:35 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 21078
Location: Missing Kouta
Elwood Blues1 wrote:
We would not have picked Brock Mclean becuase we dont go for hard nose ball winners with beef on their bones.....we overlook players like that...t
Goddard is no superstar and would have been handy but doesnt win games...
Wells was probably the biggest loss becuase his dispoal and freaky skills may have won us some games but he wouldnt have stopped Robertson kicking six or been able to handle Barry Hall or stop Joel Corey or Ablett etc etc....we needed key position players who win games...

I agree with Tyrants but have been saying the same things for a while now...Collingwood have Rocca, Buckley and Richards out...if we had Fevola, Stevens and French out we would be crying foul and looking for injury excuses...list wise they have better talls than us.
Malthouse is prepared to play youth and gamble...we are conservative and backward in team selection.....

They could gamble on Egan becuase they have Tarrant, Rocca, Fraser, Cam Cloke, Travis Cloke, Walker as key position players to rotate and experiment with......we have Fevola, Whitnall, Hartlett and rookie listed Sentanta...we should have gone with a big KPP at No 9 instead of Russell or Egan....my view is you fix the spine first and then fix the rest......how many wingers/flankers win you games....how many CHF's win you games....?

Agree with Jessie Smith...should have been taken with a late pick and not Longmuir......

What KPP should we have taken instead of Russell? Dunn, Bates, Pattison, Willits, Wells, Murphy, all were drafted after Russell and before Hartlett. What good are they if you've got Wiggins,Sporn,McGrath,etc delivering crap ball to them? :shock:
Forwards are only as good their onballers delivery which Brisbane demonstrated last night. Whilst Russell looks to be a classy midfielder with pace we are crying out for and we urgently need to find replacements for Kouta,Camporeale and Lappin.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 5:47 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 3:29 pm
Posts: 534
I am not conceding on that one yet.

K.Sheedy could see limitations in McGrath and Bannister. Is this the same Sheedy that picked up Allan and Murphy?

Kevin is an absolute genius just like Malthouse.

Which young blokes do we start playing? There are 5 YOUNG players who have not played a game yet.

Russell, Blackwell, Hartlett, Bryan (23) and Raso. Rule a line through Hartlett due to injury, Raso is a stick so you are left with three.

Mick Malthouse is giving young players a go. Well blow me down Collingwood have 5 players who have not played a game yet, B.Hall,
Heath Shaw, Brayden Shaw, Billy Morrison and Sean Rusling.

Some of the blokes have been on the list for 2 years. This is the same Collingwood that finished below us in 2004 and is currently below us.
This is the same Collingwood that we should be learning from.

I just like to stick with facts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 6:10 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am
Posts: 4827
Willits and or Maric/Pattison.......skinny wingman wont win you many games but having a CHF who can take mark might...put J Brown or Tredrae in our team and some of those bombs would be marked....how many Russells, Simpson, Chambers do you want....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 22, 2005 6:22 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 7:13 pm
Posts: 21078
Location: Missing Kouta
Elwood Blues1 wrote:
Willits and or Maric/Pattison.......skinny wingman wont win you many games but having a CHF who can take mark might...put J Brown or Tredrae in our team and some of those bombs would be marked....how many Russells, Simpson, Chambers do you want....

Maric was overlooked twice by Carlton so I doubt we rated him as a potential CHF and Willits from all reports he wouldn't be any better than Lance. The Tigers don't have a problem fielding skinny players of the likes of DeLedio, Tambling and Meyer in the one team.
Elwood Blues1 wrote:
Chambers do you want....

Chambers isn't skinny and we have missed his pacy, long kicking game.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 74 guests


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 post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group