No chances or not good enough?

[older saint]

I , like many have been bemused now for 2 years about the selection decisions made , especially when it comes to the younger guys on our list.
There are 2 schools of thought , one being they are not yet developed enough physically or skill wise to play AFL football yet; or
That the guys in front of them are playing better and therefore they retain their position.

Looking at this across both 2018 and 2019:
If we look at option 1, this to me is based around the old "hawthorn" model of the 80's 90's whereby players generally played around 40+ reserves games before they really became regulars at senior level .
If we look through those who we bemoan not given a chance: Clarke, Coffield, Rice, White, McKenzie, Phillips, Battle, Paton, Austin, Pierce, Marshall ( i have excluded McCartin, King, Clavarino, Bytel due to injuries either 2018 or 2019 or both)

Of this list Coffield probably is the least developed physically , drafted a s a bottom ager, yet played more games in 2018 and hasn't been seen this year.
To me players such as Rice, White, Clarke, Phillips, both in 2018 and 2019 appear to me to have been given the least opportunity to succeed. All have not been given a sustained run at AFL level.
Battle, Marshall, Pierce all had to wait a long time, but grabbed their chance and forced the selectors to keep them. That said Marshall wasn't picked round 1, Battle has had to move to CHB and benefit form injuries, Pierce only kept his spot on the list last year because they were forced to play him and suddenly realised he could offer something. McKenzie has got a spot now, although a very good mark for his size his foot skills really hurt at times and i wonder if say a White was given the same opportunities he may not be a better option?
You could argue none of these have grabbed their chance and smashed at at AFL level, but very few do initially and none of these guys are top 5 picks

Option 2 is a little harder to justify
2018 record of 4.5 - 17.5 Clearly says what was put on the park wasn't good enough

Rice, White, Coffield are all HBF /BP - That then puts them up against : Geary, Savage, Webster, Newness , in 2018. Hard to see how they didnt get more chances in 2018 based in the years the senior guys had.
Austin - Carlise, Brown - Brown 2018 wasn't great
Phillips, Mckenzie Clarke, - wing 2018 Again guys like Billings, Newnes, Sinclair , Lonie, filled the role.

If we look to 2019 ( as the coach likes to use the term "Body of Work")
we have seen improvement in Savage, Geary, Roberton, Webster injured has seen Paton and McKenzie given opportunities. White continues to get in the Best in Sandy reports so something doesn't add up to me here, and adding Long in this week for Paton - Forward for a back makes little sense .
Newnes started well but last 3 weeks has seen a return to 2018 form . Sinclair is hot and cold, good is very good but disappeared recently,
Parker started great but the last 2 weeks has really dropped off - surprised he wasn't "managed" as although mature age recruit still year 1 at AFL level.
Surely Clark after given 1 game in the road at Freo then dropped deserves a chance after multiple weeks performing in VFL . Rice is another who appears in best players but seems to only see his name listed as emergency.

good sides - Geelong, Richmond, Collingwood, - apart from own VFL side( another argument) , - lose a player and bring in a guy from the reserves who plays that role and slips straight in no issues. The first 4 or so weeks this happens, but as things got a little harder and injuries grew it seems selectors have lacked the conviction to stick to the journey and gone for the perceived safer option of the more experienced player regardless of role.

Yes you need a balance of youth and experience ( Melbourne showed everyone that) however you also need to reward effort and not reward players who aren't performing because the number of games payed is 3 figures

So which is it , are we not as good at developing players or draft the wrong players, Are the guys we draft players we need to be more patient with and they need 3 years before they are ready for continual AFL play, or is there a lack of conviction or over belief in the guys currently there ( as 4-5 following a 4.5-17.5 season clearly shows they are not good enough collectively).

The greatest risk we face on this is the likes of Rice, White, Clarke, Coffield, ask to be traded to get more opportunities. Combine this with say an Acres - continually played out of position , and a couple others all of a sudden we are starting agin, again , and we lose another Tom Lynch who wasn't given a chance by Lyon

[Ghost Like]

Well written Older Saint. I don't know which one it is or whether it is a hybrid of both. I do believe that in a side lacking genuine experience and that role falling to those not ready to take the mantle we are showing a genuine lack of quality in our 50 to 150 game players.

Hard to believe it is these players being given the benefit of the doubt. As I've said before, to see Clark, Marsh and Joyce copping the blame (dropped) for the GWS game, yet with no wins since the only player dropped was Long who is now back in. This is what is baffling and must be incredibly frustrating and bewildering for our youngsters.

Development is obviously an issue or so it seems, equally self preservation for a single game in isolation is also damaging / stunting development.

Some say our kids are not good enough. I disagree and am beginning to believe our mid tier or current upper echelon are the ones that are really not good enough. Certainly not good enough to allow our kids to find their feet and show their talent.

This falls on selection and the coach, thank god Longer was suspended and injured otherwise the revelation that is Marshall may not have been discovered. Likewise the injuries / suspension to Carlisle / Roberton and Brown may not have realised Battle and Wilkie. If Battle has been good down back I cannot wait to see Clav. Sadly we will need an injury because I do doubt our selection integrity.

Baffling that Clark, Coffield, White and Hind cannot get extended runs whilst we continue to pick the same, praying our win / loss ratio miraculously changes.

[Josh Battle]

Lots of good questions older saint

Yes it is baffling Ghost Like.

Perhaps one of the key ingredients to success is to assess each player and work out whether they are part of the future and whether they fit into the type of team you want to build. It's such a complex caper when you come in to a new club as head coach and you are in charge of a rebuild. There's no doubt in my mind that after we traded BJ and Dal and had a string of retirements that the glory days of 2009/2010 were well and truly over

The problem with incorrectly assessing the team and its potential is that you risk playing too many senior blokes that won't be around when the rebuild matures. That is what I believe happened to a certain extent with Richo after he took over from Watters and he was too soft on the older players and too matey with them and did not cull hard enough in his first year or so. That's on the list management and the CEO and the board as well.

We had to rebuild. I'm positive that there was reluctance and perhaps part of the reason that Watters was sacked was because of the reluctance to bite the bullet and rebuild. I mean it's not easy to cull champions and 200 gamers and 150 gamers and older players who are showing signs of wear and tear. Do you hang on to them in the hope that the club can quickly turn things around and somehow miraculously becomes a contender before these older guys retire?

Probably a few recruitment decisions from 2014-2016 were also made as a result of the head coach and the board and the CEO incorrectly thinking that we were going to bounce back quickly and be a contender. We could have perhaps traded Armo and Chips when they had currency. They got it wrong and it meant we also missed a chance to get new young blood into the team that would help with the maturing of the core group that may eventually get us back into finals.

Richo was commissioned to help fashion a side that could play well often enough to contend for finals and hopefully do it over consecutive seasons and hopefully get enough finals experience to eventually be a premiership chance. He failed. He got the mix wrong when he started and I think he's still doing it. I reckon Cho is now as confused as the rest of us and there in lies the problem. Perhaps he is no good and he was never cut out for this caper.

[freely]

It's a lot easier to induct young players into a team that's going well. Our problem has been - and this is the trouble with any rebuild where the club's bottomed out - is that we waited too long. That's basically the end of the Lyon era - that's when we should have been doing our rebuild - feeding young players into a system that was working. That's the luxury Hawthorn or Geelong, say, have had. The team is well-balanced so a top-up here, an injection of new talent there - they can carry a couple of new players. I mean - look no further than the way Geelong was able to carry Stanley. If everything else is working, they can give him time to come good.

Our situation is completely different - when Lyon dumped us, he completely failed to bring new kids into the working side. We've been struggling to put together a balanced team ever since. The one thing we have going for us now is that our kids are coming through together. If they stay together, we may get that balance we need. All right, Seb Ross has got his failings but you know what you're going to get. He's like a peg in the ground - to some extent, you've got to build around guys like him. We have to get the structure right. Then the apparently neglected players - the Whites and Rices - can slip in nicely.

At the moment, every time we bring in a new player we're hoping he's going to be the messiah - and I don't think it's just us fans hoping for that either! So they come in, they stuff up, they're out and we're back to the drawing board. Structure first and keep our bottle. Confidence in the game plan, confidence in each other, then gradually feed them in.

[Ghost Like]

Totally agree with your assessment of Lyon and how he left us, this reluctance with blooding kids continued in his first few years at Freo. My concern with our mid tier, so called leaders is that their accountability to our young blokes appears measured by the young blokes performance, not theirs.

Case in point, Clark's game against GWS. He did not rack up the possessions but laid numerous tackles. Some saw that as a failing, that he was always second to the contest. I saw it as a young bloke trying to impact when the ball didn't fall his way. The way GWS transitioned from defence unabated to goal was not his fault or Marsh's fault or Joyce's fault. It was the fault of turnovers, poor inside 50 entries and lack of accountability to direct opposition. Clark could have skirted the packs pleading for a handball receive for a possie and turn it over but that was not his role, nor is it his style. Our senior players were the ones responsible for our forward entries, our forward pressure and that was what let us down.

Marsh played better than Bruce that day. Joyce was a lamb to the slaughter and the way the ball entered the Giants forward line there was every chance Brown would have been. At least Brown would have voiced his opinion of our mids and half forwards for their lack of pressure and turnovers.

If our senior players aren't getting the job done it is counter productive to put it at the feet of our kids.

[older saint]

While what you have said about Lyon is correct that was 7 years ago he left. Richo has been here for 5 seasons, and when he started had the likes of Riewoldt, Montagna, Armitage , Milne?, Surely by now what you talk about could also have happened .
Yes losing Stevens probably hurt a little more than many expected too.

today to me is line in the sand moment . go to 5-5 and set you season up for a run at top 8 or 4-6, 5 losses in a row, and apart fromBrown , due to match up concerns, no Senior player being held accountable. Hope my fear for today is proved wrong and Long comes in a kick a few, Parkers pressure is back and Newnes has a great game.

[Josh Battle]

While what you have said about Lyon is correct that was 7 years ago he left. Richo has been here for 5 seasons, and when he started had the likes of Riewoldt, Montagna, Armitage , Milne?, Surely by now what you talk about could also have happened

You forgot about Dempster, Sam Fisher, Stuv, Schneider, Gilbert, and of course Jarryn Geary.

This is Richo's 6th year. Our recruiting has been ok during the Richo years and comparable to other teams rebuilding (and teams mostly outside the top 8). It is our player development and player education that has been poor imo.

For many years we had ALL young blokes in the Zebs without the mentoring of senior blokes beside them on game day. Problem was that the senior players wanted to earn match payments and be selected in front of the younger blokes. Richo and the board let it happen because their 5 year plan said we were going to be a top 4 team in 2018.

Armo and Gilbo are being used this year as on field coaches and mentors in the reserves and I reckon we should have done this years ago with such a wealth of talent and senior players on the list. It's great for the guys to have Batchelor on field today as well.

Selection and encouragement has been poor by Richo and I reckon it's important to show faith and play the younger blokes in the firsts. Richo dropped Nathan Brown this year for the first time I can remember, but Richo has ALWAYS played senior blokes in front of the less experienced players.

[older saint]

While what you have said about Lyon is correct that was 7 years ago he left. Richo has been here for 5 seasons, and when he started had the likes of Riewoldt, Montagna, Armitage , Milne?, Surely by now what you talk about could also have happened

You forgot about Dempster, Sam Fisher, Stuv, Schneider, Gilbert, and of course Jarryn Geary.

This is Richo's 6th year. Our recruiting has been ok during the Richo years and comparable to other teams rebuilding (and teams mostly outside the top 8). It is our player development and player education that has been poor imo.

For many years we had ALL young blokes in the Zebs without the mentoring of senior blokes beside them on game day. Problem was that the senior players wanted to earn match payments and be selected in front of the younger blokes. Richo and the board let it happen because their 5 year plan said we were going to be a top 4 team in 2018.

Armo and Gilbo are being used this year as on field coaches and mentors in the reserves and I reckon we should have done this years ago with such a wealth of talent and senior players on the list. It's great for the guys to have Batchelor on field today as well.

Selection and encouragement has been poor by Richo and I reckon it's important to show faith and play the younger blokes in the firsts. Richo dropped Nathan Brown this year for the first time I can remember, but Richo has ALWAYS played senior blokes in front of the less experienced players.

Correct which i think will ultimately be his downfall as the senior players have not delivered, are too comfortable knowing they won't be dropped, are not good enough , or a combination of both. The 5 year plan was a fantasy considering the whole of the Grand Final core will be gone and apart from Carlisle we have not replaced any of them with A grade talent.

Watching Sandy on Sunday Clark had soo much time and looked a level above everyone else out there, Please, please give him at least 3 games to have a proper run at it.

[Toy Saint]

Unfortunately a lot of the young guys simply cannot run out a full game, as such the coach can only afford about two in the side. I'm suggesting Gresham, Dunstan & Acres are only good for about 85 minutes, whereas some, possibly less talented guys like Geary, Newnes, Savage and Ross can play 115 minutes.

Mind you, I'm not a fan of our forward set-up with too many low possession pressure forwards in Parker, Long, Young & Kent. We could have an extra tall if White or Joyce came into the backline and freed up Battle or Marsh. Alternately Hunter could replace a small forward, and help share some midfield load.

[Scollop]

Unfortunately a lot of the young guys simply cannot run out a full game, as such the coach can only afford about two in the side. I'm suggesting Gresham, Dunstan & Acres are only good for about 85 minutes, whereas some, possibly less talented guys like Geary, Newnes, Savage and Ross can play 115 minutes.

Mind you, I'm not a fan of our forward set-up with too many low possession pressure forwards in Parker, Long, Young & Kent. We could have an extra tall if White or Joyce came into the backline and freed up Battle or Marsh. Alternately Hunter could replace a small forward, and help share some midfield load.

I think you're right to some extent about the guys who cannot run out games. That is an indictment on our fitness staff and our coaches if there are too many in the team who fall into that category

Gresh admitted that this was his first preseason. Can anyone confirm? Not sure if injuries and surgeries have affected all our mids and half forwards. If Newnes and Mackenzie and Savage have higher endurance then Richo should consider giving them all minutes in the middle.

Newnes played his role and did well, but I'd like to see him support the mids from time to time. As far as the low possession forwards are concerned, I reckon Benny and Dean had very good games. They played through the middle and around the stoppages as well.

Long was servicable until that umpire incorrectly reported him for a shoulder bump. Long was off the ground for a fair while and when he came back on he wasn't his usual kamikaze self, but still contributed. Kent would have had very high GPS numbers imo, because I recall many times where he was an option on the back flanks or the wings and he was everywhere also setting up opportunities in the forward line.

Parker also got into the game and he's surprised me with his fitness. Kicked a nice goal in the last quarter. Marsh was spent by the last quarter, but he too put in a really good game. His work rate and effort was outstanding for someone who hasn't had AFL conditioning and had not done a preseason with us.

The match against Carlton was a great contest even if both teams skills were not A grade. When you play a physical game like we did, I reckon it affects even the fittest players. Most of our boys were spent by the last ten minutes and ther will be some that don't recover as well. Hopefully they are honest with themselves and with the fitness staff and they put their hand up for a rest.

Next week is an opportunity to manage the ones that may not come up and play the boys who performed well at Sandringham