Not a Good Sign?

[rodgerfox]

Form slump or not, missing Roo or not, this figure from last week's match is a worry.....

St Kilda Attribute Essendon
187.5cm Height 187.3cm
87.0kg Weight 84.2kg
25yr 9mth Age 23yr 7mth
102.5 Games 61.5


We fielded a team with an average age of nearly 26!! And an average of 100 games each!!

Teams with that sort of experience advantage should be able to beat average and inexperienced teams whether missing one player or in a form slump.


This is a damning figure I think. It's the kind of figure that suggests your team doesn't have any improvement in it.


Thoughts?

[degruch]

Not great, but there are plenty of stats from that game that were good or not good. Good news is, we have a crack at beating a similarly inexperienced team (I think) this weekend!

[SydneySainter]

Form slump or not, missing Roo or not, this figure from last week's match is a worry.....

St Kilda Attribute Essendon
187.5cm Height 187.3cm
87.0kg Weight 84.2kg
25yr 9mth Age 23yr 7mth
102.5 Games 61.5


We fielded a team with an average age of nearly 26!! And an average of 100 games each!!

Teams with that sort of experience advantage should be able to beat average and inexperienced teams whether missing one player or in a form slump.


This is a damning figure I think. It's the kind of figure that suggests your team doesn't have any improvement in it.


Thoughts?

Agreed. We're a list on the decline, which is why of 09 Grand Final was a MUST WIN. We of all people should know that you don't always get a second chance.

[saintlee]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

[rodgerfox]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

But that's the worry - should a team with an average age of 26 and an average of 100 games each be so rattled by the loss of one guy?

For a team of kids I can absolutely understand it. But for us right now?

[degruch]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

The form loss and the structual hole are separate issues IMO. 26 shots at goal last week, that's a lot for a forwardline that supposedly doesn't work! The mids didn't seem to have too much trouble getting it there either, and if the backline had clean skills, they'd still look the goods too...all without Roo.

[SydneySainter]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

But that's the worry - should a team with an average age of 26 and an average of 100 games each be so rattled by the loss of one guy?

For a team of kids I can absolutely understand it. But for us right now?

Well, all of the Roo critics who had him in "over-rated" basket must now look like complete turkeys. Losing Roo was not only losing the key plank in our structure, it's also like we've lost about ten players.

[bigred]

So...

Because they we had an average age that is a couple of years older....Our form, or lack thereof should not have any bearing on whether we win or lose the game?

o.O

I think you are reading just a little more into this than it deserves.

Maybe...

I would prefer we had some younger guys on the list...but I guess this is what happens when you top up and top up.

[saintlee]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

But that's the worry - should a team with an average age of 26 and an average of 100 games each be so rattled by the loss of one guy?

For a team of kids I can absolutely understand it. But for us right now?

I agree. It is a worry. An experienced team like ours should be doing better to cover the loss of 1 player (albiet our best player), but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

[degruch]

...but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

That I agree with SL. Geelong has faced similar problems without Scarlett in the team, but I'm not sure if anyone is calling 'No Scarlett, No Cats'.

[saintlee]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

The form loss and the structual hole are separate issues IMO. 26 shots at goal last week, that's a lot for a forwardline that supposedly doesn't work! The mids didn't seem to have too much trouble getting it there either, and if the backline had clean skills, they'd still look the goods too...all without Roo.

26 shots should win you most games....however not coverting those shots into goals was the problem. I think those misses come down to poor form...

[Stephen Theodore]

I thought we looked okay for parts of the game on Sunday, unlike the week before against Carlscum when we looked dreadful for the entire game.

As mentioned earlier by degruch we actually had 26 shots for goal, which says we're getting our hands on it, and close to enough to have a pot for goal, but unlike earlier in the season, our accuracy is just not there.

A game away from Victoria is just the medicine the team needs, a bit of bonding, etc. and we'll come out and pants the Eagles this weekend.

[rodgerfox]

...but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

That I agree with SL. Geelong has faced similar problems without Scarlett in the team, but I'm not sure if anyone is calling 'No Scarlett, No Cats'.

But that's not entirely true.

They had no Scarlett and no Corey and no Ablett and no someone else yet still belted the average teams.

Granted they'd be in danger in finals or in a GF without these guys - but not completely and utterly lost against poor opposition.

[degruch]

...but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

That I agree with SL. Geelong has faced similar problems without Scarlett in the team, but I'm not sure if anyone is calling 'No Scarlett, No Cats'.

But that's not entirely true.

They had no Scarlett and no Corey and no Ablett and no someone else yet still belted the average teams.

Granted they'd be in danger in finals or in a GF without these guys - but not completely and utterly lost against poor opposition.

It coincided with their form slump last year. First they rested him (and others), then he was out injured for 3-4 (?) weeks, during which they lost several games, and narrowly won some (Freo at Subi by one point, another by 2 points).

It's true they missed several big players (Stevie J for a lot) over the same period, much the same as we have lost Fisher, Kosi and Gram over the same period. Not entirely without comparison.

[rodgerfox]

...but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

That I agree with SL. Geelong has faced similar problems without Scarlett in the team, but I'm not sure if anyone is calling 'No Scarlett, No Cats'.

But that's not entirely true.

They had no Scarlett and no Corey and no Ablett and no someone else yet still belted the average teams.

Granted they'd be in danger in finals or in a GF without these guys - but not completely and utterly lost against poor opposition.

It coincided with their form slump last year. First they rested him (and others), then he was out injured for 3-4 (?) weeks, during which they lost several games, and narrowly won some (Freo at Subi by one point, another by 2 points).

It's true they missed several big players (Stevie J for a lot) over the same period, much the same as we have lost Fisher, Kosi and Gram over the same period. Not entirely without comparison.

??

Firstly, they missed Chapman, Ottens, Scarlett, Johnson and others for quite a few games and only lost 4 games for the season.

Against us and the following week against the Lions when they took their ressies up - and against Carlton and the Bulldogs.

The only real bad game was the loss against Carlton.


They are a case in point. They may have had a 'slump' but still were highly competitive.

[bigred]

Hang on...we have only been uncompetitive in one game here.

It is not like we lost the last three by 100+ each.

[degruch]

...but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

That I agree with SL. Geelong has faced similar problems without Scarlett in the team, but I'm not sure if anyone is calling 'No Scarlett, No Cats'.

But that's not entirely true.

They had no Scarlett and no Corey and no Ablett and no someone else yet still belted the average teams.

Granted they'd be in danger in finals or in a GF without these guys - but not completely and utterly lost against poor opposition.

It coincided with their form slump last year. First they rested him (and others), then he was out injured for 3-4 (?) weeks, during which they lost several games, and narrowly won some (Freo at Subi by one point, another by 2 points).

It's true they missed several big players (Stevie J for a lot) over the same period, much the same as we have lost Fisher, Kosi and Gram over the same period. Not entirely without comparison.

??

Firstly, they missed Chapman, Ottens, Scarlett, Johnson and others for quite a few games and only lost 4 games for the season.

Against us and the following week against the Lions when they took their ressies up - and against Carlton and the Bulldogs.

The only real bad game was the loss against Carlton.


They are a case in point. They may have had a 'slump' but still were highly competitive.

Johnson and Ottens were missing against us, we were missing Max and King. They 'rested' key players against the Lions, then gradually brought them back. They looked very fragile in defense, only just scraped over the line a few times.

By whatever, you can find numbers to prove anything you like, we're not travelling well at the moment, but neither were the Cats last year and early this year. Good teams come back, we have another chance this weekend...although nothing at Subi is easy, the home crowd seems to frighten the umpires if nothing else.

[Con Gorozidis]

In general terms I agree...it is a worry, and I am quite worried about this weekend's match against the Eagles as well....if we lose to WCE, that would be 4 losses out of five, and the 1 win was a steal....

Nonetheless, I think our recent poor patch is basically down to a lack of form, and a structural hole left by Rooey. I think if the team can find form, than the structural hole won't be as obvious or painful!

But that's the worry - should a team with an average age of 26 and an average of 100 games each be so rattled by the loss of one guy?

For a team of kids I can absolutely understand it. But for us right now?

.


Well, all of the Roo critics who had him in "over-rated" basket must now look like complete turkeys. Losing Roo was not only losing the key plank in our structure, it's also like we've lost about ten players.

ud be hard pressed to find a saints fan in this galaxy who reckoned roo was over-rated. in my experience the only people that called him over rated were people who watched 1 saints game per year max.

lets face it. our ability to fast track youngsters has been crap and our trading has been average at best. so we are certainly not a team on the rise thats for sure

[plugger66]

Got anything else negative out of the game RF. If you look close enough surely you will find more.

[Saintsfan]

Form slump or not, missing Roo or not, this figure from last week's match is a worry.....

St Kilda Attribute Essendon
187.5cm Height 187.3cm
87.0kg Weight 84.2kg
25yr 9mth Age 23yr 7mth
102.5 Games 61.5


We fielded a team with an average age of nearly 26!! And an average of 100 games each!!

Teams with that sort of experience advantage should be able to beat average and inexperienced teams whether missing one player or in a form slump.


This is a damning figure I think. It's the kind of figure that suggests your team doesn't have any improvement in it.


Thoughts?

It was an upset.

Are you going to pull out the stats for when Geelong lost to Carlton two years in a row or when Geelong lost to Collingwood?

What about us beating the Crows at AAMI in 2005?

The Tigers beating the Crows in that basketball style match a few years ago?

Rodger there are plenty of example not just including the ones aforementioned of younger teams beating older teams. It happens.

[Dr Spaceman]

Rodger there are plenty of example not just including the ones aforementioned of younger teams beating older teams. It happens.

Especially when the younger team adopts a "nothing to lose" attitude to the game.

[bob__71]

...but utilmately I think the problem is exacerbated by a form slump

That I agree with SL. Geelong has faced similar problems without Scarlett in the team, but I'm not sure if anyone is calling 'No Scarlett, No Cats'.

But that's not entirely true.

They had no Scarlett and no Corey and no Ablett and no someone else yet still belted the average teams.

Granted they'd be in danger in finals or in a GF without these guys - but not completely and utterly lost against poor opposition.

I think essendon and Carlton beat us because they were the better team on the day. I don't consider them poor opposition, I just dont like them.

[bigred]

I think we played average.

Kicked at goal even worse.

Like the Port game we should have and could have won.

Key stuff ups of fundamentals screwed us.

[Leo.J]

We've lost Roo, and it's hurting us.

But imo Grammy is hurting us too, but with both of them out it really hurts.

Grammy was 2nd in the comp for inside 50's last year having 5.7 a game, and Rooey despite being down the list he contributed on average 3.8 a game.

This year between them they were averaging 8.

So looking at this we'll go and take the best forward and the player who has the most forward 50 entries out of the top 5 clubs and we'll just imagine how they'd be fairing.

Cloke and Beams
Mooney and Chapman
Hill and Pavlich
Hall and Griffen
Judd and O'halphin
Goodes and Okeefe

There might be a few more form slumps if these guys were out for extended periods.

[SainterK]

It will be interesting to have this discussion again later in the year, and find out which we would prefer.

Young fresh legs in May OR seasoned mature bodies in September?