what to make of the intangibles?

[6621104]

Great teams have great players - Geelong recently. Great players sometimes make almost great teams -Geelong of the 90's, the wonderful StKilda sides of the recent past. What is the difference? OK maybe for us not enough great players.
There is a real but hard to define difference between a great team and a team of great players. The so called intangibles that players describe as wanting to play for each other, wanting group success over individual success etc.
How is this shift in thinking and acting created? Moving a professional athlete from the focus on self, to the focus on team? The coach must have some part, but the players must also sign up. There must be a corp of leaders within the group so influential that the non negotiables are agreed and complied with. And leaders who pass on the task to an equally influential younger generation.
Many here have commented that we have yet to become a great club despite the undeniable list of great players we have had. Some of the best ever. Some of these we have seen head to other clubs. Plugger, Hall, Stewart ...even BJ.
Great players but not great leaders.
We must not loose our leaders or we will never make the grade. And we need a core of respected senior players who help the youngsters understand what is expected.
Thats why Dal should stay.

[Con Gorozidis]

Listening to Travis Boak interview last week - player buy-in and doing selfless acts like you see the Swans and Hawks do is born of a belief that the team is a chance for success. This develops gradually and players make assessments based on how they rate their list relative to other sides.

If a critical mass of individual players starts believing the team has what it takes to have success they buy-in and you get the selfless acts and the 'team spirit' but players dont buy-in to team success until they believe they are a real shot- and that is based on their own assessment of where the team is at .

If keeping the status quo due to core leaders with non-negotiables was the key - why are we 3rd last? You cant argue for the status quo when we just finished 3rd last and our 'leaders' are getting worse not better.

The reality is - selfless acts grow when players are prepared to trade off personl success for team success and they will only do that when they really believe team success is on the cards. And they do that when they realise they have a lot of good players.

In 09 we had 10-12 very good players aged 25-28. So of course we had belief we could beat most sides.
In 2013 - we had Nil.

You cant manufacture team spirit - players arent that stupid.

I'm not saying trade Dal - but keeping him or not keeping is irrelevant to our future success. He wont be there next time we make finals that is for certain. But if we get a good offer the new person may be able to help us make finals and may even be a future leader.

This is why I am open-minded about Dal.

Players arent babies waiting to be lead. I want to see 22 players on the field who make the right decisions on their own. I want to build a real team. Not focus on some mystical qualities of a few 'leaders'. You contradict yourself and you also cant explain why we are third last.

[maverick]

See I am not so sure about that.
Using Shane Crawford as an example.
He was 30 odd when Buddy, Roughy, Lewis & Ellis were recruited in 2004/2005.
By 2007 they were playing finals and had won a premiership, with him as a key player when he was 34.
I think Dal could still be part of things myself, especially as he could play off the HBF.

[bobmurray]

Now they we are in a rebuild i'd like to see the team keep evolving.

Thanks Dal, being a 2 club player is not that bad, Allan Davis ended up playing for 4 clubs, now that is bad or desperate.

[Con Gorozidis]

See I am not so sure about that.
Using Shane Crawford as an example.
He was 30 odd when Buddy, Roughy, Lewis & Ellis were recruited in 2004/2005.
By 2007 they were playing finals and had won a premiership, with him as a key player when he was 34.
I think Dal could still be part of things myself, especially as he could play off the HBF.

this year we had

hayes, milne, kosi, riewoldt, dal, fisher, montagna, blake, dempster, schneider - all senior 'leaders' , 'mentors' and 'helpers' and we finished 3rd bottom.

How many mentor/leaders do we need and do people think they really help as much as we like to imagine?

Maybe Joey will be a key player at 34?
What if it comes down to keeping Joey or Dal?

Maybe Joey can be our 'Shane Crawford' in your example? Maybe Roo will be our 'Shane Crawford'?

We are desperate for good young players. Sadly tough calls need to be made. We cant keep all these veterans .

[fingers]

Culture.

[Kickit]

See I am not so sure about that.
Using Shane Crawford as an example.
He was 30 odd when Buddy, Roughy, Lewis & Ellis were recruited in 2004/2005.
By 2007 they were playing finals and had won a premiership, with him as a key player when he was 34.
I think Dal could still be part of things myself, especially as he could play off the HBF.

this year we had

hayes, milne, kosi, riewoldt, dal, fisher, montagna, blake, dempster, schneider - all senior 'leaders' , 'mentors' and 'helpers' and we finished 3rd bottom.

How many mentor/leaders do we need and do people think they really help as much as we like to imagine?

Maybe Joey will be a key player at 34?
What if it comes down to keeping Joey or Dal?

Maybe Joey can be our 'Shane Crawford' in your example? Maybe Roo will be our 'Shane Crawford'?

We are desperate for good young players. Sadly tough calls need to be made. We cant keep all these veterans .

I think I'd prefer Joey as the role model. A late draft pick he's never had the media attention of Dal Santo, but he worked his way into an elite status.
Forget about Saad, Milera, TDL. Plonk Joey in the forward line, he could be our version of Paul Chapman without the injuries.