The coaching

[defacto]

comparing ross lyon to scott watter is like comparing apples with oranges, they are two completely different coaches. ross was incredibly good on game day, his tactics and strategy were 2nd to none. his work in 2010 GF1 was outstanding. he took a massive risk dropping mcevoy and it paid dividends. we were 1 man down and he also almost pinched a win from restructuring the match ups alone!!! ray to swan, gilbert to maxwell, blake and kozi to the ruck with the 3rd man up. baker in. if we won, it would have got more recognition and gone down as one of the best examples of coaching in a grand final.

the problem with ross though, is he is incredibly demanding and dictates to you how you do your job. to be honest, if we still had ross, i think we'd slowly sink to the bottom and stay there. i dont think ross knows how to build and develop a team. it just isnt his style or demeanor. ross is incredibly good at taking a side that is developed and mature and driving them to their peak. the problem i think ross has now is he really has inherited the freo list 2 years too late. in 1-2 years time freo will be where we are now. pav, sandi, mcpharlin are in the twilight years of their careers. take out sandi and pav and you can pretty much guarantee they will lose another 3-5 games and have no impact comes finals (if they get there).

scott i think is exactly what we need now. the problem with scott is he isnt as good on game day. i dont think he can adapt to whats happening. i also dont rate laidley as a game day coach, which is meant to be his strong point. scott is good in the media though, an excellent communicator and i think he is an excellent manager. he has also come at a time where the senior players needed to be empowered again, re-energised and their confidence rebuilt. i think he has done that. the other positive is he can manage other coaches and staff very well and empower them. ross would have dictated it to them and slowly forced them out. so i think its just a matter of getting the right people around watters at the right time. now we need development coaches, we dont need game day coaches. scotts development of players is excellent as well. the more i think about it, the more i think we have a much better version of grant thomas. which is prefect for where we are going and where we are at right now.

[Richter]

Agree we are short on outside players... or players in the modern parlance can run and spread, carry and effectively dispose. This was the case under Lyon too, which is why he recruited Lovett and why we didn't hugely miss Ball. Heck, even going back to GT's time, we had problems in that area.So we can hardly blame Watters for that deficiency in our team. Lyon worked around it by playing to the strengths the team already had and played GOP role fillers like McQ and Eddy rather than speculative hit or miss outside players like Fiora.

But into the future it becomes vital to develop more of these players, which is presumably why Cripps got a few games. Perhaps Siposs will de slop that way, Winmar is another, though perhaps has not come on as much as we might have hoped. Not sure who else there is coming through...

[Dave McNamara]

We lost a game we were expected to lose.

Against the early Premiership favourites who had been fired up all week, both privately and publicly, after a shock loss last week.

And after losing our one genuine ruckman prior to the game.

And after losing our best defender, from an already undersized backline, at half time.

Yet despite all this, some posters are able to critically analyze the coach's match day performance and conclude its sub standard. 

Sensational stuff!

Spot on diagnosis Doc!



PS: Massive bonus points from me for throwing up that Mick Thomas pic. Weddoes are my all time favourite band. (Apologies to Stevie re his beloved Beatles. )

[mullet]

What did scott say about Dal at the interview after the game. I heard something on SEN and they were going to play it but I had to get out of the car so didnt hear.

[The Craw]

What did scott say about Dal at the interview after the game. I heard something on SEN and they were going to play it but I had to get out of the car so didnt hear.

Needs to be able to cope with a tag..... was the crux of it.

[mullet]

What did scott say about Dal at the interview after the game. I heard something on SEN and they were going to play it but I had to get out of the car so didnt hear.

Needs to be able to cope with a tag..... was the crux of it.

Oh is that all, SEN were making out like it was really bad.

[Teflon]

Too early as others have said to assess.

Definately got Rioli/Buddy match ups wrong - Id have preferred Dempster to Rioli and Gilbert to Buddy with the clear instruction that in this match Gilbert will need other defenders across to help out.

I liked his attempt to get Dal half forward and into the game -- to be honest though, Dal himself needs to work out how he takes a tagger to uncomfortable spots on the ground and manages to still have an impact. He doesnt have to get 30 every week....

For mine, Watters as a coach with his development focus is what we need now. I too am not sold on the so-called tactical brilliance of Dean Laidley (never was at Norf either). Would love and dream to have Leigh Tudor back our club........this guy everywhere he goes improves player performance...has nous and Swans will go closer than many think this year.

I think the hard task Watters has in the short term (while he pumps games into players who have SKILLS) is to be abit more daring aka........don't be afraid to mix a Riewoldt in defence, Schneider back , drop Milne et al IF we need to go forward....in many games for me moving forward win/losses are irrelevant - its about fast tracking development and 2012 should be devoted to that.

[plugger66]

Coaching is ok for a first year coach. He has made errors thats for sure but sometimes you have match ups because the other options are worse. Would be looking more at our star players who have clearly been effected by the GF losses and also some here need to acknowledge how good RL was as a coach to get what he did as a team out of our side.

[Teflon]

Coaching is ok for a first year coach. He has made errors thats for sure but sometimes you have match ups because the other options are worse. Would be looking more at our star players who have clearly been effected by the GF losses and also some here need to acknowledge how good RL was as a coach to get what he did as a team out of our side.

I think most acknowledge Lyons a good coach.

Equally I think many are now realising what he left behind....a shell of ageing stars and a huge gap of mid 20's before a tail end of kids with no experience.

I truly reckon Lyons a "now" coach - not a builder........he'll have his work cut out at Freo IMO.....their core list is not as good as St Kilda's in their prime 2009 and with Sandilands, Pavlich and McPharlin ageing......he's got some big KPP holes coming. I also hope they pay $1m for Cloke........not sure I'd put all my eggs in that basket, sure he's contested marking is great, but he's been in a premier side.....when things dont go their way he can also look very ordinary with no defensive pressure.

[plugger66]

Coaching is ok for a first year coach. He has made errors thats for sure but sometimes you have match ups because the other options are worse. Would be looking more at our star players who have clearly been effected by the GF losses and also some here need to acknowledge how good RL was as a coach to get what he did as a team out of our side.

I think most acknowledge Lyons a good coach.

Equally I think many are now realising what he left behind....a shell of ageing stars and a huge gap of mid 20's before a tail end of kids with no experience.

I truly reckon Lyons a "now" coach - not a builder........he'll have his work cut out at Freo IMO.....their core list is not as good as St Kilda's in their prime 2009 and with Sandilands, Pavlich and McPharlin ageing......he's got some big KPP holes coming. I also hope they pay $1m for Cloke........not sure I'd put all my eggs in that basket, sure he's contested marking is great, but he's been in a premier side.....when things dont go their way he can also look very ordinary with no defensive pressure.

No doubt RL is a now coach and said it 4 years ago on here and was roundly abused as negative but given our history and how close he went I think it was worth the punt. Anyway I still argue that apart from the Lovett pick we lost bugger all picks because of trades. And yes he didnt give many young guys a go but really there isnt and wasnt a great deal of class to work with.

[saintsRrising]

Equally I think many are now realising what he left behind....a shell of ageing stars and a huge gap of mid 20's before a tail end of kids with no experience.

I.

Ok..this line gets trotted out by many.

Can you make a list of the young players that he did not develop?

Personally I reckon that our recruiting department (for whatever reason) was diabolical for the last several years of GT's reign and all bar the last draft period of Lyon's.

Also IMO our trading was the only thing in Lyon's ere that allowed the list to improve.

Our last two draft periods for kids look ok, but there is a black hole of many years that we are now paying the price for.

Now if Lyon (and GT who was an active trader too) had traded less there may have been a few more kids taken....but IMO that would have just resulted in our recruiters having secured even more averag-ish to dud players.

I truly reckon Lyons a "now" coach - not a builder.........

Indeed he is a "now"...but why would he not be?

In both cases now..Saints and Freo he has inherited lists not quite good enough for a to be playing GF's.

But in both cases they still need some "renovating" and improvement to get them intoa GF.
He did it with the saints. Remains to be seen if he can imprive Frep enough to get there.

[Teflon]

Equally I think many are now realising what he left behind....a shell of ageing stars and a huge gap of mid 20's before a tail end of kids with no experience.

I.

Ok..this line gets trotted out by many.

Can you make a list of the young players that he did not develop?

Personally I reckon that our recruiting department (for whatever reason) was diabolical for the last several years of GT's reign and all bar the last draft period of Lyon's.

Also IMO our trading was the only thing in Lyon's ere that allowed the list to improve.

Our last two draft periods for kids look ok, but there is a black hole of many years that we are now paying the price for.

Now if Lyon (and GT who was an active trader too) had traded less there may have been a few more kids taken....but IMO that would have just resulted in our recruiters having secured even more averag-ish to dud players.

I truly reckon Lyons a "now" coach - not a builder.........

Indeed he is a "now"...but why would he not be?

In both cases now..Saints and Freo he has inherited lists not quite good enough for a to be playing GF's.

But in both cases they still need some "renovating" and improvement to get them intoa GF.
He did it with the saints. Remains to be seen if he can imprive Frep enough to get there.

Woulnt it be quicker for you to give me a list of the ready made starting 22 players recruited under Lyons regime that he did develop into AFL weekly players playing for us now??

Let me guess...Stanley? nup, Armitage ? nup, Johnson? Archer?

Where is this bountiful youth under Lyon you are clearly attempting (poorly) to debunk this myth with??

Sometimes we over analyse this game - if it walks like a duck........

Ross Lyon aint a developing coach -you dont need a statistical graph to highlight that for you..or maybe you do???

Oh and do show me the "renovated" saints players Lyon bought in to win us GF's.....how many still runing around that will and can contribute for our future????

Polo?
Eddy?
Mqualter?
Ray?
Gardiner?
King?
Gamble?

Maybe the "Lyon aint a developer" gets trotted out - cause its true????? theres a novel thought...

[Con Gorozidis]

We lost a game we were expected to lose.

Against the early Premiership favourites who had been fired up all week, both privately and publicly, after a shock loss last week.

And after losing our one genuine ruckman prior to the game.

And after losing our best defender, from an already undersized backline, at half time.

Yet despite all this, some posters are able to critically analyze the coach's match day performance and conclude its sub standard. 

Sensational stuff!

i have plemty of time for scotty and know he will improve.
and while we were expected to lose until i really watched them last night i hadnt realised how bad the hawks really are this year. They are way over rated by the media. They were ripe for the picking and there for the taking. Ok buddy cyril and hodgey are good with a few hard midfielders. but outside that they are full of mediocrity and have a midget defence.
ill say it now. hawks NO chance for top 4.

[plugger66]

We lost a game we were expected to lose.

Against the early Premiership favourites who had been fired up all week, both privately and publicly, after a shock loss last week.

And after losing our one genuine ruckman prior to the game.

And after losing our best defender, from an already undersized backline, at half time.

Yet despite all this, some posters are able to critically analyze the coach's match day performance and conclude its sub standard. 

Sensational stuff!

i have plemty of time for scotty and know he will improve.
and while we were expected to lose until i really watched them last night i hadnt realised how bad the hawks really are this year. They are way over rated by the media. They were ripe for the picking and there for the taking. Ok buddy cyril and hodgey are good with a few hard midfielders. but outside that they are full of mediocrity and have a midget defence.
ill say it now. hawks NO chance for top 4.

So we must be a bottom 6- 8 side. Lost to freo at home and Port who are terrible as well as the Hawks who in your opinion are overated. Well I actually thought we played well last night but were beaten by a good side. Well I certainly hope so or it is going to be a long 5-7 years.

[MrCordz]

I've attended the Freo and Hawks games this year and find our spread and positioning on the field is much weaker - I watch the whole ground when I watch the footy and see that we get to drawn to the ball - under RL we always had the extra men wide of the play to assist in the switch. No we are getting caught out by the opposition doing exactly that. It is all about a disciplined structure these days. I think our endeavour and quality across the ground in terms of personnel is good enough but we are getting caught out of position too often. The Hawks wore us out I feel as they ran and spread harder than us in the first 3 quarters and we ran ourselves into the ground trying to keep up. Lenny looked tired and gave the ball up often through tired and ill-thought disposal. The hard runners are what we need. Gut running is still King in my opinion. You need 10 to 12 gut running midfielders like WCE and Sydney.

[Con Gorozidis]

So we must be a bottom 6- 8 side. Lost to freo at home and Port who are terrible as well as the Hawks who in your opinion are overated. Well I actually thought we played well last night but were beaten by a good side. Well I certainly hope so or it is going to be a long 5-7 years.

Hawks didnt impress me at all. I think people are taking some false comfort from losing to them n a close one.
I think they are a 6-8 side. So yeah we have some issues. Not insurmountable though. Our only real weakness is we are one tall backman down. But we all knew that in the pre-season.
But reckon we will battle to make top 8 this year..

[Richter]

Equally I think many are now realising what he left behind....a shell of ageing stars and a huge gap of mid 20's before a tail end of kids with no experience.

I.

Ok..this line gets trotted out by many.

Can you make a list of the young players that he did not develop?

Personally I reckon that our recruiting department (for whatever reason) was diabolical for the last several years of GT's reign and all bar the last draft period of Lyon's.

Also IMO our trading was the only thing in Lyon's ere that allowed the list to improve.

Our last two draft periods for kids look ok, but there is a black hole of many years that we are now paying the price for.

Now if Lyon (and GT who was an active trader too) had traded less there may have been a few more kids taken....but IMO that would have just resulted in our recruiters having secured even more averag-ish to dud players.

I truly reckon Lyons a "now" coach - not a builder.........

Indeed he is a "now"...but why would he not be?

In both cases now..Saints and Freo he has inherited lists not quite good enough for a to be playing GF's.

But in both cases they still need some "renovating" and improvement to get them intoa GF.
He did it with the saints. Remains to be seen if he can imprive Frep enough to get there.

If you look at the 2010 grand final teams on both sides that is intsructive as to what type of coach each man (Lyon and Malthouse) were.
Not at the stars (BJ, Lenny, Roo et al. for us; Swan, Pendlebury, Shaw, Cloke for them) but the lower lights...

Saints - Eddy, Ray, Peake, Schneider, Jones, Dempster, Gardiner, McQualter
Pies - Toovey, Wellingham, Ball, Sidebottom, Beams, Blair, MacAffer, Jolly, Brown, Dawes

There's a spread of decent recycled talent throughout both of those lists, but the difference is that our other GOPs were role players with generally average to poor skills, while the pies were young up and comers with reasonable skills - most of them taken down the picking order within the previous 3 or 4 drafts eg Toovey (rookie); Wellingham (rookie); Sidebottom (pick 11); Beams (pick 29); Blair (rookie); MacAffer (rookie); Dawes (pick 28)

Conclusion - Lyon went for mostly recycled stars but virtually no young up and comers were either picked or developed over that time, whilst Malthouse did both. No doubt that the pies got lucky with so many of their lesser lights coming on, but nevertheless nearly all of them are still on their list, whilst half of ours are now gone.

[Scollop]

I like the way we are playing under Scotty and I like the gameplan. By and large, I like the team selections.

Very good points Richter makes and i'd just like to add that it also comes down to footy philosophy. Do you want to top up your team with talented, natural footy players that you can mould and develop and give a turbo boost to their confidence by playing them early in their career, or do you want seasoned hard bodied mature footballers that are fit and can play a mainly negating run with role and help contain the opposition?? Under Lyon the balance was too heavily skewed towards containment, rather than attacking the goals.

Lyons focus was always on defense and other teams knew what to expect. Lyon wanted to contain the other team rather than back his players to beat the opposition in the traditional footy sense. Play the ball, win the footy, break the lines and balance the defensive side with players that just love to kick goals. Half a dozen of those guys you mentioned from the Pies GF line-up are prolific GOAL kickers. Isn't that what all footy players do so naturally - try and kick goals and dream of one day kicking a matchwinner in a final? Out of all the players Lyon bought in, the only guy that came close to a true goalsneak was Schneids. That's 6 vs 1. Scoreboard pressure is the best form of pressure. Lyons game plan had us behind on the scoreboard more often than not in finals, and we seemed to be trying to kick goals to chase teams rather than having an attacking mindset and utilising 2 of the AFL's most dangerous forwards in Kosi and Roo. The team balance was too heavily weighted aroound supporting the defenders rather than crumbing to the forwards. Under Lyon, Kosi would be sprinting to the bench or sprinting to help the defenders, more times in a match than actually sprinting on a lead in the forward 50. He'd contest 2 marks a match within the forward 5o rather than 2 times a quarter. Milney and Roo seemed to be the only forwards, and one would lead left and the other right. Why was Milne used as a leading forward when he's a midget? Most of the time the forward line was non existent and there'd be no-one to kick to when we won the footy at half back or in the centre.

We could not generate goals through forward crumbers who could win their own footy and yet in 2009 ( call me a fool or whatever - I probably need to read AFL for dummies ) but I saw a kid debut in a match down in Tassie and I was licking my chops waiting to see him play in finals...In 2009 apparently he wasn't ready. In 2010, apparently he was unfit or injured...Jack Steven finally played a final in 2011. If Lyons footy philosophy was different he might have tried the kid earlier than the 2011 finals. I mean seriously - he played against in Tassie and played well so why not give him another go and bamboozle the opposition with something they're not expecting. Rhys was on our list in 2010. I would have liked to have seen him get a game in the perfect sunshine and on a fast track MCG surface in finals 2010 or what about the Magpies defense seeing a 200cm forward pocket. That's where Lyon had no surprises when it came to preparing to win a match and to go the offensive - Like Goldsack going forward or Blair playing instead of Lockyer or Medhurst. Armo and Geary also deserved to play finals when they absolutely earnt the right and had the contested gamestyle required for finals. They both could have been given a game or two in the fianls series of 2010 but were ignored. Oh yes but....Lyon supporters will always come up with excuses and say that 'they weren't ready'. Bu11dust!! Armo, Geary, Steven, Stanley, and maybe Miles, Lynch, Walsh and others would have developed faster and been given a huge confidence boost under a better coach.

[Moorabbin Saints]

Effort is there 100%. You could see our boys busting their guts in the contest (apart from the softy Gram!).

We just don't have the skills at the moment to match it with a side like Hawthorn. Turnovers cost us, and teams with quick players will slice through us on the rebound.

Forward line looks a hell of a lot more functional with quick ball movement, Stanley and Milera have looked dangerous at times. Still need to find the best way to use Roo however. Milne looks a yard slower than previously and is struggling. May be his last season.

Midfield is okay but we need more output from Goddard, Dal Santo and Montagna consistently - we can't afford to have 1 or 2 of these taken completely out of the game each week. Steven and Armo have been positive so far. We are also missing a ruckmen, someone in the Brogan or Hudson mould who are playing as a backup would have been good for times when Big Mac go down.

Backline is the worry. Clearly we are one key defender short, I've admired how hard Tommy Simpkin is trying but he's still a kid. The fact we were forced to play Dempster on Buddy shows our deficiencies there. Fisher going down hurts. Geary has been very solid on smaller forwards. Would like the defense to tighten up a bit - but it's certainly not all their fault when we allow other teams to rebound us quickly and expose our backline.

Overall, I think we are where most expected us to be. We're in a transition phase, and over the next few years we need to keep giving these youngsters games, while the older core mentor them. I can see us as a danger to the top sides, it'd be like us to lose to Richmond but give Carlton/Sydney a run for their money. We don't have the cattle anymore to be a top side and we need to accept that. Hawthorns class compared to ours was the major difference last night.

[saintsRrising]

If you look at the 2010 grand final teams on both sides that is intsructive as to what type of coach each man (Lyon and Malthouse) were.
Not at the stars (BJ, Lenny, Roo et al. for us; Swan, Pendlebury, Shaw, Cloke for them) but the lower lights...

Saints - Eddy, Ray, Peake, Schneider, Jones, Dempster, Gardiner, McQualter
Pies - Toovey, Wellingham, Ball, Sidebottom, Beams, Blair, MacAffer, Jolly, Brown, Dawes

There's a spread of decent recycled talent throughout both of those lists, but the difference is that our other GOPs were role players with generally average to poor skills, while the pies were young up and comers with reasonable skills - most of them taken down the picking order within the previous 3 or 4 drafts eg Toovey (rookie); Wellingham (rookie); Sidebottom (pick 11); Beams (pick 29); Blair (rookie); MacAffer (rookie); Dawes (pick 28)

Conclusion - Lyon went for mostly recycled stars but virtually no young up and comers were either picked or developed over that time, whilst Malthouse did both. No doubt that the pies got lucky with so many of their lesser lights coming on, but nevertheless nearly all of them are still on their list, whilst half of ours are now gone.

I do not think you read my post. Who were the young and good talent that Lyon did not develop? IMO the cupboard was bare. Who were these young potential guns that were never developed? (and Steven had a groin injury in 2010)

With the Pies they got their recruiting right after being poor...both kids and trades and this allowed them to build their Premiership Team.

Malthouse got good young talent to develop. Lyon did not (and indeed GT did not in his latter years).

If you think otherwise please list all the young talent that never made it into the seniors.

With you Pie examples you actaully support my case:
most of them taken down the picking order within the previous 3 or 4 drafts eg Toovey (rookie); Wellingham (rookie); Sidebottom (pick 11); Beams (pick 29); Blair (rookie); MacAffer (rookie); Dawes (pick 28)


You cannot make a silk purse out a sows ear. Howard and co...were not poor due to bad coaching...they were just not good selections.

The very very few that consistently showed promise are the ones now coming on... Steven, Stanley, Simpkin, Geary.....with the early draft picks of Ben and Armo.

Why does St Kilda have so very very many players with poor footskills = years of BAD recruiting.

How many good kicks have we recuited. The cupboard is amazingly bare. BJ an obvious pick = no decision tere. Dal..a great pick -up, Gwilt...a smokie that has paid off...Ball pre-injury....but after them?

Is this bad coaching? No it was a recruiting department that did not value such skills sufficiently enough with the result that we often picked up players that other clubs passed up. Now..YES some of them would have been fine...but we consistently recruited too many.

If there was one key factor that cost us the game against the Hawks it was too many players with poor skills.

[SainterK]

Dunno.

Have to look at the draft lists, which picks were used and on who, which were given up for trades.

Fact is though, I reckon he came in with this plan of recruiting journeyman, and the board ticked it off.

[Richter]

sRs with respect it's a circular argument... the young players were not developed so they did not turn out to be guns... but perhaps if guys like Johnson, Cahill, Heyne, Walsh, Lynch had been properly developed then 1 or 2 of them might have turned out better. Are you telling me that the pies players like the ones I named above were all flukes? One or two maybe, but not that many... it is the very absence of young developed players... the gap in our list... that damns Lyon's philosophy towards future planning... it isn't just down to us having had a crappy recruiting department...

Scotty has been in the joint 5 minutes and look at the development structure that is now in place. Of course it is not all his doing but the Saints management's too... however most of the personnel have been recruited because of a connection with Watters... Jamie Graham, Maxy Hudghton, Simon McPhee. It pretty obvious that developing young players is not about having just one guy at the top putting his arm around the kids... maybe that worked in the old days with the likes os Sheedy... but these days the guy at the top has to promote a whole culture of nurturing...Scotty is saying and doing all the right things from this point of view, which is not just about having a better footy department, it's also about encouraging the senior players to be mentors to the younger guys, which Watters bangs on about just about every time he does an interview... I'll bet he's the same behind closed doors at the club...

I would wager that Scotty laid out a plan to develop youth throughout the club at his interview... and that was music to the Saints' management's ears... after Mr 'my office door is closed' Lyon's tenure.

[saintsRrising]

Dunno.

Have to look at the draft lists, which picks were used and on who, which were given up for trades.

Fact is though, I reckon he came in with this plan of recruiting journeyman, and the board ticked it off.

The "kids" taken in the National Draft under Lyon and in the years prior to him arriving.

2010: Cripps, Crocker, Ledger, Siposs (new recruiting team )

2009 Winmar
2008 Lynch Stanley Heyne Alistair Smith Cahill
2007 Ben Steven Eljay Connors
2006 Armo Howard Allen (injured)
2005 Gilbert Raymond Sweeney
2004 McQualter Gwilt

So if you were the coach faced with such such stellar drafting of kids and had come from a club that had had done well with recycled players which way would you go

IMO relative to where players were taken it was an under-perfrom....and IMO it was not due to the coaches.

The players from that list, who had talent have been given a fare crack to make it.

Lyon kept persevering with Gwilt till he settled in the backline.
Club insiders will tell you that in the pre-season prior to last year that Stanley would be groomed as key forward, but then had the season from hell.

Now if Lyon (and GT) had never traded we would have had moe kids, but IMO the pattern would have been the same...mainly duds.

[saintsRrising]

Are you telling me that the pies players like the ones I named above were all flukes? One or two maybe, but not that many....

No..not flukes at all...and where did I imply that?

I thought I wrote that the Pies got their recruiting house in order.
They went out and poached the right guy.

Now YES they developed as well. But IMO our drafting of kids was for many seasons very poor.

it is the very absence of young developed players... the gap in our list... that damns Lyon's philosophy towards future planning... it isn't just down to us having had a crappy recruiting department...

.

Well we will have to disagree there. IMO if you look at the drafting of kids under both Lyon (apart from the last one) and under GT post Fisher draft our recruiting of kids was very poor and this is the main reason for the "gap" in our list.

[saintsRrising]

Anyway back on coaching.

Off field recruiting and player development have both been beefed up ...

Our last two drafts look ok from a perspective of the players as a whole, and for value relative to where they were taken.

Bringing in Pelchen last season has been a clear part of a more strategic acquisition of players...both kids and trades.

Watters like any new coach is learning on the job.

AFL keeps evolving and Watters gameplan looks well suited to the current era, but no so suited to number of poor kicks we have in the team.. Cattlewise we are proan to turnovers which get punished as never before. We have some skilled kids..but they are not yet AFL ready. So a real Catch 22 here. Best of this years recruits is the mature Milera. Will get better.

Match-coaching Watters has been variable. Lyon clearly out -coached him...as did Clarkson, though Watters helped Clarkson with a few more moves. I felt sorry for Sipos....who after playing well last week on wing-ish from initially started as a marking target...and with Kosi, Roo and Stanley up forward that was always going to be a graveyard shift fora kid.

Watters is taking a long term view and has given goes to a goodly number of emerging players.

Overall he is going ok for a new coach. He will keep sifting players and tweaking the gameplan. I am expecting a better 2013 than 2012 though. I do expect us to improve over the season.