Coach Men's Senior Coach: Brad Scott

[HirdsTheWord]

Okay, hypothetical for you.

We drop Weid for Baldwin this week.

Baldwin plays CHF and really struggles. I won't say worse than what Weid has been doing, but as bad as.

Meanwhile, we send Weideman back to the VFL, and play him solely in defense, where he played the last quarter last week. And he dominates. Like, 3x BOGs, looks really comfortable etc...

4 straight games of Baldwin being awful, the fans are demanding a change.

Are you bringing Weideman back in to play CHF in that situation?

(This might seem like a random and pointless hypothetical for you, but what I've described above is literally what you're pretty much suggesting should happen, just in reverse. Guy in the AFL, poor form, "anyone else" calls. Guy not playing the same position but in the VFL, in good form doing something else, bring him in).

In that hypothetical id argue dropping weed does the exact thing we want it to? gives him the confidence he needs?

Though i dont know why we'd drop weed and put him in defence.

Weed is not doing anything at AFL level, and it's not getting any better. time to change the magnets up.

Not saying my idea is the only solution. but weed needs to be dropped. It is untenable what he is delivering and its not like 17 games is a small sample size.

 

[Keystone agony]

I dont think 'structure' really has anything to do with Voss or Weideman being picked

Id expect the club to go with the 2 rucks again this week as Bryan was solid enough

Then a loss to the dogs and i think we could see a Voss make a debut as the 2nd KPF the following week (If Baldwin doesnt go fwd in VFL this week and Weid if dropped doesnt absolutely tear the VFL apart)

Baldwin needs to be playing KPF in the VFL been saying it for several weeks now

We have options of Cox, Reid, Montgomerie, smaller down back in AFL if need be

 

[cAsEy_18]

In that hypothetical id argue dropping weed does the exact thing we want it to? gives him the confidence he needs?

Though i dont know why we'd drop weed and put him in defence.

Weed is not doing anything at AFL level, and it's not getting any better. time to change the magnets up.

Not saying my idea is the only solution. but weed needs to be dropped. It is untenable what he is delivering and its not like 17 games is a small sample size.

Yes, I think a lot of people (ant555 included) are actually agreeing with you in saying that it's got to the point where Weid probably needs to be dropped.

The part we're disagreeing with is the "Anyone else" approach. There genuinely are a limited number of options available to replace him - and that is a list issue more than a coach issue.

Scott is pleading for consistency - not necessarily in the playing group, but in the structure he wants to play. If Hunter wasn't injured, I daresay we might've seen a change a few weeks earlier.

But Scott wants that 2nd key forward playing. Its a structure that has worked, it's a structure that has the players buying in - to drop Weid for someone smaller (eg: Voss, or an even smaller guy) would change that structure. Hey, maybe that will genuinely work better, but when you're trying to establish a structure in your 1st season, you don't make radical changes to it. That could be a next year job.

For the record, I think Weideman will come out for Phillips this week.

 

[Lore]

View attachment 1744943

this is gonna be my favourite meme I reckon

 

[faible]

Yes, I think a lot of people (ant555 included) are actually agreeing with you in saying that it's got to the point where Weid probably needs to be dropped.

The part we're disagreeing with is the "Anyone else" approach. There genuinely are a limited number of options available to replace him - and that is a list issue more than a coach issue.

Scott is pleading for consistency - not necessarily in the playing group, but in the structure he wants to play. If Hunter wasn't injured, I daresay we might've seen a change a few weeks earlier.

But Scott wants that 2nd key forward playing. Its a structure that has worked, it's a structure that has the players buying in - to drop Weid for someone smaller (eg: Voss, or an even smaller guy) would change that structure. Hey, maybe that will genuinely work better, but when you're trying to establish a structure in your 1st season, you don't make radical changes to it. That could be a next year job.

For the record, I think Weideman will come out for Phillips this week.

Players that are in the realm of ruck height on our list;

200cm or above:

• Draper
• Bryan
• Wright
• Reid
• Phillips
• Cox

195cm - 199cm:

• Stewart
• Hayes
• McBride
• Weideman
• Hunter
• Jones
• Zerk-Thatcher
• Ridley

194cm: Patrick Voss

So with a 1 ruckman, 1 KPF, 1 'other player capable of playing ruck and KPF' structure that means you need 3 of the above group.

Wright is the preferred option as the full-time KPF, Bryan or Phillips as the ruck, then 1 of the other group, of which Hayes, Zerk-Thatcher and Ridley are genuine KPD's not forwards.

Leaving us a just returning from injury Cox, McBride who hasn't been playing forward, Weideman who is horribly out of form, an undersized and (AFAIK) not ruckman Patrick Voss who also hasn't been lighting up the VFL in that role, or the ruckman who's not playing in the ruck.

Were Jones, Hunter, Draper and Stewart available I suspect Weideman would have been dropped weeks ago.

 

[Maxabillions]

I feel like at least part of the reason Brad hasn’t dropped Weed is because his confidence was affected by being dropped a lot at the Dees and not being able to string a lot of games together. Surely at this point though his confidence is being shattered through continually under performing and now needs to play 2s for a bit for his own sake.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Yes, I think a lot of people (ant555 included) are actually agreeing with you in saying that it's got to the point where Weid probably needs to be dropped.

The part we're disagreeing with is the "Anyone else" approach. There genuinely are a limited number of options available to replace him - and that is a list issue more than a coach issue.

Scott is pleading for consistency - not necessarily in the playing group, but in the structure he wants to play. If Hunter wasn't injured, I daresay we might've seen a change a few weeks earlier.

But Scott wants that 2nd key forward playing. Its a structure that has worked, it's a structure that has the players buying in - to drop Weid for someone smaller (eg: Voss, or an even smaller guy) would change that structure. Hey, maybe that will genuinely work better, but when you're trying to establish a structure in your 1st season, you don't make radical changes to it. That could be a next year job.

For the record, I think Weideman will come out for Phillips this week.

i didn't mean "anyone" i wouldn't put bloody Tippa at CHF.

I'm simply saying Weed has done enough to show he isn't up for it, and he needs time back in reserves.

Voss and Baldwin are more than capable giving it a crack at that position. Both can crash a pack.

I see zero point in Weed have an 11th consecutive shocker and putting more pressure on him.

 

[Beerfish]

this is gonna be my favourite meme I reckon

There'll definitely be plenty of opportunities to use it.


Sadly.

 

[frodos gardener]

And some not at all

me irl

 

[yodellinhank]

me irl

Some would have you picked ahead of Weideman, so there's that...

 

[ant555]

i didn't mean "anyone" i wouldn't put bloody Tippa at CHF.

I'm simply saying Weed has done enough to show he isn't up for it, and he needs time back in reserves.

Voss and Baldwin are more than capable giving it a crack at that position. Both can crash a pack.

I see zero point in Weed have an 11th consecutive shocker and putting more pressure on him.

If either of them where more than capable then Scott would have played them.

It is not really about the player. It is about compromising the system they want to build by picking a player that can not fill the role.

I suspect they may try Cox now he has played 5 or so games back and played CHF last week. He is one who can get up and back and provide the KM that they want. They may also go with two rucks and use Langford at CHF as he also has the engine. This option becomes available because Bryan has reached a stage where they may be able to trust him in the ruck more.

This is not under 14 or division 3 seconds where you let anyone have a crack.
They are in the first year of building a sustainable game plan so you do not change the system and throw players into the mix who have not been able to play the role in the VFL , Voss , or in Baldwins case has been moved to another position because they could see the limitations he had as a forward his size.

I know Weideman has offered nothing much on a personal level but he still pushes up and down and engages a defender. He has also held his spot because they have had concerns with Bryan at AFL level so he has filled in as the second ruck. I doubt he would still be in the side if certain players had not been injured. I am not backing Weideman . I do not see him as the long term. I have watched Voss closely live and he does not have the work rate across the game. If he did he would be playing. Maybe he does better but they have to change what they want to build going forward to play him in that role. You have to remember we are basically in grade 1 when it comes to the Scott era.

It is about the long term and not short term .

 

[frodos gardener]

I see where ant is coming from. The one thing (I take at face value as fact) Weids is doing right is the running and to the required places. We know he’s not doing anything else right at the moment, but if the running means it sets up the forward line unit through separation or particular placement then it is tangibly something he can do that (again, I assume) alternatives in the VFL can’t do. If Voss comes in and doesn’t do the running then it messes with the setup of the other forwards. It also changes the particular matchups and means Wright is more likely to cop 2-on-1s with the second tall defender coming in to crash him and/or provide cover.

I’m not saying I like it, or agree with Sam’s continued selection, but I can understand the thinking.

 

[ant555]

And as I mentioned Cox is in and they are going with two rucks with Weideman out. Keeping the same style structure.

 

[Lore]

I feel like at least part of the reason Brad hasn’t dropped Weed is because his confidence was affected by being dropped a lot at the Dees and not being able to string a lot of games together. Surely at this point though his confidence is being shattered through continually under performing and now needs to play 2s for a bit for his own sake.

A bit of that perhaps, for a while.

The thing that is really shredding his confidence now is probably a consequence of the role itself. I'm not convinced we have anyone on the list that is capable of getting up and down the ground AND slotting goals from probably 55, since that's apparently the closest they get to goal with the ball in their hands. I'm not convinced actually that there's anyone we could recruit that could fulfil the role as currently constituted.

If the point is just to raise his confidence then continuing to play him in a role that is smashing his confidence is counter-productive.

 

[ghostdog]

So Scott made the declaration before the season started that he would use this season to observe the players and to get to know the list.

I'm interested to know what people think he has learned about various players this year, as well as maybe what people think he hasn't.

I'll start with being thankful that he has realised that Weideman, at the moment, ain't the guy. He's depth.

So, captain obvious; I think he'd be stoked with Langford and it appears Langers is revelling in the way he's being coached. Certainly, he has learned that Langford is a forward. He'd have to be happy with what Zach has shown and that he loves responsibility and can will himself to another level in-game.

I'd like to know what he really thinks of Parish, Shiel, Laverde... Baldwin.

 

[ant555]

Baldwin will not be a forward and Voss can not play LP would be two things he has learned.

 

[Kong]

He's clearly trying to find the right players and mix for small forwards.

Early season, Guelfi and Snelling were both stiff with selection, and now it appears Menzie is. Add in the rotation/rest approach he has with Davey and Walla, too.

He has plenty of options, so it makes sense to experiment.

 

[Petrify]

He quickly learned that Hobbs is a gun. Made him prove he was worth the spot in the VFL. Started him as the sub in round 6. Been on starting 22 ever since.

 

[Pweter]

He's certainly not in a rush with the young guys this season which is fine imo. Many have been injured and others aren't ready. Those that are ready like Hobbs, Menzie and Perkins have been playing and now Cox is back in the mix, the next age bracket up is also locked in or played when available with players like Caldwell, Durham, Jones and Martin.

We've had glimpses of what Davey will be, sounds like Wanganeen is showing consistent form so will be interesting to see if he gets a nod later in the year. I'd let Tsatas keep building in the reserves, he finds the pill and is working hard but he'll need to tidy his disposal before getting a call up imo.

It'll be interesting to see what Scott does with Shiel as he was playing a mid/forward role and starting to go quite well at it before he got injured. While I think Scott likes him, he recognises the sub mistake by not gifting him a full game in the seniors and is going to need to earn his spot. Fair enough with the output of Hobbs and Caldwell in his absence.

Moving McGrath back and keeping Langford forward (except when his hand was forced with injury) have been big wins. Baldwin back looks another win, it'll be interesting to see how he goes with another recall as a defender.

I don't think Scott's got the mix too wrong to be honest, it'd be interesting to have this conversation if we had our full compliment of talls available, or close to full.

 

[cAsEy_18]

Amongst many that have already been listed (Langford a forward, Hobbs better than expected, Baldwin a defender), I think he might be coming to the thought on the midfield mix that Merrett might be the one best used elsewhere, be it forward or defense.

More in that he might be more flexible than some other guys to do that (eg: Parish), and that his kicking is valuable in all areas of the ground.

 

[yodellinhank]

Baldwin will not be a forward and Voss can not play LP would be two things he has learned.

He pretty much moved Baldwin straight back and he hasn't been played forward?

 

[jdstorm]

Things I think Scott has learned

-Zac Merrett is amazing and a great captain. His kicking means while he’s the best suited to be moved out of the midfield it’s essential that he stays there

-Ridley is the 2nd most reliable player and to get him involved as much as possible.

-McGrath is a back pocket and needs to work on his disposal

-Langford is a gun 3rd tall

-Martin/Durham is a good wing combination

- talls are lacking all over the ground and provide little contest at wing pack marking situations. Ridley up to HB has helped that.

-The list has close to 30 AFL players on it, so needs a few more to have the same depth as the really good teams

-Hobbs is another Mr Reliable.

- too many small players makes list balance hard.

- needs to play 3 SFs alongside Stringer and Langford to have enough pressure to keep the ball in the front half.

-Perkins can play a role as a run with midfielder which helps lack of size.

Hopefully - Small mids playing forward aren’t as good as actual SFs and should just go to the VFL

 

[I Remember Bluey]

this is gonna be my favourite meme I reckon

 

[dank420_]

So now you guys are all about the learnings...

 

[ghostdog]

Baldwin will not be a forward and Voss can not play LP would be two things he has learned.

LP?

He's certainly not in a rush with the young guys this season which is fine imo. Many have been injured and others aren't ready. Those that are ready like Hobbs, Menzie and Perkins have been playing and now Cox is back in the mix, the next age bracket up is also locked in or played when available with players like Caldwell, Durham, Jones and Martin.

We've had glimpses of what Davey will be, sounds like Wanganeen is showing consistent form so will be interesting to see if he gets a nod later in the year. I'd let Tsatas keep building in the reserves, he finds the pill and is working hard but he'll need to tidy his disposal before getting a call up imo.

It'll be interesting to see what Scott does with Shiel as he was playing a mid/forward role and starting to go quite well at it before he got injured. While I think Scott likes him, he recognises the sub mistake by not gifting him a full game in the seniors and is going to need to earn his spot. Fair enough with the output of Hobbs and Caldwell in his absence.

Moving McGrath back and keeping Langford forward (except when his hand was forced with injury) have been big wins. Baldwin back looks another win, it'll be interesting to see how he goes with another recall as a defender.

I don't think Scott's got the mix too wrong to be honest, it'd be interesting to have this conversation if we had our full compliment of talls available, or close to full.

Yeah I like the concept of 'wins' as far as learning, and agree with McGrath and Langford being wins. Baldwin consistently playing back is a kind of win, but I don't think there's a full understanding of his capacity unless he gets consistent time in the seniors.
Other wins as far as learning about the players, I think include;
Laverde
BZT
Ridley
Martin
Hobbs
Phillips
Bryan
Caldwell (but I think there's still more to be known about Caldwell in terms of his capacity to go to another level)
Langford
Menzie
Merrett
Heppell
Weideman
Parish (...I think he realised that Parish can flourish alongside Setterfield)
Setterfield on-ball, not on a wing.
Tsatas
ADJ
Munkara

I'm not sure we / Scott has necessarily learned anything new about;
Hind
Redman (only because he has been ultra consistent for a couple of years now)
Draper
Durham
Shiel
Stringer
Perkins
Jones
Snell
Guelfi
AMT
Wright

I think we're learning about Perkins by him starting at CBs, but how the second list (and some of the first list, like Weideman) is challenged over preseason will be interesting.

Amongst many that have already been listed (Langford a forward, Hobbs better than expected, Baldwin a defender), I think he might be coming to the thought on the midfield mix that Merrett might be the one best used elsewhere, be it forward or defense.

More in that he might be more flexible than some other guys to do that (eg: Parish), and that his kicking is valuable in all areas of the ground.

Yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about the idea that for Parish to be at his most effective, he needs Setterfield there. I know Setters gives Zach space as well, but as you pointed out, he's not one-dimensional like Parish... well, he seems one dimensional to me anyway.

Things I think Scott has learned

-Zac Merrett is amazing and a great captain. His kicking means while he’s the best suited to be moved out of the midfield it’s essential that he stays there

-Ridley is the 2nd most reliable player and to get him involved as much as possible.

-McGrath is a back pocket and needs to work on his disposal

-Langford is a gun 3rd tall

-Martin/Durham is a good wing combination

- talls are lacking all over the ground and provide little contest at wing pack marking situations. Ridley up to HB has helped that.

-The list has close to 30 AFL players on it, so needs a few more to have the same depth as the really good teams

-Hobbs is another Mr Reliable.

- too many small players makes list balance hard.

- needs to play 3 SFs alongside Stringer and Langford to have enough pressure to keep the ball in the front half.

-Perkins can play a role as a run with midfielder which helps lack of size.

Hopefully - Small mids playing forward aren’t as good as actual SFs and should just go to the VFL

There's heaps here I hadn't considered.
Durham individually I wasn't sold on having demonstrated much more than last year, except that his tank seems to have improved, but his wing pairing with Martin has proven to be really productive, especially when you consider that Martin likes to push forward more. I'd like to see Duz hold more of his marks.

Also agree, the lack of marking talls around the ground is stark. A tall marking key back will hopefully allow Ridley to push up and do more of that, as well as Laverde / BZT. Not sure what happens there though.