How long...

[gringo]

...since we have gone into a game with every single decision prior to or during the game made with the sole aim of winning the game? I would argue at least five years. I'm sick of developing players, refining game plans etc. I want a return to the days where you could attend a game of football knowing that every single decision made in relation to the game was to assist the EFC in winning that game. You can tolerate it for a couple of seasons but it's simply gone too far at Essendon. A loss doesn't hurt the club enough.

Discuss.

[Gimps]

Agreed.

We just keep f****** around. Get out there, and do everything possible to win the game. If someone isn't up to it, let them develop in the reserves.

[little_ripper]

...since we have gone into a game with every single decision prior to or during the game made with the sole aim of winning the game? I would argue at least five years. I'm sick of developing players, refining game plans etc. I want a return to the days where you could attend a game of football knowing that every single decision made in relation to the game was to assist the EFC in winning that game. You can tolerate it for a couple of seasons but it's simply gone too far at Essendon. A loss doesn't hurt the club enough.

Discuss.

I'm not sure if I get what your alluding too. What decisions recently regarding selection or game plan have not been about trying to win the game?

[gringo]

There's thousands of reasons. Not playing Reimers, never playing a loose man in defence, pushing Lloyd out at the end of last season, a reluctance to tag gun players, odd team selections (even in the final against Adelaide), an attack at all costs mentality...need I go on? It seems for the last 5 years or so we've always had one eye on tomorrow. It devalues each game we play in. I don't get anywhere near as excited watching Essendon play as I did ten years ago. Granted we were a far superior team then but I think the reason is that each game is played with a view to challenging for a flag in future years. I'm sick of it.

[Rover 7]

Absolutely right.
It seems to have crept in since the arrival of the biggest hoax at Essendon, the marvellously misnaned "Five Year Plan"{revised every year}.Everyone had one so we had to join the long list.
It's the biggest con everywhere.
It pushes modest targets abrogates immediate responsibility and usually comes with "plausible"reasons when the're not met.Or like last year, we scraped into the eight by fluke to meet one of the dodgy critea.
It's sad to see such consistantly modest achievements satisfy too many at Essendon.
David Evans Has been quoted as saying he can't any reason we the Club shouldn't be aiming for the finals every year.Just like he was brought up expecting to win.
He could start by changing thinking with the ritual burning of that Five Year Plan.

[Sismis]

You're right we should pull a premiership team out of..... thin air.

I think Knighter is on the right track, we are showing improvement in almost every area.

Considering you thought we were a bottom four team, surely we are achieving far above your expectstions?

[gringo]

We could still finish in the bottom four.

There is a fine balance between ensuring that each game is given the due respect it deserves whilst developing a list/gameplan that will deliver the club's next flag.

In my view, the balance is skewed too far in favour of the latter.

[Sismis]

I'd argue wins over 4 of the teams in the 8 would indicate we are giving winning a fair shake.

[gringo]

I'd argue wins over 4 of the teams in the 8 would indicate we are giving winning a fair shake.

Without disecting each of those four wins I fear your argument is a little simplistic Sismis.

[Sismis]

You are saying we are not focussing enough on winning, we are winning games against quality opposition. If we are able to do that while still focussing on getting game time into the likes of Gumby i think the balance is spot on.

It may have caused us to drop games like the Hawks, Port and Sydney but in the long term these experiences will make us stronger.

The return of Jetta and Davey for such a dramatic impact gives me confidence that Knighter has a good handle on how long to leave players in the 2s.

[rockhole]

To enter into a campaign to win a flag, a definite strategy is required. The watershed was the departure of Sheedy, who the club believed had run out of ideas and appeared to have no defined strategy other than to recycle players to try and maintain some degree of respectibility. Knights came in with a fresh approach, new ideas and a strategy which he no doubt sold to the board.

I share the frustration of all supporters in that, at times. we seem to be treading water, but Knight's plan is better than no plan.

If this means trying out everyone on the list, playing them all over the ground and copping defeat as part of improving, then so be it.

With no plan and just a view to play week to week for a win, we would snag the occasional victory, but most likely come adrift at the pointy end of the season if we were lucky to make the finals.

Knights and the board will live and die by the strategy they have put in place. I believe that we are on the right track although I admit it is a gut wrenching journey.

[swoodley]

You're right we should pull a premiership team out of..... thin air.

I think Knighter is on the right track, we are showing improvement in almost every area.

Considering you thought we were a bottom four team, surely we are achieving far above your expectstions?

Actually, Gringo stated quite clearly that we were a big chance for the spoon this year (copied to my sig at the time)

[little_ripper]

There's thousands of reasons. Not playing Reimers, never playing a loose man in defence, pushing Lloyd out at the end of last season, a reluctance to tag gun players, odd team selections (even in the final against Adelaide), an attack at all costs mentality...need I go on? It seems for the last 5 years or so we've always had one eye on tomorrow. It devalues each game we play in. I don't get anywhere near as excited watching Essendon play as I did ten years ago. Granted we were a far superior team then but I think the reason is that each game is played with a view to challenging for a flag in future years. I'm sick of it.

Er, they've played Reimers when hes been up and ready(and hes done reasonably well).
Lloyd wasn't pushed, in fact he was offered a 1 year contract and declined it.
We've tagged good players, last round it was Hodge. If anything we've played with one too many taggers in the side.
Heck aren't we number 1 in the comp for tackles?

Cast your mind back further than out last premiership side. I don't remember 94-98 being anything special.

This time round we have arguably some of the finest young key position talent coming through in Gumbleton, Hurley and Pears.

The club really faaaarked its drafting between 01 and 04/05 and it takes a while to replace 5 years of questionable decisions.

This is a very young side(experience and age), young teams are up and down.

[gringo]

There's thousands of reasons. Not playing Reimers, never playing a loose man in defence, pushing Lloyd out at the end of last season, a reluctance to tag gun players, odd team selections (even in the final against Adelaide), an attack at all costs mentality...need I go on? It seems for the last 5 years or so we've always had one eye on tomorrow. It devalues each game we play in. I don't get anywhere near as excited watching Essendon play as I did ten years ago. Granted we were a far superior team then but I think the reason is that each game is played with a view to challenging for a flag in future years. I'm sick of it.

Er, they've played Reimers when hes been up and ready(and hes done reasonably well).
Lloyd wasn't pushed, in fact he was offered a 1 year contract and declined it.
We've tagged good players, last round it was Hodge. If anything we've played with one too many taggers in the side.
Heck aren't we number 1 in the comp for tackles?

Cast your mind back further than out last premiership side. I don't remember 94-98 being anything special.

This time round we have arguably some of the finest young key position talent coming through in Gumbleton, Hurley and Pears.

The club really faaaarked its drafting between 01 and 04/05 and it takes a while to replace 5 years of questionable decisions.

This is a very young side(experience and age), young teams are up and down.

Reimers hasn't been played this year due to his inflated opinion of himself.

Lloyd left because he wasn't guaranteed a game at full forward every week, as he should have been.

We play taggers, but they don't seem to have a true tagging role on many occassions.

Tackling has nothing to do with this argument.

You lose your way completely following your tackling comment.

There's no doubt it's a question of balance. My view is we need to swing the balance further towards an emphasis on winning games.

[gringo]

To enter into a campaign to win a flag, a definite strategy is required. The watershed was the departure of Sheedy, who the club believed had run out of ideas and appeared to have no defined strategy other than to recycle players to try and maintain some degree of respectibility. Knights came in with a fresh approach, new ideas and a strategy which he no doubt sold to the board.

I share the frustration of all supporters in that, at times. we seem to be treading water, but Knight's plan is better than no plan.

If this means trying out everyone on the list, playing them all over the ground and copping defeat as part of improving, then so be it.

With no plan and just a view to play week to week for a win, we would snag the occasional victory, but most likely come adrift at the pointy end of the season if we were lucky to make the finals.

Knights and the board will live and die by the strategy they have put in place. I believe that we are on the right track although I admit it is a gut wrenching journey.

Reckon this is about right.

[little_ripper]

There's thousands of reasons. Not playing Reimers, never playing a loose man in defence, pushing Lloyd out at the end of last season, a reluctance to tag gun players, odd team selections (even in the final against Adelaide), an attack at all costs mentality...need I go on? It seems for the last 5 years or so we've always had one eye on tomorrow. It devalues each game we play in. I don't get anywhere near as excited watching Essendon play as I did ten years ago. Granted we were a far superior team then but I think the reason is that each game is played with a view to challenging for a flag in future years. I'm sick of it.

Er, they've played Reimers when hes been up and ready(and hes done reasonably well).
Lloyd wasn't pushed, in fact he was offered a 1 year contract and declined it.
We've tagged good players, last round it was Hodge. If anything we've played with one too many taggers in the side.
Heck aren't we number 1 in the comp for tackles?

Cast your mind back further than out last premiership side. I don't remember 94-98 being anything special.

This time round we have arguably some of the finest young key position talent coming through in Gumbleton, Hurley and Pears.

The club really faaaarked its drafting between 01 and 04/05 and it takes a while to replace 5 years of questionable decisions.

This is a very young side(experience and age), young teams are up and down.

Reimers hasn't been played this year due to his inflated opinion of himself.

Lloyd left because he wasn't guaranteed a game at full forward every week, as he should have been.

We play taggers, but they don't seem to have a true tagging role on many occassions.

Tackling has nothing to do with this argument.

You lose your way completely following your tackling comment.

There's no doubt it's a question of balance. My view is we need to swing the balance further towards an emphasis on winning games.

Lose way completely? You can't expect a young side to be up every week winning games of football. Its just unrealistic.

You can't really capture effective tagging in statistics, but being number one in tackles means that defensively we are starting to do something right in close.

Who knows why Reimers wasn't picked last week, but I'd back the coaching staff in on whatever reason. I hardly think his exclusion is a decision based on development over trying to win a game.

[s'dreams]

Suffering from our history...

While teams like Sydney, Geelong or St Kilda have a core team of stars and gameplan so they can bring in and develop a small number of youngsters - we haven't had the core group and instead have a list of talrented youngsters and a number of b and c graders (with one A grader).

While I sometimes wish that we had adopted the Carlton or Melb approach of tanking to cherrypick the draft - we didn't

Instead - the approach taken is that currently shown by Richmond and North ... get the youngsters in and build a core unit.

Though the key difference between us an those two teams is the coach. While their coaches are tough and uncompromising, ours seems softer by comparison. The issue here is while Hardwick and Scott replaced unachieving tossers, ours replaced a 27 year legend - and has had to balance recovery with sensitivity to the past.

While I agree with Gringo that I wish a more bloodyminded focus should be on winning - Knights has had to cover his back with both the board and the supporters. If only he didn't get the job based on the contention that we had the list to challenge in 2010 or 2011.

Cheers - sti

[Rossoneri]

Just because the coach was a tough player, it doesn't mean his team will be the same. Sheedy was a hard player but in our last few years, we were soft as butter.
Paul Roos was an outside HBF but his team are tough as nails. Worsfold team is softand for a while, so was Harvey's.

[s'dreams]

Just because the coach was a tough player, it doesn't mean his team will be the same. Sheedy was a hard player but in our last few years, we were soft as butter.
Paul Roos was an outside HBF but his team are tough as nails. Worsfold team is softand for a while, so was Harvey's.

Agree ... my comments weren't about how Scott and HArdwick translated their on-field attitude to coaching ... but how they go about their coaching.

Would love to see more mongrel about knights this year ... especially as last year he stared down some players who were faves.

cheers - sti

[bomberdonnie]

Just because the coach was a tough player, it doesn't mean his team will be the same. Sheedy was a hard player but in our last few years, we were soft as butter.
Paul Roos was an outside HBF but his team are tough as nails. Worsfold team is softand for a while, so was Harvey's.

Agree ... my comments weren't about how Scott and HArdwick translated their on-field attitude to coaching ... but how they go about their coaching.

Would love to see more mongrel about knights this year ... especially as last year he stared down some players who were faves.

cheers - sti

Yet this year he regularly gives games to his faves even when they dont deserve one