Which AFL sides do u think will improve this year?
Western Bulldogs:
After a fair bit of solid recruiting this year is probably there best chance at a flag consdering impending retirements to key players. They've shown that there able to put some blistering patched of footy together but lack consistency in their application - probably due to a fair contingent of their key players being quite young.
With the addition of Aker to the side and another pre-season for the young blokes the bullies look certain to progress this year.
Finished 8th last season but I'd say this year will finish 5th or higher.
Hawthorn:
The hawks have a lot of promising young players who are starting to come into their prime. They showed last season that they are capable of some good football and I think won 4 out of their last six games after a mid-season slump. I expect them to press for a top 8 birth and rate them from 9th-7th.
Essendon:
I had to include our lads for many reasons, and they definitely deserve it. To be honest its very hard to see us finishing as badly as we did last season but time will tell. With Lloyd and Michael back in the side we have two A grade players to add to our list. Not to mention a host of youngsters on the improve.
I think most would agree that our list last season was a lot better than 15th and we definitely have added talent to our side since round 22, 2006.
I predict a finish from 10th - 8th
The improvers?
I reckon:
Bulldogs, 4-5, with the addition of Aker and some of their your younger players on the improve they will pick up from last year and could crack the top four.
Hawthorn: 7-10. They have been rebuilding for a while now and but they have to produce results some time. I would expect some of their younger players to be coming of age and the team becoming seriously competitive.
Essendon: cant see them finishing bottom four again. With a bit of luck 7th or 8th although it could be 9th or 10th.
Bulldogs, 4-5, with the addition of Aker and some of their your younger players on the improve they will pick up from last year and could crack the top four.
Hawthorn: 7-10. They have been rebuilding for a while now and but they have to produce results some time. I would expect some of their younger players to be coming of age and the team becoming seriously competitive.
Essendon: cant see them finishing bottom four again. With a bit of luck 7th or 8th although it could be 9th or 10th.
-
Windy_Hill
- Champion of Essendon
- Posts: 12859
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm
Its very even - with real improvement likely to come from Essendon, Hawthorn and I believe Brisbane as a smokey
Teams to slip will be Adelaide, West Coast (been on a 2-3 season high thus far) and Sydney (see West Coast)
This means teams like Bulldogs, Fremantle and Demons will really press for top 4
Teams to slip will be Adelaide, West Coast (been on a 2-3 season high thus far) and Sydney (see West Coast)
This means teams like Bulldogs, Fremantle and Demons will really press for top 4
-
nmgilbert
- On the Rookie List
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:48 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Yeah, I expect Clarkson will be in trouble if the hawks dont make it. Jeff Kennett doesnt seem to think much of him and Jeff is the loud mouth down at Glenferrie.
I agree that Geelong should improve. They have a decent list but played some crap footy last year. The big question for me is what the cause of that slump was. Most people suggest a lack of mental strength after winning the NAB cup - like they got complacent or something. They did have two very bad losses that stick out at me and suggest mental fragility - the 9 goal loss to the hawks in round 3 or something at skilled stadium when they were unbackable favourites and the loss to the eagles when they were up by 50 odd points around 3 quarter time. How a team can lose from there I dont know but Geelong lost the pot.
Another possible reason for Geelong's capitulation is the increased pace and uncontested nature of the game in 2006. There midfield is really full of blue collar type contested players with non-exceptional skills which made it harder for the Geelong style of game play. I think that in general, when a team turns the ball over these days the opposition tends to punish them a lot more on the scoreboard because todays game is more like keep things off.
I'd say Geelong could challenge for a top 8 spot but i'd say they'll finish around 10th.
I agree that Geelong should improve. They have a decent list but played some crap footy last year. The big question for me is what the cause of that slump was. Most people suggest a lack of mental strength after winning the NAB cup - like they got complacent or something. They did have two very bad losses that stick out at me and suggest mental fragility - the 9 goal loss to the hawks in round 3 or something at skilled stadium when they were unbackable favourites and the loss to the eagles when they were up by 50 odd points around 3 quarter time. How a team can lose from there I dont know but Geelong lost the pot.
Another possible reason for Geelong's capitulation is the increased pace and uncontested nature of the game in 2006. There midfield is really full of blue collar type contested players with non-exceptional skills which made it harder for the Geelong style of game play. I think that in general, when a team turns the ball over these days the opposition tends to punish them a lot more on the scoreboard because todays game is more like keep things off.
I'd say Geelong could challenge for a top 8 spot but i'd say they'll finish around 10th.
Well said. Half the reason Geelong's forward line have recieved so much criticism is the fact that their midfield do not posses the skills to get them the ball in a favourable manner. The Eagles midfield, for example, make an average forward line function very well.nmgilbert wrote:Yeah, I expect Clarkson will be in trouble if the hawks dont make it. Jeff Kennett doesnt seem to think much of him and Jeff is the loud mouth down at Glenferrie.
I agree that Geelong should improve. They have a decent list but played some crap footy last year. The big question for me is what the cause of that slump was. Most people suggest a lack of mental strength after winning the NAB cup - like they got complacent or something. They did have two very bad losses that stick out at me and suggest mental fragility - the 9 goal loss to the hawks in round 3 or something at skilled stadium when they were unbackable favourites and the loss to the eagles when they were up by 50 odd points around 3 quarter time. How a team can lose from there I dont know but Geelong lost the pot.
Another possible reason for Geelong's capitulation is the increased pace and uncontested nature of the game in 2006. There midfield is really full of blue collar type contested players with non-exceptional skills which made it harder for the Geelong style of game play. I think that in general, when a team turns the ball over these days the opposition tends to punish them a lot more on the scoreboard because todays game is more like keep things off.
I'd say Geelong could challenge for a top 8 spot but i'd say they'll finish around 10th.
We have a great forward line at Essendon, potentially the best in the league, and a very good defence, particularly with the addition of MM. However, our midfield have the worst footskills in the league by a country mile. Further, when they turn the ball over, which is often, they don't have the pace to man up when the ball is coming back the other way. This was typified by our first half against Hawthorn (the second time we played them).
Bottom line this year: unless we stop turning the ball over due to poor disposal by foot, we can forget about progressing up the ladder. My fear is that kicking is a skill that you either have or you don't. Obviously you can improve aspects of your kicking, but essentially, it's a skill that a player needs to have when they arrive at Essendon. A player is not suddenly going to become a good kick over the preseason. Considering we have the likes of Watson, Johnson, Pev, Winda, Kepler, Lovett-Murray etc running through the middle, this is a major problem for us.
-
Windy_Hill
- Champion of Essendon
- Posts: 12859
- Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:23 pm
-
nmgilbert
- On the Rookie List
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:48 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Its interesting you say that and I agree that a player should be able to kick when they arrive at Essendon. To me players with poor skills fit into two categories - those that have technical deficiency in their style and those that have good technique.My fear is that kicking is a skill that you either have or you don't. Obviously you can improve aspects of your kicking, but essentially, it's a skill that a player needs to have when they arrive at Essendon. A player is not suddenly going to become a good kick over the preseason.
Players in the first category (eg, Kepler Bradley) could easily greatly improve their kicking accuracy if they reconstructed their kicking technique however this requires them to go 1 step backwards to go 3 steps forwards. Motor skills do take time to develop but I think a few weeks is long enough to consistently perform a new technique thats been learnt without slipping into old habits to often.
However there may be other complications for example, Kepler who leans back to much at contact when he kicks might do this because of poor hamstring flexibility - this deficiency in the body can't be rectified in a few weeks if at all. In this case it becomes a matter of improving hamstring length so that Kepler can perform the kicking technique properly. However this is just an example - i'm not suggesting that this is Kepler's problem because I don't know.
Anyway, players in the second category - the ones that have good technique but still kick poorly are a lot harder to help. Often there lack of accuracy is attributed to a lack of talent etc but its likely there are other causes for the poor execution. This could include poor balance which can be measured and then improved to an extent though I highly doubt that Essendon have the technology to measure that to the extent I know they are doing it at the Fremantle and the Western Bulldogs.
The other reasons for poor execution are probably more subtle things such as mental processes when decision making etc.
Either way, it is often difficult to get a player to change their technique because often they do have to get worse for a little bit.
-
CameronClayton
- High Draft Pick
- Posts: 652
- Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:42 am
No-one mentioned Freo yet, the only team to knock over the Weagles twice last year. I always look for teams that knock over the champion teams in their prime (both Swans & Weagles gave the Bears a hard time, even in 2001-2003) as the next team to look out for.
Freo for premiers in 2007.
Doggies will again improve, but I always have question marks over short forward lines working in finals. Things you can get away with during the year, can fall apart in finals (just ask Port in 2001 to 2003).
Hawks to improve, & Port to be knocking on the door of the 8, if not actually in it.
Us, well even a 100% improvement will only get us 7 wins, which is good enough for a 13th or 14th finish (based on 2006 ladder). Got to be realistic & people on here who think we are certs for 8, should look at all the predictions at the start of 2006 which said the same.
The most hated predictions I see are the ones that say, IF we get no injuries, & IF we get a good deal from the umps, & IF we get a good deal from the tribunal etc etc. Just say where you think we are going to finish, because none of the other 3 things mentioned above are ever gonna happen to us.
Freo for premiers in 2007.
Doggies will again improve, but I always have question marks over short forward lines working in finals. Things you can get away with during the year, can fall apart in finals (just ask Port in 2001 to 2003).
Hawks to improve, & Port to be knocking on the door of the 8, if not actually in it.
Us, well even a 100% improvement will only get us 7 wins, which is good enough for a 13th or 14th finish (based on 2006 ladder). Got to be realistic & people on here who think we are certs for 8, should look at all the predictions at the start of 2006 which said the same.
The most hated predictions I see are the ones that say, IF we get no injuries, & IF we get a good deal from the umps, & IF we get a good deal from the tribunal etc etc. Just say where you think we are going to finish, because none of the other 3 things mentioned above are ever gonna happen to us.
A number of reasons, Benny Dos-lossage:BenDoolan wrote:I'm glad NMG has responded to your post before me, but my question to you is......Why not?gringo wrote:
A player is not suddenly going to become a good kick over the preseason.
The biggest reason is history. I struggle to think of one player in AFL who has gone from poor kicking to good kicking over a preseason, or even over the passage of their career for that matter. Players can improve their set shots at goal, but hitting blokes on the tit whilst running at full pace is a completely different story. It seems that players are either have good disposal, or poor disposal. Unfortunately, half our midfield kick like Connex run their trains…erratically, inconsistently and at a great cost to stake-holders.
I'm not saying that small adjustments can't be made to technique, but wholesale changes are generally impossible. It's like a golf swing. It's near impossible to build a golf swing from scratch once a player is a pro. You can make an ugly swing work, but the good players are those whose technique is perfected from a very young age.
History? That's relevant when we have new technology and innovative techniques to deal with the issue today....gringo wrote: The biggest reason is history. I struggle to think of one player in AFL who has gone from poor kicking to good kicking over a preseason, or even over the passage of their career for that matter.
And history suggests that (off the top of my head) Stuart Loewe and Michael Symons were significant improvers of their initial abysmal kicking skills. With more research I'm sure we could uncover numerous players who have improved their skills by honing in on the very deficiencies Gilby pointed out in his post......
rama_fan wrote:Brisbane and Port Adelaide I reckon will suprise a lot of sides.
Theyve got some great young guys, Port maybe more than the Lions.
you rekon??, i would of thought the lions will stuggle, not enough goal kickers and backline will stuggle more than anything... I agree with you on port, they are coming to be a quick side.
If you read my post more closely I pointed out that an exception to the rule is set shots at goal. Loewe and Symons (with his Phar Lap inspired approach) both spent their days kicking goals.BenDoolan wrote:History? That's relevant when we have new technology and innovative techniques to deal with the issue today....gringo wrote: The biggest reason is history. I struggle to think of one player in AFL who has gone from poor kicking to good kicking over a preseason, or even over the passage of their career for that matter.
And history suggests that (off the top of my head) Stuart Loewe and Michael Symons were significant improvers of their initial abysmal kicking skills. With more research I'm sure we could uncover numerous players who have improved their skills by honing in on the very deficiencies Gilby pointed out in his post......
"Technology" and "innovative techniques" have got nothing to do with it. We are talking about kicking a football, not building a rocket. And if they did, why has JJ and Pev gone backwards in their kicking? And why is everyone in the AFL not already a good field kick?
Having a a poorly skilled midfield has been our archilles for years.
Probably because we have had a shithouse skills department, ever thought of that?gringo wrote:If you read my post more closely I pointed out that an exception to the rule is set shots at goal. Loewe and Symons (with his Phar Lap inspired approach) both spent their days kicking goals.BenDoolan wrote:History? That's relevant when we have new technology and innovative techniques to deal with the issue today....gringo wrote: The biggest reason is history. I struggle to think of one player in AFL who has gone from poor kicking to good kicking over a preseason, or even over the passage of their career for that matter.
And history suggests that (off the top of my head) Stuart Loewe and Michael Symons were significant improvers of their initial abysmal kicking skills. With more research I'm sure we could uncover numerous players who have improved their skills by honing in on the very deficiencies Gilby pointed out in his post......
"Technology" and "innovative techniques" have got nothing to do with it. We are talking about kicking a football, not building a rocket. And if they did, why has JJ and Pev gone backwards in their kicking? And why is everyone in the AFL not already a good field kick?
Having a a poorly skilled midfield has been our archilles for years.
And since when has Pev been a bad kick on the run and hitting targets?
Well I used to say that until someone here (Gilby) was able to credibly explain the role of biomechanists."Technology" and "innovative techniques" have got nothing to do with it. We are talking about kicking a football, not building a rocket.
I know your type. You pigeon hole certain players for having one clanger and then brand them as atrociously skilled players for the rest of their careers. However, if you religiously look at the stats sheet, you will also find the likes of Hird, Lloyd, Fletcher, McVeigh, Lucas (guys you haven't nominated as poorly skilled) having weekly clangers also.....
No. I'm the type that sits up in the stands, with my membership snugly in my pocket, wondering why JJ has just missed a running shot at goal from 15 metres out, why Watson has failed to make the distance from 40 metres out, why Watson has missed Lucas on the lead by ten metres and now can't chase his opposite number who is sprinting through the midfield waving at him, why Kepler's foot passes nearly hit the Phone Dome's roof, why Stanton continually kicks the ball over players heads on the run, why we continually draft players that can't kick the ball yet good foot skills is becoming more and more important as AFL evolves…BenDoolan wrote:Probably because we have had a shithouse skills department, ever thought of that?gringo wrote:If you read my post more closely I pointed out that an exception to the rule is set shots at goal. Loewe and Symons (with his Phar Lap inspired approach) both spent their days kicking goals.BenDoolan wrote:History? That's relevant when we have new technology and innovative techniques to deal with the issue today....gringo wrote: The biggest reason is history. I struggle to think of one player in AFL who has gone from poor kicking to good kicking over a preseason, or even over the passage of their career for that matter.
And history suggests that (off the top of my head) Stuart Loewe and Michael Symons were significant improvers of their initial abysmal kicking skills. With more research I'm sure we could uncover numerous players who have improved their skills by honing in on the very deficiencies Gilby pointed out in his post......
"Technology" and "innovative techniques" have got nothing to do with it. We are talking about kicking a football, not building a rocket. And if they did, why has JJ and Pev gone backwards in their kicking? And why is everyone in the AFL not already a good field kick?
Having a a poorly skilled midfield has been our archilles for years.
And since when has Pev been a bad kick on the run and hitting targets?
Well I used to say that until someone here (Gilby) was able to credibly explain the role of biomechanists."Technology" and "innovative techniques" have got nothing to do with it. We are talking about kicking a football, not building a rocket.
I know your type. You pigeon hole certain players for having one clanger and then brand them as atrociously skilled players for the rest of their careers. However, if you religiously look at the stats sheet, you will also find the likes of Hird, Lloyd, Fletcher, McVeigh, Lucas (guys you haven't nominated as poorly skilled) having weekly clangers also.....