Bottom 6 rubbish myth!

[WayneJudson42]

I see we're back to blaming the list.

7 days is certainly a long time in football.

Poor list being poorly coached?

Needless to say we would have won if GT was still coaching?

OK, JUST KIDDING!!!!!!!!!

Seriously though, watching the Cats makes you wonder where we are at..... far away IMO

All things being equal... same coach, same gameplan, same commitment, same effort, etc. They have more talent and would still beat us.

[JeffDunne]

And the truth remains that it's not one or the other.

Can you take much from last week's game other than we still don't seem to be entering these games in the correct frame of mind?

We were never a chance and in simple terms we "choked".

Ross' first final and I'm sure he learnt a lot from it. I hope.

Will be interested to see how we handle this week. Some players you'd think have a lot to prove. If they can't get up this week they never will.

[saintsRrising]

And the truth remains that it's not one or the other.

Can you take much from last week's game other than we still don't seem to be entering these games in the correct frame of mind?

We were never a chance and in simple terms we "choked".

Ross' first final and I'm sure he learnt a lot from it. I hope.

Will be interested to see how we handle this week. Some players you'd think have a lot to prove. If they can't get up this week they never will.

Have to agree...we choked big time....and alos that there area lot of factors that makea good team....the list being but just one.

Was speaking with Simon O'Donnell last night and he was pretty annoyed with the lack of application and effort of many in the first half including one set of brothers.

[WayneJudson42]

And the truth remains that it's not one or the other.

Can you take much from last week's game other than we still don't seem to be entering these games in the correct frame of mind?

We were never a chance and in simple terms we "choked".

Ross' first final and I'm sure he learnt a lot from it. I hope.

Will be interested to see how we handle this week. Some players you'd think have a lot to prove. If they can't get up this week they never will.

Have to agree...we choked big time....and alos that there area lot of factors that makea good team....the list being but just one.

Was speaking with Simon O'Donnell last night and he was pretty annoyed with the lack of application and effort of many in the first half including one set of brothers.

As much as some people bag the Swans, you have to give them credit. They are a bunch of "home brand" players who have achieved incredible success based on their team values and ethics.

It's no coincidence that they also used the same leadership program as the Cats.

The question for us remains... can we develop the bottom 6 to an acceptable level? Or are they simply not up to it?

[Alfie Hewsdale]

How does our 2006 list(finals finish) compare with Geelong 2006 list ( 10th?).

What has changed since then?

I believe that in the last two years virtually the entire Geelong list have had best ever (or close to it) form.

Many on our list have not.

If every player on our team plays to their potential we can beat anyone.

That is Geelongs secret, most of their players particularly their stars play to their potential EVERY WEEK.

[WayneJudson42]

How does our 2006 list(finals finish) compare with Geelong 2006 list ( 10th?).

What has changed since then?

I believe that in the last two years virtually the entire Geelong list have had best ever (or close to it) form.

Many on our list have not.

If every player on our team plays to their potential we can beat anyone.

That is Geelongs secret, most of their players particularly their stars play to their potential EVERY WEEK.

Why? See my post above.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Bottom 6, top 6, surely the real barometer of a team is the 10 in the middle? Bottom 6 probably tells you where you are as list manager. Top 6 tells you whether you're a chance of turning it on regardless of circumstance - but it's the middle 10 who would generally state where you're really at... which is pretty glib, because it's basically saying it's a team game, and most times there isn't a single player in a group of 22 who can be singled out as the weakest link, and it only gets harder as you look for the "6th worst" player in a loss. It's a team game.

To be clear: I look at the Cats, and I see Blake as a passenger. I see others the Lonergan and Taylor, and think they look great... in ideal circumstances, I honestly don't have the faintest idea how good they really are.

I look at the Saints, and (obviously) I've got an opinion on every player, but I'm as happy as I've been for some time with how the "bottom 6" players are travelling. From Sunday, I'd be listing Xavier Clarke in the bottom 6 (with some excuses, but excuses won't go back and change the result), and I rate X (unfortunately made of glass though, and I wonder if he'll ever actually amount to anything).

But you look at the game, and look at getting smashed in clearances, and getting smashed in disposal, and getting smashed in decision making, and I wonder, are we really going to rate our list top to bottom on those 3 criteria, opposition lists on those 3 criteria, and make decisions based on a single game? (if anywhere, we'd do it here, and it'd probably be interesting, but it would take time & motivation I don't have)...

I can't see our current crop matching the Cats clearance power. I can see our current crop doing a better job of disposing of the ball, and ideally doing a better job of decision making too (it's honestly one of the areas I'm really optomistic about for '09 as the palyers get more and more instinctual about the style Lyon demands).

From a list perspective, that points to the midfield (I think clearance power has been a major weakness all year long), but I don't think it's about bottom 6/top 6 - it's about the general ability of players to step in and win the contested ball at stoppages. The Cats had 3 players with more than 10 contested possessions, and 4 with 5 or more clearances. I can't recall seeing anything approaching that from the Saints in a couple of years. It's tough to stop (how many tags do you want to run?)... and it's not about generalities like the top and bottom 6 of the list.

[saintsRrising]

It's no coincidence that they also used the same leadership program as the Cats.

Stan Alves was the first AFL Coach to use this motivational person and his system.

The year = 1997....

I think Roos may well have been the second.

And while his company is now involved with many AFL Teams...the Ctas were the ones that gained his personal attention two years back.

[evertonfc]

Any attempt to overlook the fact that our bottom six is absolutely diabolical should be shot down.

Our bottom six sucks. It's a fact.

It's not the complete cause of all our problems that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that we're carrying blokes like Gwilt, McQualter, R Clarke, Blake, C Jones and Eddy.

They all chip in to some degree, but they all have major, major flaws in their game right now. Some of them may kick on to become good players, but no more than one or two of them IMO.

When you throw in serial underperformers like Sam Gilbert and Justin Koschitzke, you're talking about more than a third of your 22 failing to contribute.

Yes, it's a problem. Don't pretend it's not.

[markp]

Some Kiwi was carrying on to me about the value of a good bottom six in the pub late the other night... said something about it being a crucial way to support your top six, and how it could help your average six to be a lot more adventurous too.

[WayneJudson42]

It's no coincidence that they also used the same leadership program as the Cats.

Stan Alves was the first AFL Coach to use this motivational person and his system.

The year = 1997....

I think Roos may well have been the second.

And while his company is now involved with many AFL Teams...the Ctas were the ones that gained his personal attention two years back.

Agree... he was right into the "ownership" aspect for the players. Obviously too advanced for our then rabble, so they sacked him.

[WayneJudson42]

Some Kiwi was carrying on to me about the value of a good bottom six in the pub late the other night... said something about it being a crucial way to support your top six, and how it could help your average six to be a lot more adventurous too.

Have said this before... Leigh Matthews gave a talk about the exact same thing.

Bottom 6 job is to help top 6 by providing space, sheperds, blocks, etc.

doesn't seem to work with Roo, tho...

[terry smith rules]

Any attempt to overlook the fact that our bottom six is absolutely diabolical should be shot down.

Our bottom six sucks. It's a fact.

It's not the complete cause of all our problems that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that we're carrying blokes like Gwilt, McQualter, R Clarke, Blake, C Jones and Eddy.

They all chip in to some degree, but they all have major, major flaws in their game right now. Some of them may kick on to become good players, but no more than one or two of them IMO.

When you throw in serial underperformers like Sam Gilbert and Justin Koschitzke, you're talking about more than a third of your 22 failing to contribute.

Yes, it's a problem. Don't pretend it's not.

ok I have made my point on the so called bottom 6 before, in summary they are as only as good as the top six can make them look (if roo can't get a kick then sure as hell jimmy gwilt will struggle)

but my real issue with your post is "underperforming" sam gilbert. He has played 37 games ffs, yes he is no joel selwood, but I reckon he is probably going just as well as most players who have played b/w 20 and 40 games.

Have some faith, I think he is going to be great, he is athletic, has closing speed, can kick (only one side unfortunately), can step, can tackle and his body will develop really well

fqf

[saintspremiers]

I see we're back to blaming the list.

7 days is certainly a long time in football.

correct.....Scientific research has shown a large proportion of SS posters have suffered amnesia since late afternoon last Sunday!

[mad saint guy]

I agree that the bottom 6 theory is a load of crap.

Geelong's strength is in Ablett, Bartel, Corey, Selwood, Ling, Chapman, Johnson and Scarlett. Those players win them games. Then there is the next tier of Ottens, Mooney, Harley Mackie etc who are all competent AFL players. Then there is just a bunch of GOPs towards the end of the list who are no better than most other team's bottom 6 - but an ordinary forward getting elite delivery looks pretty damn good, as do defenders who never have to compete one-on-one.

Our problem is that we don't have enough of the top tier. If we dominated the midfield then Gilbert would look as good as Taylor and Gwilt as good as Lonergan.

[evertonfc]

This is Taylor's first year - he's done very well to hold down the post that he has.

Lonergan would walk into any other team, including ours.

You can't blame everything on a weak bottom six, but ours holds up very poorly when our 'stars' don't fire. Their job should be to help hold the line in case this happens; they simply never do.

[terry smith rules]

When you throw in serial underperformers like Sam Gilbert and Justin Koschitzke, you're talking about more than a third of your 22 failing to contribute.

without labouring the point

check out the australian today

how much the club rate sam and how important it was to get him back into the side

he is going to be a star

[Solar]

This is Taylor's first year - he's done very well to hold down the post that he has.

Lonergan would walk into any other team, including ours.

You can't blame everything on a weak bottom six, but ours holds up very poorly when our 'stars' don't fire. Their job should be to help hold the line in case this happens; they simply never do.

same could have been said about charlie gardiner and king

one was the number 1 ruck in a flag and the other was an emergency....

King hasn't set the world on fire, yes he gives us a big body in the ruck but struggles to take contested marks floating back.

Charlie is average at best....

I'm curious about how lonergan or taylor would go in another jumper?

There are always the saying "would walk into any other team" but sometimes it is found out.

Plus for the record we have our 2 best small backman and CHB out. Thius gilbert has been developed as either a FB or BP. Yes he has had bad games but is improving. Thats the key.

BAM! Never thought about the 10 in the middle, great analysis. I think this is where we have not developed in the past 2-4 years. The likes of ball, dal santo, xavier clarke, BJ were all in that middle 10 in 2004-05. The only player that has moved into the top 6 has been BJ IMO.

[remboy]

It doesn't matter whether players are in the top six, bottom six or any other six, we need 22 contributers. If you've got even 1 player not pulling their weight it's one too many. The reason Collingwood have got to where they are is because all of their players put in.
Try put their side against ours player for player and you would think that on potential we should win 9 out of 10 against them.
All we need is 100% effort from 100% of the team 100% of the time. If we get that we win, if we don't we lose. It's that simple.

[terry smith rules]

Any attempt to overlook the fact that our bottom six is absolutely diabolical should be shot down.

Our bottom six sucks. It's a fact.

It's not the complete cause of all our problems that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that we're carrying blokes like Gwilt, McQualter, R Clarke, Blake, C Jones and Eddy.

They all chip in to some degree, but they all have major, major flaws in their game right now. Some of them may kick on to become good players, but no more than one or two of them IMO.

When you throw in serial underperformers like Sam Gilbert and Justin Koschitzke, you're talking about more than a third of your 22 failing to contribute.

Yes, it's a problem. Don't pretend it's not.

care to comment

[evertonfc]

Any attempt to overlook the fact that our bottom six is absolutely diabolical should be shot down.

Our bottom six sucks. It's a fact.

It's not the complete cause of all our problems that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that we're carrying blokes like Gwilt, McQualter, R Clarke, Blake, C Jones and Eddy.

They all chip in to some degree, but they all have major, major flaws in their game right now. Some of them may kick on to become good players, but no more than one or two of them IMO.

When you throw in serial underperformers like Sam Gilbert and Justin Koschitzke, you're talking about more than a third of your 22 failing to contribute.

Yes, it's a problem. Don't pretend it's not.

care to comment

Sure...

Raph Clarke was the only one who genuinely stood up and had a crack for mine.

The rest were crap. Throw in Fiora to the underperforming list, too.

So few of our bottom players ever stand up when the top fails.

[maverick]

Any attempt to overlook the fact that our bottom six is absolutely diabolical should be shot down.

Our bottom six sucks. It's a fact.

It's not the complete cause of all our problems that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that we're carrying blokes like Gwilt, McQualter, R Clarke, Blake, C Jones and Eddy.

They all chip in to some degree, but they all have major, major flaws in their game right now. Some of them may kick on to become good players, but no more than one or two of them IMO.

When you throw in serial underperformers like Sam Gilbert and Justin Koschitzke, you're talking about more than a third of your 22 failing to contribute.

Yes, it's a problem. Don't pretend it's not.

care to comment

Sure...

Raph Clarke was the only one who genuinely stood up and had a crack for mine.

The rest were crap. Throw in Fiora to the underperforming list, too.

So few of our bottom players ever stand up when the top fails.

Whose do?
Our top 6 are the problem, they just aren't good enough against the very best.

[Con Gorozidis]

Whenever I think about the game last week all I can get is a picture of one or two saints players surrounded by 4-6 cats players - and then seeing them run in a pack. It was impressive and it happened all day.

Exactly...as much as it may grate on us...the Ctas have seta new benchmark for TEAMWORK.

There may well have been better teams in the past....but I do not believe that there has been better TEAMWORK.

Whatever our gameplan is......we have to rise to this new benchmark ourselves.

HEAR HEAR this wise gentleman.

the flipside to the bottom 6 thing is u have to be a good player to even make the team in the first place. look how competitive it is to just get on the interchange or in the emergency at geelong right now. tomahawk, ryan gamble, tenace. all good players. who will they drop this week?? varcoe is no slouch. llok at the hawks. 2 or 3 very good players left out. timmy boyle and xavier ellis are very decent players.

the point is there is no simple reason to success. no magic formula. no short cuts. no secrets. you need a a whole squad. skills. fitness. recruitment. coaching. talent. strategy. psychology. even a little luck. the only way is the long hard way. anyone looking for simplistic short-cuts is not going to get them. there are no messiahs. no super coaches. saints have failed in several of the areas i mentioned.
anyone believing there is a magic switch or our players are going to all wake up one morning and be better than they are - i got news its not going to happen. cmon guys. lets be realistic. we need to work harder than ever to get this side up. and its going to take years. because we just wasted the last 4 years. we have stayed the same still while others progressed, adapted, recruited, improved.