Football Manager - 2007 Version

[pahoffm]

I understand what you're getting at. Youve been getting at it for a while. And I agree with the principles, I just think the data you present could be a little more intuitive if grouped slightly differently. It's no criticism of what you're doing, just a suggestion.

As said, fair point.
We, all, continually evolve.

 

[gustiger12]

If you look at our big man department, it is a worry.

The majority of the Bulldogs list at present (or certainly the ones who have played the bulk of the season) were drafted during Wallace's era.
This was due to the fact that the game was turning into a running game, sort of like Gaelic footy.

Last season, the Bulldogs did very well playing that type of brand, however, this season, that have been found wanting, because they are a one-trick pony.

Close Johnno down, and close down their running....and you have the Bulldogs cold.
Their second half of the season was abysmal and hence the talk of a trade for Fevola (or a key-forward).

What I am worried about is that we are slowly becoming the "new Bulldogs" and by the time our players are ready to run and play the style Wallace likes, then this style will be redundant, and teams will shut us down.
And what forward do we have that will be able to take a contested grab in the forward line, once Richo goes?

Our forward-line will consist of mobile forwards, such as Brown, Pettifer, Riewoldt....and to a lesser degree, Lids and Bling.
And it is this idea of mobile-forwards that has cost the Bulldogs dearly this season.

Have a look at the teams up near the top....they may have a good running brigade, but they also have good talls up forward....Mooney/N.Ablett/Ottens....Q.Lynch/Hansen...Petrie/L.Brown/Hale....Franklin/Roughead/Boyle.

To do well in this era, you have to have a solid game-plan, but also a plan B.
The Bulldogs didn't have one this season...and unless we draft some tall options this draft, then we are going to stay down the bottom for a few more years yet. :-\

Any reason you left out Schulz, Hughes and Patterson from your list of tall. I am sure the club is still hopeful that one of not both of these guys will be able to fill a key forward role when Richo moves on. (But they need to get there act together)

 

[pahoffm]

If we adjust the taller height fields based on:
190-193 Mobile Talls
194-197 Taller KPPs
198+ Rucks,
we see a small change.
Polak, at 194, comes out from mobile talls and goes into taller kpps.
Pattison moves one to the right as well and goes into the ruck category.

Table based on ages at beginning of Season 2007

	<179	180-184	185-189	190-193	194-197	198+
28+		Brown F	Johnson M	Gaspar D	Richardson F
			J.Bowden D	Kingsley F	Simmonds R
25-27			Tivendale M		Hall D	Knobel R
				P.Bowden D
		Pettifer F	Tuck M
22-24	Krakouer F	Newman D	Coughlan M
	King D		Hyde M		Polak D
			Moore D
18-21	Foley M	Howat M	Jackson F	Schulz F		Graham R
	Hartigan D	Raines D	Deledio M	McGuane D		Pattison F
	Tambling M	Meyer F	Polo M	Thursfield D
	White D	Peterson F	Oakley-Nicholls D	Hughes F
		Edwards M	Casserley D	Riewoldt F
		Connors M
		Collins M
		Clingan M

So that's how it looks now.
Not much of a change, and results in 2 questions:
1. Is Polak better sorted as a mobile tall or a taller KPP?
2. Is Pattison better sorted as a taller KPP or as a ruckman?

No doubt there will be differing opinions.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Good work but might want to revisit the players ages Phantom.
Most seem a year shy.

 

[bertallen]

We are a bit young, short and light, and dont kick or handball too well.

Dimensions are easy lists and I appreciate them as they do help us to see why we are where we are.

I would like to see a list of who are the quality kickers, handballers and who has the best vision as these skills are as important as height and weight

 

[pahoffm]

We are a bit young, short and light, and dont kick or handball too well.

Dimensions are easy lists and I appreciate them as they do help us to see why we are where we are.

I would like to see a list of who are the quality kickers, handballers and who has the best vision as these skills are as important as height and weight

Yeh, fine.
You give me a list of who you think are good in these quality areas, and I'll integrate these into the table above.

 

[pahoffm]

Looking at the list from another perspective provides some challenges for the future.

BTW, I've now adjusted the ages to reflect season 2008.

B:	King 174 24	Gaspar 192 31	P.Bowden 191 26
	Hartigan 178 22	Thursfield 191 21	McGuane 190 21
	White 179 21
HB:	J.Bowden 188 30	Hall 196 27	Newman 182 25
	Moore 189 24		Raines 182 22
	Oakley-Nicholls 188 20		Clingan 184 19
C:	Tivendale 185 28	Coughlan 186 25	Howat 182 22
	Hyde 186 25	Connors 183 19	Edwards 180 19
	Casserley 186 20		Collins 184 19
HF:	Deledio 188 20	Richardson 195 33	Pettifer 182 26
	Meyer 184 21	Polak 194 23	Peterson 182 20
F:	Pattison 198 22	Kingsley 193 29	Brown 182 30
		Schulz 193 22	Krakouer 176 25
		Hughes 193 21
		Riewoldt 192 19
R:	Simmonds 196 29	Johnson 187 30	Foley 177 22
	Knobel 202 27	Tuck 188 26	Tambling 179 21
	Graham 200 20	Jackson 187 21
		Polo 186 20

The two key defensive positions stand out, like a naked Jennifer Hawkins.
Polak, although having an impressive season, did nothing to fill the gap at CHB.
And our only defender, 195cm+, just retired, though he was absent in 2007 anyway.

Four Full forwards may be too many. Although Kingsley is gone, and Reiwoldt should become a CHF in time. Schulz's inability to evolve into defense has left a big gap there, and is disappointing. With Polak appearing to be a CHF, it makes the tenure of at least of those remaining FFs questionable.
For all 3 remaining FFs, the move into defence offers a strong opportunity.
Trading for an established tall defender & drafting a junior tall defender seem a must.
The problem is there don't appear to be any quality ones, outside of Rance, in this year's draft pool. I reckon Natanui would fit in here perfectly, just as Ryder did at Essendon.

Clearly, we have enough HBF's and not enough key backs. I've admired Myers over the last 2 years, but we clearly don't need him.

There is a question mark over Coughlan's recovery, at this stage.
And placing Connors in the centre is, again at this point, purely speculation.
It makes the argument for Cotchin a strong one.

We do need at least another ruckman.
Knobel is gone, and Simmonds has reached that age where injuries tend to occur regularly. I'd like to see a 21/22yo ruckman, and I'd like to see us develop a 17/18yo to give us sufficient depth in this area for years to come.
Kreuzer would be nice, but if not, maybe McEvoy, or Dawson as a 3rd round pick.

The inside area looks ok for next year, with space opening up when Johnson retires.

The delistings & trades in coming weeks will keep us on the edge of our seats with anticipation.

 

[Freezer]

There is a question mark over Coughlan's recovery, at this stage.

Is there a problem with his rehab or are you speculating that he will take a year to come back after so many problems?

Just wondering if there has been another setback that I haven't heard about.

 

[pahoffm]

There is a question mark over Coughlan's recovery, at this stage.

Is there a problem with his rehab or are you speculating that he will take a year to come back after so many problems?

Just wondering if there has been another setback that I haven't heard about.

No new problems, but there is uncertainty as to how quickly full recovery will occur, if ever.

 

[Freezer]

There is a question mark over Coughlan's recovery, at this stage.

Is there a problem with his rehab or are you speculating that he will take a year to come back after so many problems?

Just wondering if there has been another setback that I haven't heard about.

No new problems, but there is uncertainty as to how quickly full recovery will occur, if ever.

True. Fingers crossed they've got it right.