the claw said:
Harry said:
The reason so many clubs pass us on their way down when they are bottoming out and then within a few years pass us on their way up is because they play the kids at the expense of the seniors that aren't good enough. They are prepared to go through the tough times because they know that if done properly, if talented kids are given a go at the expense of senior duds, and they are allowed to gain some solid experience (despite the hammerings) that they will eventually come good. Old average players have no future, which is a concept we can't seem to grasp.
People say that you can't expose the kids to massive losses in that you will crush their development and their confidence. They also say that you need the senior players around them to provide leadership. That might be true if you actually have senior players showing leadership but at tigerland we unfortunately don't have any.
By leaving the senior duds in the team, if anything you are further destrioying the future development of the kids as these so-called senior experienced players show no backbone, no leadership qualities and are indirectly exposing the kids to their flaws and bad footballing habits.
This is what has killed us in the past as it appears bad habits and a lack of leadership has been past down from generation to generation.
Seriously speaking here - what on earth can say a Gaspar, Kellaway or a Tivendale possibly teach the kids, besides how to slump their shoulders, put their heads down and cop a belting?. Seriously.
I'd rather Terry cut as many seniors from the side and start from a clean slate (as much is possible), despite the floggings. This way he can teach and nurture the team exactly how he wants them without the adverse influence from the habitual senior losers we have.
ah thank you harry.for so eloquently saying what i have been trying to say. but going by experience on this site you have just wasted your time most deluded ferals just dont want to know. its as if they are in a warm and fuzzy fantasy land and dont want to be pulled out of their comfort zones.
The problem is this issue is always presented as an either/or situation. Play all the kids (Claw etc) or don't play the kids (what Claw thinks everyone else thinks). It's not black and white, it's a management issue and there are a lot of factors that need to be considered. I reckon the changes are happening.
This argument ignores the simple question of whether our list is good enough (and it's clearly not). Where kids have shown something in the twos they've been picked. There have been a lot of debutantes over the last year or so. The question is are there many who have shown enough to be picked and been ignored? The coaching staff will be looking at performance but also issues of physical conditioning, mental attitude and readiness. Lids met all those tests and has boomed. Guys like Pattison, Meyer, Roach, Foley and Hartigan haven't and have been put back to develop after getting opportunities. Raines looks like he's starting to take the step up but it's taken a few stints at Coburg to get him there.
Some hacks who have been stuck with despite the complaints of many here have actually improved (for example Pettifer and while he's no world beater, I would argue Hall) but I agree there are some I would have dropped long ago (Krakouer for example).
It may be simple enough to say "well we aren't winning with a lot of the older players in the team so lets get rid of them and just pick kids" but that's not how successful teams have been built. Teams that have actually made the progression from the bottom to the top have had to do it by managing their list carefully. We haven't done that for years with lemons like Frawley in charge but I think it's happening now. We improved a lot last year. Lets see how we go over the year once we get into the season and play a few games at home.
The list will change again this year, some more mediocre players will slip off and some more kids will come on. (And I agree with Phantom we need to be more aggressive this year come draft time.) Guys like Jackson, Foley, Hartigan, Tambling etc will be better physically and will hopefully be growing in confidence after a number of games this year. That's when our development will be clearer. Don't say we've been waiting for over 20 years (which of course we have) because Wallace deserves a chance to do something those before him didn't do.
The one thing I can be certain of is that if Wallace succeeds Claw will say it's because of the kids and that proves he was right. If Wallace fails Claw will say we didn't play enough kids and that proves he was right. It's the luxury we all have as unaccountable supporters.
)
