(05-04-2017, 12:05 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:They have kicked more behinds than goals in every match they have played this year.

All it will take is a week where they actually take their opportunities properly, and they will look like a pretty good side and the opposition will be the ones ruing their missed opportunities instead.

Whilst I don't think that this is an indicator of anything that will happen this year, I look at it, and realise, that these guys have been competitive if not good during this season. 

12.14 vs Western Bulldogs 15.10
11.14 vs Richmond 14.15
11.14 vs Sydney 11.13
7.13 vs St. Kilda  9.15
11.16 vs Essendon 15.10
15.17 vs Geelong 11.12

Im under no illusions as to where we are at, but it looks as though the Pies have been traveling better than us in terms of hitting the scoreboard regularly.

Our record by contrast:

14.5 vs Richmond 20.12
9.10 vs Melbourne 13.8
7.15 vs Essendon 6.6
12.10 vs GC Suns 17.6
6.11 vs Port 20.17
15.7 vs Sydney 11.12

Purely as a numbers exercise, we are scoring at an average of 20.17 scoring shots per match.  The pies have been averaging 25.86 scoring shots per match.
We have been allowing scoring shots of 24.7 scoring shots to our opposition per match, whilst the Pies have been averaging 25 scoring shots against. 

This has no bearing on the rate in which either of us will hit the scoreboard nor does it take into account scoring efficiency or even junk time scoring where the opposition allows a bit more leeway for teams to hit the scoreboard because the game is done but it does tell a story that they have been traveling better than we have in terms of hitting the scoreboard, and they seem to have been just as frugal as we have in terms of conceding.

So they should, they are a much more mature outfit, and they have been more consistent than us.

At the end of the day, neither of us know what is happening, but I don't live in a fools paradise and know that this will be a tough but winnable match, vs an opponent that hasn't been that good, but has had no real bad games either.

(05-04-2017, 01:22 AM)LP link Wrote:If we take too many 1st game kids, combined with a bunch of 1st season players, we'll be back to the Port Adelaide situation and get a smashing which does nothing positive for anybody!

I can't see BB making that mistake twice, no matter how much pressure he is under from the club to play the kids! :o

(05-04-2017, 12:50 AM)PaulP link Wrote:McGuire also hates the Swans and GWS, and on any given day probably every other AFL club.

I don't deny the doctrine of the arch nemesis (although I think its era has passed), I just  think it should be put on the back burner. This is "Old Carlton". From the supporters point of view, it's good for a bit of fun and pointless argy bargy, but that's pretty much it. If the players and club think that a gimmick like this will motivate them, then something's wrong, especially in the modern era.

(05-04-2017, 02:14 AM)Gointocarlton link Wrote:Rivalries exist and are also created, nothing "old" about it. Ask any kid drafted 10 years ago, today or in 10 years time what they think about playing on the MCG v Carlton, Filth, Scum or the Tiggers in front of 80-90K. Ask Hawks players/fans what they think of Geel and the Scum. The arch enemy stuff is just an extension of the rivalry IMO (ie rivalry taken to the next level), always been there for the players and fans, always will be.

(05-04-2017, 02:22 AM)LP link Wrote:Just an FYI.

BB is trying to have a past player coming every game to give the guys a heartfelt rev up, we don't need a jumper presentation to be scheduled for this to happen. It's a great initiative.

(05-04-2017, 02:34 AM)PaulP link Wrote:I guess the point I was making is that in the professional era, and in the post-zone era, things like rivalries and arch enemies are old school. I can understand some fans getting into it, but beyond that, it's passé. Our players should be ready to play, irrespective of who the opponent is. And if we need a gimmick for every opponent we play, then something's wrong iMO.

Rob Walls admitted in an interview with Mike Sheahan that most of his rivalry with Essendon was made up, and stemmed mainly from issues with Sheedy.

(05-04-2017, 02:52 AM)deags link Wrote:My head agrees with you on this, but when MM was coaching (and I don't want this to develop into an MM bash fest) he tried to take the emotion out of traditional rivalry games and we seemed to be on the back foot from the get go against teams obviously primed to want to feed on our ambivalence.

(05-04-2017, 03:29 AM)deags link Wrote:Unfortunately though, as professional as you like us to be, I don't think you can  deny that there is at least some effect.