"Coaching To Win" VS "Playing For The Future"

[Thryleon]

But my point still remains, we should know by now. I certainly don't, others may beg to differ.

I disagree, thee blokes are doing nothing for our culture and nothing for our future. The only bloke that even looks like he really busts his guts is Army but he needs to be just a fraction off and he's not very good.

But in this case, when you look at who is playing instead of them, it's really a no brainer who should play.

Sure, but have a think about the message you send the group too.

Armfield honest trier, not overly talented but has elite pace commits 100%.
Ellard knows his way around a footy field but isnt outstanding, can kick a goal commits 100%.
Walker has ability, but on his day can be a game breaker but has been found.  Usually busts a gut at worst, but gets found out defensively not from a lack of want I might add.  Commits 100%.

These guys have limitations in their game. Its plain as day, but its worth remembering that Ellard and Armfield regularly perform at similar standard at VFL level to our current best performers most weeks.  Currently they are being rewarded for their efforts.  Walker has hardly played VFL footy but he too dominates whenever he does as in the one game he played there about 4 weeks ago.

We shouldnt just stop with them, we could go further, but there is a limit to how far you can go.  Sam Rowe is one who wouldnt and maybe shouldnt get a game, but it wouldnt help Jaksch or any other future key defender to get smacked every week whilst at the moment he actually has been one of our better performers of late (says more about the team than him but its still worth remembering).  Daniel Talia developed well at Adelaide because he had Ben Rutten leading the way rather than just leaving him to get smacked at one point.

I maintain a previous point.  Kids develope better elsewhere due to the system they go into.  Selwood was a fresh faced bloke, who joined an outfit that was cherry ripe to start dominating the AFL in his first year.  Put him in with Kelly, Ling, God junior, Bartell and the rest of their mids, and as a result, they were able to bring him through a system where everyone knew what was happening, and what role they had to play.  So, rather than 5 dear in the headlights, they had 1, and a bunch of players setting the standard around him.  As a result they were able to bring him up to their level quickly.

I have no doubt in my mind, that had we taken Selwood, and they Gibbs, Gibbs would be the current Geelong captain, and would be revered in much the same way Selwood is.  Would Selwood have gone okay with us? He might have done better than Gibbs has, but I believe that things would have been different for him, and he wouldn't be as dominant as he is today. 

This predates any one coach.  The trouble stems from the mentality of bring in what we need on money rather than develope our own, and is probably the thing that Elliott was most guilty of.  We bought what we needed and what we wanted.

This is where I was hoping Malthouse would help us.  Implement a system that brings in the next bloke for the guy departing.  It hasn't worked for whatever reason.  Hopefully the next guy we get in will be able to implement a system that nurtures, developes and grows all of our players in a manner that makes them champions of the game, and better people.