You're half-right; but AFL players are not born great, and we're not actually after clones of our current great players. BBBH is not a clone of Lockett; MOL is not a clone of anyone, certainly not Simon Minton-Connell or Capper. Goodes is tearing up the rule-book as he goes. None of Buchanan, Kirk or JBolt plays exactly the game that Schwass, Paul Kelly or Cresswell did. We're after good, hopefully great, players who play in the relevant parts of the ground, not replicas of the great players who went before.Originally posted by Guzzitza
I find it difficult to see how you intend to do this , somehow prepare for the next 3 or 4 years time yet keep these key players on at the same time. [snip] Thats why there is the window, the coach will keep the best players he has out on the field for as long as possible, even though it can mean hampering younger players development - because you need to make the most of those great players you have, while you still have them.
Luckily, because you can have more than 6 players on the ground at once, you can get game time, confidence and a feel for the team's game into the next generation of players without having to take the senior group off the ground. They certainly have to take a big step up after BBBH or MOL retires. But that big step becomes an impossible step if some 'genius' 18 year old plays his first game the week after BBBH hangs up his boots, and the public is told, 'Behold! Your new key forward is here!' Grundy will earn more than 3 or 4 games a year over the next 2 or 3 years if he's good enough to be a long-term key forward, even if MOL and BBBH play every game in that time.
The best-case scenario is that a player takes the mantle, he doesn't wait for it to be handed to him: i.e. by the time 2008 rolls around, people are going to the game and saying, 'Micky O is a legend of the club; but the guy you've really got to watch out for is Reg Grundy'. You can debate whether Malceski contributed more to the team than Williams in the matches both played (possibly not); but I know who I was more excited to turn up and watch.
There are heaps of examples of that natural development in the Swans squad. In 2001, Leo Barry was more of a support act in defence and was not the elite player he has become, Kirk really came on as a player and a leader when Schwass and Paul Kelly were nearing or at the end, Goodes had huge talent but was erratic as all hell 5 years ago, JBolt was always keen as a puppy but didn't have anywhere near the leadership skills he now has, Schneider stepped seemingly from nowhere into a slot for a small forward in 2003, etcetera. Players develop into the roles as they're able to take them and as opportunities arise. The above achievements occurred without the coaching group having to force Schwass off the park so that Kirk could develop a greater sense of responsibility, etc.
'Several key players around the same age' is the important phrase, but it's apt to mislead in terms of longevity. Some footballers go until 33-34 or longer, some retire at 29. More years than not, every club will lose one or more 'key players'. Just a product of dividing the number of good players at a club by the average length of career. What you're looking to avoid is too many structurally important players retiring at the same time. Kirk for example is a key player, but isn't structurally that important. MOL probably isn't either; even though he does things that no other forward is likely to, our gameplan doesn't revolve around him (as opposed to some other marking forward) being there.
BBBH and Leo Barry are really the big ones. What we're looking to avoid, is both of them retiring in the same year. Should hopefully be manageable.
Bookmarks