Round 1 V Essendon

[Matt80]

It is simple, we pick the best 22 fit and available for the Essendon game, 4 points are at stake. If nothing else percentage is always important

This talk of resting players for round 1 in the name of "Asset Management" is absurd in the extreme

- - - Updated - - -



Early contender for dumbest post of the year - have you ever actually played competitive sport Matt or do you just see everything through your gratingly annoying Corporate Advisor Speak?

I used to watch Sir Alex at Man United rest and refresh players through a long season. This managed injuries and player impact while building the depth and capability of his whole squad. Sir Alex would not play his best players if the game was a cup tie against a 4th division side. A depleted Dons side is the equivalent of a lower division soccer side.

Cricket Australia practices informed player management. They don't play Mitchell Johnson in Ryan Harris for every game. The rest and refresh them so they operate at maximum impact when required.

These two approaches were not designed by McKinsey and Co. They were designed by World Class coaches who understand competitive sport.

[treespirit]

Wouldn't hurt the supporters to see a glorious opening to the season for a change!

[RogueSwan]

Yeah, a solid ten-fifteen goal win, with no injuries would wonderful.

[graemed]

This is about asset management. If you are playing the top up Dons side, who you can beat without your most impressive assets, why risk your assets.

Every game you play them is a risk of an ACL. Why put them under that risk when you don't require them to win. Buddy will not benefit from the extra game.

This is about underwriting and protecting our assets.

If the Dons are at full strength, we go in full strength.

Sorry Matt but this type of economic bottom line thinking is really silly. Every team knows from 2013 on that building percentage in "soft" games is critical to your final ranking. To suggest resting players because the opposition is weak is contrary to "best practice". If they are genuinely unfit or injured then it is up to the fitness and physio depts to say so and deem them unavailable. To not play your best team on the basis of some perceived development policy is the worst possible message to being sending not only to your own side, but more importantly to the opposition: "Look we don't rate you so we'll play our juniors."

Every player you mentioned will be needed against Port in Adelaide the following week.

By playing them against Essendon, a) we find out if they're fit, b) we give them the chance to improve their match fitness and/or c) they get more game time to tune up their skills under match day pressure.

[Dosser]

I used to watch Sir Alex at Man United rest and refresh players through a long season. This managed injuries and player impact while building the depth and capability of his whole squad. Sir Alex would not play his best players if the game was a cup tie against a 4th division side. A depleted Dons side is the equivalent of a lower division soccer side.

Cricket Australia practices informed player management. They don't play Mitchell Johnson in Ryan Harris for every game. The rest and refresh them so they operate at maximum impact when required.

These two approaches were not designed by McKinsey and Co. They were designed by World Class coaches who understand competitive sport.

If we were in a competition that forced us to play 2-3 games a week you may be right but until then the comparison (and therefore strategy) is ridiculous.

[Untamed Snark]

Sorry Matt but this type of economic bottom line thinking is really silly. Every team knows from 2013 on that building percentage in "soft" games is critical to your final ranking. To suggest resting players because the opposition is weak is contrary to "best practice". If they are genuinely unfit or injured then it is up to the fitness and physio depts to say so and deem them unavailable. To not play your best team on the basis of some perceived development policy is the worst possible message to being sending not only to your own side, but more importantly to the opposition: "Look we don't rate you so we'll play our juniors."

Every player you mentioned will be needed against Port in Adelaide the following week.

By playing them against Essendon, a) we find out if they're fit, b) we give them the chance to improve their match fitness and/or c) they get more game time to tune up their skills under match day pressure.

Agree with all of this.
It's not just about the game this week, it's also about getting ready for next week and the one after. Conditioning & building up match fitness. Learning to play with new additions and gelling together with new coaching tactics.
And even poor teams can occasionally beat the great ones (Dees anyone? ) and the end of the season could well depend on those four points and the percentage boost.

[Dosser]

You are right. Rewind to round 1 of 2014. People were probably saying we should ease players in to the season then as well.

[Meg]

You are right. Rewind to round 1 of 2014. People were probably saying we should ease players in to the season then as well.

I think we did, it's just that they did their "easing" while going through the motions of playing.

Please, not again against Essendon.

[The Big Cat]

I used to watch Sir Alex at Man United rest and refresh players through a long season. This managed injuries and player impact while building the depth and capability of his whole squad. Sir Alex would not play his best players if the game was a cup tie against a 4th division side. A depleted Dons side is the equivalent of a lower division soccer side.

Cricket Australia practices informed player management. They don't play Mitchell Johnson in Ryan Harris for every game. The rest and refresh them so they operate at maximum impact when required.

These two approaches were not designed by McKinsey and Co. They were designed by World Class coaches who understand competitive sport.

You can't compare Man U with an AFL team (unless it's Hawthorn). Man U rape poorer and overseas clubs (via increasing their billion pound debt) so they have a stock of excellent players that are there for the very reason of playing the lesser games. The result is the most predictable, uninteresting competition in world sport with a league of many many teams but only four clubs that can ever be premiers.

[treespirit]

Also, match practice is requred for all players, young or experienced, especially at the start of the season.

This talk of an easy win is making me nervous.

[Matt80]

Now do people understand my point on asset management and not playing your best players when you don't have too?

[jono2707]

Now do people understand my point on asset management and not playing your best players when you don't have too?

And your point is?

Edit: please treat this as a rhetorical question - I don't really want to hear whatever crackpot theory you want to try to force down our throats.....

[Matt80]

And your point is?

We have Buddy with a potential Jaw or Cheek bone injury. He could be out for 4-6 weeks. Just to play NAB cup.

If the Dons are depleted, don't risk our best players who may benefit from more rehab time.

[jono2707]

We have Buddy with a potential Jaw or Cheek bone injury. He could be out for 4-6 weeks. Just to play NAB cup.

If the Dons are depleted, don't risk our best players who may benefit from more rehab time.

Looks like you missed my updated post.

Thanks for sharing your expertise.

Yawn.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Buddy was fit, there was not risk in playing him. It was a freak accident.