Season stats

[Wolfpack]

Stop quoting every posto.

 

[Stevo]

Ok Wolfpacko!

 

[Wolfpack]

Thanks Stevo'o!

 

[bones]

Stop quoting every posto.

Yolo.

 

[Wolfpack]

Stop quoting every posto.

Yolo.

Yoqo.

 

[globaleagle]

You guys should stay away from this thread"o".

http://www.silvertails.net/forum/Thread-Legend-spotto?pid=515127#pid515127

 

[Stevo]

No worries Globo!!

 

[mickqld]

A very telling stat that was thrown up on the Sterlo show on Fox. The teams who score the most points over their opposition in the last 20 minutes of games. I can't remember all the stats but there was one team streets ahead of the rest. Manly with 97 more points scored than their opposition in the last 20 min. The next closest was Storm with 53. Souffs and Rorters were way behind.

 

[Stevo]

Is that a fitness or a patience/experience thing do you think, Mick? Maybe a little of all?

You don't get Micko at all do you? lol

 

[Technical Coach]

My theory has always been to have a good enough attack to break fresh defensive lines and if that is the case scoring at the back end is made easier if you have the fitness and class to take advantage of fatigue.

 

[mickqld]

Is that a fitness or a patience/experience thing do you think, Mick? Maybe a little of all?

You don't get Micko at all do you? lol

I think it indicates that those 2 teams will wear you down and then put you away. Fitness definitely but it's their defenses and keeping in the grind that wear the opposition out. The experience of those 2 teams pacing themselves in the contest is also a big factor. Everyone's blowing on about Souffs and Rorters but in finals this is what wins premierships.
LOL No Micko's please. I'm not some flanelette shirt ,desert boot wearing, Winnie Blues up the sleeve westie.

 

[Stevo]

Is that a fitness or a patience/experience thing do you think, Mick? Maybe a little of all?

You don't get Micko at all do you? lol

I think it indicates that those 2 teams will wear you down and then put you away. Fitness definitely but it's their defenses and keeping in the grind that wear the opposition out. The experience of those 2 teams pacing themselves in the contest is also a big factor. Everyone's blowing on about Souffs and Rorters but in finals this is what wins premierships.
LOL No Micko's please. I'm not some flanelette shirt ,desert boot wearing, Winnie Blues up the sleeve westie.

Haha sorry Michael. You got me!

 

[mickqld]

If you analyse most of Manly's performances in winning games especially in finals games over the last few years. The half time score is usually fairly close then we blow teams away in the last 20min. Games where we blow teams away in the first half nearly always end up with an even second half. We aren't a team used to running away and going on with it. We tend to want to get into the grind and try to outmuscle and exhaust the opposition in most big games. Even 2008 GF was 8-0 after 50 min and 2007 GF was close into the second half till Snake got clobbered by the scum.

 

[Stevo]

Yeah i like it that way. Although it would be good at times to go on with it. It would have been nice to put a good score on the Tits last week.

 

[Technical Coach]

So what you are saying is that our attack should struggle to score points to maintain the grind and hope our superior fitness comes over the top.

Having a clinical creative attack that can bust through and score against a fresh defensive line(which is harder to do) is not mutually exclusive to being able to get into the grind or have fitness levels that come over the top in the last quarter.

You need to be able to have a balance not one or the other and fitness levels should not even be related to when you score points.

 

[manlyfan76]

So what you are saying is that our attack should struggle to score points to maintain the grind and hope our superior fitness comes over the top.

Having a clinical creative attack that can bust through and score against a fresh defensive line(which is harder to do) is not mutually exclusive to being able to get into the grind or have fitness levels that come over the top in the last quarter.

You need to be able to have a balance not one or the other and fitness levels should not even be related to when you score points.

Technical Coach i agree with you a lot of the time but I must say that the only thing that matters in First Grade is WINNING. 15 teams are losers every year. The minor premiers do not win year in year out. The team with the best attack or defense does not win every grand final. You might care about how we win but the score board only cares about who wins. The lower grades are for theories and systems and doing what is right. How do teams have seasons like Parra a few years ago? because winning counts, how you win does not. Look at the Swans victory a few seasons ago, the CEo of the AFL knocked them for their style of play but they were the Champions.

Any team that wins the big one, like the Storm see other teams follow their method in following years. even teams like the dogs of last year have seen teams copy some of their play. Winning creates the standard. If Manly run out 10 145kg players next year and three small halves/backs and go undefeated everybody will be looking for massive players. Why because winning counts. Nothing Else Matters. See following Video.
http://youtu.be/Tj75Arhq5ho

 

[Technical Coach]

So what you are saying is that our attack should struggle to score points to maintain the grind and hope our superior fitness comes over the top.

Having a clinical creative attack that can bust through and score against a fresh defensive line(which is harder to do) is not mutually exclusive to being able to get into the grind or have fitness levels that come over the top in the last quarter.

You need to be able to have a balance not one or the other and fitness levels should not even be related to when you score points.

Technical Coach i agree with you a lot of the time but I must say that the only thing that matters in First Grade is WINNING. 15 teams are losers every year. The minor premiers do not win year in year out. The team with the best attack or defense does not win every grand final. You might care about how we win but the score board only cares about who wins. The lower grades are for theories and systems and doing what is right. How do teams have seasons like Parra a few years ago? because winning counts, how you win does not. Look at the Swans victory a few seasons ago, the CEo of the AFL knocked them for their style of play but they were the Champions.

Any team that wins the big one, like the Storm see other teams follow their method in following years. even teams like the dogs of last year have seen teams copy some of their play. Winning creates the standard. If Manly run out 10 145kg players next year and three small halves/backs and go undefeated everybody will be looking for massive players. Why because winning counts. Nothing Else Matters. See following Video.
http://youtu.be/Tj75Arhq5ho

I agree with you the point I'm making is "teams don't build attacking structures or plans off the back of first winning the grind" if that is the case they are basically suggesting they are not good enough to score against a fresh defensive line.

The quality of a team in attack is to score under different situations against all opposition but also be able to stay in the grind and burn teams in the back end.

Manly over the last 6yrs have always been able to grind a game out which shows we have a good attitude and culture the most important element to have.

It's not always about looking at basic attack/defensive stats and saying "we have the best attack/defence based off stats", it's under pressure how they perform. Over the years I have rated our defence and attitude under pressure more than I rate our attack allowing Manly to stick in the grind and still win most games.

If you go through our past win loss records most losses are off the back of struggling to score points or when Brett is not in the squad. I will say this year the Brett excuse/reason for our poor attack is being over hyped---Manly are playing against weaker opposition since the Roosters game and we will not know how much we have improved until we are tested again.(i'm not saying there is no improvement as I can see the attack has been worked on but we need to see it under pressure)

Attacking structures from all NRL teams are overly reliant on quality fullbacks chiming in or being a threat suggesting they are one dimensional carbon copies of each other.

---

If you analyse most of Manly's performances in winning games especially in finals games over the last few years. The half time score is usually fairly close then we blow teams away in the last 20min. Games where we blow teams away in the first half nearly always end up with an even second half. We aren't a team used to running away and going on with it. We tend to want to get into the grind and try to outmuscle and exhaust the opposition in most big games. Even 2008 GF was 8-0 after 50 min and 2007 GF was close into the second half till Snake got clobbered by the scum.

Finals games should be close due to playing against higher quality more often but some of these games have been close due to playing sideways and errors in the first half.

Games against the Cowboys in the past and Melb last year come to mind.

 

[mickqld]

TC I have a question for you. If Manly had Foran and a fully fit Snake, (and some competent referees) in that game a few weeks ago against the Rorters do you think we would have won ? I think we would have. There is very little between winning and losing in big matches between top teams this day.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Don't forget the simple factor of being 'in form'. A few relaxed training-style gallops against poorer teams can give the players confidence, get them practised in their timing under match conditions etc., so hopefully when we play the top sides we will be in top form. (For an example of out of form see Parramatta)

 

[Technical Coach]

TC I have a question for you. If Manly had Foran and a fully fit Snake, (and some competent referees) in that game a few weeks ago against the Rorters do you think we would have won ? I think we would have. There is very little between winning and losing in big matches between top teams this day.

No (doing my best to not elaborate with technical dribble keeping it short and simple for the masses and to take a load off Dan's servers)