Should be better for it in the long run if thats the case. Unfortunately simply due to the huge inundation of injuries and youth we won’t really know how the fitness levels are for the end of the year
that or the total opposite and they were under prepared.
you don’t often hear of 3 players breaking down on a light training run over the bye weekend.
The old saying though may be it, train smarter not harder.
geelong supposedly took on a new approach this season, train at max for 2 sessions a week, at what they believe is higher intensity than a match, and let them recover more.
seems to be working.
whatever it is, our players look smaller physically then the top sides, they don’t run at pace as much as the top sides.
we are no where near the top levels of fitness of the comp, maybe that’s why they’ve broken down, just wrong preperation for what they thought the standards were going to be.
I agree our players are always under prepared and small I’ve said it many times that when we play top teams it’s like students versus teachers every year.
So ramping up the training was bound to break them it even happened with stringer went to gws he tried to go with them and done a hamstring I think early and they rebuilt him again
His role was changed in 2024 and he lost control over recovery - that’s why he and Carlton parted ways. When he had control over fitness and recovery look what they did - they stormed the finals and were running over teams.
There’s a bit of messiah worshipping in this thread re burgess. His IP would be all over the AFL. It’s not like he can keep his program from all his assistants and other professionals in AFL.
If sports science was some mystic profession, then maybe he has the magic touch - but it’s science not a black art.
Sure it’s time for some new personnel and a new leader in our HPD, but the reasons for our injury crisis will be multiple and connected and go far beyond smurphy.
We’ll never actually know for sure as there are so many possible causes. But if it is a perfect storm then it’s the combined impact of
playing surfaces x over/under-loading x insufficient recovery times/program x slack player commitment to recovery x injury-prone players who never actually heal completely x communication/organisational problems x … see long article posted re holistic approach to HP.
There you go.
Vozzo was certainty appointed as a ‘football first’ CEO banking on his footy department experience prior to his three years of legal counsel (bearing in mind 3 years is a long time removed from a footy department senior role).
That in itself moved Essendon out of its X driven marketing laneway of 8 years.
And when you change laneways there’s always an associated risk.
The Vozzo appointment wasn’t risk free, and in no way a vanilla decision.
And as someone else pointed out, the Rosa appointment was a huge leap in his career (Peel Thunder to The Hangar in a different role ) and a calculated risk taken by Essendon to anoint him as the future List manager.
I’d hate to be buying the vanilla milkshakes you’ve been trying to sell.
The former coach of Western United said they couldn’t get away from the Hangar and its training oval surfaces quick enough they were that bad. Oval 2 seems to be the problem. This has been confirmed to me by a recently retire ex player (whose career spanned Windy Hill and the Hangar)
I have heard that the original excavation and resurfacing was compromised due to concerns with local residents (dust? Noise?). I can’t verify the truth of this.
the degree of ‘risk’ you’re talking about here is so marginal it’s basically non existent.
Edit: (or maybe that’s the difference - I’m suggesting it’s not especially risky rather than arguing there is no risk at all)
When you take into account that it was ‘football’ that was failing the entire time under Campbell’s watch, moving to a footy focused ceo with actual relevant footy experience is objectively, not particularly risky given the stated objective to improve football.
Rosa’s experience and suitability as well as Vozzo’s related footy department experience has been covered appropriately elsewhere.
well he is the fitness guy, he’s main job is to have them afl fit, how the actual coach chooses to use them is on the coach.
i can’t see how the coaching of the first half of the year, and the players form, could be contributed to fitness, but somehow bam half way through the year, ironically after a loss to us, their fitness starts kicking in and they can overrun teams.
that’s like saying chris scott, fagan, mitchell and geelongs, brissy and hawks IP is all over the afl, so every club should be what doing the same ?
it’s one thing to know of a theory, it is another to have the knowledge and experience of all the intricacies that go along with it, and to mitigate really bad outcomes.
and it’s not about just pushing them beyond their comfort zones, he’d have to know when to push, when to ease back, what sort of recovery is needed, what sort of rehab timeframes and again when to push and ease back on them.
you can reverse engineer some of that to a degree, but when ■■■■ hits the fan, you may not have the necessary knowledge or experience to to minimise the damage.
there is also only 18 positions at this level in any one year, less over the years, so yes while the IP might be in a multitide of peoples hands, the amount of people who could effectively use it, well again it mimics the amount of effect people who can take what they’ve learnt about coaching, and implement it in a head role.