-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Bachar Houli - بشار حولي,
- Thread starter Baloo
- Start date
Leysy Days, the most important man in football 
Well perhaps not, but he is one of the most important posters on PRE. Makes reading past the mad_doggies of this forum worth it.
Well perhaps not, but he is one of the most important posters on PRE. Makes reading past the mad_doggies of this forum worth it.
Leysy Days said:
Really Leysy?
Would you have said the same when he was the s&c coach over the team that had gone from 2 x grand finalist to the team that finished 2nd last and was so crap they got the priority pick that got them Pendlebury and Thomas?
There are a lot of good people at Collingwood now, it's a massive assumption to pick out 2 of them, Malthouse and Buttifant, and assume they are the ones that made the key moves to take them from the bottom to the top of the ladder.
For what it's worth I have heard educated minds say that it was Buckleys input into the defensive structure, and a very wise assistant strength and conditioning coach that have had plenty to do with Collingwoods rise up the ladder.
I would hate to try and cherry pick the guys responsible for the Pies success.
Leysy Days said:
Whilst I think you overstated the most important man in AFL football, he is a very important cog in what Collingwood have become. Like you, have only heard great things about him and his importance at Collingwood.
Reckon this is where we are still way behind. Hornsby has been with us for so many years of below par performances and output. I think whilst a decent fitness guy, you have to wonder about him being the head of Sports Science for us. We need to improve and get better. This is an area where we should go poaching. Sydney, the Bulldogs and the Saints have guys that we must try and get.
Agree again there Bob,
On people playing down Buttifant's signifigance. Leysy might have been a smidge over the top, but you only have to listen to Malthouse' regard for him to know the impact he's had on that club in recent years.
In leysy's years watching football he has never seen a team be able to burst run for such long periods like this Collingwood team. Leysy finds it just amazing how they can do this far better than any other club. Buttifant has been the architect of that. If he is able to lift a list in an area like that across the board it makes a huge difference to a teams performance. That has to make him damn invaluable leysy would have thought. Certainly more than one individual player on results.
Here's a couple of articles on Buttifant - Interestingly the first one shows his upgrade to director of sports science in 2008. Incidentally when Collingwood started massively increasing interchanges. It is widely known Buttifant was the architect of this after years of research into how this could assist players/teams ability to impact games.
Other clubs have since followed Buttifants work, but most are still miles behind the pies when it comes to physically bringing out the best in their players, especially in power running. They are now talking about tailoring the total games per individual for the year so they can always play at there optimum. Dont expect too many pie players (if any) to play all 22 games this year.
http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/tabid/5586/default.aspx?newsid=62719
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/pies-keep-mum-about-fitness-success-secrets-20101002-16236.html
On people playing down Buttifant's signifigance. Leysy might have been a smidge over the top, but you only have to listen to Malthouse' regard for him to know the impact he's had on that club in recent years.
In leysy's years watching football he has never seen a team be able to burst run for such long periods like this Collingwood team. Leysy finds it just amazing how they can do this far better than any other club. Buttifant has been the architect of that. If he is able to lift a list in an area like that across the board it makes a huge difference to a teams performance. That has to make him damn invaluable leysy would have thought. Certainly more than one individual player on results.
Here's a couple of articles on Buttifant - Interestingly the first one shows his upgrade to director of sports science in 2008. Incidentally when Collingwood started massively increasing interchanges. It is widely known Buttifant was the architect of this after years of research into how this could assist players/teams ability to impact games.
Other clubs have since followed Buttifants work, but most are still miles behind the pies when it comes to physically bringing out the best in their players, especially in power running. They are now talking about tailoring the total games per individual for the year so they can always play at there optimum. Dont expect too many pie players (if any) to play all 22 games this year.
http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/tabid/5586/default.aspx?newsid=62719
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/pies-keep-mum-about-fitness-success-secrets-20101002-16236.html
Giardiasis said:Leysy Days, the most important man in football
Well perhaps not, but he is one of the most important posters on PRE. Makes reading past the mad_doggies of this forum worth it.
Cheers Giar, watchout though Tigertim wont think much of you for saying that.
Leysy Days said:
Don't disagree about the fantastic fitness levels the Pies have achieved Leysy, but again think you are getting a bit carried away at the individual input of Buttifant. Pretty sure he came on board the second year of Malthouses coaching stint, and he is doing pretty much the same job, perhaps with a fancy new name, and more importantly a massively increased staff and budget, as he always has.
You can change his name to Director of Conditioning, but when it comes down to it he is still just the head trainer like he has always been, through their lean years and now their success.
These guys all read exactly the same research journals as each other, there are very few big secrets out there in strength and conditioning, so at the end of the day it will often come down to who has the most money and can employ the most staff and purchase the best equipment.
I remember a few years ago talking to a mate who had lunch with Neil Balme. Balme was talking about how they were about to purchase a decompression chamber to keep at Collingwood Football Club to help aid in the recovery of players. My mate was amazed at spending so much money on such a small part of the rehab chain and asked why you would do that. Balmy pretty much used words to the effect of "because we can"!
No doubt there will be room for improvement at the Tigers in strength and conditioning, and I have no idea of whether or not Matt Hornsby is the right guy for the job, but I reckon it's more about budgets and teams than it is about individuals.
For what it's worth, did you know the Saints don't even have GPS trackers to monitor their training loads? Richmond are way ahead of the Saints in this particular regard with their computerized monitoring of every players training load. This is one of many ways the S&C team use to try and minimize soft tissue injuries, an area the Tigers have an exceptional record in, over the last few years.
Out of interest what are the names of the journals that specialise in this topic?linuscambridge said:
Given that the Saints have been amongst the top 2 or 3 teams for the last 5 years or so, that says to me that while S+C and skills training is important, being best practise at recruiting is still where it is at.linuscambridge said:
evo said:
Dozens, probably hundreds of journals in the field, just google exercise physiology and wade on through. I haven't subscribed to any since the mid 80s, so couldn't even tell you who is in fashion right now. Over time guys like Hornsby and Buttifant will know where the good research is being done. In my day Penn State used to be good, a couple of guys Kramer and Fleck turned out some good stuff. Anyway, boring.
I agree totally on the recruiting. I know you have been around long enough on this site to remember the Pendlebury draft. Plenty on here bagged the crap out of the Pies recruiters for taking on a skinny basketballer at pick 5. We all know how that worked out for them.
And how about their rookies!!! We get Robbie Hicks, they get Blair. We get Will Thursfield and they get Harry O'Brian, we get Relton Roberts and they get Nick Maxwell. How do they keep doing it?
linuscambridge said:
Agree to a point that Collingwood are at an advantage to some in that they can afford some things others can't. Disagree though at the insinuation there is not much between the talent of some sports science teams as opposed to others because they read the same journals. Its the guys in this field that can see the future of the game & innovate from the knowledge they've learned that give there sides advantage. i.e - this from the start of 2008 when Collingwood got the jump on the competion that they still hold with regards to the advantage of rotations. -
In keeping with the trend of modern football clubs, Malthouse's conversion has nothing to do with faith and everything to do with science.
David Buttifant, Collingwood's sports science director, said the club's escalation in bench use between round 19 and 20 coincided with the introduction of an improved mathematical formula to measure player workload and fatigue on match days.
"We have done a fair bit of research into this, looking at trends of the game and how to sustain intensity and velocity," Buttifant said.
"From that, we were able to prescribe a better indicator which Mick uses every week. We have devised a sophisticated, algorithmic formula. That is relayed to Mick and he determines all the rotations."
http://www.news.com.au/malthouse-sets-pace-of-change/story-e6frf36c-1111115888287
There are plenty of clubs that have facilities & money like Collingwood. Not one has been able to replicate the constant power running that Collingwood possesses. Thats not down to luck ILO.
Anyway its an interestic topic Linus with no real definitive answer.
evo said:
St Kilda are an interesting case. They've been fortunate to have who leysy considers to be 3 of the top 6 players in the whole comp both in influence & drive in recent seasons. I.E Goddard, Hayes & Reiwoldt. They are backed up by influential all-australians like Montagna, Dal Santo & Fisher. Combine that with a game-plan that was good for its time, a guy that is extremely well regarded in fitness circles & you have there recipe for success.
Agree that recruiting is vital but St Kilda probably arent a good example as they are far from best practice in this area. (In fact they recently replaced there head recruiter).
linuscambridge said:
The big thing with Collingwood is not so much there recruiting but the philsophy they have towards it. They are prepared to continually try to unearth an unexposed player late on in the draft. As opposed to us even to this day. Look at last years rookie draft. They take unheard of young guys like Thomas Gordon, Declan Reilly, Jack Perham, Jye Bolton & Paul Cribbin. If just one of them turns into a long term player it will be a better result than us (which considering there history is a good bet). Whilst we take Tom Hislop, Brad Miller & just one young player in Ben Jakobi.
They have the right idea. We still dont.
Good posting Daisy.
No doubt though the extra cash makes a difference in terms of the resources a guy like Buttifant has at his disposal.
The luxury of having these high altitude training trips to Arizona each year being a case in point.
They also spent $100,000 on an altitude training room. How many teams can afford that??
No doubt though the extra cash makes a difference in terms of the resources a guy like Buttifant has at his disposal.
The luxury of having these high altitude training trips to Arizona each year being a case in point.
They also spent $100,000 on an altitude training room. How many teams can afford that??
Leysy Days said:
I don't deny that Buttifant hasn't done a good job, but I still think the articles you quote are close to propaganda pieces rather than ground breaking journalism.
There are plenty of clubs using gps trackers to monitor players distance travelled, speed attained and time at maximum heart rate, and using this data to decide on rotations. This was not a CFC initiative and IMO is far more accurate than any mathematical formula. Every player will have a different vo2 max., anaerobic threshold, pain tolerance, etc. It would be a pretty special formulae that could standardize all of that data across a team.
Regardless of that, they did set the standard for the high rotations in modern football and do demonstrate a formidable fitness level. However, by the end of last year every club had latched on to the high rotations and yet it didn't seem to help anybody beat Collingwood! In that sense the rotations off the bench is clearly not the defining feature of their success
In terms of budgets, and spending on sports science, Gale has made it pretty clear that he thinks it is critical to our success to try and match Collingwood if we want to squeeze the most out of our team. Collingwood go high altitude training in Arizona, we go to New Zealand!
Agree emphatically with everything you said about use of the rookie list
evo said:
Based on impact factor (which is essentially based on numbers of citations) the top 4 journals in sports science are:
Exercise and Immunology Reviews (impact factor 2.9)
American Journal of Sports Medicine (2.3)
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (2.1)
Journal of Applied Physiology (2.1)
