Analysis 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22?

[LukeParkerno1]

Indeed. Our boys aren’t that far off it. Crazy to think that if Buddy and Parker weren’t absent in round 23, we may have made a preliminary final. But we’ll only ever have “maybe” scenarios as long as we continue not to play to the strengths of our players.

We need to give players like Florent space. Now he's not the only one but the point remains, get the ball in his hands, move it quick and he can deliver it. We have the players, well I at least think we are closer than we have shown...but it's the chippy,slow gameplan that is hurting us.

 

[caesar88]

We need to give players like Florent space. Now he's not the only one but the point remains, get the ball in his hands, move it quick and he can deliver it. We have the players, well I at least think we are closer than we have shown...but it's the chippy,slow gameplan that is hurting us.

Agree re Florent. It was an eyesore to see him at half back on a few occasions in the latter stages of the year. Don’t get me wrong he did the role well but he’s the most damaging player in our side when it’s in his hands IMO. He’s the only one that can kick the goal he kicked against the Bulldogs, and that break away goal against Richmond when he left them in his wake. Keep him on the wing and forward of centre. If I see him anywhere near the half back again I’ll hurl.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Agree re Florent. It was an eyesore to see him at half back on a few occasions in the latter stages of the year. Don’t get me wrong he did the role well but he’s the most damaging player in our side when it’s in his hands IMO. He’s the only one that can kick the goal he kicked against the Bulldogs, and that break away goal against Richmond when he left them in his wake. Keep him on the wing and forward of centre. If I see him anywhere near the half back again I’ll hurl.

Add Jones to that too, if either are on HB, I might absolutely lose it deluxe.

 

[caesar88]

Add Jones to that too, if either are on HB, I might absolutely lose it deluxe.

In fairness Jones doesn’t have as much class, but what he lacks in that makes up for in brute willingness to get it forward at all costs. I guess that’s why I’m okay with him as a half back flanker, because he just clears it out of there when others follow the Horse method of dilly-dallying around sideways and back and forth. But I am intrigued to see him translate that get-it-forward-dont-care-how approach to the midfield.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

In fairness Jones doesn’t have as much class, but what he lacks in that makes up for in brute willingness to get it forward at all costs. I guess that’s why I’m okay with him as a half back flanker, because he just clears it out of there when others follow the Horse method of dilly-dallying around sideways and back and forth. But I am intrigued to see him translate that get-it-forward-dont-care-how approach to the midfield.

Hey we might have a couple of mids that you know kick it forward! I hear that the one way to score goals is to kick it forward!

 

[TheMase]

Building a gameplan around 19 and now 20 year old Florent, and his inexperienced friends, is unrealistic and unfair on them imo.

They certainly are the players that will assist with changing the way we play, but is putting that much pressure on them to play such a key role at their level of experience and age the right thing to do in 2018?

Certainly they’ll continue to improve and become more consistent, and perhaps 2019 is the year to pull that trigger, but I think it is disingenuous to think that they could have taken on that level of responsibility in 2018.

 

[caesar88]

Building a gameplan around 19 and now 20 year old Florent, and his inexperienced friends, is unrealistic and unfair on them imo.

They certainly are the players that will assist with changing the way we play, but is putting that much pressure on them to play such a key role at their level of experience and age the right thing to do in 2018?

Certainly they’ll continue to improve and become more consistent, and perhaps 2019 is the year to pull that trigger, but I think it is disingenuous to think that they could have taken on that level of responsibility in 2018.

But that’s the point it’s not just Florent. It’s also Jones, Hayward, Aliir, Lloyd, Ronke, Heeney, Papley, McCartin etc. All youngsters that make up a large portion of our side. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with bending the game plan to suit these players. If they weren’t up to the challenge they wouldn’t be in the senior side. Selecting them to bring in flair or pace or athleticism but then playing the same formula that doesn’t allow much of those things is what’s unfair on them IMO.

 

[TheMase]

But that’s the point it’s not just Florent. It’s also Jones, Hayward, Aliir, Lloyd, Ronke, Heeney, Papley, McCartin etc. All youngsters that make up a large portion of our side. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with bending the game plan to suit these players. If they weren’t up to the challenge they wouldn’t be in the senior side. Selecting them to bring in flair or pace or athleticism but then playing the same formula that doesn’t allow much of those things is what’s unfair on them IMO.

I did say Florent and friends?

Florent, Hayward, Ronke and McCartin aren’t ready to carry the team in the way you are asking of them in 2018. It’s one thing to have them play, it’s entirely different thing to place the burden of responsibility on them.

If we had done as you would have liked in 2018, our results would have been far worse imo and it is possible it could have damaged some of those kids mentally. By the end of the year they were absolutely spent without even being given that weight of responsibility.

“If they aren’t up to the challenge, they wouldn’t be in the senior side” - does this mean if Fox comes in, we should direct play through him because well, he was selected so he should take on the bulk of responsibility? Maybe we should have given Kennedy a rest and made Robinson our number one mid. He got selected, so he must be up for the challenge? Well no...

I agree with you that those players will see the dynamics of our team and gameplan change, but expecting 18/19/20 year olds to be carrying that torch is off the mark for 2018 that just passed.

2019, different conversation for some of them provided they have seasoned players around them for support.

 

[caesar88]

I did say Florent and friends?

Florent, Hayward, Ronke and McCartin aren’t ready to carry the team in the way you are asking of them in 2018. It’s one thing to have them play, it’s entirely different thing to place the burden of responsibility on them.

If we had done as you would have liked in 2018, our results would have been far worse imo and it is possible it could have damaged some of those kids mentally. By the end of the year they were absolutely spent without even being given that weight of responsibility.

“If they aren’t up to the challenge, they wouldn’t be in the senior side” - does this mean if Fox comes in, we should direct play through him because well, he was selected so he should take on the bulk of responsibility? Maybe we should have given Kennedy a rest and made Robinson our number one mid. He got selected, so he must be up for the challenge? Well no...

I agree with you that those players will see the dynamics of our team and gameplan change, but expecting 18/19/20 year olds to be carrying that torch is off the mark for 2018 that just passed.

2019, different conversation for some of them provided they have seasoned players around them for support.

But I didn’t say they had to carry the torch or that they should be the sole playmakers in our team. Rather the brand of footy as a whole should have been reflective of a change. There were times this year where Horse & co, credit to them, had us playing Swans footy but loosened the reins enough to benefit the youngsters they had selected. The games I’m talking about were the Hawthorn match at the G, the shoot out vs North, the second and third quarters against Melbourne at the G, and the first quarter against Gold Coast. It was tough tempo footy, but flexible enough with the tempo that the dynamic kids could still come into the game. And unsurprisingly we kicked winning scores in all of those instances.

But there were too many times where they just reverted to tightening the reins and playing an ultra nostalgic brand that wasn’t unlike the 05-06 era Swans. It left the kids floundering, looking lost at sea, being played out of position, having too much asked of them. And unsurprisingly the majority of these cases is when we either did not kick a winning score or we stumbled ass backwards into a win. That’s not practical, nor is it a reliable way to instill belief in a young team.

I get where you’re coming from. Change, especially when on the run like mid-season, is usually not ideal for youngsters’ development. But the change I wish Horse brought more of would actually make it easier for them. They’d have more time and space and direct plays to help bring them into the game instead of being thrown into slog-matches that don’t suit their size or their strengths.

 

[RUNVS]

The problem was that when we did try that attacking style, often the opposition closed us down because our young guys got beaten one-one-one. We had to revert to another style, because the kids were too small and too inexperienced to keep that plan going.

That's why i just roll my eyes at the "horse haters". We did change the gameplan, we tried to be more attacking, but it takes more than one off-season and a bunch of kids to pull it off. And the "chiptiy chipity" across the backline that people complain about was us trying to set up a loose man at the back of the square so we could go into attack mode. Sometimes we got it right, but often it didn't work out. It will take more time, but i think the rules changes allowing the player taking the kick-in to run and have a bit more space will make it a more viable plan going forward.

What precise matches did we try and be more attacking?

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

It was not the kids but some of the more experienced players who played poorly and could not play more expansive footy.

 

[caesar88]

What precise matches did we try and be more attacking?

vs West Coast in Perth - beat the premiers.
vs Hawks at the G - won without Buddy.
vs Geelong at the Cattery - won without Buddy.
vs North at Etihad - won a high scoring shootout (unheard of!!!)
vs Gold Coast for a quarter - kicked 6.4.
vs Melbourne at the G - won over preliminary finalists.

They were among our very best wins this year. There is a lack of faith both on here and in the coaches box that this group of Swans can succeed playing free-flowing and direct footy. Not the right word as there is faith, but rather a fear that we might lose if we loosen the shackles, that the game will run away from us if we open it up, that our youngsters may not be able to handle it. Well guess what, we lost 8 games this year, and they were on the back of some of the ugliest, slowest, scrappiest performances I’ve seen from a Swans team in years. Might as well take the risk and play some daring footy. What’s the worst that can happen? We miss the finals, or make them and get bundled out in week one?

 

[CD__]

Potentially an unpopular opinion, but I wouldn’t mind JPK giving up the captaincy to Parker so that he can go back to just concentrating on his footy.

 

[RUNVS]

vs West Coast in Perth - beat the premiers.
vs Hawks at the G - won without Buddy.
vs Geelong at the Cattery - won without Buddy.
vs North at Etihad - won a high scoring shootout (unheard of!!!)
vs Gold Coast for a quarter - kicked 6.4.
vs Melbourne at the G - won over preliminary finalists.

They were among our very best wins this year. There is a lack of faith both on here and in the coaches box that this group of Swans can succeed playing free-flowing and direct footy. Not the right word as there is faith, but rather a fear that we might lose if we loosen the shackles, that the game will run away from us if we open it up, that our youngsters may not be able to handle it. Well guess what, we lost 8 games this year, and they were on the back of some of the ugliest, slowest, scrappiest performances I’ve seen from a Swans team in years. Might as well take the risk and play some daring footy. What’s the worst that can happen? We miss the finals, or make them and get bundled out in week one?

So you are saying when the Swans attack then we win? Then why in hell do we attack so little?

 

[zyzzbruh]

What precise matches did we try and be more attacking?

There were multiple games I attended this season, and having the ability to see the full length of the ground made it clear how inept our skills and decision making were. There were multiple strings of attack where you can see the stars lining up perfectly through the wings or middle of the ground, and being so used to seeing our team pull it off quite easily over the years I expected nothing less. The amount of times we missed targets and fumbled was actually beyond the joke. Jones, florent, Hayward, Hewett, Newman, hanners, heeney were the main culprits and it would in turn have an effect on seasoned players like Parker and Kennedy who were put under so much pressure because of it. I’m not pointing these lads out to have a go, with some of them it came down to pure inexperience. Some however were shite at times no excuses.

 

[Wolftone]

Ronke isn’t a great field kick imo. Has unbelievable goal sense and accuracy there but his field kicking leaves a bit to be desired. Mills is so so. Papley is ok.

Thurlow was rated one of the best kicks on the Cats list prior to his run of injuries.

Aliirs kicking is solid, but normally 30m passes. I feel he plays within his limitations (which is what you want!). As does Lloyd.

Jack and Smith ordinary as you point out and probably our worst / least inventive.

I don't agree re Ronke. His kicking is very good. At least if he is going to put the ball high he puts it to the advantage of our guys. His passing is top notch, especially if he g as marked. On the run it can be a bit 50/50 Bu mainly good.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[S120]

Potentially an unpopular opinion, but I wouldn’t mind JPK giving up the captaincy to Parker so that he can go back to just concentrating on his footy.

I think it's something that definitely has to be considered. Particularly considering that fans have wanted almost every other facet of the side to be revamped, why not the captaincy? Kennedy's form has dropped away since he's been made captain. He's still a very good player but his numbers were significantly lower in 2017 than in 2016 and lower again in 2018 than in 2017. Plus there have been considerable doubts about how the team has played since he's become captain.

I think I'd be in favour of Kennedy giving up the captaincy with all things considered. I'd love to see him concentrate on being the best player he can be again.

 

[TheMase]

I don't agree re Ronke. His kicking is very good. At least if he is going to put the ball high he puts it to the advantage of our guys. His passing is top notch, especially if he g as marked. On the run it can be a bit 50/50 Bu mainly good.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

When he was drafted the main knock on him was his kicking.

In 2018 he had a kicking efficiency of 53.3% which is considered below average for his position based on statistical benchmarking. His general disposal efficiency is 57.9% which is also below average.

He will get better no doubt, will learn to play within his limitations, but I don’t think I’d call him a very good field kick.

 

[Wolftone]

I cannot see Clarke or Thurlow playing round 1. They are upgrade depth players.

Assuming a fit list (huge assumption) Dawson, Reid, Mills, Menzel, Naismith and possibly Blakey would be candidates for Round 1.

Hanners and Newman are gone from the last team we fielded v GWS, opening two spots. If Naismith is fit I think Sinkers would miss. Jack is unlikely to be best 22. Cunningham and Smith will compete for the small defender role. If Reid is fit (!!!!!!) the third tall will be between McCartin and Menzell.

Under the new Ruck rules we will not play an under sized player in the Ruck. It would be absolute suicide to do so. All the opponent, a Ruck sized player, has to di is continue taking the ball out of the Ruck and they will be killing us.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Wolftone]

Exit interviews with players were very honest and the coach was told to change his approach to game style. Contrary to rumour, Longmire continues to have a great relationship with the players but yes, they are tired of the grinding game style.

I hope he can change Mick. But he hasn't given a great deal of evidence of change in the past. He did from mid 2011 when he introduced slingshot but from then on it has all been pretty predictable. Very lucky to have some really great players to execute a old game plan. But of course that has not held up in the games that really count.

I hope Horse can change. He seems like a nice fella and his parents are lovely. I met them some years ago outside a pub on the way to the game. Lovely, friendly people. I hope he has what it takes to take the criticism, and I'm sure there was plenty from players and the footy department, and look at a new way of working and game plan.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Wolftone]

By all reports Horse seems to have a great relationship with the players and always seems to put effort into how they're feeling and what they're thinking. The only places I have heard of discontent is from this forum. It would make sense for the same coach who pulls Morton aside when he's worried about his mental health and gives Buddy time off during finals campaigns is also open to dialog from his players and assistant coaches.

Also with everything I've read about Horse he doesn't like change to his gameplans. This isn't because he's stubborn but he believes in the same philosophy as Clarkson, build a solid system and stick to it. If you keep chopping and changing players wont have an idea of how many are in their 50, when they should switch, etc, etc.

Really looking forward to 2019

You got that wrong. In 2010 the Hawks players approached Clarkson, who as you say had the attitude if you have a good formula why change it, and told him his old game plan was not working and to come up with something new or lose his job. This was from the players, Hodge, Mitchell etc. He did and continued to tweek his game plan ever since. He is even able to change during games.

Since he has moved his premiership winning players on or retired them his game plan has changed again. This is out of necessity. The players he has now have a different skill set to the ones he had in the premiership years.

As for discontent from our players. You could see frustration coming out on the field. Not only that there were some performances where you could see the player's hearts were not in it. They no longer believed in the game style. In the final against GWS it was evident even before quarter time the players did not believe this style was going to win them the game. They knew what was Co. I g and were helpless to stop it. This is because there was no back up and the basics were not in place to counter what Cameron had GWS do to us.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Wolftone]

I havnt noticed any change from clarko what so ever.

Even if our style did change we can’t be expecting results from it straight away. Hardwick had to persist with his gameplan and multiple disappointing seasons before it got them anywhere. I feel like you’re all going to be too quick jumping on horses throat if results don’t go our way. I have no doubt horse will be listening to those around him and making adjustments accordingly. He wouldn’t be in the position he is from a club and business perspective if he was a dictator. He clearly has the respect of the players, coaching staff an club

Sorry but you must either be blind or blinkered. Clarkson has changed his game plan multiple times. That is why he won 4 premierships. Hardwick changed the Richmond game plan completely. In 2016 he was playing three talls in the forward-line in 2017 he had one. He played two rucks in 2016 in 2917 one. His hunt and kill game plan didn't eventuate until 2017. His game plan was totally different to the one that had them getting slaughtered in 2016.

Mind boggling that you could not see this

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Wolftone]

The thinking here seems to be that Reid and Sinclair are an either/or proposition. IWhy not play them both?
Naismith in the ruck, Buddy and Sinclair on the ground and Reid on the bench.
At any one time one of them wil be off, so at any one time we will have two tall targets in the forward line, plus one ruck, either Naismith or Sinclair.
Further, as Buddy ages, he probably will need more time on the bench.
Therefore we will have two tall forwards, two mediums - Hayward and Menzel, plus perhaps Kennedy or Parker rotating, and two smalls in Papley and Ronke.

I agree totally with you. The other thing is that with the change to the Ruck rules you can't play an under-sized Ruck anymore. If you do the real Rickman will crucify you by taking the ball out of the Ruck every time and dishing it out to teammates. The data of the weaker rucks have now gone. Strong, hard, tough, skillful rucks will reign supreme. Naismith, Sinclair, Cameron and Amarty should all do well. But players like Lobb might struggle against stronger opponents.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Wolftone]

I had them competing in my squad but, as others have pointed out, the changes to the ruck rule around taking possession out of the ruck probably means you can't chuck a medium player in to do a chop out for you while the ruckman is on the bench. Having said that you can't go too tall across the park either. I actually think Reid and Sinclair might be fighting for a similar role as a forward/second ruck. If Reid is fit he'd have to be a starter but that's a significant if.

Reid has been tried as second Ruck and it was the worst experiment ever. He was woeful. Towers got more hit outs than him

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[BloodySwan]

You got that wrong. In 2010 the Hawks players approached Clarkson, who as you say had the attitude if you have a good formula why change it, and told him his old game plan was not working and to come up with something new or lose his job. This was from the players, Hodge, Mitchell etc. He did and continued to tweek his game plan ever since. He is even able to change during games.

Since he has moved his premiership winning players on or retired them his game plan has changed again. This is out of necessity. The players he has now have a different skill set to the ones he had in the premiership years.

As for discontent from our players. You could see frustration coming out on the field. Not only that there were some performances where you could see the player's hearts were not in it. They no longer believed in the game style. In the final against GWS it was evident even before quarter time the players did not believe this style was going to win them the game. They knew what was Co. I g and were helpless to stop it. This is because there was no back up and the basics were not in place to counter what Cameron had GWS do to us.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Change during a season or game to game, not change all together. Clarko even said after the Richmond game

https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/h...arkson-cracks-it-at-media-sheep-ng-b88953131z

“I don’t mean to be too unflattering, but you guys are like a bunch of sheep,” Clarkson told reporters at his post-match press conference.

“Someone brings up the fact that Clarkson’s going to tactically have an impact on this game, (and they) haven’t watched the way I’ve coached for 14 years.

“We’re a system-based coaching side, and that’s why Richmond are so strong at the moment. They’re system-based.

“Every side’s that won premierships are system-based. None of it tactics.

“You’ll occasionally win a game with something spectacular, but not usually in finals.”