Coach John Longmire - Part IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Gun Island said:
A better mixture of players helps. .


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...


I think so and it helps our midfield as well.

But It must be hard to coach a guy like Buddy at times, mids kick to him a lot, he demands the ball, egos get involved.

Be worse coaching NBA stars etc on massive $$ and managing that .

I just think Horse can now move pieces around, put Hayward to the goal square etc and not have it be a big deal he shifted Logan to a decoy role for instance .
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Nool Carpenna said:
As a long time coach, and I'm curious what other coaches here think, my only reservation about Horse's coaching has been his insistence on this role-playing edict and a seeming inability/disinterest to match oppo teams in the hunger department.

I mean, when playing quality teams, the losses come down to the bounce of the ball, a bad call by Umps, a poor option or two, or some failed execution, but so many times we have been overcome by lesser teams that just seem to "want it more", inevitably followed up by a presser where Horse trots out, "We let ourselves down playing our roles and we'll continue to work on that".

He seems to have now landed in a utopia where the playing group have collectively matured, applying their individual strengths to the roles they play within structures that are giving fantastic results and much reward and satisfaction.

I fully expected the Blues to jump out of the gates quickly last Friday and that we would grind our way back. I had resigned myself to a nail-biter that would come down to who was in front at the final siren. That we turned it around merely by changing gears, and without receiving instruction from the coaches at a break, is very encouraging, but then to utterly dismantle them made it one of the most enjoyable games in memory.

It's interesting that we are hearing players now mentioning "Going harder for longer". While "Going harder... ", goes some way to acknowledging the importance of hunger, adding, "... for longer", draws it right back into John's roleplaying framework.

Yes, we prevailed against a hungry, up and about, quality, albeit injury-riddled, list this week, but I look forward to sterner tests later in the H&A before I am totally convinced by Horse's theory and his ability to make that final step to premiership glory.

N.B. I know he has won a flag but I am firmly of the belief that what got us over the line in 2012 was more about player-driven hunger from old hard heads like Goodesy, LRT, McVeigh, Bolton, Kirk, O'Keeffe, Grundy, Mattner and Teddy etc. than it was about any disciplined roleplaying.
Click to expand...
I've never been a coach, but take my views from playing competitive sports (primarily basketball).

For me, especially during finals. It comes down to the hunger of the players as a collective, above almost anything else. Of course skill and athleticism comes into play, but the hunger and commitment to keep at it and the focus to win at all costs is what gets you over the line.

For me, a lot can be learned by watching players in big moments, tight games, finals etc. There are some players who just have that trait and excel in those moments. Where others go into their shells and leave the work to to the others.

The 2012 team was a prime example as you mentioned. Someone like malceski had IT, he wasn't phased by the big occasion and rose to it. Matter was another one who wasn't overly gifted, but he willed himself. He played to the occasion. Goodes was gifted, plus had the temperament to perform on big occasions so I wasn't surprised to see him kick a critical goal on one leg. Teddy (although hampered by injury), LRT. Nick Smith, Shaw, JPK even though he was young. That was a group of mentally tough players who weren't going to let the occasion get the better of them. Similar to JPK. hanners was special in that he had that mentality from the start. He just had a self-assurance in his game and just wanted to win.

Other players are brought along for the ride. They're not going to step up in those games, but if the core players set the scene, it allows those lesser players to still contribute. But for me. It comes down to which team has more players in that first group. That's why there's such a thing as a "bottom 6" in footy. The core group need to take the bottom 6 along, and cover up the errors that the bottom 6 will inevitably make on the day.

Some players just have IT, for others it comes with maturity / correcting past mistakes / failures, but a certain group will never be able to rise to the occasion.

I feel like our current group have a good mix, but are still growing / maturing, so depends where we're at come finals, but we're making all the right moves atm so I'm pretty confident. Although the forward line probably worries me the most in that respect.
 
Can we please calm down so we don't have to bring out the sweeper on this thread

images (2).jpeg

We're 9-1 and sitting two games + percentage clear on top of the ladder. Let's just enjoy things while they are going well. There will be misunderstandings and things can get lost in translation over the internet but they don't need to escalate.
 
caesar88 said:
Can we please calm down so we don't have to bring out the sweeper on this thread

View attachment 1995096

We're 9-1 and sitting two games + percentage clear on top of the ladder. Let's just enjoy things while they are going well. There will be misunderstandings and things can get lost in translation over the internet but they don't need to escalate.
Click to expand...
Nice street sweeper. Obviously under repair and although after 35 years of paying rates to Hobson Bay council have never seen it venture down my street.
 
Nool Carpenna said:
Really? I hadn't noticed.

Can't imagine why I thought you might be interested in an exchange of ideas and thoughts when your knowledge and insights, through your involvement in AR, clearly puts you into a realm of coaching that coaches of "lesser" sports could never comprehend, much less contribute to a conversation. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sorry if i came across the wrong way Nool
 
Heeney2Franklin said:
Why? he adapted and changed and for that he is receiving all the pundits.

He will be coach of the year no doubt.
Click to expand...
Exactly. People writing him off, saying he is soft at the selection table (hello Parker), needs to drop Lloyd and Hayward (lmao), will never win another premiership (2 games clear at 150%) and can't coach a midfield (the biggest joke of all).

People were saying these things just 6 short weeks ago. He's put egg on their faces.
 
ashep said:
Exactly. People writing him off, saying he is soft at the selection table (hello Parker), needs to drop Lloyd and Hayward (lmao), will never win another premiership (2 games clear at 150%) and can't coach a midfield (the biggest joke of all).

People were saying these things just 6 short weeks ago. He's put egg on their faces.
Click to expand...

The Hayward criticism has confused me for years so i choose to ignore it, dropping Lloyd and replace him with who exactly? another criticism of a player which continues to confuse me.

Now the only wait and see will be if indeed we manage to get there again this season on his approach and the team approach during that week.

Teams lose Grand finals all the time but for a 1vs2 you expect it to not be concluded in 15mins again that is preparation/mindset so that remains to be seen.

But indeed what a platform to build on 10-1 or 9-2 entering the bye is absolutely fantastic.
 
ashep said:
Exactly. People writing him off, saying he is soft at the selection table (hello Parker), needs to drop Lloyd and Hayward (lmao), will never win another premiership (2 games clear at 150%) and can't coach a midfield (the biggest joke of all).

People were saying these things just 6 short weeks ago. He's put egg on their faces.
Click to expand...


I said he wont win a premiership, Ill will wear it and hope to be soaked in egg, but he hasn't proven that wrong yet at all
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Heeney2Franklin said:
How good would that egg be! glorious have a 12oz crate of eggs on your face! :p
Click to expand...


Would feel a bit dumb for doubting him, but I will learn to live with it.

But we know he can finish in first etc
 
The King! said:
Would feel a bit dumb for doubting him, but I will learn to live with it.

But we know he can finish in first etc
Click to expand...

Nah not dumb at all mate.

2012 was more the players producing a unrepeatable performance.

2014 was forgettable no contest

2016 was a great contest scores were even deep in the 4th.

2022 was over quicker than 2014 no contest

Didn't add the numerous equally forgettable EF/SF final exits we have gone in as favourites.

So as you can see the Jury is well and truly still out.
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of people underestimate what a huge advantage playing the grand final at the MCG is for Victorian teams. I'm not suggesting it would have made a difference in 22 but when the competition is so even and you have the 2 very best teams competing against each other there is usually stuff all between them in terms of talent so even the smallest advantage is amplified.

Playing on a ground you're familiar and comfortable with, not having to travel etc make a big difference imo.

Interstate sides need to be a lot better than their Victorian counterparts on grand final day to win it so I don't expect horses GF record to be 50 / 50. He has to wear some criticism for the extent of the losses in 14 and 22 though in fairness.
 
MF said:
I think a lot of people underestimate what a huge advantage playing the grand final at the MCG is for Victorian teams. I'm not suggesting it would have made a difference in 22 but when the competition is so even and you have the 2 very best teams competing against each other there is usually stuff all between them in terms of talent so even the smallest advantage is amplified.

Playing on a ground you're familiar and comfortable with, not having to travel etc make a big difference imo.

Interstate sides need to be a lot better than their Victorian counterparts on grand final day to win it so I don't expect horses GF record to be 50 / 50. He has to wear some criticism for the extent of the losses in 14 and 22 though in fairness.
Click to expand...

Its massive advantage in terms of preparation and familiarity of playing infront of a massive crowd but it never gets brought up or acknowledged so yer what do you do lol.

Just think of this remember in school when you had to do a oral presentation infront of 15-20ppl eventually you get comfortable right? now do the same speech infront of 300 you just freeze up.

Probably not the best comparison but yer.
 
GoTheSwannies said:
I've never been a coach, but take my views from playing competitive sports (primarily basketball).

For me, especially during finals. It comes down to the hunger of the players as a collective, above almost anything else. Of course skill and athleticism comes into play, but the hunger and commitment to keep at it and the focus to win at all costs is what gets you over the line.

For me, a lot can be learned by watching players in big moments, tight games, finals etc. There are some players who just have that trait and excel in those moments. Where others go into their shells and leave the work to to the others.

The 2012 team was a prime example as you mentioned. Someone like malceski had IT, he wasn't phased by the big occasion and rose to it. Matter was another one who wasn't overly gifted, but he willed himself. He played to the occasion. Goodes was gifted, plus had the temperament to perform on big occasions so I wasn't surprised to see him kick a critical goal on one leg. Teddy (although hampered by injury), LRT. Nick Smith, Shaw, JPK even though he was young. That was a group of mentally tough players who weren't going to let the occasion get the better of them. Similar to JPK. hanners was special in that he had that mentality from the start. He just had a self-assurance in his game and just wanted to win.

Other players are brought along for the ride. They're not going to step up in those games, but if the core players set the scene, it allows those lesser players to still contribute. But for me. It comes down to which team has more players in that first group. That's why there's such a thing as a "bottom 6" in footy. The core group need to take the bottom 6 along, and cover up the errors that the bottom 6 will inevitably make on the day.

Some players just have IT, for others it comes with maturity / correcting past mistakes / failures, but a certain group will never be able to rise to the occasion.

I feel like our current group have a good mix, but are still growing / maturing, so depends where we're at come finals, but we're making all the right moves atm so I'm pretty confident. Although the forward line probably worries me the most in that respect.
Click to expand...
No coaching experience here either, but agree - save for one small detail: the bottom six in a list and the least hungry on the big stage can be different players. See for example Fox (outperformer) and Tippett (arguably underperformer)
 
MF said:
I think a lot of people underestimate what a huge advantage playing the grand final at the MCG is for Victorian teams. I'm not suggesting it would have made a difference in 22 but when the competition is so even and you have the 2 very best teams competing against each other there is usually stuff all between them in terms of talent so even the smallest advantage is amplified.

Playing on a ground you're familiar and comfortable with, not having to travel etc make a big difference imo.

Interstate sides need to be a lot better than their Victorian counterparts on grand final day to win it so I don't expect horses GF record to be 50 / 50. He has to wear some criticism for the extent of the losses in 14 and 22 though in fairness.
Click to expand...
Hawthorn and Richmond's (minus the 2020 GF at the Gabba, which was neutral) entire dynasties were won with home ground advantages.
 
MF said:
I think a lot of people underestimate what a huge advantage playing the grand final at the MCG is for Victorian teams. I'm not suggesting it would have made a difference in 22 but when the competition is so even and you have the 2 very best teams competing against each other there is usually stuff all between them in terms of talent so even the smallest advantage is amplified.

Playing on a ground you're familiar and comfortable with, not having to travel etc make a big difference imo.

Interstate sides need to be a lot better than their Victorian counterparts on grand final day to win it so I don't expect horses GF record to be 50 / 50. He has to wear some criticism for the extent of the losses in 14 and 22 though in fairness.
Click to expand...
If 2016 wasn’t corrupt he would be sitting at a 2-2 for win-loss. It would still be concerning how we lost in 2014 and 2022 but not so bad, and agree the playing at home factor cannot be ignored (there are lots of sports where one side gets on top in a GF and then the other side capitulates - happens all the time in league as well).
 
RedBloodBlackSwan said:
No coaching experience here either, but agree - save for one small detail: the bottom six in a list and the least hungry on the big stage can be different players. See for example Fox (outperformer) and Tippett (arguably underperformer)
Click to expand...
That's a fair point and your right, but for me there's a fair bit of overlap without it being a 1 to 1 relationship. I generally include the player's expected performance in big games when rating them as a bottom 6 player or not.
 
Nool Carpenna said:
As a long time coach, and I'm curious what other coaches here think, my only reservation about Horse's coaching has been his insistence on this role-playing edict and a seeming inability/disinterest to match oppo teams in the hunger department.

I mean, when playing quality teams, the losses come down to the bounce of the ball, a bad call by Umps, a poor option or two, or some failed execution, but so many times we have been overcome by lesser teams that just seem to "want it more", inevitably followed up by a presser where Horse trots out, "We let ourselves down playing our roles and we'll continue to work on that".

He seems to have now landed in a utopia where the playing group have collectively matured, applying their individual strengths to the roles they play within structures that are giving fantastic results and much reward and satisfaction.

I fully expected the Blues to jump out of the gates quickly last Friday and that we would grind our way back. I had resigned myself to a nail-biter that would come down to who was in front at the final siren. That we turned it around merely by changing gears, and without receiving instruction from the coaches at a break, is very encouraging, but then to utterly dismantle them made it one of the most enjoyable games in memory.

It's interesting that we are hearing players now mentioning "Going harder for longer". While "Going harder... ", goes some way to acknowledging the importance of hunger, adding, "... for longer", draws it right back into John's roleplaying framework.

Yes, we prevailed against a hungry, up and about, quality, albeit injury-riddled, list this week, but I look forward to sterner tests later in the H&A before I am totally convinced by Horse's theory and his ability to make that final step to premiership glory.

N.B. I know he has won a flag but I am firmly of the belief that what got us over the line in 2012 was more about player-driven hunger from old hard heads like Goodesy, LRT, McVeigh, Bolton, Kirk, O'Keeffe, Grundy, Mattner and Teddy etc. than it was about any disciplined roleplaying.
Click to expand...
It's taken me a while to get to respond to this post.
I agree that it seems too often in the big games we are not "up" enough to carry the day no matter what.
However, I'm not so sure that it's because of an over-focus on role. For sure Horse talks about it a fair bit but we've all seen him getting pretty emotional too. I think it's part of his straight bat rather than number one on his agenda. Physical pressure on the other hand definitely is.
I hope this team is beginning to learn that it hasn't yet reached its limitations and that when the big games arrive they crack in from the first bounce.
That was the one thing that worried me about the Carlton game. We should have been better prepared.
 
The King! said:
Coaching is a skill set though, almost surprised at times you don't see more teams grabbing a good coach from other sports.
Click to expand...
That's true. And AFL coaches in general have been inspired by the tactical side other sports for quite a while now.

Pretty sure 'flooding' in AFL began through Rodney Eade. From what I remember, he was a big fan of basketball and brought the idea of a zone defense into the AFL when he became our coach which was unique at the time. Things have evolved since then. But coaches are always looking outside for different ideas in all manor of things right down to strength and conditioning if it translates well into our code.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Coach John Longmire - Part IV

Similar threads

Heeney2Franklin
Autopsy Joy in Longmire 300th Swans by 2 over the Dogs.
14 15 16 17 18
Replies
425
Views
12K
RubbaDuck
RubbaDuck
B
Past R I P Graeme John
Replies
6
Views
806
Neverwas
N
G
Banter Songs that remind you of a particular player
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
Grand Uncle Horace
Grand Uncle Horace

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top