Coach John Longmire - Part IV

Remove this Banner Ad

The coaches have a had a huge amount to do with our success this season. We have beaten teams playing well and come up with answers to the questions they pose and not only (or even primarily) because our list is better. Every week we are preparing well. Clearly Horse deserves the lion's share of the credit - but there are a whole team producing these outcomes. Spike is something fresh. But Pyke probably still deserves some of the credit for what still has his fingerprints on it.

The club also deserves a lot of credit for putting everything in place and supporting it to flourish. We've built our list patiently and methodically so that now we have a list that is among the younger but also among the more experienced teams, and beautifully balanced. Despite difficulties recruiting players to come to Sydney sometimes. Our performance and physios have done a sterling job to have such a healthy list. The club culture and ethos is flying. The whole club is united and pulling together (notwithstanding some glitch involving Wicks).

Please don't let us peak too soon and let us drive hard all the way to the last Saturday in September. And in the meantime let's enjoy the ride. It's not often we get to enjoy being the outright, consensus best team in the comp, playing champagne footy.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Our last 2 games show how we want to play:
1. Defend as a unit, both with and without the ball. We moved our players into position at all times, ensured we always had players in the right spot and even held up play when moving forward in case we needed to defend quickly
2. Attack through the middle. We have been doing this for a few seasons now but it still shows. We are at our best when we break down the middle and move the ball quickly.

Both are a big part why we beat 2 finalists comfortably, and both are a result of Horse and the coaches
 
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.
 
Good signs to see to the naked eye more reaction and positional changes. Always been a good man manager.

Recognising Parker is too slow is a tick as well and moving Lloyd more to a winger role.

Heeney midfield only took him 10 years but tick.

He is a great regular season coach , September is when he will be under the pump I guess. I said he won't coach another flag , he has the list to do it and the talent and the base to build here, best chance he will have (barring injury curse), so let's see.

I agree with the observation on the playing group resilience too and that is a credit to Horse and the panel that they guys seem to have evolved to mid quarter adjustments and not reverting back to grab and bomb, quick handball makes someone else's problem.

People will hate the term but with Heeney , quarterbacking the midfield instead of Parker there's more class and precision.

Horse is coach of the year right now, but even as a bit of a critic , never doubted his coaching during a year, though again and some will go no was always brilliant, I think he has adjusted more this year.
 
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.
Your last paragraph is true. As a team we got our highest tackle count for the year in the Grand Final at 110. Best for the year prior to that was 99 against Adelaide in Round 6, then 90 against Essendon in Round 11. The old guard in that game were definitely up for it in the sense of applying pressure all day in a 4 qtr effort.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

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.
Are you talking about yourself or Horse at the start please
 
Your last paragraph is true. As a team we got our highest tackle count for the year in the Grand Final at 110. Best for the year prior to that was 99 against Adelaide in Round 6, then 90 against Essendon in Round 11. The old guard in that game were definitely up for it in the sense of applying pressure all day in a 4 qtr effort.
And 20 year old Dan Hannebery.

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk
 
Well they are completely different sports , Aussie rules is unique


Coaching is a skill set though, almost surprised at times you don't see more teams grabbing a good coach from other sports.
 
Well they are completely different sports , Aussie rules is unique

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:
 
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:
I don't relate it to Horse , coaching is coaching and i did it at senior and junior level at footy and cricket . What im saying is that hockey is nothing like ours and im not being disrespectful as people like you that put in are fantastic .
 
We are nothing like Field Hockey , i always thought it was hockey


There's Ice Hockey, Underwater Hockey, Roller Hockey etc.

Where did I say the sports are the same, the principles of coaching are. Read Roos or Alves books. Roosy coached basketball for instance.

I am not suggesting Scott Roth be head coach of Richmond, but why not get him as an assistant for example . Leading people , man management and general coaching is not all Xs and Os. I am sure even Horse (and other senior coaches) trust the line coaches with a lot of that.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top