Unofficial Preview SEASON 2025 - Best 22, Game Plan, Personnel

[Kiama Chris]

I think what makes players dip in grand finals is veering away from basic footy. The magnitude of the game makes you do things you wouldn't normally do - and as counter intuitive as it sounds, one of those things is players being too tense and wasting energy in the contest in an effort to not lose it. Some might think that is exactly what we needed, but it's a fine line, it can create a bees to a honey pot effect and completely throws off team structure. Add the desperation of not wanting to lose, go a few goals down and it all starts to unravel - players start hoping their teammates lift whilst shying away from their own tasks because it feels hopeless, and the final result ends up being a soulless performance.

There were moments in that first qtr where we had an opportunity to punish them on the break but execution and decision making streaming forward was brain dead, you can tell how tense they were in those moments. If we had relaxed and put those scores on the board the lions would've felt more pressure and it could've turned into a completely different game.

This is a perfect example of how a grand final can change your performance. As weird as it may sound, you might think you did really well by raising tackle count (and you may have very well played a ripper game), but it can also be a canary in the coal mine. If everyone plays at an abnormal intensity it can completely throw the team off. Especially in todays game where it's more about executing skills rather than rough and tumble 90's footy. If you can play your normal game and the team is able to flow, the teams normal standard of contested footy will naturally come to where it needs to be. If every player had the mindset of just laying 50 tackles rather than playing your usual game, then you're more than likely going to get done. What stood out for me was Brisbane's efficiency and decision making, not their contested work, that was just a flow on affect. There's not a more hopeless feeling in footy when you feel like you're busting your backside whilst the opposition pick you off in such a clean and effortless manner.

That's not to say we don't need to improve in the contest, but that needs to be an off-season thing that we incorporate and practice in season for it to become our new status quo. If we were ever going to win that GF, the only way was to win it the exact same way we won our 17 home and away games.

If i'm completely honest, i think the only way for this team going forward is to continue harnessing our strengths to the endth degree. I just don't trust that this group has that contested footy style of play in them. We lost because we didn't play our game.

Our first part of the season was good on the pressure side, then we dropped away, suggesting that we thought our turnovers were enough without that level of effort. I think we have it in us if we get our heads out of our .

 

[zyzzbruh]

Our first part of the season was good on the pressure side, then we dropped away, suggesting that we thought our turnovers were enough without that level of effort. I think we have it in us if we get our heads out of our .

Round 0 and Round 1 absolutely we looked fierce, but i think beyond those two games we were a pretty average contested side and were winning games without it as a focus - maybe it was the energy of the beginning of a new season?

Concerning part for me is when we started to slump Horse knew it was 'the contest' yet the players never responded. All well and good knowing what to do but whats the point if the players don't know how to switch it on. That's what makes me think it's just not in them.

 

[Nool Carpenna]

Round 0 and Round 1 absolutely we looked fierce, but i think beyond those two games we were a pretty average contested side and were winning games without it as a focus - maybe it was the energy of the beginning of a new season?

Concerning part for me is when we started to slump Horse knew it was 'the contest' yet the players never responded. All well and good knowing what to do but whats the point if the players don't know how to switch it on. That's what makes me think it's just not in them.

.... and the one player that has that firecracker contest, and that could possibly have inspired it in others, just wasn't dynamic enough for Horse's gameplan, nor had the bloodlines to please the masses, slowly had his role diminished until he was deemed un-needed when the whips were cracking.

At least Taylor's never been pantsed in front of an audience of millions on GF Day.

 

[caesar88]

.... and the one player that has that firecracker contest, and that could possibly have inspired it in others, just wasn't dynamic enough for Horse's gameplan, nor had the bloodlines to please the masses, slowly had his role diminished until he was deemed un-needed when the whips were cracking.

At least Taylor's never been pantsed in front of an audience of millions on GF Day.

I would've gone with Adams, but he wasn't exactly demanding selection with his form before being dropped, so there's no guarantee he would've been any different from the rest by the time the GF rolled around.

 

[caesar88]

I think what makes players dip in grand finals is veering away from basic footy. The magnitude of the game makes you do things you wouldn't normally do - and as counter intuitive as it sounds, one of those things is players being too tense and wasting energy in the contest in an effort to not lose it. Some might think that is exactly what we needed, but it's a fine line, it can create a bees to a honey pot effect and completely throws off team structure. Add the desperation of not wanting to lose, go a few goals down and it all starts to unravel - players start hoping their teammates lift whilst shying away from their own tasks because it feels hopeless, and the final result ends up being a soulless performance.

There were moments in that first qtr where we had an opportunity to punish them on the break but execution and decision making streaming forward was brain dead, you can tell how tense they were in those moments. If we had relaxed and put those scores on the board the lions would've felt more pressure and it could've turned into a completely different game.

This is a perfect example of how a grand final can change your performance. As weird as it may sound, you might think you did really well by raising tackle count (and you may have very well played a ripper game), but it can also be a canary in the coal mine. If everyone plays at an abnormal intensity it can completely throw the team off. Especially in todays game where it's more about executing skills rather than rough and tumble 90's footy. If you can play your normal game and the team is able to flow, the teams normal standard of contested footy will naturally come to where it needs to be. If every player had the mindset of just laying 50 tackles rather than playing your usual game, then you're more than likely going to get done. What stood out for me was Brisbane's efficiency and decision making, not their contested work, that was just a flow on affect. There's not a more hopeless feeling in footy when you feel like you're busting your backside whilst the opposition pick you off in such a clean and effortless manner.

That's not to say we don't need to improve in the contest, but that needs to be an off-season thing that we incorporate and practice in season for it to become our new status quo. If we were ever going to win that GF, the only way was to win it the exact same way we won our 17 home and away games.

If i'm completely honest, i think the only way for this team going forward is to continue harnessing our strengths to the endth degree. I just don't trust that this group has that contested footy style of play in them. We lost because we didn't play our game.

But the way we won our 17 home & away games was with contested footy, that's the thing. We are predominantly a defensive rebound, outside ball movement team. But if you look at the quarters that won us games, it was always built on contested ball & clearances and pressure. Grundy getting on top in the ruck, the mids actually winning the ball, players sticking tackles. From there, the ball movement stuff flowed on.

I don't think we would've won many games at all without that contested style. Problem is for the most part, we just aren't really good enough to do it for more than a quarter or so, and when we are, it's usually in the back end of games when we'd run over the top of teams.

I don't know how we can possibly get better at our strengths. It's hard to imagine a team with more hard-running, line-breaking, elite-kicking players in it than ours. It just never got us that far in games until we'd lift in the contest. That to me suggests we definitely need to make the contest our main priority.

 

[Bloods86]

I would've gone with Adams, but he wasn't exactly demanding selection with his form before being dropped, so there's no guarantee he would've been any different from the rest by the time the GF rolled around.

I think it was, as it should have been, down to one of Parker or Adams.

I was fine with it being Parker, but the minute Heeney was injured / Lions were getting on top, he should have been into the middle, rather than trying to see how Isaac / the midfield would keep going. Think he had 1 CBA in the first half...

There's a bit of revisionism around Adams. In the games he had more CBAs (4 over 40%), he had all of 11 clearances. He showed more potency in cameos or run with, and he's not much of a forward, so Parker won out.

 

[caesar88]

I think it was, as it should have been, down to one of Parker or Adams.

I was fine with it being Parker, but the minute Heeney was injured / Lions were getting on top, he should have been into the middle, rather than trying to see how Isaac / the midfield would keep going. Think he had 1 CBA in the first half...

There's a bit of revisionism around Adams. In the games he had more CBAs (4 over 40%), he had all of 11 clearances. He showed more potency in cameos or run with, and he's not much of a forward, so Parker won out.

Yeah I've always felt like when Adams got the midfield opportunities, he did look good and justified getting them, and then we just... wouldn't explore that again for another month. It was quite frustrating, so I can only imagine how Adams himself felt.

But Adams didn't seem to have much to offer in terms of reversing our fortunes or inspiring his teammates when we started to decline in the back end of the season. He was just like most of the rest really, struggling to positively impact.

 

[Bloods86]

Yeah I've always felt like when Adams got the midfield opportunities, he did look good and justified getting them, and then we just... wouldn't explore that again for another month. It was quite frustrating, so I can only imagine how Adams himself felt.

But Adams didn't seem to have much to offer in terms of reversing our fortunes or inspiring his teammates when we started to decline in the back end of the season. He was just like most of the rest really, struggling to positively impact.

I think he was similar to Parker. Showed a bit in spurts in the midfield, though had done well vs Lions earlier in the season.

But don't think they had both shown enough to both play, as mids who were looking like time was catching up with them a bit. Parker had been effective impacting defenders and finds the goals more, so kept his spot.

We just didn't react quickly enough on the day, don't really think Adams had shown why he would have stopped/turned the tide.

If anything, Campbell/Cleary forward, with the other or Adams as sub instead of 3 KPFs (i.e. Logan) would be my hindsight move.

Not likely to have mattered much.

 

[caesar88]

I think he was similar to Parker. Showed a bit in spurts in the midfield, though had done well vs Lions earlier in the season.

But don't think they had both shown enough to both play, as mids who were looking like time was catching up with them a bit. Parker had been effective impacting defenders and finds the goals more, so kept his spot.

We just didn't react quickly enough on the day, don't really think Adams had shown why he would have stopped/turned the tide.

If anything, Campbell/Cleary forward, with the other or Adams as sub instead of 3 KPFs (i.e. Logan) would be my hindsight move.

Not likely to have mattered much.

It's a slippery slope playing coulda-woulda-shoulda with the GF. I've said it before but I think it was the worst team we have named for a GF. There were so many areas of vulnerability in our named 22 that no individual selection decision would've made much of a difference.

This year will be interesting for Adams, though. Parker going you would think opens up a spot for him, but there's a bloke called Callum Mills who will hopefully be eyeing midfield time. That's before you get to Sheldrick & Cleary, who could be candidates in that mid/forward role.

 

[Bloods86]

It's a slippery slope playing coulda-woulda-shoulda with the GF. I've said it before but I think it was the worst team we have named for a GF. There were so many areas of vulnerability in our named 22 that no individual selection decision would've made much of a difference.

This year will be interesting for Adams, though. Parker going you would think opens up a spot for him, but there's a bloke called Callum Mills who will hopefully be eyeing midfield time. That's before you get to Sheldrick & Cleary, who could be candidates in that mid/forward role.

Covered it before, but I'd have:

• Mills in for a Lloyd/Florent, push Warner/Gulden out of CBs
• Campbell in for a KPF
• Sheldrick/Cleary in for Parker, other as sub

Before I get to Adams.

However, if you lose one of Rowy, Mills, maybe Heeney, or it's wet, you'd be looking at Adams in the 22.

 

[Kiama Chris]

But the way we won our 17 home & away games was with contested footy, that's the thing. We are predominantly a defensive rebound, outside ball movement team. But if you look at the quarters that won us games, it was always built on contested ball & clearances and pressure. Grundy getting on top in the ruck, the mids actually winning the ball, players sticking tackles. From there, the ball movement stuff flowed on.

I don't think we would've won many games at all without that contested style. Problem is for the most part, we just aren't really good enough to do it for more than a quarter or so, and when we are, it's usually in the back end of games when we'd run over the top of teams.

I don't know how we can possibly get better at our strengths. It's hard to imagine a team with more hard-running, line-breaking, elite-kicking players in it than ours. It just never got us that far in games until we'd lift in the contest. That to me suggests we definitely need to make the contest our main priority.

I think we and quite a few others have identified that we were heavy on "flankers" and light on contested types which meant the contested types were overworked. Of course "flankers" can also be contested but some of ours weren't or were given different roles or whatever.
For my money we need 5 pressure/contested midfielders - Mills, Heeney, Rowbottom, Sheldrick and Warner so that they can maintain a level of freshness. At least two of those are also deadly outside as well. Adams, Roberts and Cleary are all good depth in that area.
IMO we can't afford to play 4 wingers - Gulden, McInerney, Lloyd and Campbell especially if they're not strong defensively.
I quite like Jordon in the contest, just WHICH contest?
I think we have the tools.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

HSun and Code have done a piece on each club's under 23 players.

No Cookies | CODE Sports

No Cookies | CODE Sports

www.codesports.com.au

https://archive.md/lPE3g

Going into last season, I never would have predicted that Gulden would have elite stats in all areas except kicking. I think this shows the immense potential in him, if he can maintain output and increase efficiency - though I also think it means he will benefit from recalibrating this year and getting the balance right between quantity and quality.

It he can do so, he might surprise us and take his game to a whole new level.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

It doesn’t feel fair to say because they are both great team players, but I hope that Jordon and Fox are fringe players in the reserves ready to step up if someone is injured / needs a rest.

I think oppositions made Jordon look better than he was at the start of last season because they didn’t give him the respect he deserved. He is a very solid player, but up to 90% quality in any position. As an opposition supporter you never feel worried that Jordon is going to hurt you.

I think Fox’s best position is defence but for whatever reason the coaches didn’t trust him there (maybe ball use / reading the play?). He is not strong enough as a pressure / defensive forward or on a wing. I don’t mind him as a sub, who can cover multiple positions but not star.

I’d still keep the three tall forwards. Lots of scope to improve pressure, speed and impact by replacing Fox, Jordon, Parker and one wingman (likely Lloyd). And also resting big players (especially Grundy) far more often.

 

[Bloods86]

It doesn’t feel fair to say because they are both great team players, but I hope that Jordon and Fox are fringe players in the reserves ready to step up if someone is injured / needs a rest.

I think oppositions made Jordon look better than he was at the start of last season because they didn’t give him the respect he deserved. He is a very solid player, but up to 90% quality in any position. As an opposition supporter you never feel worried that Jordon is going to hurt you.

I think Fox’s best position is defence but for whatever reason the coaches didn’t trust him there (maybe ball use / reading the play?). He is not strong enough as a pressure / defensive forward or on a wing. I don’t mind him as a sub, who can cover multiple positions but not star.

I’d still keep the three tall forwards. Lots of scope to improve pressure, speed and impact by replacing Fox, Jordon, Parker and one wingman (likely Lloyd). And also resting big players (especially Grundy) far more often.

If Cox doesn't play Fox in the 22 and in defence, subject to form obviously, then that's his mistake. I'd be one of Robbie's biggest fans on here, but I don't really rate him as a sub. Yeah, he's versatile, but he's best left in one position from start to finish, for games on end (like most players are). No surprise his form drops when he's thrown around the ground in-game or week-to-week (which would cause the more casual observers to doubt his value). And if the alternative is yet another attacking half back, we've learned little.

If opposition has a great half-back, Jordon is a lock.
If opposition doesn't, and Mills is in the team for any head-to-head midfield duels (though not a hard tag), then Jordon might be in trouble. That said, yeah he doesn't give opposition teams any fear that he'll hurt you on attack, but they probably don't fear the likes of Chad in first halves, or Blakey (from the latter half of the season). More than one way to have an impact, and it's not just the flashy types.

So if you play Fox in defence and Jordon as a tagger, I'm not sure it's fair to say we'd get a better combination of impact, speed or pressure from elsewhere. In their best roles, they apply plenty of pressure and neither are slow (especially Fox), and negating the opposition has its place (within reason).

In any case, if I was in charge (and we can all be thankful I'm not), I'd be loathe to drop Fox or Jordon, two players who actually gave a crap on grand final day, when we've spent months lamenting attitude and effort. If anything, barring pre-season form/injury issues, I'd be highlighting the likes of Fox, Jordon, Cunningham, Rowbottom, Melican etc as the players to learn from if we're serious about a flag. I wouldn't say any had great games on grand final day, but we're either serious about players turning up, or we drop those who did and send a very mixed message on what we rate.

Amen to resting players when needed. Should have happened with Grundy. Mills should have been managed through the twos initially.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

It doesn’t feel fair to say because they are both great team players, but I hope that Jordon and Fox are fringe players in the reserves ready to step up if someone is injured / needs a rest.

I think oppositions made Jordon look better than he was at the start of last season because they didn’t give him the respect he deserved. He is a very solid player, but up to 90% quality in any position. As an opposition supporter you never feel worried that Jordon is going to hurt you.

I think Fox’s best position is defence but for whatever reason the coaches didn’t trust him there (maybe ball use / reading the play?). He is not strong enough as a pressure / defensive forward or on a wing. I don’t mind him as a sub, who can cover multiple positions but not star.

I’d still keep the three tall forwards. Lots of scope to improve pressure, speed and impact by replacing Fox, Jordon, Parker and one wingman (likely Lloyd). And also resting big players (especially Grundy) far more often.

I was with you right up until the 1st sentence of the final paragraph.

 

[Kiama Chris]

AFL.vom demonstrating the usual lack of imagination.
Your club's best 22 in 2025: Who's in, who's out, who's new - https://www.afl.com.au/news/1260580

 

[Punts]

Imo Still think Campbell will struggle at senior level and for most part of his career.

Not sure he is best 22

 

[Adnico26Parker]

AFL.vom demonstrating the usual lack of imagination.
Your club's best 22 in 2025: Who's in, who's out, who's new - https://www.afl.com.au/news/1260580

I love how they're recycling content from over a month ago without the foresight to remove a player who is now injured and won't play for 4 months - classic AFL media

 

[SwansLifer]

I love how they're recycling content from over a month ago without the foresight to remove a player who is now injured and won't play for 4 months - classic AFL media

I mean what is the AFL industry worth each year now? Actually don't know and would hate to guess, but if you can't hire a team of people for content, good content I mean, year round, what in the hell are you doing?

 

[BloodySwan]

But the way we won our 17 home & away games was with contested footy, that's the thing. We are predominantly a defensive rebound, outside ball movement team. But if you look at the quarters that won us games, it was always built on contested ball & clearances and pressure. Grundy getting on top in the ruck, the mids actually winning the ball, players sticking tackles. From there, the ball movement stuff flowed on.

I don't think we would've won many games at all without that contested style. Problem is for the most part, we just aren't really good enough to do it for more than a quarter or so, and when we are, it's usually in the back end of games when we'd run over the top of teams.

I don't know how we can possibly get better at our strengths. It's hard to imagine a team with more hard-running, line-breaking, elite-kicking players in it than ours. It just never got us that far in games until we'd lift in the contest. That to me suggests we definitely need to make the contest our main priority.

I can't remember which game it was but in the preview they were asking how each team were going to win and Buckley was "Sydney are a contested team. If they win the contested footy they win the game" and everyone kinda gave him a puzzled look.

 

[Bloods86]

Imo Still think Campbell will struggle at senior level and for most part of his career.

Not sure he is best 22

If we keep moving him around, playing him as 2nd or 3rd string in roles, and not ever actually playing him in his drafted positions, this is more likely.