Sydney List Assessment - John Longmire

[roowatch]

My worry is that Longmire will be too much the same, it is a new era.
My hope is that he will bring new assistants and freshen up the place

Well of course it will be more of the same. That is the reason they rushed to contract Longmire before he might have taken a senior job elsewhere. The powers that be believe in continuity, consistency and maintaining a particular approach. Yes, some new assistant coaches might ad some new ideas.
And for Goodes, the situation is not unusual. Barassi rode Keith Greig and Malcolm Blight the hardest of all his players at North because he acknowledged they were the best and expected them to perform accordingly EVERY week

 

[RW]

That's one of the best interviews with Roosy I've read in a long time. I agree with his assessment of the Essendon game as being our most disappointing loss, we were really flat that day coming up against a team that was really just making up the numbers in finals. It was strange that our best games of the season involved the two losses (to the Saints and Cats) but it was probably the highest level we've played at for a while, even against Brisbane we were a bit stiff I thought.

Of course it's hard to make predictions as younger teams are notoriously inconsistent and it's more likely for a young team to have a really bad season one year and then rebound, a bit hard to tell with us but I think we'll be knocking on the door of the top 8 or thereabouts.

 

[bedford]

Well of course it will be more of the same. That is the reason they rushed to contract Longmire before he might have taken a senior job elsewhere. The powers that be believe in continuity, consistency and maintaining a particular approach. Yes, some new assistant coaches might ad some new ideas.
And for Goodes, the situation is not unusual. Barassi rode Keith Greig and Malcolm Blight the hardest of all his players at North because he acknowledged they were the best and expected them to perform accordingly EVERY week

I don't reckon Longmire was going to get a gig elsewhere as he was becoming like Brian Royal, a good number two but just couldn't crack it for the top job thats why Lyon got St Scum

 

[SOPH_CROSS]

was i the only one who was soooo excited when Horse said that Sexy Smith had Leadership quality...he was always a gun in the ressies and was always a lader he talks to everyone makes sure everyone is ok before him self i cant wait to see him next year hes gonna kill it :]

 

[bedford]

We need a Roomies thread again for the sexy stuff

 

[BarneyBent]

ROK has always been a Forward for christs sake , but had asked when the contract was on the line for a midfield role, so he was inconsistent as a forward.
And once again the old chessnut about Goodes being inconsistent, just a bit you say. One day when he's gone coaches and some so called fans will realise what they had in no. 37

ROK has always been a half forward flanker. He was basically playing as a 189 cm FF at the start of the year. He's a great mark for his size but that's expecting a bit much! His biggest asset is his motor, and he wasn't being allowed to utilise it. It's all very well to say he was playing as a forward, he's been an AA forward, therefore he was playing the same role and he should have been fine, but he wasn't: as an AA HFF, ROK was motoring up to the wing and beyond; for the first 5 rounds of 2009, he barely left the forward 50.

Don't get me wrong, at his best Goodes was magical, but it wasn't until the last third of the season that we came to be able to rely on him to regularly be in the bests. He's a freakish talent, a legend for what he can do, and at his best is probably the best player I've seen, I love him to bits, but that doesn't mean we have to simply turn a blind eye to his occasional bad games. That just cheapens the praise he so rightly deserves.

 

[AG]

Goodes was on fire in the first half of the season as well. He only played three bad games in R3, R4 and R6. Overall, he had a very consistent year.

 

[bungee]

Thats not it , compare the two players reports by Longmire.
My worry is that Longmire will be too much the same, it is a new era.
My hope is that he will bring new assistants and freshen up the place

Roos & Lyon have a similar style, Longmire will probably have the same. I hope he doesn't change it as it's a winning formula. We needed some list refreshment but there's nothing wrong with our 'ugly' style which has seen us dominate the finals more than any other team since 2003.

2010 - Bring it on !

 

[BarneyBent]

Goodes was on fire in the first half of the season as well. He only played three bad games in R3, R4 and R6. Overall, he had a very consistent year.

He was well beaten by Goddard in Rd 1, and Rd 9 against Port was meh (solid, not great). He was still very good though, definitely. The middle part was probably his patchiest, but strangely enough also probably the period that let us know he was in with a shot at the Charlie. In this period (if I had to define it, probably Rds 11-18), he played with bursts of brilliance reminiscent of his Brownlow form, but wasn't doing it enough, and was going missing too often, which the Swans coaches would have absolutely hated. There was talk of him "almost" capturing his Brownlow form, his odds tentatively began to drop, but it really wasn't until his last 4 games, playing as a true CHF, that things completely clicked. He was very, very good beforehand, but it wasn't until then that he was truly excellent. He's a good chance of polling 10 votes alone in those 4 games.

 

[bedford]

Just remember he's getting the best shut down player from the opposition, i might have got carried away about this but i have fans from other teams questioning how Goodes and B2 could finish so low in our lottery last Friday. Just for the record B2 only had 24 goals kicked on him this year and wasn't beaten by the sook in Riewolt and he carved most other defenders up.

 

[BarneyBent]

Just remember he's getting the best shut down player from the opposition, i might have got carried away about this but i have fans from other teams questioning how Goodes and B2 could finish so low in our lottery last Friday. Just for the record B2 only had 24 goals kicked on him this year and wasn't beaten by the sook in Riewolt and he carved most other defenders up.

I completely agree on B2, for the record. I hope he was 11th at least. Could have been top 5.

FWIW, my top 5 for the B&F would probably be:

1. ROK (I reckon they got that one right)
2. Shaw (lacked the brilliance of Goodes, but was more consistent and structurally was one of our most important players, especially with Mattner rotating through the midfield)
3. Goodes (need I reiterate? Brilliant season, consistency just let him down at times)
4. Jude Bolton
5. Craig Bolton.

I've got Brett Kirk coming in at 6th, though really he, Jude and Craig , and also Jols are just about interchangeable.

 

[bedford]

Goodes was on fire in the first half of the season as well. He only played three bad games in R3, R4 and R6. Overall, he had a very consistent year.

Tell that to Longmire, even Judd and Ablett had quiet games but still showed flashes of brilliance in those games.

 

[AG]

Shaw ahead of Goodes?

 

[bedford]

What would you expect on here AG

 

[AG]

What would you expect on here AG

Our best player to be rated as our best.

1. Goodes
2. ROK
3. J.Bolton
4. Jolly
5. Shaw
6. C.Bolton
7. Kirk

 

[GoTheSwannies]

And once again the old chessnut about Goodes being inconsistent, just a bit you say. One day when he's gone coaches and some so called fans will realise what they had in no. 37

first of all...whenever anyone talks about goodes form...they compare him to HIS OWN best form...so if someone says goodes form is down...they're saying he's not at the spectacular game-winning best form he's capable of...the swans rely on his best form and really need him to perform at his best to be competitive...

in saying that...apart from the last 3rd of the season...i felt goodes form was down at times, especially at the start and some patches in the middle of the season...there were some games where he just wasn't having much of an impact on the contest, he'd get to the ball but couldn't really move it forward....some games he was kept to low possessions by his direct opponent...i think it was partly due to the poor form of the players around him, and partly due to the changing of his role in the team....but once he got settled in he was back to his damaging best...he just lacked that shine in the early parts of the season...

when ROK was in great form goodes was kinda lacking IMO

 

[bedford]

Thats the trouble, the expectation is too high, remember he is only human

 

[The Paranormal]

remember he is only human

Wrong.

He is a god.

 

[Swans120]

Wrong.

He is a god.

Amen.

Dont worry boys and girls, Goodesy will win 2010 and 2011 Brownlows to become the 1st 4 time winner and the first to do it as a CHF in a long time. Dont know if he will get the recognition from the coaches though...I cannot wait to see how he plays a whole season as a roaming CHF...unstoppable.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Amen.

Dont worry boys and girls, Goodesy will win 2009, 2010 and 2011 Brownlows to become the 1st 5 time winner

efa.

 

[GoTheSwannies]

Thats the trouble, the expectation is too high, remember he is only human

lol@only human...

every coach wants to get the best out of their players...what's wrong from expecting that from goodes?? it's just that you'd expect more out of goodes because he's capable of it...and every player has down games...but goodes worst was far from his best...so while he's not expected to be playing out of his skin every game, it's about making sure he's still making a significant contribution even if he is a bit down on his usual form...it's about getting him to bridge the gap between his outstanding games and his poorer performances

 

[BarneyBent]

Shaw ahead of Goodes?

I originally had Goodes ahead of Shaw, but swapped them. I was just really, really impressed with Rhyce this year. He barely had an off game, and shouldered almost all responsibility for giving us drive out of defence, doing it brilliantly. Really, he was the only player that was able to consistently rebound from defence, as Mattner rotated regularly through the midfield, Malceski couldn't crack the team, and Smith is still young and was focusing more on his defensive efforts in any case.

Shaw had just about zero help in his role, he carried the team out of defence. He deserves a lot of recognition for that.

 

[bedford]

Shaw when he was locked down on by the opposition was no good, a real good season but not in the same class as Goodes . Gee some of you guys expect too much

 

[Dangas]

Shaw did have a good season, but he is the same as his brother, just runs off his opponent

 

[BarneyBent]

Shaw did have a good season, but he is the same as his brother, just runs off his opponent

Yes, because Goodes is such an accountable player...

That was his role. Sometimes he was given defensive roles, like on Dane Swan, and he performed them admirably, and when he wasn't, he invariably picked up 27+ possessions, mostly kicks, used the ball terrifically, and was the engine of the Swans' rebound. Structurally speaking, aside from KPPs, I'd say he was the most important player on the park for us. This year, Goodes was icing (aside from the last four rounds, in which he played as a genuine CHF). ****ing fantastic icing, but you take it away and you've still got a cake. Shaw was the flour. Take it away, and the cake (more specifically, our counter-attack and initiative coming out from defence) falls apart.

That's part of the reason why Goodes will win the most Brownlow votes, and justifiably so, but Shaw came in ahead of Goodes in the B&F. It varies with Goodes depending on what position he plays (this doesn't apply for his ruckman days, for example, or when he was playing as a genuine in/out midfielder), but this year he didn't usually play a position that is structurally particularly significant. He played primarily as a roaming half-forward. Not exactly a vital position to have, but if you've got a player that can play it as well as Goodesy, then it's a massive bonus. Individually speaking, even taking into account the bit of inconsistency I was talking about before, Goodes would have been better than Shaw this year. The Brownlow is an individual award, it doesn't really take into account roles and influence on the team, and as such Goodes will do better. But Shaw's position was far more significant, a lot more responsibility was heaped onto his shoulders, and I would say his performances had a greater impact on the team results. I reckon this is something taken into account by the coaching staff when voting on the B&F. It's also the reason that when Goodes was playing structurally significant roles, and did it well, he usually won the B&F (03, ruckman, 06, genuine guts midfielder).