Leppa's Gameplan

[a mayes ing]

I jus dont understand. Leppitch was supposed to be a really good defensive coach and our gameplan is also meant to help our defense even more. This season our defense looks really bad and leaks a lot of goals. We are not getting blown away in the 1st qurter like we used to but individually our backmen have been very poor.

 

[winged1]

I jus dont understand. Leppitch was supposed to be a really good defensive coach and our gameplan is also meant to help our defense even more. This season our defense looks really bad and leaks a lot of goals. We are not getting blown away in the 1st qurter like we used to but individually our backmen have been very poor.

The gameplan is around precision passing, then they select guys with poor foot skills in the backline (lisle, golby, Clarke at times and sauce(though he has improved over the years.)) So the player skill set doesn't meet the game plan.

 

[a mayes ing]

The gameplan is around precision passing, then they select guys with poor foot skills in the backline (lisle, golby, Clarke at times and sauce(though he has improved over the years.)) So the player skill set doesn't meet the game plan.

I agree, it just doesnt make sense to me why Leppa would put Lisle in the lineup in the 1st place, there was no need to. Maybe this week would be a good opportunity to start putting good kicks in there, Harwood, imo, is an elite kick especially in short kicks. He needs to come in. We also need run and carry in the backline.

 

[winged1]

I agree, it just doesnt make sense to me why Leppa would put Lisle in the lineup in the 1st place, there was no need to. Maybe this week would be a good opportunity to start putting good kicks in there, Harwood, imo, is an elite kick especially in short kicks. He needs to come in. We also need run and carry in the backline.

Which means Cutler even though it is another rookie.

 

[dlanod]

I jus dont understand. Leppitch was supposed to be a really good defensive coach and our gameplan is also meant to help our defense even more. This season our defense looks really bad and leaks a lot of goals. We are not getting blown away in the 1st qurter like we used to but individually our backmen have been very poor.

Sorry for moving this out of the Vent thread but you guys were having a pretty good discussion (good) in the Vent thread (bad).

 

[chopperduck]

No matter what you think about the game plan, 3 rounds in is not the time to judge it. There is a lot of things to change. There is a lot of learning going on for players and coaches, and its going to take time.

 

[winged1]

Sorry for moving this out of the Vent thread but you guys were having a pretty good discussion (good) in the Vent thread (bad).

Sorry, will try to keep the emotional knee jerkism going in the other thread. I blame VOSS!! Crap stuffed it up again.

 

[winged1]

No matter what you think about the game plan, 3 rounds in is not the time to judge it. There is a lot of things to change. There is a lot of learning going on for players and coaches, and its going to take time.

Exactly. But as I said the selections don't seem to be gelling with the intended plan.

I notice a lot of teams playing a similar way, Melbourne, Richmond, Essendon just the better ones move the ball more accurately and quicker, while Melbourne and the Lions just turn it over.

 

[dlanod]

My pet bugbear is the application of a coach's gameplan regardless of the cattle he's got on board. The very best coaches can adapt their system for that, or recruit specifically to fill those holes. I think Leppa's success may come down to how we recruit over the next two draft and trade periods. Unfortunately Voss was more focused on age profiles early on rather than fitness for his plans, so we basically mulliganed first up. It looks like Leppa won't have that false dawn, so we'll have to see how it eventuates.

I think the basic gameplan makes sense - it's just whether Clarke and Merrett and Golby and Lisle and Patfull get a better grasp on it, as it makes a lot of demands of the defence in ball use, movement and defending opposition fast breaks.

 

[Last of the Roys]

I was actually thinking of starting a thread on our gameplan since the end of yesterday's match.

Obviously it is far too early to judge whether our gameplan will be successful. But what I would first like to know, is what is it? What exactly are we trying to do in our 'ideal' gameplan? What team are we most trying to emulate?

A number of people have put forward ideas, but personally I still don't really understand what our gameplan is. There seems to be certain aspects that have stood out:

• Concentrating on winning more contested possessions. Leppa himself has repeatedly said this and we witnessed it in the first two rounds (obviously the Gold Coast game was a whitewash in that department).
• More deliberate pin-pointing of passes out of defence and going forward.
• Increase use of the switch to try and open up space for our players on the other side of the ground.
• (Not really sure what we are trying to do defensively)

What else do you think it involves?

Again it is likely to take a long time to judge whether it will be successful or not, but it is hard not to see the problems it seems to create in the short term in allowing us to be competitive. For a long time we have lacked skills to enable precision passing. And when we played at our best last year it was through free flowing football that gets the ball into our forward line quickly.

 

[winged1]

I think it is to try to bring the defensive press forward by switching by staying patient and eventually bring the defence towards, with the idea to move the ball up the open side quickly when that happens. By bringing the press forward it can open up the forward line if our players stay deep, therefore giving some space to lead into in the forward 50 and meet the ball. A few times I have seen it work well, but when we turn it over or cant find that pin point pass to a leading half forward on the open side it all stuffs up and we get stung on the rebound.

 

[Caiphus]

My pet bugbear is the application of a coach's gameplan regardless of the cattle he's got on board. The very best coaches can adapt their system for that, or recruit specifically to fill those holes.

I know what you mean and I agree completely. It is too early to say whether Leppa needs to adjust the list to suit his gameplan or if he is capable of the other way around. I think there was nothing to lose by gambling on a complete tactical realignment compared to a slow adjust because even if we made the top 8 this year the likelihood was the bottom reaches... we aren't necessarily going to slide too far in his first year in charge trying to implement it.

In my opinion, our age profile is still too young to be able to consistently execute ANY plan and playing on gut instinct hasn't been able to generate results (a lot of Vossy's direct style relied on instinctive ball movement rather than structure if you ask me) and one pre-season isn't enough to bed in running patterns and tactical discipline, when there has been very little schooling of that across our whole list.

Even our elder statesmen have had very little schooling on that front, because I think 2005-2008 were not much better in regards to playing a technically proficient game. That we have had two players in the last 10 years that have come through that have been able to consistently kick to the forwards advantage (with only one of them left and looking to be on the sidelines until next season) it is the major thing we need to work on.

One thing I have talked about for a few years is the midfield balance. We still haven't had enough coherence in its makeup for everyone to understand the situation and individual players are frequently not producing positive outcomes when they make the decision to join the contest or alternatively when they decide to spread; and a large proportion of times when we do get it right, our skills cause a breakdown in play. Our clearance and contested ball numbers suffered for years not because we weren't competitive in the clinches, but because we were unable to make the right decisions to get that first uncontested possession after a stoppage.

A slower, more deliberate gameplan that drills good decision making into the team can only be a good thing at the end of the day. Instinct has done a lot of good things for us, but it is clear that we will never be a top side playing that way and we will need to supplement it with a clear logical plan that plays to our strengths and leaves as big a margin for error as possible - because working in fine margins has not generated much success, or even positive sentiment.

One thing we have had going for us over the last few years is effort and determination. There aren't too many games that I have seen where the majority of players haven't been busting their guts the entire time. Most of our team has a competitive spirit to them and in my reckoning if contested footy was won on guts alone then we shouldn't have had any issues - but we have had plenty. I hope our players show that same determination and effort in increasing their footy intellect because that is what we need to compete now.

My initial impression of "Leppa the coach" was that he was a strategic coach rather than a guts and glory type. I'm not sure if that was a correct assessment yet, and it will take about 10 more weeks before it's any clearer to me. From his interaction with the media so far, he has left me feeling comfortable that he is watching the same game as us and is trying to solve the same problems that we all see.

 

[a mayes ing]

One of the big problems with this gameplan, atm, is that because it is slow it allows the opposition players to get their numbers back. If we do manage to kick our way from defensive 50 into our forward 50, which atm is very difficult, our forwards aren't good enough to get any seperation from their opponents and lead into the right areas. And if they manage to get seperation, do we have any good kickers in our midfield to pass to them accurately. All our elite kicks are in the defensive area (hanley, rich etc. Mayes looks like he will be spending more time in the forward 50).

 

[Bucking Beads]

Do we have enough elite kickers to pull of this gameplan?? I am not sure we do. The game plan certainly needs a lot more time to see how it goes.

 

[Gibbo_88]

I have only been able to watch one of our games so far this season (hawks) and highlights of the others and I don't see much evidence of a specific game plan. Need to see a few games where it's a close loss or we win by 20-30 first. Leuenberger, Hanley, Patfull, Golby and Rich have played below their ability. The only time I think we've looked good is when Green has the ball, the rest of the time we look very predictable in every attacking move.

 

[Big Sauce 21]

They need to play in front. The backs lack speed and it's showing

 

[jjami15]

It's the old chicken or the egg syndrome. What comes first the strategy or the players to execute the plan. As others have noted, when it is executed by the better teams it is not slow. The ball is in a state of constant motion. Watching Essendon last night (granted Carlton weren't much chop) the ball never stopped be it either by hand or by foot but what allowed this was constant movement by the players. For this to happen the players have to be fit enough and the notion of the fitter teams being the better teams is nothing new. So are we fit enough to add to the quandary? I would say not. So we currently are not fit enough or skillful enough to put Leppa's game plan into place successfully.

Both of these elements can be changed however over time. The game is becoming more running based anyway so look for more of these types to drafted and as Hawthorn have done drafting players with elite foot skills.

Leppa has a vision of how to play and over time we will become better at it. There will be minor adjustments made to it as he goes along. He is learning about the playing list and will be given the opportunity to do it right.

 

[bato]

It's the old chicken or the egg syndrome. What comes first the strategy or the players to execute the plan. As others have noted, when it is executed by the better teams it is not slow. The ball is in a state of constant motion. Watching Essendon last night (granted Carlton weren't much chop) the ball never stopped be it either by hand or by foot but what allowed this was constant movement by the players. For this to happen the players have to be fit enough and the notion of the fitter teams being the better teams is nothing new. So are we fit enough to add to the quandary? I would say not. So we currently are not fit enough or skillful enough to put Leppa's game plan into place successfully.

Both of these elements can be changed however over time. The game is becoming more running based anyway so look for more of these types to drafted and as Hawthorn have done drafting players with elite foot skills.

Leppa has a vision of how to play and over time we will become better at it. There will be minor adjustments made to it as he goes along. He is learning about the playing list and will be given the opportunity to do it right.

+1

You've saved me from writing up an essay of my own. Well said.

 

[a mayes ing]

It's the old chicken or the egg syndrome. What comes first the strategy or the players to execute the plan. As others have noted, when it is executed by the better teams it is not slow. The ball is in a state of constant motion. Watching Essendon last night (granted Carlton weren't much chop) the ball never stopped be it either by hand or by foot but what allowed this was constant movement by the players. For this to happen the players have to be fit enough and the notion of the fitter teams being the better teams is nothing new. So are we fit enough to add to the quandary? I would say not. So we currently are not fit enough or skillful enough to put Leppa's game plan into place successfully.

Both of these elements can be changed however over time. The game is becoming more running based anyway so look for more of these types to drafted and as Hawthorn have done drafting players with elite foot skills.

Leppa has a vision of how to play and over time we will become better at it. There will be minor adjustments made to it as he goes along. He is learning about the playing list and will be given the opportunity to do it right.

It does look like we are trying to implement Hawthorns gameplan when we have possession. I dont think our players are used to running so much.

 

[chopperduck]

One of the big problems with this gameplan, atm, is that because it is slow it allows the opposition players to get their numbers back. If we do manage to kick our way from defensive 50 into our forward 50, which atm is very difficult, our forwards aren't good enough to get any seperation from their opponents and lead into the right areas. And if they manage to get seperation, do we have any good kickers in our midfield to pass to them accurately. All our elite kicks are in the defensive area (hanley, rich etc. Mayes looks like he will be spending more time in the forward 50).

The idea with this though is that it also allows us time to set up defensively to help lock the ball in our forward half and get repeat shots on goal. Worst case, you dont take a mark, but they are constantly under pressure. With the defensive structures set up it is hard for them to get the ball out of their back half and with pressure comes turn overs. Other options are a ball up from a tackle, a throw in from out of bounds or a free kick which gives a shot on goal. If we are winning contested ball and clearances, the first 2 options still suit as we might manufacture a quick snap at goal.

People have talked a lot about switching and kicking the ball around, but to be honest, I havent seen us doing a lot of that. I think we are going along the wings and taking the low risk options more currently, as we are yet to ger our positioning and switch play going correctly, nor do we have the cattle down back to pull it off. I think this is why Hanley and Rich have been down back, to offset our poor ball use coming out of defense.

Last year we did a lot more run and gun, but we also got stomped on because of it. We would move the ball to quick, kick to a bad contest, lose possession and they would rebound down the other side and cut us up. The only reason we held out as well as we did, was because we played extra defenders back. This was a trade off, as we didnt have numbers up the ground the pressure the ball carrier, but it was hard for them to actually get a shot on goal once the ball was in there. We would then try move the ball quickly and rebound for a shot ourselves.

Both styles have positives and negatives, neither is right or wrong, but one thing that stands out is that we dont have the skills to play either method to perfection, but I think Leppa's plan minimises damage more. We in general, havent had too much trouble scoring under Leppa, certainly no more than we had previously anyway. But I think we are better defensively.

 

[chopperduck]

jjami15 is correct. The idea is slower movement, but constant. Having the ball move never gives a zone or press defense time to fully set up. It does require good fitness, although it also requires experience and timing. To mark a ball, be able to either hand ball off to someone going past, or immediately play on turn and kick to another lead requires a well drilled team, perfectly timed leads and players knowing exactly where to be and set up. This is the part that will take us awhile to get, and is why we go the safe percentage kick to the boundry more often than not.

 

[James North]

It's too early to tell whether any of the losses have anything to do with the game plan. It's not too early to tell that we lost against the GC because we didn't show up as a team.

I was very enthused by the way we held up against Geelong and Hawthorn particularly the scores we kicked.

 

[AFLQLD]

Interesting that in his post-game Leppa talked several times about the numbers -especially possessions, contested and uncontested. There is probably decades of evidence that these numbers are the critical ones for most teams - some, like Sydney seem to break the trend from time to time. By and large, at this level, possession wins and defending is hard work.

If we can't win or break even in contested possessions then we really need to have a big win in uncontested possessions and I think that Leppa wants us to be a team that is good enough to win at least our share of contests and then control the ball through uncontested possessions and we aren't (yet) good enough to do it. Building uncontested possessions mean a lot of running and spreading to space and very clear well-drilled understanding of the game plan. Above all it means quality transfer of the ball and that is where the current game plan can easily come unstuck. The other aspects I think we are capable of. Clean reliable transfer by hand or foot is some way off with a fair few of our players and some may not ever be reliable enough. I would say that our kicking skills are probably mid-table at best (with a couple of notable exceptions, good and bad) and our hand passing is variable - from fairly good to fairly poor. We simply have to improve in these areas.

We can be a very static team at the moment and that is compounding the disposal skill errors. Much easier to turn an average disposal into a good one with players on the move. I agree with others that Leppa has a vision for a winning game plan and will then do two things: find the players who have the skills or can learn the skills to execute it and tweak the game plan to play to our strengths as he gets to know the players.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Balony_pony16]

A good gameplan is one that has a bit of uncertainly about it... you just dont want to be predictable. This is where Leppa's game of playing high possession from the backline with the likes of Adcock, Golby, Merrett, Lisle, and clarke is a masterstroke!!!! For you can never predict where the play will go off these boys kicks

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[carnthemlions]

It's the old chicken or the egg syndrome. What comes first the strategy or the players to execute the plan. As others have noted, when it is executed by the better teams it is not slow. The ball is in a state of constant motion. Watching Essendon last night (granted Carlton weren't much chop) the ball never stopped be it either by hand or by foot but what allowed this was constant movement by the players. For this to happen the players have to be fit enough and the notion of the fitter teams being the better teams is nothing new. So are we fit enough to add to the quandary? I would say not. So we currently are not fit enough or skillful enough to put Leppa's game plan into place successfully.

Both of these elements can be changed however over time. The game is becoming more running based anyway so look for more of these types to drafted and as Hawthorn have done drafting players with elite foot skills.

Leppa has a vision of how to play and over time we will become better at it. There will be minor adjustments made to it as he goes along. He is learning about the playing list and will be given the opportunity to do it right.

I think Essendon and Hawthorn are both good examples of how precise ball movement doesn't have to be slow when everything's working. Particularly in Essendon's case, I don't think they necessarily have a lot of 'elite' ball users. What they do well is finding safe targets coming out of defence without allowing the opposition too much time to get numbers back. What we need to improve on is our movement while in possession. If we we want to play this way, we need players to be constantly in motion. Kicking to contests anywhere backward of the centre shouldn't be something that happens very often if we get it right- kicking down the line to contests gives you a less than 50-50 chance of retaining possession at best.