Analysis 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22?

[zyzzbruh]

All these lists are far too early.

Based on previous seasons, we know that Reid still has to survive pre-season, and there are chains and drains all around the SCG ready to trip up the unwary.

Ofcourse there will be injuries etc and chances for players will come. but for round 1 assuming everyone is fit, the synopsis by everyone here seems to be that Menzel, Clarke, thurlow, Naismith, Mills, pelican, Reid and Blakey will start round 1. That’s 8 players.

Assuming Grundy, McVeigh, jack get dropped (which they most likely won’t) who else goes out of the team? Mccartin is the only obvious one. Do we really want to drop the likes of Hayward, papley, Ollie, ronke and Dawson?? I definitely don’t.

Ontop of that we still have stoddart, maibaum, ling and oriardan who have showed promise. Depending on who bolts, it’s going to be very hard for any of our recruits to make the team. Unless Menzel is 100% fit and training every session he won’t play.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Ofcourse there will be injuries etc and chances for players will come. but for round 1 assuming everyone is fit, the synopsis by everyone here seems to be that Menzel, Clarke, thurlow, Naismith, Mills, pelican, Reid and Blakey will start round 1. That’s 8 players.

Assuming Grundy, McVeigh, jack get dropped (which they most likely won’t) who else goes out of the team? Mccartin is the only obvious one. Do we really want to drop the likes of Hayward, papley, Ollie, ronke and Dawson?? I definitely don’t.

Ontop of that we still have stoddart, maibaum, ling and oriardan who have showed promise. Depending on who bolts, it’s going to be very hard for any of our recruits to make the team. Unless Menzel is 100% fit and training every session he won’t play.

I cannot see Clarke or Thurlow playing round 1. They are upgrade depth players.

Assuming a fit list (huge assumption) Dawson, Reid, Mills, Menzel, Naismith and possibly Blakey would be candidates for Round 1.

Hanners and Newman are gone from the last team we fielded v GWS, opening two spots. If Naismith is fit I think Sinkers would miss. Jack is unlikely to be best 22. Cunningham and Smith will compete for the small defender role. If Reid is fit (!!!!!!) the third tall will be between McCartin and Menzell.

 

[Mick Oxlong]

I cannot see Clarke or Thurlow playing round 1. They are upgrade depth players.

Assuming a fit list (huge assumption) Dawson, Reid, Mills, Menzel, Naismith and possibly Blakey would be candidates for Round 1.

Hanners and Newman are gone from the last team we fielded v GWS, opening two spots. If Naismith is fit I think Sinkers would miss. Jack is unlikely to be best 22. Cunningham and Smith will compete for the small defender role. If Reid is fit (!!!!!!) the third tall will be between McCartin and Menzell.

Naismith won’t be playing Rd 1, he needs playing time so Sinclair will be 1st choice at the start of the year. Thurlow and Clarke are effectively replacing Newman and Hannebery, so there’s every chance they play immediately (see below). Grundy, Smith, McVeigh and Melican won’t be walk ups along with Reid and Jack.

My info is, the club had a really good look at themselves post season because they didn’t like what they saw in the rear vision mirror. The trade and FA period wasn’t for depth, it was for the purpose of playing them. Reputation and experience means nothing next year.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

My info is, the club had a really good look at themselves post season because they didn’t like what they saw in the rear vision mirror. The trade and FA period wasn’t for depth, it was for the purpose of playing them. Reputation and experience means nothing next year.

Mick. I really hope that is the good oil.

 

[Mick Oxlong]

Mick. I really hope that is the good oil.

Exit interviews with players were very honest and the coach was told to change his approach to game style. Contrary to rumour, Longmire continues to have a great relationship with the players but yes, they are tired of the grinding game style.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Maybe Horse has had a Hardwick moment

 

[sr20]

Seniors
B Smith Grundy Aliir
HB Rampe Melican Lloyd
C Florent Heeney Jones
HF Franklin Reid - Play from the 50 to the Wing
MF Hayward Papley - Play Predominantly Inside 50, Lead and Crumb
F Sinclair Menzel - Deep Options
R Naismith Kennedy Parker
INT Mills Hewett Cunningham McVeigh

Defenders: Grundy Melican Aliir take the 3 Talls. Smith the small forward. Rampe and Lloyd are the creative players off half back (McVeigh, 7th Defender in same role)

Forwards: Forward line structure will be 2 deep (1 long kick in, 1 space in front), 2 marking options up between the 50 and Wing and 2 that play predominantly in the 50 either as lead up options for short kicks, or crumbers for long kicks in. Reid and Franklin play higher up, both can mark the ball, and Franklin particularly is a penetrating kick. Sinclair is the long get out option in the square. Menzel is the player you want leading into space. Hayward and Papley the two general forwards.

Ruck: Naismith is Number one Ruckman. Sinclair gives the chop out 25-30% of the game

Midfielders: Florent, Jones and Cunningham to be the gut running wingers. Heeney, Parker, Kennedy, Mills and Hewett, or combinations of these 5 are what you want at the stoppages.

Tried to keep the twos in the same line-up and you'll see who they replace.

Lock Down SD: Smith - O'Riordan
KPD: Grundy, Melican, Aliir - Maibaum, Tucker, Reynolds
Playmaker Def: Rampe, Lloyd, McVeigh - Thurlow, Stoddart, Foot
Lead up Fwd: Franklin, Reid - Blakey, McCartin
Deep Get Out/BackUp Ruck: Sinclair - Amartey
Deep Lead Up: Menzel - Pink
Mid/Gen FWD: Hayward, Papley - Ronke, Rose
Wingers: Florent, Jones, Cunningham - Clarke, Ling, McInerney
Stoppage: Heeney, Kennedy, Parker, Hewett, Mills - Dawson, Fox, Rowbottom, Bell, Jack

Reserves
B O;Riordan Maibaum Reynolds
HB Thurlow Tucker Stoddart
C Clarke Dawson Ling
HF Blakey McCartin
MF Ronke Rose
F Amartey Pink
R Cameron Fox Rowbottom
INT Bell Jack McInerney Foot

 

[RUNVS]

My info is, the club had a really good look at themselves post season because they didn’t like what they saw in the rear vision mirror. The trade and FA period wasn’t for depth, it was for the purpose of playing them. Reputation and experience means nothing next year.

Words cannot express how much I hope that is true.

 

[RUNVS]

Maybe Horse has had a Hardwick moment

I hope so too, though so far Horse's philosophy seems to be "if at first you don't succeed try the exact same thing again and again and again until it does succeed".

 

[Tedeski]

Exit interviews with players were very honest and the coach was told to change his approach to game style. Contrary to rumour, Longmire continues to have a great relationship with the players but yes, they are tired of the grinding game style.

Exactly. This far into his coaching journey I've no doubt Horse does have the capacity to listen to others & take on board any criticism coming his way & make adjustments accordingly. To assume he doesn't is just ignorant. People are allowed to have disagreements while trying to get the club to be the best it can be, but it's how they all move forward that matters.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Exactly. This far into his coaching journey I've no doubt Horse does have the capacity to listen to others & take on board any criticism coming his way & make adjustments accordingly. To assume he doesn't is just ignorant. People are allowed to have disagreements while trying to get the club to be the best it can be, but it's how they all move forward that matters.

Proof will be in the pudding so to speak though. Any coach can say he'll change, the great ones actually go and do it and re-invent their side. I do have faith in the team though.

 

[Mick Oxlong]

Words cannot express how much I hope that is true.

I'd be extremely shocked and disappointed in my source if it wasn't.

 

[BloodySwan]

Exactly. This far into his coaching journey I've no doubt Horse does have the capacity to listen to others & take on board any criticism coming his way & make adjustments accordingly. To assume he doesn't is just ignorant. People are allowed to have disagreements while trying to get the club to be the best it can be, but it's how they all move forward that matters.

By all reports Horse seems to have a great relationship with the players and always seems to put effort into how they're feeling and what they're thinking. The only places I have heard of discontent is from this forum. It would make sense for the same coach who pulls Morton aside when he's worried about his mental health and gives Buddy time off during finals campaigns is also open to dialog from his players and assistant coaches.

Also with everything I've read about Horse he doesn't like change to his gameplans. This isn't because he's stubborn but he believes in the same philosophy as Clarkson, build a solid system and stick to it. If you keep chopping and changing players wont have an idea of how many are in their 50, when they should switch, etc, etc.

Really looking forward to 2019

 

[caesar88]

I think on the surface it’s hard for us to say well how could someone like Ronke or Cunningham be dropped after the seasons they just had?

But I think what our inclusions like Clarke, Blakey, Menzel etc do is keep those guys honest. As much as we want to develop our youngsters, if they’re not performing up to the standard then they should be dropped. Learning to hold your spot in the 22 and be competitive for selection is part of their development anyway. I don’t think we’ve brought in anyone who will improve our 22 immediately (besides Menzel), but we have brought in fellas who will keep our bottom 6 accountable at all times, which in an indirect way actually does improve our 22.

For example towards the end of this year, Ronke and McCartin were both struggling as could be expected. But there was no one challenging for their spots, and so we basically just rewarded them for their earlier form for lack of better options. I think if the youngsters this year were to show signs of struggle, they wouldn’t have the luxury of faith, and that’s a good thing for the team and for the youngsters themselves.

 

[Caj]

Also with everything I've read about Horse he doesn't like change to his gameplans. This isn't because he's stubborn but he believes in the same philosophy as Clarkson, build a solid system and stick to it. If you keep chopping and changing players wont have an idea of how many are in their 50, when they should switch, etc, etc.

Clarko may expect his troops to adhere to his game plan, but he has changed it multiple times now over his coaching tenure to adjust to the playing list at his disposal, or to keep up with changes to the game. The frustration from some of us with Horse is that he hasn't been able to do that.

Anyway, hopefully Mick's info is on the money

 

[connolly]

By all reports Horse seems to have a great relationship with the players and always seems to put effort into how they're feeling and what they're thinking. The only places I have heard of discontent is from this forum. It would make sense for the same coach who pulls Morton aside when he's worried about his mental health and gives Buddy time off during finals campaigns is also open to dialog from his players and assistant coaches.

Also with everything I've read about Horse he doesn't like change to his gameplans. This isn't because he's stubborn but he believes in the same philosophy as Clarkson, build a solid system and stick to it. If you keep chopping and changing players wont have an idea of how many are in their 50, when they should switch, etc, etc.

Really looking forward to 2019

There is so much I personally disagree with this opinion. However having opened my mouth on Longmire previously I intend to shut it and keep an open mind in the Bloods spirit of completely irrational optimism and the old south joie de vivre. Until about round 2.

 

[BloodySwan]

Clarko may expect his troops to adhere to his game plan, but he has changed it multiple times now over his coaching tenure to adjust to the playing list at his disposal, or to keep up with changes to the game. The frustration from some of us with Horse is that he hasn't been able to do that.

Anyway, hopefully Mick's info is on the money

That's a fair criticism but truth be told, when has he really needed to? This is Horse's worst season since he's been in charge and he still made the 8. He's been able to rejuvenate the squad around the same structures but this will definitely be the first time he has to create a new structure

 

[zyzzbruh]

Clarko may expect his troops to adhere to his game plan, but he has changed it multiple times now over his coaching tenure to adjust to the playing list at his disposal, or to keep up with changes to the game. The frustration from some of us with Horse is that he hasn't been able to do that.

Anyway, hopefully Mick's info is on the money

I havnt noticed any change from clarko what so ever.

Even if our style did change we can’t be expecting results from it straight away. Hardwick had to persist with his gameplan and multiple disappointing seasons before it got them anywhere. I feel like you’re all going to be too quick jumping on horses throat if results don’t go our way. I have no doubt horse will be listening to those around him and making adjustments accordingly. He wouldn’t be in the position he is from a club and business perspective if he was a dictator. He clearly has the respect of the players, coaching staff an club

 

[caesar88]

I havnt noticed any change from clarko what so ever.

Even if our style did change we can’t be expecting results from it straight away. Hardwick had to persist with his gameplan and multiple disappointing seasons before it got them anywhere. I feel like you’re all going to be too quick jumping on horses throat if results don’t go our way. I have no doubt horse will be listening to those around him and making adjustments accordingly. He wouldn’t be in the position he is from a club and business perspective if he was a dictator. He clearly has the respect of the players, coaching staff an club

The results don’t have to show straight away, but we need to see that the change is at least happening. Maybe next year when we have a young, quick and athletic side, we could try playing a faster, more direct type of footy more than two or three times a year. This year we had 8 losses, all in almost identical fashion and because of the same flaws in how we play. I could wear another 8 losses next year if at least they were from us taking the game on and giving a bit more license to the youngsters. Guarantee it won’t always pay off right away, but it would pay off in the long run. I think that’s all some people wanna see from Horse & co, just a sense that we’re going in a different direction and not getting stuck in a time warp like it’s 2013.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The results don’t have to show straight away, but we need to see that the change is at least happening. Maybe next year when we have a young, quick and athletic side, we could try playing a faster, more direct type of footy more than two or three times a year. This year we had 8 losses, all in almost identical fashion and because of the same flaws in how we play. I could wear another 8 losses next year if at least they were from us taking the game on and giving a bit more license to the youngsters. Guarantee it won’t always pay off right away, but it would pay off in the long run. I think that’s all some people wanna see from Horse & co, just a sense that we’re going in a different direction and not getting stuck in a time warp like it’s 2013.

Well said. I can cop losing if the way we are playing is exciting and we can see growth. It’s not just about wins and losses

 

[Crust]

The thinking here seems to be that Reid and Sinclair are an either/or proposition. IWhy not play them both?
Naismith in the ruck, Buddy and Sinclair on the ground and Reid on the bench.
At any one time one of them wil be off, so at any one time we will have two tall targets in the forward line, plus one ruck, either Naismith or Sinclair.
Further, as Buddy ages, he probably will need more time on the bench.
Therefore we will have two tall forwards, two mediums - Hayward and Menzel, plus perhaps Kennedy or Parker rotating, and two smalls in Papley and Ronke.

 

[The Gong]

The thinking here seems to be that Reid and Sinclair are an either/or proposition. IWhy not play them both?
Naismith in the ruck, Buddy and Sinclair on the ground and Reid on the bench.
At any one time one of them wil be off, so at any one time we will have two tall targets in the forward line, plus one ruck, either Naismith or Sinclair.
Further, as Buddy ages, he probably will need more time on the bench.
Therefore we will have two tall forwards, two mediums - Hayward and Menzel, plus perhaps Kennedy or Parker rotating, and two smalls in Papley and Ronke.

I had them competing in my squad but, as others have pointed out, the changes to the ruck rule around taking possession out of the ruck probably means you can't chuck a medium player in to do a chop out for you while the ruckman is on the bench. Having said that you can't go too tall across the park either. I actually think Reid and Sinclair might be fighting for a similar role as a forward/second ruck. If Reid is fit he'd have to be a starter but that's a significant if.

 

[scaryness]

The thinking here seems to be that Reid and Sinclair are an either/or proposition. IWhy not play them both?
Naismith in the ruck, Buddy and Sinclair on the ground and Reid on the bench.
At any one time one of them wil be off, so at any one time we will have two tall targets in the forward line, plus one ruck, either Naismith or Sinclair.
Further, as Buddy ages, he probably will need more time on the bench.
Therefore we will have two tall forwards, two mediums - Hayward and Menzel, plus perhaps Kennedy or Parker rotating, and two smalls in Papley and Ronke.

Naismith is the 'or' here.

Lots of people think he is a lock and I have no idea why.

 

[RUNVS]

Naismith is the 'or' here.

Lots of people think he is a lock and I have no idea why.

Agreed. He is certainly a better tap ruckman than Sinclair but Sinclair is much more useful around the ground than Naismith is as well. Depends on what Longmire wants since both offer completely different things.

 

[caesar88]

Naismith is the 'or' here.

Lots of people think he is a lock and I have no idea why.

Neither he or Sinclair are locks IMO as they could both improve significantly in certain aspects of their game. I don't think one is better than the other but Sinclair did get a bit of a head start on Naismith by getting the sole ruck duties for a whole season while Naismith was on the sidelines.