Analysis 2019 List, Game Plan and Best 22?

[connolly]

And isn’t it funny that when we tried something different and attacked for a quarter, Dew didn’t have any answers for us? We kicked six goals in that first quarter and could’ve had more. Then we went back to the same old style that Dew knew inside out.

One of the characteristics of the Horse game plan is that when we get in front he puts the shutters up and goes defensive. Even for him doing that in the second quarter of a game is to say well - bizarre. Against Dew that really cost us.

 

[sthmelb_dimmies]

I agree injuries restrict the implementation of team plans. But surely the GC defeat is a flashing red light. GC hardly had a dominating group of big men. They were basically a bunch of skinny kids that ran us ragged by quick ball movement and domination of the central corridor. The fact that their coach knew Longmire's game plan backwardsknew the weakness of it and coached against it was obvious. That game would have been studied by every coaching staff in the competition. We either change or go down the ladder next season.

By the same token, I’m looking forward to see how North plays against Sydney next year with Shawry sitting in their box.

 

[Artygunner]

Don’t know if this had been said or not but has anyone wondered whether Stoddart will play a big role in 2019 given the change to kick in rules?

I can see him using his pace and great left foot taking the kick ins. Imagine him taking off gaining an extra 15 metres before putting the laces in to the pig skin. Could be a really effective weapon

 

[S120]

And isn’t it funny that when we tried something different and attacked for a quarter, Dew didn’t have any answers for us? We kicked six goals in that first quarter and could’ve had more. Then we went back to the same old style that Dew knew inside out.

That game I think came down less to different styles of play from first quarter to the other three quarters than a general malaise over the team which was there from the first bounce. In that first quarter there were signs of laziness defensively which is ordinarily not there and it was papered over by some free flowing play in attack. But when Gold Coast tightened up after quarter time we never went with them. That was the worst effort from a Swans side I think I've ever seen that day. It was pure and unabashed complacency.

 

[6yearsold]

After the GC the jig was up in regards to the game plan. Be instructive to watch the game again and the players visible as GC ran over the top of us.

Clarke can play off a half back flank, go into the middle and has pace, Mc V can but cant and doesn't; COR can play off a flank, play in the middle and has pace and McV can, but can't and doesn't; Thurlow can play on a half back flank, a wing and has pace and McV can but can't and doesn't. If McV lines up in the firsts next year that means there has been some disappointing pre-seasons by the newbies or the coach is playing favourites. O hold on he doesn't does he?

clarke was moved to hb last year at nm and it coincided with his form going backwards. he is a midfielder who we brought in to fill hanneberys role. he does not have the kicking skills to play hb.

mcveigh is easily best 22 going on his form for the past two seasons.

 

[Keyter]

 

[caesar88]

With respect wouldn't a team being run over the top of late in a game indicate tiredness/fitness issues and a team being beaten from the first siren indicate a game plan issue? What you said seems counter-intuitive

When were we run over the top of late in a game? The Geelong game we fizzled pretty early on, and the Giants one the same, only they didn't kick away as much as Geelong did. I was talking about these two finals and how in both matches, we were never really in it enough to say whether it was a game plan issue or not, because the intensity just wasn't there, and you can't do peanuts in a final without intensity. I think that lack of intensity was more to do with the unevenness of our team. Too many youngsters with not enough in-form leaders to steer the ship.

 

[caesar88]

One of the characteristics of the Horse game plan is that when we get in front he puts the shutters up and goes defensive. Even for him doing that in the second quarter of a game is to say well - bizarre. Against Dew that really cost us.

Agree completely. He was too reactive. In the second quarter, we continued playing that aggressive brand, only we started making more mistakes and not being able to pull off quite as many of the risky plays. But instead of sticking to the mentality we obviously went into that match with, he shut up shop as you said and just caved and went full defensive. At some point you have to back your players in. We had more talent out there than the Suns did. We didn't need to panic and doubt the plan we went in with. There were plenty of examples as I said in another post where we'd played attacking and did actually pull off very good wins, like the Hawthorn game and the North shoot-out at Etihad. It was arguably the worst coaching effort I've seen from Horse tbh

 

[caesar88]

That game I think came down less to different styles of play from first quarter to the other three quarters than a general malaise over the team which was there from the first bounce. In that first quarter there were signs of laziness defensively which is ordinarily not there and it was papered over by some free flowing play in attack. But when Gold Coast tightened up after quarter time we never went with them. That was the worst effort from a Swans side I think I've ever seen that day. It was pure and unabashed complacency.

We may have to agree to disagree here because I think it was the total opposite of complacency. I think it was panic and over-reaction as soon as we faced a bit of a challenge from the Suns. But we completely abandoned everything that got us 5 goals in front all because the 17th-placed team was having a bit of momentum. It may have seemed like there was a malaise over our boys, but the rug was pulled from under them at half time by their own coach. A group that young was always going to be lost. That second quarter was an arm-wrestle, two teams trying different strategies, the Suns getting a bit of momentum but nothing too crazy. If we kept playing attacking, we may have only needed a few more goals and it may have broken the Suns. Instead it was just ABORT MISSION, THE SUNS ARE COMING!

Doesn't it say something that the coach of the 17th-placed team that was 5 goals down backed their game plan in across the four quarters more than the coach who was 5 goals up with a more talented side?

 

[MarkP]

The AFL owns a large chunk of Champion Data. They should release all the stats to the fans.

ALL YOUR STATS ARE BELONG TO US

 

[zyzzbruh]

I actually don't even think McVeigh is that elite by foot anymore. Produced some absolute shockers that should've been regulation kicks this season. It's more just his smarts that still stand out. Knowing how to move in traffic, his little side-steps and flicks to advantage, not rushing when he has it.

I thought his kicking was good, he just had less time because of the extra perceived pressure we had on us this year. What stood out to me most was his fumbling. I’ll never forget that game v port Adelaide when he was 20 meters in the clear at half back, bent over and attempted to pick the ball up 3 times and missed it every single time before getting bumped off it and conceding a goal that broke out backs that game.

Was the story of our season, fumbling and perceived pressure. Team was clearly too young and shite to pull off chains of play.

 

[Vin Rogue]

I agree injuries restrict the implementation of team plans. But surely the GC defeat is a flashing red light. GC hardly had a dominating group of big men. They were basically a bunch of skinny kids that ran us ragged by quick ball movement and domination of the central corridor. The fact that their coach knew Longmire's game plan backwards, knew the weakness of it and coached against it was obvious. That game would have been studied by every coaching staff in the competition. We either change or go down the ladder next season.

The boys put the cue in the rack after the first quarter. The red flag is that they mentally switched off. Not a game where any gameplan of Horses was followed after the end of the first quarter.

 

[connolly]

clarke was moved to hb last year at nm and it coincided with his form going backwards. he is a midfielder who we brought in to fill hanneberys role. he does not have the kicking skills to play hb.

mcveigh is easily best 22 going on his form for the past two seasons.

I might concede fringe this year but the year before he had a shocker. And still got picked. Clarke is more versatile can play half back, has more pace and can play through the middle. McV plays one position - very slowly - how he is "easily" in the best 22 is based purely on some years past performance and Longmire's view of course.

 

[connolly]

We may have to agree to disagree here because I think it was the total opposite of complacency. I think it was panic and over-reaction as soon as we faced a bit of a challenge from the Suns. But we completely abandoned everything that got us 5 goals in front all because the 17th-placed team was having a bit of momentum. It may have seemed like there was a malaise over our boys, but the rug was pulled from under them at half time by their own coach. A group that young was always going to be lost. That second quarter was an arm-wrestle, two teams trying different strategies, the Suns getting a bit of momentum but nothing too crazy. If we kept playing attacking, we may have only needed a few more goals and it may have broken the Suns. Instead it was just ABORT MISSION, THE SUNS ARE COMING!

Doesn't it say something that the coach of the 17th-placed team that was 5 goals down backed their game plan in across the four quarters more than the coach who was 5 goals up with a more talented side?

Apparently Stewie Dew had nothing to do with it

 

[caesar88]

Apparently Stewie Dew had nothing to do with it

I think he definitely did. Knowing Horse like he would, he probably knew we wouldn't persist with the attacking style of the first two quarters and just instructed his boys to sit tight and wait for us to capitulate. And whaddoyaknow

 

[Jewelsbon]

To put it simply the game plan is outdated, it’s good enough to knock off middle of the road sides and every now and then a better team that might be off.
The fact is this game style is not sustainable for 3 - 4 finals games.
The lack of ability to keep the foot on the throat and put teams away kills us and keeps the opposition in the game on most occasions right until the end.
I don’t know what the answer is but Longmire has shown his hand time and time again over the last few years and come up short.

Sorry but that statement is just plain wrong, we went 8 - 3 against top 8 sides last year so the game plan was clearly better than "just good enough to knock off middle of the road teams".
Our biggest issue last year was we were crap at home, purely and simply, why? I don't know, but please don't re-write history to try and make your point.

 

[6yearsold]

I might concede fringe this year but the year before he had a shocker. And still got picked. Clarke is more versatile can play half back, has more pace and can play through the middle. McV plays one position - very slowly - how he is "easily" in the best 22 is based purely on some years past performance and Longmire's view of course.

The year before he had a shocker?

When he was out of the team early we were losing to everyone. He came back and was one of our best if not our best in getting us to the finals, only losing once.

fair enough you don't like him but you seriously are just making stuff up about mcveigh.

 

[Wolfgang West]

To put it simply the game plan is outdated, it’s good enough to knock off middle of the road sides and every now and then a better team that might be off.
The fact is this game style is not sustainable for 3 - 4 finals games.
The lack of ability to keep the foot on the throat and put teams away kills us and keeps the opposition in the game on most occasions right until the end.
I don’t know what the answer is but Longmire has shown his hand time and time again over the last few years and come up short.

This point is 100% spot on and anyone who has an inability to recognise it has no clue what so ever. Fact.

 

[bungee]

This point is 100% spot on and anyone who has an inability to recognise it has no clue what so ever. Fact.

Nah. You give Horse too much credit for the execution of the gameplan. He tells players what he would like them to do. That doesn't mean they do it.

 

[bungee]

Good to see we now have the equal 9th oldest list, courtesy of blooding 18 players over the last 3 years. I suspect we'll blood more this year. Blakey is a cert. Meanwhile Hawks have the oldest list. So much for their great rebuild. Half their team will be due for hip replacement surgery in the next couple of years. Still, I suspect they'll do better than many pundits think, but we'll do a lot better, especially if we can keep our players on the park for a change.

 

[caesar88]

Good to see we now have the equal 9th oldest list, courtesy of blooding 18 players over the last 3 years. I suspect we'll blood more this year. Blakey is a cert. Meanwhile Hawks have the oldest list. So much for their great rebuild. Half their team will be due for hip replacement surgery in the next couple of years. Still, I suspect they'll do better than many pundits think, but we'll do a lot better, especially if we can keep our players on the park for a change.

I think Hawks are actually ahead of us a little. To me we have very similar issues. Both with a large portion of youngsters not quite ready to take that step to the next level yet, and are still reliant on our core experienced players who are a little over the hill. Where they have an advantage is that they have that middle tier range (Shiels, Smith, Gunston, Breust) who are now in the primes of their careers and having career best years. We don't have that, as they've either left (Rohan, Hanners) or injury-plagued (Reid). Lloyd and Parker are the exceptions. They've also traded in players who will have an immediate impact (Mitchell, O'Meara, Wingard, Scully) while we've drafted in players who will take some time. I suspect it will mean Hawthorn are better than us for the next few years, but then we will be better than them for the few years after that.

Our time will come in 2021 I believe.

 

[bungee]

I think Hawks are actually ahead of us a little. To me we have very similar issues. Both with a large portion of youngsters not quite ready to take that step to the next level yet, and are still reliant on our core experienced players who are a little over the hill. Where they have an advantage is that they have that middle tier range (Shiels, Smith, Gunston, Breust) who are now in the primes of their careers and having career best years. We don't have that, as they've either left (Rohan, Hanners) or injury-plagued (Reid). Lloyd and Parker are the exceptions. They've also traded in players who will have an immediate impact (Mitchell, O'Meara, Wingard, Scully) while we've drafted in players who will take some time. I suspect it will mean Hawthorn are better than us for the next few years, but then we will be better than them for the few years after that.

Our time will come in 2021 I believe.

I agree with 2021 or thereabouts but I think we can still be competitive in the short term (depending on injuries). We have only Grundy (32) and Macca (33) older than 31. In the 24-29 age group we have Rampe, Aliir, Sinclair, Menzel, Lloyd, Cunningham, Naismith, Fox, Reid and Thurlow. We should have had more in that age but we missed because of "the ban". Plus Hanners should have been at his best if not for injuries and Rohan never really made it. At the younger end though we have a large number of talented and experienced 20-23 yr olds and even more talent coming through.

For us it's a matter of how well we bridge between the retirement of guys like Jack, Smith, Grundy, Macca and even Buddy and Kennedy while bringing the next generation through. In a few years we'll have Jones, Heeney, Paps, Hewett, Mills, Ronke, Rose, Florent, Hayward, Dawson, Clarke and Melican reaching their prime years with the aforementioned 24-29's taking over leadership as our senior players and guys like Blakey, Amartey, Cameron, McCartin, O'Riordan, Pink, Ling, Stoddart, Rowbottom, Bell and others will be coming through the 50-100 game mark. That's going to be a really healthy age/talemt profile. I think we're well ahead of the Hawks in that department as sadly (for them) they've been spent much of their future to try to be competitive in the present. Like Richmond they are becoming too dependant on too few and injuries could really test their depth.

 

[connolly]

Agree completely. He was too reactive. In the second quarter, we continued playing that aggressive brand, only we started making more mistakes and not being able to pull off quite as many of the risky plays. But instead of sticking to the mentality we obviously went into that match with, he shut up shop as you said and just caved and went full defensive. At some point you have to back your players in. We had more talent out there than the Suns did. We didn't need to panic and doubt the plan we went in with. There were plenty of examples as I said in another post where we'd played attacking and did actually pull off very good wins, like the Hawthorn game and the North shoot-out at Etihad. It was arguably the worst coaching effort I've seen from Horse tbh

In the first quarter we attacked through the corridor, played on and scored quick goals. Jones was playing in the centre and scored a memorable running goal out of the centre. In the second quarter we tried to close the game up, slowed it down and moved the ball around the flanks. GC then dominated through the central corridor, ran the ball quickly, played on and scored goals against an out of position defence and by their forwards running into space. The slow ball movement around the flanks is a Longmire tactic to play the ball out of a deep defense. Dew countered it by rebounding quickly with a high defensive line across the wings. For anyone to claim that the players were sluggish is a nonsense. Longmire' propaganda at his press conferences always in a defeat blames player attitude and lack of tackling pressure. It was the GC that didn't lay a tackle in the first quarter. When they applied the pressure with a high defense at the swans receiving the inevitable slow ball out of our defense and created turnovers, we were beaten. Buddy didn't kick a goal. The ball was being turned over on the wings forcing Buddy up the ground. When Buddy is forced to hunt the ball up the ground he doesn't score goals. Spare me the brilliant Longmire tactic where he claims Buddy goes up the ground to get into the game. The game should be coming to him FFS.That game is a blueprint on how to beat a deep defense team on their transition - like the one Longmire coaches.

 

[connolly]

I thought his kicking was good, he just had less time because of the extra perceived pressure we had on us this year. What stood out to me most was his fumbling. I’ll never forget that game v port Adelaide when he was 20 meters in the clear at half back, bent over and attempted to pick the ball up 3 times and missed it every single time before getting bumped off it and conceding a goal that broke out backs that game.

Was the story of our season, fumbling and perceived pressure. Team was clearly too young and shite to pull off chains of play.

He has less time because he has slowed down. A lot. Its called age.

 

[caesar88]

I agree with 2021 or thereabouts but I think we can still be competitive in the short term (depending on injuries). We have only Grundy (32) and Macca (33) older than 31. In the 24-29 age group we have Rampe, Aliir, Sinclair, Menzel, Lloyd, Cunningham, Naismith, Fox, Reid and Thurlow. We should have had more in that age but we missed because of "the ban". Plus Hanners should have been at his best if not for injuries and Rohan never really made it. At the younger end though we have a large number of talented and experienced 20-23 yr olds and even more talent coming through.

For us it's a matter of how well we bridge between the retirement of guys like Jack, Smith, Grundy, Macca and even Buddy and Kennedy while bringing the next generation through. In a few years we'll have Jones, Heeney, Paps, Hewett, Mills, Ronke, Rose, Florent, Hayward, Dawson, Clarke and Melican reaching their prime years with the aforementioned 24-29's taking over leadership as our senior players and guys like Blakey, Amartey, Cameron, McCartin, O'Riordan, Pink, Ling, Stoddart, Rowbottom, Bell and others will be coming through the 50-100 game mark. That's going to be a really healthy age/talemt profile. I think we're well ahead of the Hawks in that department as sadly (for them) they've been spent much of their future to try to be competitive in the present. Like Richmond they are becoming too dependant on too few and injuries could really test their depth.

Correct we will have a strong age profile in three or four years time, but it will all be for naught if Horse & co can’t get the best out of them. I still have my reservations there...