Coach John Longmire - Part II

[Tedeski]

So are you Teddy

It's repetitive Bedders.

 

[RUNVS]

It's been more than 2 years that we've looked like the best and worst team in the comp in the same year.
The one thing that is really noticeable about the criticism levelled at Horse/the game plan is that credit is never given to opposition teams for doing such a good job and completely breaking down our game plan. Opposition usually put the most work into trying to break down the game plan of the best teams.

Plenty of people in the know have said it, the Swans are the most predictable team in the competition. This means it is easier for an opposition team to break down our gameplan as they know Longmire is not going to throw in any surprises or change things up.

 

[Tedeski]

the Swans are the most predictable team in the competition.

This can be attributed to having Buddy Franklin in our forward line & is the reason why someone like Sam Reid is valued by our coaching department.

 

[RUNVS]

This can be attributed to having Buddy Franklin in our forward line & is the reason why someone like Sam Reid is valued by our coaching department.

I am not sure I agree as Cameron Mooney and Terry Wallace have both said for years now that the Swans are super predictable, both saying the words "you know exactly what you are going to get from them" or to that effect anyway. They both said that Longmire knows his gameplan, and he knows that the opposition knows his gameplan, but he backs his gameplan and his players to be good enough to overcome any strategies opposition coaches and players come up with to counteract that gameplan.

Basically it would be like General Eisenhower announcing on the 25th of May 1944 that the Allies plan on attacking Normandy in a few weeks time and backing in Allied troops to simply be better than whatever the Germans could throw at them.

 

[Tedeski]

I am not sure I agree as Cameron Mooney and Terry Wallace have both said for years now that the Swans are super predictable, both saying the words "you know exactly what you are going to get from them" or to that effect anyway. They both said that Longmire knows his gameplan, and he knows that the opposition knows his gameplan, but he backs his gameplan and his players to be good enough to overcome any strategies opposition coaches and players come up with to counteract that gameplan.

Basically it would be like General Eisenhower announcing on the 25th of May 1944 that the Allies plan on attacking Normandy in a few weeks time and backing in Allied troops to simply be better than whatever the Germans could throw at them.

Yep I agree.
Everyone knows that 70% of forward entries are going to Buddy.
Against the Cats at Geelong & without Buddy, we got the job done when not many other teams have been able to over the last 10 years.
Buddy makes us predictable............................but geez he's good!

 

[connolly]

I am not sure I agree as Cameron Mooney and Terry Wallace have both said for years now that the Swans are super predictable, both saying the words "you know exactly what you are going to get from them" or to that effect anyway. They both said that Longmire knows his gameplan, and he knows that the opposition knows his gameplan, but he backs his gameplan and his players to be good enough to overcome any strategies opposition coaches and players come up with to counteract that gameplan.

Basically it would be like General Eisenhower announcing on the 25th of May 1944 that the Allies plan on attacking Normandy in a few weeks time and backing in Allied troops to simply be better than whatever the Germans could throw at them.

Salute to the Eisenhower reference. Longmire is like Marshal Kulik who argued just before the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union that the tank would never replace horse cavalry.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

This can be attributed to having Buddy Franklin in our forward line & is the reason why someone like Sam Reid is valued by our coaching department.

Disagree. It is not Buddy but the game plan we adopt when he is playing that is one cause of our lack of attack.

Oddly enough Buddy is the most unpredictable forward of a generation ... yet our game plan has often been slow build up and then bomb it to the the poor bugger who often competes against three Oppo players. Buddy is the epitome of brilliant unpredictability, just as our game plan is the antithesis.

I agree the addition of a smart decent enough kpd in Reid will help us have another target. He will need need to be hit up regularly to stop the double and triple teaming of Bud. As some inc me have suggested we need to move from treacle movement from D50 and HB to a more direct and run style.

As much as Reid and a Menzell/stronger McCartin will be important the root solutions are improving our mids and backline personnel with a more advanced accompanying game plan.

It is assumed we have a strong backline because we rarely give up big scores. However our backline and its inadequacies have been papered over by flooding our mids and some forwards into D50. As we have seen on innumerable occasions we are vulnerable to being stuck there. Having slow blokes like Macca and Reg does not help run. Having a dreadful kick like Smithy who is only capable of safely chipping sideways and backwards but rarely forward does not help. In fact it enables the diabolical chippetty chip style that the Opposition love.

For me we can only carry one slow bloke and we cannot carry Smithy unless he is only there to lock down a specialist small forward who is on fire. If he does play the game plan must be to keep the ball out of his hands as much as possible.

 

[Tedeski]

Buddy is the most unpredictable forward of a generation

Not when he is hampered by injury which has him less mobile up forward as he was for much of the season, now that we know why he was not training through the week. So when your key forward isn't able to be at his roaming best then the whole game plan can be a little thrown out & become more predictable when the coach puts his faith in him. Now against GWS he could hardly move but he is Buddy so he was named. So again, as I said after the 2016 GF, my only criticism I have of Horse is that he allowed the selection of unfit players & it really shits me & if Buddy doesn't play, what will the fickle Swans supporters have to cheer about, hey?
We can keep throwing up different reasons can't we?

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Not when he is hampered by injury which has him less mobile up forward as he was for much of the season, now that we know why he was not training through the week. So when your key forward isn't able to be at his roaming best then the whole game plan can be a little thrown out & become more predictable when the coach puts his faith in him. Now against GWS he could hardly move but he is Buddy so he was named. So again, as I said after the 2016 GF, my only criticism I have of Horse is that he allowed the selection of unfit players & it really shits me & if Buddy doesn't play, what will the fickle Swans supporters have to cheer about, hey?
We can keep throwing up different reasons can't we?

I agree about the problems we have experienced in playing crocked players ... Buddy did an extraordinary job carrying one injury all season. The second incurred before the finals really crocked him. Hindsight is a terrible thing, but I do wonder what would have happened if we had rested him for six weeks or so after the injury suffered in Round 1.

In 2018 Buddy was frequently double and triple teamed. Even a healthy champ would have struggled with the attention he received.

I wonder too what would have happened had Hanners been told at the beginning of 2017 to take the year off, have surgery if needed and to get his body right. As it was he was below average in 2017 and a liability in 2018.

 

[caesar88]

Disagree. It is not Buddy but the game plan we adopt when he is playing that is one cause of our lack of attack.

Oddly enough Buddy is the most unpredictable forward of a generation ... yet our game plan has often been slow build up and then bomb it to the the poor bugger who often competes against three Oppo players. Buddy is the epitome of brilliant unpredictability, just as our game plan is the antithesis.

I agree the addition of a smart decent enough kpd in Reid will help us have another target. He will need need to be hit up regularly to stop the double and triple teaming of Bud. As some inc me have suggested we need to move from treacle movement from D50 and HB to a more direct and run style.

As much as Reid and a Menzell/stronger McCartin will be important the root solutions are improving our mids and backline personnel with a more advanced accompanying game plan.

It is assumed we have a strong backline because we rarely give up big scores. However our backline and its inadequacies have been papered over by flooding our mids and some forwards into D50. As we have seen on innumerable occasions we are vulnerable to being stuck there. Having slow blokes like Macca and Reg does not help run. Having a dreadful kick like Smithy who is only capable of safely chipping sideways and backwards but rarely forward does not help. In fact it enables the diabolical chippetty chip style that the Opposition love.

For me we can only carry one slow bloke and we cannot carry Smithy unless he is only there to lock down a specialist small forward who is on fire. If he does play the game plan must be to keep the ball out of his hands as much as possible.

Two ways to achieve this and improve the midfield:

1. Play Sinclair in lieu of Reid, and have he and Naismith in the same team. Naismith is the better tap ruck and could work it to our midfielders advantage more than Sinclair, but at the same we can't not have Sinclair's ticker and work rate in the side, so he takes the place of Reid in the forward line and occasionally rucking (either Dawson or Blakey then fills the spare forward role when Sinclair is rucking.)

2. Stop over-possessing the ball. We need to be clearing it out of a stoppage in no more than two possessions, instead of just over-possessing the ball so that we can create the rolling scrum that previously suited us with a different list. We were ranked 16th last year for centre clearances. Because the longer you keep the ball in tight, the more you over-work it, the harder it becomes to clear it out. The opposition just pounces on it, and why I felt like we so often got caught holding the ball. We need to prioritise getting it in the hands of Florent, Jones, Cunningham etc waiting on the outside. They're the ones we need to bring in to the game more. We struggle so much in getting it out to those blokes that by the time it gets there, they have no time or space to do the things they do best, which is run and carry and make attacking plays.

This is why I was glad we drafted Rowbottom. I watched him a lot during the TAC cup (and to be fair only his highlights from the championships), but the kid never goes backwards or sideways. He's always looking for the best option forward of him and uses bullet hand-passes to get it out into an advantageous position, instead of say Hanners' lofty hospital handballs. Obviously to think an 18 year old will hold the key is ridiculous but we could do with more inside mids that have an attacking mentality like this. As great as Kennedy and Parker are, I feel like they often show so much guts just to gain possession of the ball that their first instinct once they have it is to get rid of it by any means necessary. That's why we end up with so many meaningless chip possessions in congestion. You can accomplish more with one or two attacking possessions in close than you can with five or six. Really hope this is drilled into our mids as the new faces like Mills and Clarke etc come through.

 

[bedford]

This can be attributed to having Buddy Franklin in our forward line & is the reason why someone like Sam Reid is valued by our coaching department.

He's only in there at the start , remember the St Scum game where he spent the last 3 quarters in their forward line.

 

[Tedeski]

He's only in there at the start , remember the St Scum game where he spent the last 3 quarters in their forward line.

Yes we obliterated them at the start.
Lets just see how we start off the season. We ate least need to see what Longmire can do with the new season & some new rules.

 

[bedford]

Yes we obliterated them at the start.
Lets just see how we start off the season. We ate least need to see what Longmire can do with the new season & some new rules.

That's better .

 

[Kiama Chris]

Two ways to achieve this and improve the midfield:

1. Play Sinclair in lieu of Reid, and have he and Naismith in the same team. Naismith is the better tap ruck and could work it to our midfielders advantage more than Sinclair, but at the same we can't not have Sinclair's ticker and work rate in the side, so he takes the place of Reid in the forward line and occasionally rucking (either Dawson or Blakey then fills the spare forward role when Sinclair is rucking.)

2. Stop over-possessing the ball. We need to be clearing it out of a stoppage in no more than two possessions, instead of just over-possessing the ball so that we can create the rolling scrum that previously suited us with a different list. We were ranked 16th last year for centre clearances. Because the longer you keep the ball in tight, the more you over-work it, the harder it becomes to clear it out. The opposition just pounces on it, and why I felt like we so often got caught holding the ball. We need to prioritise getting it in the hands of Florent, Jones, Cunningham etc waiting on the outside. They're the ones we need to bring in to the game more. We struggle so much in getting it out to those blokes that by the time it gets there, they have no time or space to do the things they do best, which is run and carry and make attacking plays.

This is why I was glad we drafted Rowbottom. I watched him a lot during the TAC cup (and to be fair only his highlights from the championships), but the kid never goes backwards or sideways. He's always looking for the best option forward of him and uses bullet hand-passes to get it out into an advantageous position, instead of say Hanners' lofty hospital handballs. Obviously to think an 18 year old will hold the key is ridiculous but we could do with more inside mids that have an attacking mentality like this. As great as Kennedy and Parker are, I feel like they often show so much guts just to gain possession of the ball that their first instinct once they have it is to get rid of it by any means necessary. That's why we end up with so many meaningless chip possessions in congestion. You can accomplish more with one or two attacking possessions in close than you can with five or six. Really hope this is drilled into our mids as the new faces like Mills and Clarke etc come through.

One thing I have noted about our contested footy is that we tend to position ourselves closer to each other and often lack a clear outlet player, leading to 3 or 4 possessions that go nowhere. If this is correct I see it as a coaching issue to get people in more advantageous positions.

 

[bedford]

One thing I have noted about our contested footy is that we tend to position ourselves closer to each other and often lack a clear outlet player, leading to 3 or 4 possessions that go nowhere. If this is correct I see it as a coaching issue to get people in more advantageous positions.

That's a pretty spot on call , we often have 3 or 4 handballs to try and get it out.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

That's a pretty spot on call , we often have 3 or 4 handballs to try and get it out.

Yep Kiama Chris has raised an interesting thought. If players inside are too close together it makes it easier to bottle them up and prevent an outlet. Its a little like the lack of separation of targets on the forward line.

 

[caesar88]

One thing I have noted about our contested footy is that we tend to position ourselves closer to each other and often lack a clear outlet player, leading to 3 or 4 possessions that go nowhere. If this is correct I see it as a coaching issue to get people in more advantageous positions.

Because that was actually what we wanted. We try to create repeat stoppages on the back of our strength in there and used to grind the opponents down this way and then our midfield would get on top as the match went on. But that was in 2014-2016. We now have a very different looking midfield and one that I don't think benefits from repeat stoppages.

 

[Tedeski]

One thing I have noted about our contested footy is that we tend to position ourselves closer to each other and often lack a clear outlet player, leading to 3 or 4 possessions that go nowhere. If this is correct I see it as a coaching issue to get people in more advantageous positions.

Yes I agree & it is because we have had too many in & under midfielders with a lack of outside players to clear the contest. Our recruiting over tha last few years since Jetta left, is trying to address this. Hayward, Papley, Florent, Ronke, etc, etc were part of that realisation that we just couldn't clear the congestion no matter how elite our ball winners were. Tom Mitchell was seen as the player to make way, rightly or wrongly, & now it seems Hanners has made way as well.
I predict we will see a more potent ability to clear the packs with speed, thus allowed forward enrty much quicker & this will make the game plan seem more up with the times.
Having watched some footage of Clarke, he will further add to the midfield clearances as he can help JPK & Parker with the heavy lifting.

A couple subtle changes to our list but now with games under their belts, our new look midfield will have us in striking distance, with a coach that will know what's required to win the ultimate.
I think we will play off in another GF in the next 3 years.

 

[TheMase]

Because that was actually what we wanted. We try to create repeat stoppages on the back of our strength in there and used to grind the opponents down this way and then our midfield would get on top as the match went on. But that was in 2014-2016. We now have a very different looking midfield and one that I don't think benefits from repeat stoppages.

The main difference imo is a ruckman that gives us first use of the ball. This allows our midfielders to spread a little more, play from more attacking positions.

Sinclair for all his effort (gives his all) either drops the ball into the middle of the stoppage or we concede the hit out. This means our midfielders start more defensively to stop the opposition clearing the ball which creates the repeat stoppages and stops us from getting the space to clear the ball effectively.

Naismith, despite not getting enough ball around the ground, had a big impact in late 2016 when we completely flipped our clearance differential from one of the worst to becoming no.1 in the AFL for that period.

We had a more dominant ruckman during those past periods and prior which is the main difference to our entire midfield setup.

Just my view.

 

[caesar88]

The main difference imo is a ruckman that gives us first use of the ball. This allows our midfielders to spread a little more, play from more attacking positions.

Sinclair for all his effort (gives his all) either drops the ball into the middle of the stoppage or we concede the hit out. This means our midfielders start more defensively to stop the opposition clearing the ball which creates the repeat stoppages and stops us from getting the space to clear the ball effectively.

Naismith, despite not getting enough ball around the ground, had a big impact in late 2016 when we completely flipped our clearance differential from one of the worst to becoming no.1 in the AFL for that period.

We had a more dominant ruckman during those past periods and prior which is the main difference to our entire midfield setup.

Just my view.

It certainly helps, but there are ways around it even if you don't have that great ruck. It's just about having an attacking mentality even if you are an inside midfielder. I think the way we played for so long has meant that guys like JPK and Parker are wired to think that it's not a bad thing to create repeat stoppages, grind our opponents into the dirt and then get the game on our terms. They're used to winning games the hard and tough way as they did so many times.

You can see the generational difference though. Where JPK and Parker often try to stand tall in the tackle just to get the handball out, an Isaac Heeney will try the don't argue and actually move the ball into space himself, or an Ollie Florent will try to break a line with some run. Even Hanners, out of all our mids from 2014-2016, had the most attacking mentality, as he'd get creative with the long handball to the outside or the lookaway handball that catches the opponent off-guard. Unfortunately he became physically incapable of playing that way, and those long handballs became hospital handballs, and the lookaway handballs became blatant turn-overs.

So there are qualities as a midfielder that allow you to dominate and be attacking even if you're not getting premium service. I just think our two midfield leaders don't happen to have them. Not a knock on them, it's just we need mids that do, and we need more of them, so I'm glad it's getting a face-lift this year.

 

[bedford]

Yes I agree & it is because we have had too many in & under midfielders with a lack of outside players to clear the contest. Our recruiting over tha last few years since Jetta left, is trying to address this. Hayward, Papley, Florent, Ronke, etc, etc were part of that realisation that we just couldn't clear the congestion no matter how elite our ball winners were. Tom Mitchell was seen as the player to make way, rightly or wrongly, & now it seems Hanners has made way as well.
I predict we will see a more potent ability to clear the packs with speed, thus allowed forward enrty much quicker & this will make the game plan seem more up with the times.
Having watched some footage of Clarke, he will further add to the midfield clearances as he can help JPK & Parker with the heavy lifting.

A couple subtle changes to our list but now with games under their belts, our new look midfield will have us in striking distance, with a coach that will know what's required to win the ultimate.
I think we will play off in another GF in the next 3 years.

Under big Stewie.

 

[connolly]

One thing I have noted about our contested footy is that we tend to position ourselves closer to each other and often lack a clear outlet player, leading to 3 or 4 possessions that go nowhere. If this is correct I see it as a coaching issue to get people in more advantageous positions.

Our midfield last year was basically roving to a beaten tap ruckman. Our structure was defensive and we relied on turnovers in the midfield. Sinclair was never a ruckman. He is a forward/ 2nd ruckman at best. His effort last year was tremendous in the circumstances where Longmire kept Cameron in the NEAFL rather than play two rucks. Another genius move. We got smashed in the centre clearances. The rule against the third man up meant that we couldn't use Towers as a second ruck. And spelt the end of Towers usefulness as far as Longmire was concerned. Another problem was that Sinclair had very little physical presence in the packs after the ball hit the ground unlike Nankervis or Mumford. So with only one (lightly framed) ruckman effectively beaten in the tap in almost every game, Kennedy in particular was roving to the opposition ruckman. The opposition set up structures to block Kennedy away from the ball drop. At times for Kennedy it looked like WWF. For those who think that Longmire will reshape the game plan to adjust to the new rules, his performance in regard to the rule change in the ruck last year doesn't give a lot of confidence that he will.

 

[Caj]

Yes we obliterated them at the start.
Lets just see how we start off the season. We ate least need to see what Longmire can do with the new season & some new rules.

Lets hope he adjusts quicker than he did with the sub rule

I still cringe that he used Mark Seaby as our sub in the first match under the new rules, no other ruckman was ever used as a sub by any other coach for the remainder of the period that the rule was in

 

[TheMase]

Our midfield last year was basically roving to a beaten tap ruckman. Our structure was defensive and we relied on turnovers in the midfield. Sinclair was never a ruckman. He is a forward/ 2nd ruckman at best. His effort last year was tremendous in the circumstances where Longmire kept Cameron in the NEAFL rather than play two rucks. Another genius move. We got smashed in the centre clearances. The rule against the third man up meant that we couldn't use Towers as a second ruck. And spelt the end of Towers usefulness as far as Longmire was concerned. Another problem was that Sinclair had very little physical presence in the packs after the ball hit the ground unlike Nankervis or Mumford. So with only one (lightly framed) ruckman effectively beaten in the tap in almost every game, Kennedy in particular was roving to the opposition ruckman. The opposition set up structures to block Kennedy away from the ball drop. At times for Kennedy it looked like WWF. For those who think that Longmire will reshape the game plan to adjust to the new rules, his performance in regard to the rule change in the ruck last year doesn't give a lot of confidence that he will.

There was no ruck rule change for 2018. The third man up changed years prior.

Towers was used as a ruck in 2017 under the same rules in place during 2018.

 

[Tedeski]

Under big Stewie.

You are very bullish on Stewie Dew Bedders. Is this a done deal from your information?