Analysis Bloods' Performance Discussion 2022

[wills2g]

It's a weird thing watching the Swans atm. Maybe it was impossible to avoid a drop off this year.
I was hoping for top 4, more consistency, and strong gameplan.
Right now we're are looking like an outside chance at best, less consistent (even from quarter to quarter), and I feel like we are playing to stop the opponent.

We are definitely in a slump, and I keep watching hoping things will click, but we seem to be getting worse each week. I imagine Longmire strip it all back this week.

A top 4 team plays their game plan to a tee with some changes to beat other top 4 sides.

Non top 4 sides change up what they do week on week because they dont have a strong system yet.

We keep changing our game plan to combat bottom 8 sides. Come on they should be adapting to us.

 

[Kapers]

I also feel like there's a lot critising Horse at the moment.
IMO, the blame is about 50/50 at the moment. The players aren't holding up to any real standard, and Horse doesn't seem to be changing much.

 

[Kapers]

The next month of footy is really important, not to win, but to see how good or bad we really are. Are our problems with effort going to fade away, or are we going to be putting ourselves in a bad position every opening siren?

Essendon, Carlton, Richmond, and Melbourne. If we only win 1 or 2 I think it might be time for a full reset. Change what we're doing, because whatever got us to 5 and 1 is clearly not good enough. We are at a very real risk of ending up 6 and 6, which I don't mind if it makes us realise that we aren't as good as we thought we were.

Usually, it's pretty easy to be a Swans supporter because you know that most weeks we are a really well-disciplined team, but recently I've feared watching the games because I'm trying to guess what Swans outfit I'll be watching. Sometimes it'll be completely different quarter to quarter.

Looking at the next 4 weeks, I don't care about wins and losses. If we win 3/4 by playing the same brand, while giving up early leads, looking lazy, and relying on points of brilliance, I don't care, we won't mean anything in finals.

All I want to see is a consistent 4 quarter effort, week in, week out.

 

[caesar88]

The next month of footy is really important, not to win, but to see how good or bad we really are. Are our problems with effort going to fade away, or are we going to be putting ourselves in a bad position every opening siren?

Essendon, Carlton, Richmond, and Melbourne. If we only win 1 or 2 I think it might be time for a full reset. Change what we're doing, because whatever got us to 5 and 1 is clearly not good enough. We are at a very real risk of ending up 6 and 6, which I don't mind if it makes us realise that we aren't as good as we thought we were.

Usually, it's pretty easy to be a Swans supporter because you know that most weeks we are a really well-disciplined team, but recently I've feared watching the games because I'm trying to guess what Swans outfit I'll be watching. Sometimes it'll be completely different quarter to quarter.

Looking at the next 4 weeks, I don't care about wins and losses. If we win 3/4 by playing the same brand, while giving up early leads, looking lazy, and relying on points of brilliance, I don't care, we won't mean anything in finals.

All I want to see is a consistent 4 quarter effort, week in, week out.

It'd be naive to think we'd be exempt from the curse of teams loaded with talent but middling in work rate. It is basically an unavoidable byproduct of every team that's been filled with players with star potential. I'm confident Horse is the right man to work them through this, as opposed to say Leon Cameron, who appears to have accepted mediocrity and arrogance as the standard at GWS with all their "stars."

But it's a delicate balance because as I said above, he also has to do his part to get the best out of them, which may involve actually giving them more freedom. Giving them ineffective roles, chopping and changing their roles, and allowing months to go by without some of them getting a chance to properly shine is probably not what our youngsters need.

So I don't envy his position. He needs to give them the freedom and license to play their natural games while also steering them away from the arrogance and complacency that can often come with being given the freedom and license. Tough balance.

 

[caesar88]

‘Alarming trends’: Swans ‘on watch’ as numbers expose rollercoaster ride to start season

‘Alarming trends’: Swans ‘on watch’ as numbers expose ‘bottom three’ potential

www.foxsports.com.au

Print version of Montagna's analysis of us.

I think it's a fair assessment, though I have a few objections.

Citing Mills, Rowbottom, Florent, McInerney and Heeney's output in our wins vs in our losses is hardly some revelatory shock. If five of any team's more capable players had below par performances then it would be a pretty good indicator the team's not having a great game and a loss is very possible.

And he says those guys aren't young kids any more but proceeds to name two of them who are only in their fourth years, not to mention ignoring things like Florent's change in position in two of our losses which would obviously lead to a drop in numbers for him, the role being asked of Rowbottom that doesn't exactly do him a lot of favours, the fact McInerney is strapped up like Tutankhamun at the moment (and shouldn't even be a factor in our contested work anyway?), Heeney being shifted around between midfield and forward.

It's fair to say "Swans need to do x, y and z" but if you're gonna name individuals and place blame you need to know the details.

He's spot on though that we need to harden up when the pressure is on. I'm not sure it's an easy fix, given that you can't just conjure up hand skills under pressure in the space of a few weeks, but increased effort alone can make a world of difference.

 

[Punts]

Where soft af at times and overrated

Won’t do anything this year come finals , that’s if we make it

 

[Tedeski]

‘Alarming trends’: Swans ‘on watch’ as numbers expose rollercoaster ride to start season

‘Alarming trends’: Swans ‘on watch’ as numbers expose ‘bottom three’ potential

www.foxsports.com.au

Print version of Montagna's analysis of us.

I think it's a fair assessment, though I have a few objections.

Citing Mills, Rowbottom, Florent, McInerney and Heeney's output in our wins vs in our losses is hardly some revelatory shock. If five of any team's more capable players had below par performances then it would be a pretty good indicator the team's not having a great game and a loss is very possible.

And he says those guys aren't young kids any more but proceeds to name two of them who are only in their fourth years, not to mention ignoring things like Florent's change in position in two of our losses which would obviously lead to a drop in numbers for him, the role being asked of Rowbottom that doesn't exactly do him a lot of favours, the fact McInerney is strapped up like Tutankhamun at the moment (and shouldn't even be a factor in our contested work anyway?), Heeney being shifted around between midfield and forward.

It's fair to say "Swans need to do x, y and z" but if you're gonna name individuals and place blame you need to know the details.

He's spot on though that we need to harden up when the pressure is on. I'm not sure it's an easy fix, given that you can't just conjure up hand skills under pressure in the space of a few weeks, but increased effort alone can make a world of difference.

You don't need stats to see what our problem is.
It's first quarters which is a classic "didn't come to play" scenario, week in week out.
We should have dropped the North game & Hawk game.

That leaves us with wins against the Cat's, Buddy's 1,000th goal match where the Cats were on a hiding to nothing.
Another against a pathetic West Coast, who we now know are clearly the team with the least amount of heart in the AFL.
Another in round 1 against the Giants who were at their worst & without Toby Greene, or a recognised ruckman.

I'm disappointed to say C88, that we are nowhere near as good as any of us thought we were after the big Buddy 1000 goal game against the Cats.
Our young "stars" are not stars at all, but very good players when they work hard for 4 quarters throughout games.
We have too many of them that excite us at times, but then are very underwhelming a lot of the other times.

So nothing will change after the game against Essendon this week, win, lose or draw because they are not a team where any positive assessment can be made on our behalf because they are putrid.
Until I see uncomfortable decisions made at the selection table, then we haven't hit our reality check at the club.
I would rather see battlers like Bell, Clarke & COR running around giving 100% with errors, in a loss, than what we saw from some of our highly rated players last week, who looked as though they were only interested in self preservation in certain moments.

Let's see if any hard calls are made tonight.

 

[Tedeski]

Where soft af at times and overrated

Won’t do anything this year come finals , that’s if we make it

Can't disagree with you Punts.
It was the most disappointed I've been since the 2014 GF against the Hawks after last week's loss to GC.
Once again jumped at the start with hardness at the ball in the middle.
That's on the midfield group.
Have a look at the starting 3 in the midfield against GC, throw in the ruckman & there is the answer to who is responsible.

 

[Bloods86]

I would rather see battlers like Bell, Clarke & COR running around giving 100% with errors, in a loss, than what we saw from some of our highly rated players last week, who looked as though they were only interested in self preservation in certain moments.

Probably wouldn't put COR in the same boat as Bell and Clarke, COR has done his job, doesn't make many mistakes, at least in recent opportunities. Bell goes AWOL, Clarke just doesn't have impact at senior level (unless given a run with job).

But yeah, the Eagles game I couldn't understand how people were raving afterwards, given we'd come off a thumping in all but the scoreboard against the Dogs, and a very poor effort vs the Roos. I'm not discounting our group yet (though I think we're probably still a couple of years from being flag challengers), as a heap of successful sides have had spurts and slumps in the lead up, but there's been some getting ahead of ourselves.

 

[caesar88]

You don't need stats to see what our problem is.
It's first quarters which is a classic "didn't come to play" scenario, week in week out.
We should have dropped the North game & Hawk game.

That leaves us with wins against the Cat's, Buddy's 1,000th goal match where the Cats were on a hiding to nothing.
Another against a pathetic West Coast, who we now know are clearly the team with the least amount of heart in the AFL.
Another in round 1 against the Giants who were at their worst & without Toby Greene, or a recognised ruckman.

I'm disappointed to say C88, that we are nowhere near as good as any of us thought we were after the big Buddy 1000 goal game against the Cats.
Our young "stars" are not stars at all, but very good players when they work hard for 4 quarters throughout games.
We have too many of them that excite us at times, but then are very underwhelming a lot of the other times.

So nothing will change after the game against Essendon this week, win, lose or draw because they are not a team where any positive assessment can be made on our behalf because they are putrid.
Until I see uncomfortable decisions made at the selection table, then we haven't hit our reality check at the club.
I would rather see battlers like Bell, Clarke & COR running around giving 100% with errors, in a loss, than what we saw from some of our highly rated players last week, who looked as though they were only interested in self preservation in certain moments.

Let's see if any hard calls are made tonight.

Look I don't agree with much of this post Ted, though I do agree that we're not as good as many of us thought we'd be. I'm not sure I was one of them. I had us finishing seventh this year from memory and I stand by it.

I think it comes down to being able to play under intense finals-like pressure. Last year, as impressed as I was with our performances, I saw some worrying signs that we weren't as good when such pressure was applied to us. In particular we had no handball game whatsoever and I spent the whole summer banging on about it, but it's because I knew it would cost us in games, and here we are... three losses where the opposition's pressure was elite and we couldn't handle it, trying to chip-kick and/or switch-kick our way through team defences when it would be far more prudent to run and carry by hand through it.

But if I had to sum up where we're at the moment and what's really caused something of a breakdown in our performances, it would be this: We have a playing group who are so suited to the dynamic bruise-free outside game-plan we implemented last year that they're now somewhat shell-shocked that they have to get their hands a little dirtier. We have a coaching staff who appear so concerned about our inability to get our hands dirty that they seem to have gone full defensive, with many players performing "roles" to try and mitigate what opposition teams can do.

So a playing group who are too attacking have caused the coaching staff to become too defensive. Both parties will have to give a little to get a little in order for the game-plan to evolve and become effective again.

 

[Neverwas]

This conversation happens every time we have a double 6 day break. Slow starts, players are flat as, skills are off, can't kick straight, timing is off etc.

They will be OK this week.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

We are still a developing team. It was great we made the 8 last year and hopefully we do the same this season. We lost two key players at the end of 2021 and have struggled to replace them.

Our mids' system is actually plural depending on the personnel used. Parker + jpk in there necessitates a different system to Mills, Warner and Rowbottom. A more attacking system was responsible for first use at the start of Q3 v Brisbanal and defensive system (and associated personnel) when Neale led their fightback.

This week I have seen people wanting to go back to Parker and jpk at game commencement. I say that has failed us for years.

Realities are we are in transition. Round 1 this year was a sign of the future with Parker spending a lot of the game forward and the team reaped the benefits.

As our younger mids develop I hope we are able to employ system variants at CBs and stoppages to improve outcomes.

 

[Bloods86]

This conversation happens every time we have a double 6 day break. Slow starts, players are flat as, skills are off, can't kick straight, timing is off etc.

They will be OK this week.

What was the excuse for the North and Hawks games? Too long of a break? Though that was actually mentioned for the Hawks, which is a bit of a cop out tbh.

 

[SM]

What was the excuse for the North and Hawks games? Too long of a break? Though that was actually mentioned for the Hawks, which is a bit of a cop out tbh.

We were fine in that game for the majority. The excuse for that game is Hawks fast starts, they've done it in a number of games. North game they were bouncing back from a week of criticism in the media and a baking from the coach.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

We were fine in that game for the majority. The excuse for that game is Hawks fast starts, they've done it in a number of games. North game they were bouncing back from a week of criticism in the media and a baking from the coach.

Not interested in excuses in any shape or form.

IMV 2022 is a write off because of the jpk issue.

 

[SM]

Not interested in excuses in any shape or form.

IMV 2022 is a write off because of the jpk issue.

Let me re-phrase. The explanations for those games is the above. We won both games so no need for an 'excuse' just an analysis of the game state.

 

[Bloods86]

We were fine in that game for the majority. The excuse for that game is Hawks fast starts, they've done it in a number of games. North game they were bouncing back from a week of criticism in the media and a baking from the coach.

Yeah but that says that Hawks and Roos at fast starts are better than us? If we in fact turned up from the opening bounce (in our control), then we should be able to see their fast start and match them at least (or given it's the Hawks and Roos, smash them anyway), rather than giving them a good lead.

 

[Crust]

The game v GWS we started fast and hard. GWS upped the pressure and we responded.
That is what is missing.

 

[SM]

Yeah but that says that Hawks and Roos at fast starts are better than us? If we in fact turned up from the opening bounce (in our control), then we should be able to see their fast start and match them at least (or given it's the Hawks and Roos, smash them anyway), rather than giving them a good lead.

No team in the comp has put four quarters together consistently. I'd be interested if you could find one for me. Dees for instance put the cue in the rack after HT against the Saints, and have regularly only turned up for 1-2 quarters to put on a burst to win the game then gone back into preservation mode. Everyone else has had peaks and troughs. We have one of the youngest lists in the 8 besides Freo and are developing as the season progresses. Expecting the side to be switched on at 100% for every minute of every game is ludicrous. The fact is that we beat both North and the Hawks, the latter comfortably, which shows our resilience and determination.

The bigger concern is the game plan the Suns use and how regularly they beat us, and why other sides haven't adopted it against us. It was similar to how the Dogs dismantled us.

 

[caesar88]

The game v GWS we started fast and hard. GWS upped the pressure and we responded.
That is what is missing.

Agree with this but it's harder to respond when the opposition have figured your game plan out. It's too much corridor or bust for us in recent times and when we try a different approach like run and carry, we don't have the hand skills for it. So our "responses" are kinda fizzling before they can even do too much damage.

 

[Bloods86]

No team in the comp has put four quarters together consistently. I'd be interested if you could find one for me. Dees for instance put the cue in the rack after HT against the Saints, and have regularly only turned up for 1-2 quarters to put on a burst to win the game then gone back into preservation mode. Everyone else has had peaks and troughs. We have one of the youngest lists in the 8 besides Freo and are developing as the season progresses. Expecting the side to be switched on at 100% for every minute of every game is ludicrous. The fact is that we beat both North and the Hawks, the latter comfortably, which shows our resilience and determination.

The bigger concern is the game plan the Suns use and how regularly they beat us, and why other sides haven't adopted it against us. It was similar to how the Dogs dismantled us.

I understand this, not what I'm talking about at all. It's a concern that every single week (bar the training run vs the Eagles) we've started slow. Yes the Giants and Cats were only a couple of goals in the lead before we got going, and we eventually overcame the Hawks and North (we shouldn't have needed to), but it's a trend. And it's not one that can be explained away by youth (that should more likely affect us later in quarters or games). And yeah teams that are well in front do go into cruise control, we did that vs the Eagles in Q3, that's not what is happening here.

My comments were in response to someone using 6 day breaks as a reason for us being flat vs the Suns. No, we've just been flat a lot, regardless of the breaks, particularly early in games. I can forgive a young team for struggling later in quarters and games, or us putting teams at arms length and then just idling (as annoying as it is), that's just not the case with us this year and it's not good enough for a team that makes noises about success at the end of the year.

For all the talk about our exciting brand of footy and plenty on here frothing and prioritising the exciting players, it feels like we're struggling for substance, where if things aren't going right, you just have to attack the ball, run harder, present options with the ball, follow opponents without it. In some games we only seem to do that when we're almost out of it, and it doesn't always end well. And that's happened against other pretty young teams too.

 

[caesar88]

I think there's a hint of arrogance in the narrative that it's our "slow starts" that are costing us. In the games where we had slow starts, such as GWS, Geelong and Hawthorn, we actually ended up winning comfortably. We want to look at our worst performances this year and we can hardly blame our slow starts.

Against North Melbourne, we were 3 points in front at half time. Then we came out in the third quarter and lost the inside 50s 16 to 14, and the contested possessions 38 to 33. Against arguably the worst team in the competition.

Against Brisbane, the scores were level at quarter time. Then we came out in the second quarter and lost the inside 50s 20 to 8, and tellingly, lost the tackles inside 50 count 4 to 1. Intent wasn't there.

And then worst of all, against the Suns, the scores were level at three quarter time. With just a quarter to go to put away one of the lesser teams in the comp, we lost the inside 50s 18 to 7, yet somehow they more than doubled our tackles inside 50 (5 to 2) and, most damningly, in the crucial last 10 minutes of play, they had 49% time in possession compared to our 17%.

That's a second quarter, a third quarter and a fourth quarter where we almost, or did, cost ourselves the game. These weren't games where we started poorly and then had to scrap our way back into it over the next three quarters. These were games where we got ourselves back into the game and then just let the game slip away again through lack of effort, intent and hardness.

 

[Millky95]

I think there's a hint of arrogance in the narrative that it's our "slow starts" that are costing us. In the games where we had slow starts, such as GWS, Geelong and Hawthorn, we actually ended up winning comfortably. We want to look at our worst performances this year and we can hardly blame our slow starts.

Against North Melbourne, we were 3 points in front at half time. Then we came out in the third quarter and lost the inside 50s 16 to 14, and the contested possessions 38 to 33. Against arguably the worst team in the competition.

Against Brisbane, the scores were level at quarter time. Then we came out in the second quarter and lost the inside 50s 20 to 8, and tellingly, lost the tackles inside 50 count 4 to 1. Intent wasn't there.

And then worst of all, against the Suns, the scores were level at three quarter time. With just a quarter to go to put away one of the lesser teams in the comp, we lost the inside 50s 18 to 7, yet somehow they more than doubled our tackles inside 50 (5 to 2) and, most damningly, in the crucial last 10 minutes of play, they had 49% time in possession compared to our 17%.

That's a second quarter, a third quarter and a fourth quarter where we almost, or did, cost ourselves the game. These weren't games where we started poorly and then had to scrap our way back into it over the next three quarters. These were games where we got ourselves back into the game and then just let the game slip away again through lack of effort, intent and hardness.

We play well for 20-35 minutes a game at this stage

 

[caesar88]

We play well for 20-35 minutes a game at this stage

Agreed and it's anyone's guess as to which quarter it will be that we play well in.

There's also nothing wrong with playing well for 20-35 minutes a game, as that's what all the best teams of the last decade have done. But in the other 100 or so minutes, we aren't just "decent". We are effing terrible. That disparity is what makes our bursts of great footy not good enough too often.

 

[Millky95]

Agreed and it's anyone's guess as to which quarter it will be that we play well in.

There's also nothing wrong with playing well for 20-35 minutes a game, as that's what all the best teams of the last decade have done. But in the other 100 or so minutes, we aren't just "decent". We are effing terrible. That disparity is what makes our bursts of great footy not good enough too often.

I remember back in 2014 against Carlton. We were up by 8, then 7 at half time before leading at 3/4 time by 70 then winning by 71.

Wish we could do that more often

AFL Tables - Sydney v Carlton - Sat, 12-Jul-2014 7:40 PM - Match Stats game I am referencing