Strategy 2018 Game Plan

[mtooler]

If we were to deviate away from our clear swans like game plan in any way, what would improve it and where are we hoping to see the key pieces come into effect to pull it off.

For me I'm thinking there could be some merit to Essendons late season attacking approach, there's merit in the small forward pressure of Tigers, I dont think we have the players to pull either style off.

What we do have is two mobile talls with decent kicks in Buddy and Reid. Those followers of game plans would identify with how Crows use lynch between the arcs a a playthrough/playmaker taking a mark in a dangerous position. With our team and our disposal difficulties that kind of usage of them interchanging from time to time could be handy. Aliir as a loose cannon CHB would also be entertaining to watch, not sure how dangerous it would be though, but love the capacity to break lines that he has.

Otherwise the traditional speedy outside wing ball users with elite foot skills to deliver into 50m, I hope Florent is that but its yet to be seen, we'd have to draft it with Obrien so I don' think that's a realistic 2018 option at present but great if it was and internally we have the cattle to do so.

Would like to see a slow down Lynch type lynchpin mark and set up approach at times in games if swans like football plan is not working and we need to control the tempo.

 

[Dan87]

kick it to bud

 

[sataris]

Everyone at the bottom of the pack to be first to the ball.

Can't stand seeing swans on the outside of a pack.

 

[RUNVS]

kick it to bud

At his chest though, rather than his feet or 1 metre above his head, or 1 metre either side of him.

 

[anotherletdown]

At his chest though, rather than his feet or 1 metre above his head, or 1 metre either side of him.

Fat chance of that happening.....

Pardon the pun but I'd settle for a settled forward line. Reid, Rowan, Papley either in the forward line with a designated role or out of it. We won't get the best out of Bud until we can build some continuity around him.

 

[doona]

2018 Game plan will equal the 2017 Game plan....... We have been shown to not deviate much.

 

[GotTheGoodes]

IMO "Game Plan" hasn't really been as much of an issue for us as much as man management, getting our best mid season then runing out of puff or copping injuries come finals... Owen6 meant we had little choice this year but it is a recurring pattern I'd like to see better addressed. I want us to hit that form during finals not the bloody month beforehand.

 

[Cadsky]

Put Sam Reid back

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

2018 Game plan will equal the 2017 Game plan....... We have been shown to not deviate much.

You mean since 2012?

 

[Syd]

Put Sam Reid back

Only after he kicks his 3rd goal though

 

[Cadsky]

Only after he kicks his 3rd goal though

Pffft. He'd be lucky to kick 3 in a whole match when were dominating.

 

[RUNVS]

Pffft. He'd be lucky to kick 3 in a whole match when were dominating.

Actually there have been matches where Reid looks like he is on fire, doing really well and the second the midfield starts losing the contest Longmire throws Reid back and leaves him there for the next 30 minutes.

 

[swansfan51]

Only after he kicks his 3rd goal though

In which case he would be moved back in 13 of his 120 games

 

[Mick Oxlong]

Game plan? Win more than 0 games in the first 6 rounds...that’d be a ******* awesome improvement on the 2017 game plan!

 

[caesar88]

If we're to base it on the Bulldogs' flag, we could take some compromising pictures of the AFL executives and umpiring officials then gradually blackmail them in the weeks leading up to and during September.

If we're to base it on Richmond's flag, do FA all year then turn up in September ready to play.

Either or i'm fine with

 

[The King!]

what was the 2017 game plan?

 

[Cadsky]

what was the 2017 game plan?

Put Sam Reid back

 

[brad cooper]

what was the 2017 game plan?

Whatever the gameplan was in 2017 it worked pretty well from round 7 onwards. It defeated the eventual premiers, runners up and prelim finalists.

 

[RUNVS]

Whatever the gameplan was in 2017 it worked pretty well from round 7 onwards. It defeated the eventual premiers, runners up and prelim finalists.

Yeah, but it also had huge weaknesses against teams that tried to keep the ball away from us, like Hawthorn did and Geelong copied because it worked so well.

 

[caesar88]

Yeah, but it also had huge weaknesses against teams that tried to keep the ball away from us, like Hawthorn did and Geelong copied because it worked so well.

But do you think that comes down to work rate? At the end of the day the 'keepings-off' game that was employed by Hawthorn, Collingwood and kinda by Geelong worked so efficiently because we allowed them to play that way and then have the game on their terms. If we showed our usual intensity, hunger for the contest, brutality towards the man, there's no way they would have been able to get away with playing that cheap kick-to-kick s**t that helped them beat us.

 

[Jewelsbon]

Yeah, but it also had huge weaknesses against teams that tried to keep the ball away from us, like Hawthorn did and Geelong copied because it worked so well.

I'll argue against you here as in I certainly wouldn't have said either team showed up a huge weakness in our game plan, we lost two games to Hawthorn by a solitary kick and and the slightest difference - a mark taken here or there, Jake Lloyd playing, a bit more hardness around the packs etc, etc would have/could have delivered an entirely different result.
As far as the final against Geelong goes, (in my opinion anyway) in our minds we had that game done and dusted and were focused on the following week, simply put we didn't bother turning up. We had shown a few weeks earlier that our game plan is capable of cutting Geelong to shreds.
Take out the first six weeks of last season and we showed our game plan works and works incredibly effectively, with only Adelaide, Hawthorn and GWS really showing they had any answers.

 

[RUNVS]

Footywire has added more stats so I thought I would post metres gained for our players, and the positions they are in in the league for that stat


This guys are in the top 100 in the league

23. Lloyd - 435m (26.0 disposals)
24. Franklin - 433m (16.9 disposals)
48. Newman - 389m (20.3 disposals)
78. Jones - 356m (19.9 disposals)

Everyone else is lower so their rank is not listed

Heeney - 328m (20.6 disposals)
Parker - 307m (25.3 disposals)
Kennedy - 305m (28.8 disposals)
Mills - 295m (17.3 disposals)
Rampe - 285m (16.6 disposals)
Jack - 281m (17.7 disposals)
Hannebery - 280m (24.7 dispoals)
McVeigh - 266m (18.5 dispoals)
Rohan - 255m (9.6 disposals)
Grundy - 253m (16.8 disposals)
Towers - 224m (14.7 disposals)
Papley - 233m (15.6 disposals)
Cunningham - 207m (14.2 disposals)
Melican - 197m (11.9 disposals)
Hewett - 162m (18.7 disposals)

So in other words per disposal, these are our most damaging players

Metres for every disposals

Rohan - 25.8m
Franklin - 25.7m
Newman - 19.2m
Jones - 17.9m
Rampe - 17.2m
Mills - 17.1m
Lloyd - 16.7m
Melican - 16.6m
Heeney - 15.9m
Jack - 15.9m
Towers - 15.2m
Grundy - 15.1m
Papley - 14.9m
Cunningham - 14.6m
McVeigh - 14.4m
Parker - 12.1m
Hannebery - 11.3m
Kennedy - 10.6m
Hewett - 8.7m

 

[caesar88]

I'll argue against you here as in I certainly wouldn't have said either team showed up a huge weakness in our game plan, we lost two games to Hawthorn by a solitary kick and and the slightest difference - a mark taken here or there, Jake Lloyd playing, a bit more hardness around the packs etc, etc would have/could have delivered an entirely different result.
As far as the final against Geelong goes, (in my opinion anyway) in our minds we had that game done and dusted and were focused on the following week, simply put we didn't bother turning up. We had shown a few weeks earlier that our game plan is capable of cutting Geelong to shreds.
Take out the first six weeks of last season and we showed our game plan works and works incredibly effectively, with only Adelaide, Hawthorn and GWS really showing they had any answers.

Agree. I also think it's easy to forget that Hawthorn should have been a top eight side this year, so two narrow losses to them just wasn't a total shame in my eyes. They still had names like Hodge, Burgoyne, Roughead, Rioli, McEvoy, Shiels, Gunston, Bruest, Isaac Smith and Puopolo in their side, throw in Tom bloody Mitchell as well as some good kids like Burton, Sicily (yuck) and Langford. There is no way they should have been getting spanked by 70-80 points at the start of the year with the talent they had in their side, and they showed they could beat a lot of good sides with their best footy still. So I think Clarkson actually should have got more out of them this year.

 

[caesar88]

Footywire has added more stats so I thought I would post metres gained for our players, and the positions they are in in the league for that stat


This guys are in the top 100 in the league

23. Lloyd - 435m (26.0 disposals)
24. Franklin - 433m (16.9 disposals)
48. Newman - 389m (20.3 disposals)
78. Jones - 356m (19.9 disposals)

Everyone else is lower so their rank is not listed

Heeney - 328m (20.6 disposals)
Parker - 307m (25.3 disposals)
Kennedy - 305m (28.8 disposals)
Mills - 295m (17.3 disposals)
Rampe - 285m (16.6 disposals)
Jack - 281m (17.7 disposals)
Hannebery - 280m (24.7 dispoals)
McVeigh - 266m (18.5 dispoals)
Rohan - 255m (9.6 disposals)
Grundy - 253m (16.8 disposals)
Towers - 224m (14.7 disposals)
Papley - 233m (15.6 disposals)
Cunningham - 207m (14.2 disposals)
Melican - 197m (11.9 disposals)
Hewett - 162m (18.7 disposals)

So in other words per disposal, these are our most damaging players

Metres for every disposals

Rohan - 25.8m
Franklin - 25.7m
Newman - 19.2m
Jones - 17.9m
Rampe - 17.2m
Mills - 17.1m
Lloyd - 16.7m
Melican - 16.6m
Heeney - 15.9m
Jack - 15.9m
Towers - 15.2m
Grundy - 15.1m
Papley - 14.9m
Cunningham - 14.6m
McVeigh - 14.4m
Parker - 12.1m
Hannebery - 11.3m
Kennedy - 10.6m
Hewett - 8.7m

Geez Hannebery should be a lot higher than that. Shows just how down he was this year

 

[RUNVS]

Geez Hannebery should be a lot higher than that. Shows just how down he was this year

I was thinking Hannebery was very low as well. You can accept Kennedy being that low as he is a genuine inside player, and many of his disposals would be short handballs to get the ball out of congestion but Hannebery isn't that much of an inside player, he really should be averaging much closer to Heeney, as he plays a somewhat similar role to Heeney.

One thing I also noticed was Rohan. I was not expecting him to be that attacking with the ball as he is even more attacking than Buddy is.