Should we flood?

[Wahooti Fandango]

I was thinking last night (watching League Teams) that the only way we can stay competitive against the Hawks is to flood. However, will this be enough to beat them or will it simply reduce the margin we lose by? As distasteful as flooding is, it may be our only option.

 

[ant555]

I was thinking last night (watching League Teams) that the only way we can stay competitive against the Hawks is to flood. However, will this be enough to beat them or will it simply reduce the margin we lose by. As distasteful as flooding is, it may be our only option.

And flooding to help reduce the losing margin really helped the development of the Tigers didnt it.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

And flooding to help reduce the losing margin really helped the development of the Tigers didnt it.

I agree with your point ant, but I am not suggesting the systematic use of flooding. I am suggesting the use of flooding only when it appears that we have no other option and when it increases our chances of winning. Whether this is the case against the Hawks I do not know.

 

[Daytripper]

I was thinking last night (watching League Teams) that the only way we can stay competitive against the Hawks is to flood. However, will this be enough to beat them or will it simply reduce the margin we lose by? As distasteful as flooding is, it may be our only option.

I've thought about this too and it might be a way for us to actually win the match.

Play Lloyd one out in the 50 with perhaps Monfries or Zaka lurking around.

If we can get the ball to our quick runners - Lovett, Winder, Davey, Dempsey off half back - break the lines and get it to Lloyd who is up against a weakened Hawthorn defense then we might be a chance.

Hawks aren't overly quick either.

It will be flooding to win the game - not to save the game (which I don't agree with).

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

I've thought about this too and it might be a way for us to actually win the match.

Play Lloyd one out in the 50 with perhaps Monfries or Zaka lurking around.

If we can get the ball to our quick runners - Lovett, Winder, Davey, Dempsey off half back - break the lines and get it to Lloyd who is up against a weakened Hawthorn defense then we might be a chance.

Hawks aren't overly quick either.

It will be flooding to win the game - not to save the game (which I don't agree with).

That was also my line of thinking. Great minds think alike.

 

[Giggidy Giggidy]

I've thought about this too and it might be a way for us to actually win the match.

Play Lloyd one out in the 50 with perhaps Monfries or Zaka lurking around.

If we can get the ball to our quick runners - Lovett, Winder, Davey, Dempsey off half back - break the lines and get it to Lloyd who is up against a weakened Hawthorn defense then we might be a chance.

Hawks aren't overly quick either.

It will be flooding to win the game - not to save the game (which I don't agree with).

We seem to have done a bit of this at times this year (primarily the Kangas match IIRC), with the exception of NOT having Lloyd (or anyone) stay at home. Looks like it could work, but whenever Dempsey, Stants & co. are running it out they've had nobody to kick to and have had to hold it up.

Would be exciting

 

[The Airing of Grievances]

We seem to have done a bit of this at times this year (primarily the Kangas match IIRC), with the exception of NOT having Lloyd (or anyone) stay at home. Looks like it could work, but whenever Dempsey, Stants & co. are running it out they've had nobody to kick to and have had to hold it up.

This part is spot on. We will struggle to score at all if we flood . The run and carry will get to the centre and the ball carrier will look up and see ........ nothing but brown and gold jumpers. He'll stop , look sideways and either kick it out wide to a stationary player or hesitate and get swamped by tacklers. This is a method to increase not reduce the likelihood of a thumping. Our game plan is about giving positive reinforcement to the idea of aggressive running. It wont work if it is only half baked.
We may, given our loss of players still get hammered . At least we give ourself a chance if we maintain a proper forward structure.

 

[jiphoc]

You will NOT beat Hawks by flooding. It is not where Essendon play there best footy. You are probably in the top 3 in the league for exciting teams to watch and that is where your best footy is.

If you flood then all Hawks will do is zone off and watch you turn the ball over when you players panic. Hawks are the best counter attacking team in the league and will then destroy you.

So how will you beat Hawks? Stick to your running game and kick the ball long to Lloyd and Bellchambers (play in the forward line?). You have a good enough team to beat anyone on your day inc Hawks and Geelong. Hy you beat Collingwood couple of weeks ago and they might finish top four.

 

[daffo]

We play our best footy when we attack the ball and break the lines. This could be done if we flood slightly (maybe having McPhee as the free defender the whole game) but we still need structure.
We can't flood with Neagle in the team, he is a stay at home FF.

My answer to the OP : NO we should not flood, at worst we have an extra player behind the ball.

 

[rdhopkins2]

Flood all you like but blokes like Buddy and Dew are pretty handy from 55.
Hoping to see a good spirited contest and somewhat of a shootout with both sides lacking in defence.
Don't try and bust the cluster, just play your natural game and get the boot up there to Lloyd pronto. Your midfield needs to dog out the gets and when we have the ball put our blokes under a heap of pressure. You will win this by taking risks, not trying to defend them.

Won't be a blowout by any means. Good luck. Hawks by 7pts for me.

 

[lamaros]

I've thought about this too and it might be a way for us to actually win the match.

Play Lloyd one out in the 50 with perhaps Monfries or Zaka lurking around.

If we can get the ball to our quick runners - Lovett, Winder, Davey, Dempsey off half back - break the lines and get it to Lloyd who is up against a weakened Hawthorn defense then we might be a chance.

Hawks aren't overly quick either.

It will be flooding to win the game - not to save the game (which I don't agree with).

Yeah, your knee-jerk 3 sentence game plan is surely going to succeed where an entire football department of professional coaches would otherwise fail.

Seriously weak and stupid effort.

 

[efcboy]

if essendon flood they might only get 10 inside 50s for the game...i don't think it suits the players we have. need to play fast attacking footy to suit the run of blokes like demspey and lovett.

way i see it:

m.williams - h.slattery first option to keep him under wraps.

roughead - pears has been decent at full back so i'm content for him to start there with hooker the backup option.

franklin - Myers. I'd give myers the chance as he unlike pears/hooker has the agility to match franklin at ground level. Given the new interpretation of rules Myers can play in front and the umpires will reward him if buddy pushes him out (franklin has most frees against). Myers similar size to bower and that worked ok last week.

McPhee - takes C.Brown if he starts forward and try and run off him to assist pears/myers when he can.

Dempsey - looks the logical choice for Rioli given he has the ground level speed and should beat him overhead.

Lovett-Murray - goes to Osborne assuming he's the 6th forward for hawks.

Hooker - plays as loose man in defence blocking the holes for Roughead/Franklin to lead into.

Ryder - plays ruck and runs forward as an attacking option given hooker is loose man in defence.

Dyson - tags Bateman.

Hocking - tags Sewell who has been more damaging than Mitchell for mine.

Watson - head to head with Mitchell for clearances.

Stanton - midfield tagged by tuck or lewis.

Lovett - likely to cop a tag from tuck or lewis.

Winderlich - plays accountable half forward role opposed to hodge.

Lloyd - CHF. not sure which hawk takes him. Could expose them for height.

Davey - sits near Lloyd around half-forward waiting to pounce on any crumbs. Could be a bit fleet flooted for hawks defenders (? birchall, moss)

Neagle - lead up FF. opposed to murphy could be an interesting dual.

Monfries - the alternate option to neagle but likely to move up the ground a bit.

Through these matchups it crowds the hawthorn forward line whilst at the same time freeing up essendons space for lloyd/neagle. The hawks will try to use Hodge as loose man but winderlich or monfries needs to go with him and if need be take their other opponent with them. If ryder is running forward he also creates another target up there.

Not confident we can win but would suggest this is the best way to go about it.

 

[Daytripper]

Yeah, your knee-jerk 3 sentence game plan is surely going to succeed where an entire football department of professional coaches would otherwise fail.

Seriously weak and stupid effort.

Its just my thoughts champ. I'm sure there's faults with it as there are with any game plan thought out by people not associated intimately with the club.

Are you saying that it would not have been discussed at all ?

 

[lamaros]

Its just my thoughts champ. I'm sure there's faults with it as there are with any game plan thought out by people not associated intimately with the club.

Are you saying that it would not have been discussed at all ?

Yep, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be discussing it at all. They've got a gameplan they're going with and they won't change it for one game. It won't help the young players discipline, it won't help the team, and it won't make us win. Flooding is entirely at odds with the list we have, the team we're putting on the park this week, and the football we're playing and trying to play.

 

[Zaka11]

if there was one week where we take em on and use pace this is it. The hawks look pretty average in the pace department. We know buddy and roughy are gonna kick a bag. we need to win some clearances and just run the lines down to lloyd and neagle!

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

I am happy to be wrong.