Autopsy Swans Vs Dees Rnd 4

[The King!]

How so? I give youngsters the benefit of the doubt if they have shown they can be best 22 players. I can cop down games from Hayward, Florent, Papley etc because there are times when they have stood up and been as important to the team as anyone. Where my tolerance runs out is when it’s clear some guys just aren’t meant to be in the senior team but are getting games because of a few teases of potential. That alone is not enough to earn the benefit of the doubt IMO, which is why Florent, Papley, Hayward etc have it, and Blakey, McInerney etc don’t.

Blakey doesnt have potential?

 

[caesar88]

More likely just is a bit lost with his leading patterns with Reid, Franklin, Sinclair and McCartin alongside him.

Sinclair has played ruck and McCartin down back, so he really only has two other key forwards to compete with. In any case, I agree that Blakey has it tough. We’ve asked an 18 year old fresh out of the draft to come into a forward line that is inconsistent at best, diabolical at worst. Which is exactly why I don’t want Blakey spending another week basing his game around our perspective of how a forward line functions. He looks out of his league, let’s let him gain some confidence by playing him among his league.

 

[caesar88]

Blakey doesnt have potential?

How did you get that from my post? I said teases of potential are not, and should not, be enough to earn a senior spot. He has enormous potential, but it’s in teases at the moment. Just like Florent in his first year.

 

[The King!]

How did you get that from my post? I said teases of potential are not, and should not, be enough to earn a senior spot. He has enormous potential, but it’s in teases at the moment. Just like Florent in his first year.

i didnt i was asking /clarifying

 

[Skeparovic]

Just down back we were missing Grundy, McVeigh and Nick Smith the backline that has been the glue since 2012.

Melican is out of sorts, Rampe isnt as good as he was 2016-2017 Allir is raw.

What do you people expect?

Based on many posts that I have read on BF I would summarise the following themes:
- winning the premiership every year
- winning every game in the season
- playing through the corridore at all times
- extremely fast transition in games
- high scoring games (>100 points)
- players to never miss set shots on goal
- players to never drop marks
- players to have perfected kicking skills
- midfield to always dominate clearences
- > inside 50's every game than opponent
- Heeney to win the Brownlow
- Mills and Heeney to play midfield
- Joey and Parker >30 possessions
- Lloyd to kick >40m passes into corridore
- players with ANY injuries to be rested
- coaches do as BF think they should
- head coach to be replaced

So in summary it seems like the perfect performance is demanded of the club each and every game or else the dominant BF narratice is that the club's performance is just not good enough. Black/white thinking, name calling, believing opinions to be facts and hindsight reasoning is perfectly okay to consistently do on BF. Context is completely irrelevant and only re-labeled as being an excuse. The demographics of the list age profile are supposedly irrevelent as are the deficiencies in the midfield, ruck and defence. The Swans just need to play exactly the way BF think they should and then they will become perfect (impossible) and win.

Personally I don't subscribe to the above expectations and can see a Swans team rebuilding that will have inconsistent performances each week. I see weaknesses in multiple areas of the list which will be improved over time and drafts. I see improvements each week in the areas of emphasis that were discussed by coaches in post-match press review. I see increased competitiveness even if the result is disappointing. That is all I ask as a club as improving processes will lead to improved outcomes and results.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Based on many posts that I have read on BF I would summarise the following themes:
- winning the premiership every year
- winning every game in the season
- playing through the corridore at all times
- extremely fast transition in games
- high scoring games (>100 points)
- players to never miss set shots on goal
- players to never drop marks
- players to have perfected kicking skills
- midfield to always dominate clearences
- > inside 50's every game than opponent
- Heeney to win the Brownlow
- Mills and Heeney to play midfield
- Joey and Parker >30 possessions
- Lloyd to kick >40m passes into corridore
- players with ANY injuries to be rested
- coaches do as BF think they should
- head coach to be replaced

So in summary it seems like the perfect performance is demanded of the club each and every game or else the dominant BF narratice is that the club's performance is just not good enough. Black/white thinking, name calling, believing opinions to be facts and hindsight reasoning is perfectly okay to consistently do on BF. Context is completely irrelevant and only re-labeled as being an excuse. The demographics of the list age profile are supposedly irrevelent as are the deficiencies in the midfield, ruck and defence. The Swans just need to play exactly the way BF think they should and then they will become perfect (impossible) and win.

Personally I don't subscribe to the above expectations and can see a Swans team rebuilding that will have inconsistent performances each week. I see weaknesses in multiple areas of the list which will be improved over time and drafts. I see improvements each week in the areas of emphasis that were discussed by coaches in post-match press review. I see increased competitiveness even if the result is disappointing. That is all I ask as a club as improving processes will lead to improved outcomes and results.

Excellent post.

 

[caesar88]

Based on many posts that I have read on BF I would summarise the following themes:
- winning the premiership every year
- winning every game in the season
- playing through the corridore at all times
- extremely fast transition in games
- high scoring games (>100 points)
- players to never miss set shots on goal
- players to never drop marks
- players to have perfected kicking skills
- midfield to always dominate clearences
- > inside 50's every game than opponent
- Heeney to win the Brownlow
- Mills and Heeney to play midfield
- Joey and Parker >30 possessions
- Lloyd to kick >40m passes into corridore
- players with ANY injuries to be rested
- coaches do as BF think they should
- head coach to be replaced

So in summary it seems like the perfect performance is demanded of the club each and every game or else the dominant BF narratice is that the club's performance is just not good enough. Black/white thinking, name calling, believing opinions to be facts and hindsight reasoning is perfectly okay to consistently do on BF. Context is completely irrelevant and only re-labeled as being an excuse. The demographics of the list age profile are supposedly irrevelent as are the deficiencies in the midfield, ruck and defence. The Swans just need to play exactly the way BF think they should and then they will become perfect (impossible) and win.

Personally I don't subscribe to the above expectations and can see a Swans team rebuilding that will have inconsistent performances each week. I see weaknesses in multiple areas of the list which will be improved over time and drafts. I see improvements each week in the areas of emphasis that were discussed by coaches in post-match press review. I see increased competitiveness even if the result is disappointing. That is all I ask as a club as improving processes will lead to improved outcomes and results.

Mate we are struggling to get even a third of those things you listed right, let alone all of them.

I also think you need to go back and fact-check because I’m pretty sure a lot of the people who have complained/criticised/questioned/lamented the team in recent weeks were the same people who have been OK with a poor win-loss record. Many on here said they could cop a drop down the ladder due to our inexperience and the need for transformation in our team. It’s wanting the team to be better and succeed but being prepared to suffer the short term consequences involved with it because they can see the bigger picture. That is applying context IMO.

 

[Kirkswan]

How so? I give youngsters the benefit of the doubt if they have shown they can be best 22 players. I can cop down games from Hayward, Florent, Papley etc because there are times when they have stood up and been as important to the team as anyone. Where my tolerance runs out is when it’s clear some guys just aren’t meant to be in the senior team but are getting games because of a few teases of potential. That alone is not enough to earn the benefit of the doubt IMO, which is why Florent, Papley, Hayward etc have it, and Blakey, McInerney etc don’t.

Because of Aliir... and 2017.

 

[caesar88]

Because of Aliir... and 2017.

What's your point?

 

[Jewelsbon]

No need to apologise S51.
In the first half when Horse wasn't coaching we played a fine attacking brand & then Horse came back & coached in the second half so those wanting him out are clearly justified. No argument from me there.

Yep, that must be it Ted.

Based on many posts that I have read on BF I would summarise the following themes:
- winning the premiership every year
- winning every game in the season
- playing through the corridore at all times
- extremely fast transition in games
- high scoring games (>100 points)
- players to never miss set shots on goal
- players to never drop marks
- players to have perfected kicking skills
- midfield to always dominate clearences
- > inside 50's every game than opponent
- Heeney to win the Brownlow
- Mills and Heeney to play midfield
- Joey and Parker >30 possessions
- Lloyd to kick >40m passes into corridore
- players with ANY injuries to be rested
- coaches do as BF think they should
- head coach to be replaced

So in summary it seems like the perfect performance is demanded of the club each and every game or else the dominant BF narratice is that the club's performance is just not good enough. Black/white thinking, name calling, believing opinions to be facts and hindsight reasoning is perfectly okay to consistently do on BF. Context is completely irrelevant and only re-labeled as being an excuse. The demographics of the list age profile are supposedly irrevelent as are the deficiencies in the midfield, ruck and defence. The Swans just need to play exactly the way BF think they should and then they will become perfect (impossible) and win.

Personally I don't subscribe to the above expectations and can see a Swans team rebuilding that will have inconsistent performances each week. I see weaknesses in multiple areas of the list which will be improved over time and drafts. I see improvements each week in the areas of emphasis that were discussed by coaches in post-match press review. I see increased competitiveness even if the result is disappointing. That is all I ask as a club as improving processes will lead to improved outcomes and results.

Brilliant post Skep, hit the nail on the head in my opinion.
I hate to roll out the old "we are spoilt as supporters" line but thats exactly what we are, just expecting that we will play finals every year for ever more - its never been done and its never going to be done by any team, anywhere, at any time so the carry on and dummy spitting on here is simply ridiculous.

 

[The King!]

We have more losing seasons than winning

Spoiled

 

[Skeparovic]

Mate we are struggling to get even a third of those things you listed right, let alone all of them.

I also think you need to go back and fact-check because I’m pretty sure a lot of the people who have complained/criticised/questioned/lamented the team in recent weeks were the same people who have been OK with a poor win-loss record. Many on here said they could cop a drop down the ladder due to our inexperience and the need for transformation in our team. It’s wanting the team to be better and succeed but being prepared to suffer the short term consequences involved with it because they can see the bigger picture. That is applying context IMO.

I think there may have been a slight misunderstanding of the tongue in cheek nature of my post. It is about highlighting the unrealistic expectations that are routinely sprouted by many (yes, not by all) on these opinion forums. My summary goes back the past two or so years and not just over recent weeks.

I think it is fairly reasonable that Swans will achieve minimal of the expectations I summarised others as desiring in 2019. In my opinion the Swans playing list age profile is at a different place to where it would need to be to make a serious run for the flag. I may be completely wrong in that belief and would need to look at the statistics of list profile of premiership teams to compare.

The Swans in my opinion are rebuilding, despite not having overtly declared it using those terms in the media. They have relied on the draft to form the nucleus of a team that will hopefully be in the thick of a premiership race in 2021. I believe that the Swans are unable to bottom out due to financial considerations and the Sydney market, hence they need to rebuild on the run whilst remaining competitive.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

I believe that the Swans are unable to bottom out due to financial considerations and the Sydney market, hence they need to rebuild on the run whilst remaining competitive.

Hmmn. This has been said so much by different people it seems to have become an article of faith. I do not think the Sydney supported base is fickle - though the Corporate box types may be.

Even with a bad run over a couple more seasons with Horse, I doubt home crowds would drop below the high 20Ks.

 

[The King!]

well we appear to be bottoming out

but seems to be one of those things trotted out along with come see buddy play etc that is used to keep nsw fans engaged in the sport

 

[Prez]

Problem is that 22 to 25 disposals was great in 1990, but we have moved on since then and Parker just doesn't have enough games where he gets into the 30's.

Parker is playing a different role. He has a role as the defensive mid that blocks and makes holes for the others. He then spends a lot of time during the game when he is sent forward especilly when it is not performing. He has been doing this since 2018.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

There’s a bright side.

Carlton and Hawthorn both lost by less than a goal today.

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

There’s a bright side.

Carlton and Hawthorn both lost by less than a goal today.

Agree. Even if the Saints win does not improve their second round pick coming to us.

 

[Mick Oxlong]

the coaching staff is bottom 4 thats the biggest problem

That is very good!

 

[Superstar swan]

I've noticed. He's become more Fyfe like in his stature.

Hopefully helps keep him fit and less injury prone.. the past few weeks have shown the sky is the limit.