Games during the season are like boxing matches , finals are brawls , the bigger the final , the more brutal the brawl .

The whistle gets put away and the slugfest is on .

My fear is we have a team of boxers (like the Bulldogs) , for the ultimate success we need more brawlers .

How many brawlers do we need? Moloney, Sylvia and Jones are brawlers, Frawley is definitely a brawler, and Tapscott, Trengove and McKenzie are all brawlers in the making (some would argue they are already there!).

What you're saying about brawling in finals is correct in my view, but I think we are slowly getting away from the soft image, to having a good handful of guys that either don't mind the rough stuff, or will soon enough. I think that's a part of the reason Jones is admired by the FD.

How many brawlers do we need? Moloney, Sylvia and Jones are brawlers, Frawley is definitely a brawler, and Tapscott, Trengove and McKenzie are all brawlers in the making (some would argue they are already there!).

What you're saying about brawling in finals is correct in my view, but I think we are slowly getting away from the soft image, to having a good handful of guys that either don't mind the rough stuff, or will soon enough. I think that's a part of the reason Jones is admired by the FD.

If they were true brawlers they wouldn't have rolled over without a whimper to have their bellies tickled by the Dawks .

If they were true brawlers they wouldn't have rolled over without a whimper to have their bellies tickled by the Dawks .

Mate, how about answering a question with some thought?

You've made a comment about us needing brawlers, and I understand what where you're coming from, but instead of the cheap shots at recent games (which are probably valid in some instances), come up with some more substance than that! Just want to know what you're thinking.

I saw the show and Roos wasn't critical of the game plan - just said it was different and it would be interesting to see how it would pan out.

What he WAS critical about was our first quarter of the game. He said, for us it was a home game, we had the fans, Jimmy's speech and the chance to show what we were made of after the shocking display against Hawthorn. Roos said it was extremely disappointing that we should start a game in that manner - and that the fans should be rightfully shattered. He's dead right!

Sheehan chimed in and pointed out that Moloney's bender showed to all and sundry that he doesn't rate the Gold Coast.

Our gameplan gave Paul Roos his biggest defeat as a coach,a beautiful 73 points.

A great win in the middle of the H&A season means diddly if the gameplan crumbles under finals like pressure.

Relying on precision footskills to penetrate zones in finals isn't playing the percentages. Run and spread is important, but not to the point where you completely lose your structure on the turnover.

I agree with your remaining points.

If they were true brawlers they wouldn't have rolled over without a whimper to have their bellies tickled by the Dawks .

I'd replace the term "brawlers" with "hard nosed pros". Joel Selwood is a HNP. Other examples include Bartel, Ball, Milburn, and Lenny Hayes. Judd has become one.

Geelong was full of them and the great Brisbane sides had plenty. To be perfectly honest, right now we don't have one. We potentially do in Trengove, Frawley, Grimes, Tapscott and a few others.

EDIT: how could I not mention one of my favourite players in Luke Hodge ? In fact, look at my favourite players and what do they have in common ?

It's fair to say that I like talent with a hard edge. How ironic that I follow a side of softies.

Edited April 15, 201114 yr by Hannabal

Games during the season are like boxing matches , finals are brawls , the bigger the final , the more brutal the brawl .

The whistle gets put away and the slugfest is on .

My fear is we have a team of boxers (like the Bulldogs) , for the ultimate success we need more brawlers .

We have some like anthony Mundine.

I'd replace the term "brawlers" with "hard nosed pros". Joel Selwood is a HNP. Other examples include Bartel, Ball, Milburn, and Lenny Hayes. Judd has become one.

Geelong was full of them and the great Brisbane sides had plenty. To be perfectly honest, right now we don't have one. We potentially do in Trengove, Frawley, Grimes, Tapscott and a few others.

EDIT: how could I not mention one of my favourite players in Luke Hodge ? In fact, look at my favourite players and what do they have in common ?

It's fair to say that I like talent with a hard edge. How ironic that I follow a side of softies.

Hmmn, good post.

One thing that is forgotten in all this rhetoric, is the so called experts are paid large substantial amounts of money for their opinion, what they do is actually read some of the forums like this one, pick a topic and run with it, fill the article, commentary, sound bite, full of comparisons, statistics, slow motion replays etc etc and it sounds like the truth.....collect pay cheque and go home........as I said if you asked a player 10 or 20 years ago what the gameplan was, he would have answered "get it forward and kick a goal", the basic premise has not changed, it is the way that it is analysed ad infinitum that has

Edited April 15, 201114 yr by satyricon

I'd replace the term "brawlers" with "hard nosed pros". Joel Selwood is a HNP. Other examples include Bartel, Ball, Milburn, and Lenny Hayes. Judd has become one.

Geelong was full of them and the great Brisbane sides had plenty. To be perfectly honest, right now we don't have one. We potentially do in Trengove, Frawley, Grimes, Tapscott and a few others.

EDIT: how could I not mention one of my favourite players in Luke Hodge ? In fact, look at my favourite players and what do they have in common ?

It's fair to say that I like talent with a hard edge. How ironic that I follow a side of softies.

Yep , pretty much sums it up . Voss and Chapman for another 2 .

Blokes that can deliver with power , with a dose mongrel if neccessary .

I've been watching us get physically beat up in big games trying to match skill against power all my life .

Even meekly allowing Davey to get monstered every week has got to stop .

Relying on precision footskills to penetrate zones in finals isn't playing the percentages.

That is the general concern.

The best teams defend space by presses and zones, and play 'man on man' footy to maximize extreme pressure on the ball carrier when not in possession.

Maybe that's the answer - "the man on man zone". I think you're channeling Bhima here.

old, is the 'man on man zone' where you play man on man and then ask the opposition to stand still in a zone formation?

Brilliant if you could get it to work!

old, is the 'man on man zone' where you play man on man and then ask the opposition to stand still in a zone formation?

Brilliant if you could get it to work!

Hypnosis!

old, is the 'man on man zone' where you play man on man and then ask the opposition to stand still in a zone formation?

Brilliant if you could get it to work!

Shouldn't you be sticking to those "just as effective" pygmy forward lines you promote ?

LOL

I don't know where this rumour that Strauss can kick comes from. I've seen him at casey a number of times, and he very rarely either hits a target, nor does he man up. And when he does, he nearly always gets beaten one on one.

A grossly over-rated footballer in my view.

I heard he got picked over Zaharakis because of his kicking skills. We wanted a medium sized half back flanker who could hit targets. He seems like a good kick; he just can't get the footy at the moment.

The game has changed in the last 3 years. That was one of the reasons I put forward for picking a tall. Interestingly, I think it was old 55 that made that point. You appear not to have understood complexity of the argument.

At least your standard operation has not changed. You still need to discredit those who oppose your opinion in order for you to feel like your opinion has merit

If you weren't so insecure, you may even learn something.

Edited April 15, 201114 yr by Axis of Bob

Establishing players before you cement a game plan is not a bad idea. By the time we're Premiership ready it'll be 2013 - 2014. It's at that time that we need a super well drilled team and game plan. Not to mention the current Forward Press will be obsolete by 2013. I guess the art is getting the players ready before you have a plan. Maybe Bailey is the Messiah, watching so far I'm not convinced but I can be.

Establishing players before you cement a game plan is not a bad idea. By the time we're Premiership ready it'll be 2013 - 2014. It's at that time that we need a super well drilled team and game plan. Not to mention the current Forward Press will be obsolete by 2013. I guess the art is getting the players ready before you have a plan. Maybe Bailey is the Messiah, watching so far I'm not convinced but I can be.

Its just stupid to say that developing players and developing a game-plan are mutually incompatible

Sheeesh

I heard the Roos, Healy and Sheehan talking about that the other night, and obviously there is 2 ways of looking at it, it will either work or it won't!

Geelong leading up to their dominance had a game plan that the coaching staff thought could win a premiership. Their plan was totally different to other teams, and as a result, they copped some hidings. To the credit of Thompson, he stuck at it, to the point where he nearly lost his job over it, but the day the players were finally able to deliver it, it was an amzing thing (for them). Then all of a sudden, they were doing it consistently, and as they say, the rest is history.

Collingwood have been the same for the past 2 years. They adopted their own style, with a lot of boundary line hugging. Not many, if any, other Clubs would play that style, but again, they stuck to their guns.

I like the fact that our plan is different to the "normal". If ours is the same, it is far too easy for other teams to know how we play, but on the same token, we can easily understand how they are playing. However, when the opposition are so used to an opponent playing similar footy to the rest of their opponents, it can often be quite hard for them to adapt to a style that is totally different (like ours).

As I said, it will either work or it wont. We DO need the players to execute it to perfection on a weekly basis, and until then, we will cop our fair share of hidings. But, as we saw against Sydney last year, when it clicks, it is a brutal beast.

Bailey needs to have confidence in his ability, and not change because "we're different to everyone else". Who knows, in 2013 or 2014, it mught be our game plan that all the other teams are trying to copy.

So people realise, there is no certainty that our current game plan will work. On the other hand, there is the same amount of certainty that if we change that it will win us a premiership. We have recruited players specifically for our game plan, so let them grow up and see what it can turn in to.

Your not getting the point. It is an old plan everyone can read, and other team plans have advanced

Establishing players before you cement a game plan is not a bad idea. By the time we're Premiership ready it'll be 2013 - 2014. It's at that time that we need a super well drilled team and game plan. Not to mention the current Forward Press will be obsolete by 2013. I guess the art is getting the players ready before you have a plan. Maybe Bailey is the Messiah, watching so far I'm not convinced but I can be.

2017-2018

Its just stupid to say that developing players and developing a game-plan are mutually incompatible

Sheeesh

From watching and listening to the FD that that's exactly what is going on. Maybe it's not a bad idea. Collingwood certainly weren't playing the full press 3 years ago so explain how are we different?

I too watched with interest - Gold Coast aside, we generate the lowest/ worst number of turnovers in our front 50. Relying on turnovers in defence with kicks into a non-existent forward line is a flawed strategy. ( How many times did players gain possession at half back or mid field last week and have no-one to kick to !) I remain underwhelmed by DB and what he brings on game day.

And how many times did the opposition get back in defense and rebound ointo the forwardline. As a tactic, noe just cannot really understand what Bailey is trying to achieve except a flogging every week.

From watching and listening to the FD that that's exactly what is going on. Maybe it's not a bad idea. Collingwood certainly weren't playing the full press 3 years ago so explain how are we different?

3 years ago collingwood certainly had a game plan even if it wasn't full press

In fact I would say that if you send out players without a decent game plan then their development would be hindered

Young players are quite capable of developing and understanding a game plan

It need'nt be the final premiership game plan but players need the structure/discpline of a game plan

Edited April 15, 201114 yr by daisycutter

The MFC & Bailey need a gameplan for each year..Let's get that sorted now, that same gameplan must be transient & easily learnt. Players change each week & must be ready to immediately pick up the slack.

Yes a gameplan can evolve and get more precise as a list gets more experienced, but young players are always drafted, as older ones retire.

In some ways now you need a gameplan for each opponent....all our opponents are "SAME SAME BUT DIFFERENT"

Yep , pretty much sums it up . Voss and Chapman for another 2 .

Blokes that can deliver with power , with a dose mongrel if neccessary .

I've been watching us get physically beat up in big games trying to match skill against power all my life .

Even meekly allowing Davey to get monstered every week has got to stop .

The only time irt really stopped was during the early '90's,,, when we had, > Earl Spalding/ Rod Grinter/ Danny Hughes/ Sean White/ Yeater/ Glenn Lovett/ Duursma/ Brett Lovett/ little Toddy Viney/ Chopper Lovell/ >>>>>>>>>>..

There was a bit of mongrel, and Just plain hardness there, as well as some class through the list.