What will suit our list our talants, what can we expect ? what do you want to see ?

What will suit our list our talants, what can we expect ? what do you want to see ?

Let's aim a little higher than a gameplan that suits 'the talents' of a 2 and 20 team, shall we?

It's Paul Roos doing the instruction with a heavy base of former Sydney people, I expect it to be based around disciplined hard work around stoppages that may look a little slow until the players marry that with the hard running that we have seen Sydney do for a decade.

Let's aim a little higher than a gameplan that suits 'the talents' of a 2 and 20 team, shall we?

It's Paul Roos doing the instruction with a heavy base of former Sydney people, I expect it to be based around disciplined hard work around stoppages that may look a little slow until the players marry that with the hard running that we have seen Sydney do for a decade.

Sounds a lot like Neeld's game plan.

Sounds a lot like Neeld's game plan.

Yep.

I just think there is no escaping the fact that we are soft in the clinches, terrible in the clearances, and timid with our running - the things that Roos will try and get them to do will be very similar to what Neeld wanted them to do.

But Roos garners repsect and confidence from the outset, and another thing I like - there is nowhere to hide when Paul Roos is your coach.

I think it will be more daring than his Sydney game plan but will be built on contested football and defensive running.

Will be interesting to see if he will coach from the ground or the box.

Sounds a lot like Neeld's game plan.

A lot of what Roos has done has been a continuation of Neelds work. He's recruited along the same lines and his gameplan seems pretty similar although possibly more direct. The big difference is his people skills. He has been able to win over the players right from the start while Neeld had them off side pretty much from the beginning.

I want to see two things.

1) A game plan that suits whoever we play that week. So we need fresh game plans depending on how we are going, and on our perception of whom we are about to play.

2) The ability to change/adapt game plans at 1/4 or 1/2 time.

I want to see two things.

1) A game plan that suits whoever we play that week. So we need fresh game plans depending on how we are going, and on our perception of whom we are about to play.

2) The ability to change/adapt game plans at 1/4 or 1/2 time.

I have been asking for this since Neil Balme's time at the club

Contested footy...obviously, accountable footy, elite kicking into the forward line. Let's try using the corridor.

What will suit our list our talants, what can we expect ? what do you want to see ?

WINNING!

Whatever the gameplan is Port showed last year what I have thought all along. It doesn't take 2-3 years to learn a gameplan. There are no more excuses for our side.

why would we look now for links to our horrible past?

I do not want to see anything to do with Neeld's boundary-oriented game plan. Please, never again! I do not want to see fear again. I do not want to see us getting locked into the negativity of passing backwards, or the unimaginative and defeated mentality of kicking out to Jamar every time, or Jack Watts waiting for the rebound when our full-back kicks out, or any of the rest of it. Kick to Jamar when it makes sense to, go by the boundary if that really is the best option, etc - but, the "game plan" needs to be using creative football intelligence and skills, not by-the-numbers negative "set plays".

I am counting on Roos to have a "game plan" based on opportunity and vision, with teamwork creating opportunity, and confidence giving rise to in-the-moment vision and execution. Something they will love playing.

Neeld's whole mentality was Neeld-oriented: the players had to buy into Neeld, and with very few exceptions they shrivelled up in proportion to how much they tried to buy in. Roos says it is up to the players, and he's right. We will at last discover what they can do. Roos is building faith and confidence in his players, in themselves and in each other, as human beings and as footballers. He is clearly focusing on the basics of football - running to support and to create options, and skills in kicking, handballing, overlapping, shepherding, presenting, making it happen fast, etc. Roos has started from a very different place to Neeld, and from training reports and everything coming out of the club, there is no grounds for saying Roos is focused on "defence first". He is a motivator and encourager, hands-on and engaging personally; and he has recruited for a powerful skilled running team. No big predictions or condemnations. What Roos is up to appears to have almost nothing in common with what Neeld did or what his priorities were.

You won't see "buy in" coming up as a big issue this year. That was the key every time our failed game plan got discussed under Neeld...

Edited December 8, 201311 yr by robbiefrom13

What will suit our list our talants, what can we expect ? what do you want to see ?

we went down the path of gamestyle that suited our talents in 2004 +.... that led us to not being disciplined & all for one hard workers. some flashed in & out & some were the workers.

not great for a team/club culture.

...... all players must be responsible for their part of the play & must go when its their turn. any who aren't ready to tackle or chase should be at Casey somewhere. Smart, hard running & rugged is a good start, & build from there.

Edited December 8, 201311 yr by dee-luded

WINNING!

And there it is in one word. That's what we all want to see.

WINNING!

Thanks for the input tho I am am not sure WINNING is a game plan, WINNING is a result of a well executed game plan.

Edited December 8, 201311 yr by Dedogtor

Thanks for the input tho I am am not sure WINNING is a game plan, WINNING is a result of a well executed game plan.

It's what I want to see. I don't really care what the game plan is, I just want to see the results, as you say, of a well executed game plan.

Who cares how it happens as long as it does. The armchair experts can analyse all they like but a loss is a loss and a win is a win. The record books don't say much about game plans, they just record winners and losers.

It will start with actually getting the ball and holding on to it

Ill never forget the nightmare under Neeld... the opposition having between 100 and 150 more possessions than us every week

What a joke of a coach he was

Edited December 8, 201311 yr by hogans_heroes

It will start with actually getting the ball and holding on to it

Ill never forget the nightmare under Neeld... the opposition having between 100 and 150 more possessions than us every week

What a joke of a coach he was

Fairly sure h_h that we cannot dump all the blame on Neeld.

He was given a lot of help from a very poor list.

JC would have struggled to get more from the 2013 lot.

I want to see two things.

1) A game plan that suits whoever we play that week. So we need fresh game plans depending on how we are going, and on our perception of whom we are about to play.

2) The ability to change/adapt game plans at 1/4 or 1/2 time.

So you want to take a 2-20 team and give them multiple game plans and the ability to switch between them at the breaks. Come off it. This is AFL not basetball or soccer where you might be able to switch game styles if you have the skilled players for it.

For mine there are 2 main components to any AFL game plan. Defensive set ups and ball movement patterns. They are the two things that with a good team you might be able to manipulate. Everything else really comes down to just being the harder working, higher intensity and more skilled team.

Defensive set ups:

- Numbers around the stoppage

- A player dropping back to form an extra number across half back

- 2 way running from the mids to seal off exits from our forward 50

Ball movement patterns

- As much fast movement as possible while maintaining possession

- Using the deep switch to get to the open side

- Mids running forward of the ball to space

- Forwards running in to open space in the forward 50

The aim will be to play defensively like Sydney or even Freo and to move the ball like Sydney of 2012 or even some aspects of Geelong 2013 but without some of the high risk corridor stuff. Again I'd imagine Roos would be keen to get the defensive stuff organised first whilst trying to keep the game moving from half back on transition.

This Fitzy goal from last year - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfzWUfnLufY - will be what I imagine we will try for on attack. It features accurate kicking from half back, Jack Watts linking up in the midfield, Dawes presenting at CHF and Fitzy finishing it off.

Fairly sure h_h that we cannot dump all the blame on Neeld.

He was given a lot of help from a very poor list.

JC would have struggled to get more from the 2013 lot.

JC would have to be Capt/Coach and stick himself in the ruck to have got a better result.

JC would have to be Capt/Coach and stick himself in the ruck to have got a better result.

I think we need him more in the midfield to be honest.

It's what I want to see. I don't really care what the game plan is, I just want to see the results, as you say, of a well executed game plan.

Who cares how it happens as long as it does. The armchair experts can analyse all they like but a loss is a loss and a win is a win. The record books don't say much about game plans, they just record winners and losers.

LIKE!

Roos Gameplan with the Swans was set up to play the SCG in a defensive manner. There will be elements of that bouught in i predict, but he will have to make it work consistently on the MCG.

BOTTOM LINE. Get the ball and use it wisely to team mates who have spread to open space.

Roos' basics will be very similar to Neeld's - you can count on it. And the Sydney Roos game plan will be the blueprint for ours. But there is one major difference. We have what is potentially an amazing forward line. Roos never had that at Sydney. At Sydney his forward/goal scoring was based around Hall inside 50, with Goodes and O'Keefe running inside 50.

With Clark, Dawes, Hogan, Fitzy and Howe, along with Watts playing something like a Goodes role, this will change the plan considerably. Not sure in what way yet, but it will have to be very different.

Midfield and defensively we will see stoppages and boundary line play just like the Swans 2005 - 2012.

Fairly sure h_h that we cannot dump all the blame on Neeld.

He was given a lot of help from a very poor list.

JC would have struggled to get more from the 2013 lot.

I'm also guessing that in the first few months of next season we won't have a president and much loved hero of the club dying and having his funeral in the week before the first game or our most exciting forward (while injured) getting arrested on assault charges or a major sponsor having to be dealt with because the owner's a nutter or having a spate of injuries to key players or your coach being undermined and falsely accused of racism or some of our players spitting dummies and wanting out or our leading goalkicker going down with a rare injury. All that on top of having a poor list to start with.

I reckon Paul Roos wouldn't need that!