Game Plan First - Personnel Later

[rpfc 27,662]

Roos is a man after my own heart: http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-04-24/systems-first-then-personnel-roos

There are some who would say you should coach for the list you have but Roos is saying that the players we have are going to learn the game plan he wants to implement.

And I sense the implicit point that those that play the system will be preferred to more talented players that don't play the system.

[What 18,810]

you cant turn over the list in one offseason

Gamepan has to come first as you build the list you want

[nutbean 8,837]

I think this is basic sense - first unknown is whether anyone on your current list can play to your plan ? Who would have said 2 years ago that Dunn would have stepped up ? You have to give the current list the opportunity to play to your plan rather than assume that they are duds ( which some are) and won't make the transition.

As RPFC said - some with talent will go for not being to play as required and some lesser lights will stay because they will play the role Roos expects of them.

[Machsy 2,858]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP.

I remember many times in the past when supporters have bemoaned the fact that we play a style that our list is unfit to execute.

Good coach or bad, they have to come in with a winning gameplan, then mould the list to implement it.

Getting rid of still-capable players like Moloney and Petterd is a result of this.

[Return to Glory 7,832]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP.

I remember many times in the past when supporters have bemoaned the fact that we play a style that our list is unfit to execute.

Good coach or bad, they have to come in with a winning gameplan, then mould the list to implement it.

Getting rid of still-capable players like Moloney and Petterd is a result of this.

Agreed. It only goes to show how inconsistent the game plan has been prior.

[Alcho Dee 269]

Neeld said the same thing.

[Machsy 2,858]

Neeld said the same thing.

I know.

I excluded this from my previous post because I thought it might detract from the point.

But Neeld was right.

[titan_uranus 22,923]

Neeld said and did the same thing, so I don't really think it's fair to applaud Roos for saying and doing it.

The problem with Neeld was that his systems and game plan were awful. Roos has already shown me his are not, and for mine the focus is definitely going to turn to personnel very soon (if it hasn't already).

[Pennant St Dee 11,653]

Neeld said the same thing.

Might help that the players seem to listen and respond to Roos

[Young Dee 1,303]

Neeld said the same thing.

I still shudder when I read that name.

Take out the WCE game this year and we have been a very competitive/totally different side this year - which was all I asked for this year.

Having said that it is easy to get frustrated when we lose games like (STK and GC) - it doesn't help that the bottom 6 seems to have improved since last year.

[CBDees 3,162]

This seems to me his approach and i applaud it. How would he have known at the start of the season that he would not have had Clark or that Hogan would not be on the track by now (or Dawes a late starter). i applaud the fact that he is using Frawley forward (in lieu of Clark) and i am assuming Perderson playing in the forward pocket is to set up the structure till Hogan comes in (when Pedrson can drift back to Frawley's expected role). I am sure that Frawley, Dawes and Hogan will prove as successful as Clark, Dawes and Hogan and that with Garland coming back, we can adapt to the other parts of Roos game plan, especially now that Georgiou has been promoted and Dunn has stepped up. Looking forward to tomorrow evening against the Swans!

[jumbo returns 6,598]

If youse guys think that Roosy isn't sharpening his pencil, you're kidding yourselves.

[Thehardtackler 785]

I sent him an email to the effect that his game plan would only work if the players were committed to it and we should only draft players who wanted to play for us and delist those who did not. He wrote back and said that he wanted players that bled Red and Blue and followed the game plan so this piece is consistent with that line.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Thehardtackler

[rpfc 27,662]

Neeld said and did the same thing, so I don't really think it's fair to applaud Roos for saying and doing it.

The problem with Neeld was that his systems and game plan were awful. Roos has already shown me his are not, and for mine the focus is definitely going to turn to personnel very soon (if it hasn't already).

The problem was not that he didn't know good systems or gameplans, Neeld's problem was that he couldn't sell it.

Roos has proven he can and that is what I mean in the OP when I say that talent will not get you a game, persistence with the system and the fundamentals will get you a game.

He could have chosen a style of play more accessible to this group but I am glad he didn't.

[dee-luded 2,958]

you cant turn over the list in one offseason

Gamepan has to come first as you build the list you want

IMO, More than the Gameplan, but to teach the very Basics that we at Melbourne have scorned for far too long. The basics of one on one footy, & the tackling, as a premium part of our game, to stop the opposition from simply outscoring us. The Chasing, the Harassing, the Pressure on the opposition to make Them crack first.

.... We have mostly been a front running team, that's fragile to pressure & physical intimidation.

Then the GamePlan to suit implementation these basic Values of Combative footy.

We can easily learn different Gamestyles & variations, after we thoroughly adopt the hard work basics of defence into our Footy Hearts DNA. to become part of our pride.

so yes these are & should be a part of the first steps of our Game Plan. physical football.

[beelzebub 22,591]

If youse guys think that Roosy isn't sharpening his pencil, you're kidding yourselves.

Sharpened...and poised I suspect Just waiting for the appropriate time.( quite some later in season )

Still a fair bit of experimentation and player fact finding ( for those Dossiers..lol ) to go

The list isnt up to it, not it you want to not only make some fist of being competitive but actually press the comp to climb.

Nothing is built properly without a plan and a team to construct. Its then about assembling the materials.

Nothing earth shattering new about any of this, other than where its being put into effect of course .

[dee-luded 2,958]

I think this is basic sense - first unknown is whether anyone on your current list can play to your plan ? Who would have said 2 years ago that Dunn would have stepped up ? You have to give the current list the opportunity to play to your plan rather than assume that they are duds ( which some are) and won't make the transition.

As RPFC said - some with talent will go for not being to play as required and some lesser lights will stay because they will play the role Roos expects of them.

i think this applies to Mick Malthouses over thought out plans.

Roosy's plans are Basic blood & bruises original footy with some modern variants. very plain & simple HONEST Footy game style. no Spin, or Windowdressings, no Fluff, no Padding.

Just plain straight forward physical footy without thuggery. Honest, Responsible, TEAM Oriented mate-ship off to battle.

[dee-luded 2,958]

Neeld said the same thing.

I think Neeld wanted to do the same things, but I suspect he was concerned he didn't have a big AFL player profile, was worried about the Melbourne players taking his 'message', so wrongly came in like a sledgehammer. turning the players against him immediately. IMO he tried to make a 'takeover', instead of winning the hearts & minds, as it were.

but he did some good stuff & began the cultural cleanup.

... this has helped Roos with his cleanup, & to shift From our old soft culture. the old cultures live long & strong in the older players heads.

to teach the new kids healthy ways, the old culture has to be killed off, & abandoned... see moloney, gysberts, cook, bennell, morton, etc, etc, all these players would have turned out differently if they started at the Hawks for example.

we in the stands too often applaud a clean pair of heels, & neglect the selfless acts of running down & bulldogging a runaway opponent. we cheer the flashy & don't give enough respect to the little but important Team things.

..... this is the beginnings of players doing only the spectacular. & the rebirth's of our persistent Poor culture.

Edited April 26, 2014 by dee-luded

[beelzebub 22,591]

not everyone can sing the same song the same

[titan_uranus 22,923]

The problem was not that he didn't know good systems or gameplans, Neeld's problem was that he couldn't sell it.

Roos has proven he can and that is what I mean in the OP when I say that talent will not get you a game, persistence with the system and the fundamentals will get you a game.

He could have chosen a style of play more accessible to this group but I am glad he didn't.

When I said 'systems' I was referring to the methods by which Neeld implemented his coaching and strategies and game plan. At any rate, I think Neeld was very bad at selling a pretty poor product. The former problem was fatal, the latter didn't help.

When was the last time a coach came to a club armed with the task of rebuilding and deployed a game plan designed to fit the players and not to push the club up? Has it ever happened?

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I think there is a difference between "game plan" and "non-negotiables".

No matter the payers you have certain non-negotiables which don't change but your overall plan should evolve to best suit your list.

[rpfc 27,662]

I think there is a difference between "game plan" and "non-negotiables".

No matter the payers you have certain non-negotiables which don't change but your overall plan should evolve to best suit your list.

I would agree that there is a difference between the fundamentals and the gameplan, and that the first is what Roos is looking for before anything, but I would disagree with your last 10 words there; your list should evolve to suit your plan.

Look, if we are talking tactics - yes, kick it long fat side to Hogan when he is up and going.

But the game plan has to be Roos driven - and it should surround how he thinks footy games will be won in the near future. Designing a game plan around a faulty list is fraught.

Constantly changing the 'system' as your list changes would be frustrating for a player looking for consistency and predictability. Roos has already said the players were amazed that they will play one style for 100% of the game they have been thrown so many different ideas in the last few years.

I see Roos having a clearly defined game plan surrounding possession footy if quick movement forward is not possible, I don't think that is suited to this list, but I don't think we should be making concessions for this list - there will be another turnover at the end of 2014.

[deanox 8,886]

Ye CB, game plan means nothing at this stage. Dee-luded nailed it above.

We need to do the basics right.

Then we need to do the basics better than everyone else.

Only then do we need a competitive game plan and opposition specific plans.

This year has seen an improvement in the basics, but I suspect it is a 2 year process to get them to top 8 standard.

That is what we needed Roos for. Not the game plan, the basics.

[Macca 16,174]

The Roos game plan can work well but only when we have enough talented players to carry it out.

We'll need to have 5-7 proven good footballers (or very good footballers) from our existing list by years end. ... players who play well, week in, week out. Jones is the standout right now but there's quite a few that can step it up. There's also an abundance of players on our list who have very little chance of becoming proven good footballers. They will be de-listed or traded out.

In the off season, we need to bring in as many talented footballers that we can lay our hands on. By the end of 2015, we'll need to have 10-12 proven good footballers on our list. That will bring us up to relevant status (in terms of winning games)

The Roos era could very well reflect the Barassi era. At the end of a one win season in 1981, Ron brought in players like Icke, Johnno, Willo, Jarrott and 1 or 2 others. In '82, we at least became relevant again. The next influx of good players wasn't until '85 onwards (although, to be fair, a number of young players that were added between '82 and '85 just didn't come on as expected)

Whilst I agree with what Roos is trying to do, he's hamstrung by a severe lack of talent. Same as Barassi was. Our game plan is going to be broken down by our own poor disposal skills and a general lack of ability but .... as more good players are added, our game plan will get appreciably better.

We do have at least 12 players on our list (right now) who could turn out to be very good players for us. If half of those 12+ players can become good-very good players for us, we're well on our way. A measure of this is the Bluey Truscott award - we need a lot more players to be in the running to win it.

[Redleg 38,195]

The key to to all of this to me , is that while we are implementing the new game plan, we are able to keep the list happy and committed. They need to see the improvement coming as the game plan is adopted and the personnel evolves.

In Roos, I believe we have the Coach who can achieve this.