A premiership game plan is built on defence and contested ball, Roos is trying to implement that at the same time as dealing with a bunch of young men who have had the stuffing beaten out of them consistently for the last 8 years and have no clue how to win, he is laying the foundations for Goodwin, he was never going to win us a flag in his 3 years, this was never going to be a quick fix, the attacking side of the game will be irrelevant if we can't defend. We simply have to get that right now, it needs to be autonomous for these guys to run two ways and defend well before we can even worry about attacking.

We are just starting to get some pieces coming together but we are a mile off being able to show it even on a semi regular basis.

Discuss

Buckley does look to be in trouble, doesn't he?

How many coaches and experienced players do you hear say that the most important thing in footy is to get defense right before anything else? Then they can build on that.

Of course, they're all wrong.

Roos is a gun coach.

So we are a defensive team, the fact that we have a sub standard midfield that don't kick goals, a team that turns it over consistently and our best key forward is a 19 year old who hasn't played a game yet contribute to this.

We can't blame the coach for this, it has to be the players. Honestly this team looks uncoachable, if Roos can't coach them then who can?

Taking the blame for what?

The season hasn't even started FFS

Taking the blame for what?

The season hasn't even started FFS

For the Essendon game and the last half of the season.

We have been shocking.

It's only going to take 1 game for the knives to come out and game could very well be RND1. If we can't compete against the Suns Roos will be under the pump.

There is almost no chance we will win the next 2 games maybe a slight chance against Richmond and then we get the horror stretch from rounds 5-7. 0-7 would get most coaches the sack.

The game against the Suns is the most important game for a long time.

I think going to the topic of the thread as a the reference its not so much about blaming Roos etc or panicking as to whos focus is it after all and who responsibly charged with making things happen?

And that must be Paul Roos as hes the head coach. Its all very well to state the bleeding obvious in a presser about we arent where others are but surely the one uttering it knows its down to him to address that. Sometimes dear ol Paul comes across a little 3rd person.

Im interested to see how this is acted upon, not just mentioned.

SO when we were playing thru the middle, pumping it into the FWD50 in the first 10 mins of the ESS game, thats defensive it is? When we sucked is when we went away from that, and that I guarantee you was not because Roos told them to stop using the corridor. Roos will never be sacked, that was his reasoning behind the 2-3 year plan, so he would never be shamed like that.

Im leaning towards the idea of Goodwin following Roos as a masterstroke.

In simple terms you craft a defensive ability as a foundation and build attacking upon it. This is mirrored in the coaching plan.

Look Rome's not built in a day..( just burnt !! ) . It must frustrate the hell out of Roos etc when good work is undone by whatever it is that conspired to take players back in time to bad habits.

But its up to the coaches to rectify this, with both instruction and suitable manpower. Buck stops with Paul

I am not going through the whole thread but I have mulled over the NAB results to try and rationalise it all.

Much has been made of strategy, it's clear that when we are in control of the game the strategy looks sound, save for forward thrusts that still look like dogs breakfasts at times.

There were a lot of Essendon players playing for thier careers and for three quarters they threw themselves at the footy and player. Similar to the game against the Bulldogs last week, when the pressure intensified and we lost control of the game we could not wrestle it back.

Having a look at our best players through the competition they are either new recruits, or experienced soldiers, the middle bracket is almost completely missing.

The team still bears the scars of being losers for too many years. Those 3 plus year players save for a few are still the issue here. They are the ones who go into their shells, lose their composure and deviate from the plans.

Obviously there are a number of strategical issues that need to considered, but for mine the problems are still largely upstairs.

We still need to try and figure out a way to make losers play like winners.

My God!
Knives coming out?
Sure, raise some concerns that need to be looked at and hopefully rectified but regardless of whether or not you felt we could have improved more last year, statistics showed we did improve last year (albeit slightly in the stat that matters the most). Sacking Paul Roos after 1 and a bit years into a 3 year transition plan would show me that this club is no longer worth supporting and I would be gone. Not because I have some overly emotional attachment to PR but more so because it would prove to me that this is an absolutely amateur organization that isn't worth saving.
Some on here were going on about how 'Neeld needed more time ' and how he should be judged at 'the end of his contract' while we were clearly going backwards at the rate of knots in 2013. We take one slight step forward with a premiership coach in his first year. We have a concrete plan in place to train up his long term successor. At this point, we lose a pre-season game to an undermanned Essendon side (who I felt the players mostly disrespected and played like millionaires against) and some people are making statements in one thread that Jack Viney is playing for his career and that if we lose to the Suns, then the pressure will be on Roos to keep his job (I can't believe I am even typing that). I have been one of his most strident critics at times but I now know how Saty feels. He tends to overreact to the slightest criticism but a lot of the stuff recently posted after the Essendon loss is hysterical junk.
We turn up round one and lose to the Suns like we did against Port in the corresponding fixture in 2013 or against Brisbane in 2012 and then questions need to be asked. I seriously doubt that will happen as the coach then had wrecked his relationships with the players while the players like Roosy. Until then, let's actually see what happens round 1 instead of doomsaying about how we need to sack Roos and drag Allen Jakovich off his fishing trawler from the NSW central coast to coach the club (the logic of course being that he 'bleeds red and blue').
RANT OFF.

SO when we were playing thru the middle, pumping it into the FWD50 in the first 10 mins of the ESS game, thats defensive it is? When we sucked is when we went away from that, and that I guarantee you was not because Roos told them to stop using the corridor. Roos will never be sacked, that was his reasoning behind the 2-3 year plan, so he would never be shamed like that.

I disagree with this, when we looked best during the game was when we were able to maintain posession through quick use of the handball and switching it out the other side.

People call for a more attacking game plan and it has been evident in the way we play that we have been far more aggressive which is good, but in order to build a successful team the most important factor is limiting scores against.

My biggest annoyance is when I sit with the idiots who call "kick it long" modern football is designed so that teams are given the long kick option, if we are unable to take a contested mark or force it over the boundary we get crucified on the turnover and it is why the good teams do not rely on kicking it long to win flags.

Our improvement from 3 years ago is 10 fold and people who base losing a practice match on whether our season will be a success or failure are ridiculous.

For those against the Roos/Goodwin succession plan, who would you rather have? Realistically who's available?

If your going to criticise at least offer up an alternative.

WJ, praha, P-man and others have nailed it. I reckon most of us see what Paul Roos is doing, why it's difficult, and that the transition to being a 'complete' side, with defence and attack in balance, confidence in each other, and the ability to win games is a big task. Did any of us think it was going to be a seamless and linear transition? Those who think Paul Roos doesn't have his heart in it, or can't implement attacking play, or is selecting the wrong players might just be those people. In which case, they are simply barking at the moon, to put it politely. Yes, we all want the team to be transformed yesterday, but it's going to be hard earnt. I couldn't be happier with how it's being implemented, and who's implementing it, but I could be a lot bl***y happier with how my team performs still. We all have to live with the paradox.

When does the coach take the blame? When the players can at least beat another clubs reserves team

For those against the Roos/Goodwin succession plan, who would you rather have? Realistically who's available?

If your going to criticise at least offer up an alternative.

That's not the point of the thread. Some of us are merely expressing concerns with Roos' performance, rather than just having blind faith in a coach who had to be coaxed out of retirement.

It's been a common theme on this forum with our past 3 coaches (Bailey, Neeld. Roos), that any criticism is seen as panicking. The same trite cliches get thrown up (he needs time to build his own team). The teams ahead of us aren't getting any worse, so we need to make huge improvements just to start to be competitive. And that's the coaches job.

This is a thread that will be worth revisiting in about 18 months time.

I posted this elsewhere, but it's relevant here.

Earlier in the preseason I was shouted down when I questioned Roos and his coaching tactics but I've seen very little in the practice games that leads me to believe Roos knows how to coach a team to kick goals. It's well documented that he reduced the scores against us last year and it's now better known that we kicked the lowest average score for years. From memory we never kicked 100 points last year and scored 6 goals or less 6 times. That's pathetic however you slice it. Like everyone I hoped that with the inclusion of Hogan and Garlett, the introduction of some new mids and a year under their belt we'd see a significant improvement in our scoring capacity.

My impression is that most teams are now concentrating on fast ball movement to break zoning and the press and that this started in the middle of last year. Teams such as Richmond and Carlton who had shocking first half years in 2014 improved dramatically when they started to move the ball quicker. Brisbane punched above their weight last year to the surprise of many and they relied on fast ball movement.

The most disappointing feature of our play this preseason has been the lack of any dare. We stop, look, hesitate, kick backwards and allow the opposition to zone back and make scoring difficult. So far I'd have to say that Roos has failed to teach us to kick goals even with Hogan and Garlett added to our attack.

And just for the record this is not new to Roos. He won a premiership based on stoppage work and defense despite having a forward line containing Goodes, Hall, O'Laughlin, Davis and O'Keeffe. I just wonder if he is capable of changing his mind set. I can't help but believe we are much better than we are showing.

One of the questions is "can Roos teach a team how to kick goals". I wondered from the day he was employed. I wondered if his time out of the game had left him behind. We'll find out this year.

Perspicacity at its finest.

There's a strong correlation between a team's number of goal-kickers and their position on the ladder. Hawthorn have had the most or second most spread in the last 2 years and won flags, while Melbourne have had the least or second least in the last 2 years and been bottom 2. Three years ago Sydney and Hawthorn were tied for first and both played off in the Grand Final. In 2011 Geelong had the most and in 2010 Collingwood had the most - both won flags.

Sydney bucked the trend in 2005, which is testament to Roos’ defensive strategies. His side came 15th from 16 teams, which in many ways made the flag an extraordinary feat. Interestingly, the team they beat in 2005, West Coast, and who went on to beat Sydney the following year, had the most spread of goal-kickers in both years; which reverts to form and supports the theory. It's obviously not surprising that if you have a wide spread of goal-kickers you're often kicking a winning score. The Swans’ efforts from 2005 won’t be repeated.

In summary, it's not just the number of goals you kick, but how many players you have kicking goals. Getting goals from your midfield becomes crucial.

So yes, you’re right, Bob. Roos hasn’t ever demonstrated that he can coach a team to regularly kick goals, or a game-plan that reflects the quality at his disposal, certainly from a goal-kicking sense.

But he’d know this and I have faith he’s doing his utmost to correct the balance. The input of Goodwin and others will be crucial.

Roos under the gun?

No i don't think so.

Just a hell of a lot of work still to do....

If he didn't need match practice then why did he play at Casey?

...

Well he's hardly likely to be geting the week off to party is he.

The game against the Suns is the most important game for a long time.

Completely agree. If we can get a win on the board first up it will give the players, coach's and supporters some much needed confidence. Confidence is something we have been lacking for a very long time.

That's not the point of the thread. Some of us are merely expressing concerns with Roos' performance, rather than justing having blind faith in a coach who had to be coaxed out of retirement.

It's been a common theme on this forum with our past 3 coaches (Bailey, Neeld. Roos), that any criticism is seen as panicking. The same trite cliches get thrown up (he needs time to build his own team). The teams ahead of us aren't getting any worse, so we need to make huge improvements just to start to be competitive. And that's the coaches job.

You dont turn chicken poop into chicken salad, but by removing the chicken poop we are starting to have enough meat to make a salad.

Roos perforamnce last year was much more than ordinary and the people expressing concerns are plain and simply wrong. Concerns that we cant kick enough goals is understandable, but how do we address this issue?

Firstly by limiting the score that the opposition kick, which he successfully addressed.

Secondly by winning the midfield battle, he has significantly increased the depth of our midfield and whilst it is still not in the top end of midfields by any means, so how can we expect to score massive scores when the ball hardly gets down there?

Thirdly improvement of the patterns of movement and cattle in our forward line, losing Mitch Clark was a significant blow as Clark, Dawes and Hogan is the makings of an Agrade forward line, but he has addressed the issue of having no spark and speed through recruiting of Gartlett and JKH.

I honestly fail to see what more he could do?

I can remember lots of crap being fired at Bomber and Clarkson early on. No point to it. It takes years to move a list from talented youngsters to flag challengers. We are building a list of talented youngsters - that is the easy part!!!! - now for what will seem like endless frustration!!!

Paul Roos' recruiting record for targeting players that have played before is second to none. We should be grateful in relation to what has been injected. The Essendon game was always going to be a lose-lose for us.

Clarkson was copping it from Hawthorn supporters in 2005 and 2006, and Clarkson didn't have a third of his team as list-clogging (semi) youth. He kept Crawf, and traded Johnny Hay and Rawlings etc...

My doubts with Roos is his historical inability to coach offence. Whenever Sydney at their peak were 4 goals down it was virtually game over in my view. Other than that, it is hard to knock him.

Would I have anyone else in the chair? No.

Roos can start taking a bit of heat mid-2016 if we are still bottom 4.

BTW, Howe and Kent mean a hell of lot more to us that people realise.

As many have already said, he will never get the blame because he won't be here long enough. It puts him in a comfortable spot, which is one of the reasons I have been worried about his limited tenure since day one. He should be like every other coach and completely 'buy in' to the club. Stick it out as long as it takes to fix this mess. That issue aside, he has demonstrated a good return in his first year, improving our average match score from a 52 point loss to 26 point loss (all from the 'points against' column BTW). If the same happens again we will be league average. However, it is pretty hard to see us finishing with a % of 100 after the three NAB challenge games we have just witnessed. It might mean nothing or it might mean everything. Time will tell.