Hawthorn have thrashed Melbourne, Fremantle and Sydney this year and it got me thinking if Clarkson has cracked the Roos game plan. Personally I also feel we should be now looking at the Hawthorn model as a blue print rather than the Swans. The key lessons I think we can learn from Hawthorn are:

1. Be more willing to move forward by hand. Statistics will show Melbourne, Fremantle and Sydney as outliers in the competition in terms of meters lost/gained from handball. Roos’ edict is to get the ball back by hand from a stoppage until you find a free kicker then hit a target and chip by foot going forward. This is very predictable and Hawthorn are very good at pushing forwards up to the stoppage and their midfield is ‘blitzing’ the ball carrier.

2. Hawthorn play three small forwards in Rioli, Breust and Puopolo, all of which are good in the air and excellent chasers. By contrast, Garlett is our only proven small forward.

3. Hawthorn’s key forwards are Roughead, Gunstan and Hale (second ruck), with Roughead and Gunstan both being very quick and mobile when the ball hits the ground. This makes me doubt if a forward line including players like Hogan and Dawes can ever really work together. It also makes me think that we should persevere with the Tom McDonald experiment up forward for the rest of 2015.

4. Hawthorn’s premiership midfield included just six inside mids in Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Burgoyne, Shiels and Langford, with Smith and Hill on the outside. Given Melbourne’s excellent offseason recruiting, I feel our list is now well stocked for inside mids with N Jones, Vince, Viney, Tyson, Brayshaw, Vandenberg and Petracca. (This doesn’t even account for the potential for Neal-Bullen and Trengove to have in impact.) While Watts is starting to show some consistency as a wingman, we really need to acquire/develop some fast, classy outside players. Hopefully Toumpas and Stretch can be these players, but I don’t feel we can rely on them making it. (Salem might also help in this area, but I don’t know if he is quick enough.) Our need to get some outside class and pace is exacerbated due to only having one bona fide AFL small forward in Garlett. (Although I also hope that Kent can develop into a quality player.)

5. The key to Hawthorn’s undersized backline is teamwork. Hawthorn rely heavily on Lake to play the Gorilla role, but are otherwise small, pacey and skilled. While Howe may be out the door, I think we should try and retain him and play him as a third tall defender like he did on the weekend (rather than a fourth as he usually does). In this role he is in a better position to go as the third man up and it should means we have a better kicking back line. For this reason, I feel we should not be afraid of losing Tom McDonald from the back six.

And....their players can kick, hit a target from 30m and don't all jump in for the contested ball.

They trust each other, have set standards and everybody 'goes' when they need to.

We're a fair way off those standards.

And....their players can kick, hit a target from 30m and don't all jump in for the contested ball.

They trust each other, have set standards and everybody 'goes' when they need to.

We're a fair way off those standards.

I agree they hit targets, but I also think that it is partly due to Clarkson's willingness to play skilled, undersized players in key posts. (i.e. Gibson, Stratton and Gunston.)

I agree they hit targets, but I also think that it is partly due to Clarkson's willingness to play skilled, undersized players in key posts. (i.e. Gibson, Stratton and Gunston.)

Therein lies our problem.

I don't think I've ever seen those three players you mentioned above, ever miss a target by hand or foot.

I thought we were following the Hawthorn blueprint in 2008?

I thought we were following the Hawthorn blueprint in 2008?

Bailey was trying to be more like Geelong and Neeld like Malthouse (at Carlton).

One of the things that Hawthorn are very good at is having multiple players capable of playing any one role, and each player capable of playing multiple roles. That allows them to play their best players (Hodge & Roughead in particular) wherever the need is greatest, safe in the knowledge that whoever steps in to their primary role will do a decent job.

But, as others have stated, their skills and decision making are elite across the field and they come to play every week - they dont have the peaks and troughs that our better players seem to.

Their recruiting and list management has been top notch for over a decade as well. Sure they have had some misses along the way, but more than enough success stories to make up for it. And players want to play for them because, aside from their success, their brand of football is so good.

And Clarko is by a big margin the best coach in the business. His ability to stay ahead of the pack is phenomenal.

Interestingly, Roos was asked on 360 last night what he takes out of watching Hawthorn play.He said that "they really value a possession." That they place such an importance on it is understandable given the manic pressure they apply on the opposition but also when they have it, they have the confidence to play on, take risks and trust that the team mate they're giving it to will also be placing the same level of value in the possession.

It makes sense when you view them as a 'whole' team, and how their recruits adjust to the style of play in short time. Sure skill has plenty to do with it but desire is everything and that is borne out of a supreme culture. They have it in spades, all over the ground and throughout their list.

We just have smatterings of it at the moment.

Therein lies our problem.

I don't think I've ever seen those three players you mentioned above, ever miss a target by hand or foot.

Saw Gibson miss his foot when trying to kick on his right...one of the funniest kicking attempts I've seen, particularly from a class player.

They rarely miss though, unless put under extreme pressure. Geelong were the only team that could consistently do it. Part of their pressure tactic was to continually force them on to the wrong foot and not let them back in. Left footers are renowned for not being great kicks on the opposite side and they have a lot of them.

And....their players can kick, hit a target from 30m and don't all jump in for the contested ball.

They trust each other, have set standards and everybody 'goes' when they need to.

We're a fair way off those standards.

team confidence, comes from heaps of individual improvements, on improvements, then the team philosophy kicks in, & momentum starts, faith follows.

Interestingly, Roos was asked on 360 last night what he takes out of watching Hawthorn play.He said that "they really value a possession." That they place such an importance on it is understandable given the manic pressure they apply on the opposition but also when they have it, they have the confidence to play on, take risks and trust that the team mate they're giving it to will also be placing the same level of value in the possession.

It makes sense when you view them as a 'whole' team, and how their recruits adjust to the style of play in short time. Sure skill has plenty to do with it but desire is everything and that is borne out of a supreme culture. They have it in spades, all over the ground and throughout their list.

We just have smatterings of it at the moment.

Part of Hawthorn's recruiting strategy during the mid 00's was to target left footers who could win contested ball. Not just any left footers. One's who could use the ball really well. I think the stat was/is that left footers on average have a higher disposal efficiency than right footers.

Hawthorn drafted with that in mind and nailed so many picks and they also happened to draft a once in a generation forward in Franklin and his mate Roughy (in the same draft). A warrior of a captain in Luke Hodge and a revolutionary coach in Al Clarkson and you can see the pieces of the puzzle started to fall nicely.

Now they're a juggernaut of a side with still so many of those left footed hard nosed footballers now experienced players and they've added nicely through FA.

So much of their list comprise of players who have elite kicking and decision making skills. Something that no other club has.

When their skills are up and they're fist to the footy, they're impossible to stop as we've seen in the last two matches against challenging sides.

We are so far behind in terms of 'skill and decision making' and I still can't quite understand why we haven't addressed this.

This offseason, we need to add two elite kickers to our side and one of them must be a backman.

Watching Garland, Dunn and Tommy McDonald back there trying to move the ball out is like watching the circus sometimes.

I think in future years if Goodwin is unable to coach us to a top ladder position, then Al Clarkeson will feel the mounting pressure and challenges that lay ahead and come home to his beloved Dees...(gee i like red wine!)

It's a good topic Fat Tony, especially this week after they've belted Swans and the likely heir apparent Port has lost it's was this season, meaning it's hard to see which team is making inroads on them although I still think Freo of early in the season can match them. GWS, Pies and Bulldogs are building however and could challenge in 2016.

As for us, I know we are light years from actually putting it together, but we are closing the gap - player comparison below.

The four where we lose out badly are:

A classy goalkicking small forward like Breust.

A second quality big forward like Roughy.

A second quality pacey linebreaking wingman like Hill.

A clever midfield/defender no-nonesense quality player like Hodge - although Brayshaw is showing the right signs.

Small forwards

Rioli - Garlett

Puopolo - Vandenberg

Breust - no one that looks likely as a comparison here yet, but Petracca may in future.

Big forwards

Gunston - Hogan

Roughead - no comparison here .

Hale/McEvoy - it would be nice to say Spencer or Dawes, but neither is as skilled. But a fit Frost might be.

Rucks

Ceglar/McEvoy - Gawn

Inside mids

Mitchell - N.Jones

Lewis - Vince

Hodge - Brayshaw (obviously not yet, but he's heading in the right direction)

Burgoyne - Cross

Shiels - Viney

Langford - Tyson - (Dom needs to work harder on his speed in off-season though)

Outside mids

Hill - no comparison here at moment, although Billy seems to read play well.

Smith - Watts - finally there's a few signs that Jack could become as good as him, although another Adelaide game and that's laughable.

Hartung - Kent - both are handy back-ups

Tall defenders

Lake - Dunn

Gibson - T Mac (both brilliant spoilers and provide run as well)

Stratton - Lumumba (I'm sorry but I really like Harry's dash and ability one-on-one so I'm probably biased here but I rate him easily the equal of Stratton)

Spangher/Frawley - Garland (all are negaters rather than offensive players)

Small defenders

Birchall - Howe - yes we lose out here, but not if Howe plays like last week each week.

Suckling - Salem

Duryea - Jetta

I actually don't think our kicking is miles off the Hawks - what we lack is the ability to go left in defence with confidence - that is because with Salem out we don't have a left-footer there.

We also lack the outside run and line-breaking confidence that Smith and Hill provide - although god help me, there's been some Watts stuff in recent weeks that suggest he could be the equal of Smith.

Finally our mids don't seem to get their hands free like Mitchell and Lewis do so well when tackled - although there are signs that we are improving in this area.

Ultimately it gets down to having the confidence and arrogance that comes with playing finals and winning flags and means players are rated as superstars rather than just very good.

It's a good topic Fat Tony, especially this week after they've belted Swans and the likely heir apparent Port has lost it's was this season, meaning it's hard to see which team is making inroads on them although I still think Freo of early in the season can match them. GWS, Pies and Bulldogs are building however and could challenge in 2016.

As for us, I know we are light years from actually putting it together, but we are closing the gap - player comparison below.

The four where we lose out badly are:

A classy goalkicking small forward like Breust.

A second quality big forward like Roughy.

A second quality pacey linebreaking wingman like Hill.

A clever midfield/defender no-nonesense quality player like Hodge - although Brayshaw is showing the right signs.

Small forwards

Rioli - Garlett

Puopolo - Vandenberg

Breust - no one that looks likely as a comparison here yet, but Petracca may in future.

Big forwards

Gunston - Hogan

Roughead - no comparison here .

Hale/McEvoy - it would be nice to say Spencer or Dawes, but neither is as skilled. But a fit Frost might be.

Rucks

Ceglar/McEvoy - Gawn

Inside mids

Mitchell - N.Jones

Lewis - Vince

Hodge - Brayshaw (obviously not yet, but he's heading in the right direction)

Burgoyne - Cross

Shiels - Viney

Langford - Tyson - (Dom needs to work harder on his speed in off-season though)

Outside mids

Hill - no comparison here at moment, although Billy seems to read play well.

Smith - Watts - finally there's a few signs that Jack could become as good as him, although another Adelaide game and that's laughable.

Hartung - Kent - both are handy back-ups

Tall defenders

Lake - Dunn

Gibson - T Mac (both brilliant spoilers and provide run as well)

Stratton - Lumumba (I'm sorry but I really like Harry's dash and ability one-on-one so I'm probably biased here but I rate him easily the equal of Stratton)

Spangher/Frawley - Garland (all are negaters rather than offensive players)

Small defenders

Birchall - Howe - yes we lose out here, but not if Howe plays like last week each week.

Suckling - Salem

Duryea - Jetta

I actually don't think our kicking is miles off the Hawks - what we lack is the ability to go left in defence with confidence - that is because with Salem out we don't have a left-footer there.

We also lack the outside run and line-breaking confidence that Smith and Hill provide - although god help me, there's been some Watts stuff in recent weeks that suggest he could be the equal of Smith.

Finally our mids don't seem to get their hands free like Mitchell and Lewis do so well when tackled - although there are signs that we are improving in this area.

Ultimately it gets down to having the confidence and arrogance that comes with playing finals and winning flags and means players are rated as superstars rather than just very good.

One thing that stands out is their skill in midfield. Jones does not compare to Mitchell, similar Burgoyne - Cross, Shiels - Viney, Lewis - Vince.

They hit that 35 - 40 m pass under presser to the spare player. Whereas we bomb a 50 m pass to out numbered contest or to the opposition.

I think it's a mistake to follow the leader. Teams who have done so in the past find by the time they've got there, the game has moved on. Successful teams appear to be those that are innovative. Terms such as Clarko's cluster and Pagan's paddock are testament to a novel approach which worked at the time but not necessarily when copied by others.

I think it's a mistake to follow the leader. Teams who have done so in the past find by the time they've got there, the game has moved on. Successful teams appear to be those that are innovative. Terms such as Clarko's cluster and Pagan's paddock are testament to a novel approach which worked at the time but not necessarily when copied by others.

I am all for innovation, but it is also a risk to be too far apart of the pack like Mark Neeld, Gerard Neesham and Neil Balme. Particularly when your list is not in contention and there is the potential for rule changes.

They just don't turn the ball over, and they also have five ex Dees on their coaching panel.

They just don't turn the ball over, and they also have five ex Dees on their coaching panel.

a lot of those ex-dees went to the hawks when they were already successful

I am all for innovation, but it is also a risk to be too far apart of the pack like Mark Neeld, Gerard Neesham and Neil Balme. Particularly when your list is not in contention and there is the potential for rule changes.

Being a follower, however, consigns you to being competitive but never actually being Number One. While it's better than being 15th to 18th, is that what we really want?

Being a follower, however, consigns you to being competitive but never actually being Number One. While it's better than being 15th to 18th, is that what we really want?

Our game plan is currently very similar to the Swans and Freo, which looks to have been worked out by Clarkson. A key point of the thread is that Roos needs to re-evaluate whether what he is trying to deliver has already been superseded. Personally I think it has and we need to inject some outside run and class into the list.

Our game plan is currently very similar to the Swans and Freo, which looks to have been worked out by Clarkson. A key point of the thread is that Roos needs to re-evaluate whether what he is trying to deliver has already been superseded. Personally I think it has and we need to inject some outside run and class into the list.

To be fair to Roos, the game plan was not the reason why I suspect he was engaged. The club needed an overhaul in development, fitness, recruitment and player management (or pastoral care, if you like). I'm not convinced Roos is a good gameday coach, but what he's delivered in those other areas is invaluable and sets the club up to go that next step. The style of play is that "next step".

Being a follower, however, consigns you to being competitive but never actually being Number One. While it's better than being 15th to 18th, is that what we really want?

I think so

We need to innovate not follow to lead

I am all for innovation, but it is also a risk to be too far apart of the pack like Mark Neeld, Gerard Neesham and Neil Balme. Particularly when your list is not in contention and there is the potential for rule changes.

Neeld was just trying to emulate Malthouse's 2010 style, but with a weaker list.

Our game plan is currently very similar to the Swans and Freo, which looks to have been worked out by Clarkson. A key point of the thread is that Roos needs to re-evaluate whether what he is trying to deliver has already been superseded. Personally I think it has and we need to inject some outside run and class into the list.

Roos' 2005 side has outside run. We haven't got that yet. And Goodwin will had the attacking gameplan that I understand will be closer to Clarkson's attacking game plan, but Roosy will have laid the defensive foundations. Contested football will never become unimportant in modern footy.

They just don't turn the ball over, and they also have five ex Dees on their coaching panel.

The first part is it, not sure about the second.