11 minutes ago, Roostwo said:

the intensity was great - but it’s a hell of a long season

I was thinking about that in terms of our approach to last season. 

I wonder if last season the plan was to not be too intense in the preseason and early part of the season for fear of burning out later in the season after the emotion of the flag (and all the related palaver) and the shorter preseason (even shorter than normal for flag contender given th season went into October),

The approach of the opposition in the first half season would have fed into that given so many teams elected to basically try and deny us the ball and not attack. We were happy to let them do that and focus on our hard-nosed defense - but that led to a lot of low energy games. 

And as some posters, such rpfc noted, our forward half pressure was way down in the first half of the season - which was perhaps partly a function of consciously dialing things back a bit to avoid burn out and get through a long season. 

I'm glad we start the season with some serious opponents because we will have to play with intensity to win.

I suspect in the games against less strong opposition we will be more likely to be proactive and not let them just chip it around their back half (though I'm sure plenty of such teams will still rely on flooding our forward line, which makes for stodgy footy). 

I really like the approached they are taking, but as you say it's long season and i hope they don't allow the intensity pendulum to swing too hard the other way.

 

3 minutes ago, binman said:

I was thinking about that in terms of our approach to last season. 

I wonder if last season the plan was to not be too intense in the preseason and early part of the season for fear of burning out later in the season after the emotion of the flag (and all the related palaver) and the shorter preseason (even shorter than normal for flag contender given th season went into October),

The approach of the opposition in the first half season would have fed into that given so many teams elected to basically try and deny us the ball and not attack. We were happy to let them do that and focus on our hard-nosed defense - but that led to a lot of low energy games. 

And as some posters, such rpfc noted, our forward half pressure was way down in the first half of the season - which was perhaps partly a function of consciously dialing things back a bit to avoid burn out and get through a long season. 

I'm glad we start the season with some serious opponents because we will have to play with intensity to win.

I suspect in the games against less strong opposition we will be more likely to be proactive and not let them just chip it around their back half (though I'm sure plenty of such teams will still rely on flooding our forward line, which makes for stodgy footy). 

I really like the approached they are taking, but as you say it's long season and i hope they don't allow the intensity pendulum to swing too hard the other way.

 

39 minutes ago, Roostwo said:

the intensity was great - but it’s a hell of a long season

Putting my one-eyed, rose coloured glasses on here, but perhaps that WAS our half intensity.  Look out competetion when we actually switch on.

15 minutes ago, Vipercrunch said:

Putting my one-eyed, rose coloured glasses on here, but perhaps that WAS our half intensity.  Look out competetion when we actually switch on.

pinching that

Love your work guys.

Just on Chandler how did you see his game. Certainly had the opportunity to make a massive claim for a round 1 berth with 1 goal 3 which easily could have been 4 goals. Didn't have massive numbers with 7 disposals but he did take 4 marks which is good for small forward and as mentioned could have booted 4. Where does Chandler sit in your calculations for the Bulldogs game?

We'll be LIVE in 20 mins

Listen & Chat LIVE: https://demonland.com/podcast

Call: 03 9016 3666

Skype: Demonland31

Fantastic work as usual @Demonland and @binman.  Thank you!

Looking forward to hearing in full