rpfc

This syle isn't tailor made for our list - it is an excellent game plan based on possession footy with hard running and honouring of that workrate, but it is a style that we are going to screw up quite a bit this year. I don't think our skills are there just yet for this and because it relies heavily in the trust of ones own skills and others to get it to you, I can see us having some very trying times and I hope it won't sap the players fragile, newfound belief.

Yes, still elbowed a bloke and should have had the ball taken from him but he had a solid night.

I think the style of play will lend itself to more wins later in the season as skills and decision making get better. I think there are going to be some monumental, Demonland-meltdown inducing howl ups in the first 6 weeks.

As a baseball fan, I now wish they never released that damn movie in Australia... Sigh.

You can worry about Vince's longevity in the game or his nightlife, but his resume goes beyond that one game. Trengove is marked harshly, but you doing the same to Vince isn't winning the argument. And Vince became our 2nd best mid the day he was traded. Trengove has a long way to go to get near Bernie.

He was just excellent. Great size for a bloke who plays more outside than in. Work rate was A+.

He was solid, but so were a number of players that he might be challenging for a spot in the team.

The natural inclination is to look forward though, and I don't think Roos intends to stifle that; I see the 'keepings off' as a complimentary piece for players patient enough to use a teammate nearby than hope one is downfield.

Well, there were 192 handballs... We did use a lot of under pressure handballs backward to teammates under pressure. IMO it is better to make sure you have given it to a teammate backwards in that situation than kicking it forward in 'hope.' Perhaps I am more surprised at how adept they were at it than Roos implementing a 'maintain possession' style of footy.

I can see the Members groaning in unison a little with some of the kicking sideways, hope it doesn't get to the players. Honestly, who here thought that Roos would go for a playing style that relies on our skills and patience under pressure? IMO it answers that question about whether you tailor your gameplan to your players or train your players to play the game style you wish and deal with the mistakes they will inevitably make.

You win a game like that in the real stuff and it will sell memberships, I don't think the needle will move significantly just yet.

That was two years ago. 331 uncontested possessions. We averaged 191 last year - 2nd lowest in the league. Can I just say that these two comments will be made a lot this year and it will make us look terrible at times, but evidently the way Roos wants us to play is direct when you can be but patient and trusting of your own skills and the workrate of your teammates when forced to slow the play. Players are going to kick backwards, they are going to screw up, but if it clicks for a few quarters it will lead to the kind of domination we saw last night. Hopefully fans will show some patience with it. I really think this is Roos not basing his gameplan on what the group can do but what the group should do.

Well, you lost your money didn't you? He didn't ask to dislocate his lisfranc and have soft tissue issues playing for your club - but here we are. Show some respect.

Toumpas' game was what I would expect from a 19 year old - lots of energy and run while getting into the wrong spots quite a bit. He had 10 marks which tells me he was pushing hard into space to get on the end of some kicks and providing an option for his teammates with that selfless running. As is said in that 'game style by rd 5' thread - the most pleasing thing was that there was a recognisable idea of how MFC players get the ball down the ground: hit players moving into space, honour runners moving past, use short kicks in any direction to maintain possession if you can't move it quickly and if you keep your work rate up, mistakes will be forgiven. Toumpas did his little, 19 year old part in that...

This is the thread people. This is the thread. Look, we will lose this game in the real stuff but we will be a real footy team this year if they can keep this up. 331 and 319. Those two numbers have significant meaning; 331 is the number of uncontested possessions we won in Roos' first game, and 319 is the TOTAL number of possessions we averaged last year. Uncontested possessions get tarred as being a 'soft touch' but the trust and hard work required to get them is some of the hardest work in the game. I can't stress enough how impressive it was to see every player reward ANY player willing to run into space and/or overlap. This is a risky gameplan that will ask for enormous effort and trust in your teammates skills (and your own) but I can see relevance from it. And that is what I hope to see in 2014.

God forbid a player have an outside interest... Nathan Jones has his own website and surfs a sh!teload, but because he is playing at near AA level - he can have a hobby and a distraction...

No it didn't change. People were wrong. He was re-signed for two years after the 2011 season and 8 years of 'service' - people that thought he was a Restricted FA did so because they either thought he hadn't been around for 10 years or thought his last contract was for three years (which would have meant he went past the 8 year threshold for the first time and leave him a RFA). He was always an UFA.

Wow. Snide.

You probably want to edit the above but there is some chance he is UFA. However, with that said - Viney, Mahoney, and Roos would have known the situation before trade week last year, so we, surely, would not have maneouvered ourselves into an UFA position with Frawley.

Playing 'hardball' doesn't rule out letting him go. He will be offered a very good contract by us, on our terms, if he agrees to another teams contract it is an explicit wish to leave the club. If we 'match' and he thinks he can get through to that team in the draft we would be throwing away a top 5 pick in the draft. Due to the Franklin deal - this 'matching' of contracts will be a little hazy. The AFL have come out and said that the Swans must honour the entire fiduciary amount for the life of the deal and not renegotiate the contract: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/afl-clears-buddys-10m-move/story-fnca0u4y-1226735072406

I had this thought too BUT it is tough to find 10 players paid more than the kind of contract Frawley would have got after his near-AA 2010. Jones, Garland, Dawes, Clark, Grimes, Trengove, and Vince probably would be making more than Frawley. McDonald, Howe, and Watts might be making more... All of those players would have to be on more than Frawley for him to be an UFA. We will know soon anyway when the AFL release the RFA/UFA Class of 2014.

And then he can go into the draft. If he agrees to another teams contract, we will trade him or let him go and get the compo.

Yeah, gloat in 5 years time... Except the Viney/Hogan deal. That's gold.

I love it when you get on here and tangle yourself in knots and then you give your obligatory "I'm dancin, you be trippin" post. I was just explaining why OD and myself made the posts we did - you are the one jumping down throats.

There are two threads going on here. Rivers is a loss, but with Frawley, McDonald and Garland was quickly becoming (and became) surplus to requirements. And Rivers has had his own nightmare injury riddled seasons so bringing up Garland's troubles isn't a great reason to keep another bloke with durability issues around. We got 7 good seasons out of him. Sylvia's best can't be replaced outside of the top 20 players in the league - but that was twice a season. His median performance can be easily replaced. There is no great loss with either.