Theory on how we might play this season...

[dog town]

I have been throwing around a few things in my head and trying to figure out what Rockets plans might be for this year. We fell down in so many areas last season and while we have added Hudson and Welsh to help fix two of those problems we still have quite a similar look to our line up. I am sure Rocket would know that we cant go on as we did last year with teams chopping up our game plan and turning it against us. With only really small changes to our line up it is hard to see how we might improve our game plan and structure even though it quite obviously needs some tinkering.

Based on things I have heard Eade say and my own observations of how we played last year I believe we will change a number of things but still stick to some of the key elements of our game plan. IMO Eade wants us to have a bit more flexibility in our game plan in order to have more than one way of beating sides.

With Murphy back to his best across half forward and the additions of Hudson and Welsh we should be more effective at our bread and butter run and gun type game plan. Those additions coupled with improvements from our younger brigade and a clear run with injuries would push us back towards the 8. We still have enough running power and pace to blow sides away when the situation requires it and with added strength and some impetus at the clearances (Hudson) we should be able to play our old style more effectively.

The difference this season could be that Eade may look at implementing a different brand of footy at times to counter sides that have become adept at picking us off. The fact that he wanted to start pre season in early October to work on "style of play stuff" says to me that in some way we are going to have a fair change to the way we play.

The signs were there in our draw to Stkilda that Eade was starting to look at different ways to chop up our style of play and make us less predictable. Against a side that had become masters at turning our own weapons against us we were able to chip and scrounge our way to a draw. I would not be suprised if we started to play a bit more tempo type footy at times and even backed ourselves inat stoppages. They say it every year but some of the talk of extra weight on our players seems more than just propaganda. Talk of 5kg and stuff suggests a bit of a change in direction IMO. I have never been a big fan of teams having big contrasts in the way they play the game from week to week or even quarter to quarter but if it stops teams from just sitting off us and waiting for us to cough up the ball then it could be worth a try. You dont really need a big forward to play something like what the swans, saints and pies have been doing at times. You just need the desire to make space for each other and the ability to lead into it.

If we do try something like this then I would urge patience as several of the teams that play this style every week took a long time to get it right. It is not something that is easy to do and in the heat of battle is the only place to perfect it.

I am not saying we will definetly go down this path but its worth discussing given some of the things that Eade has said and the lack of structual change to our line up. I still think we will play a fairly similar style to 2005/2006 most of the time particularly now that we have put a few lingering injuries behind us.

Thoughts?

[LostDoggy]

Eade should of made these changes (weight and game plan) after the West Coast semi final flogging 2006. Until we get at least one dominate key forward we will be just making up the numbers (4th-10th).

[Dry Rot]

Good post Dogtown.

I have been wondering if our game plan is flawed or just our execution of it?

ie if the team was fit enough to run all day, we broke even in the clearances and the midfield and forward line actually applied defensive pressure would it work against all comers?

[hujsh]

Eade will probalbly just have a plan B and a plan C. I don't like the idea of tempo football. It is dying out and if we use it we could be smashed. If we played defensive i would rather see us play like Adelaide than Sydney. We will probably see more minor than major adjustments

[LostDoggy]

Great post Dogtown, a real thought starter. I know Eade thought he had the game plan and the players to make the finals in 2007 after a more than impressive 2006. The problem is that teams worked out and defused the advantage he had in 2006. The coast to coast goals were just shut down and and as a result we struggled to kick winning scores.
It will be interesting to see if the Cats playing code gets broken in 2008 as they will be the ones that everyone else studies.

What do we need? I like the new motto mentioned in the paper today that indicates we will be a bigger team and play a more direct that possession style. Working out game day tactics is not my strong point but I do know that we need to be able to execute one of them very well and have a couple of modified styles that we can adapt to against certain team. Versatility with our game plans could be the key for us.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I think we'll use Welsh and Minson deep with Johnno, Murph and Mitch across half forward. Aker or Jarrod Harbrow could be used as the crumbers.

We may even play three ruckmen so Will can play as a full-time forward rather than combine the two roles.

[Mantis]

I think we'll use Welsh and Minson deep with Johnno, Murph and Mitch across half forward. Aker or Jarrod Harbrow could be used as the crumbers.

We may even play three ruckmen so Will can play as a full-time forward rather than combine the two roles.

Do you just???

[The Coon Dog]

I think we'll use Welsh and Minson deep with Johnno, Murph and Mitch across half forward. Aker or Jarrod Harbrow could be used as the crumbers.

We may even play three ruckmen so Will can play as a full-time forward rather than combine the two roles.

Plausable Sockeye, I like your thinking.

[RedWine&Blue]

I think we'll use Welsh and Minson deep with Johnno, Murph and Mitch across half forward. Aker or Jarrod Harbrow could be used as the crumbers.

We may even play three ruckmen so Will can play as a full-time forward rather than combine the two roles.
Sounds like a good set up. I really like your idea of playing Will as a full time forward.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Do you just???

It suddenly came to me last night.

[LostDoggy]

I think we'll use Welsh and Minson deep with Johnno, Murph and Mitch across half forward. Aker or Jarrod Harbrow could be used as the crumbers.

We may even play three ruckmen so Will can play as a full-time forward rather than combine the two roles.

I hope Minson can improve his marking to the point that he can be viable up forward but based on the last couple of seasons he has a lot of work to do.I hope JC has someone working with Minson on improving his marking unless the vision is to have him do what Groenewegen did and just get the ball to the ground and have the crumbers around him. That might be the best option. If he could hold his marks he is a reasonable kick for goal.

[LostDoggy]

I think we'll use Welsh and Minson deep with Johnno, Murph and Mitch across half forward. Aker or Jarrod Harbrow could be used as the crumbers.

We may even play three ruckmen so Will can play as a full-time forward rather than combine the two roles.

What about Murph and injury concerns about playing across HF?
Any chance for a tall CHF?

[Dry Rot]

I hope Minson can improve his marking to the point that he can be viable up forward but based on the last couple of seasons he has a lot of work to do.

Agreed. IIRC he isn't a great mark and hasn't shown much as a forward.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Minson is a ruckman and will be a great one. A big wild thumping brute who can actually palm the ball very well. Give him time.
I don't see him as a forward except maybe as a pinch hitter.

[bulldogsman]

What about Murph and injury concerns about playing across HF?
Any chance for a tall CHF?

Maybe Grant could be used there if Murph is out for 1 or two weeks.

[bornadog]

Minson is a ruckman and will be a great one. A big wild thumping brute who can actually palm the ball very well. Give him time.
I don't see him as a forward except maybe as a pinch hitter.

Eade has stated many times that Minson will be used up forward. Whether it works, time will tell. One thing for sure is the lad is very aggressive and hard at the ball so some of the fullbacks better watch out, as he will be hard to match up.

The telling factor is the way we deliver the ball to him. If we start to just bomb it in long, he will be a sitting duck and can't be expected to take the big grab every time. The midfield is cructial in the way they deliver the ball to the forward line.

I do not like tempo footy at all as I have not seen any successful teams try it and win alot of games (I may be wrong). I like the way Geelong took our game plan from 2006 and improved on it. Not only did they kick alot of goals, their defence was tight as tight can be.

The bulldogs defence has been abysmal for a long time:eek: and I for one have been very critical of it on this forum and on BF. In the past three years, we have had more goals kicked on us than virtually every other team. I for one donot believe we have solved the backline problem yet. We are relying on 18 year old Everrit and second year player Williams to help out Harris, Hargrave, Morris and Gilbee. You may say its the style of play, ie all out attack, but look at Geelong, they kicked some big scores this year and their defence was fantastic. Hopefully, the game plan in the future will include being tighter in defence, and not tempo footy, as when it goes wrong, it really hurts you.

[Sockeye Salmon]

What about Murph and injury concerns about playing across HF?
Any chance for a tall CHF?

Unfortunately not.

Murph will not be playing exclusively CHF - no-one will - the role will be shared between Murph, Mitch, Welsh and even Johnno.

[LostDoggy]

Unfortunately not.

Murph will not be playing exclusively CHF - no-one will - the role will be shared between Murph, Mitch, Welsh and even Johnno.
What about trying a tall kid out or a fringe player at CHF at Williamstown?

[LostDoggy]

Agreed. IIRC he isn't a great mark and hasn't shown much as a forward.

I might be wrong but wasnt Minson initially drafted as a forward?

[hujsh]

What about trying a tall kid out or a fringe player at CHF at Williamstown?

Since when do we develop tall forwards They must become defenders or perish :mad:

[Dogs 24/7]

I might be wrong but wasnt Minson initially drafted as a forward?
From memory he was drafted as a forward and didnt like being in the ruck.

[LostDoggy]

Since when do we develop tall forwards They must become defenders or perish :mad:
? Thank you for your valuable input.

[hujsh]

? Thank you for your valuable input.

Just sarcasm. But really we haven't done a good job of developing forwards and most have ended up as backmen or been lost ;). That may be because of Werribee or it may be something deeper

[LostDoggy]

Just sarcasm. But really we haven't done a good job of developing forwards and most have ended up as backmen or been lost ;). That may be because of Werribee or it may be something deeper

If it was funny I would have paid it. Doesn't answer my question.
I don't believe want you have written anyway because we have struggled for key talls in backline for years until recently.

I think Wight might be given a run at CHF at Willy.

[hujsh]

If it was funny I would have paid it. Doesn't answer my question.
I don't believe want you have written anyway because we have struggled for key talls in backline for years until recently.

I think Wight might be given a run at CHF at Willy.

Ease up! (is that an old saying or something?) B.Harris was drafted as a forward and Doogs was a forward prospect and they have played back. Williams has played back straight away even at Werribee when he could be a forward. Then players like Walsh have been left to ewither away in the Werribee seconds. Even Jade Rawlings played back to try to resurrect his career.

PS where do i know your name from.

[Raw Toast]

Good to read your thoughts DT.

I agree that Eade seems keen to have the team able to play more than one style this year, and reckon he'll implement at least a fall-back option for when our run is stopped, as you've outlined.

I'm also very interested as to how Eade is going to tinker with the 'run and carry' game. In particular are we going to have the forwards lead into space a bit more, and will our midfield be as attacking?

I think the elements of our game-plan that Geelong borrowed so successfully from us was the run from defence, but once they got 60meteres or so from goal, they then kicked to leading half-forwards, whereas we often continued to try and run the ball. I hope we try and lead-up more often, and some of the pre-season reports of Murphy at CHF suggest this might be the case.

Adelaide supporters report that Welsh spent half his game-time this season leading up, and the other half at full-forward, so it'll be interesting to see what Eade does with him. I think he mainly wants him to kick goals and to play a bit like Paul Hudson did for us (ie a very accurate second or third option). In some ways he'll actually be replacing Robbins, in that he'll be leading for the ball, rather than crumbing. This raises the issue of forward defensive pressure which we really need to improve on, and which I've heard Eade is making a priority. Part of the reason we got smashed going the other way was because the ball came out so easily, and I think the planned move of Minson forward is partly about locking the ball in more.

Minson sounds like he'll get an extended run at full-forward (or thereabouts), and won't be leading so much, but rather there for the long ball. I think the minimum hope is that he can play the Morgan role of at least bringing the ball to ground and adding some aggression (but hopefully not too much!). I think his marking can improve but I've generally been an optimist with Minson, and he was drafted as a forward. He might also help protect Johnson a bit.

So if Minson spends almost all his time as a forward (rucking in the forward line but with us playing two other rucks), then that might mean the other forwards will be leading a bit more.

I'm not that sure how much our midfield set-up and attitude will change. Clearly we want it to be an attacking strength, but it will be interesting to see if midfield coach Leon Cameron has a bit of a defensive mindset as well, having coached the defenders last year. Hudson quickly becomes one of our most important players because if we can improve our contested work and clearences then we don't need to take as many risks going forward. I think DT implied as much when he said we might start locking the ball in more rather than trying to run it at every opportunity.

Personally I hope (and think) we'll continue to generally play an attractive style of footy, but one that is more sustainable and that doesn't leave us so exposed going the other way. Geelong certainly showed that such a style is possible.

[hujsh]

Good to read your thoughts DT.

I agree that Eade seems keen to have the team able to play more than one style this year, and reckon he'll implement at least a fall-back option for when our run is stopped, as you've outlined.

I'm also very interested as to how Eade is going to tinker with the 'run and carry' game. In particular are we going to have the forwards lead into space a bit more, and will our midfield be as attacking?

I think the elements of our game-plan that Geelong borrowed so successfully from us was the run from defence, but once they got 60meteres or so from goal, they then kicked to leading half-forwards, whereas we often continued to try and run the ball. I hope we try and lead-up more often, and some of the pre-season reports of Murphy at CHF suggest this might be the case.

Adelaide supporters report that Welsh spent half his game-time this season leading up, and the other half at full-forward, so it'll be interesting to see what Eade does with him. I think he mainly wants him to kick goals and to play a bit like Paul Hudson did for us (ie a very accurate second or third option). In some ways he'll actually be replacing Robbins, in that he'll be leading for the ball, rather than crumbing. This raises the issue of forward defensive pressure which we really need to improve on, and which I've heard Eade is making a priority. Part of the reason we got smashed going the other way was because the ball came out so easily, and I think the planned move of Minson forward is partly about locking the ball in more.

Minson sounds like he'll get an extended run at full-forward (or thereabouts), and won't be leading so much, but rather there for the long ball. I think the minimum hope is that he can play the Morgan role of at least bringing the ball to ground and adding some aggression (but hopefully not too much!). I think his marking can improve but I've generally been an optimist with Minson, and he was drafted as a forward. He might also help protect Johnson a bit.

So if Minson spends almost all his time as a forward (rucking in the forward line but with us playing two other rucks), then that might mean the other forwards will be leading a bit more.

I'm not that sure how much our midfield set-up and attitude will change. Clearly we want it to be an attacking strength, but it will be interesting to see if midfield coach Leon Cameron has a bit of a defensive mindset as well, having coached the defenders last year. Hudson quickly becomes one of our most important players because if we can improve our contested work and clearences then we don't need to take as many risks going forward. I think DT implied as much when he said we might start locking the ball in more rather than trying to run it at every opportunity.

Personally I hope (and think) we'll continue to generally play an attractive style of footy, but one that is more sustainable and that doesn't leave us so exposed going the other way. Geelong certainly showed that such a style is possible.

Well summarized RT. I definitely support a midfield that can be a bit more defensive but it will be interesting where that will come from. Callan will obviously be an option but whether Cooney, Griffen, Cross and Ray can mind their men as well as attack will be interesting. You certainly seem to understand the tactics of the game as far as i can tell

[dog town]

Good to read your thoughts DT.

I agree that Eade seems keen to have the team able to play more than one style this year, and reckon he'll implement at least a fall-back option for when our run is stopped, as you've outlined.

I'm also very interested as to how Eade is going to tinker with the 'run and carry' game. In particular are we going to have the forwards lead into space a bit more, and will our midfield be as attacking?

I think the elements of our game-plan that Geelong borrowed so successfully from us was the run from defence, but once they got 60meteres or so from goal, they then kicked to leading half-forwards, whereas we often continued to try and run the ball. I hope we try and lead-up more often, and some of the pre-season reports of Murphy at CHF suggest this might be the case.

Adelaide supporters report that Welsh spent half his game-time this season leading up, and the other half at full-forward, so it'll be interesting to see what Eade does with him. I think he mainly wants him to kick goals and to play a bit like Paul Hudson did for us (ie a very accurate second or third option). In some ways he'll actually be replacing Robbins, in that he'll be leading for the ball, rather than crumbing. This raises the issue of forward defensive pressure which we really need to improve on, and which I've heard Eade is making a priority. Part of the reason we got smashed going the other way was because the ball came out so easily, and I think the planned move of Minson forward is partly about locking the ball in more.

Minson sounds like he'll get an extended run at full-forward (or thereabouts), and won't be leading so much, but rather there for the long ball. I think the minimum hope is that he can play the Morgan role of at least bringing the ball to ground and adding some aggression (but hopefully not too much!). I think his marking can improve but I've generally been an optimist with Minson, and he was drafted as a forward. He might also help protect Johnson a bit.

So if Minson spends almost all his time as a forward (rucking in the forward line but with us playing two other rucks), then that might mean the other forwards will be leading a bit more.

I'm not that sure how much our midfield set-up and attitude will change. Clearly we want it to be an attacking strength, but it will be interesting to see if midfield coach Leon Cameron has a bit of a defensive mindset as well, having coached the defenders last year. Hudson quickly becomes one of our most important players because if we can improve our contested work and clearences then we don't need to take as many risks going forward. I think DT implied as much when he said we might start locking the ball in more rather than trying to run it at every opportunity.

Personally I hope (and think) we'll continue to generally play an attractive style of footy, but one that is more sustainable and that doesn't leave us so exposed going the other way. Geelong certainly showed that such a style is possible.
Pretty much agree with all of that. Just having Murphy, Hahn at peak fitness along with Welsh gives Eade a few more options in regards to how we play the game.

Certainly seems like Minson will get a bit of a run at playing as a deep forward but I hope he gets a bit of a license to lead and run around. Taking marks inside 50 doesn't just happen and half the work is done before the ball gets anywhere near you. Having Minson relying solely on taking contested marks 15-20 metres from goal just wont work. He will need to work his opponents a bit more than that.

[Raw Toast]

Certainly seems like Minson will get a bit of a run at playing as a deep forward but I hope he gets a bit of a license to lead and run around. Taking marks inside 50 doesn't just happen and half the work is done before the ball gets anywhere near you. Having Minson relying solely on taking contested marks 15-20 metres from goal just wont work. He will need to work his opponents a bit more than that.

Good point DT. I think Minson is more of a confidence player than many realise and he's likely to play better anyway if he can get some easier touches as well as going for contested marks close to goal. It'll be interesting to see how many forward ruck contests he takes, as this might help him get more in the game as well - I guess it depends in part how good Hudson is at playing the kick behind play role (as well as Street or Skipper).

Minson's had a strange career trajectory so far, though maybe his development is not too unusual for big men. He struggled in his first year, hardly getting out of the reserves (when Hudson was at Werribee), and then suddenly was at another level the next year, putting in dominant performances for Werribee from pretty much the start IIRC (which included a fair few towering marks), and then impressing in his first games for us. He's been up and down since then, and obviously hampered by injuries and his marking has been criticised heavily. He put in the occassional performance last year with Werribee where in the ruck and as a marking forward, and did take a memorable screamer over Gasper a few years ago.

Clayton recruited him as an Anthony Rocca type and when fit he does have an impressive leap. He's had timing issues with his leap though, and this probably effects marking as well as ruck-work. It also might account for some of his consistent inconsistency. Maybe he needs to develop his general body-work in both types of contests so that he is not only reliant on his leap to impact on contests.

[Raw Toast]

I definitely support a midfield that can be a bit more defensive but it will be interesting where that will come from. Callan will obviously be an option but whether Cooney, Griffen, Cross and Ray can mind their men as well as attack will be interesting.

Cross, Boyd and Ray have all played tagging roles, while Griffen has mainly played as a defender, so they've all got defensive skills (whereas someone like Higgins, and maybe also Cooney, has had to learn more recently). I think if they're more confident will win our fair share of contested possessions then they won't need to play as hyper-attacking (and risky) footy.