What is Bulldogs football?

[Ghost Dog]

So we know what 'Bloods' Footy is.
Other teams are deemed to have their style.
What represents 'Bulldogs' footy?

[LostDoggy]

The press will tell you it's play on at all costs, lightning quick skinny outside types, coast-to-coast, don't like the hard stuff, previously not enough focus in the forward 50 with a mosquito fleet, now too Barry-centric, plan B is to throw Lake up forward.

[Ghost Dog]

The press will tell you it's play on at all costs, lightning quick skinny outside types, coast-to-coast, don't like the hard stuff, previously not enough focus in the forward 50 with a mosquito fleet, now too Barry-centric, plan B is to throw Lake up forward.

:D funny. I don't know, is this a silly thread? But I found myself asking that question while watching the Collingwood game.

[SonofScray]

The general consensus externally would be that Bulldogs footy is attacking, one way stuff. Downhill skiers etc. We've had that tag since Wallace's reign.

The reality is that we have built a solid contested brand of footy up over the Eade era. We were probably better suited to the flashy play on game but you need the other side more.

Traditionally I'd like to think Bulldog footy is all about tenacity. A ferocious attack on the ball, a bit nasty in close, and dogged persistence. In a way our footy is all about that because when its all there we're just about the best, when it isn't we fall away bad.

[Bumper Bulldogs]

Over the last month I would say #@!% house.

[mighty_west]

I'd say what Bulldogs football is and what we want Bulldogs football to be are two completely different things, unfortunatly....time to toughen things up mentally & physically.

[Doc26]

When things aren't going our way our structures tend to disintegrate; typically a lack of strong on field leadership and generally a lack of accountability and hardness. I'm loathe to say it, and hate it, but Grant Thomas does tend to sum us up quite well when things are not going our way. I often think back to the Liberatore years when it was us seen as unsociable and with that harder edge and wish that we could get some of that resolve back. Of course not all must play this type of role and apologies to a few, Huddo being one that comes to mind, but hopefully Liam, Cal even a Sam Reid and the new brigade can lead the way and instil some of that grit back again as their development continues.

[LongWait]

The fact that we are even asking the question speaks volumes....

[Mofra]

At a guess, Bulldogs football = real estate.
We seem to play well when we give the opposition no space, we guard space in the D50 instead of an opponent (unless the ball is coming in quickly), our forwards run to try and create space for Bazza to lead into or someone to take the ball running the other way (Griffen has been very good at this in 2010).

We have been a very good contested footy side for periods this year as well, perhaps reflecting the mature bodies on the park. It will be intersting to see how (if) this changes next year where I dare say we will field a younger line-up.

[LostDoggy]

After 30 years of supporting them, Bulldogs football is heartbreaking. :(

[LostDoggy]

After 30 years of supporting them, Bulldogs football is heartbreaking. :(
For me 59 years, when I think back to some of those dark dark times years ago, we are not doing too bad when we finished 4th and everything seems doomed.

[mighty_west]

For me 59 years, when I think back to some of those dark dark times years ago, we are not doing too bad when we finished 4th and everything seems doomed.

Thats a great point, and perhaps a sign that we are finally breaking out of that near enough is good enough mentality, it has been said many times before, but has it actually been working.

For us to be successful, perhaps there has to be that ruthlessness in us all, and not accepting second best.

[LostDoggy]

For me 59 years, when I think back to some of those dark dark times years ago, we are not doing too bad when we finished 4th and everything seems doomed.

I remember a conversation I had with someone in 2000. We were discussing our footy teams and I said something like "I barrack for the most heartbreaking team in the AFL". He disagreed, saying that he being a Geelong supporter had it much worse as they kept losing grand finals. We then debated if it was worse to keep losing grand finals or preliminary finals!! I'm glad he's seen some premiership joy over the past 3 years, hopefully our turn will come soon. :)

[1eyedog]

I don't know.

Play on and kick through zones and deep presses with precision and pace when we have it.

Pressure on the ball carrier when we don't.

Desperation at stoppages when we want it.

What we have been trying to do since 2006 and what Geelong mastered in 2007.

[Mantis]

Gia was on SEN last night and brought up the fact that we have to get back to playing 'Bulldogs footy' if we are to turn this form slump around.

In his words (or close enough to) he described Bulldogs footy as:

'We win the contested ball and then spread and via quick ball movement we deliver cleanly to our forward targets.'

----

Gia also mentioned that it is up to the 'leaders' to produce this week. I would argue that it was up to the 'leaders' to perform last week too.

[LostDoggy]

Gia was on SEN last night and brought up the fact that we have to get back to playing 'Bulldogs footy' if we are to turn this form slump around.

In his words (or close enough to) he described Bulldogs footy as:

'We win the contested ball and then spread and via quick ball movement we deliver cleanly to our forward targets.'

----

Gia also mentioned that it is up to the 'leaders' to produce this week. I would argue that it was up to the 'leaders' to perform last week too.

Presumably, so would he

[Bulldog Revolution]

Gia also mentioned that it is up to the 'leaders' to produce this week. I would argue that it was up to the 'leaders' to perform last week too.

I dont think you'd get any disagreement from anyone, but it is the double chance for a reason

[Mantis]

I dont think you'd get any disagreement from anyone, but it is the double chance for a reason

We have been saying the same thing for 3 years.

Our performances in each of the QF's during this time, by and large have been poor to very poor and in each of these games our 'leaders' as a group have played poorly.

It would be nice for a change that we didn't get ourselves into this 'fighting for survival' position and that our leaders had this 'pow-wow' before the QF and would make a stand in that game.

[Sedat]

We have been saying the same thing for 3 years.

Our performances in each of the QF's during this time, by and large have been poor to very poor and in each of these games our 'leaders' as a group have played poorly.

It would be nice for a change that we didn't get ourselves into this 'fighting for survival' position and that our leaders had this 'pow-wow' before the QF and would make a stand in that game.
I personally think we should bring back the final 5, finish on top, have the QF week off, then play (and win) the 2nd Semi so we can go straight to the GF without having to worry about a PF.

Jokes aside, I am heartily sick of our inability to 'get up' in the first week of the finals. It has proven very costly as it has made us do a mountain of extra work in week 2 just to get to the prelim. Having fresher legs might well have made a difference in both the 08 and 09 PF's - the fresher legs might have been able to kick straigher in the 2nd half of both matches for starters.

[Sockeye Salmon]

We have been saying the same thing for 3 years.

Our performances in each of the QF's during this time, by and large have been poor to very poor and in each of these games our 'leaders' as a group have played poorly.

It would be nice for a change that we didn't get ourselves into this 'fighting for survival' position and that our leaders had this 'pow-wow' before the QF and would make a stand in that game.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that we have never finished top of the ladder in our entire history - even 1954.

The best side over the course of the year usually finishes top, the reason we battle away in finals - and the reason a number of our players stuggle in finals - is that we have never been the best team.

[Mantis]

Let's not lose sight of the fact that we have never finished top of the ladder in our entire history - even 1954.

The best side over the course of the year usually finishes top, the reason we battle away in finals - and the reason a number of our players stuggle in finals - is that we have never been the best team.

Agree with that, however this year was the first time we had to play the top team 1st week of the finals. I guess in that respect perhaps Saturday's result was a true indication to where we truly are... especially with some key players missing, but to not play anywhere near the type of footy we are capable of was (has been) very disappointing.

[Greystache]

Let's not lose sight of the fact that we have never finished top of the ladder in our entire history - even 1954.

The best side over the course of the year usually finishes top, the reason we battle away in finals - and the reason a number of our players stuggle in finals - is that we have never been the best team.

We also haven't beaten a team that finished in the top 4 since 1961. Clearly it's not even a case of not being able to beat the best, we simply as a club can't beat anyone who's a challenger.


Jokes aside, I am heartily sick of our inability to 'get up' in the first week of the finals. It has proven very costly as it has made us do a mountain of extra work in week 2 just to get to the prelim. Having fresher legs might well have made a difference in both the 08 and 09 PF's - the fresher legs might have been able to kick straigher in the 2nd half of both matches for starters.

As I mentioned above we haven't beaten a contender in 50 years, hence the reason we get beaten first week each time.

What are the reasons for it? That's anyone's guess, but my opinion is having been so unsuccessful for so long we have built up a culture (particularly with our older supporters) that we're just happy to be there rather than expecting us to lift now we're there. This culture has to have an effect on the playing group. I know having a GF, who's entire family is fanatical Essendon, that when finals arrive no matter how well they've been going prior to that point, the expectation is the playing group will step up a level. It's not hope, it's expectation! The way they failed to do that in 2009 I think sealed Knight's fate among the supporters as much anything else.

We're so keen as a club to "fly under the radar" that when we get to the big game we're intimidated by it rather than embracing it. Until as a club we can stand up and announce we're the team to beat come at us, and have the players actually believe it, we'll continue to be the also rans.

[Sockeye Salmon]

What are the reasons for it? That's anyone's guess, but my opinion is having been so unsuccessful for so long we have built up a culture (particularly with our older supporters) that we're just happy to be there rather than expecting us to lift now we're there. This culture has to have an effect on the playing group. I know having a GF, who's entire family is fanatical Essendon, that when finals arrive no matter how well they've been going prior to that point, the expectation is the playing group will step up a level. It's not hope, it's expectation! The way they failed to do that in 2009 I think sealed Knight's fate among the supporters as much anything else.

We're so keen as a club to "fly under the radar" that when we get to the big game we're intimidated by it rather than embracing it. Until as a club we can stand up and announce we're the team to beat come at us, and have the players actually believe it, we'll continue to be the also rans.

This is the stuff I don't like and the point I was making. It's not culture, it's not a mind set. We have never been good enough. We have never been the best team.

For a while of this (70's-80's) we were losing anyone who was any good, in the 90's we had a crack (half a dozen really good players but too many plodders to go with them) and the late 00's we have got close again, but never have been the best team (perhaps a bit unlucky to have hit one of the best teams in decades).

97 was a very open year and maybe we had a chance then, last year we weren't far off the pace (but were still behind Geelong and St. Kilda basically all year) but that is really it.

I think we are not as good as the top 3 this year. Perhaps if everything went right we might have been able to win it, but it didn't and we simply aren't good enough to beat the best sides when we are less than full strength.

That doesn't mean you throw out everyone over 25 and start again, but you do need to get some younger blokes into the mix and that is exactly what we have done this year.

Can we get better with this group? Bloody oath we can. If our 1982 group (Lake, Boyd, Murphy, Morris and Giansiracusa) can hold it together for another year or two and Roughead, Grant, Jones, Wood, Reid and Ward can improve, we can win it, and should be going for it.

[LostDoggy]

SS, how about teams who manage to sneak a flag or two in the years they are not the best team? How about teams that were CLEARLY the best team all year yet keep losing the big one? It is not usually the 'best teams' that play off in the GF. Brisbane never finished top of the table in their three-peat. Port finished top 3 years in a row before even getting close to the GF. Carlton made a GF knocking off the Bombers who were clearly the best team all year. Adelaide won a flag from 5th. Where did Sydney or West Coast finish in their two GF years? They weren't both top 2 -- Sydney nearly won it from 4th in '06. St.Kilda, on the other hand, couldn't make a GF most of the noughties despite having one of the better lists going around.

We were arguably the best side in '97 for most of the season. I remember the footy show doing a table prediction 3/4s of the way through the season, and someone put the Dogs on top, and then someone else pushed us way up the board to show that that's how far ahead of everyone we actually were.

Losing by 30-50 points (like last week) means you're not good enough. Leading by 30 and losing by 2, missing easy shots when tight finals are on the line, letting teams back in when the game should be over, means that there is a cultural/mental problem.

[Greystache]

This is the stuff I don't like and the point I was making. It's not culture, it's not a mind set. We have never been good enough. We have never been the best team.

For a while of this (70's-80's) we were losing anyone who was any good, in the 90's we had a crack (half a dozen really good players but too many plodders to go with them) and the late 00's we have got close again, but never have been the best team (perhaps a bit unlucky to have hit one of the best teams in decades).

97 was a very open year and maybe we had a chance then, last year we weren't far off the pace (but were still behind Geelong and St. Kilda basically all year) but that is really it.

I think we are not as good as the top 3 this year. Perhaps if everything went right we might have been able to win it, but it didn't and we simply aren't good enough to beat the best sides when we are less than full strength.

That doesn't mean you throw out everyone over 25 and start again, but you do need to get some younger blokes into the mix and that is exactly what we have done this year.

Can we get better with this group? Bloody oath we can. If our 1982 group (Lake, Boyd, Murphy, Morris and Giansiracusa) can hold it together for another year or two and Roughead, Grant, Jones, Wood, Reid and Ward can improve, we can win it, and should be going for it.

The point I was making is what is the best side? Was Essendon the best side in 93? Was Brisbane in 01? Was Hawthorn in 08? I would say no, but what did happen was their senior players lifted and played their best games of the season and that in turn dragged the fringe players with them. I would hardly call Hawthorn's team brilliant but they got the best out of everyone on the day it mattered and that got them a flag.

My point is the expectation on our core group of seniors players to lift their game is very low and thus our fringe players don't step up accordingly.

We've had as long a list of individual stars as any club, but how many players have we had who have regularly dominated in finals? Or even how many players have been regular performers?

Until we as a club start expecting our senior players to lift for finals rather than hoping they will this group and most likely our next will never be "the best team"

[Sockeye Salmon]

SS, how about teams who manage to sneak a flag or two in the years they are not the best team? How about teams that were CLEARLY the best team all year yet keep losing the big one? It is not usually the 'best teams' that play off in the GF. Brisbane never finished top of the table in their three-peat. Port finished top 3 years in a row before even getting close to the GF. Carlton made a GF knocking off the Bombers who were clearly the best team all year. Adelaide won a flag from 5th. Where did Sydney or West Coast finish in their two GF years? They weren't both top 2 -- Sydney nearly won it from 4th in '06. St.Kilda, on the other hand, couldn't make a GF most of the noughties despite having one of the better lists going around.

We were arguably the best side in '97 for most of the season. I remember the footy show doing a table prediction 3/4s of the way through the season, and someone put the Dogs on top, and then someone else pushed us way up the board to show that that's how far ahead of everyone we actually were.

Losing by 30-50 points (like last week) means you're not good enough. Leading by 30 and losing by 2, missing easy shots when tight finals are on the line, letting teams back in when the game should be over, means that there is a cultural/mental problem.

If we barracked for Port I would definately be questioning their mental strength blowing 3 top finishes (but they did get one in the end) and certainly upsets happen, but you can't rely on them.

We weren't really a very good side in 97, I think our side now is a much better side, but everyone else was ordinary too. I did say that 97 was the one that got away.

Certainly you don't have to finish first to win one, but it is usually a good indicator that you are a decent team, but there are lots of things that have to go right to win a premiership. Sheedy said he thought he won lotto in 93.

Saying we have not won a premiership because of our culture / mental strength (or lack of it) is bollocks.

[comrade]

If we barracked for Port I would definately be questioning their mental strength blowing 3 top finishes (but they did get one in the end) and certainly upsets happen, but you can't rely on them.

We weren't really a very good side in 97, I think our side now is a much better side, but everyone else was ordinary too. I did say that 97 was the one that got away.

Certainly you don't have to finish first to win one, but it is usually a good indicator that you are a decent team, but there are lots of things that have to go right to win a premiership. Sheedy said he thought he won lotto in 93.

Saying we have not won a premiership because of our culture / mental strength (or lack of it) is bollocks.

So we're just a club that can't develop players or recruit them properly?

[Greystache]

Saying we have not won a premiership because of our culture / mental strength (or lack of it) is bollocks.

So is our failure to even beat a contender?

[LostDoggy]

We were arguably the best side in '97 for most of the season. I remember the footy show doing a table prediction 3/4s of the way through the season, and someone put the Dogs on top, and then someone else pushed us way up the board to show that that's how far ahead of everyone we actually were.

.

That ws 98 and it was Brereton before we lost a number in the second half of the season.

A lot depends on the quality of the leading teams - Port ran into Brisbane. We have run into Geelong

[Sockeye Salmon]

So we're just a club that can't develop players or recruit them properly?

For a long time we couldn't keep them. That accounts for a lot of it.

Over the last two decades we have spent more time in the top 8 than most, at a guess. We just haven't been quite good enough.

Premierships are bloody hard to win and in some cases we simply have had one or two things go wrong. If Paul Dear didn't break Peter Foster's leg in 92 does anyone think Brownless would have kicked 9 on Fossie? Would we have beaten West Coast anyway?

We have put ourselves in a position a few times to be a chance, but everything has to go right and they haven't.



In 85 Kelvin Templeton, Geoff Jennings, Ted Whitten and Mick Egan were all still under 30 and all retired (or in KT's case moved on and pretending to still be playing).

[LostDoggy]

For a long time we couldn't keep them. That accounts for a lot of it.

Over the last two decades we have spent more time in the top 8 than most, at a guess. We just haven't been quite good enough.

Premierships are bloody hard to win and in some cases we simply have had one or two things go wrong. If Paul Dear didn't break Peter Foster's leg in 92 does anyone think Brownless would have kicked 9 on Fossie? Would we have beaten West Coast anyway?We have put ourselves in a position a few times to be a chance, but everything has to go right and they haven't.



In 85 Kelvin Templeton, Geoff Jennings, Ted Whitten and Mick Egan were all still under 30 and all retired (or in KT's case moved on and pretending to still be playing).


I think this has been just about our best year defence wise since '92' especially considering we play alot indoors and Im preety sure our total points against is the lowest since then. Such a shame Cooney and Morris are out :mad:

[cambo]

Gia was on SEN last night and brought up the fact that we have to get back to playing 'Bulldogs footy' if we are to turn this form slump around.

In his words (or close enough to) he described Bulldogs footy as:

'We win the contested ball and then spread and via quick ball movement we deliver cleanly to our forward targets.'

----

Gia also mentioned that it is up to the 'leaders' to produce this week. I would argue that it was up to the 'leaders' to perform last week too.

This will work as long as our forwards are in the forwrd 50 and not up on the wing, we always seem to get the ball in our defensive 50 and look up and there is no one there, so we stop and go sideways or backwards while the oposition mans up on our forwards, then we turn it over, last week we had a massive amount of turnovers over 100, we need our pace and foot skills back!!!

[Sockeye Salmon]

This will work as long as our forwards are in the forwrd 50 and not up on the wing, we always seem to get the ball in our defensive 50 and look up and there is no one there, so we stop and go sideways or backwards while the oposition mans up on our forwards, then we turn it over, last week we had a massive amount of turnovers over 100, we need our pace and foot skills back!!!

Welcome to 2010.

[Grantysghost]

We have been saying the same thing for 3 years.

Our performances in each of the QF's during this time, by and large have been poor to very poor and in each of these games our 'leaders' as a group have played poorly.

It would be nice for a change that we didn't get ourselves into this 'fighting for survival' position and that our leaders had this 'pow-wow' before the QF and would make a stand in that game.

Unfortunately we have come across the eventual premiers in the last two QF's. Lets just pray that the cycle is broken this year!

[Bulldog Revolution]

We have been saying the same thing for 3 years.

Our performances in each of the QF's during this time, by and large have been poor to very poor and in each of these games our 'leaders' as a group have played poorly.

It would be nice for a change that we didn't get ourselves into this 'fighting for survival' position and that our leaders had this 'pow-wow' before the QF and would make a stand in that game.

Completely agree with you

I remember saying to a colleague before the Hawthorn QF that it was the 4th most important game of my life time (85, 97, 98 prelims excluded) and that were we to win it, we would very likely be in the grand final with a real shot.

And I also felt pretty confident, but Hawthorn blew us out of the water, and Buddy was, and it pains me to say it, incredible. Collingwood outlcassed us, but on the evidence of the season, it wasn't a surprise, which was depressing in a different kind of way.

For me I would say that last years QF effort against Geelong was the worst.

But then again it shouldn't be a competition for most honourable QF losses should it?

[comrade]

For me I would say that last years QF effort against Geelong was the worst.


I have never walked away from a game more disappointed.

[Mantis]

I have never walked away from a game more disappointed.

The 97 and 09 Prelims were much, much worse than this one.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

The 97 and 09 Prelims were much, much worse than this one.

Seconded.

Never felt worse after last year's PF.

[comrade]

The 97 and 09 Prelims were much, much worse than this one.

I wasn't at the 97 game, but whilst last year's prelim was heart-wrenching I was proud of the way we played.

A win in last year's QF would have just about guaranteed a GF spot and we were insipid until junk time in the last quarter.

[EasternWest]

The 97 and 09 Prelims were much, much worse than this one.

I can't agree with you on the 09 one for disappointment. Well, it was disappointing, but in a whole different context to last week against the Pies.

We lost, but I was proud of our guys. Not one of my idiot St. Kilda mates got into me (as they usually do) about it. They couldn't believe how good that game was. Of course, they won, so magnanimity came easily to them, but still...

[Ghost Dog]

We need a new brand of football. There seems, at our club, a conflict between the past and the future. The past wants to go back to history - The 'underdog' tag, the 'battlers'.
As the population expands in the western corridor, the opportunities for the club grow. Have to shed the old like a snake skin and embrace the opportunity. Even if we don't win tomorrow, I hope that on field, the club can define what it stands for.

Sorry, I'm a bit drunk, and there are far too many Freo supporters in the CBD.
hey, at least we have a half decent song!
Go Bulldogs!

[LostDoggy]

I can't agree with you on the 09 one for disappointment. Well, it was disappointing, but in a whole different context to last week against the Pies.

We lost, but I was proud of our guys. Not one of my idiot St. Kilda mates got into me (as they usually do) about it. They couldn't believe how good that game was. Of course, they won, so magnanimity came easily to them, but still...

09 tore my heart out.

[LostDoggy]

Unfortunately we have come across the eventual premiers in the last two QF's. Lets just pray that the cycle is broken this year!

Maybe they came across us and got an easy ride to the prelim and the flag :(

[EasternWest]

09 tore my heart out.

Oh, 100% agreed. But the disappointment had a far different feel to this years disappointment against the Pies.

[LostDoggy]

Oh, 100% agreed. But the disappointment had a far different feel to this years disappointment against the Pies.

:) Just think of how good it is knowing we will be in the finals longer than the Pies.

[LostDoggy]

:) Just think of how good it is knowing we will be in the finals longer than the Pies.

If we win tonight and have to face the Saints in another prelim i am going to have a very sleepless week.