Will improvement in these areas get us a flag?

[kaos theory]

Its seems these two areas (see below) have not been discussed much here, but I've been thinking they could have a big impact on our chances of making a big improvement and getting a shot at a flag.

These areas are:

1. Player Conditioning

2. Game Style (or game plan)

1. Player Conditioning

There is no question that through the years 2002-2007 we carried one of the worst injury lists in the game. The effect this had on our ability to win games at the time is obvious (probably cost us a GF in 05), but equally it stifled the development of many of our young players. E.g raph, X, kosi, ball, and many others who would regularly break down with soft tissue injuries, and they are not where they could be as a result.

Since the new admin has come in place, our injury list went from the worst to the best in one season. BUT, the bigger benefit I believe is yet to come. This is the the first full pre-season the new fitness team has been in charge of the players. Last yr, they didn't have the history or knowledge of the players to tailor appropriate programs.

I think this yr we will see a significant improvement in general on field performance from all players because they will be prepared as good as they have every been. Do not underestimate a strong pre-season. At the start of 07 Cooney have a poor pre-season, due to knee issue, and everyone thought he was another player that couldn't live up to expectations. Then, after a big 08 pre-season, he wins the brownlow.

Along with the general conditioning improvement, if we can see big improvement in players like raph, X, Kosi, Dal, Armo, geary, etc. then that will add enormous flexibility and confidence to our play.


2. Game Style
Late in the season last yr, Westerway was interviewed on radio. And he said something very significant, which I think many people didn't seem to pick up on. During this interview he was asked at one point, how he would like to see the club to be perceived. He started giving all the usually stuff as answers (e.g. successful, playing regular finals, etc.), but then he made a point at about this (my words here, paraphrasing):

"I want the club to be known as playing an exciting brand of football. So whatever our position on the ladder, people would always associate something exciting about watching the St.Kilda football clubâ€

[matrix]

What do others think?

that we'll see as many threads and posts on "Game Plan" as we saw in 2008



i agree that the conditioning has to get better...and it will

[saintspremiers]

great post Kaos......before it gets Hijacked, the "exciting footy" comment is very relevant IMO.

Rossy might just want to win at any cost, be it low scoring/flooding/whatever, but the "market" (ie. supporters) have voted with their feet, and our attendances last season weren't in keeping with our ladder position IMO.

Given our likely membership struggle, the balance between "exciting" footy and "winning at any cost" footy must be high on the agenda.

If Westaway and Archie are pressuring Ross to develop a higher scoring model, then I think that's a very good thing.

Ross is a clever man - I doubt he'd get too hung up (like perhaps GT would have), if given a directive such as that.

Yep - Presidents and CEO's, generally speaking, shouldn't mess with the "game plan", but I think it can be done to some extent, without significant toe tredding!

[Eastern]

So, breaking this all down

We want to score aound 115-120 points per match with all/most of our best players out on the park

Yeah, I can see that as a meams of attracting fans, members & sponsors. It would also see the AFL and the TV networks looking at us more fovorably than they currently do

It would probably get us to (at least) a prelim final

Yeah, it ticks plenty of boxes !!

[kaos theory]

Given our likely membership struggle, the balance between "exciting" footy and "winning at any cost" footy must be high on the agenda.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. As we can see, most teams that win a flag aslo play exciting footy.

[WayneJudson42]

Well this is RL's 3rd year as coach.

There are 2 ways at looking at our game plan so far... either it is good but poorly executed due to learning curve and/or not having the right players... or it was stuffed.

I still maintain that we needed to learn how to play defensive, so this should no longer be an issue.

We have also recruited players wit run, which we sorely missed, as we tried to follow the Lions plan.

So I guess we'll wait and see. One thing I noticed, and it may or may not be relevant, is that Cats and HAwks were also accused of inefficient game plans before their rise to power. So hopefully, it's been the learning curve years for us.

Expect to see a flexible approach where we can attack and defend when required.

My personal view is that we didn't have the correct types to carry it out, given that it was stated over and over again that quick ball movement was the aim.

[sunsaint]

WJ42 hit the nail.
I didnt buy into this game plan was crap debate.
It wasnt the game plan that was the problem it was the players.
Not quick enough, not willing to chase, not smart enough, take your pick.
If Westaway thinks that Hawthorn is exciting then he is ignoring the corralling tactics that they use. The reason you might get the impression is their players ability to switch from defence to attack with SPEED.
In 09 the other thing our players could learn from the two top teams is that a pack situation is not another opportunity for a stoppage, but to rip the ball away from your opponent leave him flailing on the ground while you sprint away for the clearance.
We've been down the path of all out attack, and it got us nowhere. Now after three years we're adding defence at every position on the ground.

OK now on to a few of the points raised.
Moving Gram and Fisher out of defense. Well unless the replacements are going to equal two of the games better offensive players down back, then what is the benefit? The result, a more "defensive" defence? Who are the replacements? Goddard and NDS would pick up a lot of uncontested possessions in the back half. So we are now robbing the backline of Gram S Fisher, Goddard... the center is going to get pretty busy.
I do agree tho that Goddard should replace NDS on-ball, but then Nic needs to find another position.

The conditioning staff have made a big impact to soft tissue problems. It has been interesting to read the latest figures for body weight. Assuming they are correct then accross the board we are heavier, perhaps to match the bigger geelong players. But what will happen to leg speed?

As for good preseasons, then the hawks are stuffed in 09 given the list of problems they have. We also have problems with Roo, Max, Hayes and X. They are the spine of the club.

One final point, IF Westaway and Drain are having input at the coaching level, (and all indications point to the fact they are) then the Saints are back to the good ole bad days, pulling in all directions and too many chiefs. Seen it all before.

[plugger66]

I am confused. Isnt the game plan the problem if the players are not good enough, smart enough or quick enough to carry it out. If that is the problem then we need a different game plan for the type of players we have.

[Saints Premiers 2008]

Well this is RL's 3rd year as coach.

There are 2 ways at looking at our game plan so far... either it is good but poorly executed due to learning curve and/or not having the right players... or it was stuffed.

I still maintain that we needed to learn how to play defensive, so this should no longer be an issue.

We have also recruited players wit run, which we sorely missed, as we tried to follow the Lions plan.

So I guess we'll wait and see. One thing I noticed, and it may or may not be relevant, is that Cats and HAwks were also accused of inefficient game plans before their rise to power. So hopefully, it's been the learning curve years for us.

Expect to see a flexible approach where we can attack and defend when required.

My personal view is that we didn't have the correct types to carry it out, given that it was stated over and over again that quick ball movement was the aim.

i stalk your posts as you speak sense

welcome to my world

[mad saint guy]

To win a flag we need 4 or 5 new players who can get the ball, run with it and hit a target

[Teflon]

I am confused. Isnt the game plan the problem if the players are not good enough, smart enough or quick enough to carry it out. If that is the problem then we need a different game plan for the type of players we have.

or you turn em over till you get the players you need...how many has Ross been through already?

I must say Melbourne would be happy applying your logic.........clearly they have the the players... .....just need to add "game plan water" and stir.... right?