Man on a mission: Ross Lyon on our pre-season

[bigcarl]

Got to keep up the scoring at 14 + per game.

that's for sure ... and we have the personnel to achieve it.

no reason, barring injuries, that we shouldn't finish top 4, IMO

[Armoooo]

Got to keep up the scoring at 14 + per game.

that's for sure ... and we have the personnel to achieve it.

no reason, barring injuries, that we shouldn't finish top 4, IMO

Especially when you look at it like this, in the second half of the season we were the third best performed team...

Add in Goddard, King, Gardiner, Schneider and Goddard aswell as a fully fit Hayes and a fitter Ball we should improve out of site...

[bigcarl]

Got to keep up the scoring at 14 + per game.

that's for sure ... and we have the personnel to achieve it.

no reason, barring injuries, that we shouldn't finish top 4, IMO

Especially when you look at it like this, in the second half of the season we were the third best performed team...

Add in Goddard, King, Gardiner, Schneider and Goddard aswell as a fully fit Hayes and a fitter Ball we should improve out of site...

agree. things are looking good. we should be setting the bar high and going into season 2008 believing that we can win the premiership.

i want them to establish themselves as contenders from the very start ... none of this "peaking at the right time" bulls***.

and armooo, do you never sleep?

[Armoooo]

Lol, it's school holidays!!, I'm still getting my 8 hours a night, it's just from 4-12

[saintly]

Reiwoldt "...had a thirteen week hamstring"?

Didn't particularly like his response to the question about Geelong's game plan. I would have thought that Lyon, Roos and the bloke at Adelaide would have been embarrassed by Geelong's success, since it was built on "kick to contests, play on at all costs and back your team mate to win the ball", all attributes which those three blokes have tried to kill at their respective clubs.

I will spew if, in 2008, we play like we did in 2007. We can and should play like Geelong...we look good when we do. Our players have a naturally attacking mind set, we have great forwards and some quality mid-fielders to deliver it to them.

As for his media approach - awesome. Im sick to death of meaningless cliches, mental aptitude/fortitude/belief clouds/process/KPI's/exit in-out strategy and promises of sustainable success, 5 yr coaching deals and multiple flags only to fall short everytime. Give me Lyons downplayed, forthright style anyday. The guys a purist in football terms - he understands the game at a critical technical and strategic level - no wonderthe players are impressed with his knowledge and preparation.....he simply gets footy and thats refreshing.

here here.

i agree with you there!

[Stjohn]

RL was being interviewed, could have been after the preseason/rookie draft, anyways, he started his interview saying, 'yeah/nah', then he quickly berated himself for using the usual footballers/coaches cliche...
very refreshing..

[JeffDunne]

I am sick to death on hearing how well we went in the 2nd half of the year.

Biggest cop out you can hear from a coach, justifying performances on selective results. We had one or two impressive wins all year - the rest were the minimum we should be performing at. Christ we fell over the line in many games against teams that didn't seem to want to win.

Last year was an utter disaster. We went into the season unprepared, we adopted a gameplan that shut us down as much as the opposition, and bottom line, a team that should have been challenging for the top 4 missed the 8! The league's most potent attack became the league's most impotent.

Oh yeah . . . that's right . . . we should be happy because David Parkin thought we tackled better in round 1 than he'd ever seen from a St Kilda team ( ). Maybe David should watch some games from 2004-6. Just a thought.

Ok, what happened to the tackling in the next 21 games? Clearly that wasn't Lyon's game plan because for the rest of season we seemed to think running to position was more important than attacking the bloke with the pill. What did David Parkin think of that?

[rodgerfox]

I am sick to death on hearing how well we went in the 2nd half of the year.

Biggest cop out you can hear from a coach, justifying performances on selective results. We had one or two impressive wins all year - the rest were the minimum we should be performing at. Christ we fell over the line in many games against teams that didn't seem to want to win.

Last year was an utter disaster. We went into the season unprepared, we adopted a gameplan that shut us down as much as the opposition, and bottom line, a team that should have been challenging for the top 4 missed the 8! The league's more potent attack became the league's most impotent.

Oh yeah . . . that's right . . . we should be happy because David Parkin thought we tackled better in round 1 than he'd ever seen from a St Kilda team ( ). Maybe David should watch some games from 2004-6. Just a thought.

Ok, what happened to the tackling in the next 21 games? Clearly that wasn't Lyon's game plan because for the rest of season we seemed to think running to position was more important than attacking the bloke with the pill. What did David Parkin think of that?

I have to agree with you Dunny.

Last was shiit. Deadset shiit.

I'm amazed that anyone can generate any excitement for 2008 based on what we saw last year.

Fair enough, the standard pre-season optimism is fine. It's part of footy. But how anyone can see any signs from 2007 to point toward a bright 2008 is beyond me.

We went from having the 'best list in the AFL' and finishing 4th, 4th and 6th (% off 4th again) to missing the 8 by 2 wins and suddenly having gaping holes in our list.

That still disgusts me. It's a disgrace.

I like Ross Lyon. Liked him as a player too. I like the way he 'performs' in the media - but FFS he has done absolutely nothing to suggest he knows what he's doing as an AFL coach.

With the same list, we went from missing the top 4 by % to finishing 9th and never even looked a threat. We had easily the best draw we've had in 4 years too.

We were insipid. Improvement needs to come from everywhere - but particularly from the coaches box.

[saintspremiers]

very well said Teflon - would be interesting to hear what our former coach thinks about such an approach......whilst I could see where GT was coming from with his benchmarks and KPI's etc, it appears it's to "corporate" to work within a footy club for some reason.

[Oh When the Saints]

With the same list, we went from missing the top 4 by % to finishing 9th and never even looked a threat. We had easily the best draw we've had in 4 years too.

In fairness, Lyon didn't have Frankie, Powell, Ackland and missed BJ, Hudghton and Goose for most of the year, all of whom played the vast majority of 2006 matches.

It's not an excuse for poor performances, because I believe the players that replaced those players were their equal in ability and committment.

But our list wasn't the same. Not worse, but not the same.


IMO the majority of our poor performances last year can be put down to what happened between October and February.

[saintsRrising]

[
I like Ross Lyon. Liked him as a player too. I like the way he 'performs' in the media - but FFS he has done absolutely nothing to suggest he knows what he's doing as an AFL coach.
.

Perhaps have a peek at the ins and outs of our list since he gained control....and you may gain some insight....

Roos fronting the then Board and demanding changes......as opposed the previous coach demanding responsibility for the conditioning and fitness mnagement of players

[rodgerfox]

I like Ross Lyon. Liked him as a player too. I like the way he 'performs' in the media - but FFS he has done absolutely nothing to suggest he knows what he's doing as an AFL coach.
.

Perhaps have a peek at the ins and outs of our list since he gained control....and you may gain some insight....

Considering the list before he arrived finished 4th, 4th and % off 4th again compared to a dismal 9th last year - I'm unsure how the list changes suggest he's on the right track.

Roos fronting the then Board and demanding changes......as opposed the previous coach demanding responsibility for the conditioning and fitness mnagement of players

So fronting the board now equates to great coaching?

What does the previous coach have to do with it? Your obsession with the previous coach is astounding. He's gone. Move on.

[Mr X from the West]

Not much talk on here about our game plan....how does it stand up against the Geelong game plan? Is our game plan relevant to modern footy? Does it suit our team? Does it allow our strengths to come to the fore?

I've already stated my position on these issues in my earlier post....what does EVERYONE ELSE THINK? I'm reading BigCarl and RodgerFox agreeing with me, at least in part; everyone else is dodging and weaving.

[Saints43]

It thought the game plan was an ideology that was going to be implemented regardless of the personnel available. It didn't change all year despite first half results being poor.
In the second half the results improved but (and I can't remember exactly but I posted the numbers here earlier) a large percentage of our games were decided by around 2 goals. There is very little margin for error if it the same (plan & execution) next year as this year. These games can be decided by an umpiring decision, a player having to leave the ground for a minute, the bounce of a ball.

Of course it might have been fitness and we will win comfortable and walk out happy and entertained all next season.

[bigcarl]

i want to believe that RL is the right man to lead this list to a premiership, but i'm not convinced yet.

it will take sustained results to win me over, including a double chance shot at the flag this year

i did not like the negative and defensive mindset we took into too many matches last year and I'll be disappointed if we're not a more attacking, confident and risk-taking unit in 2008.

the 2007 gameplan should be scrapped imo

[mischa]

I am sick to death on hearing how well we went in the 2nd half of the year.

Biggest cop out you can hear from a coach, justifying performances on selective results. We had one or two impressive wins all year - the rest were the minimum we should be performing at. Christ we fell over the line in many games against teams that didn't seem to want to win.

Last year was an utter disaster. We went into the season unprepared, we adopted a gameplan that shut us down as much as the opposition, and bottom line, a team that should have been challenging for the top 4 missed the 8! The league's most potent attack became the league's most impotent.

Oh yeah . . . that's right . . . we should be happy because David Parkin thought we tackled better in round 1 than he'd ever seen from a St Kilda team ( ). Maybe David should watch some games from 2004-6. Just a thought.

Ok, what happened to the tackling in the next 21 games? Clearly that wasn't Lyon's game plan because for the rest of season we seemed to think running to position was more important than attacking the bloke with the pill. What did David Parkin think of that?

Excellent post. How anyone with half a brain can think he's vastly superior to GT already, is totally beyond me. As for Parkin well the AFL mafia (and especially those old Fitzy boys) think it's brilliant don't cha know

[mischa]

I like Ross Lyon. Liked him as a player too. I like the way he 'performs' in the media - but FFS he has done absolutely nothing to suggest he knows what he's doing as an AFL coach.

With the same list, we went from missing the top 4 by % to finishing 9th and never even looked a threat. We had easily the best draw we've had in 4 years too.

We were insipid. Improvement needs to come from everywhere - but particularly from the coaches box.

Yes. Agreed. But I do wonder what's wrong with him that he's close friends with Robert Walls

[Quixote]

Ok...

In the interview, RL clearly states his three fundamental objectives for the team -

A) Win the contested ball
B) Tackle strongly
C) Use the ball well

These are very logical stipulations. If we could perform these three fundamentals to a high quality week-in week-out, we would be a very good football team. Think about it. A) when the ball is up for grabs we win it, B) when the opposition has the ball we hurt them, C) when we have the ball we use it with skill and brains. Point C does not necessarily mean Don't Kick to a Contest. It could very well mean kick to your first option because if it is contested then point A comes into play.

I believe they are very strong principles to have in place for the team. They give us the scope to play a brand of football which could be both attacking and accountable. Keep in mind, RL does not give away much in intervies such as the one in the OP. He is also, I think it is becoming more and more evident, just as hard as the reputation that preceedes him.

One last thing...

Note the way in which RL describes the Geelong brand of play... he thought they "competed well" (A), "tackled strongly" (B) and were "clean/efficient" (C).



..........

[Armoooo]

Very nice summation, footy is a simple game, people just like to over analyse it (myself included) if you get the ball more than your opponents and use it better when you have it you will win, simple as that...

[bigcarl]

Note the way in which RL describes the Geelong brand of play... he thought they "competed well" (A), "tackled strongly" (B) and were "clean/efficient" (C).

they also had 5 guys who kicked 30 or more goals for the season; we had three. they were best for converting inside 50s into goals; we were among the worst.

what RL is talking about above is fundamentals. i'm talking about gameplan and structure. they are different.

our gameplan in 2007 was lousy and cost us games. as i've said countless times in other threads we need more consistent and reliable avenues to goal and it starts by having guys who can kick goals within kicking distance

btw. you're right that footy is a simple game ... if you don't outscore your opponent you won't win.

[Oh When the Saints]

they also had 5 guys who kicked 30 or more goals for the season; we had three.

Agree. Big problem and needs to be addressed.

they were best for converting inside 50s into goals; we were among the worst.

From Rounds 11-22, we were #3 in the AFL in this statistic. In 2006, we were around #8-9 in this statistic.

our gameplan in 2007 was lousy and cost us games. as i've said countless times in other threads we need more consistent and reliable avenues to goal and it starts by having guys who can kick goals within kicking distance

Which games did our gameplan cost us?



My view is this:
- Lyon introduced some changes that gave us a more defensive focus which fits his outlook (and IMO the outlook of nearly every modern coach, including Thomas in '06) on football at AFL level (not football at lower levels).

- These changes were moderately successful, although our performances were worringly inconsistent in the first 7 games. Still, we easily beat Carlton and Sydney two weeks in a row and things were starting to click. We were 4-3 and off to a solid start.

- The injury list we had from Rounds 8-10 was worse than anything I have seen in my eighteen years watching the Saints. You may dispute this, but take a look at the players who took the field in Round 8 for us:
http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/game ... 70519.html

- IMO we were the worst team in the AFL at that stage (in terms of players on the park). Our results reflected this, although we should have beaten the Kangaroos in Round 11.

- In the second half of the year, we were the 3rd best team in the AFL. We converted our inside 50's to scoring shots at a high rate, and were it not for some inaccurate kicking, would have won 2 more matches (had we kicked as accurately as we had in previous years). We averaged 14 goals per game.

- I felt we got the balance right between attack and defence in the second half of 2007.
But we fell over the line in some games?

All fitness. Fitness. Fitness.

Fitness and nothing else IMO.

[skeptic]

All you can really judge RL on atm is based on what he has been able to control. In his first season he couldn't have much influence on the type of player he wanted at the club... he had what he was given.

He should be judged on how he's altered the list since and IMO his list management has been superb.

GT put together a team to win a premiership and they came damn close but ultimately failed. They had a real go in 04 and 05. For whatever reason whether it was arrogance or internal pressure rather than reload in 06 (which he should have done), cut losses, develop new players etc he chose the bandaid solution and had 1 more shake at the prize.

The result was a list with a lot of dead wood.

In his short time RL done a reasonable job in ressurecting the list. He's cut a lot of deadwood off and replaced it with kids and players that suit our needs. The results aren't tangible atm. The season was poor BUT he has responded appropriately to it.

We'll know more in 12 months but there's no reason to believe we won't do anything but improve

[Teflon]

I am sick to death on hearing how well we went in the 2nd half of the year.

Biggest cop out you can hear from a coach, justifying performances on selective results. We had one or two impressive wins all year - the rest were the minimum we should be performing at. Christ we fell over the line in many games against teams that didn't seem to want to win.

Last year was an utter disaster. We went into the season unprepared, we adopted a gameplan that shut us down as much as the opposition, and bottom line, a team that should have been challenging for the top 4 missed the 8! The league's most potent attack became the league's most impotent.

Oh yeah . . . that's right . . . we should be happy because David Parkin thought we tackled better in round 1 than he'd ever seen from a St Kilda team ( ). Maybe David should watch some games from 2004-6. Just a thought.

Ok, what happened to the tackling in the next 21 games? Clearly that wasn't Lyon's game plan because for the rest of season we seemed to think running to position was more important than attacking the bloke with the pill. What did David Parkin think of that?

Once again absolutely NO mention in your rant/dribble regarding what talent we had available TO PUT ON THE PARK in 07 - not a mention of the impact that has on developing some form of consistency...NO mention of a NEW AFL coach who had not even the chance to stamp HIS authority on a list? a fitness plan?....nup........nothing about context from Jeffery...just hysterical claptrap "the sky is falling" garbage geared at attempting to convince Mischa/Dodgy (aiming high there JD...) that your some sort of football messiah.... ...your the kinda guy Id want in a trench warfare wit me Jeff....real steady as she goes type.....

I dont see last year as a disaster at all Jeff- sure Id like to have played finals - would like to every year BUT only if we were going in as serious competitors...and we werent.

What I have seen since last year and what does give me cause for optimism is a coach that:

(a) Has at the very least acknowledged our ruck woes and ATTEMPTED to do something about it (and not stick with Jason Blake yet again...)

(b) A coach that has drafted 4 players with real potential to be top 22 players in 08 for effectively 1 draft pick?

(c) A coach that was instrumental in the recruitment of one of the best injury prevention /fitness gurus in Misson in the land...

(d) A coach that has identified deadwood on the list AND DONE SOMETHING ABOUT IT short of the minimum 5 yrs the previous dope was handing out to all and sundry...

Jeffery the game plan you say reduced us to rabble last year and a disaster had us storming home last year to only just miss finals with still nowhere near our best side on the park - that same game plan (IF Jeff.....you can believe our senior coach...but hey...your closer to the sanctum.what would he know....) had not changed from game 1 Jeff........still disastrous...still got a problem with the "tackling".....

Your entitled to be negative Jeff - its all you have... but I for one feel quietly confident going into this season and given a decent injury run am very happy with where our coach is taking us.

......Id love to sit in on one of your virtual Board meetings Jeff.........must be a hoot....and very uplifting for your "virtual" team......do you do the minutes????...I bet theyre all..."and Jeffery then said...."

[Teflon]

I am sick to death on hearing how well we went in the 2nd half of the year.

Biggest cop out you can hear from a coach, justifying performances on selective results. We had one or two impressive wins all year - the rest were the minimum we should be performing at. Christ we fell over the line in many games against teams that didn't seem to want to win.

Last year was an utter disaster. We went into the season unprepared, we adopted a gameplan that shut us down as much as the opposition, and bottom line, a team that should have been challenging for the top 4 missed the 8! The league's more potent attack became the league's most impotent.

Oh yeah . . . that's right . . . we should be happy because David Parkin thought we tackled better in round 1 than he'd ever seen from a St Kilda team ( ). Maybe David should watch some games from 2004-6. Just a thought.

Ok, what happened to the tackling in the next 21 games? Clearly that wasn't Lyon's game plan because for the rest of season we seemed to think running to position was more important than attacking the bloke with the pill. What did David Parkin think of that?

We went from having the 'best list in the AFL' and finishing 4th, 4th and 6th (% off 4th again) to missing the 8 by 2 wins and suddenly having gaping holes in our list.

This is the same "best list" you told us all for weeks was a nonsense?........this is worse hypocrisy than our rotational cpataincy policy developing leaders yet the job is merely a coin toss - which is Dodg? best list or a convenient argument when Jeff pandering?

That still disgusts me. It's a disgrace.

Me too. I hate lame @ssed arguments with hypocrisy that are pure grandstanding and not interested in the slightest in contrbuting to genuine debate.

With the same list, we went from missing the top 4 by % to finishing 9th and never even looked a threat. We had easily the best draw we've had in 4 years too.

The SAME list?. SAME liat as what? ......2005? 06?......are you truly serious here Dodg?.....the SAME list in performance/age/output/experience???????????....

We were insipid. Improvement needs to come from everywhere - but particularly from the coaches box.

It already has IMO.....roll on 08...and give me a dose of that pre season optimism.....

[Teflon]

Note the way in which RL describes the Geelong brand of play... he thought they "competed well" (A), "tackled strongly" (B) and were "clean/efficient" (C).

they also had 5 guys who kicked 30 or more goals for the season; we had three. they were best for converting inside 50s into goals; we were among the worst.

They also had a midfield, defence and forward half that were largely settled and untouched by injury???????

what RL is talking about above is fundamentals. i'm talking about gameplan and structure. they are different.

How can you have a good "game plan/strategy blah blah" whatever without excellent fundamentals? what do you build off?????.....Lyon has it spot on - yeah the team and he need to get the balance right..by the end of 07 - with a fair injury run - we started to see that IMO.

our gameplan in 2007 was lousy and cost us games. as i've said countless times in other threads we need more consistent and reliable avenues to goal and it starts by having guys who can kick goals within kicking distance

Do point out those game please?

btw. you're right that footy is a simple game ... if you don't outscore your opponent you won't win.

BTW..theres more to just kicking goals to winning footy - most premiership sides have the best defence...wonder why????