Must win games

**Wil** · 2 May 2005, 07:43 AM

One reason to not be TOO concerned with the Swans is that we have actually played some tough opposition so far. They are teams that were not expected to perform well in this season, that are. So it is good to get into some "easier" opposition...

(*cough* These are not famous last words.)

**Syd Swan** · 2 May 2005, 08:38 AM

In our current form I think we will struggle to beat anyone. Even the teams that are playing poorly are still kicking decent scores, with the exception of Port. We just have to simply stop flooding and try and outscore the opposition with open running style football. I remember when Eade was sacked every body on here was saying it was great to get rid of Floodney Eade. Well I think Eade was just causing a slight rise in the tide and was replaced by a coach who has created a tsunami.

**mocaholic** · 2 May 2005, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by Mike_B
Of the 50-50 games, the game against the Dogs concerns me. They are getting far more from their mid-range players this year (Gilbee, Giansiracusa, Hahn, Robert Murphy) and have the ability to play a fast possession-style game, but can also play very direct if they want. Even though they don't have tall forwards (especially now with Darcy going down) they have a lot of mid-sized players who can kick goals.

I reckon their coach goes alright.

**Thunder Shaker** · 2 May 2005, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by NMWBloods
What are we going to do with draft picks? We already have 4 top 10 draft picks for our midfield and yet we have just about the worst midfield in the competition.

How many of them did we draft ourselves, and how many are cast-offs from other clubs?

**ugg** · 2 May 2005, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
How many of them did we draft ourselves, and how many are cast-offs from other clubs?

They're all drafted by us.

**Barry Schneider** · 2 May 2005, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Wil
One reason to not be TOO concerned with the Swans is that we have actually played some tough opposition so far. They are teams that were not expected to perform well in this season, that are. So it is good to get into some "easier" opposition...

(*cough* These are not famous last words.)

The Swans losses have been to the form sides of the comp.
We have lost to 1st,2nd,4th and 6th on the ladder.
We have had bad starts before and I am confident Roos can turn it around.
Comments such as "sack Roos" and "play for draft picks" are ridiculous in my opinion.

**giant** · 2 May 2005, 10:02 AM

Originally posted by Barry Schneider
The Swans losses have been to the form sides of the comp.
We have lost to 1st,2nd,4th and 6th on the ladder.
We have had bad starts before and I am confident Roos can turn it around.
Comments such as "sack Roos" and "play for draft picks" are ridiculous in my opinion.

Agreed BS. As soul destroying as 2005 has been so far there is a real chance to turn it around in the next 8 weeks. On current form, it's difficult to see that happening but this team and this coach have done it before.

Let's take it one week at a time(!) and find some form against the sad old Bombers.

**Sanecow** · 2 May 2005, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Barry Schneider
The Swans losses have been to the form sides of the comp.
We have lost to 1st,2nd,4th and 6th on the ladder.

I always find that funny it the first part of the season. One of the reasons they are seemingly "form sides" is because they won games against us! According to this theory, the Hawks after round one could say "Sure we lost badly, but the Swans are the form side of the comp, look at their percentage for heaven's sake!"

**Ruck'n'Roll** · 2 May 2005, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by anne
Pick some tall players to start with.

Or perhaps play the one's we've drafted, did you notice that when Gardner hurt his knee he hwas being played on by Tiger.

It realy makes me very very angry to see runners forced to play on giants, it shortens their career and stuffs up our run.

Especially when LRT gets shifted all over the place. Play him at CHB and don't sook when he stuffs up, while the Riewolts and Scarlets of this world may step into champion status most KPP take time and errors to make it. For example Carter, Dunkley, Daniher v1 and 3 and even Barry Hall.

**Barry Schneider** · 2 May 2005, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by Sanecow
I always find that funny it the first part of the season. One of the reasons they are seemingly "form sides" is because they won games against us! According to this theory, the Hawks after round one could say "Sure we lost badly, but the Swans are the form side of the comp, look at their percentage for heaven's sake!"

I think 6 weeks is long enough to have an opinion of who are form sides and who aren't.

**RogueSwan** · 2 May 2005, 01:24 PM

Re: Must win games

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Must Win games

I thought this might be a thread about the teams new mantra.

Must Win games
Must Win games
Must Win games

**Sanecow** · 2 May 2005, 01:36 PM

Originally posted by Barry Schneider
I think 6 weeks is long enough to have an opinion of who are form sides and who aren't.

1. WCE have won four games at home (not a sign of form for WCE) and wins away against Brisbane (even we beat them) and Adelaide. Maybe in form, maybe not.

2. Adelaide has wins against Port Adelaide, Collingwood and Sydney. Maybe in form, maybe not.

3. The Roos have wins against Hawthorn, Collingwood and Sydney. Maybe in form, maybe not.

Wait until half way through the season before making the call.

***NMWBloods*** · 2 May 2005, 01:40 PM

Re: Re: Must win games

Originally posted by RogueSwan
I thought this might be a thread about the teams new mantra.

Must Win games
Must Win games
Must Win games

I think it would have been more useful.

Perhaps a flowchart for the players:

Must Win Games

=

Must Kick Goals

=

Must Kick Ball

***NMWBloods*** · 2 May 2005, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by Barry Schneider
I think 6 weeks is long enough to have an opinion of who are form sides and who aren't.

After 6 rounds last year Fremantle were 4th - they finished 9th.

After 6 rounds Geelong were 10th and finished 4th.

After 11 rounds Essendon were 4th and touted as a flag chance - they bombed.

It changes over time, dependent upon opposition and where they play, and ladder position doesn't always mean a lot.

**Barry Schneider** · 2 May 2005, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by NMWBloods
After 6 rounds last year Fremantle were 4th - they finished 9th.

After 6 rounds Geelong were 10th and finished 4th.

After 11 rounds Essendon were 4th and touted as a flag chance - they bombed.

It changes over time, dependent upon opposition and where they play, and ladder position doesn't always mean a lot.

Then why oh why are people vitriotically bagging the team and Roos if it doesn't matter how a team is going after 6 weeks.
I made the point the Swans have had poor start to the season before and turned it around.