Forgive me for asking...

[swansrock4eva]

Quite possibly a silly question, seeing as i've been reduced to "lurker" status for a while due to very hectic life stuff, but isn't this a REBUILDING PERIOD? I.e. a time where:
- not everything is going to be perfect overnight, but will hopefully improve as we go along;
- we evaluate current players in a bit of trouble for a period of time - say 4-5 weeks, and then either pat them on the back for picking it up (and hope like hell they continue in their "picked up" train of thought), or dump them;
- we start thinking of and in turn acting upon plans for the youngsters, in time with the work invovled in the previous point

We haven't been anywhere near fan-bloody-tastic this year, no doubts about that, but really - it's a LONG process - Ron Barrassi took at LEAST 94 and 95 to set something up, before Eade took the reins and gave us a Grand Final, so what is it that is making everyone expect Roosey to wave his magic wand and have us top of the ladder now and forever more, after a grand total of 4 weeks' rebuilding?

[NMWBloods]

Good question, and we don't expect to win frequently (or we shouldn't). But the problem is that the team's performances have been woeful the past three weeks. Most of the team is not showing anything. There are few positive signs out there. Which part of re-building does that satisfy?

I'll note also, that the invective directed against players is frequently directed against those who have been in the team long enough to know better and play better.

[Jimmy C]

Not me SR4E. I totally expect a crummy year (or 2). I always hate us to lose, but I'll always forgive if the the team at least provides a contest.

[treespirit]

No sr4e, but like NMW said, I expect the experienced players to at least turn up and play.

[CureTheSane]

Is it just me or does Roos seem to be contradicting himself a lot.

4 Rounds in and it's gone from "wouldn't have minded a loss to Carlton too much" to "soul searching" and "tough decisions"

This is the problem putting your heart on your sleeve in public.

He says he has a long term plan for the year, well, what is it Roosey?

The Swans need to do the following if tehy are serious about all this.

1. Stop bull****ting with listing injured player and 'tricks' Name a fit side and play it.

2. Drop the players who don't perform.

3. If a youngster is being player, it should be a 1/4 by 1/4 proposition. If he does enough, he gets another 1/4 and then another, until he had a bad one.
No dragging youngsters after ne error.

4. Stop THREATENING action. ACT!

5. Get everone in the gym more. Compare a team photo of Sydney to Brisbane.....

6. Get a team psycologist.
In fact, that can be point #1

[Diego]

Roos is sounding like Eade did last year...which makes me think about how much influence does Colless and his board have on match day?

Surely this excuse that we need high profile players due to marketing etc in not valid anymore, as we don't have players in that calibre. to be a superstar with a high profile you need to be a brilliant footy player.

Or have they forgotten about this at the swans?

Memo to the SSFC: The product stinks and I know a few people who want their money back!

[hardluck_harry]

Can understand Roosy's point. It's not losing so much as it's the way the team has lost. Though everyone prefers winning.

It's the case of when the game is in the balance that's when we capitulate. There's not really much point in making a spirited fightback when the game is over or hanging tough for two and half quarters just to be run over in the end.

Maybe, Roos needs to start with a clean slate get rid of the guys that don't have the mental strength and who continually fail under pressure, I'm sure the first four weeks that notes have been taken of who's gone missing at crunch times.

BTW CuretheSane can I add one more point to your list?

7 Anyone taking a mark inside 50 or running with the pill into the 50 must have a shot at goal, unless there's absolute certain pass on.

Just getting sick of guys taking marks 40 metres out or streaming in at goals only to stuff up short passes. Have a ping at them, the more shots you have the more chance of kicking goals.

[Diego]

Originally posted by hardluck_harry

7 Anyone taking a mark inside 50 or running with the pill into the 50 must have a shot at goal, unless there's absolute certain pass on.

It must have been erased from the brain when "the game plan" was being taught. Shame a lot of the players fell asleep during this class..

[Bron]

And I will add "anyone kicking the ball back into the opposition goal square (or near) gets pulled". Why on earth do we kick it back to a dangerous position? Why not just hand it over if that's what they want to do.

[CureTheSane]

Yep, and point 8

RUSH BEHINDS.

For God's sake, this is such an advantage to be able to conceed onlty one point and have a kick out that they changed the pre season rules to toy with taking it out of the game plans.

So many times I am yelling "rush it, rush it!!!" only to have them play fancy-ass football, turn it over and pay for it with a goal to the opposition.

[swansrock4eva]

But see my point is that rebuilding must be something for the whole team to do. So say roos has set a benchmark of 5 weeks - after week 5 the continual offenders start getting dropped and the good performers in the 2's start getting their rewards. That means we still have one more week before we start to see changes. Yes, it would be bloody awesome to see the team rock up ready to play 4 quarters each week, but for some reason or another it's not happening. We CAN'T be the only ones seeing it, and seeing as we were so willing to put our faith in roosey, what's with this taking it back as soon as things aren't as hunky dory as the first match against carlton? He's got a plan happening and I for one am willing to at least wait a few weeks more before i take my knife out of the drawer and start sharpening it up.

[Charlie]

Gem, I couldn't agree more.

[CureTheSane]

Well, therein lies the problem.
We have no idea what Roos' benchmark is.
And what if say, McPherson or Mattews has a blinder on the 5th week?
They get to stay for anotehr 5?
I like a week to week proposition better.
Let's rotate the 5 worst players out each week.

I don't think anyone has the knives out for Roos yet.
His flaw so far has been being so vocal about some things while keeping so many other things unsaid.

Like I said in another thread, he seems to be contradicting himself.

When I say that, it is not to 'knife' him or bag him, but in the hope that someone says "you are wrong CTS, here is what he is doing"
But we all seem to be in the dark.
If it's a long term plan, and he expects losses, then he's not gonna be giving too much away...

[Mike_B]

I know there's time yet to do this, as we still have 18 games to go, but I'd like to see some of the younger guys, barring injury, having played 8-10 games this year (ie guys who had played less than 10 games before this season started) where they get a decent amoutn of time on the ground. Geelong did that last year, knowing that it was unlikely for kids to step up and maintain form over the entire season, and on the whole, IMHO it was a success for the Cats. I'd like us to try something along those lines.

[Red]

'Trouble with 'development years' is we still have to try to win games, at least until it's "mathmatically impossible to make the finals" (R. Eade). I can't see how promoting guys that look 'physically underdeveloped' (SWANSBEST) next to the Ainslie team is going to accomplish this.

Personally, I was as gutted with last nights dismal performance as anyone. But it looks like it's a bitter pill we're all going to have to swallow, for a little while longer at least.

Still, I wouldn't mind seeing some of this "exciting brand of football" (P. Roos) that we were promised.