I'm done

[KTigers]

11am Tuesday and so far, no reports of Mad Monday injuries, scandals, bust ups or arrests. First stage of the rebuild achieved!

Phew ! Second stage is that we now must acknowledge publicly that we are in a Rebuilding Phase.

[mcs]

This is an excellent overview, Meg, and for someone who “doesn’t have any close connections with the demographic” you’ve nailed the generational shift in attitude. I do train people in this demographic, and telling them to lift their game, even in the most gentle way imaginable, is absolutely not on. Jarrad McVeigh spoke to a group of supporters before the North game, and when he said “the contemporary player is a different beast and moves on pretty quickly”, I could only laugh quietly internally. I’m not pretending I understand them, because I don’t. The change has happened quickly, over about the last 4-5 years or so, where professionalism is a thing of the past, and it’s all about how they can maximise a situation to personal benefit. Of course, this is a gross generalisation, but there’s definitely a significant proportion who have this attitude, and it rubs off. I also work in a team environment, so it’s tricky and not a bit disappointing when you’re trying to teach someone with minimal skills, but their own approach is entirely self-centred. Many of my colleagues say the same thing, across a range of related disciplines and internationally, so there’s certainly a generational change. Maybe JL is a dinosaur like me, and no longer knows how to get his message across.

Some really interesting insights Kafka, even if I don't totally agree with all of them. I'm slightly older than this generation coming through (late 30s), but like you Kafka work and train plenty of people in the early-mid 20s.

I disagree that you can't tell people to 'lift their game' - you absolutely can, and do it effectively. But I think it needs a much more nuanced way to what once did work. It needs a gentler touch to what once was the norm, and they don't respond in the same way that other generations (even myself) did at that point to direct criticism.

I don't think they are any more driven by considerations of personal benefit than any other generation either, even if it definitely feels like that sometimes. I think part of that feeling is because they are far more direct in their responses and views than what may previously have been the broad 'norm' - they aren't as afraid to be very strong in their views, or be clear with their goals. To some degree, they play the 'long game' less in terms of their future aspirations (I've had plenty say - this is a first step towards XYZ, rather than trying to pretend my workplace is their dream job), and I think that rubs off a bit in that team environment, where there is ongoing jostling for future positions/opportunities almost from day dot.

I think a lot of it comes from being an uber-connected and information rich generation. That isn't saying they seek to learn more than other generations did, or are more intelligent or anything - but at the snap of the fingers one can now find information on just about any topic. That brings (even if it is misplaced) confidence in their own views, and a willingness to be fairly strong in their views, and to be thinking far further forward than what many at that point of their careers may do.

I also think, in the general workplace (not in the same way it permeates in the fairly privileged space of a footy club) environment, a lot of young people feel under serious pressure to succeed, and succeed quickly - be it to achieve what are increasingly difficult life goals, be it to meet family expectations - whatever might be the driver. Those factors of course have always been there - but I think in an increasingly cut throat world in many ways, those pressures are increasing.

Who knows what that all means for a footy team - but I do agree that it means to some degree the old approach may struggle to work effectively. Equally, I don't think it rules out the effectiveness of a bit of 'hard love' either. And I think our club is probably at that point now - if we are to truly minimise the likelihood of what has now happened twice with this playing group in 3 years in future (should we be lucky enough to get back there), then some hard truths are going to have to be discussed, some hard lessons learnt, and it will probably involve a few casualties along the way.

I actually don't think it will need a whole lot of sabre rattling though - but as I've said before, I think the first step needs to be a tightening up of messaging. If we truly want to succeed in the ultimate way as a footy club, this messaging around 'getting there' almost being enough can't continue in its current form. And I'd argue neither can this 'we won't be defined by one game' narrative. Like it or lump it - your legacy in AFL footy will always be linked to whether you perform when it matters. That may not be the driving force for all players that it once was, but as a footy club it screams of mediocrity in terms of chasing the ultimate goal if such a view dominates how we respond to what was a dismal failing on the biggest stage.

I think there is a fair bit of validity in what Roos had to say yesterday in this space - a whole lot of options should be on the table, and hard calls made. Even if that involves very bruised egos along the way.

For instance - if Warner is serious about returning to WA next year, then the club should shake his hand and say you are on the table this year, like it or lump it, and we will maximise what the club gets in return. In the uber-professional era, and one where players have a lot more power than they once had to influence the direction of a footy club, there is little room for sentimentality on such matters. We've been pushovers very often at the trade table, and every risk we are headed for again getting massive unders on a high quality player. Only time will tell if we've learnt out lesson.

[Kafka's Ghost]

Some really interesting insights Kafka, even if I don't totally agree with all of them. I'm slightly older than this generation coming through (late 30s), but like you Kafka work and train plenty of people in the early-mid 20s.

I disagree that you can't tell people to 'lift their game' - you absolutely can, and do it effectively. But I think it needs a much more nuanced way to what once did work. It needs a gentler touch to what once was the norm, and they don't respond in the same way that other generations (even myself) did at that point to direct criticism.

I don't think they are any more driven by considerations of personal benefit than any other generation either, even if it definitely feels like that sometimes. I think part of that feeling is because they are far more direct in their responses and views than what may previously have been the broad 'norm' - they aren't as afraid to be very strong in their views, or be clear with their goals. To some degree, they play the 'long game' less in terms of their future aspirations (I've had plenty say - this is a first step towards XYZ, rather than trying to pretend my workplace is their dream job), and I think that rubs off a bit in that team environment, where there is ongoing jostling for future positions/opportunities almost from day dot.

I think a lot of it comes from being an uber-connected and information rich generation. That isn't saying they seek to learn more than other generations did, or are more intelligent or anything - but at the snap of the fingers one can now find information on just about any topic. That brings (even if it is misplaced) confidence in their own views, and a willingness to be fairly strong in their views, and to be thinking far further forward than what many at that point of their careers may do.

I also think, in the general workplace (not in the same way it permeates in the fairly privileged space of a footy club) environment, a lot of young people feel under serious pressure to succeed, and succeed quickly - be it to achieve what are increasingly difficult life goals, be it to meet family expectations - whatever might be the driver. Those factors of course have always been there - but I think in an increasingly cut throat world in many ways, those pressures are increasing.

Who knows what that all means for a footy team - but I do agree that it means to some degree the old approach may struggle to work effectively. Equally, I don't think it rules out the effectiveness of a bit of 'hard love' either. And I think our club is probably at that point now - if we are to truly minimise the likelihood of what has now happened twice with this playing group in 3 years in future (should we be lucky enough to get back there), then some hard truths are going to have to be discussed, some hard lessons learnt, and it will probably involve a few casualties along the way.

I actually don't think it will need a whole lot of sabre rattling though - but as I've said before, I think the first step needs to be a tightening up of messaging. If we truly want to succeed in the ultimate way as a footy club, this messaging around 'getting there' almost being enough can't continue in its current form. And I'd argue neither can this 'we won't be defined by one game' narrative. Like it or lump it - your legacy in AFL footy will always be linked to whether you perform when it matters. That may not be the driving force for all players that it once was, but as a footy club it screams of mediocrity in terms of chasing the ultimate goal if such a view dominates how we respond to what was a dismal failing on the biggest stage.

I think there is a fair bit of validity in what Roos had to say yesterday in this space - a whole lot of options should be on the table, and hard calls made. Even if that involves very bruised egos along the way.

For instance - if Warner is serious about returning to WA next year, then the club should shake his hand and say you are on the table this year, like it or lump it, and we will maximise what the club gets in return. In the uber-professional era, and one where players have a lot more power than they once had to influence the direction of a footy club, there is little room for sentimentality on such matters. We've been pushovers very often at the trade table, and every risk we are headed for again getting massive unders on a high quality player. Only time will tell if we've learnt out lesson.

Totally agree regarding Warner. A reprise of the Dawson fiasco cannot be entertained.

[Swannette]

In the harsh wash-up from Saturday, the thing that has bubbled to the surface for me is that I no longer feel or think I can trust the club or the players to demonstrate that they truly mean what they say. The Robbie Fox quote/attitude noted previously is really concerning - essentially that a GF win would be nice but a loss won't define him/them. What the? It certainly defines me and most passionate fans I would think, and when a loss like we had lines up with poor effort across the ground (as opposed to a close game where they tried their guts out), I will find it hard to stand up to anyone and defend my team or my club. They told us they had learned from 22, told us they were ready, told us they WANTED it as much as we did. Their actions would suggest otherwise. I'm not done with the club but this is the most disconnected I've felt in 27 years.

[UUaswan]

To be fair to Robbie, getting interviewed post GF debacle was never going to be easy.

To be real fair, the bloke is in and out of the side all year, thrown around more than anyone so his prep is probably the worst yet he was one of the few that showed up.

The guy lives on 1 year contracts.

Teams needs to adopt a no excuse mantra, stop talking about prep, travel rest, days break.
We have had them in our favour and against us for the same result.

Who cares, hard contested footy and accountability, back each other in but call each other out.

[KTigers]

I think for many footballers' success is defined by getting to be a professional player and keeping their place in the team. What the team does collectively is what
the team does collectively. It's a different thing. We as fans come in much later. The team already exists, and them just existing is not enough for us. We want more
from them, to win all the time and to win on the last Saturday in September. We aim higher for them than many of them aim for themselves. Hence, we set ourselves
up for disappointment.

[Meg]

The Robbie Fox quote/attitude noted previously is really concerning - essentially that a GF win would be nice but a loss won't define him/them. What the?.

Robbie’s words sound like something the psychologist said to the team. And it is really important for elite athletes not to allow their sense of identity and self-worth to be completely defined by their sporting careers. There are many sad examples of retired athletes who have not managed that separation who have slumped into serious depression or worse.

However I agree it would have been better not said publicly. Like UUaswan, I think we should cut Robbie some slack in the immediate post game environment as he searched for words to say. I don’t doubt Robbie cares — and cares a lot.

[mcs]

My comments re: Robbie were in no way a reflection on him - as you say Meg, that is clearly words coming from the internal support staff etc and internal messaging.

Robbie is one of very few who deserves absolute respect for how he played in both the 2022 debacle and the 2024 'definitely very cold' fiasco. One of few that played like they really 'cared' (Again harsh - I'm sure they all care, but it isn't apparent from how we played).

Bloke is all heart - my worry is that the club is portraying such messaging outside its four walls.... I fully get the need to not allow them to have an identity/self worth/purpose defined solely by their sporting careers - at an individual level, its perfectly reasonable and completely necessary. But as an overall organisation, it is very messy messaging at this time to say the least. Be really interesting to see what the messaging is at the Skilton Medal dinner.

[imuninformedtwo]

Some reporting in Melb the VFL coach is gone, and J McVeigh will go to that role - which opens up a spot in the box for a fresh voice.

[barry]

Maybe the new caring John Longmire works well when the team is travelling well, but under the pressure and intense scrutiny of grand final week, JL reverts to his core fire and brimstone self, and the players are worse for it.

[Merdo5555]

The group is mentally soft and that comes from the top down. Not just the coach but the Chair and the Board. The fact that nothing changed after the Geelong debacle says it all (I called for Longmire's sacking then) but even if that was a step too far what really changed? Nothing.

Yes the modern footballer might not be able to handle tough feedback, guess what they arent going to win you a Grand Final if thats the case because they wont make the physical sacrifices required.

Do you think Lachie Neal loses his bundle if he gets some tough criticism.

If the players arent mentally strong enough move them on, if Chad doesnt want to be here long term again move him on.

Bring some in who can lead the team with the requisite balance of tough love and support

Whatever John is doing isnt working. Even if by miracle he wins the GF next year it will still be 3 wasted GF's. Id happily sit in Richmond's spot knowing there is a tough rebuild ahead but boy we can celebrate those 3 Premierships. If you manage the list very well you dont even need a long rebuild.

Fundamentally John should go because he has overseen the disappearance of the bloods culture.

[stevoswan]

The following anecdotes are as comment on the above re JL — a sentiment I have read elsewhere in comments suggesting JL is not tough enough nor demanding enough to coach for success at the highest level.

i attended three of the ‘Before the Bounce’ events in the Swans HQ before matches at the SCG. I heard four past players — all of whom I think each of us respect — speak in Q & A sessions: Josh Kennedy, Lewis Roberts-Thompson, Dan Hannebery and Kieren Jack.

In relation to playing under JL, the common theme seemed to be that in the time of their playing careers, Longmire had been a demanding coach, relentless in demanding of high performance, hard on players who failed to play at the standard he demanded. LRT implied that he enjoyed playing under Roos more than under JL as Roos was such a ‘caring’ man (the adjective he used) — while hastening to add JL also cared about his players, Kennedy commented that now as a spectator he sometimes winced seeing a player make a blunder as he envisaged what JL would be saying. Hannebery commented about how tough JL had been on him, how he felt nervous walking past Jl’s office after a match if he knew he hadn’t played well, while adding that looking back he respects the high standards JL demanded and feels that helped him mature as a person. (Dan also said JL was like a second father to him when he came to Sydney at such a young age.)

However — the other common theme (which each of the three who played the most under Jl said) was that the authoritarian, demanding approach would no longer work under the demographic of the current players. And that they all believed that JL had understood that and had softened his approach. And they were all admiring of JL’s capacity and willingness to change. (JL has commented several times about how close the group became during the period spent together living and playing under Covid lockdown. My guess is that has had a significant influence on JL’s approach.)

I don’t have any close connections with young men or women in the late teens to early 30’s demographic. So I am no expert on what works in coaching a group of elite athletes of that age bracket. However I have reflected on Clarkson’s (so far) lack of success with North M v Mitchell’s rapid development of a high performing team of young men at Hawthorn towards the end of the season. I suspect Clarkson still has an ‘old era’ approach while Mitchell provides a more relaxed ‘new era’ approach. And Fagan seems to be the very opposite of ruthless.

And having related the above, I don’t for a moment believe JL at any time has adopted the attitude that getting to GF is ‘great, well done, the result doesn’t matter’. He is very measured in his public comments —yet stated bluntly in press conference after the Port thumping that what the players delivered was ‘unacceptable’. I suspect he has said the same to the players behind closed doors after Saturday’s match. The players were devastated (despite some suggesting otherwise), just look at the footage of players being comforted by partners and parents after the match. JL is not a person who would publicly throw them under a bus while they are hurting so much.

I don’t have the answers for what happened on Saturday. I suspect there are numerous factors that were there all year but which came together at the one time under the brilliance and fierce toughness of the Lions. We do need to take some hard decisions for the future. We do need some tougher, stronger players to play hard contested footy alongside the lighter fleet-of-foot brigade (and that might require putting a star on the trade table). We do need to be able to maintain our skills under pressure (distressing to see how far off kicking and handballing were all match). We do need to reconsider game plans and the players need to be capable of sticking to them (JL said they went in with the intent of shortening the ‘teasing’ difference — yet our players gave their opponents oodles of room with predictable outcomes). We do need to be more mentally resilient (though the Swans have been a leader in employing a psychologist and she was on the bench and in the rooms with players all match).

There is a lot of introspection, planning and tough decisions needed for next season. Perhaps that might include JL deciding to move sideways to a new role, or announcing a transition to a new coach over 2025. There is no way the club would sack him in my view and I would be horrified if they did. But the answer is not as simple as ‘we need a coach who is more ruthless’.

Sorry for the essay, like everyone else this has been churning around in my mind since Saturday.

After a week off from RWO to just distance myself from the inevitable post match hysteria which would just make coming to terms with the loss even more frustrating and painful, I will say this......do not apologise for the 'essay' Meg.....it's the first post in this thread that is sensible and measured and not tainted by unhinged anger and tempestuous arrogant 'knowledge' of what is best for our club.

So glad we don't have some of the posters here running the club.

One more thing, enjoy barracking for the Giants Barry....you've been itching to for years. See ya.

I think I'll take another week off. Sheese.

[mcs]

After a week off from RWO to just distance myself from the inevitable post match hysteria which would just make coming to terms with the loss even more frustrating and painful, I will say this......do not apologise for the 'essay' Meg.....it's the first post in this thread that is sensible and measured and not tainted by unhinged anger and tempestuous arrogant 'knowledge' of what is best for our club.

So glad we don't have some of the posters here running the club.

One more thing, enjoy barracking for the Giants Barry....you've been itching to for years. See ya.

I think I'll take another week off. Sheese.

Drop the holier than holy attitude Stevo. You are better than that.

Just because you don't agree with other people's point of view doesn't make their comments 'unhinged anger' or 'tempestuous arrogant'. Like everything in the world, life is a mix of views, and none of us individually should think we are well placed to be the moderators of said views.

There are a multitude of views on this thread, and most are made in a reasonable way, even if you don't agree with them.

[Swandave]

I've been silent on this board for a few years as I've been happy enough to login and read the general commentary around all things Swans, but the latest GF debacle has prompted me to put my 2 cents in.
I normally post as "Dave" since about 2004 or so, but for some reason my account has been nuked since the migration to the new platform.

Anyhow, I have a few theories as to why Horse hasn't seen success since 2012 and it all starts with him playing primarily as a full forward.

Apart from Malcolm Blight, I can't think of any successful coaches in recent memory who played as forwards and who have won multiple flags. You look at the most successful coaches since the 2000s and what they have in common - they are all hard nosed midfield and/or defender antagonist type players. Leigh Matthews, Alistair Clarkson, Chris Scott, Damien Hardwick. Even Pagan, Horse's coach, was a defender.

Defenders and midfielders are generally most effective when they are hard at the ball and the man, not so much forwards - they thrive on the back of the hard work done from down the field and finding space to lead. It's not in their DNA to physically unsettle the opposition (Lockett and Hall are probably exceptions). The amount of times I've heard Horse going on in pressers about being "mindful" of this and that was enough to make me gag. They've been turned into a team of mild mannered nice-boys seemingly incapable of smashing someone on the field to rattle them, apart from maybe Luke Parker - but so much for that now. The Bloods are barely registering a pulse these days.

I reckon the main reason 2012 was a success is that it was close enough to the transition from Roos at the end of 2010 (another defender) and his defensive game style, with a handful of players also from 2005 who knew what it took to get over the line. By 2014 we were starting to see Horse's influence on GF day where the "Unsociable Hawks" out-muscled the Swans in what has now become the standard for Swans GF appearances. Speaking of the Hawks, watch them build on the back of another antagonistic midfield/defender coach in Sam Mitchell. They will be looking at another flag before the Swans I reckon, because Mitchell knows what it takes and how to unsettle the opposition. We have the talent - they just need reprogramming.

I also have an issue with the SCG. Last time we won a GF was when the prelim was played at Stadium Australia, which has the same length as the MCG - albeit narrower. The Gabba is pretty much the same size as the SCG but the Lions had the advantage of playing the week before on the larger MCG. The Swans would've been better finishing lower and playing on a longer ground or having the finals out at Olympic Park - not sure if it can even be converted for AFL footy anymore though. I know criticising the SCG is like sacrilege on RWO but it just doesn't cut it as far as I'm concerned. Especially not having a drop in wicket, making the centre like concrete. It sucks.

So that's where I stand on the situation anyway. Can't see anything changing in 2025, unfortunately.

[The Big Cat]

I I have a few theories as to why Horse hasn't seen success since 2012 and it all starts with him playing primarily as a full forward.

yep. No success at all since 2012. Twelve disastrous seasons.