Comeback Kings

[sharp9]

I was just thinking and it occurred to me that for all our reputaion as the "never say die" "come-back Kings," we hardly ever come back to win a match at any time in the last 3 years or so.

I assert that to "come back" you need at least 4 goals to win. As for games when we have let other teams get a START...for all our brilliant come backs I don't think we have actually won one in the last 3 years.

Am I wrong?

In 2005 and five we had brilliant last quarter come from behind wins against Brisbane at the Gabba and against Geelong in the Semi-Final. I can't recall a come back since then.

Can anyone else recall the last time we were 20 points down and won?

As for starts....we have lost games by less than a kick after giving 3, 4, 6 goal starts to

Eagles at Subi (2005)
Richmond at the G (2005)
Eagles in GF (2006)
Eagles at Homebush (2007)
Essendon at SCG (2007)
St. Kilda at Dome (2008)

On top of this we have had significant fightbacks to lose after giving away big starts to

Essendon at the Dome (2006)
North at Dome (2007)
Geelong at Kardinia (2007)
Geelong at Kardinia (2008)


That's 11 games we have given up starts over less than 3 years...and NOT ONCE have we managed to win.

This is all from memory so someone correct me if I'm wrong (or add others I have forgotten)

Damn... I just thought of one....3 goals down to Hawthorn in the first quarter last year. But even then I don't think it was over 20 points.


So the moral of the story is, for all our relentles fighting capabilities (which keep our percentage so good) we nearly always lose when we fall behind...esp if we fall behind early.

Have now checked some stats....in 51 games over 05-08 the winner at quarter time has lost just 8 times. In addition there was a tied first quarter (Collingwood 07) and a drawn game after the Swans led by 10 at quarter time (Brisbane 07).

That's 52 first quarter leaders for 43 wins. Extraordinary. Swans 3 losses and a draw when leading at q time, 5 wins when behind at q time.

So the big moral of the story is "get ahead by quarter time" FFS!!!!!!!

[i'm-uninformed2]

That post is far too rational and well-researched. Get off RWO immediately!

[NMWBloods]

Part of the reason is my standard mantra - we don't kick enough goals. Comebacks typically consist of one or more quarters of outscoring opponents by 5/6+ goals. We rarely do this. We think it's a great comeback/quarter if we kicked 4 goals to 1. Hard to peg back big leads in that case.

How many quarters have we outscored an opponent by 25+ points in a quarter when we've been behind?
How many times have we outscored an opponent by 25+ points in a quarter at all?
How many quarters have we been outscored 25+ points?

Not that often (and take out Car, Melb, Rich, Haw virtually never).

Not that surprising when you consider the amazing strings of low scores we put together because of the focus on stopping the opponent rather than scoring ourselves.

In fact looking at our WL record and games scoring > 100 points against top 8 sides (incl finals) in the previous seasons, we have:

2007: 3-8, 2

2006: 5-6, 2

2005: 8-7, 3

2004: 6-7, 2

So in the previous four seasons, we have played 50 games against top 8 sides, winning 22 of them (44%) and scoring > 100 points on 9 occasions (18%).

[ROK Lobster]

So in the previous four seasons, we have played 50 games against top 8 sides, winning 22 of them (44%) and scoring > 100 points on 9 occasions (18%).

Spin it as "blue-collar" and "bloods-like", promote your less talented players at all opportunities (including making public their begging letters after being delisted, their rugby (league) heritage, the fact that they could not get another game with another club), have your more talented players make public statements (on and off the field) of the importance of team, the spirit at the club and the like, and publically shame any individual who does not tow the line - or perhaps creates the perception of not always towing the line - (regardless of talent), and count the cash.

[Nico]

Would someone please send this to the coaching panel.

[swansrule100]

Would someone please send this to the coaching panel.

they are too busy working out who will sit where this week

[DST]

It's very simple, we don't often (like other sides) get down by alot to come back due to our capacity to stick with sides.

No way of knowing this, but I would suggest that over the last 4 to 5 years it would be very rare in a game where we would find ourselves down in a game by more than 5 goals.

DST

[NMWBloods]

It's very simple, we don't often (like other sides) get down by alot to come back due to our capacity to stick with sides.

No way of knowing this, but I would suggest that over the last 4 to 5 years it would be very rare in a game where we would find ourselves down in a game by more than 5 goals.

A big reason we don't get down by a lot is, as I noted above, we lock the game down against top 8 sides so neither side score a lot. Having said that, it happens more than you'd think, and we usually lose (as per Sharp9's OP).

Based mainly on end of quarter scores, where we are behind 20 pts / 30 pts and our W/L record when we are behind.

2008: 1/1
W-L: 0-2

2007: 1/7
W-L: 0-8

2006: 3/3
W-L: 0-6

2005: 4/3
W-L: 2-5

[swantastic]

A big reason we don't get down by a lot is, as I noted above, we lock the game down against top 8 sides so neither side score a lot. Having said that, it happens more than you'd think, and we usually lose (as per Sharp9's OP).

Based mainly on end of quarter scores, where we are behind 20 pts / 30 pts and our W/L record when we are behind.

2008: 1/1
W-L: 0-2

2007: 1/7
W-L: 0-8

2006: 3/3
W-L: 0-6

2005: 4/3
W-L: 2-5

Going by that we are pretty @@@@ then.

Out of 23 games we only won 2,,FFS Swans pull you fingers out of your arse.

I think it was you NMW who said it is most likely because we dont kick many goals,and i tend to agree.

[NMWBloods]

So the big moral of the story is "get ahead by quarter time" FFS!!!!!!!

Amazing, yet not in the slightest surprising, how important this is!

[NMWBloods]

Spin it as "blue-collar" and "bloods-like", promote your less talented players at all opportunities (including making public their begging letters after being delisted, their rugby (league) heritage, the fact that they could not get another game with another club), have your more talented players make public statements (on and off the field) of the importance of team, the spirit at the club and the like, and publically shame any individual who does not tow the line - or perhaps creates the perception of not always towing the line - (regardless of talent), and count the cash.

Swans game plan =
* Beat up the crap sides to improve percentage
* Drag the top sides down into a low-scoring stoppage-fest to limit potential damage in a loss or give 50/50 chance of close win
* The above gives a sufficient combination to finish at or about top 4
* In finals, stick with low-scoring grind giving 50/50 chance of win

Good for win rate, not as good as a spectacle.

[goswannie14]

Swans game plan =
* Beat up the crap sides to improve percentage
* Drag the top sides down into a low-scoring stoppage-fest to limit potential damage in a loss or give 50/50 chance of close win
* The above gives a sufficient combination to finish at or about top 4
* In finals, stick with low-scoring grind giving 50/50 chance of win

Good for win rate, not as good as a spectacle.

At the end of 2005 most on here would have said, "So what! We have wone the flag!"

[swantastic]

At the end of 2005 most on here would have said, "So what! We have wone the flag!"

I still say the same,i dont give a @@@@ just as long as we win.

[NMWBloods]

At the end of 2005 most on here would have said, "So what! We have wone the flag!"

Hence my comment - Good for win rate, not as good as a spectacle. The whole game plan so nearly came unstuck with no flag though!

[Industrial Fan]

Lions had a pretty similar run during their reign at the top. The games they lost were close, but they could always pile on goals. In most cases they came up just short. I'd be interested to see their record under the same circumstances.