Are we contenders in 2012?

[ernie koala]

Carlton, 1995. Won 23 from 25 games to take minor premier. Beat Geelong in the final for the premiership.
Got beaten by Sydney and St Kilda in successive weeks (rounds 8 and 9). Sydney finished 1995 in 12th, St Kilda finished in 14th.

You can argue they were not middle of the road sides at the time. But it does happen (Essendon in 2000 - 24 from 25, lost to the Bulldogs is another, but that was only once in the season)

One major difference is, both these sides had a functioning forward line...Along with all other serious contenders, for as long as I can remember.

[ernie koala]

True, Ernie. I've been on the Hawks bandwagon since February. Now that's ground to a halt, I'm on the Pies'.

I'm jumping on the Eagles wagon....with an eye on the Bombers if they keep winning.....At this rate, we'll be a shoe in come september !

[Hartijon]

One major difference is, both these sides had a functioning forward line...Along with all other serious contenders, for as long as I can remember.

Spot on. Although it is a very even competition this year which makes it "Anybody's Flag" at this stage we don't have much hope with our current forward line to go deep into September. Three things make me pessimistic

1.The decision to make TDL the sub.......clueless!We are still not "getting it"
2. Playing an out of form KPP in the Forwards ....not helpful to winning a game and I find the excuse that an out of form player attracts a good defender to be the epitomy of negativity that gives the end result of losing games.

3.With the even competition ,if we don't play at our best anybody can beat us and the lack of enthusiasm is a real worry.What's wrong?

[Triple B]

Your comparing the 1995 Carlton premiership team that lost 2 games all season and the Bombers from 2000 who lost 1 solitary game in the last round of the season with the 2012 Swans??????

The question in this thread is are we contenders in 2012?

The simple answer on the evidence to date is no

One major difference is, both these sides had a functioning forward line...Along with all other serious contenders, for as long as I can remember.

Frog was commenting on the specific quote 'contenders don't lose to middle of the road teams' when he pointed out that 2 of the most dominant teams from a H&A perspective in the past 20 years both lost their only games to 'middle of the road sides' or worse.

In '95 we absolutely pumped Carlton on a Fri night at the SCG by 12 goals, inflicting their first loss of the season with Plugger giving Silvagni a nice old touch up. Great night and I was hoarse for days.

At no time did Frog say we are anywhere near their standard, just that good sides, even great sides, do get beaten occasionally when they are expected to win...

[Melbourne_Blood]

Occasionally as in twice in three weeks? or, arguably, three times in 4 weeks?

[Frog]

Spot on. Although it is a very even competition this year which makes it "Anybody's Flag" at this stage we don't have much hope with our current forward line to go deep into September. Three things make me pessimistic

1.The decision to make TDL the sub.......clueless!We are still not "getting it"
2. Playing an out of form KPP in the Forwards ....not helpful to winning a game and I find the excuse that an out of form player attracts a good defender to be the epitomy of negativity that gives the end result of losing games.

3.With the even competition ,if we don't play at our best anybody can beat us and the lack of enthusiasm is a real worry.What's wrong?

Oh, stop it. We played 70% of the game in our defensive half. Locket and Hall would have had trouble kicking a goal from our defensive 50. The crap went over the whole ground, not just the forward line.

[GongSwan]

Oh, stop it. We played 70% of the game in our defensive half. Locket and Hall would have had trouble kicking a goal from our defensive 50. The crap went over the whole ground, not just the forward line.

Zackly, when the mids get dominated our forwards don't matter at all, although i don't think they worked hard enough (bar Mcglynn) to provide a way out of the back 50 and slow the game down. Our backline, while under siege for incredibly long periods still stood up and created enough pressure that they missed easy shots. Let's not all abandon ship just yet, while our mids need to lift, they are mostly younger players and even if they have some bad games for whatever reason, the talent is there and we need to keep them playing as a unit with an eye to the future. We can't just keep sending Jude and ROK in there to save the day, they are getting on in football terms and need to be used sparingly in the middle. I agree starting TDL as the sub was not a tactical masterstroke, but how much difference would it have made? It's time to start using one midfielder each week as teh sub and rotating them to keep them freshened up a little. At teh end of this year, we need to find a key forward to run with Reid, and another midfielder who can play like Jude, but we need to keep building on the combinations between the younger players, once we get our best team back on the park we can start building for toward teh end of this year

[Dosser]

Most teams know by now that the Swans mids ARE our forwards, so if they beat us there, they win the game. End of story.

[WeHaveTheGoodes]

Most teams know by now that the Swans mids ARE our forwards, so if they beat us there, they win the game. End of story.

Such a simple but accurate answer.

Our gameplan was pulled apart by radelaide and the tigers, we were found out and now all opposition coaching staff have to do is watch these two games and now the saints game and presto. It's too easy me thinks.

[caj23]

Frog was commenting on the specific quote 'contenders don't lose to middle of the road teams' when he pointed out that 2 of the most dominant teams from a H&A perspective in the past 20 years both lost their only games to 'middle of the road sides' or worse.

In '95 we absolutely pumped Carlton on a Fri night at the SCG by 12 goals, inflicting their first loss of the season with Plugger giving Silvagni a nice old touch up. Great night and I was hoarse for days.

At no time did Frog say we are anywhere near their standard, just that good sides, even great sides, do get beaten occasionally when they are expected to win...

You and Frog are just took a small part of my post and rebutted it just for the sake of disagreeing with me. The fact is that those two teams were 9-0, we are 6 - 3, the situations are not comparable, so I don't know what the point of the comment was.

Watch Collingwood, West Coast and Essendon this year and see how many games they drop against the St Kildas and Richmonds of the league and you'll see where the Swans sit in 2012

[Ruck'n'Roll]

It's not as if this weeks loss should come as a huge surprise.

Our big problem remains a lack of pace, in fact we have the exact same lack of pace now as we did in 2009 (when we recruited Rohan, Jetta and Sumner to alleviate it).

Then as now our midfield were being exposed for pace both ways.

When they have the ball our opponents spread faster than us, giving them "cheap" goals. Of course when we have the ball our players are preassurised by their opponents into taking poor options and making skill errors.

The problem is as simple and as insoluble as that. And while we can get away with our lack of pace if our opponents can't (or won't) match us for intensity, if they do then we can be beaten.

Just as the recruitments of 2009 helped boost our pace, the injuries of 2012 (especially Rohan and Goodes) have stipped that boost away.

As for the lack of intensity, I have no idea whether it's apparent or actual, only the team can know that.

[ernie koala]

Oh, stop it. We played 70% of the game in our defensive half. Locket and Hall would have had trouble kicking a goal from our defensive 50. The crap went over the whole ground, not just the forward line.

I agree, we were crap generally all over the ground last week...but IMO , from watching this season unfold....we have a crap, hopscotch, patchwork forwardline... particually without Goodes there...
And until that's rectified, we can't claim to be serious contenders.

[GongSwan]

Don't bring up the lack of pace, not many on here see it as an issue, but I agree with you, and since Rohan went out injured i've been hoping Harry would get a go, fair enough he's young and inexperienced, but he's quick and would help spread, I'd even say bring back Everitt, as long as he plays on a wing, away from the contested situation, and not in the forward line, just as an out from d50, transition to f50, Jetta can't be the only one in teh team doing this, it's just too much for one young bloke

[jono2707]

At teh end of this year, we need to find a key forward to run with Reid, and another midfielder who can play like Jude, but we need to keep building on the combinations between the younger players, once we get our best team back on the park we can start building for toward teh end of this year

I agree that we need a key forward - we have needed that for a few years now really, as Jesse doesn't seem to be the answer and Reid needs help. However I think we are good for Jude replacements, with Parker from last year and Mitchell this year to join Hanners, Jack and JPK....

[GongSwan]

I agree that we need a key forward - we have needed that for a few years now really, as Jesse doesn't seem to be the answer and Reid needs help. However I think we are good for Jude replacements, with Parker from last year and Mitchell this year to join Hanners, Jack and JPK....

I was thinking more along the lines of experience, but I agree with yr point, we will be well served for in and under mids, I think we've been stuck a bit when we rushed to sign White on a false promise. Time to cut a few loose next year and look for a name in the forward line