We haven't had a forward line for some years now. IMO it's BY FAR our weakest area. Until N.G.Brown came along we had one forward. Didn't seem like enough to me. But we might be assembling some personnel now. What should our forward structure look like? Phantom has had a look at our overall setup compared to the Bloods’ but how our forward line compare?
I've long been a fan of Sydney's forward set up and I think it's a good idea to build a forward line around that model. For sheer flexibility it is the benchmark of Australian Football and offers tactical superiority as well as talent. Wallet likes tactical superiority. Like Eade, he's weak for it and you can bet that pair is drooling over the shape of the Sydney attack.
It's not possible to fully emulate their setup however, as their lynchpin, Barry Hall, is very much a one-off player. Hall's ability to bring other players into the game is unequalled in the AFL, even if he's just getting the hell out of there to open up holes for his team-mates. So our team will need a marking CHF as well as a savvy or marking FF.
There were some notable changes to the Swans' setup in attack during 2005. They replaced the aging Ball with Jolly (part-time in a pocket) and they used Goodes more as a CHF/flanker than in 2004. But the most important changes were that O'Keefe spent more time pushing into the backline (2004 he worked more forward of centre) and Nick Davis was also sent well up the park.
Each Sydney forward takes his opponent up the park into the congestion to create space inside the arc for running flankers and midfielders as well as leading forwards.
It's most unusual to see a six man forward setup these days. Sydney plays four or five, usually. The sixth is a spare midfielder, sometimes each flanker is a spare mid.
It seems to me that we have a few of the pieces in place to build a Sydney type setup over the next few years provided we can get the key slot covered.
Ryan O'Keefe- He's a midfielder. A running receiver who can push forward into a hole and kick a goal. Brett Deledio can surpass him in this role if we can get enough supply without him. If Deledio becomes pivotal to our midfield (a big chance IMO) maybe Tuck can be pushed forward. He takes a nice grab and this could be the way to expand and polish his game. It would be a real plus if Tuck's game, like R.O’K's could continue to grow and improve.
Nick Davis- N.G.Brown, K.Pettifer, R.Tambling. If we had enough talent up forward to be able to play NGB in the fifth forward role, we'd be good. Really good. OTOH if we play Pettifer in it we're behind IMO. Pettifer is too reliant on his aerial game for mine. ND's ground game is classes above his. Maybe Pettifer can keep improving. More likely is that Richard Tambling can fill this role. He's quicker, more athletic, has smarts and can kick a goal. He's the hope.
Barry Hall- He can't take a pack grab. Never could. Yet Butterfingers Hall is one of the most valuable players in the comp because he can recover his fumbles and dish to running team-mates by hand or foot. He mixes it up. Sometimes he makes U turns, usually he doesn't, using quick smart handball.
At his second club, under a brilliant if sometimes strident coach, Hall grew a leg, I mean a brain. He still melts down at times but his play is usually very clever and team oriented. He's not normally a contact player. He is extremely elusive and mobile for a big fellow. He doesn't turn on the spot like Tredrea but he can baulk better and is smarter. Jay Schulz, as a junior, played a bit like him but isn't as big. Like Hall, he has struggled to get into games in his youth but the Sarge was not as prodigious at the same age. He may make a Hall type in years to come, if not as good. Jay's hands are sometimes freakishly smart. Maybe.
Other than Jay we have nobody of the Hall type. The other KPP prospects we have are simply way too small to play the Hall role without assistance. IMO this is the type we should be looking for and grooming.
M.O'Loughlin- We don't have anybody of this type ATM. M.O'L is athletic, strong and equally adept in the air or on the ground. If he could lift his right leg he'd have kicked a bag in the GF. Even half right he was able to embarrass the WCE duds on the lead but couldn't convert. He's got a well rounded game with the exception of his decision making and defensive interest. This is where we can surpass him. If we can groom a less athletic player like say, Hughes (who has natural smarts) to apply a lot of defensive pressure, maybe we can compensate for a lack of athletic talent here in the long term. But for the next few years (save probably 2006) we have a player of equal class to M.O'L- N.G.Brown is a fifty goal tall/small of All Aust quality. He’s not as big, strong or athletic as Micky but he’s a very gifted natural footballer. This is a slot we've got covered in the medium term.
Adam Goodes- plays a wing/flank role rotating through CHF. His main job is up the park. I think we're looking to rotate Ray Hall and Pat Bowden through this role in 06 but they don't seem to have he quality to play in a Premiership team here. Because we'll never have a high class Barry Hall type, we will need a conventional bullocking CHF. Pattison is all we've got in the pipeline for now. We need a few more prospects in this dept. Sydney used Vogels in a deep CHF or #3 forward role at times along with Sean Dempster (used in tagging roles at times, too). Structurally, this seemed to improve the Swans, despite the lack of quality of the players. It suggests to me that if we can groom a real CHF we can get a better forward line than Sydney's.
J.Ball/D.Jolly- T.Simmonds, A.Pattison. Our ruck/forwards are probably inferior to a fit Ball but the Swans seldom used him in attack in 2005. Jolly is a battler who uses his body well. We can exceed the Swans model in this department particularly if Pattison goes on.
A.Schneider/P.Williams/N.Fosdike- Each of these change flankers was injured for most of 2005 so their numbers give a misleading account of the contribution they made at the business end of the season. We don't have a pacy, goal kicking rover who can convert from fifty. The Swans have three (albeit crocks). Bling could do it if we picked up a M.O'L classy type and moved NGB into the N.Davis role. But it's still only one prospect. We gotta rectify this. We need pacy crumbing smalls with goal range. Lots of em.
I've long been a fan of Sydney's forward set up and I think it's a good idea to build a forward line around that model. For sheer flexibility it is the benchmark of Australian Football and offers tactical superiority as well as talent. Wallet likes tactical superiority. Like Eade, he's weak for it and you can bet that pair is drooling over the shape of the Sydney attack.
It's not possible to fully emulate their setup however, as their lynchpin, Barry Hall, is very much a one-off player. Hall's ability to bring other players into the game is unequalled in the AFL, even if he's just getting the hell out of there to open up holes for his team-mates. So our team will need a marking CHF as well as a savvy or marking FF.
There were some notable changes to the Swans' setup in attack during 2005. They replaced the aging Ball with Jolly (part-time in a pocket) and they used Goodes more as a CHF/flanker than in 2004. But the most important changes were that O'Keefe spent more time pushing into the backline (2004 he worked more forward of centre) and Nick Davis was also sent well up the park.
Each Sydney forward takes his opponent up the park into the congestion to create space inside the arc for running flankers and midfielders as well as leading forwards.
It's most unusual to see a six man forward setup these days. Sydney plays four or five, usually. The sixth is a spare midfielder, sometimes each flanker is a spare mid.
It seems to me that we have a few of the pieces in place to build a Sydney type setup over the next few years provided we can get the key slot covered.
Ryan O'Keefe- He's a midfielder. A running receiver who can push forward into a hole and kick a goal. Brett Deledio can surpass him in this role if we can get enough supply without him. If Deledio becomes pivotal to our midfield (a big chance IMO) maybe Tuck can be pushed forward. He takes a nice grab and this could be the way to expand and polish his game. It would be a real plus if Tuck's game, like R.O’K's could continue to grow and improve.
Nick Davis- N.G.Brown, K.Pettifer, R.Tambling. If we had enough talent up forward to be able to play NGB in the fifth forward role, we'd be good. Really good. OTOH if we play Pettifer in it we're behind IMO. Pettifer is too reliant on his aerial game for mine. ND's ground game is classes above his. Maybe Pettifer can keep improving. More likely is that Richard Tambling can fill this role. He's quicker, more athletic, has smarts and can kick a goal. He's the hope.
Barry Hall- He can't take a pack grab. Never could. Yet Butterfingers Hall is one of the most valuable players in the comp because he can recover his fumbles and dish to running team-mates by hand or foot. He mixes it up. Sometimes he makes U turns, usually he doesn't, using quick smart handball.
At his second club, under a brilliant if sometimes strident coach, Hall grew a leg, I mean a brain. He still melts down at times but his play is usually very clever and team oriented. He's not normally a contact player. He is extremely elusive and mobile for a big fellow. He doesn't turn on the spot like Tredrea but he can baulk better and is smarter. Jay Schulz, as a junior, played a bit like him but isn't as big. Like Hall, he has struggled to get into games in his youth but the Sarge was not as prodigious at the same age. He may make a Hall type in years to come, if not as good. Jay's hands are sometimes freakishly smart. Maybe.
Other than Jay we have nobody of the Hall type. The other KPP prospects we have are simply way too small to play the Hall role without assistance. IMO this is the type we should be looking for and grooming.
M.O'Loughlin- We don't have anybody of this type ATM. M.O'L is athletic, strong and equally adept in the air or on the ground. If he could lift his right leg he'd have kicked a bag in the GF. Even half right he was able to embarrass the WCE duds on the lead but couldn't convert. He's got a well rounded game with the exception of his decision making and defensive interest. This is where we can surpass him. If we can groom a less athletic player like say, Hughes (who has natural smarts) to apply a lot of defensive pressure, maybe we can compensate for a lack of athletic talent here in the long term. But for the next few years (save probably 2006) we have a player of equal class to M.O'L- N.G.Brown is a fifty goal tall/small of All Aust quality. He’s not as big, strong or athletic as Micky but he’s a very gifted natural footballer. This is a slot we've got covered in the medium term.
Adam Goodes- plays a wing/flank role rotating through CHF. His main job is up the park. I think we're looking to rotate Ray Hall and Pat Bowden through this role in 06 but they don't seem to have he quality to play in a Premiership team here. Because we'll never have a high class Barry Hall type, we will need a conventional bullocking CHF. Pattison is all we've got in the pipeline for now. We need a few more prospects in this dept. Sydney used Vogels in a deep CHF or #3 forward role at times along with Sean Dempster (used in tagging roles at times, too). Structurally, this seemed to improve the Swans, despite the lack of quality of the players. It suggests to me that if we can groom a real CHF we can get a better forward line than Sydney's.
J.Ball/D.Jolly- T.Simmonds, A.Pattison. Our ruck/forwards are probably inferior to a fit Ball but the Swans seldom used him in attack in 2005. Jolly is a battler who uses his body well. We can exceed the Swans model in this department particularly if Pattison goes on.
A.Schneider/P.Williams/N.Fosdike- Each of these change flankers was injured for most of 2005 so their numbers give a misleading account of the contribution they made at the business end of the season. We don't have a pacy, goal kicking rover who can convert from fifty. The Swans have three (albeit crocks). Bling could do it if we picked up a M.O'L classy type and moved NGB into the N.Davis role. But it's still only one prospect. We gotta rectify this. We need pacy crumbing smalls with goal range. Lots of em.
