Is the 2012 team as good as 2005's

**barry** · 20th August 2012, 11:08 AM

For most of the season I have been thinking that this years team isnt as good as 2005, and therefore a premiership will be hard.

But the last few games are turning me around. Kennedy is the midfield Goodes of 2005.

Pyke is the "LRT", the rough code convert who has our hearts in our mouths. But Pyke is a playing well, and plays an area of the game (forward and mid) where mistakes dont always cost goals (LRT was CHB).

Our forward line is not up to 2005, but closing the gap every day. It works bueatifully when all parts are assembled. No one is the dominant Barry Hall, but Reid, LRT, Goodes, McGlynn, Martin/Midfielder all work well together.

The only question, is can you win a flag without a dominant forward. West Coast proved you can in 2006, but you need a gun midfield (which we have), and you only win by a point. !!

**dimelb** · 20th August 2012, 11:32 AM

The forward line is not conventional blockbuster material, but it works. Covering Reid is a big job. Covering Reid and LRT is a very big job. Covering Reid, LRT and Pyke/Mumford is an alarming job, and if they all switch on, it becomes mission impossible.

**mcs** · 20th August 2012, 11:52 AM

I'll leave comparing the team to the 2005 version to hopefully the day after the Grand Final, but I will comment on our forward line.

When we are playing well and switched on (see first half of the third quarter yesterday), we have a midfield that can dominate possession, break hard, create a lot of space and get forward quickly. When this happens, our forward line looks very good and we kick plenty of goals. When our midfield struggles, then generally our forward line looks slow,static and not particularly good. Our forward line is certainly not up there on paper with probably 4 or 5 others, but the rest of the team really helps to make up for it, and when we are playing well then it is a very effective forward line indeed.

**Industrial Fan** · 20th August 2012, 12:37 PM

We could beat Collingwood in 2005.

Probably better drilled then too, with better defined outlets and ability to gain control of a game that was not going our way.

**Big Al** · 20th August 2012, 01:22 PM

2012 would murder the 2005 side. Both hard at it but the outside run of 2012 would be too much for the 2005 side. 2012 is also better coached.

**BillyRayCypress** · 20th August 2012, 01:35 PM

I think you also need to look at the opposition. That is alot better in 2012 than in 2005 or 2006.

The 2012 side is better on and off the field.

**Nico** · 20th August 2012, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Big Al

2012 would murder the 2005 side. Both hard at it but the outside run of 2012 would be too much for the 2005 side. 2012 is also better coached.

Strewth Al thats a bit tough on Roosey. After all we did win the flag. I think the similarity is that both sides have solid, scrooge backlines. We had the line breaking Kennelly and to a lesser extent Crouch and the 2012 backline is very similar. Reg does worry me though with his disposal and uncertainty at times. Overall I think we have a better depth in our midfield this year. Another similarity is that we are winning almost all the close ones. Also we have won 16 games the most in a season since 1996 and have probably been more consitent. For mine, a deadheat, can't pick it.

**hot potato** · 21st August 2012, 12:35 AM

Memory is fading a bit , but gut feeling the 2012 team is better equipped from a versatility point of view...

**Captain** · 21st August 2012, 09:37 AM

2005 team had more stars.

2012 team has less duds.

**barry** · 21st August 2012, 09:47 AM

Originally Posted by Captain

2005 team had more stars.

2012 team has less duds.

Good summary. Our 2012 team is a lot like West Coasts 2005/06 team.

If Swans 2005 played Swans 2012, it would be a very hard slog not unlike the collingwood game we saw last week. And who would Goodes, LRT play for ?