He's sharing cigarettes with RampeOriginally Posted by aguy
He's sharing cigarettes with Rampe
If we are paying a bombers side full of discards and VFL players regardless if we dont go hard we will still flog them without trying. Swans are at a different level fitness wise than 2nd or even 3rd grade bombers players.
By the 3rd quarter most of the bomber top ups wont even be able to keep up.
I saw quick footage of a bombers top up player the other night and it was the 2nd or 3rd qrt and he had to come off due to being exhausted.
I suspect if we are up by 20+ goals up in the last Horse will rest the older players.
Essendon played GW$ in the NAB Cup and actually won the last half.
Tells us about GW$ or Essendon (top up) fitness?
I dont know dont care. I just watched 1 minute of it while i was at a bar waiting for friends.
If anything GWS would have stopped trying and treated it as a training drill in the last.
There could be great benefits to Buddy, Tipp and Goodes having knee soreness for round one. Sam Reid gets an opportunity as the main forward. He may kick 6 goals and nail six tackles. That would really help his confidence early in the season.
Pyke having some knee soreness may allow Naismith or Tom D to get some ruck time.
Ben McGlynn and Mcveigh having muscle tightness may allow Lloyd and Heeney greater midfield time. Hiscox may sneak onto the subs bench.
Ted Richards being out will give his brother a chance.
It's important that the Swans keep assessing their depth chart and preparing the older players for the harder games (Port).
As Paul Keating once said "I'm going to do you slowly". We don't need to beat the depleted Dons by 120 points with a full strength team. Winning by 35 points, while preparing the older players for round two is the play. Lets "do the competition slowly". We don't need to jump out of the blocks with "fightback".
It is simple, we pick the best 22 fit and available for the Essendon game, 4 points are at stake. If nothing else percentage is always important
This talk of resting players for round 1 in the name of "Asset Management" is absurd in the extreme
- - - Updated - - -
Early contender for dumbest post of the year - have you ever actually played competitive sport Matt or do you just see everything through your gratingly annoying Corporate Advisor Speak?
I used to watch Sir Alex at Man United rest and refresh players through a long season. This managed injuries and player impact while building the depth and capability of his whole squad. Sir Alex would not play his best players if the game was a cup tie against a 4th division side. A depleted Dons side is the equivalent of a lower division soccer side.
Cricket Australia practices informed player management. They don't play Mitchell Johnson in Ryan Harris for every game. The rest and refresh them so they operate at maximum impact when required.
These two approaches were not designed by McKinsey and Co. They were designed by World Class coaches who understand competitive sport.
Wouldn't hurt the supporters to see a glorious opening to the season for a change!
Yeah, a solid ten-fifteen goal win, with no injuries would wonderful.
"Fortunately, this is the internet, so knowing nothing is no obstacle to having an opinion!." Beerman 18-07-2017
Sorry Matt but this type of economic bottom line thinking is really silly. Every team knows from 2013 on that building percentage in "soft" games is critical to your final ranking. To suggest resting players because the opposition is weak is contrary to "best practice". If they are genuinely unfit or injured then it is up to the fitness and physio depts to say so and deem them unavailable. To not play your best team on the basis of some perceived development policy is the worst possible message to being sending not only to your own side, but more importantly to the opposition: "Look we don't rate you so we'll play our juniors."
Every player you mentioned will be needed against Port in Adelaide the following week.
By playing them against Essendon, a) we find out if they're fit, b) we give them the chance to improve their match fitness and/or c) they get more game time to tune up their skills under match day pressure.
If we were in a competition that forced us to play 2-3 games a week you may be right but until then the comparison (and therefore strategy) is ridiculous.
Agree with all of this.
It's not just about the game this week, it's also about getting ready for next week and the one after. Conditioning & building up match fitness. Learning to play with new additions and gelling together with new coaching tactics.
And even poor teams can occasionally beat the great ones (Dees anyone? ) and the end of the season could well depend on those four points and the percentage boost.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks