![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
thats right you must believe, back and support every thing StK...trust people, don't be cynical....our history of success demands this
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Well I would not quite call it a blessing.rodgerfox wrote:Oddly, I don't think this is such a huge problem.
I actually do think this is a blessing in disguise.
.
You are as soft as hot butter!Teflon wrote:If its 12 weeks we are gonna feel this big time.WinnersOnly wrote:HEALY just quoted 16 weeks... F*** @@@@@@@
Everyone suggesting we will just beat sides without Riewoldt is dreaming.
It brings our fwd line right back to the pack, changes our structure performance in that while we may plonk another big body there their success rate will not be that of Riewoldt....
Still the bigger picture is finals - whatever it take get him right and pray we have enough games to get some run/form into him before the main stuff....cause imo we will not win it without him (you dont just lose the best player in the game and not feel it...)
But Collingwood are not a contender. That is the issue.Thinline wrote:You are as soft as hot butter!Teflon wrote:If its 12 weeks we are gonna feel this big time.WinnersOnly wrote:HEALY just quoted 16 weeks... F*** @@@@@@@
Everyone suggesting we will just beat sides without Riewoldt is dreaming.
It brings our fwd line right back to the pack, changes our structure performance in that while we may plonk another big body there their success rate will not be that of Riewoldt....
Still the bigger picture is finals - whatever it take get him right and pray we have enough games to get some run/form into him before the main stuff....cause imo we will not win it without him (you dont just lose the best player in the game and not feel it...)
What contribution did Roo make on Fri night? Pretty much diddly. We still beat an apparent contender pretty comfortbly in the end. Why? Because we have a structure that is ingrained, disciplined hardarse players who never give up, and a top ten or twelve players that are the envy of every club because of their ruthless and unending committment.
So quit the doom and gloom, bud. Smell the roses.
I actually think the biggest impact will be on the 'structure' (I really think if you asked 1000 footy followers what that term actually means 999 wouldn't know).fingers wrote:This won't be as big a problem as everyone thinks. Yes we will miss him. How could we not. But even Shane Crawford commented on the Sunday footy show that the whole plan for the Saints and what wins them games is the structure.
We are a machine and we will replace this important part with another one. Maybe not as good but we have options. BJ, Fisher, Gilbert, Gwilt, Gardiner will all rotate through the forward line.
We will be ok. It's why we play the way we play.
Do you want a tissue?Saintsfan wrote:But Collingwood are not a contender. That is the issue.Thinline wrote:You are as soft as hot butter!Teflon wrote:If its 12 weeks we are gonna feel this big time.WinnersOnly wrote:HEALY just quoted 16 weeks... F*** @@@@@@@
Everyone suggesting we will just beat sides without Riewoldt is dreaming.
It brings our fwd line right back to the pack, changes our structure performance in that while we may plonk another big body there their success rate will not be that of Riewoldt....
Still the bigger picture is finals - whatever it take get him right and pray we have enough games to get some run/form into him before the main stuff....cause imo we will not win it without him (you dont just lose the best player in the game and not feel it...)
What contribution did Roo make on Fri night? Pretty much diddly. We still beat an apparent contender pretty comfortbly in the end. Why? Because we have a structure that is ingrained, disciplined hardarse players who never give up, and a top ten or twelve players that are the envy of every club because of their ruthless and unending committment.
So quit the doom and gloom, bud. Smell the roses.
Geelong and possibly Footscray and Hawthorn are contenders.
All we need is one of those teams to beat us in a prelim or a gf and its all gone to waste again.
I don't think it's anything like 2004/2005.Saintsfan wrote:This sounds like 2004/2005 all over again
'When (insert gun player(s)) return we will be sweet'
That turned out well
You bet.58ter wrote:last i saw Nick he had 2 arms 2 legs ie human.
look at Ottens last year came back fit and well, clarke keating in previous brisbane teams. we only need to finish 4th or better thats only 12 games out of the next 19. Can't wait to see our players and coaching staff meet ths challange
I'm sorry but...what?Thinline wrote:Do you want a tissue?Saintsfan wrote:But Collingwood are not a contender. That is the issue.Thinline wrote:You are as soft as hot butter!Teflon wrote:If its 12 weeks we are gonna feel this big time.WinnersOnly wrote:HEALY just quoted 16 weeks... F*** @@@@@@@
Everyone suggesting we will just beat sides without Riewoldt is dreaming.
It brings our fwd line right back to the pack, changes our structure performance in that while we may plonk another big body there their success rate will not be that of Riewoldt....
Still the bigger picture is finals - whatever it take get him right and pray we have enough games to get some run/form into him before the main stuff....cause imo we will not win it without him (you dont just lose the best player in the game and not feel it...)
What contribution did Roo make on Fri night? Pretty much diddly. We still beat an apparent contender pretty comfortbly in the end. Why? Because we have a structure that is ingrained, disciplined hardarse players who never give up, and a top ten or twelve players that are the envy of every club because of their ruthless and unending committment.
So quit the doom and gloom, bud. Smell the roses.
Geelong and possibly Footscray and Hawthorn are contenders.
All we need is one of those teams to beat us in a prelim or a gf and its all gone to waste again.
Fair dinkum.
Maybe not 9.Saintsfan wrote:
They can be hardarse all they want but if they have nobody to kick to what is the use in being hardarse? Kosi should do the job however what if he doesn't? We will not win a huge amount of games only kicking 9 goals per match.
Welcome to 2007 style Ross Lyon lockdown football....except now we know how to play itrodgerfox wrote:Maybe not 9.Saintsfan wrote:
They can be hardarse all they want but if they have nobody to kick to what is the use in being hardarse? Kosi should do the job however what if he doesn't? We will not win a huge amount of games only kicking 9 goals per match.
But we can still win plenty of games by kicking 11 or 12. That's the beauty of where the team is now at.
I agree with this 100%, good post.rodgerfox wrote:Oddly, I don't think this is such a huge problem.
I actually do think this is a blessing in disguise.
I know for the diehards, winning every week so you don't cop shiit from your mates is very important. But the reality is, we only need to win enough to make the top 4.
Ideally, enough to make the top 2 - but with Adelaide, Port, West Coast etc. being reeky this year the top 2 most likely won't be that big a deal to us.
We won 20 games last year, but in the end it just didn't matter. We played 4th. So if we finished 4th - same scenario.
Anyway, he'll be back this season.
He'll be back for the finals, and fit by then. No niggles, no moon boots, no helicopters circling Moorabbin trying to suss out if his knee is really cactus or not.
Put it this way, if he does have any niggles they can clean them up too whilst he's under.
The other thing, like it or not, we are reliant on him. But, credit to the coach - I don't actually think it's because we have to be.
We were pretty average on Friday night I thought against a plodding team without one of their best players and no forward line. Gutsy and tough, but not brilliant by any stretch.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if Collingwood missed the 8.
We actually looked better when Roo went off. We can score without him, but I just don't think we try to score without him necessarily. I think we figure 'well he's there, so why not use him'.
Cause when he goes off the ground altogether, we actually look very coherent.
When he's on the ground and quiet, we look average.
So, this is a blessing.
What we need Roo to be for us to win the flag, is to play a role. Not the role.
When he comes back, we'll be settled and will have luxury of slotting the best player in the comp back in to add to the team - not be the team.
We only need to win 11 more games to finish top 4. That's 58% of games.
If we need one guy to win 58% of our remaining games, then so be it. We are what we are.
But I'd be very surprised if that's what we are.
I think of our structure in a different sense, more of a style and way we go about it. As I think you allude to, we will need to change our forward set up (structure if you will) but not the team structure nor the style of footy.rodgerfox wrote:I actually think the biggest impact will be on the 'structure' (I really think if you asked 1000 footy followers what that term actually means 999 wouldn't know).fingers wrote:This won't be as big a problem as everyone thinks. Yes we will miss him. How could we not. But even Shane Crawford commented on the Sunday footy show that the whole plan for the Saints and what wins them games is the structure.
We are a machine and we will replace this important part with another one. Maybe not as good but we have options. BJ, Fisher, Gilbert, Gwilt, Gardiner will all rotate through the forward line.
We will be ok. It's why we play the way we play.
By suggesting our structure will hold up, suggests someone else will take on Roo's role in our structure.
If we try to do this, then we will literally be without the comp's best player and naturally will miss him sorely. No one can play his role like he does.
However if we alter our structure due to him not being there (like Friday night's last quarter), and rely on our discipline, team ethos, fitness, desire and the rest of our gun players then we'll minimise the impact of one player not being out on the ground.
Correct and the finals are part of this season.plugger66 wrote:How anyone thinks losing a player for a heap of the season with no guarantee of him playing again this season is a blessing is beyond me. Obviously we cant do anything about it but there is absolutely no positive in this at all for this season. maybe will help in the future but surely for us it is all about this season.
Could not of put it better myself RF.rodgerfox wrote:Oddly, I don't think this is such a huge problem.
I actually do think this is a blessing in disguise.
I know for the diehards, winning every week so you don't cop shiit from your mates is very important. But the reality is, we only need to win enough to make the top 4.
Ideally, enough to make the top 2 - but with Adelaide, Port, West Coast etc. being reeky this year the top 2 most likely won't be that big a deal to us.
We won 20 games last year, but in the end it just didn't matter. We played 4th. So if we finished 4th - same scenario.
Anyway, he'll be back this season.
He'll be back for the finals, and fit by then. No niggles, no moon boots, no helicopters circling Moorabbin trying to suss out if his knee is really cactus or not.
Put it this way, if he does have any niggles they can clean them up too whilst he's under.
The other thing, like it or not, we are reliant on him. But, credit to the coach - I don't actually think it's because we have to be.
We were pretty average on Friday night I thought against a plodding team without one of their best players and no forward line. Gutsy and tough, but not brilliant by any stretch.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if Collingwood missed the 8.
We actually looked better when Roo went off. We can score without him, but I just don't think we try to score without him necessarily. I think we figure 'well he's there, so why not use him'.
Cause when he goes off the ground altogether, we actually look very coherent.
When he's on the ground and quiet, we look average.
So, this is a blessing.
What we need Roo to be for us to win the flag, is to play a role. Not the role.
When he comes back, we'll be settled and will have luxury of slotting the best player in the comp back in to add to the team - not be the team.
We only need to win 11 more games to finish top 4. That's 58% of games.
If we need one guy to win 58% of our remaining games, then so be it. We are what we are.
But I'd be very surprised if that's what we are.
Losing Riewoldt is definitely a major disaster, but that does not mean that we should break down and cry.plugger66 wrote:How anyone thinks losing a player for a heap of the season with no guarantee of him playing again this season is a blessing is beyond me. Obviously we cant do anything about it but there is absolutely no positive in this at all for this season. maybe will help in the future but surely for us it is all about this season.
I agree but it could never be called a positive. As I said we obviously have no choice.ace wrote:Losing Riewoldt is definitely a major disaster, but that does not mean that we should break down and cry.plugger66 wrote:How anyone thinks losing a player for a heap of the season with no guarantee of him playing again this season is a blessing is beyond me. Obviously we cant do anything about it but there is absolutely no positive in this at all for this season. maybe will help in the future but surely for us it is all about this season.
When ever you suffer a disadvantage, you should immediately examine how you can take advantage of the circumstances.
These circumstance allow the club to try other players in the team and to develop structures and alternate game plans.
Game plans that can be used in the finals if Riewoldt, is being swamped as occured in last years Grand Final.
The loss of Riewoldt can still be used to improve the club's chances of winning this year's premiership.
I call it taking advantage of disadvantage.
Well we are not going to win the flag in 5 years time so why not now...oh wait this is super forward planning for the future because we are constantly preparing for the future despite our bench chance in a zillion years is now...plugger66 wrote:How anyone thinks losing a player for a heap of the season with no guarantee of him playing again this season is a blessing is beyond me. Obviously we cant do anything about it but there is absolutely no positive in this at all for this season. maybe will help in the future but surely for us it is all about this season.
It is not a postiive yet but it can still be turned into a postive.plugger66 wrote:I agree but it could never be called a positive. As I said we obviously have no choice.ace wrote:Losing Riewoldt is definitely a major disaster, but that does not mean that we should break down and cry.plugger66 wrote:How anyone thinks losing a player for a heap of the season with no guarantee of him playing again this season is a blessing is beyond me. Obviously we cant do anything about it but there is absolutely no positive in this at all for this season. maybe will help in the future but surely for us it is all about this season.
When ever you suffer a disadvantage, you should immediately examine how you can take advantage of the circumstances.
These circumstance allow the club to try other players in the team and to develop structures and alternate game plans.
Game plans that can be used in the finals if Riewoldt, is being swamped as occured in last years Grand Final.
The loss of Riewoldt can still be used to improve the club's chances of winning this year's premiership.
I call it taking advantage of disadvantage.