Lyon - Long Term? Or 'the next step'?

[saintly]

Agreed with almost everything you have said, it's funny how we can all get sucked in to believing the hype when sometimes a bit of patience will gain us more.

I really GET the whole muscle memory thing. There are times that the whole TEAM is in tune, they know where the tap is going or the ball will be travelling. A couple of first quarters this year have made me smile more then I have for a long time. But currently we can't do that for 4 quarters, but when it does come off we look great.

Having a certain plan but still moving players around to find the best fit is what Lyon needs to do. The performance will come from this.

regarding muscle memory.

you remember when westcoast did training blindfold. I laughed at the time. but maybe it was not a bad idea.

when blind foled. you have to know where the next palyer is going to run. instincts come in.

voices heard.

maybe it was not a bad idea. They did win the flag after all.

[rodgerfox]

I think this thread is pretty apt now.

If you ignore the usual 'hijackers' who tried to ruin it, it's a reasonable read by all involved.

[saintsRrising]

Hey nice bump Rodge..This was your OP back then...

Good coaches don't resort to 'Plan B' to pinch games. They drill their team until they can play 'Plan A' at 100% effort for 4 quarters.

'Plan B' is for coaches who coach for their resume (their personal win/loss ratio) not for the long term benefit of the club.

.

But in your other string you started today you have it as:

Oh, was that it? The main difference?

Someone should have told RL 12 months ago... play on at all costs and we'll be right.

Clearly, there has been a change in tact in regards to risk taking and playing on.
Has it been a change in plan fundamentals by Lyon? Or, was it always the plan that once we were fit and at the business end, we'd start taking risks and moving it quicker.

Or, was this Lyon's instruction all along and as a team and down to every single individual, we failed to listen or ignored this?

I highly doubt the latter.

So what will you post tomorrow????


Lyon has stuck to his guns...kicked a few player up the bum ...and the Hawks game was the result of Lyon's gameplan being enacted with confidence.


Also remember that there are two parts to the gameplan...when we have the ball...when they have the ball.

We are just seeing both parts being well executed now.

[rodgerfox]

Hey nice bump Rodge..This was your OP back then...

Good coaches don't resort to 'Plan B' to pinch games. They drill their team until they can play 'Plan A' at 100% effort for 4 quarters.

'Plan B' is for coaches who coach for their resume (their personal win/loss ratio) not for the long term benefit of the club.

.

But in your other string you started today you have it as:

Oh, was that it? The main difference?

Someone should have told RL 12 months ago... play on at all costs and we'll be right.

Clearly, there has been a change in tact in regards to risk taking and playing on.
Has it been a change in plan fundamentals by Lyon? Or, was it always the plan that once we were fit and at the business end, we'd start taking risks and moving it quicker.

Or, was this Lyon's instruction all along and as a team and down to every single individual, we failed to listen or ignored this?

I highly doubt the latter.

So what will you post tomorrow????


Lyon has stuck to his guns...kicked a few player up the bum ...and the Hawks game was the result of Lyon's gameplan being enacted with confidence.


Also remember that there are two parts to the gameplan...when we have the ball...when they have the ball.

We are just seeing both parts being well executed now.

I don't follow what you mean?

Don't tell me this is going to turn into yet another thread about me??? You guys really need to geet over me.


Anyway, in response....

We are playing a different style. I can't see how that can possibly be doubted.


This thread was not 'bumped' to say 'I was right all along' like you do. It was 'bumped' as it's more relevant now really than it was then. I think it's an interesting discussion to be had.


We weren't being coached for the short term I don't think. I still believe that. I believe that Lyon has been trying to impart some 'fundamentals' on the team. During this learning period, we've been appalling. However, as with all long term goals, you'll always have short term pain along the way.

The change happened at Q time of the North game. If Lyon magically said something to the team during that huddle, something he hasn't been able to get through to them after 2 pre-seasons and nearly 40 games of football - a miracle must have taken place.

We've changed our tact. The fundamentals will remain the same that we've learnt over the past 2 years, but how we go about winning games has changed.


Now as for your other comment.....

"So what will you post tomorrow????"

Just because someone has a view one day, why would you not be open to that changing the next day? I get bagged for apparently having some sort of agenda which apparently every post tries to push, no matter what.

Yet now I'm being accused of changing my view too much??

This probably says more about you and your 'agendas' really. Protec your stated 'view' at all costs!!
There's nothing wrong with your views changing.


I guess you'll never keep everyone happy though. Here's a tip for you if my posts bother you so much - don't read them.

[WayneJudson42]

Good coaches don't resort to 'Plan B' to pinch games. They drill their team until they can play 'Plan A' at 100% effort for 4 quarters.

'Plan B' is for coaches who coach for their resume (their personal win/loss ratio) not for the long term benefit of the club.

I'll actually stick up for you on the above Rodge.

So what will you post tomorrow????

Lyon has stuck to his guns...kicked a few player up the bum ...and the Hawks game was the result of Lyon's gameplan being enacted with confidence.

I think some are getting confused with this. There is no Plan B. All we are doing is playing the game as required more instinctively.

What we are questioning is why the change has occured in the change.

Talk about agendas ffs. I'll happily take issue with comments made in the past, or that I don't agree with. But it's sad to see that people actually "keep score" and try to payback at every opp.

[saintsRrising]

[

There is no Plan B. All we are doing is playing the game as required more instinctively.

.

Is not that what I said?...and with greater confidence and execution.

And

We are playing a different style = No.

We are just executing our gameplan better...and playing it like the coach intended (IMO Rodge...)....
It is a bit like learning to drive a manual car.

You know what to do...the instructor has told you and shown you...but you keep using the clutch wrong, forgettiong to indiacte, look in the mirror etc.

Then it all clicks and away you go. Unconscious competence ...though some incorrectly refer to it as muscle memory (which it is not as the brain is still involved)....


End result of both is that the end result looks different from the earlier efforts when in actuallity it is really the same thing.

[saintsRrising]

Talk about agendas ffs. I'll happily take issue with comments made in the past, or that I don't agree with. But it's sad to see that people actually "keep score" and try to payback at every opp.

If someone bumps a thread as Rodger did, then why not comment on it?

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Lyon: Long term of the next step?

Still don't know, but I'm more content to give him the chance to be long term than I was a month ago.

[TimeToShineFellas]

Talk about agendas ffs. I'll happily take issue with comments made in the past, or that I don't agree with. But it's sad to see that people actually "keep score" and try to payback at every opp.

Well there's not much else for some of these keyboard warriors in real life to do unfortunately.........

[iwantmeseats]

I just don't get this thread.

Face facts: Lyon's "Plan A" isn't any bloody good. It is derived from Lyon's total lack of confidence and his resulting tendency mostly to copy what the Swans have done for the last umpteen years: flooding, retreating, coralling, chipping, etc. Every now and then he has a rush of blood to the head and permits long balls to the forward line.

What he has not done is to develop a game plan based upon attacking the ball. If he develops a plan A that includes that element, I'll feel far more comfortable.

I was going straight down this path as I read through the posts. So much so, I just need to quote it. SPOT on.

[barks4eva]

I just don't get this thread.

Face facts: Lyon's "Plan A" isn't any bloody good. It is derived from Lyon's total lack of confidence and his resulting tendency mostly to copy what the Swans have done for the last umpteen years: flooding, retreating, coralling, chipping, etc. Every now and then he has a rush of blood to the head and permits long balls to the forward line.

What he has not done is to develop a game plan based upon attacking the ball. If he develops a plan A that includes that element, I'll feel far more comfortable.

I was going straight down this path as I read through the posts. So much so, I just need to quote it. SPOT on.

Just add some red chilli to these two and you have Kimchi!

[plugger66]

I just don't get this thread.

Face facts: Lyon's "Plan A" isn't any bloody good. It is derived from Lyon's total lack of confidence and his resulting tendency mostly to copy what the Swans have done for the last umpteen years: flooding, retreating, coralling, chipping, etc. Every now and then he has a rush of blood to the head and permits long balls to the forward line.

What he has not done is to develop a game plan based upon attacking the ball. If he develops a plan A that includes that element, I'll feel far more comfortable.

I was going straight down this path as I read through the posts. So much so, I just need to quote it. SPOT on.

Just add some red chilli to these two and you have Kimchi!

Have you got a bother called blake4eva?

[saintsRrising]

I just don't get this thread.

Face facts: Lyon's "Plan A" isn't any bloody good. It is derived from Lyon's total lack of confidence and his resulting tendency mostly to copy what the Swans have done for the last umpteen years: flooding, retreating, coralling, chipping, etc. Every now and then he has a rush of blood to the head and permits long balls to the forward line.

What he has not done is to develop a game plan based upon attacking the ball. If he develops a plan A that includes that element, I'll feel far more comfortable.

I was going straight down this path as I read through the posts. So much so, I just need to quote it. SPOT on.

I just heard Ball speaking on 3aw.

The main thing he said that they spoke about at half time of the Hawks game, and were asked to address, was their contested ball and tackling.

Ball said in their match review today that the differences in the measures in these two factors was stark in comparing the two halves.

That would sound like to me that the Saints have a game plan that includes attacking the ball (and ball carrier as one cannot tackle players who do not have the ball)....and that the coach is not happy when the players are not doing enough of it.

[WayneJudson42]

iwantmeseats wrote:
meher baba wrote:
I just don't get this thread.

Face facts: Lyon's "Plan A" isn't any bloody good. It is derived from Lyon's total lack of confidence and his resulting tendency mostly to copy what the Swans have done for the last umpteen years: flooding, retreating, coralling, chipping, etc. Every now and then he has a rush of blood to the head and permits long balls to the forward line.

What he has not done is to develop a game plan based upon attacking the ball. If he develops a plan A that includes that element, I'll feel far more comfortable.


I was going straight down this path as I read through the posts. So much so, I just need to quote it. SPOT on.

FFS, another one who "knows" what the plan was

If you hae a copy of RL's plan, then please share it with us.

Unless either of you 2 are actually RL indisguise, how can you state this as fact? And not expect to be ridiculed?

F*** me, you lot are soooo convinced that he was trying to copy Sydney, that you fail to see the tress for the forest. No wonder you cop so much crap on this forum.

Prove the facts and I'll STFU.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

iwantmeseats wrote:
meher baba wrote:
I just don't get this thread.

Face facts: Lyon's "Plan A" isn't any bloody good. It is derived from Lyon's total lack of confidence and his resulting tendency mostly to copy what the Swans have done for the last umpteen years: flooding, retreating, coralling, chipping, etc. Every now and then he has a rush of blood to the head and permits long balls to the forward line.

What he has not done is to develop a game plan based upon attacking the ball. If he develops a plan A that includes that element, I'll feel far more comfortable.


I was going straight down this path as I read through the posts. So much so, I just need to quote it. SPOT on.

FFS, another one who "knows" what the plan was

If you hae a copy of RL's plan, then please share it with us.

Unless either of you 2 are actually RL indisguise, how can you state this as fact? And not expect to be ridiculed?

F*** me, you lot are soooo convinced that he was trying to copy Sydney, that you fail to see the tress for the forest. No wonder you cop so much crap on this forum.

Prove the facts and I'll STFU.

With respect, the bolded part was written in April.

I would have taken more issue with trying to get into Lyon's head and inferring a total lack of confidence than in the assumptions made at that time about our game plan.

I absolutely cannot believe the number of people who take issue with posters trying to figure out what our game plan was and making assumptions based on results. The Saints were regularly worrying more about the man they should have been competing with the ball for rather than the ball. They would have multiple taggers on on ballers.

The appearance was that plan A was tempo footy. Of course we had Lyon and a number of Saints telling us it wasn't, but we haven't seen any signs of what it was (barring good quarters here and there where we smashed opposition sides in the clearances) until the last month. Hard to give props to gameplans you don't see over actions you see repeatedly.

Personally, I'm not convinced that he's trying to copy Sydney, and haven't been since mid last year. But as Roos is happy to let contests like round 1 come into being because his side often wins them, we've been very content to play flood vs flood... and guess what? The way we're running the ball now? Sydney does that too. A lot of the fundamentals Roos and Lyon believe in are likely to be similar, so everyone just needs to get the hell over whether or not we play like Sydney (who are top 4 right now anyway) and pay more attention to what works and what doesn't.

[Mr Magic]

The problem with threads like this one (and many others if truth be told) is often the motive behind their posting in the first place.

Maybe if they were genuine attempts to discuss/debate things they wouldn't turn in to the 'tit-for-tat' pi$$ing contests they do (and I'm as guilty as anybody else in this).

So many threads are started just to push the OP's agenda.

None of us (I believe) actually knew/know what Lyon's gameplan was/is, nor do we know what any other teams gameplan is (all we can do is guess what it/they are). We may think we do but we don't actually know (unless someone on Saintsational has some inner knowledge that they would like to divulge?).

Therefore every post in a thread like this is pure supposition and yet most are written in a manner that would lead readers to tihnk that the poster cldoes actually know.

I can't claim to speak on anybody else's behalf but from the responses it would seem that some/many take objection to that.

[rodgerfox]

The problem with threads like this one (and many others if truth be told) is often the motive behind their posting in the first place.

Maybe if they were genuine attempts to discuss/debate things they wouldn't turn in to the 'tit-for-tat' pi$$ing contests they do (and I'm as guilty as anybody else in this).

So many threads are started just to push the OP's agenda.

Have you read the OP? If you can find anything sinister in that, then I feel sorry for you. How about just reading something and taking it for what it is?

None of us (I believe) actually knew/know what Lyon's gameplan was/is, nor do we know what any other teams gameplan is (all we can do is guess what it/they are). We may think we do but we don't actually know (unless someone on Saintsational has some inner knowledge that they would like to divulge?).

Therefore every post in a thread like this is pure supposition and yet most are written in a manner that would lead readers to tihnk that the poster cldoes actually know.

I can't claim to speak on anybody else's behalf but from the responses it would seem that some/many take objection to that.

This part I agree with.

Hence why if I offer an opinion, I use words such 'believe', 'think', 'hope' etc. to make it clear it's my opinion - not a fact that I have been made aware of.

It annoys me when reading SrR's posts and not being able to tell whether or not it's his view, or if he infact have some inside info.

[Mr Magic]

The problem with threads like this one (and many others if truth be told) is often the motive behind their posting in the first place.

Maybe if they were genuine attempts to discuss/debate things they wouldn't turn in to the 'tit-for-tat' pi$$ing contests they do (and I'm as guilty as anybody else in this).

So many threads are started just to push the OP's agenda.

Have you read the OP? If you can find anything sinister in that, then I feel sorry for you. How about just reading something and taking it for what it is?

None of us (I believe) actually knew/know what Lyon's gameplan was/is, nor do we know what any other teams gameplan is (all we can do is guess what it/they are). We may think we do but we don't actually know (unless someone on Saintsational has some inner knowledge that they would like to divulge?).

Therefore every post in a thread like this is pure supposition and yet most are written in a manner that would lead readers to tihnk that the poster cldoes actually know.

I can't claim to speak on anybody else's behalf but from the responses it would seem that some/many take objection to that.

This part I agree with.

Hence why if I offer an opinion, I use words such 'believe', 'think', 'hope' etc. to make it clear it's my opinion - not a fact that I have been made aware of.

It annoys me when reading SrR's posts and not being able to tell whether or not it's his view, or if he infact have some inside info.

This time, I'll take your post at face value.
IMHO, you have made so many posts that turn out to be nothing more than 'bait' so you can in turn 'push your barrow' it's too difficult to know when you are fair dinkum or not. Hence I (ands I don't presume to speak on behalf of anybody in my 'crew') tend to view your posts with suspicion.

As far as SrR is concerned, there is no doubt in my mind that when he posts from knowledge, he says so, and it is quite obvious to me that everything else from him is his opinion.

You seem to choose to find a post/sentence/phrase/word/nuance of his that you can object to, IMHO, to further 'push your barrow'.

Maybe I'm reading your posts incorrectly, but that's the way they appear to me.

[rodgerfox]

Maybe I'm reading your posts incorrectly, but that's the way they appear to me.

Quite clearly, you are.

Here's a tip which might help - don't read my posts if they upset you so much. Problem solved!

[WayneJudson42]

Everyone has the right to post their opinions.

My issue is as follows...

We have a poster who was calling for the coach's head not so long ago. He was adament in his judgement that RL was no good coz he was copying the Sydney style.

These are strong words, friends. Very clear, very concise.

Now we win a few, and the tune is changed to "yes, we have won a few, and maybe he can coach" and the inference is that the reason we have changed was because the coach decided not to copy Sydney and play more attacking. Which is exactly what the poster said needed to happen.

FACT: Unless we have inside info... no one knows.

WTF is plan A? Did it exist?

Yet, some will use this argument as Gospel to justify their previous hysteria re sacking Lyon. All the while, their argument is based on factless speculation.

FFS, throw it up as a question for debate, or state that it's "IMHO".

It's not a personal attack on anyone. I agree to disagree with anyone, incl Rodge and Jeff, but it ain't personal with either of them.

Likewise, it wasn't an attack on the posters. It was their opinion, and inference that they actually know what goes on in the inner sanctum.

In fairness to other posters, we have discussed the possibilities in an open and respectable manner.

[Mr Magic]

Maybe I'm reading your posts incorrectly, but that's the way they appear to me.

Quite clearly, you are.

Here's a tip which might help - don't read my posts if they upset you so much. Problem solved!

So once again you throw the 'bait' out there.
This post just 'proves' the point I was making.

Thanks for the 'tip'.
Unfortunately experience has shown me that your 'tips' are as worthwhile as your 'feigned indigantion'.

[rodgerfox]

Maybe I'm reading your posts incorrectly, but that's the way they appear to me.

Quite clearly, you are.

Here's a tip which might help - don't read my posts if they upset you so much. Problem solved!

So once again you throw the 'bait' out there.
This post just 'proves' the point I was making.

Thanks for the 'tip'.
Unfortunately experience has shown me that your 'tips' are as worthwhile as your 'feigned indigantion'.

Another post about me!!!

Man, get over me.

[WayneJudson42]

The appearance was that plan A was tempo footy. Of course we had Lyon and a number of Saints telling us it wasn't, but we haven't seen any signs of what it was (barring good quarters here and there where we smashed opposition sides in the clearances) until the last month. Hard to give props to gameplans you don't see over actions you see repeatedly.

Agree, now here's where we differ...

Adding the "tempo" dimension or "defensive" side to our game requires learning. Most experts who have coahed or played, seem to agree that it can take up to 2 years to learn a new style.

So...

When are we supposed to learn it? At training? nope.
Preseason? uh uh.

How about during the season proper? Maybe. If we look at constant attack and play how we did, at what stage do we learn.

Obviously, it would be something that you phase in over time. You will win some (we did) and you'll lose some (we did) in the process.

Also, we've hadf some great quaters and halves of footy. But not 4 quaters on a consistant basis. So by your logic, those good quaters were an abberation, and the players went against RL's instructions?

That's about as logical an argument as those who believe that at 3/4 time, RL tells players to shut the game down for the entire quater.

IMHO we have taken a few steps back in ordere to move forward.

[Mr Magic]

Maybe I'm reading your posts incorrectly, but that's the way they appear to me.

Quite clearly, you are.

Here's a tip which might help - don't read my posts if they upset you so much. Problem solved!

So once again you throw the 'bait' out there.
This post just 'proves' the point I was making.

Thanks for the 'tip'.
Unfortunately experience has shown me that your 'tips' are as worthwhile as your 'feigned indigantion'.

Another post about me!!!

Man, get over me.

Ha, coming from the person who weekly posts a 'Look at Me, Look at Me Thread'!

You really do have an over-inflated opinion of yourself.

[rodgerfox]

So once again you throw the 'bait' out there.
This post just 'proves' the point I was making.

Thanks for the 'tip'.
Unfortunately experience has shown me that your 'tips' are as worthwhile as your 'feigned indigantion'.

Another post about me!!!

Man, get over me.[/quote]

Ha, coming from the person who weekly posts a 'Look at Me, Look at Me Thread'!

You really do have an over-inflated opinion of yourself.[/quote]

And another one!!