Rose and Ryan: Reviewing the Dockers, Swans, Crows and 'Roos

Cam Rose: it’s time to continue on our merry way of our post-season reviews. Today we look at four of the fallen finalists – Adelaide, Sydney, North and Fremantle.

We can start by saying that we’ve both written about the Dockers in the last couple of days, so I’m not sure there’s a whole lot more to be said.

(You can read Ryan’s thoughts from yesterday here, and mine from Tuesday are here)

It seems like we’re both optimistic of what Ross Lyon and the Dockers can do in the short term, and are bucking what seems to be the majority trend a little bit.

Ryan Buckland: to be frank, the media response hasn’t surprised me one bit, which is what compelled me to write that piece. I was high on the Dockers from the get go, in an environment when some people that are paid to do this for a living were saying they’d miss the top eight altogether.

As I said about 500 words in, the same media that were projecting Lyon’s team to fall by the wayside this season are now saying they’re a group of unfulfilled talent and have to rebuild. Please.

Fremantle have the best midfield and defence in the league. Where they need help – and where management has been asked, politely, to provide some assistance – is forward line talent. Fortunately for the Dockers, there’s some of that available on the market this year.

Rose: speaking of forward line talent, let’s look at Adelaide.

The Crows played some exhilarating attacking football at times this year, both before and after Phil Walsh’s untimely death. Given that, it was a shame to see them surrender so meekly against the Hawks in their semi-final. They didn’t fire a shot when the match was on the line early in the game.

They have a beautiful balance of talls and smalls up forward, so they’ll continue to be dangerous in that area of the ground. With the loss of Patrick Dangerfield, is that forward line going to see enough opportunities next year?

Ryan: for a game played in teams of 18, it’s remarkable the impact a single player can have. With Dangerfield, and perhaps another strong one-on-one defender, I would have been tipping the Crows to give the top four a good shake next season. Now without Dangerfield, that becomes a much more challenging proposition.

All of a sudden, Rory Sloane gets the hard tag, Scott Thompson is the guy that gets bodied up at stoppages, and it’ll be up to one of the youngsters to play a greater role.

They’ve still got the stocks, and the game style, to have a solid crack at September, and a big reason why is the forward line, which generates a lot of its own entries and scores.

We both had Taylor Walker as our centre half forward in our All Australian teams; how big is his omission from the real side?

Rose: I can live with it, as I found that second key forward position the hardest to fill. I’m glad to see Jack Riewoldt get some recognition at least; he’s been a hard-working consistent footballer for a long time, certainly much longer than fools like Mark Maclure would have us believe.

If the Crows can maintain their position in the second week of finals after losing Dangerfield, then they’ll have done well. I fancy that they’re one team most people will have slipping next year.

Ryan: yeah, I agree on the Crows to slip narrative. It’s an easy case to make when you lose your best player, and have a new coach. I just said Fremantle are the most interesting team in the league – maybe it’s actually Adelaide.

Rose: what do you make of Sydney? I’m on public record as saying John Longmire should be moved on, because the Swans have underachieved over the last three years. Where do you stand?

Ryan: Sydney are another interesting one. I flagged some concerns in July, and those concerns manifested in their two finals. The Swans are a team battling a bit of an identity crisis: are they the gritty Bloods, or the Bondi Billionaires? Like most things, I suspect the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

When Sydney clicked this year, they looked very dangerous. You could say that about any team around this part of the ladder though, couldn’t you? And as you put very well in your piece, there is a strong argument to say they have underachieved in winning one flag from two grand finals given the players they have.

The Swans story seems to be a slip in 2016. I’m not so sure yet. Injuries hit key players at precisely the wrong time, while they didn’t have good production from half of their midfield for the first half of the year. Questions certainly need to be asked of the medium-term direction, given they’re severely constrained as to what they can do to improve their list. But the players that they do have – Isaac Heeney, Tom Mitchell, Luke Parker (who is only 22), Harry Cunningham – all project as good-to-great.

Are they a top four team in 2016? I’d be leaning towards no right now, given who is around them. But they could also challenge for a premiership. What about you?

Rose: the Swans will stay up there, based on natural talent if nothing else. I still look at that midfield of Josh Kennedy, Dan Hannebery, Jarrad McVeigh and Kieren Jack, plus the young players you’ve mentioned, and it will still arguably be the best in the league. With Kurt Tippett and Lance Franklin up front, they’ll continue to be dangerous.

Sam Reid needs to play as a permanent defender, both to give them a younger face back there, and to take away those demoralising set-shot misses that he continues to offer up.

Surely Matthew Leuenberger will decide to go there, and if they can get a full season out of him, that will be a major plus. They certainly do need a genuine crumbing forward though, although there’s a few teams in that boat.

Ryan: I’d actually like to see another big-bodied, lone-hand ruckman head to Sydney. Matthew Lobbe is the definition of surplus to requirements if the mooted Charlie Dixon to Port Adelaide deal goes ahead. But Leuenberger would also be a nice fit. Agree that they’ll be thereabouts – the talent is too great in number.

Rose: Ultimately, I would love to see what the Swans would produce under the likes of Alastair Clarkson, Ken Hinkley or Luke Beveridge, to see what some fresh ideas could do to the playing group.

In terms of a more experienced coach, Brad Scott has now had six years at the helm of North Melbourne. How’s he doing?

Ryan: ah, North Melbourne. The Crowd gave it to me when I said they’d make it into the top four. Strangely, I reckon I’ve spent more time talking about North Melbourne than any other team this year – perhaps Fremantle get that ignominious honour after yesterday.

They’re in a fascinating spot, for sure. When Brad Scott took over, the North list was close to a disaster: good top-end talent, but woeful depth and chock full of role players. And then they lost Josh Gibson, David Hale and Hamish McIntosh. They are, in many respects, the first real free agency experiment.

At this stage I still give them a pass grade, because they’ve made the preliminary final round two years in a row, and were the sixth-best team on percentage in 2013 but missed the eight. He’s got another year on his current deal, and you would think another trip to the last four will be a requirement for him to go farther than that.

The team is built to win in the here and now, and after next year the likes of Jarrad Waite, Brent Harvey, Michael Firrito and Drew Petrie – maybe even Daniel Wells and Nick Dal Santo – will be approaching retirement.

How about you? Is it grand final or bust?

Rose: not sure about grand final or bust, but I just don’t see a premiership with this current group, as they still lack the class. They’ve had a crack, bringing in quality top-ups, and there’s no shame in that, but it’s not going to happen for them. They’re another list I compare to the Dogs of 2008-10.

Simply put, the competition is designed for one club to win a flag every 18 years. Obviously that’s not going to happen, and a lot of clubs aren’t even going to make a grand final in that time. But the reign of a coach is not necessarily a failure if they can’t land that premiership glory. North fans will have to comfort themselves with those thoughts at some point in the next couple of years.

Ryan: just on your last point there, and we’ve been saying this over the past few weeks but it’s worth repeating: the 2016 season looks incredibly wide open. These four clubs will probably figure in the finals, but equally there are any number of sides outside of a couple that have legitimate claims.

Rose: indeed. Apart from probably Hawthorn up the top, and perhaps Carlton down the bottom, every other club would expect themselves to improve significantly next season, and fancy their chances of leap-frogging those above them.

Ryan: so, we’re out of teams to review for now! Next week we’ll discuss the conqueror and the conquered – maybe include a little review of the game itself while we’re at it.