There's been a bit of talk about our forward movements but I reckon we'll still be a heavy flooding team from defence. Last year we matched the Swans for playing like the Sydney Harbour and swamped teams where we could in defence with our midfield and sometimes half our forward line sitting behind half back flank. The games against Sydney and Adelaide where we got close enough for them to smell fear were full flood games, but then sometimes it looked as though we were trying different strategies.

I think our heavy flooding was to limit the damage and when I see heavy flooding I know we have given the game away.
I dont see flooding teaching your youngsters much either and its a bit like playing Zone in basketball....you have acknowledged the fact you cant go man on man with the other team because you dont have faith in the talent of your players. I hope Denis lets the young blood run free and we have enough faith in our own abilities to kick a winning score......
Flooding is a last resort method to save games IMO and we should be embracing the attacking style of play that good Carlton teams were known for...you might get a few beltings early on but your young players develop better skills and know how from playing attacking footy rather than standing like cows in a paddock just filling up space in the backline...

IMHO, The game is evolving past having a set "gameplan" or philosophy.
Teams needs to counter changes in tempo and tactics during a game, not when the review is completed by the coaches.
Sydney are the trendsetters in this regard but teams will be following their thought processes, not their gameplan.
Sydney are viewed as a high possession side but if you view their stats, they were actually the 14th ranked team in the AFL for possessions.
They probably average the highest contested mark per mark ratio and the most contested possessions per possession.
In other words, they are a low possession, contested football side.

Where Sydney excel is their ability to beat the flood. Hence they would probably have the best record against Brisbane in the AFL.
It goes a long way toward explaining their defeating the Saints in the finals.
In short, they control the tempo of the game and refuse to kick to flooded zones. If the fast break is on, Sydney can move the ball as well as any.
If not, they control the ball at all costs.
That appears to be what we are trying to achieve.
The biggest problems IMO are-

a. We dont have enough senior players capable of dictating the tempo

b. Pagan has actively tried to turn the players into non creative, robotic type players who instinctively follow his credo completely. The ability to create and improvise was taken away from the players the day he walked in to the club.

Training however appears to indicate a willingness to control the ball until we reach the centre of the ground. For the first time in 3 years drills are encompassing and encouraging lateral movement of the ball. Drills are specifically designed to facilitate changing of direction, chipping to the on coming lead and leading wide to the wings.

We wont be playing a Sydney type gameplan as such, if anything our game style will go further away from theirs statistically.
What we will see is an increase in chip passing, less kicking to contests and a bit more freedom for the players to create.
We will become less predictable structurally and our midfield rotation will increase substantially.

The rule changes implemented by the AFL will suit running teams attempting to outrun the flood. That's where I see us heading this year.
The players will take quite a bit of time to adapt and that is obvious when any match simulation takes place.
But we will play exciting footy. The kids will love this style of game and players with natural flair like Hartlett, Fisher, Bower, Carlos and Scotland will show out.

I think our heavy flooding was to limit the damage and when I see heavy flooding I know we have given the game away.
I dont see flooding teaching your youngsters much either and its a bit like playing Zone in basketball....you have acknowledged the fact you cant go man on man with the other team because you dont have faith in the talent of your players. I hope Denis lets the young blood run free and we have enough faith in our own abilities to kick a winning score......
Flooding is a last resort method to save games IMO and we should be embracing the attacking style of play that good Carlton teams were known for...you might get a few beltings early on but your young players develop better skills and know how from playing attacking footy rather than standing like cows in a paddock just filling up space in the backline...

What we will see is an increase in chip passing, less kicking to contests and a bit more freedom for the players to create.

But we will play exciting footy. The kids will love this style of game and players with natural flair like Hartlett, Fisher, Bower, Carlos and Scotland will show out.

BV are you suggesting a clarkson style of chipping game or a williams , sheedy style of possession game- What are your thoughts as you get to training

I'm not really suggesting either.
What I suspect is we will see is more of a willingness to retain possession.
Previously our players didnt have the confidence in themselves or the confidence from the coach to create options other than "kick it down the line".
I suspect we'll see more running with the ball, more lateral movement of the ball and a willingness to "lead up" and short pass 15/20 metres to the on coming player.
Previously Pagan wanted to get the ball forward as quickly as possible.
I suspect we will see more emphasis on having possession forward on the centre before kicking to contests.
If that takes longer, so be it.

But dont think we will see a big change in numbers, we will still be one of the lowest possession sides. I just believe our game will become slightly less based on contests which with a young side, is smart.