2025

A preview of the preview.

If you’ve read my Essendon 2024 year in review, you’ll already have a solid grasp of what I believe worked on-field and why, what didn’t, and the reasons behind it, as well as which players thrived under significant changes and who has yet to reach a higher level—if they’re capable.

Now, as we shift focus to 2025, I want to explore what Essendon should continue building on from last season, as well as the key areas that need improvement. While progress was made in certain aspects of the game, there are still clear gaps that need addressing to compete more consistently over longer periods.

In this piece, I’ll break down the elements of Essendon’s game that should be refined, the areas where improvement is critical to matching the best teams, and what those changes might look like in practice.

The aim is to outline the steps needed for Essendon to move beyond promise and towards sustained, long-term success.

The Fixture.

The draw sets Essendon up for a strong start, and with a healthy list, the team should aim to have things in order before the season really intensifies.

Across the first 11 games, Essendon makes just three interstate trips, only two after Opening Round, including a matchup with Melbourne in Gather Round following an early bye.

During this stretch, the Bombers play four times at the MCG, including a rare clash against Adelaide, a team they haven’t faced at the ‘G’ since 1995. Essendon holds a 3-0 record against the Crows at the home of football.

After Round 11 (Dreamtime vs. Richmond), the difficulty ramps up significantly.

A six-day break leads into a trip to Brisbane, followed by matchups against Carlton and Geelong, then a five-day break before another interstate trip to face Fremantle. This four-week block could be season-defining.

Following the Dockers, Essendon faces a return clash against Gold Coast and a second meeting with 2024 wooden spooners Richmond—just five games after Dreamtime.

Then comes the tough finish, where once again, the Bombers’ ability to close out a season will be tested. If finals are to come, they’ll have to earn it, with five of their last six games against 2024 finalists.

Making it count.

One of the key metrics I tracked last year was possession chains—essentially measuring how often teams start with the football, how long each chain lasts, and what the end result is.

In 2023 Essendon ranked 17th in this metric, with only West Coast having less opportunities. In 2024, that improved to 11th, thanks in part to winning more clearances, moving from 12th to 9th in clearance differential, but the biggest difference came from winning the ball back off the opposition, and then even more importantly, where on the field that happened.

In 2023, Essendon ranked 16th for intercepts between the 50 metre arcs. In 2024, that jumped to 3rd, reflecting a major shift in the defensive structure. The passive “roll back” defence, which allowed the opposition to transition through the middle third, was replaced with a strategy that prioritised winning the ball back closer to goal.

But now, the next step must be capitalising on these turnovers.

Punishment.

Intercepting closer to goal boosted the forward 50 numbers, but more refinement is needed when the ball enters there.

The AFL average for converting a forward 50 entry into a shot at goal in 2024 was 48.01%. Nine teams finished above the average, and only GWS made the finals with a rate below it. By comparison, Essendon’s conversion rate was 43.9%, ranking them 15th in the league. Despite being 4th in inside 50 entries last year, Essendon’s ability to find a marking target, at just under 22%, was only 12th best in the competition.

Those teams ranked higher than Essendon for marks per inside 50 had tall targets who were able to “stand up” in their aerial battles. However, Hogan, Daniher, McKay, Curnow, Ugle-Hagan, Cameron, and more were all afforded more opportunities to do this because of what happened further up the ground initially.

It’s easier to use your abilities in the air when you only have to battle against one opponent directly. Only the Western Bulldogs, among last year’s finalists, averaged fewer one-on-one contests in the front half than Essendon, with the Bombers ranking 14th over the course of the season. This now brings me to the number one change I want to see in 2025.

Ball Movement.

Essendon ranked as the 4th best team for points scored from centre bounce, trailing only Geelong, Western Bulldogs, and Carlton in this metric. A significant factor being the 6-6-6 rule. With this in mind,

Essendon attacked this setup with speed and directness to capitalise on the rule.

However, when the game is in motion and the ball starts behind this point on the ground, Essendon's forward method becomes completely different.

Only Fremantle required more possessions than Essendon to transition from defensive 50 to forward 50, with Geelong and Collingwood needing the least.

The safe ball use and indirect sideways kicks to teammates allow too much time for the opposition to roll back numbers and provide support. This significantly impacts Essendon's ability to convert the initial inside 50 entry into maximum points when in transition.

As a result, Essendon is forced to defend the front half, struggling to turn repeat entries into goals with defenders already set up ahead. The only way to say it is, Essendon needs to move the ball forward quicker from the back half, whether by foot or through run and carry.

Inclusion.

Allowing tall marking forwards to stand against their direct matchup, similar to the advantage provided by the 6-6-6 rule, opens up additional opportunities for another group of players that Essendon has often lacked. At other times, this has been influenced by team selections during the week.

In 2024, Essendon averaged 32.4 points starting from the back half, which was slightly below the AFL average, ranking them 12th overall. Of those points, 13 originated in the defensive third, ranked 15th and well below the AFL average.

A shift in how the ball is moved forward from this area could significantly enhance scoring opportunities, particularly benefiting the half forwards and small forwards. Under the current controlled transition, these players often end up scavenging for crumbs from marking targets in crowded spaces, with limited chances to capitalise. They frequently chase balls kicked over their heads, forcing them to play in straight lines rather than a more dynamic 360° game, limiting their scoring options.

Imagine them working up the ground into space, becoming part of possession chains moving forward, challenging and testing their matchups. The decision for defenders then becomes whether to follow them up or hold back as defensive support. A wrong decision could mean watching their matchup come at them with ball in hand at speed or being turned around by overlap and run, beaten in the race back to goal with the space created earlier. This approach not only allows scoring opportunities from general play, such as groundball contests or run and carry.

Last year, Essendon generated only 44.12% of their shots on goal through general play, just under the AFL average of 45.03%. Only two finalists in 2024 had a lower rate, with Grand Finalists Brisbane and Sydney at 48.9% and 47.5%, respectively. This has been an area led by Stringer for Essendon over the last two seasons, and it's something they must obviously look to replace. This can certainly be achieved through a wider variety of players, faster ball movement, unpredictability, and punishment.

The hype surrounding NGA (Next Generation Academy) prospect Kako is justified. To thrive, Kako will need space to showcase his pace and goal smarts, creating chances for himself and his teammates. His success depends on the selection of teammates who can complement and support him, which means coaches must change their approach to the structure ahead of the ball.

Faster ball movement will create more chaos and space, reducing congestion as the game is in motion. Natural leg speed is required to take advantage of these changes and to ensure the opposition doesn't exploit these opportunities. This responsibility isn't for just one player, but at least two, maybe three who consistently support each other.

The expectation is that the "fleet of foot" small forwards apply pressure, with the assistance of others who can capitalise on this pressure and hit the scoreboard. At worst, they must ensure that the ball doesn't leave the area easily.

Historically, the Essendon list profile lacked depth in this category, or coaches felt obligated to fill positions with "higher profile names" rather than selecting for team balance. With one of those bigger names now moved on, and a small forward effectively replacing him on the list, it's time to allow him to thrive. Kako must have the likes of Gresham, Menzie, Davey Junior and even new draftee Unwin regularly by his side for change.

Last season, St. Kilda ranked number one in winning forward 50 groundballs when they couldn't find a marking option, recovering the ball just under 68% of the time it was on the ground—over 13% higher than the league average. In comparison, Essendon ranked 16th at 49.7%.

Only Richmond and West Coast were worse in having their forward entries rebounded out in 2024. Along with North Melbourne and Gold Coast, they were the only teams to concede more points from possession chains starting in their own forward 50 than Essendon.

The Bombers conceded just over 17 points on average from their forward third. The gap to the top teams isn't huge—Sydney, Geelong, Adelaide, Hawthorn, and GWS make up the top five, all conceding fewer than 13 points per game—so there's a goal, pardon the pun, within reach that will make a difference.

Deserve more.,

At least 60% of a team’s score should come from intercepts, but in 2024, Essendon achieved this rate or higher in only seven games and outscored the opposition from this source in just nine games.

The hard work of setting up behind the ball to win it back, or intercepting in the immediate area with numbers and support, deserves greater rewards. These rewards can come from players who naturally have “dare” in their game and can hurt the opposition with ball in hand, skills, and time and space.

It’s happening.

Having attended multiple training sessions in the lead-up to the season (my training notes are all available here on the website), it looks like my long-held wish for Martin to go on-ball is likely to happen.

His starting position on the field—whether half back, half forward, wing, or full forward—is less concerning to me than what happens when the game is in motion (provided his role is covered in the system.)

Martin has multiple flow-on effects in scoring and with his teammates. Few players in the lineup, apart from Merrett, can challenge the opposition after disposal like Martin can. He is more effective with 25 disposals on ball than 30 behind the ball, and can turn 40% or more of his disposals into scores. Imagine increasing his 18 kicks for 3.5 inside 50 entries to six plus entries from 20-25 kicks.

Feed him the ball on the outside of congestion or into open space, and have him facing forward toward goal—now opposition coaching boxes have even more to worry about.

In recent seasons, Merrett has been the primary target for opposition attention. Now, with Martin's skills, more strategic decisions will be necessary both during the week and in-game. The more players around the ball who can capitalise on intercepting and punishing the opposition, the better.

Martin joining Merrett, Parish, Duursma, and co on the “outside” has a lot of potential going forward, but this group will not just be reliant on intercepting the ball. They’ll also be reliant on another area that needs improving. I’ll be honest, I’m not confident there’s an answer yet. Even if there isn’t one short term, I’m hoping to at least see if someone may be the answer in the future.

Is it you?

Winning contests at ground level against the best midfields has not been a strength of Essendon's onballers in recent years. The Bombers have lost the overall groundball differential by a total of -14.6 since 2019 (excluding the shortened season and game time of 2020). This measurement is broken down into two areas: loose ball gets and hard ball gets.

Definition of loose ball.

“A disputed ball at ground level not under direct physical pressure that results in an opportunity to record a legal disposal.”

Definition of Hardball.

“A disputed ball at ground level under direct physical pressure, resulting in an opportunity to effect a legal disposal.”

Translation:

Gathering the ball in the open before an opponent arrives versus a direct physical contest in congestion and extracting it while being tackled.

During the same period, the hardball differential accounted for a loss of -9.3, with only West Coast ranking lower than Essendon. The primary reason for these struggles is personnel. Essendon's current midfield mix mainly consists of loose ball clearance players. However, Caldwell and Durham showed potential in filling the void last year, and there is hope for a third player to join this group.

Tsatas played seven games in 2024 but didn't attend a single centre bounce all season. When involved in the midfield, he played as a winger, which doesn't suit him. His natural fit is as an inside midfielder, clean below his knees in congestion, feeding teammates on the outside while drawing multiple opponents to free up those teammates.

This is his third year of football, and expecting him to "be the difference" this early is unrealistic. With Caldwell and Durham's growth and an injury-free season for Setterfield, the hope is for a more competitive midfield, enhancing Essendon's ability to challenge the top teams and their chances of success in finals.

More action.

Throughout early 2023 in Scott's first preseason at the club, player talk was centered around improving defence, one of the problem areas of 2022. In that time, there have been incremental tweaks, and this should continue into 2025, influenced by lineup changes and adjustments to methodology.

I wrote about the intercept numbers' drastic improvement earlier; there’s no denying that they’re impressive figures. Unfortunately, the counter to those numbers is when the ball wasn’t won back further up the ground.

In 2024, only four teams were forced to defend one-on-one contests more in the back half than the Bombers. (a factor being what happened further up the field, and just another reason why the lineup must change in that part of the ground).

Unfortunately, no team lost more of those contests than the Bombers. They don't necessarily need to win them, but they must not lose them regularly against their direct opponents.

Of defenders who played six or more games, Essendon had five players in the worst 60 for losing one-on-one contests. Three of these players, Redman, Laverde, and McKay, remain on the list, as Heppell and Kelly have retired.

The defensive approach the group chose, and hopefully wasn't instructed to use, is unbalanced. Key defenders need to focus on being lockdown defenders more often, starting within arm's reach of their opponents and ideally taking the safer “back shoulder” positioning.

McKay has shown he can perform well in this role in the past, but he, Laverde, and at times Redman, often prioritised intercept marking and played too loosely on their direct matchups. Too many players focused on winning the ball back to start forward chains rather than ensuring they don't lose their contests. This mindset needs to change, and a significant (and tall) change to the lineup should make a difference.

Look up and down.

Like many fans, I have wanted to see Reid have a change of luck and get a consistent chance at regular senior football. If he can maintain consistent game time, he could be a significant factor in Essendon's improvement this season.

In 2024, McKay, Ridley, and Laverde only played together in nine games, while for 20 games, the key backs were just McKay and Laverde. Adding Reid as a key pillar will have a positive effect on the defenders around him.

Among the key defenders, my preference is for McKay to play the deepest, focusing purely on negating his matchup. Reid should position himself further up the ground, knowing that McKay is behind him as another layer of defence. This allows Reid to be more aggressive in his positioning to win the ball back. Ridley and Redman playing higher alongside him should create a more balanced defensive layer further up the ground.

Reid coming into the team helps in the air, now it’s about help on the ground.

Essendon’s defensive 50 groundball loss rate when the opposition didn’t take a mark was the 4th worst rate in the competition, just under 40% of the time it went into the defensive third the opposition won the contest at ground level, only North Melbourne, Adelaide and West Coast had a worse rate. Similar to the issues regarding the “talls” mentality, too many of the “smalls” seemed to want to be too creative in rebound. In my opinion, this is something that can be solved through system changes and players capabilities. This is what I hope Prior can bring with the aid of Shiel and a more defensive mindset for McGrath.

Thursday's team selection will continue to be a topic of debate, but for Shiel's move to the back half, utilising his leg speed and carry, to succeed, players like Prior, McGrath, and Roberts need to complement this setup.

In his four games, Roberts demonstrated his potential in winning groundball, with over 85% of his possessions starting this way, ranking him in the top 75 of all players in the competition, as well as inside the top 25 for intercept possessions won at ground level per time on ground.

Prior’s value also extends to his foot skills, with his ability to find an extra 10-15 metres in penetration and accuracy impossible to miss over the preseason.

This, with an improvement from both McGrath and Redman below their knees

should certainly help in improving Essendon’s poor rate in allowing just under 50% of opposition entries inside 50 turning into shots at goal, the 4th worst rate in the league last year.

Players I’m most interested in viewing in 2025.

Duursma

- With better luck on the injury front, he has the potential to be an All Australian wingman in 2025.

- Plays the role of his position with a defensive first mindset, with his aerial abilities as an asset in being able to play “tall” behind the ball.

Jones.

- Don't play him anywhere else but in the forward line.

- In the past, he’s been inconsistent in getting into his teammates’ “vision” ahead of the ball, but his work rate to present and be seen as a marking option over preseason training has stood out.

Draper.

- His leap and tap work are standout in early match simulations, but the real highlight has been his follow-up work around the ground.

- He has “blown up” both Bryan and Goldstein on the spread from ruck contests, linking up around the ground and pushing forward hard to make defenders question their matchup. Can he sustain this for a longer period?

Perkins.

- I want to see him show more initiative, be on the move and not flat-footed when the ball is in motion.

- Anticipating what may happen more will help him be a viable option to his teammates, both in attacking and defending.

Clarke.

- There’s plenty of dare in his game. He looks to run with the ball or position himself as an option when he doesn’t have it.

- His attacking mindset and desire to continue to push forward will see him playing sooner rather than later.

Essendon Player Contracts

• Contracted Until 2025

• Alwyn Davey

• Archer Day-Wicks

• Ben Hobbs

• Dylan Shiel

• Harrison Jones

• Jaxon Prior (UFA)

• Jayden Laverde (UFA)

• Jye Menzie

• Luamon Lual

• Nick Bryan

• Saad El-Hawli

• Sam Draper (RFA)

• Todd Goldstein (UFA)

• Vigo Visentini

• Will Setterfield (UFA)

• Zach Reid

• Contracted Until 2026

• Angus Clarke

• Archie Perkins

• Archie Roberts

• Elijah Tsatas

• Jade Gresham

• Jayden Nguyen

• Kayle Gerreyn

• Lewis Hayes

• Matt Guelfi (RFA)

• Nate Caddy

• Nikolas Cox

• Rhys Unwin

• Zak Johnson

• Contracted Until 2027

• Isaac Kako

• Kyle Langford (UFA)

• Nicholas Martin

• Peter Wright

• Xavier Duursma

• Zachary Merrett (UFA)

• Contracted Until 2028

• Jye Caldwell (RFA)

• Mason Redman (UFA)

• Sam Durham (RFA)

• Contracted Until 2029

• Ben McKay

• Darcy Parish (UFA)

• Jordan Ridley (UFA)

• Contracted Until 2030

• Andrew McGrath (UFA)

• RFA – Restricted Free Agent

• UFA – Unrestricted Free Agent

Key performance indicators I’ll be tracking this year as compared to last year:

- Intercept to shot at goal strike rate, for and against: Seven of the eight finalists had a positive differential, with the Grand Finalists ranked second and third.

- Clearance to shot at goal strike rate, for and against: Six of the eight finalists had a positive differential, with Essendon ranking fifth.

- Possession chains, for and against: Five of the top eight were finalists with a positive differential.

- Possession chains to shot at goal strike rate, for and against: The top five were all finalists, with Brisbane ranking first and Sydney fourth. Seven of the eight finalists were above the AFL average.

- Marks inside 50 rate, for and against: Five finalists were above the AFL average for both for and against.

- Shots per inside 50 rate, for and against: All finalists were above the AFL average for, and seven finalists were above the AFL average against.

- Shots from general play: All finalists totaled 253 or more, with Essendon at 248.

- Scores from front half: Seven of the finalists had a positive differential, with the top five all being finalists.

- Scores from back half: Seven of the finalists had a positive differential.

- Opposition possessions per intercept: Seven of the top nine were all finalists, with Essendon ranking sixth.

- Opposition rebound 50 rate: Five of the top seven were finalists.

- Offensive one-on-ones: Four finalists were above the AFL average.

- Offensive one-on-one win rate: Six of the finalists had a win rate above 27%.

- Groundball, for and against: Five of the finalists had a positive differential.

- Hardball, for and against: Six of the finalists had a positive differential.

- Forward 50 groundball retention rate: Five of the finalists were above 57%.

Final thoughts.

Entering the third year under the new regime, I can definitely see a positive change in direction. Last year, a closer framework resembling a finals brand was implemented, and this progression needs to continue this year. Based on last year's information, the list profile needed to change, and it’s certainly on its way to being successful not just for 15 weeks, but for 25 weeks and beyond.

More natural leg speed has been introduced to the list, aligning with the modern game, and this should now change the way Essendon attacks games with the ball in hand.

Nine players were either moved on or retired at the end of last year, resulting in an average games loss of just over 90. Four of those players played between 15 and 23 games in 2024. Of the eight replacements, only one player has any AFL experience, with just 39 games. The average age of the list is now the fourth youngest in the competition, but no cap should be put on what Essendon can achieve in 2025.

If there is to be an overall improvement in performance, it will have to come from the core group of 20 to 24-year-olds, of which there are 17 on the list. We should expect that everyone in that group still has levels to reach, and how high they can go this year will be in their own hands and those of the coaches to extract as much as possible from them.

I won’t be governed by wins or losses, at least not for now. I believe that if improvements in the processes put in place can be made, even just a small amount, the team is on the right track for long-term success. How quickly this can happen against the competition is up to them.

Go Dons!