One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on March 04, 2010, 02:43:52 AM
-
Tigers plan to be top Victorian club
MICHAEL GLEESON
March 4, 2010
RICHMOND has embraced a vision for a golden decade with an ambitious plan to more than double membership, clear debt and play finals three times, all within five years.
The Tigers are determined to rouse the sleeping giant of football and their dormant fans through their plan, which carries a motto of 3-0-75. The motto stands for playing finals three times, having zero debt and signing 75,000 members within the next five years.
The five-year plan is about positioning the club for where it will be by the end of the decade, with a vision for 2020 that they return not just to being one of the top four Victorian clubs, but the top Victorian club.
Significant in the short term is the intention to play finals three times by 2014, which would require the Tigers to make the eight no later than 2012 - and stay there.
Left unstated was if, when or how many premierships the club hoped to win by 2020.
The five-year written plan, drafted by Brendon Gale after he took over as chief executive last year, pledges the club to the surprisingly bullish targets, which exceed the stated goals of any rival.
All staff at the club - players, coaches and administration - as well as the board gathered in the players' gym at Punt Road on Tuesday night for the presentation, and all ''signed up'' to the goals.
The plan has been driven by Gale and reflects the belief at the club that, after two years of significant personnel change, the Tigers have the critical people in place to attack such broad goals.
Gale has taken over as chief executive, Craig Cameron as general manager of football, Damien Hardwick is the new senior coach, Simon Derrick has been appointed commercial operations manager and Cain Liddle is membership manager.
Richmond carries about $4 million in debt, although importantly the new final stage of its Punt Road redevelopment is being done without further capital input by the club. The existing debt would be wiped out and the club would enjoy strong profit growth after retiring the debt.
The financial improvement would ride from a doubling of membership to hit a target of 75,000 members. The Tigers last year enjoyed a record membership of 37,000, which was primarily seen as a spike in response to the arrival of Ben Cousins.
The long-held belief at Richmond, and broadly in football, is that there is a huge reserve of support that has drifted from the club over the past two decades, which have been marked by upheaval and poor on-field performance.
However, Gale reminded staff on Tuesday that Richmond was the first club in the VFL to attract one million fans to its games in a year - 1972 and again in 1973 - while the next club to do so, Collingwood, took until 1979. Essendon did not do so until 1993 and Carlton 1995.
The belief is not just that Richmond can get back to being one of the top four Victorian clubs but that it can get back to being the top club.
On the field, Richmond comes from a long way back in its push to make the finals, having finished 15th last year and being the bookmakers' favourite for the wooden spoon this year.
Complicating matters is that to fill holes remaining in their list the Tigers confront drafts weakened by the concessions for the Gold Coast and Western Sydney.
Gale last night declined to comment on the strategic plan, saying he wanted to send the information to members first.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tigers-plan-to-be-top-victorian-club-20100303-pizq.html
-
Significant in the short term is the intention to play finals three times by 2014, which would require the Tigers to make the eight no later than 2012 - and stay there.
Being ready by 2012 is still very uncertain given our young list. The likes of Griffiths and Astbury who we want to eventually takeover our key forward posts next to Jack will still be in only their 3rd year of AFL. 2013 IMO would be a more confident prediction for us.
Also predicting finals by 2012 coincides with Hardwick's final year of his contract. The last thing we need is another media campaign frothing from week to week based on whether we win or lose. Do we plan to do a Hawthorn which followed a similar strategy and re-sign the senior coach at the end of 2011?
Good to have high ambitions but this year I wish we had just kept quiet as we had been doing and laid the foundations first both on and off field before spruiking 3 years in a row of finals :-\.
-
Good to have high ambitions but this year I wish we had just kept quiet as we had been doing and laid the foundations first both on and off field before spruiking 3 years in a row of finals :-\.
First up the article doesn't spruik finals 3 years in a row the strategy supposedly says finals 3 times over a 5 year period. The writer has assumed that there will be no finals in 2010 or 2011 so to play 3 times in 5 years he has made the call that it will be 3 years in a row
Secondly, I said after the AGM that they had said that there was a new "vision" plan for the Club that Benny had put together and that he was going to release it to the members. This is clearly that plan
At the time the majoirty on here thought it a great idea even though we had no idea what was in it ;D and wanted to see it, so I don't think we can now be too critical if it gets put out in the public
The most pleasing thing to me is that Benny wouldn't talk about it until he releases it to the members
Most disappointing thing is again someone at the Club has opened their traps and told the media
-
If you build it, they will come.
-
A little bit of sunshine for our eternally optimistic but always cruelly let down supporters ::)
Actions speak louder than five year plans
Been there, done that
What happened to the club's supposed low-key approach lol
Come in "spinner" doctor
-
Good to have high ambitions but this year I wish we had just kept quiet as we had been doing and laid the foundations first both on and off field before spruiking 3 years in a row of finals :-\.
First up the article doesn't spruik finals 3 years in a row the strategy supposedly says finals 3 times over a 5 year period. The writer has assumed that there will be no finals in 2010 or 2011 so to play 3 times in 5 years he has made the call that it will be 3 years in a row
To be fair to the journo that's not an unrealistic assumption. It's highly unlikely we'll play finals in the next two years.
Secondly, I said after the AGM that they had said that there was a new "vision" plan for the Club that Benny had put together and that he was going to release it to the members. This is clearly that plan
At the time the majoirty on here thought it a great idea even though we had no idea what was in it ;D and wanted to see it, so I don't think we can now be too critical if it gets put out in the public
I was more interested in the off-field plans - increasing our revenue base through non-footy means. I don't have a problem with the 75k members and $0 debt aims of this plan. They aren't pie in the sky dreams IMO given we are still able to generate 46k members after 30 years of being rubbish. On-field promises though I wish we as a club would shut up.
The most pleasing thing to me is that Benny wouldn't talk about it until he releases it to the members
Most disappointing thing is again someone at the Club has opened their traps and told the media
Agree on both counts WP.
-
who the #!ck is the mole?!!! Flush him/her/them out immediately, we leak like a sieve, pathetic ::)
-
To be fair to the journo that's not an unrealistic assumption. It's highly unlikely we'll play finals in the next two years.
Damn! I was hoping to use my Grand Final guarantee this year. :'(
-
Vision is correct. The goals are high but can be achieved- especially those revolving membership numbers. Get on board.
-
To be fair to the journo that's not an unrealistic assumption. It's highly unlikely we'll play finals in the next two years.
Damn! I was hoping to use my Grand Final guarantee this year. :'(
Patience smokey patience ;). I've got a GF guarantee too. Hoping to get to use it within the next decade :pray but not the next 2-3 years.
-
well done Benny Gale
-
Why not?
-
If you build it, they will come.
(http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/2797/emptymall2.jpg) (http://img205.imageshack.us/i/emptymall2.jpg/)
Not always...... ;)
-
A vision is always good and while I understand why the clubs taking the angle of being no 1 for members, 75k is still directing it's revenue efforts at the one trick pony.....us.
Love the 0 debt but is that really a visionary, aspirational goal?
Being a number 1 club does target zero debt, look at the Magpies, Hawks, crows, Eagles etc they have cash RESERVES.
And playing finals 3 of 5 years is low balling particularly when your vision is to be the number 1 club.
So they may have been better off taking this year to communicate transformation - easier to justify and general enough to avoid it blowing up in your face.
Take the year to better understand capability - on and off field, use this year to take baby steps of progress so people can actually see you are making a difference, THEN build, articulate and pitch a vision.
Too hard, too soon.
-
Take the year to better understand capability - on and off field, use this year to take baby steps of progress so people can actually see you are making a difference, THEN build, articulate and pitch a vision.
Agree Y&B. In a year's time the new facilities would be finished and we would have seen how the cubs went after a year under Hardwick. Add another draft's worth of kids as well on top of our current young core. Have at least something concrete to sell to back up the message. Less time for our supporters to have to wait too for the vision to become a reality.
-
Problem is that all clubs are taking baby steps of improvement so if that's all we're aspiring for then we'll still remain behind the others.
Nothing wrong with setting aspirational goals, better to set high goals and just fall short than easy goals that you only just meet.
-
i just do not understand how Richmond is $4 Million in debt?
can somebody please explain?
what is the point of sending a Financial Report stating that revenue has made a profit, but now Richmond are $4 Million in debt?
My Opinion:
3 times in five years - possibly!
2010 - ummmmmm
2011 - hmmmm
2012 - possibly
2013 - should be
2014 - have to be
75,000 members is a lot! but i think that if Richmond make the finals once (between 2010-2012) our membership will sky-rocket.
the targets/goals are big, but good!
i was thinking that "what happened to being quiet?" but Gale has said, members will know of our plan.
so yes, something has leaked!
Melbourne i heard have something like 150 wins in 10 years.
15 wins per year for Melbourne, good luck!
:)
-
balls out go hard 75k Tigers on top, nice one centurion :gotigers
-
Is there a link to melbourne's ambition of an average of 15 wins per year for the next 10 years??
:thatsgold :ROTFL
-
i just do not understand how Richmond is $4 Million in debt?
can somebody please explain?
what is the point of sending a Financial Report stating that revenue has made a profit, but now Richmond are $4 Million in debt?
torch, there is a massive difference in making a profit and having a debt. Debt relates to monies owed to outside parties
There are a few parts to the financial report you speak of. The 2 main parts are 1/ Income Statement (P&L) and the Balance Sheet (Assets/Liabilities)
Profit is generated when you your revenues are greater than your expenses - just like you make a loss if your expenses are greater than your revenue - that's your Income Statement.
The $4 million debt is recorded in the balance sheet and it is a liability - it is made up of the loans the Club has that are yet to be repaid. Loans don't get recorded as revenues. They are held in the balance sheet until they are repaid. That is what the debt is. As the loans get repaid the debt reduces. Currently the club has loans with their bankers that they are repaying.
-
The five-year written plan
my fav. part of the article
:cheers
-
i just do not understand how Richmond is $4 Million in debt?
can somebody please explain?
what is the point of sending a Financial Report stating that revenue has made a profit, but now Richmond are $4 Million in debt?
torch, there is a massive difference in making a profit and having a debt. Debt relates to monies owed to outside parties
There are a few parts to the financial report you speak of. The 2 main parts are 1/ Income Statement (P&L) and the Balance Sheet (Assets/Liabilities)
Profit is generated when you your revenues are greater than your expenses - just like you make a loss if your expenses are greater than your revenue - that's your Income Statement.
The $4 million debt is recorded in the balance sheet and it is a liability - it is made up of the loans the Club has that are yet to be repaid. Loans don't get recorded as revenues. They are held in the balance sheet until they are repaid. That is what the debt is. As the loans get repaid the debt reduces. Currently the club has loans with their bankers that they are repaying.
ok, so our Loans are for? the Development?
my understanding of the Balance Sheet, is that both your Assets and Liabilities have to be balanced as at a date.
or is it that, when the Loan-Repayments are paid, they are recorded at that amount instead of $4 Million?
:)
-
Is there a link to melbourne's ambition of an average of 15 wins per year for the next 10 years??
:thatsgold :ROTFL
It was mentioned on the radio by Robbo from memory. Last Friday the Dees had their spruiking day where they invited all the media down to sell a 10-year plan/vision. Part of that plan was to end up being the dominate team of the next decade with 150 wins. 150 wins over 10 years is 15 wins per year and that average is meant to include the next couple of years where they will get nowhere near that kind of average. Talk about kidding themselves :rollin. 15 wins equals finishing top 4 every year for the next decade :nope. Not even great sides like Brisbane and Geelong have got close to pulling that kind of record off yet the back-to-back wooden spooners have it as their main aim :wallywink.
-
Vision is correct. The goals are high but can be achieved- especially those revolving membership numbers. Get on board.
what based on 1mil spectators in 72. chooses to ignore we clearly are no longer a top 4 side. we have had 38 yrs of mediocrity since 74 even if you throw in the 80 ptemiership. ignores the fact this club has probably lost 3 generations od supporters. ignores the fact that many supporters from the early 70s are 2ft under. and because of mediocrity not replaced.
you dont get 75k supporters because they are in the woodwork you get them because you build over a long period of time.
its a myth that we are a top 4 club, or even potentially a top 4 club with a massive QUICK membership turnaround. the simple fact is we arent. we havent been for a long while.
you want 75k memebership well we had better go thru several generations of success first.
look its good to set the bar but to publicly prattle poo is crazy. have they learnt nothing from the wallace yrs.
-
What did you expect in a plan, for gale to come out and say... poo, we're effen hopeless in in 5 years we'll be happy to have 35,000 members and be slumming it on the verge of the 8.
Hope always dies last, and Brendon Gale is selling some hope. I agree with him but all these things are matters of opinion anyway.
-
we dont need hope or idiots bullshitting all we need is the truth. its all we have ever needed.
-
ok, so our Loans are for? the Development?
my understanding of the Balance Sheet, is that both your Assets and Liabilities have to be balanced as at a date.
or is it that, when the Loan-Repayments are paid, they are recorded at that amount instead of $4 Million?
:)
The loans are a legacy of the Casey presidency where we tried to spend our way to success spending money we didn't have on Spud's footy department so we could pay 100% of the salary cap basically :-\. The redevelopment was mostly funded by the Local, State and Federal Governments plus a $1m or so from the Club itself.
The loan repayments are an expense. It's an weekly/monthly/annual cost. The actual total amount owing on the loan is a liability. The amount owning depends on whether the loan repayments exceed the interest charges or not. If the repayments are greater than the interest charges then the total amount owning on the loan goes down; if the repayments are less than the interest charges or the club askes for more money from the bank then the total amount owning on the loan goes up. Currently the liability (amount owning on the loan) is $4m. If the club repays more than the interest charges over the following year then in next year's financial report the liability (amount owning on the loan) will be less than $4m and how much less will depend on how much we have repaid off the loan in that 12 month period to October 31, 2010.
-
ok, so our Loans are for? the Development?
my understanding of the Balance Sheet, is that both your Assets and Liabilities have to be balanced as at a date.
or is it that, when the Loan-Repayments are paid, they are recorded at that amount instead of $4 Million?
:)
I am not sure what you mean in that 2nd sentence torch.
In answer to your first question - the loans - on the balance sheet these are refered to "Interest Bearing Liabilities" and they are made up of a number of things. The Club has a borrowing arrangement (facilities) with their Bankers. Like any business the club would use the borrowing facilities for a number of things - like bank overdraft, short term bills (loans), and likely the loan they took out to build the pool and office some 6-7 years ago. Does the current loan amount include anything for the new development? I would think not as the club has recevied all those grants but they may have had to fund something wiull they waited for the grant money to come in.
The Club's Balance Sheet gives the Club's Asset/Liability position @ 31/10/2009 = balance date. All the Asset accounts are balanced and so to are the liability accounts. The Clubs blance sheet is very strong as it shows a net assets position of over $10mil (Total assets less Total liabilities). However, despite the net asset position $4 mil debt remains because it is a liability that still requires payment
In answer to your final bit... how it would be recorded...
As example the balance sheet says the "Interest Bearing LIabilities" is $4.9 mil at 31/10/2009.
If in the next 12 months the club repays $1.9 mil of that and doesn't borrow anything futher then when the next balance sheet is issued the "Interest Bearing Liabilities" would be recorded as $3.0 mil (4.9 less 1.9)
-
Vision is correct. The goals are high but can be achieved- especially those revolving membership numbers. Get on board.
what based on 1mil spectators in 72. chooses to ignore we clearly are no longer a top 4 side. we have had 38 yrs of mediocrity since 74 even if you throw in the 80 ptemiership. ignores the fact this club has probably lost 3 generations od supporters. ignores the fact that many supporters from the early 70s are 2ft under. and because of mediocrity not replaced.
you dont get 75k supporters because they are in the woodwork you get them because you build over a long period of time.
its a myth that we are a top 4 club, or even potentially a top 4 club with a massive QUICK membership turnaround. the simple fact is we arent. we havent been for a long while.
you want 75k memebership well we had better go thru several generations of success first.
look its good to set the bar but to publicly prattle poo is crazy. have they learnt nothing from the wallace yrs.
it's not a myth at all when you consider the scale of crowds that we haveconsitently drawn over the years...there is an assumption that our performances will improve...and by virtue of that we will once again crack 1mn...heck we havent been far off it in recent years and look where we;ve been...have some substance to your rebuttals rather than pure nonsense
-
The 75k wishlist is not only a message to our 400k supporter base or whatever it is but probably also a subtle hint to AD and AA that our home ground is the MCG and not the Docklands and that we don't want to be away games at Kardinia Park when other clubs don't. A big membership base also appeals to tv networks and sponsors.
-
The loans are a legacy of the Casey presidency where we tried to spend our way to success spending money we didn't have on Spud's footy department so we could pay 100% of the salary cap basically :-\. The redevelopment was mostly funded by the Local, State and Federal Governments plus a $1m or so from the Club itself.
In part yes it is a leagacy of the Casey regime but the club certainly borrowed to pay for the pool and offices that were built back in what was it? 2002-2003? Also, like all AFL clubs they've been running a overdraft for years. Previous Financial Statements of the Club show this ;D
The loan repayments are an expense. It's an weekly/monthly/annual cost. The actual total amount owing on the loan is a liability. The amount owning depends on whether the loan repayments exceed the interest charges or not.
Actual loan repayments are not an expense. Loan repayments are generally deemed (under accting standards) to be be repayments of principal of the outstanding liability.
The club is more than likely running on Commercial Bills arrangement with their bank. Most AFL clubs operate this way and reading the Clubs Full Accounts for 2009 - that's how I read it. These are short term borrowings that can have maturity dates at anywhere from 10 days to a couple of years
All interest (which is an expense) would be charged separately. Any principal repayments made would be made on top of the interest charged. E.g if the Club had a 60 day bill of say $500k falling due (maturing) next week that they intended to retire (repay) it they would be charged the interest (say 9,000) on top of the principal. They would then be required to hand over to the bank $509k in total.
Thus endeth my free Accounting 101 lesson for today
-
In part yes it is a leagacy of the Casey regime but the club certainly borrowed to pay for the pool and offices that were built back in what was it? 2002-2003? Also, like all AFL clubs they've been running a overdraft for years. Previous Financial Statements of the Club show this ;D
The club made a combined $3.5m loss from 2003-4. I don't recall a $4m or so overdraft before then. From memory the AFL had to basically go guarantor for us.
Actual loan repayments are not an expense. Loan repayments are generally deemed (under accting standards) to be be repayments of principal of the outstanding liability.
The club is more than likely running on Commercial Bills arrangement with their bank. Most AFL clubs operate this way and reading the Clubs Full Accounts for 2009 - that's how I read it. These are short term borrowings that can have maturity dates at anywhere from 10 days to a couple of years
All interest (which is an expense) would be charged separately. Any principal repayments made would be made on top of the interest charged. E.g if the Club had a 60 day bill of say $500k falling due (maturing) next week that they intended to retire (repay) it they would be charged the interest (say 9,000) on top of the principal. They would then be required to hand over to the bank $509k in total.
Thus endeth my free Accounting 101 lesson for today
Ta for the correction and clarification WP. I wasnt sure what torch meant and obviously gave a poor layman's explanation in terms of a mortgage rather than a commerical bill :-[. Shows I'm not an accountant lol :wallywink.
-
The club made a combined $3.5m loss from 2003-4. I don't recall a $4m or so overdraft before then. From memory the AFL had to basically go guarantor for us.
From the Balance sheet Oct 2002 - "Interest Bearng Liabilities" = $600k - the start of the funding for the pool etc.... ;D :rollin
-
we have a much bigger support base than what many think
if we start producing some bs membership packs like say the hawks and bombers do, we can easily reach 75k
most importantly, we will pass 55 - 60k easy just if we start winning games.
we have 30plus k again this yr, after 30 yrs of bs we still have healthy numbers
we cant achieve anything unless we have clear goals and ambitions, well done to benny gale for finally giving us some targets to aim 4
if we fall shaort and reach 2 finals and get to 60k members , its still a win
-
3 or 5 game memberships are not a bad idea at all. While some people who now buy a full membership may drop down to one of these cheaper ones, i would imagine there are a lot of people who are not prepared to stuff out the full amount because they only attend a small number of games who may find these type of membership packages appealing.
-
3 or 5 game memberships are not a bad idea at all. While some people who now buy a full membership may drop down to one of these cheaper ones, i would imagine there are a lot of people who are not prepared to stuff out the full amount because they only attend a small number of games who may find these type of membership packages appealing.
exactly and the hawks and bombers memb figures are soewhat distorted as they have these kind of packs
we will conquer and reign supreme once again , i feel it
-
I like the plan, would love to see it come to fruition, but I think it would impress (or appease) more people if the RFC would step it out for us. They say in 5 years they want no debt, 75K members and 3 finals series to be played in - well I would like to see, year-to-year, how they are going to work towards that and what their short-term targets are to achieve this.
It would seem a less "pie in the sky" sort of hope if they could say "We plan to achieve blah, blah this year which will keep us on target to be $0 debt in 5 years. We are going to market this and this with an aim to achieve 35K members this year which will keep us on target for 75K in 5 years"
That sort of outlining gives people short-term focus that we can evaluate the running success, and overall probability, of this plan giving members, supporters, affiliates and the general public a gauge on our progress during our "transformation" year and years to follow.
Maybe they've done that, we won't know until the plan is released to members and we can pore over it thoroughly.
-
Last year a half game membership would have been a good idea :rollin
-
You should have heard Rita whateverhernameis this arvo on SEN go to town on us over this. Calling us a rabble club with delusions of grandeur and living in fantasyland ::).
-
Start winning games and playing a good brand of footy and the rest will take care of itself! Pretty simple. Money, members ect....
We are a footy club after all with really passionate supporters.
Not really sure of what i think of Benny's plan but would prefer to let the footy do the talking for awhile. There's been to much crap fed to us over the last 5 years.
Time to put up or shut up!!!!
-
2012 is the end of hardwicks 3 year deal.
The media will drag it out and rehash it in the preseason before season 2012 and put him square under the microscope. They like pulling the strings and mounting the pressure on their target coaches for the year, makes them feel good as to how much of a stir they can create - Scumbags. :chuck
This really shouldn't have gotten out at this stage. It's great they are setting goals as an organisation but like hadynd88 mentioned, what are the small parameters and KPI's we will be working towards short term that will indicate whether we are ahead behind or par for the course in terms of fulflling the ultimate goal? It's these small parameters that truly show how serious someone is about their goals. Otherwise its just talk.
btw great post hadynd88 obviously take goal setting seriously. :)
-
I like the plan, would love to see it come to fruition, but I think it would impress (or appease) more people if the RFC would step it out for us. They say in 5 years they want no debt, 75K members and 3 finals series to be played in - well I would like to see, year-to-year, how they are going to work towards that and what their short-term targets are to achieve this.
It would seem a less "pie in the sky" sort of hope if they could say "We plan to achieve blah, blah this year which will keep us on target to be $0 debt in 5 years. We are going to market this and this with an aim to achieve 35K members this year which will keep us on target for 75K in 5 years"
That sort of outlining gives people short-term focus that we can evaluate the running success, and overall probability, of this plan giving members, supporters, affiliates and the general public a gauge on our progress during our "transformation" year and years to follow.
Maybe they've done that, we won't know until the plan is released to members and we can pore over it thoroughly.
Saw this on BF. We would need to average annually 10% membership growth for the next 5 years to reach 75k
2009: 47,000 incl. non-ticketed
2010: +10% = 51,700
2011: +10% = 56,870
2012: +10% = 62,557
2013: +10% = 68,812
2014: +10% = 75,693
Of course we are below last year's figure already by about 4-5000. Success on-field is what is needed to really boost membership.
As far as the debt, we're unlikely to touch it until all the redevelopment is finished and we can tick it off as fully funded. If the plan is 3 finals within 5 years then the debt won't start being paid off until we see those finals appearances and the increased revenue they generate in terms of membership, crowds, mechandise, sponsors (winning gives you prime time tv spots), etc.
2010: -
2011: $4m
2012: $3.5m
2013: $3m
2014: $2m
2015: $0
As far as finals go IMO the plan has us a year ahead of "schedule". By 2012 our 2009 draftees such as Griffiths and Astbury who we need for team balance and structure up forward will still only be in their 3rd year. They may click but they also could be a year away from a breakout year. 2013 would give them another year (their 4th) and the core of the team will be more mature (Cotch for instance will be 22, Lids 25).
2010: 15th-16th
2011: 13th-14th (club may want 11th-12th)
2012: 11th (club may want 8th = finals)
2013: 6th ........ IMO clubs have breakout years so there's a jump into the finals.
2014: Top 4
2015: Top 4 and a genuine challenger
So 2010 and 2011 we are still dipping into the draft big time and turning over our list. Pick 4 or 6 in 2010 and a top 10 in 2011. After Hardwick's second year he would have effectively turned over the list from when he started.
Of course with clubs that are rebuilding transforming, the rebuild is not always linear. Some clubs have a step backward year before genuinely challenging for a flag - Geelong in 2006, St Kilda 2007, Bulldogs 2007?. The Hawks were the exception.