One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: TigerLand on June 16, 2010, 01:54:20 PM
-
I know a lot on here are big on tanking for draft picks and how stupid it would be to finish 15th by a game and go from pick 4 to 8.
Seeing our form of late would you rather see the likes of Riewoldt, Nason, Martin, Cotchin etc been given free reign to go about there business and perform at their best and win a few games and prove to the playing group and supporters our game plan has weight going into the pre season with confidence.
Or would you rather we put the cue in the rack not play these players, but play McMahon, Polak, Dea, Gourdis, Roberts etc. and plan to fail?
-
I just want them to go out and play. If they win they win.
We're going to come up against some absolute rubbish in the final 12 rounds (Power and Crows in Melb, Kangas, Demons and Lions are winnable).
The way we're going, we could also cause an upset of a top 8 side if they're off their game.
-
Really good draft this year. Even if we win games and lose out on say pick 4 and we end up with say pick 6 or even pick 8 you can still end up with a good kid with good skills ie who can fill a position where we have a need. Blayne Wilson from WA etc etc. Even down the draft order you may be able to get some decent kids like Kiefer Yu etc etc. I'd like us to win some more games if we can.
-
you can lose by a small margin and still have belief, structure and faith. just look at what the dees did and the blues.
everyone knew that by going down by a small margin most weeks they still had the belief they were going places.
same should apply here but moreso next year if we win less than 5 this year.
if it comes down the end of the season in a game that decides Pick 4 then i would seriously hope we adjust our line up accordingly.
You may say whats the difference between Pick 4 or Pick 5 well not a lot but we may miss out on the next Martin because of one pick in the draft.
You dont want to think you are better than what you actually are thereby opting to top up instead of drafting kids. e.g Brisbane
-
Crap mentality, first and foremost no spoons! It is an embarrassment of monumental proportion. Leave that stuff for the Saints of the world in my book. Never want to see another spoon at Richmond in my life! Literally makes me sick in the guts.
Really dont give this, 'that pick' 'this pick' too much credence.
Would we of ended up with Martin if we didn't beat the Demons last year? Scully and Trengrove look the goods but I wouldn't give up Martin for quids. You can make up a million scenarios for/against just don't cut it here.
I go to every game expecting the boys to give their best and hope and cheer for a win evrytime I go.
Que sera ! Just go out to WIN :gotigers
-
I just want them to go out and play. If they win they win.
Got it in one :clapping
-
The million dollar question is how many wins are required to collect the spoon.
If its 4...then forget it....Bye bye pick 4.
Not sure if I am still caught up in the euphoria of Sundays magnificent victory but I would think we are a good chance to win half our remaining ten games.
Richmond could very well finish the season with a record of 7-15.
-
The way we are playing we will win more than 4 games for better or worse.
Personally i feel that either way we will improve but would prefer list mangemnt mode this season and next to load up on talent to really push in 3 years time but it looks like we'll go earlier - will we have the cattle to be anything more than a midtable essendon/kangaroos? (for mine, no, but others think otherwise)
-
I know there are some around here who will be horrified by this, but I say "let's keep winning". The more the better.
When all the doomsayers were saying we had the worst list in the competition, I bit my tongue and bided my time. It's my belief that the only thing wrong with our current list is inexperience.
I think our recruiters absolutely nailed the 09 draft with Martin, Nason, Astbury, Griffiths, Farmer and Webberley all reaping results in the seniors, Taylor, O'Reilly,Roberts and Hicks progressing nicely at Coburg, and Westhoff, Grimes and Contin showing great potential in the Burgers seconds.
When you add these players to the likes of Lids, Cotchin, Foley, Jack, and Newman to name just a few, I think we already have the makings of a list that will be ready to challenge the very best sooner rather than later.
I think the scope for huge improvement is already on our playing list. And we should be putting games into all our kids and having a real tilt at our enemies, instead of throwing games to slide a few pegs down in the draft order.
-
Crap mentality, first and foremost no spoons! It is an embarrassment of monumental proportion. Leave that stuff for the Saints of the world in my book. Never want to see another spoon at Richmond in my life! Literally makes me sick in the guts.
Really dont give this, 'that pick' 'this pick' too much credence.
Would we of ended up with Martin if we didn't beat the Demons last year? Scully and Trengrove look the goods but I wouldn't give up Martin for quids. You can make up a million scenarios for/against just don't cut it here.
I go to every game expecting the boys to give their best and hope and cheer for a win evrytime I go.
Que sera ! Just go out to WIN :gotigers
Agree
-
I still think we need to play all those players on the cusp to figure out if they stay next year.
Play all of Polak, Polo, Thomson, Morton, Nahas, Thursfield, King & White, figure out if they should be kept, traded or delisted
Also get more games into Taylor, Post, Browne, Gourdis, Roberts, Grimes & Rance
We're supposed to be planning for the future and getting games into these players is what this transformation is meant to be about.
If we win playing these guys then the future is looking pretty good, if we lose, then at least we are developing our kids and analysing the list. 4 wins will result in 3 Top 30 selections in the draft which can only help moving forward.
-
you cant beat singing that song after a a win.
-
I think the term "tanking" is outdated.
The bottom line is that we are not going to put a side that will be geared just to win in the last 2 months of the year.
Younger players will be rested, older players will be put into cotton wool (what few we have and those who have niggles) and others who have not had a go will be given a few games to see if they are worth keeping on the list.
Players will also be tried in different positions to understand what they might be capable of doing in seasons to come.
Nothing wrong with that but it might result in winning 3 or 4 games instead of 7 or 8.
Wins are not relevant in that context - they are a bonus.
Judging a team by their win or loss record at our stage of development in isolation of the above factors is simplistic and irrelevant to some extent.
There is no much point having intent if you don't understand capability.
-
I'd love it if we played out the year battling out close loses and sneaking in the rare win while watching our young players grow and come together as a team. That is my hope for the year because it will assure us of more quality players to top up the list with next year so we have a full list of talent and/or potential and not disappointments or stalled players.
Ultimately we are about winning finals and flags. We will not remember wins but we will remember multiple 10 year players. I don't think we should tank but just as yellowandblack has suggested we need to see our full list play to determine who will make it beyond this year. We know Lids, Cotchin, Martin and co. are in our long term plans but what about Browne, Polo, Roberts, Gilligan or Gourdis? What positions does Tambling, King, Tuck and even Astbury play there best footy? All these questions should be answered this year rather than when we are marching up the ladder.
If we are doing what is suggested above and still winning games well then who am I to argue that we made a mistake liftig from the bottom of the ladder? Our list would be obviously in a very good position already.
Stripes
-
I just want them to go out and play. If they win they win.
Got it in one :clapping
Yes, there really isnt anything else to say other than that.
-
never believed in tanking, never will
thats why the saints and demons and blues will never win premierships because karma will screw them
geelong built a great team and never bottomed out
we can do the same
-
look, i will be on the Adelaide, West Coast, Port Adelaide, Melbourne band-wagon!
Tank!
our season is done!
winning pointless matches doesn't do anything for 2011!
look at Fremantle now and Adelaide now!
last year one finished close to a prelim, and the other talk of a wooden spoon!
the pre-season is important!
Andrew Gaff at Pick 4, Melbourne boy, left footer - worth the Tanking.
Cotchin (21) Martin (19) Gaff (18) in 2011 with Tuck, Foley, Jackson, Deledio, Tambling, Edwards - Midfield.
yes, if McMahon did not kick that goal, we would of had pick 2 and 18.
yes, who knows if we would of picked Martin and Griffiths at 3 and 19.
but, this year we would of had picks 4 and 6!
i think we should win matches we can afford to win.
for example, this week, play to win.
it depends on 15th position!
finish last, because I BELIEVE, we have a future!
play McMahon, Polo, Poast, Morton, Polak, Rance, Nahas, Gourdis, Roberts, Hicks, etc, etc, etc.
because we can delist another 6-8 players and just draft kids.
our best 30 is good enough!
i hate it when we lose, but we had the first 11 matches to do something and we didn't!
so why win matches now, when teams are dropping off!
if we are serious, we win in the first half of the season.
yes, it is a new coach and a new plan, and it looks like they are getting used to it.
but play it "Week By Week!"
i will not be upset if we lose now!
SHORT TERM PAIN, FOR A DECADE OF MARTIN, COTCHIN, DELEDIO, GRIFFITHS, RIEWOLDT, TAMBLING, ASTBURY, DEA, FOLEY - PREMIERSHIPS!
think LONG TERM!
i am!
and i likey!
:)
-
eat the wagon wheel................the wagon wheeeeel.
-
yes, if McMahon did not kick that goal, we would of had pick 2 and 18.
yes, who knows if we would of picked Martin and Griffiths at 3 and 19.
but, this year we would of had picks 4 and 6!
NO WE WOULDN'T!!!
:banghead :banghead :banghead
-
yes, if McMahon did not kick that goal, we would of had pick 2 and 18.
yes, who knows if we would of picked Martin and Griffiths at 3 and 19.
but, this year we would of had picks 4 and 6!
NO WE WOULDN'T!!!
:banghead :banghead :banghead
;D, GC17 anyone
-
NO WE WOULDN'T!!!
:banghead :banghead :banghead
Keep punching Infamy ;D
If Melbourne had of won the game against us, they would have tanked against Freo. They were never going to lose pick 1 & 2.
-
we would then have got pick 2 and an extra second round by finishing last
-
we would then have got pick 2 and an extra second round by finishing last
So we would of got Trengrove or Scully and Martin would not be palying for us. Tooooo many ifs and buts.
WIN
-
we would then have got pick 2 and an extra second round by finishing last
We WOULD NOT have got an extra 2nd round pick
We had too many points after we beat Essendon, how friggin hard is this for people to understand?
The only thing our win over Melbourne did was mean that didn't have to tank against Freo to get pick 1 & 2
-
we will play the kids and try and win.
Build the right winning culture and develop them well.
young players will be gifted games and older players will have to knock the door down to get an opportunity if they keep doing their jobs they will get games if not, they will be sraight out.
-
I want to see Browne, Gourdis, Hicks and even Westoff play if they can engineer it! I want to see as many of our young players on the part for extended periods and I want to see if Astbury should be playing forward or back, Lids in the backline or midfield, King as a tagger, backman or for Coburg? I want to see all of this this year when wins DON'T matter. This is our year to be our basis for the future right, our structural foundations to build upon.
The minute we start looking for wins instead of focusing on developing is the step back to the Wallace era I believe.
Tank.
Stripes
-
we will play the kids and try and win.
Build the right winning culture and develop them well.
young players will be gifted games and older players will have to knock the door down to get an opportunity if they keep doing their jobs they will get games if not, they will be sraight out.
this is acceptable going forward imho.
-
All l ever want is to go watch the Richmond football club play football.
Show improvment each week with the chance of winning at the end of the day.
Show the skills of the best players in the country & a bit of biff :thumbsup
-
......... & a bit of biff
:lol Can't take the 70's out of the old fella hey TM?
-
......... & a bit of biff
:lol Can't take the 70's out of the old fella hey TM?
got to love running around in todays packs lol ;D
-
......... & a bit of biff
:lol Can't take the 70's out of the old fella hey TM?
got to love running around in todays packs lol ;D
If you had the chance to run around in todays packs youd never get a game cause youd be suspended. Deep down you know your a thug ;D
-
Sorry I'm still on the we must finish last bandwagon. It's about the future not 2010. As Hardwick has always said this year isn't about wins and losses. Finish last while being very competitive and add more quality to our list to build a list that starts to peak in 2013 onwards and is capable of winning a premiership. That has to remain our main goal. We can't get carried away with one or two wins against out of form bottom 8 sides and divert from our long-term plan. Another mid say to join Lids (pick 1), Cotch (pick 2) and Martin (pick 3) would be great as would another KPP which you can never have too many of. It was a disgrace by those in charge last year we won more than 4 games last year :banghead. It's also not just about pick 4 but also about our later picks as well. Finishing last with 4 wins give us picks 4, 27, 28, 45, ... In a year with GC17 hogging the draft, all early and mid-range picks are going to be worth their weight in gold.
-
Don't think we'll have under 5 wins now
-
Don't think we'll have under 5 wins now
Rd 14 Sydney MCG loss
Rd 15 Freo ES loss
Rd 16 Nth possibility
Rd 17 Coll loss
Rd 18 Adel MCG big chance
Rd 19 Melb loss
Rd 20 Carl loss
Rd 21 St K loss
Rd 22 Port big chance
Will get to 4 definentely as we will beat either one of the SA sides. Nth might be one of those teams at 8-8 with a % of 80 and still a chance to make finals. We play 5 teams in the 8 currently in the run home. Touch and go Infamy. I think we will win 1 of our last 9 the kids will start getting tired.
-
Don't think we'll have under 5 wins now
No and do we care, NO, we are better than the the team that we wanted or some did to tank.
-
Don't think we'll have under 5 wins now
No and do we care, NO, we are better than the the team that we wanted or some did to tank.
lets see how we come up against a top 8 side which has always been our downfall. Cant match it with the big boys.
a few wins against bottom 8 clubs is something we achieve most years. Nothing new there.
We need more quality players and together with the game plan we will be right in the mix.
-
never believed in tanking, never will
thats why the saints and demons and blues will never win premierships because karma will screw them
geelong built a great team and never bottomed out
we can do the same
There you go X, Karma screwed Carltank on the weekend.
-
ill give you a few reasons why Geelong never had to bottom out, tank or whatever you wanna call it
Gary Ablett
Matthew Scarlett
Tom Hawkins
-
Sorry I'm still on the we must finish last bandwagon. It's about the future not 2010. As Hardwick has always said this year isn't about wins and losses. Finish last while being very competitive and add more quality to our list to build a list that starts to peak in 2013 onwards and is capable of winning a premiership. That has to remain our main goal. We can't get carried away with one or two wins against out of form bottom 8 sides and divert from our long-term plan. Another mid say to join Lids (pick 1), Cotch (pick 2) and Martin (pick 3) would be great as would another KPP which you can never have too many of. It was a disgrace by those in charge last year we won more than 4 games last year :banghead. It's also not just about pick 4 but also about our later picks as well. Finishing last with 4 wins give us picks 4, 27, 28, 45, ... In a year with GC17 hogging the draft, all early and mid-range picks are going to be worth their weight in gold.
I agree 100% MT! I hope the likes of Gale, Hardwick and co are smarter than our last years administration (yes I know they are almost the same lot) and make the early call to ensure we finish last with less than 5 wins. West Coast are already shutting up shop with players like Glass being put under the knife early to ensure they have only a threadbare list of kids to play out the year and finish down the bottom. It has been our greatest folly over the last 5 years that we haven't made the tough decisions as a club and rebuilt over consequent years but rather done a half arsed job at it. I'd rather finish down the botto of the ladder for 3 years in a row than 3 times over 6 years like we have to do now.
We need to take our medicine properly so we can actually improve rather than always sit between 16th and 9th! If we are going to win between 4 and 7 regardless of effort then I say we need to ensure that it is 4 where there is at least some benefits!
Stripes
-
Don't think we'll have under 5 wins now
Rd 14 Sydney MCG loss
Rd 15 Freo ES loss
Rd 16 Nth possibility
Rd 17 Coll loss
Rd 18 Adel MCG big chance
Rd 19 Melb loss
Rd 20 Carl loss
Rd 21 St K loss
Rd 22 Port big chance
Will get to 4 definentely as we will beat either one of the SA sides. Nth might be one of those teams at 8-8 with a % of 80 and still a chance to make finals. We play 5 teams in the 8 currently in the run home. Touch and go Infamy. I think we will win 1 of our last 9 the kids will start getting tired.
Interesting Tucker
This is how I see it:
Rd 14 Sydney MCG close loss
Rd 15 Freo ES chance but but close loss
Rd 16 Nth possibility
Rd 17 Coll loss
Rd 18 Adel MCG WIN
Rd 19 Melb WIN
Rd 20 Carl big chance - now that would be KARMA ;D
Rd 21 St K loss
Rd 22 Port WIN
-
ok I'm not really sure which side to take on this issue..What I would like to know is how you curtail this group of players who seem enthusiastic and eager ,from continuing on this path and suddenly put the brakes on..yes you can give players rests and promote more youngsters but wouldnt that severly disrupt this process that began pre season
-
how would u guys feel if a miracle happens and we win every game from now on, i personally would be exstatic, i know it wont happen, but winning is the best way to develop, not tanking
we should develop whatever boys we get and not worry about getting better picks, win as many games as possible :gotigers :gotigers :gotigers
-
As I said before, if we win, we win.
Francis Jackson seems to be doing a reasonable job as recruiter and the Tigers have boosted his support staff this year with Hartley coming on board.
I'll back him to pick a gun for us, whether it be pick 4, 6, 8 or 10.
-
As I said before, if we win, we win.
Francis Jackson seems to be doing a reasonable job as recruiter and the Tigers have boosted his support staff this year with Hartley coming on board.
I'll back him to pick a gun for us, whether it be pick 4, 6, 8 or 10.
I'm with you Wayne. After the great job they did with last year's draft, I have faith in the recruiters to pick up good players with whatever picks we end up with. 'Fraid we'll have to agree to disagree on this point MT. I enjoy winning too much, and I reckon the pre-season's are too long to be looking forward to only a handful of wins every year from now until 2013.
-
ill give you a few reasons why Geelong never had to bottom out, tank or whatever you wanna call it
Gary Ablett
Matthew Scarlett
Tom Hawkins
Spot on.
And generally other than that it was what they did with picks between 20 and 60 that got them where they are (Ling, Johnson etc)
-
ill give you a few reasons why Geelong never had to bottom out, tank or whatever you wanna call it
Gary Ablett
Matthew Scarlett
Tom Hawkins
Spot on.
And generally other than that it was what they did with picks between 20 and 60 that got them where they are (Ling, Johnson etc)
thats bs
hawkins still is not proven and we had our fair share of father sons
richo bowden bourke etc
ablett was not that great when he started , bs excuses
-
ill give you a few reasons why Geelong never had to bottom out, tank or whatever you wanna call it
Gary Ablett
Matthew Scarlett
Tom Hawkins
they were all Father and Son picks?
???
-
ill give you a few reasons why Geelong never had to bottom out, tank or whatever you wanna call it
Gary Ablett
Matthew Scarlett
Tom Hawkins
Spot on.
And generally other than that it was what they did with picks between 20 and 60 that got them where they are (Ling, Johnson etc)
thats bs
hawkins still is not proven and we had our fair share of father sons
richo bowden bourke etc
ablett was not that great when he started , bs excuses
Actually X it is spot on the money - they didn't need to TANK (actually it supports your agrument :shh).
Yes they got the benefit of the old Father/Son rule but they have got it right with their late drafting.... even in their premiership years they've got good kids late in the draft
-
Actually X it is spot on the money - they didn't need to TANK (actually it supports your agrument :shh).
:lol
-
Keep playing all the kids (not the older fringe players), put those who need surgery in if they need to, dont play players who are injured (like Wallace)and if we keep winning then fine, we dont need the higher pick because we are closer than what we first thought.
Either ways a win in my book-
-
It has been our greatest folly over the last 5 years that we haven't made the tough decisions as a club and rebuilt over consequent years but rather done a half behindd job at it. I'd rather finish down the botto of the ladder for 3 years in a row than 3 times over 6 years like we have to do now.
We need to take our medicine properly so we can actually improve rather than always sit between 16th and 9th! If we are going to win between 4 and 7 regardless of effort then I say we need to ensure that it is 4 where there is at least some benefits!
Spot on Stripes. No more short cuts or getting ahead of ourselves because we've beaten a few bottom 8 sides. We are still daylight away from the top sides and need to add more quality to add depth to our list.
It's no point comparing drafting now to 10 years ago. Recruiting is far more sophisticated now and the father-son rule has changed so that a Geelong would no longer be allowed to pick up both Hawkins and Selwood in the one draft. Look at the recent drafts. Fewer and fewer of the top kids are now turning out to be duds. In fact most of the first rounders especially inside the top 5 have cemented a spot in their team's best 22 early on in their career and a number are on their way to becoming future A-graders. It's turning out that more and more of the elite talent is being found early on in the draft. Sheesh our 3 best young mids are all top 3 picks. Sure there are talented kids found later in the draft which is where a recruiter earns his money but there are more misses than hits. It's why a number of clubs are publicly concerned about the draft concessions being offered to GC17 and GWS. Clubs that finish mid-ladder or higher will be frozen out of the 'normal' first round of draft meaning most will miss out on accessing future elite talent. That's why finishing last this year isn't such a bad thing. We'd be the only existing club with a top 5 pick which would give us an advantage. Drafting is about playing the odds and doing your homework.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_AFL_Draft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_AFL_Draft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_AFL_Draft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_AFL_Draft
-
ill give you a few reasons why Geelong never had to bottom out, tank or whatever you wanna call it
Gary Ablett
Matthew Scarlett
Tom Hawkins
Spot on.
And generally other than that it was what they did with picks between 20 and 60 that got them where they are (Ling, Johnson etc)
thats bs
hawkins still is not proven and we had our fair share of father sons
richo bowden bourke etc
ablett was not that great when he started , bs excuses
Actually X it is spot on the money - they didn't need to TANK (actually it supports your agrument :shh).
Yes they got the benefit of the old Father/Son rule but they have got it right with their late drafting.... even in their premiership years they've got good kids late in the draft
sh! :shh :shh
-
You can't develop a winning culture by turning it on and off according to your ladder position. Tanking for picks is a mirage.
-
Hardwick will not deliberately lose games, he has too much integrity.
-
very interesting ...
our 2006 draft under "The Tanned One" was not so bad ...
Draft:
Jack Riewoldt @ 13 (1st R)
Shane Edwards @ 26 (2nd R)
Daniel Connors @ 58 (4th R)
Carl Peterson @ 60 (4th R)
Andrew Collins @ 73 (5th R)
Rookies:
Pick 8 - Tasman Clingan
Pick 24 - Jake King
Trades:
Pick 8 (Ried, Coll) & Pick 42 (Houli, Ess) for Graham Polak & Pick 13 (Riewoldt, Rich) & Pick 63 (Goldsack, Coll)?
Pre-Season:
Pick 6 - Kent Kingsley
obviously, the actual draft of 2006 their are four out of five that are still with us.
to me, the coaching development has worked under Hardwick.
so with more draft picks, the better we will be!
:)
-
very interesting ...
our 2006 draft under "The Tanned One" was not so bad ...
Draft:
Jack Riewoldt @ 13 (1st R)
Shane Edwards @ 26 (2nd R)
Daniel Connors @ 58 (4th R)
Carl Peterson @ 60 (4th R)
Andrew Collins @ 73 (5th R)
Rookies:
Pick 8 - Tasman Clingan
Pick 24 - Jake King
Trades:
Pick 8 (Ried, Coll) & Pick 42 (Houli, Ess) for Graham Polak & Pick 13 (Riewoldt, Rich) & Pick 63 (Goldsack, Coll)?
Pre-Season:
Pick 6 - Kent Kingsley
obviously, the actual draft of 2006 their are four out of five that are still with us.
to me, the coaching development has worked under Hardwick.
so with more draft picks, the better we will be!
:)
Part of the reason this draft is starting to look good is due to these players now being in their 4th year, a few good preasons and decent AFL experience. Hopefully the kids we grabbed in 2007 will start coming good next year.
-
MT where would you say the weaknesses are on our list that need addressing with top picks? Not so long ago I would have pointed to any number of areas, the most glaring being a lack of key defenders. But with Astbury, Rance and Post developing well, along with Gourdis and Grimes still waiting in the wings, I think we're right down back.
Then there were the lack of key forwards. But Jack has suddenly rocketed up another level, while Griffiths is showing signs of developing,and Astbury and Post looking capable of rotating from CHB through CHF, as well as Westhoff showing consistent form at Coburg.
Then there was that old chestnut the rucks, which everybody was worried about not so long ago. We could probably add another one in the draft. But it's not pressing with the Graham and Vickery combination working well, and Browne pushing for senior selection.
As for our midfield, I'd stack it up against any in the competition.
For mine the thing we're probably still lacking the most is someone to stop little pests like Milne, Betts, and Rioli. Otherwise I reckon if we keep putting games into our existing list, we'll be ready to make our run anytime soon. To hell with begging scraps from a series of compromised drafts all the way up to 2013.
-
MT where would you say the weaknesses are on our list that need addressing with top picks? Not so long ago I would have pointed to any number of areas, the most glaring being a lack of key defenders. But with Astbury, Rance and Post developing well, along with Gourdis and Grimes still waiting in the wings, I think we're right down back.
Then there were the lack of key forwards. But Jack has suddenly rocketed up another level, while Griffiths is showing signs of developing,and Astbury and Post looking capable of rotating from CHB through CHF, as well as Westhoff showing consistent form at Coburg.
Then there was that old chestnut the rucks, which everybody was worried about not so long ago. We could probably add another one in the draft. But it's not pressing with the Graham and Vickery combination working well, and Browne pushing for senior selection.
As for our midfield, I'd stack it up against any in the competition.
For mine the thing we're probably still lacking the most is someone to stop little pests like Milne, Betts, and Rioli. Otherwise I reckon if we keep putting games into our existing list, we'll be ready to make our run anytime soon. To hell with begging scraps from a series of compromised drafts all the way up to 2013.
I like your optimism RR! I remember most supporters thinking a similiar thing after the great 2004 draft with our midfield stocks high with Lids, Bling, Meyer, Polo and White with Johnson, Tuck and Campbell leading the way. Up forward we had Schulz, Brown and Richo and Kingsley as backup. In ruck the young Patto would support our new head ruck Simmonds with Knobel stepping up. Done back we had our AA stuff Gaspar with Bowden also supporting...so where are we now :whistle
My point is, that before we put all our eggs in one basket I think we need to wait and see and just in case some of these promising players don't step up lets recruit some talent to at least add depth and competition to the list.
Stripes
-
I like your optimism RR! I remember most supporters thinking a similiar thing after the great 2004 draft with our midfield stocks high with Lids, Bling, Meyer, Polo and White with Johnson, Tuck and Campbell leading the way. Up forward we had Schulz, Brown and Richo and Kingsley as backup. In ruck the young Patto would support our new head ruck Simmonds with Knobel stepping up. Done back we had our AA stuff Gaspar with Bowden also supporting...so where are we now :whistle
My point is, that before we put all our eggs in one basket I think we need to wait and see and just in case some of these promising players don't step up lets recruit some talent to at least add depth and competition to the list.
Stripes
Yeah, I don't know where all this new-found optimism is coming from, it's so unlike me. The prozac must be kicking in :lol
But seriously: I remember being absolutely underwhelmed with our 2004 draft at the time. I wanted either one of Roughead or Franklin, plus more key position players, and was crushed that we used so many top 20 picks on skinny flankers. And time, plus Buddy's continuing brilliance has only confirmed my fears back then. I know what you're saying Stripes. There have been many false dawns along the road to the Tigers resurgence, and I've seen them all over these last BLEAK thirty years, as I'm sure you have. But something just feels different this time. The buzz around the place with Hardwick and these players reminds me off those heady days of Northey in 94/95. And before any cynic replies "well look what happened there", I'd say that unfortunately in that instance the club shot itself in the foot once again, before we were able to really reap the long-term fruits of that partnership.
I have absolute faith in Hardwick, his assistants, our recruiters, and MOST of our current playing list.
-
I like your optimism RR! I remember most supporters thinking a similiar thing after the great 2004 draft with our midfield stocks high with Lids, Bling, Meyer, Polo and White with Johnson, Tuck and Campbell leading the way. Up forward we had Schulz, Brown and Richo and Kingsley as backup. In ruck the young Patto would support our new head ruck Simmonds with Knobel stepping up. Done back we had our AA stuff Gaspar with Bowden also supporting...so where are we now :whistle
My point is, that before we put all our eggs in one basket I think we need to wait and see and just in case some of these promising players don't step up lets recruit some talent to at least add depth and competition to the list.
Stripes
Yeah, I don't know where all this new-found optimism is coming from, it's so unlike me. The prozac must be kicking in :lol
But seriously: I remember being absolutely underwhelmed with our 2004 draft at the time. I wanted either one of Roughead or Franklin, plus more key position players, and was crushed that we used so many top 20 picks on skinny flankers. And time, plus Buddy's continuing brilliance has only confirmed my fears back then. I know what you're saying Stripes. There have been many false dawns along the road to the Tigers resurgence, and I've seen them all over these last BLEAK thirty years, as I'm sure you have. But something just feels different this time. The buzz around the place with Hardwick and these players reminds me off those heady days of Northey in 94/95. And before any cynic replies "well look what happened there", I'd say that unfortunately in that instance the club shot itself in the foot once again, before we were able to really reap the long-term fruits of that partnership.
I have absolute faith in Hardwick, his assistants, our recruiters, and MOST of our current playing list.
Good points RR and I have to say I feel the difference too! Still I think we need to continue to build the list unlike what the club didn't do once Northey moved. I don't want another Frawley top up or Wallace save my behind year because we have deviated from the hard yards. I want to see the wins but not at the expense of a future premiership. I just want as my quality players and depth to our list as possible while we can. As soon as we begin to march up the ladder that opportunity will go so while we have a chance I say use it, regardless of the short term pain it inflicts. As you said, whats another half year of tears compared to the 30 we have already endured :'(
Don't think it will happen now regardless because Hardwick is too good. Sad when succeeding becomes a potential negative but that's the flawed system now isn't it. :o
Stripes
-
MT where would you say the weaknesses are on our list that need addressing with top picks? Not so long ago I would have pointed to any number of areas, the most glaring being a lack of key defenders. But with Astbury, Rance and Post developing well, along with Gourdis and Grimes still waiting in the wings, I think we're right down back.
Then there were the lack of key forwards. But Jack has suddenly rocketed up another level, while Griffiths is showing signs of developing,and Astbury and Post looking capable of rotating from CHB through CHF, as well as Westhoff showing consistent form at Coburg.
Then there was that old chestnut the rucks, which everybody was worried about not so long ago. We could probably add another one in the draft. But it's not pressing with the Graham and Vickery combination working well, and Browne pushing for senior selection.
As for our midfield, I'd stack it up against any in the competition.
For mine the thing we're probably still lacking the most is someone to stop little pests like Milne, Betts, and Rioli. Otherwise I reckon if we keep putting games into our existing list, we'll be ready to make our run anytime soon. To hell with begging scraps from a series of compromised drafts all the way up to 2013.
My premise is based on wanting us to develop into and become a premiership side and when you look at the premiership sides of the recent past there's quality across every line of the 22 who run out. Rarely there's a dud or ordinary player carried anymore as they are a liability.
Our defence:
I'm still not 100% convinced McGuane, Moore and Thursty will be our tall backs going forward. Sure we currently also have Gourdis, Rance, Post and even Astbury as tall defenders but there are severe question marks over Goo and Rance, Postie hasn't come on yet and has had 2nd year blues and Astbury is on in his first year although has shown promise. I still think we struggle breaking out of a full-press zone as the footskills in our backline aren't reliable enough and lack penetration across the board. It's the reason Lids has had to go back there to combine with Newy to give us quality footskills coming out of defence. We are also undersized down back.
Our midfield:
Probably the strongest part of our current list and we do have potential A-graders in Lids, Cotch, Martin. Add Foley, Tuck, Cuz, Jacko, Collo as our 2nd tier mids. We still need to add more quality. Firstly because IMO the best sides have a dozen quality mids (A and B-graders combined) they can rotate through there. Secondly because we'll need to replace Cuz and Tuck. Thirdly because an injury or two will expose our lack of depth.
Our midfield strength is our in-close contesting and clearance work. We get cut open though by the better sides on the spread once the ball clears the stoppage. Partially that will fix itself as our cubs' fitness improves and they physically mature but we need more class and size to add to Lids, Cotch and Martin.
Our rucks:
Gus and Vickery look okay now to take us forward although both are still learning especially Ty. We should have at least 4 rucks on our list to cover any injuries IMO. Look at Carlton and what has happened with Kreuzer. Browne is still very raw and not a decent possession gatherer. We don't know yet whether he'll become an AFL standard ruckman.
Our forwards:
Still our weakest aspect. Jack's form and bags of goals doesn't hide the fact he is our only reliable goal source each and every week. Jack is also our only confirmed forward going forward. Griffiths, Astbury, Nason, Taylor and co. are only in their first year. Way too early to judge whether they'll become A-graders or at least decent B-graders at AFL level.
To me the job is so far only half done. We have a young core now to build around which we didn't have 5 years ago but that core needs to be added to (what Ramps calls the second wave of recruiting) to build a quality list that has depth that can take us to a flag. We still are very thin in the 24-28 y.o. age bracket. When you look at our list we really won't mature until 2013 onwards. There's still too many on our list too young and inexperienced to say we have the players to take us up the ladder.
We have also had a dream run with injuries for once (excluding Foley). That won't always be the case. Good sides/lists can cover injuries. If god forbid Jack, Martin or even Gus did a knee or copped some long-term injury we'd be stuffed.
-
Our defence:
I'm still not 100% convinced McGuane, Moore and Thursty will be our tall backs going forward. Sure we currently also have Gourdis, Rance, Post and even Astbury as tall defenders but there are severe question marks over Goo and Rance, Postie hasn't come on yet and has had 2nd year blues and Astbury is on in his first year although has shown promise. I still think we struggle breaking out of a full-press zone as the footskills in our backline aren't reliable enough and lack penetration across the board. It's the reason Lids has had to go back there to combine with Newy to give us quality footskills coming out of defence. We are also undersized down back.
Our midfield:
Probably the strongest part of our current list and we do have potential A-graders in Lids, Cotch, Martin. Add Foley, Tuck, Cuz, Jacko, Collo as our 2nd tier mids. We still need to add more quality. Firstly because IMO the best sides have a dozen quality mids (A and B-graders combined) they can rotate through there. Secondly because we'll need to replace Cuz and Tuck. Thirdly because an injury or two will expose our lack of depth.
Our midfield strength is our in-close contesting and clearance work. We get cut open though by the better sides on the spread once the ball clears the stoppage. Partially that will fix itself as our cubs' fitness improves and they physically mature but we need more class and size to add to Lids, Cotch and Martin.
Our rucks:
Gus and Vickery look okay now to take us forward although both are still learning especially Ty. We should have at least 4 rucks on our list to cover any injuries IMO. Look at Carlton and what has happened with Kreuzer. Browne is still very raw and not a decent possession gatherer. We don't know yet whether he'll become an AFL standard ruckman.
Our forwards:
Still our weakest aspect. Jack's form and bags of goals doesn't hide the fact he is our only reliable goal source each and every week. Jack is also our only confirmed forward going forward. Griffiths, Astbury, Nason, Taylor and co. are only in their first year. Way too early to judge whether they'll become A-graders or at least decent B-graders at AFL level.
To me the job is so far only half done. We have a young core now to build around which we didn't have 5 years ago but that core needs to be added to (what Ramps calls the second wave of recruiting) to build a quality list that has depth that can take us to a flag. We still are very thin in the 24-28 y.o. age bracket. When you look at our list we really won't mature until 2013 onwards. There's still too many on our list too young and inexperienced to say we have the players to take us up the ladder.
We have also had a dream run with injuries for once (excluding Foley). That won't always be the case. Good sides/lists can cover injuries. If god forbid Jack, Martin or even Gus did a knee or copped some long-term injury we'd be stuffed.
[/quote]
Our Defence:
I'm not convinced McGuane Moore and Thursty will be our key defenders going forward either. But they're so hard to seperate, its difficult to tell which of the three (if any) is the keeper. I think the question mark over Goo was always his kicking, but I've seen a lot of him at Coburg now, and I believe it's no longer a problem. I don't believe he's far from senior action. Neither IMO is Post who is MASSIVE now, and the word was he was struggling for a while with the extra muscle.Rance is improving. I haven't given up on him yet.And from what I've seen of Grimes,(like Astbury) he will be a beauty when he fills out. He might play his first Coburg senior game tomorrow :thumbsup
Our Midfield:
You mention Lids,Cotch, Martin, stuff,Cuz, Jacko and Collins, and say that the better teams have 12 mids in their rotations. Well throw in Edwards,Nason,Webberley and Contin (who there are big raps on) and there's your 12. And that's not even mentioning White and King who are now playing great footy.
Of those only Cuz is short-term, as I believe Tucky with his father's longevity genes could play well into his 30's. Sure, we need to keep unearthing them. Even Hardwick said we'll be looking for more outside runners next draft. But do we really need pick 4? There are lots of good players to be had even in the 20 to 40 range if you draft smartly. Nason at 71 is living proof of that.
Our Rucks:
Yes I agree, we need to add another. We need at least four on the list. And with Simmo retiring, if a hole in our list structure opens up we need to close it. But once again, ruckmen tend to be picked up a little later in the draft, unless they're exceptional talents like Kruezer and Natanui. Or big vacancies in our team structure that needed addressing like we did when we took Vickery early.
Our Forwards:
Yes, it's a worry that Jack is being left to shoulder so much of the scoring burden at the minute. But let's see how some of these key position names come up. As well as the likes of Nahas, Roberts,Hicks and Taylor at ground level.
You say the job is only half-finished. But there are still many players on our list we haven't even seen at senior level yet: Contin, Grimes, Gilligan,Gourdis, Hicks,O'Reilly and Westhoff. On top of that, we've only seen glimpses of Taylor, Roberts, Webberley, Griffiths and Dea so far.There is just so much scope for improvement with our current list. With Simmonds gone, McMahon's papers stamped and the likes of Hislop,Thompson,and probably Polo and Morton to go, that's plenty of room for new faces coming into 2011.
Finally,you say the lack of 24-28 yr olds on our list is a problem. Well there's only 2 ways to fix that. One is to wait for our list to start ageing, obviously. The other is to recruit some older, recycled players. And I'm sure we don't want to go down that path again. It never worked for us in the past. And look at the mess Brisbane are in now taking that approach.
-
There's a lot of hope in your post RR but can we afford to hope players will come on any more? I don't think we can assume that even two thirds of this years recruits will make it. The average is one third for all recruits so if we can develop half of this years debutants I think we will be doing extremely well.
That said, we still have holes all over the ground particularly in the ruck and forwardline with both areas serverely depleated of talent. Against Power, WC and Brisbane manner of our players and structures have looked good but against more mature and capable opposition our weaknesses will be highlighted again.
Without Jack as a target our forwardline is almost non-existant. Sure Griffiths, Taylor, Astbury and even Westoff could all be forward stars but they could all become our answer to Schulz, Kracker(sp?), Hughes and Pettifier too.
Our Rucks are hanging on by a thread. Gus has really stood up and Vickery showing sensation signs but remember 2006? Simmonds went down, Knoble was injured and young Patto had to shoulder the ruck burden. If any of our ruckman don't develop, which is almost a unbackable certainty, then we are one or two ruckman in the red. A trade may help in future years once our teams has inched up the ladder but this still remains a real concern.
Even our midfield needs more quality. To mentioned a group of potential support players in the middle but we need more talent of the likes of Cotchin and Martin (as I believe Lids will stay in the backline) otherwise these two will be blanketed by taggers every week. All great premiership dynasties have had at least 4 star midfielders in the middle so by my reckoning we are still at least two champion ball users short. This is where Pick 4 would give us the strong possibility of securing one such player while with later picks the probability begins to shorten.
I don't think we has hope players will come on any longer. We need to keep going to the draft to give us as much depth and chance we have that every area on the ground is covered.
Stripes
-
To me the job is so far only half done. We have a young core now to build around which we didn't have 5 years ago but that core needs to be added to (what Ramps calls the second wave of recruiting) to build a quality list that has depth that can take us to a flag.
Its about time that "Multiwave Recruiting" become famous in the AFL.
I may write my own recruiting book
All the way with Multiwave- The Ramps route to success ;D :lol
Kitchen and other merchandise to arrive shortly!
-
To me the job is so far only half done. We have a young core now to build around which we didn't have 5 years ago but that core needs to be added to (what Ramps calls the second wave of recruiting) to build a quality list that has depth that can take us to a flag.
Its about time that "Multiwave Recruiting" become famous in the AFL.
I may write my own recruiting book
All the way with Multiwave- The Ramps route to success ;D :lol
Kitchen and other merchandise to arrive shortly!
Ramps Revolutionary Recruiting! :D
-
Our Defence:
I'm not convinced McGuane Moore and Thursty will be our key defenders going forward either. But they're so hard to seperate, its difficult to tell which of the three (if any) is the keeper. I think the question mark over Goo was always his kicking, but I've seen a lot of him at Coburg now, and I believe it's no longer a problem. I don't believe he's far from senior action. Neither IMO is Post who is MASSIVE now, and the word was he was struggling for a while with the extra muscle.Rance is improving. I haven't given up on him yet.And from what I've seen of Grimes,(like Astbury) he will be a beauty when he fills out. He might play his first Coburg senior game tomorrow :thumbsup
Our Midfield:
You mention Lids,Cotch, Martin, stuff,Cuz, Jacko and Collins, and say that the better teams have 12 mids in their rotations. Well throw in Edwards,Nason,Webberley and Contin (who there are big raps on) and there's your 12. And that's not even mentioning White and King who are now playing great footy.
Of those only Cuz is short-term, as I believe Tucky with his father's longevity genes could play well into his 30's. Sure, we need to keep unearthing them. Even Hardwick said we'll be looking for more outside runners next draft. But do we really need pick 4? There are lots of good players to be had even in the 20 to 40 range if you draft smartly. Nason at 71 is living proof of that.
Our Rucks:
Yes I agree, we need to add another. We need at least four on the list. And with Simmo retiring, if a hole in our list structure opens up we need to close it. But once again, ruckmen tend to be picked up a little later in the draft, unless they're exceptional talents like Kruezer and Natanui. Or big vacancies in our team structure that needed addressing like we did when we took Vickery early.
Our Forwards:
Yes, it's a worry that Jack is being left to shoulder so much of the scoring burden at the minute. But let's see how some of these key position names come up. As well as the likes of Nahas, Roberts,Hicks and Taylor at ground level.
You say the job is only half-finished. But there are still many players on our list we haven't even seen at senior level yet: Contin, Grimes, Gilligan,Gourdis, Hicks,O'Reilly and Westhoff. On top of that, we've only seen glimpses of Taylor, Roberts, Webberley, Griffiths and Dea so far.There is just so much scope for improvement with our current list. With Simmonds gone, McMahon's papers stamped and the likes of Hislop,Thompson,and probably Polo and Morton to go, that's plenty of room for new faces coming into 2011.
Finally,you say the lack of 24-28 yr olds on our list is a problem. Well there's only 2 ways to fix that. One is to wait for our list to start ageing, obviously. The other is to recruit some older, recycled players. And I'm sure we don't want to go down that path again. It never worked for us in the past. And look at the mess Brisbane are in now taking that approach.
Wooooh camel woooooh! ;D
Stripes has basically said what I wanted to reply :thumbsup. We have too many unknown cubs to count them as clear options going forward. For example the midfield - by 12 I meant certainties that can be relied upon at AFL level week in week out. The likes of Nason, Webberley, Contin, Grimes, etc are unproven and could turn out to be as much flops long term as best 22ers. Remember Polo and Raines looked promising early on but once the opposition figured them out they didn't come on. In fact the majority of our list is unproven at AFL level even a number of those in the Richmond at the moment. We haven't beaten anyone yet of note. They've all been bottom 8 sides out of form and low on confidence. We still need to add more class before we can get in a position to match let alone beat the top sides when a game matters to them as much as it does to us. If we get ahead of ourselves then we'll just repeat the mistakes of the past 15 years falling short of the best.
Not meaning to single him out as Nason has been good for a first year player but as much as Nason has been promising he is nowhere near in the same class of a Lids, Cotch or Martin to say we can find their types at pick 71 when they were top 4 picks. Sure you can still find decent AFL footballers later in the draft but they are rare finds amongst the chaff and the A-grade cream is more and more rising to the top end of the drafts year by year as recruiting become more and more sophisticated and analysed.
-
To me the job is so far only half done. We have a young core now to build around which we didn't have 5 years ago but that core needs to be added to (what Ramps calls the second wave of recruiting) to build a quality list that has depth that can take us to a flag.
Its about time that "Multiwave Recruiting" become famous in the AFL.
I may write my own recruiting book
All the way with Multiwave- The Ramps route to success ;D :lol
Kitchen and other merchandise to arrive shortly!
:rollin :thatsgold
Ramps' prototype machine for recruiters lol
(http://www.gguitars.com/images/sourceaudio/distortion.jpg)
-
To me the job is so far only half done. We have a young core now to build around which we didn't have 5 years ago but that core needs to be added to (what Ramps calls the second wave of recruiting) to build a quality list that has depth that can take us to a flag.
Its about time that "Multiwave Recruiting" become famous in the AFL.
I may write my own recruiting book
All the way with Multiwave- The Ramps route to success ;D :lol
Kitchen and other merchandise to arrive shortly!
:rollin :thatsgold
Ramps' prototype machine for recruiters lol
(http://www.gguitars.com/images/sourceaudio/distortion.jpg)
Nice pictures - wheres the dud eject button ;D
-
Wooooh camel woooooh! ;D
Stripes has basically said what I wanted to reply :thumbsup. We have too many unknown cubs to count them as clear options going forward. For example the midfield - by 12 I meant certainties that can be relied upon at AFL level week in week out. The likes of Nason, Webberley, Contin, Grimes, etc are unproven and could turn out to be as much flops long term as best 22ers. Remember Polo and Raines looked promising early on but once the opposition figured them out they didn't come on. In fact the majority of our list is unproven at AFL level even a number of those in the Richmond at the moment. We haven't beaten anyone yet of note. They've all been bottom 8 sides out of form and low on confidence. We still need to add more class before we can get in a position to match let alone beat the top sides when a game matters to them as much as it does to us. If we get ahead of ourselves then we'll just repeat the mistakes of the past 15 years falling short of the best.
Not meaning to single him out as Nason has been good for a first year player but as much as Nason has been promising he is nowhere near in the same class of a Lids, Cotch or Martin to say we can find their types at pick 71 when they were top 4 picks. Sure you can still find decent AFL footballers later in the draft but they are rare finds amongst the chaff and the A-grade cream is more and more rising to the top end of the drafts year by year as recruiting become more and more sophisticated and analysed.
My optimism isn't based around who we've beaten. I know we haven't beaten anybody of significance yet. In fact we're just as likely to get touched up by the ducks again next week as we always do, then you'll all be lining up to say "I told you so".
But maybe in a year or two when these kids get a few more pre-season's and matches under their belts, and a few more kilo's on their frames it'll be a different story. And I know that history says that a large percentage of these kids wont make the grade, but I wager that a lot more of this particular batch will come on than usual.
See, the thing that I find a bit contradictory from you and Stripes (and I'm not having a go at you here) is you're all for recruiting, recruiting and more recruiting. But when we go out and actually make FOURTEEN changes to our list in one season, you seem more intent on looking for the next batch, and the next, right up until 2013, than actually wanting to have a good close look at the players that we've already brought on board.
-
My optimism isn't based around who we've beaten. I know we haven't beaten anybody of significance yet. In fact we're just as likely to get touched up by the ducks again next week as we always do, then you'll all be lining up to say "I told you so".
But maybe in a year or two when these kids get a few more pre-season's and matches under their belts, and a few more kilo's on their frames it'll be a different story. And I know that history says that a large percentage of these kids wont make the grade, but I wager that a lot more of this particular batch will come on than usual.
See, the thing that I find a bit contradictory from you and Stripes (and I'm not having a go at you here) is you're all for recruiting, recruiting and more recruiting. But when we go out and actually make FOURTEEN changes to our list in one season, you seem more intent on looking for the next batch, and the next, right up until 2013, than actually wanting to have a good close look at the players that we've already brought on board.
But RR one draft of finally doing the right thing of making 14 changes doesn't make a list. Our recruiting philosophy prior to last year was a shambles. We kept changing our "grand plan" from year to year. In 2004 we brought in a whole heap of kids (ignoring their quality or lack of) then the following year we just used 3 picks. This was followed by 5 picks because we rated the 2006 draft and then just 3 picks again in 2007 because we didn't rate it and traded pick 19 for McMahon ::). In 2008 we then just used 2 picks on kids and 2 on top ups. I know I'm not saying anything new but I mean they didn't have a clue what they were doing :banghead. Even last year winning more than 4 games which would have given us at chance at picks 4 and 6 this year was a disgrace. Imagine adding two young guns to our current list of cubs. It's a missed opportunity for what - one more goal and 2 behinds :P. There was no forward planning and no foresight. So yes it is probably a fair comment RR to say I look at one batch followed by another batch and so on because as a Club we never did so in past and that is why we didn't go anywhere. We never (re)built a list full stop!
This upcoming draft is Hardwick's most crucial. He needs to have another clean out (mostly the obvious names). It'll be a lot easier to do so if you are replacing our duds with quality youngsters. Winning too many games that we finish mid-ladder is detrimental to that aim. The last thing we need is another 2005 draft. We wanted Paddy Ryder and missed out on him by finishing Ninth. The system punishes clubs for meaningless wins in the second half. It's designed to reward bottom clubs based on ladder position. We need to take our medicine, finish as low as possible and rebuild our list with quality. That quality especially in this GC17 rigged draft is found early on and not starting with a mid-teen first round pick.
-
My optimism isn't based around who we've beaten. I know we haven't beaten anybody of significance yet. In fact we're just as likely to get touched up by the ducks again next week as we always do, then you'll all be lining up to say "I told you so".
But maybe in a year or two when these kids get a few more pre-season's and matches under their belts, and a few more kilo's on their frames it'll be a different story. And I know that history says that a large percentage of these kids wont make the grade, but I wager that a lot more of this particular batch will come on than usual.
See, the thing that I find a bit contradictory from you and Stripes (and I'm not having a go at you here) is you're all for recruiting, recruiting and more recruiting. But when we go out and actually make FOURTEEN changes to our list in one season, you seem more intent on looking for the next batch, and the next, right up until 2013, than actually wanting to have a good close look at the players that we've already brought on board.
But RR one draft of finally doing the right thing of making 14 changes doesn't make a list. Our recruiting philosophy prior to last year was a shambles. We kept changing our "grand plan" from year to year. In 2004 we brought in a whole heap of kids (ignoring their quality or lack of) then the following year we just used 3 picks. This was followed by 5 picks because we rated the 2006 draft and then just 3 picks again in 2007 because we didn't rate it and traded pick 19 for McMahon ::). In 2008 we then just used 2 picks on kids and 2 on top ups. I know I'm not saying anything new but I mean they didn't have a clue what they were doing :banghead. Even last year winning more than 4 games which would have given us at chance at picks 4 and 6 this year was a disgrace. Imagine adding two young guns to our current list of cubs. It's a missed opportunity for what - one more goal and 2 behinds :P. There was no forward planning and no foresight. So yes it is probably a fair comment RR to say I look at one batch followed by another batch and so on because as a Club we never did so in past and that is why we didn't go anywhere. We never (re)built a list full stop!
This upcoming draft is Hardwick's most crucial. He needs to have another clean out (mostly the obvious names). It'll be a lot easier to do so if you are replacing our duds with quality youngsters. Winning too many games that we finish mid-ladder is detrimental to that aim. The last thing we need is another 2005 draft. We wanted Paddy Ryder and missed out on him by finishing Ninth. The system punishes clubs for meaningless wins in the second half. It's designed to reward bottom clubs based on ladder position. We need to take our medicine, finish as low as possible and rebuild our list with quality. That quality especially in this GC17 rigged draft is found early on and not starting with a mid-teen first round pick.
Couldn't have said it better myself MT :clapping
RR - I share your optimism regarding our last batch of draft choices but until they are proven quality players, which won't occur for many years to come, I don't want to throw away this opportunity to bring in another batch of quality players onto the list. We can't afford to wait and hope that our current crop will all make it so while we are in a position of drafting strength on the bottom of the ladder, we need to use it. If that means we engineer a couple of loses against bottom eight sides who are also looking to the draft, then so be it if it means our future will be better.
What's the difference between 4 or 6 wins? A hell of a lot in terms of draft choices but very little otherwise. This is why we need to look to the draft as much as look to develop our culture, confidence and game plan.
Stripes
-
Scenario-based question for the pro-tankers:
Imagine we are in our current situation (young list, 1st year coach, years of failure etc etc) and we come to the last round. We sit on the bottom of the ladder but only by percentage to the 2 teams above us. They have both played and lost and we will jump from 16th to 14th with a win. We are playing Geelong who need to win to take top spot and Newman takes the mark 50mts out directly in front when the siren sounds with us 5 points down. Do you want him to kick the goal and consign us to draft pick #8 or miss and get us draft pick #4?
-
Scenario-based question for the pro-tankers:
Imagine we are in our current situation (young list, 1st year coach, years of failure etc etc) and we come to the last round. We sit on the bottom of the ladder but only by percentage to the 2 teams above us. They have both played and lost and we will jump from 16th to 14th with a win. We are playing Geelong who need to win to take top spot and Newman takes the mark 50mts out directly in front when the siren sounds with us 5 points down. Do you want him to kick the goal and consign us to draft pick #8 or miss and get us draft pick #4?
Scenario won't happen Smokey as we play Port. :thumbsup
However as you put it assuming the scenario is real I would want us to miss. To me the difference between pick 4 as our first pick and pick 8 or 10 is huge. If we win four games or six games to me is not much difference and we'll get the earlier pick. At pick 10 the draft is a little more unpredictable in terms of who you are going to get. Just as an example we're we expecting Rance at 18 in 2007? I'm still an advocate for pick 4 and until we are in a real position to move up the ladder I'm still of the school that we should ensure we think of the future and not the present. Save our pennies for later.
Furthermore if we are running the Cats to a shot after the siren in that climate you mention then why shouldn't we enhance our list further with pick 4. The scenario you present would mean we are on the rise anyway so a pick 4 would only further strengthen our list moving forward to next year.
I know some won't agree but that's fine also. :thumbsup
-
Scenario won't happen Smokey as we play Port. :thumbsup
;) That's why I started it with "Imagine"!! :)
-
Scenario-based question for the pro-tankers:
Imagine we are in our current situation (young list, 1st year coach, years of failure etc etc) and we come to the last round. We sit on the bottom of the ladder but only by percentage to the 2 teams above us. They have both played and lost and we will jump from 16th to 14th with a win. We are playing Geelong who need to win to take top spot and Newman takes the mark 50mts out directly in front when the siren sounds with us 5 points down. Do you want him to kick the goal and consign us to draft pick #8 or miss and get us draft pick #4?
Miss! Hello Jordie ;)
It's just not pick 4 either. The 2nd, 3rd round picks will be earlier as well. Play the odds and increase the pool of kids to choose from.
-
Scenario-based question for the pro-tankers:
Imagine we are in our current situation (young list, 1st year coach, years of failure etc etc) and we come to the last round. We sit on the bottom of the ladder but only by percentage to the 2 teams above us. They have both played and lost and we will jump from 16th to 14th with a win. We are playing Geelong who need to win to take top spot and Newman takes the mark 50mts out directly in front when the siren sounds with us 5 points down. Do you want him to kick the goal and consign us to draft pick #8 or miss and get us draft pick #4?
Its a miss for mine unless its the Blues or Pies..lol A wooden spoon dont mean jack poo if you go on to win a flag in the years to come.
Saints win a flag this year you think any Saints supporter is going to care about any spoon they have won in the past.
We need a few more quality players but we are well on track if we keep this up.
-
Watching Coburg today we definitely don't have a heap of quality depth on our list right now :P.
-
Well MT and Stripes, I can see this thread going round and round in circles. You have your opinion, and I have mine, and we'll never convince each other otherwise.
All I'll say is, I just totally abhor the idea of tanking or even wanting the Tigers to legitimately lose just to gain a few rungs up the draft ladder. Drafting has proven time and time again to be such an inexact science that there are plenty of examples of better players being unearthed with a lower pick anyway. But that's not the point. The point is that playing to lose makes sport utterly meaningless. Every time you run out, you should want to win end of story. We can blame the AFL for creating an stuffed scenario, and what makes it even worse is they know damned well that teams have laid down for draft picks, but Demetriou has his head so far up his own sphincter he doesn't even have the guts to admit it.
Either way, I refuse to play his little game, ansd I hope Hardwick and the Tigers refuse to as well. It was great to see the Blues lose Kreuzer for a year after they cheated to steal him from us.Maybe fate hates tankers after all.
-
IMO
We have 11 games left.
Perfecting the game plan with the future of our club is the highest priority. Putting the best young 22 (Including Tuck and Cousins for leadership) on the park with as many future hopeful premiership players as possible. Playing to win with our best structure to our game plan.
The byproduct from this is developing our future structure with our future game plan. The positives from winning with a young side with our future game plan has more positives in terms of confidence, comradeship, validation of our game plan and player development, than tactically fielding a weak side and playing players out of position (tanking). The difference between winning with our kids and all the positives for our future out ways throwing all of that out the window for the difference between pick 4 and 8, by miles.
-
Lol @ RR bloodhungry kruiser comment
-
People won't like this but today wasn't a bad loss to have long-term. Jumping up to 11th would've been fools gold. We've been there before so many times to our own detriment. Let North finish mid-ladder and cop the crap draft picks. Belief, structure and faith only takes you so far. You need the class and depth on your list first to make the most of the former when we do eventually climb the ladder. Our list is still in the rebuilding and development stage and a couple of years off from being a genuine finals side. A bottom 2-3 finish this year will give us access to another top classy kid and lower 2nd/3rd round picks we need to improve our list.
Written, spoken and authorised by MT, Pro-tankers party, Melbourne ;)
-
People won't like this but today wasn't a bad loss to have long-term. Jumping up to 11th would've been fools gold. We've been there before so many times to our own detriment. Let North finish mid-ladder and cop the crap draft picks. Belief, structure and faith only takes you so far. You need the class and depth on your list first to make the most of the former when we do eventually climb the ladder. Our list is still in the rebuilding and development stage and a couple of years off from being a genuine finals side. A bottom 2-3 finish this year will give us access to another top classy kid and lower 2nd/3rd round picks we need to improve our list.
Written, spoken and authorised by MT, Pro-tankers party, Melbourne ;)
i agree 100%
Losses like that are not good though where you had very few players who came to play.
-
People won't like this but today wasn't a bad loss to have long-term. Jumping up to 11th would've been fools gold. We've been there before so many times to our own detriment. Let North finish mid-ladder and cop the crap draft picks. Belief, structure and faith only takes you so far. You need the class and depth on your list first to make the most of the former when we do eventually climb the ladder. Our list is still in the rebuilding and development stage and a couple of years off from being a genuine finals side. A bottom 2-3 finish this year will give us access to another top classy kid and lower 2nd/3rd round picks we need to improve our list.
Written, spoken and authorised by MT, Pro-tankers party, Melbourne ;)
Our run in is pretty tough really.
Collingwood and St Kilda will do us.
Melbourne and Carlton seem to lift when they play us.
Adelaide and Port are the only games I really feel confident about, but Port will have a few players playing for their careers in Rnd 22.
I think we will win 1 or 2.
-
People won't like this but today wasn't a bad loss to have long-term. Jumping up to 11th would've been fools gold. We've been there before so many times to our own detriment. Let North finish mid-ladder and cop the crap draft picks. Belief, structure and faith only takes you so far. You need the class and depth on your list first to make the most of the former when we do eventually climb the ladder. Our list is still in the rebuilding and development stage and a couple of years off from being a genuine finals side. A bottom 2-3 finish this year will give us access to another top classy kid and lower 2nd/3rd round picks we need to improve our list.
Written, spoken and authorised by MT, Pro-tankers party, Melbourne ;)
True
-
Our run in is pretty tough really.
Collingwood and St Kilda will do us.
Melbourne and Carlton seem to lift when they play us.
Adelaide and Port are the only games I really feel confident about, but Port will have a few players playing for their careers in Rnd 22.
I think we will win 1 or 2.
I agree Jake with 1-2 wins but I rate the Adelaide game harder than Melbourne and especially Carlton as the Blues are in free fall at the moment. We haven't beaten the Crows in years. Only Port is the gimme win for us. Bottom 4 sides travelling interstate in round 22 normally get flogged because there's nothing to play and they don't want to be there.
-
People won't like this but today wasn't a bad loss to have long-term. Jumping up to 11th would've been fools gold. We've been there before so many times to our own detriment. Let North finish mid-ladder and cop the crap draft picks. Belief, structure and faith only takes you so far. You need the class and depth on your list first to make the most of the former when we do eventually climb the ladder. Our list is still in the rebuilding and development stage and a couple of years off from being a genuine finals side. A bottom 2-3 finish this year will give us access to another top classy kid and lower 2nd/3rd round picks we need to improve our list.
Written, spoken and authorised by MT, Pro-tankers party, Melbourne ;)
I agree.
Our list is better than Essendons, Port and probably WCE.
Beating top 4 sides is great and I'm all for, but a "gutsy' win out of he ordinary in the wet against a bottom 8 team doesn't have much upside long term.
-
TANKING TIME!
-
time to play Hicks, Contin, O'Rielly, Gilligan ...
better to finish 15th than 10th/11th with Cotch/Foley/Jackson already out
-
i see it like this.
firstly,i agree wholeheartedly with mt.
Secondly
Collingwood and St Kilda will do us.
Melbourne and Carlton we will beat and they will be the type of wins that bring the team closer together (young list beating other young lists on the block)it's almost imperative we do this.
Adelaide and Port we will win one of.
-
i see it like this.
firstly,i agree wholeheartedly with mt.
Secondly
Collingwood and St Kilda will do us.
Melbourne and Carlton we will beat and they will be the type of wins that bring the team closer together (young list beating other young lists on the block)it's almost imperative we do this.
Adelaide and Port we will win one of.
I agree with this
-
Our list is better than Essendons, Port and probably WCE.
Beating top 4 sides is great and I'm all for, but a "gutsy' win out of he ordinary in the wet against a bottom 8 team doesn't have much upside long term.
I agree Popelord although I would think the Eagles are tanking. Worsfold would surely join Mark Williams in the sacked coaches club this year if they weren't and he didn't have Boardroom approval. Very suss. We'll see how they'll go this weekend against struggling Carlton at home at Subi. A win would jump them back ahead of us giving us pick 4.
-
TANKING TIME!
Why do we need to deliberately loose?
-
If we win by playing as many of the kids who are up for it ,I will be happy but if we win playing guys who are injured or have a few years up and havnt got a great chance of remaining at the club in the future , I wont be happy.
-
TANKING TIME!
Why do we need to deliberately loose?
Yep Dimma will send them out to win but being a young inexperienced side (especially now so many outs we are back to having a midfield unfamiliar with each other) we are unlikely to win many of our remaining games. The benefit is more and more cubs on our list gain experience which helps us long term.
-
Which is not tanking
-
Which is not tanking
Yep it's not tanking in the true sense of players blatantly going out and trying to lose. Some might argue though that in AFL lingo "tanking" can include experienced players with any niggle, that would/could still try and play if finals were on the line, being put into cotton wool to make sure they're 100% right for preseason training and 2011. Collingwood did it in 2005 to score Pendelbury and Thomas in the draft.
-
Which is not tanking
do the thing that is like, but not tanking, then
-
Which is not tanking
Yep it's not tanking in the true sense of players blatantly going out and trying to lose. Some might argue though that in AFL lingo "tanking" can include experienced players with any niggle, that would/could still try and play if finals were on the line, being put into cotton wool to make sure they're 100% right for preseason training and 2011. Collingwood did it in 2005 to score Pendelbury and Thomas in the draft.
The thing is MT, if it happened before the draft it was just smart player management. It still is smart player management, unlike RFC allowing Richo to attempt to come back late last year, which was plain stupid.
Speaking of tanking, a term that has it's basis in boxing as another way of saying taking a dive, what about the Danny Green Fiasco?
Plenty of lols there
"Green screamed at Briggs: ''You f---ing dog'' as the referee waved off the contest."
"He added soon after: ''Paul Briggs is not getting paid a cent. That is criminal, what he did. I will rise above that canine and apologise."
''I am feeling very, very angry.''
The comments left on various sites about the incident shows just how low an act people in general see tanking/diving.
Would hate to see RFC seen in this vein, even though some seem more than willing for that to happen, even if it is not deserved.
-
Which is not tanking
Yep it's not tanking in the true sense of players blatantly going out and trying to lose. Some might argue though that in AFL lingo "tanking" can include experienced players with any niggle, that would/could still try and play if finals were on the line, being put into cotton wool to make sure they're 100% right for preseason training and 2011. Collingwood did it in 2005 to score Pendelbury and Thomas in the draft.
The thing is MT, if it happened before the draft it was just smart player management. It still is smart player management, unlike RFC allowing Richo to attempt to come back late last year, which was plain stupid.
Speaking of tanking, a term that has it's basis in boxing as another way of saying taking a dive, what about the Danny Green Fiasco?
Plenty of lols there
"Green screamed at Briggs: ''You f---ing dog'' as the referee waved off the contest."
"He added soon after: ''Paul Briggs is not getting paid a cent. That is criminal, what he did. I will rise above that canine and apologise."
''I am feeling very, very angry.''
The comments left on various sites about the incident shows just how low an act people in general see tanking/diving.
Would hate to see RFC seen in this vein, even though some seem more than willing for that to happen, even if it is not deserved.
would you be happy to Wallace coach out the season, win a couple more games instead of Jake the Rake - and missed Dustin Martin in the draft? not have Aston on the list this season or next season or the next 10years?
-
How did you draw that conclusion?
-
How did you draw that conclusion?
you still indulging in ths discussion al? ;D
-
better than telly ;D
-
Which is not tanking
do the thing that is like, but not tanking, then
Which basically means that there are almost no instances where real "tanking" occurs in the AFL. The overwhelming majority of "tanking" accusations are made at clubs that play kids, cotton wool good players etc.
-
Yeah, correct Y&B.
It would be irresponsible not to do those things once you know finals are out of the question.
-
Today showed why we need to finish as low on the ladder (and hence as high in draft) as possible and get access to the most talented kids available. A massive albeit not unexpected reality check.
We're on the right track given even today we got decent games out of young guys like Astbury and a pleasant return to form by Rance but our list depth is poor and we need to replace our list cloggers with more of the best young talent so in 3 years time it's us who are top 4 and dishing out the 14 goal hidings.
-
We were also playing Collingwood MT, who are one of the teams that develops without draft picks. Since 2000 they've only had 4 or 5 and whilst they've done really well with those picks (Didak, Thomas, Pendleebury) the real backbone of their relative success is that they've done so well with their later picks and rookies and also some of their recycled talent.
Anyway I despise the notion of tanking, don't think we will ever tank under Hardwick. Today wasn't a tank we were simply outclassed and it showed our depth isn't great. Nothing sinister about finishing last if you have ordinary squad depth and young players getting tired in their first few seasons.
As soon as we have 10-12 real players in or before their prime to build around we will be able to do a Collingwood/Geelong and build by smart drafting, but I do think we need pick 4 at this stage.
-
Haven't the Pies received two pre-first round priority picks in their time? Fraser and Thomas.
No doubt they the Pies have done well with some of their rookie picks but they do have a number of first rounders plus two father-sons in their best 22 and their classiest players like Didak and Pendlebury were top 5 picks. Add to that 8 of their 22 today were drafted 7 plus years ago. They've had a core to build around since the late 90s and have added to that core since then. We are just developing a core now.
1995: Prestigiacome (10)
1998: Lockyer (rookie)
1999: Fraser (1), Davis (34), Johnson (62), O'Bree (PSD 1)
2000: Didak (3)
2001: Swan (58)
2002: Maxwell (rookie)
2003: Shaw (48, F/S)
2004: Cloke (39, F/S), O'Brien (rookie, 21)
2005: Thomas (2), Pendlebury (5), Anthony (37), Toovey (rookie, 2)
2006: Reid (8), Brown (10), Dawes (28), idiot (44), Goldsack (63), Wellingham (rookie, 10), MaCaffer (rookie, 26)
2008: Sidebottom (11), Beams (29), L.Brown (78), Blair (rookie, 27)
2009: Ball (30)
Trades: Jolly (14), Wood (14), Medhurst (Tarrant)
-
Sorry MT, I had meant to say
"Since 2000 they've only had 4 or 5 top 10"
-
No probs Jake. I'd still argue especially in recent drafts that as recruiting becomes even more sophisticated the cream is more and more at the top of the draft. It's playing the odds to finish as low as possible while rebuilding to back your recruitment staff and give them access to the largest pool of the best kids as possible. It also gives you early access to the 2nd and 3rd rounds which as you point out Jake are important picks as well to fill out and add the depth to a club's list.
Speaking of tanking hello West Coast Eagles ::). 26 points up at half time at home with Carlton down to 3 on the bench and come out in the second half and play like they've never played together before.
-
Like, it's so unusual for a team in contention for the wooden spoon to be overrun by a team in contention for the finals?
They must have dived!
Which players were asked to under-perform in the second half?
-
Like, it's so unusual for a team in contention for the wooden spoon to be overrun by a team in contention for the finals?
They must have dived!
Which players were asked to under-perform in the second half?
Embley might as well been wearing a Blues jumper :wallywink.
Just ticked off Carlton won al.
The whole WCE side under-performed in the second half. Jeckyl and Hyde stuff between halves. Never seen so many simple uncontested marks dropped since we had the yips in the first 15 minutes of round 1 last year. The Eagles ineptness in the second half was so bad and such a major momentum change from the first half. Carlton had hardly been setting the world on fire recently winning just 1 of their past 5 before tonight. They won't last long if the finals. I thought the Eagles were a good chance to knock them off tonight.
-
To wade into this looong running thread, I'm with the tankers, but we also need to develop our players and spend spend spend off field.
I wouldn't rate our list very good or even the potential of our list as "very good" at the moment. We wont be competitive for another 2 or maybe 3 years more, given that we have some big list holes.
I reckon we will dump 8-10 players at the end of this year, in another clean out.
-
bit of a reality check the past few weeks, sydney got smashed by a record margin under roos today and freo were done nastily, they're both not exactly in vintage form.. Puts some perspective on where we're at and how long the road will be especially if we experience injury issues
-
melbourne batch of kids of young players looked strong today
-
melbourne batch of kids of young players looked strong today
Their best players were still Green, Bruce, Sylvia & Jamar who aren't exactly kids
-
melbourne batch of kids of young players looked strong today
Their best players were still Green, Bruce, Sylvia & Jamar who aren't exactly kids
yes true, their young players were very good however. They are staerting to remind me of Hawthorn 2006. Plethora of early draft picks, late season surge (2006) which catapults them to finals in 2007. Reckon Dees are set, have done their time and will soon show how good they will be in the coming years
-
melbourne batch of kids of young players looked strong today
Their best players were still Green, Bruce, Sylvia & Jamar who aren't exactly kids
yes true, their young players were very good however. They are staerting to remind me of Hawthorn 2006. Plethora of early draft picks, late season surge (2006) which catapults them to finals in 2007. Reckon Dees are set, have done their time and will soon show how good they will be in the coming years
Except, contrary to popular opinion, it wasn't the plethora of early picks that got the Hawks to the finals. Buddy, Roughead & Lewis certainly played a big part, but the rest was their existing list.
-
melbourne batch of kids of young players looked strong today
Their best players were still Green, Bruce, Sylvia & Jamar who aren't exactly kids
yes true, their young players were very good however. They are staerting to remind me of Hawthorn 2006. Plethora of early draft picks, late season surge (2006) which catapults them to finals in 2007. Reckon Dees are set, have done their time and will soon show how good they will be in the coming years
Except, contrary to popular opinion, it wasn't the plethora of early picks that got the Hawks to the finals. Buddy, Roughead & Lewis certainly played a big part, but the rest was their existing list.
I think you'll find that abt 10 of their GF 22 were drafted from 04 onwards and make no mistake this is a direct result from having plenty of early picks to use on bluechip talent. They got themselves a lot of early draft picks from the thompson, Hay trades as well as PP's. Now not all their early draft picks worked like Thorpe and Dowler but what it actually enabled them to do was get their list structues correct quickly which enabled them to draft players like Gilham, Guerra & Dew.
Franklin(5)
Roughead(2)
Lewis(7)
Ellis(3)
Birchall(14)
Rioli(12)
Renouf(24)
that's 7 top draftees in a short span that played in the GF, I'd call that a plethora of young draftees directly assisting the Hawks to win a flag.
-
They may have had 1/3 of their list from 2004 or afterwards, however it wasn't the reason they won the flag
The reason they won was the 14 or so senior players on their list from before Clarkson arrived
-
They may have had 1/3 of their list from 2004 or afterwards, however it wasn't the reason they won the flag
The reason they won was the 14 or so senior players on their list from before Clarkson arrived
rubbish, you can't have one without the other. and 7 were top end draft picks, there were 10 all up that came from 04 onwards, thats a pretty big chunk
-
They still weren't the major contributors
-
They still weren't the major contributors
that's purely opinion, what is fact is without them there wouldn't have been a premiership.
-
bit late for this thread i think the damage has already been done not just this yr but last yr as well.
meaningless wins are just that meaningless. you can get faith and belief with out actually winning games. in fact the order is firstly tank that should directly aid structure when you have enough quality and the cattle to actually win regularly faith and belif take care of themselves.
no point building up unrealistic expectations and with it false belief and faith just to have it knocked out of like it was on the weekend. where was the faith structure and belief then.
cattle first people the rest will almost take care of itself.
-
melbourne batch of kids of young players looked strong today
Their best players were still Green, Bruce, Sylvia & Jamar who aren't exactly kids
yes true, their young players were very good however. They are staerting to remind me of Hawthorn 2006. Plethora of early draft picks, late season surge (2006) which catapults them to finals in 2007. Reckon Dees are set, have done their time and will soon show how good they will be in the coming years
Except, contrary to popular opinion, it wasn't the plethora of early picks that got the Hawks to the finals. Buddy, Roughead & Lewis certainly played a big part, but the rest was their existing list.
I think you'll find that abt 10 of their GF 22 were drafted from 04 onwards and make no mistake this is a direct result from having plenty of early picks to use on bluechip talent. They got themselves a lot of early draft picks from the thompson, Hay trades as well as PP's. Now not all their early draft picks worked like Thorpe and Dowler but what it actually enabled them to do was get their list structues correct quickly which enabled them to draft players like Gilham, Guerra & Dew.
Franklin(5)
Roughead(2)
Lewis(7)
Ellis(3)
Birchall(14)
Rioli(12)
Renouf(24)
that's 7 top draftees in a short span that played in the GF, I'd call that a plethora of young draftees directly assisting the Hawks to win a flag.
spot on TM.
-
They may have had 1/3 of their list from 2004 or afterwards, however it wasn't the reason they won the flag
The reason they won was the 14 or so senior players on their list from before Clarkson arrived
rubbish. Their flag came from the 2005 draft. Wouldnt have come close to a flag without their picks from that one or any of the ones after
-
They may have had 1/3 of their list from 2004 or afterwards, however it wasn't the reason they won the flag
The reason they won was the 14 or so senior players on their list from before Clarkson arrived
rubbish. Their flag came from the 2005 draft. Wouldnt have come close to a flag without their picks from that one or any of the ones after
Yeah Beau Dowler, Max Bailey, Beau Muston, Travis Tuck, Mitch Thorp, Jarryd Morton, Josh Kennedy & Garry Moss had a massive impact on their premiership
-
They may have had 1/3 of their list from 2004 or afterwards, however it wasn't the reason they won the flag
The reason they won was the 14 or so senior players on their list from before Clarkson arrived
rubbish. Their flag came from the 2005 draft. Wouldnt have come close to a flag without their picks from that one or any of the ones after
Yeah Beau Dowler, Max Bailey, Beau Muston, Travis Tuck, Mitch Thorp, Jarryd Morton, Josh Kennedy & Garry Moss had a massive impact on their premiership
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
-
They may have had 1/3 of their list from 2004 or afterwards, however it wasn't the reason they won the flag
The reason they won was the 14 or so senior players on their list from before Clarkson arrived
rubbish. Their flag came from the 2005 draft. Wouldnt have come close to a flag without their picks from that one or any of the ones after
Yeah Beau Dowler, Max Bailey, Beau Muston, Travis Tuck, Mitch Thorp, Jarryd Morton, Josh Kennedy & Garry Moss had a massive impact on their premiership
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
Infamy?
Well eff me I've heard it all now.
:lol
-
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
Excuse me?
My post stated that 10 of the hawks premiership side was drafted post 2004 of which 7 came from a "plethora" of early draft picks which then enabled them to get their list structures right quickly which in turn enabled them to draft mature players like Guerra, Dew & Gilham. Now I don't know about you and infamy but 10 players is a pretty significant contribution to a premiership. Inf states they werent the reason the other 12 established players were and then you tell us he's running rings around us with facts? lol give me a break
-
Its all rubbish anyway unless everyone does the Ramps Multiwave Recruitment you cant expect any club to succeed. How many times do I need to say it "Its all the way with Multiwave" ;D
-
Its all rubbish anyway unless everyone does the Ramps Multiwave Recruitment you cant expect any club to succeed. How many times do I need to say it "Its all the way with Multiwave" ;D
Can you refresh our memories on the meaning of "multiwave", please?
Is that something you learnt from Jade Rawlings? :lol
-
Its all rubbish anyway unless everyone does the Ramps Multiwave Recruitment you cant expect any club to succeed. How many times do I need to say it "Its all the way with Multiwave" ;D
Can you refresh our memories on the meaning of "multiwave", please?
Is that something you learnt from Jade Rawlings? :lol
whose jade rawlings? ;D
-
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
Excuse me?
My post stated that 10 of the hawks premiership side was drafted post 2004 of which 7 came from a "plethora" of early draft picks which then enabled them to get their list structures right quickly which in turn enabled them to draft mature players like Guerra, Dew & Gilham. Now I don't know about you and infamy but 10 players is a pretty significant contribution to a premiership. Inf states they werent the reason the other 12 established players were and then you tell us he's running rings around us with facts? lol give me a break
I'm not arguing that there were plenty of players from those drafts playing in the grand final team. My argument is that it wasn't these players that won them the match. Roughead, Franklin, Rioli & Renouf were amongst the lowest possession winners on the ground.
Ellis & Lewis were the best of the young bunch, but it was Sewell (24yo), Hodge(24), Osborne(26), Crawford(34), Guerra(26), Dew(29), Bateman(27), Brown(25), Williams(25), Ladson(24), Gilham(24) & Mitchell(25) that were the core of that side and the good performers on the day. None of those players were obtained by tanking. Even Lewis who was very good in the grand final was obtained by trading, not tanking, it was only Ellis of the well performed players in the grand final that was obtained by tanking.
In the end though, it was Geelong who lost that match, Hawthorn were the Steven Bradbury of the 2008 Grand Final.
-
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
Excuse me?
My post stated that 10 of the hawks premiership side was drafted post 2004 of which 7 came from a "plethora" of early draft picks which then enabled them to get their list structures right quickly which in turn enabled them to draft mature players like Guerra, Dew & Gilham. Now I don't know about you and infamy but 10 players is a pretty significant contribution to a premiership. Inf states they werent the reason the other 12 established players were and then you tell us he's running rings around us with facts? lol give me a break
I'm not arguing that there were plenty of players from those drafts playing in the grand final team. My argument is that it wasn't these players that won them the match. Roughead, Franklin, Rioli & Renouf were amongst the lowest possession winners on the ground.
Ellis & Lewis were the best of the young bunch, but it was Sewell (24yo), Hodge(24), Osborne(26), Crawford(34), Guerra(26), Dew(29), Bateman(27), Brown(25), Williams(25), Ladson(24), Gilham(24) & Mitchell(25) that were the core of that side and the good performers on the day. None of those players were obtained by tanking. Even Lewis who was very good in the grand final was obtained by trading, not tanking, it was only Ellis of the well performed players in the grand final that was obtained by tanking.
In the end though, it was Geelong who lost that match, Hawthorn were the Steven Bradbury of the 2008 Grand Final.
Its not only the performance on the day, its who got them there, but even so, the 2 players who turned the game on its head after halftime were rioli with a couple of game changing tackles and Dew(btw as I mentioned earlier, dew,gilham,guerra were there bc the hawks got so many top draft picks through tanking and trading and subsequently could pull the trigger on these types late). Agree Geelong blew it in the end
-
Tanking v B.S.F
Tanking ... B.S.F is already at Richmond!
The past two weeks have proven to me that we need Quality.
108 Point Loss v Geelong (R6)
82 Point Loss v Collingwood (R17)
72 Point Loss v Western (R2)
Five 50-60 Point Losses v Carlton, Sydeny, Melbourne, Adelaide & North Melbourne.
Eight of 12 Losses have been smashings.
That tells me that we have too many players that are not up to it.
I am sick of getting smashed!
So if we are going to clean out our list ... TANK!
Do not forget!
Our season was over after Round 9!
ZERO AND NINE!
Winning matches now is a waste.
Round 8 to Round 15 should of told every Richmond supporter WE CAN PLAY!
However, we have to many holes to fill ... so lets fill them with the best 17/18 year olds we can get!
Collins, Connors, Riewoldt last year had question marks against them.
This year, as of today, they will be apart of our 11th Premiership!
So we have found some keepers!
How are we meant to find players if we do not draft the best talent out there?
Right now, it looks like we have found a player in Astbury.
Nason? Possibly?
Griffiths? Possibly?
Martin ... so no more!
Four first year players are certain to be in our 11th Premiership!
So, seven players from this years list will be in our 11th Premiership!
TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK!
It is not about 2010 or 2011.
2012 and beyond!
Do not be fooled!
Pick 4 is better then Pick 6!
You would always take the best Pick!
Do not care who went at this pick and that pick.
Ask yourself, would you take $100 (Pick 4) or $50 (Pick 6) for free?
:bow
-
Tanking v B.S.F
Tanking ... B.S.F is already at Richmond!
The past two weeks have proven to me that we need Quality.
108 Point Loss v Geelong (R6)
82 Point Loss v Collingwood (R17)
72 Point Loss v Western (R2)
Five 50-60 Point Losses v Carlton, Sydeny, Melbourne, Adelaide & North Melbourne.
Eight of 12 Losses have been smashings.
That tells me that we have too many players that are not up to it.
I am sick of getting smashed!
So if we are going to clean out our list ... TANK!
Do not forget!
Our season was over after Round 9!
ZERO AND NINE!
Winning matches now is a waste.
Round 8 to Round 15 should of told every Richmond supporter WE CAN PLAY!
However, we have to many holes to fill ... so lets fill them with the best 17/18 year olds we can get!
Collins, Connors, Riewoldt last year had question marks against them.
This year, as of today, they will be apart of our 11th Premiership!
So we have found some keepers!
How are we meant to find players if we do not draft the best talent out there?
Right now, it looks like we have found a player in Astbury.
Nason? Possibly?
Griffiths? Possibly?
Martin ... so no more!
Four first year players are certain to be in our 11th Premiership!
So, seven players from this years list will be in our 11th Premiership!
TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK!
It is not about 2010 or 2011.
2012 and beyond!
Do not be fooled!
Pick 4 is better then Pick 6!
You would always take the best Pick!
Do not care who went at this pick and that pick.
Ask yourself, would you take $100 (Pick 4) or $50 (Pick 6) for free?
:bow
As tanking is cheating and you are hell bent on the club doing this, is it fair to assume that you yourself are a cheat and not someone to be trusted in any dealings?
-
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
Excuse me?
My post stated that 10 of the hawks premiership side was drafted post 2004 of which 7 came from a "plethora" of early draft picks which then enabled them to get their list structures right quickly which in turn enabled them to draft mature players like Guerra, Dew & Gilham. Now I don't know about you and infamy but 10 players is a pretty significant contribution to a premiership. Inf states they werent the reason the other 12 established players were and then you tell us he's running rings around us with facts? lol give me a break
I'm not arguing that there were plenty of players from those drafts playing in the grand final team. My argument is that it wasn't these players that won them the match. Roughead, Franklin, Rioli & Renouf were amongst the lowest possession winners on the ground.
Ellis & Lewis were the best of the young bunch, but it was Sewell (24yo), Hodge(24), Osborne(26), Crawford(34), Guerra(26), Dew(29), Bateman(27), Brown(25), Williams(25), Ladson(24), Gilham(24) & Mitchell(25) that were the core of that side and the good performers on the day. None of those players were obtained by tanking. Even Lewis who was very good in the grand final was obtained by trading, not tanking, it was only Ellis of the well performed players in the grand final that was obtained by tanking.
In the end though, it was Geelong who lost that match, Hawthorn were the Steven Bradbury of the 2008 Grand Final.
I agree with this post in part but let's not underestimate the value of those players when it comes to getting them there in the first place!
-
I'm reluctant to say it, but Infamy is regularly running rings around a lot of you guys because he uses solid argument backed up with proper examples. There is no substitute for these methods. Research + common sense + logic + reasoned argument > bluster + illogical statements + myth + guess work
Excuse me?
My post stated that 10 of the hawks premiership side was drafted post 2004 of which 7 came from a "plethora" of early draft picks which then enabled them to get their list structures right quickly which in turn enabled them to draft mature players like Guerra, Dew & Gilham. Now I don't know about you and infamy but 10 players is a pretty significant contribution to a premiership. Inf states they werent the reason the other 12 established players were and then you tell us he's running rings around us with facts? lol give me a break
I'm not arguing that there were plenty of players from those drafts playing in the grand final team. My argument is that it wasn't these players that won them the match. Roughead, Franklin, Rioli & Renouf were amongst the lowest possession winners on the ground.
Ellis & Lewis were the best of the young bunch, but it was Sewell (24yo), Hodge(24), Osborne(26), Crawford(34), Guerra(26), Dew(29), Bateman(27), Brown(25), Williams(25), Ladson(24), Gilham(24) & Mitchell(25) that were the core of that side and the good performers on the day. None of those players were obtained by tanking. Even Lewis who was very good in the grand final was obtained by trading, not tanking, it was only Ellis of the well performed players in the grand final that was obtained by tanking.
In the end though, it was Geelong who lost that match, Hawthorn were the Steven Bradbury of the 2008 Grand Final.
I agree with this post in part but let's not underestimate the value of those players when it comes to getting them there in the first place!
Maybe so, however it was that senior core of players doing the bulk of the work that allowed those youngsters to walk into the side and shine so quickly.
We on the other hand needed our youngsters to come into the side and be the core, very different
-
Yeah thats true also!
-
Tanking v B.S.F
Tanking ... B.S.F is already at Richmond!
The past two weeks have proven to me that we need Quality.
108 Point Loss v Geelong (R6)
82 Point Loss v Collingwood (R17)
72 Point Loss v Western (R2)
Five 50-60 Point Losses v Carlton, Sydeny, Melbourne, Adelaide & North Melbourne.
Eight of 12 Losses have been smashings.
That tells me that we have too many players that are not up to it.
I am sick of getting smashed!
So if we are going to clean out our list ... TANK!
Do not forget!
Our season was over after Round 9!
ZERO AND NINE!
Winning matches now is a waste.
Round 8 to Round 15 should of told every Richmond supporter WE CAN PLAY!
However, we have to many holes to fill ... so lets fill them with the best 17/18 year olds we can get!
Collins, Connors, Riewoldt last year had question marks against them.
This year, as of today, they will be apart of our 11th Premiership!
So we have found some keepers!
How are we meant to find players if we do not draft the best talent out there?
Right now, it looks like we have found a player in Astbury.
Nason? Possibly?
Griffiths? Possibly?
Martin ... so no more!
Four first year players are certain to be in our 11th Premiership!
So, seven players from this years list will be in our 11th Premiership!
TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK!
It is not about 2010 or 2011.
2012 and beyond!
Do not be fooled!
Pick 4 is better then Pick 6!
You would always take the best Pick!
Do not care who went at this pick and that pick.
Ask yourself, would you take $100 (Pick 4) or $50 (Pick 6) for free?
:bow
As tanking is cheating and you are hell bent on the club doing this, is it fair to assume that you yourself are a cheat and not someone to be trusted in any dealings?
Al are you a tool or are you just pretending to be a tool? If you're pretending you're doing a bloody fine acting job :gotigers
-
Nah, just practicing so I can upgrade from internet nuffer.
-
cheating???
ROFL!
:rollin
-
Its all rubbish anyway unless everyone does the Ramps Multiwave Recruitment you cant expect any club to succeed. How many times do I need to say it "Its all the way with Multiwave" ;D
Can you refresh our memories on the meaning of "multiwave", please?
Is that something you learnt from Jade Rawlings? :lol
whose jade rawlings? ;D
LOL @ Ramps' trademark "multiwave recruiting" :lol :thumbsup
First wave: Lids, Cotch, Jack and the pre-2009 rest
Second wave: Martin, Astbury, Griffs, .... plus whoever we draft this year
Combined they should give us our core for the next decade.
-
Its all rubbish anyway unless everyone does the Ramps Multiwave Recruitment you cant expect any club to succeed. How many times do I need to say it "Its all the way with Multiwave" ;D
Can you refresh our memories on the meaning of "multiwave", please?
Is that something you learnt from Jade Rawlings? :lol
whose jade rawlings? ;D
LOL @ Ramps' trademark "multiwave recruiting" :lol :thumbsup
First wave: Lids, Cotch, Jack and the pre-2009 rest
Second wave: Martin, Astbury, Griffs, .... plus whoever we draft this year
Combined they should give us our core for the next decade.
wave #1:
2003 - Foley, Jackson, Tck
wave #2:
04-08
wave#3:
hardwick / aston martin
-
Patrick Smith in today's Australian...
"Sides such as Melbourne, Richmond and Carlton have manipulated their teams in the latter part of seasons gone to ensure they could qualify for the best possible selections at the draft table. The more losses, the better the picks."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/tanking-flourishes-at-the-top-and-bottom-of-the-ladder/story-e6frg7mf-1225908598878
When did we tank? ???
-
Really good draft this year. Even if we win games and lose out on say pick 4 and we end up with say pick 6 or even pick 8 you can still end up with a good kid with good skills ie who can fill a position where we have a need. Blayne Wilson from WA etc etc. Even down the draft order you may be able to get some decent kids like Kiefer Yu etc etc. I'd like us to win some more games if we can.
People should jot down this name KIEFER YU. I hear RFC keen on this kid and have been for a fair while. Never seen him play myself but rumours have been around for months and as I posted this months ago. Outside runner from what I know with very handy skill set.
-
stuff smith is at it again....didnt take him long to revert
-
Patrick Smith in today's Australian...
"Sides such as Melbourne, Richmond and Carlton have manipulated their teams in the latter part of seasons gone to ensure they could qualify for the best possible selections at the draft table. The more losses, the better the picks."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/tanking-flourishes-at-the-top-and-bottom-of-the-ladder/story-e6frg7mf-1225908598878
When did we tank? ???
Stupid call there Smith you fool, the games I saw... we were not tanking!!!
-
Tanks for the premiership
Mark Stevens
Herald Sun
October 04, 2010
DALE Thomas was Collingwood’s best in one Grand Final. Scott Pendelbury won the “Normie” in the next.
What to do those two blokes have in common?
They were both selected at the pointy end of the draft in 2005. Top five, in fact.
Thomas went at No.2 and Pendlebury at No.5.
How the hell did the Magpies snare both?
In case you’ve forgotten, the Pies embarked on some crafty list management.
You could call it tanking, actually.
In that season, only five years ago, the Pies lost 10 of their last 11 (and their final eight) to finish on five wins.
By sneaking in under the five-and-a-half win threshold, they gained a priority pick, which went on Thomas. Once the actual draft started, they gleefully took Pendelbury at No.5.
These two are the future of the club for at least the next eight to 10 years.
Has there ever been a better advert for playing kids (tanking) and loading up for a future assault on a flag?
Promising youngsters such as Heath Shaw, Harry O'Brien and Sean Rusling were rewarded with games at the time.
But many other debutants, including Ben Davies, Chris Egan, David Fanning, Brent Hall and Adam Iacobucci sank quickly from sight after playing their role in that bizarre season.
The Pies did what they had to to. Plain and simple.
Just like Melbourne did what it had to do last year, to pick up Tom Scully and Jack Trengove. You just can’t underestimate the importance of picking up two gun midfielders so early on.
We are not taking anything away from the overall recruiting of Derek Hine. The guy looks a genius now.
But to put it simply, it took the Pies five years to cash in to cash in on a big tank.
Using that as a measure, expect Dean Bailey to be a premiership coach in 2014.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/tanks-for-the-premiership/story-e6frf9jf-1225933781665
-
But doesn't tanking destroy a clubs culture? ??? :P
-
perhaps this thread should has been called
some crafty list management verses Belief, Structure and Faith?
-
2 players don't win you a flag
Look at the performances they've got from their later picks, that's what won them the premiership and has set them up for the next 5-6 years or more
In fact the Pies have wasted more early picks than they've had success with
-
2 players don't win you a flag
Look at the performances they've got from their later picks, that's what won them the premiership and has set them up for the next 5-6 years or more
In fact the Pies have wasted more early picks than they've had success with
Daisy and co certainly helped though....
-
2 players don't win you a flag
Look at the performances they've got from their later picks, that's what won them the premiership and has set them up for the next 5-6 years or more
In fact the Pies have wasted more early picks than they've had success with
2010 Collingwood Magpies Disposals Per Game Leaders (Minimum 5 Games Played)
Rank Name Games Average
1 Dane Swan 26 31.54
2 Scott Pendlebury 26 26.58
3 Alan Didak 24 24.58
4 Dale Thomas 26 23.96
5 Heath Shaw 23 21.26
collingwood have more top 10 picks than st kilda.
regardless of wha they have wasted, they won a flag on the back of tanking.
-
supporters on every site ive been on are talking about how to get their hands on a below 30 pick. well we had one in our mitts and threw it away.
we should be looking at 4 and 6 this yr a pick 15 thru 26 for bling another second rounder for thursfield pick 30 47 and 64. but of course we dont need these picks and they would be of no help at all.
-
before the GF on saturday they were showing how many top 10 draft picks each side had. Saints had 7, pies 8(7 played).
How many do we have? 5, whichever way you look at that simple stat and where we have been for so long - well thats just criminal!!!!
in 2005 and 2006 collinwood got pendles, thomas, reid and brown, thats how successful clubs rebuild, they get a mountain of high draft picks in a short period of time and then build with and around that quality.
you still need top end quality....
but anyhow we dont need them an extra few quality players dnt help :)
-
If playing kids is tanking than we tanked all year, even when winning.
Youd think that jounalist would have a better grasp of the english language, but obviously not.
-
If playing kids is tanking than we tanked all year, even when winning.
Youd think that jounalist would have a better grasp of the english language, but obviously not.
Playing kids is good, if we lose games through the development of the young talent then so be it.
If it gives us draft picks then at least we are re-building from the ground up with our own players learning our own style of play.
The foreign legion approach of the past 10 years has been a disaster. It is a stupid short cut.
I would personally prefer to lose the odd extra game here and there to get an extra priority but would never knock a win every game approach.
I would never support a win an extra game here or there or be competitive by recruiting Brad Miller - perpetuating the effing idiotic crap from Spud and Wallace and won't add anything other than deny young talent the opportunity to shine at our club.
-
If that was the reason they were considering Miller then he would be going onto the main list, not the rookie list.
As I've said before, im sure the club has put more thought into these decisions than many of the supporters commenting on them.
-
If that was the reason they were considering Miller then he would be going onto the main list, not the rookie list.
As I've said before, im sure the club has put more thought into these decisions than many of the supporters commenting on them.
al, i'm not sure what you're basing that post on, other than perhaps a condescending logic.
-
even if it is condescending, isnt logic something worth basing a post on? :)
-
even if it is condescending, isnt logic something worth basing a post on? :)
in the end, it's an opinion use whatever logic you like to make your point it's a free country ask our new CHF!
-
I think in a normal uncompromised draft we would not be picking up Miller. I think the fact that the talent pool is so diluted this year (and next) is also the reason why we expect there to be such player movement this year between clubs as well.
Miller will be joining the club because their is no young player of any potential value that would outweigh the potential worth he could have to the club. He is not on the list. He will not be taking the place of a young player either in our squad or in the team. He is there to help groom the young developing players on-field at Coburg and to act as an emergency forward in the off chance our forward structure is decimated through injury.
This recruitment is not so much about his ability to improve the team through his playing ability but more-so how he can improve the team with his experience, knowledge and leadership. Have faith in what the club is trying to do.
Stripes
-
before the GF on saturday they were showing how many top 10 draft picks each side had. Saints had 7, pies 8(7 played).
How many do we have? 5, whichever way you look at that simple stat and where we have been for so long - well thats just criminal!!!!
in 2005 and 2006 collinwood got pendles, thomas, reid and brown, thats how successful clubs rebuild, they get a mountain of high draft picks in a short period of time and then build with and around that quality.
you still need top end quality....
but anyhow we dont need them an extra few quality players dnt help :)
How do you figure 5? That's a furphy. The way I see it we had 8: Cotchin, Deledio, Martin, Polak, Riewoldt, Vickery, Tambling & Cousins.
Then factor in Ottens, Pettifer, Meyer, Pattison and Oakley Nicholls — all 1st round picks who are either playing elsewhere right now or retired from AFL but could still be playing. I might have forgotten a few as well!
That's 13 1st rounders in the last 10 years or so, and people still sit here and carp on about quality and tanking and that's the only way forward etc.
It's rubbish. Complete rubbish.
-
before the GF on saturday they were showing how many top 10 draft picks each side had. Saints had 7, pies 8(7 played).
How many do we have? 5, whichever way you look at that simple stat and where we have been for so long - well thats just criminal!!!!
in 2005 and 2006 collinwood got pendles, thomas, reid and brown, thats how successful clubs rebuild, they get a mountain of high draft picks in a short period of time and then build with and around that quality.
you still need top end quality....
but anyhow we dont need them an extra few quality players dnt help :)
How do you figure 5? That's a furphy. The way I see it we had 8: Cotchin, Deledio, Martin, Polak, Riewoldt, Vickery, Tambling & Cousins.
Then factor in Ottens, Pettifer, Meyer, Pattison and Oakley Nicholls — all 1st round picks who are either playing elsewhere right now or retired from AFL but could still be playing. I might have forgotten a few as well!
That's 13 1st rounders in the last 10 years or so, and people still sit here and carp on about quality and tanking and that's the only way forward etc.
It's rubbish. Complete rubbish.
Umm how many do we have on our list moving fwd? ::)
Ottens, Meyer, Pattison, JON, Polak, Cousins wtf? read my post properly (TOP 10 PICKS ON OUR LIST) before calling it rubbish mate, you have clearly missed the point!
-
How do you figure 5? That's a furphy. The way I see it we had 8: Cotchin, Deledio, Martin, Polak, Riewoldt, Vickery, Tambling & Cousins.
Riewoldt was 13, Cousins was a father son, now Tambling is about to be traded
The one people have missed is Jordan McMahon who was Pick 10 in 2000, Adam Thomson was Pick 11 in 2004 so just misses out
In 2011 we will have Cotchin (2), Deledio (1), Martin (3), Vickery (8) and maybe Tambling (4) if he doesn't get a good trade
The other which you could argue is Mitch Morton who was a father son pick to West Coast in 2004 and was was considered a certainty to go Top 10 otherwise
-
Sorry, was talking about 1st rounders as opposed to top 10 - you can get the stats to say what you like - just depends on where you choose to draw the line.
Certainly I haven't missed the point - in fact I think you might have tony_montana.
The point is: we have had more than our fair share of top 10 or high draft picks in the past 10 years, many more than Geelong, and comparable numbers or better than any premiership team of the past decade.
Yet, we still languish near the bottom. So, the answer must lie in other areas — not in tanking, but in player development, recruitment, coaching and coaching support, medical and physical — you name it.
There are so many posters on here that believe that all you need to do is lose games to get high picks and then sit back and watch the team win the flag. Chasing success, or believing that tanking is the secret just aren't looking at the facts, and are refusing to look at what has made Geelong, Collingwood, St Kilda etc so competitive. It isn't tanking, I can tell you that.
-
Sorry, was talking about 1st rounders as opposed to top 10 - you can get the stats to say what you like - just depends on where you choose to draw the line.
Certainly I haven't missed the point - in fact I think you might have tony_montana.
The point is: we have had more than our fair share of top 10 or high draft picks in the past 10 years, many more than Geelong, and comparable numbers or better than any premiership team of the past decade.
Yet, we still languish near the bottom. So, the answer must lie in other areas — not in tanking, but in player development, recruitment, coaching and coaching support, medical and physical — you name it.
There are so many posters on here that believe that all you need to do is lose games to get high picks and then sit back and watch the team win the flag. Chasing success, or believing that tanking is the secret just aren't looking at the facts, and are refusing to look at what has made Geelong, Collingwood, St Kilda etc so competitive. It isn't tanking, I can tell you that.
actually i havent ffoo, I think I'd know the point of my own argument ;)
if you noted, my point is that (first and foremost)you need quality at the top end to push up the ladder simple as that and the surest low risk way to find that talent is with top 10 picks. I was illustrating that with (now 4) top 10 picks on our list moving fwd and reiwoldt being the only potential superstar on our list outside this parameter, we have an obviours dearth of high end quality on our list(Lids/Cotch/Martin/Reiwoldt as our only real A-graders)
We are still very much in rebuild mode and another 2-3 top 10 picks which are almost certain to be very good players, wouldnt go astray in giving us enough A-graders to build around. Thats the bottom line and I don't see how people can dispute this as pie in the sky stuff? pretty much common sense imo
As for your argument of our plethora ofpast top 10 picks, you are correct, we have had PLENTY over the journey which points to a serious lack of development and good coaching as well as appalling talent identification and list management. Those areas seem to be fixed now and we finally look as though we are catching up to industry standards BUT we are coming from so far behind that a few extra quality players would have been invaluable and helped speed up the process.
-
if you don't think collingwood tanked to get picks #2 #5 in 2005 you are dreaming
Sorry, was talking about 1st rounders as opposed to top 10 - you can get the stats to say what you like - just depends on where you choose to draw the line.
Certainly I haven't missed the point - in fact I think you might have tony_montana.
The point is: we have had more than our fair share of top 10 or high draft picks in the past 10 years, many more than Geelong, and comparable numbers or better than any premiership team of the past decade.
Yet, we still languish near the bottom. So, the answer must lie in other areas — not in tanking, but in player development, recruitment, coaching and coaching support, medical and physical — you name it.
There are so many posters on here that believe that all you need to do is lose games to get high picks and then sit back and watch the team win the flag. Chasing success, or believing that tanking is the secret just aren't looking at the facts, and are refusing to look at what has made Geelong, Collingwood, St Kilda etc so competitive. It isn't tanking, I can tell you that.
-
People should go have a look at the Collingwood North Melbourne game in the year that Collingwood got the priority. Look at the last 5 to 10 minutes. End of story!
-
if you don't think collingwood tanked to get picks #2 #5 in 2005 you are dreaming
That's not the point . The point is: if you think that tanking won them a flag, you are dreaming.
Tell me, when did Geelong tank to win a flag? How many top 10 picks did they have?
Belief in tanking is a loser short term fix mentality, and is a red herring to the main game.
-
the fact is two of collingwoods most key players, 2nd and 4th most possessions this season we attained via tanking 5 years ago and translated to winning the flag this season.
Geelong drafted the like of bartel, selwood with top 10 picks. And added other players, some of the highest talented in the draft pool; ablett, scarlett, Hawkins etc. Via father son.
if you don't think collingwood tanked to get picks #2 #5 in 2005 you are dreaming
That's not the point . The point is: if you think that tanking won them a flag, you are dreaming.
Tell me, when did Geelong tank to win a flag? How many top 10 picks did they have?
Belief in tanking is a loser short term fix mentality, and is a red herring to the main game.
-
Yeah, Bartel 8 and Selwood 7. Nothing unusual there.
Hawkins lol.
Let's not forget that Ablett wasn't rated much higher than 25 when drafted, and played to that for his first few seasons. Similarly, Bartel took at least 2 years to cement a place in the Geelong side, and was even talked of as a trade.
So, something happened to see those boys and the rest of the Geelong side become a two-time premiership juggernaut. Do we put it down to tanking? No. Categorically no.
-
And Collingwood did not get Thomas by tanking - he was coming anyway due to the low finish. Pendlebury was the only extra and they would have won that flag without him.
-
Yeah, Bartel 8 and Selwood 7. Nothing unusual there.
Hawkins lol.
Let's not forget that Ablett wasn't rated much higher than 25 when drafted, and played to that for his first few seasons. Similarly, Bartel took at least 2 years to cement a place in the Geelong side, and was even talked of as a trade.
So, something happened to see those boys and the rest of the Geelong side become a two-time premiership juggernaut. Do we put it down to tanking? No. Categorically no.
Weres all our past greats sons? :lol
-
And Collingwood did not get Thomas by tanking - he was coming anyway due to the low finish. Pendlebury was the only extra and they would have won that flag without him.
no I don't think they would have
-
And Collingwood did not get Thomas by tanking - he was coming anyway due to the low finish. Pendlebury was the only extra and they would have won that flag without him.
no I don't think they would have
Which final game(s) did he mean the difference between winning and losing?
-
FooffooValve, trying to convince tanking proponents that there is more to success than deliberately losing, such as hard work, dedication and smart management in all aspects off the club is like trying to convince a long term dole bludger they would be better of to go out and get a job.
-
FooffooValve, trying to convince tanking proponents that there is more to success than deliberately losing, such as hard work, dedication and smart management in all aspects off the club is like trying to convince a long term dole bludger they would be better of to go out and get a job.
:lol
-
No one who is pro-tanking has ever argued it is the be all and end all. It is the first of three main components aimed to maximise your draft selections so you turn over your list quickly and bring as many of the best and classiest young footballers in in as short a space of time as possible to grow as a team together. Our course investing in recruitment staff and resources so those many picks pay off and development of those junior footballers in AFL players is also important. However they come afterwards as you can't recruit and develop a team of average footballers into a premiership side. You need access to the classiest juniors which more and more are found at the top end of the draft.
By the way in the past whenever this topic has come up anti-tankers would try and argue no club that has "tanked" to gain extra priority picks has won a flag. Now we've seen two in past three years. Further to that every Melbourne-based club that made the finals this year tanked when they were rebuilding their lists - Pies, Saints, Dogs, Hawks and Blues. Melbourne isn't far off playing finals either. I'm not sure why some supporters of a club like ours whose played just two finals in 27 years wouldn't support following a pathway that has worked for so many clubs ???.
And Collingwood did not get Thomas by tanking - he was coming anyway due to the low finish. Pendlebury was the only extra and they would have won that flag without him.
no I don't think they would have
Which final game(s) did he mean the difference between winning and losing?
You don't rate Pendlebury that highly smokey? IMO he's the classiest player on the Collingwood's list. His basketball background gives him great awareness in and out of traffic so he always seems to have time to dispose of the ball which he executes well as well. No surprise for me he won the Norm Smith.
-
before the GF on saturday they were showing how many top 10 draft picks each side had. Saints had 7, pies 8(7 played).
How many do we have? 5, whichever way you look at that simple stat and where we have been for so long - well thats just criminal!!!!
in 2005 and 2006 collinwood got pendles, thomas, reid and brown, thats how successful clubs rebuild, they get a mountain of high draft picks in a short period of time and then build with and around that quality.
you still need top end quality....
but anyhow we dont need them an extra few quality players dnt help :)
How do you figure 5? That's a furphy. The way I see it we had 8: Cotchin, Deledio, Martin, Polak, Riewoldt, Vickery, Tambling & Cousins.
Then factor in Ottens, Pettifer, Meyer, Pattison and Oakley Nicholls — all 1st round picks who are either playing elsewhere right now or retired from AFL but could still be playing. I might have forgotten a few as well!
That's 13 1st rounders in the last 10 years or so, and people still sit here and carp on about quality and tanking and that's the only way forward etc.
It's rubbish. Complete rubbish.
lol how the deluded muddle things or should that be muddy things.
what you are talking about here is recruiting. weather it is pick 1 which gives you the best possible chance of getting it right, or pick 101 which gives you less chance of getting it right and absolutely no chance at elite players whiuch is by the way what you advocate . if you choose poorly you fail. oh i know regardless lets just not participate in the draft. because that is the next step to your argument.
tanking is all about the nd it is uteliseing many nd picks and it about getting them right its also about giving yourself the best chances to get it right. after all if you are poo at recruiting you want every concievable thing in place to give you the best chance to get it right and lessen the risk.
you totally miss the point and this debate is not exclusive to your side when it comes to the recruitment side of it. all recruiting is dependent on getting your picks right. we will fail just as badly doing it your way if we dont get them right.
this thread is not about the garbage you spew up. its based on if we get it right not some spurious argument of we cant recruit so why bother.
ya know heres a way to look at it. you name 8 first rounders. 2 we never gave up a 1st rounder for so lets forget them and look at what we invested in the nd.
6 of those 8 came to us as a direct result of low finishes and we utilised the nd. of those 6 we have a miss with tambling and we have a skinny 200cm bloke in vickery who looks okay but will take time to develop and bring to the fore his potential. anyone who rights off a 200cm ruckman after 2yrs is an idiot. the other 4 martin cotchin deledio riewoldt are a mile in front of anyone on our list and we got them only because we were crap.
ive asked this before 2 or 3 or 4 extra wins or dustin martin. bloody hell as it was, one nothing extra win and a draw or bastinac.get the bloody pick right and the rewards are enormous yet here you are mired in but what if we get them wrong well what if we get them right.
if we had tanked the idea would have been not just martin but scully as well. its double dipping and when a very early pick is not involved it means a pick around 18 bloody hell if we had used our pick 19 in 07 ward and pears could now be tigers. get it right and the rewards are fantastic. if we had won just 4 last yr we would have griffiths and just after him bastinac.
weather we get it it right or wrong that has nothing to do with tanking, you tank,ah no, you enter every draft on the assumption that you will get it right and grow the list. if you think otherwise dont take part.
-
^^Wahh that is a big post
Claw :clapping
-
^^Wahh that is a big post
Claw :clapping
Pity that it is misguided claptrap!
Actually I shouldn't say claptrap - that would be a bit rude, but then again Claw is mainly that. Unfortunately he thinks that being abusive means his opinion carries more weight. That's the misguided part.
It isn't beyond me to see that having higher picks gives you a statistically slightly higher chance of picking a good player. But I challenge you to go back through every single draft and really analyse whether that is true. No, wait, I'll save you the time and just say that unless you have a pick in the top 3, then this is plainly NOT true.
We were NEVER going to have a pick in the top 3 this year. FACT. Wouldn't have mattered if we'd lost 22 games straight.
We are rebuilding not only a list, but a game plan, an attitude and an entire club. The tanking advocates say that as early as possible we should assess whether or not we are going to make finals, and if that assessment is 'no', then we should lose as many games as is necessary to secure the highest pick possible in the draft. Let's not forget also that there are no high priority picks any more.
So, here we have a new coach with a largely new bunch of players busting his gut to implement a new game plan that may take 3 years or more to get right. It was pretty clear before the season started that we weren't going to make finals, and confirmed at about round 5 that finals were completely out of our reach. So, according to the tankers, we should have been manipulating results from that point on to ensure that we moved from pick 6 to pick 4 in the draft, and perhaps picked up another pick somewhere in the 20s. Forget about ruthlessly implementing a game plan to the best of our ability, forget about teaching these young players what is required to win football games, forget about implementing a win at all costs mentality around our loser-mentality football club, no, let's make sure we lose enough games to move a couple of places up a draft order so that we might be able to grab a quick fix.
It is useless comparing us to other clubs that have had the advantage of priority pick. You aren't comparing apples with apples. And, there are just as many examples of clubs that haven't "tanked" that have been successful. None of the tankers like to look at Geelong because their huge sustained success over many years flies in the face of the tanking argument.
The tanking argument (especially in the post priority pick era) is such a minor part of what makes a club successful that it is virtually not worth talking about. It is a red herring.
The club needs to focus on building a club around principles, standards, structures and goals. Not around distracting side issues like losing as many games as possible when finals are out of reach.
Someone mentioned something about Pendlebury being the difference for Collingwood. What utter piffle! Sure, he's a terrific player, but the difference for Collingwood this year was the bottom six players, and the break-out years of players like Thomas, Wellingham, O'Brien, Blair, Goldsack etc into genuine role-players, plus the addition of Jolly and to a lesser extent Ball. Their success owes a very small almost undetectable percentage to tanking.
-
Pendlebury is a superstar therefore tanking is not a red herring.
-
Pendlebury is a superstar therefore tanking is not a red herring.
That's the best you've got?
Pendlebury was a PP was he not? Lemme know how we can get one of those Ramps!
-
You don't rate Pendlebury that highly smokey? IMO he's the classiest player on the Collingwood's list. His basketball background gives him great awareness in and out of traffic so he always seems to have time to dispose of the ball which he executes well as well. No surprise for me he won the Norm Smith.
Yes I do MT, I rate him very highly but I don't think he made a p00fteenth of difference of whether Collingwood won the flag or not. The answer is at the bottom end of the list and how they have drafted/developed their low-end players, not the top. Just like Geelong before them, they go deep in their list and it's the names that missed out that tell the story - Medhurst, Lockyer, O'Bree, Fraser, Anthony, Davis, Prestigiacomo, Brown - all would be playing seniors in most other sides yet all missed either some or all of the final matches. Those guys plus the kids that did play - Beams, Macaffer, Blair, Wellingham, Dawes, Toovey - it's the ability of this group that won the flag for them this season. And tanking had zero to do with that. If you get all the ground work right then you can always go and top up on the missing bits of class when your 'window' opens - Jolly and Ball are perfect examples - but you can't go out and top up on a mindset, a culture, an attitude or a proven gameplan and you can't get that tanking.
Edit: the swear filter changed p00f to sissy? What the?
-
Pendlebury is a superstar therefore tanking is not a red herring.
That's the best you've got?
Pendlebury was a PP was he not? Lemme know how we can get one of those Ramps!
by losing enough games to get one. its pretty straight forward. weve had plenty of chances in the past and stupidly made the mistake of chasing irrelevant wins. thats basically it in a nutshell.
-
Pendlebury is a superstar therefore tanking is not a red herring.
That's the best you've got?
Pendlebury was a PP was he not? Lemme know how we can get one of those Ramps!
by losing enough games to get one. its pretty straight forward. weve had plenty of chances in the past and stupidly made the mistake of chasing irrelevant wins. thats basically it in a nutshell.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but those kind of PP's don't exist any more. In a nutshell.
The cost/benefit of tanking doesn't add up any more, if it ever did.
We've been losing for too long. We need to start valuing winning a bit more. A lot more.
-
Our bottom six are still the problem.
Miller. Mcgaune. Farmer. Gourdis. Hislop.
Jackson needs to wrk out what his future is.
-
Our bottom six are still the problem.
Miller. Mcgaune. Farmer. Gourdis. Hislop.
Jackson needs to wrk out what his future is.
Jacksons future is with someone else. Hopefully.
-
Amen brother.
-
I don't think we saw anything yesterday we didn't already know. Melbourne are ahead of us with their list as far as depth while our the bottom end of our side and list is still clogged with duds that need to be moved on. We knew when Hardwick took over it would take more than two trade/draft periods to clean up and rebuild our list. So far only half the list has been turned over since Dimma arrived.
-
I thought I was the only one that disliked Jackson, everyone loves his attack and aggression on the ball, which is also a negative seeing as he gets reported 1 in 4 games. As much as I admire his courage the guy isn't AFL standard. Have always said we'll never be a top side when our best 22 consists of guys like Jackson and Tuck. It's just reality, fine blokes I'm sure and OK footballers. Not top 4 standard.
-
I thought I was the only one that disliked Jackson, everyone loves his attack and aggression on the ball, which is also a negative seeing as he gets reported 1 in 4 games. As much as I admire his courage the guy isn't AFL standard. Have always said we'll never be a top side when our best 22 consists of guys like Jackson and Tuck. It's just reality, fine blokes I'm sure and OK footballers. Not top 4 standard.
Ive never been a big fan either. For some reason the coach wants him in the side.
-
I thought I was the only one that disliked Jackson, everyone loves his attack and aggression on the ball, which is also a negative seeing as he gets reported 1 in 4 games. As much as I admire his courage the guy isn't AFL standard. Have always said we'll never be a top side when our best 22 consists of guys like Jackson and Tuck. It's just reality, fine blokes I'm sure and OK footballers. Not top 4 standard.
Ive never been a big fan either. For some reason the coach wants him in the side.
As a negating player he has value.
Would be very interested in the stat of how many games we won when Jackson had over 20 possessions. Should not be disposing the ball, certainly not from a handball receive.
Have to ask whether he'd get a game at Carlton, Hawthorn, Geelong or Collingwood.
I'd honestly doubt it.
-
Wouldnt be getting a game at those clubs IMHO.
-
I thought I was the only one that disliked Jackson, everyone loves his attack and aggression on the ball, which is also a negative seeing as he gets reported 1 in 4 games. As much as I admire his courage the guy isn't AFL standard. Have always said we'll never be a top side when our best 22 consists of guys like Jackson and Tuck. It's just reality, fine blokes I'm sure and OK footballers. Not top 4 standard.
Ive never been a big fan either. For some reason the coach wants him in the side.
As a negating player he has value.
Would be very interested in the stat of how many games we won when Jackson had over 20 possessions. Should not be disposing the ball, certainly not from a handball receive.
Have to ask whether he'd get a game at Carlton, Hawthorn, Geelong or Collingwood.
I'd honestly doubt it.
I love this site!
Been saying this for 3 years and getting howled down.
-
It's these blokes at 24ish who have been in our system for 7 seasons that we know won't take us to the next level that should be traded. He has media profile and is seen as a positive citizen. If we are smart he would be perfect to trade to for a decent draft pick to a club that has poor PR as Jako speaks well.
At somewhere like St Kilda, Dogs, North he would be perfect just as he would be to GWS or Port for Trengove and McGuane.
-
It's these blokes at 24ish who have been in our system for 7 seasons that we know won't take us to the next level that should be traded. He has media profile and is seen as a positive citizen. If we are smart he would be perfect to trade to for a decent draft pick to a club that has poor PR as Jako speaks well.
At somewhere like St Kilda, Dogs, North he would be perfect just as he would be to GWS or Port for Trengove and McGuane.
there are not man players 24ish on the list...
13 aged 24 or over.
Deledio. Keep.
Graham. Should be delisted but our ruck stocks very young. Weak.
White. 50/50. Not really good enough.
Mcgaune. Would rather thursfield in the team. Honestly.
Morton. Senior player and talented. Really hurting us he's got his finger up his ass and playing. Vfl.
Jackson. Leadership group. Sposed to be a coach pet / gun player. I think he is bit poo and would make top 6 team best 22.
Thursfield. Playing coburg reserves.
Foley. Keep.
King. Forward line pressure appauling without the rat.
Moore.
Miller. Like a older fwd line mcgaune.
Newman. Keep.
Tuck. Oldest player on list can't get a game. Must be in trouble.
-
I still reckon we need to move King on sooner rather than later.
He is what, 27? and for average players that try hard the end comes awful quick, especially when they have pace and not much else. I doubt he will play much past 30 which will when we are getting set for a sustained tilt at it.
It is a position that needs a successor being groomed in the next 18 months.
-
We seem to lack mid tall toward options.
Both Newman or tuck would be worth a try but the coach doesn't pick tuck and wants Newman in the backline. Deledio would be near perfect option but the team isn't good enough to play without lids protecting thr goals as a defender/mid.
From the remaining senior players nahas is already in the team. Orelly. Houli. Webberly etc. All seem better suited to the backline.
Looking at the list Morton. Stands out but is not selected. Connors in the same boat.
It seems mcdonald has been drafted in the role of kings long term replacmnt. Given his draft postion and inablity to
make thr coburg seniors we need to look at drafting forward running players. You'd think thr will go for the most talented mid option.
I would consiter drafting high skilled mids and starting them on back stuff and consiter playing deledio chf alongside griffits. Vickery. Riewoldt. Long term. Similar to Jameshird/kouta play attacking where ever thru most needed fwd / mid.
-
Jackson needs to wrk out what his future is.
Agree with this
I thought I was the only one that disliked Jackson, everyone loves his attack and aggression on the ball, which is also a negative seeing as he gets reported 1 in 4 games. As much as I admire his courage the guy isn't AFL standard. Have always said we'll never be a top side when our best 22 consists of guys like Jackson and Tuck. It's just reality, fine blokes I'm sure and OK footballers. Not top 4 standard.
Ive never been a big fan either. For some reason the coach wants him in the side.
As a negating player he has value.
Would be very interested in the stat of how many games we won when Jackson had over 20 possessions. Should not be disposing the ball, certainly not from a handball receive.
Have to ask whether he'd get a game at Carlton, Hawthorn, Geelong or Collingwood.
I'd honestly doubt it.
Would he get a game at those clubs - I'd say no
Problem shone like a beacon yesterday it is ihis decision making and disposal. Those "dinky" little along the ground handbalss are a joke and the times yesterday the choice of who to give it off to was awfual at best and terrible at worst
But while Dimma is coach Jacko is guaranteed a game
-
MT,
if the club were fair dinkum
None of the above will be at Punt Road.
We might as well keep turning them over
I didn't recruit them Jack. Craig Cameron has been managing ::) our list since 2008. Good luck turning them all over this year when GWS is hogging the top end of the draft. Not to forget Cameron missed out planning for priority picks b/w 2009-11 all for less than a handful of meaningless late season wins against other bottom sides ::). Seriously for just 4 wins less (and 2 draws) over a 3 year period we could have had an additional two pick 4s and pick 19 (Fyfe or Bastinac). That's how you (re-)build a list. The Club has never understood the draft system and taken advantage of it :banghead.
-
MT,
if the club were fair dinkum
None of the above will be at Punt Road.
We might as well keep turning them over
I The Club has never understood the draft system and taken advantage of it :banghead.
You mean deliberately lose? It's called cheating. Leave that to Carlton and Melbourne. It suits those scumbags, and makes anything they achieve completely hollow and meaningless. Unlike ANY of our real wins that you are so quick to deride.
-
MT,
if the club were fair dinkum
None of the above will be at Punt Road.
We might as well keep turning them over
I The Club has never understood the draft system and taken advantage of it :banghead.
You mean deliberately lose? It's called cheating. Leave that to Carlton and Melbourne. It suits those scumbags, and makes anything they achieve completely hollow and meaningless. Unlike ANY of our real wins that you are so quick to deride.
And Hawthorn, Collingwood, St Kilda, Bulldogs, Eagles, .... The only club that's had recent success that didn't 'tank' for priority picks was Geelong and they didn't need to with all their cheap father-sons being their bonus selections. It's not cheating if it's all within the rules RR.
-
It seems to be within the rules, because the AFL stick their head up their collective bum and pretend it isn't happening. Just like they are rife with double standards and corruption regarding unfair fixtures, disparity in umpiring and MRP decisions, giving new franchises an unfair leg up with the cream of the draft,and third party pay arrangements.
At the end of the day, if you run out and deliberately go through the motions to secure a better draft pick, IT'S CHEATING.Even if you try to dress it up by "resting" players, or sending them off early for operations that can wait until the end of the season. I will never be comfortabe with it. And if the AFL are fair dinkum, (which I know they aren't) neither should they be.
-
This belongs in a different thread, but I agree RR the AFL is in denial and the draft system needs to change to provide incentive for bottom sides to win. A NBA-style lottery for the bottom half of the ladder would help.
However, while the current system is in place, winning meaningless games against other bottom sides late in the season proves nothing. Moreso, if you have the chance to secure a bonus priority pick at or near the top end of the draft then any club which then misses out on one by just 1-2 wins is stupid.
In 2009 we were on just 2 wins when Wallace was sacked midway through the season. Under Rawlings we then beat Essendon by just 5 pts, a tanking Melbourne by a kick after the siren and drew with North when we were a goal down with a minute to play. So for a couple of goals extra we cost ourselves having a 10 year player of the quality of a Nathan Fyfe or even a Ryan Bastinac. Move forward to 2010 and we have just one win by the midpoint and we come from 33 down to beat Sydney by 3 points and scrape home against an inaccurate Adelaide who should have put us away by half-time. Again two narrow meaningless wins has cost us another 10 year player such as a Heppel or Lynch (Suns' young gun FF) or even a Andrew Gaff who will push his way into a fast improving Eagles line-up. Call it "cheating" all you want but that's how you need to play the off-field recruiting game because that's how the smart clubs play it. Sure we can stick to sitting on our high moral pedestal while we remain in the bottom 4 for 10 years and counting while other clubs fall down and then rise right back past us to the top of the ladder :banghead. Sorry I prefer instead to build a strong classy list as quickly as possible within the rules allowed just as most other clubs do.
ps. Just one stat for everyone to think about - if you just take the first half of the past 5 seasons, we have won a measely 10 wins from 55 matches :help. That's on average just 2 wins by the season midpoint for the past 5 years straight. Our year has been over within the first two months if not the first month in each of those 5 years. Any club with that pitiful record needs additional help in gaining quality players to improve its onfield performance and the AFL actually has a system already in place if a club is smart to provide extra early-ish picks for clubs that hardly win a game year after year - it's called priority picks. Too bad that after the past 5 years of pain and crap we have NO priority picks to show for it when we had the chance to gain them ::). Compare that to the Eagles who just 4 years after winning a flag tanked to gain a priority pick which enabled then to add Darling. Our supporters like to put blame on the coach and/or the players but it is those higher up the chain that are at fault. Not a braincell between them when it comes to understanding how to take full advantage of the draft system :banghead. That's not including either picking up recycled duds like Thomson, Hislop, Miller under Cameron's watch and feeding supporters a whole lot of bulldust as to why they'll be good recruits ::). As a club we only have ourselves to blame for continually doing things half-hearted and keeping us in mediocrity. Right now I must admit I have little confidence in the leadership of the Club as far as those connected with the footy dept :-\.
-
MT, as i have said for the past 5 years, the footy dept doesnt have much idea.
Even if we did have a priority pick, we would have buggered up the selection
How we actually picked Martn is beyond belief
-
MT, I am well aware of what being honest has cost us as a club in terms of draft picks. I just think it's contrary to the very nature of any sport for a competing team or individual to want to run out and deliberately lose. Can you imagine watching the Olympics and hoping Australia don't get any medals? If any sport gets to that stage, which the AFL clearly did some time ago, then its' integrity is in serious trouble. When the Pakistanis were caught deliberately throwing matches for bookies there was worldwide condemnation, and heavy penalties from the ICC, and rightly so.
But what makes the AFL so insidious is that the game's administrators, instead of wiping this blight out, simply look the other way. The main reason is that they created this mess in the first place by implementing a system which rewards cheats. I understand your basic argument is, hey, the world's rotten and if you can't beat 'em join 'em. Certainly the rewards on offer support that argument, as Carlton storm their way to a top four finish, while we languish eternally at the bottom of the ladder. But I'm afraid this situation, combined with all the other inequities that we have to put up with from this rotten, crooked Demetriou/Anderson/stuff administration (as mentioned in my last post) have gone a L-O-N-G way towards turning me off this game for good. I don't know if you still go to training. But if you do, you may have wondered why you don't see me there anymore.
-
yeah, actually agree with you there rolls
the only thing id add is that even if we had cheated, we were that incompetent we would not have benefited from it
-
This belongs in a different thread, but I agree RR the AFL is in denial and the draft system needs to change to provide incentive for bottom sides to win. A NBA-style lottery for the bottom half of the ladder would help.
However, while the current system is in place, winning meaningless games against other bottom sides late in the season proves nothing. Moreso, if you have the chance to secure a bonus priority pick at or near the top end of the draft then any club which then misses out on one by just 1-2 wins is stupid.
In 2009 we were on just 2 wins when Wallace was sacked midway through the season. Under Rawlings we then beat Essendon by just 5 pts, a tanking Melbourne by a kick after the siren and drew with North when we were a goal down with a minute to play. So for a couple of goals extra we cost ourselves having a 10 year player of the quality of a Nathan Fyfe or even a Ryan Bastinac. Move forward to 2010 and we have just one win by the midpoint and we come from 33 down to beat Sydney by 3 points and scrape home against an inaccurate Adelaide who should have put us away by half-time. Again two narrow meaningless wins has cost us another 10 year player such as a Heppel or Lynch (Suns' young gun FF) or even a Andrew Gaff who will push his way into a fast improving Eagles line-up. Call it "cheating" all you want but that's how you need to play the off-field recruiting game because that's how the smart clubs play it. Sure we can stick to sitting on our high moral pedestal while we remain in the bottom 4 for 10 years and counting while other clubs fall down and then rise right back past us to the top of the ladder :banghead. Sorry I prefer instead to build a strong classy list as quickly as possible within the rules allowed just as most other clubs do.
ps. Just one stat for everyone to think about - if you just take the first half of the past 5 seasons, we have won a measely 10 wins from 55 matches :help. That's on average just 2 wins by the season midpoint for the past 5 years straight. Our year has been over within the first two months if not the first month in each of those 5 years. Any club with that pitiful record needs additional help in gaining quality players to improve its onfield performance and the AFL actually has a system already in place if a club is smart to provide extra early-ish picks for clubs that hardly win a game year after year - it's called priority picks. Too bad that after the past 5 years of pain and crap we have NO priority picks to show for it when we had the chance to gain them ::). Compare that to the Eagles who just 4 years after winning a flag tanked to gain a priority pick which enabled then to add Darling. Our supporters like to put blame on the coach and/or the players but it is those higher up the chain that are at fault. Not a braincell between them when it comes to understanding how to take full advantage of the draft system :banghead. That's not including either picking up recycled duds like Thomson, Hislop, Miller under Cameron's watch and feeding supporters a whole lot of bulldust as to why they'll be good recruits ::). As a club we only have ourselves to blame for continually doing things half-hearted and keeping us in mediocrity. Right now I must admit I have little confidence in the leadership of the Club as far as those connected with the footy dept :-\.
heppel was taken after conca, could have had him anyway
-
Keep the tambling pick or use this draft?
Heppel pee poor vs mmurphy. Conca would have shown more kahonas
-
Keep the tambling pick or use this draft?
I hope the club are inclined to hang onto it for another year. This year is meant to be a shallow draft. Next year is meant to be a super draft, and we have to get amongst it as much as we can (at least once GWS is finished raping it.)
-
We can't use the Tambling pick this year.
We have to inform the AFL that we are using it before the start of the season.
I am not sure whether we can trade it this season though??
-
Keep the tambling pick or use this draft?
I hope the club are inclined to hang onto it for another year. This year is meant to be a shallow draft. Next year is meant to be a super draft, and we have to get amongst it as much as we can (at least once GWS is finished raping it.)
I believe they have already said they wont be using it this year
Had to nominate to the AFL back in May I think it was whether they intended to use it and they didn't
-
Well I still don't believe in tanking however as I have mentioned before I think we are 2-3 more drafts away from establishing a winning team....So for this year I hope we finish as low as the losses permit us to finish....
-
Keep the tambling pick or use this draft?
I hope the club are inclined to hang onto it for another year. This year is meant to be a shallow draft. Next year is meant to be a super draft, and we have to get amongst it as much as we can (at least once GWS is finished raping it.)
I believe they have already said they wont be using it this year
Had to nominate to the AFL back in May I think it was whether they intended to use it and they didn't
great news
-
Well I still don't believe in tanking however as I have mentioned before I think we are 2-3 more drafts away from establishing a winning team....So for this year I hope we finish as low as the losses permit us to finish....
I think we will finish in exactly the position the losses permit us to finish WAT. ;D
-
TANK!
Their is NO Structure and the players are loosing Belief and Faith in Mr Hardwick!
Play the VFL standard players such as Edwards, Jackson, Farmer ...
Rest Jack and Martin if they are injured!
-
Martin isn't injured.
-
Their is NO Structure and the players are loosing Belief and Faith in Mr Hardwick!
Every player that has uttered a word in the media this year have said they all have belief in the game plan and faith in Hardwick you wet breadstick
-
Well I still don't believe in tanking however as I have mentioned before I think we are 2-3 more drafts away from establishing a winning team....So for this year I hope we finish as low as the losses permit us to finish....
I think we will finish in exactly the position the losses permit us to finish WAT. ;D
:thumbsup
-
Well I still don't believe in tanking however as I have mentioned before I think we are 2-3 more drafts away from establishing a winning team....So for this year I hope we finish as low as the losses permit us to finish....
I think we will finish in exactly the position the losses permit us to finish WAT. ;D
And that is certainly not lost on me :thumbsup
-
we are not in a position to worry about tanking we will lose all our remaining games regardless. seems the only lower position that may become available is if the crows now put on a spurt.
-
Dean Bailey just dropped a bomb - admitted he did the right thing by melbourne to gain the best draft picks by playing players out of position in his first years..
Tanking exists.. Of course the AFL's Adrian Anderson has spoken to Dean and has clarified that no investigation is required :lol
-
TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK
-
Experimentation not tanking: Worsfold
By Nathan Schmook
7:50 PM Wed 03 Aug, 2011
WEST Coast coach John Worsfold has defended the right of clubs to experiment with their players in different positions once their chances of making the finals are over, dismissing suggestions that it is tanking.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/120121/default.aspx
-
Asked for his views on the 'tanking' debate, Hardwick said: "When seasons are over coaches will experiment with players in certain positions and we're probably no different at the moment."
"But to say players tank is ridiculous."
"Coaches will look at certain players in different positions but by no means is that tanking, it's experimenting and that's fine."
"A lot of clubs are also ... looking at season 2012."
http://www.sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/tigers-to-make-statement-132733
-
which is pretty much my sentiments. It would happen without a draft system in place anyway.
Melbourne on the other hand set out to loose to gain draft picks and we have seen the result of this policy
-
TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK TANK
Don't forget - dan Richardson says everyone wanted to come 8th
Hence it's the fans fault ... 2016