One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Ramps on April 13, 2009, 06:01:33 PM
-
This is it. The last year where we can find good picks before GC come in. The best place for Richmond to finish is 16th.
That means - first pick in the ND, then a priority pick at the start of the second, then the next pick.
The most important thing is getting the priority pick. We need a key forward. Rumblings about town that young Tom Hawkins may be gettable at seasons end.
We need to trade out whatever we can, from the players who wont make it at Richmond,
Richard Tambling and Shane Edwards being just 2 of these that now number Many. :'(
-
tanking is not the answer, and its a typical responce from you
we just need smrter ppl making decisions at the club, and need to get rid of every player that does not want to play for us and find players that do.
tanking is bullsit
-
This is it. The last year where we can find good picks before GC come in. The best place for Richmond to finish is 16th.
That means - first pick in the ND, then a priority pick at the start of the second, then the next pick.
The most important thing is getting the priority pick. We need a key forward. Rumblings about town that young Tom Hawkins may be gettable at seasons end.
We need to trade out whatever we can, from the players who wont make it at Richmond,
Richard Tambling and Shane Edwards being just 2 of these that now number Many. :'(
i agree ramps.
We are not up to it. Bottom 4 side we are
-
tanking is not the answer, and its a typical responce from you
we just need smrter ppl making decisions at the club, and need to get rid of every player that does not want to play for us and find players that do.
tanking is bullsit
Yeah - well we saw what NOT TANKING in 2005 and 2006 have done to our club and we see what TANKING has done for Hawthorn and Carlton.
Its time to TANK.
-
DISAGREE.
this what needs to happen.
Clean out of all coaching staff.
And start the season from next week.
Play attacking footy (which wallace said he was going to play, I must of gone to the wrong game ???)
Play quick transition and have players pushing forward of the ball instead of zoning back.
Dont play ANY light weights outside forward 50, that means no Edwards, no Tambling, No King.
Pretty simple if you ask me.
Its amazing what could happen
-
tanking is not the answer, and its a typical responce from you
we just need smrter ppl making decisions at the club, and need to get rid of every player that does not want to play for us and find players that do.
tanking is bullsit
Yeah - well we saw what NOT TANKING in 2005 and 2006 have done to our club and we see what TANKING has done for Hawthorn and Carlton.
Its time to TANK.
Agree Ramps.
We need to get in before these new franchises collect all the talent.
Yes Tiger Time lets win 9-11 games finsish between 9-11 and keep all this mid table mediocrity going. You would know b/c you saw what 2005 and 2006 mid table finishes did for us and you speak to people like Rodney Eade whereas people like Ramps and Myself have no idea as we were not at the game today and we're at the shops looking for cheap chocolate elegant rabbits!!!!!!!!
-
typical bloody losers
tankers are w@nkers full stop
-
typical bloody losers
tankers are w@nkers full stop
Oh yes you know what a loser is.
Please enlighten me on your health your salary your friends the length of your schlong and various other things you were compelled to tell us about on a previous thread just so we all know how beneath you we all are oh righteous one.
-
typical bloody losers
tankers are w@nkers full stop
typical response from a guy who probably goes to about a game every 4 years because he cant be stuffed buying a membership.
move on tiprat
-
Stick to the topic and no personal INSULTS
-
typical bloody losers
tankers are w@nkers full stop
typical response from a guy who probably goes to about a game every 4 years because he cant be stuffed buying a membership.
move on tiprat
never assume little boy, cos u will make an ass out of yourself, but i guess you are used to this. once again, you degrade yourself and this site with your abuse.
delre##@hotmail.com you will be hearing from me
-
we dont have to tank :rollin
we are that bad we are born to fall off the broken ladder & back to bottom
some prick for years has been sending me a email with a picture of a tiger on a broken ladder
l'm starting to beleive it now
-
typical bloody losers
tankers are w@nkers full stop
Oh yes you know what a loser is.
Please enlighten me on your health your salary your friends the length of your schlong and various other things you were compelled to tell us about on a previous thread just so we all know how beneath you we all are oh righteous one.
move on, or do u always walk around with a bag over your head
-
typical bloody losers
tankers are w@nkers full stop
Oh yes you know what a loser is.
Please enlighten me on your health your salary your friends the length of your schlong and various other things you were compelled to tell us about on a previous thread just so we all know how beneath you we all are oh righteous one.
move on, or do u always walk around with a bag over your head
Oh grow up TT.
Stop trying to be controversial and a hardnut.
You are merely inadequate. I am almost inclined to feel sorry for you. Almost.
-
A new coach - implementing the things Jacko talks about and some early picks in the national draft along with a big forward through the PSD could change things at RFC in a big way.
-
This is it. The last year where we can find good picks before GC come in. The best place for Richmond to finish is 16th.
That means - first pick in the ND, then a priority pick at the start of the second, then the next pick.
The most important thing is getting the priority pick. We need a key forward. Rumblings about town that young Tom Hawkins may be gettable at seasons end.
We need to trade out whatever we can, from the players who wont make it at Richmond,
Richard Tambling and Shane Edwards being just 2 of these that now number Many. :'(
You kidding? its round 3!
-
Our only hope for what?
I couldn't imagine going out to play football to lose on purpose, IMO opinion it would be a low self degrading act.
If we are crap and lose so be it but don't encourage a losing culture in a culture that would appear to be struggling at the moment anyway.
-
Our only hope for what?
I couldn't imagine going out to play football to lose on purpose, IMO opinion it would be a low self degrading act.
If we are crap and lose so be it but don't encourage a losing culture in a culture that would appear to be struggling at the moment anyway.
Your philosophy was the club philosophy in 2005 and 2006 ... and now we're rooted!
-
Your philosophy was the club philosophy in 2005 and 2006 ... and now we're rooted!
Have you played football Ramps, would you go out and play football to lose?
Tanking = no self respect or heart, do you think Richo would agree to tanking?
-
Melbourne have pick one sewn up as they will win less than 5 games 2 years in a row no matter how hard we tank.
-
Have you played football Ramps, would you go out and play football to lose?
Unless he has played AFL, no other comp offers a reward for finishing last. There would be no reason to lose on purpose.
-
Unless he has played AFL, no other comp offers a reward for finishing last. There would be no reason to lose on purpose.
Even in the AFL there is no reward for a player as an individual to tank, the club possibly when draft picks mature.
-
Tank" We don't need to tank, the way we are playing right now is productive enough of No results, we are already 0-3, hell we only need to continue doing what we are already doing. Tank, why try to do something when you can do it naturally to begin with.
-
tanking does not work, never has never will. saints had heaps of great picks, havent won anything, the blues, well ony they and fools believe they are "coming"
the hawks never won a premiership cos of tanking , they won because geelong kicked crap and they changed the way footy is played, nothing to do with their list , we bat them remember.
all the past premiers have not won cos of tanking but becaus ethey remained competitive and raised the bar, the eagles, swans, geelong, port, lions bombers etc
tanking is bs and only losers think it is the way to go
-
losing is what occurred today. the list is no good. the coach should go as of tomorrow. finishing on the bottom will be good for us, sadly we dont need to tank, i finally realised today how poo we really are. :banghead
-
losing is what occurred today. the list is no good. the coach should go as of tomorrow. finishing on the bottom will be good for us, sadly we dont need to tank, i finally realised today how poo we really are. :banghead
Ramps its a shame no one saw what we all saw many years ago and thats how pathetic we really are.
the list, the coach and ooh those furqin idiot assistant coaches.
cant wait to hear how another week about how everyone wants Wallace to coach the year out.
Wallace press conference!!
1) " I asked the players at half time to perform and they did their job"
2) " I just want them to play like they did at Geelong"
What an absolute loser this guy is. We lost in Geelong and we lost today.
Do you think at lexus centre they play halves and are content with a loss.
I achieved a desire result today. I knew in that Carlton game our year would be a waste and 4 games later i am positive of it
WE ARE THE BROTHER CLUB OF THE FREMANTLE FOOTBALL CLUB. WE ARE A DISGRACE TO BE PLAYING IN THIS COMPETETION
-
Terry Wallace MUST stay...
...if only to p1ss Daniel and Jackstar off.
:thumbsup
-
Terry Wallace MUST stay...
...if only to p1ss Daniel and Jackstar off.
:thumbsup
Mate , he cannot coach, end of story, if you have been going to the games, you should already know this
-
Terry Wallace MUST stay...
...if only to p1ss Daniel and Jackstar off.
:thumbsup
no time to be personal to anyone at this time, not even Terry.
Terry however does need to go. 92 games to do something and we have not moved one iota from our round 22 game against Sydney in 2004.
We lost 6 8 44 too 16 12 108.
No improvement from 93 games games ago. If anything we are worse off.
Bye Bye Terry.
-
Tank" We don't need to tank, the way we are playing right now is productive enough of No results, we are already 0-3, hell we only need to continue doing what we are already doing. Tank, why try to do something when you can do it naturally to begin with.
Read this again it has it all. And it is what I would have put down. I agree with this at this time as we are just hopeless.
-
Has anyone got a list of the top 20 players available in this years National Draft. Hopefully we will have 3 picks in the top 18.
-
Way we are going we need all of the top 20. Not just a lonely 3 picks.
-
terry should go....it's apparent that no matter what happens he will not be coach next year, so letting him coach out the year makes no sense in terms of development. and terry is the type of coach who has too much pride, and he will be still trying to get as many meaningless wins as he could, which would be jeopardising our future.
we want a whole swag of picks in the national draft this year. certainly 3 in the top 20, preferably with pick 1. only way to do that is to play the year out with a caretaker coach who will do what the board wants and tank.
-
Guttering way to lose a game but if we take the emotion out of it and think post-2009 now that we are 1-7 then Ramps is right. The Board should keep Terry on until the end of the season and tell him on Tuesday night to do a Ratten for the rest of the season, play the youngsters and aim for a top 2 pick with 4 wins or less so we have 3 picks in the top 20. People will say it's a loser mentality but we aren't good enough to seal wins anyway and its how the stupid draft system works and rewards. Make the most of a bad year by investing in the future.
-
Guttering way to lose a game but if we take the emotion out of it and think post-2009 now that we are 1-7 then Ramps is right. The Board should keep Terry on until the end of the season and tell him on Tuesday night to do a Ratten for the rest of the season, play the youngsters and aim for a top 2 pick with 4 wins or less so we have 3 picks in the top 20. People will say it's a loser mentality but we aren't good enough to seal wins anyway and its how the stupid draft system works and rewards. Make the most of a bad year by investing in the future.
Correct!
Lets take the early picks. Another issue is are there any more handy players in the VFL- ala Nahas. Theres no doubt in my mind your almost better off going with a 20-21 yo VFL player who "knows" how to play the game with the late picks.
-
Guttering way to lose a game but if we take the emotion out of it and think post-2009 now that we are 1-7 then Ramps is right. The Board should keep Terry on until the end of the season and tell him on Tuesday night to do a Ratten for the rest of the season, play the youngsters and aim for a top 2 pick with 4 wins or less so we have 3 picks in the top 20. People will say it's a loser mentality but we aren't good enough to seal wins anyway and its how the stupid draft system works and rewards. Make the most of a bad year by investing in the future.
Correct!
Lets take the early picks. Another issue is are there any more handy players in the VFL- ala Nahas. Theres no doubt in my mind your almost better off going with a 20-21 yo VFL player who "knows" how to play the game with the late picks.
Nahas really stood out last year with 50 goals from a FP and we took him as a rookie so it didn't cost us a pick. His size or lack of it is why he has been overlooked before. His footy ability and 1%ers are good. Most VFL players though are ordinary - King and Silvester for instance. Skills and/or pace needed at AFL level aren't there.
-
Guttering way to lose a game but if we take the emotion out of it and think post-2009 now that we are 1-7 then Ramps is right. The Board should keep Terry on until the end of the season and tell him on Tuesday night to do a Ratten for the rest of the season, play the youngsters and aim for a top 2 pick with 4 wins or less so we have 3 picks in the top 20. People will say it's a loser mentality but we aren't good enough to seal wins anyway and its how the stupid draft system works and rewards. Make the most of a bad year by investing in the future.
Correct!
Lets take the early picks. Another issue is are there any more handy players in the VFL- ala Nahas. Theres no doubt in my mind your almost better off going with a 20-21 yo VFL player who "knows" how to play the game with the late picks.
Yep!!!
What would have a win proved today. Ooh yeah thats right another mid table finish leaving the new coach nothing to work with.
These are the kind of results that we should have got all those years when we ended up in no man's land (9th).
Nahas and Collins i think are fantastic players and will be good cattle for the new coach to work with. A tick for whoever found him and a tick for bringing Cousins to this club for he is a true champion of the game and should be in the leadership group at once.
Nahas B & F by the length of the straight as it stands right now
Bowden and Brown can set sail into the sunset together because they are finished as footballers for this club.
Sorry Bowden because i have defended him in the past but today i believed he shouldn't have been put on Tredrea so again the fault of our soon to be ex coach Wallace.
-
Nahas and Collins i think are fantastic players and will be good cattle for the new coach to work with. A tick for whoever found him
Collins was a Miller pick
-
Nahas and Collins i think are fantastic players and will be good cattle for the new coach to work with. A tick for whoever found him
Collins was a Miller pick
we were just lucky he had severe op when that draft was on
we dont need to tank, we will lose most games when we have those few freeloaders and lazt pricks in our team
-
Nahas and Collins i think are fantastic players and will be good cattle for the new coach to work with. A tick for whoever found him
Collins was a Miller pick
well he got something right there.
He didnt get much of the ball today but i liked what i saw.
Its time to say goodbye to Bowden, Simmo and that show pony Brown.
Goodbye and Goodluck
-
Nahas and Collins i think are fantastic players and will be good cattle for the new coach to work with. A tick for whoever found him
Collins was a Miller pick
we were just lucky he had severe op when that draft was on
we dont need to tank, we will lose most games when we have those few freeloaders and lazt pricks in our team
Rubbish, Collins developed OP in his first year on our list
He was a smokey on no one elses radar at the time, those in the media knew we liked him, but injury had NOTHING to do with him going late in the draft
-
i actually believe that our needs are quite pointed in terms of a dynamic FF..we are winning plenty of footy for little reward...imagine if we had roughead at FF...there's a few that look as they might be struggling at the level with questions looming over polo but rance will take him over...Tanking will cost us millions in falling gate receipts and memberships..Not sure I see any advantages in taking us to the brink ::) then again spose we could work our way to 5 picks in top 20 once again to really set ourselves up like we did in 2005, that worked ???
-
definitely should play the young players and tank for the rest of the year. as for wallace, i dont' mind him staying on as long as he is told that he must drop the oldies (except cousins) and tank with the young ones. (though it would be helpful if we appoint the new coach towards the end of the season before the season finishes so he has a couple of games in which to implement his game plan and assess the young players in terms of list management.
best case scenario we get the wooden spoon. that would ensure we get picks 1 or 2 depending on whether melbourne gets priority pick, and enable us to pick up one of scully or butcher. We'd get a top 2 pick and 2 more in the top 20. Josh free as F/S with our last pick and pick 1 in the PSD.
-
I agree that it is time to look to the draft now and play the youth. We can't make the finals now (well it would be a miracle) so fighting out the rest of the season would be counter productive IMHO.With the mass exodus of our senior players including players such as Pettifier, King and JON we need quality youth to replace them with. No use getting rid of older players only to replace them with poor to average players.
Stripes
-
I agree that it is time to look to the draft now and play the youth. We can't make the finals now (well it would be a miracle) so fighting out the rest of the season would be counter productive IMHO.With the mass exodus of our senior players including players such as Pettifier, King and JON we need quality youth to replace them with. No use getting rid of older players only to replace them with poor to average players.
Stripes
smart post
alexander rybak
-
i actually believe that our needs are quite pointed in terms of a dynamic FF..we are winning plenty of footy for little reward...imagine if we had roughead at FF...there's a few that look as they might be struggling at the level with questions looming over polo but rance will take him over...Tanking will cost us millions in falling gate receipts and memberships..Not sure I see any advantages in taking us to the brink ::) then again spose we could work our way to 5 picks in top 20 once again to really set ourselves up like we did in 2005, that worked ???
We are 1-7 anyway so it's not much of stretch to be 4-18 on current form :-\. Memberships are already in the kitty this year and with a fresh start with a new coach and a new crop of top draftees our supporters should stick by the club as they have for the past 3 decades. Our membership did go up after each of our past two spoons.
The philosophy was right having 5 picks in the top 20. We didn't have the recruiting personnel and resources at the time to make the most of it. We also this time around have a young U23 core already in place to add to and build around. We won't be starting from scratch as we did in 2004 needing to clean out the whole list. I agree bj that we lack big key forwards to straighten us up to get reward for our forward line entries. Roughead was pick 2 remember. We also still need another quality midfielder or two but the major deficiency in the side is the lack of big key forwards.
-
.... so fighting out the rest of the season would be counter productive IMHO.
I disagree Stripes. That only breeds and reinforces the same losing culture that got us here in the first place. Would much rather they spent the rest of the season learning (as St Kilda have with the same losing culture list they have had for a few years) that attack, pressure and teamwork produce the goods. Learn that skill for the rest of the season, win as many games as they can, and come back in 2010 much richer in the knowledge of what it actually takes to succeed. Tanking for lower draft picks is only a placebo to satisfy the emotional demands of supporters.
-
.... so fighting out the rest of the season would be counter productive IMHO.
I disagree Stripes. That only breeds and reinforces the same losing culture that got us here in the first place. Would much rather they spent the rest of the season learning (as St Kilda have with the same losing culture list they have had for a few years) that attack, pressure and teamwork produce the goods. Learn that skill for the rest of the season, win as many games as they can, and come back in 2010 much richer in the knowledge of what it actually takes to succeed. Tanking for lower draft picks is only a placebo to satisfy the emotional demands of supporters.
wise old man Smokey ;D :thumbsup
-
.... so fighting out the rest of the season would be counter productive IMHO.
I disagree Stripes. That only breeds and reinforces the same losing culture that got us here in the first place. Would much rather they spent the rest of the season learning (as St Kilda have with the same losing culture list they have had for a few years) that attack, pressure and teamwork produce the goods. Learn that skill for the rest of the season, win as many games as they can, and come back in 2010 much richer in the knowledge of what it actually takes to succeed. Tanking for lower draft picks is only a placebo to satisfy the emotional demands of supporters.
Hasn't hurt Carlton this year.....
-
.... so fighting out the rest of the season would be counter productive IMHO.
I disagree Stripes. That only breeds and reinforces the same losing culture that got us here in the first place. Would much rather they spent the rest of the season learning (as St Kilda have with the same losing culture list they have had for a few years) that attack, pressure and teamwork produce the goods. Learn that skill for the rest of the season, win as many games as they can, and come back in 2010 much richer in the knowledge of what it actually takes to succeed. Tanking for lower draft picks is only a placebo to satisfy the emotional demands of supporters.
Hasn't hurt Carlton this year.....
They were already going to be much improved, regardless of the year they tanked. Their improvement has come from the years at the bottom, mainly because of their salary cap cheating - they weren't tanking then - only the one year of Pagan's sacking - that got them Kruezer and he hasn't been the difference.
-
They were already going to be much improved, regardless of the year they tanked. Their improvement has come from the years at the bottom, mainly because of their salary cap cheating - they weren't tanking then - only the one year of Pagan's sacking - that got them Kruezer and he hasn't been the difference.
Actually that got them Kruezer and Judd and he is a big part of their on field improvement. Murphy and Gibbs were handy too plus the other high picks they recieved from finishing low.
If we bottom out again we can fill any void left by our senior players with quality youth to top up much like what the Hawks did with Franklin, Roughhead and Sewell.
Bottoming out hasn't hurt the Hawks chances of a premiership either...
Stripes
-
Actually that got them Kruezer and Judd and he is a big part of their on field improvement.
Tanking only got them 1 extra pick - they were already going to finish low - so it didn't get them both Kruezer and Judd.
Murphy and Gibbs were handy too plus the other high picks they recieved from finishing low.
If we bottom out again we can fill any void left by our senior players with quality youth to top up much like what the Hawks did with Franklin, Roughhead and Sewell.
Bottoming out hasn't hurt the Hawks chances of a premiership either...
Stripes
But in both examples above they finished low because they were no good - they didn't tank. They didn't have to risk the downside of tanking - the reinforcement that losing is the way to success. If we finish on the bottom this year because we are no good then great - we get a high pick. But I don't believe we are anywhere near as bad as what the results and ladder currently show and that tanking will have a far worse long term negative impact on our list. Bloody hell, if we come to each game for the rest of the season with the same attacking and pressuring attitude that we did last week then what a platform for next year! We showed last year that when we believe, we are a good side - we now need to reinforce the learning that ability alone is not enough - you need the attitude to go with it if you want to be really successful. Tanking destroys everything that is based on and maybe, only maybe, delivers a benefit. Who is to say our pick #6 won't be a better pick than our pick #2?
-
Its not about the early pick- whether its 2 or 6, its about getting the priority at the start of the 2nd round. Last time we had 3 picks inside 20 we got Cotchin and Rance and we had a chance for Selwood or the kid that footscray got- we messed up and traded it for McMahon lol.... we can get 3 very good players if we tank and we need as many as we can get.
-
Its not about the early pick- whether its 2 or 6, its about getting the priority at the start of the 2nd round. Last time we had 3 picks inside 20 we got Cotchin and Rance and we had a chance for Selwood or the kid that footscray got- we messed up and traded it for McMahon lol.... we can get 3 very good players if we tank and we need as many as we can get.
We will agree to disagree on this Ramps. I don't think the risk is worth the return. You don't teach a kid anything by not trying to win.
-
Tanking only got them 1 extra pick - they were already going to finish low - so it didn't get them both Kruezer and Judd.
Who is to say our pick #6 won't be a better pick than our pick #2?
You are right it did get them an extra pick. But actually tanking did get them Krezer and Judd. If they had not of tanked to finish 2nd lst they would have lost the extra pick at the top of the draft and they would have lost the opportunity to get Kruezer because their pick would have been lower than 1 or 3.
And yes in the same vein pick 6 might work out better than pick 2 but finishing the season at 16th or 15th position with less than 16.5 points will see an extra pick in the top 20 without having to trade.
Picks 2 18 and 20 will work out better on average than picks 6 and 22
-
Picks 2 18 and 20 will work out better on average than picks 6 and 22
you dont say ?
-
lol@ Tanking.
Sh it attitude.
-
You don't teach a kid anything by not trying to win.
Not only that how do you get a player like Cuz to tank. Probably the only way is not to play him which would go down real well.
-
You are right it did get them an extra pick. But actually tanking did get them Krezer and Judd. If they had not of tanked to finish 2nd lst they would have lost the extra pick at the top of the draft and they would have lost the opportunity to get Kruezer because their pick would have been lower than 1 or 3.
They would have got either of Judd or Kruezer without tanking. They were already going to finish in the bottom 3 which was always going to get them 2 picks in the top 20. That was always going to get them Judd at the least. He was always going to Carlton regardless of what posturing the Eagles were doing re: trading picks. Tanking only got them 1 extra player and if you think that Kruezer has made any significant difference to that side and it's current position then I strongly disagree.
And yes in the same vein pick 6 might work out better than pick 2 but finishing the season at 16th or 15th position with less than 16.5 points will see an extra pick in the top 20 without having to trade.
Picks 2 18 and 20 will work out better on average than picks 6 and 22
Again, I disagree. The exact science that drafting isn't will always be swayed by a hundred different factors, not the least being plain old luck. Learning how to win with a high pressure, positive attacking attitude is a given, a known, a no risk no brainer. Just ask any Geelong or Hawthorn or St Kilda supporter. Pinning our hopes on 1 more high draft pick is to repeat the messiah folly we have done so in such spectacularly unsuccessful fashion for the past 27 years.
-
I don't think you can make a player tank but you can make an administration and a coach tank. If we rested Lids (TT would love this idea), Tuck, Simmonds, Gus, Moore etc and replaced them with youth - ie Gilligan, Vickery, Post, Putt, Browne, Hislop, Thomson, Silvester etc then we will more than likely lose. You won't even have to play them all at once just a few in important positions ie ruck, FB, midfield and FF.
Gaining high draft picks isn't a garrantee to obtaining great players but it sure helps! You get first, second etc pick of all the players but more importantly, you gain more early choices and better choices all the way throught he draft. Therefore you have a number of players that have the potential to develop rather than just a few.
The winning culture argument doesn't cut it with me. Players will always try to win. If they become disheartened for a season they don't reamin so for the rest of their careers especially with a new coach. If we do tank play the youth, then I would expect them to still try and win but I would also expect us to try and secure early picks in the last compromised draft in the next umpteen years.
Last chance to top up and give us a few addition quality players to give us the edge.
Stripes
-
You don't teach a kid anything by not trying to win.
Not only that how do you get a player like Cuz to tank. Probably the only way is not to play him which would go down real well.
But you can send him for surgery on a broken hand mayb.........
-
The winning culture argument doesn't cut it with me. Players will always try to win.
Stripes
I'm not advocating the need to seek a winning 'culture' as such - that will come naturally through sustained success. I am advocating the importance of 'learning to win successfully'. We have talent, we are young but we have no idea of what it takes to win and win and win. We won games late last year without seeing or learning the need to bring a hard, attacking, pressuring attitude to every game - we basically won on sheer talent alone. This year, when pressured, that has been shown to be not enough. Tanking by only playing kids, out of position etc etc does not teach or reinforce this learning, nor does it teach kids that a position in the 22 is very hard to earn and when earnt is even harder to keep - it should be cherished. Dropping and promoting players willy nilly to chase the pot of gold at the end of the draft rainbow will only prove one thing - that the pot is filled with fool's gold.
-
Dropping and promoting players willy nilly to chase the pot of gold at the end of the draft rainbow will only prove one thing - that the pot is filled with fool's gold.
I'll bow to your superior poetic skills smokey and agree to disagree. I want success as much as you do but I just think that a few wins here and there will make little difference either way this year where finishing down the bottom of the ladder may reap us many rewards at the end of rainbow in the future ;)
Stripes
-
Dropping and promoting players willy nilly to chase the pot of gold at the end of the draft rainbow will only prove one thing - that the pot is filled with fool's gold.
I'll bow to your superior poetic skills smokey and agree to disagree.
:lol I don't actually know where I plucked that one from. :lol
-
its not really tanking is it, its just good management for the future.
Simmons Brown Johnson Bowden, should all be played at coburg and only elevated on superb form.
Simmonds should be dropped and Bowdens effort on Tredrea was just terrible last week, he should go too.
Richo whould be put on ice for next year.
The problem at full forward should be solved in the following way
Gourdis, Vickery, Post, Hughes, Putt should all get a shot at playing the position, they will probably lose most contests but it will stuff their development
Browne should come in for Simmons
Connors Edwards Hislop Thompson should be blooded
Just play the kids and retire the veterans, or send injured players into surgery straight away. The fact that Moore has not been replaced by Thirsty is just Baffling, as he is clearly injured, and cannot perform at senior level.
If we win with the kids in great, if we lose and they show something ( IE Nahas Cotch and Collins against Port ) even better, plus we get the benefit of players of the like of Rance, Ward, Polo coming through our club come draft time.
The worst thing that could happen this year is we win a few meaningless games and finish 10th. Its pointless
-
its not really tanking is it, its just good management for the future.
Spot on Blaisee. It's not what you do, it's how you say you are doing it.
I have to agree with everything in Blaisee's post. There is no use persisting with 30+yo's. There is no use finishing 10th, and we would be lucky if we did that. Yes there is pain, and there is a need to breed a winning culture at the club, but it can't be worse than the pain of this earlier this year. And I'd like to see a 'good footy' culture, or as Smokey puts it, a 'sustained success' culture at a long term perspective, rather than scrounge the odd win this year. We really need the extra cream that comes in the top 2 of a draft. (not to mention wiser lower order picks)
Time for some 'good management' of the club this year I say.
-
its not really tanking is it, its just good management for the future.
Simmons Brown Johnson Bowden, should all be played at coburg and only elevated on superb form.
Simmonds should be dropped and Bowdens effort on Tredrea was just terrible last week, he should go too.
Richo whould be put on ice for next year.
The problem at full forward should be solved in the following way
Gourdis, Vickery, Post, Hughes, Putt should all get a shot at playing the position, they will probably lose most contests but it will stuff their development
Browne should come in for Simmons
Connors Edwards Hislop Thompson should be blooded
Just play the kids and retire the veterans, or send injured players into surgery straight away. The fact that Moore has not been replaced by Thirsty is just Baffling, as he is clearly injured, and cannot perform at senior level.
If we win with the kids in great, if we lose and they show something ( IE Nahas Cotch and Collins against Port ) even better, plus we get the benefit of players of the like of Rance, Ward, Polo coming through our club come draft time.
The worst thing that could happen this year is we win a few meaningless games and finish 10th. Its pointless
amen :cheers
-
You are right it did get them an extra pick. But actually tanking did get them Krezer and Judd. If they had not of tanked to finish 2nd lst they would have lost the extra pick at the top of the draft and they would have lost the opportunity to get Kruezer because their pick would have been lower than 1 or 3.
One more thing with the Kruezer/Judd deal Gracie. Carlton also lost a #4 pick KPP in that deal so in tanking all they really managed to do was replace Kennedy with Kruezer. They might look back and say we got it right but it is a very, very risky strategy if you ask me and certainly not worth the effort of tanking. The real winners in the Carlton tanking were West Coast.
-
You are right it did get them an extra pick. But actually tanking did get them Krezer and Judd. If they had not of tanked to finish 2nd lst they would have lost the extra pick at the top of the draft and they would have lost the opportunity to get Kruezer because their pick would have been lower than 1 or 3.
One more thing with the Kruezer/Judd deal Gracie. Carlton also lost a #4 pick KPP in that deal so in tanking all they really managed to do was replace Kennedy with Kruezer. They might look back and say we got it right but it is a very, very risky strategy if you ask me and certainly not worth the effort of tanking. The real winners in the Carlton tanking were West Coast.
Kruzer is the next Dean Cox.
The eagles did better out of that deal. No worries!!
They needed a ruckman and they got one. Kennedy is nothing compared to Kruzer
-
You are right it did get them an extra pick. But actually tanking did get them Krezer and Judd. If they had not of tanked to finish 2nd lst they would have lost the extra pick at the top of the draft and they would have lost the opportunity to get Kruezer because their pick would have been lower than 1 or 3.
They would have got either of Judd or Kruezer without tanking. They were already going to finish in the bottom 3 which was always going to get them 2 picks in the top 20. That was always going to get them Judd at the least. He was always going to Carlton regardless of what posturing the Eagles were doing re: trading picks. Tanking only got them 1 extra player and if you think that Kruezer has made any significant difference to that side and it's current position then I strongly disagree.
And yes in the same vein pick 6 might work out better than pick 2 but finishing the season at 16th or 15th position with less than 16.5 points will see an extra pick in the top 20 without having to trade.
Picks 2 18 and 20 will work out better on average than picks 6 and 22
Again, I disagree. The exact science that drafting isn't will always be swayed by a hundred different factors, not the least being plain old luck. Learning how to win with a high pressure, positive attacking attitude is a given, a known, a no risk no brainer. Just ask any Geelong or Hawthorn or St Kilda supporter. Pinning our hopes on 1 more high draft pick is to repeat the messiah folly we have done so in such spectacularly unsuccessful fashion for the past 27 years.
Reiwoldt, Kosi, Goddard, Ball
good players?
-
I listen to the Tigers on the Radio against Port with a mate, he started to hang a bite of S$!t at the end of the game, but i must admit it did bother me about the lost, I was comfortably Numb!! ( More suited theme song for the Tigers i think for this year by the way). :lol
So i agree blaisee it is time to play the kids if we loose with them so be it ,but if we start winning with them i think everyone will get more of a buzz out of it somthing for our next coach to work with, and be excited by.
If Terry stays strictly play our kids or get a care taking coach who will. :gotigers
-
Reiwoldt, Kosi, Goddard, Ball
good players?
But they didn't get them tanking. That's my point. They were a crap team that was going to finish on the bottom with only a couple of wins anyway. My comments are all based on the merits of tanking - I don't believe it is justified.
-
Reiwoldt, Kosi, Goddard, Ball
good players?
But they didn't get them tanking. That's my point. They were a crap team that was going to finish on the bottom with only a couple of wins anyway. My comments are all based on the merits of tanking - I don't believe it is justified.
Whether they were crap or tanked is irrelevent though. They benefitted from having all those top 3 picks. So you're better off finishing last than 9-11th. Our two best youngsters are Cotch and Lids. No coincidence that they were top 2 picks.
As blaisee said tanking doesn't mean get the players to throw games. It means managing your side each week to give the youngsters more of a go to the benefit of the team in the future ahead of playing more senior players now who may win you a meaningless game here and there this year but aren't part of the future. Not only do you gain long term putting games into our current kids but you also are rewarded with the best chance of getting the best kids in the draft with 3 picks in the top 20. Trade a player away for a mid 20 pick and that gives up 5 picks in the top 35 or so. That makes a nice change to finishing 9th, trading picks away, and picking up just 2 kids in the National draft :scream.
-
Whether they were crap or tanked is irrelevent though.
Again, that's my point MT. I disagree 100%. Tanking is an attitude that reflects the culture of your team and your club and if you do that and accept that then you have a much harder climb back to gaining credibility and respect - the 2 things our club has publicly craved and was supposed to be resolved in the current 5 year plan. Tank this year (many would argue 'again') and you are just reinforcing the acceptance of failure and hopelessness of the situation in the playing group and among the supporters - the 2 biggest single influence groups in the club structure.
They benefitted from having all those top 3 picks. So you're better off finishing last than 9-11th. Our two best youngsters are Cotch and Lids. No coincidence that they were top 2 picks.
Yes but tanking didn't get them 3 picks - it got them 1. And as anyone in football knows - any single pick in the draft will always have an element of luck as to the eventual success or failure. Learning to win correctly will never ever fail.
As blaisee said tanking doesn't mean get the players to throw games. It means managing your side each week to give the youngsters more of a go to the benefit of the team in the future ahead of playing more senior players now who may win you a meaningless game here and there this year but aren't part of the future. Not only do you gain long term putting games into our current kids but you also are rewarded with the best chance of getting the best kids in the draft with 3 picks in the top 20. Trade a player away for a mid 20 pick and that gives up 5 picks in the top 35 or so. That makes a nice change to finishing 9th, trading picks away, and picking up just 2 kids in the National draft :scream.
You can manage the kids just as well without tanking. Here's a novel idea - play every player on their merits and form alone. Don't give players - senior or junior - games they don't deserve. Teach, learn and reinforce that to succeed at this club you must play to the best of your ability with the right attitude week in, week out. That type of experience is worth 50 games played under no pressure or consequence of failure. Anyone advocating tanking is guilty of doing the very thing we despise seeing in our team on gameday - no will to succeed, no fear of failure. And tanking by the stealth of 'sound management' is still just tanking - it fools no-one and breeds a losing culture just the same. People talk of the current 'embarrassment' of supporting Richmond. It is the players who should have such a fear of this personal and team embarrassment that it drives them to win - ain't gonna get that tanking. Sorry, I can't see any benefit in tanking worth the downside and risk but I guess I'm talking in the minority here so I'll close my contribution to this topic as I have pretty much covered my opinion.
-
Sorry, I can't see any benefit in tanking worth the downside and risk but I guess I'm talking in the minority here so I'll close my contribution to this topic as I have pretty much covered my opinion.
And a good balanced debate it has been on both sides and interesting reading. :clapping
I must say being the fence sitter I am I dont have a strong view either way, I would like the excitement that gaining a top draft pick like Lids and Cotch would bring but I do worry about the underlying effect on our club during the "tanking/management" period and what it may breed into our developing players.
-
I must admit, this season has highlighted how badly we need a key forward to straighten up our forward line, give us some structure. While Jack Riewoldt has had a pretty average year except for one game, he's actually shown me more than I thought he would, I had doubts on him from day one, yet I can see he'll be a player now. However he needs support, he'll never be a sole focal point for the forward line. A big Kosi/Roughead/Hawkins type would give Jack a lot more support. It really is a shame that Schulz is so lazy and Hughes is a pansy. Hopefully Gourdis can come good, surely with his speed and decent marking ability we should be able to turn him into a handy leading forward.
Given our season has gone to pot, I think we need to plan for the future. Johnson, Bowden & Simmo haven't got much to offer any more. Brown may even have some trade value if we can get him 100% fit, so keep him in the side as small forwards can usually play longer, just look at Brad Johnson & Aker. Richo will be lucky to play again this year, but keep Cousins in the side, he has plenty he can teach our kids.
If we can fight out some hard fought losses, win a couple more against good opposition then pick the best key forward we can with a very early pick it will go a long way to fixing our structure. It really is the missing piece, we seem pretty well covered in other areas of the ground, but I don't think our list is as bad as some make out. 3 top 20 picks is what we need to improve our midfield further and fix our spine.
-
My fear now is that we will play all the senior players given they were the influencing factor on TW near departure and we will begin to win some meaningless games with them.
If we are going to win games this year then do it with youth rather than with players who will not be part of our future.
Stripes
-
Infamy do you think it would make sense to trade morton + reiwoldt (+ brown + steak knives) for a key forward or high picks to obtain same?
-
Infamy do you think it would make sense to trade morton + reiwoldt (+ brown + steak knives) for a key forward or high picks to obtain same?
No chance in hell, trade players for picks only
Plus why would we trade Morton & Riewoldt when there are approaching the age when they will be at their peak
Morton is leading our goal kicking tally and Riewoldt would be the best key forward taken out of the 2006 draft so far
-
Infamy do you think it would make sense to trade morton + reiwoldt (+ brown + steak knives) for a key forward or high picks to obtain same?
No chance in hell, trade players for picks only
Plus why would we trade Morton & Riewoldt when there are approaching the age when they will be at their peak
Morton is leading our goal kicking tally and Riewoldt would be the best key forward taken out of the 2006 draft so far
I think Player for Player trades has to happen as well unfortunately, not because we want it, but because if we want to get rid of 10 players then the only way for it to happen is to get in 2 or 3 players from other clubs - whilst keeping all our picks under say pick 50. Players of interest, Tim Houlihan- WCE, Nathan Djekurra- Geelong, Travis Tuck- Hawthorn etc etc. Blokes who can kick well.
-
Jay Schulz Pick 60 for Nathan Djerrukka
deal.
-
Jay Schulz Pick 60 for Nathan Djerrukka
deal.
Yeah - thats the type of player for player swap Im talking about, not necessarily exactly the players involved, but you have exactly the idea Im talking about :thumbsup
-
tanking would be meaningless, its a blight on the AFL, Punters, Members, Sponsors, & the savage Richmond supporters
stop this stupid tanking talk. you cant judge players if they are playing below thier best quality, or you end up with a bunch of useless players who will continue the losing culture. wakeup some of you stuffwits we need to win games for the better of the club to get continued support from sponsors & members
-
Infamy do you think it would make sense to trade morton + reiwoldt (+ brown + steak knives) for a key forward or high picks to obtain same?
No chance in hell, trade players for picks only
Plus why would we trade Morton & Riewoldt when there are approaching the age when they will be at their peak
Morton is leading our goal kicking tally and Riewoldt would be the best key forward taken out of the 2006 draft so far
I think Player for Player trades has to happen as well unfortunately, not because we want it, but because if we want to get rid of 10 players then the only way for it to happen is to get in 2 or 3 players from other clubs - whilst keeping all our picks under say pick 50. Players of interest, Tim Houlihan- WCE, Nathan Djekurra- Geelong, Travis Tuck- Hawthorn etc etc. Blokes who can kick well.
Funny how guys like Hislop & Thompson were first round draft picks and the trade/drafting is widely critisised on here despite the fact they were both first round draft picks and cost us a 3rd or 4th round pick yet Djekurra is still on some of our radars.
Don't get me wrong I'd like to get him too, I just find it funny how those two are critisised so heavily so soon despite being so young
-
However he needs support, he'll never be a sole focal point for the forward line. A big Kosi/Roughead/Hawkins type would give Jack a lot more support. It really is a shame that Schulz is so lazy and Hughes is a pansy. Hopefully Gourdis can come good, surely with his speed and decent marking ability we should be able to turn him into a handy leading forward.
If Gourdis has abilty that you speak of, why would the club delist him?
-
Infamy do you think it would make sense to trade morton + reiwoldt (+ brown + steak knives) for a key forward or high picks to obtain same?
No chance in hell, trade players for picks only
Plus why would we trade Morton & Riewoldt when there are approaching the age when they will be at their peak
Morton is leading our goal kicking tally and Riewoldt would be the best key forward taken out of the 2006 draft so far
I think Player for Player trades has to happen as well unfortunately, not because we want it, but because if we want to get rid of 10 players then the only way for it to happen is to get in 2 or 3 players from other clubs - whilst keeping all our picks under say pick 50. Players of interest, Tim Houlihan- WCE, Nathan Djekurra- Geelong, Travis Tuck- Hawthorn etc etc. Blokes who can kick well.
Nothing wrong with raiding Saints / Geelong list, as long as kids are young; Hislop/Morton, not McMahon/Knobel/KNisley
Djekurra, Armitage etc.
-
Infamy do you think it would make sense to trade morton + reiwoldt (+ brown + steak knives) for a key forward or high picks to obtain same?
No chance in hell, trade players for picks only
Plus why would we trade Morton & Riewoldt when there are approaching the age when they will be at their peak
Morton is leading our goal kicking tally and Riewoldt would be the best key forward taken out of the 2006 draft so far
I think Player for Player trades has to happen as well unfortunately, not because we want it, but because if we want to get rid of 10 players then the only way for it to happen is to get in 2 or 3 players from other clubs - whilst keeping all our picks under say pick 50. Players of interest, Tim Houlihan- WCE, Nathan Djekurra- Geelong, Travis Tuck- Hawthorn etc etc. Blokes who can kick well.
Funny how guys like Hislop & Thompson were first round draft picks and the trade/drafting is widely critisised on here despite the fact they were both first round draft picks and cost us a 3rd or 4th round pick yet Djekurra is still on some of our radars.
Don't get me wrong I'd like to get him too, I just find it funny how those two are critisised so heavily so soon despite being so young
Nature of the beast when you recruit anyone, there will always be the what if?
-
Jay Schulz Pick 60 for Nathan Djerrukka
deal.
Noone in their right mind even give a half eaten twistie for Jay Schulz.
Should have traded him 2 years ago from Port for pick 28.
Our players have gone down in value in regards to those that were tradeable in 2007.
-
However he needs support, he'll never be a sole focal point for the forward line. A big Kosi/Roughead/Hawkins type would give Jack a lot more support. It really is a shame that Schulz is so lazy and Hughes is a pansy. Hopefully Gourdis can come good, surely with his speed and decent marking ability we should be able to turn him into a handy leading forward.
If Gourdis has abilty that you speak of, why would the club delist him?
To put him on the rookie list as he's a project player
He never stopped training with the club, he was never leaving
-
I must admit, this season has highlighted how badly we need a key forward to straighten up our forward line, give us some structure. While Jack Riewoldt has had a pretty average year except for one game, he's actually shown me more than I thought he would, I had doubts on him from day one, yet I can see he'll be a player now. However he needs support, he'll never be a sole focal point for the forward line. A big Kosi/Roughead/Hawkins type would give Jack a lot more support. It really is a shame that Schulz is so lazy and Hughes is a pansy. Hopefully Gourdis can come good, surely with his speed and decent marking ability we should be able to turn him into a handy leading forward.
Given our season has gone to pot, I think we need to plan for the future. Johnson, Bowden & Simmo haven't got much to offer any more. Brown may even have some trade value if we can get him 100% fit, so keep him in the side as small forwards can usually play longer, just look at Brad Johnson & Aker. Richo will be lucky to play again this year, but keep Cousins in the side, he has plenty he can teach our kids.
If we can fight out some hard fought losses, win a couple more against good opposition then pick the best key forward we can with a very early pick it will go a long way to fixing our structure. It really is the missing piece, we seem pretty well covered in other areas of the ground, but I don't think our list is as bad as some make out. 3 top 20 picks is what we need to improve our midfield further and fix our spine.
We saw this again last night. No tall forward structure.
-
Actually there was forward structure in the first half, although not over tall.
2nd half it fell to bits and players push back behind the ball trying to stop the onslaught instead of playing attacking footy like the first half.
That aint the players fault :banghead
-
Actually there was forward structure in the first half, although not over tall.
2nd half it fell to bits and players push back behind the ball trying to stop the onslaught instead of playing attacking footy like the first half.
That aint the players fault :banghead
It is when they all stop running and working together. It's kind of hard to play attacking footy when the opposition get on top in the midfield because the intensity and pressure of the whole side has fallen away to a non-existent level and you need to set up every attack from the backline even if you get the ball back. The players got to play the way they wanted this week and we still weren't good enough to play anymore than 2.5 quarters of decent footy nor score as many goals as we should've in the first half to build an unasailable lead. The smaller forward line structure only worked in the first half because we were dominating in the midfield clearances which allowed our forward line to remain open. Once the midfield started evening up we needed bigger and taller marking options up forward to keep up playing long and direct.
-
Worsfold today has admitted the Eagles are tanking ....
But Worsfold said such losses were inevitable as West Coast's looks to stuff itself into premiership contention just two-and-a-half seasons after it's 2006 triumph.
"It's going to take a little bit of patience from people to understand where we’re going," Worsfold said from Subiaco Oval on Tuesday.
"If they want to have a side that might finish ninth or tenth for five years in a row, we could manufacture that, but if they want a team that could potentially win a premiership within five or six years of their previous premiership, then that's what we're aiming for.
"We've got a strong focus on that and we're prepared to wear some pain heading towards that.
"We've got a big picture of more imminent success than just being a run of the mill side for a long period."
http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=77605
-
wooshers got the right philosophy, but on a different note who knows about this years draft talent and what do we target. kpp !
-
Worsfold today has admitted the Eagles are tanking ....
Good luck with that Eagles.
You have to play us twice and Melbourne once more!! :lol
-
SEN say we wont get the picks even if we tank because of last years wins...
-
Sounds like we want to win though OE. We will end up getting on a great roll and win the last 6 or 7 to finish the season around 10th - 14th and @#$% our last chance to rebuild in an uncompromised draft.
Why won't the club learn. Surely even a blindman can see we need more quality players if we don't want to finish around 9th until doomsday. :banghead
Stripes
-
SEN say we wont get the picks even if we tank because of last years wins...
We won't get a priority pick in the first round but we will in the second round giving us 3 picks in the top 20 at the least.
-
Thanks Stripes.
It's not my area of expertise :P
-
SEN say we wont get the picks even if we tank because of last years wins...
We won't get a priority pick in the first round but we will in the second round giving us 3 picks in the top 20 at the least.
And I reckon that is all we need - even if it is pick 2, 18 and 19.
List is not as bad as it appears. Get Longmire.
-
SEN say we wont get the picks even if we tank because of last years wins...
We won't get a priority pick in the first round but we will in the second round giving us 3 picks in the top 20 at the least.
And I reckon that is all we need - even if it is pick 2, 18 and 19.
List is not as bad as it appears. Get Longmire.
2, 18, 19, 35 and 51 (or wherever the picks fall around those numbers) we should use on youngsters in the draft. Whilst many underestimate the draft coming, its not as bad as many are making out, and we could find a decent player even at 35, pick 51 is always a risky pick, but we need to use it anyway. Any picks anywhere in the middle of 2 and 50 that we can grab from other clubs should also be used.
-
SEN say we wont get the picks even if we tank because of last years wins...
We won't get a priority pick in the first round but we will in the second round giving us 3 picks in the top 20 at the least.
And I reckon that is all we need - even if it is pick 2, 18 and 19.
List is not as bad as it appears. Get Longmire.
2, 18, 19, 35 and 51 (or wherever the picks fall around those numbers) we should use on youngsters in the draft. Whilst many underestimate the draft coming, its not as bad as many are making out, and we could find a decent player even at 35, pick 51 is always a risky pick, but we need to use it anyway. Any picks anywhere in the middle of 2 and 50 that we can grab from other clubs should also be used.
Add a trade - player for a pick (late 2nd rounder for example) - and that'll make 5 picks in the top 35. You then don't have to worry about how deep this draft is. It'll then be up to the list manager and recruiters in conjunction with the new coach to get it right this time around.
-
No matter what the pick numbers are it is still a bit of a lottery - and some will just not work out
having said that - if the focus is youth the age of our list will shrink even more. We actually have a very young list if you take out the 30+ blokes
I actually did some number crunching and was surprised to find that the average age of our list @ 30/4/09 taking out the 6 old blokes ;D (30+ ers) is 22.078 years.
Include the old blokes and it makes the average age 23.294 years.
Dig a bit deeper and if you take out the 4 blokes who are 26+ then the average age falls to around 21.3 years.
If go deep in the draft only taking kids then we could be around the 20-21 y.o. average.
If thats what we all want then the climb upwards will take time we need to be prepared for that and dare I say it be patient again ;D :thumbsup
-
Worsfold today has admitted the Eagles are tanking ....
But Worsfold said such losses were inevitable as West Coast's looks to stuff itself into premiership contention just two-and-a-half seasons after it's 2006 triumph.
"It's going to take a little bit of patience from people to understand where we’re going," Worsfold said from Subiaco Oval on Tuesday.
"If they want to have a side that might finish ninth or tenth for five years in a row, we could manufacture that, but if they want a team that could potentially win a premiership within five or six years of their previous premiership, then that's what we're aiming for.
"We've got a strong focus on that and we're prepared to wear some pain heading towards that.
"We've got a big picture of more imminent success than just being a run of the mill side for a long period."
http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=77605
Worsfold would know he'll have the full support of the whole club from the President and Board to the Footy manager and recruiters. They've been rebuilding for the past 2 years and this will be their 3rd rebuilding draft.
2007 draft: 3, 13, 20, 22 + gained Josh Kennedy in the Judd trade.
2008 draft: 2, 18, 20, 36, 52
So the Eagles have gained 7 top 25 draftees to just our 2 in the past two drafts.
In 2006 despite winning the flag they still upgraded picks (traded fringe tall McDougall to the Dogs, Gardiner to Saints) and then used all their picks - 16, 29, 43, 50, 80. The Eagles understand that the National Draft is the best chance each club has of accessing the most talented youngsters each year and that you don't trade your picks away while in a rebuilding phase.
Compare that to the bozos at Richmond who after 23 drafts still don't get it trading away picks for fringe players and keep giving out mixed messages from the top down because we have no clear policy, direction and leadership as far as our footy division and recruiting goes :banghead. If the Club wanted to do something radically bold it would not only plan to finish bottom this year but also use the new coach's honeymoon first year to clear out the oldies at the end of the season and with the youngest side and list in 2010 finish with just 4 wins to gain the pre-first round priority pick ahead of the Gold Coast's first 5 picks. That would give us picks 1 and 7 while the majority of existing clubs miss out on a top 20 pick altogether. This adds 5 more top 20 quality juniors to our list including 2 young guns (name the last dud No.1 pick). Our existing young core won't peak until 2012-13 (Cotchin will be only 22, Lids 25) so by then no one will care that we were crap in 2009-10 when we finally have a strong list with no age gaps and are playing finals.
MT sits and waits for people to stuff out lol :outtahere.
-
Our current side is now built on the back of the young players not the senior players so I don't feel the climb to the top will be hindered in any way. In the past losing Simmonds was disasterous, similiarly Browns injury stole our season away. Losing Richo, Bowden, Johnson and even Pettifer would have spelt the end of our year but today we do not rely upon them.
If all of our 30+ were to finish playing today it would have little to no effect to our side and if we want to get really brutal, losing Pettifier, Tuck and Newman would not have a huge impact either.
Bodes well for the future really.
Stripes
-
Really thats twice now we have finished on the ladder higher than we are actually tallented. We should have finished botom 3 last year with no more than 4 wins. I mean Carlton walked away with Gibbs, Murphy, Kruz (although I think Cotch is better) and someone else by consistantly remaining on the bottom.
I just hope if we finish bottom the Eagles and Melbourne win 5 or more games otherwise we could be screwed because they recruited very well last year.
-
No matter what the pick numbers are it is still a bit of a lottery - and some will just not work out
No 1. picks have been more certain though this decade - Kreuzer, Gibbs, Murphy, Deledio, Cooney, Goddard, Hodge and Riewoldt. Watts will be a good player too as he develops. Top 1-2 picks are gold and our two best young players came from them.
having said that - if the focus is youth the age of our list will shrink even more. We actually have a very young list if you take out the 30+ blokes
I actually did some number crunching and was surprised to find that the average age of our list @ 30/4/09 taking out the 6 old blokes ;D (30+ ers) is 22.078 years.
Include the old blokes and it makes the average age 23.294 years.
Dig a bit deeper and if you take out the 4 blokes who are 26+ then the average age falls to around 21.3 years.
If go deep in the draft only taking kids then we could be around the 20-21 y.o. average.
If thats what we all want then the climb upwards will take time we need to be prepared for that and dare I say it be patient again ;D :thumbsup
Good stuff WP. What do you do for a living again?! ;D :thumbsup
We've waited 27 years already so what's another year or two wait to finally get our rebuild right. The new teams coming in are a problem all clubs face from a recruiting p.o.v. The smart clubs will find and exploit opportunity out of the situation. I forgot too that clubs will be forced next year to give a player away to the GC. If it's an excess player that has some trade value then that's another decent pick in return.
-
Worsfold today has admitted the Eagles are tanking ....
But Worsfold said such losses were inevitable as West Coast's looks to stuff itself into premiership contention just two-and-a-half seasons after it's 2006 triumph.
"It's going to take a little bit of patience from people to understand where we’re going," Worsfold said from Subiaco Oval on Tuesday.
"If they want to have a side that might finish ninth or tenth for five years in a row, we could manufacture that, but if they want a team that could potentially win a premiership within five or six years of their previous premiership, then that's what we're aiming for.
"We've got a strong focus on that and we're prepared to wear some pain heading towards that.
"We've got a big picture of more imminent success than just being a run of the mill side for a long period."
http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=77605
that's why it's important for us to tank. it's sad those at the club and wallace dont' see that....such a moron....
this is the attitude i was afraid WCE would be taking....we can't afford for them to also get a priority pick...they're currently on 3 wins. need to find at least 2 more wins for them
-
Good thing we play them twice, peggles. ;)
-
As far as I am concerned we don't need any more kids as a priority right at this time. We have developed well. What we are screaming for is a quality ready made KPP that can lead the way for players like Vickery, Post & Putt. When I mean quality, I mean giving up our first rounder for a gun but obviously this depends on any being available. Someone like Pavlich, Roughead, Petrie, Franklin, Firrito etc would be ideal. Pipedream maybe, but teams like the swans always seem to snare marquee forwards in their prime that always seem work out for them.
Our older and more experienced players are currently not leading by example and since Richo hit the injury list we have no KPP in our forward line of any substantial quality. We need a big strong target to straighten us up and if anything hits the ground, we already have little nifty nachos to pick up the crumbs. We are currently missing Richo bigtime! Also not having Gus last week really left us short. Simmo is flat lining, Jack is in poor form, Cleve is nowhere to be seen, Schulz is well....Schulz. Realistically, a couple of those North boys in Petrie or Firrito may not be too hard to snare if they have a crap season and psycho Laidley goes postal on them. We can only hope.
Those in favour say I!!! :outtahere
-
Nay!
We don't need to top up with a forward who would only be around the club for a few years. We need to recruit players and KPF who will be there when all our young players are at their peak.
Stripes
-
This is why finishing down the bottom this year is so important. Tell me you wouldn't want one of these two guy running around in the yellow and black next year!
John Butcher: Immensely talented key position prospect with the Gippsland Power. At 197cm has great agility, pace and endurance for his size and is rarely beaten in a marking contest. Has clean hands and can play forward, back or even in the ruck. An exceptional talent. AIS/AFL Academy graduate.
Tom Scully: Captain of the TAC Cup's Dandenong Stingrays and potential number one draft pick. Scully is a dominant left-footed inside midfielder, clean on both sides of his body. Incredible aerobic capacity and an appetite for the contest to match. The complete package. AIS/AFL Academy graduate.
Stripes
-
Add this fellow into the mix for his size and goal kicking but also his leadership qualities -
Alex Keath: A 196cm Murray Bushrangers forward with outstanding speed for his size. Talented key position prospect with a great work ethic, and doesn't stop presenting. Quality leader who captain the Victorian under-17s cricket team and has been selected in the Australian World Cup under-19s squad. Current AIS/AFL Academy squad member.
Stripes
-
Add this fellow into the mix for his size and goal kicking but also his leadership qualities -
Alex Keath: A 196cm Murray Bushrangers forward with outstanding speed for his size. Talented key position prospect with a great work ethic, and doesn't stop presenting. Quality leader who captain the Victorian under-17s cricket team and has been selected in the Australian World Cup under-19s squad. Current AIS/AFL Academy squad member.
Stripes
Is Keath eligible to be drafted, I thought he wasnt available this year.
-
I'm not sure. I just grabbed the reports from the AFL website. It didn't have ages included. If he isn't odds on he will be wearing a GC jumper in 2011.
Stripes
-
No matter what the pick numbers are it is still a bit of a lottery - and some will just not work out
having said that - if the focus is youth the age of our list will shrink even more. We actually have a very young list if you take out the 30+ blokes
I actually did some number crunching and was surprised to find that the average age of our list @ 30/4/09 taking out the 6 old blokes ;D (30+ ers) is 22.078 years.
Include the old blokes and it makes the average age 23.294 years.
Dig a bit deeper and if you take out the 4 blokes who are 26+ then the average age falls to around 21.3 years.
If go deep in the draft only taking kids then we could be around the 20-21 y.o. average.
If thats what we all want then the climb upwards will take time we need to be prepared for that and dare I say it be patient again ;D :thumbsup
Having a young list is the only way forward now.
However, we need to build on that this year but making the best of this final draft
-
Having a young list is the only way forward now.
However, we need to build on that this year but making the best of this final draft
We have a very young list now. The reality of that is getting masked by 6 veterans who will mostly, if not all, be gone at season's end.
-
Add this fellow into the mix for his size and goal kicking but also his leadership qualities -
Alex Keath: A 196cm Murray Bushrangers forward with outstanding speed for his size. Talented key position prospect with a great work ethic, and doesn't stop presenting. Quality leader who captain the Victorian under-17s cricket team and has been selected in the Australian World Cup under-19s squad. Current AIS/AFL Academy squad member.
Stripes
Is Keath eligible to be drafted, I thought he wasnt available this year.
Keath is ineligible as far as the existing clubs go (by just 20 days) but he could be picked up by the Gold Coast as one of the twelve 17 y.o. they are entitled to this year.
Alex Keath 20/01/1992 196cm 82kg
-
GC are going to be a superpower no doubt and for a long time. I just hope we don't have our chances dashed because of them.
-
We diefinantly need to play the list as Sheedy did years ago,to see who can cut it and who cant, winning games serves no purpose but to finish 9th again.
-
We diefinantly need to play the list as Sheedy did years ago,to see who can cut it and who cant, winning games serves no purpose but to finish 9th again.
I completely agree camboon
-
GC are going to be a superpower no doubt and for a long time. I just hope we don't have our chances dashed because of them.
They're going to have trade for senior players though. They'll get 16 ready-mades from the exisiting clubs but they'll need to find more for their first year at least. It'll be interesting to see what actual compensation is offered to the existing clubs in terms of picks. Essendon (Lloyd), Adelaide (McLeod) and North (Bell) did well out of Freo's entry. Even Port traded for a couple of duds when they came in (Brewer from Geelong and Downsbrough from West Coast).
-
We diefinantly need to play the list as Sheedy did years ago,to see who can cut it and who cant, winning games serves no purpose but to finish 9th again.
We diefinantly do,although we all already know. :whistle
-
We've still got to play the tanking Eagles twice this year don't we? Win both as well as tonight against Freo and then the Dees and we could end up back at pick 5 and no priority pick despite 2009 being a total and utter write-off :help.
-
We've still got to play the tanking Eagles twice this year don't we? Win both as well as tonight against Freo and then the Dees and we could end up back at pick 5 and no priority pick despite 2009 being a total and utter write-off :help.
I would not mind if we win a few games.
As long as we do it with young footballers in key postions.
Winning games by 3points with Bowden / Simmonds / Pettifer in the side is not good for the future
-
"To tank? Or not to tank? That is the question."
torch
The Richmond Football Club is now facing another problem, Tanking. The question for the Richmond Football Club after Friday Night will be whether it is in the best interest for the club to tank? Terry Wallace will coach his 99th and final match as Richmond coach against his first coaching club, the Western Bulldogs. Reguardless of the result, Richmond will then have to appoint a 'caretaker coach' for the remaining 11 matches. The question for the Richmond Football Club is whether to appoint a coach that is in it for 'himself' or for 'Richmond'? If Wayne Campbell is to get the nod over the other assisant muppets, would Wayne Campbell want to risk his coaching career for Richmond's 'development'? Would Wayne Campbell be more then happy to accept the caretaker position on basic instruction to 'tank'? One would think that Wayne Campbell would only do such a thing if he was given the Richmond coaching position next year. Richmond has stated many times in the media that they want 'young blood'. Richmond have also have been on record stating that 'we will go through the procedure, we will have a sub-coaching panel to decided our next coach'. It is wise for Richmond to ask one of the assisant muppets to coach for 'tanking'? Would they want to ruin their chances of a coaching opportunity in years to come? So who would then want to 'caretake coach' Richmond? Is Kevin Sheedy that 'fill in man'? On another level, Would 'tanking' help Richmond at all? In previous drafts they have had a top 20 pick/picks which have managed to fall down. (ie: Oakley-Nicholls, Hughes) Sydney, Adelaide, Collingwood, Geelong and to some extent North Melbourne have not be disadvantaged from not 'tanking' with all teams making the finals in consecutive years. Joel Selwood was taken at pick 8, according to my calculations, Geelong finished 9th that year they took Joel. To me, if you have recruiters doing their job, then there is no need to have picks 1,2 and 3. What Terry Wallace failed to do while he was in charge of recruiting, was actually recruiting 17/18 year olds. Instead Terry Wallace recruited players like; Mark Graham (04), Patrick Bowden, Knoble (05), Polak, Kingsley (06), McMahon (07) Hislop, Thomson, Cousins (08). Trading picks for players wasn't and actually isn't a good decison, unless you want Chris Judd! Terry Wallace era has basically been a failure.The only thing he has done is what he needed back in 2004, which was 22 year old players. Richmond now has plenty of Under 23 players, but have they developed? In August 2004, Terry Wallace chose 'Richmond's list over Hawthorn's list'. Richmond chose Wallace over Eade. Then Wallace chose 'the quick fix' to Clarkson's 'pain now, glory later'. One thing Clarkson said at the beginning of his era, was that he will have a clean out, we will suffer now, and two tall forwards. Terry Wallace said 'Richmond will play more attacking football and are the sleeping giant of the AFL'. June 3rd 2009, Terry Wallace is coaching his last match on the 5th June 2009 and the Richmond Football Club is still fast asleep! Terry Wallace's approach in 2004 must or mustn't be employed for Richmond in 2010? Does Richmond need a fresh face? Does Richmond need to start over again? Does Richmond need a 'ready made coach'? Richmond's 2009 season has been doomed from the start after Round one. Does that mean that this 'culture' at Richmond is still a cancer? Is winning not everything? Relating back to the title, 'tanking'? Is it Richmond only option? If so, would that change or remove that cancer? No! Would winning as many matches from now on would mean more then tanking? Maybe? Would the new caretaker coach be in it for 'himself' or 'Richmond'? To me Wayne Campbell will be Richmond's caretaker coach. It would be an insult to Wayne if we didn't at least ask him to coach. However Wayne Campbell might be thinking, 'can i coach next year?' Richmond may say 'lets see how you go'? or 'we will consider you'. Either way, the biggest question that the Richmond Football Club have to ask themselves is as of Wednesday the 3rd of June 2009, 'To tank? Or not to tank? That is the question?'.
-
Torch,
I mean no offence but that is bloody hard to read....I get lost reading it after 3 or 4 lines.
-
Oh goodie another thread on tanking lol
It might be an idea torch to split all that up into a few paragraphs to make it easier to read ;).
Adelaide, Collingwood and North may have made finals regularly over the past decade for various reasons but all haven't looked like winning a flag. Not enough class on their lists to step up as real contenders.
The Cats have had the benefit of a heap of father-sons under the old rule where they got top 10 quality at 3rd round bargin basement price. So effectively they had two top 10 picks in those drafts to gain the top class needed to form the basis for the side they have become. Half their premiership side were either top 25 draftees or Father/Sons who were rated as top 10 picks. If you look at their more recent drafting those that have cemented a spot in their 22 now like Varcoe and Taylor were top 20 picks as well. As recruiting becomes more and more sophisticated the most talented kids are now found more and more at the top end of the draft (top 20). 'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more. In 1999 and 2001 they drafted 15 kids from the National draft alone (most 3rd rounders or better). They learnt a hard lesson from 2000 that trading picks for recycled players while rebuilding as a quick fix doesn't work. So within 3 drafts Thompson had set-up a young core of 23 players to sort through and build around. 10 of the 23 would go on to become premiership players. Another 5 came from the pre-Thomson era. So that's 15 future premiership players on their list by the end of 2001 yet they wouldn't make the finals for another 3 years (2004) and a flag for another 6 years (2007).
Compare that to Richmond where Wallace recruited 7 kids in 2004 yet we went back into old bad habits of drafting only 13 kids over the past 4 National drafts and traded away picks for recycled players. Now less than half of Thompson's original young core of 23 "made-it". Using the same percentage at Richmond leaves about 5 kids from 2005-8 drafts who will go on and make it :-\. At that rate it would take you almost 20 years to get a full side's worth of premiership quality players which of course makes no sense as no one plays for 20 years so in effect you will never reach a full side's worth. So we need to tank away to get more early picks and then trade player(s) away to get even more picks. Investing in the National draft is the only way any club can get the best talented kids to their club.
Geelong's recruiting under Thompson........ (22 in bold are their 2007 premiership side)
Pre-1999: Harley (trade), King (PSD), Milburn (48), Scarlett (FS), Wojcinski (24)
99: traded Mansfield for 31, Colbert + 53 for Mooney + 15
Corey (8 ), Spriggs (15), Bray (17), Foster (23), Chapman (31), Ling (38), Enright (47), Lindsay (r = promoted rookie)
00: traded Steinfort for 44, traded picks 11, 27, 42, 45, 57 for Kingsley, Murphy, White.
J.Hunt (44), Lowther (71), Simpson (79), Baldwin (r), O'Brien (r)
01: traded Murphy for 23, Bizzell for 17, 41, pick 55 for Grgic
Bartel (8 ), Kelly (17), Gardiner (23), S.Johnson (24), G.Ablett (40-FS), Playfair (41), McGuiness (42), McCarthy (69), D.Johnson (81)
02: traded Burns for Finnin
Mackie (7), Lonergan (23), Callan (36-FS), Moloney (PSD), Rooke (r), Chambers (r)
03: traded Clarke for Loats, Street for Haynes
Tenace (7), Thurley (22), Blake (38-FS), Spencer (42), Koulouriotis (PSD), Slade (r)
04: traded picks Moloney + 16 for Ottens
Prismall (32), N.Ablett (48-FS), Egan (62), Brynes (r)
05: traded Chambers for 35
Varcoe (15), West (31), Owen (35), Gamble (47), Stokes (61)
06: no trades
Selwood (7), Djerrkura (25), Hawkins (41-FS), Hogan (57)
07: traded Playfair for 44, Callan + 66 for 62, King +Gardiner for 90
Taylor (17), D.Simpson (34), S.Simpson (44), Donohue (60+FS), Mumford (r)
08: traded Prismall for 39
Brown (15), Gillies (33), S.Motlop (39)
-
Same topic as last months moderators do something please :banghead
-
Same topic as last months moderators do something please :banghead
You can rest your head TM. I've merged both threads.
-
;D
-
We have had far more success on average with the rookie draft than we have with the Nation Draft. I wonder if the two drafts were the responsibility of two different recruiters?
In retrospect we have made mistakes with our trading but I believe this has been as much about attempting to cover the gapping holes we had on our list in terms of 23 - 27 year olds and position wise. Players like Knobel, Graham and even Kingsley were patch jobs. They didn't cost us high draft picks but they did take a way even the possibility of unearthing a talent from these picks. The chances are that these would not have made it but then again players like Foley, Graham, Nahas etc have all come from the rookie draft so you never know.
Trades such as the ones made for Polak, McMahon, Thomson, Hislop are the most harming given they were made with relatively high picks. Polak and McMahon look to be outright loses while Hislop and Thomson are still young and only arrived at the club so should be afforded a little time to see if their trades were worthwhile but the meer fact that the club made these trades in the first place was a mistake.
We do need to bottom out to continue the rebuild and we do need to do everything in our power to ensure Melbourne and WC win as well. This is now a competition for a future - this draft could make or break the club and if we miss the boat here and allow other clubs to get a head of us with draft talent, we will suffer for that mistake for decades to come. :'(
Stripes
-
Talking about our great player McMahon which Jackstar was correct about again, Hows he going down there at Coburg ;D he must be settled in by now ;D
funny how the Bulldogs had him playing in the VFL most of his last year there & we pay him all that money to be a VFL player. seriously whats wrong with that guy.
He can play football & surely has the smarts but he just slacking off or is he injured or purely fell out of love with Wallet ;D
Whats the story Jack on your old mate McMahon ;D
-
'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more.
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
-
'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more.
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
What a great post :clapping
-
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are.
My dad used to say - 'You can't make strawberry jam out of horse manure son'. Let's just say I kept him away from my toast at all costs! :chuck ;D ;)
But all the same his point is a valid one. If I went down to the club with a few of my mates and we were trained together play as the new Richmond team, to fight for each other, to shepherd, block and never give up etc etc. To build a strong culture, we would still lose every game by 200 points(if we're lucky!). Why? Well because we haven't the talent.
We need to get the raw talent into the club first before we can hope to develop a winning culture in the team. Will a group of average players play better with the type of development, support and team focus you refer to - you bet they will but the question remains will this be good enough? If we get more quality talent into the team with high draft picks we can then develop the same culture and club focus you refer to but with much greater results.
Right now we need a strong foundation to build from and without quality young players to form our core, whatever development/culture we create can only go so far regardless of the club culture.
We need the draft AND we need to change our culture.... but the draft is the first step.
Stripes
-
Just my opinion but the Club should get rid of the 4 senior blokes - not including Richo or Cousins, unless of course Richo retires or Cousins does an injury in that case the 6 should retire en masse. The savings should go towards paying for a couple of extra full time development coaches adding onto what we already have and trying to get a Balme to Richmond as Football Operations Manager.
-
Hypothetical Question Time
I realise that most likely we are going to be blown off the park against the inform dogs.......But "WHAT IF"
On Friday night the Tigers play at a level not seen in 09.The quality of their play has Bruce & Dennis describing it as SORCERY.We go goal for goal with our much fancied opponents.
Dying seconds....Richmond down by 2pts....Jack Marks 45 m out......siren goes.
Would you want Jack to.... (A) Kick the winning goal OR
(B) Miss and score a behind
Love to hear the opinions of Pro-Tankers and Anti-Tankers.....I know my heart would be ruling my brain.
-
I usually pick against the Tiges this year but I am happy to see them win (hopefully not more the 4).
My answer would be I would be happy to see Richmond win if we were playing all our kids.
-
Spoken to Balmey, he is a true tiger and pretty sure he would love to be back. How come we didn't try before he went to Geelong has me ??? the usual bad judgment and missing the boat.
Regards the Tank, may as well forget it guys we are gunna win more than 50 % of our games from here on which will give us 8 wins + guarenteed.(http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-shocked003.gif)
-
My dad used to say - 'You can't make strawberry jam out of horse manure son'. Let's just say I kept him away from my toast at all costs! :chuck ;D ;)
We need to get the raw talent into the club first before we can hope to develop a winning culture in the team.
You can easily make manure out of strawberry jam though.
Worrying about the raw talent first before the culture is putting the cart before the horse. You can bring in all the raw talent you like, but induct them into a poor culture and they will fit right in.
I firmly believe that if we'd drafted Franklin ahead of Tambling, with our current culture, he'd be playing for Coburg or in and out of the side like Riewoldt, or inconsistent like Tambling.
No, it is far far far more important to start fixing our broken culture than worrying about losing games to finish higher in the draft. Of course, we must participate in the draft, up to our necks. Nobody is suggesting that the draft isn't important. But it is only as important as all the other components that make up our culture.
-
My dad used to say - 'You can't make strawberry jam out of horse manure son'. Let's just say I kept him away from my toast at all costs! :chuck ;D ;)
We need to get the raw talent into the club first before we can hope to develop a winning culture in the team.
You can easily make manure out of strawberry jam though.
Worrying about the raw talent first before the culture is putting the cart before the horse. You can bring in all the raw talent you like, but induct them into a poor culture and they will fit right in.
I firmly believe that if we'd drafted Franklin ahead of Tambling, with our current culture, he'd be playing for Coburg or in and out of the side like Riewoldt, or inconsistent like Tambling.
No, it is far far far more important to start fixing our broken culture than worrying about losing games to finish higher in the draft. Of course, we must participate in the draft, up to our necks. Nobody is suggesting that the draft isn't important. But it is only as important as all the other components that make up our culture.
Yep. And fear of losing is just as important as anything else.
-
This is a bit of a 'chicken and egg' or tank v winning culture argument we have going on here. :-\
Firstly I argue completely with you regarding the desperate need we have for changing our club culture, developing a team orientated game plan, focusing on structures and accountability...but I just don't agree with you regarding the timing.
Now is not the time to start changing the club, game plan etc when in a few months we will have a new coach with a new style, focus, ideas and leadership. Why would we want to change everything immediately, turn the place on its head, create club goals/focus etc only to have it all turned on its head with the inclusion of a new coach?
In addition, finishing down the bottom does not create a losing attitude otherwise the Lions would never have won 3 flags in a row, the Hawks one last year, the Saints be unbeaten and even Geelong be so dominant for so long. All of these team have had their time at the bottom and built up good young list before they then created the type of winning culture we are so desperate need at Tigerland.
Right now we need the cattle to work with more than the culture. Players such as Bling, Polo and even JON :o etc are not lost in terms of culture and development. With a new coach, development focus and support they can still realize their potential but does it need to happen immediately when wins will only damage our draft chances....???
On a side note, I am becoming more and more convinced that we will win 5/6 games this season and make this argument defunk. The players all talk about winning and turning the season around and a caretaker coach will be keen to make a name for themselves so I think you will get the wins you want Fooman.
At just what cost winning will be to us at this stage of our rebuilding and development to our future can only be judged later. :whistle
Stripes
PS Chuck - I support with my heart while the game is being played but head otherwise. :thumbsup
-
Now is not the time to start changing the club, game plan etc when in a few months we will have a new coach with a new style, focus, ideas and leadership. Why would we want to change everything immediately, turn the place on its head, create club goals/focus etc only to have it all turned on its head with the inclusion of a new coach?
Who said anything about changing the game plan or whatever?
What I'm saying is that whatever sides we select for the remainder of the season should be asked to prepare to win like they've never prepared before. As thoroughly and as professionally as they humanly can. If we win, great. If we lose, well at least we did everything we could to improve ourselves. What new coach wouldn't want that?
We get too fixated on draft picks, or on the coach (saviour), or the next champion, and lose sight of the fact that we need to distribute our resources and, more importantly, attitudes across every corner of the organisation. We need to put our eggs in all baskets. We need to ask every employee of the RFC to do all he/she can to improve his/her performance, every board member, every trainer, every bootstudder. Not just to improve, but work towards being the absolute best in their field. We need to recruit the right people on field and off field, and we need to develop them and bring them into and help us create the culture that trickles down to everyone, including the playing group.
Forget about tanking. It is a massive red herring.
-
As for that hypothetical, I'd want Jack to kick the goal. Not so much for the win, but for the fact that missing would destroy Jack's confidence.
-
First thing we do to change the culture,before drafting,is,
sack all the lagging dogs.
Identify and make an example of them.
Johnson,Simmonds and all the weak rats that "just couldn't stand to play under terry" anymore,
forcing the club into public embarrassment and once again, the laughing stock of professional sports.
These are the ones who put themselves before the club,clearly as they genuinely are selfish individuals,willing to lay blame for their own misgivings on anyone but themselves.
That would take responsibility.
A sign that they have not yet dealt with it is a sign that our management is insipid,forever catering to the players and their clueless aspirations.
Make an example of these bufoons and then come talk to me.
-
We have had far more success on average with the rookie draft than we have with the Nation Draft. I wonder if the two drafts were the responsibility of two different recruiters?
I do agree although it's a bit of a false economy when we have to play our late and rookie draft picks due to our early picks failing so often.
Trades such as the ones made for Polak, McMahon, Thomson, Hislop are the most harming given they were made with relatively high picks.
Polak was only a downgrade of a pick and we got the player we were after anyway. McMahon was a disasterous trade and I never agreed with it. Thomson I also think we over paid for, but not by that much. Hislop as a 4th rounder I have no problem with, although it wasn't a trade.
-
Hypothetical Question Time
I realise that most likely we are going to be blown off the park against the inform dogs.......But "WHAT IF"
On Friday night the Tigers play at a level not seen in 09.The quality of their play has Bruce & Dennis describing it as SORCERY.We go goal for goal with our much fancied opponents.
Dying seconds....Richmond down by 2pts....Jack Marks 45 m out......siren goes.
Would you want Jack to.... (A) Kick the winning goal OR
(B) Miss and score a behind
Love to hear the opinions of Pro-Tankers and Anti-Tankers.....I know my heart would be ruling my brain.
I would hope miss.
-
Now let me get my head around it.
We are going to lose a lot of older and players (8to10) who arnt up to it at the end of the year anyway, so I guess alot of you are saying is that we should finish 9th or 10th then get a whole lot of late draft picks or heaven forbid rejects from other side to replace the guys that are cut. We also dont put the required experince into the kids so they take longer to develop just so we can win 8 games. Correct me if I'm wrong but as a rule the top 10 picks generally make it and the further you go the less likely they will.
We have some good kids but we need more!
This is why I was hoping Terry was going to hang around as he had nothing to lose by developing the list.
-
but the dogs cried and got wallet sacked....
-
but the dogs cried and got wallet sacked....
:o ???
-
I think hes suggesting there was a call for blood which stopped TW from doing what Tony Shaw did for Collingwood.
If Richmond win for 4 game this year maybe we should review a few other positions within the club as well. Still think could suggest that we are unlikely to make the finals an need to build for the future and play the kids. No grief is being given to Melbourne or West Coast for basic so I would suggest if we could do the same.
If Rawlings is made caretaker there is a good chance that he will play the list at the direction of the senior management.
-
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
That is a fantastic post :clapping :clapping :clapping
:thumbsup
-
Who said anything about changing the game plan or whatever?
What I'm saying is that whatever sides we select for the remainder of the season should be asked to prepare to win like they've never prepared before. As thoroughly and as professionally as they humanly can. If we win, great. If we lose, well at least we did everything we could to improve ourselves. What new coach wouldn't want that?
We get too fixated on draft picks, or on the coach (saviour), or the next champion, and lose sight of the fact that we need to distribute our resources and, more importantly, attitudes across every corner of the organisation. We need to put our eggs in all baskets. We need to ask every employee of the RFC to do all he/she can to improve his/her performance, every board member, every trainer, every bootstudder. Not just to improve, but work towards being the absolute best in their field. We need to recruit the right people on field and off field, and we need to develop them and bring them into and help us create the culture that trickles down to everyone, including the playing group.
Forget about tanking. It is a massive red herring.
:clapping :clapping :clapping
And fortunately we have already made improvements in a lot of areas, especially off-field. We need to continue to improve but we are not a basket case club now - 5 years ago we were.
-
WP, Foo and smokey - I think you'll have your way and we will win more games than we lose for the rest of the season.
I hope in the wash up we get the culture you are heralding and we have the cattle to execute it.
I still stand firm that in years to come no one will remember a few meaningless wins at the end of an already disasterous year....but they will remember whether we got a group of quality players or just another batch of failed chances.
Either way, the decision and future is out of our hands and firmly in the Richmond administrations
Stripes
-
'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more.
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
People forget about Geelong's father-sons who were rated top 10 picks before their respective drafts. The Cats were effectively getting two top 10 picks in those years ...
2001: Bartel (8 ) and G.Ablett
2004: The traded their first rounder for Ottens but they knew they had N.Ablett up their sleeve later in the draft.
2007: Selwood (7) and Hawkins
They already had Scarlett prior to Thompson becoming their coach.
The new F/S rule was brought in so clubs couldn't have both their first round pick and then their F/S choice if the F/S was a young gun. Take Bartel, Selwood and Ottens off the Cats' list and the dynamics of their midfield change.
You need the most talented kids first and plenty of them. Sure our recruiting and development resources have been poor but it's no coincidence that our two most talented youngsters Lids and Cotch were both top 2 picks. Our last priority pick gave us Rance. I doubt people who are 'anti-tankers' would give them away now for 2 more wins in 2004 or 2007. We don't have the bonus of top quality father-sons walking en masse into our club as Geelong did. So we need the earlier picks instead to grab the best talent in numbers especially that extra priority pick which would give us 3 picks in the top 20.
You need to get bring as many talented kids as possible to the Club as the first building block otherwise you're wasting your time in terms of their development into a successful team. You still need to do all those other areas you mentioned FFV but recruiting the best kids in number comes first. Picking up only 2-3 kids a year in the National draft like we have because we finished 9th-10th and ending up with picks 8, 24 plus trading away our 3rd pick for a recycled dud isn't enough in quantity and quality to cull and turn over your list quickly and change the culture of the playing list. You need plenty of picks and the higher the better to get the best kids. If we win no more than 4 games this year and trade a player or two away for even 30-40ish draft picks then you have say draft picks 2, 18, 19, 30ish, 35, 40ish. 6 new kids instead of just 2 and more talented kids to boot. Do that a couple of years in a row (I would tank next year as well) and you clean the deadwood out of our list quickly and evoke real change to the playing list in terms of quantity, quality and structure rather than what we have now which is basically the same group of players each and every year failing us with just a few changes around the seams.
I don't see a consistent recruiting policy at Richmond even though we're having this review and we've changed footy managers and now senior coach. There's mixed messages coming out of the club. One minute we're rebuilding, the next promising finals or bust, then its back to youth but we'll trade draft picks away for older fringe players. We make it up as we go along :help. The direction of the club needs to come from the Boardroom and the head of the footy dept. They need to stand up, show some leadership and make up their minds if we are truly rebuilding or not. Changing coaches, fitness staff, etc... and then still repeating the same dumb recruiting mistakes won't help improve our list or side.
-
'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more.
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
People forget about Geelong's father-sons who were rated top 10 picks before their respective drafts. The Cats were effectively getting two top 10 picks in those years ...
2001: Bartel (8 ) and G.Ablett
2004: The traded their first rounder for Ottens but they knew they had N.Ablett up their sleeve later in the draft.
2007: Selwood (7) and Hawkins
They already had Scarlett prior to Thompson becoming their coach.
The new F/S rule was brought in so clubs couldn't have both their first round pick and then their F/S choice if the F/S was a young gun. Take Bartel, Selwood and Ottens off the Cats' list and the dynamics of their midfield change.
You need the most talented kids first and plenty of them. Sure our recruiting and development resources have been poor but it's no coincidence that our two most talented youngsters Lids and Cotch were both top 2 picks. Our last priority pick gave us Rance. I doubt people who are 'anti-tankers' would give them away now for 2 more wins in 2004 or 2007. We don't have the bonus of top quality father-sons walking en masse into our club as Geelong did. So we need the earlier picks instead to grab the best talent in numbers especially that extra priority pick which would give us 3 picks in the top 20.
You need to get bring as many talented kids as possible to the Club as the first building block otherwise you're wasting your time in terms of their development into a successful team. You still need to do all those other areas you mentioned FFV but recruiting the best kids in number comes first. Picking up only 2-3 kids a year in the National draft like we have because we finished 9th-10th and ending up with picks 8, 24 plus trading away our 3rd pick for a recycled dud isn't enough in quantity and quality to cull and turn over your list quickly and change the culture of the playing list. You need plenty of picks and the higher the better to get the best kids. If we win no more than 4 games this year and trade a player or two away for even 30-40ish draft picks then you have say draft picks 2, 18, 19, 30ish, 35, 40ish. 6 new kids instead of just 2 and more talented kids to boot. Do that a couple of years in a row (I would tank next year as well) and you clean the deadwood out of our list quickly and evoke real change to the playing list in terms of quantity, quality and structure rather than what we have now which is basically the same group of players each and every year failing us with just a few changes around the seams.
I don't see a consistent recruiting policy at Richmond even though we're having this review and we've changed footy managers and now senior coach. There's mixed messages coming out of the club. One minute we're rebuilding, the next promising finals or bust, then its back to youth but we'll trade draft picks away for older fringe players. We make it up as we go along :help. The direction of the club needs to come from the Boardroom and the head of the footy dept. They need to stand up, show some leadership and make up their minds if we are truly rebuilding or not. Changing coaches, fitness staff, etc... and then still repeating the same dumb recruiting mistakes won't help improve our list or side.
Amen, but you know that Stripes and Myself are on the same page as you. I am so sick of the B/S that we only just need to try harder, win more games, have a better culture, sack all coaches. I see some hope in our leadership this year but there is no magic pudding, hard decisions for the long term need to be made and they need to made on our drafting, no more short term crap from other clubs.
-
I don't remember anyone rating GAJ a top 10 selection pre-draft. If anything most people thought a 3rd rounder was about right.
-
I don't remember anyone rating GAJ a top 10 selection pre-draft. If anything most people thought a 3rd rounder was about right.
Geelong supporters loved him from day one. Started with the Falcons in the TAC Cup as a 15 year old under Turner and made the Vic Country squad.
-
I think that Leigh Matthews is interested in our coaching job. Heard him tonight on 3aw, said we had afew players to work with etc. I think hes interested.
-
'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more.
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
I do not buy this at all.
maybe if our father sons start turning out like Nath /Gary Ablett , hawkins
-
I do not buy this at all.
maybe if our father sons start turning out like Nath /Gary Ablett , hawkins
Yes, Nathan Ablett, what a game turning champion he was. 32 games in 3 seasons, averaged 8.6 disposals 3.9 marks and 1.4 goals per game for his career - and not a Brownlow vote to be seen. Played in a premiership team and made not one scrap of difference to that team for the entire year. Currently getting a kick for Broadbeach in Queensland but still, not too many of them. Raines has a better career record than that and look how much we all love him!
They got lucky with 2. Just looking at recent times so did we - Richardson and Bowden, so did Collingwood - Shaw and Shaw, so did Essendon - Watson and Neagle, so did Carlton - Silvagni and Waite, so has almost every other club over the years. So now there is a rule in place to prevent getting a 'steal' - big deal - father and son picks are cyclical and realistically frought with more danger than a standard draft pick because of the sentimental factor. Blaming father and son picks for Geelong's current success is just another red herring - just like thinking that tanking for a priority pick will fix our problems. Stop trying to find the cure in the pill jar of low picks - you are only putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
-
I don't remember anyone rating GAJ a top 10 selection pre-draft. If anything most people thought a 3rd rounder was about right.
Correct. G Ablett was never spoken of as a top 10 pick. Never.
But I think you are missing my point completely mt. I agree that we need to keep our picks and trade aggressively for more. It is a numbers game, and your own example in Geelong actually proves that you don't need picks in the top 5 to be successful (though, sure, if you get them you don't knock them back!). And yes, Geelong have had some luck with F/S picks (is it luck?) and we have had bad luck with Cogs, Brown, Polak etc. I think I could make a workable argument that our F/S picks (Roach, Raines) might be suffering the same fate as other high pick under-performers (eg Tambling, JON, Pettifer etc).
Far more important is the structure of the club, the environment that you create, and the processes that you induct draftees into. Without the right elements in place, you may as well stop now, which is what we have effectively done for 25 years. We have pinned our hopes on a succession of saviours (be they coaches, players or administrators) and it hasn't got us anywhere because we continue to believe that they are the answer.
The answer is not in making sure we don't win games to ensure a slightly higher pick. Whether we get pick 3 or pick 8 this year is not going to make the difference that turns us into a successful club. History has taught us that. It is far more important that we start adopting an absolute best practice attitude throughout the club, from the top down, and that starts with preparing our players to win at all costs, to prepare with winning as the priority, and then doing everything we can to support them in this outcome.
The players need to get the message that the answer lies within them, not with some 17 year old kid running around in the TAC cup. Adopting a "tanking" approach gives people the message that the answers lie elsewhere. That is not the right message to be sending.
-
I must admit, while I have been of the mindset that our season is over and it is pointless to try and win more than two more matches, there is a way that we can play to win in the 2nd half of the season and still get the same advantages as the priority pick.
If we play all our kids and fringe players and one or two of them can step up and show some good form, then we may be able to get a half decent 2nd rounder for a player we plan to get rid of anyway. Port were willing to part with a 2nd rounder for Schulz, maybe they still will be if we can get him kicking a few goals or playing back in defence and getting 20+ disposals a game again. Likewise with Jordan McMahon, if we can get him picking up 25-30 disposals on the HBF or wing and with a high disposal efficiency like he usually has, then it may also make him attractive to another club for a late 2nd, early 3rd round pick perhaps.
A fringe player in a losing side will never gain much attention from other clubs
-
then it may also make him attractive to another club for a late 2nd, early 3rd round pick perhaps.
If we cant get that I would accept a slab of VB and a couple of cartons of ciggy's
-
Fooffoovalue - I think we are all agreeing that culture is essential to creating a strong and successful club. Its just the timeline we are disagreeing about.
The fact is is that it is very unlikely regardless of which caretaker coach is brought in that our culture will change before the end of the year given that this intrim coach is merely filling time until the year's. They make some changes, alter the game plan slightly etc but no significant changes can be made until the club has consistent leadership. This will only occur when a long term coach is employed at the end of the year.
So taking this into account what difference with winning 4 games or 6 games to our long term culture?
In addition you mention draft picks make little difference in the end. I ask you this then if you had a young Deledio (Pick 1) or JON (Pick 8) which player would benefit more and perform better from the education and culture you herald? What about even Cotchin(No 2) and Riewoldt(No 8) ?
Picking up a high first round pick can be the difference between getting a star player and a good player and no matter how much education/development a player recieves they can only every reach a certain level.
This is why looking to the draft THIS year is more important that attempting any half-hearted, short term change of culture which will only be changed yet again once a new coach is installed.
We all agree we need a change, its just all in the timing..... :thumbsup
Stripes
-
I don't agree with a lot of what you say, but by the same token, we're no that far apart.
I'm not talking about any half-hearted overnight culture change, like washing your hair or something. I'm talking about forgetting about preparing the team to lose, or hoping we lose, or sending even the vaguest message that we don't really want to win. I'm talking about our approach and attitude, and I believe that it is crucial that we start now, not after we lose some games to get a slightly better draft pick.
Culture change doesn't happen because you decide to change it. If it were that easy we'd have done it a long time ago. Culture change happens over a longer period, but it starts with things like preparation, attitude, subliminal messages about improvement, etc, not just in the playing group but throughout the club. Take Brisbane for example. They investigated every possible means of bettering their club, right down to intravenous drips at half time. The fact that the players used drips was not in itself particularly advantageous, but it was the attitude that was important. They started flying at lower altitudes for away games. Once again, it wasn't the action so much as the attitude that we look at doing anything to improve performance.
That's why I believe that talking about losing games for the sake of a draft pick is actually at odds with developing a winning attitude. It isn't smart planning, it could actually be counter-productive in terms of developing the right culture. I'd go as far as saying that 'tanking' might actually be the way to go for a stronger club with a stronger culture, but for us, I believe it is destructive because of our very weak culture. We need to do what is right for Richmond, not what looks like it might be successful for another club. At Richmond, we finally need to start looking at the solutions within the club, not look at importing solutions from outside. When we adopt that attitude, we'll start to build a winning culture.
-
So taking this into account what difference with winning 4 games or 6 games to our long term culture?
It's like the diet you are starting after the weekend - you never start it.
Picking up a high first round pick can be the difference between getting a star player and a good player and no matter how much education/development a player recieves they can only every reach a certain level.
It matters far less what picks you get and far more how well you choose them. Geelong anyone? Sydney anyone? Adelaide anyone? North Melbourne anyone? Port Adelaide anyone? Brisbane anyone? Collingwood anyone?
This is why looking to the draft THIS year is more important that attempting any half-hearted, short term change of culture which will only be changed yet again once a new coach is installed.
This years draft is just as important as any other year and the importance is not in the pick number but in the pick itself - surely we have learnt that lesson over time?
We all agree we need a change, its just all in the timing..... :thumbsup
Stripes
Couldn't have said that better myself Stripes. No time like the present to make a change to something that needs changing.
-
I don't agree with a lot of what you say, but by the same token, we're no that far apart.
I'm not talking about any half-hearted overnight culture change, like washing your hair or something. I'm talking about forgetting about preparing the team to lose, or hoping we lose, or sending even the vaguest message that we don't really want to win. I'm talking about our approach and attitude, and I believe that it is crucial that we start now, not after we lose some games to get a slightly better draft pick.
Culture change doesn't happen because you decide to change it. If it were that easy we'd have done it a long time ago. Culture change happens over a longer period, but it starts with things like preparation, attitude, subliminal messages about improvement, etc, not just in the playing group but throughout the club. Take Brisbane for example. They investigated every possible means of bettering their club, right down to intravenous drips at half time. The fact that the players used drips was not in itself particularly advantageous, but it was the attitude that was important. They started flying at lower altitudes for away games. Once again, it wasn't the action so much as the attitude that we look at doing anything to improve performance.
That's why I believe that talking about losing games for the sake of a draft pick is actually at odds with developing a winning attitude. It isn't smart planning, it could actually be counter-productive in terms of developing the right culture. I'd go as far as saying that 'tanking' might actually be the way to go for a stronger club with a stronger culture, but for us, I believe it is destructive because of our very weak culture. We need to do what is right for Richmond, not what looks like it might be successful for another club. At Richmond, we finally need to start looking at the solutions within the club, not look at importing solutions from outside. When we adopt that attitude, we'll start to build a winning culture.
Again FooffooValve........ :clapping :clapping :clapping
-
Trying to win at all cost with weak cattle is why we have finished 9th for a record number of years. Players can only perform to their highest potential which for some on our list is not high enough to help us get a flag. Without the cattle, a winning culture is fruitless.
-
Without the cattle, a winning culture is fruitless.
We've got 27 years of bitter experience to prove that without the winning culture, the cattle are useless.
-
Trying to win at all cost with weak cattle is why we have finished 9th for a record number of years. Players can only perform to their highest potential which for some on our list is not high enough to help us get a flag. Without the cattle, a winning culture is fruitless.
I disagree. I think a winning culture gets a team playing above themselves - Sydney and North Melbourne are 2 excellent examples. We don't have a lot of weak cattle when it comes to ability - we do when it comes to knowing how to use that ability to win. How many times this year have we been in absolute winning positions only to blow it? Weak cattle doesn't get you to that point. A winning culture would see us at about 7-3 this year with the same cattle.
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
Makes sense no more than 4 wins. Agree :thumbsup
-
We've got 27 years of bitter experience to prove that without the winning culture, the cattle are useless.
That has as much to do with the players as it does with the culture. Surely after 10 + coaches, one of them has had the foresight to instigate a change in culture yet her we stand, flagless. We have never allowed ourselves to rebuild and start with talented youth which is why we have never been successful. The last coach who tried was KB but he was never able to complete the process but the side he built got us to the finals at least after he was expelled.
This is the first time we have even attempted to rebuild from scatch and many on here would agree that we only did a half-arsed job at that. All the same though the job remains unfinished and unless we build up the raw talent to work with no matter what culature we build in this club, even if the players play above themselves smokey, we will never achieve the heights we can because we are still missing pieces to the puzzle.
We have 27 years of bitter experience to prove that without the cattle, a wiining culture is useless. :P ;)
Stripes
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
Great post :clapping :clapping :clapping
-
The importance is not in the pick number but in the pick itself - surely we have learnt that lesson over time?
Have to agree with you here smokey. You have to live with your choices but I guess having a higher pick gives you more choices and, in some ways, easier ones. You have speculate and hope less on player development and pick ready made talent. That's why we didn't stuff up the Lids pick but missed on the Meyer pick.
This is an interesting argument here none the less. I can see your side perfectly but I think we are just coming at the same problem at different angles.
Stripes
-
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
How do we go about that against West Coast and Melbourne who are the poster boys of tanking clubs?
It should make for interesting game viewing, is there a requirement you need to keep 18 players on the field, maybe we could play 14 or so.
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
I dont believe what Im reading, I could swear that you didnt believe in the Tank and that weve debated this issue before and we were on opposite sides. Well its good to see you join the realists amongst us. And yes I even agree with you on WCE. Last year I think I did a summary of were all club lists were at and from memory I was extremely bullish on the Eagles going forward. Theyre tanking beautifully and in 3 years they will be a powerhouse again.
-
How many times this year have we been in absolute winning positions only to blow it? Weak cattle doesn't get you to that point. A winning culture would see us at about 7-3 this year with the same cattle.
It has been Port, Sydney, Essendon and Geelong. As you said Smokey the season that could have been.
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
I dont believe what Im reading, I could swear that you didnt believe in the Tank and that weve debated this issue before and we were on opposite sides. Well its good to see you join the realists amongst us. And yes I even agree with you on WCE. Last year I think I did a summary of were all club lists were at and from memory I was extremely bullish on the Eagles going forward. Theyre tanking beautifully and in 3 years they will be a powerhouse again.
unfortuntaly ramps, I can tell you that the tigers have no interest in managing losses, the board isnt strong enough to take its medicine, it should of interevened in 2008 and managed a bottom 4 finish, and it should interevene now and ensure that youth get games and retire the old farts.
Big test for march in the coming weeks, and I believe he will fail the test.
We need to understand the reality of where and realistically we have 10 players that are of the right age and sound body that would get a game anywhere else, the rest are injury prone, too old, or just have not got enough exposed form to show with any confidence that they will be good enough. If you accept the former as a reality then how nice would it be to get 3 players in this year like Cotch Rance and Adam Selwood.
Then we will have 3 young superstars ( Scully Cotch Lids ) and 10 genuine AFL footballers on the list. If we are fair dinkum it has to be done, West Coast are not stupid
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
I dont believe what Im reading, I could swear that you didnt believe in the Tank and that weve debated this issue before and we were on opposite sides. Well its good to see you join the realists amongst us. And yes I even agree with you on WCE. Last year I think I did a summary of were all club lists were at and from memory I was extremely bullish on the Eagles going forward. Theyre tanking beautifully and in 3 years they will be a powerhouse again.
unfortuntaly ramps, I can tell you that the tigers have no interest in managing losses, the board isnt strong enough to take its medicine, it should of interevened in 2008 and managed a bottom 4 finish, and it should interevene now and ensure that youth get games and retire the old farts.
Big test for march in the coming weeks, and I believe he will fail the test.
We need to understand the reality of where and realistically we have 10 players that are of the right age and sound body that would get a game anywhere else, the rest are injury prone, too old, or just have not got enough exposed form to show with any confidence that they will be good enough. If you accept the former as a reality then how nice would it be to get 3 players in this year like Cotch Rance and Adam Selwood.
Then we will have 3 young superstars ( Scully Cotch Lids ) and 10 genuine AFL footballers on the list. If we are fair dinkum it has to be done, West Coast are not stupid
Absolutely spot on. But theres a group of people in the club and around the club that want to continue to talk rubbish and talk about winning cultures - its all crap. We dont enough talent. Never have had. Now those people are going around saying that the draft is no good- which is also bulldust- people who follow the juniors and games- would have there lists of potential talent, and whilst Im no expert there is atleast 35 players including the players from TAC Cup who have exposed form and from the WAFL and interstate (who I havent seen yet) that I reckon can easily be drafted to AFL clubs. We in effect could manage to get 4 of these if we are smart and thats not a bad influx of young talent- although this year in reality id like to see us take atleast 6 maybe 7 picks in the draft not including recycleds.
-
17 goals conceded from direct turnovers suggests its time to get more quality.
-
17 goals conceded from direct turnovers suggests its time to get more quality.
Being in winning positions 4 or 5 times this season and then not getting the job done suggests we lack a winning culture.
-
17 goals conceded from direct turnovers suggests its time to get more quality.
Being in winning positions 4 or 5 times this season and then not getting the job done suggests we lack a winning culture.
id ont thuink I can bare to watch the next three months, we are going to blow any chance we have of being succesful by winning irrelevant games
-
17 goals conceded from direct turnovers suggests its time to get more quality.
Being in winning positions 4 or 5 times this season and then not getting the job done suggests we lack a winning culture.
id ont thuink I can bare to watch the next three months, we are going to blow any chance we have of being succesful by winning irrelevant games
Mate, just off the top of my head I can think of about 12 players on our list who were picks inside the top 20. There are probably more (that doesn't include Cousins Brown Johnson or Richo.)
If you truly believe that losing games to make sure we get pick 3 instead of pick 8 is the answer to all our problems, then you need to wake up. It is a total delusion.
We need to bring in as many youngsters as we can, and teach, develop, and imbue them with a winning attitude. If we lose games and get pick 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 whilst doing that to the best of our ability, so be it.
-
Its not a debate about pick 3 or pick 8 although that in itself is a good enough reason. The priority pick is why we want to tank. To get 3 picks inside 20 and 4 picks before 35.
-
Its not a debate about pick 3 or pick 8 although that in itself is a good enough reason. The priority pick is why we want to tank. To get 3 picks inside 20 and 4 picks before 35.
Ramps, don't get me wrong I wouldn't be knocking it back if it came our way, but I don't agree with tanking to get it. Probably our biggest problem is lack of belief and self-respect (has been a problem for 20 years) and you don't rebuild and earn that by tanking.
-
the club wont be tanking.
whats the point, have had quality draft picks in the past, and guess what, we are no better off.
We need to change the culture imediately.
You might find an extremely different style of play next week ;)
-
the club wont be tanking.
whats the point, have had quality draft picks in the past, and guess what, we are no better off.
We need to change the culture imediately.
You might find an extremely different style of play next week ;)
jack, guess what?
it looks like you're mate campbo has been overlooked for the caretakers role and it is going to be rawlings
-
Tanking is for weak minded people. you cannot build a champion if his only running at half pace. its like a racehorse & greyhound.
They must be pushed to thier limits to see thier ability or shoot them. Players who dont perform shoot themselves & thier value & never recover cause the other teams will always be ahead of them in skills, fitness & onfield ability to read the game properly & they will never win anything in life.
If the AFL suspects clubs of tanking a full inquiry would be launched & the club licence would be terminated.
-
Tanking is for weak minded people. you cannot build a champion if his only running at half pace. its like a racehorse & greyhound.
They must be pushed to thier limits to see thier ability or shoot them. Players who dont perform shoot themselves & thier value & never recover cause the other teams will always be ahead of them in skills, fitness & onfield ability to read the game properly & they will never win anything in life.
If the AFL suspects clubs of tanking a full inquiry would be launched & the club licence would be terminated.
Could never be proved and to suggest a clubs licence would get terminated is bull and you know it.
-
what world are you living in ramps, no club is ever fully secured from anything, note Fitzroy
if any club was proven cheating l can gaurentee the licence of that club would be terminated
Goverment Betting law would put them out of action alone
-
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
I dont believe what Im reading, I could swear that you didnt believe in the Tank and that weve debated this issue before and we were on opposite sides. Well its good to see you join the realists amongst us. And yes I even agree with you on WCE. Last year I think I did a summary of were all club lists were at and from memory I was extremely bullish on the Eagles going forward. Theyre tanking beautifully and in 3 years they will be a powerhouse again.
unfortuntaly ramps, I can tell you that the tigers have no interest in managing losses, the board isnt strong enough to take its medicine, it should of interevened in 2008 and managed a bottom 4 finish, and it should interevene now and ensure that youth get games and retire the old farts.
Big test for march in the coming weeks, and I believe he will fail the test.
We need to understand the reality of where and realistically we have 10 players that are of the right age and sound body that would get a game anywhere else, the rest are injury prone, too old, or just have not got enough exposed form to show with any confidence that they will be good enough. If you accept the former as a reality then how nice would it be to get 3 players in this year like Cotch Rance and Adam Selwood.
Then we will have 3 young superstars ( Scully Cotch Lids ) and 10 genuine AFL footballers on the list. If we are fair dinkum it has to be done, West Coast are not stupid
100% spot on
the problem with the RFC is we have never gone down this path.
Look what state our club is in now after finishing 9th. can it be any worse finishing last and collecting a Scully or a Butcher. Come on...
what a stuffin disgrace if we beat the Eagles. BIG stuffin DEAL. Our problems arent going to be solved in 1 week we need to look beyond for once.
-
Quote from: Ramps on Yesterday at 02:21:22 pm
Quote from: blaisee on Yesterday at 01:44:43 pm
The fact of the matter is we have 10 players on our list that would get a game at any other club. The rest are over 30, not good enough or unproven.
The other fact is that our best 2 players lids and cotch were both priority picks.
Look at what west coast are doing,
they won a flag in 2006 and are lining up for their second priority pick this year, they are the most professional club in Australia. We have made finals twice in the last 30 years and are debating the merits of tanking.
Its a joke, we need to win less than 5 games, its critical
I dont believe what Im reading, I could swear that you didnt believe in the Tank and that weve debated this issue before and we were on opposite sides. Well its good to see you join the realists amongst us. And yes I even agree with you on WCE. Last year I think I did a summary of were all club lists were at and from memory I was extremely bullish on the Eagles going forward. Theyre tanking beautifully and in 3 years they will be a powerhouse again.
unfortuntaly ramps, I can tell you that the tigers have no interest in managing losses, the board isnt strong enough to take its medicine, it should of interevened in 2008 and managed a bottom 4 finish, and it should interevene now and ensure that youth get games and retire the old farts.
Big test for march in the coming weeks, and I believe he will fail the test.
We need to understand the reality of where and realistically we have 10 players that are of the right age and sound body that would get a game anywhere else, the rest are injury prone, too old, or just have not got enough exposed form to show with any confidence that they will be good enough. If you accept the former as a reality then how nice would it be to get 3 players in this year like Cotch Rance and Adam Selwood.
Then we will have 3 young superstars ( Scully Cotch Lids ) and 10 genuine AFL footballers on the list. If we are fair dinkum it has to be done, West Coast are not stupid
100% spot on
the problem with the RFC is we have never gone down this path.
Look what state our club is in now after finishing 9th. can it be any worse finishing last and collecting a Scully or a Butcher. Come on...
what a effin disgrace if we beat the Eagles. BIG effIN DEAL. Our problems arent going to be solved in 1 week we need to look beyond for once.
I believe in Santa and The Easter Bunny plus Fairies at the bottom of the garden. I also believe that all people are kind and nice plus I believe that we have a full list of players that could win us a grand final. I also believe that we just need a nice coach and all we have to do is change our culture. If you believe this as well please contact me as I some land I would like to sell you that was great sea view half the time.
March want to play our side on form so I guess he believes in Fairies. I hope and pray that he is really just playing lip service to all the Richmond supporters that want a magic pudding and the non Richmond and media that want us to make another knee jerk, feel good, short term decision that will ensure that we don't make the effing finals for the 25 years well - I despair and even more after last night.
-
what world are you living in ramps, no club is ever fully secured from anything, note Fitzroy
if any club was proven cheating l can gaurentee the licence of that club would be terminated
Goverment Betting law would put them out of action alone
Individuals in clubs cheat. Clubs as a whole don't.
Individuals will be made scapegoats not the sport or the clubs.
Just look at world cricket and soccer in Italy and England.
Game is bigger than any individual but not the clubs b/c without the clubs you have no game.
Tanking is obvious but cannot be proven in a court of law or by investigators.
-
I do not buy this at all.
maybe if our father sons start turning out like Nath /Gary Ablett , hawkins
Yes, Nathan Ablett, what a game turning champion he was. 32 games in 3 seasons, averaged 8.6 disposals 3.9 marks and 1.4 goals per game for his career - and not a Brownlow vote to be seen. Played in a premiership team and made not one scrap of difference to that team for the entire year. Currently getting a kick for Broadbeach in Queensland but still, not too many of them. Raines has a better career record than that and look how much we all love him!
They got lucky with 2. Just looking at recent times so did we - Richardson and Bowden, so did Collingwood - Shaw and Shaw, so did Essendon - Watson and Neagle, so did Carlton - Silvagni and Waite, so has almost every other club over the years. So now there is a rule in place to prevent getting a 'steal' - big deal - father and son picks are cyclical and realistically frought with more danger than a standard draft pick because of the sentimental factor. Blaming father and son picks for Geelong's current success is just another red herring - just like thinking that tanking for a priority pick will fix our problems. Stop trying to find the cure in the pill jar of low picks - you are only putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
Nath Ablett > Hughes / Gourdis / Putt
-
Nath Ablett > Hughes / Gourdis / Putt
Pick 48 vs pick 24/51/rookie 24.
They got 34 non-influential games out of a pick 48. Your point?
-
Carlton are the most perfect example of what your list looks like when you finish near the bottom and not 9th/10th every bloody year.
They may lose tonight but one thing is for certain they will play finals and we will not.
We will win some meaningless games starting this weekend. I will be slapping some serious cash on the Tigers next week.
-
Carlton are the most perfect example of what your list looks like when you finish near the bottom and not 9th/10th every bloody year.
They may lose tonight but one thing is for certain they will play finals and we will not.
We will win some meaningless games starting this weekend. I will be slapping some serious cash on the Tigers next week.
just get on
-
Carlton are the most perfect example of what your list looks like when you finish near the bottom and not 9th/10th every bloody year.
They may lose tonight but one thing is for certain they will play finals and we will not.
We will win some meaningless games starting this weekend. I will be slapping some serious cash on the Tigers next week.
Im already organising my multi ...
-
Both March and Rawlings made a point of saying that we will aim to win as many games as we can for the rest of the season and aim to have a similar end to the 2009 year as we did in 2008.... :help
So it sounds like many of you will get your 'winning culture' for the rest of this season which will be just as successful as the winning culture we established by winning 8 of the last 11 last year. :o
Stripes
-
Carlton are the most perfect example of what your list looks like when you finish near the bottom and not 9th/10th every bloody year.
Lol, I'm sure you will give Marchy a ring and remind him to rort the salary cap for a few years, call the AFL and get them to exclude us from a draft or two so that we can pick up some No 1 picks and a few pp picks too?
I mean, if you are going to tank, you may as well do it properly, right?
-
So it sounds like many of you will get your 'winning culture' for the rest of this season which will be just as successful as the winning culture we established by winning 8 of the last 11 last year. :o
Stripes
Stripes - not sure I can explain it to you any more clearly, but you are making the fundamental error of confusing winning games between now and the end of the year with developing a strong club culture. As I've said ad nauseum, if developing a strong club culture was just about wining some junk time games, then we wouldn't have had such little success for nearly 30 years.
Our problems run much deeper than that and people really are kidding themselves if they think that tanking for 11 games is going to solve entrenched problems.
-
So it sounds like many of you will get your 'winning culture' for the rest of this season which will be just as successful as the winning culture we established by winning 8 of the last 11 last year. :o
Stripes
Stripes - not sure I can explain it to you any more clearly, but you are making the fundamental error of confusing winning games between now and the end of the year with developing a strong club culture. As I've said ad nauseum, if developing a strong club culture was just about wining some junk time games, then we wouldn't have had such little success for nearly 30 years.
Our problems run much deeper than that and people really are kidding themselves if they think that tanking for 11 games is going to solve entrenched problems.
So if that is the case then why are you so determined that we pick our best team every week for the rest of the season, even though many of them will not be part of any culture beyond this year or success in the future? Why is winning some meaningless games this year more important than claiming the best talent in this year draft to replace the out going players?
Our culture change can not establish itself this year regardless of what any of us want here. Any new coach will bring about change and hopefully the positive culture change we are all praying for but any culture changes that are made now will be a band aid at best, detrimental at worst.
Foo - you have as much chance of changing my mind as I do of changing yours ;)
Stripes
-
So if that is the case then why are you so determined that we pick our best team every week for the rest of the season, even though many of them will not be part of any culture beyond this year or success in the future?
Stripes
Show me where I've said that. You haven't been reading or comprehending much.
In fact I've said the exact opposite. ::)
I'm for picking as young a team as possible, cutting all the deadwood out and starting again. I'm talking about making sure these young players are prepared as meticulously as possible to win the game. If they win, good. If they don't win, also good, at least they get used to doing everything they possibly can to win a game.
This is the first building block in starting to build a strong club culture.
We must also put far more resources into player development. For the past 25 years we have paid lip service to this aspect of running a footy club.
That's just the start.
I'm not the slightest bit interested in changing your mind, just stating my opinion in what OUR club requires.
-
Nath Ablett > Hughes / Gourdis / Putt
Pick 48 vs pick 24/51/rookie 24.
They got 34 non-influential games out of a pick 48. Your point?
if you don't think father/son player have been important in the last 3 years of Geelong then i dunno what to say
- Scarlett: a grade key ack
- Gary Ablett: not top ten pick? son of greatest player in the game better than Polak/Sampi, pick 4/5
- N Ablett: played in a flag. decent tall forward option
- Hawkins: highest rated KPP in a strong draft
-
So if that is the case then why are you so determined that we pick our best team every week for the rest of the season, even though many of them will not be part of any culture beyond this year or success in the future?
Stripes
Show me where I've said that. You haven't been reading or comprehending much.
I'm astounded that anyone would think that winning games in the second half of the year against sides that are putting as many games into their kids so they can assess them and give them experience is going to improve our culture.
Last year all we did was show we are stupid, as a lot of sides that we went past on the ladder was because they wanted to not only get a better draft pick but to put experience into the kids and to play the list to determine who's worth keeping.
I'm sick of not making the finals and believe we need to change the culture, but we also need a better list which will only come by picking top 20 kids and by luck the we get a gem in the draft - picking up discards fails. Theres no way we will make the finals and to win games just so we all feel a little short term pleasure at the expensive of our long term future will not fix our culture .
Only strong leadership and the pain of rebuilding (see it to the end) will fix our club and that includes playing the youth . If we don't win , thats the cost we need to pay, Other clubs have done it and become successful because they see it out.
-
I'm astounded that anyone would think that winning games in the second half of the year against sides that are putting as many games into their kids so they can assess them and give them experience is going to improve our culture.
I haven't seen too many people advocating NOT playing the kids.
-
But I think you are missing my point completely mt. I agree that we need to keep our picks and trade aggressively for more. It is a numbers game, and your own example in Geelong actually proves that you don't need picks in the top 5 to be successful (though, sure, if you get them you don't knock them back!). And yes, Geelong have had some luck with F/S picks (is it luck?) and we have had bad luck with Cogs, Brown, Polak etc. I think I could make a workable argument that our F/S picks (Roach, Raines) might be suffering the same fate as other high pick under-performers (eg Tambling, JON, Pettifer etc).
Far more important is the structure of the club, the environment that you create, and the processes that you induct draftees into. Without the right elements in place, you may as well stop now, which is what we have effectively done for 25 years. We have pinned our hopes on a succession of saviours (be they coaches, players or administrators) and it hasn't got us anywhere because we continue to believe that they are the answer.
The answer is not in making sure we don't win games to ensure a slightly higher pick. Whether we get pick 3 or pick 8 this year is not going to make the difference that turns us into a successful club. History has taught us that. It is far more important that we start adopting an absolute best practice attitude throughout the club, from the top down, and that starts with preparing our players to win at all costs, to prepare with winning as the priority, and then doing everything we can to support them in this outcome.
The players need to get the message that the answer lies within them, not with some 17 year old kid running around in the TAC cup. Adopting a "tanking" approach gives people the message that the answers lie elsewhere. That is not the right message to be sending.
But FFV how are you going to implement these structures and create this new playing group environment if you just continually add just a couple of kids each year (and only one kid in the top 20-25) into a failing playing group that hardly changes from year to year because you don't have the early draft picks to allow you to cut deeper into the list at once and make the changes fast enough to remove those that are creating the poor losing environment. It's a catch 22 situation. You can't cut deep effectively unless you have a number of early picks and you only get a top 20 pick in our situation but either trading someone with high trade value (JON, Schulz, McMahon, Petts, King etc won't do that) or you tank and grab the priority pick which gives you 3 picks inside the top 20 and access to more talented kids.
As Ramps said tanking is not so much about having a top 3 pick rather than pick 8 (although they are more certainties to make it especially in recent drafts) but the fact it gives you a number of early picks rather than just one. If you don't have early top 20 picks you're then replacing a Jake King with a kid picked up with pick 60 or 70+ whose chances of making it or being any better than Kingy are minimal. With a priority pick you've replaced King with a top 20 kid. You're right FFV it is a numbers game. Gaining a priority pick is playing the numbers. It gives you more options in terms of culling your list further in one go and replacing it with better talent. You are upgrading the quality of your list. You're weeding out as quickly as possible those who continually fail the team. There's no point talking about raising standards and demanding a winning culture if you continue to make minimal changes to the playing list and hold onto the same ordinary players who let you down time and time again because you don't have enough early picks to replace the dud players with better quality. You need to turnover the list as quickly as possible to see real change. It's a two-fold action - tank to clear the decks faster and replace with better quality.
Once you have the more talented list then you can demand more of them and raise the bar as they are far more capable of reaching the elite standards required compared to our existing group who in the main are just incapable of reaching these standards in the first place through lack of talent and skills (and yes application as well). Working harder alone though won't cut it at this level if you don't have the elite talent to begin with.
For others to say we could've, should've, might've been 7-3 if we waved a magical wand and had a winning culture is with all due respect wishful thinking. The fact is we're 2-9 for a reason - we are simply not good enough. We have far too many players on our list that are simply not good enough to begin with. We have far too many list cloggers and passengers. Too many triers and not enough top liners. If Friday night proved one thing it was the massive gulf in class between us and any decent side. The boys actually tried on the night but they were stuffed by the 3rd quarter just keeping up with the doggies to half time (the inefficient gameplan doesn't help us run out games mind you). The bulldogs cut us to ribbons and it only a matter of time before the game was going to be blown open. We've played so much catch up footy this year because we aren't good enough. Trying and working harder isn't going to make us a better team alone. We need MUCH more talented footballers on our list. We have a few classy players but nowhere near enough. The club under Wallace's coaching only did half a job during his reign. We are only halfway there at best. The next coach will need to complete the rebuilding process and with the Gold Coast coming in he and our recruiting staff are going to need all the early picks they can get to do it.
-
I agree that we need plenty of picks and we need to play the youngsters. I won't agree that we need to sacrifice self respect and winning processes to get them though. Our list is not nearly as bad as the current win-loss ratio suggests, and we are nowhere near realising our potential.
Our player development and team ethics are deplorable and we need to address these problems more than we need to lose. If we begin to address that and still end up with 4 wins, fine. But it wouldn't worry me a jot if we win 5 more games if I can see that we are making headway in these areas. Much more important and should be our main focus.
-
i rekon it depends what type of games we win. if we bet top 4-6 teams in games they want to win and we play with style and skill most would be happy, but more wins like the freo one by a few points and lots of injuries is pointless and doesn't get us anywhere!
-
I agree that we need plenty of picks and we need to play the youngsters. I won't agree that we need to sacrifice self respect and winning processes to get them though. Our list is not nearly as bad as the current win-loss ratio suggests, and we are nowhere near realising our potential.
Our player development and team ethics are deplorable and we need to address these problems more than we need to lose. If we begin to address that and still end up with 4 wins, fine. But it wouldn't worry me a jot if we win 5 more games if I can see that we are making headway in these areas. Much more important and should be our main focus.
I know I'm not going to change your mind FFV and vice versa which is fine as it's all opinions. Having said that I don't see 'tanking' and playing a side full of kids which is unlikely to win yet in doing so gets AFL games and experience into them and better draft picks as well, sacrificing self-respect and winning processes. I remember us giving a Geelong side in 2000 a 77 point hiding at the Dome when Ling, Corey, Enright and co. were first gamers and Thomson was in his first year as coach. It didn't do them any harm in the long-term. Likewise the first two years of Clarkson's reign were mostly losing ones for the Hawks following on from 3 years of no finals under Schwab. They lost 12 from 13 games at one stage in 2006 and were playing shocking over-handball footy to a point where people were questioning whether Clarkson was up to it. They took their medicine bottoming out and putting the long-term future ahead of the present. I'm sure Clarkson could have played/kept a couple more senior players to grab an extra win or two and pushed them higher up the ladder missing out on priority picks but he kept his focus on what was best for Hawthorn long-term and what would build the best list for them. He also had the full support in doing so from the HFC Board. They didn't flip-flop like ours when it came to the footy team.
As for our list we do now have a young core to (re-)build around but we are still a long long way off and need to add more quality youngsters. There's potential but history shows not all of them will make it. We are essentially where Hawthorn was in 2004. We need to go through a second phase of rebuilding and bottoming out to add more youngsters with class to the list. In the end we want to build a premiership side rather then one that just scrapes into the final 8. The problem in the past is we as a club have overrated ourselves and our list. If we believe this current list is not far off then we are kidding ourselves. Now that's not to say it's a basketcase list given the number of U23's we have but we need to bottom out and add more youngsters and more classy ones to complete the job otherwise we'll still be debating where Richmond is at in another 30 years :P.
We can't have our cake and eat it too as far as wins as well as plenty of good draft picks. In the situation we are in now at 2-9 and sitting 15th you don't get more and better picks winning 3 or more games in the second half of the season and finishing higher on the ladder. The draft system doesn't allow for it. In fact it penalises you for doing so :banghead. Our trade options are limited given the number of dud list cloggers we have that no other club would want so we need the early picks and especially the priority pick to give us more room to offload those who are responsible for a poor playing culture and are simply not up to it. I agree FFV our player development and team ethics are deplorable but what do we expect when we have so many selfish and/or ordinary players that we keep hold onto for far too long and in some cases years because we don't/can't take an axe to the list with so few picks. We still need to take more medicine as painful as it is in the short term under the current draft system to eventually get to where we all want Richmond to get to = a regular top 4 side and that elusive 11th flag.
-
Agree that we need to take our medicine, but I'd rather develop our own immunity rather than take the antibiotics.
Put another way, what are the factors that have produced such an apparently underperforming list? We need to properly identify and correct these fundamentals before we need to address the list. It might well be possible to do both simultaneously, but all I'm saying is, given a choice, I'd rather see us address some fundamental deficiencies in our on and off field structure and processes than lay low for half a season. If we can achieve both, fine, but if we don't address some basics, then I can see the list (no matter what the make-up) underperforming ad infinitum. And if addressing these problems now means that we win some games, then that is palatable, even preferable to losing games. I'd also rather see us trade for picks than lose for them — something we haven't done enough of in the past.
I'm not really interested in comparisons with Carlton or Hawthorn or any other club because our problems are unique to Richmond. Our culture is our own (unfortunately), and following someone else's course is dangerous as it assumes all other factors are equal. I would say that Hawthorn's culture (and Carlton's, and West Coast's) are far far stronger than ours, and can handle a measured "tank". I just don't believe that it is Richmond's best option right now — it is one option and not without merit, but I don't believe it is the most productive long term option.
Really, if winning premierships were just as simple as collecting the most high draft picks, then we may as well just stop playing games and give the flag to the club with the mostest. I'm with Demetriou on this one — clubs that put their store in tanking for picks as the solution to problems have their priorities skewed.
-
I can't believe that the best idea many people can come up with going forward is to tank - for a club with some admitted culture problems that we are slowly turning around, tanking will only set us back 5 years.
Imagine your at work the first half of the year is down on profits, the bosses blame the managers, the workers turn on them as well and the investors scream for blood then the new caretaker manager gets told "Don't perform too well for the 2nd half of the year so we can attract some young guns to come in next year and in a couple of years when they're ready - they'll take us to the top".......................... Doesn't make any sense outside of footy and doesn't make much sense in footy.
This will give players the impression that they aren't good enough for the Tigers and they're never going to be, the caretaker will have no desire to rally the troops into any kind of decent performance because his time at the top and eventual fate has already been decided. Really inspiring considering we want a big turn around in attitudes next year (if not this year).
If we want to continue changing the bad culture developed by Frawley and others and give supporters something to look forward too, aim at 8th, expect 12th finish 10th. Can be done and should be done.
-
Finishing 9th got us us no where last year, finishing 10th will be just as benefical to both our culture and future.
Its more baout how we play over the remainder of the year and who we play with rather than the position we finish.
I hope we play the kids and finish with under 5 wins but if we play the kids and win more then at least I know we are on the right path for the future. Playing our older guys now is pointless.
Stripes
-
good to see a young Richmond side on the park this week.
finally
-
Let's forget all this tanking crap and get out there and play football :jump :woohoo
-
Agree Mopsy :lol, now we dropped 6 players over 25 and brought in 6 under 22. YES, if we win with the kids its just good all round.
PS: never saw Mopsy play but I wish I had, Mopsy and Jack, now they were the days when Tigers were real Tigers
-
Some really good posts on this topic and i have enjoyed reading both sides to the story BUT i must admit i hope we play the kids
so we loose! To me it is black and white, don't win more than 5 games and get early picks to make our list better.
The culture of the club is bad because we cannot win enough games each year- get a better list together, win games and the culture thing takes care of it's self. SIMPLE!!
And going on todays selections the RFC have the same idea in mind- thank God!
Everything the RFC has done in the last week (appointing Jade and dropping old heads) has said this is the direction we are going weather they say it or not! :gotigers be smart!
-
Agree that we need to take our medicine, but I'd rather develop our own immunity rather than take the antibiotics.
Put another way, what are the factors that have produced such an apparently underperforming list? We need to properly identify and correct these fundamentals before we need to address the list. It might well be possible to do both simultaneously, but all I'm saying is, given a choice, I'd rather see us address some fundamental deficiencies in our on and off field structure and processes than lay low for half a season. If we can achieve both, fine, but if we don't address some basics, then I can see the list (no matter what the make-up) underperforming ad infinitum. And if addressing these problems now means that we win some games, then that is palatable, even preferable to losing games. I'd also rather see us trade for picks than lose for them — something we haven't done enough of in the past.
Fair enough question. What factors have produced such an apparently underperforming list?
I guess a short reply is another question - Is this list actually underperforming or are we truly where we are at?!
Anyway what factors? Okay IMHO.....
1) Personnel
Simply put our lists including 95 and 2001 (outclassed and blown away in 2 out of 3 finals both times) have never been since 1983 anywhere near good enough to go with the more skillful and classier sides. We've in the past 15 years shown the classic signs of a club that has struggled for a long time. We overrate the playing list as soon as we win more games than we lose. Even now we are not underachieving or at least we cannot kid ourselves we are underachieving. The scoreboard and ladder never lies. In a year where 4/5s of the comp is mediocre we are sitting 15th four games and % behind even these mediocre teams after just 11 rounds. A blunt summation of the season is we've been outclassed in virtually every game even against Melbourne :help. We try our guts out for 2 quarters and each time we get a sniff the opposition shift into another higher gear and we get left for dead. We need a significant addition of class into our playing list and the best chance of doing that is via early picks in the National draft and a number of them.
As I said we have some talented youngsters and a young core now to (re-)build around and all is not lost but we have only done half a job. To complete the rebuild we need to go to the well again and bottom out scoring as many early picks as possible. Trading blokes like Schulz, JON, Petts, Jordie, King and alike won't get you those early picks. Cogs won't either. You'll be lucky to even get a late pick for any of them. Unless you're willing to trade say a 27 year old Tuck or some quality youngster with potential then only tanking this year will enable us to score three top 20 picks needed to begin the necessary second rebuilding phase. We need to do it this year as well as opportunities will be limited due to the new teams coming in and raiding the drafts from 2010-12.
2) A man's team's got to know his their limitations!
We allow expectations to well exceed the abilities of our list and then talk up these expectations even further in the media. That is asking for trouble and is a waiting disaster. When reality hits it totally devestates confidence and belief. Mentally it must be totally shattering for the playing group let alone us supporters to have such high hopes crushed within week or so into a new season and realising what high expectations you had you'll never get anywhere near and 6 months of hard preseason training equates to zip! It happened under Spud in round 2, 2002 against Essendon and now in round 1 this year under Wallace. Both coaches were deadman walking to use a Herald-Sun headline from those respective games. Geisch's Waterloo was round 22, 1998 but everyone knew with the club making no changes after that debacle he'd be a gonna by 1999. In each case the playing list and especially the older core were also goners and a cleanout and rebuild was required. After 1998 and 2002 we didn't have a cleanout and didn't rebuild. Let's not make the same mistake this time around.
3) Resources
Well we've know for ages we've been one of if not the worst club in terms of resources or lack of. 16th in spending on the footy dept., no development coachs until 2 years ago, facilities dating back to the 80s at best, no permanent or quality preseason training base (Vic Park ain't it :help ), etc. This should improve dramatically by 2011 with the new MCG size Craigieburn facility and the Punt Rd realignment (Dome size) and total redevelopment giving us finally state of the art facilities to train, recover and develop our players. We've added development coaches. Next up would be looking at our fitness, conditioning and medical areas. I'm presuming this review would have looked into the latter. Our improving finances should give us greater scope to move in all areas of the footy dept. especially recruiting and having more scouts out and about. That's another argument for grabbing as many early draft picks as we can. We are finally starting to arrange a fully equip recruiting dept. that we need to compete in the AFL 2009 and beyond rather than one person beit Miller, Beck or whoever left to do our recruiting by themselves like we are back in the 1960s. The majority of our current list was chosen under the latter deficient 'process'. Now that we are putting in more money, resources and personnel into our recruiting let's give our recruiting staff the best chance to bring the best young talent in numbers to our Club via the National draft.
4) Leadership
No argument here it's been poor. Not only within the playing group but right through the Club up to the top. The Club needs to shut up for once and let what happens onfield do the talking. We've been a gunna club - we're gunna do this and we're gunna do that. No more false promises and false dawns. Just shut up! The leaders of the club also need to present a firm, clear and consistent position for the rest of the club to follow. They need to set the standard. You can't have mixed messages coming out of Punt Rd where we're rebuilding via youth one minute, trading picks away for 22 y.o. players on the fringe the next, then rate one year a 5/10 effort but promise finals the next in the same breath as though we just had to turn up this year to make the top 8 :P. Same goes for the coach. We've had Spud with plan A but no plan B followed by Plough with plans A-Z but which one we played changed from week to week and year to year. Why change a gameplan and players positions over summer that was working for us ???. Same goes for the list manager - are we truly rebuilding or not! The whole club loses focus far too easily as soon as results don't happen as quickly as we would like them and we start taking shortcuts that hurt us. Surprise surprise that is what we see also onfield.
Hopefully Rawlings' changes this week is the first sign that the whole club from top to bottom is reseting our focus back on youth and the long-term future as 2009 is a write-off.
Really, if winning premierships were just as simple as collecting the most high draft picks, then we may as well just stop playing games and give the flag to the club with the mostest. I'm with Demetriou on this one — clubs that put their store in tanking for picks as the solution to problems have their priorities skewed.
I never said winning a flag is as simple as collecting the most high picks but it is the first step to bring into the Club the best young talent that you need to build towards one. Class wins flags. The best coaching and player development programs while still being necessary components (I agree we need them too) can't compensate if the cattle is ordinary to begin with.
-
I can't believe that the best idea many people can come up with going forward is to tank - for a club with some admitted culture problems that we are slowly turning around, tanking will only set us back 5 years.
Imagine your at work the first half of the year is down on profits, the bosses blame the managers, the workers turn on them as well and the investors scream for blood then the new caretaker manager gets told "Don't perform too well for the 2nd half of the year so we can attract some young guns to come in next year and in a couple of years when they're ready - they'll take us to the top".......................... Doesn't make any sense outside of footy and doesn't make much sense in footy.
This will give players the impression that they aren't good enough for the Tigers and they're never going to be, the caretaker will have no desire to rally the troops into any kind of decent performance because his time at the top and eventual fate has already been decided. Really inspiring considering we want a big turn around in attitudes next year (if not this year).
If we want to continue changing the bad culture developed by Frawley and others and give supporters something to look forward too, aim at 8th, expect 12th finish 10th. Can be done and should be done.
Firstly welcome to OER hadyn :)
The work analogy fails because no boss would give his managerial staff a bonus for coming last in profits and an even bigger bonus for coming last 2 years in a row. Yet the AFL does. That's the stupidity of AFL draft system and priority pick :P. It penalises clubs who finish 9th or 10th while rewarding 15th and 16th.
-
Interesting that people dismissed TW ideas of substitutes and paying clubs at the end of the season for where they finish on the ladder to give clubs an incentive to finish higher up the ladder regardless of whether they would make the finals or not, but now the AFL are looking into both senerios.
Credit where credit is due I say
Stripes
-
Fair enough question. What factors have produced such an apparently underperforming list?
I guess a short reply is another question - Is this list actually underperforming or are we truly where we are at?!
Anyway what factors? Okay IMHO.....
1) Personnel
........
2) A man's team's got to know his their limitations!
........
3) Resources
........
4) Leadership
A good post MT and I agree with a lot of it. While you are (in intention) mounting the case for focusing on youth and draft picks - tanking - you are (in effect) fully supporting FFV's case for changing the culture. All the reasons that you mentioned for our failures in the past are what make up the 'culture' of the club - the thoughts, attitudes and actions that have kept us as perennial under-achievers. And if the club is serious about addressing the complete issue then it must address each and every component in turn. You mention the facilities, the Punt Rd redevelopment, the recruiting resources, the player development etc and all of these are now being addressed. Obviously they couldn't be until the Board managed to turn the finances around - that had to be Step #1 and thankfully they got that right. They are well into addressing the remainder of these other fringe elements now and if we grab our opportunity and manage it correctly then we will see gradual improvement in player development (which is really the pointy end of all these elements) over the coming years. The last thing we need to address for our complete 'culture-changing' solution is to regain the on-field respect of every other club in the league. We can only do that one way and we would all agree that this will be by winning matches.
And this is where our thinking diverges. You say that we need more picks to do that but I say we don't. I believe there is a risk to the culture change (player attitude to acceptance or fear of defeat) in doing this (tanking) with such a young list that is unacceptable. Personally, I place an extremely high priority on this aspect of player character and if you look back at every modern premiership team there is a common thread through each - the fear of losing - every single team was never beaten until the final siren. Which brings me to my second reason for being anti-tanking. There is not one team I can think of that has gone on to win a premiership in the modern era after deliberately tanking. Some have bottomed out and gained some quality picks that has helped in winning one but none that have deliberately tanked to get more. The clubs that have been the most successful for sustained periods don't go (and have not gone) to the bottom - they have the right personnel and methods in place to draft and develop smartly and successfully. As we are doing now (attempting at least) as per my first paragraph. The number of the pick and the number of picks is much less relevant to them as is picking smarter and developing better - Culture with a capital C.
I know this argument can (and probably will) go on ad infinitum and in reality is probably very much a chicken and egg scenario that only history can judge. I just know that in all my player and coach and spectator life I have always found the hardest team to beat was the one that hated to lose - the one that actually didn't even know how to lose.
-
You can still have both by investing in the kids.
-
I can't believe that the best idea many people can come up with going forward is to tank - for a club with some admitted culture problems that we are slowly turning around, tanking will only set us back 5 years.
Imagine your at work the first half of the year is down on profits, the bosses blame the managers, the workers turn on them as well and the investors scream for blood then the new caretaker manager gets told "Don't perform too well for the 2nd half of the year so we can attract some young guns to come in next year and in a couple of years when they're ready - they'll take us to the top".......................... Doesn't make any sense outside of footy and doesn't make much sense in footy.
This will give players the impression that they aren't good enough for the Tigers and they're never going to be, the caretaker will have no desire to rally the troops into any kind of decent performance because his time at the top and eventual fate has already been decided. Really inspiring considering we want a big turn around in attitudes next year (if not this year).
If we want to continue changing the bad culture developed by Frawley and others and give supporters something to look forward too, aim at 8th, expect 12th finish 10th. Can be done and should be done.
Firstly welcome to OER hadyn :)
The work analogy fails because no boss would give his managerial staff a bonus for coming last in profits and an even bigger bonus for coming last 2 years in a row.
Tell that to AIG
-
mt,
1) Personnel - I'd be trading either Tuck or Foley, whoever attracts the higher pick. I reckon one of them might get us a top 20 pick.
2) Knowing limitations - agree. But the subtext of what you're saying is "We are mentally soft". Surely a big problem to address? Is playing to lose going to help?
3) Resources - agree.
4) Leadership - yep, pathetic. It's debatable, but I reckon strong leadership in our situation is to ignore the tanking temptations and send the message that previous "losing" practices won't be tolerated. (eg St Kilda with Gram, Geelong with Johnson etc etc — unless you believe that everyone is preparing perfectly, or behaving well - I don't.)
You've identified some of the club's underlying problems - really big problems, yet the tankers would have us believe that an extra 17 year old kid will solve them. I don't subscribe to that POV. Sure, take him if he's there and we have the pick. But we need to try to win, prepare to win and win if the game is there to be taken. Then, if we want another pick, go out and get it. Make a few hard decisions that we've avoided in the past, precisely because we tend to overestimate the ability of our players. IMO both Tuck and Foley are limited players - good, but limited. Trade one for a reasonable pick.
-
1) Personnel - I'd be trading either Tuck or Foley, whoever attracts the higher pick. I reckon one of them might get us a top 20 pick.
Tuck is 4 years older at 27 than Foley even if longevity and durability is in the family genes. Maybe you might get more for him next year off GC17 compared to the existing clubs.
2) Knowing limitations - agree. But the subtext of what you're saying is "We are mentally soft". Surely a big problem to address? Is playing to lose going to help?
Well we are mentally soft because we have too many players on our list who are simply not up to it but that's not what I meant here. I meant we as a club talk well before we can walk. I don't want to hear anymore leading into a new season or a big game that means as much to the opposition as it does to us things such as we're after respect, we're tougher, we're competitive, we're gunna play finals, we're gunna do this, we're gunna do that, etc..... Talk is cheap. After just 2 finals appearance in almost 3 decades we should be the last club that talks the talk until we walk the walk.
Likewise we need to be honest with our assessment of where we are at. It's one thing to set high goals but it's another to get ahead of yourself and lose focus on where you're heading. IMO we as a Club lost our focus from rebuilding and topped up. Selecting just 5 kids in the past two National drafts is not the stuff of a rebuilding club. Compare that to the Eagles who 3 years after winning a flag are going to the well for the 3rd year in a row. There's no debate about the virtues and dishonour of tanking over there. They just get on with it. Worsfold has admitted as much. You've got to use the system at the time and get the best out of it for your club long-term. 2009 is a write-off and an extra win or two now will do nothing to establish a winning culture in the current playing group. If winning 8 out of 11 last year didn't change the culture last then what makes anti-tankers think winning 4 out of the next 11 will. It makes no sense. It's the quality of the playing group that needs changing and improving and winning meaningless games this season works against that due to the draft system in place which rewards tanking.
4) Leadership - yep, pathetic. It's debatable, but I reckon strong leadership in our situation is to ignore the tanking temptations and send the message that previous "losing" practices won't be tolerated. (eg St Kilda with Gram, Geelong with Johnson etc etc — unless you believe that everyone is preparing perfectly, or behaving well - I don't.)
The better the quality the team is the easier it is to lead.
You've identified some of the club's underlying problems - really big problems, yet the tankers would have us believe that an extra 17 year old kid will solve them. I don't subscribe to that POV. Sure, take him if he's there and we have the pick. But we need to try to win, prepare to win and win if the game is there to be taken. Then, if we want another pick, go out and get it. Make a few hard decisions that we've avoided in the past, precisely because we tend to overestimate the ability of our players. IMO both Tuck and Foley are limited players - good, but limited. Trade one for a reasonable pick.
You're misunderstanding the point to say it's only about getting and relying on one extra kid. It's the fact you get 3 picks in the top 20. If you want to trade for another then good make that 4 top 20 picks. The more the better to turn over the list quickly. Changing the personnel as quickly as possible to remove the cause of the poor culture within the playing list while at the same time giving the existing cubs more gametime and adding more talented kids which over time will improve the quality and culture of the overall list.
-
Thanks for the win with cubs Jade. You've got one more up your sleeve ;).
-
I dont know who or want change you want MT but Id like to see Pattison out and Post in. As for the tank, smart teams like WCE tank and get Natanui ... other clubs dont. If Natanui can continue to learn the game then game over, he'll end up winning brownlows and he'll help the Eagles get there next flag. On another matter, it burns when you see blokes like Callan Ward running around and we got McMahon down at Coburg ... geezus ... Im glad Wallace is gone. What a stuffen stupid thing to do.
-
You're misunderstanding the point to say it's only about getting and relying on one extra kid. It's the fact you get 3 picks in the top 20.
No, you are misunderstanding the notion of culture. Players don't create a winning club culture, the club does. That means everybody. The culture trickles down to the playing group, not up from it.
Much of what you have said I agree with, but only strengthens the argument to not worry about how many games we win or lose, but concentrate on the process of building a strong club culture.
-
west coast ahve never tanked, they are just crap, worse than us. they lost judd cousins but on tope of that have lost other premiership players and had players like kerr and embley have no consistancy due to inury and form. they have had a poor fwd structure for for a couple of yrs now and its only now they are starting to shape their fed line
tanking does not work, all it does is train the mind that losing is ok and one gets reward for losing
tanking is rubbish and should not even be talked about
as cuz says , winning isnt everything, ITS THE ONLY THING
-
west coast ahve never tanked, they are just crap, worse than us. they lost judd cousins but on tope of that have lost other premiership players and had players like kerr and embley have no consistancy due to inury and form. they have had a poor fwd structure for for a couple of yrs now and its only now they are starting to shape their fed line
tanking does not work, all it does is train the mind that losing is ok and one gets reward for losing
tanking is rubbish and should not even be talked about
as cuz says , winning isnt everything, ITS THE ONLY THING
The players don't tank, but the match committee does
You only need to look at the number of wins relative to the priority pick each year
When the limit was 5 wins there were no clubs finishing with 6 wins for the year
Now they've dropped it to 4, all of a sudden the worst sides in the comp are never winning more than 4 (with the exception of Melbourne 2 years ago who played off against Carlton who also had 4 wins in Round 22)
It happens too regularly to just be a coincidence... open your eyes
-
open my eyes, which 3
tanking is an excuse, its bs
tanking is a term used to please the fans and make excuses for their pathetic teams
oh we are not that bad , we are just tanking ....................rubbish
-
Carlscum tanked . . . didnt they put stevens, fevola and another 2 on the bench in last quarter to throw a game?? Not to mention they wanted to lose the 'Kreuzer Cup' game more than Melbourne did!
-
How much Melbourne be bleeding now that they lost the Kruezer Cup.
If they lost to Carlton then:
a) Carlton dont get Kruezer and dont have a spare pick in top 3 for Judd;
b) Demons get Cotch (assuming we went for Kruz) or vice versa;
c) in 2008 draft, they would have had Watts and Nick Nat....
-
open my eyes, which 3
tanking is an excuse, its bs
tanking is a term used to please the fans and make excuses for their pathetic teams
oh we are not that bad , we are just tanking ....................rubbish
Yes open your eyes!!!!!
You pick a side that will loose, not tell the players to go out and loose.
Please tell me you are not that STUPID!!!... although i may not believe you.
I think Con65 makes a good point about the Dees, i only hope we don't have a story like that in the future.
-
How much Melbourne be bleeding now that they lost the Kruezer Cup.
If they lost to Carlton then:
a) Carlton dont get Kruezer and dont have a spare pick in top 3 for Judd;
b) Demons get Cotch (assuming we went for Kruz) or vice versa;
c) in 2008 draft, they would have had Watts and Nick Nat....
Carlton are cheats.
-
How much Melbourne be bleeding now that they lost the Kruezer Cup.
If they lost to Carlton then:
a) Carlton dont get Kruezer and dont have a spare pick in top 3 for Judd;
b) Demons get Cotch (assuming we went for Kruz) or vice versa;
c) in 2008 draft, they would have had Watts and Nick Nat....
Carlton are cheats.
I was thinking they're another word starting with c and ending in unts.
-
Greg Denham writes an article today discussing Michael Voss.
Link here: http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25643240-23211,00.html?from=public_rss (http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,25643240-23211,00.html?from=public_rss)
A few excerpts from the article:
"We, as a club, have to play finals," Voss said.
"Make no bones about it, we have to play in finals to be able to nourish that inner hunger that develops by playing finals matches. That's part of our development because you have to know what the pressure of a final has."
"The one thing we've highlighted this year is that there's still a level of attitude and competitiveness that you've got to have regardless of who you are," he said.
"So I don't concentrate on injuries or who is there or who's not there, because there's actually no excuses why you can't deliver X. It's about competing rather than submitting.
"There's a standard that we should have in our club that we expect everyone to accomplish it, whether you're 18 years of age or 32. The fact is, this is the minimum that we expect."
"We've been coaching for a minimum level which is acceptable," Voss said. "So the youth understands the minimum they must deliver and if they do better than that, great. So performance is not really measured on kicks, marks and handballs, it's on what's your competitive effort, and they are doing that."
I wonder what he thinks of tanking?
-
Voss has Brown, Power, Black, Bradshaw, Brennan and now Rich to work with. Our senior players give us nothing that our youth doesn't and players such as Brennan and Rich are all products of the draft.
-
That's true Stripes, our seniors don't. But it is his attitude to competitiveness and playing to the maximum output at all times that I think is very significant. How many times do we all bemoan the 'play as we train' factor at Richmond?
-
west coast ahve never tanked, they are just crap, worse than us. they lost judd cousins but on tope of that have lost other premiership players and had players like kerr and embley have no consistancy due to inury and form. they have had a poor fwd structure for for a couple of yrs now and its only now they are starting to shape their fed line
tanking does not work, all it does is train the mind that losing is ok and one gets reward for losing
tanking is rubbish and should not even be talked about
as cuz says , winning isnt everything, ITS THE ONLY THING
Don't kid yourself. Wset Coast have done it before
From 1990 to 1999 West Coast finished 3,1,4,6,1,5,4,5,7,5
Then in 2000 they were 13th then in 2001 they were 14th
From 2002 to 2007 they went 8,7,7,2,1,3
Before finishing 2008 at 15th with 4 wins
They picked up McDougall (traded to Bulldogs in 2006 for a 2nd round pick) and Kerr, Humm in 2000 and Judd Sampi Seaby Hansen in 2001
and last year they got Natanui Shuey and Swift in top 20 picks
and they are headed for three more top 20 picks this year
This is following on from the 2007 draft when they scored big out of the Judd trade and picked up Masten, Ebert, Notte, Selwood (4 picks in the top 22 picks) plus got Kennedy (pick 4 in 2005)
West Coast use the system beautifully and make sure they limit their wins
-
"From 1990 to 1999 West Coast finished 3,1,4,6,1,5,4,5,7,5
Then in 2000 they were 13th then in 2001 they were 14th
From 2002 to 2007 they went 8,7,7,2,1,3"
So if we follow an Eagles (tm) 'Tanking' Campaign style we get a decent finals appearance in 2015 and a premiership in 2017 provided we are blessed with a series of good draft results like Kerr, Humm, Judd, Seaby etc
hmmm there are so many things wrong with that i don't know where to start - maybe with the obvious chance factor of all our High draft picks from this being duds (Aaron Fiora anyone?) or maybe with the time factor. How many fans will hang around for the better part of another decade waiting for success? Then of course there is the possibility that draft concession rules get changed halfway through 'The Great Tank' and we are left with a demoralised, loss-accepting culture, half the *star* drafts we wanted and no plans for pulling ourselves out of the crap.
I'm yet to hear one positive, thoughtful long term plan that involves tanking the rest of our season away apart from getting a high draft pick who *may* be a champion later on.
Hadyn
-
"From 1990 to 1999 West Coast finished 3,1,4,6,1,5,4,5,7,5
Then in 2000 they were 13th then in 2001 they were 14th
From 2002 to 2007 they went 8,7,7,2,1,3"
So if we follow an Eagles (tm) 'Tanking' Campaign style we get a decent finals appearance in 2015 and a premiership in 2017 provided we are blessed with a series of good draft results like Kerr, Humm, Judd, Seaby etc
hmmm there are so many things wrong with that i don't know where to start - maybe with the obvious chance factor of all our High draft picks from this being duds (Aaron Fiora anyone?) or maybe with the time factor. How many fans will hang around for the better part of another decade waiting for success? Then of course there is the possibility that draft concession rules get changed halfway through 'The Great Tank' and we are left with a demoralised, loss-accepting culture, half the *star* drafts we wanted and no plans for pulling ourselves out of the crap.
I'm yet to hear one positive, thoughtful long term plan that involves tanking the rest of our season away apart from getting a high draft pick who *may* be a champion later on.
Hadyn
What should we do then Haydn?
Keep on going the way we have been with the same list that has us 3 and 9!... With wins against shyt teams! Cross our fingers and hope for the best!...
What?...
It's all well and good to say lets start a winning culture, the only problem with this is you have to have the list. And just in case you have missed the first half of the season, we don't!!!!!
I just wish people would stop living in fairyland!
Edited to correct quote
-
or maybe with the time factor. How many fans will hang around for the better part of another decade waiting for success?
Impatience has been the catalyst to the RFC's failure over the past quarter of a century
The process needs to be followed, there are no shortcuts anymore, you cannot just buy your way to a flag
Our board and supporters demanding instant success is why we've been so crap for so long, they trade away long term stability and success for just being competitive in the short term. You'd have to be blind or stupid to not see that.
-
2009 = Tank
Let's use this broken system for once to our advantage.
-
All we need to do is increasingly play the kids, we will then do three things, get experience into the kids, see who's worth keeping / trading and of course if we lose - its a win all round.
We don't need to then compromise the culture by losing because our we wont be good enough to win and if we win with kids, its not the end of the world - ( hopefully no more the on more win)
-
All we need to do is increasingly play the kids, we will then do three things, get experience into the kids, see who's worth keeping / trading and of course if we lose - its a win all round.
We don't need to then compromise the culture by losing because our we wont be good enough to win and if we win with kids, its not the end of the world - ( hopefully no more the on more win)
I would hope that if we keep playing the kids and win, then people would be happy or at least try to be happy.
Surely, playing the kids and winning is a good thing :-\ Or are we supposed to lose at all costs
Because by winniong with the kids could actually mean that our kids aren't that bad and with the right person in charge the future actually looks positive
:thumbsup
-
Cant argue, like I said either way playing the kids is a win all round.
Even if we rest some of the more senior guys when they are sore to give a couple of the boys a chance to step up .
-
winning with kids is fine, winning with the experienced blokes is a waste of time and in that instance Its better to tank.
-
tanking is just a term to please supporters when their teams are poo. it makes them sleep better , " we are not poo , we are tanking, playing for picks"
rubbish
tanking just means u r poo , no more no less
ppl have to get out of the denial stage
playing kids and losing is not tanking, its developing young players and giving them experience. in other words rebuilding
when the kids start winning as they develop then you hit the jackpot, look at geelong, they never tanked
-
tanking is just a term to please supporters when their teams are poo. it makes them sleep better , " we are not poo , we are tanking, playing for picks"
rubbish
tanking just means u r poo , no more no less
ppl have to get out of the denial stage
playing kids and losing is not tanking, its developing young players and giving them experience. in other words rebuilding
when the kids start winning as they develop then you hit the jackpot, look at geelong, they never tanked
tanking is not an excuse, it happens, as we have said above, just look at carlton . . . sure they were 'poo' and may have lost a lot of games anyway, but the fact is they helped lose winnable games performing under their optimal level due to coaches instructions, resting better players etc etc.
-
tanking is just a term to please supporters when their teams are poo. it makes them sleep better , " we are not poo , we are tanking, playing for picks"
rubbish
tanking just means u r poo , no more no less
ppl have to get out of the denial stage
playing kids and losing is not tanking, its developing young players and giving them experience. in other words rebuilding
when the kids start winning as they develop then you hit the jackpot, look at geelong, they never tanked
tanking is not an excuse, it happens, as we have said above, just look at carlton . . . sure they were 'poo' and may have lost a lot of games anyway, but the fact is they helped lose winnable games performing under their optimal level due to coaches instructions, resting better players etc etc.
there is no guarantee that the blues will win a premiership, look atthe saints, they had all those early picks years ago but still havent won a thing, sure they are flying atm, but they still havent won a flag with all their picks and by the time finals come, the saints will drop
carlton may try and buy a flag again, but tanking and early picks dont guarantee success. culture and winning do
-
I wasnt trying to argue tanking leads to success, merely that it does exist. Leading to success is an entirely different matter, and I guess we will have to wait and see whether or not it does.
-
tanking is just a term to please supporters when their teams are poo. it makes them sleep better , " we are not poo , we are tanking, playing for picks"
rubbish
tanking just means u r poo , no more no less
ppl have to get out of the denial stage
playing kids and losing is not tanking, its developing young players and giving them experience. in other words rebuilding
when the kids start winning as they develop then you hit the jackpot, look at geelong, they never tanked
I agree.
Thing with Geelong is they hit the jackpot picking up the best player in the AFL and the best key defender in the AFL through F/S. But otherwise their talent identification and development is top notch.
Harley, Ling, Enright, Stokes and more all later than 2nd round.
Not sure how many of their guns were first round picks, but the only ones I can think of are Corey and Bartel.
The point is often made that Deledio and Cotchin are far and away the best youngsters we have and we need more round 1 picks, but I think this shows more that our talent identification is pretty poor.
-
Its easy to be a better player if you have star players around you. Can any one argue that Murpy is a better player when Judd is in the team. We need the quality to get the best from the quantity.
-
look atthe saints, they had all those early picks years ago but still havent won a thing,
If they win the flag this year you can put it down to their early draft picks - just took a couple of years, but they have plenty of them just maturing. They also shoulda/cooda won one earlier.
-
tanking is just a term to please supporters when their teams are poo. it makes them sleep better , " we are not poo , we are tanking, playing for picks"
rubbish
tanking just means u r poo , no more no less
ppl have to get out of the denial stage
playing kids and losing is not tanking, its developing young players and giving them experience. in other words rebuilding
when the kids start winning as they develop then you hit the jackpot, look at geelong, they never tanked
I agree.
Thing with Geelong is they hit the jackpot picking up the best player in the AFL and the best key defender in the AFL through F/S. But otherwise their talent identification and development is top notch.
Harley, Ling, Enright, Stokes and more all later than 2nd round.
Not sure how many of their guns were first round picks, but the only ones I can think of are Corey and Bartel.
The point is often made that Deledio and Cotchin are far and away the best youngsters we have and we need more round 1 picks, but I think this shows more that our talent identification is pretty poor.
Or that really early picks are better footballers!
-
All we need to do is increasingly play the kids, we will then do three things, get experience into the kids, see who's worth keeping / trading and of course if we lose - its a win all round.
We don't need to then compromise the culture by losing because our we wont be good enough to win and if we win with kids, its not the end of the world - ( hopefully no more the on more win)
I would hope that if we keep playing the kids and win, then people would be happy or at least try to be happy.
Surely, playing the kids and winning is a good thing :-\ Or are we supposed to lose at all costs
Because by winniong with the kids could actually mean that our kids aren't that bad and with the right person in charge the future actually looks positive
:thumbsup
As a young side beating sides whose season is alive and in important games for them where they need to win would be a real positive. However in games where the result has no bearing on anything then it's really just about giving the kids AFL experience and education win, lose or draw. It's hard to enjoy a win when you know the opposition and their fans couldn't give a stuff about the result and are looking forward to two picks in the top 5 to grab another Naitanui.
-
west coast ahve never tanked, they are just crap, worse than us. they lost judd cousins but on tope of that have lost other premiership players and had players like kerr and embley have no consistancy due to inury and form. they have had a poor fwd structure for for a couple of yrs now and its only now they are starting to shape their fed line
tanking does not work, all it does is train the mind that losing is ok and one gets reward for losing
tanking is rubbish and should not even be talked about
as cuz says , winning isnt everything, ITS THE ONLY THING
Don't kid yourself. Wset Coast have done it before
From 1990 to 1999 West Coast finished 3,1,4,6,1,5,4,5,7,5
Then in 2000 they were 13th then in 2001 they were 14th
From 2002 to 2007 they went 8,7,7,2,1,3
Before finishing 2008 at 15th with 4 wins
They picked up McDougall (traded to Bulldogs in 2006 for a 2nd round pick) and Kerr, Humm in 2000 and Judd Sampi Seaby Hansen in 2001
and last year they got Natanui Shuey and Swift in top 20 picks
and they are headed for three more top 20 picks this year
This is following on from the 2007 draft when they scored big out of the Judd trade and picked up Masten, Ebert, Notte, Selwood (4 picks in the top 22 picks) plus got Kennedy (pick 4 in 2005)
West Coast use the system beautifully and make sure they limit their wins
Exactly Gracie. After sitting next to Eagles fans on Saturday night who had travelled over from Perth for the game I can tell you they are on the tank bandwagon big-time. Seeing Naitanui run around only reinforced their faith in the draft's early picks. Read BF and it's no different. Worsfold came out a few weeks ago and basically implied they are tanking. I mean they finished 15th last year and will finish bottom 3 again this year yet the Eagles are about to give Worsfold a whole further 3 years lol. They've tasted success so their fans have patience to rebuild and rebuild properly by bottoming out for a few years and using the draft system to the max. to do what's best for their list so they can challenge again in 3-4 years time. Yep I'm sure come November when they get their hands on two of Scully, Butcher, Lucas and Morabito plus another top 20 pick they'll be saying to themselves geez we must be real losers for losing to Richmond in round 12 ::) :nope.
-
look atthe saints, they had all those early picks years ago but still havent won a thing,
If they win the flag this year you can put it down to their early draft picks - just took a couple of years, but they have plenty of them just maturing. They also shoulda/cooda won one earlier.
bs, if they win a flag now, which they wont, it is a bit late to use those draft picks. 3 yrs ago yes, now no.
if they win now its because of lyon and their recent additions. not their picks from way back then
-
look atthe saints, they had all those early picks years ago but still havent won a thing,
If they win the flag this year you can put it down to their early draft picks - just took a couple of years, but they have plenty of them just maturing. They also shoulda/cooda won one earlier.
bs, if they win a flag now, which they wont, it is a bit late to use those draft picks. 3 yrs ago yes, now no.
if they win now its because of lyon and their recent additions. not their picks from way back then
Well i guess it all depends who were the best players on the ground and who influenced that win, if it was the early picks, it would point to the draft being the reason for the success, no? ;)
-
no body tanks to get draft picks to win a premiership 7 yrs later , thats bs and weak, and to say that picks 7 yrs prior were the catalyst of the premiership is even more bs
if that were the case with all those top 20 picks 6 yrs ago, we should be contenders now, but in 2 -3 -4 yrs time if we come good, we cannot say its cos of teh 2004 draft and "tanking"
wallace missed the boat, if he were a good coach we should have been contenders last yr
tanking and picks are bs, its all about development and culture
-
if they win now its because of lyon and their recent additions. not their picks from way back then
If they win now do you think any of these players would be a big factor?
Reiwoldt - priority pick
Kossie - priority pick
Ball - pick 2
Goddard - pick 1
Del santo - pick 13
Clarkes - picks 5 and 8
...have I forgotten any?
-
if they win now its because of lyon and their recent additions. not their picks from way back then
If they win now do you think any of these players would be a big factor?
Reiwoldt - priority pick
Kossie - priority pick
Ball - pick 2
Goddard - pick 1
Del santo - pick 13
Clarkes - picks 5 and 8
...have I forgotten any?
Hayes was pick 11
Hudghton pick 15
Montagna at pick 37 would be their only A-grader not picked up early in the draft although a third rounder is still a decent pick (unless you're a Richmond recruiter ::) )
The main difference between Lyon and Thomas is Lyon isn't an idiot like Conflakes who believed ruckmen had no real purpose in the game. Gardiner, King and to a lesser extent McEvoy (pick 9) have made a massive difference.
-
You're misunderstanding the point to say it's only about getting and relying on one extra kid. It's the fact you get 3 picks in the top 20.
No, you are misunderstanding the notion of culture. Players don't create a winning club culture, the club does. That means everybody. The culture trickles down to the playing group, not up from it.
Much of what you have said I agree with, but only strengthens the argument to not worry about how many games we win or lose, but concentrate on the process of building a strong club culture.
The main cultural problem at Richmond for a long time now has been entrenched short-term thinking at the expense and harm of our mid to long term interests. Winning a couple of meaningless games against fellow strugglers at the expense of top 20 draft picks is short-term thinking. These wins will be forgotten as soon as the final siren sounds in round 22.
There's little that can be significantly achieved now with 2009 a write-off apart from playing the kids until the end of the season in readiness for 2010 and beyond which appears to be what we are doing now. The offseason is when key changes are made - delistings, trades, new draftees added, team gameplans modified and tuned, and further resources added. To maximize the effectiveness of these offseason decisions we need as many early picks as available to us to cut as many of those players not up to it and give our recruiting department the best chance to replace them with better quality young footballers. Winning no more than 4 games provides us with these early picks; winning meaningless games against bottom sides deprives us of them.
All that beating bottom sides does is make the club feel good for a week and relieve some pressure on the club until we play a decent side and harsh reality hits home again and knocks the stuffing out of our confidence. It does nothing as far as building a winning club culture because belief and a winning culture comes from winning games that count and matter as much to your opponent as it does to you - when it is do or die. None of our remaining 10 games matter as far as the result goes because 2009 is a write-off. Top sides will not prepare and pump themselves up when playing us and bottom sides have already put the cue in the rack. We've won these meaningless games in the past and no surprise our culture hasn't changed. We've tried getting the best out of our existing list when games were on the line and once again we froze and didn't give a yelp :(. Round 1 was just another embarrassing flop in a long list of disasters on the big stage for Richmond in the modern era. Clarkson when he arrived at Hawthorn used part of his salary to pump more into recruiting. He realised there's no point trying to get the best out of a list unless you have real quality on it to begin with. We are only part way through our rebuilding process. Just as the Club needs to improve the off-field areas we both agree we need to do (more resources etc) we still need to bottom out to complete the rebuild and add far more quality and class to our list. The most effective way of doing this is to be smart and use and maximize the draft system rules in place.
-
At the end of the day if you think all we need is a coach and a culture I'm going to be dead before we play finals again.
PS: I hope like hell we don't start drinking our own bath water and think we are any good again once we win a few games whilst the smart clubs start the list development again.
Do you think we are dumb at Richmond or just employ dumb decision makers or people with short term self interest.
Question: If we had won four games and we were 2 goals down in the last quarter of the last game would you take off the 4 best players and move the player to the wrong positions.
-
if they win now its because of lyon and their recent additions. not their picks from way back then
If they win now do you think any of these players would be a big factor?
Reiwoldt - priority pick
Kossie - priority pick
Ball - pick 2
Goddard - pick 1
Del santo - pick 13
Clarkes - picks 5 and 8
...have I forgotten any?
exactly..........
-
At the end of the day if you think all we need is a coach and a culture I'm going to be dead before we play finals again.
PS: I hope like hell we don't start drinking our own bath water and think we are any good again once we win a few games whilst the smart clubs start the list development again.
Do you think we are dumb at Richmond or just employ dumb decision makers or people with short term self interest.
Question: If we had won four games and we were 2 goals down in the last quarter of the last game would you take off the 4 best players and move the player to the wrong positions.
In a heartbeat.
-
look atthe saints, they had all those early picks years ago but still havent won a thing,
If they win the flag this year you can put it down to their early draft picks - just took a couple of years, but they have plenty of them just maturing. They also shoulda/cooda won one earlier.
bs, if they win a flag now, which they wont, it is a bit late to use those draft picks. 3 yrs ago yes, now no.
if they win now its because of lyon and their recent additions. not their picks from way back then
Abit late?
How old do you think Reiwoldt, Ball, Kosi, Goddard are??
??? ??? ???
-
we have waited 27 yrs for another premiership, ahh why not lets wait another 30 , we will stay in this bs lets get best picks in draft cycle and in 30 yrs time a premiership will mean much more ::)
-
The main cultural problem at Richmond for a long time now has been entrenched short-term thinking at the expense and harm of our mid to long term interests. Winning a couple of meaningless games against fellow strugglers at the expense of top 20 draft picks is short-term thinking. These wins will be forgotten as soon as the final siren sounds in round 22.
There's little that can be significantly achieved now with 2009 a write-off apart from playing the kids until the end of the season in readiness for 2010 and beyond which appears to be what we are doing now. The offseason is when key changes are made - delistings, trades, new draftees added, team gameplans modified and tuned, and further resources added. To maximize the effectiveness of these offseason decisions we need as many early picks as available to us to cut as many of those players not up to it and give our recruiting department the best chance to replace them with better quality young footballers. Winning no more than 4 games provides us with these early picks; winning meaningless games against bottom sides deprives us of them.
All that beating bottom sides does is make the club feel good for a week and relieve some pressure on the club until we play a decent side and harsh reality hits home again and knocks the stuffing out of our confidence. It does nothing as far as building a winning club culture because belief and a winning culture comes from winning games that count and matter as much to your opponent as it does to you - when it is do or die.
Once again you confuse the result of these last 10 games (ie either a win or loss) with the process of winning. I have not and have never said that it is important that we win these games to begin create a strong long term culture. What I have said is that it is important that we prepare the side to win at all costs. These games are only meaningless if we tank, and by tanking I mean not just playing young players, but playing people in strange positions, playing kids that aren't ready, taking off guns at crucial moments etc.
I would argue that ensuring that we don't win more than 4 games, either by playing very weak teams or by actually manufacturing losses, is the epitomy of short-term thinking.
Tell me, out of these 6 people, who do you think are the 3 most important people at Geelong, in terms of winning premierships: Mark Thompson, Brian Cook, Joel Selwood, stuff Costa, Neil Balme, Brad Ottens.
-
The fact remains that current form has us getting those picks anyway, and like FooFooValve i don't believe in "manufacturing losses". Playing kids is not tanking - it's preparation, team strengthening and smart football. Pulling Cousins/Foley/Brown/Lids off 5 minutes from the end, 5 points down against say Melbourne or Fremantle WOULD be tanking and to say the least disheartening and disappointing.
If we expect these young players to tank the rest of the season away, then we have no leg to stand on next year if they don't put in 110%. Why should they if 75% was good enough the year before? Our older, more experienced players might cope with that kind of mental switch in a few short weeks/months but the kids won't and they are who we should be focused on.
-
Foofoovalue - the remainder of the season should be seen as an opportunity to test the players so if we can move them into alternative positions and roles to see if they are better suited/and or could fill a need if injuries/situation dictates it, then why would this be a problem.
I want to build a strong team for the future and playing the youth, testing the list and, if required, playing potential/raw players over more experienced players to gauge their worth, is all very much an important strategy toward that. Call it tanking or call it building for the future but wins should always be the goal of the team...just not always the administration and just as Cris Connolly said when interviewed in todays paper refering to the draft - 'You can't make Chicken Salad out of Chicken %#$^'. Sound familiar? ;)
We need more quality added to our list to replace those who are too old or underperforming and the only real way to do that in the current climate is to finish down the bottom. Takes an astute club to give the illusion of trying to win to the supporters, instilling in the list that losing is unacceptable but making the growth of the list and future of the club its number one priority.
Wins are worthless at this stage unless they are a step towards future success and its hard to see how a close win against a weak side like WC, Fremantle or North is helping our players or club.
Its all about the future now not the moment
Stripes
-
we have waited 27 yrs for another premiership, ahh why not lets wait another 30 , we will stay in this bs lets get best picks in draft cycle and in 30 yrs time a premiership will mean much more ::)
I agree but the problem we have found ourselves is Under Wallace.
We never really bottomed out like we should have. If we did we would have got one of Murphy or Gibbs.
we never got the picks we should have. These bull poo 9th finishes combined with additions like Kingsley, Mcmahon have put us in the position we are in. Not to mention Trent stuffin knobel. 2 picks later Blues nab Eddie Betts.
We were fooled into thinking we are better than what we really are.
we need to really bottom out and keep all our stuffin picks at least this year and get the best kid in the land. Wallace has screwed us sideways.
IVE ALWAYS SAID THIS TO FRIENDS. THE FIRST COACH WHO KEEPS ALL OUR PICKS AND REBUILDS FROM THE GROUND UP WILL GET US PLAYING REGULAR FINALS NOT THIS MEANINGLESS WINS GARBAGE THAT GETS DISHED UP YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR.
Melbourne is on the rise as are the Blues. Wonder why??
These pathetic meaningless wins dont count IMO. I couldnt give a stuff about beating Eagles to be honest except for the fact i cleaned up at the TAB.
I want to smash sides like Saints, Cats Blues and Pies, something we seem to never be able to acheive.
-
The fact remains that current form has us getting those picks anyway, and like FooFooValve i don't believe in "manufacturing losses". Playing kids is not tanking - it's preparation, team strengthening and smart football. Pulling Cousins/Foley/Brown/Lids off 5 minutes from the end, 5 points down against say Melbourne or Fremantle WOULD be tanking and to say the least disheartening and disappointing.
If we expect these young players to tank the rest of the season away, then we have no leg to stand on next year if they don't put in 110%. Why should they if 75% was good enough the year before? Our older, more experienced players might cope with that kind of mental switch in a few short weeks/months but the kids won't and they are who we should be focused on.
Wake up mate, nobody is telling these kids to tank, it is the coaches and team selecters that need to make sure we don't win games. Let these kids go out and have a go but if it gets tight, the coaches need to do whatever they need to loose.
Do you think our list is good enough to compete against the Geelongs and Saints? If you are not an idiot the answer is no, and the best way to try and fix that is to get early picks. Could it be any simplier!
Winning anymore games would be the most stupid thing our club has done since not picking the big Pav!
-
Do you think our list is good enough to compete against the Geelongs and Saints? If you are not an idiot the answer is no, and the best way to try and fix that is to get early picks. Could it be any simplier!
Winning anymore games would be the most stupid thing our club has done since not picking the big Pav!
So can I ask a hypothetical?
Next week against the Saints if by some miracle we are up by say 10 points with 4 minutes to go would you still think we should tank the result?
I understand your argument but what happens if we are actually in a winning postion against a quality side(s).. What do you think we should do in that situation
-
Do you think our list is good enough to compete against the Geelongs and Saints? If you are not an idiot the answer is no, and the best way to try and fix that is to get early picks. Could it be any simplier!
Winning anymore games would be the most stupid thing our club has done since not picking the big Pav!
So can I ask a hypothetical?
Next week against the Saints if by some miracle we are up by say 10 points with 4 minutes to go would you still think we should tank the result?
I understand your argument but what happens if we are actually in a winning postion against a quality side(s).. What do you think we should do in that situation
Is this also assuming that the side is the same as it was last week... or younger?
I do believe that this season is over and we should be looking to boost our list via the best picks in the draft we can get. HOWEVER, if our team of kids can get us in a winning position over the best side in the comp (or one of the two best) then go for the win at all costs. If our kids can beat the ladder leader then theres no point in tanking as they will be able to beat crap teams as well and we'll get over 4 wins regardless. Who knows, if our kids can beat StKilda, we may still be able to play finals.
-
Is this also assuming that the side is the same as it was last week... or younger?
I do believe that this season is over and we should be looking to boost our list via the best picks in the draft we can get. HOWEVER, if our team of kids can get us in a winning position over the best side in the comp (or one of the two best) then go for the win at all costs. If our kids can beat the ladder leader then theres no point in tanking as they will be able to beat crap teams as well and we'll get over 4 wins regardless. Who knows, if our kids can beat StKilda, we may still be able to play finals.
But how do we know if our team is good enough if we don't train to win, plan to win, prepare to win and try to win?
-
Is this also assuming that the side is the same as it was last week... or younger?
I do believe that this season is over and we should be looking to boost our list via the best picks in the draft we can get. HOWEVER, if our team of kids can get us in a winning position over the best side in the comp (or one of the two best) then go for the win at all costs. If our kids can beat the ladder leader then theres no point in tanking as they will be able to beat crap teams as well and we'll get over 4 wins regardless. Who knows, if our kids can beat StKilda, we may still be able to play finals.
But how do we know if our team is good enough if we don't train to win, plan to win, prepare to win and try to win?
You know your team is good enough if you win games against top opposition when winning actually gets you somewhere... i.e. finals
While there is a system in place that rewards failure then when you know your season is over, it's time to go for that carrot
-
Do you think our list is good enough to compete against the Geelongs and Saints? If you are not an idiot the answer is no, and the best way to try and fix that is to get early picks. Could it be any simplier!
Winning anymore games would be the most stupid thing our club has done since not picking the big Pav!
So can I ask a hypothetical?
Next week against the Saints if by some miracle we are up by say 10 points with 4 minutes to go would you still think we should tank the result?
I understand your argument but what happens if we are actually in a winning postion against a quality side(s).. What do you think we should do in that situation
I'll say it ONE last time, we should loose.
So what if we beat the Saints, we beat the Hawks last year and that did stuff all to help us at the end of the day, this season is a right off and we should at the very least make the most of a bad season by gaining extra picks in this years draft.
Only the RFC and it's selfish supporters could entertain not taking advantage of the situation we are in, for a few meaningless wins regardless of who we are playing.
It's time to be smart and think past today, and look to the future and maybe we will not be talking about us tanking in round 12 of next season and seasons after that.
Just my opinion...
-
Do you think our list is good enough to compete against the Geelongs and Saints? If you are not an idiot the answer is no, and the best way to try and fix that is to get early picks. Could it be any simplier!
Winning anymore games would be the most stupid thing our club has done since not picking the big Pav!
So can I ask a hypothetical?
Next week against the Saints if by some miracle we are up by say 10 points with 4 minutes to go would you still think we should tank the result?
I understand your argument but what happens if we are actually in a winning postion against a quality side(s).. What do you think we should do in that situation
now thats stupid WP.
I would want to win in that case because it would mean so much to this cloub, especially as Saints are one of our bogey sides and only if its a young outfit like last week.
What im talking about is useless meaningless wins like last week against the Eagles who never came to play from the first bounce.
Beating teams like that only sugar coat the fact we are so far away from teams like the Cats and Saints its not funny.
-
now thats stupid WP.
I would want to win in that case because it would mean so much to this cloub, especially as Saints are one of our bogey sides and only if its a young outfit like last week.
What im talking about is useless meaningless wins like last week against the Eagles who never came to play from the first bounce.
Beating teams like that only sugar coat the fact we are so far away from teams like the Cats and Saints its not funny.
No daniel it isn't stupid - just look at the replies
You've answered that if it is the Saints or Geelong we beat it's OK. And if we are in the position to win then we should try and win those games. But any others we should lose because they are meaningless
Big tone on the other hand has said it doesn't matter who it is we should lose. No "ifs buts or maybes" we should lose every game for the remainder of the season to ensure a priority pick
Infamy's point is IF we are in the position to win against top sides with a young team then we should take those wins if they come about
I was interested to read people's views because this topic is about tanking (which I am against BTW) and it appears that some people want a complete tank (eg big tone), others want a partial tank subject to conditions (eg you), while some just want to see the kids played and let the results be what they are (eg me).
Everyone has an opinion and that's great. I was just interested to see if the tankers were flexible in thier tanking requirements ;D
-
Infamy's point is IF we are in the position to win against top sides with a young team then we should take those wins if they come about
I was interested to read people's views because this topic is about tanking (which I am against BTW) and it appears that some people want a complete tank (eg big tone), others want a partial tank subject to conditions (eg you), while some just want to see the kids played and let the results be what they are (eg me).
I must admit, I have to add another condition to my POV, I'm purely talking about this week coming up. If we are 4-8 after Round 13 then we can still make the finals. It's unlikely, but if the young team can beat StKilda then they may get enough confidence to finish the season strongly with a pretty easy run in the 2nd half of the season.
If we have won two in a row, including knocking off StKilda, then our following games against Adelaide in GC, Carlton, North, Essendon, Melbourne, Sydney @ MCG, Collingwood, Hawks & West Coast are all winnable. Not sure we can win 8 of them, but who knows. If we lose against StKilda as expected, then I think we need to continue bringing in more and more kids, winning against top sides is great, beating middle of the road sides to help us finish mid table is just going to stifle our development.
If we are 3-17 going into Round 21 against Hawthorn and 2 goals up in the 4th quarter, they I'd say it's pretty stupid to try and win unless we are going to try and tank against the West Coast Tankers the following week. Finishing this season with 5-7 wins against only bottom 4 teams would be a tragedy and an indictment on our football commitee.
-
Infamy's point is IF we are in the position to win against top sides with a young team then we should take those wins if they come about
I was interested to read people's views because this topic is about tanking (which I am against BTW) and it appears that some people want a complete tank (eg big tone), others want a partial tank subject to conditions (eg you), while some just want to see the kids played and let the results be what they are (eg me).
I must admit, I have to add another condition to my POV, I'm purely talking about this week coming up. If we are 4-8 after Round 13 then we can still make the finals. It's unlikely, but if the young team can beat StKilda then they may get enough confidence to finish the season strongly with a pretty easy run in the 2nd half of the season.
If we have won two in a row, including knocking off StKilda, then our following games against Adelaide in GC, Carlton, North, Essendon, Melbourne, Sydney @ MCG, Collingwood, Hawks & West Coast are all winnable. Not sure we can win 8 of them, but who knows. If we lose against StKilda as expected, then I think we need to continue bringing in more and more kids, winning against top sides is great, beating middle of the road sides to help us finish mid table is just going to stifle our development.
If we are 3-17 going into Round 21 against Hawthorn and 2 goals up in the 4th quarter, they I'd say it's pretty stupid to try and win unless we are going to try and tank against the West Coast Tankers the following week. Finishing this season with 5-7 wins against only bottom 4 teams would be a tragedy and an indictment on our football commitee.
How fooled were we all with that win last year.
The Hawks then delivered the ultimate insult by winning the Flag.
Infamy and big tone never have been more correct in any posts they have made.
What a complete and utter waste of time finishing with 6 wins opposed to 4. Seriously open your eyes people.
-
I don't think we were fooled by the win against Hawthorn, if anything it just showed the football world that you could beat the zone and other teams are using similar tactics this year to beat them.
-
I don't think we were fooled by the win against Hawthorn, if anything it just showed the football world that you could beat the zone and other teams are using similar tactics this year to beat them.
Does this mean that TW actually did something right in the four and a half years he was coach?
Now where's Jackstar?
:lol
-
Infamy's point is IF we are in the position to win against top sides with a young team then we should take those wins if they come about
I was interested to read people's views because this topic is about tanking (which I am against BTW) and it appears that some people want a complete tank (eg big tone), others want a partial tank subject to conditions (eg you), while some just want to see the kids played and let the results be what they are (eg me).
I must admit, I have to add another condition to my POV, I'm purely talking about this week coming up. If we are 4-8 after Round 13 then we can still make the finals. It's unlikely, but if the young team can beat StKilda then they may get enough confidence to finish the season strongly with a pretty easy run in the 2nd half of the season.
If we have won two in a row, including knocking off StKilda, then our following games against Adelaide in GC, Carlton, North, Essendon, Melbourne, Sydney @ MCG, Collingwood, Hawks & West Coast are all winnable. Not sure we can win 8 of them, but who knows. If we lose against StKilda as expected, then I think we need to continue bringing in more and more kids, winning against top sides is great, beating middle of the road sides to help us finish mid table is just going to stifle our development.
If we are 3-17 going into Round 21 against Hawthorn and 2 goals up in the 4th quarter, they I'd say it's pretty stupid to try and win unless we are going to try and tank against the West Coast Tankers the following week. Finishing this season with 5-7 wins against only bottom 4 teams would be a tragedy and an indictment on our football commitee.
Lets just keep it simple- play the kids, loose but loose well, let them run and kick long, if they make mistakes, fine but let them 'play'. Don't tag, just go head to head, and encourage them to take risks. We have nothing to loose but games and that's what will get us the best result going forward.
Even the thought of an incoming coach will change if they have a good chance to pick up early draft picks. It may even be the difference between getting the coach we want! :pray
-
Once again you confuse the result of these last 10 games (ie either a win or loss) with the process of winning. I have not and have never said that it is important that we win these games to begin create a strong long term culture. What I have said is that it is important that we prepare the side to win at all costs. These games are only meaningless if we tank, and by tanking I mean not just playing young players, but playing people in strange positions, playing kids that aren't ready, taking off guns at crucial moments etc.
I would argue that ensuring that we don't win more than 4 games, either by playing very weak teams or by actually manufacturing losses, is the epitomy of short-term thinking.
Playing a midfielder in Stenglein in a back-pocket on Morton while youngsters Selwood, Ebert, Masten and co. learn how to play midfield together isn't short term thinking by Worsfold yet it cost them game as Morton kicked 5 for us. The Hawks lead by 7 goals at half-time against us in 2005 with their priority pick on the line and funnily enough after some dodgy moves they got run over by a kick with Petts kicking the winner. Carlton and Collingwood all pulled off guns or put them in the medical room in the second half of the season when they were after a priority pick. They'll be playing finals this year. Funny how most other clubs 'tank' by playing their kids yet it hasn't done their culture and processes of winning any harm, yet at Richmond who has been in mediocreland for the whole history of the draft, tanking should be a no-no ???.
Stripes' post is spot on :thumbsup. Watching Coburg today only reaffirms in my mind we need a cleanout to turn over the list quickly and to get as much quality on our list as possible to replace the duds we have who can't perform even at VFL level.
Foofoovalue - the remainder of the season should be seen as an opportunity to test the players so if we can move them into alternative positions and roles to see if they are better suited/and or could fill a need if injuries/situation dictates it, then why would this be a problem.
I want to build a strong team for the future and playing the youth, testing the list and, if required, playing potential/raw players over more experienced players to gauge their worth, is all very much an important strategy toward that. Call it tanking or call it building for the future but wins should always be the goal of the team...just not always the administration and just as Cris Connolly said when interviewed in todays paper refering to the draft - 'You can't make Chicken Salad out of Chicken %#$^'. Sound familiar? ;)
We need more quality added to our list to replace those who are too old or underperforming and the only real way to do that in the current climate is to finish down the bottom. Takes an astute club to give the illusion of trying to win to the supporters, instilling in the list that losing is unacceptable but making the growth of the list and future of the club its number one priority.
Wins are worthless at this stage unless they are a step towards future success and its hard to see how a close win against a weak side like WC, Fremantle or North is helping our players or club.
Its all about the future now not the moment
Stripes
Tell me, out of these 6 people, who do you think are the 3 most important people at Geelong, in terms of winning premierships: Mark Thompson, Brian Cook, Joel Selwood, stuff Costa, Neil Balme, Brad Ottens.
Everyone is important as everyone needs to do their part. Those off-field can't succeed without those onfield being of top quality and vice-versa. You want the best people at all levels of the club. I'm not disagreeing with that. I have been critical of those off-field as well. However, while off-field decisions are independent of wins/losses over the next 10 weeks, decisions on our playing list and what delisting and recruiting options we'll have do depend on results as the draft rules stipulate a 4 win limit for a priority pick. Right now we don't have anywhere near the best people at a playing list level. It's not just as simple as get a new coach in and make them work harder or them finding a winning mentality. Many of our players are simply not up to AFL standard to begin with no matter how hard they try or what they think. The 'process of winning' requires a talented list to begin with so it does depend on results or lack of them over the next 10 weeks thanks to the draft rules. The draft rules are stupid as they encourage tanking but they are the rules. Our list is ordinary and still has far too many holes in it thanks to continually poor short-term recruiting decisions and never truly bottoming out. As the National draft offers and delivers the best talent especially early on (something the RFC has never understood), for us to maximise our ability to get the best at a playing list and recruiting level we cannot afford to win more than 4 games. 10 weeks of short-term pain for the long-term benefit of 3 top 20 picks and with that the greater ability to cut deeper into our list on top of picking up 3 talented kids as opposed to only 1. It's a no brainer!
-
The 'process of winning' requires a talented list to begin with...
Well, I guess this is where our thinking diverges, for Richmond anyway. I think you can prepare sides that have no hope of winning to take the field with full preparation and an attitude that they must win. It is a waste of time to send a side out with the subliminal message that they aren't required to win. That's when getting games into youngsters does become meaningless, or close to it.
As I've said, I'm not interested in what West Coast are doing, are what Carlton have done. Their cultures are so different from ours it isn't funny. We can't afford to 'play games' with our non-existent culture. I believe we are actually in a fragile state, not because of our list but because of our lack of a genuine winning culture right through the entire club. It wouldn't matter if we had picks 1 and 3 or 3 and 19 or whatever, we won't be able to capitalise on the talent until we turn our attention to our club culture. Once we turn our gaze solely to one or two draft picks to save ourselves, we take our eyes off the real hard ball.
You're free to disagree, and you may be right, we may be a couple of high picks away from a flag. Time will tell.
-
Can't agree that it good to have a winning culture but how about last years premiers are you worried about how they did it.
They just played the kids after trading off senior players - yes we cant do that but we don't have to play guys who wont be on the list. We also don't have to play players who are carrying injuries as they should be sent off so they are right for next year.
Don't want to change your mind but I'm hoping the whole club is willing to take some loss pain this year so our kids can be proud to follow the Tigers.
PS: We have been trying to have a winning culture with mediocre players for 25 years and the proofs in the pudding.
-
PS: We have been trying to have a winning culture with mediocre players for 25 years and the proofs in the pudding.
Really? I can't recall one period in the past 25 years when we have adopted and tried to implement a culture change - that's been our problem. Our culture is what it is - a failure. This whole argument of culture vs tanking is 'chicken and egg'. As always history will tell us who was right - bring on the next messiah.
-
PS: We have been trying to have a winning culture with mediocre players for 25 years and the proofs in the pudding.
Really? I can't recall one period in the past 25 years when we have adopted and tried to implement a culture change - that's been our problem. Our culture is what it is - a failure. This whole argument of culture vs tanking is 'chicken and egg'. As always history will tell us who was right - bring on the next messiah.
I think you are right- time will tell but the point I think camboon is making is that regardless of what culture changes we tries to make, we were destined to fail given the players we had. Firstly they had been part of a losing/selfish culture for their careers and passed that on and secondily they did not have the collective talent to win regardless of their culture.
But yes - bring on the next coach that is bound to lead us to glory....just hope he can find us some players to take with him. :shh
Stripes
-
PS: We have been trying to have a winning culture with mediocre players for 25 years and the proofs in the pudding.
Really? I can't recall one period in the past 25 years when we have adopted and tried to implement a culture change - that's been our problem. Our culture is what it is - a failure. This whole argument of culture vs tanking is 'chicken and egg'. As always history will tell us who was right - bring on the next messiah.
I can tell you for a fact that the numerous coaching and management staff have tried to change the culture within the club and as I mentioned whilst we recuited rejects and had fractured suppoert it all fell away very quickly - you can't half fix this problem and you must have the clay to work with in the first place.
I think the real debate is hear whether you can make the finals with our current list by whipping them harder and if it serves any purpose by winning games against sides that are manageing their lists to ensure they have close losses so they ensure they make the finals before we ever will. I hear if you stop banging your head against the wall it stops hurting!
-
How does that old saying go - "A team of champions is never as good as a champion team" - that's probably slightly off but close enough.
Culture, attitude and spirit have almost as big a part in this game as skill does. Look at the Lions, premiers 3 years running until egos and attitudes got in the way and then a dramatic fall from grace. West Coast?? Sydney?? Hawthorn - it only took them one year to lose half of thier impact and hold over the league. Unless this is their secret plan "Win a Grand Final, Tank for Picks, Win a Grand Final, Tank for Picks"??? Somehow i doubt it.
Then have a look at Geelong. How long now have they been dominating in this competition? 4 years? It's just their bad luck that the sides they've faced in finals/grand finals have been higher quality than Brisbane who didn't dominate like Geelong have. Give them 3 years with Essendon, Collingwood, Collingwood and Pt Adelaide as Grand Final opponents and they'd broken Brisbane's record to be beside Melbourne with 4 in a row.
The difference between Hawks, Lions, Eagles, Swans and Geelong - culture and attitude. They didn't fire Bomber Thompson mid-season (not that i'm against getting rid of TW) and they ended up wooden spooners - they kept their focus, kept their culture and spirit and look at them now.
But yet people keep pleading for the tank - get the best kids in the draft, fill our list with the best talent and hope they all live up to their potential. Remember priority picks don't always net the best players - how far down was James Hird taken? Pick 79!!
-
Hird was drafted one year ago or 15 years ago? The nature of drafting has changed alot. Superstars such as Hird have little chance of falling outside the top 10, let alone pick 70.
After watching Coburg effort on Saturday the club needs as many talented young players as possible.
-
hadynd88 - Geelong have been dominating the competition for 2.5 years not 4, they finished in 10th place in 2006
-
Hird was drafted one year ago or 15 years ago? The nature of drafting has changed alot. Superstars such as Hird have little chance of falling outside the top 10, let alone pick 70.
After watching Coburg effort on Saturday the club needs as many talented young players as possible.
Agree that we need as many youngsters as possible.
Citing Geelong isn't going to help the tanking argument — they haven't had a pick inside the top 7 for yonks, and some of their superstars are later picks eg Ling 38, Chapman 31, Enright 47, Johnson 24. Even Egan at 62.
Geelong is an example of how to hang on to picks, trade for more and then develop, develop, develop the list and bring players into a winning environment.
Our player development is depressingly bad. It takes us 5 years to get our players to a level that it takes other teams 1, 2 or 3.
-
Very Good point that Geelong keeps their kids and doesn't bring in players unless they are critical to team balance (Ottens - mmm) The clubs usually let players go that have baggage or are past their use by dates. We pick up some of these players and I'm guessing they don't always add to our culture. At the best we should only pick up other clubs discards and they are usually discard whether manufactured or genuine in the pre season and only after our recruiters are sure there is absolutely nothing left in the national draft taking a punt on ( funny how we have brought some Rookies on)
Also Geelong have the greatest luck in the history of the game with the father /son rule - Ablett, Scarlett
-
Whereas in recent times we've had David Bourke and Tom Roach as F/S :P. It made a massive difference if you are handed a gun on platter as a F/S under the old rules. We know that thanks to Richo in 1992 (Collingwood chased him hard but he wanted to play for us). Under the new F/S rules Geelong would've missed out as they have had to decide between a Selwood and Hawkins, or a Bartel and Ablett, rather than effectively having two top 10 picks. Add that to them smartly keeping their picks and trading for more and they turned over their list quickly.
The 'process of winning' requires a talented list to begin with...
Well, I guess this is where our thinking diverges, for Richmond anyway. I think you can prepare sides that have no hope of winning to take the field with full preparation and an attitude that they must win. It is a waste of time to send a side out with the subliminal message that they aren't required to win. That's when getting games into youngsters does become meaningless, or close to it.
As I've said, I'm not interested in what West Coast are doing, are what Carlton have done. Their cultures are so different from ours it isn't funny. We can't afford to 'play games' with our non-existent culture. I believe we are actually in a fragile state, not because of our list but because of our lack of a genuine winning culture right through the entire club. It wouldn't matter if we had picks 1 and 3 or 3 and 19 or whatever, we won't be able to capitalise on the talent until we turn our attention to our club culture. Once we turn our gaze solely to one or two draft picks to save ourselves, we take our eyes off the real hard ball.
You're free to disagree, and you may be right, we may be a couple of high picks away from a flag. Time will tell.
IMO you can prepare a side that has no hope of winning to take the field with full preparation and an attitude that they must win but that's probably for just a game or two. We've seen many times a poorer side on paper upset a more fancied opponent in any one game. However play that same contest 10 times and the better classier side will win say 8/10 of them. The AFL season is a marathon of 22 games (plus finals if you make it). It sorts out the better sides from the mediocre poorer ones. Once a side gets on a roll of losses then belief and confidence falls away and players start focussing on themselves in survival mode rather than the team. They lose faith in the team's capacity to win and their teammates and start doubting those giving them instructions. Ask any coach and they'll say they are only as good as the players they have at their disposal.
I don't disagree with you FFV about our culture from top to bottom being poor for decades. I agree it still needs addressing and hopefully this review the Club is undertaking will contribute significantly to finally addressing all the areas we fall short in as a Club. I know people who went to the Club 80 function last night were impressed and comforted with what March, Wright, Cameron and Jackson had to say about where the Club is at now and what still needs to be done. I think where I differ from your view FFV is I don't believe our cultural problems can be addressed properly to any significant degree in the upcoming 10 weeks with a caretaker coach and the Club still finalising the footy department review. It would just be a makeshift response IMO. Even just from a resources viewpoint (or rather lack of it) the Craigieburn facility won't be finished until early next year and the Punt Rd redevelopment which hasn't commenced yet won't be completed until 2011. We are still a club in transition. Our playing list is in transition as well and there's nothing we can do about our list now except give experience to those cubs who are part of our future, drop those that aren't, and plan to maximise the upcoming draft to add the better talent we desperately need. In the past our culture has been just pray and hope with no detailed planning nor firm long-term direction. IMO part of the planning should be maximising the number of early picks we'll have to cut deeper and pump in better talent more quickly to turnover the list quickly. You're right though to say time will tell.
-
Whereas in recent times we've had David Bourke and Tom Roach as F/S :P. It made a massive difference if you are handed a gun on platter as a F/S under the old rules. We know that thanks to Richo in 1992 (Collingwood chased him hard but he wanted to play for us). Under the new F/S rules Geelong would've missed out as they have had to decide between a Selwood and Hawkins, or a Bartel and Ablett, rather than effectively having two top 10 picks. Add that to them smartly keeping their picks and trading for more and they turned over their list quickly.
You forget that Ablett was a pretty good small forward (originally touted as a 2nd or 3rd rounder) until his own playing group told him he wasn't working hard enough. Then...wooshka!
How many Richmond players are in that category? Unanswerable, but the sudden and late improvement of Jackson and Tambling this year suggests that there are a few.
IMO you can prepare a side that has no hope of winning to take the field with full preparation and an attitude that they must win but that's probably for just a game or two. We've seen many times a poorer side on paper upset a more fancied opponent in any one game. However play that same contest 10 times and the better classier side will win say 8/10 of them.
Once again, you confuse the result with the attitude and preparation. My point is that we must prepare our young players to win these last 10 games as best we can. If they lose, at least they have done everything in their control to win the game. If they win, fantastic. If we are preparing them to win, and they do, then we have to be prepared to accept that that is a very good thing for their development, and of more value than losing for the sake of an extra pick.
-
You forget that Ablett was a pretty good small forward (originally touted as a 2nd or 3rd rounder) until his own playing group told him he wasn't working hard enough. Then...wooshka!
How many Richmond players are in that category? Unanswerable, but the sudden and late improvement of Jackson and Tambling this year suggests that there are a few.
Not unusual for eventual gun mids though to start their careers as small/midsize forwards until they have a few years in the system to build up their body to handle the workloads required to play midfield. Cyril Rioli is following the same path at Hawthorn.
It would have been helpful too at Richmond to have a development coach before their 3rd year in Blingers case and 4th in Jacko's case. The Club didn't have basic resources in the footy dept and until the new facilities are completed in 2011 our resources still aren't up to the elite standard of the best and wealthy clubs.
Having said that the player still needs to do the hard work and have the natural ability to begin with. Jacko was a gun long distance runner at school and of course Richie is finally starting to show the talent that had recruiters excited when he was a junior. Jake King for instance could work as hard as Ablett and Rioli (and he probably does as work ethic is a strength of his) but he'll still be a hack of a kick and just a VFL player at best :yep.
Once again, you confuse the result with the attitude and preparation. My point is that we must prepare our young players to win these last 10 games as best we can. If they lose, at least they have done everything in their control to win the game. If they win, fantastic. If we are preparing them to win, and they do, then we have to be prepared to accept that that is a very good thing for their development, and of more value than losing for the sake of an extra pick.
But you prepare the players to win even when a club is tanking. You say nothing to the players and you expect them to do their best and go out there and aim to win. You still do all the midweek preparation such as watching opposition videos, discussing tactics, etc with the players as normal. It's the match committee that manipulates team selection (play a young inexperienced side instead of your current "best" 22) and the coaching staff choose match-ups that are more for educational and developmental reasons at the expense of winning the game (such as get a young mid in his first or second year to try and run around with Judd, Ablett or this week Dal Santo instead of Jacko who we know already can do a tagging or run-with-role).
When you're a poor side you're losing far more often than winning anyway even with more experienced players. It's not a huge leap to tank :P. Doing the above means you're preparing for next year now rather than waiting for official preseason to start in November. Part of that preparation for next year and beyond as a club should be list management. We need to plan now for this. We need a wholistic plan. We can't afford to leave recruiting to chance as we have in the past. We'll have most likely 4 retirees this year. So having an average collection of picks - say 7, 24, 40, 56 - only covers them leaving. That leaves us relying on picks 72, 88, etc, which have a high probably of failing or being no better than what we have now, to replace our current list cloggers. How's that going to improve the quality of our list ???. Remember as well this year 1/3 of the kids usually available aren't. You need the early picks and as many as you can get your hands on. Sure you can trade someone with decent trade value such a Tuck say for another decent pick but that's just one extra pick who essentially is replacing Tucky not our list cloggers. Tanking on the other hand would give us two extra early picks for free!
Anti-tankers want their cake and to eat it too. They want wins now and they want a better list for the future compared to the poor one we have now. Under the current draft system and with the new teams coming in it doesn't work that way. You have to choose one or the other. Attitude and preparation alone while still necessary will not make us a better side. You need the top talent to begin with. Combine this talented list with a win at all costs attitude, preparation and elite training resources at their disposal and then you're going somewhere.
-
Probably the saddest thing for people with opinions like you and me MT is that the club isn't tanking and probably won't start tanking unless the ship has already sailed. :'(
-
Probably the saddest thing for people with opinions like you and me MT is that the club isn't tanking and probably won't start tanking unless the ship has already sailed. :'(
If we are 3-12 after the next 3 tough games (St K, Adel, Carl) then you would hope the club would change its mind but I won't hold my breath.
-
Perhaps a 100 pt shellacking at the hands of the saints might jolt them into reality.
-
Probably the saddest thing for people with opinions like you and me MT is that the club isn't tanking and probably won't start tanking unless the ship has already sailed. :'(
If we are 3-12 after the next 3 tough games (St K, Adel, Carl) then you would hope the club would change its mind but I won't hold my breath.
If we are 6-9 will you change yours?
:P
-
If we are 6 - 9 we will rejoice - NOT , if we are 5 -17 we will be calling for the execution of the people within our club the accept being average is goos enough!
Finishing last wont win anything but it will stop this delusional bull dust that we are close to being a finals side.
WE NEED GOOD PLAYERS , a united club and management who are strong and will not diverge from the hard decisions that must be made. Well I guess they don't have to be made if you all would like to keep finishing AVERAGE
-
we require another batch of kids to reboot for '10
comming 9th is not going to help
need to get away from the Walls-Geishen-Frawley era
-
Then have a look at Geelong. How long now have they been dominating in this competition? 4 years? It's just their bad luck that the sides they've faced in finals/grand finals have been higher quality than Brisbane who didn't dominate like Geelong have. Give them 3 years with Essendon, Collingwood, Collingwood and Pt Adelaide as Grand Final opponents and they'd broken Brisbane's record to be beside Melbourne with 4 in a row.
But yet people keep pleading for the tank - get the best kids in the draft, fill our list with the best talent and hope they all live up to their potential. Remember priority picks don't always net the best players - how far down was James Hird taken? Pick 79!!
Geelong midfeild:
James Bartel - pick 8 2001 draft
Joel Corey - pick 8 1999 draft
Joel Selwood - pick 7 2006 draft
Gary Ablett - F/S pick 2001 draft
Brad Ottens - pick 2 1999 draft
James Kelly - pick 17 2001 draft
-
You always teach the kids winning is everything, even when tanking. Tanking is in the lineup of the side, the kids will go out there and try 100% but it doesn't mean they realise we're trying to throw games to obtain better draft picks. More than likely they will lose because they aren't good enough yet and some of them aren't ready for AFL football.
I don't know how many times I have to say it for you to get it. While I don't think we're aggressively tanking right at this minute, as we would probably see Gourdis, Post, Putt a lot sooner than we have, the signs are there with Joel Bowden and Nathan Brown on the sidelines, etc along with a ton of experience. Hopefully it stays this way too and they continue down this, let's say 'list management' aka softcore tanking path.
Trust me if all we were focused on was winning we wouldn't be playing Tyrone Vickery, Tom Hislop, Alex Rance and the likes because even though they're BF hated options, the guys on the sidelines will most likely do a better job at getting you a win as those kids are in very early stages of development. We have drove ourselves into a corner where we have to tank as we relied on older players to win us game for so long and now they're all at the end of the road we're left with massive holes in the list and no quick fix option which history suggests we love so much. It has caught up with us, albeit very slowly and the Swans are in a similar position even though their problems are a lot worse. A bunch of old timers and not enough quality kids coming through to fill the gaps and a rampaging GC/WS with a bunch of cash and draft picks ready to bend over everybody over come trade/draft day.
-
Geelong midfeild:
James Bartel - pick 8 2001 draft
Joel Corey - pick 8 1999 draft
Joel Selwood - pick 7 2006 draft
Gary Ablett - F/S pick 2001 draft
Brad Ottens - pick 2 1999 draft
James Kelly - pick 17 2001 draft
Richmond midfield:
Brett Deledio - pick 1
Richard Tambling - pick 4
Trent Cotchin - pick 2
Ben Cousins - F/S
Adam Pattison - pick 16
Ty Vickery - pick 8
Dean Polo - pick 20
Your point?
-
His point is Geelong has a quality midfielders that came from top 10 - 20 draft picks and not from latter picks - good point -
-
Probably the saddest thing for people with opinions like you and me MT is that the club isn't tanking and probably won't start tanking unless the ship has already sailed. :'(
If we are 3-12 after the next 3 tough games (St K, Adel, Carl) then you would hope the club would change its mind but I won't hold my breath.
If we are 6-9 will you change yours?
:P
After seeing our 3 ins this week we won't be 6-9. We are playing our list. If by some miracle we did end up 6-9 then that'd be an indictment on our playing group. Seriously if we were good enough to win the next 3 games then we shouldn't have lost anymore than 3 games so far and we should be expecting a undefeated run home. Apart from the first 3 rounds we had a good draw this year. There are more mediocre teams this year than ever going by the ladder where 7-6 gets you a top 4 spot. We simply weren't and aren't anywhere near good enough to even beat these mediocre sides.
-
His point is Geelong has a quality midfielders that came from top 10 - 20 draft picks and not from latter picks - good point -
It's not a great point. Geelong haven't had PP's and haven't had a pick higher than 7. Also conveniently forgot to mention some of their finest players - Chapman, Ling, Steve Johnson. I wonder why?
Our list is littered with top 20 picks.
I'm not saying that we couldn't use more high picks (of course) but to turn the whole club around to give us one extra top pick is letting the tail wag the dog. It's akin to saying after a bad loss, "Well, we were playing St Kilda." Or, well, we were playing in Perth."
If people seriously believe that our problems are solved by an extra high pick or two, really, they're kidding themselves. Geelong realised that and did something about it, and, believe me, it had nothing to do with engineered losses.
Let's hope our review shows us something similar.
-
SEN played a snippet from Cambo just before 4pm. He said we need to follow the examples of Hawthorn and Melbourne (re: play the kids). He also said choosing Jade as caretaker was the right choice by the club.
-
Don't think there are many disagreeing with that.
-
Just to add to the debate...
Learn to look past numbers
Greg Baum | June 27, 2009
LEIGH Matthews, characteristically blunt, reckons it is hard to see a No. 1 draft pick in Jack Watts. In the two games he has played, Watts has looked overwhelmed. But it must be remembered that he is being held to an impossibly high standard. It is not his standard, but one set by the system. He is being held to the standard of No. 1 draft pick, and all it has come to mean.
If Watts had been drafted at, say, No. 40, he would still be the same man, the same footballer: 18, at school, a junior. But assessments would be different. It would be said that he had played as you might expect of an 18-year-old, part-time, schoolboy footballer thrown into the AFL. It would be said, as his school coach Robert Shaw said, that he was out of his league.
Much is skewed here. The foremost is the system. The draft order is seen as a perfect and immutable hierarchical arrangement of the available talent, from best to worst. The expectation is that the drafted players will be successful more or less in proportion to their draft number.
This ignores many realities. One is that clubs recruit according to their position and needs; Melbourne, too far down the ladder to bother with quick fixes, calculatedly chose a younger player in Watts. This did not stop the expectations piling up.
Another reality is that the draft order is a consensus, not a hierarchy. A third is that even recruiters admit it is only ever right on the day it is made. It is dynamic. From draft day onwards, some improve, some regress, some follow a steady course. Despite all the science now applied, no one can predict who will go which way.
The system is cruel on players, but cruel for recruiters, too. They make their judgments in advance, yet their work is judged retrospectively. Critics might quibble on draft day, then denounce thunderously five years later. Ultimately, it means jobs: ask Terry Wallace.
It is generally held that first-round draftees are guaranteed to become regular footballers. But let's look. We'll ignore the past three drafts, since it is too soon to make conclusive judgements about them, and concentrate on the three before that.
In 2005, Josh Kennedy, Beau Dowler, Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls, Darren Pfeiffer and Max Bailey all were drafted in the top 20. For different reasons, all have struggled to make an impact. Bernie Vince (32), John Anthony (37), Sam Lonergan (50), Joel Patfull (56) and Mathew Stokes (60) are all regulars.
In 2004, John Meesen, Chris Egan, Adam Thomson, Danny Meyer, Cameron Wood and Ryan Willits were all top-20 picks, Brent Prismall (32), Mark LeCras (37), Chris Knights (56), Matthew Egan (62), and James Gwilt (63) not. In 2003, the top 20 included Andrew Walker, Farren Ray, Kepler Bradley, Kane Tenace, David Trotter, Fergus Watts, Josh Willoughby, Billy Morrison and Llane Spaanderman, but not Jed Adcock (33), Mark Blake (38), Ricky Dyson (44), Heath Shaw (48), Daniel Jackson (53), Michael Rischitelli (61) or Shane Tuck (73).
It's gloriously inexact. If you trawl through these lists, every club has made "mistakes", and every club has identified "bargains". In fact, all they have done is make their most informed choice on draft day. The draft is a beginning, not an end.
Even at the pointy end, a certain level of inspired guesswork is necessary. The case in point is the famous 2004 draft, in which Lance Franklin was taken at No. 5, behind Brett Deledio, Jarryd Roughead, Ryan Griffen and Richard Tambling. This, as much as anything, probably cost Wallace his job. Yet on the day, doubt was muted.
Out of this system, each player emerges with a number, and it comes to define him thereafter. It lionises some, condemns others.
Sadly, the clubs are complicit in this....
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/learn-to-look-past-numbers/2009/06/26/1245961404996.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
-
AFL spin
load of rubbish
-
I would suggest higher draft choices give you a higher chance for picking up a very good player rather than a garrentee of claiming one. A high draft pick enables a club to use all the evidence and previous experience on hand to take a consisently good performer.
What is garrenteed though, if you finish with 4 wins or less, it that you get an extra opportunity to pick up a quality player. This is why, lets speculate, picks 4/18/20 is far more important to a clubs future than picks 6 & 24 etc.
Tanking this year will enable us a better chance to make an educated choice of 5/6 players that could be part of our premiership team in the future. The further you go up the draft peaking order the more speculative your choices become.
Its all about giving yourself the best odds of success
Stripes
-
So, just to refresh my memory - what week was it again that the Eagles are going to start their tanking strategy?
Worsfold must be livid - players being prepared to win at all costs yet going out and breaking every rule in the game plan by fighting hard as a team for 4 quarters and beating last year's premiers (or any team for that matter). Players like Natanui, Masten, Selwood would have got no benefit whatsoever from being part of a team that prepared, played and succeeded in that manner. Heads will definitely roll in the West this week.
-
Yes smokey, dreadfully unprofessional of the Eagles to win a game against the reigning premiers and jeopardise their PP. ::)
-
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=588046
-
11 Sydney 20 13 5 8 0 93.72
12 West Coast 16 13 4 9 0 89.44
13 North Melbourne 16 12 4 8 0 76.27
14 Richmond 12 12 3 9 0 79.80
15 Fremantle 12 13 3 10 0 76.17
16 Melbourne 4 13 1 12 0 68.14
Melbourne vs West Coast
Round 14 Sat 4 July MCG
-
Natanui type players is why clubs should tank. Richmond should tank its the best option for us with just afew games left this season.
-
gee i cant believe anyone who watched the BIG NAT last night would seriously prefer winning 6 games is as opposed to 4.
What bloody difference does it make. I would rather win 4 and at least show something in the other games we lose as opposed to winning 6 against Freo, Demons, North, Eagles etc etc and get smashed by the other teams at the top end. GET REAL PEOPLE!!!
Woosha is a VERY SMART OPERATOR. Our club can learn a hell of a lot from a club like that.
-
gee i cant believe anyone who watched the BIG NAT last night would seriously prefer winning 6 games is as opposed to 4.
What bloody difference does it make. I would rather win 4 and at least show something in the other games we lose as opposed to winning 6 against Freo, Demons, North, Eagles etc etc and get smashed by the other teams at the top end. GET REAL PEOPLE!!!
Woosha is a VERY SMART OPERATOR. Our club can learn a hell of a lot from a club like that.
AGREED!
-
Yes smokey, dreadfully unprofessional of the Eagles to win a game against the reigning premiers and jeopardise their PP. ::)
Very surprised the Eagles won...
-
I would suggest higher draft choices give you a higher chance for picking up a very good player rather than a garrentee of claiming one. A high draft pick enables a club to use all the evidence and previous experience on hand to take a consisently good performer.
What is garrenteed though, if you finish with 4 wins or less, it that you get an extra opportunity to pick up a quality player. This is why, lets speculate, picks 4/18/20 is far more important to a clubs future than picks 6 & 24 etc.
Tanking this year will enable us a better chance to make an educated choice of 5/6 players that could be part of our premiership team in the future. The further you go up the draft peaking order the more speculative your choices become.
Its all about giving yourself the best odds of success
Stripes
Exactly. The problem with Baum's article is he names 6 players in the top 20 who were flops (so supposedly 14 of the 20 weren't) and then 6 players outside the top 20 who made it of the 60 players picked up later on (most drafts go to about pick 80 roughly). It's about playing the odds.
-
Yes smokey, dreadfully unprofessional of the Eagles to win a game against the reigning premiers and jeopardise their PP. ::)
Very surprised the Eagles won...
Hawthorn woeful
-
West Coast - Beat the reigning premiers convincingly one week then the next start losing to the bottom side that's won just 4 games from its last 50 and lost its past three games by 10 goals :whistle
-
West Coast - Beat the reigning premiers convincingly one week then the next start losing to the bottom side that's won just 4 games from its last 50 and lost its past three games by 10 goals :whistle
your not suggesting the eagles tankfest is back on again ;)
On the other hand Melbourne would move to 8 points just 4 beneath us. Interesting scenarios all round.
Melbourne play
Us (Richmond) in Round 18
Nth in Round 19
Freo in Round 20 (Melbourne)
West Coast Play
Port in Round 16
Freo in Round 17
North in Round 20
Richmond in Round 22.
We can cost WCE there priority pick in R22 if they havent won the 1 remaining game they need to forfeit the pick.
Melbourne requires a lot of luck and alot of stupidity at the same time from there point of view nevertheless if they notch up win no2 today anything could happen.
-
your not suggesting the eagles tankfest is back on again ;)
How could you say such a thing ;). I'm sure this is all above board :whistle
Hmmm there's still a chance Melbourne won't finish with the first two picks if they beat us :whistle.
-
Herald Sun not updating scores past 26 minute mark but the snowflakes are 20 points up so they move to 8 points. Tom Scully to Richmond is still possible :cheers
-
Herald Sun not updating scores past 26 minute mark but the snowflakes are 20 points up so they move to 8 points. Tom Scully to Richmond is still possible :cheers
The Dees won 112-92. Sadly I can't see the Dees winning 3 more games for us to get Scully. Yep we could tank and they may beat Freo in Melbourne but that's about it. North should beat them.
-
West Coast - Beat the reigning premiers convincingly one week then the next start losing to the bottom side that's won just 4 games from its last 50 and lost its past three games by 10 goals :whistle
Hwthorn is not much chop these days
-
Looking at the remaining games here are some scenarios:
West Coast must lose every game to get a priority pick - if they do that then North have 5 wins, Richmond and Fremantle have a minimum of 4.
North must lose every game to get a priority pick - if they do that then West Coast have 5 wins, Richmond have a minimum of 4, Melbourne have a minimum of 3.
Fremantle can win one more game and still get a priority pick - if they don't then then West Coast have 5 wins.
Richmond can win one more game and still get a priority pick - if they don't then North and West Coast have 5 wins, Melbourne have a minimum of 3.
Melbourne can win 2 more games and still get a priority pick - if they don't win any then North have 5 wins, Richmond and Fremantle have a minimum of 4, only 2 of Richmond/Fremantle/West Coast can stay under 5.
It's only possible for a maximum of 4 teams to get a priority pick.
Here are the 'affected' games:
R16 - Richmond vs North
R17 - Fremantle vs West Coast
R18 - Melbourne vs Richmond
R19 - North vs Melbourne
R20 - West Coast vs North
R20 - Melbourne vs Fremantle
R22 - West Coast vs Richmond
-
Nice work smokey.
North just in front at half-time up at the SCG. Hopefully one less team to worry about.
-
North just in front at half-time up at the SCG. Hopefully one less team to worry about.
Scratch that. Swans kicked away in time-on of the last to win.
-
No surprise that WC lost on he road to a fired up Melbourne. That's their 18th consecutive road loss.
-
Given how many teams *could* be eligible for priority picks come end of season - is the tank even worth it? if 4 teams can get it and we are 1 of them that leaves (likely) WC, Freo and Melbourne around the same if not worse position than us.
I'm not sure how they scale the priority picks but surely the worse position = the better pick so if we end up the best of the worst (which is a distinct possibility) is that priority pick likely to be much of an advantage anyway? We'll still get picks for being low on the ladder and Melb, Freo, WC will use their priority picks to snap up the best of what they can before we can.
It seems like a catch 22, even if we tank we have to tank better than others in the "draft pick cavalry" and given our inability to maintain a winning drive for four quarters can we even tank properly at this stage? :) Although we did it the smart way on Saturday - let em break away early then we can seem like we're trying for the second half but lost because we couldn't recover our first half losses!!
-
We have both the Eagles and North's PP chances in our own hands given they are on 4 wins and we play both of them in the last 8 rounds.
Worsfold is speaking tank-talk again ...
"I'm prepared to wear that pain and prepared to wear the short-sighted criticism for the long vision that we have."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/80204/default.aspx
-
We have both the Eagles and North's PP chances in our own hands given they are on 4 wins and we play both of them in the last 8 rounds.
Worsfold is speaking tank-talk again ...
"I'm prepared to wear that pain and prepared to wear the short-sighted criticism for the long vision that we have."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/80204/default.aspx
With Terry now gone...Worsfold has taken the mantle of the biggest "Spin Doctor" in the AFL.
After their loss to Melbourne I can say its starting to wear a little thin on the Perth public.
-
We have both the Eagles and North's PP chances in our own hands given they are on 4 wins and we play both of them in the last 8 rounds.
Worsfold is speaking tank-talk again ...
"I'm prepared to wear that pain and prepared to wear the short-sighted criticism for the long vision that we have."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/80204/default.aspx
With Terry now gone...Worsfold has taken the mantle of the biggest "Spin Doctor" in the AFL.
After their loss to Melbourne I can say its starting to wear a little thin on the Perth public.
The Perth public will be back on side if in late November the back page of West Australian has a photo of Worsfold with two of the best 4 kids in the draft standing either side of him in West Coast polos. The RFC has to make sure for its own self-interest that doesn't happen.
-
Another loss today gets us one small step closer towards our much needed priority pick at the start of the 2nd round.
-
Lose by one point would be ideal.
-
This isn't on the net so I scanned it in. It's Malthouse view on tanking...
Stamp out priority draft picks to banish tanks from the grounds
By MICK MALTHOUSE
SAT 11 JUL 2009, The Australian, Page 47
IT's time for the ugliest word in football to rear its head again.
The top sides have September on their minds; the middling outfits are focused on that, too, but down at the bottom of the ladder, it's priority draft picks and next year that are starting to becomes the issues.
Allegations of tanking -- the word the AFL doesn't want you to hear -- are about to be in the news again.
What a shame.
Last week was a definitive round for a lot of clubs for a lot of reasons. We hoped for and got a great game between St Kilda and Geelong, but we were surprised by a blowout between the Bulldogs and Hawthorn.
The other results were reasonably predictable and now we have a handful of sides who are approaching the mathematical reality of not making the eight.
Where do they head?
There was an interesting comment made during the week by Terry Wallace when he was asked about coaching and whether he had coached to lose games.
Terry said he coached every game, but he didn't necessarily make moves in every game towards the end of the year. He basically said that he let the game run out.
Every coach knows you cannot tell players to play at half-pace; it is just not on. A coach can, if he wants, move players to a position where they are less effective. If a coach doesn't make moves at all, then you let players run their own game and will find they are against multiple opponents who are coming off the interchange.
I can't be certain, but I interpret Terry's comments to mean that Richmond, at the time he was speaking of, was not necessarily unhappy to lose a game of football if it meant a better draft pick.
Terry is a great coach and if he did allow this to occur, I would suspect he was under some pressure, or maybe it is just the invidious position clubs are put in when they know that a win will be more costly than a loss. Maybe I have misinterpreted his comments altogether.
The fact remains, however, that Melbourne, Richmond, North Melbourne, Fremantle and West Coast find themselves in a position where they can get priority draft choices should things go a certain way for the rest of the year.
I am in no way suggesting that they will, but the reality is that there are priority draft choices for clubs who keep under a maximum number of wins for the season and you cannot stop the perception, if not reality, that there is an inducement to underperform.
John Worsfold has just re-signed with West Coast, a side that has lost 18 consecutive games on the road. I listened to him speak recently and he suggested they have a young side and the plan is to nurture them through to a mature group.
The Eagles won a premiership by nurturing young players through so the reasoning is very sound, but we are rarely dealt the same hand as coaches.
John would dearly love to find that he had a young Chris Judd, Daniel Kerr, Ben Cousins and Dean Cox on his list again. Collectively, they were one of the best midfield groupings ever, but it is unlikely he will be that lucky again.
John now has to go through his list and find out who can fill the key positions. He has an exciting prospect in Nick Naitanui.
Fremantle has been in the building process for a number of years and it has a coach who has been more than patient. The Dockers lose games when they are in front, which they did at home last week, and this is part of a learning process, but now the young players have to learn how to win or they will continue to learn how not to win.
North Melbourne and Richmond are both operating under caretaker coaches. This pair are the intriguing ones because I dare say that whoever inherits these sides will be hoping that neither of them win too many more games so they can get the best possible draft picks.
The caretaker coaches, of course, will not want this to happen; they will want to win every possible game to enhance their career prospects. I suspect a taste of senior coaching will be addictive to both these men and they will not want to go back to being assistants.
Melbourne won last week in a tribute to Jim Stynes, but it has to keep winning -- the team cannot be allowed to continue without showing signs of improvement.
The club has been in the wilderness for several years and has not made inroads on the ladder. While it was wonderful they did it for Jim, you wonder why they have not been able to motivate themselves to such a performance earlier. They showed on the weekend they are capable of doing it.
All these sides will be aware that the Gold Coast is coming in and Western Sydney after that. The best 12 17-year-olds are already out of the draft and the draft is already compromised, but there are still priority picks available.
The talk will start very soon about which clubs have decided to pursue these last picks. I know this upsets the AFL and they deny it happens.
The last thing the AFL needs is people saying or thinking that sides may go into a match not wanting to win.
You would never hear of tanking, whether it happens or not, if priority picks did not exist.
A side should never need to bottom out to rise again and good clubs can always rebuild themselves without this help.
Football should not be in the position where in round 15 the talk of tanking and priorities starts again. It is unsavoury, a blight on the game and totally avoidable. Get rid of priority picks and you will get rid of this ugly allegation and this unseemly suspicion.
-
Tigers going beautifully today tank wise 1.8 in the 3rd quarter so far ... well done to all as for Malthouse ... hes peeing in the wind. The AFL wont pull the picks ... not before the Gold Coast come in anyway.
-
If that's the effort for the rest of our games with such a young side then we'll survive until the end of the season without the Club imploding and media pressure coming from the outside. Tiger callers post-game seem quite calm despite the loss.
-
2 weeks in a row i have walked out feeling very pleased.
Good result
keep up the good work boys.
Certainly has a touch of the Blues a few years back when ervery game they come close but no cigar
-
2 weeks in a row i have walked out feeling very pleased.
Good result
keep up the good work boys.
Certainly has a touch of the Blues a few years back when ervery game they come close but no cigar
Sydney losing is also a good result for us if the Foley rumours are true ;)
-
What we need:
We need to tank to get the extra pick
We need to finish on the bottom or atleast 2nd last
We need to trade out some senior players with currency ie. Foley, Newman etc.
We need to pick 3 midfielders and 2 KPPs over 195cm.
We need to pick as many of the following players as we can from the draft
1) Tom Scully
2) Dustin Martin
3) Koby Stevens
4) Ben Griffiths
5) Daniel Talia.
Im thinking we will get 2 of 5 by trading may we get 3 of the 5 ... only a miracle gets us the 5.
-
Scully will go No.1 so we've got no chance of getting him. Melbourne won't win another 3 games. We can however finish bottom still which would grab a Butcher if we want a 195cm+ KPP. Pick up a Talia with our PP if he's still available and that's two plus a mid with our 2nd rounder. Another mid with our 3rd rounder. A trade for another first rounder if we were to go down that path would get us another mid.
-
Hard to tank when Freo can only kick a point to half-time and are 70 points down :P
-
Hard to tank when Freo can only kick a point to half-time and are 70 points down :P
lucky we don't play them again this year. it's hard to lose to that mob
-
Scully will go No.1 so we've got no chance of getting him. Melbourne won't win another 3 games. We can however finish bottom still which would grab a Butcher if we want a 195cm+ KPP. Pick up a Talia with our PP if he's still available and that's two plus a mid with our 2nd rounder. Another mid with our 3rd rounder. A trade for another first rounder if we were to go down that path would get us another mid.
i agree totally with that plan. of course the player i want the most out of the draft is the superstar in scully. but i wouldn't be displeased at all if we end up getting butcher. he fills our biggest need i reckon. good thing he didn't do that well at the u18 carnival. may just make it bit easier to grab him.
just shows how important the PP is to us. definitely need 2 talls in the top 20. the options for him at the PP are talia, griffiths or carlisle.
i think it would be mighty hard to trade for another first rounder
-
Hard to tank when Freo can only kick a point to half-time and are 70 points down :P
lucky we don't play them again this year. it's hard to lose to that mob
Freo play the Eagles in 2 weeks. The Eagles will have to tank massively to lose.
-
Hard to tank when Freo can only kick a point to half-time and are 70 points down :P
lucky we don't play them again this year. it's hard to lose to that mob
Freo play the Eagles in 2 weeks. The Eagles will have to tank massively to lose.
Freo's record in the derby is great though so the Eagles may have their work cut out.
A win for Freo won't be that bad gets them to 4 wins and if we can lose all our remaining games despite our superior percentage to them we will still be on 3 wins with the Dees who we lay in rd 18 assuming they beat us. Just one win by us may be the difference of us snaring pick 2 or pick 4,5 or 6.
-
Looking at the remaining games here are some scenarios:
West Coast must lose every game to get a priority pick - if they do that then North have 5 wins, Richmond and Fremantle have a minimum of 4.
North must lose every game to get a priority pick - if they do that then West Coast have 5 wins, Richmond have a minimum of 4, Melbourne have a minimum of 3 4.
Fremantle can win one more game and still get a priority pick - if they don't then then West Coast have 5 wins.
Richmond can win one more game and still get a priority pick - if they don't then North and West Coast have 5 wins, Melbourne have a minimum of 3 4.
Melbourne can win 2 1 more games and still get a priority pick - if they don't win any then North have 5 wins, Richmond and Fremantle have a minimum of 4, only 2 of Richmond/Fremantle/West Coast can stay under 5.
It's only possible for a maximum of 4 3 teams to get a priority pick.
Here are the 'affected' games:
R16 - Richmond vs North
R17 - Fremantle vs West Coast
R18 - Melbourne vs Richmond
R19 - North vs Melbourne
R20 - West Coast vs North
R20 - Melbourne vs Fremantle
R22 - West Coast vs Richmond
We're about to enter the 7 week tank-athon now. I think only 3 teams can now end up with a PP with the Dees winning today. Survival of the tank-iest :yep
West Coast 4 wins
North 4
Richmond 3
Melbourne 3
Fremantle 3
-
We're about enter the 7 week tank-athon now. I think now only 3 teams can now end up with a PP with the Dees winning today. Survival of the tank-iest :yep
West Coast 4 wins
North 4
Richmond 3
Melbourne 3
Fremantle 3
So looking forward to it.. NOT :'(
-
We're about enter the 7 week tank-athon now. I think now only 3 teams can now end up with a PP with the Dees winning today. Survival of the tank-iest :yep
West Coast 4 wins
North 4
Richmond 3
Melbourne 3
Fremantle 3
So looking forward to it.. NOT :'(
It's only 7 more weeks WP. Chin up ... we'll survive through it if it benefits the list in the long term. Just go to the footy and cheer each and every good and exciting thing each of the cubs do such as we saw from Post and Vickery yesterday :thumbsup.
-
It's only 7 more weeks WP. Chin up ... we'll survive through it if it benefits the list in the long term. Just go to the footy and cheer each and every good and exciting thing each of the cubs do such as we saw from Post and Vickery yesterday :thumbsup.
Sorry MT - for me now I am just so sick of losing. I want to see the kids play but I also want to win because winnig is actually a good thing.
While some people don't care what the results are, I still care and I am still "ticked" off after yesterday - we could have won it was Carlton for crying out loud
I am seriously starting to think why do I bother forking out the $$$ I do to watch loss after loss- they aren't little $$$.
just so sick of losing :help
-
It's only 7 more weeks WP. Chin up ... we'll survive through it if it benefits the list in the long term. Just go to the footy and cheer each and every good and exciting thing each of the cubs do such as we saw from Post and Vickery yesterday :thumbsup.
Sorry MT - for me now I am just so sick of losing. I want to see the kids play but I also want to win because winnig is actually a good thing.
While some people don't care what the results are, I still care and I am still "ticked" off after yesterday - we could have won it was Carlton for crying out loud
I am seriously starting to think why do I bother forking out the $$$ I do to watch loss after loss- they aren't little $$$.
just so sick of losing :help
I can understand that WP. I guess I'm so sick of losing that it's ironically a significant part of my support to tank if that makes sense. I'm sick of us being crap and having a glass ceiling at 9th spot on the ladder. I'm sick of us having too many ordinary footballers on our list and keeping them for far too long because we never have enough decent picks to delist and replace them with better players. We are finally going to invest properly in the draft. That means finally putting significant $$$ and resources where it counts into recruiting and facilities for development. Part of this investment comes out of our pocket as members. A record number of members. The club will make a million dollar porfit because of all our collective hip pocket support - big and small.
Let's give the Club as many top 20 picks as we can to give them the best chance to clear the decks and bring in much better talent with these greater recruiting resources and with which these players will use these new elite facilities to develop faster and to a higher standard that will turn us into a top 4 side. The cost of this is short-term pain (losing this year) but after 27 years of waiting and quick fixes I'm willing to wait a little longer if that means we finally do things right. I'm comfortably numb about results at the moment to be honest. Even if we had won I wouldn't be as excited as I was last year because the season is shot. A win here and there won't for satisfy me and compensate for a shocking year. We must finally use this stupid draft system which rewards absolute failure to our advantage. I want to look back on 2009 and say yeah we were hopeless and finished down the bottom of the ladder but out of that we fast tracked a number of our kids plus in the draft we grabbed another gun mid, key forward, etc who are part of a strong list in 5 years time and are leading us into another finals campaign.
-
Given its our last season to take advantage of the draft concessions, we really do need to take advantage of them while we can.
It will make up for what we'll miss out on in the next 3 years.
-
12 West Coast 16 15 4 11 0 88.14
13 North Melbourne 16 15 4 11 0 77.72
14 Richmond 12 15 3 12 0 77.80
15 Melbourne 12 15 3 12 0 73.85
16 Fremantle 12 15 3 12 0 71.67
-
Well Walls would play the kids and rest Cox, Kerr and the their older players if he was Eagles coach because they've won a flag recently. However he would try to win every game if he was coach of Melbourne because they need the lift wins give the Club. Go Figure! ???
-
It's only 7 more weeks WP. Chin up ... we'll survive through it if it benefits the list in the long term. Just go to the footy and cheer each and every good and exciting thing each of the cubs do such as we saw from Post and Vickery yesterday :thumbsup.
Sorry MT - for me now I am just so sick of losing. I want to see the kids play but I also want to win because winnig is actually a good thing.
While some people don't care what the results are, I still care and I am still "ticked" off after yesterday - we could have won it was Carlton for crying out loud
I am seriously starting to think why do I bother forking out the $$$ I do to watch loss after loss- they aren't little $$$.
just so sick of losing :help
Totally agree!
Sick to death of losing
It seems as losing is acceptable at punt road :banghead
-
It's only 7 more weeks WP. Chin up ... we'll survive through it if it benefits the list in the long term. Just go to the footy and cheer each and every good and exciting thing each of the cubs do such as we saw from Post and Vickery yesterday :thumbsup.
Sorry MT - for me now I am just so sick of losing. I want to see the kids play but I also want to win because winnig is actually a good thing.
While some people don't care what the results are, I still care and I am still "ticked" off after yesterday - we could have won it was Carlton for crying out loud
I am seriously starting to think why do I bother forking out the $$$ I do to watch loss after loss- they aren't little $$$.
just so sick of losing :help
BOO HOO!
You want your cake and eat it too. Its time for the RFC to be SMART and look to the future and if that makes a few on here a little sick of loosing, so what!!! Suck it up!!!! :banghead
-
so are we hoping Melbourne, West Coast, Fremantle and North Melbourne win more then five matches?
just hard going to matches and watching teams like Essendon win against us.
would love to just win that match to eff them p***ks up!
our draw for the remaining seven matches are all winnable matches, which would come in handy if we were fighting for a top eight spot.
makes the last seven weeks harder to 'tank'. i think i am leaning towards 'tanking'. i think we can lose all seven matches and i think Fremantle might win
one or two matches.
-
Now we've got the Herald-Sun pushing for Melbourne to tank :P
Time for Melbourne Demons to gain from the pain
Mark Stevens | July 14, 2009
MELBOURNE has gone through too much pain to let it slip now.
Deep down, the hierarchy knows it.
The supporters know it too.
Winning more than four games this year would be irresponsible.
As tantalising as the final seven weeks look on paper, Melbourne must ensure it wins only once more.
Don't call it tanking. Just call it smart list management.
The players will be trying, but that doesn't mean the coaching staff won't be shuffling names on the magnetic board with an eye to the future.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25778488-19742,00.html
-
BOO HOO!
You want your cake and eat it too. Its time for the RFC to be SMART and look to the future and if that makes a few on here a little sick of loosing, so what!!! Suck it up!!!! :banghead
Seeing I have been very clear in the fact that I am ANTI-TANKING I don't think I want my cake and to eat it too ...
Whatever
-
Now we've got the Herald-Sun pushing for Melbourne to tank :P
Time for Melbourne Demons to gain from the pain
Mark Stevens | July 14, 2009
MELBOURNE has gone through too much pain to let it slip now.
Deep down, the hierarchy knows it.
The supporters know it too.
Winning more than four games this year would be irresponsible.
As tantalising as the final seven weeks look on paper, Melbourne must ensure it wins only once more.
Don't call it tanking. Just call it smart list management.
The players will be trying, but that doesn't mean the coaching staff won't be shuffling names on the magnetic board with an eye to the future.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25778488-19742,00.html
lol
-
I'm usually about winning no matter where we are on the ladder but I have to admit the "T" word is starting to creep into my thought processes for the first time ever and for one very good reason. Ninth place finishes! I'm sorry, but they suck dogs balls, especially when we don't carry on the momentum of a very good second half season. If winning was all important to our players psyche, why didn't the winning feeling continue on into this year?? Why did it stop in the early 80's?? It wasn't because we lost that loving feeling, it was because we lost or didn't have the cattle to carry on sustained success! I now feel that the only way we are going to get that winning feeling back is to build the club with more quality youngsters and a decent coach to shape them into future stars. We have no key forwards or backmen of star quality. We have serviceable ones and serviceable is not going to win us premierships. I can see we have a really good core of young players and we need to keep that flow going by introducing more quality youngsters with early draft pics.
I will still hate seeing us lose especially to the scum and the wobbles and I will no doubt still cheer if we win, but if we don't, I won't feel too upset knowing that a team stuck in reverse gear with the current draft system, does deliver many advantages.
-
BOO HOO!
You want your cake and eat it too. Its time for the RFC to be SMART and look to the future and if that makes a few on here a little sick of loosing, so what!!! Suck it up!!!! :banghead
You have admitted in another thread that you decided not to go to watch Richmond because "Going to the footy and hoping your team loses is just not enjoyable".
Is that how you suck it up?
I imagine it wouldn't be enjoyable to hope they lose but I wouldn't know because I'd never do it.
So, it's ok for you to stay away and hope they lose but not ok for people who do bother to go and support to want to win. ???
No cake for you.
Last time I checked the future was any time beyond now and includes the coming weekend's game.
-
BOO HOO!
You want your cake and eat it too. Its time for the RFC to be SMART and look to the future and if that makes a few on here a little sick of loosing, so what!!! Suck it up!!!! :banghead
Seeing I have been very clear in the fact that I am ANTI-TANKING I don't think I want my cake and to eat it too ...
Whatever
I am anti tanking as well, and I actually beleive that the players who play each week play as if its it last game.They play to WIN
If some of you think that players go out to lose , you are totally wrong.
-
and furthermore, we have a ordinary history with drafting players, so whats the point?? JON :banghead
-
BOO HOO!
You want your cake and eat it too. Its time for the RFC to be SMART and look to the future and if that makes a few on here a little sick of loosing, so what!!! Suck it up!!!! :banghead
Seeing I have been very clear in the fact that I am ANTI-TANKING I don't think I want my cake and to eat it too ...
Whatever
You want your cake and eat it too by wanting to win now, and let me guess you want to keep winning next year too. Now I hope I am very clear here too, we are not good enough!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :wallywink People like you live in fairyland and have for 3 decades! :banghead FFS we need better players to compete with the clubs like St. Kilda and Geelong in the future not Fremantle and Melbourne.
Winning a few meaningless games now just to keep a couple of people like you happy is just stupid and irresponsible. Look past your own agenda for a minute and maybe we as a club will be back somewhere you might be happy with.
I know I am wasting my time with people like you but WHATEVER!!!
Maybe if we all think happy thoughts everything will change for the RFC or maybe we should get better players into our club and give ourselves a chance.
-
BOO HOO!
You want your cake and eat it too. Its time for the RFC to be SMART and look to the future and if that makes a few on here a little sick of loosing, so what!!! Suck it up!!!! :banghead
Seeing I have been very clear in the fact that I am ANTI-TANKING I don't think I want my cake and to eat it too ...
Whatever
I am anti tanking as well, and I actually beleive that the players who play each week play as if its it last game.They play to WIN
If some of you think that players go out to lose , you are totally wrong.
:banghead :banghead :banghead No wonder everyone on here thinks you are a flog! Nobody says the players go out to loose- is it that hard to work out! And if it is i will not even try to confuse you with it.
Keep up the good work Jackstar
-
Big Tone, what is the point to tanking? At Punt Rd there is not a winning culture, tanking to get a number 1 or 2 pick to Punt Rd only reinforces that losing culture.We need to win games in order be financially viable and to create a winning culture. Essendon have never had a number 1 pick and have won a flag this millenium, Sydney were recently in two gfs and won one without having to tank, Port Adelaide, Brisbane same story. St. Kilda havent won a flag yet despite all their early picks, ditto Carlton, Freo, ourselves. Success breeds success, not losing!
-
Big Tone, what is the point to tanking? At Punt Rd there is not a winning culture, tanking to get a number 1 or 2 pick to Punt Rd only reinforces that losing culture.We need to win games in order be financially viable and to create a winning culture. Essendon have never had a number 1 pick and have won a flag this millenium, Sydney were recently in two gfs and won one without having to tank, Port Adelaide, Brisbane same story. St. Kilda havent won a flag yet despite all their early picks, ditto Carlton, Freo, ourselves. Success breeds success, not losing!
This is what the rest of us who want to tank call the 9th strategy. Finishing 9th has ruined Richmond. Winning meaningless games has ruined Richmond. We are stupid if we dont tank. With Gold Coast and West Sydney coming into the comp, you strategy is one that would see us get no where near a flag for the next 20 years. TANKING is the only hope for us- that and getting a decent coach like Malthouse. Thats how we can change the culture. By bringing in kids like Scully who bleeds yellow & black and wants to play for us. By bringing in 3 or 4 top quality kids to replace the aging players who have never brought any success to Richmond anyway and by bringing in with them a coach like Malthouse who can teach them the right way and Inspire Deledio and Tambling to improve further.
-
History has never suggested Tanking works. Why would you try again after a failed one?
Adelaide have NEVER tanked. NEVER. Have just drafted well and have magnificent football department. Same with Port. Even with Essendon they have no top 5 draft picks ripping up the competition. It's all well developed youngsters.
Tanking has never won a premiership.
Hawthorn is the only team with concessions that have won a premiership. But I'd argue that there game plan won them the Garnd Fainl they should never have won. The invention of the rolling zone and tactics of professional free kicks and rush behind rules were taken advantage of perfectly. They also have never had a number 1 draft pick.
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
-
Look past your own agenda for a minute and maybe we as a club will be back somewhere you might be happy with.
My own agenda.... what would that be exactly? I'd love to know what you think my agenda actually is.
I know I am wasting my time with people like you but WHATEVER!!!
People like me? :lol
Just because I don't agree with your tanking views you say I live in fairyland and you reckon you are wasting your time on people like me. You are entitled to your view and I'm entitled to mine.
Maybe if we all think happy thoughts everything will change for the RFC or maybe we should get better players into our club and give ourselves a chance.
So are you saying that there is absolutely no upside regarding our list right at the minute?
Whether people want to admit it or not we actually do have some very good young players at the Club now and I want them to understand that winning is what matters not tanking. I want to them to believe they can win as opposed to going through season after season thinking well it's OK to lose because the Club will get some good draft picks this year
So forgive me because I actually think that there is some upside in relation to some of the young blokes on our list. granted we have made some shocking decisions over the years but we have actually got some right.
So if that's thinking happy thoughts then I am guilty
-
History has never suggested Tanking works. Why would you try again after a failed one?
Adelaide have NEVER tanked. NEVER. Have just drafted well and have magnificent football department. Same with Port. Even with Essendon they have no top 5 draft picks ripping up the competition. It's all well developed youngsters.
Tanking has never won a premiership.
Hawthorn is the only team with concessions that have won a premiership. But I'd argue that there game plan won them the Garnd Fainl they should never have won. The invention of the rolling zone and tactics of professional free kicks and rush behind rules were taken advantage of perfectly. They also have never had a number 1 draft pick.
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
No doubt, the post of the year.
:thumbsup
-
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
Knee jerk deluded reacting does.
-
No doubt, the post of the year.
:thumbsup
You have never been more correct Jack.
-
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
Knee jerk deluded reacting does.
delusion my friend is when you win meaningless games for year on end finishing 9th and 10th and getting crap picks.
-
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
Knee jerk deluded reacting does.
delusion my friend is when you win meaningless games for year on end finishing 9th and 10th and getting crap picks.
Delusion is when you blame it on the picks.
-
delusion my friend is when you win meaningless games for year on end finishing 9th and 10th and getting crap picks.
It's not necessarily the pick number but who you select.
pick 7 in last years draft was some kid called Daniel Rich and he aint to shabby for a crap pick :rollin
-
delusion my friend is when you win meaningless games for year on end finishing 9th and 10th and getting crap picks.
It's not necessarily the pick number but who you select.
pick 7 in last years draft was some kid called Daniel Rich and he aint to shabby for a crap pick :rollin
Daniel Rich= GUN. He will win a Brownlow one day
-
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
Knee jerk deluded reacting does.
delusion my friend is when you win meaningless games for year on end finishing 9th and 10th and getting crap picks.
Define crap picks?
Brisbane didn't tank last year and picked up Rich, if they won another game may have picked up Chris Yarran who isn't anywhere near rated as Rich.
However in Melbourne and West Coasts case of tanking to get a completely separate pick is obviously an advantage. But tanking to get pick 1 over 5 as an absolutely tanking extreme - history has no evidence of this working.
Maybe tank and get pick 7, Selwood, Rioli and Rich all best 1st year players have been number 7. No team had to tank to pick up those players.
There is no word to convince me tanking works. Sure if it comes down to the last game of teh year that if you lose you get pick 3 instead of pick 4. Sure you get a slight advantage, but that still doens't convince me that it has that has significant effect to win premierships.
If we won extra game and missed out on Deledio and Tambling we could only pick up a Griffen and or Williams or Franklin. I don't think we'd be a worse side.
-
besides the fact that us tanking gets us an extra pick at the start of the 2nd round, id prefer to get a real early pick. People talk up Rich ... anyone wanna explain pick 8: Jarrad Oakley Nicholls and how JON fits in with us not tanking as the best strategy.
In effect for 7 weeks of pain you guys want to lose access to a potential superstar like Scully.
-
Big tone, what are meaningless wins exactly? Tell the players and supporters who sing the song the song after the game, the sacked coaches, the sponsers, the kids who have no idea of the intracies of the draft etc.what meaningless wins are. Most of all tell the supporters of this club who have stuck by them since 1980!
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
OK now how do you avoid meaningless wins?
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
Sorry I have to disagree.
The fact of the matter is tanking is like doing well at school. You just simply have more options.
Just cause you have good school grades doesn't mean your going to go onto be a successful doctor.
It's what you do with them that counts.
If we lost 1 more game in 2005 we may have picked up Ryder instead of Nicholls. But we could have won 3 more games made the 8 played finals and picked up Shaun Higgins with pick 11. We would have won more games, played finals, gained massive experience for Deledio's etc and had a better list and better player for first round pick at the end of the day.
For the heart ache it causes nothing suggests that lower picks guarantee success.
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
Sorry I have to disagree.
The fact of the matter is tanking is like doing well at school. You just simply have more options.
Just cause you have good school grades doesn't mean your going to go onto be a successful doctor.
It's what you do with them that counts.
If we lost 1 more game in 2005 we may have picked up Ryder instead of Nicholls. But we could have won 3 more games made the 8 played finals and picked up Shaun Higgins with pick 11. We would have won more games, played finals, gained massive experience for Deledio's etc and had a better list and better player for first round pick at the end of the day.
For the heart ache it causes nothing suggests that lower picks guarantee success.
But the issue is that we wouldnt necessarily pick up Ryder :banghead
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
Sorry I have to disagree.
The fact of the matter is tanking is like doing well at school. You just simply have more options.
Just cause you have good school grades doesn't mean your going to go onto be a successful doctor.
It's what you do with them that counts.
If we lost 1 more game in 2005 we may have picked up Ryder instead of Nicholls. But we could have won 3 more games made the 8 played finals and picked up Shaun Higgins with pick 11. We would have won more games, played finals, gained massive experience for Deledio's etc and had a better list and better player for first round pick at the end of the day.
For the heart ache it causes nothing suggests that lower picks guarantee success.
But the issue is that we wouldnt necessarily pick up Ryder :banghead
Most likley not.
Which goes back to the argument that we need more resources in scouting for talent.
Also says alot about our developing department and structure.
Just wanted to add that tanking should only be talked about when referencing losing games for an "extra" pick not lower picks. History has never, not once proved that getting a lower pick will get you the better player. getting an "extra" pick however is an advantage. In Melbourne's case at this stage I can understand that winning no more than 1 more game will be the difference from getting Trengrove or not. That is a whole separate argument and comes down to running the club like a business. But again such as Carltons case and St.Kildas (so far) have never won a premiership with these concessions.
I'd rather teach our boys to learn that no matter what game it is, you play for this club and you play hard and with desire. The moment you let them off the hook by letting them earn the easy coin for a 50% effort is the point you let complacency set in and laziness. 2 death warrants of a football team you never want.
-
So if the ladder ends up like it is now in the bottom eight with Melbourne and the Eagles winning less than 5 games what picks will we get?? Is pick 3 our first pick or pick 6?
Port Adelaide 15 7 8 0 91.9 28
Hawthorn 15 7 8 0 89.2 28
Sydney 15 6 9 0 93.2 24
West Coast 15 4 11 0 88.1 16
North Melbourne 15 4 11 0 77.7 16
Richmond 15 3 12 0 77.8 12
Melbourne 15 3 12 0 73.8 12
Fremantle 15 3 12 0 71.7 12
-
We would have pick 5 if the draft happened tomorrow. Freo would get a priority pick at the start of the 2nd round, since they had more than 4 wins last year.
-
Mike Sheahan's hopped on the tank bandwagon....
AFL must rejig its priority-pick system
Mike Sheahan | July 14, 2009 09:05pm
DESPITE its best intentions - honourable intentions, too - the AFL is duty-bound to revisit its draft compensation system. With seven rounds remaining in the home-and-away series, there is more interest in the spots at the bottom of the ladder than the top.
.......
How can a club turn its back on a system that delivered Nick Riewoldt and Justin Koschitzke to St Kilda in 2000, Jarryd Roughead and Lance Franklin to Hawthorn in 2004, Dale Thomas and Scott Pendlebury to Collingwood in 2005, and Matthew Kreuzer and Chris Judd to Carlton in 2007?
The answer is it can't.
Demetriou says: "Melbourne Football Club, in my view, will do everything it can to win football matches because it needs to win football matches and their own people have said so.
"I happen to think those people are of the highest integrity."
I happen to think Carlton learnt to live with defeat for a period in 2007 because of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Most Melbourne supporters will do the same.
Time for the AFL to adopt the old saying, God helps those who help themselves.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25783692-19742,00.html
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
Sorry I have to disagree.
The fact of the matter is tanking is like doing well at school. You just simply have more options.
Just cause you have good school grades doesn't mean your going to go onto be a successful doctor.
It's what you do with them that counts.
If we lost 1 more game in 2005 we may have picked up Ryder instead of Nicholls. But we could have won 3 more games made the 8 played finals and picked up Shaun Higgins with pick 11. We would have won more games, played finals, gained massive experience for Deledio's etc and had a better list and better player for first round pick at the end of the day.
For the heart ache it causes nothing suggests that lower picks guarantee success.
But the issue is that we wouldnt necessarily pick up Ryder :banghead
We absolutely wanted to pick Ryder, we were hoping he'd be the one that slipped out of the Top 7 along with Dowler. We should always have taken Mitch Clarke, but there were massive ???s over his desire to move away from Perth given he'd pull out of U18 games when he knew an interstate scout was there.
-
Meaningless wins are wins late in the season when the season is already shot. They are wins that we have had for the best part of 20 years. They are the same wins that cost us players like Patrick Ryder and got us players like Jarrad Oakley Nicholls.
Sorry I have to disagree.
The fact of the matter is tanking is like doing well at school. You just simply have more options.
Just cause you have good school grades doesn't mean your going to go onto be a successful doctor.
It's what you do with them that counts.
If we lost 1 more game in 2005 we may have picked up Ryder instead of Nicholls. But we could have won 3 more games made the 8 played finals and picked up Shaun Higgins with pick 11. We would have won more games, played finals, gained massive experience for Deledio's etc and had a better list and better player for first round pick at the end of the day.
For the heart ache it causes nothing suggests that lower picks guarantee success.
But the issue is that we wouldnt necessarily pick up Ryder :banghead
We absolutely wanted to pick Ryder, we were hoping he'd be the one that slipped out of the Top 7 along with Dowler. We should always have taken Mitch Clarke, but there were massive ???s over his desire to move away from Perth given he'd pull out of U18 games when he knew an interstate scout was there.
spot on infamy, jack is wrong again.
We would have taken ryder or dowler, ryder was the preferance at the time.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
-
We would have pick 5 if the draft happened tomorrow. Freo would get a priority pick at the start of the 2nd round, since they had more than 4 wins last year.
Gee not very rewarding for finishing 3rd off the bottom if it eventuates, may as well finish 9th again IMO.
-
History has never suggested Tanking works. Why would you try again after a failed one?
Adelaide have NEVER tanked. NEVER. Have just drafted well and have magnificent football department. Same with Port. Even with Essendon they have no top 5 draft picks ripping up the competition. It's all well developed youngsters.
Tanking has never won a premiership.
Hawthorn is the only team with concessions that have won a premiership. But I'd argue that there game plan won them the Garnd Fainl they should never have won. The invention of the rolling zone and tactics of professional free kicks and rush behind rules were taken advantage of perfectly. They also have never had a number 1 draft pick.
Nothing suggests that tanking wins you premierships. Absolutely nothing.
How many games have the Saints LOST this season?
::)
-
Look past your own agenda for a minute and maybe we as a club will be back somewhere you might be happy with.
My own agenda.... what would that be exactly? I'd love to know what you think my agenda actually is.
I know I am wasting my time with people like you but WHATEVER!!!
People like me? :lol
Just because I don't agree with your tanking views you say I live in fairyland and you reckon you are wasting your time on people like me. You are entitled to your view and I'm entitled to mine.
Maybe if we all think happy thoughts everything will change for the RFC or maybe we should get better players into our club and give ourselves a chance.
So are you saying that there is absolutely no upside regarding our list right at the minute?
Whether people want to admit it or not we actually do have some very good young players at the Club now and I want them to understand that winning is what matters not tanking. I want to them to believe they can win as opposed to going through season after season thinking well it's OK to lose because the Club will get some good draft picks this year
So forgive me because I actually think that there is some upside in relation to some of the young blokes on our list. granted we have made some shocking decisions over the years but we have actually got some right.
So if that's thinking happy thoughts then I am guilty
There is some.
If there was enough we would not be on equal wins with Freo or Melbourne right now - would we?
Do you not think we would have a better chance of winning games in 2-3 years from now, if we were to add a Jack Trengrove or Tom Scully?
-
Big tone, what are meaningless wins exactly? Tell the players and supporters who sing the song the song after the game, the sacked coaches, the sponsers, the kids who have no idea of the intracies of the draft etc.what meaningless wins are. Most of all tell the supporters of this club who have stuck by them since 1980!
2007 - round 22
Carlton vs Melbourne
carlton lose; get kruzer + Judd
Melbourne get Cale Morton and 2 years of crap
---
do you really think winning in round 22 after a crap season means anything? Richmond killed Melbourne last game, last season. we lost to carlton next game by 90 odd points, and lost to Melbourne round 4 :gotigers
-
Lol Please..
Have won 1 more than Geelong who never tanked.
A few more than Collingwood who have never recieved a priority pick.
-
Saints - won every game, 167.25%
- saints 'tanked' 5 years ago - picke up Reiwoldt, Ball, Goddard etc. best players in leagues best side
Geelong build the side around 99/01 drafts, but won flags due t F/S picks. something we do have.
Collingwood yet to win more than 1 flag last 50 years. I would not be using that model to copy.
'lol please'? maybe you are right. If we win a few more games we might stll come 9th :gotigers
-
Collingwood yet to win more than 1 flag last 50 years. I would not be using that model to copy.
Why are you using St Kilda as the model to copy then? ??? Also yet to win more than 1 flag last 50 years.
Actually yet to win more than 1 flag last 110 years. Collected 26 wooden spoons though.
-
2000
1 Nick Riewoldt Southport Sharks St Kilda
2 Justin Koschitzke Murray Bushrangers St Kilda
9 Kayne Pettifer Murray Bushrangers Richmond
10 Jordan McMahon Glenelg Western Bulldogs / Richmond
2001
2 Luke Ball Sandringham Dragons St Kilda
5 Xavier Clarke St Mary's Football Club St Kilda
13 Nick Dal Santo Bendigo Pioneers St Kilda
33 David Rodan Calder Cannons Richmond
2002
1 Brendan Goddard Gippsland U18 St. Kilda
12 Jay Schulz Woodville-West Torrens Football Club Richmond
-
According to a caller on 3aw, some Melbourne supporters are setting up a petition that if their Club is "stupid" and wins 2 more games they will not re-sign up as members next year.
-
Lol Please..
Have won 1 more than Geelong who never tanked.
A few more than Collingwood who have never recieved a priority pick.
I'm pretty sure Dale Thomas was a priority pick in 2005
-
To me it's simple- don't win more than four games and finish as low as possible and that will give us the best chance of picking who we want to be at your club next year. Who we pick is up to us, if we stuff it up, that is a different issue.
Just for the record i like singing the song too but i would like to do it more often and IMHO it think the best way to achieve that is to have better players on our list.
-
Lol Please..
Have won 1 more than Geelong who never tanked.
A few more than Collingwood who have never recieved a priority pick.
I'm pretty sure Dale Thomas was a priority pick in 2005
The Pies have had two priority picks
Priority Pick before Round 1
Carlton (3): Andrew Walker (2003), Marc Murphy (2005), Matthew Kreuzer (2007)
Hawthorn (3): Luke Hodge (2001 - traded by Freo), Jarryd Roughead (2004), Xavier Ellis (2005)
Collingwood (2): Josh Fraser (1999), Dale Thomas (2005)
St Kilda (2): Nick Riewoldt (2000), Luke Ball (2001)
W.Bulldogs (2): Adam Cooney (2003), Ryan Griffen (2004)
Fremantle (1): Paul Haselby (1999)
Melbourne (1): Colin Sylvia (2003)
Richmond (1): Brett Deledio (2004)
West Coast (1): Chris Judd (2001)
Priority pick after to Round 1
Carlton: Shaun Hampson (2006)
Essendon: Leroy Jetta (2006)
Melbourne: Sam Blease (2008)
Richmond: Alex Rance (2007)
West Coast: Luke Shuey (2008)
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
Miller loved him big time
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
Miller loved him big time
They both did
-
How many games have the Saints LOST this season?
::)
When did they tank?
-
Kerr gone for the season with OP will help the Eagles chances of holding onto their PP :-\.
-
Kerr gone for the season with OP will help the Eagles chances of holding onto their PP :-\.
ah the westankers are up for it AGAIN.
-
Kerr gone for the season with OP will help the Eagles chances of holding onto their PP :-\.
Rd 22 Eagles v Tigers may go down the same path as Melbourne v Carlton in the same round in 2007. Play kids and some first gamers Putt Gourdis Gilligan give the Eagles a start and they can worry about pick 4 or 5 while we worry about pick 1 or 2.
Rd 18 Ensure the Dees get off to a flyer and let them maintain that rage for the match whilst we make small inroads into the deficit at times to not totally embarass ourselves.
Sunday- Play King on Corey Jones. Deledio at FF Cousins in the Fwd pocket Tambling in the other pocket and start Tuck in the back pocket with Edwards in the centre with JON to ensure North have a ten goal quarter. Leave Jackson on the bench and let Boomer kick one of those goals where he puts his hand on his ear towards the 3 North fans choking on their four and twenties that evokes all that is the Shinboner spirit.
So North 5 wins
Get Melb to four with games against Freo and North to come
Eagles get to five with a win against us
Leaves Freo with 3 wins and hopefully a win against the Eagles in the derby as they have not won since rd 7 and bragging rights mean more to Freo hence they are a nothing club and the Eagles win flags.
End result wooden spoon to the Tigers. As Paul Keating once said this was the recession we had to have well Tuckerbag is saying this is the spoon we had to have. Paul Keating once said not long after the aforementioned comment that the figures of our monthly trade deficit reducing from the previous month was a beautiful set of numbers. Well for RFC pick 1 and another one or two first rounders and putting some players up for trade to get some early picks in the second round will be a beautiful set of numbers also. :thumbsup
-
Mend fixture to end tank talk
Mark Stevens | July 16, 2009
IT DOESN'T take much to rile rank-and-file supporters. But they have two common gripes:
No. 1: The fixture is all over the shop and difficult to follow.
No.2: When you start barracking against your own team to ensure it gains an early draft pick, there is something horribly wrong.
But there is one simple solution to fix both problems: Go back to a more traditional draw and award the priority picks after Round 15 to stop all the tanking talk.
The AFL should next year return to the commonsense scenario of all 16 clubs playing each other once in the first 15 weeks.
Teams playing each other twice in the first 10 weeks is ridiculous. Some teams having to wait until Round 20 to meet for the first time is even more mind-boggling.
Returning to the traditional model would have the welcome flow-on effect of again making Round 15 a reasonable benchmark for assessing the performance of clubs.
A better benchmark than after Round 22, in fact, given which clubs you play twice can be so crucial in determining ladder order.
So rather than scrap the priority picks completely, they should be awarded after Round 15 when every team has played each other once.
The AFL could cut the qualification from no more than four wins to no more than three, in keeping with the shorter span.
The ladder after Round 22 would still determine draft order, but any priority pick would be decided earlier.
Richmond assistant coach David King raised a similar plan last year - and it makes sense. There would be a far smaller window for tanking speculation and the headlines that come with it.
There may be some jostling for spots from Rounds 13-15, but the AFL would rid itself of the current problem of seven weeks of tank talk from now until the end of the season.
And there would be significantly less incentive for clubs heading into Round 15 to look to draft picks rather than the four points.
Why would you consider tanking when you are still mathematically in the hunt for the finals? In the weeks leading up to Round 15, far more clubs are still in the mix.
The tanking talk gains momentum as clubs drop out of finals contention and face up to two months simply playing out time with an eye to next year.
So much of the footy played between now and Round 22 is junk because some clubs are going full-throttle for a premiership and others are shuffling kids and eyeing draft picks.
With the priority picks out of the way, lowly clubs are far more likely to be competitive in the final weeks of the season.
Sure, there may jockeying for spots in the final rounds, but that is difficult to manufacture. It is far easier to make sure you don't win a certain number of games.
But by the time the final rounds arrive, the big carrot - that tasty priority pick - would already be gobbled up.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25788205-19742,00.html
-
Tanking not a good outcome, but if we lose playing our young kids, thats fine, loose to nth melb this is fine, as we tried with what we have, but we loose the draft picks by winning
that silly, as we can have only to fail to get wins, wins means Jack Scalley, Jack stuff, Ben Grittiths, and others that will be the players we wanted not the Losers.
Hope the Tank never happans again, but take it while it is there.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
Stupid comment
If that was the case, then why did he slip to Pick 13?
Clarke & Higgins are the ones we really missed out on.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
Stupid comment
If that was the case, then why did he slip to Pick 13?
Clarke & Higgins are the ones we really missed out on.
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
Hurn was overlooked by some clubs because a bit like Rich last year they believe there was much development in him left given his solid ready-made body. Remember these decisions were made when a number of recruiters were in love with athletes who could run and jump while overlooking natural footballers.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
Stupid comment
If that was the case, then why did he slip to Pick 13?
Clarke & Higgins are the ones we really missed out on.
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
Hurn was overlooked by some clubs because a bit like Rich last year they believe there was much development in him left given his solid ready-made body. Remember these decisions were made when a number of recruiters were in love with athletes who could run and jump while overlooking natural footballers.
I didn't mean who we would have taken, just in hindsight who we "should have" taken. Clarke would have fixed a key forward and ruck need, however not sure we would have been able to keep him from going back to WA. Higgins is a gun, I can't remember the reason Miller & Jackson didn't rate him, but there would be a couple of clubs kicking themselves that they missed out on him.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
Stupid comment
If that was the case, then why did he slip to Pick 13?
Clarke & Higgins are the ones we really missed out on.
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
Hurn was overlooked by some clubs because a bit like Rich last year they believe there was much development in him left given his solid ready-made body. Remember these decisions were made when a number of recruiters were in love with athletes who could run and jump while overlooking natural footballers.
I didn't mean who we would have taken, just in hindsight who we "should have" taken. Clarke would have fixed a key forward and ruck need, however not sure we would have been able to keep him from going back to WA. Higgins is a gun, I can't remember the reason Miller & Jackson didn't rate him, but there would be a couple of clubs kicking themselves that they missed out on him.
No probs Infamy. I agree we should have taken Clarke :(.
-
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
Thank god Miller has gone.
-
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
Thank god Miller has gone.
Its not quite that simple though
Clarke was a super junior talent, he was playing in the same level as Deledio at U16s but was even younger than him, won medals and was considered a standout #1 pick going into the 2005 U18 season.
There were massive question marks on his attitude though as he had a pretty shocking year at U18s level. He was petulant, took himself off the ground and missed games when interstate recruiters showed up. He did everything he could to show teams outside WA that he didn't want to leave. Had we picked him, I'm doubtful we would have been able to sort out his issues, the lack of success, lack of player development and well... lack of Leigh Matthews to play under, I would suggest he'd have asked for a trade pretty quickly.
-
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
They preferred Dowler and Ryder, but they were taken immediately before. It was Varcoe that they rated next, but they ended up passing on him because of a negative medical report about his foot.Dempsey was a consideration, but they rated JON above him.
They didn't want Mitch Clark because of so-called character and "attitude" issues.
-
Everyone rated JON highly because of his impressive sprints and results from the academy, i remember reading in one forum they were saying he was going to be the next Judd :lol Anyway, their is a degree of luck with every pick, shame it didnt work out for JON, I dont even think he could be a Blingers, he struggles to get a game and when he does, he reminds me of a deer in front of headlights :rollin :banghead :help
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
Stupid comment
If that was the case, then why did he slip to Pick 13?
Why di Rich go @ 7?
Hurn was seen as a stand out.
-
Everyone rated JON highly because of his impressive sprints and results from the academy, i remember reading in one forum they were saying he was going to be the next Judd :lol Anyway, their is a degree of luck with every pick, shame it didnt work out for JON, I dont even think he could be a Blingers, he struggles to get a game and when he does, he reminds me of a deer in front of headlights :rollin :banghead :help
i think JON has been one of the biggest losers from our lack of player development skills in-club. We didn't know how to make a good footballer out of him and apparently couldn't convince him to eat a hamburger now and then to put some weight on.
I think his career (if it doesn't improve from here) is more a blight on the RFC dev. staff than his own personal ability or willingness to train or anything like that. All of this is my own opinion of course.
-
Again problem lies within the resources for scouting.
Should go far and beyond to scot for 30 plus players that are draftable not a handful.
We don't get our wanted picks and we make rash decisions like Oakly Nicholls who should have gone pick 20+
JON was not a rash decision, Francis Jackson loved him, Miller did too. At the draft night when asked who's pick he was Miller joked that if he failed he was Francis' and if he was a success then he was his, although that may have been the other way around.
The rest of the football world rated Hurn.
Stupid comment
If that was the case, then why did he slip to Pick 13?
Why di Rich go @ 7?
Hurn was seen as a stand out.
Slipping to 13 is twice as far as Rich slipping to 7
Regardless, a few rated Hurn highly, almost everyone who didn't have a Top 6 pick rated Rich as Top 2
-
From memory we wanted Ryder, JON or IIRC Dempsey in that order. Who said 2 out of 3 ain't bad :P. Miller didn't rate Clarke as a top 10 pick. Kennedy, Dowler and Ryder were his 1st round talls. Clarke was rated on par with Cleve as late 1st/early 2nd round talls.
They preferred Dowler and Ryder, but they were taken immediately before. It was Varcoe that they rated next, but they ended up passing on him because of a negative medical report about his foot.Dempsey was a consideration, but they rated JON above him.
They didn't want Mitch Clark because of so-called character and "attitude" issues.
Ta for the memory filler GB. You're right Varcoe was the 3rd one along with Ryder and JON. I knew Dempsey fitted in somewhere in that puzzle. We knew Dowler would most likely be gone before our pick even after he was in that car accident so with Ryder picked just before our pick it was JON we were going to pick up :P.
-
Everyone rated JON highly because of his impressive sprints and results from the academy, i remember reading in one forum they were saying he was going to be the next Judd :lol Anyway, their is a degree of luck with every pick, shame it didnt work out for JON, I dont even think he could be a Blingers, he struggles to get a game and when he does, he reminds me of a deer in front of headlights :rollin :banghead :help
i think JON has been one of the biggest losers from our lack of player development skills in-club. We didn't know how to make a good footballer out of him and apparently couldn't convince him to eat a hamburger now and then to put some weight on.
I think his career (if it doesn't improve from here) is more a blight on the RFC dev. staff than his own personal ability or willingness to train or anything like that. All of this is my own opinion of course.
JON's situation is one of picking someone based on athletic ability rather than footy ability. He probably looked flashy in open space on the bigger WA grounds on a highlights tape but I wonder how many times we watched him playing live. Miller couldn't be everywhere. JON has good hands but virtually every other aspect of his game is lacking. His kicking technique is flawed. It's too 'open' - the ball takes too long to get from hand to boot and prone to miskick. Unless he's in open space you can easily force him into a turnover with even a bit of pressure. He also lacks footy smarts and just makes far too many mistakes full stop let alone for a top 10 pick. He's only once shown pace to the team's advantage and that was on debut kicking that winning point against Essendon. We got it wrong at the draft table.
-
Demetriou was just on ABC 774 and still believes tanking doesn't exist. He said clubs are trying to win for memberships, sponsors, etc and he doesn't believe in conspiracy theories. Everything (Kerr missing through injury for instance) deep down has a logical explanation.
-
Demetriou was just on ABC 774 and is still believes tanking doesn't exist. He said clubs are trying to win for memberships, sponsors, etc and he doesn't believe in conspiracy theories. Everything (Kerr missing through injury for instance) deep down has a logicial explanation.
He's either delusional or stalling until after the GC17 and NSW teams come in. I think the latter is the most likely as he wants to use the draft as the support to prop them up until success ensures. I think once these teams have lifted from the bottom of the ladder the AFL will sudden see the blatantly obvious and change the draft system to make it into a lottery or based on the first 15/17 games of the season when everyone has played each other once.
If Demetrio acknowledges there is a problem he would be obligated to attempt to fix it - something he can't afford to do currently.
Stripes
-
Demetriou was just on ABC 774 and still believes tanking doesn't exist. He said clubs are trying to win for memberships, sponsors, etc and he doesn't believe in conspiracy theories. Everything (Kerr missing through injury for instance) deep down has a logical explanation.
Struth Andy D did the rounds of the wireless station today. He was on SEN between 12.00 and 12.30 and said tanking doesn't exist. then he was on 3AW just after 1.00pm and said tanking doesn't exist and then ABC
And btw he reckons tanking doesn't exist :wallywink :wallywink :wallywink
-
Demetriou was just on ABC 774 and is still believes tanking doesn't exist. He said clubs are trying to win for memberships, sponsors, etc and he doesn't believe in conspiracy theories. Everything (Kerr missing through injury for instance) deep down has a logicial explanation.
He's either delusional or stalling until after the GC17 and NSW teams come in. I think the latter is the most likely as he wants to use the draft as the support to prop them up until success ensures. I think once these teams have lifted from the bottom of the ladder the AFL will sudden see the blatantly obvious and change the draft system to make it into a lottery or based on the first 15/17 games of the season when everyone has played each other once.
If Demetrio acknowledges there is a problem he would be obligated to attempt to fix it - something he can't afford to do currently.
Stripes
It's probably a bit of both. Andy D can wipe his hands clean of the issue next year with no priority picks and GC17 having the first 3 picks and 6 inside the top 10.
It's a farce at the moment even for those sides fighting for the finals. Any side playing mostly the bottom 5 or 6 sides for the remainder of the H/A season is getting a cushy ride straight into September compared to others who need to fight against mainly top 8 sides.
-
good result i spose
-
good result i spose
Yep bloody fantastic
-
it will all come down to the melbourne game, if we lose against the dees then we still have decent hope for a really good pick.
-
I hope Freo beat Wet Toast this week.
Like Sheahan said last night On The Couch, the Eagles don't deserve a priority pick, they won a Grand Final in 2006.
-
I hope Freo beat Wet Toast this week.
Like Sheahan said last night On The Couch, the Eagles don't deserve a priority pick, they won a Grand Final in 2006.
Its tax time. If you employ a good accountant to find loopholes in tax laws to pay less tax and get a maximum refund then W Coast are entitled to find a loophole in another flawed system in the priority pick tanking issue and do the same.
I'm with you Wayne. I hope Freo win this week too and West Coast get their cumuppance from us in round 22. We should be accomodating enough in our generosity to let them kick 8 in the first quarter.
-
The priority pick was designed to help clubs that continually struggled over a number of years. Perhaps they should make it a 5 year criteria whereby if you miss the finals for 5 years straight only then do you get a priority pick. Under the 2 year system with a 4 win limit a club like Richmond misses out on the major benefit (2 picks in the top 5) because we are a yo-yo club between 9th and 16th. We've never been totally pathetic for 2 years in a row. We bounce between pathetic and just mediocre and miss out :P. Potentially (if we don't win another game) we could be wooden spooners in 2 of the past 3 years yet the system rewards the Eagles who won a flag in 2006. It's a ridiculous system.
As for Freo vs West Coast - no doubt Freo will win. The Eagles can't afford another win while Freo get Sandilands and Pavlich back this week.
-
How to tank in 10 easy steps
Jon Ralph | July 21, 2009 11:50pm
EVERYONE agrees players don't throw games. But that doesn't mean there aren't many ways for coaches eyeing priority picks to minimise their chances of winning.
Here is the Herald Sun's how-to guide to tanking.
1. PLAY YOUR STARS OUT OF POSITION
When you are a bottom-four side and your coach is planning for the future, no one notices positional changes in the name of experimentation.
In the "Hasleby Game" of 1999, where Fremantle won a priority pick by coughing up a halftime lead to Geelong, even the Freo players were suspicious.
The Cats were down by nine points at halftime but Fremantle bled the last 11 goals, and Dockers midfielder Brodie Holland smelled a rat.
"I do remember sitting with (teammate) Jess Sinclair and talking about how it's the first time he's played back pocket and the first time I've played on the half-back stuff," Holland later said. "There were a few funny moves. There's definitely been a few chats amongst the older boys because we were curious."
2. PLAY ALL YOUR KIDS
It is now the norm rather than the exception -- force-feed your up-and-coming kids with games late in the year.
When the Pies lost 10 of the last 11 games of 2005 to secure Scott Pendlebury and Dale Thomas, they gave games to anyone. Promising kids such as Heath Shaw, Harry O'Brien and Sean Rusling were rewarded.
But many other debutants, including Ben Davies, Chris Egan, David Fanning, Brent Hall, and Adam Iacobucci, sank quickly from sight.
3. DON'T TAG THE OPPOSITION'S STAR
In the infamous Carlton-Melbourne Round 22 clash of 2007, silky Demons onballer Travis Johnstone was allowed to run rampant, gathering 42 possessions loose across half-back. It was perhaps the only time that season he was not assigned the opposition's best tagger.
Heath Scotland earned three Brownlow votes for his 31 possessions a fortnight earlier in Round 20, but the Demons didn't tag him that day either.
In the same round, Essendon's Andrew Lovett cut Carlton to shreds. Yet a Carlton official has twice recounted the story that when a coaching member asked "Who is on Lovett?", the reply was something like, "Let's not worry about picking up Lovett".
4. PUT PLAYERS IN FOR SURGERY
Tony Liberatore, who was banished from Carlton for his tanking claims, said defender Bret Thornton was forced into a needless ankle operation late in 2007.
The Blues and Thornton denied that, but many players are now given early surgery.
Clubs call it "list management", and we don't blink an eye. But if you are rewarded with a priority pick for a low finish, the pressure is on to manage that list a little harder.
5. DUMP THE 30-PLUS TYPES
It doesn't need explanation any more. Last year Demons Adem Yze and Jeff White played out their careers in the VFL. This year it is Tigers Joel Bowden, Nathan Brown and probably Troy Simmonds when he resumes from injury.
Bowden was in excellent form when dumped, but hasn't been able to get back in the side.
6. GIVE BATTLERS A GO
If you haven't already succeeded by putting the elders out to pasture and introducing raw kids, there is Plan C.
Every list has a host of strugglers desperate for one last chance to prove they deserve another contract.
Mostly they are no good, but playing them in prominent or key-position roles helps to death-ride your team.
7. CHANGE TACTICS
In that 1999 Kardinia Park game, a Fremantle team that had flooded heavily all year suddenly played one-on-one football.
"A lot of the boys were talking about a few of the moves," Docker Garth Taylor said. "The older players were having a conversation about it."
Boundary rider Richard Osborne noted "how refreshing in this day and age when coaches are just obsessed with flooding the backline, seeing Barry Stoneham one-out in the forward line".
8. LIMIT ROTATIONS
As Terry Wallace said this month, it's not what you do. It's what you don't.
If your players just don't have any petrol in the tank because they haven't had enough rest, it stands to reason they will be overrun.
9. TAKE YOUR MATCH-WINNERS OFF LATE
As Carlton's priority pick went down to the wire in 2007, Brendan Fevola was at several times brought from the field at key stages in games.
Against Collingwood, the Blues were level in time-on of the last term.
Then Fevola left the field for more than two minutes with a thigh problem, and Collingwood kicked the last four goals.
The evidence is not damning, but it doesn't hurt.
10. ASK YOUR COACH
In 2003 former Hawthorn coach Ken Judge claimed Hawks board member Don Scott had asked him in 1998 to lose the last five games of the year to help the club's draft prospects.
Scott denied the allegation and threatened legal action.
But according to Andrew Demetriou, tanking doesn't exist, so Judge must have simply misheard him.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25817489-19742,00.html
-
I almost fell off my chair laughing when I heard Eddie today say priority picks provide no benefit. I wonder how you got both Daisy Thomas and Pendlebury Eddie :wallywink.
-
3aw asked for a comment from Frawley (coaches association), Adrian Anderson and Demetriou about tanking.
Spud - "no comment"
Anderson - "no comment, I'm heading into a function"
Demetriou - "I'm bored with it all, bored talking about it, and I can't be bothered commenting"
-
Grant Thomas attacks AFL tanking stance
Mark Robinson | July 23, 2009
FORMER coach Grant Thomas has lashed AFL boss Andrew Demetriou as the tanking issue gained more momentum yesterday. "Absolutely there is tanking," Thomas said.
"I don't think there is any doubt and anybody who doesn't think there is any doubt is delusional and putting their head in the sand.
"Andrew Demetriou is treating the stakeholders of the game, be it the supporters, the members and anyone else involved, with a deal of disrespect."
The controversial former St Kilda coach and Demetriou have opposing views on several subjects, significantly umpires, and Thomas understands Demetriou's stance to uphold and promote the game.
But he is staggered the AFL not only ignores the contentious tanking issue but claims it doesn't exist.
"Don't poke crap down our throats and tell us to eat it," Thomas said yesterday.
Thomas said Terry Wallace's revelations in yesterday's Herald Sun were "refreshingly honest" and "hopefully a fillip for Andrew Demetriou to acknowledge, finally, there is an issue".
Thomas coached the Saints from midway through 2001 and was sensationally sacked after the 2006 season.
They finished 15th in '01 with four wins and then won five games and had a draw in '02, again finishing 15th.
The Saints have been aided by priority selections.
In the 2000 draft, they secured Nick Riewoldt with a priority selection at No. 1 and Justin Koschitzke with pick No. 2. In 2001, Luke Ball was taken at No. 2 with a priority selection.
Thomas said yesterday he had not tanked as coach.
"Fortunately, and I can say this honestly, when I was coaching St Kilda early days, or when I was director of footy early days, we didn't have to put in place any strategies or tactics to lose. We were so damned bad we couldn't win," he said.
In 2000, the Saints finished last, five wins below the 15th-placed team, Collingwood, which took Alan Didak at No. 3.
"We were out on our own. We weren't competing with anyone else," Thomas said.
"Hand on heart, we never mentioned tanking. We didn't have to because we couldn't win. We were absolutely, unadulterated terrible."
Thomas said tanking was not as contentious an issue at the start of the century as it was now, mainly because the importance and professionalism of the draft was not of today's standards.
"Now it's become so sophisticated and recruiting has become so good, there is absolute confidence you are going to get a damn good player in the top half a dozen and that's why the race is now on," he said.
"The competition splits in half at a particular time of the year. One half is aiming for finals and premierships and the other half is aiming for draft picks.
"That's not every club, but you have to ask one question: If you're playing in your first final next week, would you put this guy out for surgery? The answer is no."
So detrimental was tanking to the game, Thomas argued players were caught up in the issue.
"Players try 100 per cent, but they also, subconsciously, because of motivation, planning, preparation, training, strategy, tactics, rotations, match-ups, etc, they start to get the drift as well and their intensity drops off," he said.
"And a half per cent drop off from all of your team is greater than 10 per cent across the team and 10 per cent across the team is enough to get you beat."
Poor games by bottom teams also affects the top of the ladder, Thomas said, citing Round 22 last year.
St Kilda beat Essendon by 108 points to win fourth spot from Adelaide by less than 1 per cent.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25822023-19742,00.html
-
Jade Rawlings promises no tanking
AAP | July 23, 2009 12:28pm
JADE Rawlings has dismissed any notion of the Tigers "tanking" matches following recent claims by his predecessor Terry Wallace.
Rawlings refused to buy into the debate on whether lowly-placed clubs purposely tried not to win late-season matches to gain access to a priority draft pick.
But he promised the Tigers would not be doing so on his watch, and the team would be doing everything possible to beat Essendon in their clash on Sunday.
"I don't buy into the tanking thing. Anyone who's watched us play, we've been in positions the last five weeks where we could have won and should have won," Rawlings said.
"After the way (Essendon) got us earlier this year, my priority is picking a team that can knock them over on Sunday."
Wallace admitted to the Herald Sun that he and his coaching staff let their final match of the 2007 season against St Kilda run its natural course with minimal input.
Richmond lost the match, ensuring they would get pick two in that year's national draft, with which they selected star midfielder Trent Cotchin.
The Tigers also got a priority second-round pick in 2007 which was used on tall utility Alex Rance.
Rawlings said Cotchin and fellow midfield gun Ben Cousins would return for Sunday's match after missing last weekend's draw with North Melbourne because of illness.
Rawlings is also attempting to strengthen his claims to take the Richmond coaching job on a full-time basis from next season.
He is caretaker until the end of this year.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25823989-19742,00.html
-
No coach is going to come out publicly and say yep we're tanking.
Amazing how the Dees this week suddenly lose all these key players to injury when playing another bottom 6 club ::)
In: Cheney, P. Johnson, Miller, Newton, Valenti, Whelan, McKenzie, Bail
Out: Brock McLean (knee), Mark Jamar (quad), Brad Green (scaphoid), Jack Grimes (back), Russell Robertson
-
Tanking is for losers
-
Yes it is Jack but Tuck dropped? We are now officially tanking.
-
WP is 100% correct with her thoughts, we are losers.
Why we are trying for an extra pick, for what ?? Another JON :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead
We have no idea what we are doing, the recruiting is a shambles,how is Thosmon and Hislop going and what picks we trade for them :banghead
::) ::)
-
JON wasn't a priority pick so why keep bringing him into it ???. He was also drafted with our one man many hats Miller recruiting department.
As for tanking being for losers - yep I'm sure Hawthorn, St Kilda, Bulldogs, Carlton and Collingwood are regreting being losers and wish they could hand back their priority picks to be winners :wallywink.
-
No Tab here in the Greek islands or i would be putting my house on the Tigers
-
JON wasn't a priority pick so why keep bringing him into it ???. He was also drafted with our one man many hats Miller recruiting department.
Can't blame Miller for everything, Francis Jackson rated him highly also
-
Andrew Demetriou's head stuck in sand
Mike Sheahan | July 24, 2009
LET'S see where the power resides at the AFL Commission table. Is it with one man, chief executive Andrew Demetriou? Or is the commission prepared to exert its ultimate power at his expense?
Surely the two must be at odds on the tanking issue.
Demetriou has declared the priority pick stays, come hell or high water; the commission simply cannot allow the current conundrum to continue.
He won't back away because it seems he doesn't back away from anything that carries his endorsement. Right or wrong.
It must take a stand. Protect the image of the game.
The priority pick must go. The AFL is losing the battle of perceptions. Badly.
The priority pick has become a matter of perception, and that perception is the game is being seriously harmed by the annual debate.
Demetriou (and Kevin Bartlett) aside, there is no one in football who doesn't believe certain clubs have done less than their best to win games that threatened to cost them priority picks or the highest possible place in the draft.
Both Demetriou and Bartlett resort to the line that players, most recently Ted Richards, risk life and limb to win games.
Of course they do. I have heard no one accuse players of doing less than their best.
Leigh Matthews supported them on 3AW last night: "So long as the players on the field are trying, I'm comfortable, to be honest," he said.
Matthews should know better. It's not about the players, it's about those who pick teams, set strategies, and make changes during a game. Plus those who command the ear of the coach leading into games.
It is completely naive of Demetriou and Bartlett - and anyone on the commission with the same view - to dismiss tanking talk.
Demetriou's head is so deep in the sand, he should be able to see China.
Of course he is seen to win any public debate, for no one at club level is prepared to own up, and those of us who know why aren't prepared to expose them.
AFL Commission chairman Mike stuff should know that a certain club close to his heart made several bizarre decisions during games late in the 2007 season.
Will stuff stand up to Demetriou? Not sure, but we will be interested to find out.
Let's remind him that Carlton secured Matthew Kreuzer and Chris Judd in the 2007 national draft by virtue of the fact it finished 15th (with fewer than five wins).
The only reasonable conclusion open to the commission, if it is brave enough, is to over-rule Demetriou and retreat to the only pure system.
The commission should remove the priority picks after the 2009 national draft and revert to the original plan, to give the worst clubs the highest picks in order.
No compromises. As soon as compromise enters the equation, exploitation will follow.
The immediate problem is the entry of Gold Coast and West Sydney to the competition, but the priority picks in principle surely are doomed.
The issue has been debated long enough. The solution now rests with those who control the game.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25826516-19742,00.html
-
Shame we've got a bloke in charge of this competition who's so out of touch with reality and thinks there's no problem.
Demetriou has to go
:wallywink
-
Maybe he's towing the company line. (??)
He argued for priority picks to be removed in 2005 and the proposal was rejected by the AFL Commission.
-
Maybe he's towing the company line.
He argued for priority picks to be removed in 2005 and the proposal was rejected by the AFL Commission.
With the head of the commission being Mike stuff :banghead
-
JON wasn't a priority pick so why keep bringing him into it ???. He was also drafted with our one man many hats Miller recruiting department.
Can't blame Miller for everything, Francis Jackson rated him highly also
Francis Jackson still reckons he will come good, LOL
-
Can U tell me the picks we get if we finish in either of these positions
12
13
14
15
We wont come last and we will win at least one more game.
-
Look I can understand and sympathise when it comes down to the "LAST" game of the year and someone like Cotch is the differance between winning and losing. I was barracking for a win by the way! Got over it pretty quick though I must admitt.
But tanking before the last game when there is so many tangibles involved doesn't make sense to me. Winning and working on getting the best (suited) players recruited makes more sense.
Gotta remember a lot of peoples careers are on the line here! If I was out in the middle and the coach was making obvious moves to jepordise the side, can say he would lose a great deal of respect from me for putting my hard work and maybe even my career at risk.
Said it before it is played a lot above the shoulders this game and any thing that goes against winning is a negative that you can never get back.
Winning mentality is just that, a win at all costs mindset - I know what I prefer from my club.
-
Demetriou was on radio today and he is still denying tanking exists. His argument against it is these bottom sides play against other in the next 6 weeks so someone has to win and that tanking questions the integrity of the personnel at these Clubs. He mentioned something about Brendan Schwab at Melbourne saying the Dees aren't tanking.
-
Can U tell me the picks we get if we finish in either of these positions
12
13
14
15
We wont come last and we will win at least one more game.
Nothing is set in stone, CUB. Depends on who gets Priority Picks.
-
On the issue of tanking Rex just said he hopes Richmond doesn't win another game.
-
AFL firm on keeping picks
July 25, 2009
AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou has categorically refused to reconsider the league's stand on the draft, rejecting mounting calls for a new system to try to remove the temptation for teams to "tank" games for priority picks.
Richmond star Matthew Richardson yesterday joined the chorus calling for an end to the scheme, while Western Bulldogs veteran Jason Akermanis suggested a lottery draft system would be better.
Richardson said the only way to end talk of tanking was to dump the priority pick system.
"They want an even competition, they want the draft picks to even up every team so that there's a cycle, so we all can make the finals," Richardson told radio station Vega.
"But the only way to get rid of this talk every year is to get rid of that priority draft pick."
But Demetriou said scrapping priority picks would not necessarily eradicate suspicions of tanking.
"You'd be saying 'Oh gosh, there are teams who actually want to get pick No. 1 and there are stories going around that they really want to finish last to get pick No. 1'," he said.
"This is a system that's been in place for a number of years — every team has played in the preliminary final since 1999 and our last six premiers have been different teams.
"That's about as even as it gets for our competition and you couldn't actually ask or script it any better than that."
Demetriou said it was "mischievous" to suggest clubs deliberately coached to lose.
He equated it to accusing those involved of "cheating or lying or that they're not people of integrity".
"I mean, we've had every coach this week come out and say that they wouldn't do it and that the talk of tanking is a terrible blight on the game," he said. "I don't believe in the theory of tanking, I never have.
"These teams who are theoretically tanking are actually playing each other other over the next few weeks so unless they're not going to show up and play each other I doubt whether we'll be changing our rule."
Full story at:
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/afl-firm-on-keeping-picks/2009/07/24/1247942051184.html
-
I realy cant understand why they cant just say that even though Tanking may not exist that the perception of it existing hurts the game. A simple change to the rules in making a lottery system like the NBA for those that dont make the finals would get rid of the problem once and for all.
-
Freo 5 points up on the Eagles at half-time in the tank-a-thon derby :-\
-
What's great about this match is that either West Coast win and lose their priority pick at the start of the draft
Or Freo win and then have to play Melbourne in a couple of weeks
Best result for us here is a draw, that way both West Coast lose their pick and Freo only has to win one more to lose theirs
-
Freo just kicked a goal to take the lead after scores were level. 22 minutes gone last quarter. The dockers have kicked the last 2 goals after the Eagles lead by 7 points ::).
Edit: Make that the last 3 goals to the Dockers. freo by 12.
-
Freo win by 5 points. Surprise surprise ::). The only positive is Freo are now above us on the ladder.
16. Melbourne 3 wins
15. Richmond 3.5 wins
14. Fremantle 4 wins
13. West Coast 4 wins
Current draft order
1. Melbourne
2. West Coast
3. Melbourne
4. Richmond
5. Fremantle
6. West Coast
7. North
.......
18. St Kilda
19. Richmond
20. Fremantle
21. Melbourne
22. Richmond
23. Fremantle
24. West Coast
25. North
........
36. St Kilda
37. Melbourne
38. Richmond
.....
54. Richmond
.....
72. Richmond
-
Melbourne Vs Richmond next week and Melbourne Vs Freo in Round 20 will be very very interesting
Both games are at the G too, they even play North Melbourne in between so they have a pretty soft draw
-
Melbourne Vs Richmond next week and Melbourne Vs Freo in Round 20 will be very very interesting
Both games are at the G too, they even play North Melbourne in between so they have a pretty soft draw
yep all the Tigers need to do now is let Melbourne win the game against us & they will be in front of us & Richmond get what they want there quick fix that will blow up in thier faces again & we will recruit another player who we wont develope
-
Melbourne Vs Richmond next week and Melbourne Vs Freo in Round 20 will be very very interesting
Both games are at the G too, they even play North Melbourne in between so they have a pretty soft draw
yep all the Tigers need to do now is let Melbourne win the game against us & they will be in front of us & Richmond get what they want there quick fix that will blow up in thier faces again & we will recruit another player who we wont develope
Really. who gives a stuff what picks in what order we get. ::)
the clowns at punt rd will no doubt pick up another Jordon McMahon , or an Adam Pattinson or a JON, honestly, they need to fix the issues down there.
Hey,we will probably trade our picks anyway :banghead
Now where is Adam Thomson :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead
-
Melbourne Vs Richmond next week and Melbourne Vs Freo in Round 20 will be very very interesting
Both games are at the G too, they even play North Melbourne in between so they have a pretty soft draw
yep all the Tigers need to do now is let Melbourne win the game against us & they will be in front of us & Richmond get what they want there quick fix that will blow up in thier faces again & we will recruit another player who we wont develope
Because all our other recent picks from being on the bottom of the ladder have been so terrible haven't they?
I mean Deledio, Tambling & Cotchin are just duds aren't they, haven't developed at all, so what's the point?
I think Jackstar & Tigermonk should be renamed Statler & Waldorf, angry, grumpy, whinging muppets
-
we just tell you what you blindly refuse to see
l dont know if its because you can't grasp it or just plain ignorant & stupid but your replys are always so stupid l have a hard time replying from laughter
l'm sure your some sort of crack user because your unrealistic in the normal life :lol
-
Melbourne Vs Richmond next week and Melbourne Vs Freo in Round 20 will be very very interesting
Both games are at the G too, they even play North Melbourne in between so they have a pretty soft draw
yep all the Tigers need to do now is let Melbourne win the game against us & they will be in front of us & Richmond get what they want there quick fix that will blow up in thier faces again & we will recruit another player who we wont develope
Because all our other recent picks from being on the bottom of the ladder have been so terrible haven't they?
I mean Deledio, Tambling & Cotchin are just duds aren't they, haven't developed at all, so what's the point?
I think Jackstar & Tigermonk should be renamed Statler & Waldorf, angry, grumpy, whinging muppets
Deledio will leave, he wants to play finals, ( another Ottens its seems ) ;)
-
yep l heard it a few weeks back his already tired of Richmond & wants out
-
You mean we see a team full of kids in the past 8 weeks showing more endeavour to do the unselfish team things than some senior players have shown in past 8 years.
Add Riewoldt and Vickery Infamy. All duds obviously ::). Yep who needs early picks in the National draft. It's only the main and best way of recruiting the best talent to the club ::).
-
You mean we see a team full of kids in the past 8 weeks showing more endeavour to do the unselfish team things than some senior players have shown in past 8 years.
Add Riewoldt and Vickery Infamy. All duds obviously ::). Yep who needs early picks in the National draft. It's only the main and best way of recruiting the best talent to the club ::).
For every one good kid, we have kept one bad kid,
Enough said.
Who resigned Schulz by the way ????
Daniel Connors, how is he going ?
Adam Thomson, a star in the making ??
Adam Patterson, developing Champion ruckman.
JON. :chuck
Angus Graham doesnt excite me at all I hate to say.
Hislop ::) How is he getting a game :banghead
And dont get too carried away with Edwards either, he played on a "'witches hat"" last week
-
Deledio will leave, he wants to play finals, ( another Ottens its seems ) ;)
[/quote]
the difference is we paved the way for ottens to leave ...lids is required and will be made an offer that underlines that fact...if he wanted to leave the two WA clubs may in fact finish bottom.they're his options...thats the draft boyo, get used to it :o
-
For every one good kid, we have kept one bad kid,
A pretty standard return for most clubs actually from draft picks if that's the case for us in recent years. Only half the kids make it on average. That's why you need to turnover the list heavily while rebuilding. We also had a one man Miller band doing our recruiting thanks to our lack of money and resources then :P. Our return should have been far better for sure (ie. Thomson, Jordie dud trades) but that's why Wallace ain't coach anymore amongst his other coaching flaws. If Plough had been as ruthless in 4.5 years as Rawlings is now we'd be a lot further ahead in our rebuild. The problem is we are still paying for having bugger all kids coming through for years before the Lids & Blingers draft leaving a huge hole now in our list 24 y.o. plus group which should be making up the majority of the side now. Instead this senior group can't even win VFL games at Coburg ::)
We're getting a new coach who won't need to top up with trades to save his neck and we have greater recruiting resources now. How about we see how the new coach recruits this year. I thought it was all Wallace's fault anyway ;).
As for tanking ........ 17 in a row to the Sainters and another 8 goal comfortable win. What "losers" lol.
-
Plan that I mentioned a few weeks agao is working to a tea.
We need to lose to Melbourne next week to get to the bottom of the ladder and then lose to W Coast in rd 22 to ensure we stay there. It is imperative we lose those two games no matter what.
Hopefully Melbourne will beat Freo in rd 20 and the final ladder would look like this.
W Coast 20
Melbourne 20
Fremantle 16
Richmond 12
What draft picks do we get if after round 22 the ladder is as I have mentioned?
Paul Keating labelled the 1990 econmic downturn the Recession we had to have.
This current spate of results and compromised drafts from next year means that this is the wooden spoon we had to have.
-
If the ladder were to end up like that we'd get picks 1, 17 & 19, just like in 2007
Personally I would rather Freo get the spoon, they will take Morabito with Pick 1 anyway
-
If the ladder were to end up like that we'd get picks 1, 17 & 19, just like in 2007
Personally I would rather Freo get the spoon, they will take Morabito with Pick 1 anyway
I also think that Freo and WCE would take WA players, we just need to finish below Melbourne and hope that they get past the priority.
-
Plan that I mentioned a few weeks agao is working to a tea.
We need to lose to Melbourne next week to get to the bottom of the ladder and then lose to W Coast in rd 22 to ensure we stay there. It is imperative we lose those two games no matter what.
Hopefully Melbourne will beat Freo in rd 20 and the final ladder would look like this.
W Coast 20
Melbourne 20
Fremantle 16
Richmond 12
What draft picks do we get if after round 22 the ladder is as I have mentioned?
Paul Keating labelled the 1990 econmic downturn the Recession we had to have.
This current spate of results and compromised drafts from next year means that this is the wooden spoon we had to have.
Your plan is flawed.
We wouldnt know who to pick up as per previous recent bottom finishes
-
PSD could become important this year. Tanking is still a good option.
-
Daniel Connors, how is he going ?
As of yesterday arvo - injured again :thumbsup
-
how dare all you ppl insinuate that deledio is leaving
my god
watch out
now DOGGED will try and molest you with his lil willy!!!!!!!
-
Nice day at the moment - Heading off soon hopefully to see a win over the bombres. :gotigers
-
Nice day at the moment - Heading off soon hopefully to see a win over the bombres. :gotigers
me too, front row AFL members, :gotigers
-
Nice day at the moment - Heading off soon hopefully to see a win over the bombres. :gotigers
me too, front row AFL members, :gotigers
lol wouldnot waste my time watching them, would never take myself anywhere to watch McMahon, Edwards, Hislop, Rewoldt, in a team of tankers :)
wish you luck in your self torture :(
-
Nice day at the moment - Heading off soon hopefully to see a win over the bombres. :gotigers
me too, front row AFL members, :gotigers
MCC today about 10 rows back from the interchange :thumbsup
-
We can't afford to be getting to 5 goal leads against teams like Melbourne and the Eagles as they will be doing their best also to not come back as they are in the same position and after the same thing as we are.
We need to ensure we play catch up in those games.
-
The Tank is over, actually it never existed to be fair.
a chance to finally do what everyone else does and we screw it over.
yay yaya another meaningless win. AGAINST A TEAM OUTSIDE THE TOP 8. yay yay
next week dees....DITTO!!!
-
Yep may as well eat W Coast and Melbourne next week and finish with 6.5 wins and finish in 12th spot.
The opportunity was there to ensure first choice in the last uncompromised draft.
Bye bye priority picks. So typically Richmond. The year was stuffed so why try and paint over the cracks in the wallpaper. Just lose a few meaningless games and ensure we have a chance to select some kids who will be 10 year players. Only favours we have done are to Port if they win or Hawthorn if the Crows win.
What are the picks we have for finishing 12th?
-
Bloody Essendon. Always knew they were crap ;)
Disappointing to lose the priority pick. Oh well the club will be forced into Plan B if it's serious about oveturning the list - trade someone with value who isn't part of our next premiership and get an extra pick.
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
-
Can't see GC17 using all those first round picks on kids in 2010 either. They'll need some age diversification in their list, just like we did (but couldn't do anything about it). There will have to be a chance to trade for a first rounder from GC ....
-
The Tank is over, actually it never existed to be fair.
a chance to finally do what everyone else does and we screw it over.
yay yaya another meaningless win. AGAINST A TEAM OUTSIDE THE TOP 8. yay yay
next week dees....DITTO!!!
Can you imagine we lost this one the media would have been like hungry sharks around us after Terry opened his mouth earlier in the week. Stupid by the club if you ask me when the opportunity was there due to the AFL having their head in the sand on this issue.
MT we will have to trade a Foley or a Newman to attract something of value now. Whereas before all we had to do was win less than 4 and ensure we did not trade away any of our picks. Stupid Stupid Stupid RFC.
All that is left for us to do is to ensure that Melbourne and West Coast beat us to ensure that they do not get a priority pick and a jump on us in years to come. Surely we can do this right. 6.5 wins and 12th spot for us means squat in the scheme of the bigger picture. Ie 2011 onwards.
Sometimes when you are in 14th spot it is not about winning and losing it is about the future. This game today was one of those games..............
-
ITS TIME TO KEEP PLAYING THE KIDS-ITS OUR ONLY HOPE !
-
ITS TIME TO KEEP PLAYING THE KIDS-ITS OUR ONLY HOPE !
Always was once Terry was gone.
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Correct, GREAT WIN
-
The Tank is over, actually it never existed to be fair.
a chance to finally do what everyone else does and we screw it over.
yay yaya another meaningless win. AGAINST A TEAM OUTSIDE THE TOP 8. yay yay
next week dees....DITTO!!!
Can you imagine we lost this one the media would have been like hungry sharks around us after Terry opened his mouth earlier in the week. Stupid by the club if you ask me when the opportunity was there due to the AFL having their head in the sand on this issue.
MT we will have to trade a Foley or a Newman to attract something of value now. Whereas before all we had to do was win less than 4 and ensure we did not trade away any of our picks. Stupid Stupid Stupid RFC.
All that is left for us to do is to ensure that Melbourne and West Coast beat us to ensure that they do not get a priority pick and a jump on us in years to come. Surely we can do this right. 6.5 wins and 12th spot for us means squat in the scheme of the bigger picture. Ie 2011 onwards.
Sometimes when you are in 14th spot it is not about winning and losing it is about the future. This game today was one of those games..............
You idiot.
As if we were going to win next week against the Dees.
Now hopefully all this tanking talk can stop.
Go Tigers.
:cheers
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Correct, GREAT WIN
:thumbsup Rick Olarenshaw made a comment in his post match interview with Newman that was so easy to overlook but I think it is soooooo pertinent. His words?
"Winning is a habit"
Pretty simple.
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Correct, GREAT WIN
:thumbsup Rick Olarenshaw made a comment in his post match interview with Newman that was so easy to overlook but I think it is soooooo pertinent. His words?
"Winning is a habit"
Pretty simple.
Wot he said.
:cheers
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Correct, GREAT WIN
:thumbsup Rick Olarenshaw made a comment in his post match interview with Newman that was so easy to overlook but I think it is soooooo pertinent. His words?
"Winning is a habit"
Pretty simple.
Winning is a habit, well done TIGERS. Was rapt today. :gotigers :gotigers :gotigers :gotigers :gotigers :gotigers :gotigers
As for the tanking issues, its for LOSERS
We need to win each week we play :gotigers
-
and for all the pro tankers, 7.30PM FOX FOOTY for the replay. :gotigers
-
yay yaya another meaningless win. AGAINST A TEAM OUTSIDE THE TOP 8. yay yay
Actually they were comfortably IN THE TOP 8
Can you count?
-
Nice day at the moment - Heading off soon hopefully to see a win over the bombres. :gotigers
me too, front row AFL members, :gotigers
lol wouldnot waste my time watching them, would never take myself anywhere to watch McMahon, Edwards, Hislop, Rewoldt, in a team of tankers :)
wish you luck in your self torture :(
What footy is all about - hope you had fun playing with urself tigerspunk. good supporter u r. :gotigers
-
Nice day at the moment - Heading off soon hopefully to see a win over the bombres. :gotigers
me too, front row AFL members, :gotigers
lol wouldnot waste my time watching them, would never take myself anywhere to watch McMahon, Edwards, Hislop, Rewoldt, in a team of tankers :)
wish you luck in your self torture :(
What footy is all about - hope you had fun playing with urself tigerspunk. good supporter u r. :gotigers
l had football commitments today so was impossible to go
dont get too excited they moved up the ladder to 12th haha another wasted season
l been a loyal supporter for many many years CUB l just refuse to watch them play they are ugly
l'm happy that they won & never threw it away, like every Richmond supporter l will enjoy the win
With Silvester being injured they would have to bring Bowden back in haha
-
i must say, going into the match, i really wanted us to lose. but towards the end of the game, i could not bear seeing us lose. the boys played great, youngsters really stood up for us.
winning well with youngsters can be tolerated and celebrated. winning with old hacks can't. a concept terry wallace never grasped.
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Lids is a priority pick you stupid narrow minded little man. A win against Essendon will be forgotten by next Monday and Lids is a superstar.
Wake up FLOG!!!!!!
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Lids is a priority pick you stupid narrow minded little man. A win against Essendon will be forgotten by next Monday and Lids is a superstar.
Wake up FLOG!!!!!!
Wont be forgotten till probably Wednesday for me, I live in Essendon :lol
Need to stick it right up a few people. :gotigers
-
Well it was only a 2nd round pick, hope melb and wc can get a few wins together now.
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Lids is a priority pick you stupid narrow minded little man. A win against Essendon will be forgotten by next Monday and Lids is a superstar.
Wake up FLOG!!!!!!
Last time I checked it was possible to win a premiership without a priority pick Can't get one without wins though.
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Lids is a priority pick you stupid narrow minded little man. A win against Essendon will be forgotten by next Monday and Lids is a superstar.
Wake up FLOG!!!!!!
Last time I checked it was possible to win a premiership without a priority pick Can't get one without wins though.
Hate to break it to you smokey-58 but we aint going to win the premiership! Is 58 your age or your IQ? :lol
-
That win will do more than any priority pick will ever do!
Lids is a priority pick you stupid narrow minded little man. A win against Essendon will be forgotten by next Monday and Lids is a superstar.
Wake up FLOG!!!!!!
Last time I checked it was possible to win a premiership without a priority pick Can't get one without wins though.
Correct, have a look at Brisbane, Bottoming out is rubbish.
-
Hate to break it to you smokey-58 but we aint going to win the premiership! Is 58 your age or your IQ? :lol
IQ. And judging by your mature, balanced and well thought out response I would guess it is about 57 higher than yours.
-
yay yaya another meaningless win. AGAINST A TEAM OUTSIDE THE TOP 8. yay yay
I suggest you check out the ladder, Daniel!
-
Well done tigers.
A winning culture reaps more rewards than a losing one. Number one rule in life.
And I love sticking it up the Bombers.
:clapping
-
Well done tigers.
A winning culture reaps more rewards than a losing one. Number one rule in life.
And I love sticking it up the Bombers.
:clapping
Correct, its good to be winners :gotigers
-
I'm not pro-tank, but we were never tanking once we gave the job to Jade and accepted his application for next year.
No way you could expect him to coach to lose. Totally different situation to Ratten.
-
Lets hope WC, Freo, Melb win some games ...
-
I don't think beating a team in the top 8 is a meaningless win. The bombers hold in the 8 is shaky
And in rounds 20 & 21 if we do the same - well that wont be meaningless either
Those kids today deserved to win, it will teach them alot
A winning culture reaps more rewards than a losing one. Number one rule in life.
And I love sticking it up the Bombers.
:clapping
Exactly
-
It doesnt matter now, its history and so is Richmonds 2009 season - promised heaps, pre season but only delivered in junk time ;D .
We still need to play the list to see whos can stand up and I hope they start next week with Hughes.
-
It doesnt matter now, its history and so is Richmonds 2009 season - promised heaps, pre season but only delivered in junk time ;D .
We still need to play the list to see whos can stand up and I hope they start next week with Hughes.
Hughes :chuck :banghead
Do you actually go to the games
You leave Reiwoldt,Post and Morton up forward.
-
It doesnt matter now, its history and so is Richmonds 2009 season - promised heaps, pre season but only delivered in junk time ;D .
We still need to play the list to see whos can stand up and I hope they start next week with Hughes.
Hughes :chuck :banghead
Do you actually go to the games
You leave Reiwoldt,Post and Morton up forward.
Agreed Jack. We should only promote players if they are worthy of selection. When we have first year players showing more promise than Hughes, I the feeling the writing may be on the wall for him.
On another note, how good was it to see Cousins and Cotch double teaming today. They were like the Umbilical Brothers with some of the great plays they pulled off today.
-
It doesnt matter now, its history and so is Richmonds 2009 season - promised heaps, pre season but only delivered in junk time ;D .
We still need to play the list to see whos can stand up and I hope they start next week with Hughes.
Hughes :chuck :banghead
Do you actually go to the games
You leave Reiwoldt,Post and Morton up forward.
Sits right next to me Jack! I agree the forward structure is looking stronger now but I would like to see Hughes get another chance once he gets his head together. Next year maybe more appropriate once he has earnt a recall.
I loved every minute of the win and sharing it with my son and family today but I still can't halp but feel that these last few weeks are meaningless in the big scheme of it all. The priority picks are gone for us now but should we hand WC and Melbourne there's to give us pick 7 or 8?
Stripes
-
Sorry , players such as Schulz and Hughes arent our future, :banghead :banghead
-
This thread has been giving me the @#$% for weeks and weeks and weeks.
Thank god we dont have to discuss Tanking anymore. :thumbsup
-
Now what would make the whole season worthwhile would be to beat Hawthorn and end their season
I hate the Hawks!
-
This thread has been giving me the @#$% for weeks and weeks and weeks.
Thank god we dont have to discuss Tanking anymore. :thumbsup
Why so? Tanking would have given us an extra pick and 3 picks in the top 20. Now we will only have 1 pick in the top 20 and our first pick will be around 6 or 7. Maybe the thread was giving you the poos, for me itll be watching Scully and co. running amok at other clubs.
We can all look forward to a very average next 10 years. We havent got a hope. And last, yeh winning is good ... but what good was it today. With McMahon, Hislop, King, Pattison et al in the side.
We are screwed because our club never takes its medicine.
And one last thing. And this aint bulldust. But the club must make the 8 next year. If they fail to make the 8 then the board will be forced to an election. And they will lose.
-
MT we will have to trade a Foley or a Newman to attract something of value now. Whereas before all we had to do was win less than 4 and ensure we did not trade away any of our picks. Stupid Stupid Stupid RFC.
All that is left for us to do is to ensure that Melbourne and West Coast beat us to ensure that they do not get a priority pick and a jump on us in years to come. Surely we can do this right. 6.5 wins and 12th spot for us means squat in the scheme of the bigger picture. Ie 2011 onwards.
Sometimes when you are in 14th spot it is not about winning and losing it is about the future. This game today was one of those games..............
We need to find another top 20 pick if we are going to make the most of this draft. Sure the 'simplest' way was not to win another game (I was pro-tanking). However now the priority pick is gone, the reality is we need to be pragmatic and trade someone with value away. Tucky would be another who may have some value. The fact is we didn't miss him or Foley today.
The way things stand we have picks 7, 24, 40, 56, ..... Equivalent to finishing 10th on the ladder if there weren't any PPs yet we've won just 4 games :scream. So we have just one pick in the top 20. Most likely that will be a midfielder as the only top 10 tall is Butcher who will be gone before pick 7. We need to trade for another early-ish pick.
I can't see us losing to Melbourne next week based on the way both sides are playing at the moment and the personnel of each side. We may knock over the Swans too after seeing them the last few weeks although it will be O'Loughlin's 300th so the Swans may be up for it. They have also owned us in recent years.
We can't go any higher than 12th but it looks like we won't fall back lower either on current form. The worst thing we can do is win in round 22 and allow the Eagles to get a PP. I would rest Cuz, Cotch, Richo, :Lids, Tambo, Riewoldt - all our most talented players. Play Putt if need be. Whatever it takes to tank it. If we go without a PP then make sure our opponents don't end up with one either so we can push up higher in the draft order. Especially screw a club like the Eagles who are deliberately tanking to use and abuse the system while Demetriou keeps his head in the sand ::).
1. Melb
2. WC
3. Melb
4. Freo
5. WC
6. North
7. Rich
.....
18. St Kilda
19. Freo
20. Melb
21. Freo
22. WC
23. North
24. Rich
...
40. Rich
...
56. Rich
...
72. Rich
-
We need to try and get a big forward and we need to find a couple of gun midfielders. The forward I would try and trade for from another AFL club, the mids we can find in the draft even though now, the cream midfielders will go to other clubs.
-
Dont get me wrong Ramps...we all understand the virtues of tanking.
I just think its going to be refreshing to talk about other things like
1) the redemption of Ben Cousins
2) The improvement of Tambling
3) Jayden Post
4) Tyronne Vickery
5) Nahas
6) How good Cotchin is going to be once he has done a full pre season.
7) 20 yr old Riewoldt
8) The fact that we now have a match committee thats not afraid to make tough decissions.
Preaching to the converted was beginning to become a bore :sleep
-
what match committee -
the same match committee that has mcmahon, hislop, king, sylvestor et al in the team.
or the interim coach who went on radio today and made out that Jordan McMahon was the bees knees and intimated that there was a place for McMahon at RFC for the future.
Im sorry guys, but everyone needs to go look at the last 15 years and see how many of these meaningless wins we have had ... there have been plenty and sadly we have always remained a rabble as a result.
The WCE on the other hand are one of the most professional outfits in Australian Sport. In 2 or 3 years theyll be winning flags and we'll all be in here fighting about where it all went wrong.
-
We need to try and get a big forward and we need to find a couple of gun midfielders. The forward I would try and trade for from another AFL club, the mids we can find in the draft even though now, the cream midfielders will go to other clubs.
To trade for a big forward from another club would cost our first round pick. Even if it was our second pick (#24) the types traded are overinflated discarded duds like Boyle, Charlie Gardiner, etc. We might as well stick with our own dud key forwards stuck at Coburg :P. No more trying to find a diamond in other clubs' rubbish. Craig Cameron needs to be locked in a room during trade week unless he's got the courage to trade a player not in our next premiership side for another decent pick. I'd rather find another pick inside 20 and go for a Talia or some kid in that range. What I was really hoping for is Melbourne and Eagles lose their PP, the Dees take Scully, the WA sides go for WA kids and us at pick 4 get Butcher, but that seems a pipedream now :-\.
-
Develop the players we have. More sense doing this than holding back the competitive nature of players in the hope of grabbing another "chance" of a player that we may not develop.
Throw the increased membership into the football development department.
Take a player like Cotchin. He will thrive when we give 110%, but no wonder his season was less than fantastic, when the players had lost the "team plan" because of Wallet.
I swear we will go backwards if we do not push on now for more wins.
We have a list of low picks, we need to get the most out of it. Getting that extra pick is a backwards step in my opinion. Success breeds success.
Some people go through life taking the easy option, and in the end fail with no ambition, no drive, and more importantly never have tasted the "never say die" attitude to succeed.
Our Club doesn't need to pursue the easy option.
-
Ramps ...I was referring to the match commitee that is demanding more of its players other than stats that look good on paper.
-
We need to try and get a big forward and we need to find a couple of gun midfielders. The forward I would try and trade for from another AFL club, the mids we can find in the draft even though now, the cream midfielders will go to other clubs.
To trade for a big forward from another club would cost our first round pick. Even if it was our second pick (#24) the types traded are overinflated discarded duds like Boyle, Charlie Gardiner, etc. We might as well stick with our own dud key forwards stuck at Coburg :P. No more trying to find a diamond in other clubs' rubbish. Craig Cameron needs to be locked in a room during trade week unless he's got the courage to trade a player not in our next premiership side for another decent pick. I'd rather find another pick inside 20 and go for a Talia or some kid in that range. What I was really hoping for is Melbourne and Eagles lose their PP, the Dees take Scully, the WA sides go for WA kids and us at pick 4 get Butcher, but that seems a pipedream now :-\.
The only player I have in mind for a player to player trade is Jesse White from Sydney. What could we offer, Id offer a player like Foley who seems to be rumoured to be well liked by Sydney. If we couldnt do a deal and we had like pick 6 or 7 in the draft I would pick Ben Griffiths.
-
Sydney won't be giving up any key forwards any time soon given they just kicked out Bazza & O'Loughlin is retiring
-
You can only ask and if they dont want to do a deal then thats ok everyone moves on. Take Griffiths in the draft and hope for the best.
-
All is not lost regarding the draft - we can trade for better picks
We need to have the courage to dangle a big carrot. Someone we know we can do without but other clubs will jump at. Now that will be good list management :thumbsup
-
All is not lost regarding the draft - we can trade for better picks
We need to have the courage to dangle a big carrot. Someone we know we can do without but other clubs will jump at. Now that will be good list management :thumbsup
We've never done that and its partly our fault. As soon as average to good players hit their zenith with us, fans proclaim them the next big thing and they stay at the club and are delisted 3-5 years later.
I'd be putting Foley out there for sure.
-
For the tankers.
Was this win worth the differnce between pick 3 and 4?
I wouldn't have thought so.
Picks 3 and 4's over the years:
2005
3: Xavier Ellis
4. Josh Kennedy
2006:
3. Lachlan Hansen
4. Matthew Leunberger
2007:
3. Chris Masten
4. Cale Morton
2008:
3. Stephen Hill
4. Hamish Hartlett
All very very good players. I'll take the win and pick 4.
-
For the tankers.
Was this win worth the differnce between pick 3 and 4?
I wouldn't have thought so.
Picks 3 and 4's over the years:
I don't think its the 3 vs 4 or 5 issue that gets the pro-tankers going, its the 18 & 20ish vs low 20's pick.
It is all academic anyway unless we get our house in order on draft day its not going to make a difference. Our performance with top picks post-Fiora has been fine. Its the mid range ones I worry about. Geelong benefitted greatly from F/S picks but one of the reasons they built such a strong list is their 20/30/40+ selections have been sensational.
-
It doesnt matter now, its history and so is Richmonds 2009 season - promised heaps, pre season but only delivered in junk time ;D .
We still need to play the list to see whos can stand up and I hope they start next week with Hughes.
Hughes :chuck :banghead
Do you actually go to the games
You leave Reiwoldt,Post and Morton up forward.
Obviusly you arnt very smart, you think one good game makes us a great side and we don't need another power forward. Even if you dont know what is happening at Coburg you could check the papers and you would see Hughes has been in good form. The reason we are going well is we are playing the list, I wouldnt mind seeing Polak get a run as well but they tell me he just not there yet even though hes in the best at Coburg.
-
All is not lost regarding the draft - we can trade for better picks
We need to have the courage to dangle a big carrot. Someone we know we can do without but other clubs will jump at. Now that will be good list management :thumbsup
We've never done that and its partly our fault. As soon as average to good players hit their zenith with us, fans proclaim them the next big thing and they stay at the club and are delisted 3-5 years later.
I'd be putting Foley out there for sure.
:thumbsup spot on
-
Demetriou just said in an interview that Richmond is proof clubs don't tank. That "Richmond tanked terribly yesterday".
-
Pope...you forgot about pick 7...J. Selwood or T. Vickery...pick 6 was D. Rich...good players can still be had in the top 10...
It is the picks in the 20/30/40 that need to be right...Post is an example of someone - so far and it is still early days...who is a good pick...Beams at 29 is a good pick...
Trading pick 42 for Thomo - so far - is not a good trade...42 for Prismall would have been much better....
-
MMM, pick 42 on a kid would be better, if we can produce good players off the rookie list which are effectively pick 100+ surely we have a better chance at getting a good kid at pick 42 - Clubs don't let players go unless there is something fundamentally wrong.
-
Pope...you forgot about pick 7...J. Selwood or T. Vickery...pick 6 was D. Rich...good players can still be had in the top 10...
Rich was also pick 7, pretty good pick that one recently, Ryder, Selwood, Palmer & Rich in the last 4 years alone, kinda hope we get Pick 7 this year and take Dustin Martin, he'd be a great addition to our midfield. Vickery was Pick 8.
However your point is still valid.
-
Rich was also pick 7,
Thanks Infamy...dont know why i had 6 on the brain....
So that means 6 teams passed up Rich...I think Freo took the biggest gamble on Hill...by passing Rich a WA kid...
But yes pick 7 has been a happy hunting ground of recent times...
-
Pope...you forgot about pick 7...J. Selwood or T. Vickery...pick 6 was D. Rich...good players can still be had in the top 10...
It is the picks in the 20/30/40 that need to be right...Post is an example of someone - so far and it is still early days...who is a good pick...Beams at 29 is a good pick...
Trading pick 42 for Thomo - so far - is not a good trade...42 for Prismall would have been much better....
Why would Geelong take our pick 42 when they could've had the Bombers 31?
-
For the tankers.
Was this win worth the differnce between pick 3 and 4?
I wouldn't have thought so.
Picks 3 and 4's over the years:
2005
3: Xavier Ellis
4. Josh Kennedy
2006:
3. Lachlan Hansen
4. Matthew Leunberger
2007:
3. Chris Masten
4. Cale Morton
2008:
3. Stephen Hill
4. Hamish Hartlett
All very very good players. I'll take the win and pick 4.
WTF ??
We are getting pick 7.
we are getting screwed.
wake up man - no pick 4
-
Now I enjoyed yesterdays win as much as anyone but it has cost us big time imo.
As we all know the draft is there to try and even up the competition but whether you win the premiership by 100 points or come stone motherless last with no wins, you get a pick inside the first 16. So the difference in most cases is minimal at best. Any first round pick has a better than average chance of being a very good footballer for his club.
That said the AFL realises that this isn’t enough to try and make up the difference between first and last. This is where the priority picks comes in.
Andrew D and his cronies from the AFL can sit back and say there is no tanking, but deep down they know there is but why change a system that is working. As Andrew states every time he gets asked the tanking question- every club has played in a prelim final in the 10 or so years. And fair enough to say that, the system works on paper.
In simple terms getting a priority pick gets you an extra pick inside the top 20. Basically two really good young footballers instead of one. Simple math will tell you that gives you a really big advantage over any team that only gets one.
Teams like Melbourne who don’t take advantage of the priority situation this year would be crazy. Because they have been terrible for a few years now they get the opportunity to pick up the best two kids in the country if they decide not to win a couple of “meaningless” games from here to seasons end. What would you as a Melbourne member/supporter want from here on in?
IMO if this happens they will go ahead of us in terms of chances of winning a premiership. Sure we may play finals before them but making finals and having a side that can challenge for a premiership are two totally different things.
Remembering half the compition play in finals every year.
A good example of a club that knows this is West Coast, they won a premiership 3 years ago and could maybe still be playing finals but to their credit they new they didn’t have the side to win another so they decide to go down and picking up some good young kids and challenge again in another few years. A club run like a business not a footy club run like our footy club. Maybe it’s because they are a young club and haven’t got the history or the pride to ‘win at every cost’ like our club but I bet you they win their next premiership before we do.
The win against Essendon on Sunday will cost our club going forward like it has done for as long as I can remember- winning games late in the season when we are out of finals contention. Giving away the only real chance of getting an advantage over the other clubs above us by picking up an extra young kid come draft day. To make the win even worse is the fact that the new clubs are coming into the compition starting next year and the drafts will be compromised making it even harder to make ground on the top sides.
It’s ironic that today after a great win on the weekend I feel the worst I have all year. IMHO I cannot see any real light at the end of this really, really long tunnel. I would have preferred us to sign Jade to coach us next year and told him to lose every game until the season was over and given him next year to prove he was worth keeping. But ensuring we got 3 picks inside the top 20 this year. Worse case scenario we’d be looking for a coach next year but with an extra potential superstar on our list in the last uncompromised draft for years.
I really hope you ‘winning culture’ people enjoyed yesterday’s win because they will be few and far between for a long time!
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
Wrong again Jack. I enjoyed it but would enjoy 3 picks inside the first 20 more.
I wouldn't expect a simpleton like you to understand! Go back to your colour in books stupid!
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
Wrong again Jack. I enjoyed it but would enjoy 3 picks inside the first 20 more.
I wouldn't expect a simpleton like you to understand! Go back to your colour in books stupid!
Yep and simpletons like you would pick up another JON :banghead
By the way, am coloring in with textas now,out grown the crayons :wallywink
-
Glad that win is out of the way. Will make the Round 20 game I am flying over for even better knowing there is no smell of tanking. :gotigers
-
Great post bigtone. :clapping
I loved the win too but it was tainted with the knowledge that we had lost a priority pick.
I'm looking forward to next year so I can start to barrack for my team without worrying about the future and instead getting excited about how well our team is going right then.
2010 finals please! We can only wait so long :scream
Stripes
-
Jackstar....please stop using JON as your only example of our recruiting.We all know he is not going to make it.
Yes 2005 was a disaster at the draft table with JON and Cleve but since then we have picked a few winners.
Riewoldt
Collins
Vickery
Post
Nahas
Rance
The reality is that only about half the kids drafted end up having significant AFL careers-At all clubs.
For what its worth... JON would of been picked up inside the top 20 by another club had we not selected him at 8.Right or wrong there were big raps on him.
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
Wrong again Jack. I enjoyed it but would enjoy 3 picks inside the first 20 more.
I wouldn't expect a simpleton like you to understand! Go back to your colour in books stupid!
You tankers are pretty good at spin. Obviously it has more impact and thus appears to suit your argument to say "3 picks inside the top 20" as if the top 20 is some imaginary line of excellence. Why don't you say "2 picks inside the top 25"? Clearly that doesn't sound as good for your spurious argument.
Losing one pick at around 17-20 is not the disaster that you make it out to be. Let's face it, if our future and next premiership depends on one pick inside the top 20, then clearly we are much closer to that flag than any of us realise. And let's not forget that we can always trade for extra picks, if we have the guts.
When you consider that it is crucial that we get as many games into our youngsters as possible in the shortest time, why would we actively manufacture a situation where the first 10 of their first 30 games are deliberate losses? Why would we waste these vital experiences by playing them out of position to ensure a loss? Or dragging them if they're playing too well? Whether they win or lose isn't the point - it is the shared experience of doing their utmost to win that is important. Pushing each other to the limit. Feeling genuine pain when they lose and genuine elation when they win. These are the things that start to bond a team.
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
Wrong again Jack. I enjoyed it but would enjoy 3 picks inside the first 20 more.
I wouldn't expect a simpleton like you to understand! Go back to your colour in books stupid!
You tankers are pretty good at spin. Obviously it has more impact and thus appears to suit your argument to say "3 picks inside the top 20" as if the top 20 is some imaginary line of excellence. Why don't you say "2 picks inside the top 25"? Clearly that doesn't sound as good for your spurious argument.
Losing one pick at around 17-20 is not the disaster that you make it out to be. Let's face it, if our future and next premiership depends on one pick inside the top 20, then clearly we are much closer to that flag than any of us realise. And let's not forget that we can always trade for extra picks, if we have the guts.
When you consider that it is crucial that we get as many games into our youngsters as possible in the shortest time, why would we actively manufacture a situation where the first 10 of their first 30 games are deliberate losses? Why would we waste these vital experiences by playing them out of position to ensure a loss? Or dragging them if they're playing too well? Whether they win or lose isn't the point - it is the shared experience of doing their utmost to win that is important. Pushing each other to the limit. Feeling genuine pain when they lose and genuine elation when they win. These are the things that start to bond a team.
I think you will find the top 20 have a better chance of making it than the top, say 40 in the draft pool.
By a fair way.
If you watched Coburg vs Casey I reckon you would have seen the clear need to get as many good young players onto the list as possibile. :-X
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
Wrong again Jack. I enjoyed it but would enjoy 3 picks inside the first 20 more.
I wouldn't expect a simpleton like you to understand! Go back to your colour in books stupid!
You tankers are pretty good at spin. Obviously it has more impact and thus appears to suit your argument to say "3 picks inside the top 20" as if the top 20 is some imaginary line of excellence. Why don't you say "2 picks inside the top 25"? Clearly that doesn't sound as good for your spurious argument.
Losing one pick at around 17-20 is not the disaster that you make it out to be. Let's face it, if our future and next premiership depends on one pick inside the top 20, then clearly we are much closer to that flag than any of us realise. And let's not forget that we can always trade for extra picks, if we have the guts.
When you consider that it is crucial that we get as many games into our youngsters as possible in the shortest time, why would we actively manufacture a situation where the first 10 of their first 30 games are deliberate losses? Why would we waste these vital experiences by playing them out of position to ensure a loss? Or dragging them if they're playing too well? Whether they win or lose isn't the point - it is the shared experience of doing their utmost to win that is important. Pushing each other to the limit. Feeling genuine pain when they lose and genuine elation when they win. These are the things that start to bond a team.
Clearly you're and idiot too. 3 picks inside the first 20 is alot better than 2 inside the top 25, you d1ck!
That one extra player puts us 1 step closer to our next premiership, and a step a head of other clubs, not the difference between us winning one or loosing one.
Grow up cokhead!
-
Clearly you're and idiot too. 3 picks inside the first 20 is alot better than 2 inside the top 25, you d1ck!
That one extra player puts us 1 step closer to our next premiership, and a step a head of other clubs, not the difference between us winning one or loosing one.
Grow up cokhead!
Looking at that post, I'd say I'm not the one that needs to grow up.
Thanks so much for debating the issues though. ::)
-
Thanks so much for debating the issues though. ::)
LOL, it was a great closure used by BT too, taken straight from the WWDFA's (World Wide Debating Forum Association) published debating tactics
-
Thanks so much for debating the issues though. ::)
LOL, it was a great closure used by BT too, taken straight from the WWDFA's (World Wide Debating Forum Association) published debating tactics
May have been a tad harsh, so I apologise. It's just this topic gets me so fired up because to me it's black and white or in our case black and yellow. :thumbsup
-
you obviously ddint go yesterday :banghead
Wrong again Jack. I enjoyed it but would enjoy 3 picks inside the first 20 more.
I wouldn't expect a simpleton like you to understand! Go back to your colour in books stupid!
You tankers are pretty good at spin. Obviously it has more impact and thus appears to suit your argument to say "3 picks inside the top 20" as if the top 20 is some imaginary line of excellence. Why don't you say "2 picks inside the top 25"? Clearly that doesn't sound as good for your spurious argument.
Losing one pick at around 17-20 is not the disaster that you make it out to be. Let's face it, if our future and next premiership depends on one pick inside the top 20, then clearly we are much closer to that flag than any of us realise. And let's not forget that we can always trade for extra picks, if we have the guts.
When you consider that it is crucial that we get as many games into our youngsters as possible in the shortest time, why would we actively manufacture a situation where the first 10 of their first 30 games are deliberate losses? Why would we waste these vital experiences by playing them out of position to ensure a loss? Or dragging them if they're playing too well? Whether they win or lose isn't the point - it is the shared experience of doing their utmost to win that is important. Pushing each other to the limit. Feeling genuine pain when they lose and genuine elation when they win. These are the things that start to bond a team.
Clearly you're and idiot too. 3 picks inside the first 20 is alot better than 2 inside the top 25, you d1ck!
That one extra player puts us 1 step closer to our next premiership, and a step a head of other clubs, not the difference between us winning one or loosing one.
Grow up cokhead!
carlton are travelling well , arent they :banghead
you have no idea. ::)
-
carlton are travelling well , arent they :banghead
While their form recently has slumped they are still in seventh position and are likely to play finals. So in all they are travelling fairly well.
-
Carlton gave up good picks for Judd who is now being exploited by opposition coaches based on his weaker defensive side of his game. The Blues would've been better off long-term holding onto Josh Kennedy at CHF next to Fev at FF. Then with pick 3 they could have picked up one of Rioli, Dangerfield, Masten, Palmer, Ebert, etc if they wanted a midfielder and then with pick 20 they could have got Tayte Pears to slot into their key defence which is weak.
Btw the Eagles have 10 ways to tank all by themselves in a single game ::). LOL at their runner allegedly telling Le Cras to stay outside their forward 50. They're not even being subtle about it anymore. We can't afford to let them lose in round 22.
-
Carlton are going better than us. Beat Richmond twice.
Judd was not a bad get for Carlton. Again, seems to normally do fairly well vs. Richmond
-
Carlton are going better than us. Beat Richmond twice.
Judd was not a bad get for Carlton. Again, seems to normally do fairly well vs. Richmond
Most champions do fairly well vs Richmond :P
The Blues are hoping Warnock and Hampson take the ruck duties next year allowing Kreuzer to play forward alongside Fev. At the moment especially with Waite out injured they are too Fev reliant and struggling to beat even bottom 8 sides. North should have won last night but couldn't kick straight. Carlton will make the finals but they are just making up the numbers and won't get past the first week. Our win/loss record at this time of year last year would have us in the top 8 this year. This year there are two great sides, five decent sides (Hawks are paying for a bad start due to injury) and the rest are rubbish. We'll probably find a side with just 11 wins make the finals this year given the large number of mediocre teams. Most years 11 wins doesn't cut it as we know all too well coming ninth.
-
what i seen of Carlton last night,they aint much good.
-
Dead right Jack. Too much reliance on too few. They were extremely lucky last night - North lost it, Carlton didn't win it - and they will only be making up numbers if they make the 8.
-
what i seen of Carlton last night,they aint much good.
they are gonna do a richmond and finish mid table. fevola is in his late 20s. carlton will be back at the bottom soon enough.
-
what i seen of Carlton last night,they aint much good.
they are gonna do a richmond and finish mid table. fevola is in his late 20s. carlton will be back at the bottom soon enough.
And they tanked to get there! Bring on the tank!!! ::)
-
what i seen of Carlton last night,they aint much good.
they are gonna do a richmond and finish mid table. fevola is in his late 20s. carlton will be back at the bottom soon enough.
And they tanked to get there! Bring on the tank!!! ::)
They did tank, there bottom 6 is very average. They are probably hoping that Warnock, Walker and maybe one or two others can improve there side. As for the tank ... when we see Scully running around in a Melbourne jumper, we will understand why we needed to tank. If we could have added Scully to our midfield, we would have had the makings of a dynamite midfield for the next 10 years.
-
what i seen of Carlton last night,they aint much good.
they are gonna do a richmond and finish mid table. fevola is in his late 20s. carlton will be back at the bottom soon enough.
And they tanked to get there! Bring on the tank!!! ::)
They did tank, there bottom 6 is very average. They are probably hoping that Warnock, Walker and maybe one or two others can improve there side. As for the tank ... when we see Scully running around in a Melbourne jumper, we will understand why we needed to tank. If we could have added Scully to our midfield, we would have had the makings of a dynamite midfield for the next 10 years.
And that is the whole problem with trying to cure a sucking chest wound with a bandaid Ramps. It ain't going to happen. 1 extra player will not make the difference and those clubs who keep placing their faith in that just keep on getting disappointed. The act of tanking takes the focus away from the reality of winning and has a negative influence that can't be ignored. I will repeat it for the one thousandth time - no team has ever ever ever ever won a flag by tanking and it's not about to happen anytime soon.
-
Do you think that Hawthorn would of won last years flag without Franklin. In effect Franklin was there priority pick as they would have taken Roughead anyway.
-
Sorry. Legally we can't even muck around referring to you know what as it's puts OER at risk.
-
Do you think that Hawthorn would of won last years flag without Franklin. In effect Franklin was there priority pick as they would have taken Roughead anyway.
When did they tank?
-
2004 and 2005
-
'Tanking' is like 'Wanking' a very poor short solution to the problem. :wallywink
-
'Tanking' is like 'Wanking' a very poor short solution to the problem. :wallywink
I think the point is it gets the job done! :lol
-
2004 and 2005
In 2004 Hawthorn won 4 games and finished 15th above us. They won 2 games in the first 8 and then lost the next 10 in a row. So what week was it in that outstanding run that they started to tank? They won 2 of their last 6 games (beating the 14th and 16th teams) and were only beaten by teams above them (by 80, 44, 17 and 65) - hardly tanking.
In 2005 they won 5 games and finished 14th above Collingwood and Carlton. They won 3 of their first 9 and then lost the next 7 in a row. So what week was it in that sterling run did they start their tank? They won 2 of their last 6 games (beating the 13th and 16th teams) and only lost to teams above them on the ladder in the other 4 (by 48, 41, 4 after kicking 13 2nd half goals, and 54) - again, hardly tanking.
In the last quarter of both seasons they lost every game they should have, against teams that should have beaten them, by margins that required no tanking. Nope, move on, no tanking here.
As I said - "no team has ever ever ever ever won a flag by tanking and it's not about to happen anytime soon".
-
'Tanking' is like 'Wanking' a very poor short solution to the problem. :wallywink
Most of us have been wanking since 1980.
Maybe tanking is a modern alternative medicine.
Nothing conservative has been working since then.
Malakies.
-
2004 and 2005
In 2004 Hawthorn won 4 games and finished 15th above us. They won 2 games in the first 8 and then lost the next 10 in a row. So what week was it in that outstanding run that they started to tank? They won 2 of their last 6 games (beating the 14th and 16th teams) and were only beaten by teams above them (by 80, 44, 17 and 65) - hardly tanking.
In 2005 they won 5 games and finished 14th above Collingwood and Carlton. They won 3 of their first 9 and then lost the next 7 in a row. So what week was it in that sterling run did they start their tank? They won 2 of their last 6 games (beating the 13th and 16th teams) and only lost to teams above them on the ladder in the other 4 (by 48, 41, 4 after kicking 13 2nd half goals, and 54) - again, hardly tanking.
In the last quarter of both seasons they lost every game they should have, against teams that should have beaten them, by margins that required no tanking. Nope, move on, no tanking here.
As I said - "no team has ever ever ever ever won a flag by tanking and it's not about to happen anytime soon".
In rd 21 2005 we beat them at the dome by 4 points coming back twice from 5 goal plus margins. I think it got to 41 points in the third quarter that day. Even Fat Harry Taylor was making us look sloppy that day. If that day was not a tank I'll barrack for Carlton.
Even in other games the tank may not have been blatant as Carlton v Essendon in 2007 but I am sure the club knew what they were doing experimenting with line ups. The difference between other clubs tanking and us is the coach. Clarkson was given time to get a list competitive enough with the full support of the board same with Worsfold at the Eagles whereas at Richmond regardless of the list too many people from outside the caoching and playing group stick their nose in those affairs and for the most part the fans would have gone beserk. After coming as the Messiah in August 04 the ferals would have been wanting to kill him had we won 10 games in his first two seasons also had he wanted to go down that path anyway.
-
2004 and 2005
In 2004 Hawthorn won 4 games and finished 15th above us. They won 2 games in the first 8 and then lost the next 10 in a row. So what week was it in that outstanding run that they started to tank? They won 2 of their last 6 games (beating the 14th and 16th teams) and were only beaten by teams above them (by 80, 44, 17 and 65) - hardly tanking.
In 2005 they won 5 games and finished 14th above Collingwood and Carlton. They won 3 of their first 9 and then lost the next 7 in a row. So what week was it in that sterling run did they start their tank? They won 2 of their last 6 games (beating the 13th and 16th teams) and only lost to teams above them on the ladder in the other 4 (by 48, 41, 4 after kicking 13 2nd half goals, and 54) - again, hardly tanking.
In the last quarter of both seasons they lost every game they should have, against teams that should have beaten them, by margins that required no tanking. Nope, move on, no tanking here.
As I said - "no team has ever ever ever ever won a flag by tanking and it's not about to happen anytime soon".
In rd 21 2005 we beat them at the dome by 4 points coming back twice from 5 goal plus margins. I think it got to 41 points in the third quarter that day. Even Fat Harry Taylor was making us look sloppy that day. If that day was not a tank I'll barrack for Carlton.
Even in other games the tank may not have been blatant as Carlton v Essendon in 2007 but I am sure the club knew what they were doing experimenting with line ups. The difference between other clubs tanking and us is the coach. Clarkson was given time to get a list competitive enough with the full support of the board same with Worsfold at the Eagles whereas at Richmond regardless of the list too many people from outside the caoching and playing group stick their nose in those affairs and for the most part the fans would have gone beserk. After coming as the Messiah in August 04 the ferals would have been wanting to kill him had we won 10 games in his first two seasons also had he wanted to go down that path anyway.
Yep, a team that won a total of 5 games, had the second lowest total of points scored for the year and the 4th highest points against is in such control of it's destiny that it deliberately chucks a game from 41 points up on a team above it on the ladder and this doesn't raise a murmur in the media. And Clarkson spent this whole season tanking to get himself the club-sanctioned extra pick. And this extra pick was the difference in them winning the 2008 flag. Yeah right.
-
Smokey ol fella your wasting your time mate ;D They cant take it in :lol
-
Long live a winning culture.
We dont need picks.
We showed how good we are today.
We absolutely slaughtered the worst team in the competition.
It was just bad luck we didnt win by a nonchalent 10 goals.
Nevermind, next week we'll slaughter our next opposition.
Great win today.
-
WCE 44...Ess 19
Lets see the Eagles lose this.
-
Well atleast if WCE wins thats one less pick in the order.
-
Eagles 29 points up at half-time. Although we need them to win to push us up the draft order I won't hold my breath.
Interesting stuff today with Bailey today flipping his whole forward and back lines around. It was like watching the U10s where everyone gets a go in every position lol. You should have heard the Demon supporters ringing into SEN afterwards thanking Jordie and Richmond ::).
-
Eagles 29 points up at half-time. Although we need them to win to push us up the draft order I won't hold my breath.
Interesting stuff today with Bailey today flipping his whole forward and back lines around. It was like watching the U10s where everyone gets a go in every position lol. You should have heard the Demon supporters ringing into SEN afterwards thanking Jordie and Richmond ::).
of course they thanked jordie, he just got them 2 star junior players instead of just the 1.
-
Eagles 25 points up at 3/4 time. Let's see if the Eagles tank a 4 goal lead in the last quarter. Bugger Bombers have just kicked a goal :-\.
-
Eagles have lost their priority pick :woohoo
Geez the Bombers are going to finish ninth yet are currently worse than bottom 4 sides :lol
-
If Melbourne had have won today they'd still have to play Freo
I reckon the Demons will beat the Dockers so they both still qualify for PPs
I wonder how much "easy money" was lost on the punt today
-
after watching west coast game on TV, tanking doesnt exist
-
Eagles have lost their priority pick :woohoo
Geez the Bombers are going to finish ninth yet are currently worse than bottom 4 sides :lol
Makes our performances over the last 3 weeks even more galling to us and why we should have tanked. Right now we would be bottom of the ladder with 3.5 wins Freo and Melbourne playing in rd 20 on 4 wins and W Coast with 5 wins. When we might be a top line midfielder or KPP short these wins will come home to roost. Melbourne will beat Freo and both teams will have one. Looks like pick 7 for us instead of pick 1 and 3 and then something in the high teens. Hopefully we can trade something of value.
-
just trade a player .
-
after watching west coast game on TV, tanking doesnt exist
no doubt that's what andew demitriou will say "wce proved that tanking doesn't exist". but he's delusional
-
Yep Tucky the Dees have just landed Scully and Butcher :(. A total of 12 points has separated us from the 5.5 wins we have to just 2 wins for the year.
We have picks 6, 23, 39, 55, 71, ... at the minute.
1. Melb 3 wins
2. Melb
3. Freo 3.5 wins
4. North 4.5 wins
5. WC 5 wins
6. Rich 5.5 wins
7. Syd 7 wins
...
17. St Kilda
18. Freo
19. Melb
20. Freo
21. North
22. WC
23. Rich
...
39. Rich
...
55. Rich
...
71. Rich
-
4. North
7. Syd 7 wins
There's your extra early pick right there folks.. take your pick ;D
Seriously we are a trade away from either North or Sydney's first round pick.
North are going on and on about needing mid fielders and speed - we have the solution for them do we have the courage to do the trade ? :help
Sydney would give up their first rounder for the right deal
:cheers
-
4. North
7. Syd 7 wins
There's your extra early pick right there folks.. take your pick ;D
Seriously we are a trade away from either North or Sydney's first round pick.
North are going on and on about needing mid fielders and speed - we have the solution for them do we have the courage to do the trade ? :help
Sydney would give up their first rounder for the right deal
:cheers
I like it WP :thumbsup but it's hard to see any club giving up a top 10 pick in trade week. As you say I could only see Sydney as well considering it and that would be only due to major financial concerns about bottoming out and needing to top up to stay competitive in a tough marketplace for AFL.
-
can somebody actually answer these questions ...
the past three weeks. are we tanking? or are our players not good enough to win by more then one goal?
please, i have been on the 'tanking @ Richmond' and our wins are ugly!
why is this?
-
can somebody actually answer these questions ...
the past three weeks. are we tanking? or are our players not good enough to win by more then one goal?
please, i have been on the 'tanking @ Richmond' and our wins are ugly!
why is this?
We've actually tried to lose every game in the last 3 weeks but we can't even do that properly
-
can somebody actually answer these questions ...
the past three weeks. are we tanking? or are our players not good enough to win by more then one goal?
please, i have been on the 'tanking @ Richmond' and our wins are ugly!
why is this?
The first half of the North game and most of the Essendon game was good footy. More direct longer kicking footy, winning the clearances and spreading well from stoppages, and hitting targets. More importantly the defensive pressure in terms of tackling and hard running was there which forced the opposition in mistakes. We just couldn't maintain the intensity required for 4 quarters which allowed the opposition to gain back the momentum and close in again on the scoreboard in both games. With a young side that can happen. They can be very inconsistent.
Today on the other hand was just hideous. Back to overpossessing with handball and selfish, lazy, leave it to other guy to do the work footy. It was back to old habits of peeling off from the ballcarrier leaving him exposed to the opposition and stuffing up with handgrenade handball. Basically non-existent teamwork. To me we mentally thought today was going to be a piece of cake after last week's effort and we weren't mentally switched on and prepared to do the 1%ers things that made last week's win so promising. The difference between our good and bad is still too large for us to get ahead of ourselves and think we're not such a bad side. We are a bottom side for a reason.
-
Andrew Demetriou may lose Kevin Bartlett in tank war
Mike Sheahan | August 03, 2009
ANDREW Demetriou now stands alone on tanking, abandoned by a previously immovable minister for propaganda, Kevin Bartlett.
The AFL legend, who covered the Richmond-Melbourne game for SEN radio, said later he had witnessed certain events that alarmed him.
Expect more from Bartlett when he returns to the microphone this morning.
The man who changes his mind as often as he visits a hairdresser gave every indication he will turn his back on Demetriou, leaving him alone and exposed as the front for the anti-tanking movement.
Like so many others at the MCG, Bartlett was perplexed by many of the moves from the Melbourne coach's box - backmen playing forward, forwards back, talls on smalls, and odd combinations in the midfield.
Demetriou may point to the fact Melbourne regained the lead deep in time-on in the last quarter with two goals after Richmond built a 10-point lead.
The cynics will counter by saying Melbourne found itself in front because Richmond simply was incapable of claiming a victory staring it in the face.
As it happened, the Tigers got home with a split-second to spare, Jordan McMahon marking on the siren and then converting from just inside 50.
McMahon has copped a heap of criticism since joining Richmond, yet he delivered in the most testing of all circumstances - a set shot after the siren to decide the game.
The AFL Commission simply has to reassure the public on this issue, as the Herald Sun has urged for several weeks.
The game is being damaged. Either by the reality of tanking, which CEO Demetriou bluntly rejects, or the widespread perception.
It is nonsensical for the AFL to push for a recasting of Round 22 in the interests of the integrity of the finals series while the home-and-away series is so obviously compromised.
Not for the first time, we say the priority picks must go.
The reward simply is too great for clubs that finish down the bottom two years running, winning no more than 16 points in both years. Which is Melbourne's situation.
The Demons may win one more without diminishing their entitlements. With Fremantle at home in Round 20, one more would seem a matter of course.
Which made yesterday's result so critical.
If Melbourne wins no more than one of its last four games and remains 16th and last on the ladder, it will be rewarded with the first two picks in the national draft, access to the best two juniors in the country.
There are those who say it would be irresponsible of those in charge to jeopardise such a handsome package.
Demetriou simply cannot continue to say: "Nothing's going to change."
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25872783-19742,00.html
-
Some very estactic Demon supporters on their forum overjoyed they lost but Demetriou says it's not an issue ::)
Title: Did you want McMahon to kick the goal?
Absolutely.
McMahon...ha! One of the worst players in the comp. Lucky to kick it, lucky to get the mark. About time things go our way, what a horrible thing to say.
I and about 10 others in the Bullring (I couldn't watch it from my seat) all cheered.
Horrible situation.
I danced around like we'd won the premiership... I love McMuffin.
Love it! The worst player in the AFL kicks a goal that delivers Scully to us - fantastic!
You should have heard the Tiges' supporters on the radio - they are soooo filthy that their team doesn't play for the future.
What a great day!!
YES YES GOD YES!
Mere seconds earlier I was fuming, filthy, devastated that I've sat through 3 years of utter garbage and it's all going to mean nothing when we beat the worst team going around, in a meaningless game.
I had to look away when McMahon was kicking it. Figures that the biggest dud in their side, who couldn't hit a target all day, was going to line up for the victory. I was ecstatic when he won it.
Some people around me must have thought I was crazy, but they will all be very happy when Tom Scully is dominating the competition for the next 10 years.
I felt like an absolute prick today. I wanted Mcmahon to kick that goal. I saw Melbourne fans walk out in dusgust when Ricky nailed that goal with less than 2 minutes to go and fans celebrating like we had won a flag after Mcmahon kicked the goal. Then I saw the players looking totally gutted laying on the ground and I thought to myself how can I possibly want my team to lose.
The priority pick has got to go! Clearly on todays performance, the players do not tank, but Bailey tanked like his llife depended on it today. At one stage we had Spencer, Miller , Jetta and Bate in the middle (look out fab four). Then Grimes n Cheney had a crack! I particularly liked Dunn(tagger) on Jackson(tagger) early in the 1st quarter. Warnock in the forwardline was a masterstroke as was Juice Newton in defence.
However, all I can say is, well done Bails. We didnt make the stupid rule, but we would be jeopardising our tilt at the flag in 3 years time if we didnt milk it for all it is worth today.
Something posters gloss over. Winning culture comes from having enough talented players to win constantly against ALL TEAMS.
Let's face it. The three wins we have had, we've still played like rubbish. It's not like we've played brilliant football and blown teams out of the water with great skills and class. The fact is that the three wins, opposition played even more poohouse then us.
Our only chance to win at the moment is hoping the opposition team plays like poo. How the hell do we win a premiership when our best chance is hoping the opposition doesn't turn up.
I want to beat Geelong and StKilda at their best and we need more talent on our list to ensure that.
Mcmahon is GOD and from this day I'll fight for his honour whenever Richmond fans bag him. I've got your back Jordan.
First thing I did after the game was buy a McMahon badge, 100% not joking
http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?showtopic=16138 (http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?showtopic=16138)
-
GOLD
-
can somebody actually answer these questions ...
the past three weeks. are we tanking? or are our players not good enough to win by more then one goal?
please, i have been on the 'tanking @ Richmond' and our wins are ugly!
why is this?
We've actually tried to lose every game in the last 3 weeks but we can't even do that properly
Wouldnt think so
-
Now where is all this talk from the tankers about West Coast being such a professionally run club that they won't let this priority pick go?
Where is it?
Are they suddenly now unprofessional, or is it that their professional opinion is that building a winning team is more important than losing for a priority pick?
Which is it?
-
What about the third option - Stupid
-
What about the third option - Stupid
I assume you mean the tankers. :rollin
-
Now where is all this talk from the tankers about West Coast being such a professionally run club that they won't let this priority pick go?
Where is it?
Are they suddenly now unprofessional, or is it that their professional opinion is that building a winning team is more important than losing for a priority pick?
Which is it?
West Coast are one of the most professional clubs in Australian Sport and massively more professional than us. In the end, when you send players out onto a field of play the players will play to win. Thats why McMahon kicked his goal yesterday, thats why West Coasts youngsters won, players play to win, clubs on the other hand - if you asked someone to tell you the truth at a club, theyd all say that these wins are meaningless- ours certainly was as for West Coast, theyll live to fight another day,and as I said, they are still one of the most professional outfits in Australian sport.
-
Now where is all this talk from the tankers about West Coast being such a professionally run club that they won't let this priority pick go?
Where is it?
Are they suddenly now unprofessional, or is it that their professional opinion is that building a winning team is more important than losing for a priority pick?
Which is it?
West Coast are one of the most professional clubs in Australian Sport and massively more professional than us. In the end, when you send players out onto a field of play the players will play to win. Thats why McMahon kicked his goal yesterday, thats why West Coasts youngsters won, players play to win, clubs on the other hand - if you asked someone to tell you the truth at a club, theyd all say that these wins are meaningless- ours certainly was as for West Coast, theyll live to fight another day,and as I said, they are still one of the most professional outfits in Australian sport.
Translation = Ramps doesn't have a clue why West Coast won yesterday. :shh
-
Now where is all this talk from the tankers about West Coast being such a professionally run club that they won't let this priority pick go?
Where is it?
Are they suddenly now unprofessional, or is it that their professional opinion is that building a winning team is more important than losing for a priority pick?
Which is it?
West Coast are one of the most professional clubs in Australian Sport and massively more professional than us. In the end, when you send players out onto a field of play the players will play to win. Thats why McMahon kicked his goal yesterday, thats why West Coasts youngsters won, players play to win, clubs on the other hand - if you asked someone to tell you the truth at a club, theyd all say that these wins are meaningless- ours certainly was as for West Coast, theyll live to fight another day,and as I said, they are still one of the most professional outfits in Australian sport.
Translation = Ramps doesn't have a clue why West Coast won yesterday. :shh
translation - i gave you a fair and legitimate answer but you didnt like it. players play to win and they do so because if you were a player who is on the edge of keeping your position on a list and not being on list, your not gonna tank so the club you play for gets an early pick which may result in you losing your place of the list and ending up getting poo money at a lower level. Thats the reality of it.
Also Essendon is a rabble. There season is falling apart. And there are rumblings that Knights position as coach is in question. I suggest hed be thinking he needs to make the 8 in 2010 or that may be the end of his coaching career.
-
I have got to say this....West Coast winning yesterday is messing with my whole belief system.
Until yesterday there were 3 certainties in life- Death,Taxes and WCE not winning another game in 2009.
-
I have got to say this....West Coast winning yesterday is messing with my whole belief system.
Until yesterday there were 3 certainties in life- Death,Taxes and WCE not winning another game in 2009.
I was actually so confident they haven't been tanking that I took them in my tipping! :thumbsup
Essendon's year is shot and so is Carlton's - even if either/both make the finals, they are only making up numbers and will be out in week 1.
-
What about the third option - Stupid
fourth option......players bet on football...WCE just paid for their end of season trip. :lol
-
Eagles bury tanking debate: KB
August 03, 2009 9:56AM
KEVIN Bartlett has responded to a Mike Sheahan column, saying he won't allow other people to put "tanking" in his mouth.
Sheahan today wrote that Bartlett might leave AFL CEO Andrew Demetiou alone at the front of the anti-tanking movement.
Bartlett appeared to be worried about some strange moves by Demons coach Dean Bailey during Melbourne’s loss to Richmond yesterday.
Speaking on radio station SEN this morning, Bartlett acknowledged that the Demons-Tigers match had shaken him, but West Coast’s unexpected win reaffirmed his belief that tanking does not happen in the AFL.
“Mike Sheahan in the Herald Sun today is correct in saying certain events did alarm me," Bartlett said.
“But I’m not going allow Sheahan and (co-commentators Andy) Maher and (Daniel) Harford and (Shane) Wakelin to put the tanking word in my mouth.
“Dean Bailey must have known what he was doing, for it took a kick after the siren by (Tiger Jordan) McMahon to bury the Demons.
“Maybe us critics and commentators aren’t as smart as we think we are. It gave me great satisfaction and relief to go home and watch the might West Coast bury the tanking issue when they buried the Bombers at Subiaco, losing a priority pick.”
Bartlett took a swipe at Maher's decision to leave the SEN commentary box before the end of the match.
“When Melbourne moved their best defenders – (Matthew) Warnock and (James) Frawley forward- Brad Miller into the ruck, sending the 200cm ruckman Paul Johnson down back to look after Nathan Brown, raised eyebrows were sending me a message from the (commentary) box.
“After a comical passage of play, Andy Maher left the box in the last quarter citing a family function had cut his day short.”
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/eagles-bury-tanking-debate-kb/story-e6frey00-1225757338081
-
translation - i gave you a fair and legitimate answer but you didnt like it. players play to win and they do so because if you were a player who is on the edge of keeping your position on a list and not being on list, your not gonna tank so the club you play for gets an early pick which may result in you losing your place of the list and ending up getting poo money at a lower level. Thats the reality of it.
Also Essendon is a rabble. There season is falling apart. And there are rumblings that Knights position as coach is in question. I suggest hed be thinking he needs to make the 8 in 2010 or that may be the end of his coaching career.
No, I didn't like it because it is a blathering excuse. Either West Coast are professional or they aren't. Either they are tanking and have control of their players or they don't. No excuses.
You should be man enough to admit that a professionally run outfit has eschewed tanking as the short term solution/mirage that it is. And let's not forget that they had much more to lose by winning than we did. Yet they put victory first.
You probably wouldn't understand why.
-
translation - i gave you a fair and legitimate answer but you didnt like it. players play to win and they do so because if you were a player who is on the edge of keeping your position on a list and not being on list, your not gonna tank so the club you play for gets an early pick which may result in you losing your place of the list and ending up getting poo money at a lower level. Thats the reality of it.
Also Essendon is a rabble. There season is falling apart. And there are rumblings that Knights position as coach is in question. I suggest hed be thinking he needs to make the 8 in 2010 or that may be the end of his coaching career.
No, I didn't like it because it is a blathering excuse. Either West Coast are professional or they aren't. Either they are tanking and have control of their players or they don't. No excuses.
You should be man enough to admit that a professionally run outfit has eschewed tanking as the short term solution/mirage that it is. And let's not forget that they had much more to lose by winning than we did. Yet they put victory first.
You probably wouldn't understand why.
The players whose careers are on the line put victory first and if you dont understand that then theres not much else I can do.
-
Voss wants any coach caught "tanking" banned for life and a lottery system brought in for the bottom 4 sides so the perception of tanking is removed.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/81934/default.aspx
-
All will be wearing egg on there face when Tom succumbs to the Richmond blood in him and elects to be traded to Richmond.
Kane Lucas, Trengrove, Morribitto will be fantastic pick ups.
-
All will be wearing egg on there face when Tom succumbs to the Richmond blood in him and elects to be traded to Richmond.
Kane Lucas, Trengrove, Morribitto will be fantastic pick ups.
Finger's crossed that he comes over to Tigerland after being developed at another club! By then our younger blokes should be winning games making it more tempting for him :pray
I think we will miss both Scully and Butcher at the draft now, either they both go to Melbourne, or one each to North and the Demons. Will be an interesting match this week between those two. I dunno what is the better scenario for us??
-
80% of Melb fans wanted to lose the game.
-
The players whose careers are on the line put victory first and if you dont understand that then theres not much else I can do.
The more you read and the more you see, tanking just doesn't seem worth the effort hey. Fancy the players not following the script and actually trying. And if Bailey was tanking yesterday then someone forgot to tell the players. And if you are the coach and you choose to tank then you had best think long and hard about the impact on your list because the players aren't stupid - if you don't tell them your plans and you take away their chances of victory I would bet you have just fast-tracked your ticket out of town. And if you do tell them they are going out to not win, then good luck making that work for you in the long run. Not near as much tanking happens as the pro-tankers would have you believe - a bit like global warming really. </end political comment>
-
80% of Melb fans wanted to lose the game.
And 100% of Melbourne fans have endured a losing run since 1964. I suppose after that long and that many failed attempts/plans/coaches/players then you will grasp at anything. Good luck to them believing that chucking a few games at the end of a season will change all that.
-
Last year they got Watts and Morton, this year its likely they will get Scully & Butcher. Players like Blease havent been seen yet who they picked up in the 2nd round last year. Theyve found some players like Liam Jurrah, Melbourne will be big improvers over the next 2 or 3 years. Lets hope we can be the same and improve as well.
-
Nice subject matter ramps. Got an enormous amount of posts. Is this a record. :clapping
-
Nice subject matter ramps. Got an enormous amount of posts. Is this a record. :clapping
big subject tanking. ;D
-
gee i cant believe anyone who watched the BIG NAT last night would seriously prefer winning 6 games is as opposed to 4.
What bloody difference does it make. I would rather win 4 and at least show something in the other games we lose as opposed to winning 6 against Freo, Demons, North, Eagles etc etc and get smashed by the other teams at the top end. GET REAL PEOPLE!!!
Woosha is a VERY SMART OPERATOR. Our club can learn a hell of a lot from a club like that.
Yes, we can. :) ;)
-
gee i cant believe anyone who watched the BIG NAT last night would seriously prefer winning 6 games is as opposed to 4.
What bloody difference does it make. I would rather win 4 and at least show something in the other games we lose as opposed to winning 6 against Freo, Demons, North, Eagles etc etc and get smashed by the other teams at the top end. GET REAL PEOPLE!!!
Woosha is a VERY SMART OPERATOR. Our club can learn a hell of a lot from a club like that.
Yes, we can. :) ;)
Did you watch Footy Classified last night Fooffoo. They would have given you the answer as to why WCE didnt tank and why they lost the game v Essendon. Anyway if you cant be bothered getting a copy of the answer, it doesnt matter, just look at the answer I gave yesterday. It was 100% exactly the same.
-
Did you watch Footy Classified last night Fooffoo. They would have given you the answer as to why WCE didnt tank and why they lost the game v Essendon. Anyway if you cant be bothered getting a copy of the answer, it doesnt matter, just look at the answer I gave yesterday. It was 100% exactly the same.
A player revolt, lol.
Of course the players want to win! What a silly argument...can't you see the point? All this time you guys are arguing that West Coast are too professional, smart operators etc etc to let another Natanui or whoever slip, they won't be like unprofessional shambles Richmond who won't tank blah blah blah...and what happens... they win and pass up a 1st round pick — a 1st rounder — not pick 19 — and all you can do is say, "The players wanted to win."
Lame.
I'm not saying that tanking doesn't exist - far from it - I'm saying that real football clubs with winning processes and structures do not under any circumstances allow anything to stand in front of winning. Richmond needs more of that attitude.
And by the way, when you start relying on Grant Thomas for back-up opinions, I'm afraid you've lost the plot. He is a self-serving buffoon.
-
Did you watch Footy Classified last night Fooffoo. They would have given you the answer as to why WCE didnt tank and why they lost the game v Essendon. Anyway if you cant be bothered getting a copy of the answer, it doesnt matter, just look at the answer I gave yesterday. It was 100% exactly the same.
A player revolt, lol.
Of course the players want to win! What a silly argument...can't you see the point? All this time you guys are arguing that West Coast are too professional, smart operators etc etc to let another Natanui or whoever slip, they won't be like unprofessional shambles Richmond who won't tank blah blah blah...and what happens... they win and pass up a 1st round pick — a 1st rounder — not pick 19 — and all you can do is say, "The players wanted to win."
Lame.
I'm not saying that tanking doesn't exist - far from it - I'm saying that real football clubs with winning processes and structures do not under any circumstances allow anything to stand in front of winning. Richmond needs more of that attitude.
And by the way, when you start relying on Grant Thomas for back-up opinions, I'm afraid you've lost the plot. He is a self-serving buffoon.
a self serving buffoon who took over a complete rabble of a club and made them constant finals performers and handed over a list to Ross Lyon which is gonna win a flag.
-
and handed over a list to Ross Lyon which is gonna win a flag.
Hopefully not I am still hoping for a big laugh when they crash out of the finals
-
a self serving buffoon who took over a complete rabble of a club and made them constant finals performers and handed over a list to Ross Lyon which is gonna win a flag.
A self-serving buffoon who inherited a half decent list and was able to top up with more high picks and still couldn't get them any higher than 3rd (even I could have got that list that high), displaying an arrogance that he couldn't climb over when he refused to admit he was wrong about the role of ruckmen in the modern game. Self-serving buffoon of the highest order. He handed over a list that finished 9th in his last season. Lyon has been the catalyst for this list (possibly) reaching it's potential, zero to do with Thomas.
-
Voss wants any coach caught "tanking" banned for life and a lottery system brought in for the bottom 4 sides so the perception of tanking is removed.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/81934/default.aspx
Not sure how he imagines they will be "caught"? Strange idea really. But if we do end up keeping the ppicks system, one idea might be that it should not include the last 6-8 or so games, rather in counting # wins last 2yrs should wrap from (say) round 16 2 yrs previous to round 16 current year. that way late season games less likely to be thrown.
-
Tanking a 'non-issue' for Tigers
richmondfc.com.au
By Mic Cullen Tue 04 August, 2009
TANKING is a non-issue for the players but is something the AFL could take a look at, according to Richmond skipper Chris Newman.
The public debate around tanking has intensified in recent weeks, and reached a crescendo after Sunday's Richmond-Melbourne game – which the Tigers won with a kick after the siren – with critics pointing the finger at several positional changes and lack of rotations from the Melbourne camp.
Newman said the topic was not discussed by players.
"No, no, we haven't talked about tanking at all," he said on Tuesday.
"I think it's always going to be bandied around at this time of the year, but it's a non-issue for us players."
However, Newman said it was something the AFL should probably have a look at.
"Oh, I guess so, it's worth having a look at, but as I've stated before, I think that [the draft is] in place for a reason, to try and make the competition as fair, as even as possible, and I think that it has that effect now," Newman said.
"That's up to the AFL to decide, but as players we just go out there and try and win every week."
Newman said talk about tanking was a blight on the game and that he had never considered doing it, especially given how rarely the Tigers have won in his time at the club.
He said the reaction of the Demons players after their loss showed that they were committed to winning.
"I don't like hearing the word, and all I can speak on behalf of is the players, and there's just no way known I'd go out there to lose a game," Newman said.
"I haven't been in too many successful years and too many successful teams, so every win for me is a bonus.
"I think that both teams were really desperate at the end of the game to get the points, and I think that if you saw the look on the Melbourne players' faces after the game, I think you'd realise that tanking probably wouldn't be bantered round their change rooms either."
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/6301/newsid/82000/default.aspx
-
a self serving buffoon who took over a complete rabble of a club and made them constant finals performers and handed over a list to Ross Lyon which is gonna win a flag.
A self-serving buffoon who inherited a half decent list and was able to top up with more high picks and still couldn't get them any higher than 3rd (even I could have got that list that high), displaying an arrogance that he couldn't climb over when he refused to admit he was wrong about the role of ruckmen in the modern game. Self-serving buffoon of the highest order. He handed over a list that finished 9th in his last season. Lyon has been the catalyst for this list (possibly) reaching it's potential, zero to do with Thomas.
Spot on smokey :clapping
I'd also add that it has taken a change of administration and a redirection of funding to bring about the right environment for success. These are the kinds of things that bring about strong club culture — not tanking.
-
a self serving buffoon who took over a complete rabble of a club and made them constant finals performers and handed over a list to Ross Lyon which is gonna win a flag.
A self-serving buffoon who inherited a half decent list and was able to top up with more high picks and still couldn't get them any higher than 3rd (even I could have got that list that high), displaying an arrogance that he couldn't climb over when he refused to admit he was wrong about the role of ruckmen in the modern game. Self-serving buffoon of the highest order. He handed over a list that finished 9th in his last season. Lyon has been the catalyst for this list (possibly) reaching it's potential, zero to do with Thomas.
Your letting personal dislike for Thomas get in the way of fair opinion. Lyon has done nothing. The list is Grant Thomas's list, the players recruited- under Grant Thomas reign. A club that has been a laughing stock for 100 years and Grant Thomas sorted them out and made them way more professional than they have ever been. Thats the reality of it.
-
Your letting personal dislike for Thomas get in the way of fair opinion. Lyon has done nothing. The list is Grant Thomas's list, the players recruited- under Grant Thomas reign. A club that has been a laughing stock for 100 years and Grant Thomas sorted them out and made them way more professional than they have ever been. Thats the reality of it.
Not at all Ramps. I'm quoting facts AND including a personal dislike.
He had Nick Riewoldt, Justin Koschitzke, Jason Blake, Stephen Milne, Lenny Hayes, Steven Baker and Max Hudghton of the current list plus he had Harvey, Gehrig, Hamill, Burke, Loewe, Peckett and Thompson to work with when he took over plus he got Luke Ball, Xavier Clarke, Matt Maguire, Nick Del Santo, Xavier Clarke and Leigh Montagna in his first year. 7 years, 3 final series, no grand finals. Yeah, did real well with that ordinary list did Grant Thomas. Self-serving buffoon.
-
Your letting personal dislike for Thomas get in the way of fair opinion. Lyon has done nothing. The list is Grant Thomas's list, the players recruited- under Grant Thomas reign. A club that has been a laughing stock for 100 years and Grant Thomas sorted them out and made them way more professional than they have ever been. Thats the reality of it.
Not at all Ramps. I'm quoting facts AND including a personal dislike.
He had Nick Riewoldt, Justin Koschitzke, Jason Blake, Stephen Milne, Lenny Hayes, Steven Baker and Max Hudghton of the current list plus he had Harvey, Gehrig, Hamill, Burke, Loewe, Peckett and Thompson to work with when he took over plus he got Luke Ball, Xavier Clarke, Matt Maguire, Nick Del Santo, Xavier Clarke and Leigh Montagna in his first year. 7 years, 3 final series, no grand finals. Yeah, did real well with that ordinary list did Grant Thomas. Self-serving buffoon.
Brendon Goddard was inherited under Thomas' reign.
So does Malcolm Blight get credit in this too?
-
a self serving buffoon who took over a complete rabble of a club and made them constant finals performers and handed over a list to Ross Lyon which is gonna win a flag.
A self-serving buffoon who inherited a half decent list and was able to top up with more high picks and still couldn't get them any higher than 3rd (even I could have got that list that high), displaying an arrogance that he couldn't climb over when he refused to admit he was wrong about the role of ruckmen in the modern game. Self-serving buffoon of the highest order. He handed over a list that finished 9th in his last season. Lyon has been the catalyst for this list (possibly) reaching it's potential, zero to do with Thomas.
It was Lyon, and not the like of Reiwoldt, Goddard, Kosi? (pick 1, 1, 2)
-
The list is Grant Thomas's list, the players recruited- under Grant Thomas reign. A club that has been a laughing stock for 100 years and Grant Thomas sorted them out and made them way more professional than they have ever been. Thats the reality of it.
I agree with that.
But I also agree that he got it horribly wrong on his stance on the importance of ruckman, and looks like a buffoon trying to defend it.
-
The list is Grant Thomas's list, the players recruited- under Grant Thomas reign. A club that has been a laughing stock for 100 years and Grant Thomas sorted them out and made them way more professional than they have ever been. Thats the reality of it.
I agree with that.
But I also agree that he got it horribly wrong on his stance on the importance of ruckman, and looks like a buffoon trying to defend it.
Yep I agree he didnt get everything right, but he got way more things right than wrong. He did a good job at St K hopefully our new coach can do the same and atleast make us finals performers on a consistent basis.
-
gee i cant believe anyone who watched the BIG NAT last night would seriously prefer winning 6 games is as opposed to 4.
What bloody difference does it make. I would rather win 4 and at least show something in the other games we lose as opposed to winning 6 against Freo, Demons, North, Eagles etc etc and get smashed by the other teams at the top end. GET REAL PEOPLE!!!
Woosha is a VERY SMART OPERATOR. Our club can learn a hell of a lot from a club like that.
Yes, we can. :) ;)
Did you watch Footy Classified last night Fooffoo. They would have given you the answer as to why WCE didnt tank and why they lost the game v Essendon. Anyway if you cant be bothered getting a copy of the answer, it doesnt matter, just look at the answer I gave yesterday. It was 100% exactly the same.
Essendon were inept was the answer. Hard to lose when the opposition is playing worse than you even when you're trying to tank. Melbourne tried everything in the book to lose against us and they still almost won we were that bad :P.
-
Demetriou is in full support of Melbourne's "experimentation" ::)
‘‘Melbourne have been a poor performing team for several years. If they get a priority pick they will deserve it, believe me.’’
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/afl-boss-backs-dees-after-loss/2009/08/04/1249350546840.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
-
Hafey on 6PR...
The four-time Richmond premiership coach also called on the AFL to act on tanking, saying the time had come for a lottery system to be introduced for priority picks.
With the focus squarely on Melbourne coach Dean Bailey after the Eagles bucked the odds and the perception by beating Essendon last weekend, Hafey said the League had to act to end the perception teams did not want to win.
"The AFL have got to do something about it, they cant afford getting the bad publicity the way they have got," Hafey told Radio 6PR.
"They have got to change a little bit, even if they just go for the lottery in the last four positions.
"They have just got to stop this - the team selections and team moves by the coach can more or less restrict them about winning, and this is what the papers have been talking about."
http://www.watoday.com.au/sport/richmond-legend-backs-cousins-in-2010-20090805-ea0q.html
-
I am a big fan of a lottery system, well at least a weighted lottery system where the bottom 8 are all involved, the bottom team receiving the biggest chance of securing the first pick while the 9th place team obtaining the smallest chance. I would scrap the priority picks altogether.
While having a lottery for the bottom 4 teams could have merit and be a better option than the current system, it would still not solve the problem. Eade pointed out that teams who were hovering around 12th - 9th position may tank to finish in the bottom 4 so this system would only shift the issue higher up the ladder.
If you just got rid of the priority picks you would still have teams tanking to secure particularly good players but in most drafts the difference between the first few picks in most drafts is marginally at best so this could help solve the problem.
Either way I solution needs to be at least trialled because all this speculation is hurting the game and confusing the supporters
Stripes
-
I'm not even a fan of a weighted lottery to be honest. Anything that slews the odds will leave the system open to conjecture and misuse. If you finish 9th to 16th then a straight lottery of 8 numbers. No incentive to do anything except win games for the good of the club. Those making the 8 can follow the normal order - there is no need to make those picks a lottery. Simple and effective.
-
I'm not even a fan of a weighted lottery to be honest. Anything that slews the odds will leave the system open to conjecture and misuse. If you finish 9th to 16th then a straight lottery of 8 numbers. No incentive to do anything except win games for the good of the club. Those making the 8 can follow the normal order - there is no need to make those picks a lottery. Simple and effective.
Agree, and then give the AFL Commission the right to award a priority or extra pick if they deem it necessary.
-
I'm not even a fan of a weighted lottery to be honest. Anything that slews the odds will leave the system open to conjecture and misuse. If you finish 9th to 16th then a straight lottery of 8 numbers. No incentive to do anything except win games for the good of the club. Those making the 8 can follow the normal order - there is no need to make those picks a lottery. Simple and effective.
Totally agree, also this way gives clubs that are on the right track and doing everyting they can to improve (teams around 10, 11, 12) an equal chance to get the best player to thier club to lift them even further up the ladder. Why should we reward the really bad sides, they also need to find ways to improve their lists without help from the AFL via the draft.
If this was the case the Tigers may have been more succussful over the last 15 years.
-
A couple of anti-tanking suggestions from Jake Niall in the Age....
Only ‘experimentation’ we need is with the draft
Jake Niall | August 6, 2009
Michael Voss has proposed a lottery for the bottom four, in which the draft order is plucked from a barrel; this is how basketball picks are allocated in America’s NBA.
I don’t like the lottery, which could conceivably place a team with 10 wins on the same footing as a basket case club with two victories. It isn’t terribly fair.
A venerated former premiership coach suggested a variation on the lottery, which I’ll call the round-15 solution. His system had the teams that had won four games or less by round 15 (when everyone would have played once) competing for the first draft pick over the final seven rounds. The team that won the most games (and/or percentage) would be the No. 1 pick, second best would be pick No. 2, etc.
The problem with this seven-round play-off, of course, is that the worst teams are excessively punished. While the incentive created for dead rubbers is a positive, it would defeat the socialistic ideal of the draft.
Even without priority picks, finishing last is a prize. The 16th club receives not just access to the best kid in the land, but first call on an uncontracted player in the pre-season draft; in 2000, St Kilda used the pre-season draft as a lever to recruit Fraser Gehrig and Aaron Hamill, while Carlton and Collingwood managed to land Nick Stevens and Shane O’Bree for nothing.
In the current finals and draft system, the least-attractive position is ninth. As Richmond fans would attest, ninth is the worst of all worlds. No early picks and no finals, the ninth and 10th teams are stuck in a mid-table purgatory.
There’s an argument to say that the ninth and 10th teams should be compensated in the draft, and the rewards to the bottom teams should be reduced. Under what I will term the ‘‘Richmond option’’, the teams that finish just outside the eight would be compensated by receiving the first pick in the second round.
The first round of the draft would remain as it is (but without priority picks), in reverse ladder order. But, once the second round starts, the ninth club is given pick 17, the 10th club pick 18, and so on. The current status quo of reverse ladder order would apply to teams in the eight. The bottom team would receive picks one and 24, which is still superior to the ninth club’s eight and 17, or the 10th team’s seven and 18. Reverse ladder order would resume after pick 24.
There is no perfect system that will allocate access to talent fairly, ensure an even competition, retain interest in late-season games and restore the public’s faith in games in which there is ‘‘experimentation’’.
There might be a better way than what we have now, though.
ANTI-TANKING DRAFT OPTIONS
RICHMOND DRAFT (rewarding ninth)
■ Priority picks are scrapped and the first round of the draft remains unchanged, in reverse ladder order, with the bottom team having pick one, the second-bottom team pick two and so forth.
■ But once the first round ends, it is the ninth-placed club that gets pick 17, the 10th team receives pick 18 and it continues in actual ladder order from 9-16 until the bottom club has pick 24.
■The draft picks of the top eight remain in reverse ladder order.
Why:
The bottom teams are already well-rewarded, and it gives incentive to win games to clubs outside the eight. Ninth is the worst spot on the ladder in a draft system.
SEVEN-ROUND PLAY-OFF
■ Proposed by a highly respected former premiership coach, this radical system would use round 15 as a cut-off date. Teams that had won four games or less would then compete for the top picks, with the spoils going to the ‘‘winner’’.
■ The bottom-four club that won the most games (and/or highest percentage) in those seven rounds would receive the first pick, the second-best pick two and so forth.
Why:
It creates huge incentives for winning dead games. The downside is that it does not reward the worst-performed team.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/only-8216experimentation8217-we-need-is-with-the-draft/2009/08/05/1249350592698.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
-
Today is another day, against a team going nowhere - actually the swans are going somewhere and thats backwards. With West Coast winning yesterday, our chances of adding a gun to our midfield have improved markedly.
-
Today is another day, against a team going nowhere - actually the swans are going somewhere and thats backwards. With West Coast winning yesterday, our chances of adding a gun to our midfield have improved markedly.
yep and watch the supporters start touching themselves if we win.
-
Buthcher or Tregrove coming our way, what would prefer, ready made mid or a KF.
-
Buthcher or Tregrove coming our way, what would prefer, ready made mid or a KF.
neither player aint going to fix the issues at punt rd
-
Freo stitch up Melbourne next week and pick 3 is ours to lose. I thought the Eagles game could be dangerous, but at home they'll destroy us.
-
Pick 3 and 19 is almost in the bag. We must also trade out or delist as many as we can. I know that McMahon is contracted and King is contracted but in reality- they should be paid out or in the case of McMahon trade him to another club and offer to pay his contract for the year.
-
Pick 3 and 19 is almost in the bag. We must also trade out or delist as many as we can. I know that McMahon is contracted and King is contracted but in reality- they should be paid out or in the case of McMahon trade him to another club and offer to pay his contract for the year.
yep pick 3 and 19 and hopefully a few more with trade would be awesome. the club says we're expected to invest heavily in the draft this year, let's see them carry that out.
-
We won't get anything for King or McMahon at the trade table. Only at Richmond do these VFL standard footballers get multi-year contracts that we can't delist them :scream ::). Pay Jordie out please :help.
To get a decent pick we have to cough up someone decent that other clubs would be interested in - Tuck, Foley or alike. Even Rainesy is still rated!
Thanks to Freo losing their PP and North flogging the Dees, right now we have picks 4, 20, 36, 52, 68, etc. We need another 2nd round pick at least.
-
Pick 3 and 19 is almost in the bag. We must also trade out or delist as many as we can. I know that McMahon is contracted and King is contracted but in reality- they should be paid out or in the case of McMahon trade him to another club and offer to pay his contract for the year.
yep pick 3 and 19 and hopefully a few more with trade would be awesome. the club says we're expected to invest heavily in the draft this year, let's see them carry that out.
We could have had so much more losing to Essendon and Melbourne the way things have panned out with Freo surprising Port today. Freo lose to Melbourne next week won't matter as Dees get to 4 wins and get their priority picks.
Melbourne could have been on 5 wins next week win win for us.
Freo would be on five wins win win for us.
Essendon would be the worst team ever to make the 8 and boy wouldn't they be patting themselves on the back in the boardroom at Windy Hill appointing Knight ahead of Hardwick win win for us
Hardwick gets the gig at Richmond win win for us
We would finish with 3.5 wins. Win win
Instead we do things the hard way for "winning culture" We have been crap for 27 yrs another 5 games here or there won't change anyones perception of us.
We just need to ensure we will finish in 15th spot if Freo beat Melbourne next week.
-
We won't get anything for King or McMahon at the trade table. Only at Richmond do these VFL standard footballers get multi-year contracts that we can't delist them :scream ::). Pay Jordie out please :help.
To get a decent pick we have to cough up someone decent that other clubs would be interested in - Tuck, Foley or alike. Even Rainesy is still rated!
Thanks to Freo losing their PP and North flogging the Dees, right now we have picks 4, 20, 36, 52, 68, etc. We need another 2nd round pick at least.
To be fair, King's been good since Jade took over and he started playing him as a tagger. He smashed Shaw today, probably the only matchup we won all day. I'd take King a million times over before Sanchez McMahon who should retire and become a butcher, he certainly knows how to be one on the footy field.
-
To be fair, King's been good since Jade took over and he started playing him as a tagger. He smashed Shaw today, probably the only matchup we won all day. I'd take King a million times over before Sanchez McMahon who should retire and become a butcher, he certainly knows how to be one on the footy field.
I agree Kingy was our best player today and the only Tiger to beat his opponent but with all due respect to Kingy who tries his guts out if he's our best player on any day then it's an indictment on the rest of the team.
-
To be fair, King's been good since Jade took over and he started playing him as a tagger. He smashed Shaw today, probably the only matchup we won all day. I'd take King a million times over before Sanchez McMahon who should retire and become a butcher, he certainly knows how to be one on the footy field.
I agree Kingy was our best player today and the only Tiger to beat his opponent but with all due respect to Kingy who tries his guts out if he's our best player on any day then it's an indictment on the rest of the team.
I agree, however I still think King gets a bit of a bad wrap. He played injured last year, had a complete ankle reco in the preseason and in the last month has played good, disciplined, team football. He's contracted for next year and each week is making me less concerned about that. Sanchez on the other hand...
-
To be fair, King's been good since Jade took over and he started playing him as a tagger. He smashed Shaw today, probably the only matchup we won all day. I'd take King a million times over before Sanchez McMahon who should retire and become a butcher, he certainly knows how to be one on the footy field.
I agree Kingy was our best player today and the only Tiger to beat his opponent but with all due respect to Kingy who tries his guts out if he's our best player on any day then it's an indictment on the rest of the team.
I agree, however I still think King gets a bit of a bad wrap. He played injured last year, had a complete ankle reco in the preseason and in the last month has played good, disciplined, team football. He's contracted for next year and each week is making me less concerned about that. Sanchez on the other hand...
Jordie can be summed up with that "attempted" shepherd in the last quarter where the Swans player just went straight through him and Jordie cartwheeled away to the ground. It was pretty funny lol.
As for Kingy - as much as I think he has zero trade value if any other club even rated him slightly and was willing to part with a late 3rd or 4th round pick I'd trade him. He's not going to be apart of our long-term future.
-
it proves that Kingy has what it takes to be a good AFL player if given the chance.
He is what we been looking for a Baker (Saints) type player who niggles the stuff out of players & always biffs them & takes their mind off the job.
if he continues to do that then he will come out a winner most days
His got mongrel in him which alot of our players need to take note of & try
-
Priority pick to be revamped from next year
Caroline Wilson | August 11, 2009
THE priority pick will disappear in its current form from the 2010 national draft. The AFL-appointed committee formulating new rules for the 17th and 18th teams has specified that for at least the next two years the No. 1 pick will go to Gold Coast and western Sydney respectively.
The group, chaired by AFL executive Andrew Dillon and including football operations boss Adrian Anderson, is also strongly considering toughening the club eligibility of the priority pick by extending the two-year qualifying period to three years or leaving priority pick approval to the discretion of the AFL.
Although AFL boss Andrew Demetriou was at pains to point out last night that the priority pick would survive in some form, he agreed that next year the first three draft picks would go to the Gold Coast before that club made its debut in 2011.
Demetriou confirmed that the highest possible pick for a club that qualified under current rules for a special pick would be No. 4 in the national draft. However, the strong push from the AFL List Development Group was that no priority pick would be taken next year without special dispensation from the commission.
Full story at:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/priority-pick-to-be-revamped/2009/08/10/1249756255918.html
-
What a surprise ..... the Dees are 5 goals up on the Dockers in their last winnable game ::).
Looks like we'll end up with pick 4 now unless the Dockers can beat the Bombers at Subi next week.
-
What a surprise ..... the Dees are 5 goals up on the Dockers in their last winnable game ::).
Looks like we'll end up with pick 4 now unless the Dockers can beat the Bombers at Subi next week.
The Melbourne fans who have turned up in their tens are obviously lifting the guys. :lol
-
The Melbourne fans who have turned up in their tens are obviously lifting the guys. :lol
:lol
Just think if Jordie had kicked for goal after the siren like he's set shot yesterday the Dees would have lost their PP and we'd be last on the ladder.
-
The Melbourne fans who have turned up in their tens are obviously lifting the guys. :lol
:lol
Just think if Jordie had kicked for goal after the siren like he's set shot yesterday the Dees would have lost their PP and we'd be last on the ladder.
Yeah, but Melbourne would have lost today though... :whistle
-
The Melbourne fans who have turned up in their tens are obviously lifting the guys. :lol
:lol
Just think if Jordie had kicked for goal after the siren like he's set shot yesterday the Dees would have lost their PP and we'd be last on the ladder.
Yeah, but Melbourne would have lost today though... :whistle
Maybe but nothing is guaranteed when Freo is playing. Just when you convince yourself no one is worse than the Tiges they prove there's always someone worse off than you lol.
-
The Melbourne fans who have turned up in their tens are obviously lifting the guys. :lol
:lol
Just think if Jordie had kicked for goal after the siren like he's set shot yesterday the Dees would have lost their PP and we'd be last on the ladder.
Yeah, but Melbourne would have lost today though... :whistle
Maybe but nothing is guaranteed when Freo is playing. Just when you convince yourself no one is worse than the Tiges they prove there's always someone worse off than you lol.
We are worse than Freeo....
-
We are worse than Freeo....
Well the good news big tone is the way we are going we are still a chance for the spoon and 1st pick in the draft not that i can think of one reason why any kid would want to come Richmond :banghead
-
We are worse than Freeo....
Well the good news big tone is the way we are going we are still a chance for the spoon and 1st pick in the draft not that i can think of one reason why any kid would want to come Richmond :banghead
Or Coach
-
We are worse than Freeo....
Well the good news big tone is the way we are going we are still a chance for the spoon and 1st pick in the draft not that i can think of one reason why any kid would want to come Richmond :banghead
Or Coach
Agreed
-
Richmond is the club that will make 1 young coach a legend at some point in time. I dont know who or when, but someone will lead us to our 11th Premiership and that coach will be a legend of our club and that in itself is enough to have lots of people wanting our job.
Remember 15 blokes put themselves forward this time.
-
Richmond is the club that will make 1 young coach a legend at some point in time. I dont know who or when, but someone will lead us to our 11th Premiership and that coach will be a legend of our club and that in itself is enough to have lots of people wanting our job.
Remember 15 blokes put themselves forward this time.
Yeah whatever ;D
I just hope this point in time happens sometime before my say 60th birthday.... that's giving the club another 20 years :banghead
-
Richmond is the club that will make 1 young coach a legend at some point in time. I dont know who or when, but someone will lead us to our 11th Premiership and that coach will be a legend of our club and that in itself is enough to have lots of people wanting our job.
Remember 15 blokes put themselves forward this time.
IN the year 2069 ::)
-
A nice big cleanout this year, a new coach, new training facilities for our players and some decent recruiting, and we can be on the verge of the 8 in 2010.
-
A nice big cleanout this year, a new coach, new training facilities for our players and some decent recruiting, and we can be on the verge of the 8 in 2010.
Not while our players refuse to play for one another ...
-
A nice big cleanout this year, a new coach, new training facilities for our players and some decent recruiting, and we can be on the verge of the 8 in 2010.
Not while our players refuse to play for one another ...
then clean out whoever doesnt want to tow the line.
-
Not while our players refuse to play for one another ...
then clean out whoever doesnt want to tow the line.
[/quote]
The good part is a lot of those will be retired/delisted this year.
-
Well, I am glad we did not tank.
Winning the extra couple of meaningless games against the like of Melbourne and then losing by 90+ points is a much better path.
Well done Richmond. :gotigers :gotigers
-
Regardless of the want to tank that went on we're now in a similar position than we were before the call to tank, so we've done a pretty good job to please both sides of the debate. ;D
-
erm.. a 'a similar position', without the higher draft position, or the extra drafts picks that come with tanking I spose you mean?
-
By kicking that goal against Melbourne I think McMahon may have done the worst thing to us on the subject of drafts since we gave away pick 19 for him.
-
By kicking that goal against Melbourne I think McMahon may have done the worst thing to us on the subject of drafts since we gave away pick 19 for him.
Well you could say then he has cost us two #19 picks ;D
-
By kicking that goal against Melbourne I think McMahon may have done the worst thing to us on the subject of drafts since we gave away pick 19 for him.
I think I hate him as much as I did Tivendale.
-
By kicking that goal against Melbourne I think McMahon may have done the worst thing to us on the subject of drafts since we gave away pick 19 for him.
I think I hate him as much as I did Tivendale.
McMahon is way worse
-
By kicking that goal against Melbourne I think McMahon may have done the worst thing to us on the subject of drafts since we gave away pick 19 for him.
I think I hate him as much as I did Tivendale.
McMahon is way worse
Infamy and I agree, Well there is a first :thumbsup
-
Go Freo Go Freo Go stuff 3 :pray
-
Go Freo Go Freo Go stuff 3 :pray
it wont happen, freo will tank
why the f did we beat the bombers and melb!!!! those 2 wins cost jade the job , not the losses
bloody fool
-
tank or not, the worst we get is pick 4 now that roos won.
word is that freo wants morabito, which is good news for us, as it would mean we'll definitely get trengove or butcher.
of course i'd much rather freo win and we lose next week as it makes it a certain pick 3 for us. also means we'd get the 2nd pick in all the later rounds in the draft. sometimes later in the draft, 1 pick makes all the difference.
-
Lol, we haven't tanked and have ended up in a similar position than we really could have aimed for by tanking. :shh
-
it wont happen, freo will tank
why the f did we beat the bombers and melb!!!! those 2 wins cost jade the job , not the losses
bloody fool
Freo looking good so far.
-
Freo looking good so far.
Freo flogging the Bombers :thumbsup
Pick 3 is now ours. A choice between Butcher and Trengove - whoever the Dees overlook :thumbsup.
All up our current picks are 3, 19, 35, 51, 67, ......
1. Melb
2. Melb
3. Rich
4. Freo
5. North
6. WC
7. Syd
....
17. St K
18. Melb
19. Rich
...
35. Rich
...
51. Rich
-
omg
cant stuffing believe,
freo would have to be the team that is more stupid than richmond
thank god for freo
-
They'll still get Morabito
-
They'll still get Morabito
they can have him, i just hope we get scully :pray :pray :pray
-
omg
cant stuffing believe,
freo would have to be the team that is more stupid than richmond
thank god for freo
You might find big money on Freo today. mmmmmmmmmmmm
-
Essendon struggles big time travelling to Perth so no real surprise. They lost badly to the Eagles as well.
they can have him, i just hope we get scully :pray :pray :pray
We would all want Scully at Tigerland (especially as a Tiger supporter himself) but Melbourne will take him at #1 sadly.
I wonder if Talia will slip to our second pick (#19) now he's reported injured (hammy).
-
So this is when we flog West Coast.... :help
-
So if we beat WCE we get pick 4 instead ?
3/4 What's the diff ?
-
Essendon struggles big time travelling to Perth so no real surprise. They lost badly to the Eagles as well.
they can have him, i just hope we get scully :pray :pray :pray
We would all want Scully at Tigerland (especially as a Tiger supporter himself) but Melbourne will take him at #1 sadly.
I wonder if Talia will slip to our second pick (#19) now he's reported injured (hammy).
scully should tell melb, pick me at ur own risk, sure i will play for 2 yrs then im out so why waste ur time with someone who hates ur guts and only loves rfc
telling the truth is not a crime
-
So if we beat WCE we get pick 4 instead ?
3/4 What's the diff ?
I dont know either
-
Essendon struggles big time travelling to Perth so no real surprise. They lost badly to the Eagles as well.
they can have him, i just hope we get scully :pray :pray :pray
We would all want Scully at Tigerland (especially as a Tiger supporter himself) but Melbourne will take him at #1 sadly.
I wonder if Talia will slip to our second pick (#19) now he's reported injured (hammy).
scully should tell melb, pick me at ur own risk, sure i will play for 2 yrs then im out so why waste ur time with someone who hates ur guts and only loves rfc
telling the truth is not a crime
Are you twelve???
Go away.....
-
So if we beat WCE we get pick 4 instead ?
3/4 What's the diff ?
Not a huge difference granted but could be the difference in getting Scully/Butcher just like it was when Essendon chose Ryder the pick before we chose JON.....
-
Nice analogy stripes, kinda like getting hit by lightning twice really.
-
Any chance of a pick 3 + player to Melbourne for pick 1???
-
Any chance of a pick 3 + player to Melbourne for pick 1???
It would have to be a player like Lids or Cotchin which would mean we lose out on the deal in terms of experience and player development. Melbourne would not give up their pick 1 or 2 this year regardless and I believe they will take Scully & Butcher.
Stripes
-
Hopefully the RFC are exploring all options to better increase our draft propsects. I dont think they would take an older player, eg Simmo, Bowden or Brown but I would jump at that if it was a goer. It would probably be more a younger player Schulz?, dont think I would do it for a young mid such as White or Jacko.
-
We give Melbourne our pick 3 plus Raines and Melbourne give us pick one.
That way we get Scully, and Melbourne still get Trengove and Butcher plus Raines.
That's only if Scully is THAT much better than pick 2 and 3.
-
We give Melbourne our pick 3, plus, for example, Moore and Melbourne give us pick one.
That way we get Scully, and Melbourne still get Trengove and Butcher plus Moore.
That's only if Scully is THAT much better than pick 2 and 3.
Apparently Trengrove has rapidly caught up to Scully in recent months in recruiters eyes. While Scully is still clearly No 1 the difference between the two is less so than before.
Also the problem with giving up a player and a pick for just another pick is that it means we will have to look even further into the draft to replace them on the list. Considering we are more than likely going to be delisting up to 10 players already, with another absence we would be unliklely to be able to replace them with a quality player.
Stripes
-
Apparently Trengrove has rapidly caught up to Scully in recent months in recruiters eyes. While Scully is still clearly No 1 the difference between the two is less so than before.
Also the problem with giving up a player and a pick for just another pick is that it means we will have to look even further into the draft to replace them on the list. Considering we are more than likely going to be delisting up to 10 players already, with another absence we would be unliklely to be able to replace them with a quality player.
Stripes
Depends what way Richmond want to go with the draft, if we get pick 1 we're assured of Trengove or Scully. At pick 3 we're not. We may even want Butcher and he might not be there at 3.
Basically, if we have 1, we get what we want.
Even a pick 2 for pick 3 swap i'd be happy with.
-
Richmonds Picks:
Round 1:
Trengrove (Sturt),
Round 2:
Cunnington (Geelong Falcons),
Round 3:
Harms (Sturt)
Round 4:
Free
Father Son
fill in the rest.
-
No way Cunnington will go 2nd round. Will go top 8 I reckon. Need Sydneys 1st pick. Trade Tuck & Jackson to Sydney for pick 8 or thereabouts.
Would they be that stupid.
Cunnington will be a star and a bolter I'd suggest. Bit like Cameron Ling in that at junior level has played a lot forward but will be a midfielder.
-
No way Cunnington will go 2nd round. Will go top 8 I reckon. Need Sydneys 1st pick. Trade Tuck & Jackson to Sydney for pick 8 or thereabouts.
Would they be that stupid.
Cunnington will be a star and a bolter I'd suggest. Bit like Cameron Ling in that at junior level has played a lot forward but will be a midfielder.
Depends if they think their recent good form equates to their young players being good.
If they do, they may top up again.
-
Think I may just enjoy summer and leave all the hypothetical schit to you guys
May be best we lose to wce friday! But it just aint in my makeup .....
-
No way Cunnington will go 2nd round. Will go top 8 I reckon. Need Sydneys 1st pick. Trade Tuck & Jackson to Sydney for pick 8 or thereabouts.
Would they be that stupid.
Cunnington will be a star and a bolter I'd suggest. Bit like Cameron Ling in that at junior level has played a lot forward but will be a midfielder.
Your right as its impossible to tell what will happen its more of a best case scenario for us, hypothetical.
Cunnington will be a great player. They said the same about Rance and he slipped to 18.
-
If we score another early pick Tony Shaw might even rate us in 2010 as he prefers Melbourne's list ahead of Richmond and North's given the Dees have the first two picks of the draft. Very deep analysis of each club's list there Shawry :wallywink.
-
No way Cunnington will go 2nd round. Will go top 8 I reckon. Need Sydneys 1st pick. Trade Tuck & Jackson to Sydney for pick 8 or thereabouts.
Would they be that stupid.
Cunnington will be a star and a bolter I'd suggest. Bit like Cameron Ling in that at junior level has played a lot forward but will be a midfielder.
Your right as its impossible to tell what will happen its more of a best case scenario for us, hypothetical.
Cunnington will be a great player. They said the same about Rance and he slipped to 18.
From the little I saw of Cunnington need to make sure that Kicking skills are Ok. Prefer others in the top 10 myself.
-
Well at least we've secured pick 3 :-\.
Who says we didn't need a priority pick :whistle. We need all the new talented blood we can get :-\. An extra 1.5 wins for nothing.
-
Well at least we've secured pick 3 :-\.
Who says we didn't need a priority pick :whistle. We need all the new talented blood we can get :-\. An extra 1.5 wins for nothing.
the extra pick would be good but we need about 10 priorities to right the ship. we are so bad, the extra pick wouldnt have made much difference.
-
Rawlings needed to win to have a chance for the job. :banghead
Late season wins. If it takes us to 9th or leaves us 15th they cripple us further.
They're like breaking every bone in your body leaving you with the embarassment of having someone else to feed you clothe you change you wipe your sorry ass and baically take your last ounce of dignity. Everything this club has done from 1982 to today has been token and futile.
-
Well at least we've secured pick 3 :-\.
Who says we didn't need a priority pick :whistle. We need all the new talented blood we can get :-\. An extra 1.5 wins for nothing.
the extra pick would be good but we need about 10 priorities to right the ship. we are so bad, the extra pick wouldnt have made much difference.
One extra pick in the top 20 mightn't sound much but it's one extra dud we could've delisted from our list and replaced. This year proves a couple of extra wins against ordinary sides is no recipe to develop a winning culture as was argued in this thread. You need draft as many talented players to begin with before you can progress forward and develop a winning team.
It would help if the AFL allocated PPs to a club like ours who haven't made the finals in 8 years and probably won't for at least another 3. That's who PPs are meant for.
-
Well at least we've secured pick 3 :-\.
Who says we didn't need a priority pick :whistle. We need all the new talented blood we can get :-\. An extra 1.5 wins for nothing.
the extra pick would be good but we need about 10 priorities to right the ship. we are so bad, the extra pick wouldnt have made much difference.
One extra pick in the top 20 mightn't sound much but it's one extra dud we could've delisted from our list and replaced. This year proves a couple of extra wins against ordinary sides is no recipe to develop a winning culture as was argued in this thread. You need draft as many talented players to begin with before you can progress forward and develop a winning team.
It would help if the AFL allocated PPs to a club like ours who haven't made the finals in 8 years and probably won't for at least another 3. That's who PPs are meant for.
thats why i have respect for the Blues, Buldogs, Hawks and whoever else went down that tanking road.
look where they are and look where we are. The lions have made finals 3 times since 1982 and thats Fitzroy. how stuffin sad is that.
i couldnt believe it when i heard that last night.
they recruit via draft and a collection picks via trading out players, whereas we recruit hacks from other clubs.
we need to find more picks peoples and thats a sad reality of where we sit right now.
-
Thank god the season is over.
LeCras @ 4.50 for leading goalkicker was a monty - At least I went out with a bang :thumbsup
1 ? - Do we tank from round 1 next year or not ? ;D
-
Are their priority picks next year to tank for? I didn't think so with GC17 coming in :-\.
look where they are and look where we are. The lions have made finals 3 times since 1982 and thats Fitzroy. how effin sad is that.
i couldnt believe it when i heard that last night.
A cheap shot by Bruce last night and a stupid stat anyway given our last finals appearance was 5 years after Fitzroy died. At least we've still got our club no matter how crap the side is and has been for a long time. The media loving hanging it on us to get a reaction.
-
Being sarcastic man
-
This is it. The last year where we can find good picks before GC come in. The best place for Richmond to finish is 16th.
That means - first pick in the ND, then a priority pick at the start of the second, then the next pick.
The most important thing is getting the priority pick. We need a key forward. Rumblings about town that young Tom Hawkins may be gettable at seasons end.
We need to trade out whatever we can, from the players who wont make it at Richmond,
Richard Tambling and Shane Edwards being just 2 of these that now number Many. :'(
bugger
-
This is it. The last year where we can find good picks before GC come in. The best place for Richmond to finish is 16th.
That means - first pick in the ND, then a priority pick at the start of the second, then the next pick.
The most important thing is getting the priority pick. We need a key forward. Rumblings about town that young Tom Hawkins may be gettable at seasons end.
We need to trade out whatever we can, from the players who wont make it at Richmond,
Richard Tambling and Shane Edwards being just 2 of these that now number Many. :'(
bugger
Look at the brightside Tambling and Edwards improved during the course of the year.
-
1 ? - Do we tank from round 1 next year or not ? ;D
To my mind next year need to play the kids regardless of form as long as they show the attitude Hardwick requires.
We need to get experience into these kids as quickly as possible unfortunately we wont get as good as draft picks due to compromised drafts but in effect we still need to tank.
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
Even a draw would do. Go dees
-
knowing our luck we will pick another tambling rather than a Buddy :banghead
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
Even a draw would do. Go dees
Saints woke up late in that 2nd quarter and hit the front. Margin now 18 and growing. Melbourne doesn't want to win even if they could and no matter how badly St Kilda plays today. Pick 3 is ours. One Jordie shot for goal from first pick :-\.
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
Even a draw would do. Go dees
Saints woke up late in that 2nd quarter and hit the front. Margin now 18 and growing. Melbourne doesn't want to win even if they could and no matter how badly St Kilda plays today. Pick 3 is ours. One Jordie shot for goal from first pick :-\.
If Jordie missed that goal, the Dees would have thrown the Freo match two weeks later.
:banghead
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
Even a draw would do. Go dees
Saints woke up late in that 2nd quarter and hit the front. Margin now 18 and growing. Melbourne doesn't want to win even if they could and no matter how badly St Kilda plays today. Pick 3 is ours. One Jordie shot for goal from first pick :-\.
If Jordie missed that goal, the Dees would have thrown the Freo match two weeks later.
:banghead
Possibly but the way Freo played that day and on the road all year it would've been hard. It's just a massive advantage Melbourne are getting.
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
Even a draw would do. Go dees
Saints woke up late in that 2nd quarter and hit the front. Margin now 18 and growing. Melbourne doesn't want to win even if they could and no matter how badly St Kilda plays today. Pick 3 is ours. One Jordie shot for goal from first pick :-\.
If Jordie missed that goal, the Dees would have thrown the Freo match two weeks later.
:banghead
Possibly but the way Freo played that day and on the road all year it would've been hard. It's just a massive advantage Melbourne are getting.
We can blame Jordy all we like, the genesis of all this is Miller and the Dried Sultana. The absence of any one of these three people in the last 2 years of history of the RFC would have seen Melbourne miss the priority pick and us getting it this year.
-
What more do you people want?
To come away with 0 wins just so we get pick 1.
Unbelievable.
I am actually glad Mebourne lost. I don't have the confidence in the RFC recruiting to get the Butcher/Trengrove choice correct, which if Melbourne won we would have been forced to choose. At least this way Melbourne wil chose either Butcher or Trengrove with there 2nd pick and we'll have the later. I'm happier that way instead of choosing either kid and having the media swallow us whole when the other starts better next year.
-
What more do you people want?
I do not want to almost lose to the last team twice this year - once early when it mattered.
And not get top 2 pick. Or another late first rounder.
Rubbish.
-
Dees are teasing us. 11 points up midway through the 2nd qtr.
Even a draw would do. Go dees
Saints woke up late in that 2nd quarter and hit the front. Margin now 18 and growing. Melbourne doesn't want to win even if they could and no matter how badly St Kilda plays today. Pick 3 is ours. One Jordie shot for goal from first pick :-\.
If Jordie missed that goal, the Dees would have thrown the Freo match two weeks later.
:banghead
Possibly but the way Freo played that day and on the road all year it would've been hard. It's just a massive advantage Melbourne are getting.
We can blame Jordy all we like, the genesis of all this is Miller and the Dried Sultana. The absence of any one of these three people in the last 2 years of history of the RFC would have seen Melbourne miss the priority pick and us getting it this year.
The Jordie comment was a throw away line. It's not his fault. In any case we can blame Wallace and Miller for many things but Miller was sacked in round 16 last year yet we still made the same stupid trade decisions in the post-season. Wallace was sacked after round 10 this year when we only had 2 wins on the board yet we ended up with 5.5 wins that cost us a priority pick. The direction and forward planning of the club comes also from higher up the chain. Melbourne didn't having a problem maufacturing just 4 wins. Schwarz was laughing all through the game today while commentating about what Melbourne was doing to tank.
-
What more do you people want?
To come away with 0 wins just so we get pick 1.
Unbelievable.
I am actually glad Mebourne lost. I don't have the confidence in the RFC recruiting to get the Butcher/Trengrove choice correct, which if Melbourne won we would have been forced to choose. At least this way Melbourne wil chose either Butcher or Trengrove with there 2nd pick and we'll have the later. I'm happier that way instead of choosing either kid and having the media swallow us whole when the other starts better next year.
What happens if Melbourne spring a surprise a draft Scully and Morabito 1 & 2. Then we'll have to choose.
If we have no confidence in the RFC recruiting staff then you would get rid of them rather than hoping another club makes the choice for us. It's bad enough we have a onfield team that doesn't back itself. The last thing we need is those off-field not backing their ability to make the right decisions.
It's the way we've played (poor coaching) and the poor list we have that makes us the worst team in the comp. It's no coincidence our percentage has ended up the lowest in the AFL. Apart from the good win over Essendon, the rest were meaningless narrow wins and a draw against fellow bottom sides including one that was deliberately throwing the game. If we are wanting to rebuild and do it properly then you need to take advantage of the assistance offered by the AFL. We've been rubbish for the last 8 years and yet we've got just one player from a pre-frist round priority pick (Blingers). Make that two PPs including post-round 1 with Rance although we threw that away trading pick 19 away for McMahon. We've finish 15th and get nothing from it :P.
-
What happens if they go to draft camp where they do the growth testing and find that Morabito could get to say 194cm?
What happens then?
-
I've heard some people say he is like Pavlich though I have no idea of the height comparisons or ability over head etc. Apparently he is a great midfielder who can go forward but is that what we really need, another 'utility'?
Stripes
-
Gambling watchdog wants please explain from AFL on tanking
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,26046662-19742,00.html
-
The Jordie comment was a throw away line. It's not his fault. In any case we can blame Wallace and Miller for many things but Miller was sacked in round 16 last year yet we still made the same stupid trade decisions in the post-season. Wallace was sacked after round 10 this year when we only had 2 wins on the board yet we ended up with 5.5 wins that cost us a priority pick. The direction and forward planning of the club comes also from higher up the chain. Melbourne didn't having a problem maufacturing just 4 wins. Schwarz was laughing all through the game today while commentating about what Melbourne was doing to tank.
I would note that the run home for us was significantly easier than the first half of the season as far as teams played. If all went perfect after Wallace got the sack and we played our absolute best we could have won 9 of the last 11 and made the finals. I'm not saying we would have, all I'm saying is the run home was much easier.
-
Gambling watchdog wants please explain from AFL on tanking
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,26046662-19742,00.html
Dear Watchdog,
We tank in the AFL to get better draft picks.
Carlton, Collingwood, The Bulldogs and St Kilda have all implemented that novel strategy and currently find themselves in the play offs for the flag. 3 of those clubs finished in the Top 4.
That is all.
Kind Regards,
Every Club except Richmond.
-
lottery draft pick would be better and more exciting :thumbsup
-
lottery draft pick would be better and more exciting :thumbsup
NBA style
-
No doubt we'd find a way to lose that every year too...
-
Minister warns of tanking threat to gambling
Jason Dowling | October 12, 2009
PROOF that AFL teams were ''tanking'' - deliberately setting out to lose - could have dramatic consequences, the minister responsible for maintaining the integrity of gambling on sport in Victoria has warned.
''I have asked for an update from the VCGR [Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation] as to the AFL's response and considered position on this [tanking] and that's something I look forward to having a look at and its something I am sure I will be discussing with other ministers,'' Gaming Minister Tony Robinson said.
AFL head Andrew Demetriou has repeatedly denied that clubs deliberately underperform to gain better draft picks, putting him at odds with many - or even most - commentators and spectators.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/minister-warns-on-tanking/2009/10/11/1255195701659.html
-
No doubt we'd find a way to lose that every year too...
Does not matter.
At least it would be more fun and fair.
When we come 9th we would still have a chance of getting Mike Jordan or LeBron James ;)
-
AFL gets tank-free mark from watchdog
Jason Dowling, City Editor | November 11, 2009
IN NEWS that may surprise many AFL observers, Victoria's gambling watchdog has found no evidence that teams ''tank''.
The Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation wrote to the AFL in August seeking an explanation on whether teams were tanking - deliberately losing games to secure an advantage in the draft.
''We are satisfied that there is no evidence that tanking has occurred,'' the commission's executive commissioner, Peter Cohen, said yesterday.
The watchdog said it was satisfied ''with measures taken by the Australian Football League to ensure the integrity of football matches''.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/afl-gets-tankfree-mark/2009/11/10/1257615042560.html
-
I feel it's good to win today. Even If we end up 9th or so.
If tanking was the root the time was many Years ago. Not now With gws.
I did find it strange we had an older team on the parkto Adelaide. :P
-
I feel it's good to win today. Even If we end up 9th or so.
If tanking was the root the time was many Years ago. Not now With gws.
I did find it strange we had an older team on the parkto Adelaide. :P
If we were older it's because both sides were young. Oldies Miller and Tucky would inflate the average age of our side but they are the only ones above 25 from memory out there today.
As for these wins the proof will be in the pudding next year especially round 1 if it's again against Carlton. Get flogged and again these will be meaningless wins. I still feel outside out top half dozen or so, who are very good footballers and matchwinners on their day, we have an ordinary 2nd tier who have/will fail against better sides than an Adelaide.
-
Some very estactic Demon supporters on their forum overjoyed they lost but Demetriou says it's not an issue ::)
Title: Did you want McMahon to kick the goal?
Absolutely.
McMahon...ha! One of the worst players in the comp. Lucky to kick it, lucky to get the mark. About time things go our way, what a horrible thing to say.
I and about 10 others in the Bullring (I couldn't watch it from my seat) all cheered.
Horrible situation.
I danced around like we'd won the premiership... I love McMuffin.
Love it! The worst player in the AFL kicks a goal that delivers Scully to us - fantastic!
You should have heard the Tiges' supporters on the radio - they are soooo filthy that their team doesn't play for the future.
What a great day!!
YES YES GOD YES!
Mere seconds earlier I was fuming, filthy, devastated that I've sat through 3 years of utter garbage and it's all going to mean nothing when we beat the worst team going around, in a meaningless game.
I had to look away when McMahon was kicking it. Figures that the biggest dud in their side, who couldn't hit a target all day, was going to line up for the victory. I was ecstatic when he won it.
Some people around me must have thought I was crazy, but they will all be very happy when Tom Scully is dominating the competition for the next 10 years.
I felt like an absolute prick today. I wanted Mcmahon to kick that goal. I saw Melbourne fans walk out in dusgust when Ricky nailed that goal with less than 2 minutes to go and fans celebrating like we had won a flag after Mcmahon kicked the goal. Then I saw the players looking totally gutted laying on the ground and I thought to myself how can I possibly want my team to lose.
The priority pick has got to go! Clearly on todays performance, the players do not tank, but Bailey tanked like his llife depended on it today. At one stage we had Spencer, Miller , Jetta and Bate in the middle (look out fab four). Then Grimes n Cheney had a crack! I particularly liked Dunn(tagger) on Jackson(tagger) early in the 1st quarter. Warnock in the forwardline was a masterstroke as was Juice Newton in defence.
However, all I can say is, well done Bails. We didnt make the stupid rule, but we would be jeopardising our tilt at the flag in 3 years time if we didnt milk it for all it is worth today.
Something posters gloss over. Winning culture comes from having enough talented players to win constantly against ALL TEAMS.
Let's face it. The three wins we have had, we've still played like rubbish. It's not like we've played brilliant football and blown teams out of the water with great skills and class. The fact is that the three wins, opposition played even more poohouse then us.
Our only chance to win at the moment is hoping the opposition team plays like poo. How the hell do we win a premiership when our best chance is hoping the opposition doesn't turn up.
I want to beat Geelong and StKilda at their best and we need more talent on our list to ensure that.
Mcmahon is GOD and from this day I'll fight for his honour whenever Richmond fans bag him. I've got your back Jordan.
First thing I did after the game was buy a McMahon badge, 100% not joking
http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?showtopic=16138 (http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?showtopic=16138)
Love the "tilt at the premiership in three years" comment. Poor bast#%^*
-
:lol
I liked the guy buying a McMuffin badge. Constant reminder of the tanking saga and Tom $cully. Must burn him every day when he sees it. :lol