One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on June 08, 2009, 06:43:45 AM

Title: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on June 08, 2009, 06:43:45 AM
Rohan Connolly's question in today's Age...

A choice between Punt Road and Arden Street would be an intriguing one for "Bucks".

List? You'd take North's over the Tigers'.

Security? You'd think Richmond.

Culture? The Roos', surely.


Age article link (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/laidley-and-roos-can-look-but-what-will-they-find/2009/06/07/1244313032888.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1)
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Ramps on June 08, 2009, 06:46:54 AM
Buckley would take Richmond. It all comes down to the bit in the article that talks about awakening a giant asleep. Its all about ego for all AFL coaches.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Fishfinger on June 08, 2009, 10:04:46 AM
Rohan Connolly's question in today's Age...

A choice between Punt Road and Arden Street would be an intriguing one for "Bucks".

Culture? The Roos', surely.

Yeah, right.
Fighting to make sure you support yourself and pay your own way by cutting back in all areas versus operating on the world owes us our existence seven figure handouts.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Ramps on June 08, 2009, 10:29:09 AM
Rohan Connolly's question in today's Age...

A choice between Punt Road and Arden Street would be an intriguing one for "Bucks".

Culture? The Roos', surely.

Yeah, right.
Fighting to make sure you support yourself and pay your own way by cutting back in all areas versus operating on the world owes us our existence seven figure handouts.

Common fish, dont disregard that good ol shinboner spirit  ;D
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: bushranger on June 08, 2009, 10:43:01 AM
To this I would have to say the Roo's as they play with a lot more passion that we do at the minute.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: peggles on June 08, 2009, 11:21:32 AM
i'd take our list over north's anyday
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: bojangles17 on June 08, 2009, 11:33:03 AM
i think most in football circles would take a job with a viable on going entity over another prospect with any number of questions raised on both the short and longer term existence that would NO doubt impact on the level of support available...it's a deep field of rookie coaches, pretty sure both clubs will get their man without crossing pathes :thumbsup
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: blaisee on June 08, 2009, 11:34:13 AM
i have said this before and I will say it again

No way bux will take the richmond job, absolutely none.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: bojangles17 on June 08, 2009, 11:38:23 AM
thats another story, I was responding to a choice bw tigers and roos...i dont think he will either, but in any case there are any number of solid candidates out there
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Fishfinger on June 08, 2009, 11:39:17 AM
i have said this before and I will say it again

No way bux will take the richmond job, absolutely none.
Would he take the North job then?
That's the hypothetical question of this thread. One or the other.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: bojangles17 on June 08, 2009, 01:17:38 PM
i have said this before and I will say it again

No way bux will take the richmond job, absolutely none.
Would he take the North job then?
That's the hypothetical question of this thread. One or the other.

i wouldnt think so, the plum jobs in this caper are the handful of well off Melbourne clubs and most of the interstate sides, given the abundance of resource that tends to advantage those clubs over the poor cousins....we have plenty going for us, Im certain we will have a wide field
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on June 16, 2009, 08:31:03 PM
Caro's response to this question of Richmond vs North:

"Richmond has more resources and supporters being a bigger club whereas North has more spirit and achieved more with a similar playing list standard over the past 5 years."
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: cub on June 16, 2009, 08:37:59 PM
Whatever the argument! In the end the male ego will surface and for that Richmond is a no brainer.
Whoever coaches Richmond to its next flag will be a legend, not only in the eyes of Tigers but all who follow football.
Norf - Really lol they will not exist in 10-15 years time as they are now - bookmark if you want  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on June 16, 2009, 10:25:26 PM
Where has this mythical shinboner spirit been this year  ???. Sheesh even we flogged them. They need to rebuild and add more talented players to their ordinary list but they can't literally afford a couple of years bottoming out at the bottom of the ladder to get them. Catch 22 for North.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: bojangles17 on June 16, 2009, 10:34:04 PM
Rohan Connolly's question in today's Age...

A choice between Punt Road and Arden Street would be an intriguing one for "Bucks".

List? You'd take North's over the Tigers'.

Security? You'd think Richmond.

Culture? The Roos', surely.


Age article link (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/laidley-and-roos-can-look-but-what-will-they-find/2009/06/07/1244313032888.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1)

norths list...you are kidding me...we have lids, cotch axel and now Tambling as the gilt edge to our midfield and they have :o
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Infamy on June 16, 2009, 11:06:05 PM
Where has this mythical shinboner spirit been this year  ???. Sheesh even we flogged them. They need to rebuild and add more talented players to their ordinary list but they can't literally afford a couple of years bottoming out at the bottom of the ladder to get them. Catch 22 for North.
Don't think they need to rebuild, just keep on developing. They have one of the youngest starting 22s in the competition. Kinda surprised they got rid of Laidley to be honest, not sure they'll have the stability to attract a quality coach, they may not exist in a few years and Laidley wouldn't have costed that much to resign.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Mr Magic on June 16, 2009, 11:49:17 PM
norths list...you are kidding me...we have lids, cotch axel and now Tambling as the gilt edge to our midfield and they have :o

Totally agree. Only a fool (or RFC hater) would think otherwise.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on June 17, 2009, 03:14:15 AM
Jake Niall's comparison in today's Age...

The coaching field is a competitive market, but it's also evident that clubs have different needs.

Richmond wants to win games. North needs to win friends and games, in that order. The Roos would like a decent salesman. The Tigers have just sacked their spruiker, and aren't so bothered about selling the brand — build a good team and they (the Tiger hordes) will come.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/more-ripples-in-coaching-pond/2009/06/16/1244918037038.html
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 17, 2009, 07:22:01 AM
Jake Niall's comparison in today's Age...

The coaching field is a competitive market, but it's also evident that clubs have different needs.

Richmond wants to win games. North needs to win friends and games, in that order. The Roos would like a decent salesman. The Tigers have just sacked their spruiker, and aren't so bothered about selling the brand — build a good team and they (the Tiger hordes) will come.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/more-ripples-in-coaching-pond/2009/06/16/1244918037038.html

Actually agree 100% with Jake Niall

North need a high profile coach to sell everything

What we need is a coach - who will develop our players and build for the future
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Smokey on June 17, 2009, 07:32:08 AM

North need a high profile coach to sell everything


TW would be a good fit and he has recently become available.   ;D
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: wayne on June 17, 2009, 08:41:50 AM
TW would be a good fit and he has recently become available.   ;D

I wouldn't wish that on North.....

Carlton or Collingwood on the other hand.....  :lol
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Ramps on June 17, 2009, 08:59:27 AM
shinboner spirit is bulldust. it doesnt exist. its just a label to make North supporters feel better about themselves.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: blaisee on June 17, 2009, 09:24:08 AM
i dont expect bux to take either job,

both will probably be offered to him

For the record, I agree with Jake Nail.

We should get a coach to coach on a two year deal, the list management should all be left to cameron, we are very lucky to be in a position were we do not need a salesman anymore
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Francois Jackson on June 17, 2009, 09:27:01 AM
shinboner spirit is bulldust. it doesnt exist. its just a label to make North supporters feel better about themselves.

i remember saying that same thing to Brady Rawlings one night and he said the exact same thing.

THEY HATE THAT LABEL.

Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 17, 2009, 10:40:18 AM

We should get a coach to coach on a two year deal, the list management should all be left to cameron, we are very lucky to be in a position were we do not need a salesman anymore

Spot on blaisee  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: the_boy_jake on June 17, 2009, 10:46:39 AM

We should get a coach to coach on a two year deal, the list management should all be left to cameron, we are very lucky to be in a position were we do not need a salesman anymore

I'd give the coach three years.

I don't see what goals could be achieved in two. Clarkson finished 14th, 11th then 5th. Takes at least two years to get a message across IMO. Top 6 in 2012 might be a reasonable target.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on June 17, 2009, 06:07:44 PM
Where has this mythical shinboner spirit been this year  ???. Sheesh even we flogged them. They need to rebuild and add more talented players to their ordinary list but they can't literally afford a couple of years bottoming out at the bottom of the ladder to get them. Catch 22 for North.
Don't think they need to rebuild, just keep on developing. They have one of the youngest starting 22s in the competition. Kinda surprised they got rid of Laidley to be honest, not sure they'll have the stability to attract a quality coach, they may not exist in a few years and Laidley wouldn't have costed that much to resign.
The average age the Roos had on the weekend was 24y 201d with 1785 games combined compared to our 22y 282d with 1242 games combined. So that's 2 years and 25ish games more experience per player than us. We had 14 Tigers under 23 y.o. (18 under 24) to the Roos 8.

Here's a comparison of the lists btw. The Roos 24-28y.o. age bracket is much stronger (we have the worst 24-28y.o group in the AFL) but our U24 group is better IMO and have gained more experience.

North Melbourne

Age (current number of games)

33: Simpson (300)
30: Harvey (269)
---------------------------------
28: Harding (123), Jones (147), Rawlings (191), Watt (154)
27: Harris (144)
26: Petrie (166), Power (117), Pratt (92)
25: Edwards (38 ), Firrito (117), Gibson (55), Hale (112)
24: McIntosh (69), Wells (130)
23: Grima (4), McMahon (41), J.Smith (5), Thompson (18)
----------------------------------
22: Campbell (41), Lower (32), J.W.Smith (27), Swallow (52), Obst# (3)
21: Adams (2), Riggio (10), Thomas (47), Urquhart (25), Wright (4), Wundke (-)
20: Anthony (-), Goldstein (8 ), Greenwood (3), Hansen (19), Tarrant (-), Warren (8 ), Delaney# (-), Gartlett# (1), Meredith# (-)
19: Benjamin (-), Ross (9), Speight# (-), White# (-)
18: O'Keefe (-), Ziebell (10)

Oldies: 2
Prime: 18
Young: 20 + 6 rookies

Games
200+:    2
150-199: 3
100-149: 7
50-99:   3
25-49:   8
1-24:   12 + 2 rookies
0:       5 + 4 rookies

Height
200+:    [3] Goldstein, Hale, McIntosh
195-199: [4] Hansen, Petrie, J.Smith, Tarrant
190-194: [9] Firrito, Grima, Power, J.W.Smith, Thompson, Watt, Wundke, Delaney#, Obst#
185-189: [13] Anthony, Benjamin, Gibson, Jones, Lower, O'Keefe, Pratt, Riggio, Simpson, Warren, Wright, Ziebell, White#
180-184: [12] Edwards, Greenwood, Harding, Harris, McMahon, Rawlings, Swallow, Thomas, Urquhart, Wells, Meredith#, Speight#
<180:    [5] Adams, Campbell, Harvey, Ross, Gartlett#


Richmond

Age (current number of games)

34: Richo (282)
31: Bowden (265), Brown (213), Cousins (244), Simmonds (188)
-----------------------------
27: Coughlan (89), Newman (145), Pettifer (113), Tuck (103)
26: McMahon (141)
25: King (35), Moore (58), Polak (106)
24: Schulz (71), Silvester# (-)
23: Jackson (59), Foley (82), Pattison (59), Raines (56), Thursfield (44)
------------------------------
22: Deledio (96), Graham (10), Polo (42), Thomson (28), Hughes (16), McGuane (44), Morton (40), Tambling (85), White (48)
21: Hislop (11), JON (12), Nahas# (9)
20: Collins (9), Connors (10), Edwards (37), Putt (-), Riewoldt (36), Gilligan# (-), Gourdis# (-)
19: Cotchin (19), Post (-), Rance (8 ), Vickery (1), Browne# (1)


Oldies: 5
Prime: 14 + 1 rookie
Youth: 20 + 4 rookies

Games
200+:     4
150-199:  1
100-149:  5
50-99:    9
25-49:    9
1-24:     9 + 2 rookies
0:        2 + 3 rookies

Height
200+:    [4] Putt (202), Graham (200), Vickery (200), Browne# (205)
195-199: [3] Pattison (198), Simmonds (197), Richo (197)
190-194: [10] Polak (194), Post (194), Hughes (193), Schulz (193), Rance (192), Riewoldt (192), McGuane (191), Thursfield (191), Gourdis# (193), Silvester# (191)
185-189: [13] Moore (189), Deledio (189), Tuck (189), Bowden (188), JON (188), Jackson (187), Johnson (187), Polo (187), Coughlan (186), Cotchin (185), Hislop (185), McMahon (185), Morton (185)
180-184: [9] Collins (184), Connors (184), Raines (184), Thomson (184), Newman (183), Pettifer (183), Brown (182), Edwards (180), Tambling (180)
<180:    [5] White (179), Foley (177), King (174), Gilligan# (177), Nahas# (176)



Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Smokey on June 17, 2009, 08:10:09 PM
Very interesting info MT, thanks for the effort in putting it together.

Given that there are only 2 confirmed coaching opportunities for 2010, I suppose the million $ question is "which of these 2 lists would you prefer to coach"?  Looking at both lists in that light, I really believe ours is light years ahead of theirs.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: blaisee on June 18, 2009, 12:02:06 AM
Very interesting info MT, thanks for the effort in putting it together.

Given that there are only 2 confirmed coaching opportunities for 2010, I suppose the million $ question is "which of these 2 lists would you prefer to coach"?  Looking at both lists in that light, I really believe ours is light years ahead of theirs.

what we have that they will never have is a long term future in Melbourne, nevertheless bux wont go to either club IMHO
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on June 18, 2009, 08:54:51 PM
Very interesting info MT, thanks for the effort in putting it together.

Given that there are only 2 confirmed coaching opportunities for 2010, I suppose the million $ question is "which of these 2 lists would you prefer to coach"?  Looking at both lists in that light, I really believe ours is light years ahead of theirs.
Not if you ask the journos  :P. They just come out with the 6 blokes over 30 line as though we are a old side yet ignore we have a younger 22 going around than North and we flogged them just 6 weeks ago. Take a 30 y.o. Brent Harvey out of the Roos' side and they've fallen to pieces. He's their only A grader.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on June 19, 2009, 04:21:11 AM
Rohan Connolly's thoughts on our list:

"In a nutshell, while I think the Cousins pick-up has proved well worthwhile, Richmond still lacks class, and a couple of gamebreakers. The upside is I think it is also slowly developing a quality midfield, one which hopefully Cousins can continue to influence for a couple more years."

http://blogs.theage.com.au/realfooty/archives/2009/06/live_blog_with_1.html?page=fullpage#comments
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Stripes on June 19, 2009, 11:10:38 AM
Even if you look at our players above 23 years of age, perhaps with the expections of Cousins, Newman, Tuck and Moore, all of our structural and better players are under that age. This should be a big incentive for a new coach considering the growth these players still have remaining and the potential for improvement in the future given a better team-orientated game plan.

North is unsuccessful with a large percentage of their team in the 'prime' age bracket.  :o


Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Ramps on June 19, 2009, 12:34:52 PM
3 picks inside 20 would also provide a bit of incentive ;D
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: WilliamPowell on June 19, 2009, 01:03:51 PM
3 picks inside 20 would also provide a bit of incentive ;D

And a good excuse when things aren't going to well on the field  ;D
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Ramps on June 20, 2009, 09:07:01 AM
3 picks inside 20 would also provide a bit of incentive ;D

And a good excuse when things aren't going to well on the field  ;D

 ;D
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on June 20, 2009, 11:33:10 PM
Even if you look at our players above 23 years of age, perhaps with the expections of Cousins, Newman, Tuck and Moore, all of our structural and better players are under that age. This should be a big incentive for a new coach considering the growth these players still have remaining and the potential for improvement in the future given a better team-orientated game plan.

North is unsuccessful with a large percentage of their team in the 'prime' age bracket.  :o
You'd expect the Roos to lose Simpson to retirement within a year or so, Corey Jones, Harris, Power and Edwards may be close to getting the chop, and there's talk Hale may be off to GC17. Harvey may still be around for 2-3 years at least unless he cops more injuries.

I'd reckon by 2011 only Newman, Tucky and Moore will be on our list above 25y.o. That's 10 senior list spots to fill just from the current over 23s who'll disappear. We're going to have to fill these spots with kids at the draft this and next year and that's not counting anyone U24 now being chopped like JON or Cleve for example. We'll need some decent picks to fill these spots so our list improves. Relying on late picks or rookies ain't going to do it although Nahas may get promoted.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on June 22, 2009, 09:09:04 PM
Walls was asked this question on One Week At A Time tonight and he chose North because of "their younger list"  ???
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Go Richo 12 on June 22, 2009, 09:14:59 PM
Walls was asked this question on One Week At A Time tonight and he chose North because of "their younger list"  ???
Not certain that wallsy could bring himself to say anything good about the tigers!
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on June 25, 2009, 07:00:58 PM
A biased North site's comparison of both clubs.....

http://roobeauty.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/buckleys-chance/
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Stripes on June 25, 2009, 09:09:06 PM
I left, what I felt, was a more balanced view on the subject under the name of FootTragic. I'm looking forward to seeing the responses  :P
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mat073 on June 25, 2009, 11:34:13 PM
I left, what I felt, was a more balanced view on the subject under the name of FootTragic. I'm looking forward to seeing the responses  :P

What a shame Stripes...busted.
Roo beauty must have someone on 24 hr troll watch. :lol

Try stirring up those mongrels at "Talkin Carlton" next. :thumbsup
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 26, 2009, 12:26:13 AM
Deledio, Cotchin, Rance, Tambling, Vickery, Thusfeild
Foley, Morton, Reiwoldt, Nahas, Graham,
Collins, Polo, Jackson, White, McGaune

vs.

Hansen,Wells, Ziebell, Hale, Jesse Smith, McIntosh, 
Swallow, Thomas, Lower, Campbell, Urquhart
Greenwood, Riggo, Ross, O'Keefe ??



I would have thought Richmond > North

I dunno, might be bias


Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on June 26, 2009, 12:33:42 AM
Where has this mythical shinboner spirit been this year  ???. Sheesh even we flogged them. They need to rebuild and add more talented players to their ordinary list but they can't literally afford a couple of years bottoming out at the bottom of the ladder to get them. Catch 22 for North.
Don't think they need to rebuild, just keep on developing. They have one of the youngest starting 22s in the competition. Kinda surprised they got rid of Laidley to be honest, not sure they'll have the stability to attract a quality coach, they may not exist in a few years and Laidley wouldn't have costed that much to resign.
The average age the Roos had on the weekend was 24y 201d with 1785 games combined compared to our 22y 282d with 1242 games combined. So that's 2 years and 25ish games more experience per player than us. We had 14 Tigers under 23 y.o. (18 under 24) to the Roos 8.

Here's a comparison of the lists btw. The Roos 24-28y.o. age bracket is much stronger (we have the worst 24-28y.o group in the AFL) but our U24 group is better IMO and have gained more experience.

North Melbourne

Age (current number of games)

28: Harding (123), Jones (147), Rawlings (191), Watt (154)
27: Harris (144)
26: Petrie (166), Power (117), Pratt (92)
25: Edwards (38 ), Firrito (117), Gibson (55), Hale (112)
24: McIntosh (69), Wells (130)


Richmond

Age (current number of games)

23: Jackson (59), Foley (82), Pattison (59), Raines (56), Thursfield (44)
------------------------------
22: Deledio (96), Graham (10), Polo (42), Thomson (28), Hughes (16), McGuane (44), Morton (40), Tambling (85), White (48)
21: Hislop (11), JON (12), Nahas# (9)
20: Collins (9), Connors (10), Edwards (37), Putt (-), Riewoldt (36), Gilligan# (-), Gourdis# (-)
19: Cotchin (19), Post (-), Rance (8 ), Vickery (1), Browne# (1)



Oldies: 5
Prime: 14 + 1 rookie
Youth: 20 + 4 rookies

Games
200+:     4
150-199:  1
100-149:  5
50-99:    9
25-49:    9
1-24:     9 + 2 rookies
0:        2 + 3 rookies

Height
200+:    [4] Putt (202), Graham (200), Vickery (200), Browne# (205)
195-199: [3] Pattison (198), Simmonds (197), Richo (197)
190-194: [10] Polak (194), Post (194), Hughes (193), Schulz (193), Rance (192), Riewoldt (192), McGuane (191), Thursfield (191), Gourdis# (193), Silvester# (191)
185-189: [13] Moore (189), Deledio (189), Tuck (189), Bowden (188), JON (188), Jackson (187), Johnson (187), Polo (187), Coughlan (186), Cotchin (185), Hislop (185), McMahon (185), Morton (185)
180-184: [9] Collins (184), Connors (184), Raines (184), Thomson (184), Newman (183), Pettifer (183), Brown (182), Edwards (180), Tambling (180)
<180:    [5] White (179), Foley (177), King (174), Gilligan# (177), Nahas# (176)





Bucks would lean towards Richmond having more to work with I would think/hope

 :cheers
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on June 26, 2009, 02:15:37 PM
I left, what I felt, was a more balanced view on the subject under the name of FootTragic. I'm looking forward to seeing the responses  :P

What a shame Stripes...busted.
Roo beauty must have someone on 24 hr troll watch. :lol

Try stirring up those mongrels at "Talkin Carlton" next. :thumbsup
Slightly sprung lol

Just tell them Stripes that Richmond's side last weekend was 2 years younger and 25 games less experienced per player. Oh and Morton is only 22, Tambling 22, Collins 20. Jackson and Foley are still only 23. They are no Lids or Cotch but still a decent young core to build a side around.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: FooffooValve on June 26, 2009, 02:26:05 PM
I'd reckon that there is way more upside in the Richmond list.

Laidley was a much better development coach than Wallace. I firmly believe that the improvement in players like Jackson, Tambling and Collins is an indication that the penny may be dropping within our group. Perhaps Cousins is the reason — certainly not Wallace anyway — and not only "natural" development.


Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Stripes on June 26, 2009, 03:54:24 PM
I left, what I felt, was a more balanced view on the subject under the name of FootTragic. I'm looking forward to seeing the responses  :P

What a shame Stripes...busted.
Roo beauty must have someone on 24 hr troll watch. :lol

Try stirring up those mongrels at "Talkin Carlton" next. :thumbsup
Slightly sprung lol

Just tell them Stripes that Richmond's side last weekend was 2 years younger and 25 games less experienced per player. Oh and Morton is only 22, Tambling 22, Collins 20. Jackson and Foley are still only 23. They are no Lids or Cotch but still a decent young core to build a side around.

I'll have to add that to my next post. I replied but they seem pretty measured at the moment and not like the typical rabid Carlsum, Collinwooble or Boomers supporters.  :shh
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Chuck17 on June 26, 2009, 04:11:31 PM
I'll have to add that to my next post. I replied but they seem pretty measured at the moment and not like the typical rabid Carlsum, Collinwooble or Boomers supporters.  :shh

I am pretty impressed how quickly they picked you up, you werent over the top at all in your trolling
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Stripes on June 27, 2009, 03:52:09 PM
I'll have to add that to my next post. I replied but they seem pretty measured at the moment and not like the typical rabid Carlsum, Collinwooble or Boomers supporters.  :shh

I am pretty impressed how quickly they picked you up, you werent over the top at all in your trolling

My guess si that it is actually mat73 moonlighting  :whistle  ;)
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: wayne on June 28, 2009, 04:08:40 PM
Ross Lyon was just interviewed on Fox and said it's surprising that we're down the bottom of the ladder.

We're great at contested ball and he said it'd be a good time to coach them.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Chuck17 on June 28, 2009, 10:47:47 PM
Ross Lyon was just interviewed on Fox and said it's surprising that we're down the bottom of the ladder.

We're great at contested ball and he said it'd be a good time to coach them.

What does he reckon now.
Title: Roos or Tigers: which is better bet? ............ Garry Lyon (Age)
Post by: one-eyed on July 15, 2009, 05:29:41 AM
Roos or Tigers: which is better bet?
Garry Lyon | July 15, 2009

What's it to be, giving the Roos a leg up the ladder or rebuilding Tiger culture and pride?

WHAT holds more appeal for the aspiring senior coach? Awakening one of the once super powers of the competition, Richmond, from an almost 30-year slumber and inspiring it to achieve what 11 other men, with similar aspirations, failed to do?

Or securing the future of a proud and traditional, blue collar football club in North Melbourne, which, despite having achieved the ultimate success in the same 30-year time frame twice, and participated in 13 more finals series, has largely failed to capture the imagination of the football public?

It is a conundrum that Nathan Buckley (and potentially one or two others) will be wrestling with in the coming weeks.

Being the one to finally get it right at Tigerland is an enticing proposition that would stimulate the minds of any competitive beast with an ego. And let's face it, ego and senior coaching are very comfortable bedfellows.

The Tiger Army is alive and well. I've experienced it off the field, having run the London Tavern Hotel in the heart of Richmond territory. Like most teams' supporters they are great winners, and ferocious losers.

As an opposition player who has stood in the goal square while the ball has been up the other end of the ground, I have had a front row seat to their passion on match day as well.

It is palpable and the roar they are able to generate is as loud and parochial as any in the competition.

What the Roo faithful may lack in numbers they make up for in loyalty and commitment. Despite being the team of the '90s, winning two flags, and boasting the best player, in my opinion, to have ever played the game, it has never been able to fully capitalise on its success.

Perennially in the bottom couple of the membership ladder and a constant battle to keep pace off the field in terms of corporate support and the requisite football facilities, makes its achievements all the more meritorious.

The primary consideration though, in any decision, will be the playing list and the potential to develop it to the point where it is a genuine contender.

The Kangaroos have, under Dean Laidley, defied expectation and involved themselves in three of the past four finals series, including a preliminary final in 2007.

That they will miss this year gives rise to the argument that their time has passed and a rebuild will be required.

With the Tigers' absence from September since 2001 it is reasonable to expect that their rebuilding should have been well and truly completed by now. That they have had to pour the concrete for the foundations on more than one occasion is cause for concern. At best, the latest "base" is just starting to dry.

Both teams have 16 players aged 22 or under. The Tigers' top five in that age bracket would consist of Trent Cotchin, Brett Deledio, Tyrone Vickery, Jack Riewoldt and I'm including Jayden Post who was super impressive on the weekend.

The Roos' top five youngsters would read: Jack Ziebell, Liam Anthony, Sam Wright, Lachie Hansen and Andrew Swallow.

At he other end Richmond has five players aged 30 and over in Joel Bowden, Nathan Brown, Troy Simmonds, Matthew Richardson and Ben Cousins while the Roos have two: Brent Harvey and Adam Simpson.

It's reasonable to say two of the five at Richmond might survive while Harvey will definitely play on and Simpson is a good chance.

The deeper you go into the lists the harder it is to separate them. Richard Tambling is to the Tigers what Daniel Wells is to the Roos. Variously an emerging superstar or a big disappointment, depending on the week or month of the year.

Both sides have only one genuine superstar in their midst: Harvey at the Roos, Richo at the Tiges. Cotchin could be the next big thing in the midfield and may be a future captain. Ziebell has similar claims at Roo land.

Robbie Tarrant is a highly rated youngster who is yet to play; Post has similar raps on him and has just started on his AFL journey.

Robin Nahas is an exciting small forward; so are Lindsay Thomas and Matty Campbell.

In terms of improving the list, the Roos may have more avenues available to them through the draft.

With three 200-centimetre-plus ruckmen on board, plus Drew Petrie, trading options present themselves, with the recently re-signed David Hale among them. A potential deal with the Gold Coast is still on the cards.

Belatedly both clubs have been able to address their archaic off-field facilities as they prepare to move into the modern era, enabling them to compete on equal terms with other clubs.

The Tigers expect to complete a $20 million development of Punt Road in time for the 2010 season, while work is well under way on North's $16 million redevelopment of Arden Street.

The importance of these works cannot be overstated. The absence of such a development at one club over the other could be enough to sway a candidate.

Off-field stability and future certainty present their own challenges. The Tigers have been no strangers to off-field controversies and their various coaches have found it almost impossible to remain immune.

Precedent and history are undeniable considerations for prospective candidates.

The Roos have appeared more settled and the returning of the club to its members this year was both timely and welcome.

James Brayshaw and Eugene Arocca have worked diligently in the past 24 months to reassure everyone that their decision to turn their back on the offer to relocate to the Gold Coast was the correct one. But they have painted a target on their back for those, particularly in the media, which saw that as a missed opportunity.

The re-signing of leading sponsor Mazda this week is significant. Brayshaw is a persuasive advocate for the Roos cause, and while his "white knight" call may have been a little naive, he has delivered on his other presidential pledges.

It is a close call as to which job might be the better one, and although the Roos may just shade it, there is no such thing as a "bad" AFL coaching job.

The glare of the spotlight would not be as severe at North Melbourne and the capacity of the playing group to get the job done may be the attraction for some.

For others, pulling into work alongside the MCG every day and leading Richmond back to its ferocious and feared best may be an urge too strong to deny.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/roos-or-tigers/2009/07/14/1247337122813.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on July 16, 2009, 02:51:18 AM
Not sure how Lyon ended up with those 5 names other than four of ours were top 10 picks - Lids (1), Cotch (2), Jack (8 ), Vickery (8 ) and Post (26). As promising as Vickers and Postie were last Saturday they have only played a couple of games each. They may end up guns (let's hope so) but it's way too early to judge. Nahas and Collins have shown more this year and both are in the 22 and under bracket.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on July 19, 2009, 07:51:55 PM
The only answer we got out of today is both sides are ordinary and a long way from being finals sides. As much as the journos keep telling us North's list is better I'd still take ours over theirs to take into the future. Harvey will leave a massive hole when he retires and they had more mature players they we did. Our better players today were all 23 and under except for Newy and Tucky.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: WilliamPowell on July 19, 2009, 08:08:36 PM
The only answer we got out of today is both sides are ordinary and a long way from being finals sides. As much as the journos keep telling us North's list is better I'd still take ours over theirs to take into the future. Harvey will leave a massive hole when he retires and they had more mature players they we did. Our better players today were all 23 and under except for Newy and Tucky.

Someone phoned 3AW tonight after the game and asked the question how many games experience did each side have

Bondy said that the Tigers had 1100 odd games of experience and the Roos over 2100 games

Based on those numbers I would think the answer is pretty obvious
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on July 19, 2009, 08:32:59 PM
Total Players By Games
 Richmond Games North Melbourne 
16 Less than 50 11
4 50 to 99 2
2 100 to 149 5
0 150 or more 4

Richmond Attribute North Melbourne 
187.0cm Height 188.2cm
82.3kg Weight 89.4kg
22yr 11mth Age 24yr 11mth
42.8 Games 81.3
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on July 19, 2009, 10:58:25 PM
Someone phoned 3AW tonight after the game and asked the question how many games experience did each side have

Bondy said that the Tigers had 1100 odd games of experience and the Roos over 2100 games

Based on those numbers I would think the answer is pretty obvious
Agree WP. Although it will take a bold coach to accept a first year of pain given the young list we will have next year. North have an older core (albeit mediocre apart from Harvey) which may get them more wins than us next year but they've got more mature deadwood to clear out. Not a year you'd think you can trade players away for good picks either being the last draft before the new teams come in. They may get a good pick for Hale in the 2010 draft if he decides to join GC17.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: harry bosch on July 19, 2009, 11:10:34 PM
Still pretty unclear , yes the side we fielded today had more young talent but they had a lot more younger players
out of the side like Ziebell ,Smith and Tarrant plus a heap more...
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: 1980 on July 19, 2009, 11:42:09 PM

If you're Buckley, you're looking much harder at how things work off the field than on. 80% of his decision will be based on who he is working for, not who is working for him.

And I doubt many in the football world rate March/Wright over Brayshaw/Arocca.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on July 20, 2009, 02:13:59 AM
Still pretty unclear , yes the side we fielded today had more young talent but they had a lot more younger players
out of the side like Ziebell ,Smith and Tarrant plus a heap more...
That's a fair point too HB. For Ziebell and Smith you know already from the few games they've played they'll be top players for the Roos. Warren looks a promising midsized forward and they were also missing Wells who isn't young but still has plenty of footy ahead of him at 24. But apart from that the rest are unknowns apart from their junior reputations. Robbie Tarrant hasn't yet debuted. We were missing Cotchin, Collins and Connors so not all of our young talent was on show either. Foley is still only 23.

I'm not bragging about our list HB. It's ordinary and needs a broom through it. I just don't see where journos say North's list is obviously better than ours when they've won just one more game than us. Structurally you can argue it's better because they have a large group of 24-28 year olds whereas we don't but that senior group is average and will take the Roos nowhere. If you take those players who have played 10 games or more this year as the core of each side then out of the 16 Roos who have played 10+ games in 2009 only 3 are 22 and under (Ziebell being on of them). The bulk of their side this year has been the senior group yet they have won only 4.5 matches. Compare that to the 17 Tigers who have played 10+ games this year and 11 of them are 22 and under. I think journos look at the six over 30s we have and probably the total average age of list which is skewed in our case and they just lazily say oh Richmond has too many old players to get rid of rather than them looking at the detailed make up of both teams each week. 
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on July 20, 2009, 03:45:01 AM
Still pretty unclear , yes the side we fielded today had more young talent but they had a lot more younger players
out of the side like Ziebell ,Smith and Tarrant plus a heap more...

What is Norths best XXII?

Ziebell & Jesse Smith both class. Cotchin not playing evens it up abit.

Not seen alot of Tarrant.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Smokey on July 20, 2009, 01:44:25 PM
Still pretty unclear , yes the side we fielded today had more young talent but they had a lot more younger players
out of the side like Ziebell ,Smith and Tarrant plus a heap more...

You can't count players that haven't played a game - there is no 'known' to base anything on and you can bet that any coach summing up the relative merits of a team will not rely on untried 'potential'.

So to compare 'reality' of the young players on both lists, of the players 23 and under that have played a game, and using the age they turn this year as the benchmark (games in brackets):

Under 20
North - Jack Ziebell (10) and Sam Wright (4).  2 players with 14 games.
Rich - Andrew Browne (1) (yes, a rookie but he will be on our list at season's end), Tyrone Vickery (4) and Trent Cotchin (23). 3 players with 28 games.

Result - we are stronger.

20 years old
North - Levi Greenwood (4) and Ben Warren (9).  2 players with 13 games.
Rich - Jayden Post (2) and Alex Rance (10).  2 players with 12 games.

Result - close (although I am very confident that our 2 will be top shelf - I'm only confident about 1 of theirs).

21 years old
North - Cruize Garlett (3), Leigh Adams (3), Todd Goldstein (9), Matt Riggio (10), Ben Ross (11), Lachlan Hansen (22), Gavin Urquhart (28) and Lindsay Thomas (48). 8 players with 134 games.
Rich - Tom Hislop (7), Andrew Collins (10), Daniel Connors (10), JON (13), Jack Riewoldt (39).  5 players with 79 games.

Result - they are stronger (but at the top end I think it is pretty even - Thomas/Urquhart vs Reiwoldt/Collins - I don't particularly rate any of the others).

22 years old
North - Liam Anthony (3), Ed Lower (32), Matt Campbell (41), Andrew Swallow (55).  4 players with 131 games.
Rich - Robin Nahas (12), Angus Graham (13), Cleve Hughes (16),  Mitch Morton (31), Shane Edwards (40), Luke McGuane (47), Matt White (49), Brett Deledio (99).  8 players with 307 games.

Result - we are much stronger.

23 years old
North - Josh Smith (5), Scott Thompson (21), Scott McMahon (44).  3 players with 70 games.
Rich - Dean Polo (45), Will Thursfield (47), Andrew Raines (56), Adam Pattison (59), Daniel Jackson (62), Richard Tambling (88).  6 players with 357 games.

Result - we are much stronger.

Overall it becomes quite obvious that North are in for a few very lean years as they have very little upcoming 'core group' to replace their older players.  We, on the other hand, have a strong 'core group' with a lot of experience already in the bank.  Chalk and cheese.
Title: Two tribes in 2012 - Richmond vs North (Age)
Post by: one-eyed on August 09, 2009, 05:46:01 AM
I'll merge this later on with the other thread about Richmond vs North lists...

Two tribes in 2012
Emma Quayle | August 9, 2009

What will the new coaches of Richmond and North Melbourne do in the first two years of their tenure? Emma Quayle assesses the challenges ahead and predicts who won't be there, who should step up and who needs to be drafted.

WHO'LL BE THE STAR?

Richmond:

Trent Cotchin, despite two interrupted seasons, has shown he could soon become Richmond's best player. If that's going to happen, in three years he should be there. Brett Deledio perhaps hasn't made the massive splash people keep wanting him to, but he is improving steadily and surely has a new level to reach. In three years, in their eighth seasons, he and Richard Tambling will be at the heart of their team's fortunes. Tyrone Vickery has only just started out, but the signs are promising and, as a strong prospect in both the ruck and the forward line, his development should play a big part in defining Richmond's fortunes from 2011.

Potential top 5 players in 2012: Trent Cotchin, Brett Deledio, Tyrone Vickery, Richard Tambling, Jack Riewoldt.

The x-factor: Daniel Connors. An undoubted talent, the clever midfielder has not hit his straps in three years on the list, for reasons to do with both injury and attitude. Can a new coach extract that talent?


North Melbourne:

It's hard to see as many potential guns on the North list. Daniel Wells will have just turned 27 entering 2012. His response to a new coach will be interesting. Like Deledio, each year we seem to want more, more and more from him, and he could also hit a new level. Both Jack Ziebell and Liam Anthony look long-termers. But there's as much if not more to like about Gavin Urquhart. He has the pace, poise and skill to really break open some games in the next few years. You'd love to also include Jesse Smith in this list, but his body simply hasn't allowed him to express any of his talent.

Potential top 5 players in 2012: Daniel Wells, Jack Ziebell, Gavin Urquhart, Jesse Smith, Lachie Hansen

The x-factor: Hansen for various reasons has not settled into a spot in the North side and can look uncertain at times. Given a chance to nail down centre half-back and settle into the position, he could have a huge say in his team's next phase.


THE CLEAN-OUT

Richmond:

The Tigers have a few to shed. In the next couple of years – if not this year – they will farewell Joel Bowden, Troy Simmonds, Nathan Brown, Ben Cousins, Matthew Richardson, Shane Tuck and Kayne Pettifer, with Kane Johnson gone already. It's hard to see Mark Coughlan or Jordan McMahon in the 2012 line-up, while the likes of Cleve Hughes, Adam Thomson, Graham Polak, Jay Schulz and Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls have played minimal parts this year and will find themselves part of the turnover at some stage. Can Dean Polo, Adam Pattison, Angus Graham, Jake King and Tom Hislop survive the emergence of others? Timing may help some of them get another one, two or three years on the list. With the Gold Coast pushing other clubs down the draft order in the next two seasons, it will be interesting to see how much change Richmond makes at once.

North Melbourne:

Adam Simpson's gone. Brent Harvey will be 34 in 2012, but could possibly still be playing. Brady Rawlings will be 31 – will he still be there? Daniel Pratt will be 30 – will he be too banged up by then to still be playing? How about Drew Petrie? He'll be 29 at the start of the season. Daniel Harris, Shannon Watt and Leigh Harding will be gone, as well as Corey Jones. The likes of Leigh Adams, Aaron Edwards, Sam Power, Matt Riggio and Ed Lower will be under pressure when change comes in the next year. Ben Ross hasn't turned a promising preseason into much more this year, and there are a few kids we haven't seen yet. Will the unlucky Smith and Robbie Tarrant get themselves to the line?


STANDING TALL

Richmond:

The Tigers have a handy group of talls coming through. Jayden Post has looked promising, as has Vickery. Depending on whether Vickery ends up mostly a forward or mostly a ruckman, they could possibly do with some back-up in either of those areas. Post could legitimately play at either end and, with Luke McGuane, Alex Rance, Kelvin Moore and Will Thursfield around, could make his way there in the next year or two. The Tigers have some juggling to do. Does one of those defenders ultimately get squeezed out, or do they try to trade someone this October? At least they have the players on their list to try things.

North Melbourne:

Scott Thompson has shown enough to suggest he has a future. Grima's next 12 months will be interesting – if he's good enough, he'll be at a nice age to be holding down a key backline spot in 2012. Same for Hansen – if he's good enough, he should really be hitting his straps in 2011 and '12. Petrie will be approaching his 30s, and the club will be hoping that either the very raw but talented Nathan O'Keefe or the very talented but always injured Tarrant will be ready to replace him. In the short term, North's management of McIntosh, Hale, Petrie and the improving Goldstein will be interesting. Will one of them be eased out in the next year or two?


IN THE MIDDLE

Richmond:

Who'll be in the midfield in 2012? Cotchin, Deledio, Tambling, Nathan Foley, Daniel Jackson – definitely. Shane Edwards, Andrew Collins, Matt White, Robin Nahas, Daniel Connors, Dean Polo – should be. Tom Hislop's a maybe. It's a handy group with some real class at the top.

North Melbourne:

The core midfield group should be Wells, Ziebell, Anthony, Urquhart, Swallow. Greenwood could be in the mix too. Again, if only Smith was there already. Can Thomas push up or either Ben Warren or Warren Benjamin (who look more like forwards) pinch hit in there? North needs to find a few more midfielders in a hurry. The good news is that the top end of this year's draft is filled with ready-to-go on-ball types.


RIGHT NOW THEY NEED

Richmond:

A complicated question for the evolving Tigers . Should Browne and/or Graham cement themselves in the next year or two, Vickery could play forward. If the club isn't convinced they will, and see Vickery as their next ruckman, they'll need to get a couple of marking talls (to complement Riewoldt and Morton, as more roaming types) in. The coach's thinking will also shape Post's immediate future. The Tigers have tall defenders in abundance, but McGuane and Moore are mid-sized, and Rance needs to work on his skills and on calming himself down when he gets the ball. Some run and class down there would be nice, although Edwards, Connors and a couple of others may provide that.

North Melbourne:

Two things appear paramount – a couple of young talls to tuck away and work on, and some midfield class to start building up some on-ball depth, although surprisingly, in piecing together a 2012, gaps also bobbed up in the back half.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/two-tribes-in-2012/2009/08/08/1249350725327.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Title: Re: Two tribes in 2012 - Richmond vs North (Age)
Post by: one-eyed on August 09, 2009, 12:40:36 PM
The probables and possibles
August 9, 2009

RICHMOND in 2012

PROBABLES AND POSSIBLES
(Probables in capital letters)

B: NEWMAN, McGUANE, MOORE
HB: Rance, POST, Edwards
C: JACKSON, COTCHIN, TAMBLING
HF: White, VICKERY, Connors
F: NAHAS, RIEWOLDT, MORTON
Foll: Graham, DELEDIO, FOLEY
Interchange from: Collins, Polo, Thursfield, Hislop


NORTH MELBOURNE 2012

PROBABLES AND POSSIBLES
(Probables in capital letters)

B: GIBSON, THOMPSON, GREENWOOD
HB: FIRRITO, HANSEN, Smith
C: URQUHART, SWALLOW, ANTHONY
HF: Wright, Tarrant, THOMAS
F: WARREN, PETRIE, CAMPBELL
Foll: MCINTOSH, ZIEBELL, WELLS
Interchange from: GOLDSTEIN, Harvey, O'Keefe, Hale, Pratt, Grima

http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/the-probables-and-possibles/2009/08/08/1249350725392.html
Title: Re: Two tribes in 2012 - Richmond vs North (Age)
Post by: Infamy on August 09, 2009, 01:19:42 PM
I know I'm biased, but from the sound of those articles it puts Richmond a fair way in front

North are short on top line midfielders and young kpps
In 2012 their main kpps will be at the end of their careers
Title: Re: Two tribes in 2012 - Richmond vs North (Age)
Post by: mightytiges on August 10, 2009, 01:25:37 AM
It did until yesterday's big backward step  :-\

Quote
RICHMOND in 2012

PROBABLES AND POSSIBLES
(Probables in capital letters)

B: NEWMAN, McGUANE, MOORE
HB: Rance, POST, Edwards
C: JACKSON, COTCHIN, TAMBLING
HF: White, VICKERY, Connors
F: NAHAS, RIEWOLDT, MORTON
Foll: Graham, DELEDIO, FOLEY
Interchange from: Collins, Polo, Thursfield, Hislop
You would hope with say 5 National draft picks per year over the next 3 drafts including 3 top 5/10-ers + rookies that more class, structure and depth will be added to that side by 2012.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on October 29, 2009, 03:02:18 AM
I guess the answer so far is Richmond as North can't find replacement assistant coaches  :wallywink


McDonald defends North as crucial roles lie vacant
Caroline Wilson | October 29, 2009

NORTH MELBOURNE football boss Donald McDonald has denied that the club was struggling to build a credible team around new senior coach Brad Scott as a result of a series of messy end-of-season assistant coaching departures.

With the club about to start pre-season training North has not yet filled the crucial midfield coaching role nor has it yet appointed its final development coach. The club has not yet negotiated a settlement with Daniel Daly, the opposition analyst.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/mcdonald-defends-north/2009/10/28/1256405425987.html
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on November 02, 2009, 01:43:37 PM
North is already talking about finals next year  :o

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86570/default.aspx
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: wayne on November 02, 2009, 05:14:02 PM
North is already talking about finals next year  :o

They officially started pre-season today and they still haven't finalised their coaching staff?!?  :o

Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Hellenic Tiger on November 02, 2009, 07:09:52 PM
North is already talking about finals next year  :o

They officially started pre-season today and they still haven't finalised their coaching staff?!?  :o



How else will the sh1tboners sell memberships to all 12 of their fans. If they make the 8 its sh1tboner spirit if they don't they're rebuilding. They are so up against it with lack of staff at the moment it is really a true reflection of where this characterless footy club is on and off field.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on November 03, 2009, 05:05:52 AM
Does anyone else think North is sounding like we did in late 2004?

Let them finish ninth and get the rubbish picks that will stiffle any real rebuilding of their list. I'm glad we're mostly keeping our traps shut leading into the preseason.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Smokey on November 03, 2009, 08:50:50 AM

I'm glad we're mostly keeping our traps shut leading into the preseason.

Yep, it makes a very pleasant change.  And Hardwick doesn't come across as someone who will have to much to say publicly so hopefully that will continue.  Having said that, at times I think we can be a bit harsh on the Wallace spin because part of his charter was to 'sell' the club after the image damage caused during the Casey/Frawley era.  I know we all eventually got sick of the spin instead of seeing positive actions but not all of it was his fault - he was paid to do what he did (among other things that he didn't do well).
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Fishfinger on November 03, 2009, 12:38:42 PM
.......at times I think we can be a bit harsh on the Wallace spin because part of his charter was to 'sell' the club after the image damage caused during the Casey/Frawley era. 
I agree but our image damage had been happening a long time before Casey/Frawley and I think it's pretty unfair to lump it just on them.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: WilliamPowell on November 03, 2009, 05:07:16 PM
Does anyone else think North is sounding like we did in late 2004?

I don't think they have much choice

Scott has to sell the North whatever they are this coming season - every single aspect of that club

His biggest challenge is getting the members to re-sign... they had a big drop in 2009 from 2008..they'd be afraid the same will happen in 2010

Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on November 03, 2009, 10:25:29 PM
I can't see them getting those membership loses back. Most of them were one-year sympathy memberships from opposition fans when the threat of relocating to the Gold Coast was over North's head. Another poor year or two could hurt them financially again. They barely made a profit this year and the new stadia deals aren't that great for clubs like North with their home games at Docklands compared to the MCG tenants.

Yep, it makes a very pleasant change.  And Hardwick doesn't come across as someone who will have to much to say publicly so hopefully that will continue.  Having said that, at times I think we can be a bit harsh on the Wallace spin because part of his charter was to 'sell' the club after the image damage caused during the Casey/Frawley era.  I know we all eventually got sick of the spin instead of seeing positive actions but not all of it was his fault - he was paid to do what he did (among other things that he didn't do well).
True smokey but I wasn't just meaning Plough was talking too much. March and Miller would also discuss club decisions through the media even when they should've been kept internally.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on December 08, 2009, 03:10:54 AM
North getting a touch ahead of themselves?


"The talent we have available is capable of playing finals, and yes, sure, we need things to go our way, but our best side, and I can say this with confidence, can beat anyone in the competition," Brad Scott said.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/single-minded-brad-scott/story-e6frf9jf-1225807908373
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: torch on December 08, 2009, 10:08:46 PM
North getting a touch ahead of themselves?


"The talent we have available is capable of playing finals, and yes, sure, we need things to go our way, but our best side, and I can say this with confidence, can beat anyone in the competition," Brad Scott said.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/single-minded-brad-scott/story-e6frf9jf-1225807908373

"North Melbourne will not make The 2010 AFL Finals!"
quote torch!

 :)
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: yellowandback on December 08, 2009, 10:16:16 PM
Brad Scott sounds like a cross between sheedy and Wallace.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Hellenic Tiger on December 08, 2009, 10:24:50 PM
Still towing that line is Scotty.
Geez footy can be a harsh game. :help
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on December 09, 2009, 09:16:53 PM
Quote
"but our best side, and I can say this with confidence, can beat anyone in the competition," Brad Scott said.
???

The only side North beat this year by more than two goals was Melbourne twice.

As far as beating "anyone in the comp" the lost to premiers Geelong by 70 points  :wallywink. Looks like North are taking their narrow win over St Kilda late in the year when the Saints had nothing to play for far too seriously.

Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: the_boy_jake on December 09, 2009, 09:30:17 PM
He's pretty much got to say it though. North live on the edge of the abyss and he needs to get try and get them above 30,000 members.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Francois Jackson on December 09, 2009, 10:13:01 PM
Quote
"but our best side, and I can say this with confidence, can beat anyone in the competition," Brad Scott said.
???

The only side North beat this year by more than two goals was Melbourne twice.

As far as beating "anyone in the comp" the lost to premiers Geelong by 70 points  :wallywink. Looks like North are taking their narrow win over St Kilda late in the year when the Saints had nothing to play for far too seriously.



funny i remember not so long ago in uum 2008 a club called Richmond did the exact same thing when we beat the Hawks

ooh how i remember coming on here and reading that we were on the right track with Terry..hahaha


Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Judge Roughneck on December 10, 2009, 02:11:24 AM
Quote
"but our best side, and I can say this with confidence, can beat anyone in the competition," Brad Scott said.
???

The only side North beat this year by more than two goals was Melbourne twice.

As far as beating "anyone in the comp" the lost to premiers Geelong by 70 points  :wallywink. Looks like North are taking their narrow win over St Kilda late in the year when the Saints had nothing to play for far too seriously.



funny i remember not so long ago in uum 2008 a club called Richmond did the exact same thing when we beat the Hawks

ooh how i remember coming on here and reading that we were on the right track with Terry..hahaha




Richmond defeats Hawthorn 
Round 20, MCG, Attendance: 44523
Sunday, 17th August 2008, 1:10 PM AEST
Brownlow Votes: 3: M Richardson, 2: T Cotchin, 1: S Tuck
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: mightytiges on December 10, 2009, 09:46:49 PM
Quote
"but our best side, and I can say this with confidence, can beat anyone in the competition," Brad Scott said.
???

The only side North beat this year by more than two goals was Melbourne twice.

As far as beating "anyone in the comp" the lost to premiers Geelong by 70 points  :wallywink. Looks like North are taking their narrow win over St Kilda late in the year when the Saints had nothing to play for far too seriously.



funny i remember not so long ago in uum 2008 a club called Richmond did the exact same thing when we beat the Hawks

ooh how i remember coming on here and reading that we were on the right track with Terry..hahaha



That was my point in a way. Means nothing if you don't back it up the following year as we didn't and we were coming off 8 wins from our last 11 rather than just one good win over a top 2 side late in the season as North did. No excuses from us to fall totally off the edge of the Earth in a year where just 10 wins got you into the finals. Not just Wallace's fault either. The playing list were just as responsible for being so mentality weak they couldn't handle the expectation of finishing 8th or higher and froze in round 1 to the point they were fumbling and dropping straightforward marks ::). Thankfully Hardwick sent one third of the playing list out the door to follow their old coach. Another third would go as well based on their woeful 2009.

Going by the noises coming out of Arden St they seem to be just blaming Laidley and reckon their playing list will be fine. They are kidding themselves if they believe that.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on January 14, 2010, 04:23:26 PM
North are already talking about September and saying they're not in a rebuilding phase  :o

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/88671/default.aspx

Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: wayne on January 14, 2010, 04:56:21 PM
They're talking themselves up hoping that it will help double their membership numbers. From 3 to 6  :lol
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: WA Tiger on January 14, 2010, 05:10:04 PM
Well if thats what they believe then good on them, I do think they are abit ahead of themselves, actually just like we were this time last year.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: the claw on January 16, 2010, 09:35:29 PM
did they or did they not with just as young a list as us finish above us.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: Hellenic Tiger on January 17, 2010, 12:28:38 AM
North are garbage plain and simple.
Self promotion to inflate the status of a brand that has not much going for it is not going to rectify the on field and financial constraints that this characterless football club have to go through year in year out. F*** them.
If by finishing a few spots above us on the ladder means they can comment on their upcoming seasons fortunes well let them gloat away. We got rid of a fair rid of crap last year and our best player in Richo retired too. Their best player Harvey is still playing. They have huge holes in their list.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: one-eyed on July 12, 2010, 09:54:49 PM
First test of this question this week. We're looking pretty attractive propostion to coach at the minute as Dimma would attest  :thumbsup
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: yellowandback on July 12, 2010, 10:03:57 PM
Well the Kangas have beaten the lesser lights of the comp - except the Hawks when they were struggling and been pants by the Bulldogs, Saints, Magpies and Dockers.

No Petrie either which will hurt them and help us enormously.

Their rucks are going to be a massive advantage even without Petrie but we have a serious midfield and a very good defense.

I can't remember the last time we had such class coming out of our backline with Connors, Newman and Lids all elite kicks.
It is going to hurt teams on the rebound inside 50 much like we have been punished in the past few years.

Interesting stat on the couch tonight - we are ranked 1 in the comp for least goals conceded once the ball is in the opposition 50.
Title: Re: Who would be the more attractive proposition to coach: Richmond or North?
Post by: torch on July 12, 2010, 10:46:48 PM
i think this match will say a lot about out us.

North Melbourne play such a discipline style and to crack them will say a lot.

this match is a must win for North Melbourne.

 :gotigers