4 years on - Hawthorn and Richmond

[Mervyn Beasley]

Actually, we just drafted better than you in the same time frame.

Since 2004, First round selections (picks 1-16):

Tigers:
Delidio - Gun
Tambling - Done nothing
Meyer - Done nothing
Pattison - Done nothing
Oakly Nichols - Total waste
Reiwoldt - Decent
Trent Cotchin - Gun

Hawks:
Roughead - Gun
Franklin - Gun
Lewis - Gun
Ellis - Slow start but came good this season, played a great grannie
Dowler - Cant break into an awesome forward line
Birchall - Great
Thorpe - Same as Dowler
Rioli - Gun

We just recruited a lot better than you guys.

Whilst our top end drafting has been sensational, a lot of our success comes down to the recruiting at the other end.
5 ex rookie listed players played for the Hawks in GF. That is great recruiting and fantastic coaching and develelopment.
Osborne(twice a rookie!!)R Campbell, B Sewell (07 B and F) C Young, S Gilham.
One game this year there were 7 with Stokes and McGlynn.

 

[Saturday@2]

Yeah, it's just bad luck that we didn't have a couple of mentally ill players that we could flog off for high draft picks. Obviously full disclosure would have been made. Remember you reap what you sew.

 

[tazhawk]

Yeah, it's just bad luck that we didn't have a couple of mentally ill players that we could flog off for high draft picks. Obviously full disclosure would have been made. Remember you reap what you sew.

You can always flog off your mentally ill Board.

After all they are the dipshits that got sucked in to Wallet's 5 year plan.

 

[Beckers]

Yeah, it's just bad luck that we didn't have a couple of mentally ill players that we could flog off for high draft picks. Obviously full disclosure would have been made. Remember you reap what you sew.

But we reaped a Premiership??

 

[worthy]

These comparison's will be every where over the next year.

To be fair to us, Hawthorn had a lot more players in that core age group, Hodge, Bateman, Mitchell, Guerra, Ladson, Osbourne etc.

We had, Newman, Hyde, Coughlan, Pettifer and Tuck etc.

I think Hawthorn has developed some of their "lesser" players better than the Tiges, that said, I believe the Tiges will play finals in 09, and from there, who knows?

 

[tazhawk]

4 years on..................... Clarkson has delivered the 2008 AFL Premiership.

4 years on .................... Wallet has delivered 9th spot and the usual truckload of bullshit spin.

 

[MadDawg]

But we reaped a Premiership??

yeah that'll teach us.

FWIW I think Richmond are doing just fine considering they're Richmond.

 

[toomanysquibs]

Remember you reap what you sew.

Ha, ha, ha. You sir are a comedic genius.....

 

[Kowalski]

Ha, ha, ha. You sir are a comedic genius.....

Grant you that one. If you're going to try & sound profound, I guess it may help to get your context/spelling correct......
FWIW I've taken a keen interest in the Hawks since the 2004 as it provides a perfect example of 2 diverging policies from the exact same starting point.
Went to a number of members functions early on in the TW reign & while initially impressed, have found myself wishing he'd keep a lower profile & just speak sense when he bobs up. AC on the other hand, seems to only say what he means regardless of what the people/media may want to hear, can't help but admire him for that.
While we've obviously had a few howlers in the draft, I'm pretty happy that things seem to be on track now & after 26 years I'll take that. The hawks do seem to have been more hard-nosed about their approach both to their list & their game and it's paid off handsomely, and they are one of the few opposition teams I genuinely enjoy watching.
Can't make out the reason for all the Haw/Rich animosity here other than 1 mob feeling a bit ripped/impatient & the other maybe a bit pleasantly surprised at the rate of their improvement.........
Certainly looking forward to the rise of Richmond & hopefully a genuine rivalry on-field developing, as both teams seem to be heading towards a peak.

 

[cs61]

Where did I say he was a hack? He had virtually everything thrown in his lap with the money to make things happen. But I wont deny that he still needed to coach the team to achieve great results he has managed since taking on the position. He's no dummy.

what a laugh.

clarkson had about the hardest job in the world taking hawthorn over where they were when he took over.

you have no idea what you are talking about, we were a laughing stock after 2004, many predicted we'd finish in the bottom four for the next 5 years.

we won a premiership in 4

 

[Beckers]

what a laugh.

clarkson had about the hardest job in the world taking hawthorn over where they were when he took over.

you have no idea what you are talking about, we were a laughing stock after 2004, many predicted we'd finish in the bottom four for the next 5 years.

we won a premiership in 4

I agree and Wallace even said he preferred the Richmond job because they had a better list......

Hawthorns list was a basket case with over paid 'reputations' chewing up the Salary Cap....sort of like MFC's is now!

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

Richmond will be terrific once they get rid of Wallace and replace him with someone who can coach. He's the only thing holding them back.

 

[MinerBoy]

Richmond will be terrific once they get rid of Wallace and replace him with someone who can coach. He's the only thing holding them back.

Let's face it. Both Rodney Eade and Terry Wallace are the luckiest mofo's to ever grace a coaches box. Both are considered quality coaches and tacticians. Yet how many coaches in AFL history have been given as long as these two over more than 1 club to deliver this 'long term success' you speak of - yet still haven't got either of the clubs they have coached just the 1 flag?

Most coaches are lucky if they get anywhere near 10 years, let alone ones that haven't even delivered a premiership.

In the final scheme they rate about the same as Neale Daniher.

As I said previously, so long in the coaching ranks without a flag or in Wallace's case, a GF appearance, to show for it. How do these blokes get to maintain a coaching position for so long? Surely it's time for the Tigers to look past the spin and analyse the cold hard facts.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

I think Graham and Kingsley are just viewed as being symbolic of the perceived different approaches taken by the two clubs. Graham perhaps particularly symbolic, given that he was a long-time faithful servant at Hawthorn, who was finally discarded only then to be re-drafted by Richmond, a club ostensibly in the same position as the Hawks.

Good post. Can't disagree with too much of that OEH, especially the reference to "perceived different approaches". Perceptions are largely built on discussions, whether it be here on BigFooty, at the water-cooler or media panel shows, so it's important that intelligent people like us continue to point out the inadequacies in people's arguments, for fear of them becoming "perceived" truths.

These picks may not have been early ones, but they were picks nonethless. IIRC, the Hawks had something like 6 Rookie listed players play in the premiership team this year; Graham's spot could've been used to develop a rookie, and similarly, the Kingsley pick could've been used to stack up on Gourdis (sp?) type-players.

Sure. They were picks nonetheless, but when you've already grabbed 7 kids, including 5 in the top 20 Picks, plus another three in the Rookie Draft, there is room to pick up a veteran who can bear the brunt of opposition "gorillas" and smooth the development of youngsters.

]"Originally Posted by cschreuder61
what a laugh.

clarkson had about the hardest job in the world taking hawthorn over where they were when he took over.

you have no idea what you are talking about, we were a laughing stock after 2004, many predicted we'd finish in the bottom four for the next 5 years.

we won a premiership in 4"[/I]

I agree and Wallace even said he preferred the Richmond job because they had a better list......

Hawthorns list was a basket case with over paid 'reputations' chewing up the Salary Cap....sort of like MFC's is now!

So Wallace was correct.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

The funny thing about Wallace is he contradicts himself.

Sure Hawthorns list probably was worse than the Richmond list in 2004. So when at the time Wallace said he thought Richmond had the better list he was close to right.

However now his excuse when asked about how Hawthorn has improved so well whilst Richmond have been treading water for 4 years is that Hawks have players in the key age group 22-26. They were on the list in 04, Mitchell Hodge Ossie Brown Ladson Bateman, they were all there.

Cant have it both ways Wallet.

 

[HighFlyer]

Actually, we just drafted better than you in the same time frame.

Since 2004, First round selections (picks 1-16):

Tigers:
Delidio - Gun
Tambling - Done nothing
Meyer - Done nothing
Pattison - Done nothing
Oakly Nichols - Total waste
Reiwoldt - Decent
Trent Cotchin - Gun

Hawks:
Roughead - Gun
Franklin - Gun
Lewis - Gun
Ellis - Slow start but came good this season, played a great grannie
Dowler - Cant break into an awesome forward line
Birchall - Great
Thorpe - Same as Dowler
Rioli - Gun

We just recruited a lot better than you guys.

Hawks have certainly done well out of their recruits. Roughead and Lewis were no brainers at the time. Richmond had Roughead already to settle in, most people expected lewis to go at 7 and 8 for good reason. If I remember correctly Richmond tried to trade the leaving Brad Ottens to North for the pick 7 you got from North for Thompson. If Ottens had accepted North's offer lewis would have been a tiger. The one that the hawks got right was Franklin. He was rumoured to suffer consistency issues and there was an element of the football world that considered him outside top 5 material. Plenty of people can tell you that Hawthorn went for the "spine". Others will tell you that they were very keen on Tambling and thought Richmond would have taken Franklin. The argument stilll stands that the hawks didn't get Franklins name right on draft day... You'd hope that since it was all "part of the plan" that they would have at least known the name of the kid. Regardless all worked out well for Hawthorn they finished above the tigers on the ladder that year and managed to pinch 3 of the best 5 talents in the draft on offer. It's water under the Bridge.

Worth understanding too is that while the Hawks drafted alot of young kids who are all excellent footballers.. It was the quality of their core group of older quality midfielders that allowed them to reach the consistent good football they are playing now. Just look at GF day this year. Richmond regardless of Wallace's comments at the time did not have the same quality in their older players and most of these are now gone ...

Mitchell, Sewell, Bateman and Crawford the core of their midfield were already at the club prior to Clarkson taking over. Hawthorn were a good year or two ahead before regardless of what Terry said at the time.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

The funny thing about Wallace is he contradicts himself.

Sure Hawthorns list probably was worse than the Richmond list in 2004. So when at the time Wallace said he thought Richmond had the better list he was close to right.

However now his excuse when asked about how Hawthorn has improved so well whilst Richmond have been treading water for 4 years is that Hawks have players in the key age group 22-26. They were on the list in 04, Mitchell Hodge Ossie Brown Ladson Bateman, they were all there.

Cant have it both ways Wallet.

I fail to see how the example you have selected is a contradiction. All that can be stated was that Terry Wallace, the football media analyst, believed that richmond had the better list circa late-2004. This has been paraphrased endlessly. Richmond validated this apparent remark by finishing well above Hawthorn the following two seasons. Then all of those players either got old, got injured, got retired, or got removed.

Here's an exaggerated parallel using a small microcosm of current players. There is no doubt that, if asked to compare the following two clusters of players, Team A would be considered by most a "better list" than Team B.

Team A - Scarlett, Corey, Mooney, Ottens

Team B - Gibbs, Murphy, Waite, Kreuzer

Team A would probably beat Team B at 4 of their next 5 meetings, and almost certainly finish above Team B in a current and imminent season of football. So if performances in a Premiership Season are the barometer of on-field success (which they should be) then Team A currently has the "better list".

But in three or four years, don't be surprised if Team B are vying for the Flag and Team B are in rebuild. In a nutshell, the average age of Carlton's current best 10 players would be well younger than the average age of Geelong's current best 10 players.

That's why Wallace asked (and received) FIVE years in his contract - Richmond were at least two years behind the Hawks in terms of constructing a suitable demographic to be a realistic Premiership threat.

The stats are there for all to see if you just do a bit of proper research rather than forming your perceptions primarily on the misguided perceptions of others.

 

[H2F]

I made a video response for this thread ...

[YOUTUBE]sYm8rNMxhBw[/YOUTUBE]

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Nice school project, young fella.

All it showed me, though, is how much better Franklin is than Roughead.

 

[MadDawg]

Nice school project, young fella.

All it showed me, though, is how much better Franklin is than Roughead.

and how much better Roughead is than Deledio and Tambling

 

[H2F]

Nice school project, young fella.

All it showed me, though, is how much better Franklin is than Roughead.

that was 06 highlights ....

They are about even now ...

 

[macdaddio]

The point the OP was making is that Wallice said Richmonds list was better then Hawthorn in 2004 during interviews with clubs for his coaching role, no one is saying the tigers have failed, but the point being made is that Wallice has failed in his assessment of both clubs....From 2004-2006 even 2007 Clarko was getting grilled by the football media while Wallice was getting away with his club failing to reach finals footy, and now if Wallice does not get his club to a final in 09 then he has been the biggest failure in 5 years since Danny Frawley

 

[cs61]

I laughed too when Wallace tried to make out those players were already on the list at Hawthorn, especially after he said Richmond had the better list for the long term, and Hawthorn the short term. He then changed his point once Hawthorn got better, and now states that Richmond were always going to take a long time. Its pure contradiction, if he didn't believe that he shouldn't of said it.

It totally disregards the work AC has done in developing the list and developing players, its not about who you draft, or who you have necessarily, but how they develop as players, where you play them, and how you train them to be the right types players. Also identifying who to cut and who to keep is a big part of it. All of those things Hawthorn has brilliantly since Clarkson took over.

Our development programs have been top notch in improving and getting the best out of fringe players, and is what sides like Richmond have not yet proven they are any good at.

Wallace needs results next year, finals or bust, as no amount of spin doctoring is going to deflect that in 5 years he hasn't done a whole lot except bring in an OK group of kids. I'm very surprised he's been allowed so much of a free ride by the press, given Clarkson was still copping it this year, even though he ended up winning a premiership.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

as cschreuder61 said, it is the development.

Croad was a semi-decent FF/CHF when clarkson took over. He is now a quality CHB.

He turned Hodge from nothing more then a flanker into a utility who can compete in any position.

He put time into players like Sewell and Young when he could have spent that time using a 2-3 year player which would have seen both those players (young and sewell) long gone by now.

He turned Guerra from a sniper off half forward into a decent half back flanker. Clarko is so good he gave Guerra some hair on his head!

 

[Hawkas_01]

I made a video response for this thread ...

[youtube]sYm8rNMxhBw[/youtube]

I love that old video. Very funny


Face it Richmond supporters you ain't got nothin on us.