Essendon and their failed rebuild

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
What's worse overachieving or underachieving? North might have a solid list but they're still on the waiting list for a replacement heart.

Dunno but we havn't lost three in a row by a combined 160 points. Demonstrates lack of heart as well
 
Hardwick inherited a list with a host of young stars and high draft picks waiting to break out. Cotchin, Deledio, Riewoldt, Rance, Vickery. He didn't exactly have it too bad.

Ok, so has our rebuild failed?

Did we even have a rebuild?

Or is this thread complete and utter shit?


Thread asking about the 'failed rebuild' is utter shit. Essendon were never in a rebuild. They were just a team going from 5th-8th to top 4. Even under Knights they were in this set. The question should be 'How come Essendon haven't taken the next step?' Or 'Why do Essendon continue to drop off at the end of the year?' They have the list to be contenders, but always seem to drop off quite badly. Of course, these last two seasons have been tainted with issues. The difference this season is that their injury list isn't nearly as bad as last seasons, yet they are dropping off in a similar way.

Also, Hardwick didn't have it bad, but didn't have it good. A lot of duds were also on that list. Plus, our young stars and picks had maybe, 50 games of experience each. A lot of inexperience.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Youngest Essendon teams since 1979 under Knights = rebuild.

How come Hardwick was turned down when he used the word 'Rebuild' when going for the Essendon job? Knights believed they could make the finals (which they did). Just because a young team were played, doesn't mean it was a 'rebuild.' A majority of that list is still there.
 
Wow. This thread is so full of stupid.

I would have thought the Tiges supporters would have outgrown their inferiority complex by now. Hardwick's done well, folks. Time for the big boy pants! No need to cheer other teams' failure - you can finally cheer your own team's success!

As for the Bombers, i think their performances this year given their off-field distractions have been nothing short of miraculous. Furthermore their fade-out came about 6 weeks later this year than last. So even ignoring the ASADA mess, progress is being made.
 
Wow. This thread is so full of stupid.

I would have thought the Tiges supporters would have outgrown their inferiority complex by now. Hardwick's done well, folks. Time for the big boy pants! No need to cheer other teams' failure - you can finally cheer your own team's success!

As for the Bombers, i think their performances this year given their off-field distractions have been nothing short of miraculous. Furthermore their fade-out came about 6 weeks later this year than last. So even ignoring the ASADA mess, progress is being made.
So let me get this straight. No Richmond supporters are allowed to start threads about opposition teams, am I right?
 
Wow. This thread is so full of stupid.

I would have thought the Tiges supporters would have outgrown their inferiority complex by now. Hardwick's done well, folks. Time for the big boy pants! No need to cheer other teams' failure - you can finally cheer your own team's success!

As for the Bombers, i think their performances this year given their off-field distractions have been nothing short of miraculous. Furthermore their fade-out came about 6 weeks later this year than last. So even ignoring the ASADA mess, progress is being made.


Actually factually incorrect. Including this year, they have only won 6 games in August out of 22 played.

The myth of June/July fade outs was pushed by media
 
Just because a young team were played, doesn't mean it was a 'rebuild.' A majority of that list is still there.

Players farewelled in the post-season 2007-09: Lloyd (270), Lucas (270), Hird (253), Camporeale (252), Michael (238), M.Johnson (194), J.Johnson (184), Heffernan (170), McPhee (167), Peverill (144), Ramanauskas (134), Bolton (124), Lovett (88), Cole (63), Laycock (58), Bradley (49), Nash (43)

New players: Bellchambers, Hurley, Zaharakis, Carlisle, Crameri, Howlett, Myers, Pears, Melksham, Hooker, Colyer, Hardingham, Slattery, D.Daniher, Quinn, Marigliani, Magin, J.Williams, Atkinson plus M.Williams, Prismall, Skipworth from other clubs

Games played prior to Knights: Hocking (1), Lonergan (1), Neagle (1), Reimers (3), Hislop (3), Jetta (4), Houli (4), Gumbleton (5), Dempsey (6), Davey (14), Johns (19)

Rebuild.
 
Wow. This thread is so full of stupid.

I would have thought the Tiges supporters would have outgrown their inferiority complex by now. Hardwick's done well, folks. Time for the big boy pants! No need to cheer other teams' failure - you can finally cheer your own team's success!

As for the Bombers, i think their performances this year given their off-field distractions have been nothing short of miraculous. Furthermore their fade-out came about 6 weeks later this year than last. So even ignoring the ASADA mess, progress is being made.


Richmond could win five flags in a row by 100 points, and I'd still take delight at the failure of Essendon. Success doesn't diminish a hate of a club, just look at what Geelong fans think of Hawthorn.
 
3 losses by a combined 160pts. Thats very concerning. Plus falling short in August yet again.

And yet we're still firmly entrenched in the 8 with this whole ASADA investigation having no doubt devastating effects on the playing group.

I'd be more concerned about round 23, especially considering your sides performance the last time we met. Could be the difference between playing a very poor side with a failed rebuild, or a side from Adelaide with a genuine shot at a flag.

:rolleyes:
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

And yet we're still firmly entrenched in the 8 with this whole ASADA investigation having no doubt devastating effects on the playing group.

So brave :rolleyes:

I'd be more concerned about round 23, especially considering your sides performance the last time we met. Could be the difference between playing a very poor side with a failed rebuild, or a side from Adelaide with a genuine shot at a flag.

Rnd 23 doesnt bother me in the slightest, on form we will win by 10 goals. In fact I hope you guys get to play finals. Rather play you than Port in week 1.
 
Players farewelled in the post-season 2007-09: Lloyd (270), Lucas (270), Hird (253), Camporeale (252), Michael (238), M.Johnson (194), J.Johnson (184), Heffernan (170), McPhee (167), Peverill (144), Ramanauskas (134), Bolton (124), Lovett (88), Cole (63), Laycock (58), Bradley (49), Nash (43)

New players: Bellchambers, Hurley, Zaharakis, Carlisle, Crameri, Howlett, Myers, Pears, Melksham, Hooker, Colyer, Hardingham, Slattery, D.Daniher, Quinn, Marigliani, Magin, J.Williams, Atkinson plus M.Williams, Prismall, Skipworth from other clubs

Games played prior to Knights: Hocking (1), Lonergan (1), Neagle (1), Reimers (3), Hislop (3), Jetta (4), Houli (4), Gumbleton (5), Dempsey (6), Davey (14), Johns (19)

Rebuild.

Disagree. If anything, they started their rebuild under Sheedy in 2006 and finished in Knights first year when they made finals. As I said, a majority of that list is still there. A majority of the players you mentioned were gone before Knights got there, with the exception of Lloyd. The rebuild started before he got there. He believed the team could make finals, which the board agreed with, effectively ending the 'rebuild.' If a team can make finals, then they can build on areas they need to, not start from the bottom which would be a rebuild. Since Knights first year, Essendon have believed they can make finals. I wouldn't call that a rebuild.
 
Thread asking about the 'failed rebuild' is utter shit. Essendon were never in a rebuild. They were just a team going from 5th-8th to top 4. Even under Knights they were in this set. The question should be 'How come Essendon haven't taken the next step?' Or 'Why do Essendon continue to drop off at the end of the year?' They have the list to be contenders, but always seem to drop off quite badly. Of course, these last two seasons have been tainted with issues. The difference this season is that their injury list isn't nearly as bad as last seasons, yet they are dropping off in a similar way.
Well, I think it's pretty easy to see why we have dropped off this year and last year. 2011 we lost Jobe for a few games in the back half half of the season and didn't yet have the depth to properly cover him, but we didn't finish the season off that badly (won three of the last five). Under Knights in 2010 we were a complete and utter shambles to finish the year, and the players had given up on him. 2009 we snuck into finals with a negative win/loss ratio. Before then, we just weren't a very good team.

Under Knights we were also the worst traveling team in the AFL; we seriously could not win on the road, so that would account for a few more 2nd half of season loses. Hird has turned this around beautifully.

Besides, being a big 4 club, we usually have to play all of Carlton/Collingwood/Richmond in the back half of the year, and no matter where our respective clubs are at at that point, these matches are always a toss of the coin.

Our late season fadeouts are a problem for sure, but I think we can be excused for the last two years. It does need to change if we want to take the next step.
 
Well, I think it's pretty easy to see why we have dropped off this year and last year. 2011 we lost Jobe for a few games in the back half half of the season and didn't yet have the depth to properly cover him, but we didn't finish the season off that badly (won three of the last five). Under Knights in 2010 we were a complete and utter shambles to finish the year, and the players had given up on him. 2009 we snuck into finals with a negative win/loss ratio. Before then, we just weren't a very good team.

Under Knights we were also the worst traveling team in the AFL; we seriously could not win on the road, so that would account for a few more 2nd half of season loses. Hird has turned this around beautifully.

Besides, being a big 4 club, we usually have to play all of Carlton/Collingwood/Richmond in the back half of the year, and no matter where our respective clubs are at at that point, these matches are always a toss of the coin.

Our late season fadeouts are a problem for sure, but I think we can be excused for the last two years. It does need to change if we want to take the next step.

Can you be excused for the last two seasons though?
 
Well, I think it's pretty easy to see why we have dropped off this year and last year. 2011 we lost Jobe for a few games in the back half half of the season and didn't yet have the depth to properly cover him, but we didn't finish the season off that badly (won three of the last five). Under Knights in 2010 we were a complete and utter shambles to finish the year, and the players had given up on him. 2009 we snuck into finals with a negative win/loss ratio. Before then, we just weren't a very good team.

Under Knights we were also the worst traveling team in the AFL; we seriously could not win on the road, so that would account for a few more 2nd half of season loses. Hird has turned this around beautifully.

Besides, being a big 4 club, we usually have to play all of Carlton/Collingwood/Richmond in the back half of the year, and no matter where our respective clubs are at at that point, these matches are always a toss of the coin.

Our late season fadeouts are a problem for sure, but I think we can be excused for the last two years. It does need to change if we want to take the next step.

Last season can be excused. This season, you'll make finals (barring AFL), but it looks like you guys are spent. Can you blame the investigation after you guys were top 4 for a majority of the season? This was going on all year remind you
 
Disagree. If anything, they started their rebuild under Sheedy in 2006 and finished in Knights first year when they made finals. As I said, a majority of that list is still there. A majority of the players you mentioned were gone before Knights got there, with the exception of Lloyd. The rebuild started before he got there. He believed the team could make finals, which the board agreed with, effectively ending the 'rebuild.' If a team can make finals, then they can build on areas they need to, not start from the bottom which would be a rebuild. Since Knights first year, Essendon have believed they can make finals. I wouldn't call that a rebuild.

Hird decided to retire but Knights made the call to trade some of the others. He had to deal with the loss of experience from the list.

Year|Coach|AvgAge|AvgGms
\2007|Sheedy|25.25|108.2
\2008|Knights|24.21|87.1
\2009|Knights|24.03|79.4
\2010|Knights|23.68|68.8
\2011|Hird|24.09|78.0
\2012|Hird|24.62|81.0
\2013|Hird|24.90|84.7
It's a pretty major step for a team to come back a year or more in age from one season to the next. Decreasing in age again in the next two seasons definitely qualifies as a rebuild in my book. As a rule of thumb, you don't contend for the flag while decreasing in age. Consider the Dogs:

Year|Coach|AvgAge|AvgGms
\2010|Eade|26.29|122.1
\2011|Eade|24.96|92.0
\2012|McCartney|24.66|85.3
\2013|McCartney|24.54|79.7
They're not as young as Essendon was, but it's most certainly a rebuild. There are different degrees and scales.

Anyway, it's all semantics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top