Get BUCKLEY Update: Dim the lights, Caro is talking dirty.

[snapperbowler]

All the talk about who has the better list is crap.

You need to look at game plans and how the team plays together.

Another factor is what draw the AFL gives you.

I remember when the Geelong and St Kilda supporters used to argued about who had the better list.

If I was a potential coach I would make my decision on the meeting with the club.

 

[scottywiper]

If you can't beat us this weekend then it's a sad indicator for your club that all your experienced players are no good and your list needs a lot of work. You will probably have 10+ 100 gamers in your team and we will have about 3. Who are these 'injured' blokes who will replace all of them in the team? Wells and Ziebell. That's the only quality you have out.

Here is list for last round and it will be much the same this round. If you can't flog us this weekend, you're in trouble. We're on the bottom for games average as a club for the last few rounds
with about 50 while you're middle of the road with about 112.

You are deadset clueless. Sadly it is true.
It's not worth the effort.

 

[__aria__]

This Barnzy is the same kind of bloke that in January thought Richmond would not finish bottom 4 this year. They're n a different world some of these Richmond supporters, and they never learn from the heart break.

 

[Barnzy]

You are deadset clueless. Sadly it is true.
It's not worth the effort.

AKA, you got nothing.

Here is something for you:

Average experience (in matches) of each club in Round 13:

129.3 Western Bulldogs
122.9 Geelong
113.4 St.Kilda
112.4 Sydney
100.6 Port Adelaide
92.1 Adelaide
91.9 Collingwood
89.2 North Melbourne
88.2 Fremantle
86.3 Essendon
82.5 Brisbane
82.5 Hawthorn
78.0 Carlton
73.7 West Coast
72.3 Melbourne
53.9 Richmond


Average experience (in matches) of each club in Round 14:

122.9 Western Bulldogs
117.9 Sydney
117.5 Geelong
106.0 St.Kilda
102.3 Collingwood
101.3 Port Adelaide
91.8 Adelaide
90.6 Essendon
90.1 North Melbourne
89.9 Brisbane
80.6 Hawthorn
80.5 Melbourne
78.4 West Coast
75.5 Fremantle
67.5 Carlton
54.3 Richmond

I was thinking about my discussions with Sydney posters when quoting the 112 but still it's a considerable difference. If your list is better than Richmond's and you have that much more experience in, I look forward to you beating us by 10 goals this weekend. Otherwise, bad signs for North fans.

 

[Zvim]

Hird said on the The Couch he would choose Richmond over North if he was Buckley. Interesting.

We do have the better list, however we have a lot of media scrutiny and pressure all the time and I'm sure Richmond are aware of the fact he might not able to handle it. Big 4 club with his name up in lights. Would be in the paper 24/7. We may be better of going for a more low-profile coach away from the spotlight.

I think Tigers have got a lot of good prospective young players and they have been given a lot more exposure than ours because your last rebuilding phase started 5 years ago, we have been only about 2 years into ours.

I think we are about 5 or 6 quality players on our list short at this point in time because of Laidley, he had too much power in list management and he was a shocking judge of players. 2004 and 2005 in hindsight was a disaster for us in terms of list management.

Thanks to Laidley we passed on Davey and had to stick him in Port Melbourne where everyone got to have a look at him. Picked up complete spuds like Picioane, Schwarze, Thurley, Green, Powell, Rawlings and traded for McConnell, Thompson and Hay rather than invest in the youth.

Granted, at least we were in the top half of the ladder a lot more than we were in the bottom half but it was this mid point in Laidley's stint that really hurt us, it was the time to start investing long-term for the guys we knew were going to be retiring and we picked up a boat load of crap.

Mind you, Richmond weren't a whole load better, but at least finishing near the bottom you didn't have the delusion of adequacy. Being competitive hurt our list during the 2002-2005 period, those four years and the financial and membership problems we had really hurt the club.

But, since we turned the corner, neutered Laidley and brought in a new list management team we have made massive in-roads. We have put on a lot of really good players in the last three years. Had we not had to correct major ****ups during that earlier period we would have been in a much stronger position, but the ground we have made up during this period has been as good if not better than any club given what we have had access to.

Where there has been a massive difference between Richmond and North has been in development, we seem to get the most out of the players a lot more than Richmond seem to do, I think the cultural difference plays a big part in that.

 

[scottywiper]

AKA, you got nothing.

Here is something for you:

Average experience (in matches) of each club in Round 13:

129.3 Western Bulldogs
122.9 Geelong
113.4 St.Kilda
112.4 Sydney
100.6 Port Adelaide
92.1 Adelaide
91.9 Collingwood
89.2 North Melbourne
88.2 Fremantle
86.3 Essendon
82.5 Brisbane
82.5 Hawthorn
78.0 Carlton
73.7 West Coast
72.3 Melbourne
53.9 Richmond


Average experience (in matches) of each club in Round 14:

122.9 Western Bulldogs
117.9 Sydney
117.5 Geelong
106.0 St.Kilda
102.3 Collingwood
101.3 Port Adelaide
91.8 Adelaide
90.6 Essendon
90.1 North Melbourne
89.9 Brisbane
80.6 Hawthorn
80.5 Melbourne
78.4 West Coast
75.5 Fremantle
67.5 Carlton
54.3 Richmond

I was thinking about my discussions with Sydney posters when quoting the 112 but still it's a considerable difference. If your list is better than Richmond's and you have that much more experience in, I look forward to you beating us by 10 goals this weekend. Otherwise, bad signs for North fans.

AKA, you are clearly a moron.
Hey spud, seeing as how you are such an einstein, how's your maths?
Do you reckon having two blokes who have played 300 games would bump up our average much, say by about 27 games per player?
And Harvey has barely played this year, he wouldn't be playing now if he weren't skipper.
You will probably have two players with under 10 games this weekend.
We will have 4 or 5.
We have had eight debutants this year, Richmond six.
PS - Schulze is still rubbish, we all know it. Guess you thought Wallace was the saviour too? Good luck if you reckon Mitch Morton is too (why is he not a midfielder - too lazy!)
I repeat, you are a moron.
Now run along, I have got better things to do than argue with idiot whose club has proven clinically incapable of getting anything right for 25 years.

 

[fairdinkum]

Eddie's comments worry me too - he is no fool. But the $$$s I hear that Bucks is being offered by us will surely be hard to turn down. Will make him the highest paid coach in the AFL if the rumour is correct.

And yet there were people trying to tell me that money won't even be a consideration for Bucks.

Makes you wonder.

 

[Barnzy]

Now run along, I have got better things to do than argue with idiot

So much hypocrisy.

Why do you keep posting back if you have better things to do?

 

[Zvim]

AKA, you got nothing.

Here is something for you:

Average experience (in matches) of each club in Round 13:

129.3 Western Bulldogs
122.9 Geelong
113.4 St.Kilda
112.4 Sydney
100.6 Port Adelaide
92.1 Adelaide
91.9 Collingwood
89.2 North Melbourne
88.2 Fremantle
86.3 Essendon
82.5 Brisbane
82.5 Hawthorn
78.0 Carlton
73.7 West Coast
72.3 Melbourne
53.9 Richmond


Average experience (in matches) of each club in Round 14:

122.9 Western Bulldogs
117.9 Sydney
117.5 Geelong
106.0 St.Kilda
102.3 Collingwood
101.3 Port Adelaide
91.8 Adelaide
90.6 Essendon
90.1 North Melbourne
89.9 Brisbane
80.6 Hawthorn
80.5 Melbourne
78.4 West Coast
75.5 Fremantle
67.5 Carlton
54.3 Richmond

I was thinking about my discussions with Sydney posters when quoting the 112 but still it's a considerable difference. If your list is better than Richmond's and you have that much more experience in, I look forward to you beating us by 10 goals this weekend. Otherwise, bad signs for North fans.

That is because you guys pissed off Johnson (220 games), Richo is hurt (282 games), Brown is in the VFL (213 games), Polak (106 games) hurt himself driving into a tram and and you are playing Vickery rather than Simmonds (188 games) who is not giving you anything more than Troy was, unless 8 hitouts and 3 disposals in that round was anything to write home about.

The problem for Richmond and what a coach would be looking at is that anyone over 100 games of experience for Richmond are complete duds or old players on the way out. Only on BF is being young a substitute for being good, that would be raising alarm bells.

Almost everyone on your second tier who are approaching 100 games supporters on your forum want to de-list or trade off. It is not the ideal scenario and if a coach has similar views on that second tier then there will be a lot more pain in the future years.

You can't be a good side until you have good experienced players.

 

[Long Live the King]

Richmond - Bucks wont be basing his decision on whether Richmonds list has less experience than Norths, he wont be comparing memberships, he probably wont even be comparing attendances..........Id imagine he would be comparing cultures.......Do I go to a club that treats its coaching staff like shit and with absolute disregard or do I coach the North Melbourne Football Club..........easy decision.....

 

[Long Live the King]

So much hypocrisy.

Why do you keep posting back if you have better things to do?

Look up the meaning of hypocrisy.........there is no contradiction here....all North posters agree that our list is superior and that you are a moron.....look that one up

 

[Barnzy]

all North posters agree that our list is superior

Oh wow, shock horror. A supporter thinks their list is better than someone elses. That bias isn't shown all the time on BF.......

 

[Long Live the King]

Oh wow, shock horror. A supporter thinks their list is better than someone elses. That bias isn't shown all the time on BF.......

buddy youre letting down all those richmond supporters who are decent....

im assuming youre only a kid which might explain it.....

but surely theres a richmond thread on their board that you can add no value to.

 

[Roos4eva]

Fair to say this thread made me laugh quite a few times.

Schulz better than Hale and Petrie combined?

Richmond have higher standards than North?

Pattison better than Goldstein?

Comedy gold right there from our good mate, Barnzy.

Keep 'em comin'.

 

[__aria__]

this thread will never be as good as "Hansen to Richmond"

now that thread is comedy gold

 

[Barnzy]

Well I'm not the one who should be concerned about anything anyways. North are the one who are going hard at Buckley yet apparently he has already said Richmond have a better list than North. I haven't heard it myself but a couple people have mentioned it, including Mark Robinson.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Well I'm not the one who should be concerned about anything anyways. North are the one who are going hard at Buckley yet apparently he has already said Richmond have a better list than North. I haven't heard it myself but a couple people have mentioned it, including Mark Robinson.

He chose his words very carefully.

I believe the term "exposed form" was used in his assessment.

 

[street_fighter]

Maybe she's trying to lull us into a false sense of security?

haha, it seems like a pretty big hedge your bets article. If North do get Buckley, she can claim she was all over it and isn't always anti-North. If we don't, then she can hit the shit out of us, which she will def do.

 

[Zvim]

He chose his words very carefully.

I believe the term "exposed form" was used in his assessment.

Which is the problem, Richmond for two decades have better exposed form by their youngsters than any other club yet have made the top half of the ladder since 1980 fewer times than Fitzroy and they have been dead for 13 years.

You could read off a list of young Richmond players longer than the dead sea scrolls that have shown amazing potential, but gone nowhere. There is a point in your career as a footballer that you have to go beyond showing glimpses and play to a high standard every week. Very few Richmond players develop beyond the potential point into good experienced players with good consistency.

I see a lot of kids running around at Richmond that I wouldn't mind seeing at North but I have felt that way about other players in the past that have got to a point you would think they look good but have stagnated or gone backwards from that point once there was the level of expectation to perform consistently.

Richmond really need 20 guys on the list they know that will be able to play consistently and with the weight of expectation.

 

[snrub]

I was thinking about my discussions with Sydney posters when quoting the 112 but still it's a considerable difference.

So you run around every other board with the same lame-arsed self-justification and poor excuses for institutionalised ineptitude?

 

[shintemaster]

I see a lot of kids running around at Richmond that I wouldn't mind seeing at North but I have felt that way about other players in the past that have got to a point you would think they look good but have stagnated or gone backwards from that point once there was the level of expectation to perform consistently.

Richmond really need 20 guys on the list they know that will be able to play consistently and with the weight of expectation.

Absolutely spot on. I still think that their biggest problems are off field, until they find some way to deal with them the wheel will continue to turn very slowly.

 

[__aria__]

So you run around every other board with the same lame-arsed self-justification and poor excuses for institutionalised ineptitude?

snub'd

 

[Barnzy]

So you run around every other board with the same lame-arsed self-justification and poor excuses for institutionalised ineptitude?

I get around.

 

[Event Horizon]

Barnzy, let me summirise the point here one more time for you. The "older" players we are playing like Harris and Jones are FRINGE players in the curent structure. Sure, we could have dropped them the day Laidley was gone, similar to how Jade Rawlings acted. But we prefer to give our players a chance, and both Harris and Jones have had little chance under Laidley.

No point playing the youngest side possible for the sake of it, is there? The point being, Scotty listed the players that will be the future of this club and I won't bother repeating it. And he also listed the injured (aka Wells, Jesse Smith, Tarrant and Matty Campbell) who are all important players under 24.

The key question that I'd be asking re Richmond if I wanted to coach them would be Who are your leaders?

 

[Roos4eva]

The key question that I'd be asking re Richmond if I wanted to coach them would be Who are your leaders?

Ouch, that's too easy, EH.