Writing Hawthorn off for any medium-long term scale is very foolish.
Not really.
We were pretty shit for nearly a decade recently and then after 1991, despite making finals a few times, we were pretty average for 15 years.
What was foolish was misjudging Hawthorn's list recently.
People still think we have an average list despite it being one of the youngest.
Hawthorn's defence has always been elite, just that we sucked in the midfield for quite a while. People got sucked into thinking that All Australian awards are sent from God on rock tablets. Didn't rate defenders like Sicily and Hardwick correctly, and so on.
SYL said that our midfield had improved immensely after Mitchell took over. He got rid O'Meara and Mitchell, pushed Nash and Day info midfield and we drafted Newcombe. The clearance stats proved this but SYL got smacked for saying as much, and opposition supporters saying how can Hawks have a top midfield if their second last on the ladder?
I further added that Hawthorn had the worst forward line in the comp and that's why the reason our midfield would struggle (despite winning midfield battles) we lacked connection in the forward line.
In one season we added, Watson, Ginnivan, Chol, Gunston, Dear and kept Breust. We saw more improvement from MacDonald. Everyone thought Dogs had the best forward line in the comp, can you safely say that after last week?
I don't know if Hawthorn have the best forward line in the comp but they arguably the best small forward line in the comp. In one season we fixed our biggest weakness and made it a strength.
The fact that Hawthorn a bottom 4 team and went from 0-5 and made top 6 is surprising, as it's never been done before 150 years. The fact we have improved and looked like a contender at some point in time, just means you didn't understand simple concepts like age profile, talent acquisition and coaching.