Hawthorn v Essendon 2007

[Hawkk]

if we had almost merged & were in the process of relocating interstate then perhaps Hawthorn may be our rival. But of course that is not the case so we rightly view a club like Hawthorn as just another competitor.

You clearly have no idea about the situation facing Victorian clubs - particularly based primarily at the MCG.

The big advantage the non Victorian clubs have over most Victorian clubs is their control over managing home grounds and membership prices. Put simply generally the SCG, AAMI, Subiaco and GABBA are much smaller then the MCG and Docklands allowing the tenants to take advantage of the supply and demand for reserve seating at the venues.

The chances of the Hawks, Tigers, Demons and probably Magpies ever regularly packing out the 100,000+ MCG is remote at best. Unlike the non Victorian clubs and Essendon these clubs won't sell more reserve seating memberships then ordinary memberships and can't bump up the pricings of these reserve seating packages basically because the supply and demand for seats doesn't allow them too.

To quote the president;

Thirdly we are going to be able to in real terms manage our own ground. We have control, at the MCG however well we play its going to be most unlikely that we will ever fill the ground, we’re not going to be able to sell reserved seats in great number we sell a number and we are trying to sell more. But we hope in Launceston that we are going to fill out that ground every time we play so we are going to have a hybrid situation, a Victorian club with a interstate emphasis giving us the opportunity to a large community who we hope to our endeavours not only on-field but how we work with the community will bring a lot of new members to us.

Put simply Hawthorn are more likely going to pack out a 25,000 seat stadium in Tasmania regularly then a 100,000+ coliseum at the MCG. The shortfall in reserve seating that exists currently can be made up and more by playing a small package of games at a much smaller stadium - basically its essential compete with West Coast etc. with an eye to the medium to long term future.

Hawthorn will most probably sign up 30-35,000 members next season - but will the 30,000 Hawk members produce the same amount of revenue that Essendon's 30,000 members (majority on expensive reserve seating packages) produce? Membership size is over rated, at the end of the day the most important figure for clubs is membership revenue…its okay having 40,000 members, but if every member contributes 100 dollars is that any better then 25,000 members contributing 200 dollars yearly?

Of course not, this is why clubs such as Essendon and St.Kilda can generate much more revenue from similar membership levels.

Why else do you think Essendon relocated 7 of its 11 home games from the MCG to the much smaller Docklands?

 

[Chewy]

Do you really want to go there? Lets compare crowd figures from 2006 and the gulf between Essendon and Hawthorn will embarrass you a little…

Bomber Average Crowds in 2006

37419 @DOME (home games only)
50911 @MCG (home games only)
42325 @ALL HOME GAMES
42714 @ALL AWAY GAMES
42520 @ALL GAMES

Hawk Average Crowds in 2006

17890 @AURORA (home games x 3)
12315 @CARRARA (home game)
35742 @DOME (home games only)
34071 @MCG (home games only)
27984 @ALL HOME GAMES
34845 @ALL AWAY GAMES
31415 @ALL GAMES

* Comparing Essendon and Hawthorn’s home attendances at the MCG in 2006, the Hawks had 16840 fewer people on average and this was Essendon’s worst season since 1933.

* We played all of our home games in Melbourne, the Hawks played 4 of their games interstate.

* Hawthorn’s lowest home game attendance at the MCG was a staggering 21989 against West Coast. Their lowest overall was 12315, a home game against Brisbane at Carrara.

* Essendon’s lowest home game attendance at the MCG was 33082 against the Saints (in the pouring rain). Our lowest overall attendance was 25465 against Sydney at the SCG.

* Hawthorn’s highest attendance figure for a home game was 43296. It’s highest away figure for the season was 54306 (both against Collingwood).

* Essendon highest home crowd was 62940 and highest overall 91234 (again, both against Collingwood).

So argue whatever the hell you want, better 80s, better youngsters, better colours , say you’ll win 7 of the next 5 premierships and Franklin will kick more goals by the end of his career than Lockett…anything you want. But don't be bragging about Hawthorn's membership or crowd figures.

I have some relevant numbers for you:

14 - losses in a row. (equal club record)
15 - games without a win. (club record)
3 - number of wins for the entire season. (equal to Carlton)
15 - finishing position on the ladder
27,857 - number of bandwagon Essendon tossers who dropped off in 2006
0 - number of flags since John Barnes became runner
1 - at least one more of year of pain and misery

 

[Longy413]

I have some relevant numbers for you:

14 - losses in a row. (equal club record)
15 - games without a win. (club record)
3 - number of wins for the entire season. (equal to Carlton)
15 - finishing position on the ladder
27,857 - number of bandwagon Essendon tossers who dropped off in 2006
0 - number of flags since John Barnes became runner
1 - at least one more of year of pain and misery

Poor, even by your standards...

 

[Fastback]

Tempo can be fast or slow, eg Ess play a fast tempo game style, Syd play a congested style, hence slow tempo.

Tempo football can be tactical or a game style.

 

[OB1]

You misunderstood.
I'm not talking about socio-economic factors or a persons education, I'm talking about morons who have never played the game, hardly watched a game, but call themselves 'Bomber supporters'.

Like who? As I tried to point out when it comes to clearly idiotic posters Hawthorn certainly seem to have the lions share.

 

[OB1]

Why else do you think Essendon relocated 7 of its 11 home games from the MCG to the much smaller Docklands?

Because its our home ground perhaps

 

[Jex]

Jason Johnson is not a game-breaker. He's a workhorse. Essendon didn't exactly show him much respect when negotiating his recent contract either. Wasn't he floated as a possible trade? Hardly a ringing endorsement for your number one midfielder.

And you were part of that negotiation process. You know how much JJ or his manager were asking for? You know where we were at with our salary cap?

Andrew Lovett? What's he done? His most effective work for Essendon has been shifting posters in the Bomber Gift Shop. Flash in the pan. Overrated.

He's quick, skillful and exciting. List the achievements of any of the players that have been on your senior list for only 2 years and then ask, what have they done? Lovett is already 24 and if he has a poor 2007, then you're flash in the pan statement might be true...right now, your opinion of him holds little worth.

...as Essendon fans keep telling us, Dustin Fletcher only plays at full back and isn't a CHB's arsehole.

Not all Bomber fans would share that opinion. Mal and Fletch won't have trouble co-existing as part of our back 6. Fletch as a rebounding backpocket sounds ok to me. We have more flexibilty now. 2 great fullbacks is a good problem to have. Good luck with Gilham, Thurgood and Jacobs...hope that works out for you. Jacobs is ok when he's sober.

 

[Longy413]

Tempo can be fast or slow, eg Ess play a fast tempo game style, Syd play a congested style, hence slow tempo.

Tempo football can be tactical or a game style.

In general terms yes, however controlling the tempo is done by slowing the game down, by maintaining possession. It isn't a two-way street.

Yes, tempo can be refered to as fast or slow. Yes, a team can play a different underlying tempo of football as their fundemental game plan, however it's rarely referred to in that manner. You rarely hear someone say the Bulldogs play fast tempo football, you do hear people say the Bulldogs play a fast brand of football or they move the ball quickly. When coaches talk about "tempo football," they are specifically speaking about controlling the tempo, it is a specific tactic employed to slow the game down.

 

[Longy413]

He's quick, skillful and exciting. List the achievements of any of the players that have been on your senior list for only 2 years and then ask, what have they done? Lovett is already 24 and if he has a poor 2007, then you're flash in the pan statement might be true...right now, your opinion of him holds little worth.

He also kicked 17 goals in 13 games and only inaccuracy (18 behinds) kept those figures from being more impressive. Anything above a goal a game isn't a bad return from a flash in the pan small forward.

 

[Fastback]

He's quick, skillful and exciting. List the achievements of any of the players that have been on your senior list for only 2 years and then ask, what have they done? Lovett is already 24 and if he has a poor 2007, then you're flash in the pan statement might be true...right now, your opinion of him holds little worth.

He's hot and cold, be honest. Not sure what his issues are but something wasn't right during the year - if he can get his head straight he'll be good for you.

Franklin, Lewis, Roughead (2 years) and Birchall (1 year) have been good for us. All are 19 btw.

 

[Longy413]

He's hot and cold, be honest. Not sure what his issues are but something wasn't right during the year - if he can get his head straight he'll be good for you.

He's a small forward, his job is to kick goals. He went goalless in just two games last season, one he played at half back all night and the other he was injured.

He had just two games were he had less than 12 possessions (one of those was the game he was injured). That's pretty damn consistent for a bloke who has played less than 40 games of AFL footy.

The man he grew up to know as his father died early in 2006, it effected him early in the season, he also had two injuries that kept him out for 6 and 4 weeks at a time. He played some good footy in between.

 

[Fastback]

In general terms yes, however controlling the tempo is done by slowing the game down, by maintaining possession. It isn't a two-way street.

Yes, tempo can be refered to as fast or slow. Yes, a team can play a different underlying tempo of football as their fundemental game plan, however it's rarely referred to in that manner. You rarely hear someone say the Bulldogs play fast tempo football, you do hear people say the Bulldogs play a fast brand of football or they move the ball quickly. When coaches talk about "tempo football," they are specifically speaking about controlling the tempo, it is a specific tactic employed to slow the game down.

If a tactic involves changing the gameplan, whether it be slow tempo, direct, bombing it long, playing wide etc etc - it's a new game plan or game style.

If a tactic involves 2 blokes playing on the opposition CHF then it's not a game style. It's a positional tactic.

The thing to remember is any tactic which changes the flow IS the game plan. You can't have game plan of fast tempo footy whilst flooding.
This is your two way street.

 

[Jex]

I have some relevant numbers for you:

14 - losses in a row. (equal club record)
15 - games without a win. (club record)
3 - number of wins for the entire season. (equal to Carlton)
15 - finishing position on the ladder
27,857 - number of bandwagon Essendon tossers who dropped off in 2006
0 - number of flags since John Barnes became runner
1 - at least one more of year of pain and misery

Stats are great…

* Hawthorn’s total of 9 wins in seasons 2004 and 2005 combined is worse than Essendon 2005-2006.

* Essendon’s record of 14 consecutive loses is thumped by Hawthorn’s 27 consecutive loses which spanned over 3 seasons 1927-1929.

* 0 flags in the last 15 years…that’s gotta sting.

* 8 flags less than Essendon

* 0 finals appeances under super-coach Clarkson...Schwaby’s looking good all of a sudden.

* Approx 3000 tears cried by Leigh Matthews after the 1985 GF

* 2 public make out sessions between Mark Williams and Sam Mitchell (don’t really want to know what happens in those chicken hawk change rooms).

 

[Hawkk]

Do you really want to go there? Lets compare crowd figures from 2006 and the gulf between Essendon and Hawthorn will embarrass you a little…

Indeed I do, if you want to compare attendances wouldn't it fitting to encounter for the 15 horrid years you Essendon fans keep banging on about.

In 1992 - coming off winning the premiership, Hawthorn attracted 35,438 across their 11 home games. Since 1992 attendances have grown 25% up until 2006, would it be to much to assume that given the same circumstances a Hawthorn premiership in 2006 would result in a 45,000 average across the 11 games?

Obviously as performance levels drop - it doesn't always take immediate effect, so to do the crowds and membership. Any right minded Richmond or Carlton supporter can testify to that.

Essendon have been in a fortunate position whereby they haven't really had a sustained down trough for the last 30 years - in a nutshall they are still probably the most successful modern Victorian based side. Therefore they are yet to experience the drop that befalls a struggling side. That's really what I was getting at.

Bomber Average Crowds in 2006

37419 @DOME (home games only)
50911 @MCG (home games only)
42325 @ALL HOME GAMES
42714 @ALL AWAY GAMES
42520 @ALL GAMES[/quote]

ANZAC day, Dreamtime and heavily built up games against Hawthorn and Carlton tend to inflate the numbers.

I'm not saying you don't deserve to play on ANZAC day or that Hawthorn does, but seriously if not for ANZAC day would this years Collingwood-Essendon game really attract 90,000+?

Comparing attendance figures is wonky and at the bottom of your heart you know it as well.

Hawk Average Crowds in 2006

17890 @AURORA (home games x 3)

Fremantle, Kangaroos, Richmond

All 3 games probably would have attracted at least another 10,000 had they been played at the MCG. I'm not complaining because we actively are willing to play there - we get strong support, money and we win. But using these games is like comparing crowds with Geelong - using Skilled Stadium attendances.

12315 @CARRARA (home game)

Ditto...

35742 @DOME (home games only)

Games against Collingwood and Geelong.

Ideally both would have been played at the MCG and attracted more people. The Collingwood return fixture attracted 55,000 despite being played on a cold, wet and dreary night.

Given that the innital fixture was played between 2 MCG co tenants at the very start of the season - with the jacket scuffle, and with both sides impressing in the first round of the season the game would have attracted more then 40,000 had it been played at the MCG.

34071 @MCG (home games only)

I must have used the Collingwood away game in there as well because that = 37,500.

As I said add in the Telstra Dome games - which rightfully should have been played at our home ground, and the figures aren't to far off the mark.

27984 @ALL HOME GAMES
34845 @ALL AWAY GAMES

This is significant.

Have a look at Essendon's home and away totals, both are pretty much the same. The away games give a pretty good indication what the home game quota should be, if not for the packaged games. This is why I find the attendance argument shoody.

If all of Hawthorn's 11 home games were played in Melbourne - like Essendon, we would probably average 35,000 across our 11 home games - which is more then respectable for a side that hasn't made the top 4 for about 15 years.

As it is we don't - we get good money not to, so our drawing power is understated.

31415 @ALL GAMES

We probably are understated some 3-4,000 thanks to the packaged games.

* Comparing Essendon and Hawthorn’s home attendances at the MCG in 2006, the Hawks had 16840 fewer people on average and this was Essendon’s worst season since 1933.

Like I said our figures are understated and Essendon's were perhaps over stated. Granted the Bombers do deserve a lot of credit for getting all these marquee games - you can only do that being successful on and off the field, but if you really think 17,000 more Essendon fans go to the average game of football you have rocks in your head.

I went to the Hawthorn-Bombers clash at the MCG early last season - for me it was memorable, for Bombers fans I'm sure they have all but forgotten, but there would have been a 2-1 Hawk ratio in the 40-45,000 people at the game. As I said some clubs just draw people.

* We played all of our home games in Melbourne, the Hawks played 4 of their games interstate.

Precisely. We get good money for it, we win, we get strong support and good TV coverage. What's the problem?

* Hawthorn’s lowest home game attendance at the MCG was a staggering 21989 against West Coast.

How exactly is that 'staggering'

For a side up until round 21 was in the bottom 4, getting 22,000 faithful to a cold and wet afternoon with stuff all build up isn't entirely bad.

Essendon had one or 2 20,000 crowds as well last season.

Their lowest overall was 12315, a home game against Brisbane at Carrara.

The same fixture draw 28,000+ the previous year at the MCG. Once again it proves my point.

Did we want to play there? The answer is no.

* Essendon’s lowest home game attendance at the MCG was 33082 against the Saints (in the pouring rain). Our lowest overall attendance was 25465 against Sydney at the SCG.

And whats the SCG or the MCG - which isn't your home ground BTW, got to do with anything?

Essendon drew 27,000 to a Saturday Night fixture vs. Port Adelaide.

* Hawthorn’s highest attendance figure for a home game was 43296. It’s highest away figure for the season was 54306 (both against Collingwood).

The first game was the battle of the jackets at the Telstra Dome. Going on precedence - the Kangaroos even drew 50,000+ at the MCG vs. Collingwood, the 43,296 game could easily have been significantly higher if played at the MCG - even the club recognize this.

The MCC budgetted for 50,000+ vs. Essendon but the day was ruined by the rain - we were unfortunate in that the majority of our MCG home games were played towards the middle and end of the home and away season - when we were mostly losing.

* Essendon highest home crowd was 62940 and highest overall 91234 (again, both against Collingwood).

Again it helps to play games on ANZAC Day, QB, Dreamtime etc.

But don't be bragging about Hawthorn's membership or crowd figures.

There aren't to many clubs that would attract 30,000 members coming off 4 bottom 4 finishes in 10 seasons mate.

Lets see where Essendon would be if they had 5 years of bottom 4 finishes. That'll really test out the Vodaphone era.

 

[Fastback]

Stats are great…


* 8 flags less than Essendon

.

where did you steal the other one from?

 

[Jex]

Franklin, Lewis, Roughead (2 years) and Birchall (1 year) have been good for us. All are 19 btw.

Yep, all exciting young talents. I won't tell Hawk fans not to enjoy watching them become great players. I also won't be told by any Hawk fans that I shouldn't enjoy watching Lovett or any other Bomber play.

 

[Chewy]

Should I mention the name Goldspink?

Not unless you want this thread to run to 40 pages.

Abuse of the umpire was warranted that day - that prick gave you 5 soft frees within 30m of goal, in the first quarter.
Had that happened to you guys, he probably wouldn't be alive.

I was referring to propensity for Bomber fans to abuse the umpire even when they had their one eye closed and didn't see the play.

JJ... Game-breaker, he's tagged every week, he breaks from stoppages, he kicks goals. He's a bloody good footballer.

I reckon you might be living in the past a bit, Longy. He was a good footballer, but he's getting on a bit now. I'm betting he'll struggle to recapture the same form from a few years back. I wouldn't be relying on a guy like him to lift my team up the ladder.

I don't think you understand what is meant when "tempo football" is talked about in the modern game. The Kennedy comparison is a long way off the mark.

I know exactly what is meant by "tempo football". You're not the only one who watches the football, Longy. I just reckon it's a trendy term for something that teams have been doing for a long time. Admittedly there is far more method and science applied to it these days, but it is not a revolutionary tactic.

The Kennedy comparison is not off the mark, just because it is not identical to the current methods. I was simply pointing out that coaches have had a notion of "tempo" and attempting to control the game's flow as far back as 1960.

Some people or coaches talk about "tempo" as if it's all about slowing the game down through possession footy. This is your definition.

Other people and coaches talk about "tempo" in the sense of slowing down, or speeding up depending on the state of play. Move the ball on quickly to maximise momentum, or keep possession to halt a side's momentum.

In the current game, you control the tempo by controlling possession. Yes, teams have been slowing the game down for decades, but not with sideways and backwards ball movement, by using the loose man behind the ball. Sheedy did this in the early 90's against Carlton and was very heavily critisised at the time.

I remember watching Robert Walls' Royboys frustrate the hell out of Hawthorn in a game in the mid 80's by chipping the ball around sidewayd and backwards to each other.

Sheedy has been an innovative coach, but he didn't invent football. Nor did he invent the loose man in defence. He was one of a group of coaches to embrace possession footy (a progression, not a radical tactic) but as far I can remember, Essendon were criticised for not controlling the tempo enough. As they fluffed around with their short passes across half forward, they inevitably panicked, chose the wrong option and coughed up possession. That was what got the critics on his back.

Tempo football is very much a tactic, it's not something you do all game, it's something you do at different stages of a game. Playing a loose man behind the ball to lessen the damage is a tactic, playing tempo football (read controlling the tempo) is a tactic in the very same vain. It's done to halt momentum of the opposition, to protect a lead, or a lot of the times in Essendon's case it's done at the end of quarters to stop that momentum beginning and to preserve the current situation of a match. Controlling the tempo (or controlling possession) is very much a defensive tactic.

2 things.

Firstly, we have different definitions of "controlling the tempo". You think it's a negative tactic. I think it can also be a positive tactic. eg Essendon preserve their 4 goal lead against Richmond in time-on of the 3rd quarter by slowing the game down, getting numbers back, chipping the ball around. Meanwhile Terry Wallace hits the phone, beseeches his players to seize the game and control the tempo themselves by speeding the game up - avoiding stop plays, keeping the ball moving, manning up the loose Bombers when possession is lost, encouraging play-on by not standing the mark...

Secondly, teams have "controlled the tempo" by slowing the game down for a long time. Whether this was to preserve a lead, minimise damage when kicking against a strong breeze, or simply because they were tired and their opponents were fitter and fresher. It's nothing new. It's just become trendy in the lexicon of Australian football as coaches seek to emulate coaching methods from other territorial ball sports.

 

[Hawkk]

Would this be the over 40k average for HOME games at the Dome that year which included interstate opponents such as Adelaide, West Coast, Port Adelaide, Sydney and Fremantle?

And all this at a time when alot of people were avoiding "Colonial" because of the farce ticketing situation they had going on.

Funny how the Essendon crowds haven't increased rapidly since the mass exoduse then does it sport?

Which year was that Tassie?

Typical North-Western mentality, I guess in your world where the ugg boot is supreme that's quite a witty comeback.

2001: 36,227 members

Like I said thoughs numbers are quite suspect. So only 3,000 opposition fans turned up to your 7 home games then?

People have citised our crowd size vs membership size in the past, but you'd be hard pressed to find that small a descrepency.

2002: 35,219

That's the year you found 2-3,000 'fans' in the last 30 minutes right?

Werent you the same side that drew 11k against Port Adelaide on a sunny Sunday arvo at the MCG 3 years ago?

We drew about 30,000 to the same game only 3 years previous to that. I've never said Hawk fans weren't fickle.

No wonder you flog games against low drawing opposition sides to Tassie.

Like games against Richmond, Kangaroos and Geelong dingbat?

Generally your home and away crowd totals add up - we lose a few thousand off the crowd totals every year playing games in Tasmania.

It says Hawthorn who have had supposedly over 30k of members over the last decade cant even hit the 30k mark for HOME games against interstate sides from WA and SA at the MCG or Dome, infact you rarely hit 25k and sometimes cant even manage 20k.

The last time we hit 30,000 was in 2004.

We've draw 30,000+ to games vs Brisbane (35k), Fremantle (40k), Sydney (70k) and fallen just short against Adelaide (29k), West Coast (29k) Port Adelaide (29k) in the past. Not bad for a side that hasn't made the top 4 in that time and has missed the boat in many of these clashes by playing them at sub 20,000 seat venues.

 

[Hawkk]

Because its our home ground perhaps

By god he is getting stupider by the minute!

 

[Hawkk]

* 8 flags less than Essendon

Typical Essendon.

Can't ever seem to get the numbers right

 

[Jex]

where did you steal the other one from?

I made that one up...how many have you guys won? Thought is was 8...maybe's it's 9. You're still 7 behind.

 

[Longy413]

The thing to remember is any tactic which changes the flow IS the game plan. You can't have game plan of fast tempo footy whilst flooding.

A game plan is something you enter the game with and tactics form part of that game plan.

Controlling the tempo is ad hoc, it's a tactic that you implement throughout the course of the game.

You have an underlying game plan, for Essendon, in basic form it is to move the ball quickly and kick it long and direct. Within that there are different tactics that can be implemented based on the situation of the game. This can be positional but it can also be implementing a tactic to alter momentum.

You can have a game plan of fast and direct football, and then stop that and control the tempo for a period of time before going back to your predetermined game style.

Anything you do within a game to alter the course of the match is a tactic. Some of those are predetermined before the match, some of those are ad-hoc.

No-one "controls the tempo" throughout a complete match, with the exception of the Richmond/Adelaide match last year. It is a tactic that coaches employ to change the flow and momentum of a game. It's something Sheedy has done a number of times and most weeks. It means we temporarily change our game style, before going back to it.

If a team decides to push their ruckman behind the ball to reduce the game, that's a tactic.

If a team decides to control possession, play keepings off, avoid kicking to a contested situation for a period of time in order to reduce the bleeding, AKA controlling the tempo, it's a tactic.

 

[Hawkk]

Yep, all exciting young talents. I won't tell Hawk fans not to enjoy watching them become great players. I also won't be told by any Hawk fans that I shouldn't enjoy watching Lovett or any other Bomber play.

I definately enjoyed watching Angus test out the bannana last year

 

[Chewy]

Lovett is already 24 and if he has a poor 2007, then you're flash in the pan statement might be true...right now, your opinion of him holds little worth.

The game is littered with guys who burst on the scene, not as teenagers, but as 21/22 year olds, played a couple of good games, then died in the arse. Lovett has a few tricks, but he's hardly shown the sort of consistency that would warrant the billing he's received so far from Dons' fans. There's been plenty of flashy, skillful types who have haven't amounted to much. Remember Cupido? I only bring this up because you mention Lovett as if it's a given he'll be improved this year and help you guys rise up the ladder. I wouldn't be so confident. I'd be happy to be proved wrong as he's a good player to watch when in full flight.

Fletch as a rebounding backpocket sounds ok to me.

Fletch has been your rebounding back pocket for the past 2-3 years, at least when the big boys line-up at full forward.
Sheedy knows what happens when he plays him against the behemoths.

Jacobs is ok when he's sober.

Jacobs is ok when his hamstring doesn't rip off the bone.
He was a having a great year until that happened.

I hope he comes back okay.

 

[brad]

I definately enjoyed watching Angus test out the bannana last year

It was all in the PLAN it was all in Plan Mr Hawkk.

Unless you're team won the flag last year you did no better than us. I mean that's why we're in this aren't we?

Wait till we see what takes place in 2007. It's a new year now!