Media alert

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
You are completely missing the point.

We are where we're at because we have recruited a whole cohort of players who just won't make the grade.

Anyone can go through the seniors line by line and come to this obvious conclusion.

This is the real story behind where we're at. Abysmal recruiting.

A comparison with Essendon is useful. Rightly hammered by the AFL they have somehow fashioned a basically competitive side our of the ashes.

I expect rhey will beat us and then the excrement will hit the fan big time.
 
Tassie4ever said:
You are completely missing the point.

We are where we're at because we have recruited a whole cohort of players who just won't make the grade.

Anyone can go through the seniors line by line and come to this obvious conclusion.

This is the real story behind where we're at. Abysmal recruiting.

A comparison with Essendon is useful. Rightly hammered by the AFL they have somehow fashioned a basically competitive side our of the ashes.

I expect rhey will beat us and then the excrement will hit the fan big time.
Click to expand...
Agree with you on some of our recruiting misses but we can't blame the current Coaching crew or Administration for much of those. The real failures were under Vossy and the latter Lethal years. Add the impact of the GH5 which Leppa has had to deal with and we were at ground zero. I have been very happy with our recruiting over the last 3 years and am taking much enjoyment out of watching our future develop. You often make the point about Bewick and Lester getting a game as an indication of our lack of quality. I wholeheartedly agree. You then make the point of Essendon recruiting well. Yes they have for a one year "finger in the Dam" exercise but what they have done is recruit a lot of Bewicks and Lesters. Guys that will be mostly competitive but will never win you a flag. The recruit quality draftees and play the kids plan will get us a shot at finals within 3 years. To lose our nerve top up with Lesters and Bewicks will entrench mediocrity.
 
wantok said:
Agree with you on some of our recruiting misses but we can't blame the current Coaching crew or Administration for much of those. The real failures were under Vossy and the latter Lethal years. Add the impact of the GH5 which Leppa has had to deal with and we were at ground zero. I have been very happy with our recruiting over the last 3 years and am taking much enjoyment out of watching our future develop. You often make the point about Bewick and Lester getting a game as an indication of our lack of quality. I wholeheartedly agree. You then make the point of Essendon recruiting well. Yes they have for a one year "finger in the Dam" exercise but what they have done is recruit a lot of Bewicks and Lesters. Guys that will be mostly competitive but will never win you a flag. The recruit quality draftees and play the kids plan will get us a shot at finals within 3 years. To lose our nerve top up with Lesters and Bewicks will entrench mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Vossy asked for support from the board in regards to player retention on day 1. Voss wasn't a terrible coach, yes mistakes were made but we were starting to look very competitive the year he was axed. If Vossy was given the same support Leppa has now we would be streets ahead and actually be a half way competitive team. And playing the kids for three years won't get us to finals. Look at GWS they are only where they are at now yes because there kids have matured but also they have brought in mature experienced players to show these kids the way and to fly the flag. GWS has set the standard of how to rebuild or technically build a club. Smart recruiting of mature players along with an excellent coaching structure (both of which we are awful at). Yes we may have the kids but we don't have the coaching panel or the mature experience to show the way.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Leemas said:
Vossy asked for support from the board in regards to player retention on day 1. Voss wasn't a terrible coach, yes mistakes were made but we were starting to look very competitive the year he was axed. If Vossy was given the same support Leppa has now we would be streets ahead and actually be a half way competitive team. And playing the kids for three years won't get us to finals. Look at GWS they are only where they are at now yes because there kids have matured but also they have brought in mature experienced players to show these kids the way and to fly the flag. GWS has set the standard of how to rebuild or technically build a club. Smart recruiting of mature players along with an excellent coaching structure (both of which we are awful at). Yes we may have the kids but we don't have the coaching panel or the mature experience to show the way.
Click to expand...

We'd be without Rockliff and whoever else wasn't a fan I guess - not sure how that would affect things and how we'd recruited since then.
 
Leemas said:
Vossy asked for support from the board in regards to player retention on day 1. Voss wasn't a terrible coach, yes mistakes were made but we were starting to look very competitive the year he was axed. If Vossy was given the same support Leppa has now we would be streets ahead and actually be a half way competitive team. And playing the kids for three years won't get us to finals. Look at GWS they are only where they are at now yes because there kids have matured but also they have brought in mature experienced players to show these kids the way and to fly the flag. GWS has set the standard of how to rebuild or technically build a club. Smart recruiting of mature players along with an excellent coaching structure (both of which we are awful at). Yes we may have the kids but we don't have the coaching panel or the mature experience to show the way.
Click to expand...
Worth acknowledging/comparing how many first round draft selections GWS have had over the course of their 'building', or does this not suit your angle of argument?
 
Leemas said:
Vossy asked for support from the board in regards to player retention on day 1. Voss wasn't a terrible coach, yes mistakes were made but we were starting to look very competitive the year he was axed. If Vossy was given the same support Leppa has now we would be streets ahead and actually be a half way competitive team. And playing the kids for three years won't get us to finals. Look at GWS they are only where they are at now yes because there kids have matured but also they have brought in mature experienced players to show these kids the way and to fly the flag. GWS has set the standard of how to rebuild or technically build a club. Smart recruiting of mature players along with an excellent coaching structure (both of which we are awful at). Yes we may have the kids but we don't have the coaching panel or the mature experience to show the way.
Click to expand...
Yes Vossy had to deal with the worst Chairman and CEO the Club has ever had and he would probably still be with us if Johnson had not decided Roos was our man without talking to him. That's all history now. Can't argue that Vossy might have been a better Coach than Leppa but I do believe that our Drafting and Recruiting has been very good in the last three years and that we will be very competitive in 3 years time. Our age profile will be much better balanced. Our current kids will all be 3 years older and we will have a much more talented list if we stick to a policy of only drafting best available then Quality Academy selections and the odd mature top up to fill an obvious need. We will also have about 30% of our list as locals and that warms my heart.
 
Media related - Mick Malthouse (like him or not) was commenting on our plight on Friday Night on SEN. Couldn't see us being strongly competitive for ten years or more. We picked the worst time in modern history to be uncompetitive on field and not an "attractive" club (think training facilities etc) because the quality draft picks we could have got went to GWS and Gold Coast (so we went further down the chain in picks), and free agency meant that quality attractive teams potentially competing for a premiership could more easily top up with a quality FA who wanted to play in a likely successful team (so think Lake into Frawley at Hawthorn) whereas those that aren't competing for a premiership or weren't an "attractive" club were less likely to attract those FAs.
 
adey115 said:
Media related - Mick Malthouse (like him or not) was commenting on our plight on Friday Night on SEN. Couldn't see us being strongly competitive for ten years or more. We picked the worst time in modern history to be uncompetitive on field and not an "attractive" club (think training facilities etc) because the quality draft picks we could have got went to GWS and Gold Coast (so we went further down the chain in picks), and free agency meant that quality attractive teams potentially competing for a premiership could more easily top up with a quality FA who wanted to play in a likely successful team (so think Lake into Frawley at Hawthorn) whereas those that aren't competing for a premiership or weren't an "attractive" club were less likely to attract those FAs.
Click to expand...
Not sure about 10 years but what he said about worse time to be at the bottom is spot on.
 
adey115 said:
Media related - Mick Malthouse (like him or not) was commenting on our plight on Friday Night on SEN. Couldn't see us being strongly competitive for ten years or more. We picked the worst time in modern history to be uncompetitive on field and not an "attractive" club (think training facilities etc) because the quality draft picks we could have got went to GWS and Gold Coast (so we went further down the chain in picks), and free agency meant that quality attractive teams potentially competing for a premiership could more easily top up with a quality FA who wanted to play in a likely successful team (so think Lake into Frawley at Hawthorn) whereas those that aren't competing for a premiership or weren't an "attractive" club were less likely to attract those FAs.
Click to expand...

Hopefully the AFL listened in and hand over the Priority Pick we should be receiving.
 
Yeah the message I took from it, was what I've actually thought for a while. A highly inconvenient storm because:
* while we were at the bottom of the ladder, you'd expect you'd get the best of the low picks
* instead these were allocated to GC and into GWS
* and those we did take, a number of them were "go homers"
* while other lowly clubs were starting to improve facilities, we weren't able to
* an unattractive club, at the bottom of the ladder
* those at the top of the ladder used that ladder position, and the lure of better facilities and infrastructure, to lure in quality FA's who hadn't won a premiership and wanted to move for a chance at the ultimate success.

And here we are. Whether Mick's ten year estimation is correct or not, basically what the AFL needs to acknowledge is that it was difficult to get decent improvement as a team when the cream of the crop picks went to GC and GWS over a number of drafts, mixed in with having the worst facilities meaning we find it difficult to lure, keep and develop. Not saying none of it is our fault, but there were/are factors that have significantly added to it.
 
Add to that the fact that we are clearly the worst side in the competition but still may not get the number one pick.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yep we were the only club in the league to finish bottom 4 in both years that the draft concessions were put in place for the Suns and Giants meaning we missed out on access to the top end players. Definitely an inconvenient time to bottom out and has made an already difficult task of rebuilding in a frontier market even harder.
 
Last edited:
LongLion said:
Not sure about 10 years but what he said about worse time to be at the bottom is spot on.
Click to expand...
We've been down the bottom more or less for 10 years so far. Not out of the possibility that we are still down the bottom in 10 years especially if the AFL continue to neglect us. Word is we are close to financial support and a review into our operating systems both on and off field to determine the next move.
 
adey115 said:
Yeah the message I took from it, was what I've actually thought for a while. A highly inconvenient storm because:
* while we were at the bottom of the ladder, you'd expect you'd get the best of the low picks
* instead these were allocated to GC and into GWS
* and those we did take, a number of them were "go homers"
* while other lowly clubs were starting to improve facilities, we weren't able to
* an unattractive club, at the bottom of the ladder
* those at the top of the ladder used that ladder position, and the lure of better facilities and infrastructure, to lure in quality FA's who hadn't won a premiership and wanted to move for a chance at the ultimate success.

And here we are. Whether Mick's ten year estimation is correct or not, basically what the AFL needs to acknowledge is that it was difficult to get decent improvement as a team when the cream of the crop picks went to GC and GWS over a number of drafts, mixed in with having the worst facilities meaning we find it difficult to lure, keep and develop. Not saying none of it is our fault, but there were/are factors that have significantly added to it.
Click to expand...
And the Suns acknowledged that they raided us specifically. Bastards.
 
It's hard to take people seriously when they point to GWS as an example of how to build a list.
 
Fatcat08 said:
It's hard to take people seriously when they point to GWS as an example of how to build a list.
Click to expand...
I'd follow the Bulldogs model over the Giants. Only really suitable to follow the Giant's example if you're a new club coming into the comp with a tonne of draft picks.
 
Boom. Women of AFL say thanks to Eddie (I don't have sufficient privileges to post in the old Eddie thread hence posting here - know it is probably not the right place for it. But anyway...)
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/ho...d/news-story/972c813076d1ddb684822def4e24952d

Holden has changed its sponsorship agreement with Collingwood

CAR manufacturer Holden has altered the structure of its sponsorship agreement with Collingwood in the wake of Eddie McGuire’s “drowning” joke about AFL journalist Caroline Wilson.

AFL.com.au reported Holden announced on Monday more than half of its money would now be devoted to the Pies’ new women’s team, which will play in the inaugural AFL Women’s League starting in 2017.

Additionally, the Australian company wants its funds devoted to more community programs.

Holden’s managing director Mark Bernhard said the decision was made with the intent of sticking with Collingwood to “drive meaningful change”.

“The easy thing to do would be to walk away from Collingwood, the hard road is to stick together and work side-by-side to champion diversity and continue to drive meaningful change,” Bernhard said in a statement.

“That is what we have decided to do; we sponsor Collingwood, not an individual.

“Industries like automotive and sporting codes like the AFL are often viewed as ‘blokey’ and behind the times when it comes to social issues.

“We now have a chance to take a stronger leadership position. Large organisations such as Holden and Collingwood have an important role to play in reinforcing the values of diversity, equality and inclusion. We can be a stronger force working together.


“Myself, and the entire Holden team, remain firm in categorically rejecting the comments made by Mr McGuire.

“This was a difficult decision and I sought counsel from friends, family and colleagues. Ultimately, however, our partnership is with Collingwood and the club has a strong record of championing diversity and inclusion.

“We want to continue to work together because this partnership is about more than just footy.”

Holden last year re-signed a sponsorship deal with Collingwood reportedly worth $3 million per year until the end of 2018, but announced it would review its deal in the wake of the fallout from McGuire’s comments.
 
Gadzorks said:
Boom. Women of AFL say thanks to Eddie (I don't have sufficient privileges to post in the old Eddie thread hence posting here - know it is probably not the right place for it. But anyway...)
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/ho...d/news-story/972c813076d1ddb684822def4e24952d

Holden has changed its sponsorship agreement with Collingwood

CAR manufacturer Holden has altered the structure of its sponsorship agreement with Collingwood in the wake of Eddie McGuire’s “drowning” joke about AFL journalist Caroline Wilson.

AFL.com.au reported Holden announced on Monday more than half of its money would now be devoted to the Pies’ new women’s team, which will play in the inaugural AFL Women’s League starting in 2017.

Additionally, the Australian company wants its funds devoted to more community programs.

Holden’s managing director Mark Bernhard said the decision was made with the intent of sticking with Collingwood to “drive meaningful change”.

“The easy thing to do would be to walk away from Collingwood, the hard road is to stick together and work side-by-side to champion diversity and continue to drive meaningful change,” Bernhard said in a statement.

“That is what we have decided to do; we sponsor Collingwood, not an individual.

“Industries like automotive and sporting codes like the AFL are often viewed as ‘blokey’ and behind the times when it comes to social issues.

“We now have a chance to take a stronger leadership position. Large organisations such as Holden and Collingwood have an important role to play in reinforcing the values of diversity, equality and inclusion. We can be a stronger force working together.


“Myself, and the entire Holden team, remain firm in categorically rejecting the comments made by Mr McGuire.

“This was a difficult decision and I sought counsel from friends, family and colleagues. Ultimately, however, our partnership is with Collingwood and the club has a strong record of championing diversity and inclusion.

“We want to continue to work together because this partnership is about more than just footy.”

Holden last year re-signed a sponsorship deal with Collingwood reportedly worth $3 million per year until the end of 2018, but announced it would review its deal in the wake of the fallout from McGuire’s comments.
Click to expand...

Simply brilliant! Well done Holden.

Imagine being a fly on the wall the moment when Eddie was told of the funding restructuring....
 
Fatcat08 said:
It's hard to take people seriously when they point to GWS as an example of how to build a list.
Click to expand...

Why is that? When our Toby Green's, Patton's, Cameron's & Coniglio's are 23 in 4 years time, we'll be a contender for the top 4. It should be a mater of our senior players competing to still be around if we keep recruiting properly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Mr Ripper
Resource Vintage Brisbane Bears/Lions Multi-Media Mega-Thread
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
9K
BrainOfMorbius
B

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top