Coach Men's Senior Coach: Brad Scott - Playing the kids!

[BrunoV]

We are on expectation.

2024
Pre season every expert (plus most supporters incl. me) had Essendon finishing in the 7-12 range*.
That’s where we will finish.

2023
Most said we were 4-6th last.
We overachieved..

It’s like some Shakespearean tragedy on steroids that has us overachieving early in the season then dropping back to expectation (or better in 2023).

Ignore Kingie, ignore Cornes, ignore Trevor from the mailroom. Yes it sucks. Yes late season capitulation needs to be addressed.

But some pre-season perspective is a valuable thing.








*Tried to find a bunch of pre season predictions but only came up with
Fox Footy 8-12
SEN Josh Jenkins 10

References -

Wide-open finals race explained — including some shocks: Every AFL club’s ladder range for 2024

Wide-open finals race explained — including some shocks: Every AFL club’s ladder range for 2024

www.foxsports.com.au

Josh Jenkins’ extended 2024 ladder prediction - 12 to 7

The former forward has given an extensive ladder prediction for the 2024 AFL season!

www.sen.com.au

This is not about results and ladder position. That is a distraction. There are too many variables which are not directly within any side's control for the analysis to start with ladder position, at least in the context of a side that is in the 9 to 12 win no mans land in any given year.

Whether we are on track or not starts with the style of football which is being played. On this question, what has anyone seen in the last 2 seasons that causes them to think that we are a more substantial side by the end of July 2024 than what we were by the end of July 2021? The list should be much more advanced now. Brad's had them for 2 seasons. We're actually now into our fourth season of a rebuild. Caldwell, Perkins, Jones, Cox, Martin, Redman, Durham, Langford is just the start of the list of players who are or should be much more advanced. We haven't lost anyone meaningful due to age. Merrett is playing like a man possessed. Parish is an All Australian!

Some will say that the problem is the list and the players. If the list is the problem and Brad Scott or anyone else in a position of power thinks that is the case, why have we handed out so many long term deals in the last 12 months? Why have we re-signed 3 underwhelming first round picks in the last 6 weeks? Where is the scope to drive change among the uncontracted listed of players?

Look at the current contracts status thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-status-afl-aflw-updated-in-op.1177710/

Does this read like a footy department that is concerned about its list? I couldn't help but tune in to Robbo last night (for what felt like the first time this year). He was talking about players playing for their careers. Who exactly was he referring to, the VFL players who weren't on that field against St Kilda? Are we going to end the careers of players with 12 to 24 months left on contracts, are we? How can Guelfi be playing for his career? Why would he be playing at all if his career was in doubt? Wouldn't we have replaced him with someone who has the capacity to be a functional small forward? Why are we already committed to a player like Jye Menzie for another season? We are locked into this course for another 12 to 24 months. This is how the every day operation makes it impossible for the culture to change.

What we are seeing, and what has been evident from very early on, is that Brad Scott almost certainly got the job because it was apparent to the decision makers that he had no real intention of challenging the status quo. Professional standards is bullshit as is challenging the players. That's what everyone else does and what everyone else tries to do with Essendon (it's actually much less than what Rutten was trying to do - his problem is that no one listened to him). That is not a challenge to the status quo. In any event, I thought that all worked anyway because players went to Arizona and he had that first year to look at the list and was then really big and bad at the end of 2023?

When you go back and listen to everything Scott has said his appeal to club was very likely that he wasn't going to challenge what had been done by Essendon previously. This is what Essendon is most scared of and which it will not allow. He didn't think any actual change or confrontation with what Essendon had produced was required. He would challenge Worsfold and Rutten and make them look stupid for not being able to have Essendon realise its potential. And here we are...

 

[maskmcgee]

Just heard some moron call up SEN and demand he be sacked because he was drinking water instead of talking on the phone when the cameras cut to him, and called for Hird to replace him.

 

[Foxx]

Brad Scott hasn't evolved from his days at North.
The game has changed and he hasn't changed with it.

It's now an outside running game. And he's playing an inside setup/gameplan.

 

[faible]

I agree he shouldn’t be a forwards coach, I’m pretty sure I mentioned this a few years ago that we brought in a good midfield coach and yet we didn’t give him that portfolio. At the same time he is the forwards coach, and come on good coaches can coach all lines of footy. Our forward line structure and flow is the worst in the league by a mile, he should be moved on from the role. I doubt they then turn around and give him the midfield job.

I believe at EFC we prefer versatility over using people or players in their best positions.

 

[jannissary]

I believe at EFC we prefer versatility over using people or players in their best positions.

we're great at it!

 

[Bunk Moreland]

This is not about results and ladder position. That is a distraction. There are too many variables which are not directly within any side's control for the analysis to start with ladder position, at least in the context of a side that is in the 9 to 12 win no mans land in any given year.

Whether we are on track or not starts with the style of football which is being played. On this question, what has anyone seen in the last 2 seasons that causes them to think that we are a more substantial side by the end of July 2024 than what we were by the end of July 2021? The list should be much more advanced now. Brad's had them for 2 seasons. We're actually now into our fourth season of a rebuild. Caldwell, Perkins, Jones, Cox, Martin, Redman, Durham, Langford is just the start of the list of players who are or should be much more advanced. We haven't lost anyone meaningful due to age. Merrett is playing like a man possessed. Parish is an All Australian!

Some will say that the problem is the list and the players. If the list is the problem and Brad Scott or anyone else in a position of power thinks that is the case, why have we handed out so many long term deals in the last 12 months? Why have we re-signed 3 underwhelming first round picks in the last 6 weeks? Where is the scope to drive change among the uncontracted listed of players?

Look at the current contracts status thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-status-afl-aflw-updated-in-op.1177710/

Does this read like a footy department that is concerned about its list? I couldn't help but tune in to Robbo last night (for what felt like the first time this year). He was talking about players playing for their careers. Who exactly was he referring to, the VFL players who weren't on that field against St Kilda? Are we going to end the careers of players with 12 to 24 months left on contracts, are we? How can Guelfi be playing for his career? Why would he be playing at all if his career was in doubt? Wouldn't we have replaced him with someone who has the capacity to be a functional small forward? Why are we already committed to a player like Jye Menzie for another season? We are locked into this course for another 12 to 24 months. This is how the every day operation makes it impossible for the culture to change.

What we are seeing, and what has been evident from very early on, is that Brad Scott almost certainly got the job because it was apparent to the decision makers that he had no real intention of challenging the status quo. Professional standards is bullshit as is challenging the players. That's what everyone else does and what everyone else tries to do with Essendon (it's actually much less than what Rutten was trying to do - his problem is that no one listened to him). That is not a challenge to the status quo. In any event, I thought that all worked anyway because players went to Arizona and he had that first year to look at the list and was then really big and bad at the end of 2023?

When you go back and listen to everything Scott say his appeal to club was very likely that he wasn't going to challenge what had been done by Essendon previously. This is what Essendon is most scared of and which it will not allow. He didn't think any actual change or confrontation with what Essendon had produced was required. He would challenge Worsfold and Rutten and make them look stupid for not being able to have Essendon realise its potential. And here we are...

Perhaps Kelly is playing for his career. That’s about all you can think of. Hind maybe? Your point stands.

Shiel should be out the door and probably is.

Stringer should be up for trade as he might actually net something, like a second rounder maybe.

Heppell is gone, though that’s no surprise.

 

[BrunoV]

Perhaps Kelly is playing for his career. That’s about all you can think of. Hind maybe? Your point stands.

Shiel should be out the door and probably is.

Stringer should be up for trade as he might actually net something, like a second rounder maybe.

Heppell is gone, though that’s no surprise.

If the club is serious Stringer will be de listed. That'd be a signal consistent with a challenge to the status quo. He should not be allowed to play for Essendon. Making his departure conditional on the value of a pick suggests he would otherwise stay. His management should already be looking for other clubs. There should be no way to bluff our way to a second round pick. The industry should know he is gone.

It's not personal. He's a horrible balance player who weaknesses outweigh the positives and have for his career with us other than the second half of 2021.

 

[Rick Ross]

If the club is serious Stringer will be de listed. That'd be a signal consistent with a challenge to the status quo. He should not be allowed to play for Essendon. Making his departure conditional on the value of a pick suggests he would otherwise stay. His management should already be looking for other clubs. There should be no way to bluff our way to a second round pick. The industry should know he is gone.

It's not personal. He's a horrible balance player who weaknesses outweigh the positives and have for his career with us other than the second half of 2021.

I love watching Stringer play. I go to the football to watch him play. Gets exciting when he’s near the ball. Also shown he can be a top liner.

But … agree, he should go for team balance.

The wrong side of 30 to carry any further / be part of a genuine premiership push.

 

[BuffDog]

A coaching trio of Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

49

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

, Hardwick and Longmire wouldn't be able to win a final with this group. Our problems are much deeper than the senior coach.

I have no issue with BS and believe he is on the right path to lifting standards and changing our culture.

I would be looking closely at our assistant coaches though. Are Tapping, Jacobs, Stants and Giansiracusa the best men available to support Brad and his vision?

 

[Old Campaigner]

This is not about results and ladder position. That is a distraction. There are too many variables which are not directly within any side's control for the analysis to start with ladder position, at least in the context of a side that is in the 9 to 12 win no mans land in any given year.

Whether we are on track or not starts with the style of football which is being played. On this question, what has anyone seen in the last 2 seasons that causes them to think that we are a more substantial side by the end of July 2024 than what we were by the end of July 2021? The list should be much more advanced now. Brad's had them for 2 seasons. We're actually now into our fourth season of a rebuild. Caldwell, Perkins, Jones, Cox, Martin, Redman, Durham, Langford is just the start of the list of players who are or should be much more advanced. We haven't lost anyone meaningful due to age. Merrett is playing like a man possessed. Parish is an All Australian!

Some will say that the problem is the list and the players. If the list is the problem and Brad Scott or anyone else in a position of power thinks that is the case, why have we handed out so many long term deals in the last 12 months? Why have we re-signed 3 underwhelming first round picks in the last 6 weeks? Where is the scope to drive change among the uncontracted listed of players?

Look at the current contracts status thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-status-afl-aflw-updated-in-op.1177710/

Does this read like a footy department that is concerned about its list? I couldn't help but tune in to Robbo last night (for what felt like the first time this year). He was talking about players playing for their careers. Who exactly was he referring to, the VFL players who weren't on that field against St Kilda? Are we going to end the careers of players with 12 to 24 months left on contracts, are we? How can Guelfi be playing for his career? Why would he be playing at all if his career was in doubt? Wouldn't we have replaced him with someone who has the capacity to be a functional small forward? Why are we already committed to a player like Jye Menzie for another season? We are locked into this course for another 12 to 24 months. This is how the every day operation makes it impossible for the culture to change.

What we are seeing, and what has been evident from very early on, is that Brad Scott almost certainly got the job because it was apparent to the decision makers that he had no real intention of challenging the status quo. Professional standards is bullshit as is challenging the players. That's what everyone else does and what everyone else tries to do with Essendon (it's actually much less than what Rutten was trying to do - his problem is that no one listened to him). That is not a challenge to the status quo. In any event, I thought that all worked anyway because players went to Arizona and he had that first year to look at the list and was then really big and bad at the end of 2023?

When you go back and listen to everything Scott say his appeal to club was very likely that he wasn't going to challenge what had been done by Essendon previously. This is what Essendon is most scared of and which it will not allow. He didn't think any actual change or confrontation with what Essendon had produced was required. He would challenge Worsfold and Rutten and make them look stupid for not being able to have Essendon realise its potential. And here we are...

Just on the list, you can’t cut too deep in a given year simply because you end up getting the replacements from the arse end of the draft and they’ll likely be delisted in a couple of years.

The criticism i’d level is that a few guys got contracts where maybe we’d be better off trading to get some more draft picks, but realistically who have we got who might net us a useful pick?

 

[Agronomus]

Apologies for the intrusion, but I don't like your odds. He came to North and immediately tried dismantling the idea of the Shinboner Spirit (the idea behind his decision had some merit, but there were other ways to go about it) and by half way through his tenure we had players in the leadership group justifying losses by saying winning wasn't everything. Seemingly the biggest cultural aspect he sought to create, was ensuring players were set up for life after football, whether that be by getting their degrees or investing in real estate. As much reason as I might have to troll you guys, I'm not lying on this.

Yeah, he could get the team up frequently enough to take scalps from top 4 teams or to come out firing after a particularly bad loss, but he never once managed to create a culture of consistent work ethic throughout a season, and a big aspect of that is something we are seeing now: his selection policies. On that note, whatever you do, don't let him get full control of list management. Cam Joyce was some no-named opposition scout or something, that eventually found himself as our list manager and number one Brad Brownnoser. Brad then managed to get that hack promoted to GM of football, his own boss, in their final three years at the club! That era was when we recruited mature hacks and did everything to try to hold onto making it into the 8, until his plan of topping up and never making top 4 failed, and he pitched a full blow rebuild to the board!

All good mate. I'm sure his norf contacts will help us get Sheezel

 

[Vindicater]

If the club is serious Stringer will be de listed. That'd be a signal consistent with a challenge to the status quo. He should not be allowed to play for Essendon. Making his departure conditional on the value of a pick suggests he would otherwise stay. His management should already be looking for other clubs. There should be no way to bluff our way to a second round pick. The industry should know he is gone.

It's not personal. He's a horrible balance player who weaknesses outweigh the positives and have for his career with us other than the second half of 2021.

I reckon Stringer could be moved for a third at best. Melbourne have two and he would look okay there where his weaknesses would be covered.

 

[BrunoV]

I reckon Stringer could be moved for a third at best. Melbourne have two and he would look okay there where his weaknesses would be covered.

Yep. Was thinking Melbourne as I typed my post.

He thrives in the sort of chaos that passes for Melbourne's forward structure. As much as I want to see the back of him as an Essendon player there is no denying his capacity to win a couple of finals for a side like Melbourne.

 

[Agronomus]

The four most important people we move on are dodo, Stringer, sheil & heppell. We must unburden what once has been

 

[P Money]

Knights/Hird/Bomber/Hird/Worsfold/Rutten/Scott
It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach

I think what we really need is a new coach

 

[yodellinhank]

Knights/Hird/Bomber/Hird/Worsfold/Rutten/Scott
It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach/It was the coach

I think what we really need is a new coach

It's a weird fixation people have on it not being the coach. History shows most coaches are failures. Even the best. You don't just stick with a coach when it isn't working and suddenly it will start working because you stuck with them. Most of them are no good.

 

[cAsEy_18]

The thing that seems unanimously understood is that our players are mentally fragile/weak. Whether they give up, whether they can't be resilient, whether they are simply not smart enough to know where to run on the field, and how that changes when momentum changes in the game - it is seemingly fairly accepted that there is an overall mental issue with our playing group.

What that means from here, I'm not sure. But points to consider given we know this.

1) Very hard to blame the coach in this situation. Coaches can have their own issues as to why they will not succeed in addition to this, but there is only so much you can do with a mentally weak group.

2) How do we get to this point? Easy to point the finger at Dodoro, and it's probably valid. But it does mean that we have likely overlooked a key factor in our drafting capacity for a long time - you look at skills, you look at potential, you look at attitude, you look at a lot of things when considering a draft prospect. How much weight do we put on mental resilience? I'm gonna put a small fortune on not a lot - and if we do, then it's not nearly enough.

3) (And the worst part) - it's no quick fix. It's very very difficult to change a player's mental psyche. Heck, not even a player, any person. Whether you are passionate, or laissez-faire, or determined, or any other personality type. We all have them. And they are much harder to change than changing football position on the field.

If we make up some abstract number and say that 70% of our players are fairly weak-minded (Could be less, could be more, who knows). You're looking at a years and years process to clear that off your list. You can't simply dump all the mentally weak-minded players in a season or 2, if they make up such a high percentage of the list. Brad Scott, Ben Rutten

Ben Rutten

Age

42

Ht

190cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.4

3star

K

6.3

2star

HB

7.0

4star

M

5.3

5star

T

1.3

3star

No current season stats available

D

10.6

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

4.4

4star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.0

3star

, James Hird, John Worsfold, the name doesn't matter. You can't do much, and achieve much, with a group of people in a weakened mental state, in any field - particularly one as cut-throat and highly pressurized as AFL football.

I have a level of confidence that the club has finally realised this - you hear of certain interviews with players, little snippets (I'm thinking of Langford, and in my head I reckon I've heard Stringer as well) say about the amount of work the club and the players have put into mental coaching this year - how do you relax, how do you tune out in your off-time, how do you make sure you re-focus, etc..

I have two worries:

1) Is that we have only just now realised this. It explains why we are so far behind the 8-ball.

2) Is what the impact of another few weeks like the one we just had could do to the group. There has clearly been a lot of positive energy garnered this year, positive mindset, regardless of what we actually achieve, that the 'feeling of the group' is different. If we have another 4 weeks like we're all predicting... does our mentally weak group go back to square 1? That's the fear.

 

[div12ressie]

If this was Brad Scott's first coaching gig it would be excused, but history is literally repeating itself from what happened during his time at North. What makes everyone here think this time it's going to be different?

 

[P Money]

It's a weird fixation people have on it not being the coach. History shows most coaches are failures. Even the best. You don't just stick with a coach when it isn't working and suddenly it will start working because you stuck with them. Most of them are no good.

Leaving aside the fact that two of those ("no good") coaches are premiership coaches, it's a weird fixation people have on it being the coach. A 20 year pattern of mediocrity that has survived 7 coaching changes and the solution is 'our coach sucks let's try someone else'

 

[Bjchan13]

Because Martin is in his position, Redman needs to get the license back.

Martin could be the best wingman in the competition, a goal kicking wingman. He could make up for our McCluggage/McGrath blunder.

I am fully convinced that Duurma and Martin could be the best wingman duo in the competition

This is exactly why Redman has had such an average season. Martin has gone back to play a nick daicos role but his disposal and decision making has dropped away almost to the point he is a liability back there. Add in that McGrath thinks he's a playmaker and is allowed by our coach to attempt to be one. You then have Redman wasting away as the third option of the 3, when he is actually the best at it. Just bizarre management of players by the coach

 

[BrunoV]

Leaving aside the fact that two of those ("no good") coaches are premiership coaches, it's a weird fixation people have on it being the coach. A 20 year pattern of mediocrity that has survived 7 coaching changes and the solution is 'our coach sucks let's try someone else'

There are a number of things happening at the same time, all of which are true but are not necessarily relevant.

Our cultural change hasn't even started to happen because Brad Scott chose not to do anything real for 2 seasons.

He has made the same mistake everyone else has made. Rather than building a style of football from the footings up, he has built on the foundation with footings floating in highly reactive clay. He's now telling players who he left to be weak front running squibs that they can no longer be weak front running squibs. The players didn't listen to Worsfold, when he tried that, and didn't listen to Truck either. What makes anyone think they will listen to Scott?

Just because we have had too many coaches over a period of time does not mean we should just stick with the last guy appointed. We should stick with the last guy appointed because of what he has achieved. This is the question I would like someone to answer, how has Essendon positively evolved from the side that played finals in 2021? How are we more sustainable? Why are we going to be better than the teams we are already fighting for a place in the bottom of the 8?

What reason should we stick with Scott that is based on the things he has achieved (as opposed to historical factors that are of no relevance to his coaching tenure)?

If I was in control at Adelaide I would stick with Nicks, for example. All indications are that he has the players committed to a cause based on hard-nosed mostly 2-way footy. The problem at Adelaide is that the list stinks and has left him with very few weapons he can use in this period. Maybe if I followed Adelaide week to week I would have a different view.

Contrary to this view that premiership sides such as Geelong under Bomber and Richmond under Hardwick emerge out of the blue, they are actually the end results of positive trends that occur almost immediately and which are linear. They are linear to the point and there is then a bad year which causes the collective consciousness to forget that Bomber won 2 or 3 finals, and qualified a side 4th, in the years prior to 2006 and that Richmond won 15 games a season in the 3 years prior to 2016. Yes, it took these guys 7 years to win a premiership but it didn't taken them more than a few years to produce quality team consistent enough to win a lot of football matches and finals.

 

[faible]

Fun fact: You can paste posts into ChatGPT to summarise them.

 

[Rick Ross]

If this was Brad Scott's first coaching gig it would be excused, but history is literally repeating itself from what happened during his time at North. What makes everyone here think this time it's going to be different?

div12ressie - What might your thoughts be on getting a Hird back to coach?

 

[div12ressie]

div12ressie - What might your thoughts be on getting a Hird back to coach?

a realistic dream come true... seeing Merrett and Hird raising the premiership cup in 2026

 

[ant555]

This is not about results and ladder position. That is a distraction. There are too many variables which are not directly within any side's control for the analysis to start with ladder position, at least in the context of a side that is in the 9 to 12 win no mans land in any given year.

Whether we are on track or not starts with the style of football which is being played. On this question, what has anyone seen in the last 2 seasons that causes them to think that we are a more substantial side by the end of July 2024 than what we were by the end of July 2021? The list should be much more advanced now. Brad's had them for 2 seasons. We're actually now into our fourth season of a rebuild. Caldwell, Perkins, Jones, Cox, Martin, Redman, Durham, Langford is just the start of the list of players who are or should be much more advanced. We haven't lost anyone meaningful due to age. Merrett is playing like a man possessed. Parish is an All Australian!

Some will say that the problem is the list and the players. If the list is the problem and Brad Scott or anyone else in a position of power thinks that is the case, why have we handed out so many long term deals in the last 12 months? Why have we re-signed 3 underwhelming first round picks in the last 6 weeks? Where is the scope to drive change among the uncontracted listed of players?

Look at the current contracts status thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/current-contract-status-afl-aflw-updated-in-op.1177710/

Does this read like a footy department that is concerned about its list? I couldn't help but tune in to Robbo last night (for what felt like the first time this year). He was talking about players playing for their careers. Who exactly was he referring to, the VFL players who weren't on that field against St Kilda? Are we going to end the careers of players with 12 to 24 months left on contracts, are we? How can Guelfi be playing for his career? Why would he be playing at all if his career was in doubt? Wouldn't we have replaced him with someone who has the capacity to be a functional small forward? Why are we already committed to a player like Jye Menzie for another season? We are locked into this course for another 12 to 24 months. This is how the every day operation makes it impossible for the culture to change.

What we are seeing, and what has been evident from very early on, is that Brad Scott almost certainly got the job because it was apparent to the decision makers that he had no real intention of challenging the status quo. Professional standards is bullshit as is challenging the players. That's what everyone else does and what everyone else tries to do with Essendon (it's actually much less than what Rutten was trying to do - his problem is that no one listened to him). That is not a challenge to the status quo. In any event, I thought that all worked anyway because players went to Arizona and he had that first year to look at the list and was then really big and bad at the end of 2023?

When you go back and listen to everything Scott has said his appeal to club was very likely that he wasn't going to challenge what had been done by Essendon previously. This is what Essendon is most scared of and which it will not allow. He didn't think any actual change or confrontation with what Essendon had produced was required. He would challenge Worsfold and Rutten and make them look stupid for not being able to have Essendon realise its potential. And here we are...

I get your point on what is actually changing when we are signing all of these players again . It is fair to question what is changing if we are signing up all these blokes . Parish and McGrath long deals. Perkins and Cox signed despite having massive question marks. It is a legitimate question mark on what they are doing.

As far as players being more profesional being bull shit . Well having seen a lot of training over the last 15 years all I can say is it did go up a level this pre season. It was more military like with sharp drills and very little lazy down time in between which was not the case in the past where players would meander over for a drink and have a bit of a **** around. Short sharp breaks where everyone runs over and runs back and bang straight into it again. On top of that none of the blokes who where not on an injury program came back an ounce out of shape. That has been 100% a change. It has been miles in front of anything we have done in the past.

As for the fourth year of a rebuild . Despite the fact we are keeping guys that people have question marks it simply is not the fourth year. You do not change the coach / gm of football / ceo / list manager and board football director and say they are continuing on with the same build even taking into account they are keeping some players you do not rate and should not keep.
You can rebuff it all you want but Scott and Vozzo spent last season running with a basic game plan and working on how they where going to set up the program going forward. You can take that to the Bank every day this week. Last year was a mulligan with some desperation selections late in the year to try and sneak into the finals which they ****ed up.
Year 1 of Scott and the new football program started in November last year. That is simply how it is. Does not matter they have signed blokes from previous builds.

You said the Hawks where second year into their build but they are actually 4 years in. Despite moving Clarkson on early their build started at the end of 2019. The had their coach in waiting . They had their list manager and GM of football already working in the program . Not a lot changed despite Wright and Clarkson going . The next blokes just moved up and continued on. Even with the board biffo going on it was the same crew who where getting on with the build.