So? Not one Hawthorn supporter would think he's an elite player, but many would support him being captain until Hodge or Mitchell takes over (1-2 seasons).
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Since '94, a side from outside the 8 has made the top 4 every year. Who
- Thread starter Dan26
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #152
No, but perhaps it is reflective of your list and it's depth that your captain has never even been close to a top quality player?
I don't type crap, and ofcourse I believe what I type...why else would I type it?
What makes Hawthorn's list so clearly better than North's in your mind?
Is it the fact that for the first time in 5 years you won more games than us and you did it in a year where we had our lowest fiish ever and 5 of your 9 wins came against bottom 3 teams?
- Banned
- #153
The Hay trade looks bad, and as it stands most would regret that - obviously.
But in the 2005 trade period we also added Swallow, McConnell and Riggio to our list. The first two played some very good senior footy and looks certs to be important components of our midfield. The third hasn't played yet, but is very highly rated in the club, and despite being drafted as an underaged played solid VFL senior footy.
Regardless of how we got there, and despite the Hay trade, most North people would be happy with our 2005 trade period and it certainly is not going to take years to recover from it. 3 quality footballers is a good get from one draft.
We had a hole at FB. We needed to fill it to improve as a football club. There was nothing wrong with the thinking behind the trade, it just appears we picked the wrong guy in Hay.
What potshots? You equate rebuilding with finishing on the bottom of the ladder - they are not mutually exclusive and that needs to be pointed out continually to you Hawthorn folk. You have a couple of moe highly rated young guys because you have a couple more priority picks in the bag. It was the consequence of a flawed AFL system for reqarding pathetic results that is gone now, it is not Hawthorn's fault, but it is certainly not a bragging point or something to be proud of.
Go ahead and disagree with my claims, but don't act flabbergasted. As I said, North's list is improved from 2005...I guess 2007 will give us the real indication about whether 2005 or 2006 was the abberattion.
We don't need loads of luck to make the finals. We need our senior players to return to form (Harvey and Grant primarily), a natural improvement from our middle tier core group and some young guys to step up.
Plus we need a better game plan for the modern game.
I would say we are in a better position than those teams to make a run at top 4. I will however say that in 3 years time we may be in a spot of bother. We, like the Bulldogs, are carried by our older guys. When we lose the likes of Grant, Harvey, Simpson and Thompson through retirement I think its a given we'll have a down period. I'm hoping we can blood a couple of high possession getting midfielders and a power forward before then...
Strapping Young Lad
Moderator
- Apr 19, 2006
- 100,501
- 251,854
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Storm, Spurs, Socceroos
- Moderator
- #155
Stop deflecting away from your silly comments about your list. This thread is not about VDB's captaincy.
I've read some of your posts talking about how you could make the top 8.
It's fanciful dreaming.
Have a look at your list. Better still have a look at your 2006 season and your coach.
Don't start blaming the fitness advisor again.
Have a good hard look and maybe some honesty might start to assemble in your brain and you'll realise Harvey, Grant, Simpson and Archer just aint goin to cut it anymore. They are getting on.
You have to start rebuilding. Lachlan Hansen was a good start, but you'll need more than just him and Jesse Smith to rise from the bottom.
What makes Hawthorns list better in my eyes?
The fact we've drafted players to form a spine in the last three years.
Roughead
Thorp
Franklin
Dowler
Murphy
with a group of mids as well
Ellis
Lewis
Birchall
Muston
Tuck
Moss
Two young ruckman(which I not you have also)
Bailey
Renouf
Add all them to a partnership of Hodge and Mitchell in the centre square who are young, plus Croad, Crawford, Jacobs, Smith, Williams, Guerra and Brown who are are all solid players and I do believe our list has more upside than yours.
- Banned
- #156
A-ha - now I see the type of supporter you are.
Half these blokes have never played a game of footy.
The ruck combo has a 2006 draftee and a guy who has done his ACL.
We are talking about 2007.
Go play one of your dream team games and let the men talk.
Strapping Young Lad
Moderator
- Apr 19, 2006
- 100,501
- 251,854
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Storm, Spurs, Socceroos
- Moderator
- #157
So typical of you Zebra. Deflect and insult.
You were the one who made the comment about us finishing bottom year after year and how it didn't constitute a rebuild.
Not all our draftees will make it, that's a given, but our list still looks alot more promising than yours.
Not that I expect you to admit it.
Just be selective and reply to what parts of a post you wish to, insult the other poster and bury your head back into the sand.
2007, year of the Roos.
You were the one who made the comment about us finishing bottom year after year and how it didn't constitute a rebuild.
Not all our draftees will make it, that's a given, but our list still looks alot more promising than yours.
Not that I expect you to admit it.
Just be selective and reply to what parts of a post you wish to, insult the other poster and bury your head back into the sand.
2007, year of the Roos.
Weren't we having a similiar conversation this time last year
I like Swallow and McConnell, but every single side has at least a couple of young players and IMHO Carlton, Hawthorn and Essendon have had a better crack at the talent pool due to North making the finals and not getting great picks, and also trading away picks in the national draft when maybe you should have trading away a senior player to add to the picks you had.
You got Hay and possibly lost a quality player in Birchall. That hurts, you can't do anything about it now and will need to look forward to building again next draft. It did cause damage though no doubt about that. Hopefully Hay turns it around cause he was a favourite of mine at Hawthorn after 2001.
Zebra you always take pot shots at Hawthorn. You little snipe about Vandenberg in this thread is just one swipe in many about Hawthorn I've seen you write on these boards.
You also contradict yourself. Last year you were claiming that Hawthorn were planning on finishing low in order to 'tank' for draft picks and that's all we were about. Tas even went on to say we were planning on doing it for 3-5 years. This year we win our last 4 games, miss out on a top 4 pick in super draft, and then move to bag us for only beating teams out of the top 8. Couldn't use tanking this year, so you bag us winning instead.
As I support Clarkson and his decisions I only judge him from from 2005 onwards (when he started) I think he's done well in 'rebuilding' with the shambles Schwab left. I don't classify rebuilding as finishing bottom, I think Port are rebuilding and are in a much better position to do so than us, we were left with a much bigger mess and I like what we've put in place in only 2 years.
I will continue to disagree that North are in a superior position for both the short and long term than other bottom sides. You guys were saying last year you were top 4 chances, and that we were destined for the bottom four for several more years yet, both were proven to be incorrect.
Archer, Grant, Harvey, Simpson; of those I can only see Harvey and Grant having significant impact due to the change in game style the AFL has endured recently. Essendon has better senior players than you and can't see why you'd rate yours more likely to lift than their's.
I agree, North played a solid acountable game style which I admired over the years, which can still be applied today but with some adjustments and flair. I don't Laidley uses Wells as well as he could, and that is the kinda player you need to design your game plan around.
Bailey being injured does not make him a bad addition nor a poor player on the list. He is a very good player and Galon was highlighting to type of players we'd brought in since rebuilding.
Deflecting by saying he's injured this year has nothing to do with it.
- Banned
- #161
Forgot about this - anyway....
What - about Hay? Probably, but my view hasn't changed on how a quality full back would improve us. Unfortunately Hay was far from quality, and on the upside Petrie slotted in CHB very well making it less of a glaring concern. A fit and firing Hay would still massively improve us.
Carlton and Hawthorn definitely have, but again - that is simply because they couldn't win 5 games in consecutive seasons and the shocking priority pick system was in place. North would have traded top 5 picks.
Eseendon have had roughly about the same picks. In 2005 they had 5, while we had 3 + added 20 year old McConnell. In 2004 both clubs had 4. And on 2004, in a year when it is viewed we seemed to have put ourselves years behind everyone else, we picked up our leading goalkicker (and arguably our best player in Thompson), a very important defender in Pratt and two of our most highly rated young guys in Jesse Smith and Brad Moran. Ask any North supporter how much they value Smith and Moran. Maybe North recruiting staff viewed this draft as pretty weak, knew they were getting smith and thought there is just a good a chance of picking up a smoky so why not get a rare power forward in Thompson. And maybe they were right. Which ever way you look at it, 2005 was a good recruiting year for us.
I really like the look of Birchall and of course I would have him over Hay right now, but that decision has not set the club back years, does not mean we have to start to rebuild and will have no bearing on our position in the 2007 season.
The fact that we drafted ruckman in 2001&2002 should start to pay dividends now. That is rebuilding. I wish we had of traded some picks in 2003 because we drafted a bunch of duds as did your club.
I hate Hawthorn....I just meant I hadn't taken a potshot in this thread. And regarding Vanderberg (who is shyte), is was the little sook GALON who had the first crack - I just returned fire.
I have never thought your players tank. I don't think any players can tank, what I have been critical of is your use of the system. I think Hawthorn traded and managed there list knowing that it was going to mean some low finishes and they would pick up draft picks. That is what I hate. Fair enough to argue you need to rebuild, but your club would have gone about it differently if the draft order were reversed. I very much believe that and I hate it. In the end, you won a few more games because of a soft draw. You have to see that. There were some good wins at the start, but you were horrible for most of the year and got four of your wins against two of the worst teams in ages in Carlton and Essendon. If you played them once, you are back in the pack.
Well if you can see it with Port, I am not sure why you can't see it with North. We have a very good group of young guys, and they are not all midfielders or halfback flankers who come straight in a get lot of possessions. There are ruckman who now have 5-6 years in the system, are 22 and are ready to have an impact. Also, we have had a great run with injuries to senior players but a terrible run with injuries to juniors (Urch, Grima, McIntosh, Trotter, Smith) - more luck with that and we will see a whole new group.
We were top 4 chances. It all went pearshaped. As I have pointed out already ficturing layed a role in you being out of the bottom 4. You did play like bottom four for a lot of the year.
But again - if North are as bad as 2006 - I will admit I misread, overrated the list - but I reckon 2006 will be an abberration.
Yep. Harvey and Grant will should have an impact. Both should be close to their prime in playing ability, and their drop from All-Australians to only OK hurt us last year. Arch may not do much, but he is handy to have. Simpsons is still in our top 10 players and will play a pretty important role.
Lloyd will make a big difference to Essendon obviously, but their other senior players had good years last year and they still only won 3. They top end is better, but our list stronger all over.
We had to get fit first. And we definitely need to attack. I don't if Laidley is hindering Wells, but I agree - the gameplan needs to be around him. Firing he would easily be our best player, but would give Thompson another 20 goals as well. We have added more forward options, we have ok speed, now we need to run and move it quickly - which apparently is what they are focussing on after the previous year focusing on strength. We misread the change in the game last year - and it did change.
Weren't we having a similiar conversation this time last year
What - about Hay? Probably, but my view hasn't changed on how a quality full back would improve us. Unfortunately Hay was far from quality, and on the upside Petrie slotted in CHB very well making it less of a glaring concern. A fit and firing Hay would still massively improve us.
Carlton and Hawthorn definitely have, but again - that is simply because they couldn't win 5 games in consecutive seasons and the shocking priority pick system was in place. North would have traded top 5 picks.
Eseendon have had roughly about the same picks. In 2005 they had 5, while we had 3 + added 20 year old McConnell. In 2004 both clubs had 4. And on 2004, in a year when it is viewed we seemed to have put ourselves years behind everyone else, we picked up our leading goalkicker (and arguably our best player in Thompson), a very important defender in Pratt and two of our most highly rated young guys in Jesse Smith and Brad Moran. Ask any North supporter how much they value Smith and Moran. Maybe North recruiting staff viewed this draft as pretty weak, knew they were getting smith and thought there is just a good a chance of picking up a smoky so why not get a rare power forward in Thompson. And maybe they were right. Which ever way you look at it, 2005 was a good recruiting year for us.
I really like the look of Birchall and of course I would have him over Hay right now, but that decision has not set the club back years, does not mean we have to start to rebuild and will have no bearing on our position in the 2007 season.
The fact that we drafted ruckman in 2001&2002 should start to pay dividends now. That is rebuilding. I wish we had of traded some picks in 2003 because we drafted a bunch of duds as did your club.
I hate Hawthorn....I just meant I hadn't taken a potshot in this thread. And regarding Vanderberg (who is shyte), is was the little sook GALON who had the first crack - I just returned fire.
I have never thought your players tank. I don't think any players can tank, what I have been critical of is your use of the system. I think Hawthorn traded and managed there list knowing that it was going to mean some low finishes and they would pick up draft picks. That is what I hate. Fair enough to argue you need to rebuild, but your club would have gone about it differently if the draft order were reversed. I very much believe that and I hate it. In the end, you won a few more games because of a soft draw. You have to see that. There were some good wins at the start, but you were horrible for most of the year and got four of your wins against two of the worst teams in ages in Carlton and Essendon. If you played them once, you are back in the pack.
Well if you can see it with Port, I am not sure why you can't see it with North. We have a very good group of young guys, and they are not all midfielders or halfback flankers who come straight in a get lot of possessions. There are ruckman who now have 5-6 years in the system, are 22 and are ready to have an impact. Also, we have had a great run with injuries to senior players but a terrible run with injuries to juniors (Urch, Grima, McIntosh, Trotter, Smith) - more luck with that and we will see a whole new group.
We were top 4 chances. It all went pearshaped. As I have pointed out already ficturing layed a role in you being out of the bottom 4. You did play like bottom four for a lot of the year.
But again - if North are as bad as 2006 - I will admit I misread, overrated the list - but I reckon 2006 will be an abberration.
Yep. Harvey and Grant will should have an impact. Both should be close to their prime in playing ability, and their drop from All-Australians to only OK hurt us last year. Arch may not do much, but he is handy to have. Simpsons is still in our top 10 players and will play a pretty important role.
Lloyd will make a big difference to Essendon obviously, but their other senior players had good years last year and they still only won 3. They top end is better, but our list stronger all over.
We had to get fit first. And we definitely need to attack. I don't if Laidley is hindering Wells, but I agree - the gameplan needs to be around him. Firing he would easily be our best player, but would give Thompson another 20 goals as well. We have added more forward options, we have ok speed, now we need to run and move it quickly - which apparently is what they are focussing on after the previous year focusing on strength. We misread the change in the game last year - and it did change.
i reckon the trend will be broken this year, the teams outside just dont have the class EXCEPT geelong, i think they are a chance but i still think 5-8 is where they will be
- May 10, 2004
- 24,853
- 5,691
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Pistons/Hammers/Sri Lanka/The Exers
the first two games have shown that port, essendon, geelong and even brisbane all have a show. one of these four teams will finish top four, im almost certain of it.
it would seem so weird to see brisbane, essendon or port in the top four again, they were strong only a few years ago, id think a few more years at least
if it were to happen id think it would be geelong, they have the best team by far
I think it's quite clear now that Port is the one.
Game clear of 3rd and playing home to Richmond next week.
While Brisbane are doing well (3rd), I can't see them finishing top 4.
Geelong are a chance. Their next two games are at Skilled.
Game clear of 3rd and playing home to Richmond next week.
While Brisbane are doing well (3rd), I can't see them finishing top 4.
Geelong are a chance. Their next two games are at Skilled.
- Sep 21, 2004
- 39,563
- 29,688
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Norwood & Liverpool.
Damn Straight
I still reckon Port will make it.
But dunno who will miss.
Freo will make it for sure.
FREWO... LOL
PORT...... LOL
Dreaming, both ordinary units.
PORT...... LOL
Dreaming, both ordinary units.
Similar threads
