The fate of those who tank.

[rayven]

In light of todays result in Perth.

A few clubs are regarded as partaking in the tactic of tanking over the last 15 years.

How many of them have won premierships, how many have achieved long term success and how many of them have supporters not bothered by this thread?

Now how many of them continue to be crap with no short term likelyhood of not being so, no matter how long ago they apparantly chose that winning wasn't everything.

I rekon that one club is doing ok but hasn't done anything substantial, nor has achieved anything long term and at first sign of faltering will be remimded on such boards as this, other than that the cloud forever holds.

anyone disagree?

 

[Illinois Nazi]

anyone disagree?

Given that this last bit is the only part of your post I can understand, I'm not sure.

 

[Call Me Cake]

It's my belief that every club that tanks for picks in a significant era of time will get their karma sooner or later.

One particular club is doing okay for now, but they haven't proven much yet and will get their fair share in due time.

 

[Naughton]

Hawthorn?

Collingwood?

Both fielded teams to maximize their chances of scoring a PP, and both won premierships.

 

[Tas]

It's my belief that every club that tanks for picks will get their karma sooner or later.

Carlton are the only of the lot that are doing okay, but they haven't proven much yet and will get their fair share in due time.

Hawthorn was the only one to have achieved success from it. It is prone to being lucky. A player like Franklin isn't available every year. They probably benefited more from Freo's woeful trading than tanking though.

 

[bunsen burner]

anyone disagree?

Do you seriously think West Coast didn't do some tanking as well?

Melbourne would have been okay if they didn't dump Bailey. Neeld is a spud who has already lost his players. I have little time for Grant Thomas but I reckon he got that bit right.

 

[The Finger]

Hawthorn was the only one to have achieved success from it. It is prone to being lucky. A player like Franklin isn't available every year.

Don't rate Pendlbry?

 

[bunsen burner]

It's my belief that every club that tanks for picks in a significant era of time will get their karma sooner or later.

One particular club is doing okay for now, but they haven't proven much yet and will get their fair share in due time.

Carlton didn't tank. Sitting on the bottom because you're shit and tanking are two different things.

 

[Bartram_Class]

Hawthorn...premiership.

Collingwood...premiership.

Carlton....not far away.

Next cab off the rank is Melbourne, and we might ruin the streak somewhat. Our failure appears the exception though (bearing in mind the 'fruit' of our tanking pissed off).

 

[Bosk]

Hawthorn was the only one to have achieved success from it. It is prone to being lucky. A player like Franklin isn't available every year. They probably benefited more from Freo's woeful trading than tanking though.

Lucky? Perhaps.

But Richmond had the option to take Franklin and didn't. Nor do we know for certain that Franklin would have developed into the player that he is today had he been drafted by Richmond or another club.

I believe luck plays a huge part in winning premierships but I also feel supporters rate the importance of low draft picks too highly and the importance of player development too little.

Oh, and before you talk about Hawthorn as though we had a charmed run of lack via the draft, don't forget we've picked up more than our share of duds just as every other club has - Thorp, Dowler, Muston, Ellis...

 

[Mancey]

Carlton didn't tank. Sitting on the bottom because you're shit and tanking are two different things.

Come off it. what about the kruezer cup? Was blatant.

In the end I don't think it comes down to if a team tanks or not. some clubs just can't seem to turn the winning mindset back on

 

[bunsen burner]

Come off it. what about the kruezer cup? Was blatant.

Maybe, maybe not. My memory is a bit hazy. even so, one match. I suspect Melbourne tanked for extended periods.

In the end I don't think it comes down to if a team tanks or not. some clubs just can't seem to turn the winning mindset back on

Not true. Do you have any evidence to back this up?

 

[Defacto]

you do realise that the eagles tanked and look how theyre going now

 

[Forward Press]

you do realise that the eagles tanked and look how theyre going now

We tanked for picks 18 and 26 in two separate years. Great.

 

[Duskfire]

you do realise that the eagles tanked and look how theyre going now

Eagles didnt tank, they were just bad.

 

[Wharf]

The culture at Melbourne is horrible at the moment and the club will be hoping Trengrove and Scully's compensation will come good.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Hawthorn?

Collingwood?

Both fielded teams to maximize their chances of scoring a PP, and both won premierships.

The unfortunate reality for those who believe in this 'karma' notion.

 

[Call Me Cake]

Collingwood and Hawthorn never actually "tanked". And they sure as hell didn't win their premierships or become premiership contenders due to their single PP.

It was just one dismal year. Almost every club has had them. It's called a wooden spoon.

It's when you see a prolonged era of dismal years, an embracing of "losing culture" if you will, that you begin to connect the dots...

Those are the teams I was talking about.

 

[Tas]

Don't rate Pendlbry?

Don't think they tanked, they were just riddled with injuries. When people say tank that to me means intentionally making your team bad over a period of time to rebuild your side. Pies just had one bad year with a lot of injuries, operated early and bounced back the following year. North did the same thing the following year from memory, without a priority pick.

You should never have got PPs just for having one shit year with injuries.

Hawthorn tanked, they traded away experienced players for picks and deliberately made their team uncompetitive for years. Their only real agenda was to avoid spoons while getting PPs.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Come off it. what about the kruezer cup? Was blatant.

Blatant would have to leave little doubt wouldn't it? You think we tanked in that match but there is very little evidence. Saying it doesn't make it so and I hate it when people talk in absolutes like that.

 

[SA HAWK]

Collingwood and Hawthorn never actually "tanked". And they sure as hell didn't win their premierships or become premiership contenders due to their single PP.

It was just one dismal year. Almost every club has had them. It's called a wooden spoon.

It's when you see a prolonged era of dismal years, an embracing of "losing culture" if you will, that you begin to connect the dots...

Those are the teams I was talking about.

Hawthorn tanked a game in Round 21 2005 against Richmond. Were miles ahead and a win would have cost us a priority pick. The Tigers had a miraculous comeback to win the game by 4 points.

Just a shame we squandered our picks no 3 & 6 on Xavier Ellis & Beau Dowler so maybe it was karma those 2 never amounted to much.

Collingwood also tanked the last 8 games of the same season to secure a priority pick and picked Dale Thomas & Scott Pendlebury with picks 2 & 5.

No karma there.

 

[Tulip]

Do you seriously think West Coast didn't do some tanking as well?

Melbourne would have been okay if they didn't dump Bailey. Neeld is a spud who has already lost his players. I have little time for Grant Thomas but I reckon he got that bit right.

I agreed with the first part of your post, second makes you look simple.

The reason Carlton, WCE, Collingwood, Hawthorn have come up from their periods of tanking/list management have been because of having a strong senior player(s) who have put their hand up and led by example. See: Judd, Cox, Buckley, Hodge.

If Neeld has lost the playing group its a blight on the players, not him.

 

[SA HAWK]

Hawthorn tanked, they traded away experienced players for picks and deliberately made their team uncompetitive for years. Their only real agenda was to avoid spoons while getting PPs.

Who did we trade away?

 

[Tulip]

We tanked for picks 18 and 26 in two separate years. Great.

Who Gaff?

It suited West Coast to prime their players for 2011 and it shows.

 

[laminex]

Carlton didn't tank. Sitting on the bottom because you're shit and tanking are two different things.

LOL i wanted us to tank but we were to crap.