View Full Version : Does "Bottoming out" lead to Premiership?
SolidTiger
4 Feb 2007, 10:23
There seems to be a lot of clubs these days that believe that the road to a premiership is to accept that the club must finish in the bottom four for about three years and embark on a "youth policy".
My question is, does this really work?
On evidence it does not. Here is an analysis of the clubs that have won the premiership over the past 7 years and the seven years leading to the premiership.(Note: brackets indicate position after finals. Non Brackets indicate after home and away)
2000- Essendon= '93-1st, '94-10th, '95-(5th)4th, '96-(4th)6th, '97-14th, '98-(8th)8th, '99-(3rd)1st.
2001,2002,2003- Brisbane= '94-12th, '95-(8th)8th, '96-(3rd)3rd, '97-(8th)8th, '98-16th, 99'-(4th)3rd, 2000-(5th)6th.
2004-Port Adelaide- '97-9th, '98-10th, '99-(7th)7th, 2000-14th, 2001-(5th)3rd, 2002-(3rd)1st, 2003-(4th)1st.
2005-Sydney- '98-(5th)3rd, '99-(8th)8th, 2000-10th, 2001-(7th)7th, 2002-11th, 2003-(3rd)4th, 2004-(5th)6th.
2006-West Coast-'99-(5th)5th, 2000-13th, 2001-14th, 2002-(8th)8th, 2003-(8th)7th, 2004-(8th)7th, 2005-(2nd)2nd.
As you can see that Sydney has never finished bottom four. Essendon, Brisbane and Port Adelaide have finished in the bottom four only once.
West Coast are the only ones to have finished bottom four twice.
The club that started the trend of this "youth policy" is St Kilda and a lesser extent Geelong. And they have not won a premiership since embarking on the youth policy. Niether has any other club that has turned to this "youth policy".
I believe the teams that has won the premiership have won it through clever trading and recuiting, good leadership, hard work and working towards a winning culture. Not because of a "youth policy".
Of course it doesn't. Good recruiting, list management, coaching, player development and a little bit of luck leads to premierships.
Bottoming out is just what clubs say when they have failed in their duties, and they want to put a positive spin on things. It gives the impression the only way is up. That's not always the case, and from the very bottom its a very, very long way to the top.
No doubt the league is cyclical and teams will have good and bad years. But the factors listed above mean that teams have higher and longer peaks and lower and shorter falls.
maccas_no1
4 Feb 2007, 11:16
All clubs go through lean times, its the way it works with drafting and the salary cap, how far clubs fall, well thats all depedant on how the list is managed, poor management will lead to a larger fall.
Im willing to admit my club will now go through a lean time starting from this year, simply because of injuries before the season has already started and poor management of the list in reguards to the lack of forward options we have, for the AFC it really is hit and miss stuff, especially as we have lost our best and most reliable forward in Hentschel and it looks like his injury will be a long one, with him not had the knee reconstructed as yet.
Edwards, Goodwin, Mcleod are all getting older and are a very big part of how successful the AFC are 2-3 years left for all those players, after that the midfeild options look okay if the players coming through develope nicely, but if they dont, well their could be issues.
Peninsula Boy
4 Feb 2007, 12:21
No need to bottom out.
All teams fall by the wayside on occasion but good drafting, a great coach and top administration is the way to glory.
What's worse about teams that bottom out as Port Power have done this year is that their supporters start acting like bottoming out means the flag is in the bag in 2-3 years and start celebrating future hypothetical events like they have already happened to make up for their present failures.
For example, the article in the Advertiser by Port Power's official historian who said that Port were '12th and loving it'.
Peninsula Boy
4 Feb 2007, 12:29
Can we leave the Port/Cow thing for threads that are obviously about having a go at each other and leave a decent thread to those who want to have a decent conversation.
Can we leave the Port/Cow thing for threads that are obviously about having a go at each other and leave a decent thread to those who want to have a decent conversation.
Well I thought my post was a fair and on-topic contribution to this thread.
It's not my fault if you and other precious Port Power supporters feel the need to get upset that others call you out for your constant premature celebrations over purely hypothetical events.
There seems to be a lot of clubs these days that believe that the road to a premiership is to accept that the club must finish in the bottom four for about three years and embark on a "youth policy".
My question is, does this really work?
On evidence it does not. Here is an analysis of the clubs that have won the premiership over the past 7 years and the seven years leading to the premiership.(Note: brackets indicate position after finals. Non Brackets indicate after home and away)
2000- Essendon= '93-1st, '94-10th, '95-(5th)4th, '96-(4th)6th, '97-14th, '98-(8th)8th, '99-(3rd)1st.
2001,2002,2003- Brisbane= '94-12th, '95-(8th)8th, '96-(3rd)3rd, '97-(8th)8th, '98-16th, 99'-(4th)3rd, 2000-(5th)6th.
2004-Port Adelaide- '97-9th, '98-10th, '99-(7th)7th, 2000-14th, 2001-(5th)3rd, 2002-(3rd)1st, 2003-(4th)1st.
2005-Sydney- '98-(5th)3rd, '99-(8th)8th, 2000-10th, 2001-(7th)7th, 2002-11th, 2003-(3rd)4th, 2004-(5th)6th.
2006-West Coast-'99-(5th)5th, 2000-13th, 2001-14th, 2002-(8th)8th, 2003-(8th)7th, 2004-(8th)7th, 2005-(2nd)2nd.
As you can see that Sydney has never finished bottom four. Essendon, Brisbane and Port Adelaide have finished in the bottom four only once.
West Coast are the only ones to have finished bottom four twice.
The club that started the trend of this "youth policy" is St Kilda and a lesser extent Geelong. And they have not won a premiership since embarking on the youth policy. Niether has any other club that has turned to this "youth policy".
I believe the teams that has won the premiership have won it through clever trading and recuiting, good leadership, hard work and working towards a winning culture. Not because of a "youth policy".
sorry, but when did we do the bottom 4 thing? Better check that before you start throwing us in that group.....
Brown Bottle
4 Feb 2007, 15:49
If you have a proud history of 9th placed finishes and there is no light at the end of the tunnel then you bite the bullet, clean out the list, and start again. It doesn't guarantee you anything, but you can hope that making wholesale changes will deliver better results sooner.
Yes, let's be fair. While Geelong did go through a few years of rebuilding, they at least tried to win every game and never blatantly tanked or 'bottomed out'.
Yes and no.
It won't automatically give a premiership, only well run clubs can do that, but it can help. I'll give West Coast as an example, could they have won it last year without Judd in their team? Not 100% sure but he definitely helped alot, and the eagles got him by 'bottoming out'.
I think the best way to look and see if this is true or not is to lok at how each player got to the club. How many early picks were in the team, etc. This would prove this theory right or wrong.
SolidTiger
4 Feb 2007, 20:42
Yes, let's be fair. While Geelong did go through a few years of rebuilding, they at least tried to win every game and never blatantly tanked or 'bottomed out'.
I concede that I was wrong about geelong being in this group. My apologies to geelong supporters.
windyhill
4 Feb 2007, 22:27
Chris Judd would make any list bounce back.
BK Eaglesfan
5 Feb 2007, 08:08
Yes and no.
It won't automatically give a premiership, only well run clubs can do that, but it can help. I'll give West Coast as an example, could they have won it last year without Judd in their team? Not 100% sure but he definitely helped alot, and the eagles got him by 'bottoming out'.
We hardly bottomed out, we didn't even finish last and Chris Judd wasn't even a number one pick. I think in fairness when we talk about 'bottoming out' we are talking about teams / clubs that finish dead last, win stuff all, get priority picks and as has happened in recent times do it for more than a year.
When I think of bottoming out I think of St Kilda in the early 00's and the procession of high draft picks that now make up their squad, Carlton and Hawthorn in recent times and again their massive numbers of top 10 picks, Freo to an extent from a few years ago.
I think the type of team the draft does help is the team that has a wretched run with injury. Look at Essendon....play the bulk of the year without their captain, 100 goal a year capable full forward and arguably best player (amongst others to miss games)...they get pick 2, a priority pick, and now Lloyd will be back on the park.
Not having a go at the Bombers as losing Lloyd for the season was hardly fun for them, but we have seen this a couple of times over recent seasons, teams badly affected by injury get top draft picks when perhaps they weren't a bad team to start with.
We hardly bottomed out, we didn't even finish last and Chris Judd wasn't even a number one pick. I think in fairness when we talk about 'bottoming out' we are talking about teams / clubs that finish dead last, win stuff all, get priority picks and as has happened in recent times do it for more than a year.
When I think of bottoming out I think of St Kilda in the early 00's and the procession of high draft picks that now make up their squad, Carlton and Hawthorn in recent times and again their massive numbers of top 10 picks, Freo to an extent from a few years ago.
I think the type of team the draft does help is the team that has a wretched run with injury. Look at Essendon....play the bulk of the year without their captain, 100 goal a year capable full forward and arguably best player (amongst others to miss games)...they get pick 2, a priority pick, and now Lloyd will be back on the park.
Not having a go at the Bombers as losing Lloyd for the season was hardly fun for them, but we have seen this a couple of times over recent seasons, teams badly affected by injury get top draft picks when perhaps they weren't a bad team to start with.
Spot on.
What's worse about teams that bottom out as Port Power have done this year is that their supporters start acting like bottoming out means the flag is in the bag in 2-3 years and start celebrating future hypothetical events like they have already happened to make up for their present failures.
You seem to have a different definition of bottoming then everyone else. Though more likely only when applied to Port (what a shock! :rolleyes: ).
Finishing 12th after 5 years in the finals and Port fans expecting to be somewhere around 7 - 10 this year is not bottoming out for a premiership. That's hardly Hawthorn (for the current poster kids of bottoming out = success) like, with us expecting (and satisfied) being bottom 4 (which weren't even this year) for 3 years as some sort of assurance of future success.
Try and at least add some measure of facts to your trolls.
doppleganger
5 Feb 2007, 12:50
There seems to be a lot of clubs these days that believe that the road to a premiership is to accept that the club must finish in the bottom four for about three years and embark on a "youth policy".
My question is, does this really work?
On evidence it does not. Here is an analysis of the clubs that have won the premiership over the past 7 years and the seven years leading to the premiership.(Note: brackets indicate position after finals. Non Brackets indicate after home and away)
2000- Essendon= '93-1st, '94-10th, '95-(5th)4th, '96-(4th)6th, '97-14th, '98-(8th)8th, '99-(3rd)1st.
2001,2002,2003- Brisbane= '94-12th, '95-(8th)8th, '96-(3rd)3rd, '97-(8th)8th, '98-16th, 99'-(4th)3rd, 2000-(5th)6th.
2004-Port Adelaide- '97-9th, '98-10th, '99-(7th)7th, 2000-14th, 2001-(5th)3rd, 2002-(3rd)1st, 2003-(4th)1st.
2005-Sydney- '98-(5th)3rd, '99-(8th)8th, 2000-10th, 2001-(7th)7th, 2002-11th, 2003-(3rd)4th, 2004-(5th)6th.
2006-West Coast-'99-(5th)5th, 2000-13th, 2001-14th, 2002-(8th)8th, 2003-(8th)7th, 2004-(8th)7th, 2005-(2nd)2nd.
As you can see that Sydney has never finished bottom four. Essendon, Brisbane and Port Adelaide have finished in the bottom four only once.
West Coast are the only ones to have finished bottom four twice.
The club that started the trend of this "youth policy" is St Kilda and a lesser extent Geelong. And they have not won a premiership since embarking on the youth policy. Niether has any other club that has turned to this "youth policy".
I believe the teams that has won the premiership have won it through clever trading and recuiting, good leadership, hard work and working towards a winning culture. Not because of a "youth policy".
the interesting thing is that all of the premiership teams had some benefit with the list
ie essendon were able to grab lloyd as compensation for losing a dud to freo, think it was delaney
brisbane, well they had the merger and plenty of concession picks before that as they were crap for so long.
port still had plenty of start up players on the list
sydney salary concessions
west coast, first who didn't really have any concessions, but they were lucky enough to land judd
bottoming out doesn't gaurantee anything, as the saints have showed injuries and luck during the season is still needed.
finally now lists are equalling out with start up concessions filtering away, the only team that has a benefit is sydney, so wouldn't surprise if they manage to stay up the top for a while longer
the interesting thing is that all of the premiership teams had some benefit with the list
ie essendon were able to grab lloyd as compensation for losing a dud to freo, think it was delaney
brisbane, well they had the merger and plenty of concession picks before that as they were crap for so long.
port still had plenty of start up players on the list
sydney salary concessions
west coast, first who didn't really have any concessions, but they were lucky enough to land judd
bottoming out doesn't gaurantee anything, as the saints have showed injuries and luck during the season is still needed.
finally now lists are equalling out with start up concessions filtering away, the only team that has a benefit is sydney, so wouldn't surprise if they manage to stay up the top for a while longer
Is it just me or is it only Collingwood supporters that go on and on about the concessions that everyone else gets as their excuse for failure?
doppleganger
5 Feb 2007, 21:45
Is it just me or is it only Collingwood supporters that go on and on about the concessions that everyone else gets as their excuse for failure?
????
thread about does bottoming out win u a flag, the answer would appear to be no.
it seems that all the previous premiership teams all had benefits of some sort sort above and beyond the norm, all except for west coast that is...who landed judd!