View Full Version : Hawthorn > Bulldogs?
Last year it seemed that we were 2 years ahead of the Hawks, but this year it would appear they've over taken us.
If you consider that, in reality, by the time we challenge for the flag, Grant will be gone, Darcy will probably be gone and West and Johno will be on their last legs.
The main thing we had over the Hawks was our older players were better than theirs, and our young guys seemed to be doing more. Now though, it seems that they're in line for a flag before us. Not being stupid, but they've got a good structure.
Maybe I'm jumping the gun on this thought (my bro is a Hawks fan so I do hear a lot about Buddy et al) but they have some true match winners. In terms of structure, we're obviously very reliant on Williams and Everitt coming good. If that happened, maybe we'd see a sudden improvement in our game.
Why have the Hawks moved so far forward this year and we've stagnated?
Dog Town
16 Jun 2007, 08:50
Why have the Hawks moved so far forward this year and we've stagnated? They have had more contributors in more games than us. No grand theories or secrets it is that simple. They have worked harder than us for a longer period of time. They always run hard and they always do well at the contest. Too many times this season we have either not had enough run or we have been smashed at the contest. All our losses can be attributed to atleast one of those factors in the main. If we work harder we will get the same results as the hawks. Long way to go this season.
Carlton were ripe for the picking last night. I had a bit of a punt on the hawks at $6.50 for over 39.5 points. Tidy profit.
Mitchell/Lewis/Sewell/Hodge - Four hard bodied midfielders. We need one.
Cross/Boyd/West/Cooney... Problems not in the mid, see Roughead and Franklin firing for the difference in my opinion. I still believe we have the better list but seeing them win is giving me the shits.
Buddy didn't play last night, and Roughead has only kicked 3 goals or more twice in his career. I'm not saying our midfield is our weakness, but they have a much more functional center then we do. Cooney is the only player we have similar to there guys.
scooter600x
16 Jun 2007, 11:12
They didn't get sucked in by any of this "best available" rubbish and used top picks on what they needed to build the best team they could rather than have a group of the best players they could get. They also traded away good players for even more draft picks.
They did get lucky, as well, in that the years they had high picks there was plenty of tall talent about.
They have two young ruckmen getting the job done in Campbell and Taylor (with Bailey and Renouf developing).
Croad, Franklin, Roughhead, Boyle and Gilham gives them good size (with Dowler and Thorp developing).
Anyone can develop midfielders so they have plenty of them as well including some class in Hodge, Lewis & Mitchell (with the likes of Ellis and Muston to come) and importantly they can do the job they're best suited to because they have key forwards playing as key forwards and key defenders playing as key defenders.
Hawthorn will be giving everyone else grief for a long time.
They traded well by getting rid of Thompson, Rawlings and Hay.
Probably luck more than skill but it's ended up in their favour.:(
Top Dog
16 Jun 2007, 12:18
Hawthorn will be giving everyone else grief for a long time.
I'd agree with that.
Couldn't help but notice that they have a well balanced line up with a blend of tough and pacy midfielders, not to mention a plethora of tall options that can go forward or back.
murphy2bedabest
16 Jun 2007, 15:17
could we have drafted franklin and griffen?
going in richmond rated deledio and thought tambling was the next best and was happy when he droped to number 4. and the hawks wanted 2 kpp.
so if we picked up franklin with 3 could griffen have slipped to 6. tambling would have gone at 4, but would have the hawks gone for williams at 5? knowing they would get lewis at 7.
or atleast we would have had franklin and williams
Go_Dogs
16 Jun 2007, 15:44
Yes, it's an interesting one and hard to speculate about. I think Richmond would've taken Tamling still, however as Hawthorn had pick 7 as well they might've been tempted to snare Griff with #5, but who knows. Would've been good having Griff and Franklin, although I'm sure Tommy Gun will do us all very proud once he gets more experience.
Bulldog4life
16 Jun 2007, 15:52
Whatever the thoughts are on the comparison we did beat them and it would be more prudent as well to compare the 2 sides after 22 rounds.
angry steve
16 Jun 2007, 15:52
could we have drafted franklin and griffen?
going in richmond rated deledio and thought tambling was the next best and was happy when he droped to number 4. and the hawks wanted 2 kpp.
so if we picked up franklin with 3 could griffen have slipped to 6. tambling would have gone at 4, but would have the hawks gone for williams at 5? knowing they would get lewis at 7.
or atleast we would have had franklin and williams
While it sure would`ve been wonderful, the fact is that; In the 2004 draft, the top 5 was always going to be Deledio, Griffen, Tambling, Roughead and Franklin - It was only the order of those five that was going to be the issue.
As we had pick six there was no chance of us ever getting two of those players - no amount of "ducks and drakes" or "smokescreens" could`ve ended up with us getting 2 of them.
For what it`s worth though, in my opinion the one we got will probably turn our to be the best of the 5.
Read Colin Wisbey`s article about Griff I`ve just attached in the "prior year recruiting" thread and I guarantee your excitements levels will increase! :thumbsu:
#1 Dogs Fan
16 Jun 2007, 16:38
I honestly think that they are ahead of them selves. I no its a big call but teams haven't really figured out how to play the hawks and beat them like we got figured out.
But in saying that we have no B plan so i think its our own fault. And yes Dog Town (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/member.php?u=6802) i absolutely agree with you on that Hawthorne have more contributers.
We can only get better in my opinion and i don't no about you guys but i have a feeling that the bulldogs are in for a very hard pre season next year and their will be some players cut of the list that we might raise an eye brow over.
ErnieSigley
16 Jun 2007, 17:23
Carlton were ripe for the picking last night. I had a bit of a punt on the hawks at $6.50 for over 39.5 points. Tidy profit.
Well done! I picked it too. I still can't believe we lost to Carlton.
SCRAY72
16 Jun 2007, 17:28
They have an awesome midfield and a lot of under rated players i.e Sewell,Gilham,Campbell,Ladson etc. that won't stay under rated much longer. They have traded and drafted well.
They have a home ground advantage in Tassie while we just take the cash and give up the 4 points when playing at "home" away.
Who has the best list is debateable. They are in better form and good luck to them.
SCRAY72
16 Jun 2007, 17:30
Well done! I picked it too. I still can't believe we lost to Carlton.
That loss to Carlton could be very costly come the end of the year. We won 3 quarters and still lost.
ErnieSigley
16 Jun 2007, 17:30
The difference between us and Hawthorn is Hawthorn didn't let Carlton dictate the terms of the match. All we had to do v Carlton was change the tempo of the game and slow it down but for some strange reason we didn't and/or couldn't.
As DT mentioned Carlton were also ripe for the picking last night, they got ahead of themselves and thought they were good.
I still think we would beat Hawthorn today as we have a much better midfield.
MrChristo
16 Jun 2007, 18:44
The difference between us and Hawthorn is that one side plays very solid, accountable football and fundamentally good defense.
One team doesn't. **
Check how many points Carlton scored against each team to see which is which. :mad::mad:
(** and hasn't for a long time, and should have been by now under Eade, surely!! :mad: x lots!)
murphy2bedabest
16 Jun 2007, 19:26
While it sure would`ve been wonderful, the fact is that; In the 2004 draft, the top 5 was always going to be Deledio, Griffen, Tambling, Roughead and Franklin - It was only the order of those five that was going to be the issue.
As we had pick six there was no chance of us ever getting two of those players - no amount of "ducks and drakes" or "smokescreens" could`ve ended up with us getting 2 of them.
For what it`s worth though, in my opinion the one we got will probably turn our to be the best of the 5.
Read Colin Wisbey`s article about Griff I`ve just attached in the "prior year recruiting" thread and I guarantee your excitements levels will increase! :thumbsu:
agree 123% i think we did get the best in griffen and im very happy with tommy gun
bluespooner
16 Jun 2007, 22:25
agree 123% i think we did get the best in griffen and im very happy with tommy gun
Absolutely baseless. Buddy Franklin would be number 1 from the 2004 draft based on performances by the length of the straight. Second in the coleman medal as we speak and he isn't even playing as the FF but often pushes into the backline. Hauls of 9 and 6 goals on at least three occasions; reached 50 goals in fewer matches then Riewoldt and a plethora of highly rated FF. Probably, Franklin is the best drafted player since 2001 super draft.
For mine the ranking from the 2004 draft: Franklin - daylight; Deledio; Lewis; Griffin; Roughead.
Absolutely baseless. Buddy Franklin would be number 1 from the 2004 draft based on performances by the length of the straight. Second in the coleman medal as we speak and he isn't even playing as the FF but often pushes into the backline. Hauls of 9 and 6 goals on at least three occasions; reached 50 goals in fewer matches then Riewoldt and a plethora of highly rated FF. Probably, Franklin is the best drafted player since 2001 super draft.
For mine the ranking from the 2004 draft: Franklin - daylight; Deledio; Lewis; Griffin; Roughead.
You're right. Franklin is a gun. I like Griff and think he'll be a good/great player, but if Buddy can keep up his form consistently, and - and this is the scary part - continue to improve, he'll be one of, if not THE dominant player in the comp. He's the type of guy that'll win a lot of games off his own boot, and probably a lot of finals too.
Gun. And exactly the type of player the dogs need.
Does it matter? We've taken Griffen and I'd imagine we're all pretty happy with him.
Knowing us, we'd have found a way to **** up or injure Buddy anyway, such is the luck of our tall guys.
Go_Dogs
17 Jun 2007, 12:08
I still think Griffen has the tools to become one of the AFL's best players, as does Franklin. This season, Franklin has come along well and shown how good he could be, whilst Griff has struggled with injury problems, and is now having an extended time on the sidelines. Wait till next year, when everyone can see how good Griff will be, before we start making these predicitions. I certainly wouldn't rate Deledio or Lewis ahead of Griff.