The Facts [Archive]

View Full Version : The Facts

Pages : [1] 2

Delediodelight

2 Jul 2008, 22:03

I dont know if is just cause it school holidays or what but there is some really stupid posts on here, so i'm going to give you all the facts, well what i know. I know you all think that we should be playing finals by now, i mean it is Wallaces fourth year at the club, but i'll give you some facts that may make you think otherwise. i'll go through different topic like the list, drafting, trading and comparing the tigers to the Hawks and doggies, who where at the same end of the ladder when Wallace started.

The List:

Wallace has said it before that when he came to the tigers the list was a disaster. it was i'll show you. you may think its him giving excuses, maybe it is but i dont think so. Wallace has stated on numorous occasions that to be a premiership threat you need a core group of players(10-14 playing in each match 6-8 in reserve) aged between 24-28(i'll refer to this as the core). the players in this group should be dominating and controlling the game, young players(less then 23) and older players(29+) stand up every now and then, a 5-10min burst or a dominating quarter or two helps, but the game should be won from the core.

Who does richmond have in the core group? Coughlan, Hyde, McMahon, Moore, Newman, Pettifer, Polak, King, Tuck. Three of which are in our best 22 (Moore, Newman, Tuck) with King and Polak close to it and Coughlan injured for 2 years so there is doubt there. So at the most we have 6 players in this 'core' group, with dare i say it Coughlan pre-injuries was/is the only player in the core group who can/could dominate and control a game for us.

What does this mean? it means a hell of alot more presure is put on the shoulders of Richo and co, aswell as the already hyped yet undeveloped kids, who are expected(from certain people on here) to be winning games at the ages of 19-20. they haven't even developed and there suppose to be winning games for us(the tigers), man now thats pressure.

I think that the average time that should be allowed for a young player to develop, as long as they are developing and have/are not gone backwards, is 6 years. you may think that that is to long, but put it into prospective 3years for the body to develop physically, 2-3 years for them to play and get exprience with the team, their body and team plans, and also allow for injuries. So what age is that 23-4. examples of this, in wallaces first year in 05, a guy so many people thought should've got delisted cause he hadn't shown any signs, yet has a break out season dominating in the centre, his name Tuck, how old? 23. Another one he had injuries, but ones he put together a couple of preseasons and a good season in reserves, his come good, and this year i think should be almost in AA contention, Moore. Some people on here are saying delist Jon, delist Meyer, delist Tambling, they are 20-21 year old their bodys haven't even developed and you expect the to be dominating games, get real. give them time to mature and develop, physically aswell as mentally, judge after this time not before or during.

There is way to much pressure put onto young players. As far as im concerned there has only ever been one player who has dominated and controlled games from the get go, JUDD. yeah he had cousins, kerr and cox around him, but he made them look even better, he was the player that burst from the centre, he made the eagles look good, and it shows now. People may say Franklin as well but i disagree, yes he is an amazing player and athlete. But the delivery he gets from Hodge, Mitchall, Bateman and co it makes his job a heap easier, also a multi-prone forwardline with Roughead, Williams, and Osbourne it makes it even harder for the defence to help out Franklins opponent. Same with Joel Selwood, he was playing 5th or 6th fiddle in an awesome midfield, it made him look awesome, he is a great player dont get me wrong. as a footnote the only other player i can see being dominate from the beginning is Palmer, but time will tell with him.

The Draft:
99 Preseason Draft....Pick 6......Clay Sampson
National Draft ..........3............Aaron Fiora
.............................22..........Ezra Poyas
.............................39..........Scott Homewood
.............................52..........Andrew Mills
.............................78..........Ty Zantuck
Trade Leon Cameron, Clinton King
Rookie elevation Ben Hollands

00 National..............9...........Kayne Pettifer
.............................25..........Mark Coughlan
.............................40..........Chris Hyde
.............................41..........Andrew Krakour
.............................55..........Chris Newman
.............................57..........Steven Sziller
Rookie Ben Haynes, Royce Vardy

01 National.............33...........David Rodan
............................63...........Adam L. Houlihan
............................68...........Chris Hyde
............................77...........Martin McGrath
Trade Paul Hudson, Greg Stafford
Rookie Graig Ednie

02 National.............12...........Jay Schulz
............................41...........Tim Flemming
............................47...........Bill Nicholls
............................62...........Daniel Sipthorp
Trade Justin Blumfield, Kane Johnson

03 National............21............Alex Gilmore
...........................37............Thomas Roach
...........................53............Daniel Jackson
...........................64............Shane Morrison
...........................70............Brent Hartigan
...........................73............Shane Tuck
...........................76............Andrew Raines
...........................79............Kyle Archibald
Trade Nathan Brown

So there is 8 players out of 28 drafted still on the list and 2 out of 11 trades and rookie elevations, so draft periods from 99 to 03 is a complete wipe out. these drafts where suppose to prived that core group (99 draft = 28year old:03 draft = 23year old). I blame the Frawley rein for this shambles of a list, him and his recruiting team (Beck) and no one else. Pethetic recruiting and drafting.

04 National......Pick 1.............Brett Deledio
...........................4.............Richard Tambling
..........................12............Danny Meyer
..........................16............Adam Pattison
..........................20............Dean Polo
..........................36............Luke McGuane
..........................52............Dean Limbach
..........................65............Mark Graham
Preseason Ben Marsh, Luke Weller
Rookie Kelvin Moore
Trade Troy Simmonds

05 National..........8..............Jarrad Oakely-Nicholls
.........................24............Cleve Hughes
.........................40............Travis Casserly
Preseason Trent Knobel,
Rookie Nathen Foley, Will Thursfield
Trade Patrick Bowden

06 National.........13.............Jack Riewoldt
........................26.............Shane Edwards
........................58.............Daniel Connors
........................60.............Carl Peterson
........................73.............Andrew Collins
Preseason Matthew White,
Trade Graham Polak

07 National.........2.............Trent Cotchin
........................18...........Alex Rance
........................52...........Dean Putt
Preseason David Gourdis
Trades Mitch Morton, Jordon McMahon

Now 04 to 07 is the Wallace rein, while i think recruiting has come along way in talent identification, i think this group looks alot better. Most of these players are still young and developing they look alot better then the previous lot. While there is still the odd mistakes there far fewer, and i'm not saying everyone will make the big time. In saying that the 04 draft players are still only 22 so by my theory they should be allowed still 2 years, yet still alot of these players are shouldering considerable workloads that are not usually expected of them for at least another 4-5 years.

The Trades
Since Wallace has arrived he has done a few trades, alot of people haven't agreed with them but i have. alot of the players who we have picked up is to firstly try and fill that age gap, in that core group, McMahon, Polak. secondly to help the team straight away, simmonds. or thirdly to trade for players that are the age of the already drafted young players coming through, Morton. these trades didn't have to be made but i think they needed to be to make us more competitive immediately and in the future. i think they had to be done to provide leadership and allow younger players to develop. Also a lot of you think you can get something of value cheaply, it happens rarely, you have to give up value to get value, if you want Warnock expect us to have to give up a 1st or 2nd round draft pick, i wouldn't give up a 1st rounder though.

Comparisons
So many posters continue to compare us to either the hawks or the doggies, but the only thing we really have in common is that we where all at the bottom of the ladder in 04 when wallace, eade and clarkson all started coaching there respective teams. they forget to remember what i have been reinforcing through this post, (that core group is the key)

The Hawks have Bateman, Boyle, Brown, Campbell, Croad, Gilham, Guerra, Hodge, Mitchell, Osbourne, Sewell, Taylor, and Williams. While the doggies have Boyd, Cross, Giansiracusa, Gilbee, Hahn, Hargrave, Lake, Morris, and Murphy. compare these groups with our core group Coughlan, Hyde, McMahon, Moore, Newman, Pettifer, Polak, King, Tuck.

For the hawks having this core group has allowed for players like Franklin, Roughead and lewis to develop at their own rate with little pressure and it shows. Same with the doggies the with the likes of Cooney and Griffin. We haven't had this luxury, and that puts more pressure onto the deledios the tamblings and it shows. And inturn results in some idiodic post/threads like delist tambling and delist Jon. there 20-1, i'm so glad their not coaching richmond. This gap in the list is the reason why Wallace was giving 5years to assemble a list, again idiodic posters say his had his time sack him, wrong his assembled/still assembling the list, so really his time as coach starts now. if he was to have the same list as what eade and clarkson started with, wallace's 3 year contract as coach should be starting from 2010 after he has finished his 5 year contract as list assembler.

rocklovelive

2 Jul 2008, 22:14

Great post.
Should be stickied and reffered to everytime some idiot makes a stupid comment.

JSFish

2 Jul 2008, 22:16

Agree with everything in that. Top post.

Tigers4premiers

2 Jul 2008, 22:28

lets see those wallace-bashers try to contradict that:thumbsu:
(apart from his occasional one-dimensional game plan)

tigertiger

2 Jul 2008, 23:10

well written this should be compulsory reading for all Richmond supporters

Darth_Tiger

2 Jul 2008, 23:44

awesome stuff mate! :thumbsu: a really good read and well thought out substantial argument.

L_J_T

2 Jul 2008, 23:48

WOW that was a really great post...if there was an award for best post on this site you would win it by a mile....It makes complete sense and I can't see anything at all in this post that could make a negative poster think bad about TW. Great stuff mate:thumbsu::thumbsu:

nut

3 Jul 2008, 00:05

I'm not convinced about TW as coach just yet. But I am a huge supporter of his List Management and how the list has been overturned since he arrived. I'm very worried that, like in the Past, our supporters will get restless and he will panic and top up or we will replace him and a newbee does the same. Nothing has me more convinced now that you cant trade picks for players to build a side... you need to draft and inject young fresh quality new Talent EVERY year.

...and be patient and support the kids..... yes not all will make it, but instead of trying to be the first poster or supporter(?) to label a player gone or he is useless... I say just shut up.

Vosstiger

3 Jul 2008, 00:31

Certainly an improved drafting procedure post Frawley:)

mitch richmond

3 Jul 2008, 00:58

Great post DD!
I love the Rookie draft! Wil, Kel and Axle!
BTW, Moore has had 6 pre-seasons and is finding his feet.
JON has had 2. All you JON knockers, drop off.
I hope they peservere with him cos he's so young. I guarentee 100% if he's given the ass, a team like Collingwood will pick him up and he'll become a very competent AFL footballer by the time he's 22.

Realistic Tiger

3 Jul 2008, 07:16

froars

3 Jul 2008, 08:16

Deledio's just stating the bleeding obvious to some, but not so to others.
I doubt everyone will agree with these statements. Although if everyone did, I'd be amused because I've been saying it for years but you won't ____ing listen lol

Well written and worked out post :thumbsu:

tigertiger

3 Jul 2008, 08:43

mattdwyer

3 Jul 2008, 08:45

great post, good job man :thumbsu:
wallace has brought in some good kids .. i'm not sure if wallace is the man who will lead us to our next flag though ... we need young blood coaching

AlexRance

3 Jul 2008, 08:59

Great post but Tuck is excellent around stopages.

Benchwarmer77

3 Jul 2008, 09:43

Good work mate....

So when are you going for a job at the tigers :D

Moreaux

3 Jul 2008, 09:46

Best post i've read in ages better than the usual negativity, great stuff.
The Frawley regime check out the 02 draft now was that a bad draft or were we particularly bad that day.
onya spud recruited like a spud too, too many workmanlike players.

RichosGuns

3 Jul 2008, 09:54

tiger of old

3 Jul 2008, 11:04

What I worry about is that fact that we just aren't improving at the speed of other teams.

We originaly drew comparison's to Hawthorn and Western Bulldog's because our teams were in similar positions and our list's were roughly the same age. Richmond probably didn't have the same talented lists but then again, these two teams are now sitting 2nd and 3rd on the ladder. Why?

Carlton have been down and out for years. Very similar to us. They have had talented individuals like us (Fevola, etc) however, it seems they have now gone past us aswell. WTF?

Who will be next to develop and rebuild before the RFC? Essendon, West Coast, even Fremantle?

The fact is Richmond's list managment is so often critiscied as being short sighted and shit, BECAUSE IT IS! While Richmond trade for middle of the road players like McMohan and Polak (even that Geelong guy), Hawthorn and Carlton trade for top drafts pick's or upper echelon players

I'm angry now :mad:
Your kidding surely?First of all the Doggies were 2yrs ahead of us as far as the development stakes go while the Hawk,s kid,s[Hodge,Mitchell,Sewell etc] were at where the Deledio,s,Tambling,s etc are now for us.We had a better list back then than the hawks mainly due to the Gasper,s,Kellaway,s,Campbell,s,Richo,s,Stafford,s.We have suffered due to the lack of 24-28yrs olds of now thanks to Spud while the hawks have gone on because of the Hodge,s etc in that said age bracket.
To say the Blues have gone past us is sheer short sightiness.One win over us doesnt make their progress any better than ours.We lost last week because of the coach[1st half game plan] not the playing personal.

nut

3 Jul 2008, 11:27

Just one question, why did Wallace say when he was appointed or just after being appointed that Richmond had a better list than the Hawks then?

At the time we did.... we were 7-4 before Brown broke his leg, whilst the Hawks finished near the bottom and received another PP.

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 11:41

7-2 nut.

Fishfinger

3 Jul 2008, 11:46

Just one question, why did Wallace say when he was appointed or just after being appointed that Richmond had a better list than the Hawks then?

He didn't.

Garry Lyon said in an article last year that he had said it. Not so.

Wallace said at the time he didn't choose Richmond over Hawthorn on list structure and that he thought Hawthorn represented the better chance for a swift turnaround.
He did also say that he thought Richmond was more advanced in the development of its young players. Seems he read that wrong.

He never said Richmond had a better list.

nut

3 Jul 2008, 12:04

The fact is Richmond's list managment is so often critiscied as being short sighted and shit, BECAUSE IT IS! While Richmond trade for middle of the road players like McMohan and Polak (even that Geelong guy), Hawthorn and Carlton trade for top drafts pick's or upper echelon players

I'm angry now :mad:

Stuart Dew Board...

If you cant see the Jig Saw Puzzle coming together than you really have not been watching the development of our side ... especially over the last 18 months. Go through the Drafts and count how many Bottom aged players we have drafted. Our Club is FAR from short sighted.

IT TOOK BOMBER THOMPSON 8 YEARS TO FINNISH THE JOB at Geelong.....

Richo Man

3 Jul 2008, 12:22

Stuart Dew Board...

If you cant see the Jig Saw Puzzle coming together than you really have not been watching the development of our side ... especially over the last 18 months. Go through the Drafts and count how many Bottom aged players we have drafted. Our Club is FAR from short sighted.

IT TOOK BOMBER THOMPSON 8 YEARS TO FINNISH THE JOB at Geelong.....
I think why some people get so grumpy is because of how long we've been down and out. Not many people want to wait another few years.
The fact is we do have players coming through but does Wallace know what he is doing when playing Hyde? It stops let's say Connors from getting a game. And Pattison is nothing this year yet he's being played? Fair enough persist with him, but if people like Edwards & Reiwoldt got dropped on form then why should he stay in? He isn't a ruckman so don't give me that bullcrap about him being our back up ruckman, I would prefer Putt to get a run, yeah big players take longer to develop but why not give him a go?
There have been several clubs that have had several players debut from last years draft, and yet we only have one in Cotchin (oh god bless you) playing. Why can't Rance get a game, just to see how he looks and then persist with him instead of Hyde?

By the way, the original post was great, I agreed with everything.

Bojangles17

3 Jul 2008, 12:23

I applaud posts that have some substance as opposed to the shallow knee jerk scaremongering that is all too frequent on these boards. By season end our results will demonstate marked improvement over our 2007 wooden spoon finish, to the narrow minded few that expected a top 4 finish, the anticipated 300% improvement over 2007 will still not be enough for the darksiders.

tigertiger

3 Jul 2008, 12:25

Its amazing how few replies there have been to the original post, the usual sky is falling in crew are off looking for easier fish to fry

nut

3 Jul 2008, 12:27

7-2 nut.

:thumbsu::thumbsu:...

When I look at our list I look at in groups and what young players are coming through.

1. Defense I only look at Kpp because you can develop the smaller Back players anytime.
Really Pleased with what we have there. Mcguane is improving, Thursfield looks like he has the tools to be a Very good defender and Moore is playing Great. Then Throw in Rance and maybe Gourdis and in 2-3 years we have an AWESOME Defense with Quality back ups if someone Gets Injured. The reason our defense has improved can be linked back to the decision of the club last year to drop Gasper. It gave Thursfield and Mcgaune harder and more challenging roles which the grew into, that wasn't being SHORT Sighted.

2. Midfield..... Deledio Foley Cotchin are all Quality Mid fielders and will be the nucleus of guts in years to come. I think we need 1-2 more quality Mids. Cogs is but he may never truly make it back. Tuck is Great, Matthew White keeps improving but I think we lack quality. Conners, Casserly and Collins all have ability and may come through.
More work needed here.

3. Forwards. This is where we really need to improve or looked to improve. Reiwoldt, Morton and Hughes have now shown they can play at the highest level. The Move of Richo out of the Forward line was not a short sighted move either. Although he has dropped in there occasionally it has given the club a good look at Shulz and Hughes, and out younger forwards have been given extra responsibility. Gourdis hopefully will keep developing as well.

All in all I think for us to keep improving we need 2-3 more Mids and maybe another Key Forward coming through the next 2 Drafts. After that I think our list is about spot on for a long time and all it will need is a constant flow of youngsters coming through.

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 12:32

nut

3 Jul 2008, 12:35

I think why some people get so grumpy is because of how long we've been down and out. Not many people want to wait another few years.
The fact is we do have players coming through but does Wallace know what he is doing when playing Hyde? It stops let's say Connors from getting a game. And Pattison is nothing this year yet he's being played? Fair enough persist with him, but if people like Edwards & Reiwoldt got dropped on form then why should he stay in? He isn't a ruckman so don't give me that bullcrap about him being our back up ruckman, I would prefer Putt to get a run, yeah big players take longer to develop but why not give him a go?
There have been several clubs that have had several players debut from last years draft, and yet we only have one in Cotchin (oh god bless you) playing. Why can't Rance get a game, just to see how he looks and then persist with him instead of Hyde?

By the way, the original post was great, I agreed with everything.

Hyde is our Second best Tagger after Johnson. Johnson has played mainly as an attacking mid this season which has open the door for Hyde. I think Hyde has been pretty good and was one of our best against Port. Connors has to earn his spot like everyone else. Edwards, Riewoldt and Morton all got dropped on Form. So did Bowden and Pets. The Days of playing the kids for the sake of playing the kids are numbered you know have to earn your spot or someone else will take it, which is what the good sides have. Depth.

Rance in the side he plays third or fourth best forward... In the 2's he plays as the number 1 Back which is the role he looks destined for. The fact that Moore and Thurs are holding him back is also healthy.

WeAreHatedAgain

3 Jul 2008, 12:37

As a Blues fan I don't think we are ahead of you by any stretch of the imagination

One advantage we do have is that we seem to have a coach that the players are playing for, we are running out games better and we aren't playing injured players

The Tigers just run out of legs on Saturday and seemed to have unfit players playing

Richo seemed to be crying out for the break, Johnson was clearly off the pace, king wasn't his zippy self and nathan brown just had a bad day

With Thursfield, McGuane and Coughlin in that side I think you are definitely a finals side

Richmonds list is more advanced than Carlton's and ok we had judd, walker, bower and houlihan out but get a decent coach and you will be right up there

Do you agree with this?

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 12:46

I think why some people get so grumpy is because of how long we've been down and out. Not many people want to wait another few years.

It's strange...the longer our dry spell goes on, the more pissed people get obviously. But it's almost as though now we finally have a team that looks like it could take us somewhere, people aren't willing to wait through the period of time that it takes all teams to move from the bottom back to the top. Seems a bit like 'we've waited 25+ years, so now that we have finally built a team that looks like it could one day challenge, why aren't we winning flags now?'

lvt06

3 Jul 2008, 12:47

Some really good posts on this thread. Some positivity is always good to read.

I think with the backs we have coming through - Rance, Thursfield, Moore and Mcguane its the forward line we need to work on.

When Pattison was recruited he was to play as a full forward. Not sure if he is going to make it as a forward. I am a fan of pattison as he works really hard around the ground, but is just not a tap ruckman either. He is a hard one to place. Then we have Putt coming throught, 202cm giant or could play ruck, although was recruited as a power forward......still raw, but it might be good to give him a chance?

As stated in other threads Watts would be perfect for us, but i cant see him dropping that far, considering Melbourne have NO forwards at all....

We need a forward, and another classy midfielder and we are more then on our was to success.

I have enjoyed this season alot, not for the fact that we lost a couple of close ones, and then to Carlton but for the fact we have been competative in most games (Sydney Adelaide - SHOCKING) but for the fact that we have seen that finally some recruitment descisons are looking good.

telsor

3 Jul 2008, 12:49

The fact is we do have players coming through but does Wallace know what he is doing when playing Hyde?

The other common complaint...Why does an old 'dud' (hyde, tiv, etc etc etc ) get a game..

As was stated, kids aren't fully developed, physically or mentally.

Physically means they can't run hard, all game ( or tackle, or take the hard bumps as well, etc ). You need older players to basically make up that time of hard running while Lids/Cotchin/etc are resting in the pocket or on the pine. The alternative is 5 mins of 'tempo football' every qtr to give the kids a breather ( which is what we've been doing the past few years ).

Mentally is a matter of 'football smarts'...Knowing when to take the other guy on, when to balk, finding the right option to dispose to, etc..some players have this naturally ( Cotchin ), but all improve over the years, particularly the early years, one way you learn is by watching what others do, and what they don't. While Hyde (etc) mightn't be 'good' and wont be in our next premiership team, he's *currently* better than those he's keeping out, and thus provides a better example.

The other part of the mental game is confidence...Both in your own ability, and those of your teammates. It comes from many things, but watching the other guys on your team doing the right things helps..Other kids are good, but it's the older, more consistant guys who really need to provide the examples.

Another part of it is teaching the kids on the fringes of selection that they need to EARN it...Being almost as good as Hyde(etc) but younger and with more potential doesn't give you a game, you need to be BETTER than the other guy to get a game.

Also...It always confuses me how the people complaining about us not playing enough kids are usually the ones who complain about how often we lose, and our poor skills/decision making and how some of the kids are duds because while they're still young, they're not dominating games (Tambling?).

If we played 22 kids, we'd lose every game, the pressure from the opposition would make our skills even worse, and the inexperience of our team would mean woeful decision making....And those same people would be calling for these kids to be dumped.

Roachy8

3 Jul 2008, 12:52

The Draft:
99 Preseason Draft....Pick 6......Clay Sampson
National Draft ..........3............Aaron Fiora
.............................22..........Ezra Poyas
.............................39..........Scott Homewood
.............................52..........Andrew Mills
.............................78..........Ty Zantuck
Trade Leon Cameron, Clinton King
Rookie elevation Ben Hollands

00 National..............9...........Kayne Pettifer
.............................25..........Mark Coughlan
.............................40..........Chris Hyde
.............................41..........Andrew Krakour
.............................55..........Chris Newman
.............................57..........Steven Sziller
Rookie Ben Haynes, Royce Vardy

01 National.............33...........David Rodan
............................63...........Adam L. Houlihan
............................68...........Chris Hyde
............................77...........Martin McGrath
Trade Paul Hudson, Greg Stafford
Rookie Graig Ednie

02 National.............12...........Jay Schulz
............................41...........Tim Flemming
............................47...........Bill Nicholls
............................62...........Daniel Sipthorp
Trade Justin Blumfield, Kane Johnson

03 National............21............Alex Gilmore
...........................37............Thomas Roach
...........................53............Daniel Jackson
...........................64............Shane Morrison
...........................70............Brent Hartigan
...........................73............Shane Tuck
...........................76............Andrew Raines
...........................79............Kyle Archibald
Trade Nathan Brown

So there is 8 players out of 28 drafted still on the list and 2 out of 11 trades and rookie elevations, so draft periods from 99 to 03 is a complete wipe out. these drafts where suppose to prived that core group (99 draft = 28year old:03 draft = 23year old). I blame the Frawley rein for this shambles of a list, him and his recruiting team (Beck) and no one else. Pethetic recruiting and drafting.

That list above is just cringe worthy! :eek:

So as illustrated, of the 39 odd players to join the Tigers in that 5 year period, only 10 (26%) are still with us.
Even worse, of those 10 only 5 (13%) would arguably be considered in our best 22. (Coughlan, Newman, Johnson, Tuck & Brown)

One day if someone had the time it would be fascinating to see the same excercise with the other 15 clubs.
I would be astonished if any other mob had a worse hit rate.

That hole in mid-age-range players is absolutely rooted...
There are more spuds on the "no longer with us" list than in Idaho!

How bizarre that as we were enjoying that brief "finals fling" in 2001, we were all blind and oblivious to the fact that we were in the middle of a period of the most criminal mismanagement of our football club in History!!!!

:thumbsd: Thumbs down to those responsible! :thumbsd:

El Segundo

3 Jul 2008, 12:55

Hey tiges fans...

I have always had a soft spot for you guys and would truly love to see you become a power again.

As a cats supporter, can I just say, it does take many, many years to build a strong team. There have been times over our recent past where I thought these days would never come.

If you were to line up Geelong and Richmond side by side, I think the main thing you would notice is the massive difference in player size.

I think you guys are in most need of some more flint hard bodied midfielders. Whether its been by design, luck or a combination of both, our guys all posses those strong hips and shoulders that just scream finals footballers. Think Ablett, Selwood, Bartel, Steve Johnson, Stokes, Corey, Ling, Enright.

Anyway, if I was in charge of the tiges list management it wouold be midfielders and more midfielders for me.

Good luck

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 12:55

That list above is just cringe worthy! :eek:

So as illustrated, of the 39 odd players to join the Tigers in that 5 year period, only 10 (26%) are still with us.
Even worse, of those 10 only 5 (13%) would arguably be considered in our best 22. (Coughlan, Newman, Johnson, Tuck & Brown)

One day if someone had the time it would be fascinating to see the same excercise with the other 15 clubs.
I would be astonished if any other mob had a worse hit rate.

That hole in mid-age-range players is absolutely rooted...
There are more spuds on the "no longer with us" list than in Idaho!

How bizarre that as we were enjoying that brief "finals fling" in 2001, we were all blind and oblivious to the fact that we were in the middle of a period of the most criminal mismanagement of our football club in History!!!!

:thumbsd: Thumbs down to those responsible! :thumbsd:

man, Spud was hell bent on sabotage. ;)

Richo Man

3 Jul 2008, 12:58

Hyde is our Second best Tagger after Johnson. Johnson has played mainly as an attacking mid this season which has open the door for Hyde. I think Hyde has been pretty good and was one of our best against Port. Connors has to earn his spot like everyone else. Edwards, Riewoldt and Morton all got dropped on Form. So did Bowden and Pets. The Days of playing the kids for the sake of playing the kids are numbered you know have to earn your spot or someone else will take it, which is what the good sides have. Depth.

Rance in the side he plays third or fourth best forward... In the 2's he plays as the number 1 Back which is the role he looks destined for. The fact that Moore and Thurs are holding him back is also healthy.
Hyde has been sh*t this year, he makes too many mistakes. He had one good game against Port, so what. And I was using Connors as an example, alright everyone's saying Collins has been tearing it up, so why isn't he getting a game?
Edwards, Riewoldt and Morton got dropped on form so why hasn't Patto gotten the boot yet?
And with Moore and Thursty holding him back yeah it's healthy but tell me why he couldn't have come into the side last Saturday? If they knew Thursty wasn't 100% right, they should have named Rance emergency and brang him in.

TigerTroy0055

3 Jul 2008, 13:15

I'm not sure where he'd get the opportunity but wouldn't be great if Plough got his hands on a Rep Team next year. I'd love to see how a team full of stars reacted to him and what sort of game plan he'd use.

I think he and the whole Club set up as far as Coburg is concerned have been working well with the development of our young list but would of liked to see a few more debuts this year instead of giving games to Tivendale , Pettifer and Hyde.

My Brother who is a Carlton Supporter reckons Wallace should be sacked because he only plays these older guys because he needs to win games to keep his job safe for next year. What a contradiction that is , whats wrong with a Coach trying to win games full stop.

The only way I've seen Wallace go wrong this year is giving these older players second chances when it has been obvious that they are not up to it any more. How Tivendale got another game in the seniors after that round 3 shocker against Collingwood is beyond me. I don't care how many touches he got or gets for Coburg the bloke was done and dusted. Helen Keller could of seen that.

Richo Man

3 Jul 2008, 13:17

The other common complaint...Why does an old 'dud' (hyde, tiv, etc etc etc ) get a game..

As was stated, kids aren't fully developed, physically or mentally.

Physically means they can't run hard, all game ( or tackle, or take the hard bumps as well, etc ). You need older players to basically make up that time of hard running while Lids/Cotchin/etc are resting in the pocket or on the pine. The alternative is 5 mins of 'tempo football' every qtr to give the kids a breather ( which is what we've been doing the past few years ).

Mentally is a matter of 'football smarts'...Knowing when to take the other guy on, when to balk, finding the right option to dispose to, etc..some players have this naturally ( Cotchin ), but all improve over the years, particularly the early years, one way you learn is by watching what others do, and what they don't. While Hyde (etc) mightn't be 'good' and wont be in our next premiership team, he's *currently* better than those he's keeping out, and thus provides a better example.

As far as who? Who is Hyde better than that isn't in the side? Tivendale? Fair enough, he's just finished. Jackson? Who I thought was very good last year but yet he hasn't been given a go this year?
You cannot say Hyde is better than kids like Collins, Edwards, Connors, Rance. They have barely got a sniff of AFL.
I mean come on, I don't care about some people in the side, but he's been around the club for ages and is a nothing player, when his career is on the line he will do enough.

nut

3 Jul 2008, 13:19

Hyde has been sh*t this year, he makes too many mistakes. He had one good game against Port, so what. And I was using Connors as an example, alright everyone's saying Collins has been tearing it up, so why isn't he getting a game?
Edwards, Riewoldt and Morton got dropped on form so why hasn't Patto gotten the boot yet?
And with Moore and Thursty holding him back yeah it's healthy but tell me why he couldn't have come into the side last Saturday? If they knew Thursty wasn't 100% right, they should have named Rance emergency and brang him in.

Early in the season Hyde played the Role Johnson has been playing the last 2 seasons... not as well but thats what he was doing. Hyde has been in the system alot longer and he can tag. Collins is coming back from Injury and he will get his chance.
Patto hasn't been to bad. e is a cash and bash ruckman tht isn't to bad around the ground. Basically there so Simmonds can get a rest. Putt is still developing.
I was surprised Rance didn't play too, who knows why... our defense wasn't the problem it was the Nick Stevens show.

TigerTroy0055

3 Jul 2008, 13:20

P.s I can just barely get my head around why Chris Hyde is still getting a game this year but if he is on our list next year I will dip my shlong in honey and poke it down the first Ants nest I can find. Thats gotta feel better than watching Hyde run around week in week out. Especially with Connors , Edwards , Collins and Co desperately putting their hands up for games.

genghiskhan

3 Jul 2008, 13:40

The problem with judging the quality of lists to assess the worth of a coach is that list judging is always subjective and prone to change. For example, one week Hughes can be a dud that needs to be given the arse, and the next week he is a superstar with a load of potential. Coaching moves and playing styles have a way of bringing out talent in some people and destroying it in others. Croad,Clement, and McPhee were duds without talent at Fremantle but stars at other clubs.

Another coach may have had a coaching philosophy that made stars out of the players Wallace sacked as duds recruited by Frawley. Definately Paul Roos did a great job at Sydney with a list most observers had judged to be lacking in talent. Admittedly, Rodan has been the only one that has gone on, but it is hard getting re-drafted once given the arse by one club. With the focus being on youth and potential, cut players are rarely given second chances these days.

Aside from subjective judgments about the list's potential, what has Wallace done right? Has he been able to rebuild a list and still win games as effectively as Hawthorn, Brisbane, Port, Nth Melbourne or the Swans? He has definitely been aiming for wins. That's what the recruitment of Brown, Simmonds, Kingsley, Graham, Polak, McMahon, Morton, Bowden was meant to achieve. It is also the reason he kept playing Hyde and Tivendale, but the wins just have not come.

While I have not seen results as yet, I have seen things that I don't agree with. I can't see what Wallace hoped to achieve by saying the list was pathetic when he got there. Was such a comment meant to make the players on the list believe in themselves? Was it meant to change the culture of criticism that Wallance now complains about?

The only fact that matters is that Richmond is losing games with seasoned bodied players. Maybe the list has a great deal of potential. Well, it should have potential. Year after year on the bottom should deliver a coach the prime draft selections. Then again, when we talk of potential, we have to remember that stars such as Simmonds, Richardson, Johnson and Brown are nearing the end of their careers. Every club has lots of kids on their lists at the moment. Consequently, almost every fan believes their list has potential. It is inevitable that not all the potential is going to be realised.

HobarTiger

3 Jul 2008, 13:41

eays

3 Jul 2008, 13:42

@ OP ....

Firstly, good post and i think we all appreciate the effort that went into it.

I do agree with some of your points, BUT....

All you did was convince (or re-affirm) to me that (i) Wallace is a relatively good list manager; and (ii) previously, our list management was shit.

But we must not forget that a list manager is NOT the same as a coach. My beef with Wallace is mostly due to how i assess him as a coach.

Reason 1 - I really think he coaches scared and this permeates through to the way we play

Reason 2 - I'm not sure he has a clear game play, and again, you see it in the players

Reason 3 - he is just plain out slow to adapt on game day. I really think he is the worst game day coach in the comp. How many times does an opposition coach create a mismatch and Terry either doesnt see it or refuses to acknowledge it and we are killed by it. The obvious example is small/med forwards who have simple killed us this season. Had he been trying different players on these types all season and we still got cut up i'd give Terry some slack. But he has persisted with the likes of King, Newman and McMahon and it simply hasnt worked.

Reason 4 - I dont like the way he structures us up ... you just dont win finals without a dominant big forward and until 2 weeks ago we hadnt exactly been giving our young big guys like Riewoldt or Hughes a chance. I'd have less of a beef even if he tried Schulz, but instead or fwd line consisted of Richoman and the midget fleet, with the occassional Polak thrown in (i dont want to be harsh on Polak since he is obviously not well atm, but he was never ever going to be a kew fwd for us that could take us places - especially given his kicking)

Reason 5 - His persistence with old hacks such as Tivendale, Hyde etc. Say all you will about these guys filling a short term gap, but i have absolutely no doubt that throwing the kids in the deep end (in a controlled, responsible manner with rotations etc - see the way Collingwood or Bris does it) is much much better for our future than playing these guys.

Reason 6 - Kane Johnson as captain in 2008. Controversial point i know, and maybe i lose some of you on it but i truly feel this way. I dont care about off field leadership, on field is really where it counts. In the heat of battle. Now i was saying this for 2007 but fair enough he was chosen captain then. But 2007 was a shocker by anyone's standards for Kane. To have this guy captain again, well its a joke. He is a completely uninspiring on field leader. People will ask, if not Kane who? I acknowledge there may not a candidate knocking the door down, but there sure as heck are many others who would be better captains - Newmann, Foley, Richoman, Brown and even Deledio.

Reason 7 - not doing the proper clean out day 1 (and drafting the likes of Humm, P Bowden, Graham, Knobel, Kingsley etc). I think Terry probably did think our list was better than Haw etc and did think we were a little closer. Fair enough, he made this mistake. It happens. But he should have realised that at the end of 2005 and did the clean out proper then. Instead we pick up only 3 kids in the 05 draft (one was JON when every man and his dog was saying Hurn and Clark were better options - but that issue aside) - again, more proof that he thought our list was closer than it was again. And further proof that this guy is just plain slow to adapt.

And what really irks me is that with all these instances that point to Wallace's actions indicating he thought our list was better than it was in 2004/2005 yet he still falls back on the "our list was absolutely deplorable, it was Spuds fault" line and people buy it.

But even if we do/have bought it, surely the list is Wallace's now. Surely we are right to expect improvement.

And for those who think we have really improved this year, i say against what metric? Against last year, when we won the wooden spoon? Ok, granted. But is that much to hang your hat on? No. Against, Wallace's first year or many of the Spud year's when by most people's admission our list was full of shit? Then NO, we havent really improved that much have we. We havent beaten one single side of worth this year to say we've really improved - Carl when injury riddled, Freo, Ess, Melb who are rabbles and Port who threw the season in well before we played them. Sure we've run some good sides close, but we've done that pretty much every year of the last 28 which have mostly been failures, so i wouldnt point to that as "improvement".

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 13:48

Great original post!

The spud years have killed us. Wallace is not perfect but the one thing I'm convinced he has done a good job with is List Management. JON maybe the biggest blooper of his 1st 5 drafts. Majority of picks are still on the list and he has had good succes with identifying talent to rookie, develop and then promote. And with the lack of quality in mid-age ranged players we have now, he has traded well to at least try and fill the gap.

Light years ahead of spud, who mis-identified young talent and wasted far too many picks of dud retreads. How the hell did our mighty club get to that position?

Wallace may never give us the Premiership we crave but his plan will regain the Club the respectability spud pissed away in his 5yr stint.

not nessecarily, but they were the second last nail in the coffin. Said it then, our recruting under the likes of Vickers and Waldron back in the KB days, set us up for 2 decades of pain and anguish. Enter Kevin Morris and we saw a light, then we got all warm and fuzzy under Daphne, because we were "professionals" all of a sudden, thinking our shit didnt stink, got rid of those who gave us the glimmer of light and know how, and enter Beck and the keystone cops. We havent had a decent recruiting guru for the last 20 years, so how the ____ do you expect to build a team from the ground up, when the cattle that was earmarked as the building blocks were utterly shit?
Then we come to the Dud of Duds, the master of shitness, Spud. Who forever and a day, wanted to prove something to someone, for his own benefit. So what does he do? he hands over the shopping list and in come the answers to our woes, the names you know. he was hell bent on getting wins for the sake of his own name, and to hide the fact that he couldnt coach an auskick side, so he opts for the Blumfields, Hudsons and Hoolahops etc of this world....and we are where we are....20 years later wallowing in the mire.
I mean, our head recruiter of those years is selling computer software now, another member of that brainless trust is selling used cars...like WTF do you expect when we hired absolute ____ing idiots to be anything but. ;)

beaver fever

3 Jul 2008, 14:21

Ok enough of the love fest. How you guys remain optimisitic after being continually let down is beyond me, because Saturday was so typical.

I will go over our entire list and give my opinion on where it is at, which is not so rosey and happy as most of you with your head in the sand. Some players are mentioned twice because of mulitple roles.

KP Defenders: To me a KP defender takes FB/CHB and has a big body to take opposition forwards and is greater than 190 cm tall. Richmond has been forced to play undersized players in these roles.

Moore: Not KPP and although he has done a fantastic job this year, we will get the most out of him in a rebounding defensive role on medium forwards such as O'Keefe (Sydney).

Polak: Has failed when given a defensive role on a power forward, with the exception of Tredrea in round 13. Not big enough, although has the right height. Decision-making is suspect in defense. Better suited to the forward-line.

Schulz: Similar to Poak and not the answer to our long-term KP defensive problems IMO. Has decent skills, but is not competitive enough and seems to be outmuscled too much. Much better suited to the forward-line.

Thursfield: Great spoiler and at a good age, he should develop into a very good defender. However his strengths are speed and skills and he should not be forced to take big forwards. Ideally he would take 3rd talls or fast leading types like Williams (Hawthorn)

McGuane: Similar to Thursfield, but without the same class and skills, I don't think McGuane is good enough to be a solid AFL performer and we need to do better.

Rance: Has shown good signs at Coburg, but is still unproven so time will tell.

Gourdis: Very raw and is still learning how to play as a defender. Suspect skills and decision making, he will take much more time.

Silvestor: A good VFL defender, but that is it.

Overall: While we have some promise here, we still lack a couple of genuine tall and big bodied defenders to take the monster forwards of the competition.

Defenders: While we have plenty of rebounding defenders, we seriously lack accountable small/medium defenders.

Newman: Very good rebounder with good decision making and a strong body. However Newman is prone to be unaccountable and while he might get a lot of the footy, his opponent will too.

Bowden: Same as Newman, except he is old now and slower. Not in our long-term future.

McMahon: Our best rebounder, but is totally unaccountable and should not be played as a defender.

King: Great rebounder, but his skills and decision making is very suspect. Generally pretty accountable.

Raines: Decent defender that generally shuts his opponent down, but has suspect decision making and skills.

Casserly: Great skills and rebound, but has been far too injury prone. needs more time.

Oakley-Nicholls: So far he has not shown a lot, but is not soft like a lot of our players. His determination and tenacity are his strengths, however his weaknessess are much more apparent. Poor decision-making, disposal and awareness. He will still be given time to show his worth.

Overall: We need more defensively minded players here as we have an abundence of unaccountability. Need a couple of tough smaller defenders to help against the small leading forwards of the competition, that have been killing us all year.

Inside Midfielders: Currently we lack skillful and tough inside types, and is the major reason why we suffer at clearances and centre breaks.

Johnson: Slow, and old, Johnson is nearing his end. While he can still find the footy, he is not our long-term answer and we need to find a replacement.

Tuck: Can find the footy, but his disposal is very suspect. Big body, but not overly quick and to me his best bet is to play as a tagger.

Coughlan: Ball magnet and has ok disposal, however is not quick and his injuries may mean he will never be the player his potential could have been.

Foley: Good awareness, fast and has ok disposal, Foley is our best inside midfielder by a mile. Has been given a lot of attention this year, and he needs much more support to maximise his potential.

Jackson: Showed promise, but appears like he will be delisted at seasons end.

Polo: Appears to be a very capable tagger and can find the footy as well. Still needs to work on his skills and speed, but I think if he can apply himself more we may have a decent player.

Tambling: Shown promise, but has yet to solidify his place in the AFL. Can win the contested footy, but consistency and competitiveness need much more work.

Deledio: Can get the contested footy, but is more useful if he is using the footy and not supplying the footy.

Connors: Has shown real class at AFL and VFL level, however injuries and attitude has meant he hasn't performed to his potential.

Cotchin: Same as deledio.

Overall: Need another 2-3 genuine inside ball getters with toughness and good skills to help out Foley.

Outside Midfielders: Doing ok in this regard, but still lack skill and competitiveness.

Tivendale: Old and no good. Delisted.

Hyde: Same as Tivendale. He is not in our long-term future.

McMahon: Great drive and quick with ok skills. Still needs to work on his competitiveness (hardness), but I think his best bet is on the wing.

White: Shown promise this year. Is quick, hard at it and tackles very well. however his skills, and decision making are not great. Still 50/50 on whether he will make it.

Deledio: Probably best suited to providing service to our forward-line and is a solid AFL performer. Has now taken his game to a new level finding plenty of the footy, he just needs to get his confidence up to really take the game on, instead of shitting himself when he doesn't have an obvious option. hence why he handballs a lot.

Oakley-Nicholls: same as previous entry. IMO he is best suited to the wing.

Edwards: Has shown a bit and could be a good player for us. Still needs to prove himself though and find more of the footy.

Collins: Shown promise at Coburg. Needs more time.

Cotchin: Same as deledio, and should be an important player for the future.

Howat: Not AFL standard and should be delisted.

Overall: We seem pretty set here for the future, but still need to add more quality.

Forwards: While we have some decent leading smalls that can find the goals, defensively minded forwards are non-existent.

Brown: Great skills, awareness and is a proven performer. At 30 though he is nearing his end and we need to find a replacement.

Pettifer: Is a proven goal kicker and can get the footy, but he is soft and lets his opponent get away with far too much. Trade or delist.

Meyer: Good skills, but injuries have hurt his chances. Has not shown enough and may be delisted.

Morton: Shown promise and is a big chance to make the grade and provide a dangerous option up forward. Good skills, competitiveness and can kick goals.

Collard: Has a lot of potential, and just needs to get his attitude and application right before he can start to live on it. Still has many question marks.

Overall: When Brown is gone we will have a big hole here and we still lack defensive, lock-down forwards/crummers. Need to find another skillful and dangerous forward as Meyer most likely isn't the answer and need to bring in crumbers like Thomas (NM), Hooper (Brisbane) and Davis (Collingwood).

KP Forwards: We have some options here but many more questions marks. Richardson is coming to the end of his career, so who will kick our goals?

Richardson: Great servant to the RFC, and may extend his career if he is left in the goal square. However I doubt he will play much longer, given how hard he pushes himself every week.

Polak: Great mark, but poor kick for goal. If he can improve this then he may be good enough, but still 50/50.

Schulz: Good kick for goal, but at 23 he needs to show much much more.

Hughes: Shown great signs, but is still generally pretty soft and prone to go missing for large parts of the game. needs to apply himself more and make it to more contests.

Riewoldt: Also shown promise and should make the grade. He just needs to start kicking some goals and he will be an important player for the club.

Overall: We have promise, but that is it. When Richardson retires we are in trouble ATM. Need to draft more KP forwards because we are relying on too few players to make the grade.

Rucks: Big problems in the ruck department. irony intended.

Simmonds: Is old now and still is only 196cm tall. Not in our long-term future.

Pattision: Good application and toughness, however is undersized and hence doesnt get many hitouts. Also questionable kicking skills. People suggesting him at CHF should forget that notion. Not fast enough or skillful enough for it. Ok as a second ruck option, but we need to do better than that.

Graham: Hasn't shown enough to suggest he will be good enough at AFL level, but needs much more time.

Putt: Same as Graham.

Cartledge: Same as Silvestor. Good VFL player, but that is it.

Overall: Up shit creek. Not enough 200+cm types and we are relying on Pattison to make the grade, otherwise we will be forced to trade 1st rounders for good ruckman.

Overall List: We have some promising young players, but many on our list have deficiencies that we have to improve on. Overall our list lacks quality, size and skill. Inside midfielders, tough small defenders, crumbing defensive forwards, 200+cm rucks, bid bodied defenders and forwards. I think the list is very suspect and we need to do much much more to fix it.

Bojangles17

3 Jul 2008, 14:32

eays

3 Jul 2008, 14:51

@ beaverfeaver ...

I am not sure that our list is our dire a predicament as that, although i do agree with a lot of what you say. Got to remember though that when the pieces fit together well, some players who may not necessarily look that good now will stand up.

I agree that we need another big defender. Moore/Mcguane are thrid defender types. Thursfield and Rance will hopefully take key forwards, but we need another for depth. I am not worried about small or rebounding defenders, think we have enough on our list and could always turn a midfiedler who isnt up to that into that role (pretty much what we are doing with Raines anyway right?)

Mid's i am satisfied with. Think there is enough to suggest we will be ok. Cotchin, Foley and Deledio will provide the A grade. Others will step up as they get older. Satisfied that one of Connors, Edwards, Collins or future draft pick would step up also as A quality, and the others along with Tuck, Polo and White will be great depth.

Fwds - we need a small forward, but i am not that concerned as we should be able to find fairly easily or just use a resting midfielder in that role. If all else fails, Tambling.

Med fwds - Morton, Brown etc. Terry has no problem finding these types. Not worried.

Big Fwds - Hughes and Riewoldt are an ok start. BUT, we need a genuine power forward to go with them. Hughes is more lead up. Riewoldt more floating HFF type. Need a genuine, gun power fwd.

Ruck - agree, we desperately need a good young ruck prospect.

OVERALL - key position defender, genuine gun power forward, ruck. You can never have enough quality mids, especially inside mids who can kick, so we should be looking for them as well.

BUT - having said all that, i dont believe Wallace is the right COACH for us in terms of taking us forward. Maybe we should remove him from that role, make him a list consultant or something and get Guy Mckenna as head coach.

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 14:51

the cold hard facts are that the senior group that has been around for the jounrney wont be around when we and if we begin to kick butt. You look at the cats and from all the years of development and experimenting that they had to endure to get the team that was "the" team, its safe to say that Milburn is the only one that was there when the journey began. The senior group are a mix of senior recruits introduced to the mix when the basis of the team was set, and only required player x or player y, to seal the deal.
Simmonds was given a 5 year contract, purely to fill a gap, might yet have somthing to offer, but if its not as a second string fill in, we are ____ed- enter warnock. Unfortunately for the mix, Knob couldnt cut the mustard because of injury, he did have presence when rucking.
Johnson? he is gone...maybe another year max, treading water.
Richo, might yet play to his 50, but wear and tear will dent his one advantage.
Browny? he might yet still be there. Purely because he is hungry to prove all the detractors wrong..and for the position he plays in, can still offer his smarts in the FL for another 4 years at least.
Bowden? watched him closely on Saturday, played a great game, but also seems to be treading water waiting for the right time to hang them up.
Pettifer? who??

Polak? was an heir apparent, time will tell after the unfortunate incident, but he has more important things to think about other than footy right now.

So after all that the senior group will most likely take the form of:
Axel
Newmo
Thurst
Cogga (if he makes it back, which i am tipping he will, because he wouldnt be doing what he is doing if he thought it was a forlorn chance)
Lids - would have played 100 by this time
and you can add 2 recruits here.
I am tipping we will see either a Cousins or Kerr in yellow and black next year.
Add to that a KPP Forward from somewhere. Dont know who, wont be a big name, in the sense of star factor. Would be tipping it will be something along the lines of for e.g a Spalding being recruited by Carlton back when....to do a job.

It will leave, maybe 1 or 2 players that were part of the Spud years, which was always going to be the way. Take a look at the team now and you will know what i mean. ;)

SKOULIKI

3 Jul 2008, 14:57

Just one question, why did Wallace say when he was appointed or just after being appointed that Richmond had a better list than the Hawks then?

Yet here we are 3.5 years later and we're a team sitting in 12th with 5 wins while the Hawks are a 12 win team sitting 3rd. And I don't want the 'they have a better core group' excuse thrown back at me because that wont wash. As I said Wallace made that comment back in 2004 when the Hawks were sitting 1 spot above us, so either he believed it to be the case or he was talking B/S from the start.

At the time he didn't know that he wont have Cogs & Brown out for two years. That makes a huge diff! 05 we were top 6 half way then Brown does his leg, then Cogs does his Knee!

If we had Cogs fit from the start of this season, the tiges will be in the eight now and people wouldn't be talking all this crap!

Obviously we are not and TW is trying to develop players to become core players and I can name a few which will be ready in 2010. Cotch, Del, Foley, White, Reiwolt, Morton, Hughes, Moore, Thursfield, Patto, Edwards & Jon!!!!

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 15:00

At the time he didn't know that he wont have Cogs & Brown out for two years. That makes a huge diff! 05 we were top 6 half way then Brown does his leg, then Cogs does his Knee!

If we had Cogs fit from the start of this season, the tiges will be in the eight now and people wouldn't be talking all this crap!

Obviously we are not and TW is trying to develop players to become core players and I can name a few which will be ready in 2010. Cotch, Del, Foley, White, Reiwolt, Morton, Hughes, Moore, Thursfield, Patto, Edwards & Jon!!!!

going out on a limb here, but after the weekend, this kid might yet prove to be the star that we have been waiting for. Things happen for him because he has the one thing that takes you from also-ran to star- ANTICIPATION and a dead set confidence in it. ;)

Moreaux

3 Jul 2008, 15:25

going out on a limb here, but after the weekend, this kid might yet prove to be the star that we have been waiting for. Things happen for him because he has the one thing that takes you from also-ran to star- ANTICIPATION and a dead set confidence in it. ;)

Agree Cogga JR even when he doesn't seem to be doing much does things like tackle, spoil and little things that bring others into the game around him, saw him kick two passes on his left foot on the weekend both under pressure, which is great that he has the confidence to do that, he stuffed one up but the other went straight to cotch.
with more experience will be a v good player.
Same with mitch morton who for whatever reason stuffed up at wce (easy to do in the last few years there), is an absolute class act great on both feet good overhead and offf the ground the complete small forward for us, will get better with more games and exp a little frightening really:thumbsu:

telsor

3 Jul 2008, 15:40

KP Defenders: To me a KP defender takes FB/CHB and has a big body to take opposition forwards and is greater than 190 cm tall. Richmond has been forced to play undersized players in these roles.

Overall: While we have some promise here, we still lack a couple of genuine tall and big bodied defenders to take the monster forwards of the competition.

The days of the Gorilla backman are gone, umpired out of it. These days you need to be *QUICK* so you can get the spoil in and beat the big guys on the ground. Sure, you might get out wrestled a few times a game, but that wont cost you as many goals as being beaten on the lead will. A bit more muscle back there would be good, but Thursty and Rance are both young, so should muscle up over the next few years.

Defenders: While we have plenty of rebounding defenders, we seriously lack accountable small/medium defenders.

Overall: We need more defensively minded players here as we have an abundence of unaccountability. Need a couple of tough smaller defenders to help against the small leading forwards of the competition, that have been killing us all year.

Agreed, although I'd say rather we need players back there who can go both ways...Tight when they have the ball, THEN run off and cause damage after a turnover.

Inside Midfielders: Currently we lack skillful and tough inside types, and is the major reason why we suffer at clearances and centre breaks.

Overall: Need another 2-3 genuine inside ball getters with toughness and good skills to help out Foley.

Outside Midfielders: Doing ok in this regard, but still lack skill and competitiveness.

Overall: We seem pretty set here for the future, but still need to add more quality.

As I've said elsewhere, more is always good when it comes to quality mids.

I consider there to be 3 types..in/out & BOTH ( Lids, Cotchin types ).

Our mids will improve with experience...There is talent there and getting that 50-100 games into them will mean an extra second to make the right decisions and dispose in tight. It'll also mean more preseasons to build up the bodies to make/break tackles.

Forwards: While we have some decent leading smalls that can find the goals, defensively minded forwards are non-existent.

Overall: When Brown is gone we will have a big hole here and we still lack defensive, lock-down forwards/crummers. Need to find another skillful and dangerous forward as Meyer most likely isn't the answer and need to bring in crumbers like Thomas (NM), Hooper (Brisbane) and Davis (Collingwood).

I like Edwards for the FP/crumber role...As for replacing Brown look to Morton.

KP Forwards: We have some options here but many more questions marks. Richardson is coming to the end of his career, so who will kick our goals?

Overall: We have promise, but that is it. When Richardson retires we are in trouble ATM. Need to draft more KP forwards because we are relying on too few players to make the grade.

I think Hughes is a good example of why several of still have hope...There are kids around, they just need time. A month or 2 back, he was widely labelled here as a wasted pick.

Agreed that another option would be useful though. As for a 'monster forward'...Isn't that what we supposedly recruited Putt for? He'll take 3-4 years though to build up the muscle/attitude/body skills for the job though ( as would any other kid we recruit for that job ).

Rucks: Big problems in the ruck department. irony intended.

Overall: Up shit creek. Not enough 200+cm types and we are relying on Pattison to make the grade, otherwise we will be forced to trade 1st rounders for good ruckman.

As we saw last year, without Simmonds we're in trouble, but Rucks don't mature until they're 23/24 and all of our list ( except Simmonds ) are younger than that. ( OK, Cartledge is 23, which is probably why he's the best of the rest ). Will Patto/Graham/Cartledge make it? Maybe, maybe not, but it's too early to panic because they're not there yet.

Mind you, I'm also of the opinion that winning the taps is overrated and a good ruckman will stop the other guy dominating the taps too much and beat him around the ground, so I think we have a philosophical disagreement there.

Overall List: We have some promising young players, but many on our list have deficiencies that we have to improve on. Overall our list lacks quality, size and skill. Inside midfielders, tough small defenders, crumbing defensive forwards, 200+cm rucks, bid bodied defenders and forwards. I think the list is very suspect and we need to do much much more to fix it.

I don't see any glaring weaknesses. Yes, in all areas we have kids playing roles that they just don't have the size/experience for, and will grow into and improve.

In *all* areas we need more quality players/options...But that's probably true of most teams, and always will be.

Give me 6 picks, and I'll take 2 mids, 1KF, 1 KB, 1 small defender & 1 Ruck...Order mostly dependant of who's available at the pick in question.

Peter SasseGum

3 Jul 2008, 15:47

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 15:55

This is a top thread, with some well thought out opinions coupled with strong, sensible arguments.

Great to see us Tiger fans banding together, and having a sensible discussion amongst ourselves.

It shows a level of maturity and thinking not really on show in other boards on this website.

Simialar to the new way of thinking at Richmond. It's disciplined, rational, progressive and truly innovative. Really makes me glad that our club is now in super capable hands.

well done to TW and this staff for bringing in a new mindset and culture to the RFC, one that will surely deliver significient, long term success :thumbsu:

LMAO....how about medium rare to TW and his staff?

BTW dude, asked you about the proffesionalism that you are well doning about at tigerland on another thread. Who were the well done professionals that had the tigers skating on the wet, in moulded soles in Sydney and didnt have the well done professionalism to pack another couple of bags with screw ins? ;)

telsor

3 Jul 2008, 15:56

well done to TW and this staff for bringing in a new mindset and culture to the RFC, one that will surely deliver significient, long term success :thumbsu:

Which brings up a point not mentioned by beaver fever that's worth noting..

Still not sold on TW/Miller being the guys to take us all the way, but I will gladly concede it's an improvement on what they replaced.

Moreaux

3 Jul 2008, 16:00

Hey pete your replies would have more credability if you didn't end them all with

"well done to TW and this staff for bringing in a new mindset and culture to the RFC, one that will surely deliver significient, long term success "
or something similar we now get the point that you think that every thingf is "well done to tw etc...et al"

It makes you sound like a RFC stooge which we all here think you are, can you please just post something without the fawning licky licky finish.

imo you have some ok positive things to say but then ruin it with youre final paragraph:o

CoggaRules

3 Jul 2008, 16:00

Which brings up a point not mentioned by beaver fever that's worth noting..

Still not sold on TW/Miller being the guys to take us all the way, but I will gladly concede it's an improvement on what they replaced.

man dog shit would have been an improvement to stepped on dog shit, so it wasnt going to be to hard to improve on what they replaced. ;)

Moreaux

3 Jul 2008, 16:03

LOL cogga too true word up:D:D

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 16:03

In response to Beaver Fever's post...By the time I finish writing this we will probably be 3 or 4 pages on, so it's post number 46 if anyone is wondering.

KP Defenders: You make some decent points here. We seem to have a lot of KP Defenders who are borderline on size and ability as to whether or not they will be able to hold down that role in a good side.

Moore: See where you're coming from, but he is only 2 centimetres shorter than Geelong's FB and CHB from last year in Scarlett and Harley, and while he is a fair bit lighter, he can always bulk up and he seems to me to be reasonably big bodied anyway.

Polak: Obviously we don't even know his situation at the moment, but when he was playing..He definitely has the right sized body to be a KPD, but as you said, when we've tried him man-on-man in defence he has struggled. Could benefit from a bit more time being tried man-on-man, as we've only really played him like that a few times.

Schulz: He seems to be almost holding his own down back, but I agree that he doesn't seem to be the answer to our defensive problems. He might stop a key forward dominating, but I can't imagine him ever shutting out a player completely.

Thursfield: As you said, great spoiler and looks like an absolute gun. Stands 191cm tall, so that's not a big problem. It's more his build that is the worry, as he is a pretty lanky and skinny kid. Against certain teams I'd give him a shot on the big forwards. Each teams big FF/CHF is different. Players like Fraser Gehrig's (not that he's playing anymore) who tend to sit in the goal square and play directly man-on-man cannot be taking out of the game by Thursfield. Some big forwards though tend to spend a bit more time up the ground, or leading out of the goal square, such as Fev or Pav. It's these players Will can take, as he has great closing speed and an unbelievable ability to get a fist in from anywhere.

McGuane: Hard to say. Similar to Thursfield in terms of closing speed and spoiling, but not quite as good. Not sure on him.

Rance: Sounds promising. Obviously a long way to go, but there's a decent chance he could become a very handy KPD.

Gourdis: Wouldn't really have a clue about how he'd go at AFL level to be honest.

Silvestor: Agreed, good VFL player, would struggle in the AFL. In the NAB Cup he looked completely lost. Might be worth giving him another game or two but I don't know that he's good enough.

Overall: A big number of players here fighting for a couple of spots, which can only be a good thing. While there don't seem to be any standouts, there are a number that have a lot of potential, and hopefully at least a couple will fulfill it.

Defenders: Just about the biggest worry about our list is the lack of a small, accountable defender.

Newman: Amazingly solid, consistent rebounder, but not overly accountable.

Bowden: Obviously not going to be our long term answer to small defenders, but he still has worth as a rebounder/marshall in the backline.

McMahon: Another rebounder, another unaccountable medium defender.

King: Based on size, he's the one who should be taking the Milne's etc. Problem is, he concedes 4 or 5 goals a game through stupid mistakes, and isn't overly accountable

Raines: Would like to see him come back in and put back on these small/medium forwards that are killing us, but often tries to do too much and turns the ball over.

Casserly: Got good wraps on him, but can't seem to string any number of games together.

Oakley-Nicholls: Needs confidence. Watching a VFL game the other week where he played very well, he looked great. Wasn't constantly second guessing himself, was taking the first option and showed great skills and poise believe it or not. Then against Port he came in and was pathetic. I want us to keep persisting with him based on what he has shown when he's firing in the VFL.

Overall: Huge number of rebounders/flankers, desperately need a small defender or two though, and one that will actually shut down their opponent.

Inside Midfielders: One of the main reasons we are suffering at clearances isn't because of our midfielders, but the fact that we rarely win a ruck contest. We have the second worst hitouts : opposition hitouts in the league, ahead of only Carlton who don't have a ruckman.

Johnson: People seem to forget that he was one of our best players this season before he got injured. As you said though, obviously isn't a long term solution.

Tuck: Never really rated him that highly, but this year he is impressing me. His kicking skills have never been great, however they are often made to look worse by his decision making. This year he has tended to go long more often rather than the shitty little chip that generally goes 10 metres over his intended target's head. A role as a tagger is definitely not out of the question though.

Coughlan: Was a gun, but we have no idea how he will turn out coming back from his constant injuries, if he comes back at all.

Foley: Yep, gun, finds the ball, doesn't have a searing kick but still generally finds targets by cleverly placing the ball to our advantage. Struggling a bit this year, but he is helping players such as Deledio by taking the number one tag each week.

Jackson: Showed a bit, but just not quite good enough. Did a few decent tagging jobs late last year, but appears to have faded this year.

Polo: Agreed, he looks like he could be quite a decent tagger who can rack them up himself. Few things to work on but looks alright.

Tambling: Good player, underrated due to Franklin's ability, which really shouldn't make Tambling any less of a player, but according to many people it does. Does need to work on concistency, but has some great assets, namely his sidestep.

Deledio: I see him as an outside midfielder. Like you said, he can get the footy, but his ability by foot and his pace are assets of an outside midfielder.

Connors: Got a lot of class about him, but still a fair way to go.

Cotchin: Looks unbelievable, one of those players that can go in and win his own ball, or sit on the outside.

Overall: Good in this area, Foley obviously our number one inside midfielders, but with a couple of good young players coming through in Polo and Tambling, as well as the experience of Johnson and the hardness of Tuck.

Outside midfielders: Got some great talent here.

Tivendale: Won't play again, and if he does it won't be much.

Hyde: Has looked okay in parts, but at his age and with multiple very good young players coming through, may not have much time left. Also, I wouldn't say Hyde is strictly an outside midfielder. He gets his own ball as well as receiving it.

McMahon: Good, penetrating kick, could benefit from some time on the wing but does well on a HBF as well.

White: Looking good this year. Doesn't have great skills, but his pace is unbelievable and seems to almost allow him to do as he pleases, as no one can tackle him. Great tackler for a little bloke.

Deledio: Rated him a bit harshly for mine, he has been our second best player this year, and while he would benefit from kicking more, he has still been fantastic this year. His handpasses don't tend to be Tivendale or Johnson hospital handballs either, they generally at least link someone up or are placed to give us some advantage. Looks like being a great long term player for the club.

Edwards: Wouldn't mind seeing how he goes with a bit of time in the midfield, but he looks fairly decent down forward as well.

Collins: Good to hear he's doing well at Coburg, still a way to go though.

Cotchin: Looks ridiculously good. Making a few established AFL players look stupid already.

Howat: Not going to be a long term player for the club.

Overall: In a couple of years, our midfield will be a force. With Deledio and Cotchin hopefully leading it and taking the tags each week, Foley will be left to do as he pleases similar to what Joel Corey does. With a few other good players rotating through, our midfield could start looking quite formidable.

Forwards: Forward line looks pretty solid, still a lot of young players coming through, but a lot of them look very good.

Brown: Getting old, but still a player with freakish ability and a knack of popping up when he is needed. Still good for 2-3 years.

Pettifer: His chances of playing again for Richmond seem to be dropping by the week. Morton has come in and really shown him how it's done, but he doesn't seem to have risen to the challenge - if anything he's done the opposite.

Meyer: Has some good skills, but injuries have ____ed him up big time.

Morton: Looks like a great pick up. Kicks goals, smart player.

Collard: Again, huge wraps on him, but he sounds like a bit of a ____er. Needs some more kicks up the arse, and if he really applies himself he may be a good player for us.

Edwards: Didn't see him in your post, but he was given a good shot early in the year up forward. Went missing for a lot of the time, but that's to be expected of young players, and really played well against Essendon. Set shots for goal seemed to worry him, but he's a bit of a goalsneak and with improvement, could potentially be our sneaky little replacement for Brown.

Overall: Plenty of players that look good in this area. Also with the number of players we may have rotating through the midfield, a couple of them will most likely spend a bit of time helping out down here as well.

KP Forwards: Big worry when Richo goes, but he's hardly even been a forward this year and we've still gone alright.

Richo: Absolute superstar, won't be around for a whole lot longer though. Being moved up on to the wing will probably shorten his career, but he's giving other young forwards a great chance to prove themselvs.

Polak: Along with Richo, he's just about the best mark I've seen. Problem is his kicking, which - assuming he can get back on the park - if he can fix he could become quite a dangerous forward.

Schulz: If he is given space to virtually own the forward 50, he will be a very dangerous lead up forward. He was consistently kicking 3-4 goals a game early last year, looked dangerous, and had a deadly kick. His kicking has gone a bit off for a while, but is still generally pretty good.

Hughes: Never going to get much of the ball, but if he can get 8 or 9 kicks a game, he will kick 5 or 6 goals. Lovely, long kick of the ball, and the way he's come in and played very well two weeks running is a great sign.

Riewoldt: Very clever player, does a lot more than his stats suggest. Probably more of a flanker, but, considering his athleticism, is a handy size that could quite easily give the oppostition a few headaches.

Overall: Looking good here. You mentioned it's only promise at this stage, but when you're such a young team which is very lacking in the middle-aged group of players, that's what you're going to have.

Rucks: Agreed, is a bit of a worry.

Simmonds: Overrated. A good player, but would love to see him apply himself like Patto does. Doesn't win enough hitouts, but is a good contested mark up forward.

Patto: Second ruck. Never going to be a first ruck, just not good enough for it. He has great work ethic though, and I actually rate his kicking skills. He can give it quite the roost.

Graham: Needs time, don't really know on him.

Putt: Same as Graham.

Cartledge: When he played in the NAB Cup, he looked very uncoordinated and out of his depth.

Overall: Struggling. Need a first ruck who will replace Simmo. Simmo will still be useful for 2-3 years, but we'll need someone after that. I can't see Patto developing enough to fill this role, so hopefully Graham or Putt will come through nicely in the next few years and take Simmo's role, which they may well do as we know that big men, especially rucks, take a long time to mature.

Overall List: Lots and lots of promise. Main problem is the lack of players in the core age group (23ish - 28ish), but that's obviously going to fix itself up as the players get older (no shit:rolleyes:). Main problems are the lack of a small defender and ruckmen. Our midfield looks fantastic, and hopefully this will take some of the damage away from our shitty ruck stocks though. Overall it looks like it will be a great unit in a few years, and this year we have improved in comparison to the rest of the league basically by four spots. Our list will keep getting bette, and we will continue to climb the ladder and be a very good football side in a few years time.

On a side note, there will be a massive Carlton/Richmond rivarly reborn in the next few years as we climb the ladder together and fight for the great view from the top.

telsor

3 Jul 2008, 16:14

man dog shit would have been an improvement to stepped on dog shit, so it wasnt going to be to hard to improve on what they replaced. ;)

True....So very true.

eays

3 Jul 2008, 16:23

Inside Midfielders: One of the main reasons we are suffering at clearances isn't because of our midfielders, but the fact that we rarely win a ruck contest. We have the second worst hitouts : opposition hitouts in the league, ahead of only Carlton who don't have a ruckman.

Johnson: People seem to forget that he was one of our best players this season before he got injured. As you said though, obviously isn't a long term solution.

JSFish .. . you make some good points (for once :)) ... but i completely disagree with this paragraph. Johnson was one of our leading ball getters, but not one of our best players. If he wasnt our captain i honestly doubt he'd get a game. He certainly would struggle to get a game in any other AFL team. When fit, he knows how to find it. He can still rack up. BUT, his possessions just dont hurt opposition sides. His kicking is a downright liability. There is only so far handballing can take you in the modern game.

IMO, Kane Johnson = poor mans Jobe Watson .... and no, i dont really rate Jobe.

KJ should step aside with grace. What i'd like to see in the next few weeks is Peter Sassegum post something like "Well done to Kane Johnson for bravely deciding to retire mid season to allow one of the new young guns to take the captainicy. Well Done to TW and the coaching staff for having faith in this (insert young gun)"

TigerTroy0055

3 Jul 2008, 17:53

JSFish .. . you make some good points (for once :)) ... but i completely disagree with this paragraph. Johnson was one of our leading ball getters, but not one of our best players. If he wasnt our captain i honestly doubt he'd get a game. He certainly would struggle to get a game in any other AFL team. When fit, he knows how to find it. He can still rack up. BUT, his possessions just dont hurt opposition sides. His kicking is a downright liability. There is only so far handballing can take you in the modern game.

IMO, Kane Johnson = poor mans Jobe Watson .... and no, i dont really rate Jobe.

KJ should step aside with grace. What i'd like to see in the next few weeks is Peter Sassegum post something like "Well done to Kane Johnson for bravely deciding to retire mid season to allow one of the new young guns to take the captainicy. Well Done to TW and the coaching staff for having faith in this (insert young gun)" Great point but It won't happen just yet , we need to wait another year for Andy Collins to get some games under his belt and then insert him as Captain.

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 18:07

Realistic Tiger

3 Jul 2008, 18:23

I went back over the matches up until Johnno got injured, and these are the bests in those games. Not the leading possession getters, but the players who these experts who watched the game thought were Richmond's best players.

Round 1 v Carlton - Richmond: Richardson, King, Foley, Johnson, Thursfield, Tuck, McMahon.
Round 2 v North - Richmond: Newman, Schulz, Bowden, Deledio
Round 3 v Pies - Richmond: Brown, Foley, Johnson, Tuck
Round 4 v Freo - Richmond: Richardson, Foley, Johnson, Brown, Simmonds, McMahon, Tambling
Round 5 v Dogs - Richmond: Richardson Johnson Simmonds Brown King
Round 6 v Hawks - Richmond: Richardson, Deledio, Foley, King, Tuck, Morton
Round 7 v Saints - Richmond: T Simmonds N Brown M Richardson B Deledio L McGuane K Johnson
Round 8 v Cats - Richmond: Richardson, Johnson, Cotchin, Deledio
Round 9 v Bombers - Richmond: Foley, Deledio, Brown, Pettifer, White, Edwards, Richardson
Round 10 v Swans (He only played 3 quarters of this match due to his injury early in the fourth) - Richmond: Deledio, Newman, Bowden, Richardson

I will admit I got these from the AFL site, so I don't know how expert these experts are, but the fact that he got in the best 6 times in 9 full games says he was at least up there.
JS, not sure about you but I paid little attention to who the papers or the AFL site name as the best players. Simply because half the time they check out the stats on games before submitting their opinions.

If you have ever listened to MMM after a match when they are doing their votes you will the 'experts' saying they need time to look over the stats before giving the votes.

If you went through the stats on each of those games you would probably find that Johnson had at least 25 touches in each game he got named. Yet there could have been a player who did a better job for the team but only got half the touches Johnson did and wont get named.

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 18:27

eays

3 Jul 2008, 19:22

Partially agree RT, but when a player is named in the best generally they are at least there or thereabouts. If a player has a lot of the ball but is absolutely shithouse, he won't get named in the bests. While it should be given purely on what they see during the match, it's not as though they base it solely on the stats. It's a bit of a mixture, and the fact that he was at least there or thereabouts in 2/3s of the matches he played leading up to his injuries suggests that he was going alright.

being positive is one thing, but if you honestly believe in your heart of hearts that KJ is a good captain ... or even a good player ... then you are simply deluding yourself.

Can you name once in the last 3 years when he was considered enough of a threat by an opposition coach that he was tagged? once? for all the possessions he gets, he isnt rated by opposition coaches - and i think their opinion (by their actions) carries a lot more weight than some unknown "experts" who do the bests lists (which most of us agree has little correlation to reality).

Foley is tagged, Deledio is tagged, heck even Cotchin having played less than 10 days is tagged. But Johnson they couldnt care less about, because they know if he has it 50 times even, he wont hurt them, most of his kicks wont be punishing and probably at least one of them will be the wrong way.

Well done to TW and the coaching staff for persisting with this over the hill has been as our captain:thumbsu:

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 19:32

being positive is one thing, but if you honestly believe in your heart of hearts that KJ is a good captain ... or even a good player ... then you are simply deluding yourself.

Can you name once in the last 3 years when he was considered enough of a threat by an opposition coach that he was tagged? once? for all the possessions he gets, he isnt rated by opposition coaches - and i think their opinion (by their actions) carries a lot more weight than some unknown "experts" who do the bests lists (which most of us agree has little correlation to reality).

Foley is tagged, Deledio is tagged, heck even Cotchin having played less than 10 days is tagged. But Johnson they couldnt care less about, because they know if he has it 50 times even, he wont hurt them, most of his kicks wont be punishing and probably at least one of them will be the wrong way.

Well done to TW and the coaching staff for persisting with this over the hill has been as our captain:thumbsu:
I don't believe Johnson is a good captain at all. A captain should lead by example, and hence be in the top 5 players on the list as well as a good leader, but Johnson would be in the bottom half of the players that run out each weekend.

Having said that, that wasn't the argument. The argument started when you disagreed that he had been one of our best players this season. I just showed that, for 6 rounds prior to his injury of 9, he was named in the best.

While I agree that these bests aren't necessarily an accurate reflection on the game, they do carry some substance. If a player is named in the best, ie the top 5ish players for our team, you must agree that it at least shows they had a reasonable game. If a player is shit on the day, regardless of possession count, he is not going to be put in the bests. So I stand by my comments, Johnson was one of our best players this season prior to his injury.

Mario Speedwagon

3 Jul 2008, 19:42

Well done to TW and the coaching staff for successfully continuing to pull the wool over the eyes of so many supporters, as evidenced by the countless delusionally positive replies to the ridiculous opening post of this topic, and thus ensuring not only the sustained acceptance of mediocrity from the Richmond Football Club for years to come, but more importantly, their own jobs.:thumbsu:

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 19:51

Well done to Mario Speedwagon for thinking that the 90% of posters who have said the OP was a great post, and the four posters who have rated this thread 5 stars are naive and wrong, and that he is correct.:thumbsu:

Well done to Peter SasseGum for being the catalyst behind an argument in which everything said will be extremely sarcastic, and will begin with a well done and end with a thumbs up.:thumbsu:

nut

3 Jul 2008, 19:54

Mario Speedwagon

3 Jul 2008, 20:10

JSFish

3 Jul 2008, 20:13

Umm I don't, and I never said I did. But whatever you say Mario.

Mario Speedwagon

3 Jul 2008, 20:30

ok champ tell us what you would have done since the 2004 draft...
Well without putting too finer point on it this is about reviewing Wallace's tenure , not about what we would've have done ..we're supporters , we have the right to question the professionals who are paid to look after our club , not come up with solutions ourselves , but knowing that argument won't fly with the likes of you ...then Ok .basically ,here's some of what I think he should've done:
Got more talls , got bigger players , thrown all the youngsters in at the deep end straight away every year , not topped up with rejects , delisted the all the worst remnants of the spud years as quickly as possible, totally rebuilt from the start instead of trying to play finals straight away...which incidentally was the exact opposite of what he told everyone he was going to do at the start of his reign...remember "Two years of pain & we hope to start challenging for finals by the third"...then no less than Nathan Brown the other week on Foxtel...(paraphrase)"I think we made a mistake by trying to play finals straight away instead of rebuilding first..we didn't really start rebuilding until last year" ..I'm actually staggered nobody's picked up on that .. Sorry Treading Water ..the gig's up , you're full of shit...your own star recruit just gave the game away...:o

nut

3 Jul 2008, 22:11

Wally Matera

3 Jul 2008, 23:14

Good post DD... but... for all the marked improvement in list management, Wallace goes ahead and makes a decision like tradin pick 19 for Jordan McMahon.

Two steps forward, 1 step back. :rolleyes:

RichosGuns

3 Jul 2008, 23:17

Terry has been at this club for how many years now? 4?

In reality he has done bupkis-to-nada.

Do not be fooled by his spin.

RichosGuns

3 Jul 2008, 23:20

Two steps forward, 1 step back. :rolleyes:

Agree entirly.

One thing holding back Terry is his pride. If he wasn't so proud he would have given McMohan, Tambling, etc runs in the seconds this year

TigerTroy0055

3 Jul 2008, 23:54

Well without putting too finer point on it this is about reviewing Wallace's tenure , not about what we would've have done ..we're supporters , we have the right to question the professionals who are paid to look after our club , not come up with solutions ourselves , but knowing that argument won't fly with the likes of you ...then Ok .basically ,here's some of what I think he should've done:
Got more talls , got bigger players , thrown all the youngsters in at the deep end straight away every year , not topped up with rejects , delisted the all the worst remnants of the spud years as quickly as possible, totally rebuilt from the start instead of trying to play finals straight away...which incidentally was the exact opposite of what he told everyone he was going to do at the start of his reign...remember "Two years of pain & we hope to start challenging for finals by the third"...then no less than Nathan Brown the other week on Foxtel...(paraphrase)"I think we made a mistake by trying to play finals straight away instead of rebuilding first..we didn't really start rebuilding until last year" ..I'm actually staggered nobody's picked up on that .. Sorry Treading Water ..the gig's up , you're full of shit...your own star recruit just gave the game away...:oAny chance of you taking over next year Mario you really know your stuff I'm not a Wallace fan but in his first year he did the following clean out

Blumfield - Delisted
Fiora - Traded For Simmonds
Tim Fleming - Delisted
Simon Fletcher - Delisted
Adam Houlihan - Delisted
Duncan Kellaway - Retired
Ben Marsh - Delisted
Bill Nicholls - Delisted
Brad Ottens - Traded wanted to go
Matthew Rogers - Retired
Luke Weller - Delisted
Ty Zantuck - Delisted

Thats 12 players gone and alot of crap players at that and 12 new players 9 of them kids to our club straight from the draft , we really went straight for the Finals that year Mario you numb nut. Below is how many players the other clubs turned over the same year

Crows = 7
lions = 5
Blues = 9
Pies = 6
Bombers = 4
Freo = 8
Cats = 5
Hawks = 7
Kangas = 6
Demons = 4
Port = 7
Saints = 6
Swans = 3
Eagles = 7
Doggys = 5

The only small bit of sense you make oh wise wise Mario is that we haven't recruited enough Talls. So I guess iits back to the pizza shop for you until you fart and your next thought brings you back to the key board.

RichosGuns

3 Jul 2008, 23:57

So I guess iits back to the pizza shop for you until you fart and your next thought brings you back to the key board.

I lol'd

TigerTroy0055

4 Jul 2008, 00:00

Agree entirly.

One thing holding back Terry is his pride. If he wasn't so proud he would have given McMohan, Tambling, etc runs in the seconds this yearThat's a fair call , both could of had at least 2 runs in the chucka's. Still not overly upset at recruiting McMahon though. We have absolutely no players 24-28 and I expect us to grab the best that is going around in that age group next year as well. Once Richo , Bowden , Brown and Johnson retire our oldest player will be max 27, 28. We need to add to our next crop of senior players to help Newman and Coughlan

1980

4 Jul 2008, 01:05

The Facts

1) Wallace chose us because we had a better list than Hawthorn. Heard his interview on 3AW

2) Every single supporter that was on this board in 2004 thought we had a better list than Hawthorn

3) Every single supporter that posted on this board in 2004 stuck it to Hawks supporters when we got Deledio AND Tambling

4) There was not a single supporter in 2004, club official, or Terry Wallace himself that would have thought it possible 4 years later the Hawks would be a top 4 side 2 seasons in a row, and we would still have yet to play 1 finals game.

5) If there is a single supporter on this board that thought when Terry Wallace was appointed that we would not play finals by year 4 of his 5 year contract, please bump the post. I'd love to see it.

If anything, the OP reinforces that Clarkson and Eade were better at developing the players available to them. Players that Wallace 1) didnt think were good enough to go further when he was at the Dogs ("I've taken this club as far as I can"); and 2) Not good enough to take the club to a Top 4 spot in the case of Hawthorn

Anyone that had those core groups at the Dogs or Hawks down as superstars in 2004 send us your post from 2004 proving it. No-one else did.

The fact that the OP is now cherishing them 4 years later pretty much brags that they have been coached well in the past 4 seasons.

They didnt just develop on their own. They were developed.

Mario Speedwagon

4 Jul 2008, 01:59

Thats 12 players gone and alot of crap players at that and 12 new players 9 of them kids to our club straight from the draft , we really went straight for the Finals that year Mario you numb nut. Below is how many players the other clubs turned over the same year

.

Hmmm now who should I believe in regard to Wallace's "plan" ...a ____in' clueless internet fag like you or Nathan Brown himself..tough decision....:o

Stick to jerking off over your favourite also-ran from Coburg, you insipid little redneck twat.

Mario Speedwagon

4 Jul 2008, 02:04

Get more talls... ok. Get bigger Players ok ... Throw youngsters in the deep end... ok... Stand down TW we have a better visionary here.

Yeah I'm a visionary for simply restating what pretty much everyone said we needed to do four years ago...but ok ,Wallace knew better than everyone...and don't the results just speak volumes for his master "plan"...man there's a lotta Darryl Cullinan's on this board...:o

Mario Speedwagon

4 Jul 2008, 03:10

...really wouldn't've mattered what we did anyway....the bottom line is Wallace can't coach...and he particularly can't coach talls as they're against his entrenched mindset...Franklin would only be just getting regular senior games now , if at all...and probably out of position too...down back with Joel learning how to be soft and rack up stats...