View Full Version : Connolly's Measure of Achievement
Did anyone notice the musings of Fremantle's newest nutter-in-residence Chris Connolly (after the departure of Ric Charlesworth) in today's West? It goes like this:
"History will only judge AFL clubs on their ability to win premierships".
OK Sausage Rolls, fair enough. Therefore he reasons:
".... the cold hard facts when you judge it historically is, Fremantle has been no less successful than Collingwood, Melbourne, Hawthorn, West Coast or any of those teams. Because in the same period they didn't win a premiership and nor did Fremantle."
There you have it folks! All those that didn't win the flag on the last Saturday in September suck, historically at least, just as much as anyone else. Doesn't matter if you finished 4th, 8th or...ahem... no better than 12th in your 8 year history.
That's a lovely method for just waving away year after year of painful underachievement. "Hey...you guys are crap just like us!"
If you can't bring your achievements up to the rest of the pack, simple.....just bring the achievements of the pack down to our level. I'm sure the violets will latch on to this nugget of tortured logic with typical beef jerkey induced enthusiam.
Perhaps Connolly ought stop mixing Red Bull with each and every South Terrace latte.
surely he is taking the ****.
that is just plain offence to the clubs that have worked their butts off over that time to be successful. :mad:
fremantle are the least successful club over the last seven years.
Originally posted by Ziggy1
Did anyone notice the musings of Fremantle's newest nutter-in-residence Chris Connolly (after the departure of Ric Charlesworth) in today's West? It goes like this:
"History will only judge AFL clubs on their ability to win premierships".
OK Sausage Rolls, fair enough. Therefore he reasons:
".... the cold hard facts when you judge it historically is, Fremantle has been no less successful than Collingwood, Melbourne, Hawthorn, West Coast or any of those teams. Because in the same period they didn't win a premiership and nor did Fremantle."
There you have it folks! All those that didn't win the flag on the last Saturday in September suck, historically at least, just as much as anyone else. Doesn't matter if you finished 4th, 8th or...ahem... no better than 12th in your 8 year history.
That's a lovely method for just waving away year after year of painful underachievement. "Hey...you guys are crap just like us!"
If you can't bring your achievements up to the rest of the pack, simple.....just bring the achievements of the pack down to our level. I'm sure the violets will latch on to this nugget of tortured logic with typical beef jerkey induced enthusiam.
Perhaps Connolly ought stop mixing Red Bull with each and every South Terrace latte.
Thats just bloody ridiculous!!!
Of course it's ridiculous carlyp.
Yet another cracker in a long line of Fremantle cop outs.
But it won't stop Dockers supporters from swallowing it hook, line and sinker, and worst of all, repeating it ad nauseum to all those who suggest they take a critical look at their record.
RogerMellie
31 Oct 2002, 16:59
Calm down folks. What's the problem with his statement? He is merely saying that in the future, people won't remember who finished 7th in whatever year, but the premiership team is guaranteed a place in the annals of Aussie Rules. In 50 years time, not too many people will think it terribly important, for instance, that West Coast won two more games than Fremantle in 2002, rather acknowledging the fact that Brisbane won the premiership. And fair enough too.
Originally posted by RogerMellie
Calm down folks. What's the problem with his statement? He is merely saying that in the future, people won't remember who finished 7th in whatever year, but the premiership team is guaranteed a place in the annals of Aussie Rules. In 50 years time, not too many people will think it terribly important, for instance, that West Coast won two more games than Fremantle in 2002, rather acknowledging the fact that Brisbane won the premiership. And fair enough too.
i'm a big fan of CC. he his definatly leading the club in the right direction but that is just a plain cop out.
comparing the 2001 season of freo ,that any freo supporter will tell you was hell to endure, with that of say hawthorn isn't fair on the fans.
Voice of Reason
31 Oct 2002, 17:26
Originally posted by RogerMellie
Calm down folks. What's the problem with his statement? He is merely saying that in the future, people won't remember who finished 7th in whatever year, but the premiership team is guaranteed a place in the annals of Aussie Rules. In 50 years time, not too many people will think it terribly important, for instance, that West Coast won two more games than Fremantle in 2002, rather acknowledging the fact that Brisbane won the premiership. And fair enough too.
Pot kettle black though Rog. Quite a few Freo fans rate the greatest game they ever played as the time they beat the Eagles by a point to finish a whole one place above us on the ladder.
I think Connelly is going in the right direction, but he does say some silly things. I contrast his management of expectations (we aim to make the Finals in 3 years) as an absolute cop-out with the squad he inherited, compared to Woosha's "we'll play it one week at a time and aim to be as good as we can be".
IMO (and I assume any neutral or Docker who said the Freo squad was better than the Eagles before last season started would agree), that is partly why the Eagles got into the Finals and the Dockers didn't - better management of players. To say that it's expected to miss the Finals for 2002 & 2003 isn't good enough for Freo.
Kenny_01
31 Oct 2002, 18:46
So what would you have expected him to say? We have been the worst club over the last 7 years? He is just putting a positive spin on our history.
And he is more or less right. Clubs will be judged on premierships in the future. It doesn't matter what else happens.
Goldenblue
31 Oct 2002, 19:01
Originally posted by Kenny_01
So what would you have expected him to say? We have been the worst club over the last 7 years?
At least he would have been telling the truth.....;)
Originally posted by Kenny_01
So what would you have expected him to say? We have been the worst club over the last 7 years? He is just putting a positive spin on our history.
And he is more or less right. Clubs will be judged on premierships in the future. It doesn't matter what else happens.
The only problem is we are not living 20,30 or 50 years in the future. What is needed by all coaches is to make their players accountable HERE and NOW. To say that performances, be it 5 years ago or last month, don't matter because we have....here we go again.....potential, and therefore the future is ours, is bloody hopeless.
If I'm not mistaken, the 15 sides who walk away with less than a flag each year should hang their heads in shame, in full knowledge that their efforts were a waste of time and they (Brissie aside) are just as bad as each other. Historically speaking of course.
"Making the finals is a 3 to 4 year plan. If you don't win the premiership it doesn't matter if you land 3rd or 13th, history will judge you all the same and this is all that counts."
Sorry Kenny. An absolute cop out. The guys a good coach but he does say some stupid things. And his squad has to know that they can't hang their hat on "potential" and "early draft pick status" forever.
If Woosha dished up this stuff I'd be more than dirty.
Kenny_01
31 Oct 2002, 21:16
Originally posted by Ziggy1
The only problem is we are not living 20,30 or 50 years in the future. What is needed by all coaches is to make their players accountable HERE and NOW. To say that performances, be it 5 years ago or last month, don't matter because we have....here we go again.....potential, and therefore the future is ours, is bloody hopeless.
If I'm not mistaken, the 15 sides who walk away with less than a flag each year should hang their heads in shame, in full knowledge that their efforts were a waste of time and they (Brissie aside) are just as bad as each other. Historically speaking of course.
"Making the finals is a 3 to 4 year plan. If you don't win the premiership it doesn't matter if you land 3rd or 13th, history will judge you all the same and this is all that counts."
Sorry Kenny. An absolute cop out. The guys a good coach but he does say some stupid things. And his squad has to know that they can't hang their hat on "potential" and "early draft pick status" forever.
If Woosha dished up this stuff I'd be more than dirty.
Fair enough but every coach says something stupid every now and again. All he meant was in the future, most of the clubs would have been viewed the ame between 95 and 02, they didn't win a premiership. Just puttiing a positive spin as I said before, on what is a pretty sad history to date.
His goal is to win a premiership, and anything else is not good enough, is what he is trying to say.
eagleskickass
1 Nov 2002, 01:54
At the moment the comment has no merrit. Everyone knows who did better than who in what year roughly, but in 50 years time, or 25 even the main thing that will be remembered is premierships. If u ask many people if melbourne finished higher than carlton in 1981 for example, unless either of these 2 teams won the GF(i don't think so) or participated most prob couldn't say. However at the moment we all know the relative record between WCE and freo, and WCE/Freo and other teams. Its more about how it will be viewed in the future, but i guess we will all still say how crap Freo went in their early years:P
Goldenblue
1 Nov 2002, 11:31
Originally posted by eagleskickass
If u ask many people if melbourne finished higher than carlton in 1981 for example, unless either of these 2 teams won the GF(i don't think so) or participated most prob couldn't say.
Carlton did win the flag in 1981. :p
However, I do agree with you. Many people will remember Freos first 7-8 years as crap, just as I remember 1989 and 2001 as crap years for the eagles.
Regardless of what Connelly says, the fact will never change and we DONT remember just who won the premiership. I still remember in the early eighties the crap sides were Melbourne, Footscray, St. Kilda and Sydney/ South Melbourne.
i_luv_westcoast
1 Nov 2002, 11:33
The word crap was invented so that there was a word to describe Fremantle :D
Originally posted by i_luv_westcoast
The word crap was invented so that there was a word to describe Fremantle :D
What would you say describes us in the 1990's?
I thought Dominate was preety good but then we really didnt dominate in the last 5 years we were good but other teams were better than us.
daddy_4_eyes
1 Nov 2002, 15:32
Originally posted by carlyp
What would you say describes us in the 1990's?
I thought Dominate was preety good but then we really didnt dominate in the last 5 years we were good but other teams were better than us.
The difference was that we were consistant, whereas the teams from those 5yrs were mostly one year wonders. And that includes Roos in 96 + 99 when they really only won premierships through luck (stole it from Sydney and Essendon respectively). WC on the other hand consistently made top 5 finishes and should have had probably one, maybe two more grand finals had it not been for unfortunate circumstances (getting screwed out of a home final twice and the speculation over MM's future in 99).
Its sort of like comparing Tommy to Woewodin. Sure Woewodin won the brownlow and had one stunning season, but he is nothing compared to Tommy.
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
The difference was that we were consistant, whereas the teams from those 5yrs were mostly one year wonders. And that includes Roos in 96 + 99 when they really only won premierships through luck (stole it from Sydney and Essendon respectively). WC on the other hand consistently made top 5 finishes and should have had probably one, maybe two more grand finals had it not been for unfortunate circumstances (getting screwed out of a home final twice and the speculation over MM's future in 99).
Its sort of like comparing Tommy to Woewodin. Sure Woewodin won the brownlow and had one stunning season, but he is nothing compared to Tommy.
Uhuh yeah I like what you have to say there!
Kenny_01
1 Nov 2002, 17:29
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
The difference was that we were consistant, whereas the teams from those 5yrs were mostly one year wonders. And that includes Roos in 96 + 99 when they really only won premierships through luck (stole it from Sydney and Essendon respectively). WC on the other hand consistently made top 5 finishes and should have had probably one, maybe two more grand finals had it not been for unfortunate circumstances (getting screwed out of a home final twice and the speculation over MM's future in 99).
Its sort of like comparing Tommy to Woewodin. Sure Woewodin won the brownlow and had one stunning season, but he is nothing compared to Tommy.
Kangaroos stole premierships? What a load of tripe. That would have to be one of the stupidiest things I've ever read.
From 1993- to 2000, the consistantly finished high up on the ladder and made it to a lot of preliminary finals.
Kenny_01
1 Nov 2002, 17:38
North Melbourne
1994- Prelim Final
1995- Prelim Final
1996- Premiers
1997- Prelim Final
1998- Grand Final
1999- Premiers
2000- Prelim Final
Yep, that is fluking it. They deserved 0 premierships according to D4E. Making it to the preliminiary finals 7 years in a row is nothing.
Originally posted by Kenny_01
North Melbourne
1994- Prelim Final
1995- Prelim Final
1996- Premiers
1997- Prelim Final
1998- Grand Final
1999- Premiers
2000- Prelim Final
Yep, that is fluking it. They deserved 0 premierships according to D4E. Making it to the preliminiary finals 7 years in a row is nothing.
I finally find reason to agree with a Dockers supporter.
Would someone please push the Earth back on it's true axis.
Originally posted by Kenny_01
Making it to the preliminiary finals 7 years in a row is nothing.
Well, to bring this thing full circle, that is apparently what Chris Connolly believes.
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
The difference was that we were consistant, whereas the teams from those 5yrs were mostly one year wonders. And that includes Roos in 96 + 99 when they really only won premierships through luck (stole it from Sydney and Essendon respectively). WC on the other hand consistently made top 5 finishes and should have had probably one, maybe two more grand finals had it not been for unfortunate circumstances (getting screwed out of a home final twice and the speculation over MM's future in 99).
Its sort of like comparing Tommy to Woewodin. Sure Woewodin won the brownlow and had one stunning season, but he is nothing compared to Tommy.
Contrary to popular opinion (or should I say popular excuses), premierships aren't fluked. I don't know how you can call either Adelaide or North Melbourne one year wonders when they won premierships *twice* in that period.
West Coast were harshly done over with those MCG semis in 1996 and 1999 I agree. But if you had the semis at home in those years where you probably would've won, all that gets you is an away preliminary. And on the basis that you lost away semis, you probably wouldn't've won the away prelims either. West Coast would've been firm underdogs against Sydney at the SCG in 1996 and against Essendon at the MCG in 1999.
daddy_4_eyes
1 Nov 2002, 18:02
Originally posted by Kenny_01
Kangaroos stole premierships? What a load of tripe. That would have to be one of the stupidiest things I've ever read.
From 1993- to 2000, the consistantly finished high up on the ladder and made it to a lot of preliminary finals.
In 1996 Sydney was the #1 team, Nth were lucky to win the premiership that year.
In 1999 Essendon dominated, lost only 3 games for the year, unfortunately they slipped up in the prelim and gifted Nth the premiership.
Anyone who says nth deserved the premiership in 96 or 99 is talking out of their ars.e. They made the prelims because they were good, I'm not disputing that, but they sure as hell weren't the #1 team in their premiership winning years.
Kenny_01
1 Nov 2002, 18:04
Originally posted by scmods
Well, to bring this thing full circle, that is apparently what Chris Connolly believes.
They went on to win 2 premierships from those 7 prelim finals so it is something. And Chris was talking about when you look back in many many years time.
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
In 1996 Sydney was the #1 team, Nth were lucky to win the premiership that year.
In 1999 Essendon dominated, lost only 3 games for the year, unfortunately they slipped up in the prelim and gifted Nth the premiership.
Anyone who says nth deserved the premiership in 96 or 99 is talking out of their ars.e. They made the prelims because they were good, I'm not disputing that, but they sure as hell weren't the #1 team in their premiership winning years.
..and brisbane weren't the top team this year. i don't have the figures but i would guess that the team that finishes on top of the ladder would not take home the cup more often than winning it.
p.s. CC is still talking out of his arse.
Kenny_01
1 Nov 2002, 18:07
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
In 1996 Sydney was the #1 team, Nth were lucky to win the premiership that year.
In 1999 Essendon dominated, lost only 3 games for the year, unfortunately they slipped up in the prelim and gifted Nth the premiership.
Anyone who says nth deserved the premiership in 96 or 99 is talking out of their ars.e. They made the prelims because they were good, I'm not disputing that, but they sure as hell weren't the #1 team in their premiership winning years.
So the Eagles didn't deserve to win their 92 premiership because they finished 4th after the regular season... is that what you're saying?
daddy_4_eyes
1 Nov 2002, 18:17
Originally posted by Kenny_01
So the Eagles didn't deserve to win their 92 premiership because they finished 4th after the regular season... is that what you're saying?
Don't be a smart arse :p
In my original post I didn't mean to imply that Nth were one year wonders, just lucky in winning the premiership (especially 99, 96 i'll give it to them)
daddy_4_eyes
1 Nov 2002, 18:23
Ohh, and I firmly believe the minor premiers should be given more credit than they currently are given. Like in soccer, where top of the ladder means you are the champions. I don't like the idea that the 5th, 6th 7th whatever placed team gets a shot at the premiership.
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
In 1996 Sydney was the #1 team, Nth were lucky to win the premiership that year.
In 1999 Essendon dominated, lost only 3 games for the year, unfortunately they slipped up in the prelim and gifted Nth the premiership.
Anyone who says nth deserved the premiership in 96 or 99 is talking out of their ars.e. They made the prelims because they were good, I'm not disputing that, but they sure as hell weren't the #1 team in their premiership winning years.
Don't be fooled by the fact that only home and away results are included in ladders. If you include finals you get:
1996: North Melbourne 19-6 v Sydney 18-6-1
1999: North Melbourne 20-5 v Essendon 19-5
Still think that NM were inferior? (I can't believe I'm defending the Kangaroos)
daddy_4_eyes
1 Nov 2002, 22:44
Originally posted by DaveW
Don't be fooled by the fact that only home and away results are included in ladders. If you include finals you get:
1996: North Melbourne 19-6 v Sydney 18-6-1
1999: North Melbourne 20-5 v Essendon 19-5
Still think that NM were inferior? (I can't believe I'm defending the Kangaroos)
Don't think you can do it like that. Firstly, the grand finalists would have played more games than the other teams, secondly they obviously had an extra win or two to their names since they did make the grand final and subsequently won it.
Interesting debate anyway. I started a thread (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53036) asking a question on this matter, unfortunately it seems to be like every other Bigfooty thread with people just screwing it up (someone voted Carlton 95 to be worst premiers of 90's!).
Kenny_01
1 Nov 2002, 22:57
What do you mean you can't do it like that? They had a better winning percentage and you would think grand finals and prelim finals are harder to win than normal home and away games.
theBlueCardinal
2 Nov 2002, 00:37
Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
In 1996 Sydney was the #1 team, Nth were lucky to win the premiership that year.
In 1999 Essendon dominated, lost only 3 games for the year, unfortunately they slipped up in the prelim and gifted Nth the premiership.
Anyone who says nth deserved the premiership in 96 or 99 is talking out of their ars.e. They made the prelims because they were good, I'm not disputing that, but they sure as hell weren't the #1 team in their premiership winning years.
...there is only 1 winner on the day and who cares if they were lucky to knock off a side the week before or had other results go their way etc, fact remains they won...
The fact is mate that in 1999 Carlton played their hearts out against Essendon in the final the week before the GF and the better side on the day won that game...North thrashed Carlton a week later and quite rightly could hold the cup up high...don't kid yourself by bagging North- they deserved that premiership.
Came late to this one, but that is a plain cop out from CC. Simple as that.
He needs to stop looking for excuses for the past and find some excuses for the future as we all know what will happen next season and the season after that etc etc...
Kenny_01
3 Nov 2002, 05:21
Originally posted by jod23
Came late to this one, but that is a plain cop out from CC. Simple as that.
He needs to stop looking for excuses for the past and find some excuses for the future as we all know what will happen next season and the season after that etc etc...
I love Connelly, he is my hero.
Originally posted by Kenny_01
I love Connelly, he is my hero.
Hahahha...how? Why?
Kenny_01
3 Nov 2002, 05:41
Originally posted by jod23
Hahahha...how? Why?
he has takwen our team froimn ****house to potential finalists.
if it wasnt for him, he would have been wooden sppooners
we love u connels
keep it up mate
Originally posted by Kenny_01
he has takwen our team froimn ****house to potential finalists.
if it wasnt for him, he would have been wooden sppooners
we love u connels
keep it up mate
It's fair to say that your list is good enough now that even Damium Drum could have avoided the wooden spoon last season.
Kenny_01
3 Nov 2002, 05:50
Originally posted by jod23
It's fair to say that your list is good enough now that even Damium Drum could have avoided the wooden spoon last season.
Damium? HE is a champ!
Go Drummy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GoEagles
4 Nov 2002, 18:35
Originally posted by Kenny_01
we love u connels
keep it up mate
Connels? :D
Man this is getting crazy now!
Kenny_01
4 Nov 2002, 20:02
Originally posted by GoEagles
Connels? :D
Man this is getting crazy now!
:D
Don't pay any attention to my posts on this thread.
But seriously, Connolly is doing alright, it is hard to judge him as a coach now based on on-field performances, but off-field he has been fantastic.