Mega Thread The Western Bulldogs - The Sack Macca saga

[Mutt]

Agreed, but Melbourne were also affected.

The clubs he quoted were those who rebuilt and then went on to win a flag during the past ten years.

Melbourne and Port Adelaide have been near the bottom for significantly longer than us and were there for years before the compromised drafts. They filled their boots before the AFL stuffed it up for us. Melbourne have been rebuilding for a decade.

 

[Pannalstaroz]

The clubs he quoted were those who rebuilt and then went on to win a flag during the past ten years.

Melbourne and Port Adelaide have been near the bottom for significantly longer than us and were there for years before the compromised drafts. They filled their boots before the AFL stuffed it up for us. Melbourne have been rebuilding for a decade.

Apologies. You're right.

 

[inyourfacedunk]

They were affected by getting better compo picks, PLUS further picks for being a basket case.

 

[_Mike_]

Geelong had massive help from the father/son rule at the time.

Libba jnr.. check
Wallis jnr... check
Hunter jnr... check
Cordy jnr.... check (for the lols at this point), maybe Zane will come good

I think we're pretty healthy in those terms for the next generation players

 

[immortalmike]

Geelong had massive help from the father/son rule at the time.

It doesn't matter whether Geelong drafted players late in the early 2000's draft years - in the recent drafts, those same players would have already been snapped up as best available in the late first and the second and third rounds. The pre-selection of potential draftees, the compensation picks, priority picks etc. etc have meant that virtually an entire first round of draftees were gone before we got our first, second, third and fourth round picks. Geelong didn't have that problem.

I don't buy the father / son advantage. Scarlett and Hawkins were the only players that should've been picked up earlier than they were. And even then the former was the only one relevant to their first flag. I distinctly remember people talking about Ablett being a mid to late third rounder because he was flaky and had attitude problems. Mind you we've done pretty well with father/sons ourselves.

Your point on compromised drafts is a good one. However I'm pretty happy with Libba, Wallis, Dahlhaus, Smith, Talia, Dickson, Roberts, Jong and Campbell. One is already elite another is knocking on the door and the rest have potential.
The reason we are where we are has less to do with those drafts and much more to do with our drafting and development prior to 2010.

 

[jamesDP]

Of course it is , been around long enough to know that.
Stampede : Jones v Magpies , pasture : Jones today. Is that coaching ? Or does it help explain why we are where we are ? Cattle not good enough ?
But my question to you , have we got the cattle to fire right now ?
Might be wrong but I along with most people who follow AFL don't think we currently have the right cattle full stop.

I think we are building the cattle, i think with the cattle we have now a coach who has more tactical savvy along with a plan b may get more out of the cattle that we currently have. But it is only my opinion and the beauty of such a forum as this we all have our opinions.

 

[Mutt]

Libba jnr.. check
Wallis jnr... check
Hunter jnr... check
Cordy jnr.... check (for the lols at this point), maybe Zane will come good

I think we're pretty healthy in those terms for the next generation players

Ablett (pick 40), Hawkins (pick 41) and Scarlett (pick 45) have our guys comfortably covered at the moment.

 

[yebiga]

There are so many things that I take issue with here that it is difficult to know where to start, so I'll stick with one point that I think is most relevant to the thread.

Firstly, the so called Geelong model, that we are supposed to be following just because McCartney was from Geelong and keeps refereeing to his assistant coaching experience there.

What is it really and how does it differ from what we were doing before hand?

If I look at what Geelong has done and from a high level view their basic model for football success seems to be as follows:
1. Employ senior coaches with AFL/VFL premiership playing experience, and leave them in no doubt that success is expected (if things drop off a bit initiate a review).
2.Recruit well, trade shrewdly, and hope you get lucky with some father-son opportunities.

We are trying to follow Step 2 but this is basically what everyone tries to do anyway. Of course we need to try to get the best people possible to make the recruiting and trading decisions, which I suppose is the heart of our current debate. We haven't followed Step 1.

The continual references on this forum to McCartney starting from scratch are not only false they are entirely disrespectful to everyone that was involved with the Bulldogs before McCartney arrived.

Disrespectful it maybe to Eade and the previous board of management but why is it you believe it unfair to be disrespectful of the Eade board of management but have no issue vilifying the current board of management?

The essential difference here is that many of us who support Brendan do feel that Eade sacrificed player development for immediate results. Last week we played Macrae, stringer, Hrovat, hunter, Stevens - all recruited in the previous season. We also played in the same game bontempelli, Honeychurch and Darley recruited from last season. Forget Crameri as Eade did his trades too. But if you compare drafting and development under the Eade era to today, well EADE is a massive fail. We saw nothing like this in 7 years compared to Brendan's 2.5 years.

This should give you cause to pause and think.

 

[dogsfan]

I think we are building the cattle, i think with the cattle we have now a coach who has more tactical savvy along with a plan b may get more out of the cattle that we currently have. But it is only my opinion and the beauty of such a forum as this we all have our opinions.

I respect your opinion but the other side of the coin is that if the club does give Macca the boot and employ a coach with "tactical savvy and a plan b etc" who is to say for certain that this group of players would respond to him in a more positive way than they will with Macca in the future.

Some people are too impatient in my opinion and need to just hold firm unlike the last 60 years where our club has in hard times been too preoccupied with just quickly getting wins to keep members happy rather than sacrificing some wins to build a sustainable winning culture.

 

[_Mike_]

Ablett (pick 40), Hawkins (pick 41) and Scarlett (pick 45) have our guys comfortably covered at the moment.

aah yes.. that's after the fact, but look back at where those guys were at the same time in their careers as are the guys I highlighted.. Saving Cordy..

 

[Ant_]

Ablett (pick 40), Hawkins (pick 41) and Scarlett (pick 45) have our guys comfortably covered at the moment.

Would've been nice to get ours that low

 

[Mutt]

Would've been nice to get ours that low

That's exactly the point I was making - Geelong rebuilt at a time when their father/sons cost them less than they would have under current bidding rules and their rebuild also took place during uncompromised drafts. We've been doubly disadvantaged compared to them.

 

[go you pups]

That's exactly the point I was making - Geelong rebuilt at a time when their father/sons cost them less than they would have under current bidding rules and their rebuild also took place during uncompromised drafts. We've been doubly disadvantaged compared to them.

Yes true, we also had our priority picks though, something that doesn't really exist anymore, Dogs, Dees, Tiges, Blues, Hawks, Saints and Pies took advantage of them when they could use them, in hindsight Clayton wasted some of ours.

 

[Mutt]

Yes true, we also had our priority picks though, something that doesn't really exist anymore, Dogs, Dees, Tiges, Blues, Hawks, Saints and Pies took advantage of them when they could use them, in hindsight Clayton wasted some of ours.

The discussion was about our current rebuild - we've had no priority picks during it.

 

[BRWB]

Yes true, we also had our priority picks though, something that doesn't really exist anymore, Dogs, Dees, Tiges, Blues, Hawks, Saints and Pies took advantage of them when they could use them, in hindsight Clayton wasted some of ours.

Good - Griffen, Cooney
Okay - Higgins, McMahon
Busts - Grant, Ray, Williams, Walsh, Everitt, Power

Yeah you could say Clayton burned some first round picks...

Better drafting and list management would have meant we didn't get quite so bad recently, so we have ourselves to blame (but can't see how Macca is responsible).

But as people are saying, the dice have been stacked against us recently, probably since Scully got two first rd picks and Ward got one...

 

[go you pups]

The discussion was about our current rebuild - we've had no priority picks during it.

You quoted Geelong being able to get F/S picks for 3rd rounders or less though, that happened at the time when priority picks were available.

 

[Mutt]

You quoted Geelong being able to get F/S picks for 3rd rounders or less though, that happened at the time when priority picks were available.

You'll need to go back and look at the posts over the past few pages to get the context. In essence, the claim was made that teams like Geelong did a rebuild in the ealy 2000's that resulted in a couple of poor years followed by a few seasons in which the wins per year increased quickly. I was pointing out that we suffer significant disadvantages in our current rebuild compared to those teams of 6 to 10 years ago.

 

[go you pups]

You'll need to go back and look at the posts over the past few pages to get the context. In essence, the claim was made that teams like Geelong did a rebuild in the ealy 2000's that resulted in a couple of poor years followed by a few seasons in which the wins per year increased quickly. I was pointing out that we suffer significant disadvantages in our current rebuild compared to those teams of 6 to 10 years ago.

Yes it was easier back then to bottom out, then rebuild, then go back up, that is the challenge right now to go back up, remember when the interstate clubs dominated between 01-06? It was a phase and this is just another one. I feel we bottomed out early enough to be able to be competitive with GWS once they rise up the ladder. I reckon St Kilda will find it harder to rebuild with these compromised drafts, they went out and got in so many fringe 20-23YO key position players, I doubt there'll be any A graders there so it wouldn't surprise me if they just turn into another North/Essendon/Richmond, we on the other hand have drafted best available over panic-based needs most of the time. We just lack a KPF (lacked one for years though hopefully it'll be addressed this year) most other areas can be addressed in the draft/RD/PSD etc, getting Wallis and Libba in 2010 helped big time in a compromised draft knowing we'd get 2 quality kids who have bled red white and blue from the day they were born. Only 1 pick for Callan Ward hurt but lets hope Macrae becomes a better player than Ward and becomes a one club player also.

 

[David Schwarz]

Rational discussion, I don't believe it.

I'm going to lie down for a few hours, I want everyone to be typing entire sentences in capital letters and stating that "if we don't win every game this season by 700 points we have failed" by the time I get back.

 

[True Dog]

Rational discussion, I don't believe it.

I'm going to lie down for a few hours, I want everyone to be typing entire sentences in capital letters and stating that "if we don't win every game this season by 700 points we have failed" by the time I get back.

Love it.... I had to double check myself

 

[ivan rassmussen]

Mutt, what picks did Geelong have during the same period inside top 20? Let's say 1997-2007 for arguments sake, as lachy listed the original clubs and years, not me.

1997 - McKay 15
1998 - Street 17
1999 - Corey 8 Spriggs 15 Bray 17
2000 - gave up 11 for Justin Murphy (really!)
2001 - Bartel 8 Kelly 17 (we passed on S.Johnson, went at 23)
2002 - Mackie at 7.
2003 - Tenace at 7.
2004 - gave up 12 and 16 (from Moloney trade) for Ottens
2005 - Varcoe 15
2006 - Selwood 7
2007 - Taylor 17

Ours:
1997 - Alvey 18
1998 - Penny 14
1999 - Murphy 13
2000 - McMahon 10
2001 - Power 10
2002 - Walsh 4 Faulkner 17 Minson 20
2003 - Cooney 1 Ray 4
2004 - Griffen 3 Williams 6
2005 - Higgins 11
2006 - Everitt 11
2007 - Grant 5 Ward 19

Of those, Geelong had 5 in the top 10, we had 6.

We passed on Corey, Kelly, Steve Johnson, Mackie, Varcoe, and Taylor.

Of the listed picks above, 7 are premiership players, plus Ottens and Johnson. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but in that period I would consider the bolded players eventual busts for the original recruiting club - Geelong: 5, Dogs: 6. We also lost Ward and McMahon.

Apart from the f/s picks they had, they just recruited well. (The "right" people perhaps?!)

From 2001 - 2007, their only top-20 bust was Tenace. We had a few, plus throw-in Rawlings and Koops and Street and Veale who were traded for top-20 picks or top picks in pre-season draft.

We were compromised during that period too - by our own recruiting/trading staff....

 

[Mutt]

Mutt, what picks did Geelong have during the same period inside top 20? Let's say 1997-2007 for arguments sake, as lachy listed the original clubs and years, not me.

1997 - McKay 15
1998 - Street 17
1999 - Corey 8 Spriggs 15 Bray 17
2000 - gave up 11 for Justin Murphy (really!)
2001 - Bartel 8 Kelly 17 (we passed on S.Johnson, went at 23)
2002 - Mackie at 7.
2003 - Tenace at 7.
2004 - gave up 12 and 16 (from Moloney trade) for Ottens
2005 - Varcoe 15
2006 - Selwood 7
2007 - Taylor 17

Ours:
1997 - Alvey 18
1998 - Penny 14
1999 - Murphy 13
2000 - McMahon 10
2001 - Power 10
2002 - Walsh 4 Faulkner 17 Minson 20
2003 - Cooney 1 Ray 4
2004 - Griffen 3 Williams 6
2005 - Higgins 11
2006 - Everitt 11
2007 - Grant 5 Ward 19

Of those, Geelong had 5 in the top 10, we had 6.

We passed on Corey, Kelly, Steve Johnson, Mackie, Varcoe, and Taylor.

Of the listed picks above, 7 are premiership players, plus Ottens and Johnson. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but in that period I would consider the bolded players eventual busts for the original recruiting club - Geelong: 5, Dogs: 6. We also lost Ward and McMahon.

Apart from the f/s picks they had, they just recruited well. (The "right" people perhaps?!)

From 2001 - 2007, their only top-20 bust was Tenace. We had a few, plus throw-in Rawlings and Koops and Street and Veale who were traded for top-20 picks or top picks in pre-season draft.

We were compromised during that period too - by our own recruiting/trading staff....

The discussion wasn't about Geelong recruiting of the past decade versus ours of the past decade - it was about how our current rebuild will be slower to achieve results than rebuilds in the previous decade because we have bottomed out in a period of heavily compromised drafts. The Geelong father/son windfall eight to ten years ago just widens that gap and makes comparisons even less relevant.

 

[ivan rassmussen]

The discussion wasn't about Geelong recruiting of the past decade versus ours of the past decade - it was about how our current rebuild will be slower to achieve results than rebuilds in the previous decade because we have bottomed out in a period of heavily compromised drafts. The Geelong father/son windfall eight to ten years ago just widens that gap and makes comparisons even less relevant.

But you were saying they didn't have a compromised draft due to no new sides taking the best talent at the time as well. I'm just showing that they had a better recruitment hit-rate, especially compared to ours. Yes, GWS and GCS have ridiculous access to players, but we are in the same boat as the remaining clubs in the current climate, and in recent years, in better drafting positions than most of the non-expansion clubs, in terms of picks. We just have to make the most of our situation. Geelong managed more limited access to top talent wisely, regardless of father-sons. No reason we can't be doing the same now.

 

[ivan rassmussen]

And if our current rebuild IS slower to achieve results, I expect it will then be inevitable that the coach's career will be curtailed. Expansion clubs or not, we can not afford to bounce along the lower rungs of the ladder winning 5-8 games for more than a few years, regardless of equalisation measures.

 

[Mutt]

But you were saying they didn't have a compromised draft due to no new sides taking the best talent at the time as well. I'm just showing that they had a better recruitment hit-rate, especially compared to ours. Yes, GWS and GCS have ridiculous access to players, but we are in the same boat as the remaining clubs in the current climate, and in recent years, in better drafting positions than most of the non-expansion clubs, in terms of picks. We just have to make the most of our situation. Geelong managed more limited access to top talent wisely, regardless of father-sons. No reason we can't be doing the same now.

But the clubs higher up the ladder than us right now have their mid to top end talent already in their team (which is why they are higher up the ladder) and mostly with 100+ games under their belts. We are trying to draft the top end talent to get us up the ladder quickly, however most of the very best kids are unavailable to us. We are trying to play catch-up with one hand tied behind our backs.