Top 4 & Bottom 4 in 4 years time (2019)

[Kangaroos4eva]

Generally sides drop down to the bottom four because they lack the talent to be able to win games or because they succumb to a bunch of older players retiring.

Number of players 27 or older on the list:

Fremantle: 15
North: 12
Carlton: 11
Hawthorn: 11
Geelong: 11
Essendon: 10
Sydney: 10
Port: 8
Footscray: 7
Melbourne: 7
West Coast: 7
Richmond: 7
Brisbane: 7
St Kilda: 7
Adelaide: 6
Collingwood: 6
GWS: 5
Gold Coast: 5

Of course, some of these older players are much more important than others, and not all of these players are equally close to retirement. However, it is interesting. North, Essendon and Carlton seem to have a lot of older players and haven't proven the ability to regenerate like Geelong and Hawthorn have. Fremantle is a fair candidate for decline. Gold Coast, GWS and Adelaide seem good candidates for development. So does Brisbane, whose older players (Staker, Maguire, Merrett, Adcock, Martin, McGuane and West) are mostly replaceable.



Every side has turnover and most sides in the league have depth issues. The point which paddy love was making is that Richmond doesn't rely much upon its older players besides Maric and Chaplin, who were both recruited as mature aged players. So Richmond has something some other sides don't, a dependence on players who will still be around in four years time. It's more concerning if you have older players who are hard to replace. Yet ruckmen are probably one of the easiest positions in the league to recruit from. As for Chaplin, he's a floating CHB, if Richmond doesn't develop that role from within, it could easily find a recruit within four years. This is different to say having your main onballer Watson being 30 years or older, or having your main attacking threat Harvey be 36. Structurally, Richmond isn't that dependent on its older guys.

It's a bit early to judge our regenerativation of our team because we haven't lost many veterans yet. Petrie, Wells and Harvey only main losses over next three years. The likes of Cunners, Ziebell, Wright and co are only young early 20s. Next two years very important in replacing kpf and Harvey is unique so hard to replace, same with wells. Atley, Mullet and co can provide the speed. We rely on Swallow and Cunners more than Harvey as demonstrated by our finals wins.

 

[Yoda_]

I don't think it is inconceivable for Essendon to be in the bottom 4 by 2018. Highly unlikely but not totally unrealistic.

 

[Bring_Back_Brad]

Top:
Collingwood
Richmond
Adelaide
West Coast

Bottom:
Carlton
Brisbane
Geelong
Hawthorn

 

[Furn2]

Richmond in bottom 4 in 2018 is a joke
Carlton in bottom 4 in 2018 is realistic

Or

 

[PetterdHoisted]

I don't think it is inconceivable for Essendon to be in the bottom 4 by 2018. Highly unlikely but not totally unrealistic.

Doubt it, they'll lose players for 6-7 rounds max next year, new coach, then normal service will resume. No one alive remembers them finishing bottom, (and not many for Geelong either).

For the top 4, I like Collingwood, again, they have +100 years form of being thereabouts. Real question will be if Bucks is still there, next year will be putrid.

Oh and Richmond, middling-to-ninth? But no lower.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Sweet bro' keep it real man

You mean the kind that Richmond and Carlton have experienced for decades now?
I tend to be weary of supporters opinions of these clubs. Their reality is a little skewed when it comes to footy jargon.

I did like the fact you mentioned every single one of our oldies and then proceeded to couple them into the 'best players' basket
You do realize Rivers and McIntosh weren't around a couple of seasons ago, in fact, both boys only finally got going in 2014. I think we'll replace them and remain competitive, just as we did Ling, Ablett, Chapman, Corey, Wojcinski, Ottens, Mooney, Byrnes, Rooke, Milburn, Scarlett, Harley, Podsiadly, Ottens . . . .

Yet you mention Byrnes as one of your significant losses.....

6 of the guys I listed finished in the top 10 of your B&F. So yeah it's a fair comment.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Richmond in bottom 4 in 2018 is a joke
Carlton in bottom 4 in 2018 is realistic

both bottom four.
Carlton wont be going anywhere, & richmond, will just be rebuilding from sacking hardwick

 

[bombersfan4000]

I don't think it is inconceivable for Essendon to be in the bottom 4 by 2018. Highly unlikely but not totally unrealistic.

im a bit puzzled by this, the younger group of players coming up, can play, the Heppell's, Merritt's, Hibbard, Bagley & co then you have the talls, Hurley & Hooker in defence & potentially the best forwardline duo in Danhier & Castile. not saying they are going to win back to back premierships, but ASADA aside, EFC are in better shape than most teams for the future

 

[Yoda_]

im a bit puzzled by this, the younger group of players coming up, can play, the Heppell's, Merritt's, Hibbard, Bagley & co then you have the talls, Hurley & Hooker in defence & potentially the best forwardline duo in Danhier & Castile. not saying they are going to win back to back premierships, but ASADA aside, EFC are in better shape than most teams for the future

The key area (midfield) is one that I'm quite skeptical on. Apart from Heppell who is absolute class, we have a large group of unknowns between 18 - 22.

 

[bombersfan4000]

The key area (midfield) is one that I'm quite skeptical on. Apart from Heppell who is absolute class, we have a large group of unknowns between 18 - 22.

Zach Merritt, will be a good player, but there are a few unknowns. it was good to see David Myers, get some constancy & Travis Colyer become an important cog. the kid Gleeson, looks like he can play but is still young. after this year will give a better indication

 

[joop]

Who gives a toss? It's 2014. I'll worry about 2018 when it gets here.

I had a laugh at the suggestion clubs such as Hawthorn and Geelong would be bottom 4. Apparently we aren't going to pick up any players at all in the next 4 years

Doesn't give a toss.....
Gets angry when someone puts his team in bottom 4....

 

[lmach]

My team
Least hated team
2nd least hated team
3rd least hated team

4th most hated team
3rd most hated team
2nd most hated team
Most hated team

 

[santa claws]

Generally sides drop down to the bottom four because they lack the talent to be able to win games or because they succumb to a bunch of older players retiring.

Number of players 27 or older on the list:

Fremantle: 15
North: 12
Carlton: 11
Hawthorn: 11
Geelong: 11
Essendon: 10
Sydney: 10
Port: 8
Footscray: 7
Melbourne: 7
West Coast: 7
Richmond: 7
Brisbane: 7
St Kilda: 7
Adelaide: 6
Collingwood: 6
GWS: 5
Gold Coast: 5

Of course, some of these older players are much more important than others, and not all of these players are equally close to retirement. However, it is interesting. North, Essendon and Carlton seem to have a lot of older players and haven't proven the ability to regenerate like Geelong and Hawthorn have. Fremantle is a fair candidate for decline. Gold Coast, GWS and Adelaide seem good candidates for development. So does Brisbane, whose older players (Staker, Maguire, Merrett, Adcock, Martin, McGuane and West) are mostly replaceable.



Every side has turnover and most sides in the league have depth issues. The point which paddy love was making is that Richmond doesn't rely much upon its older players besides Maric and Chaplin, who were both recruited as mature aged players. So Richmond has something some other sides don't, a dependence on players who will still be around in four years time. It's more concerning if you have older players who are hard to replace. Yet ruckmen are probably one of the easiest positions in the league to recruit from. As for Chaplin, he's a floating CHB, if Richmond doesn't develop that role from within, it could easily find a recruit within four years. This is different to say having your main onballer Watson being 30 years or older, or having your main attacking threat Harvey be 36. Structurally, Richmond isn't that dependent on its older guys.

i understand that and i did say most clubs will turn over up towards close to half their lists in 4 trade/draft periods.while agree we dont rely on our vets much well we only have 4. we do rely heavily on the rest of our older players which imo are mostly easily replaceable. we have a lot of upgrading to do if we wish to be better than middling.

outside of the veterans on our list which for me are those who turn 29 plus next yr and i say again there are only 4, newman, maric, chaplin and foley.the problem really is with our our mature group 25 to 28yo. and our development group 22 to 24.

hunt 24, lloyd 25, gordon 25, griffiths 23, astbury 24, grimes 23, dea 23, hampson 27, vickery 24, petterd 26, batchelor 23, morris 26, houli 26, knights 28, grigg 26, thomas 28, conca 22, lambert 23. these guys are all C grade players or worse. this is what i mean by quality.

it only leaves the following in the age groups i mentioned mature and development groups, who are A OR B graders = elite and very good.
cotchin 24, rance 25, martin 23, deledio 27, riewoldt 26.
we do have some juniors 18 to 21 who look promising in saying all of the above.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

i understand that and i did say most clubs will turn over up towards close to half their lists in 4 trade/draft periods.while agree we dont rely on our vets much well we only have 4. we do rely heavily on the rest of our older players which imo are mostly easily replaceable. we have a lot of upgrading to do if we wish to be better than middling.

outside of the veterans on our list which for me are those who turn 29 plus next yr and i say again there are only 4, newman, maric, chaplin and foley.the problem really is with our our mature group 25 to 28yo. and our development group 22 to 24.

hunt 24, lloyd 25, gordon 25, griffiths 23, astbury 24, grimes 23, dea 23, hampson 27, vickery 24, petterd 26, batchelor 23, morris 26, houli 26, knights 28, grigg 26, thomas 28, conca 22, lambert 23. these guys are all C grade players or worse. this is what i mean by quality.

it only leaves the following in the age groups i mentioned mature and development groups, who are A OR B graders = elite and very good.
cotchin 24, rance 25, martin 23, deledio 27, riewoldt 26.
we do have some juniors 18 to 21 who look promising in saying all of the above.

So in other words the only players on Richmond's list that you rate are either All Australians or All Australian squad members? Everyone else is a C-grader? Including Lambert who was drafted a week ago and hasn't even played a game yet?

How on Earth have we managed to play finals two years in a row?

 

[Richo83]

im a bit puzzled by this, the younger group of players coming up, can play, the Heppell's, Merritt's, Hibbard, Bagley & co

Baguley is 27, Hibberd is nearly 25, they aren't young. Baguley may even be retired by 2018. So that leaves Heppell and the two Merretts. That's good, but every club has a bunch of good kids.

then you have the talls, Hurley & Hooker in defence

Again, many clubs have those.

& potentially the best forwardline duo in Danhier & Castile.

Carlisle hasn't convinced me as a forward. He kicked 27 goals this year, nearly half of them came in two games. He's a backman forced to play forward because Essendon don't have any other forwards.

not saying they are going to win back to back premierships,

Thank christ!

but ASADA aside, EFC are in better shape than most teams for the future

I'm not convinced. In 2018, Chapman and Fletcher will be retired. Watson, Stanton, Goddard and Cooney will be on the wrong side of 30. That's a fair chunk of your midfield gone. In terms of youngsters, you've got Zaharakis, Heppell, the two Merretts, Melksham and Myers. Apart from Heppell there aren't any elite midfielders coming through. I think it's impossible to tell but I think there are signs that Essendon could struggle if if fails to replace the likes of Watson, Goddard, Chapman and Stanton.

 

[Richo83]

i understand that and i did say most clubs will turn over up towards close to half their lists in 4 trade/draft periods.while agree we dont rely on our vets much well we only have 4. we do rely heavily on the rest of our older players which imo are mostly easily replaceable. we have a lot of upgrading to do if we wish to be better than middling.

If they're heavily relied upon, why are they easily replaceable?

it only leaves the following in the age groups i mentioned mature and development groups, who are A OR B graders = elite and very good.
cotchin 24, rance 25, martin 23, deledio 27, riewoldt 26.
we do have some juniors 18 to 21 who look promising in saying all of the above.

Miles is B grade, Ellis could become A grade. This is another glass half empty post from you. You still haven't addressed the fact that Richmond doesn't rely much on players who will retire within the next four years. That's a good sign in terms of ensuring a side doesn't tumble down the ladder. One of the things which really hurts development is losing key players due to injury. Besides Maric and Chaplin, both recruited from other sides, who will Richmond lose? Deledio is nearly 28 but he's very durable. Has missed four games in the past seven seasons and eight games in his 10 year career.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

Who do you think will be in the Top 4 and Bottom 4 in 2018,

Top 4
Gold Coast
GWS
Brisbane
West Coast

Bottom 4
Fremantle
Richmond
Geelong
North Melbourne

Geelong Bottom 4 - LMAO

Geelong haven't been bottom 4 for over thirty years. Sure we could drop down outside the eight in coming years, anything's possible. But they have enough talent coming up to stay in the middle of the ladder if that happens.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Baguley is 27, Hibberd is nearly 25, they aren't young. Baguley may even be retired by 2018. So that leaves Heppell and the two Merretts. That's good, but every club has a bunch of good kids.

David Zaharakis, Hocking, Myres, Colyer, Howlett just off the top of my head!

Again, many clubs have those.

as good duo as them?, there is tayte pears, if he ever gets over his injuries, as back up, Dempsey, Hibbard

Carlisle hasn't convinced me as a forward. He kicked 27 goals this year, nearly half of them came in two games. He's a backman forced to play forward because Essendon don't have any other forwards.

it was his first season up forward, he still young, Daniher has just turned 20, those two are enough to build a forward line around, throw in Bellchambers as the talls

 

[thetank]

having a laugh surely?

I think Melbourne has a good chance of being top 4 in 4 years time. Are you suggesting that Melbourne will be bad for 12-15 consecutive years?

Teams don't stay perpetually on the bottom of the ladder, Melbourne has had its bad run.

 

[jjsmitty8]

Why the **** has nobody suggested our team, ________? We are going to do much better than everyone thinks over the next four years and beyond. I mean, ______ and _______ are back from injury, _________ and ______ are ready to take their games to the next level and have you seen who we selected in the draft last week? Our first selection, _________, is great odds for the rising star next year (get on him!) let alone four years time! As for _________, I think he'll be a real smokey and I reckon we got him for a steal this year. On top of that, we've cleared out ________ and _________ which really makes room for _________ who will be much better in that position anyway. There is no way _________ will be bottom 4, not like our rival team, ______, who are absolute certainties.

Congratulations sir, you've just won BigFooty.

 

[Mr Magic]

i understand that and i did say most clubs will turn over up towards close to half their lists in 4 trade/draft periods.while agree we dont rely on our vets much well we only have 4. we do rely heavily on the rest of our older players which imo are mostly easily replaceable. we have a lot of upgrading to do if we wish to be better than middling.

outside of the veterans on our list which for me are those who turn 29 plus next yr and i say again there are only 4, newman, maric, chaplin and foley.the problem really is with our our mature group 25 to 28yo. and our development group 22 to 24.

hunt 24, lloyd 25, gordon 25, griffiths 23, astbury 24, grimes 23, dea 23, hampson 27, vickery 24, petterd 26, batchelor 23, morris 26, houli 26, knights 28, grigg 26, thomas 28, conca 22, lambert 23. these guys are all C grade players or worse. this is what i mean by quality.

it only leaves the following in the age groups i mentioned mature and development groups, who are A OR B graders = elite and very good.
cotchin 24, rance 25, martin 23, deledio 27, riewoldt 26.
we do have some juniors 18 to 21 who look promising in saying all of the above.

Do you think we will get into contention in 2018?

 

[santa claws]

If they're heavily relied upon, why are they easily replaceable?



Miles is B grade, Ellis could become A grade. This is another glass half empty post from you. You still haven't addressed the fact that Richmond doesn't rely much on players who will retire within the next four years. That's a good sign in terms of ensuring a side doesn't tumble down the ladder. One of the things which really hurts development is losing key players due to injury. Besides Maric and Chaplin, both recruited from other sides, who will Richmond lose? Deledio is nearly 28 but he's very durable. Has missed four games in the past seven seasons and eight games in his 10 year career.

Ellis and Miles are still juniors, As is Vlastuin and others. I did say we had had some promising juniors but i wasnt talking about the 18 to 21 group.
I was commenting on the 22 thru 28 age groups. In looking at the list i apologise, i placed Miles as a junior but at 23 hes a development player and i agree he is a very good player and a B grader.

The vast core of players we have, in both the 22 to 24 and 25 to 28 age groups, are regulars. Thus they are heavily relied upon.Most would play more than half the games each yr if fit.
It isnt rocket science in fact its quite simple. The vast core 22 thru 28yo imo are only C grade at best, or worse. Hence they are replaceable.
Fact is if we wish to become a top 4 side we must be strenuous in looking to upgrade on most of em. We need a lot of juniors to make the grade and force out some very ordinary players.
W e are a middling side for a reason. We crack in big games for a reason. Its dog eat dog in trying to win a premiership and we forget all sides look for improvement.

Yes i agree we dont have the problem of lots of vets on the list retiring, imo only Ivan would be missed greatly anyway.Imo our problem is we do have far too many development and mature players not being good enough, many of whom are regulars. Some may go on and become decent players.

Few vets is no guarantee of tumbling down the ladder. A lack of depth and quality sure can cause this though.
Just as a shedload of juniors on your list is no guarantee of long term success.

We will turn over just as many players as other sides, if not more over the next 4 yrs. Yes there wont be many vets amongst them. We wont be delisting/retireing many vets as we have few, but we will be or should be delisting and looking to upgrade on many in the age groups i mentioned.

Will the following players be there in 4yrs time?? THATS the guts of this thread. Imo an even more relevant question should be, should we be looking to do better than those listed in 22 thru 28 bracket in most cases.???
Astbury 24yo , Batchelor 23, Chaplin 29, Conca 22, Dea 23, Foley 29, Gordon 25, Griffiths 23, Grigg 26, Lloyd 25, Grimes 23, Hampson 27, Houli 26, Knights 28, Maric 29, Morris 26, Newman 32, Petterd 26 , Vickery 24, Hunt 24. rookies Lambert 23, Thomas 28.
On top of that i havent mentioned juniors or rookies, We will cop our fair share of failures here if Jacksons record is anything to go by.

juniors

Mcbean 20, Elton 21, mcintosh 20, Mcdonough 21, B Ellis 21, Lennon 19, Vlastuin 20, C Ellis 18, Menadue 18, Drummond 20, Butler 18, Mckenzie 19.
rookies Arnot 21, Short 18, Castagna, Soldo ?.

i suppose it all comes down to how we rate players.me i just think we dont have enough quality or depth and the list is still very much a middling list, it would not be improbable to see us become a bottom 4 side in 4 yrs time if we get it wrong and i cant see us becoming a top 4 side not with the talent on other teams lists.

 

[santa claws]

Do you think we will get into contention in 2018?

to win a flag no.not with the current list. maybe if we get it right 2018 could be a possibility but geez some clubs have stockpiled quality young players and it will be awfully hard to go past em. we will have to do well no really well in all areas of recruiting just to get on level terms.

imo we need another 4 or 5 high quality players to go with the 7 or 8 we currently have. we also need a fairly reasonable upgrade over all of the list.
also i think there a 4 or 5 sides in and around us who are in better shape moving fwd.

like us all clubs have the opportunity to improve each yr.if we improve say 10% this yr but melb and gws improve 20% they could go past us.that is just an example of how hard it could and can be to get there.
we never ever as supporters consider what the other mobs are doing except to ricdicule them. we could concievably improve next yr and miss the 8 such is the competition.

 

[Mr Magic]

to win a flag no.not with the current list. maybe if we get it right 2018 could be a possibility but geez some clubs have stockpiled quality young players and it will be awfully hard to go past em. we will have to do well no really well in all areas of recruiting just to get on level terms.

imo we need another 4 or 5 high quality players to go with the 7 or 8 we currently have. we also need a fairly reasonable upgrade over all of the list.
also i think there a 4 or 5 sides in and around us who are in better shape moving fwd.

like us all clubs have the opportunity to improve each yr.if we improve say 10% this yr but melb and gws improve 20% they could go past us.that is just an example of how hard it could and can be to get there.
we never ever as supporters consider what the other mobs are doing except to ricdicule them. we could concievably improve next yr and miss the 8 such is the competition.

So what areas do you think we need to improve? Positions etc..

 

[Engimal]

Top 4:
Gold Coast
North
Brisbane
Essendon (IF there are no significant penalties from the drug scandal)

Bottom 4:
Geelong
Adelaide
Carlton
Collingwood

In saying that, 4 years is four god damned years away. There'll be a few good thread bumps to be had in the 2018 season, I'm sure.