Are Geelong about to do a Carlton & Essendon?

[Lunchlady Doris]

That poster that was given as a goal in the 09 GF from Hawkins certainly counted. Got gifts with the old rule F/S selections so they could keep their draft picks for Bartel etc. V lucky. Then they got to sell Ablett, who they got for free, so double dipped again. No team will ever get that outrageous luck, from the old F/S rule and that goal umpire error, again. They are heading for the bottom, fast.

Hey champ, Collingwood were awarded a goal from a shot that hit the post in 2011. Geelong still won.

Fancy that.

 

[#gosaintas]

Hey champ, Collingwood were awarded a goal from a shot that hit the post in 2011. Geelong still won.

Fancy that.

Don't get me started on bloody collingwood

 

[Scott lastname]

I'd have thought the only "gift" was Joel Selwood, with Hawkins coming in cheaply as a F/S selection. But the so called "extraordinary luck" you say Geelong experienced with F/S selections pales into insignificance when you consider Geelong's highest draft pick in the past 15 or so years was No.7.

And I defy anyone to provide tangible evidence that but for the F/S eligibility Scarlett or GAJ deserved to be earlier draft selections.

I don't remember people talking up Scarlett much pre-draft, so I think that's probably right. The fact he played at the Falcons means the Geelong brainstrust probably had a better look at him than most and would have gotten him anyway, so I think it's fair to say that Scarlett (whilst ultimately clearly a bargain) wouldn't have been considered a "bargain" F/S pick in the same way that, say, caused angst with Hawkins.

2001 is still the ultimate AFL draft of all time, and absolutely nothing else comes remotely close. All the talk leading up to the draft was about Judd, Ball and Hodge and which of the three would go first, because no one could split the three of them. When you look at the rest of that draft, it has crazy amounts of talent. Bartel, Dal Santo, Kelly, Johnson, Mitchell, Swan (actually, Hawthorn and Geelong killed it that draft) and of course Ablett. He wasn't being talked about in the top echelon in the media, but then no one was apart from the top three.

Geelong had picks 8, 17, 23 and 24 before they finally took Ablett at 40. Under current rules, I don't think anyone was looking at him in the top 10. However, he was well rated (I believe osteitis pubis concerns, same as a lot that era, probably held a little sway). If someone 10-16 rated him, then Geelong lose pick 17. If someone 18-22 rated him, then they lose 23.

I think it's arguable that Geelong saved some picks when you compare the two sets of rules and probably lose Stevie J as a result (as they rated Charlie Gardiner higher than him), but didn't pay massive unders.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

i duno, i think if you re-sign Clarko he'll keep the Hawkes in the top8 but i dunno about a top 4 though

He's changed teams!

Essendon to Hawks!

LukeParkerno1 you've started a trend!

 

[Crankyhawk]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_players_drafted_to_the_Australian_Football_League_under_the_father–son_rule

You've gone for 11, which I agree is quite a bit (second most after Collingwood). However, we just haven't had the cattle to pick. We've looked at a few, but they haven't turned out and no one else has given them a go.

I will disregard Bews for now, because too early to tell. So out of those 10, only five have played less than 50 games, which gives you a 50% strike rate. Of those five, three are probably amongst the top F/S selections in recent memory (Ablett, Scarlett, Hawkins). That's an incredibly good strike-rate (second only to Essendon's, but with comprehensively better results).

Collingwood gave 12 a shot, of 11 (one is too recent), 6 played less than 50 games. And one of the guys to play more than 50 games was Jason Cloke, so I'm counting him in the duds pile! Heath Shaw and Travis Cloke are their best to come out of it. That's a 36% success rate.

Hawthorn have 0/3 (1 if you count J.Kennedy's success at Sydney), Carlton's best are Lance Whitnall (fair) and Jarrad Waite (2/7 - 28%), etc. etc.

Essendon have Fletcher and Watson, with Daniher and possibly Neagle looking the goods (not confirmed yet), so they've done well too (uncannily well in percentage terms). West Coast McKintosh and Cousins. Richmond have also done decently well, with Richardson, Bowden and Bourke.

Melbourne and North Melbourne have none so far (although Viney with potential). Sydney only got Sean Dempster. Brisbane only J.Brown. St Kilda only Sierakowski. Port only Ebert. Fremantle only B. Peake.

Geelong have benefited more than any other team from F/S - yes a lot is development. But you can't completely disregard talent and luck in this.

EDIT: Sorry Dogs fans - forgot you. You have L.Darcy, but quite a few youngsters showing potential if they can stay away from drugs (Libba and Wallis, with Hunter and Cordy looking like also rans at this stage)

Was Paul Hudson father son? Would count his output as least as good as Waite. And Shane Tuck was serviceable at Richmond.

 

[SleazySimon]

That's true because his obvious poster in 09 was called a goal. They changed the rules due to Geelong's good fortune.

Another bitter Saint winging about 09. You people never mention the free handout goal given from two 50 metre penalties for so called 'demonstrative abuse'

 

[gaelictiogar]

Do an Essendon? enter a period of more than a decade where they won't win a final, and give an unproven club legend the coaching gig with no actual accreditation who sends them back down to the bottom when they were supposedly coming good!??

The bigger question is, which Geelong veteran will Essendon pick-up at the end of the season....Mackie or Kelly?

There is quite a lot of precedent for extremely settled successful sides full of gun players being followed by extended fallow periods so the idea that Geelong could go many years struggling is not as far fetched as it seems.

Go back a decade and ask if Essendon of 2005 would "do a Richmond" and it would have been laughed out of court. Meanwhile a decade later Essendon are being held up a a model of dysfunction.

I'm not saying it will happen but its not outlandish to suggest it might.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

He's changed teams!

Essendon to Hawks!

LukeParkerno1 you've started a trend!

This is how the get the majority of their supporters.

 

[Scott lastname]

Was Paul Hudson father son? Would count his output as least as good as Waite. And Shane Tuck was serviceable at Richmond.

Prior to the father/son rule coming in for the purposes of the AFL Draft, which is the context of the discussion. However - yes, definitely a success story. Actually, I think, an underrated footballer.

For S.Tuck - I agree... That's why I said we chose the wrong Tuck...

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Last nights game they had 11 guys over 150 games experience. Only 6 guys under 50 games.

They rely on Selwood so much that if he is curtailed they are certain to lose.

They have topped up with Mitch Clark which hasn't worked.

Young kids coming through? Most of them don't look like they'll be as good as the previous generation and don't compare too well to kids at other clubs.

The investment in Caddy has reaped an ok midfielder but not the gun they were expecting.

The question is why are so many old guys playing? Why aren't more kids being played?

I don't get the point of this post? I think that's the perfect balance (or close to it). You need to blood the youngsters while they're surrounded by experienced players. It's the best way for them to learn while still being competitive. You can't carry more than 6 players under 50 games each week and expect to be competitive consistently.
Haw v Car
Hawks had 8 players with 200+ games, with another 2 around 150+ (Rioli on 148).
Carlton had I think it was 7 players 21 or under, 11 players with less than 50 games experience and only 2 (if you include Murphy who was playing in his) with 200+. Nobody else was even over 150 games, with Jamison being the closest on 138.
Even if Carlton were a top 8 side with a healthy list, they would struggle to compete with a team profile like that.

Fact is you need a good balance of experience and maturity to bring the kids through with any level of success.