Can lowly clubs rebuild now?

[TedDougChris]

I'm going to say a tentative 'Yes', but it's very difficult.

We're seeing a trend of players being able to be selective where they go, the FA clause, the uneven fixtures, the uneven off-field expenditure and the compromised salary caps have meant that there is no fairness in the competition.

So for a struggling club to attract a FA, you need one that either supported that club as a kid and is willing to go there for comparible terms, or to pay over. Paying over for a player means it's more likely that someone else at the club would be squeezed out and we are all aware that depth of talent is one of key reasons for success.

A struggling club would need everything to go right to be successful. If the FA clauses change again, allowing players to leave earlier, I'd imagine that it will become even harder for the poorer clubs.

Just out of interest, Port in 2004 were the last poorer club to win a flag, that didn't either have a retention allowance or significant resources available. Even Geelong are a much wealthier club than many in the League (through hard work, good people and good recruitment to give them their due)... Pre-that you need to go to North in 1999 (I think). So one or two flags in the last 15 years.....

 

[Yoda_]

Lynden Dunn is having a great season...

When he signed his current contract he wouldn't have been worth the money he is on.

 

[dajesmac]

I actually think the Dogs' young nucleus is quite good. Especially considering they're approaching a draft stocked with talls in which they will have high picks.

 

[AjsGuns]

Dogs drafted very well in 2010 (Libba and Dahl) and 2012 (Macrae, Stringer, Hrovrat and Hunter) i see a rise for us and Melbourne next year although i might be a little biased. I certainly agree that it takes a lot longer to rebuild now though.

 

[dajesmac]

Dogs drafted very well in 2010 (Libba and Dahl) and 2012 (Macrae, Stringer, Hrovrat and Hunter) i see a rise for us and Melbourne next year although i might be a little biased. I certainly agree that it takes a lot longer to rebuild now though.

You'd be doing well to rise as early as next year, talented or not.

 

[Albert Ross]

People can argue about extra things but I feel one way is the best way to explain it;


(I'm completely making up numbers here so feel free to post some more accurate numbers)

Nick Malceski - $350,000 per year
Lyndenn Dunn - $350,000 per year

Now your trying to tell me that Malceski and Dunn are fairly close players, ability wise? Paying a proper market value would allow the lesser clubs to pay the value for higher priced FA etc.

I agree with the argument and have previously said the minimum cap is a massive boon to the successful clubs by tying a hand behind the back of the bottom clubs. But to play devils advocate

The opposite argument to that is Dunn is never going to be poached, and Malceski might be. Or to use some other made-up numbers

Jeremey Cameron - $500k
Joe Daniher - $150k

Going to be hard to get a Cameron or Patton out of the GWS for money.

 

[James44]

Too many concessions were given to GWS & GC.

It has created a league that has barely changed.

Coll, Hawthorn, Geelong & Sydney have either played in every finals series since 2006 or missed one year at most.

FA has meant a lot of players stay longer at their original clubs, apart from Buddy & Thomas, the real stars don't move in FA.

Compared to the NRL, where player movement is very free, if you have poor years, it takes years to rebuild up the ladder.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Port Adelaide says Hello!

 

[doggies ftw]

I actually think the Dogs' young nucleus is quite good. Especially considering they're approaching a draft stocked with talls in which they will have high picks.

Wouldn't be surprised if they were all gone by our pick to be honest. Most likely to be available is Goddard and he's probably not really the type we need up forward, but I'd be happy with him.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

common theme in most of those in the almighty dollar.

That, or in the case of Shaw and Mumford, their clubs were actively trying to get rid of them

* off we offered Mumford 3 contracts, Mumford went because he's one of the best ruckman going around and could get more money else where which we simply could not afford given the recruiting plans, would have loved to keep him but we would have lost just about everyone of the players we've signed this year had we given him the money he was after. (our depth is s**t enough atm)

Plus Shane'o brought a house in Sydney 2012. GWS offered good money and mummy wouldn't have to up root.

No brainer.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Yeah, because Melbourne made such great use of all their high draft picks when they had them.

 

[piesnz]

I see it not so much as being that clubs can't rebuild from the bottom and more that clubs are attempting to follow the Geelong/Hawthorn/Collingwood/Sydney model of staying up all the time. It's been recognised that having a winning culture, top level recruiters and development of players is more important than draft picks. That also flows on into clubs' ability to recruit players from other clubs. Look at Hawthorn's ability to constantly bring in guns despite it being assumed they must be close to the salary cap.

 

[liz]

FA has meant a lot of players stay longer at their original clubs, apart from Buddy & Thomas, the real stars don't move in FA.

FA has been in for two and a bit years. Don't think we can yet determine what the longer term effects are going to be. Goddard is another star who chose to take advantage of the system and change clubs. Nick Dal Santo is another, though given his age the circumstances were maybe a little different.

 

[DanA]

A has meant a lot of players stay longer at their original clubs, apart from Buddy & Thomas, the real stars don't move in FA.

Disagree. Goddard, Dal Santo, Buddy and Thomas are all stars. You can probably add Frawley and possibly Mundy to the list this coming off season. That's a fair number already. Geelong lost Chappy, J.Hunt and Podsiadly last summer and in the past probably would have been able to sign them on small contracts. I think we're going to see a lot of older players leave for that last payday.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Disagree. Goddard, Dal Santo, Buddy and Thomas are all stars. You can probably add Frawley and possibly Mundy to the list this coming off season. That's a fair number already. Geelong lost Chappy, J.Hunt and Podsiadly last summer and in the past probably would have been able to sign them on small contracts. I think we're going to see a lot of older players leave for that last payday.

As far as small forwards go Eddie Betts is a star too.

 

[Godogs247]

Bulldogs should make a deal with GWS now

pick 4 (Goddard) and Shaun Higgins for

Patton and pick 20 (Ahern)

Bulldogs then would
Patton
pick 20-Ahern
pick 24-Lavede
pick 41-Hayes
pick 58-Cordy
pick 72-Upgrade Jong

with bont

 

[Dr Tigris]

Obviously yes. But it is harder now. The increase in the number of teams means you get worse draft picks. And losing the extra picks for poor years means topping up is harder.

However, a few years of good drafting when gettign top 5 picks = a good core to the squad. Decent drafting, trading and development can build a strong squad fairly quickly.

However, the rich clubs with a good culture have a huge advantage. They attract good players and youngsters coming in get a fantastic atmosphere to develop in. We are yet yo see if the really good teams can regularly keep on after the core of their teams goes. The Swans have done this, but we are yet to see if Geelong and the Hawks can. If these teams slowly drfit to beign mid table/low top 8 and cannot rebuild then over tiem lower temas will slowly beccome the top teams for extended periods. That means a very slow churn of teams. Which in turn means about half the teams are going to be mediocre of poor for long periods - i.e. 10 years plus.

 

[Collingwoodity]

Yes. But culture is more important than draft picks (which has been said already).

 

[I am Jack]

I actually think the Dogs' young nucleus is quite good. Especially considering they're approaching a draft stocked with talls in which they will have high picks.

I agree, I think the dogs are rebuilding exceptionally well.
If they manage to snare a forward the caliber of McCartin, they'll be well placed.

 

[I am Jack]

Yes. But culture is more important than draft picks (which has been said already).

I wouldn't say more important, IMO it is a mixture of both.
People point to Melbourne and rant culture, but an argument could be made - that the Dees just drafted poorly.
Culture is important, as is talent.

 

[doona]

we simply could not afford given the recruiting plans

We forced him out because of our recruitment plans. From what I read we never tabled an offer for him. The contract talks were put until seasons end, then we didnt offer him a contract because of Franklin.

I think you are thinking of lamb (who we offered a couple of contracts to but took the GWS payday)

 

[Collingwoodity]

I wouldn't say more important, IMO it is a mixture of both.
People point to Melbourne and rant culture, but an argument could be made - that the Dees just drafted poorly.
Culture is important, as is talent.

Gibbs, Murphy, Kreuzer, Walker, Lucas. Top 10 draft picks who are performing worse at Carlton because of poor player development and a culture of self-entitlement. Judd was their only leader. They could only follow him. Now they are floundering without his leadership. These players would likely have been developed better at Hawthorn or Geelong.

IMO its mostly culture.

 

[Black Dynamite]

Bulldogs should make a deal with GWS now

pick 4 (Goddard) and Shaun Higgins for

Patton and pick 20 (Ahern)

Bulldogs then would
Patton
pick 20-Ahern
pick 24-Lavede
pick 41-Hayes
pick 58-Cordy
pick 72-Upgrade Jong

with bont

Surprised if Ahern makes it to 20.

 

[TwentyNine]

Hmm

Are things the way they have been for decades

Or have they changed for no particular reason

Lock in A, Eddie

 

[Chaisa]

Were Port Adelaide Top 4 two years ago?

There's your answer.