Prediction Geelong will bottom out some time between 2015-2017

[Stig_90]

You never know how it will pan out. A lot of pessimistic posts in here, but who knows, we might be lucky enough to lure Patty Dangerfield and bring a few more kids with Gregson's talent in and stay around the top 4-6 mark.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

So we agree

True.


I think the gap between Collingwood/Richmond and Hawthorn/Fremantle is massive.

Of course, we all want the same thing, but the context also includes a bunch of other clubs all trying to pull off the same trick.

True the gap is big between Collingwood/Richmond and Hawthorn/Fremantle but you can not expect our under 25 year olds most of which are under 23 to be able to play premiership level football at this stage. The fact that they can play to a level that is good enough to comfortably beat some middle road sides suggest that they have some good potential.

Again not directed at you but why are we not aspiring to be the best club on the field ? whatever happened to good to great ? we seem to be as supporters suggesting that our fate for the next 10 year is written into destiny and has already been determined. Why don't we take the view that with great list management, great player management and great coaching that we can be an on field powerhouse in the near future ?

 

[jnrburger]

Bottoming out - this is it. Ongoing proactive list management, a willingness to start culling the injury-prone, some potential trades and free agency give us a unique ability to turn around very quickly from here on in. Some of these are big IFs, but hear me out:

1. Have to cull injury prone and almost half the thirty plus players this year - eg. McIntosh, Rivers, Enright, Kelly, Simpson, Delaney, Bates, adding in Hartman and Toohey already gone - a lot gone at once I admit; then
2. Free agency - danger and another midfielder become critical - assume scooter (for example)
3. A willingness to then trade a pick or two - round 1+ if a key defender is available, round 2 if a half-back flanker is there
4. Then largely left with lower round picks to top up young / rookie stocks
5. Some kids in the pipeline to step up a notch, and one or two injuries to finally heal in 2016 - eg. Menzel and Vardy
6. Pick up a big bodied ruck essentially to play in the twos, but providing different option to stanley and blicavs - assume mature recruit or delisted - something like a Max Gawn

We could then go into 2016 looking something like (or better, depending on trades):

B: Bews, Lonergan, Kolodjashnij
HB: Thurlow, Taylor, Guthrie
C: Duncan, Danger, Scooter
HF: Motlop, Walker, Johnson
F: Clark, Hawkins, Gregson
Foll: Stanley, Selwood, Caddy
Int: Blicavs (just easier to name home here!), Bartel, Mackie, Stokes, Murdoch, Lang, H-Smith, Cockatoo.....

Must then ensure we have the next key defender plus a back up by the end of next year - assume we'll have to trade to find a ready-made replacement for Lonergan, and Schofield at WCE becomes UFA end of 2016 who would serve as a good back up.

A truck load of champion retirements then coming through at end of 2016 - Johnson, Bartel, Stokes, Mackie, Lonergan, plus likelihood of a couple more injured types like McCarthy and Cowan (or upside if they turn out ok).

Yes, it all looks like a lot, but look at what has already gone in the past few years - Scarlett, Ling, Harley, Milburn, Corey, Mooney, Rooke, Wojcinski, Hunt, Chapman, Ottens, Ablett, Varcoe - 13 players which we in our best 22 of the premiership era.

This has been well managed so far, and if the first 3 quarters against Sydney on the weekend are anything to go by, no reason to think it won't continue to be well managed.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

You never know how it will pan out. A lot of pessimistic posts in here, but who knows, we might be lucky enough to lure Patty Dangerfield and bring a few more kids with Gregson's talent in and stay around the top 4-6 mark.

I would hope that we can land Dangerfield and another quality player this year .If we make some tough choices at the end of the year the money will be there in the salary cap.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Bottoming out - this is it. Ongoing proactive list management, a willingness to start culling the injury-prone, some potential trades and free agency give us a unique ability to turn around very quickly from here on in. Some of these are big IFs, but hear me out:

1. Have to cull injury prone and almost half the thirty plus players this year - eg. McIntosh, Rivers, Enright, Kelly, Simpson, Delaney, Bates, adding in Hartman and Toohey already gone - a lot gone at once I admit; then
2. Free agency - danger and another midfielder become critical - assume scooter (for example)
3. A willingness to then trade a pick or two - round 1+ if a key defender is available, round 2 if a half-back flanker is there
4. Then largely left with lower round picks to top up young / rookie stocks
5. Some kids in the pipeline to step up a notch, and one or two injuries to finally heal in 2016 - eg. Menzel and Vardy
6. Pick up a big bodied ruck essentially to play in the twos, but providing different option to stanley and blicavs - assume mature recruit or delisted - something like a Max Gawn

We could then go into 2016 looking something like (or better, depending on trades):

B: Bews, Lonergan, Kolodjashnij
HB: Thurlow, Taylor, Guthrie
C: Duncan, Danger, Scooter
HF: Motlop, Walker, Johnson
F: Clark, Hawkins, Gregson
Foll: Stanley, Selwood, Caddy
Int: Blicavs (just easier to name home here!), Bartel, Mackie, Stokes, Murdoch, Lang, H-Smith, Cockatoo.....

Must then ensure we have the next key defender plus a back up by the end of next year - assume we'll have to trade to find a ready-made replacement for Lonergan, and Schofield at WCE becomes UFA end of 2016 who would serve as a good back up.

A truck load of champion retirements then coming through at end of 2016 - Johnson, Bartel, Stokes, Mackie, Lonergan, plus likelihood of a couple more injured types like McCarthy and Cowan (or upside if they turn out ok).

Yes, it all looks like a lot, but look at what has already gone in the past few years - Scarlett, Ling, Harley, Milburn, Corey, Mooney, Rooke, Wojcinski, Hunt, Chapman, Ottens, Ablett, Varcoe - 13 players which we in our best 22 of the premiership era.

This has been well managed so far, and if the first 3 quarters against Sydney on the weekend are anything to go by, no reason to think it won't continue to be well managed.

Great post

I agree we should be going hard after both danger and scooter , they would basically along with an improved Duncan put us very close to premiership contention. We have more chance of getting them this year than hawthorn had of getting Gibson and Burgoyne back in 09.Big test for the club this year.

 

[Moggy]

Again not directed at you but why are we not aspiring to be the best club on the field ? whatever happened to good to great ? we seem to be as supporters suggesting that our fate for the next 10 year is written into destiny and has already been determined. Why don't we take the view that with great list management, great player management and great coaching that we can be an on field powerhouse in the near future ?

I think we all aspire to the same thing, it's just a difference of opinion on how quickly we can get there.

 

[catman2006]

Yep pretty much on the money can see this year and next as the two years we struggle in saying that with good recruitment and drafting at end of the year could be better then expected

 

[Moggy]

Great post

I agree we should be going hard after both danger and scooter , they would basically along with an improved Duncan put us very close to premiership contention. We have more chance of getting them this year than hawthorn had of getting Gibson and Burgoyne back in 09.Big test for the club this year.

I definitely agree that a clever, aggressive and successful trade/FA/draft period could accelerate things, but I just can't see the club being really bold.

It's just not in our DNA to take big risks - and that's probably a good thing overall.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I definitely agree that a clever, aggressive and successful trade/FA/draft period could accelerate things, but I just can't see the club being really bold.

It's just not in our DNA to take big risks - and that's probably a good thing overall.

I take the view that for us to compete with Sydney and Hawthorn we have to start to get better at picking up players from other clubs.

After hawthorn lost the 2012 grand final Clarkson said that there is 3 avenues that Hawthorn will use to get better

1.Player improvement
2.Trades/Free agents
3.Draft

To be the best club on the field we have to be good at all 3 , being good at only 2 puts us at disadvantage especially with free agency in the picture.

 

[Moggy]

I take the view that for us to compete with Sydney and Hawthorn we have to start to get better at picking up players from other clubs.

After hawthorn lost the 2012 grand final Clarkson said that there is 3 avenues that Hawthorn will use to get better

1.Player improvement
2.Trades/Free agents
3.Draft

To be the best club on the field we have to be good at all 3 , being good at only 2 puts us at disadvantage especially with free agency in the picture.

Makes sense.
Who would you consider trading out?

 

[bulletproof]

I hope it is a strong draft next year, we could easily see ten list changes (rookie and main) this year.

 

[Teriyakicat]

I hope it is a strong draft next year, we could easily see ten list changes (rookie and main) this year.

I read somewhere that it isn't deep at all, bulletproof - I've been worried about that for the reason you've mentioned. ie so many list changes. We will have to keep our fingers crossed that Wells is able to work his magic.

 

[Jimmy Yamazaki]

If we do not get any trades/FA's done this year and we lose some vets then yes it's very likely we will finish last probably 2017. Holding on to Cowan, Vardy, Menzel, even Simpson and Brown as long as we have is starting to hurt us now.

However it's not the end of the world. We get a couple picks 1 or 2 and get the best talent in the draft a couple years running.

 

[Craigacat]

A truck load of champion retirements then coming through at end of 2016 - Johnson, Bartel, Stokes, Mackie, Lonergan, plus likelihood of a couple more injured types like McCarthy and Cowan (or upside if they turn out ok).

Yes, it all looks like a lot, but look at what has already gone in the past few years - Scarlett, Ling, Harley, Milburn, Corey, Mooney, Rooke, Wojcinski, Hunt, Chapman, Ottens, Ablett, Varcoe - 13 players which we in our best 22 of the premiership era.

This has been well managed so far, and if the first 3 quarters against Sydney on the weekend are anything to go by, no reason to think it won't continue to be well managed.

That is a really interesting point.

You can think in your mind that until all the premiership players actually move on/retire, that the era is not fully completed yet. However as you've rightly pointed out, we have been transitioning for quite some time now anyway.

 

[Whit3y]

and bring a few more kids with Gregson's talent in and stay around the top 4-6 mark.

not if we give up our picks on the likes of henderson

 

[Saint]

How many KPD have been recycled players? You don't need to draft them with high picks. Egan, Taylor, Lonergan, Scarlett(FS exception), Rivers, Enright, Milburn, Harley.

None of them cost the cats anything to get, they were either late picks or recycled, there's no reason to give anything away to get KPD any more.

Hawthorn's KPD are all recycled players (Frawley, Lake, Gibson)

The only reason to give up players or high draft picks is for proven a-graders. Dangerfield or a KPF would warrant it, but not to replace a KPD.

Geelong have developed young players well because of the older players who mentor them and set an example. There's no point having the young players without any mentors. When Duncan, Guthrie and others have matured enough then new younger players will be able to prosper.

The big problem is if Lonergan and Taylor are injured/retire at the same time. If one is around, they will be able to help any new KPD into the role. Same goes for the midfield based around Selwood/Bartel and the forwards based around Hawkins.

There's no doubt that guys like Bews and Thurlow are able to play better next to Enright and Taylor.
Guthrie and Duncan walk a bit taller around clearances with Bartel and Selwood next to them.
Mitch Clark and young Gregson have a much easier job with Hawkins stamping his authority around the contests.

That guidance is only needed until about the 70 game mark when the player is self-confident and then the player works into the role as leader by the 100 game mark.

The problem with teams that actually bottom out is that there's nobody around to help players through to 70 games and you get guys like Jack Watts who have played 100 games but barely have enough self-confidence on-field to execute basic skills despite all the talent in the world. One pre-season at Geelong alongside Selwood and Bartel, then a half a season of games at the start of his career and he would have been a star by 100 games.

 

[Pollywaffle]

I think this year will be our annus horribilis ( no bum jokes please )
Then back on the good side of the J curve. I see 2017 as a good prospect with some astute list management (a la Dangerfield and some other surprises) it is surprising how perceptions, and results, can turn around

 

[Catatonic Shock]

How many KPD have been recycled players? You don't need to draft them with high picks. Egan, Taylor, Lonergan, Scarlett(FS exception), Rivers, Enright, Milburn, Harley.

None of them cost the cats anything to get, they were either late picks or recycled, there's no reason to give anything away to get KPD any more.

Hawthorn's KPD are all recycled players (Frawley, Lake, Gibson)

The only reason to give up players or high draft picks is for proven a-graders. Dangerfield or a KPF would warrant it, but not to replace a KPD.

Geelong have developed young players well because of the older players who mentor them and set an example. There's no point having the young players without any mentors. When Duncan, Guthrie and others have matured enough then new younger players will be able to prosper.

The big problem is if Lonergan and Taylor are injured/retire at the same time. If one is around, they will be able to help any new KPD into the role. Same goes for the midfield based around Selwood/Bartel and the forwards based around Hawkins.

There's no doubt that guys like Bews and Thurlow are able to play better next to Enright and Taylor.
Guthrie and Duncan walk a bit taller around clearances with Bartel and Selwood next to them.
Mitch Clark and young Gregson have a much easier job with Hawkins stamping his authority around the contests.

That guidance is only needed until about the 70 game mark when the player is self-confident and then the player works into the role as leader by the 100 game mark.

The problem with teams that actually bottom out is that there's nobody around to help players through to 70 games and you get guys like Jack Watts who have played 100 games but barely have enough self-confidence on-field to execute basic skills despite all the talent in the world. One pre-season at Geelong alongside Selwood and Bartel, then a half a season of games at the start of his career and he would have been a star by 100 games.

Quality post mate.

 

[BennyLitter]

Anywhere would be good.

Well seeing that we won a premiership and been in the finals every year in Scott's reign tells me we have been challenging for priemierships.

But I'm happy for you that think it is reasonable to call for the sacking of the coaching team because you perceive that we are no longer challenging in 2015 after 7 rounds...

You need to get a grip mate, if we have a healthy & inform list we can 'challenge' anyone...

The fact that we aren't relying on the older brigade (apart from Lonergan & possibly Rivers) also tells me that the transition is well under way, and challenging for priemierships in the next couple of years is a real possibility.

The future is bright, why all the doom & gloom?

 

[Seeds]

Well seeing that we won a premiership and been in the finals every year in Scott's reign tells me we have been challenging for priemierships.

But I'm happy for you that think it is reasonable to call for the sacking of the coaching team because you perceive that we are no longer challenging in 2015 after 7 rounds...

You need to get a grip mate, if we have a healthy & inform list we can 'challenge' anyone...

The fact that we aren't relying on the older brigade (apart from Lonergan & possibly Rivers) also tells me that the transition is well under way, and challenging for priemierships in the next couple of years is a real possibility.

The future is bright, why all the doom & gloom?

Sigh. Its a response to the op that we are bottoming out for three years (not 7 weeks) in a period that the initial plan when Scott was hired was to be competing for a flag. If the op's assumption is true (I'm not making an opinion on this point - neither disagreeing or agreeing) then it would be safe to assume that the long run plan that was envisaged in 2010 and that Scott used to get the job has spectacularly failed - bottoming out is the exact opposite of competing for a flag. Scott may have won a flag in 2011, but that has nothing to do with what we are discussing. You don't keep someone in a job if they were only good at it four years ago.

 

[Seeds]

How many KPD have been recycled players? You don't need to draft them with high picks. Egan, Taylor, Lonergan, Scarlett(FS exception), Rivers, Enright, Milburn, Harley.

None of them cost the cats anything to get, they were either late picks or recycled, there's no reason to give anything away to get KPD any more.

Hawthorn's KPD are all recycled players (Frawley, Lake, Gibson)

The only reason to give up players or high draft picks is for proven a-graders. Dangerfield or a KPF would warrant it, but not to replace a KPD.

Geelong have developed young players well because of the older players who mentor them and set an example. There's no point having the young players without any mentors. When Duncan, Guthrie and others have matured enough then new younger players will be able to prosper.

The big problem is if Lonergan and Taylor are injured/retire at the same time. If one is around, they will be able to help any new KPD into the role. Same goes for the midfield based around Selwood/Bartel and the forwards based around Hawkins.

There's no doubt that guys like Bews and Thurlow are able to play better next to Enright and Taylor.
Guthrie and Duncan walk a bit taller around clearances with Bartel and Selwood next to them.
Mitch Clark and young Gregson have a much easier job with Hawkins stamping his authority around the contests.

That guidance is only needed until about the 70 game mark when the player is self-confident and then the player works into the role as leader by the 100 game mark.

The problem with teams that actually bottom out is that there's nobody around to help players through to 70 games and you get guys like Jack Watts who have played 100 games but barely have enough self-confidence on-field to execute basic skills despite all the talent in the world. One pre-season at Geelong alongside Selwood and Bartel, then a half a season of games at the start of his career and he would have been a star by 100 games.

Never got the infatuation of trying to recruit key defenders with first round draft picks. Most gun key defenders either never began as key defenders (usually key forwards) or weren't that highly rated around draft time, like Scarlett.

 

[BennyLitter]

Sigh. Its a response to the op that we are bottoming out for three years (not 7 weeks) in a period that the initial plan when Scott was hired was to be competing for a flag. If the op's assumption is true (I'm not making an opinion on this point - neither disagreeing or agreeing) then it would be safe to assume that the long run plan that was envisaged in 2010 and that Scott used to get the job has spectacularly failed - bottoming out is the exact opposite of competing for a flag. Scott may have won a flag in 2011, but that has nothing to do with what we are discussing. You don't keep someone in a job if they were only good at it four years ago.

I think you're missing the point!

My point is that we have been 'challenging' ever since Scott took over!

And it's probably a bit premature to predict us bottoming out after 7 rounds in 2015!

 

[Seeds]

I think you're missing the point!

My point is that we have been 'challenging' ever since Scott took over!

And it's probably a bit premature to predict us bottoming out after 7 rounds in 2015!

And that has nothing to do with what I posted so why quote me.

 

[Vdubs]

I definitely agree that a clever, aggressive and successful trade/FA/draft period could accelerate things, but I just can't see the club being really bold.

It's just not in our DNA to take big risks - and that's probably a good thing overall.

Disagree.
HMc- risk
Stanley- risk
Clark- risk
Menzel, Cowan, Vardy- how many clubs tolerate the risk of keeping on 3 players who between them have played no more than a handful of games in 3 seasons?
Our club takes as many if not more risks than most, and they will do the correct recruiting as it is needed.
BLICAVS- amazing success story, untried footballer , plays first season as #1 ruck virtually, and now is being talked about as the new Stynes.

 

[Moggy]

Disagree.
HMc- risk
Stanley- risk
Clark- risk
Menzel, Cowan, Vardy- how many clubs tolerate the risk of keeping on 3 players who between them have played no more than a handful of games in 3 seasons?
Our club takes as many if not more risks than most, and they will do the correct recruiting as it is needed.
BLICAVS- amazing success story, untried footballer , plays first season as #1 ruck virtually, and now is being talked about as the new Stynes.

Yes and no
Most of those are what I would call long shots but not risky calls that could backfire.
A risky call for me would be to trade out Bartel, SJ and Taylor to get top ten picks or whatever. Calls like that can kill a club for a decade if they go wrong.