Play Nice The 'all things Carlton' mega-thread

[Mr_Plow]

Someone please help me understand this push for compo.

Last year Carlton was on the way back, and no talk of compo.
This year their fans suggest injuries are the reason for another wooden spoon - which is fair enough.
So injuries are effectively the reason for compo NOT an competitive list.

That’s just wrong.

Carlton fans can’t have it both ways.
You can’t on the one hand say we have a good list but injuries crueled our season, and then in the same breadth push for compo.
Compo is only justified if your full list was so poor that you finished bottom.

So please make up your minds.

Why not both? *insert gif*

 

[Gethelred]

Someone please help me understand this push for compo.

Last year Carlton was on the way back, and no talk of compo.
This year their fans suggest injuries are the reason for another wooden spoon - which is fair enough.
So injuries are effectively the reason for compo NOT an competitive list.

That’s just wrong.

Carlton fans can’t have it both ways.
You can’t on the one hand say we have a good list but injuries crueled our season, and then in the same breadth push for compo.
Compo is only justified if your full list was so poor that you finished bottom.

So please make up your minds.

... which, if you remember, was our initial position as well.

Then, the rest of the AFL media decided - mere weeks after declaring that Carlton didn't deserve one, shouldn't get one, were the worst thing ever even before they did and if they got it it would be too much - that Carlton were so poor (which we were, no arguments here) - that they changed the narrative to the point where not only a PP would be considered and would be likely but would possibly be better than end of first round, without any prompting from us.

There are two scenarios here. Scenario one: we inquired quietly, asking if a PP would be on offer only to be rebuffed by HQ. Media gets wind of it unofficially, and brings it up in talkback and through print media, creating a rather significant amount of bad press. Liddle goes and gives his interview, declaring that we don't want a priority pick, that we would dig our way out of our own hole. Story's over, press moved onto something else, brief patch of good press. Then, as the poor performances ratcheted up - especially the loss to Melbourne and/or Fremantle - and the discourse changed; where we once 'got ourselves into this situation and could get ourselves out', we were 'so terrible that there is no dawn in sight without AFL intervention'. So, our position changed with the narrative, and who turns down a free hit at the draft or a trading chip?

Scenario two: we inquired quietly, asking if a PP would be on offer only to be rebuffed by the AFL, and so we deliberately leaked our discrete inquiry and allowed the torrent of hysteria that follows the notion of the PP to fester, before cutting it off. We then allowed the AFL media to make our case for us, as a deliberate plan to a) avert tanking allegations and b) to obtain the priority pick we wanted from the start, manipulating the press, the public and the AFL to get what we wanted.

So, pick one. Are we opportunists who accept what is offered and went back on what we said - because, you know, people change their minds all the time - or are we villains and dastardly schemers who plotted and manipulated our way to getting what we wanted?

I really don't care what we do, but it's good to have options, and it isn't as though there are not plenty of clubs that trace their premiership success back to priority picks.

 

[No SPIN]

... which, if you remember, was our initial position as well.

Then, the rest of the AFL media decided - mere weeks after declaring that Carlton didn't deserve one, shouldn't get one, were the worst thing ever even before they did and if they got it it would be too much - that Carlton were so poor (which we were, no arguments here) - that they changed the narrative to the point where not only a PP would be considered and would be likely but would possibly be better than end of first round, without any prompting from us.

There are two scenarios here. Scenario one: we inquired quietly, asking if a PP would be on offer only to be rebuffed by HQ. Media gets wind of it unofficially, and brings it up in talkback and through print media, creating a rather significant amount of bad press. Liddle goes and gives his interview, declaring that we don't want a priority pick, that we would dig our way out of our own hole. Story's over, press moved onto something else, brief patch of good press. Then, as the poor performances ratcheted up - especially the loss to Melbourne and/or Fremantle - and the discourse changed; where we once 'got ourselves into this situation and could get ourselves out', we were 'so terrible that there is no dawn in sight without AFL intervention'. So, our position changed with the narrative, and who turns down a free hit at the draft or a trading chip?

Scenario two: we inquired quietly, asking if a PP would be on offer only to be rebuffed by the AFL, and so we deliberately leaked our discrete inquiry and allowed the torrent of hysteria that follows the notion of the PP to fester, before cutting it off. We then allowed the AFL media to make our case for us, as a deliberate plan to a) avert tanking allegations and b) to obtain the priority pick we wanted from the start, manipulating the press, the public and the AFL to get what we wanted.

So, pick one. Are we opportunists who accept what is offered and went back on what we said - because, you know, people change their minds all the time - or are we villains and dastardly schemers who plotted and manipulated our way to getting what we wanted?

I really don't care what we do, but it's good to have options, and it isn't as though there are not plenty of clubs that trace their premiership success back to priority picks.

I admire a poster who both acknowledges the hypocrisy and opportunism in the PP push, as opposed to logical and valid justification, as should otherwise be the case.

It would be a sad precedent for the game if PP’s were granted without obvious and transparent justification.

 

[Gethelred]

I admire a poster who both acknowledges the hypocrisy and opportunism in the PP push, as opposed to logical and valid justification, as should otherwise be the case.

It really doesn't matter. You're damned if you did it for the right reasons or in the right way or if you didn't.

There are any number of other interpretations of our actions, some of which are sincere or honest, but most of the time those in the media and the general public aren't interested in what actually happened/happens, but in the best way to use what happens to pot other people. Why bother fighting it, especially when those people aren't the ones who need to be convinced of the necessity of providing a club that has won what, 3 games in their last 45(?) with a pick in the mid/late teens as a salve for other issues.

I'd say that all clubs would do the same thing, and they would, but that doesn't make it any better. All organisations make decisions based on creating their own prosperity, and if someone offers them a free hit why others would begrudge them for it is a little beyond me.

It would be a sad precedent for the game if PP’s were granted without obvious and transparent justification.

Sure, but the AFL wants a bob both ways. They don't want to release details of what exactly constitutes PP criteria because when the last did that the media created a furore over Melbourne's somewhat dubious use of second twenty-two players at times over 2013, and they like manipulating things to produce the result they're after.

And asking for transparency from a private business is like squeezing blood from an orange.

 

[schmuttt]

Actually Melbourne 2013 was worse. You also finished with 2 wins, but with a percentage of 54 (lower than ours this year).

That was the year you drafted Hogan (win) but traded Pick 2 (Josh Kelly) for 8 (Salem) and Dom Tyson (lose).

Hopefully we dont make the same mistake trading away Pick 1 this year.

Id argue our list is in better shape that Melbournes was in 2013 (we already have most of the pieces in place), so hopefully it doesnt take us 5 years to make finals again. We should be back in genuine finals contention in around 2021 (3 years).

Melbourne 2013 is absolutely worse than Carlton this year in terms of the list. The recruiting 2013 onwards for us has been fantastic, Carlton already have the foundations for a good side. From our side in round 23 2013 only 6 players remain on the list.

 

[WetCrow1991]

We are a very patient lot us Carlton supporters, but thanks for your input all the same

Probably not a good thing, entire club needs a cleanout top to bottom.

 

[Navara79]

Probably not a good thing, entire club needs a cleanout top to bottom.

Should we employ "Collective Minds?"

 

[Jeremias]

Probably not a good thing, entire club needs a cleanout top to bottom.

Love these sweeping statements, without context nor explanation.

We’ve made plenty of changes over the past few years.

Who do we need to “cleanout” and why?

 

[watchdog1987]

Serious question.

It seems SOS is trying the same model as used the GWS. Bring in heaps of youth cop beltings and come good.

Will this really work? GWS haven't managed to make a grand final let alone win one and SOS has about 20% of the picks available he did at GWS.

What makes him think this tactic will win premierships at Carlton.

 

[Mr_Plow]

Serious question.

It seems SOS is trying the same model as used the GWS. Bring in heaps of youth cop beltings and come good.

Will this really work? GWS haven't managed to make a grand final let alone win one and SOS has about 20% of the picks available he did at GWS.

What makes him think this tactic will win premierships at Carlton.

Gee, well I don't know, I suppose rather than investing in the draft we should have invested in a list of delisted free agents.

How merry.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

Serious question.

It seems SOS is trying the same model as used the GWS. Bring in heaps of youth cop beltings and come good.

Will this really work? GWS haven't managed to make a grand final let alone win one and SOS has about 20% of the picks available he did at GWS.

What makes him think this tactic will win premierships at Carlton.

I'm pretty sure SOS is bringing in lots of youth because we had none when he walked through the doors.

And unlike the giants, Carlton will look to become more team-oriented. Just about every premiership winning side is team-oriented. GWS hasn't been that.

Not sure how one can say it does or doesn't work if what you're claiming is the case. To me, it seems like you're trying so hard to conjure something out of scraps to make SOS look bad.

I honestly don't know what more he could've done with the tools he was supplied with.

 

[Gethelred]

Serious question.

It seems SOS is trying the same model as used the GWS. Bring in heaps of youth cop beltings and come good.

Will this really work? GWS haven't managed to make a grand final let alone win one and SOS has about 20% of the picks available he did at GWS.

What makes him think this tactic will win premierships at Carlton.

GWS haven't made a grand final for many reasons - injury, lack of deep commitment to each other, inadequacy of coaching/game plan, short term vicissitudes of opposition form that would've beaten them at their best anyway (I defy anyone to say that WB in 2016 would've have found a way to win against them that day regardless of who they played. They were the most unique combination of limited yet good enough in the moment that I've ever seen) etc - but their key issue really is that they haven't really peaked yet.

Shiel, Cameron, Ward, Davis, Scully; these are their first gen players, the ones who they chose and have spent their careers fighting for the cause. Shaw was and still is his own person, and the next age group down are supremely talented - Greene, Kelly, Coniglio, Whitfield - and will form the core of their side as they move forward, but to this point they've imported in their experience. Until they have their own versions of 'been there, done that', they're going to be a bit limited. Right now, they're a little bit harder than they were last year, and much harder than the year before in terms of character, but they still play their best footy when it's easy. When it's fun, they perform; when it gets a bit harder, they struggle to pull the game back on their terms. You can blame coaching for that - I do, to an extent - but in a realistic way it's because they don't really have true clubmen on their list who've been there and failed. Geelong in 2007 had an entire generation of players contribute to that squad's development; Hawthorn had the 'line in the sand', and Clarkson making it relevant to a young group, before cultivating the best squad across the board of the last 20 years that peaked at just the right time.

Part of their problem is that they continue to trade these players, the ones who could become the fabric of the club, away. It ensures a continuing cycle of talent coming in, sure, but it also ensures that no-one sees GWS as a permanent home, as their career or their life to uphold the institution of the club. But, ultimately, I'm getting a bit afield.

A true rebuild has been the only means of winning a flag during the AFL era. This is the first time we as a club has ever attempted it with the right level of commitment and the appropriate attitude towards patience that a rebuild requires. It could certainly fail; there are more examples of a rebuild falling on its face than there are successful flags from them, but that's the result of working in an 18 side competition. A mark for success should always be a premiership, but failing that setting the club up for a long period of contention is the mark that we set ourselves, and in this way based on the evidence we have before us I am confident in the club - across the board, from SOS to Bolton to MLG and Liddle - to either have the right people in place or to conduct review after review to ensure that the right people are found.

 

[Malifice]

Melbourne 2013 is absolutely worse than Carlton this year in terms of the list. The recruiting 2013 onwards for us has been fantastic, Carlton already have the foundations for a good side. From our side in round 23 2013 only 6 players remain on the list.

That's why I'm a bit more positive we should be back playing finals 2020/21 in 2-3 years and not 5.

And agree with your recent recruiting. Some bold moves have paid off (trading into the mini draft for Hogan, trading down for Oliver etc).

Now you blokes are players in the FA and trade market. Lever last year and likely Gaff this year.

Were taking a balanced approach this year and will go hard at trades and FA next year and the year after as the kids we've got in mature and hopefully drag us back up the ladder.

 

[CrippasHeavyLoad]

Probably not a good thing, entire club needs a cleanout top to bottom.

From a distance. Well just sit back and watch your club unravel. CM saga is great to watch

 

[WetCrow1991]

Love these sweeping statements, without context nor explanation.

We’ve made plenty of changes over the past few years.

Who do we need to “cleanout” and why?

Your board for one.

 

[PP34]

How can you not see the logic in picking up DFA’s in case you need a senior body or two for depth? You realise the only reason they played was nobody else was available to select.

This is the one thing that has really baffled me this year.

Sorry I just don’t see what the logic was in picking up O’Shea etc. Since when is it a thing to pick up failed AFL players to prop up your teams reserves? The Northern Blues can get their own players.

They were a waste of AFL senior list spots. Would much rather us picking up a few players untried at AFL level.

I’m a fan of a fair bit of what SOS has done but the O’Shea and Shaw pickups in particular were terrible.

They definitely weren’t break in case of emergency pick ups either. O’Shea was playing in round 2 even though we had three other key defenders playing. Mullett was on the wing in round 1. It’s fairly obvious that SOS saw them as blokes who would thrive with another chance.

 

[PP34]

Hope SOS is ballsy enough to pony up a quality pick for a quality player this year.

Sounds like he wanted to do so in 2015 offering 12 for Tomlinson and this year McGovern is the man.

The Hawks and Pies have shown that sometimes you have to give quality to get quality and an O’Meara, Mitchell, Treloar type would be the perfect place to not only build a base around, but help to entice other talent to the club.

That said, Pies turned Beams into gold with DeGoey, Greenwood and Crisp. Hopefully he can do the same with the Gibbs chips he was handed.

He’s played around the edges and drafted reasonably well with high draft picks, but moneyball can only take you so far.

McGovern isn’t even close to any of those players listed and if we pay up big for him then we’re stuffing up big time.

 

[doppleganger]

This is the one thing that has really baffled me this year.

Sorry I just don’t see what the logic was in picking up O’Shea etc. Since when is it a thing to pick up failed AFL players to prop up your teams reserves? The Northern Blues can get their own players.

They were a waste of AFL senior list spots. Would much rather us picking up a few players untried at AFL level.

I’m a fan of a fair bit of what SOS has done but the O’Shea and Shaw pickups in particular were terrible.

They definitely weren’t break in case of emergency pick ups either. O’Shea was playing in round 2 even though we had three other key defenders playing. Mullett was on the wing in round 1. It’s fairly obvious that SOS saw them as blokes who would thrive with another chance.

Yep.

Mullet played the first 9 games, O'Shea 9 of the first 11...they weren't break in case of emergency depth as some SOS disciples make out.

 

[Rusty_lucas]

Yep.

Mullet played the first 9 games, O'Shea 9 of the first 11...they weren't break in case of emergency depth as some SOS disciples make out.

To be fair 3 of our half backs (Docherty, Williamson and Bryne) who were all pegged to be best 22 before the start of the season missed the whole year (Bryne played the first game or 2 before being injured). As well as a few other injuries to defenders, so yes they were very much depth until injury struck

 

[Jeremias]

Your board for one.

No explanation?

 

[mrjones]

Melbourne 2013 was genuinely the worst team I have seen but Carlton 2018 2 wins & 59% suggests the performances are not streets ahead. I think Carlton are ultimately doing the right thing by rebuilding from the ground up. The Malthouse era was a cluster****. I also am not surprised Carlton finished last this year, Murphy and Kruezer were crocked, Docherty missed the season and Gibbs went to Adelaide, to have significantly improved on last year would’ve been defying gravity.

That said, I think there are legitimate questions to be asked. 3 wins from 32 games following 12 from the first 34 under Bolton is quite a backslide & the 55 matches without a score of 100 or more would test any clubs resilience. From my own observation the game plan/style is not as evident as it had been through 16/17. Carlton are obviously going to have a crack at McGovern and/or Shiel which I think is the right thing to do but those kind of results make it difficult to sell the club to potential recruits. Those type of results are going to really challenge the morale of the current playing group.

I’m not trying to be a keyboard warrior and say Carlton are screwed but I think some queries over how it is tracking are legitimate. Melbourne from about 07-13 prove that throwing a whole bunch of high draft picks together and accepting bad performances because we’ll be right in 3-4 years is not really a sound theory. I hope for Carlton supporters sakes that the same bullshit I had to endure isn’t going on at their club.

Sound and Reasonable comments. Good luck on Friday. Was tossing up between Melbourne and GWS on who to "support" in the finals and this post has me all in with Melbourne.
I probably won't be so amicable in a couple of years when the gap is being bridged.

 

[Malifice]

Yep.

Mullet played the first 9 games, O'Shea 9 of the first 11...they weren't break in case of emergency depth as some SOS disciples make out.

Its almost as if we lost an AA BnF winner HBF in the Pre Season to a knee injury...

Oh wait. We did.

That's 'break in case of emergency'. I guess we could have played another 1st year player in Schumaker there instead, but he would have been slaughtered. There is only so many 18 year olds you can play at once.

 

[mrjones]

You are rebuilding, if they aren’t their to play regular AFL football what is the point in adding them?

Guys like Mullet, O’Shea and Shaw themselves didn’t really have quality AFL experience, or provide any leadership as they barely played much footy themselves.

If sh1t went badly and there was no one else to select, who cares if you are playing an 18-19 year old kid or Mullet...either way you are fecked.

Horrible list management to add them, which is evident by them being delisted just one year later.

All close to 100 games AFL experience. Right amount of experience but maybe not the right types for Carlton. Didn't work out with these three, didn't cost anything in regards to draft picks, move on.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Yep.

Mullet played the first 9 games, O'Shea 9 of the first 11...they weren't break in case of emergency depth as some SOS disciples make out.

williamson and docherty missed the whole season and mullet and o'shea were their replacements. this really isn't rocket science.

 

[PP34]

Its almost as if we lost an AA BnF winner HBF in the Pre Season to a knee injury...

Oh wait. We did.

That's 'break in case of emergency'. I guess we could have played another 1st year player in Schumaker there instead, but he would have been slaughtered. There is only so many 18 year olds you can play at once.

Mullett started on the wing in round 1. Someone like Lachie O’Brien was available from memory.

O’Shea was a tall defender who played his first game in round 2 with Jones, Weitering, Marchbank and Plowman all playing. We were not screaming out for another tall defender. The club also continued to gift him games all year despite him being one of the worst Carlton players I’ve seen.

That does not scream break in case of emergency.

And again why pick up blokes for your AFL list if they’re not up to AFL standard?

Silvagni’s reasoning is garbage. He thought they were good enough for AFL footy still.