Remove this Banner Ad

Are North Being Too Impatient With Their Rebuild?

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Requiem said:
You're ignoring the leadership aspect of my argument.

Gutting a club rapidly of it's senior players is rarely a good idea. (See Melbourne circa 2008, Richmond 2007, Brisbane 2014, ect).

My argument is that with any successful transition process, a club would be wise to retain it's more valuable veterans in order to pass on desirable qualities onto the next generation.

I'm not implying that Boomer should be playing forever, I think that his on-field presence is more valuable than a top 4 pick in what is considered to be a weak draft.
Click to expand...

I'm not ignoring it. I just don't agree in this case it's more important. Neither did the club incidentally.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

No harm in trying to get players of Kelly or Martin's calibre. They probably do need a few years at the top end of the draft to get enough good talent into the club to challenge again. Normally you wait til you've had a couple of years stockpiling the talent before you try to get experienced talent in. However if they are way under the Salary Cap - I can understand the temptation to see if you can lure in some top tier talent.

It was obvious this was coming years ago. North were trying to challenge with a list that had a lot of players on the wrong side of 30. Its not rocket science. They'll just have to ride this bumpy path for a few years until they can get back on track.

They still have some good players to build around but its a case of too much left to too few.
 
Who else are they going to pay who's on their list right now? Nothing wrong with getting a big fish and front-loading the contract to lock them in.

They still have to meet the salary cap floor, so the money needs to be spent.
 
Requiem said:
You're ignoring the leadership aspect of my argument.

Gutting a club rapidly of it's senior players is rarely a good idea. (See Melbourne circa 2008, Richmond 2007, Brisbane 2014, ect).

My argument is that with any successful transition process, a club would be wise to retain it's more valuable veterans in order to pass on desirable qualities onto the next generation.

I'm not implying that Boomer should be playing forever, I think that his on-field presence is more valuable than a top 4 pick in what is considered to be a weak draft.
Click to expand...
On field all Harvey did was chase kicks. He did it well but lets not presume he was Luke Hodge out there.

They had an experienced backline, Ziebell, Cunnington, Swallow/Goldstein in the middle and Brown/Waite up forward, they weren't completely lost for on field leadership and I don't think there's a lot of talk about off field leadership being a problem.

They didn't win many games but at no stage were North noncompetitive or not developing players in a good environment this year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

master bate said:
On field all Harvey did was chase kicks. He did it well but lets not presume he was Luke Hodge out there.

They had an experienced backline, Ziebell, Cunnington, Swallow/Goldstein in the middle and Brown/Waite up forward, they weren't completely lost for on field leadership and I don't think there's a lot of talk about off field leadership being a problem.

They didn't win many games but at no stage were North noncompetitive or not developing players in a good environment this year.
Click to expand...
Harvey was known as one of the best preparers for match day, plus his off field professionalism was first class.

Those are the intangibles I was refering to.
 
SizeMatters said:
If North don't land a big fish I think they may fold in 2 or 3 years.
Click to expand...
cannot said:
Brisbane Roos
Click to expand...

If they're not back up by the time Hawthorn's contract in Launceston is done, they'll be so dependant on the AFL for money they wont be able to resist the offer to have 7 home games in Tas....

Then 5-10 years later when the facilities at Arden St are starting to look even rattier and their cotenants there become more frustrating to deal with, they'll get an offer for a state of the art facility in Hobart that is entirely theirs and move their training based down there.

Gradually, another game or two will be moved to Tas and their Melbourne presence will be almost exclusively 'replacement games'.

Eventually the pretence will be dropped, the team will be renamed and Melbourne members just get 'away game' access to all games in Melbourne. They might still have one or two token 'home' games in Melbourne, but the crowds will be pretty much opposition fans anyway.


Frog in boiling water relocation.
 
telsor said:
If they're not back up by the time Hawthorn's contract in Launceston is done, they'll be so dependant on the AFL for money they wont be able to resist the offer to have 7 home games in Tas....

Then 5-10 years later when the facilities at Arden St are starting to look even rattier and their cotenants there become more frustrating to deal with, they'll get an offer for a state of the art facility in Hobart that's is entirely theirs and move their training based down there.

Gradually, another game or two will be moved to Tas and their Melbourne presence will be almost exclusively 'replacement games'.

Eventually the pretence will be dropped, the team will be renamed and Melbourne members just get 'away game' access to all games in Melbourne. They might still have one or two token 'home' games in Melbourne, but the crowds will be pretty much opposition fans anyway.


Frog in boiling water relocation.
Click to expand...
I think it's needed for the game. Too many clubs in Victoria. Would be hard to get the bandwagoner Tasmanians to support Roos over the Hawks though...
 
They pay Goldstein to play elsewhere in 2018 and get a decent draft pick for him.
They pay each of the following guys the extra 1 mil they had set aside for Kelly/Martin and still back salary cap. Front loading the deals now is how you satisfy players wanting extra cash.

FB: Williams Thompson
HB: Macmillan Tarrant Mullett
C: McDonald Ziebell
HF: Garner Wood Hrovat
FF: Simpkin Brown
Foll: Preuss Cunnington Higgins
Int: Turner Dumont Clarke

Plus: Atley, Jacobs, Wright, Daw, a couple of veterans in Waite and Gibson and a bunch of decent young talls

They made the right move trying to land an A grader to prevent the full rebuild but they don't need a full rebuild anyway because their list isn't crap. It's reasonably healthy and has some talent, and if the young talls come on they won't need to spend multiple draft picks there.

The instructions to the North recruiters really should be to find a lot of talented high upside players because their list is healthy. I'd have them somewhat similar to the Dogs in the Brendan McCartney era. Some gun draft picks - especially a Bont - and a bit of patience and they'll be in a good spot even if everyone thinks they are irrelevant and not going anywhere.
 
SizeMatters said:
I think it's needed for the game. Too many clubs in Victoria. Would be hard to get the bandwagoner Tasmanians to support Roos over the Hawks though...
Click to expand...


I disagree....Frankly a 9th Melbourne team is more viable than even 1 in Tas, but I can still see the AFL pushing for it to happen for appearances sake.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

telsor said:
If they're not back up by the time Hawthorn's contract in Launceston is done, they'll be so dependant on the AFL for money they wont be able to resist the offer to have 7 home games in Tas....

Then 5-10 years later when the facilities at Arden St are starting to look even rattier and their cotenants there become more frustrating to deal with, they'll get an offer for a state of the art facility in Hobart that is entirely theirs and move their training based down there.

Gradually, another game or two will be moved to Tas and their Melbourne presence will be almost exclusively 'replacement games'.

Eventually the pretence will be dropped, the team will be renamed and Melbourne members just get 'away game' access to all games in Melbourne. They might still have one or two token 'home' games in Melbourne, but the crowds will be pretty much opposition fans anyway.


Frog in boiling water relocation.
Click to expand...

They'd be better off in the long run to cut their losses and move to Tassie in the next year or two.
 
telsor said:
If they're not back up by the time Hawthorn's contract in Launceston is done, they'll be so dependant on the AFL for money they wont be able to resist the offer to have 7 home games in Tas....

Then 5-10 years later when the facilities at Arden St are starting to look even rattier and their cotenants there become more frustrating to deal with, they'll get an offer for a state of the art facility in Hobart that is entirely theirs and move their training based down there.

Gradually, another game or two will be moved to Tas and their Melbourne presence will be almost exclusively 'replacement games'.

Eventually the pretence will be dropped, the team will be renamed and Melbourne members just get 'away game' access to all games in Melbourne. They might still have one or two token 'home' games in Melbourne, but the crowds will be pretty much opposition fans anyway.


Frog in boiling water relocation.
Click to expand...

'football genocide'
 
cannot said:
Tassie could easy support a club

itd piss on GC / GWS...
Click to expand...


Different issues...
GC/GWS aren't there for current support, they're there with the long term in mind and all about future growth.

Tas meanwhile is barely able to support a team now (Tas is 1/12th the size of the Vic population and 1/15th the Vic economy), and long term the prospects are even worse (long term relative decline in population and economy). In addition to having no central location to host a team.
 
master bate said:
they don't need a full rebuild anyway because their list isn't crap.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this part. No where near as bad as some teams 6-7 years ago, but probably the worst positioned currently in the AFL. Brown is a stud, as is Tarrant and they have a few quality youngsters in McDonald, Garner, Clarke, Durmont, Wood, and Preuss. But IMO not enough at the top, with Ziebell and Higgins having a history of wear and tear and probably have three and two years left respectively, to really try a half rebuild/half top up.
 
TigermanM2 said:
Point is that if you kept Boomer on the list this year he would have been playing seniors. Brad Scott admitted as much.

That means less games for any one of the 11 youngsters who made their senior debut this year.

Which was more important?
Click to expand...

culture is more important than "blooding the youth". A couple of those youngsters will probably be delisted anyway and then what have you gained?

all the teams at the top end in the last 10 years only the Hawks had a reasonable swag of high 1st round picks anyway.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

L
    • Like
Are North still in a rebuild phase?
2
Replies
44
Views
3K
Cunnington Cartel
Cunnington Cartel
joe444
    • Like
Voss: Carlton are being bullied
2
Replies
41
Views
1K
Mr.X
Mr.X
W
    • Like
Hawthorn rebuild quickness
Replies
18
Views
610
timokane
T
PerthBoy86
    • Haha
    • Wow
Suspensions for accidental contact are getting too much
Replies
5
Views
328
Gone Critical
Gone Critical
W
WSYD GWS do they need to rebuild
Replies
15
Views
264
RPCB
RPCB
L
Do Port need to enter a rebuild phase?
Replies
19
Views
451
Daka
Daka
Lingsface
My way too early AA side.
2 3
Replies
73
Views
2K
txbyhull
txbyhull

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom