Chris Scott's legacy if he gags in another finals series?

[Xtreme]

He will be the Michael Chang/Anastasia Myskina of the AFL world (aka one slam wonder)

 

[ButtersILove]

Yes and at that stage they start again, and look to compete again in 3-4 years. Which if we rebuild now is exactly what we would try and do.

The thing you're ignoring is: if your club decided to develop a strong intake of youth at that 2015 point and build a quality young team around Dangerfield, Geelong would be much better primed to challenge right now with Dangerfield, Selwood and Hawkins still playing.

Instead, you have a best 22 with half of the spots occupied by 30+ year olds (which will include both Guthrie and Menegola next year) and by far the worst contingent of players aged in the 18-27 year old bracket.

It's easy to say "rebuild then, rebuild now, same thing", but when you neglect youth for as long as Geelong have, you're going to end up with a list demographic to Melbourne's in 2008, or Brisbane's in 2010. It's not a pretty sight, and it can take up to a decade to dig your way out of the mire.

 

[PhatBoy]

The thing you're ignoring is: if your club decided to develop a strong intake of youth at that 2015 point and build a quality young team around Dangerfield, Geelong would be much better primed to challenge right now with Dangerfield, Selwood and Hawkins still playing.

Instead, you have a best 22 with half of the spots occupied by 30+ year olds (which will include both Guthrie and Menegola next year) and by far the worst contingent of players aged in the 18-27 year old bracket.

It's easy to say "rebuild then, rebuild now, same thing", but when you neglect youth for as long as Geelong have, you're going to end up with a list demographic to Melbourne's in 2008, or Brisbane's in 2010. It's not a pretty sight, and it can take up to a decade to dig your way out of the mire.

If we made that decision in 2015 we wouldn’t have recruited Dangerfield though would we? We missed the finals that year but had a fair few issues and still won enough games to make it most years, so the angle was ‘this guy is a gun, he’s interested, our squad is still strong, let’s get him.’ If we got to the end of that season and decided to scale back I can’t see us having recruited danger in the first place

 

[master bate]

They kind of have to until Cameron, Hawkins, Dangerfield, Selwood and Stewart are on their last legs. Personally I think they are in a hole and need a clean out, but hey, they know what they’re doing.

Harry Taylor was in that group until he retired last year, and the Cats reshuffled with Blicavs down back but they didn't really properly replace Taylor.

Selwood and Hawkins kind of have to be on their last legs based on age alone. If Selwood can't impact finals is he on his last legs? Hawkins still can, he's a marvel, but for how much longer?

I think they'll just keep on trucking because why the hell not? But the issue is as much the lack of talent in the 23-27 year old age range as it is the over 30's.

They've found Tom Stewart and added Jez Cameron, but it's really hard to just stumble in to guys in their mid 20's at their physical prime who can be difference makers and the Cats need that in the midfield and flanks.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

We literally led a grand final, the last game of the season, that decides a oremiership at half time. In what sphere of competitive sport is that not contending.

I don’t want to bore people because we have had this discussion before. But I will simply say if you think Geelong being 15 points ahead against a team with 2 gun half backs crocked in the opening minutes…..at a point that would equate to 8 minutes remaining to half time in a full length match….. then losing 9.7 v 2.3 thereafter….and being totally cooked at what would be the 16 minutes remaining mark in a full length game….is truly contending, then I disagree. Like tonight(key player May injured early,) if the match was played 10 times over the Cats would be lucky to win once.

Winning one of their last 15 finals matches against teams finishing top 4 post finals gives the real answer to whether Geelong have been contending or pretending from 2012 onwards.

 

[PhatBoy]

I don’t want to bore people because we have had this discussion before. But I will simply say if you think Geelong being 15 points ahead against a team with 2 gun half backs crocked in the opening minutes…..at a point that would equate to 8 minutes remaining to half time in a full length match….. then losing 9.7 v 2.3 thereafter….and being totally cooked at what would be the 16 minutes remaining mark in a full length game….is truly contending, then I disagree. Like tonight(key player May injured early,) if the match was played 10 times over the Cats would be lucky to win once.

Winning one of their last 15 finals matches against teams finishing top 4 post finals gives the real answer to whether Geelong have been contending or pretending from 2012 onwards.

It’s the last game of the season, two teams left standing, I don’t give a toss who is injured, we are leading, and you think that is not being in contention. So basically unless you are the team that wins the grand final you were never in contention.

cadel evans never contended for a TdF until he won it?
Frankie Fredericks never contended for an Olympic gold
Greg Norman never contended for an American major?

 

[hk89]

The thing you're ignoring is: if your club decided to develop a strong intake of youth at that 2015 point, and build a team around Dangerfield, Geelong would be much better primed to challenge right now with Dangerfield, Selwood and Hawkins still playing.

Instead, you have a best 22 with half of the spots occupied by 30+ year olds (which will include both Guthrie and Menegola next year) and by far the worst contingent of players aged in the 18-27 year old bracket.

It's easy to say "rebuild then, rebuild now, same thing", but when you neglect youth for as long as Geelong have, you're going to end up with a list demographic that resembles Melbourne's in 2008, or Brisbane's in 2010. It's not a pretty sight, and it can take up to a decade to dig your way out of the mire.

I'm not a big fan of Scott's coaching, but you don't start a rebuild when you can still make prelims (and last year a GF). Flags are very hard to win, and they are a damn side harder to win from the bottom 8 than the top 4. Also, Geelong has in fact not completely ignored the draft, they did get some decent kids in around the time Dangerfield joined. Obviously it wasn't their main focus, but they probably didn't ignore the draft to the extent Hawthorn did for example. I don't at all agree that it is clear they'd be better placed if they rebuilt earlier , how many prelims have Carlton played after 3 or more rebuilds? Melbourne have had several goes at it, and before tonight the closest they'd got to a flag during those rebuilding years was a massive prelim flogging. Your club has done pretty well with a rebuild (thanks partly to Hawthorn's generosity ), but don't assume everyone else can do as good a job - many haven't.

The final result isn't always pretty when you don't get the flag you're chasing, but you can't jump off until the window is fully closed, and IMO while Geelong have always had a few list issues they've not been able to address via trading and the odd dip into the draft, they've never had a fully closed window, and still don't. Perhaps a new coach should be considered, but they can't stop chasing a flag with this list, not after just investing 3 first rounders in Cameron.

 

[ButtersILove]

If we made that decision in 2015 we wouldn’t have recruited Dangerfield though would we?

Says who?
Being plodders for four years didn't stop Brisbane from selling the farm for Dayne Beams. I doubt they regret it either, he was a really good player for them, captained the club, then helped them score Collingwood's two first rounders.
There's no rule that says you can't both recruit Dangerfield and still prioritize youth. Instead Chris Scott decided to keep throwing away first and second rounders for guys like Tuohy, Henderson, Ablett and Stanley.

 

[Scotland]

They need to change. I was really bullish on them tonight but my god, Melbourne were phenomenal. It’s the inability to keep up with the flow of the game when playing a younger and fresher side. The time is now to accept that it won’t happen with this group.

Selwood
Dalhaus
Henderson
Higgins

All have to go. They need currency at the trade table. Cam Guthrie and Miers should be considered for trade. I genuinely don’t know what else. Ratugolea? They absolutely need currency at the trade table and they don’t have it.

They’re a very well run club. Off field is solid. They’ll be down for the next 2-3 years and back into it by 2025-2026. A bit like late nineties to 2004. They just have to set themselves up now, rebuild and bounce back. A good rebuild shouldn’t take long. Good club like Geelong will be back up.

Chris Scott has been in the chair for 11 seasons.

They change in personnel, but is it in a good way? In their defence Tim Kelly (23 when drafted, left at 25) and Tom Stewart (drafted at 23) would've been in the team tonight if they had their way.

Max Holmes was drafted at pick 20 last year and played tonight. Stephens and De Koning first round picks from 2019 have played one game between them in two years. Jordan Clark had a good first year then has barely been sighted since, rumours he wants to move elsewhere. Fogarty left, Constable looks like leaving this year.

In the same period (2017 onward) they've added Ablett Jr (55 games in the second stint), Dahlhaus (58), Rohan (61), Steven, Jenkins, Smith (24), Higgins (18), Cameron (15). Scott said on his presser that they believe in players coming through the VFL but if they keep losing first round picks after 2-3 years they will have to keep topping up.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Like Selwood a lot but jeez this is bordering on a delusional take after that.

He is the greatest beneficiary of the status quo being maintained at Geelong.
At what point is he speaking out of self-interest, or the better good of the club?

He himself would struggle to delineate at this point. And there are a bunch of influential players, and one head coach, in a similar situation imo.

That's the challenge Geelong faces now.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

It’s the last game of the season, two teams left standing, I don’t give a toss who is injured, we are leading, and you think that is not being in contention. So basically unless you are the team that wins the grand final you were never in contention.

If you are nowhere near as good as the team who wins the GF, then yes, you are not genuinely in contention. If you were nowhere near as good because you were decimated by injuries or other misfortune, then maybe this wouldn’t point to any weakness in the list management or other strategies, but the Cats cannot say that.

 

[theyellowsash]

Yeah but…but…but ‘winning percentage!’

Whingeing percentage more like it

 

[PhatBoy]

Says who?
Being plodders for four years didn't stop Brisbane from selling the farm for Dayne Beams. I doubt they regret it either, he was a really good player for them, captained the club, then helped them score Collingwood's two first rounders.
There's no rule that says you can't both recruit Dangerfield and still prioritize youth. Instead Chris Scott decided to keep throwing away first and second rounders for guys like Tuohy, Henderson, Ablett and Stanley.

You can debate the merit of whether we should have rebuilt or not endlessly but all those players have played fairly important roles in getting us to the deep parts of the season in the meantime and all four were out there on grand final night last year so I don’t know that those specific deals are the busts they’re being made out to be

 

[PhatBoy]

If you are nowhere near as good as the team who wins the GF, then yes, you are not genuinely in contention. If you were nowhere near as good because you were decimated by injuries or other misfortune, then maybe this wouldn’t point to any weakness in the list management or other strategies, but the Cats cannot say that.

Sorry but that’s the stupidest theory I’ve ever heard.

 

[hk89]

If you are nowhere near as good as the team who wins the GF, then yes, you are not genuinely in contention. If you were nowhere near as good because you were decimated by injuries or other misfortune, then maybe this wouldn’t point to any weakness in the list management or other strategies, but the Cats cannot say that.

They were smashing Melbourne in the final round before an unlikely comeback. Obviously tonight they were nowhere near it, but that's the problem, they are not universally bad against the top teams, just that when it counts they haven't been able to produce. That's why I'd consider a new coach over an immediate full rebuild at this point in their cycle.

 

[ButtersILove]

I'm not a big fan of Scott's coaching, but you don't start a rebuild when you can still make prelims (and last year a GF). Flags are very hard to win, and they are a damn side harder to win from the bottom 8 than the top 4. Also, Geelong has in fact not completely ignored the draft, they did get some decent kids in around the time Dangerfield joined. Obviously it wasn't their main focus, but they probably didn't ignore the draft to the extent Hawthorn did for example. I don't at all agree that it is clear they'd be better placed if they rebuilt earlier

Didn't you once used to write essays justifying Hawthorn's list management philosophy? That didn't turn out so well.

, how many prelims have Carlton played after 3 or more rebuilds?

I don't think Carlton or any club care about "making prelims". You build a team to give yourself the best chance of winning flags. It's the end of 2021, and it's pretty obvious in hindsight Geelong picked the wrong option in 2015, even if recruiting Dangerfield was still correct.

Melbourne have had several goes at it, and before tonight the closest they'd got to a flag during those rebuilding years was a massive prelim flogging.

Again, prelims mean nothing. Most supporters would much rather see their club spend 3 years near the bottom if it meant having a very serious chance of winning a flag later, rather than making 3 successive prelims, but not actually having that good of a chance to win the flag and being left with a horrible list profile.

 

[PhatBoy]

Didn't you once used to write essays justifying Hawthorn's list management philosophy? That didn't turn out so well.

I don't think Carlton or any club care about "making prelims". You build a team to give yourself the best chance of winning flags. It's the end of 2021, and it's pretty obvious in hindsight Geelong picked the wrong option in 2015, even if recruiting Dangerfield was still correct.

Again, prelims mean nothing. Most supporters would much rather see their club spend 3 years near the bottom if it meant having a very serious chance of winning a flag later, rather than making 3 successive prelims, but not actually having that good of a chance to win the flag and being left with a horrible list profile.

We did have a good chance of winning a flag. We didn’t, that’s how it goes

 

[ButtersILove]

You can debate the merit of whether we should have rebuilt or not endlessly but all those players have played fairly important roles in getting us to the deep parts of the season in the meantime and all four were out there on grand final night last year so I don’t know that those specific deals are the busts they’re being made out to be

Whether or not those players are busts is not the point.

Isaac Smith was very clearly not a "bust" when judging his output, but there are very valid grounds to suggest Geelong shouldn't have been targeting an old guy like him to begin with.

As I said before, you have by far the worst contingent of players in the 18-27 age bracket. Jack Henry is the only one there that could be classified as an A-grader. These are the long-term consequences of Chris Scott's obsession with instant gratification.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Sorry but that’s the stupidest theory I’ve ever heard.

If you can’t beat more than one in fifteen top four teams in finals over a 9 season span, how can you be said to be contending for a flag year after year? Not like a lot of those matches were lost by a kick either…or for that matter, any. . Geelong have been playing some sort of confidence trick on their supporters, and by all accounts, look like continuing to do so.

 

[ButtersILove]

We did have a good chance of winning a flag. We didn’t, that’s how it goes

The only year in the last 6 years that qualifies as a "good chance" would be 2020, but that was a season with shortened quarters and everything was out of whack. You were still convincingly beaten by Richmond in the Grand Final, and probably would've lost to us too, just like in the qualifying final.

Making the prelim doesn't mean you have a "good chance" of winning the flag.

 

[hk89]

Didn't you once used to write essays justifying Hawthorn's list management philosophy? That didn't turn out so well.

And if you read any of them, you'd understand that it was clear to most Hawthorn fans that supported the strategy that it was obviously a risky strategy, but made sense given we were still able to finish top 4, and how littered the bottom 8 is with teams who had failed multiple rebuilds without the rewards that are supposed to come from them. Obviously you eventually reach a point where you don't have a choice, and I don't think Geelong are there (and I don't think Hawthorn were there either at the time). It is easy to say AFTER a team doesn't win a flag with a given strategy that it was a bad strategy, but that ignores the chances of success of one strategy versus another. Strategies can't be made with the benefit of hindsight. Geelong are not even at the point where you can say their strategy has failed yet. It looks like they are running out of time, but that's been said since probably 2009.

I don't think Carlton or any club care about "making prelims". You build a team to give yourself the best chance of winning flags. It's the end of 2021, and it's pretty obvious in hindsight Geelong picked the wrong option in 2015, even if recruiting Dangerfield was still correct.

Geelong made a grand final last year. With some better luck for them, and/or worse luck for Richmond they could have easily had a flag.

Again, prelims mean nothing.

Nonsense. Prelims are the gateway to the GF. They mean plenty.

Most supporters would much rather see their club spend 3 years near the bottom if it meant having a very serious chance of winning a flag later,

Sure, but nobody can guarantee that. What about all the times 3 years near the bottom gets you another 3 years near the bottom? If you are still good enough to make prelims , IMO you have a MUCH better chance of winning a flag from that position than you do from spending 3 years at the bottom.

rather than making 3 successive prelims, but not actually having that good of a chance to win the flag

They made a GF. There is no better chance to win a flag than that. If Port choke against Dogs tomorrow, and then again next year, will you be calling for a rebuild? Lucky you were not running the show during their previous finals choking stint otherwise they'd have 0 AFL flags instead of 1.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

They were smashing Melbourne in the final round before an unlikely comeback. Obviously tonight they were nowhere near it, but that's the problem, they are not universally bad against the top teams, just that when it counts they haven't been able to produce. That's why I'd consider a new coach over an immediate full rebuild at this point in their cycle.

If you think they were smashing Melbourne in the Rd 23 team, do yourself a favour, go to the AFL site, watch the first half in forensic detail and see if you think Geelong were actually smashing Melbourne….my assessment was with a normal run based on the balance of play, Melbourne would have been not more than about 2 goals down at half time. We saw what happened after that.

Geelong are “universally bad” against top teams in finals. Winning one of their last fifteen finals against top 4 teams has to tell you that, surely?

 

[Roddy]

Whingeing percentage more like it

They win that every year by far...

 

[hk89]

If you think they were smashing Melbourne in the Rd 23 team, do yourself a favour, go to the AFL site, watch the first half in forensic detail and see if you think Geelong were actually smashing Melbourne….my assessment was with a normal run based on the balance of play, Melbourne would have been not more than about 2 goals down at half time. We saw what happened after that.

44 point lead is a smashing at that point of the game. I'm not really sure what you mean by "a normal run". Do I need to fish my tin-foil hat out of the cupboard to understand what you mean?

They are “universally bad” against top teams in finals. Winning one of their last fifteen finals against top 4 teams has to tell you that, surely?

Sure, and that's why I'd consider changing coach. They keep losing to teams in finals they've often been good enough to beat in H&A. Sounds like their game plan in finals needs addressing. It is too early to rebuild now, and they pretty much went further all in on this last year, which now makes it even harder for them to consider an immediate rebuild. You don't rebuild after losing a prelim (despite the humiliation). I wouldn't even suggest Richmond should go a full rebuild yet, and they couldn't even make finals.

 

[Roby]

Didn't you once used to write essays justifying Hawthorn's list management philosophy? That didn't turn out so well.

How would you know know? You only started an account less than three weeks ago.