Could danger actually be bad for geelong

[The Passenger]

If Danger was getting paid 1.5M+ per season then you might be onto something. But he's not, so you're not.

 

[Sttew]

There were people on our board who said we'd be a better team with our Dangerfield.

Some people are just irrational.

You mean 'without'?

 

[blaisee]

If Danger was getting paid 1.5M+ per season then you might be onto something. But he's not, so you're not.

How do you know what he is getting paid .

Is it a coincindence that as soon as he tune up , kelly sj bartel enright retire or are encouraged to retire ?

Or that someone like lids can't be squeezed in ?

These things are all connected

 

[Sttew]

How do you know what he is getting paid .

Is it a coincindence that as soon as he tune up , kelly sj bartel enright retire or are encouraged to retire ?

Or that someone like lids can't be squeezed in ?

These things are all connected

So Enright at 35 retiring is a sign that Danger is on a colossal salary?

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Who was on the massive salary when we let go Ottens, Ling, Mooney and Milburn?!?

 

[PhatBoy]

How do you know what he is getting paid .

Is it a coincindence that as soon as he tune up , kelly sj bartel enright retire or are encouraged to retire ?

Or that someone like lids can't be squeezed in ?

These things are all connected

Not sure if serious.

 

[Xtreme]

They will not win the flag while he is at Geelong.

 

[PhatBoy]

They will not win the flag while he is at Geelong.

Maybe not. But unless that fact is a direct consequence of acquiring him, it's not really a relevant point is it.

 

[Xtreme]

Maybe not. But unless that fact is a direct consequence of acquiring him, it's not really a relevant point is it.

You can't win a flag recruiting just one player.
Sydney also thought a premiership was a shoe in with recruiting Buddy, that hasn't worked out either.

At least you'll have his suit surfing commercial to remember him by

 

[Wojcinski]

You can't win a flag recruiting just one player.
Sydney also thought a premiership was a shoe in with recruiting Buddy, that hasn't worked out either.

At least you'll have his suit surfing commercial to remember him by

You can't win a flag recruiting just two players.
Sydney also thought a premiership was a shoe in with recruiting Buddy and Tippett, that hasn't worked out either.

At least you'll have JOM's knee xrays and pictures at Dingley to remember him by

 

[Wojcinski]

Who was on the massive salary when we let go Ottens, Ling, Mooney and Milburn?!?

Jared Rivers obviously

 

[Down at K Park]

Well, on the other hand, you didn't get him to lead a rebuild did you?

I'm 100% certain if you asked any senior Geelong official and player about their aims in the next 2-3 years while they have Dangerfield absolutely peaking, it'd be a premiership. Anything less by that definition would be a failure. It's all being pedantic about the words, sort of Geelong with Dangerfield not getting a flag being a 'failure' v getting Dangerfield 'not worth it', but regardless, the Cats have a big window open.

Shouldn't most teams aim to be to win a premiership? If you aren't aiming to win a premiership then you are either a failure as a club or you are a bottom 4 side trying to rebuild from the ground up like Carlton or Brisbane.

No doubt every one of this years top 8 aimed to win the premiership. But there can only be one winner.

 

[ashep]

Geelong just shot themselves in the foot.

I don't know how much the rest of you know about Geelong's midfield culture (i'm an expert) but composure and effective disposal by foot are huge parts of it. It's not like it is at the Swans where you can become successful by just bombing it forward blindly. If you miss a target at Geelong you bring shame to yourself and the only way to get rid of that shame is to go surfing in a suit.

What this means is the Geelong fanbase, after watching this, is not going to accept anthing less than a flag, nor will they renew their memberships. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want but Geelong has alienated an entire fanbase with this move.

Geelong, publicly apologise and send Danger back to Adelaide or you can kiss your premiership window goodbye.

 

[Xtreme]

You can't win a flag recruiting just two players.
Sydney also thought a premiership was a shoe in with recruiting Buddy and Tippett, that hasn't worked out either.

At least you'll have JOM's knee xrays and pictures at Dingley to remember him by

Hawthorn merely replaced a Flintstone mobile and a Datsun 120Y with a new Porsche, Ferrari and a BTTF Hoverboard (aka Vickery)

 

[Mad_Hatter]

You can't win a flag recruiting just one player.
Sydney also thought a premiership was a shoe in with recruiting Buddy, that hasn't worked out either.

At least you'll have his suit surfing commercial to remember him by

Luckily then I suppose theres 44 players on a list?
We didn't "poach" Danger because we felt he was the missing piece of a Premiership puzzle (you know, like the hawks have done constantly, or what Geelong did when we got Ottens...), we simply brought in a quality player on a reduced salary (comparatively) who wanted to come home.

 

[Xtreme]

who wanted to come home.

Last I checked he's playing for the Geelong Cats not the Mogg's Creek Cats

 

[Duskfire]

How do you know what he is getting paid .

Is it a coincindence that as soon as he tune up , kelly sj bartel enright retire or are encouraged to retire ?

Or that someone like lids can't be squeezed in ?

These things are all connected

I agree with Lids. But Chris Scott has always cut older players - he did with milburn and mooney after his first season. The only one I think was potentially squeezed out was Sj - everyone else was fine. Heck everyone was questioning Bartel on here in the final couple of the games of the season so no surprises there. And Enright retired - all reports suggest it was up to him.

At the end of the day I find it even baffling it's being questioned. If danger did squeeze out some older players oh well that's the world we live in. Would other clubs have told him no?

 

[FootyJunkie]

danger could be dangerous for geelong

 

[Topkent]

Essentially what I mean is, the sides that have been successful in the last 15 years are not teams that have basically said "OK our time is up, let's cop a hit for a few years and aim at getting good draft picks and build for a Crack in 5 years."

Yes of course every team that's "up" has to have been down at some point but think back through the dynasties of the current century and where they came from.

Brisbane didn't have to do a clean out. They were a solid team that had been building for 5 years. Port had been strong basically since entering the comp. West coast had been strong almost since inception. Sydney were decent enough for ages. The Cats made a preliminary final 4 seasons before winning the comp. You could borderline make a case for hawthorn of 08 but they too had been an OK side for a while. The pies as well.

There is no real.concrete evidence to say "bottoming out for a few years and stacking up high draft picks for another tilt is the recipe for success". The draft picks help but a culture of competitiveness is just as important.

What? Your whole dynasty was built on basically 2 drafts and bringing a shitload of talented kids in together
Same with the Hawks, Bringing in Lewis, Mitchell, Buddy, Roughy, Hodge etc together was the main reason they won the flag

Rebuilding works perfectly if you have the right senior players around them. Melbourne failed because a bunch of party animals were left as the leaders when the kids came in and the Blues ****ed up their draft choices in the middle of their rebuild

The swans are the only anomaly to this rule being able to Develop Kennedy, Mitchell, Parker, Jack and Hannebury with later picks

 

[Wojcinski]

What? Your whole dynasty was built on basically 2 drafts and bringing a shitload of talented kids in together
Same with the Hawks, Bringing in Lewis, Mitchell, Buddy, Roughy, Hodge etc together was the main reason they won the flag

Rebuilding works perfectly if you have the right senior players around them. Melbourne failed because a bunch of party animals were left as the leaders when the kids came in and the Blues stuffed up their draft choices in the middle of their rebuild

The swans are the only anomaly to this rule being able to Develop Kennedy, Mitchell, Parker, Jack and Hannebury with later picks

Geelong never really bottomed out is his point, Geelong did most of their recruiting during a lean period yes, between '98 and '03 but their year on year results were 12th, 11th, 5th, 12th, 9th, 12th over that period with the worst season being '03 when they finished 12th with 7 wins, 1 draw and 14 losses. Geelong didn't really go "our mid 90's successful period is over, lets sell the farm and draft a batch of kids" more so than they kind of tried to keep competitiveness within the club despite often fielding very inexperienced sides. On the other end of the spectrum clubs like Carlton, Melbourne, Port and now Brisbane have gone full on bottom-out mode, cutting experienced players and playing for draft picks.

 

[Topkent]

Geelong never really bottomed out is his point, Geelong did most of their recruiting during a lean period yes, between '98 and '03 but their year on year results were 12th, 11th, 5th, 12th, 9th, 12th over that period with the worst season being '03 when they finished 12th with 7 wins, 1 draw and 14 losses. Geelong didn't really go "our mid 90's successful period is over, lets sell the farm and draft a batch of kids" more so than they kind of tried to keep competitiveness within the club despite often fielding very inexperienced sides. On the other end of the spectrum clubs like Carlton, Melbourne, Port and now Brisbane have gone full on bottom-out mode, cutting experienced players and playing for draft picks.

Yeah I don't think you need to go full bottom out, I think the st Kilda and dogs current rebuilds are the best way to do it
Hit the draft hard but keep a core group of senior players that allow you to still win games

I don't think you need 50 first rounders, but you need to bring a group of kids together and that requires hitting the draft

 

[Wojcinski]

Yeah I don't think you need to go full bottom out, I think the st Kilda and dogs current rebuilds are the best way to do it
Hit the draft hard but keep a core group of senior players that allow you to still win games

I don't think you need 50 first rounders, but you need to bring a group of kids together and that requires hitting the draft

You're right and the Dogs have shown it works, St Kilda is on the verge of finals again as well. Having said that St Kilda did bottom out for a couple of seasons but they still kept a number of mature players from their good period of 09-10 to keep the ship steady.

 

[PhatBoy]

What? Your whole dynasty was built on basically 2 drafts and bringing a shitload of talented kids in together
Same with the Hawks, Bringing in Lewis, Mitchell, Buddy, Roughy, Hodge etc together was the main reason they won the flag

Rebuilding works perfectly if you have the right senior players around them. Melbourne failed because a bunch of party animals were left as the leaders when the kids came in and the Blues stuffed up their draft choices in the middle of their rebuild

The swans are the only anomaly to this rule being able to Develop Kennedy, Mitchell, Parker, Jack and Hannebury with later picks

Congrats on missing the point.

We picked up Bartel and Ablett in 2001 - do you know where we finished in 2000? Fifth.
It isn't as though we said 'let's bottom out, start afresh and cash in at the draft.' We had a poor season in 2001, and had two picks inside the top 30 - Bartel at 8 and Johnson at 24. We got Ablett f/s, and Henry f***ing playfair.

In 99 we got Joel Corey at 8, Ling at 38, Chapman at 31 and Enright at 47.
In 99 we had finished one game out of the 8.

This was not a side that, as I pointed to, made a conscious effort to rebuild - there's that stupid f***ing word again - and clean out in order to go down the ladder and start again.

In the 2000 draft we didn't get a pick until 44 (Josh Hunt).

Yes of course like team that succeeds, we HAD to start somewhere and yes of course we did well out of a couple of drafts - mostly through players taken later in the order.

My point, that seems to.have completely used you like a traffic cone, is that the cats never pulled the stupid 'OK let's start from the ground up, trade for some extra draft picks, slide down the ladder for a few years and hope that we come good.' At every juncture we tried to stay competitive.

I can't speak for hawthorn accurately like I can for Geelong and I do know that they profited greatly from a couple of drafts and high picks they got in them. But in my memory that seemed a result of being at a naturally low ebb rather than being middle of the road and deciding to put a broom through the place and start again.

 

[Saint]

Last I checked he's playing for the Geelong Cats not the Mogg's Creek Cats

That's rich coming from a Hawthorn supporter who's team has been based at Waverley for 20 years and wants to move to a tip in Dingley.

 

[Saint]

Congrats on missing the point.

We picked up Bartel and Ablett in 2001 - do you know where we finished in 2000? Fifth.
It isn't as though we said 'let's bottom out, start afresh and cash in at the draft.' We had a poor season in 2001, and had two picks inside the top 30 - Bartel at 8 and Johnson at 24. We got Ablett f/s, and Henry f***ing playfair.

In 99 we got Joel Corey at 8, Ling at 38, Chapman at 31 and Enright at 47.
In 99 we had finished one game out of the 8.

This was not a side that, as I pointed to, made a conscious effort to rebuild - there's that stupid f***ing word again - and clean out in order to go down the ladder and start again.

In the 2000 draft we didn't get a pick until 44 (Josh Hunt).

Yes of course like team that succeeds, we HAD to start somewhere and yes of course we did well out of a couple of drafts - mostly through players taken later in the order.

My point, that seems to.have completely used you like a traffic cone, is that the cats never pulled the stupid 'OK let's start from the ground up, trade for some extra draft picks, slide down the ladder for a few years and hope that we come good.' At every juncture we tried to stay competitive.

I can't speak for hawthorn accurately like I can for Geelong and I do know that they profited greatly from a couple of drafts and high picks they got in them. But in my memory that seemed a result of being at a naturally low ebb rather than being middle of the road and deciding to put a broom through the place and start again.

At that time compensation picks were easier to get and Hawthorn were suitably woeful enough to get a few of them.

It did almost cost them their club though as they were trying to merge at the time.

Had Hawthorn drafted as badly as Richmond did over the same time, the club would no longer exist. That's the huge risk you take with a complete bottoming out and it doesn't work for the majority of clubs.