Does it take too long for clubs to rebuild their lists?

[Soggy2112]

What's too long? What counts as contending? Top 4 or top 8?

The fact is if every team won a flag it would take 18 years for all teams to win one. You would play in 2 Grand Finals and 4 Preliminary finals in that 18 years. Based on a top 8 you should only play finals 8 out of 18 seasons.

But everything isn't equal and some clubs are going to have more success than those numbers meaning other clubs are having less.

IMO, the question shouldn’t be how long it takes to rebuild, but is it too difficult to rebuild?

A proper rebuild will always take time. In order to do it successfully it is going to mean getting a good chunk of your core from the draft and those players will take time before they are ready to consistently perform at a high level.

I would argue it’s not too hard. Some clubs just waste their opportunities and that’s on them. With any club that has failed their rebuild, you could point to a range of poor decisions that led them there.

 

[THE_GUN]

4-6 years to make finals should be the aim

Winning a premiership could take 20 years and multiple rebuilds
But the side will need between 10-15 1st round picks in the side these days unless they can ace alot of late picks

Being a Richmond supporter im expecting 2029 to make finals again but if all picks from last year are a hit then maybe just maybe 2028

 

[Footy Smarts]

Yes, the poor clubs take too long to come good after bottoming out

Cats, hawks always don’t seem to ever drop away

The Hawks had a steak winning only 38 out of 103 games including missing finals in 5 consecutive years recently. It wasn't North or West Coast levels of despair but that's a solid time being well below average.

 

[Jim Prideaux]

And this 2025 season is weird too

The league has become so even that a slightly off performance can be damaging. Part of this is how professional the league has become, another part is teams prioritising consistency in their players and their systems.

On one side of the coin it means almost anyone can beat anyone on their day, but on the on the other side of it, it makes it very difficult for bottom teams to rise up.

The league has always had bottom teams that struggle, but in the past they would jag wins against mid tables sides who had a bad day. These days those mid tables sides aren’t having as many bad days, and as such it makes it harder to rise.

 

[Freomaniac]

The league has become so even that a slightly off performance can be damaging. Part of this is how professional the league has become, another part is teams prioritising consistency in their players and their systems.

On one side of the coin it means almost anyone can beat anyone on their day, but on the on the other side of it, it makes it very difficult for bottom teams to rise up.

The league has always had bottom teams that struggle, but in the past they would jag wins against mid tables sides who had a bad day. These days those mid tables sides aren’t having as many bad days, and as such it makes it harder to rise.

Yeah I know how that feels. Freo were top 4 with 4 games to go then ended up 10th with 4 narrow losses

 

[Mr.X]

What's too long? What counts as contending? Top 4 or top 8?

A genuine Top 4 team is contending.

 

[PowerfulPies2023]

Spider Everitt
Along came a spider
Spiderman
Glenn Freeborn

Glenn Freeborn

Age

52

Ht

183cm

Wt

81kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.7

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

5.5

4star

M

2.7

3star

T

1.7

4star

No current season stats available

D

10.8

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

4.6

4star

M

1.6

2star

T

1.8

4star

Mark Freeborn
Born Again Christian
Christian Bale
Gareth Bale
Gareth Southgate
South of the border
Border Security

 

[Freomaniac]

I was listening to SEN this morning and I heard one of the more intriguing discussions between David King and Rohan Connolly about the time it takes for teams to rebuild their lists. They had quite a fiery disagreement and I think both made some reasonable points. I'll paraphrase.

David King was I think responding to a call from a Carlton fan who was ready to throw in the towel, and it prompted him to argue that it simply takes too long for teams to rebuild. According to King, you can't have sides down the bottom for five or even seven years. The effect, according to King, is that you'll have younger fans simply tuning out because they're not as invested as the older fans who are willing to endure such a lengthy lean period. He argued that we need even more fluid player movement to avoid the likes of Carlton, St Kilda and Melbourne (for example) being down as long as they have been.

Rohan Connolly acknowledged the point about young fans but disagreed that there should be any specific mechanism to expedite these rebuilds. He argued that if clubs make bad decisions off-field, there should be a price to pay. He also pointed out that in the AFL era, there have been 11 teams win premierships, which he said was actually pretty good. He also made the point that for the first time in 20 years, there is no undefeated team after four rounds, suggesting that some of the quality at the top has eroded and that further equalisation would actually be undesirable.

I can see both arguments. I think King is right about younger fans tuning out, although I don't accept we should tailor the competition according to the attention spans of eight-year-olds. I think Connolly is right in saying there must be a price paid for getting it wrong off-field, but I'm not sure the competition is actually as even as everyone says. It might be even on a micro level, in that any team can beat another on their day. But on a more macro level, look at the disparity in finals appearances over the past 10 years. It's not that even. Since 2007, Geelong have played finals 11 out of 12 seasons. Melbourne haven't played finals since 2006. Is that "even"?

But even if the competition isn't truly even, should it be? Surely there should be a difference in outcomes and attempts to over-engineer evenness are not necessarily desirable. If Hawthorn are good enough to win three flags in a row, why should we invent a mechanism to prevent that?

So with all that in mind, does it take too long for teams to rebuild their lists? Should there be further mechanisms in place to help it happen quicker? Or is the five- or six-year rebuild a reasonable price to pay for getting it wrong off-field?

Ah sweet Jesus.... Where are you now? LoL

 

[Wojcinski]

1 to 2 seasons for good clubs

 

[Scotland]

Depends on many factors.

Not many people arguing pro WC positions currently. We came last and the list sucks. But in the 20 years to 2020 we made the finals 14 times, played in 4 grand finals and won 2 flags. You would take that unless you support Brisbane, Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney or Richmond.

We are where we are because of the period leading up to 2020 and decisions made in and around that period. Richmond are where they are for similar reasons. Played finals 8 times in 10 years, 3 GFs, 3 flags. There are only 6 players left from the 2020 flag side that are under 30 and 4 of them now play elsewhere. If Richmond are as bad as they are now for 3, 4, 5 years then you still take that + 2017-2020 over the 35 years that came before that.

4-5 years should be the benchmark from ground zero. 5 years is how long it took GWS to make the finals starting from scratch and Gold Coast were on track in year 4 before GAJ got injured. Yes they had all sorts of draft concessions but they started with nothing. If you take the worst list in the comp today you should at least be a .500 team (or an 11-12/12-11 team in the current format) in 4-5 years. There is no excuse for WC having had access to early draft picks from 2022 onward and turning over most of the list to be winning 1 or 2 games in 2029 when the list should be full of 50-100+ gamers.

How bad you are also relies on how bad everyone else is at the time. WC, North, Richmond, Essendon were all hot garbage this year. Essendon had a slightly higher ceiling but were ruined by injuries but still aren't good. Hawthorn finished 16h with 7 wins in 2023. That was their low point if you exclude 2020 which was only 17 games. North haven't won 7 games in a season since 2019. It's all relative.

The spanner in the works today is how much easier it is for clubs to bypass the draft. It used to be easier to build a list from the bottom and harder to stay at the top, and teams like Geelong and Sydney bucked the trend. It's now harder to build a list from the bottom and easier to stay at the top, and my team has bucked that trend which is super.

I watch the NBA and it's dominated by "markets". Everyone wants to play for LA, NY, Miami, Boston and now Golden State. No one dreams of playing for Memphis or Minnesota. Yet they have proper free agency, proper salary cap rules, proper player trading and a simple last-to-first draft and in the last 10 years 5 titles have gone to small market teams, the Lakers have finished last in their conference, the Bulls have finished third last in theirs, the Knicks have finished last in theirs multiple times etc. Since the AFL love wasting money on executive rubbish they could do worse than send some peanuts from HQ over for a few weeks when the NBA season starts and learn a thing or two.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Depends on many factors.

Not many people arguing pro WC positions currently. We came last and the list sucks. But in the 20 years to 2020 we made the finals 14 times, played in 4 grand finals and won 2 flags. You would take that unless you support Brisbane, Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney or Richmond.

We are where we are because of the period leading up to 2020 and decisions made in and around that period. Richmond are where they are for similar reasons. Played finals 8 times in 10 years, 3 GFs, 3 flags. There are only 6 players left from the 2020 flag side that are under 30 and 4 of them now play elsewhere. If Richmond are as bad as they are now for 3, 4, 5 years then you still take that + 2017-2020 over the 35 years that came before that.

4-5 years should be the benchmark from ground zero. 5 years is how long it took GWS to make the finals starting from scratch and Gold Coast were on track in year 4 before GAJ got injured. Yes they had all sorts of draft concessions but they started with nothing. If you take the worst list in the comp today you should at least be a .500 team (or an 11-12/12-11 team in the current format) in 4-5 years. There is no excuse for WC having had access to early draft picks from 2022 onward and turning over most of the list to be winning 1 or 2 games in 2029 when the list should be full of 50-100+ gamers.

How bad you are also relies on how bad everyone else is at the time. WC, North, Richmond, Essendon were all hot garbage this year. Essendon had a slightly higher ceiling but were ruined by injuries but still aren't good. Hawthorn finished 16h with 7 wins in 2023. That was their low point if you exclude 2020 which was only 17 games. North haven't won 7 games in a season since 2019. It's all relative.

The spanner in the works today is how much easier it is for clubs to bypass the draft. It used to be easier to build a list from the bottom and harder to stay at the top, and teams like Geelong and Sydney bucked the trend. It's now harder to build a list from the bottom and easier to stay at the top, and my team has bucked that trend which is super.

I watch the NBA and it's dominated by "markets". Everyone wants to play for LA, NY, Miami, Boston and now Golden State. No one dreams of playing for Memphis or Minnesota. Yet they have proper free agency, proper salary cap rules, proper player trading and a simple last-to-first draft and in the last 10 years 5 titles have gone to small market teams, the Lakers have finished last in their conference, the Bulls have finished third last in theirs, the Knicks have finished last in theirs multiple times etc. Since the AFL love wasting money on executive rubbish they could do worse than send some peanuts from HQ over for a few weeks when the NBA season starts and learn a thing or two.

It's lovely to talk about other leagues and how they do things right.
I laugh at people who talk about how the NFL do things over there and we should copy them too.

The AFL, since they changed the name have had 14 different clubs win a premiership, 17 of 18 teams have played in a grand final.
Do these other sports have records like this?
Does it cost on average $35,000 to go watch a GF.
Do ads cost $7mill for a 30 second slot?

 

[Scotland]

It's lovely to talk about other leagues and how they do things right.
I laugh at people who talk about how the NFL do things over there and we should copy them too.

The AFL, since they changed the name have had 14 different clubs win a premiership, 17 of 18 teams have played in a grand final.
Do these other sports have records like this?
Does it cost on average $35,000 to go watch a GF.
Do ads cost $7mill for a 30 second slot?

Waffle.

The AFL changed its name in 1990. A lot more than the first initial has changed since then. The reason players don't get $50m a year and tickets to the GF don't cost $30k is the market isn't there. If the AFL could get $10b for the TV rights with Kayo costing $100 a month and a GA ticket being $200 - they would.

Streaks of not playing finals since 2010:

Gold Coast: 14
Brisbane, Carlton, North: 9
Melbourne*, St Kilda: 8 (*extended streak of 11 pre 2010)
Adelaide: 7
Freo, WC: 6

Title of the thread is "Does it take too long for clubs to rebuild their lists?" and given how many extended streaks outside finals we are saying you would have to say the answer is yes.

Wooden spooners:

1997 Melbourne, GF 2000
1998 Brisbane, 3 pear 2001-2003 (result of merger)
1999 Collingwood, GF 2002
2000 St Kilda, prelim 2004
2001 Freo, finals 2003
2002 Carlton, no finals until 2009 (salary cap scandal no draft picks, also finished last 2005 and 2006)
2003 WB, finals 2006
2004 Richmond, finals 2013 (two 9ths though because OG Richmond)

You can also throw in WC and Hawthorn to this period who didn't win spoons but were <5 win teams.

It was easier to rebuild before first round PPs were removed. Not many people suggest otherwise. So since they were removed then logically it has become harder. That's just one aspect. Since 2010 the AFL has introduced free agency, compo picks, academies, NGAs, points bidding and held two expansion drafts. They had a good thing going and have tinkered with it to the point it acts against the goals of equalisation. Which is fine if that's what people want but you have to accept that teams are going to be down the bottom for 5-10 years at a time and a lot of the games each week aren't going to be competitive.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Waffle.

The AFL changed its name in 1990. A lot more than the first initial has changed since then. The reason players don't get $50m a year and tickets to the GF don't cost $30k is the market isn't there. If the AFL could get $10b for the TV rights with Kayo costing $100 a month and a GA ticket being $200 - they would.

Streaks of not playing finals since 2010:

Gold Coast: 14
Brisbane, Carlton, North: 9
Melbourne*, St Kilda: 8 (*extended streak of 11 pre 2010)
Adelaide: 7
Freo, WC: 6

Title of the thread is "Does it take too long for clubs to rebuild their lists?" and given how many extended streaks outside finals we are saying you would have to say the answer is yes.

Wooden spooners:

1997 Melbourne, GF 2000
1998 Brisbane, 3 pear 2001-2003 (result of merger)
1999 Collingwood, GF 2002
2000 St Kilda, prelim 2004
2001 Freo, finals 2003
2002 Carlton, no finals until 2009 (salary cap scandal no draft picks, also finished last 2005 and 2006)
2003 WB, finals 2006
2004 Richmond, finals 2013 (two 9ths though because OG Richmond)

You can also throw in WC and Hawthorn to this period who didn't win spoons but were <5 win teams.

It was easier to rebuild before first round PPs were removed. Not many people suggest otherwise. So since they were removed then logically it has become harder. That's just one aspect. Since 2010 the AFL has introduced free agency, compo picks, academies, NGAs, points bidding and held two expansion drafts. They had a good thing going and have tinkered with it to the point it acts against the goals of equalisation. Which is fine if that's what people want but you have to accept that teams are going to be down the bottom for 5-10 years at a time and a lot of the games each week aren't going to be competitive.

Seriously?
On one hand you are saying the market isn't there, but on the other hand you say the NBA is dominated by the market.
You want us to copy them, but the market isn't there?

You want us to copy them, I think we do ok and the premiership % proves it.

There is no right and wrong way, some clubs get players through the draft and like to build that way, others like to trade players in more.

Some clubs do it better than others.

It's a competition, would you rather the AFL just make clubs take turns

 

[Scotland]

Seriously?
On one hand you are saying the market isn't there, but on the other hand you say the NBA is dominated by the market.
You want us to copy them, but the market isn't there?

You want us to copy them, I think we do ok and the premiership % proves it.

There is no right and wrong way, some clubs get players through the draft and like to build that way, others like to trade players in more.

Some clubs do it better than others.

It's a competition, would you rather the AFL just make clubs take turns

What are you talking about? NY is a market, LA is a market, Miami is a market. It's got nothing to do with the US being 10x the size of Australia and their sport having global appeal. The rules they have in place prevent the same 5 or 6 teams just signing whoever they like each year.

I would rather the AFL had actual rules that apply to all clubs that all clubs have to follow. There are basically no rules in the Premier League. FFP is a wet lettuce leaf. No trades, no salary cap, no free agency, no drafts. Just a lot of private money. 7 teams have won it since 1992 with 51 competing. Two teams from one city have won it 21 times out of 33 seasons. Half the teams are just happy to be there. And it's one of the most popular competitions in the world. So there's no right or wrong way to do anything. But if you are going to have a salary cap and draft and all that jazz then actually have it.

 

[go_the_dockers]

IMO no club is ever any more than 5 years away from being able to win a flag.

Put another way, if you get your drafting, recruiting, coaching, development and off-field in order, any club can win the flag within 5 years.

Eagles are 5 years away from top 4, after the worst 4 years in there history.

Carlton, Essendon won't win a flag in 5 years. I doubt they finish top 4 in the next 5 years

 

[LoungeLizard]

What are you talking about? NY is a market, LA is a market, Miami is a market. It's got nothing to do with the US being 10x the size of Australia and their sport having global appeal. The rules they have in place prevent the same 5 or 6 teams just signing whoever they like each year.

I would rather the AFL had actual rules that apply to all clubs that all clubs have to follow. There are basically no rules in the Premier League. FFP is a wet lettuce leaf. No trades, no salary cap, no free agency, no drafts. Just a lot of private money. 7 teams have won it since 1992 with 51 competing. Two teams from one city have won it 21 times out of 33 seasons. Half the teams are just happy to be there. And it's one of the most popular competitions in the world. So there's no right or wrong way to do anything. But if you are going to have a salary cap and draft and all that jazz then actually have it.

But here you are wanting to copy what the Yanks do.
We have 18 teams in the comp, the comp has been going for 35 years, 14 of those teams have won a flag in that time, 17 of them have played in a Grand Final, and all of them teams have not been in the comps for the 35 years.

Now, to me that's a damn good strike rate, how about instead of us following what other sports want to do, how about we do what we do and they follow what we do.

I follow Australian Rules Footy, not American Rules, if you want American Rules, go follow American sports.

 

[Mr.X]

Generally yes however clubs can accelerate if they have productive off seasons

Saints are a good example, were average in 2025 but have brought in some talent that could make them a top 4 contender

 

[Soggy2112]

Generally yes however clubs can accelerate if they have productive off seasons

Saints are a good example, were average in 2025 but have brought in some talent that could make them a top 4 contender

The Saints have a mediocre list and I don’t think Ryan or Silvagni changes that.

Flanders is a gamble. He could be a star, but he needs to progress to A grade calibre to make him worth the pick they gave up.

 

[ioppolo]

Last time Saints went hard in an off season they reached the lofty heights of 6th. I doubt they finish much higher than that tbh. Week 2 (3) fodder.

Although it would be hilarious if team wildcard took them out.

 

[PowerfulPies2023]

Carlton took 12 years to play finals again. Ask them