Have we learnt anything from Geelong?

[Coach_Required]

The thing that worries me is that other clubs seem to have youngsters about to take the next step.

Our youngsters seem to have stagnated over the pre-season and we are relying on players like Cogs, Simmonds, Brown, Morton and McMahon to provide the improvement from last season. I just can't see a youngster having a break-out year like Foley did last year.

That is a major cause for concern IMO

It worries me aswell Tigerrific, so much so your old partner is back .......

 

[krisholio14]

What are you basing this on? It is no surprise to anyone that you must get your act together off the field before success will flow on.

If you bother with even some cursory analysis of what we are doing off the field, you will see that this part of our club is doing very well. From a basket case 4 years ago, we've now had 2 $1m profit seasons, the second of which occurred in a season where we finished last.

When looking at the club as a whole, it is easy to see that there's a clear strategy in place and all efforts are going towards the implemenation of this.

The only thing that hasn't followed from this so far is the onfield success.

You'll see what I mean, sooner rather than later.

 

[Catsace]

What are you basing this on? It is no surprise to anyone that you must get your act together off the field before success will flow on.

If you bother with even some cursory analysis of what we are doing off the field, you will see that this part of our club is doing very well. From a basket case 4 years ago, we've now had 2 $1m profit seasons, the second of which occurred in a season where we finished last.

When looking at the club as a whole, it is easy to see that there's a clear strategy in place and all efforts are going towards the implemenation of this.

The only thing that hasn't followed from this so far is the onfield success.

Agree with your post as Geelong took a few years tp get up to speed financially. We were in debt by over $6 million in 1999, and also at that point the AFL were seriously looking to displace Geelong from Skilled as the ground was of borderline quality for AFL footy. If Richmond are making profits of over $1 million nowadays, the onfield success will be able to follow. I remember a story in the 'Save our Skins' campaign days back in the late 80's or so when a sheriff was walking out of Punt Road with a couple of premiership cups, before i think then board member Cameron Schwab stopped him. No doubt if Richmond get a few wins up, the crowds that will follow will be massive.

But in the absence of actual wins as such, at least a vision of what the future looks like offering hope and a plan with which to have faith in, is almost as good. Parts of 2002 and 2003 were like that for Geelong, at least in the sense that the young players began to become integral parts of the side. Richmond i feel is at 2003 level for Geelong, the window of 2011, however that may have been taken by the media and other knockers, is a reasonable target for the fruition of the current plan.

 

[Tigerrific]

It worries me aswell Tigerrific, so much so your old partner is back .......

I'm hoping that you have resurrected your old nic too early and that PRR will return before the end of the season but I must admit that I am worried too. (Good to see you back though)

Why are our young players taking so much longer to mature and perform than all the other clubs? Look at Collingwood for example; our young players are probably more highly rated than theirs but they are not performing up to the same standard. Kids like Goldsack, Cox, Clarke and Toovey all went up a level last season. Thomas and Pendelbury have been putting it together for a couple of years too.

We know what the senior players are capable of but I want to see guys like Schulz, Hughes, Meyer, Oakleigh Nicholls, White, Casserley, and Moore perform this year. They have all been around for a while now and its time for them to shape up or ship out!

 

[tigers_of_old_08]

No...
Geelong weren't getting smashed to the extent we were/are with entire team capitulation. Geelong had spot-fire problems that need solving.
Geelong also had a home ground advantage that normally in good times they can bank on as certain wins......it was just a matter of time.

The Geelong faithful were more reactive in a shorter period than us.
The state of Geelong unhappiness at the time had developed after the last period of relative finals success (the Gary Ablett Snr years) and before the 2007 flag.
A lot of Geelong supporters were happy during the Ablett Snr years as they thought they were always a 'sniff' at the flag.
(A 'sniff' at the flag for a Richmond supporter since 1980 is starting the season!)
That's a lot shorter than our 27 years of playing an awful style of football with little hope.

Geelong's time would have come under Thompson once his small problems were ironed out.

We on the other hand......don't have the players that consistently perform as a team, or are up to AFL Senior Football standard.....so Wallace staying or going is irrelevant.

Geelong just prior to their flag was a rough diamond.
Richmond now is a piece of coal. And Wallace is not a miner of men.

Our problems are deeper and ingrained, the Geelong experience has no similarity to ours.

Right on the money and beautifully put.

 

[Rayzorwire]

I'm hoping that you have resurrected your old nic too early and that PRR will return before the end of the season but I must admit that I am worried too. (Good to see you back though)

Why are our young players taking so much longer to mature and perform than all the other clubs?

Ash Hansen was 22 before he kicked a footy at senior level, and was 26 before he got to his 50 game mark - he's played 54 in total. At 23 he played 20 games, averaged 12 possessions and barely over a goal a game.

Fair enough, he's had injuries, but many of our supporters holler about players not being up to scratch at far younger ages and would have totally shitcanned Hansen if he was on our list, but would also happily trade for him now.

Adam Hunter was 24 before he'd played 50 games, and 24 going on 25 before he started to become the player he is today.

Matt Priddis is 23 going into this season and has played 26 games. He'll be 24 before he plays 50 games.

Are they/did they 'take too long' to blossom as players because the Eagles have a crap development program, or did they blossom as players because the Eagles were realistic and showed patience?

Let's compare Priddis playing his 50th game at 24 with:

Deledio has played 62 games at age 20,
Tambling 53 games at 21,
Pattison 35 games at 21,
Foley 49 games at 22,
Polo 25 games at 21,
Raines 51 games at 21,
Schulz 49 games at 22,
Jackson 36 games at 21,
Edwards 16 games at 19...the list goes on.

Most of these blokes (probably all but Deledio and Foley) wouldn't have played 1/3rd of those games - or at all yet - on a stronger list.

The Eagles go into this season with 14 players on the their list not yet exposed to AFL football - we have 7. Ours are all fresh recruits or rookies except for Casserley, and probably 3 of them will play at some stage this year.

On the one hand, supporters complain that we haven't/don't cut the list hard enough, yet I suspect that 2-3 years down the track, the same people are moaning that the kids we got instead haven't developed fast enough.

That's what happens when you throw most kids in the deep end at 18, 19 and 20 yrs of age. It takes them longer to find their feet than if they'd been allowed to play until 21-22 at a lower level.

Our kids aren't slow to develop or lacking in talent, they've just been called upon earlier than is ideal, and earlier than happens at good clubs.

 

[smokey_58au]

Ash Hansen was 22 before he kicked a footy at senior level, and was 26 before he got to his 50 game mark - he's played 54 in total. At 23 he played 20 games, averaged 12 possessions and barely over a goal a game.

Fair enough, he's had injuries, but many of our supporters holler about players not being up to scratch at far younger ages and would have totally shitcanned Hansen if he was on our list, but would also happily trade for him now.

Adam Hunter was 24 before he'd played 50 games, and 24 going on 25 before he started to become the player he is today.

Matt Priddis is 23 going into this season and has played 26 games. He'll be 24 before he plays 50 games.

Are they/did they 'take too long' to blossom as players because the Eagles have a crap development program, or did they blossom as players because the Eagles were realistic and showed patience?

Let's compare Priddis playing his 50th game at 24 with:

Deledio has played 62 games at age 20,
Tambling 53 games at 21,
Pattison 35 games at 21,
Foley 49 games at 22,
Polo 25 games at 21,
Raines 51 games at 21,
Schulz 49 games at 22,
Jackson 36 games at 21,
Edwards 16 games at 19...the list goes on.

Most of these blokes (probably all but Deledio and Foley) wouldn't have played 1/3rd of those games - or at all yet - on a stronger list.

The Eagles go into this season with 14 players on the their list not yet exposed to AFL football - we have 7. Ours are all fresh recruits or rookies except for Casserley, and probably 3 of them will play at some stage this year.

On the one hand, supporters complain that we haven't/don't cut the list hard enough, yet I suspect that 2-3 years down the track, the same people are moaning that the kids we got instead haven't developed fast enough.

That's what happens when you throw most kids in the deep end at 18, 19 and 20 yrs of age. It takes them longer to find their feet than if they'd been allowed to play until 21-22 at a lower level.

Our kids aren't slow to develop or lacking in talent, they've just been called upon earlier than is ideal, and earlier than happens at good clubs.

Right on the money and beautifully put.

 

[Bifrost]

If we are to be compared with Geelong, then our year will be 2012.

It took 8 years for Geelong to build the list they have. Our starting point was the 2004 draft, so essentially season 2005 was the first of our 8 years.

And deliberate!! if you were only following the Tigers to see success, you would have left a long time ago. The fact that you still wear your yellow and black on your sleeve (or under your forum name) means you love the club despite the lack of success over the past decades. If nut is ready for the fundy cult, then so am I and so are you.

That is unless you are actually an alt account for some Hawks supporter. Which wouldn't surprise me.

 

[tugga]

Why is it that when we get the ball, there’s never an easy option upfield? Geelong gets the ball and they have 2 or 3 options. The ball carrier has an eternity to work out the best, quickest option and he honours it. Our bloke gets the ball, looks upfield to find everyone covered and either gets collared in a tackle or is forced to go backwards or sideways. It all stems from the likes of Bowden and Johnson who are so used to playing that way.

 

[HobarTiger]

Ash Hansen was 22 before he kicked a footy at senior level, and was 26 before he got to his 50 game mark - he's played 54 in total. At 23 he played 20 games, averaged 12 possessions and barely over a goal a game.

Fair enough, he's had injuries, but many of our supporters holler about players not being up to scratch at far younger ages and would have totally shitcanned Hansen if he was on our list, but would also happily trade for him now.

Adam Hunter was 24 before he'd played 50 games, and 24 going on 25 before he started to become the player he is today.

Matt Priddis is 23 going into this season and has played 26 games. He'll be 24 before he plays 50 games.

Are they/did they 'take too long' to blossom as players because the Eagles have a crap development program, or did they blossom as players because the Eagles were realistic and showed patience?

Let's compare Priddis playing his 50th game at 24 with:

Deledio has played 62 games at age 20,
Tambling 53 games at 21,
Pattison 35 games at 21,
Foley 49 games at 22,
Polo 25 games at 21,
Raines 51 games at 21,
Schulz 49 games at 22,
Jackson 36 games at 21,
Edwards 16 games at 19...the list goes on.

Most of these blokes (probably all but Deledio and Foley) wouldn't have played 1/3rd of those games - or at all yet - on a stronger list.

The Eagles go into this season with 14 players on the their list not yet exposed to AFL football - we have 7. Ours are all fresh recruits or rookies except for Casserley, and probably 3 of them will play at some stage this year.

On the one hand, supporters complain that we haven't/don't cut the list hard enough, yet I suspect that 2-3 years down the track, the same people are moaning that the kids we got instead haven't developed fast enough.

That's what happens when you throw most kids in the deep end at 18, 19 and 20 yrs of age. It takes them longer to find their feet than if they'd been allowed to play until 21-22 at a lower level.

Our kids aren't slow to develop or lacking in talent, they've just been called upon earlier than is ideal, and earlier than happens at good clubs.

Excellent post. We've been throwing our kids to the wolves because our senior players have been rubbish and cut, while the likes of West Coast, Adelaide, Port Geelong and Collingwood have had a good core of senior players which has allowed those teams to ease their youngsters into the team and system without too high an expectation. We are relying on our kids to win games to cover the faults of previous administrations - it isn't going to happen overnight.

Having said that I'm not convinced Wallace can see this through or even if they have selected the right crop of kids but at least the club now has a plan to build from the ground up and not the band aid rejects we saw employed under Frawley and others.

 

[deliberate!!]

If we are to be compared with Geelong, then our year will be 2012.

It took 8 years for Geelong to build the list they have. Our starting point was the 2004 draft, so essentially season 2005 was the first of our 8 years.

And deliberate!! if you were only following the Tigers to see success, you would have left a long time ago. The fact that you still wear your yellow and black on your sleeve (or under your forum name) means you love the club despite the lack of success over the past decades. If nut is ready for the fundy cult, then so am I and so are you.

That is unless you are actually an alt account for some Hawks supporter. Which wouldn't surprise me.

The difference between yourself & nut and myself, is that I've stopped blindly believing in something's success just because it exists to start with.
I don't believe Richmond can or will have success just because we exist in a competition.
(Go take a look at some of the non-successful teams in the lower leagues of English Soccer.....longevity does not equal success)
I don't believe time will eventually make us Premiers.
I don't believe hope is a sign post on the road to success.
It nourishes some, but not all.
I believe in physical signs of progress.

I can't hope for physical signs of progress. I must see it.
If you want me to believe, show me something.

I know I have supported the Richmond Football Club since I was 2.
Why? I have a picture of myself in a Richmond jumper blowing out my birthday cake with a Richmond footballer on the top of the cake.
I think the jumper is beautiful. Punt Road is my home. Our theme song is the best. And our mascot is ferocious. That's all I believe in. All these things exist.

And if I was an alternative Hawks troll......surely I would have lost interest in shit stirring or trolling the RFC Board since joining here in 2003.
I'd be over that by now. And anyway, the few times I've left the RFC Board and headed over to foreign boards I've been slapped with a Card or warning of some description....lol

The older I get, the more I go to the football not looking for success....but progress. I let go of the success baggage long ago. I now go to the football and see if 'they are hitting their targets?'....'are they backing each other up?'.....'who looks like can make the next step up?'....'Can Schulz prove me wrong?'....'Will Richo play the perfect game?'.....'Can we play 4 quarters?'....'Is there anything to build on?' All simple signposts of progress on the day.

You see I don't just try and roast Richmond every time, but I've put in enough long years watching and supporting financially this club, for the club to give me a glimpse back.......a glimpse of progress in the right direction.
I don't want hope....hope is intangible.
I'l go to see the Tigers in Round 1, not hoping there is a game, knowing there is a game.

After progress, success will come.

(And to those that get sick of me or hate me, I fully understand.....I get sick of my writings sometimes. Just take solace in the fact I'm only a nick on a footy board....take me or leave me.....that's what I do anyway.....Cheers)

 

[nut]

Ash Hansen was 22 before he kicked a footy at senior level, and was 26 before he got to his 50 game mark - he's played 54 in total. At 23 he played 20 games, averaged 12 possessions and barely over a goal a game.

Fair enough, he's had injuries, but many of our supporters holler about players not being up to scratch at far younger ages and would have totally shitcanned Hansen if he was on our list, but would also happily trade for him now.

Adam Hunter was 24 before he'd played 50 games, and 24 going on 25 before he started to become the player he is today.

Matt Priddis is 23 going into this season and has played 26 games. He'll be 24 before he plays 50 games.

Are they/did they 'take too long' to blossom as players because the Eagles have a crap development program, or did they blossom as players because the Eagles were realistic and showed patience?

Let's compare Priddis playing his 50th game at 24 with:

Deledio has played 62 games at age 20,
Tambling 53 games at 21,
Pattison 35 games at 21,
Foley 49 games at 22,
Polo 25 games at 21,
Raines 51 games at 21,
Schulz 49 games at 22,
Jackson 36 games at 21,
Edwards 16 games at 19...the list goes on.

Most of these blokes (probably all but Deledio and Foley) wouldn't have played 1/3rd of those games - or at all yet - on a stronger list.

The Eagles go into this season with 14 players on the their list not yet exposed to AFL football - we have 7. Ours are all fresh recruits or rookies except for Casserley, and probably 3 of them will play at some stage this year.

On the one hand, supporters complain that we haven't/don't cut the list hard enough, yet I suspect that 2-3 years down the track, the same people are moaning that the kids we got instead haven't developed fast enough.

That's what happens when you throw most kids in the deep end at 18, 19 and 20 yrs of age. It takes them longer to find their feet than if they'd been allowed to play until 21-22 at a lower level.

Our kids aren't slow to develop or lacking in talent, they've just been called upon earlier than is ideal, and earlier than happens at good clubs.

... nicely put.

 

[Brooksy88]

I go to the football not looking for success....but progress. I let go of the success baggage long ago. I now go to the football and see if 'they are hitting their targets?'....'are they backing each other up?'.....'who looks like can make the next step up?'....'Can Schulz prove me wrong?'....'Will Richo play the perfect game?'.....'Can we play 4 quarters?'....'Is there anything to build on?' All simple signposts of progress on the day.

Very well put. in the same boat

 

[_RT_]

The difference between yourself & nut and myself, is that I've stopped blindly believing in something's success just because it exists to start with.
I don't believe Richmond can or will have success just because we exist in a competition.
(Go take a look at some of the non-successful teams in the lower leagues of English Soccer.....longevity does not equal success)
I don't believe time will eventually make us Premiers.
I don't believe hope is a sign post on the road to success.
It nourishes some, but not all.
I believe in physical signs of progress.

I can't hope for physical signs of progress. I must see it.
If you want me to believe, show me something.

I know I have supported the Richmond Football Club since I was 2.
Why? I have a picture of myself in a Richmond jumper blowing out my birthday cake with a Richmond footballer on the top of the cake.
I think the jumper is beautiful. Punt Road is my home. Our theme song is the best. And our mascot is ferocious. That's all I believe in. All these things exist.

And if I was an alternative Hawks troll......surely I would have lost interest in shit stirring or trolling the RFC Board since joining here in 2003.
I'd be over that by now. And anyway, the few times I've left the RFC Board and headed over to foreign boards I've been slapped with a Card or warning of some description....lol

The older I get, the more I go to the football not looking for success....but progress. I let go of the success baggage long ago. I now go to the football and see if 'they are hitting their targets?'....'are they backing each other up?'.....'who looks like can make the next step up?'....'Can Schulz prove me wrong?'....'Will Richo play the perfect game?'.....'Can we play 4 quarters?'....'Is there anything to build on?' All simple signposts of progress on the day.

You see I don't just try and roast Richmond every time, but I've put in enough long years watching and supporting financially this club, for the club to give me a glimpse back.......a glimpse of progress in the right direction.
I don't want hope....hope is intangible.
I'l go to see the Tigers in Round 1, not hoping there is a game, knowing there is a game.

After progress, success will come.

(And to those that get sick of me or hate me, I fully understand.....I get sick of my writings sometimes. Just take solace in the fact I'm only a nick on a footy board....take me or leave me.....that's what I do anyway.....Cheers)

Summed it up perfectly. I have asked a number of times for someone to give hard evidence of progress and as yet I have not had anyone deliver on this request. Surely if there was some evidence it would have been posted by now.