John Worsfold signs contract extension.

[Au_Blue#24]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
And herein lies the flaw in your arguement. In 2001 head to head you beat up by 34 & 24 points. I'm sorry to disilussion you blokes but this indicates to me that we were definately the crappiest.

we'll see who's the crappiest this year shall we

muuuwwwwhahahahaha

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by masai
The Eagles didn't really have a clean out and Woosha has inherited a mixed group of young and old. Having this group meant that he had to work with what he had and maybe try to ease out older players to bring in younger players to take the team forward for the next 5 years.

I'd probably argue this now - the Eagles never enforced a clean out, but since 1999 the team has had a huge turn over compared to the years prior to that. After all, the Eagles only have two of the premiership players left (notably the youngest two as well), while over the last four seasons (not so much '03) the veterans of that golden period have been dropping like flies. Plus we had to get rid of the dead wood Judge brought in (though for some reason Trent Carroll has survived).

From the list in 2000 the following are gone: Antonowicz, Bellotti, Bennett, Crabb, Cummings, Donnelly, Gehrig, Haynes, Holmes, Kemp, Lewis, Pe Matera, McIntosh, McKenna, Metropolis, O'Brien, Read, Rintoul, Stone, Symmonds, Turnbull, White and Williams (plus probably a couple more who were on the list but didn't play a game). That's 23 players, and of that list only Gehrig would have been worth keeping and perhaps Read (we'll see).

 

[Ripper]

Originally posted by Au_Blue#24
we'll see who's the crappiest this year shall we

muuuwwwwhahahahaha

You are quite welcome to have the title this year.

 

[masai]

Originally posted by Mr Q
I'd probably argue this now - the Eagles never enforced a clean out, but since 1999 the team has had a huge turn over compared to the years prior to that. After all, the Eagles only have two of the premiership players left (notably the youngest two as well), while over the last four seasons (not so much '03) the veterans of that golden period have been dropping like flies. Plus we had to get rid of the dead wood Judge brought in (though for some reason Trent Carroll has survived).

From the list in 2000 the following are gone: Antonowicz, Bellotti, Bennett, Crabb, Cummings, Donnelly, Gehrig, Haynes, Holmes, Kemp, Lewis, Pe Matera, McIntosh, McKenna, Metropolis, O'Brien, Read, Rintoul, Stone, Symmonds, Turnbull, White and Williams (plus probably a couple more who were on the list but didn't play a game). That's 23 players, and of that list only Gehrig would have been worth keeping and perhaps Read (we'll see).

Fair enough.

My comment about Woosha not doing a clean out came about after talking to 2 Eagles premiership players who said that when Woosha arrived he wanted to do some things differently but was unable to get everything 100% his way from day 1, he had to be very diplomatic on alot of team issues. He is now getting his own plan up and running.

Interesting to see how many players you have turned over, but then you must get rid of at least 4 players a season so it quickly mounts up.

It makes funny reading when supporters debate over who was the crappiest in 2001, but from the 3 teams mentioned (Eagles, Dockers & Saints) it shows that one team has really under achieved in comparison with the other two.

 

[masai]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
Bloody inflation!

Isn't that the amount we pay to run Aunty, 7 cents?.

 

[Mr Q]

Originally posted by masai
It makes funny reading when supporters debate over who was the crappiest in 2001, but from the 3 teams mentioned (Eagles, Dockers & Saints) it shows that one team has really under achieved in comparison with the other two.

True indeed (where's the _Dudd when you need him?). You might have been crapper than us, we might have been crapper than you, the only definite is that 2001 had two exceptionally crap WA teams who've done an exceptional effort of turning it around, and one crap Vic team that's got nowhere so far despite having what appeared to be the biggest upside.

 

[Exeter]

Woosha and Jesus have quite a bit in common - except that Worsfold has usually been the one doing the crucifixion rather than being the crucifyee ( you know what I mean).

I must say that the debate about who was the crappier team is a novel twist on an age old theme - the sort of thing you'd more traditionally expect from Dogs and Saints supporters.

For what its worth - I reckon Worsfold's got two years to show marked improvement in the team - if we don't make top four at the end of next year and look like giving it a serious shake thereafter, all bets are off.

 

[Ripper]

Originally posted by Exeter

I must say that the debate about who was the crappier team is a novel twist on an age old theme -

Make the most of it, it won't happen again.

For what its worth - I reckon Worsfold's got two years to show marked improvement in the team - if we don't make top four at the end of next year and look like giving it a serious shake thereafter, all bets are off.

Dead right! Although they have both done excellent jobs I believe CC is slightly in front because of the number of Players that have gone from zero to a usefull total of games. This is important as most players (unless you are a Hazelby or a Judd) don't become truely usefull until thay have around the 50-100 games under their belts.

BTW. I believe CC "honeymoon" finished in round 3 2003.

 

[coasting]

There is no doubt that the Dockers were a worse team in 2001. However, that is not the point, the point is which team had the better future at the end of 2001? For all his foibles, Damien Drum went about rebuilding the team in the right way, with youth, as opposed to Ken Judge who brought in the foreign legion. At the end of 2001 the Eagles looked an old, jaded team that needed a serious injection of youth with alot of hard rebuilding to do. I distinctly remember Terry Wallace saying at about this time that 'any coach in the league would love to get their hands on Fremantle'. No one was saying that about the Eagles. In fact, we were widely tipped for the spoon at the beginning of 2002. Connelly is reaping the benefits of the hard decisions made under Damian Drum while the trading of draft picks during his time at the club has been questionable at best. Anyone who took over a 0-17 team and made them even remotely competitive was always going to look like a super-hero.

 

[The Mission Man]

...of the hard decisions made under Damian Drum...

Getting rid of Spider Burton and consequently playing Clem Michael for an entire season on a crook knee. Losing the confidence of an entire playing group. Trading on a fistfull of speedy young fifty-gamers (Sinclair, Holland, Clement) and reintroducing some good solid predictable slowness. Gamely boxing on despite having no skills as a game-day coach.

Oh, you said "hard". I usually see "Damian Drum" and "decisions" in the same sentence and think bad.

He got (by virtue of being bad at his job) and used some high draft picks and a concession pick in a bumper year for talent. Real hard decision.

 

[Exeter]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46



Although they have both done excellent jobs

Not sure about that yet.

My view is that both coaches have done what was expected of them.

Given their squad the Dockers should be playing finals footy - Connolly has simply done as he should have. Mind you, its easy to look sensational when you consider the quality of his predecessors.

Worsfold too has simply got the Eagles back to where they could reasonably expect to be. While I've always been a big fan of the chemist, I've yet to see any real indication of outstanding tactical nous.

If and when both coaches can regularly get their respective teams to be consistent top four contenders - then I might consider using words like "excellent".

 

[Ripper]

Originally posted by Exeter
Not sure about that yet.

My view is that both coaches have done what was expected of them.

If and when both coaches can regularly get their respective teams to be consistent top four contenders - then I might consider using words like "excellent".

Your a hard man Exeter.

 

[Exeter]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
Your a hard man Exeter.

a hard man is good to find.

or at least that's what I'm told anyway

 

[Moo]

Yes Mish but apart from getting rid of Spider Burton, playing Clem Michael for an entire season on a crook knee, losing the confidence of an entire playing group, trading speedy young fifty-gamers (Sinclair, Holland, Clement), reintroducing some good solid predictable slowness and having no skills as a game-day coach.......what has he ever done to harm us?

 

[WaDsY]

Delivery is due!
Expect it to arrive on the 25th of September 2004.