ladder 2003

[nut]

After rnd 22

1 Adelaide 17 wins
2 Brisbane 16 wins and %
3 Saints 16 wins
4 Port 15 wins
5 Ess 14 wins
6 Richmond 13
7 Geelong 12 wins
8 WC 11 wins

9 Collingwood 11 wins
10 Hawks 10
11 Freo 10
12 WB 8
13 Carlton 7
14 Melb 5
15 Syd 4
16 North 4 wins

 

[Ausgard]

Re: Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by grayham
Sorry, no offense. I'm just the messenger. Someone had to come last.

but how come we came last just about every time ?

 

[noodle]

Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by Ausgard
We are so bad that we can never be competitive again ?

I mean fair enough that people want to put us down the bottom next year with an untried coach and new playing style etc etc but being a dud for 3 years ?

whats the reason for North being crap all of a sudden ? came 7th last year when half our salary cap wasn't playing ?

don't stress Aus, grayham has obviously been smoking crack.

2003:
8. Sydney - Bounce back to a more accurate ladder position

2004:
5. Sydney - good draft choices starting to pay off.

2005:
1. Sydney - Roos is the new super coach.

 

[Ronaldo]

After rnd 22

1 Adelaide 17 wins
2 Brisbane 16 wins and %
3 Saints 16 wins
4 Port 15 wins
5 Ess 14 wins
6 Richmond 13
7 Geelong 12 wins
8 WC 11 wins

9 Collingwood 11 wins
10 Hawks 10
11 Freo 10
12 WB 8
13 Carlton 7
14 Melb 5
15 Syd 4
16 North 4 wins


If St Kilda win 16 games next year, other strange things will happen

Osama Bin Laden mayor of New York
Australia will invade NZ
Cricket to become interesting
John Howard wins Cleos most eligible bachelor
Norf supporters give up dope


SENZA CALCIO NON C'E VITA

 

[nut]

Originally posted by Ronaldo
After rnd 22

1 Adelaide 17 wins
2 Brisbane 16 wins and %
3 Saints 16 wins
4 Port 15 wins
5 Ess 14 wins
6 Richmond 13
7 Geelong 12 wins
8 WC 11 wins

9 Collingwood 11 wins
10 Hawks 10
11 Freo 10
12 WB 8
13 Carlton 7
14 Melb 5
15 Syd 4
16 North 4 wins


If St Kilda win 16 games next year, other strange things will happen

Osama Bin Laden mayor of New York
Australia will invade NZ
Cricket to become interesting
John Howard wins Cleos most eligible bachelor
Norf supporters give up dope


SENZA CALCIO NON C'E VITA

Momentum is a strange thing. I believe last season they played well below them selves. If they have an Ok run with injuries than they will certainly be there abouts. Collingwood will have another crack at the Eight but will miss out on %.

The saints has one of the best list in the AFL.

 

[MightySaint]

Originally posted by Ronaldo

If St Kilda win 16 games next year, other strange things will happen

Osama Bin Laden mayor of New York
Australia will invade NZ
Cricket to become interesting
John Howard wins Cleos most eligible bachelor
Norf supporters give up dope


SENZA CALCIO NON C'E VITA

I can't disagree too much there.

 

[grayham]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by Ausgard


but how come we came last just about every time ?

Well, I just think there has been too much upheavel this year, and with only 92% of the cap next year, it will be very hard to remain competitive, especially with an untried bargain basement coach.

The following years are basically the same, but with the combined effect of severe financial pressure from finishing last in 2003.

 

[Fall Out Boy]

Re: Re: ladder 2003

Pure speculation at this stage, but anyway.

1. Brisbane - Still the best, by a fair way.
2. Port - Still on the up.
3. Adelaide - Carey
4. Collingwood - Need the kids to keep improving.
5. Essendon - A fit Hird and Lloyd.
6. West Coast - Only if Kerr and Judd play like they did in 2002
7. Richmond - Too much talent to wallow at the bottom.
8. Geelong - Given one more year, the kids can surely eek out the necessary 2 extra wins to make it.
9. North - Don't have the talent, money or the master coach, but they do have the Shinboners spirit.
10. Dogs - See Richmond
11. Melbourne - The loss of Woewodin and Powell is too much of a blow.
12. Hawthorn - The Spider experiment will backfire.
13. Carlton - Pagan will get them off the bottom.
14. Fremantle - Endlessly talked up, yet to deliver.
15. St. Kilda - Can't see them improving, despite the return of Kosi.
16. Sydney - Average list with no key defenders. Will struggle.

 

[Zombie]

Re: Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by noodle
don't stress Aus, grayham has obviously been smoking crack.

Who are these good draft choices that Sydney have made? Can't think back to previous years but I know they ballsed up big time this year by picking up McVeigh when players like Salopek were still available.

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Generalissimo
5. Adelaide. Bickley, Ricciuto and Smart are ageing and I think the addition of Burns and Carey will unsettle the forward line, but if they fire Adelaide could well take the flag.

Mark Bickley and Nigel Smart are both 33, but Ricciuto is only 27.

From the Advertiser:
The only other Crows aged 26 or over are Carey, Burns, ruckman Matthew Clarke (29), Ben Hart (28), captain Mark Ricciuto and Mark Stevens (27) and Nathan Bassett, Tyson Edwards, Simon Goodwin, Ben Marsh and Andrew McLeod (26).

This year Adelaide's forward structure had four players in & out - Fitzgerald, Bienke, Welsh & Schell. Only Welsh got near to playing half the games. Ricciuto, Edwards, McLeod, Ladhams & Johnco(k all had "cameo" roles in the forward line. Burton {edit here} & Stevens were just about the only constants.

I don't believe you can get much more unsettled than that.

PS to grayham - you think Adelaide need to re-build in 2005 after only (a likely) 5 players have departed from the current list?

 

[nut]

On Adelaide.

The thing that would unsettle them the most would be injuries to there mid field. This is there strength and the reason they made the eight last season.
Clarke has 1 maybe 2 more years as a quality ruckmen and a lot is on his shoulders to direct traffic in the middle. The Loss of Johnson wont be felt unless they lose midfielders to injuries.

22 uninterupted games from A. Mcleod will see him win the Brownlow.
Adelaide will finish first.

Dont right the Bombers off come September.

Collingwoods return of 13 wins in 2002 will be cut to 11 in 2003.

Saints can thank Melbourne for not finishing second.

 

[TheMase]

Re: Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by noodle
don't stress Aus, grayham has obviously been smoking crack.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2003:
8. Sydney - Bounce back to a more accurate ladder position

2004:
5. Sydney - good draft choices starting to pay off.

2005:
1. Sydney - Roos is the new super coach.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This isnt so unrealistic.
8th COULD happen next season .. but I would more likely say 10th.

Other than that the other predictions arent out of hte question.
Although i would have them 6th and then 3rd (or something like that ..)

 

[TheMase]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by Zombie
Who are these good draft choices that Sydney have made? Can't think back to previous years but I know they ballsed up big time this year by picking up McVeigh when players like Salopek were still available.

Lewis Roberts-Thompson
Daniel Hunt
Mark Powell
Sean Dempster
Nick Malceski
Jared Sundqvist
Joshua Thewlis
Scott Stevens
Adam Schneider
Jarred McVeigh
Luke Ablett
Amon Buchanan

Im pretty sure that most of those were drafted from the 2000 draft onwards.

 

[grayham]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ladder 2003

Originally posted by Zombie
Who are these good draft choices that Sydney have made? Can't think back to previous years but I know they ballsed up big time this year by picking up McVeigh when players like Salopek were still available.

I wouldnt be counting your chickens just yet. In Sydney position, McVeigh was a good choice. There would be a fair chance that Salopek will be playing for elsewhere in 2006 citing homesickness.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by BrainOfMorbius
If you don't finish in the top four you may as well not bother, I think. Port'll be up there.

Yeah, I agree, but Port have shown a habit of misjudging how hard you have to work to get a desired result. Thats the only predictable reason I can think of to justify the placing of 5th in the initial post. I don't reckon it'll happen, but if it does, age won't be the reason.

 

[ScouseCat]

MY LADDER FOR 2003:

1. Brisbane - will once again be leaders of the pack!
2. Adelaide - Carey and Burns will form a potent attack.
3. Collingwood - Shane Woewodin will have a good season as the Carring Bush make the finals despite losing twice to Geelong!!
4. Geelong - top 4 for the Cats providing our kids continue their good development and we are able to sustain it for the whole 22 games.
5. Port Power - have missed the boat somewhat with their list but should still make the finals.
6. West Coast - will once again be very hard to beat in Perth and providing they can win a couple of games away from home should make it.
7. Hawthorn - will make finals after a disappointing 2002.
8. Fremantle - its now or never for the Dockers!!

--------------------------------

9. Western Bulldogs - a good mid-table side, may sneak into the finals, may not.
10. Essendon - will have a 1997 like season to rebuild.
11. Melbourne - hotels at the snow are going fast so book now!
12. Kangaroos - will find it harder under Laidley but will be competitive.
13. St Kilda - still a couple of years off with their young players.
14. Richmond - in a rebuilding phase.
15. Sydney - will struggle after losing key players.
16. Carlton - not even the mastercoach Pagan will lift the Blues off the bottom. Back to Back wooden spoons is on the cards!

 

[Bulldog1954]

Originally posted by nut

The saints has one of the best list in the AFL.

Then they are either gutless or weak

1. Brisbane (16-18 wins) (by an absolute mile)
2. Port Adelaide (14-16)
3. Collingwood (13-15) (hope not though)
4. Adelaide (13-15)(Carey will be good, but not god send)
5. Hawthorn (12-14)
6. Western Bulldogs (11-14) (Grant to fire at CHB)
7. Essendon (11-14)
8. Melbourne (11-12)

9. Kangaroos (10-11)
10. Geelong (10-11)
11. West Coast (10-11)
12. Sydney (10-11)
13. Fremantle (6-8)
14. Richmond (6-8)
15. St Kilda (4-6)
16 Carlton (4-6)

 

[da_bomber]

Originally posted by Zombie
You are a whinger mate, if you think Essendon had the 2nd worst injury list in 2002 then you are dreaming. Like I have said in the past, Essendons injury run in 2002 was comparable to the average injuries for a year, no more, no less. There were plenty of sides who had much worse injury runs tha Essendon.

As for good young players at Essendon, who? I don't doubt that Essendon have a good group of experienced players but the youth of the club is quite poor.

Where did u pull this from:
Essendon had the 3rd worst injury list and by plenty of other sides who had worser you mean Carlton and St.Kilda.
And where did they finish? 15th and 16th.
So who do you think filled in for these injured players like Hird, Mercuri, Lloyd, Alessio, Salmon, Fletcher, Misiti, Solomon and Moorcroft who were all out for extended periods of time?
Young Players!!!

No Good young players at Essendon?
Then how does a side with one of the youngest list and according to you poor talented in the AFL finish 5th and nearly beat the oldest side in the AFL in the Semi.

 

[nut]

Originally posted by Bulldog1954
Then they are either gutless or weak

15. St Kilda (4-6)


You obvisouly didn't see there injury list.

Hamil, Gehrig, Harvey, Burke, Thompson,Black,Hayes surrounding the young players in riewoldt, Kosi, Del-santo, Clarke, Brooks and Goddard will see a rapid rise up the ladder.

Harvey and Burke ,two tough, in and under, All Australian Midfielders that hardly played a game between them last season will icrease the productivity in the mid field.

If they don't make the eight then Bye Bye GT.

 

[da_bomber]

Top 8 in 2003:

Port Adelaide (Have to be perfrom now because of a ageing list)
Adelaide (Better team with Carey if he performs)
Brisbane (Could be lower if they get some serious injuries)
Essendon (No injuries should ensure top 4)
Richmond (Have one of the best forward lines if not injured)
Melbourne (Have to be consistent though)
Collingwood (The young players being unpredictable)
Carlton (Will surprise and will bring back that arrogance with them)

 

[dockertor]

Gee why don't I just put the ladder as it was last year except put my team 5 or so places higher.
Oops it seems to have been done already

 

[Bulldog1954]

Originally posted by nut

Originally posted by Bulldog1954
Then they are either gutless or weak

15. St Kilda (4-6)


You obvisouly didn't see there injury list.

Hamil, Gehrig, Harvey, Burke, Thompson,Black,Hayes surrounding the young players in riewoldt, Kosi, Del-santo, Clarke, Brooks and Goddard will see a rapid rise up the ladder.

Harvey and Burke ,two tough, in and under, All Australian Midfielders that hardly played a game between them last season will icrease the productivity in the mid field.

If they don't make the eight then Bye Bye GT.

Last season and the year before St Kilda were meant to rapidly improve. I know they have gotten a lot of injuries recently but even with injuries finishing 15th or whatever the last couple of years is crap. And whats to say they won't get a lot of injuries again this year, it seems a long shot that Harvs and Bourke will get through next year unshaved. St Kilda over the last 6-7 years have performed up to the level their list has been rated once

 

[rfctigerarmy]

2003 Ladder:

1/ Adelaide --- Carey or no Carey, Very hard team to beat. Premiers 2003.
2/ Brisbane --- No three in a row for the Lions. Like the Crows will still be hard to beat.
3/ Port Adelaide --- Starting to drop every so slightly but will still have a year. Its 2003 for the Power or not at all.
4/ West Coast --- Will rise. My surprise for 2003 will be that the Eagles will get a top 4 spot.
5/ Collingwood --- Dropping... Had there fame now get lost.
6/ Richmond --- Top 8 - Just. Tall forwards and a new Midfield the problem for opposition.
7/ Hawthorn --- Still to showy to be in the top 6. Sorry Hawk fans!
8/ Western Bulldogs --- Just grab the 8th spot. Toss up between them and Geelong.

9/ St.Kilda --- Not next year my St.Kilda friends, not next year...
10/ Geelong --- Still young and will pounce. Will give opposition teams a hard time.
11/ Melbourne --- Sorry Dees, not next year. 2004 top 8.
12/ Fremantle --- Like Geelong. It was hard to fit a spot for them higher.
13/ Carlton --- Win the first 5 games, then will slide.
14/ Essendon --- Need a ruckman. The midfielders they got rid of didnt do much to the eam in 2002 anyway. Probably 14th cause I dont like them.
15/ Kangaroos --- Not bottom like a lot of people think. They will be 2nd last!
16/ Sydney --- Need help.

 

[Kimbo]

Top Four: Most people are tipping it to stay the same, only the order to change. Wonder how often that actually happens? That said, it seems like a safe bet.

1. Adelaide, don’t lose too much with Johnson gone, age of player-group right for doing what needs to be done, and fwd line strengthened, made good by midfield delivery.

2. Brisbane haven’t lost much (Caracella + Brennan for Headland), plus motivation of three straight.

3. Port Adelaide, similar, but have gained Pickett, Salopek without losing much.

4. Collingwood; exceeded expectations in 2003, but were expected to be thereabouts in 2003, unless they get a dose of 2nd year blues. I’m assuming the tears of GF day translate into competitive on-field performance, as much as it hurts to acknowledge.

Bottom of the Eight:

5. Melbourne. Sense they’ll be more consistent (from year to year), coach has proven he can get them there, finals experience, maturing player group.

6. Richmond. Bit of a Punt (excuse the pun), but trusting that 2001 form means Frawley can coach, plus inclusion of some midfield hardness, and fit Richo/Ottens.

7. Essendon. Prove they are thereabouts, and Hird/Lloyd/Fletcher/Johnsons/Solomon to ensure no dramatic drop, but unlikely to contest without rebuilding.

8. Fremantle. Despite what some are saying, I don’t think Freo have ever had realistic claims to the finals, until now. Playing list much stronger, more talented and a confident coach and strong home grd advantage will see them make it in 2003.

Next Few...

9. Hawthorn. Just don’t have the all round strength or mental toughness. Schwab to be sacked mid-season by admin. used to success.

10. Geelong. Similar to last year. Exciting at times, but inconsistent due to young list, but regardless of exactly where they finish (5-11), building strongly for the future. 2004/5 to be time to evaluate Bomber.

11. West Coast. Overrated with a list not as strong as Freo’s, and whilst competitive with Woosha at the helm, they may lack the depth to maintain or improve on 2002; rely on too few. What happens if Cousins is injured?

12. Western Bulldogs. Suspect this ranking is low too, with champions (Grant, West, Johnson, Darcy etc) and young ones to take next step. What can Rohde do with them is the main question.

X-Factors… Sides that, by default or a new, untried coach, are ranked lower than those above, and which logic suggests are rated low, but could, conceivably move higher up the ladder:

13. Carlton. Pagan’s discipline and minimum risk game plan, plus better run with injuries to raise them, possibly as high as bottom of 8.

14. St Kilda. Those draft picks to result in improvement, plus move onfield time from Harvey and Bourke, but what can Cornflakes do with them? They could also be around the bottom of the 8, but seeing is believing.

15. Sydney. Poor list, lots of champions retired, and untried coach (similar to Bulldogs and Kangas). Only higher than Kangaroos based on home grd advantage. There again, Roosy could be a supercoach and they could make the 8?!

16. Kangaroos. What’s this, a Roos supporter, ranking them last? Well, I acknowledge it’s a possibility, but am not fussed about the player loses, Pickett aside. We could do better than most rate us (just outside the 8) as I believe the younger players are better than opposition supporters rate them. Again, however, the coach is untried which seems to create doubt in the minds of all. Regardless, we’ll be experimenting and giving younger players game time, so there will be some backward steps in the short term. No problem, the experience, plus another year of low draft picks will serve us well in the mid-longer term.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Kimbo
Top Four: Most people are tipping it to stay the same, only the order to change. Wonder how often that actually happens? That said, it seems like a safe bet.

From memory, it hasn't stayed the same at any time in the last ten years... anyone want to pull me up on this?

It won't stay the same again, unless an extraordinary series of coincidences come into play. There are so many variables which decide which team finishes where- injuries, player form, even what sort of draw they get- (a middle of the road team which plays the wooden spooners twice and the best team in the league once has an effective 2 game lead over a middle of the road team who gets their fixtures the other way round).
I'm willing to put $20 down on the table that the top four will NOT consist of all four of Adelaide, Brisbane, Port Adelaide and Collingwood, in any order, if anyone wants to take the bet.