Thread starter
#1
I kinda get the feeling that season 2001 will be make or break time for Richmond, Hawthorn and Melbourne.
RICHMOND - where do you start? Perhaps by renaming them after a Chemical Brothers album? (ie: "Dig your own hole"). Even the Roys have made the finals more times in the last 20 years than Richmond, and we haven't even had a team in the AFL for the last 4. If Richmond don't make the finals this season - then they never will with their current crop of players. Question is, while they rely on a few stars, with a decent crop of core players, does the squad as a whole have the intestinal fortitude to put an entire season together (as opposed to just 8 weeks of good footy)? Is it a culture problem?
MELBOURNE - made the GF last year. By default, however. Off-field dramas to the Roos and Lions, and injuries to Carlton left the Demons with a few short steps (and a favourable draw) to making and easy road to GF glory (only to be outdone by a far superior side on the day). Will they sink again, like in '99 (and every other year after they've had a good one)? Will they be able to keep their best side on the track? Is their best side even good enough to match it with the competition's other best sides (Dons, Lions, Roos, Blues)?? Do they have any real stars or any genuine depth to cover personnel losses? Or are they still a few years off?
HAWTHORN - been billed as the next big thing since at least '97, now. Showed promise at different stages last year (knocking off Bulldogs, Lions, Roos) - but do they have the polish to make that a regular occurence? Or are they just a bunch of pretenders?
RICHMOND - where do you start? Perhaps by renaming them after a Chemical Brothers album? (ie: "Dig your own hole"). Even the Roys have made the finals more times in the last 20 years than Richmond, and we haven't even had a team in the AFL for the last 4. If Richmond don't make the finals this season - then they never will with their current crop of players. Question is, while they rely on a few stars, with a decent crop of core players, does the squad as a whole have the intestinal fortitude to put an entire season together (as opposed to just 8 weeks of good footy)? Is it a culture problem?
MELBOURNE - made the GF last year. By default, however. Off-field dramas to the Roos and Lions, and injuries to Carlton left the Demons with a few short steps (and a favourable draw) to making and easy road to GF glory (only to be outdone by a far superior side on the day). Will they sink again, like in '99 (and every other year after they've had a good one)? Will they be able to keep their best side on the track? Is their best side even good enough to match it with the competition's other best sides (Dons, Lions, Roos, Blues)?? Do they have any real stars or any genuine depth to cover personnel losses? Or are they still a few years off?
HAWTHORN - been billed as the next big thing since at least '97, now. Showed promise at different stages last year (knocking off Bulldogs, Lions, Roos) - but do they have the polish to make that a regular occurence? Or are they just a bunch of pretenders?

