Analysis Making the Top 4 and building to a flag. 4TH is IRRELEVANT, MAKE IT TOP 3

[tribey]

The way our club works we will have 10-12 players of the 39 currently on the list playing in 2025.

Your list of 21 players above is an overestimation of who will be on our playing list in 2025. That's why 2025 will not be too late.

Between 2012-2019 the Grand finalists, on the day, have played between 12 and 16 25+ year olds with the exceptions being 1) the outlier Bulldogs in 2016 with 7, 2) Richmond in 2017 with 11 and 3) the Hawks in 2012 with 10 when they lost to Sydney, but then changed that and had 15,16 and 16 in their premiership years.

Ken can believe what he wants. He ain't going to deliver us flag success with his player selections and game plan. We have seen the best of his work and its not good enough.

At the end of 2021 there is no Westhoff, Boak, Robbie, Ebo, Broadbent, Hartlett, Paddy, Charlie, Rockliff, Jonas, Motlop, Watts, S Gray and McKenzie.

Most of these guys haven't deliver when it has counted, and when they have been at the peak of their powers, so they wont magically be able to produce premiership winning stuff in 2020 or 2021.

That was the team that beat Freo at Subiaco in the 2014 Semi.

Look at that talent. Look at their ages.

Hinkley promptly drove this group into a wall, but nah, he’ll take Rozee, Butters, Duursma and a bunch of inferior guys (Drew on our list at 27? Riiiight) to the promised land.

Sure.

 

[TeeKray]

View attachment 766863

That was the team that beat Freo at Subiaco in the 2014 Semi.

Look at that talent. Look at their ages.

Hinkley promptly drove this group into a wall, but nah, he’ll take Rozee, Butters, Duursma and a bunch of inferior guys (Drew on our list at 27? Riiiight) to the promised land.

Sure.

This group of players went on to play 1 (losing) final in 5 years - all the while adding big names like Ryder, Dixon, Rockliff, Watts and Motlop to its mix.

But it's not the coaching.

 

[Cam1870]

This group of players went on to play 1 (losing) final in 5 years - all the while adding big names like Ryder, Dixon, Rockliff, Watts and Motlop to its mix.

But it's not the coaching.

God thats depressing

 

[tribey]

This group of players went on to play 1 (losing) final in 5 years - all the while adding big names like Ryder, Dixon, Rockliff, Watts and Motlop to its mix.

But it's not the coaching.

I labour the point to the extent where even Ilias would roll his eyes, but this is where the ‘Rozee/Butters/Duursma’/‘young team’ delusion needs to be fired into the sun.

Just Wingard (21)/Polec (21)/Wines (19) as a trio in isolation coming off their collective 2014 finals series where they put in some truly stunning performances in the crucible of September against some all-time great players and great teams, let alone the rest of those guys with their best footy logically ahead of them.

And it all came to sweet ****ing nothing.

But here we are, resting our entire future on the shoulders of three kids from ONE DRAFT.

Lol.

Any faith in what we’re doing under this regime is a collective illness at this point.

 

[TeeKray]

How depressing is this thread?

Since its creation, 12 clubs have made the top 4, including 1 that didn't even exist until several years after the thread was started.

Only Gold Coast, Carlton, Essendon, Melbourne and North Melbourne sit alongside us in having not made the top 4 in this time - truly elite company.

But apparently we as a collective of Port supporters expect too much.

 

[dirty2]

#sackhinkley

 

[Janus]

I labour the point to the extent where even Ilias would roll his eyes, but this is where the ‘Rozee/Butters/Duursma’/‘young team’ delusion needs to be fired into the sun.

Just Wingard (21)/Polec (21)/Wines (19) as a trio in isolation coming off their collective 2014 finals series where they put in some truly stunning performances in the crucible of September against some all-time great players and great teams, let alone the rest of those guys with their best footy logically ahead of them.

And it all came to sweet ****ing nothing.

But here we are, resting our entire future on the shoulders of three kids from ONE DRAFT.

Lol.

Any faith in what we’re doing under this regime is a collective illness at this point.

If you're using that group as a indication of future success, Byrne-Jones, Houston, Amon, Marshall, Powell-Pepper, Bonner, Burton, Ladhams, Hayes and Farrell are all younger than Andrew Moore was. Even Wines is younger than Boak and Gray were in 2013. We're resting our entire future on the shoulder of those guys as well as Rozee, Butters and Duursma.

You're looking back at that group with nostalgia, around a time when interchange numbers weren't capped as much as they are now so guys without endurance (i.e the three guys you mentioned) could perform at their peak because they knew they could come to the bench for a rest.

Out of that list: Neade, O'Shea, Pittard, Lobbe, White, Monfries, Cornes and Schulz went down hill after 2014. Moore never arrived. Hartlett never became the elite midfielder he was supposed to be due to injuries and lack of endurance, which is why we had to go and get Powell-Pepper. Carlile got injured and then retired the next year. Pittard had exactly one good year and Trengove was exposed for being a poor defender (sounds familiar with Howard, actually).

Negativity doesn't equal reality.

 

[tribey]

But apparently we as a collective of Port supporters expect too much.

Hinkley/Koch/Thomas/Whom It May Concern p¡sses away the foundation and potential of 2014 — and all that entails from premierships to sponsorships and potential hegemony — and after 5 years of this dross when supporters finally begin to drop off and reach for pitchforks in increasing numbers, the likes of Rooch aim at the revolution instead of Marie Antoinette.

It’s wonderful.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

How depressing is this thread?

Since its creation, 12 clubs have made the top 4, including 1 that didn't even exist until several years after the thread was started.

Only Gold Coast, Carlton, Essendon, Melbourne and North Melbourne sit alongside us in having not made the top 4 in this time - truly elite company.

But apparently we as a collective of Port supporters expect too much.

Yep technically we didn't make it to top 4 in the minor round but we did get to that 1 Preliminary Final in 2014.

The AFL have loved saying that all 16 established teams have made a prelim final this century for the last 5 years or so, to justify their equalization policies. This is an update of a a post I made straight after Collingwood beat Geelong in the QF and made the PF this year.

Collingwood's 9th PF this century 2002,03,07,09,10,11,12,18 and 19. 1 Flag from 5 GFs + drawn GF

Geelong 2004,07,08,09,10,11,13,16,17,19 = 10 PF's. 3 Flags from 4 GF's

Sydney.. 2003,05,06,12,13,14,16, = 7 PF's....... 2 Flags from 5 GF's

Hawthorn 2001,08,11,12,13,14,15, = 7 PF's........ 4 Flags from 5 GF's

West Coast 2005,06,11,15,18 = 5 PF's................ 2 Flags from 4 GF's

Port Adelaide 2002,03,04,07,14 = 5 PF's.............. 1 Flag from 2 GF's

Adelaide 2002,05,06,12,17 = 5 PF's..................... 0 Flags from 1 GF

St Kilda 2004,05,08,09,10 = 5 PF's...................... 0 Flags from 2 GF + drawn GF

Brisbane 2001,02,03,04 = 4 PF's......................... 3 Flags from 4 GF's

Richmond 2001,17,18,19 = 4 PF's....................... 2 Flags from 2 GF's

Bulldogs 2008,09,10,16 = 4 PF's.......................... 1 Flag from 1 GF

North Melbourne 2000,07,14,15 = 4 PF's............... 0 from 0


That's 69 of 80 Prelim finalists of this century Everyone has made a PF this century except for Gold Coast.

Freo 3, 0 from 1, Essendon 2, 1 Flag from 2 GF's, GWS 3, 0 from 1, Melbourne 2, 0 from 1, Carlton 1.

That is what the AFL hangs its hat on re equalisation. In 2012 when the 2 new teams had entered they could say all 16 teams had made the PF this century. Actually could have said that in 2008.

13 of the 18 teams have made a PF post 2012 the GWS's 1st season and GC's 2nd. Not making one since 2012 has been GC, Carlton, Essendon, Brisbane and St Kilda

 

[tribey]

Negativity doesn't equal reality.

• 9th
• 10th
• 5th (lost to 8th at home)
• 10th
• 10th (R23 average age 26y 41d sans Motlop, Ebert, Watts)

That’s reality. And it’s not positive.

 

[GremioPower]

• 9th
• 10th
• 5th (lost to 8th at home)
• 10th
• 10th (R23 average age 26y 41d sans Motlop, Ebert, Watts)

That’s reality. And it’s not positive.

That's why 2018 would already be soul-crushing, regardless; and still we lost 6 of the last 7 games, going from Minor Round contenders to completely missing Finals.

Yet, NOTHING has happened. Then, we have finished 10th again in 2019. Guess what, NOTHING has happened!

How can anyone trust this regime?

 

[Schulzenfest]

I labour the point to the extent where even Ilias would roll his eyes, but this is where the ‘Rozee/Butters/Duursma’/‘young team’ delusion needs to be fired into the sun.

Just Wingard (21)/Polec (21)/Wines (19) as a trio in isolation coming off their collective 2014 finals series where they put in some truly stunning performances in the crucible of September against some all-time great players and great teams, let alone the rest of those guys with their best footy logically ahead of them.

And it all came to sweet ****ing nothing.

But here we are, resting our entire future on the shoulders of three kids from ONE DRAFT.

Lol.

Any faith in what we’re doing under this regime is a collective illness at this point.

Here's the thing about the young team argument. Let's assume for a moment that we actually are just a bunch of ungrateful whingeing Poort Powa fans, numbers and maths are fake news, Trent McKenzie and Cam Sutcliffe are great youthful signings, half our team in Round 23 wasn't in their late 20's or older, and we truly are a 'young team'.

Okay. So what? Ken spectacularly ****ed up the last talented young team we gave him. Why should we give him another one?

 

[Edgepower]

Yep technically we didn't make it to top 4 in the minor round but we did get to that 1 Preliminary Final in 2014.

The AFL have loved saying that all 16 established teams have made a prelim final this century for the last 5 years or so, to justify their equalization policies. This is an update of a a post I made straight after Collingwood beat Geelong in the QF and made the PF this year.

Collingwood's 9th PF this century 2002,03,07,09,10,11,12,18 and 19. 1 Flag from 5 GFs + drawn GF

Geelong 2004,07,08,09,10,11,13,16,17,19 = 10 PF's. 3 Flags from 4 GF's

Sydney.. 2003,05,06,12,13,14,16, = 7 PF's....... 2 Flags from 5 GF's

Hawthorn 2001,08,11,12,13,14,15, = 7 PF's........ 4 Flags from 5 GF's

West Coast 2005,06,11,15,18 = 5 PF's................ 2 Flags from 4 GF's

Port Adelaide 2002,03,04,07,14 = 5 PF's.............. 1 Flag from 2 GF's

Adelaide 2002,05,06,12,17 = 5 PF's..................... 0 Flags from 1 GF

St Kilda 2004,05,08,09,10 = 5 PF's...................... 0 Flags from 2 GF + drawn GF

Brisbane 2001,02,03,04 = 4 PF's......................... 3 Flags from 4 GF's

Richmond 2001,17,18,19 = 4 PF's....................... 2 Flags from 2 GF's

Bulldogs 2008,09,10,16 = 4 PF's.......................... 1 Flag from 1 GF

North Melbourne 2000,07,14,15 = 4 PF's............... 0 from 0


That's 69 of 80 Prelim finalists of this century Everyone has made a PF this century except for Gold Coast.

Freo 3, 0 from 1, Essendon 2, 1 Flag from 2 GF's, GWS 3, 0 from 1, Melbourne 2, 0 from 1, Carlton 1.

That is what the AFL hangs its hat on re equalisation. In 2012 when the 2 new teams had entered they could say all 16 teams had made the PF this century. Actually could have said that in 2008.

13 of the 18 teams have made a PF post 2012 the GWS's 1st season and GC's 2nd. Not making one since 2012 has been GC, Carlton, Essendon, Brisbane and St Kilda

Reads worse for us if you were to do the same for just this decade

 

[Janus]

Here's the thing about the young team argument. Let's assume for a moment that we actually are just a bunch of ungrateful whingeing Poort Powa fans, numbers and maths are fake news, Trent McKenzie and Cam Sutcliffe are great youthful signings, half our team in Round 23 wasn't in their late 20's or older, and we truly are a 'young team'.

Okay. So what? Ken spectacularly f’ed up the last talented young team we gave him. Why should we give him another one?

Because he helped build it, since he’s one of the three members of the list management committee?

 

[Schulzenfest]

Because he helped build it, since he’s one of the three members of the list management committee?

This is such a non-sequitur that I don't know where to start refuting your point, because I can't even figure out what your point is. He's the senior coach. Even if he was good at building lists (and a quick glance at the amount of bog average 25+ year olds on our list and our appalling lack of KPP depth will tell you that he absolutely isn't), that's a completely different skill to being the senior coach of a football club.

And he was an abject failure with the last extremely talented list featuring the likes of Gray, Boak, Wines, Wingard, Polec, Hartlett, Ebert, Westhoff, Jonas, Ryder, Dixon, Hombsch, Pittard in their prime that we gave him to work with. Why would we expect the next extremely talented list he gets to work with to be any different?

 

[Janus]

This is such a non-sequitur that I don't know where to start refuting your point, because I can't even figure out what your point is. He's the senior coach. Even if he was good at building lists (and a quick glance at the amount of bog average 25+ year olds on our list and our appalling lack of KPP depth will tell you that he absolutely isn't), that's a completely different skill to being the senior coach of a football club.

And he was an abject failure with the last extremely talented list featuring the likes of Gray, Boak, Wines, Wingard, Polec, Hartlett, Ebert, Westhoff, Jonas, Ryder, Dixon, Hombsch, Pittard in their prime that we gave him to work with. Why would we expect the next extremely talented list he gets to work with to be any different?

You know you’re scraping the barrel when you have to list Hombsch and Pittard with the rest of those guys. And that’s 13 players. Last time I checked a list was 40 players.

It’s the fact that most of those guys are still playing that adds to the new players and elevates them higher. This is honestly the stupid generational wars on a microcosm level - it’s meant to be that the experience helps the youthful exuberance to be better than they were at the same age. That’s how the human race has surged upward at every generation - learning from the mistakes of the generation before. It’s not a competition.

In 2013/14 we had guys like Carlile, Cornes, Cassisi and Schulz running around. Once those guys left there was an experience vacuum and we had players doing stupid s**t over and over again because they had no one to learn from.

Phase out players who don’t meet the standard, encourage the young players to be better than the previous group by holding them to a higher account and you’ll win a flag by the fundamentals of universal law.

 

[Schulzenfest]

You know you’re scraping the barrel when you have to list Hombsch and Pittard with the rest of those guys. And that’s 13 players. Last time I checked a list was 40 players.

Then you've forgotten how good Hombsch and Pittard were at their best. And there are others such as Cornes, Schulz, Carlile, Monfries, White, Impey, Clurey, DBJ, Houston, SPP, Rockliff, Motlop, Watts etc who were here for some but not all of that time period so I didn't include them.

And as for your second point, Jason Castagna and Nathan Broad are two time premiership players. You don't need 40 superstars.

It’s the fact that most of those guys are still playing that adds to the new players and elevates them higher. This is honestly the stupid generational wars on a microcosm level - it’s meant to be that the experience helps the youthful exuberance to be better than they were at the same age. That’s how the human race has surged upward at every generation - learning from the mistakes of the generation before. It’s not a competition.

In 2013/14 we had guys like Carlile, Cornes, Cassisi and Schulz running around. Once those guys left there was an experience vacuum and we had players doing stupid s**t over and over again because they had no one to learn from.

Phase out players who don’t meet the standard, encourage the young players to be better than the previous group by holding them to a higher account and you’ll win a flag by the fundamentals of universal law.

Okay cool, but none of this has any relevance whatsoever to the fundamental point of 'Ken stuffed up our last good list, why won't he stuff up the next one'. You're just arguing a completely different point.

 

[Janus]

Then you've forgotten how good Hombsch and Pittard were at their best. And there are others such as Cornes, Schulz, Carlile, Monfries, White, Impey, Clurey, DBJ, Houston, SPP, Rockliff, Motlop, Watts etc who were here for some but not all of that time period so I didn't include them.

And as for your second point, Jason Castagna and Nathan Broad are two time premiership players. You don't need 40 superstars.

List management is fluid, but there’s a definitive list every year. If you’re including Powell-Pepper, Clurey, Watts, Rockliff and Motlop you can’t include Cornes, Carlile, Schulz, White and Monfries because the first group of players replaced the second group of players.

And I know you don’t need superstars. You do need competent AFL players who can execute though.

Okay cool, but none of this has any relevance whatsoever to the fundamental point of 'Ken stuffed up our last good list, why won't he stuff up the next one'. You're just arguing a completely different point.

I don’t think the previous list was actually good. It had no depth, which is what a lot of list analysts said the problem with it was.

The list we have now has a couple of holes but if you think about it, the following played less than three quarters of the season:

Wines
Dixon
Watts
Hartlett
Ebert
Burton

And we were a 1 point GWS loss away from playing finals, even with the North Melbourne debacle. Those guys play the majority of the season, and we win at least two more games. We aren’t that bad, and we are getting better.

 

[tribey]

Dido - No White Flag.mp3

 

[Amarula]

And Castagna and Broad are two-time premiers because they have important roles to play in a strong team structure.
We do not have a team structure, strong or otherwise.
The job of a successful coach in any sport is to consistently turn 22 individuals into a team whereby the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. This Hinkley has emphatically been unable to do, and without major internal change he is totally incapable of doing in the future.

 

[Janus]

Reading Buckenara's article on Port, and he's saying what I've been saying:

"It boils down to two key questions:

1. Does the group have the burning desire to achieve the ultimate success?

2. Are there too many individuals and players with self-interest?

I have been involved in the football industry for a long time as a player, recruiter and administrator and, along the journey, I’ve learnt many lessons about what it takes to build a successful team and culture.

I’m not saying that this Port Adelaide playing group is too self-interested, because I don’t know that — only the players themselves will know this deep down.

Sometimes coaches can’t even pick this trait within their group and it’s one of the biggest challenges of being a coach in today’s football where the rewards for individuals — contracts and individual accolades — are so big it can impact a player’s priorities when team success must be the motivation. In effect, team success is a bonus on top of a lucrative long-term deal.

While no one can blame a player for making a decision based on securing his long-term future, there needs to be a balance between personal gain and team success. After all, the most successful teams of the modern era — Geelong (2007-2011), Hawthorn (2012-15) and now Richmond (2017-19) — all have one thing in common: Making personal sacrifices to achieve sustained team success.

There needs to be some robust and honest discussions within Port Adelaide over the summer, centred around one key question: ‘Does team and club success mean enough to us as a playing group?’

The list is good enough to be a finals contender and if the hunger and desire is strong enough then this group would be capable of challenging for a top-four position next year. The problem is, Port Adelaide has been so inconsistent for so long. How can we still be questioning a group’s hunger to succeed?"

Dougal Howard was a player who was too self-interested. As soon as he put up his hand and said 'I think I'm a better as a defender', it was time to go.

Ditto Ryder. “Scotty Lycett was out of the team and I didn’t even start in the ruck, I think little things like that towards the end of the year made my mind up. Obviously that was disappointing for me but I find myself moving with an opportunity I’m very happy about." I mean, seriously? He was more concerned about starting in the ruck than giving a young up and coming ruck like Ladhams a shot at it?

I said last year that we got rid of Polec and Wingard because they were players who were more concerned about themselves than the team. But those guys are easy to spot, because they usually isolate themselves from their teammates. They have no concept of team ethos at all.

The harder ones to spot are the players who say the right things and genuinely enjoy being around their teammates but they aren't willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. The guys who have the balance between individual performance and team performance skewed toward the individual. The 'I'll play as a team as long as I get mine' types, where it should be 'I'll play as a team, and if I get mine, great. If not, that's fine too.'

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

There needs to be some robust and honest discussions within Port Adelaide over the summer, centred around one key question: ‘Does team and club success mean enough to us as a playing group?’

The whole club has been too dishonest. It starts at the top. The fish rots from the head down. When the bullshiter in chief is dishonest then you can't expect the rest of the club not to be dishonest.

 

[raptalia]

The problem is we know what should happen but it never does. You wander how many 9-12 finiishes it will take before Koch realises that major change is needed.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Reading Buckenara's article on Port, and he's saying what I've been saying:

"It boils down to two key questions:

1. Does the group have the burning desire to achieve the ultimate success?

2. Are there too many individuals and players with self-interest?

I have been involved in the football industry for a long time as a player, recruiter and administrator and, along the journey, I’ve learnt many lessons about what it takes to build a successful team and culture.

I’m not saying that this Port Adelaide playing group is too self-interested, because I don’t know that — only the players themselves will know this deep down.

Sometimes coaches can’t even pick this trait within their group and it’s one of the biggest challenges of being a coach in today’s football where the rewards for individuals — contracts and individual accolades — are so big it can impact a player’s priorities when team success must be the motivation. In effect, team success is a bonus on top of a lucrative long-term deal.

While no one can blame a player for making a decision based on securing his long-term future, there needs to be a balance between personal gain and team success. After all, the most successful teams of the modern era — Geelong (2007-2011), Hawthorn (2012-15) and now Richmond (2017-19) — all have one thing in common: Making personal sacrifices to achieve sustained team success.

There needs to be some robust and honest discussions within Port Adelaide over the summer, centred around one key question: ‘Does team and club success mean enough to us as a playing group?’

The list is good enough to be a finals contender and if the hunger and desire is strong enough then this group would be capable of challenging for a top-four position next year. The problem is, Port Adelaide has been so inconsistent for so long. How can we still be questioning a group’s hunger to succeed?"

Dougal Howard was a player who was too self-interested. As soon as he put up his hand and said 'I think I'm a better as a defender', it was time to go.

Ditto Ryder. “Scotty Lycett was out of the team and I didn’t even start in the ruck, I think little things like that towards the end of the year made my mind up. Obviously that was disappointing for me but I find myself moving with an opportunity I’m very happy about." I mean, seriously? He was more concerned about starting in the ruck than giving a young up and coming ruck like Ladhams a shot at it?

I said last year that we got rid of Polec and Wingard because they were players who were more concerned about themselves than the team. But those guys are easy to spot, because they usually isolate themselves from their teammates. They have no concept of team ethos at all.

The harder ones to spot are the players who say the right things and genuinely enjoy being around their teammates but they aren't willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. The guys who have the balance between individual performance and team performance skewed toward the individual. The 'I'll play as a team as long as I get mine' types, where it should be 'I'll play as a team, and if I get mine, great. If not, that's fine too.'

You love talking about the culture of the playing group and flatout refuse to acknowledge the wider club culture that drives that player culture.

The AFL doesn't care if we win, so David Koch doesn't prioritise winning, and doesn't hold his subordinates accountable for poor performance.

No playing group will foster a premiership culture while the club leadership don't drive that culture.

 

[tribey]

You love talking about the culture of the playing group and flatout refuse to acknowledge the wider club culture that drives that player culture.

The AFL doesn't care if we win, so David Koch doesn't prioritise winning, and doesn't hold his subordinates accountable for poor performance.

No playing group will foster a premiership culture while the club leadership don't drive that culture.

It’s taken 5 years, but we’ve well and truly hit upon the Carlton/Melbourne draft treadmill now.

Let your stalwarts’ careers bleed out with nothing to show for it, trade your better 23-26yo’s for magic beans, and HiT tHe DrAfT for a bunch of kids who can’t be judged for at least 3-5 years, absolving everyone from the President to the Coach of all accountability for sh¡t onfield performance.