Opinion Non-Crows AFL 4: The Centre Cannot Hold

[Vader]

Vader never said they identified they peaked in 2017 immediately after 2017. They did identify that was correctly the case though (at the end of 2019)

We had the bulk of our squad available in 2018-19 and didn't want to lose any players. It's why we added Gibbs. As soon as that didn't work because we had overrated the capabilities of our squad, then we started pushing out anyone of value

Correct.

In 2017 we made the GF.
In 2018 we missed the finals on the back of a horrendous injury list, courtesy of Burton & Hass' staggering incompetence. The club thought that this result was an abberation, and (understandably) persevered with (mostly) the same team in 2019.
In 2019 the players went on strike, and it became abundantly clear that the window had closed. The decision was made to rebuild the list from the ground up.

 

[relapse]

Not so laughable unfortunately. Kane is just playing the numbers.

We enter 2022 with the most inexperienced list in the AFL in both age and games played. Here is were clubs have finished when they were the 18th least experienced in both games and age over the past 5 years.

2020 - Gold Coast - 14th
2019 - Gold Coast - Wooden Spoon
2018 - Brisbane - Wooden Spoon
2016 - Brisbane - 17th

Combine that with the fact we have finished last and 4th last.

I think the opposite, I think it says a lot about his lack of footy IQ.

Last year was a classic example, "The Crows will be bottom next year because they lost Brad Crouch".

He couldn't even grasp the concept of our younger players improving, his opinion was based off his belief that in 2020 the Crows had Brad Crouch and didn't in 2021 so they were worse, it's simpleton logic.

Yes we are the youngest team, but guys like Schoenberg, Sholl, Jones, McHenry are entering their third year of regularly playing and will be better than they were in 2021. We have also Matt Crouch back and have brought in Dawson.

Irrespective of what that dullard Kane Cornes thinks, our list is in better shape going into 2022 than it was in 2021

 

[ringo200]

I have said before that if we had Dangerfield in 2016-2017, I think we would have potentially snagged a flag in one of those years.

People forget just how good we were in 2016, we were sitting 2nd in 2016 going into the final round. If you threw Danger into that side we potentially may have won 1 or 2 more games in 2016 and finished first or second.

Crazy our 2007-2009 drafting didn't net a premiership.

Danger, Sloane, Walker, Talia, Phil Davis, Gunston is a lot of quality in a short space of time especially considering the draft picks available to us.

 

[Mego Red]

You as blind as a bat old son.

Port played some pretty good footy in 2020 when they lost by a kick to the eventual premiers in a preliminary final.

Hinkley has done a pretty good job for the Power. I feel he will be ultimately unsuccessful in winning a flag, but those lambasting him have short memories and have obviously forgotten the Primus years.

So - he'll end up coaching the record number of games without achieving ultimate success. Surely that means Port have been happy with the kind of middling tease as a club that no other club has been satisfied with?

 

[GROTTO]

Crazy our 2007-2009 drafting didn't net a premiership.

Danger, Sloane, Walker, Talia, Phil Davis, Gunston is a lot of quality in a short space of time especially considering the draft picks available to us.

Since 98 we have had genuine chances to win a flag or fluke one even. (2012)

We just didnt take them.

 

[Mego Red]

2017 we finished 1st and made a grand final. Then lost Lever & Cameron.

2018 - finished 12-10 and then lost McGovern.

2019 - finished 10-12 then lost Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Jacobs, Jenkins.

2020 - finished 3-14 bottom of ladder. Lost Brad Crouch & Hartigan.

2021 - finished 7-15 and slightly improved on the previous year. First offseason since 2016 that we have not lost a required player and 2nd offseason since 2013 (betts) /2017 (Gibbs) that we managed to poach a required player from another club.

The more we gutted - the worse we got.

Lever was a loss.

McGovern and Cameron - one got obviously better, one got worse. Saved us a bunch of cash - though you'd rather keep the player that drastically improved if you could do these things with hindsight.

I wouldn't have argued to keep any of Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Jacobs, Jenkins, Brad Crouch or Hartigan. By then, we were rebuilding, and I wouldn't consider any of them required. IF we required them, they would have stayed.

 

[Mego Red]

I have said before that if we had Dangerfield in 2016-2017, I think we would have potentially snagged a flag in one of those years.

People forget just how good we were in 2016, we were sitting 2nd in 2016 going into the final round. If you threw Danger into that side we potentially may have won 1 or 2 more games in 2016 and finished first or second.

If we'd managed to get Kernahan, we might have won in the 90s.

The discussion is irrelevant, as Dangerfield wanted to be in Victoria. It's not like we got outbid and he just wanted to go.

 

[Vader]

Lever was a loss.

McGovern and Cameron - one got obviously better, one got worse. Saved us a bunch of cash - though you'd rather keep the player that drastically improved if you could do these things with hindsight.

I wouldn't have argued to keep any of Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Jacobs, Jenkins, Brad Crouch or Hartigan. By then, we were rebuilding, and I wouldn't consider any of them required. IF we required them, they would have stayed.

Of the list, only Lever, Cameron & McGovern departed before the rebuild decision was made.

 

[Scorpus]

Of the list, only Lever, Cameron & McGovern departed before the rebuild decision was made.

We also could have forced Cameron and McGovern to stay if we really wanted to, as both were contracted

 

[Vader]

We also could have forced Cameron and McGovern to stay if we really wanted to, as both were contracted

Cameron is the only one who really hurt. Doedee has been more than adequate as a Lever replacement, but Murphy is very much a poor man's version of Cameron.

McNuggets' departure should only be seen as a win for the Crows.

 

[AFC979810]

I think the opposite, I think it says a lot about his lack of footy IQ.

Last year was a classic example, "The Crows will be bottom next year because they lost Brad Crouch".

He couldn't even grasp the concept of our younger players improving, his opinion was based off the concept that in 2020 the Crows had Brad Crouch and didn't in 2021 so they were worse, it's simpleton logic.

Yes we are the youngest team, but guys like Schoenberg, Sholl, Jones, McHenry are entering their third year of regularly playing and will be better than they were in 2021. We have also Matt Crouch back and have brought in Dawson.

Iirrespective of what that dullard Kane Cornes thinks, our list is in better shape going into 2022 than it was in 2021

He wasn't really wrong about us in 2021. We were rather rubbish.

We finished bottom four and 2 of our 7 wins came in the last month of the season against 2 teams (Hawks/North) that were actively tanking to get better draft picks.

He is a click bait journalist and a crappy fireman. But he is also smart in playing the numbers. Apart from blind optimism and the hope we can be the one suprise packet of 2022 - there aren't a lot of signs pointing to a rise up the ladder.

And look - I understand the optimism in Preseason. Its easy to get excited about Schoenberg, Sholl, Jones, Mchenry. I get it. We all love the AFC.

But every bottom 4 club has exciting youngsters coming through. Shit - tell me you wouldn't be excited about Norths talent. Stephenson (pick 6), Zurharr, Larkey, Davies Uniakey (pick 4), Tarryn Thomas (pick 8), McKay (pick 21) are all under 24 years of age and have 35 - 75 games. Add in the #1 pick and Will Phillips and that's probably better than what we have on paper.

 

[AFC979810]

Brisbane didn’t win the spoon in 2018.

My bad they were Bottom 4 in 2018.

In 2017 (where the typo was) they were the youngest list in age and games played and won the spoon.

My point still stands. Huzzah.

 

[AFC979810]

Cameron is the only one who really hurt. Doedee has been more than adequate as a Lever replacement, but Murphy is very much a poor man's version of Cameron.

McNuggets' departure should only be seen as a win for the Crows.

So none of these departures hurt us. Which is why we went from a 1st on the ladder and a Grand Final to the wooden spoon in the space of 3 short seasons.

Didn't miss Lever at all. All Australian defenders grow on trees. Could never play Lever and Doedee in the same side.

The one thing I know about good AFL sides and that is - there is a limit on how many good players you want. Too many is a bad thing. I mean look at those suckers Melbourne. Had two All Australian defenders this year (what a waste!!).

 

[Vader]

So none of these departures hurt us. Which is why we went from a 1st on the ladder and a Grand Final to the wooden spoon in the space of 3 short seasons.

Didn't miss Lever at all. All Australian defenders grow on trees. Could never play Lever and Doedee in the same side.

The one thing I know about good AFL sides and that is - there is a limit on how many good players you want. Too many is a bad thing. I mean look at those suckers Melbourne. Had two All Australian defenders this year (what a waste!!).

McNuggets didn't hurt us - if anything, we've gained as a result of his departure.
Doedee was more than adequate as a Lever replacement.
Cameron hurt, big time.

The rest of them left after the rebuild decision was made, so they're irrelevant to this discussion.

Given what Melbourne paid Lever, we would have been batshit insane to even contemplate matching it.

 

[AFC979810]

McGovern and Cameron - one got obviously better, one got worse. Saved us a bunch of cash - though you'd rather keep the player that drastically improved if you could do these things with hindsight.

But then again with regards to McGovern - you need to look at the big picture.

In a forward line of Walker, Jenkins, Lynch, Betts, Cameron - McGovern is a brilliant player. Its the Des Headland effect. In a midfield of Voss, Black, Akermanis and Power - Headland could excel. When he went to Freo - he was a shell of the man he was at Brisbane.

Dynasty sides can afford to (and want to) lose 1 or 2 players like this along the way. The problem comes when losing players like this isnt the exception its the rule.

 

[AFC979810]

McNuggets didn't hurt us - if anything, we've gained as a result of his departure.
Doedee was more than adequate as a Lever replacement.
Cameron hurt, big time.

The rest of them left after the rebuild decision was made, so they're irrelevant to this discussion.

Given what Melbourne paid Lever, we would have been batshit insane to even contemplate matching it

Why?

Was that money better spent on Gibbs?

Was the Lever money better spent on the nobody we brought into the club at the end of 2018. Or the nobody we brought in to the club a the end of 2019. Or the nobody we brought in at the end of 2020?

Between 2017 and 2020 we have lost Lever, Cameron, Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Hartigan, Betts, Atkins, Greenwood, Crouch and we brought in nobody. Where the hell has the money gone?

Surely it wasn't all saved for Dawson's measly 600k year deal from 2022 - 2026?

 

[arrowman]

But that's the issue with how fine the line is between success and failure at AFL level.

Malcolm Blight was an umpires decision away from being in that category and having "failed at 4 clubs".

Paul Roos and John Worsfold are both a kick away from being in the near enough category and also a kick away from being dual premiership coaches.

Ross Lyon an unlucky bounce of the ball from exiting the near enough category.

Nathan Buckley a dom sheed kick away from it.

John Longmuire is in that category if Gunston doesn't hit the post late in the 4th quarter of the 2012 grand final.

Why anyone would want to fire a coach who is good enough to get his team to the top 4 of an 18 team league in the previous season is just crazy to me.

Can't argue with that. And that's why I'll give Craig a pass as our coach. OK there's only one true measure of success etc, but he wasn't a "bad / failed" coach as such. On the other hand, his time ran out, for whatever reason(s) and so he joins the long list of "couldabeen" coaches.

Obviously when it comes to hiring and firing coaches, there's a lot of factors such as the stage the club is at / whether the coach is the right one for that time (rebuild, development, finishing touches etc). Not to mention probably the internal "vibe" that tells the club whether the coach has "lost" the players and it's time for a new voice.

So when it comes to Scott - yeah, he's done nothing sackable in terms of team performance, I agree. Is he "under pressure"? Well, if "under pressure" means the only thing that saves him is taking the next step (GF), then that's not IMO fair on him, given the state of their playing list. On the other hand, when the cliff comes (surely this year or next), will the club decide to stay with the 11+ year veteran, or bring in a new voice to go with the new, younger playing list? (Surely they do).

 

[Thetrader15]

Well I think it was a combination of that. Plus the camp. Plus the fact that we were completely incapable of keeping best 22 players.

How the hell can all the other clubs keep their stars. Brisbane/Geelong/Hawthorn have all managed to keep their stars through extended dynasty's. Our little brother has had pretty similar success as we have had between the years of 2009 - 2021. Compare the players that have walked out on them.

Why were we the only club that couldn't afford to keep good players between 2009-2021?

I think the player retention has a bit to do with how good we have been at selecting players late in the draft.

Players like Gunston, Cameron, Keath, Greenwood, McGovern, Lyons, Tippett in fact almost everyone but Lever and Dangerfield were drafted late. This means they probably aren't at that high end of salaries and most left before their prime, going to bigger offers based on potential (Cameron, Gunston, McGovern, Lyons, Lever), rather than what they had delivered at that point in their career.

So we have drafted and developed well, but we have had a socialist salary cap policy, so those top end players can get a lot more at other clubs, but the bottom end are paid more highly (we didn't lose many on the list who weren't best 25 - look how long CEY, Brodie Martin, etc hung around) looking for more opportunities.

This policy also means we aren't attracting new players to the club. Why would Dixon / Rockliff / Polec / Ryder / Lycett come to us on $500k when he can get $800k down the road?

We've now changed this policy, so attracting players is going to be easier (e.g. Dawson we outbid Port), we just have to trust our recruiting staff pick the right ones to pay up for.

 

[Vader]

Why?

Was that money better spent on Gibbs?

Was the Lever money better spent on the nobody we brought into the club at the end of 2018. Or the nobody we brought in to the club a the end of 2019. Or the nobody we brought in at the end of 2020?

Between 2017 and 2020 we have lost Lever, Cameron, Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Hartigan, Betts, Atkins, Greenwood, Crouch and we brought in nobody. Where the hell has the money gone?

Surely it wasn't all saved for Dawson's measly 600k year deal from 2022 - 2026?

Because he'd done SFA to that point in his career, and matching Melbourne would have made him the highest paid player on our entire list - at 20 years of age.

 

[Scorpus]

Between 2017 and 2020 we have lost Lever, Cameron, Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Hartigan, Betts, Atkins, Greenwood, Crouch and we brought in nobody. Where the hell has the money gone?

Surely it wasn't all saved for Dawson's measly 600k year deal from 2022 - 2026?

Extending the contracts of Lynch, Douglas, Mackay, Sloane, Walker, Matt Crouch, Milera, Jones and various draftees - plus paying for Gibbs, and also paying for Jenkins and Betts to play at other clubs

 

[AFC979810]

So when it comes to Scott - yeah, he's done nothing sackable in terms of team performance, I agree. Is he "under pressure"? Well, if "under pressure" means the only thing that saves him is taking the next step (GF), then that's not IMO fair on him, given the state of their playing list. On the other hand, when the cliff comes (surely this year or next), will the club decide to stay with the 11+ year veteran, or bring in a new voice to go with the new, younger playing list? (Surely they do).

I don't disagree. Scott is 100% gone once Geelong have eeeked out every last inch of this playing group (and rightly so). They are trying to squeeze out one last flag, which IMO is the right thing to do.

I don't care what your list profile is - if you have finished top 4 in the last 2 seasons you try and win it all.

 

[AFC979810]

Extending the contracts of Lynch, Douglas, Mackay, Sloane, Walker, Matt Crouch, Milera, Jones and various draftees - plus paying for Gibbs, and also paying for Jenkins and Betts to play at other clubs

How did Richmond do it? Without losing al their stars?

How did Geelong do it over the past 10 years? Hawthorn?

You are acting like we are the only ones operating under salary cap conditions

 

[Thetrader15]

Why?

Was that money better spent on Gibbs?

Was the Lever money better spent on the nobody we brought into the club at the end of 2018. Or the nobody we brought in to the club a the end of 2019. Or the nobody we brought in at the end of 2020?

Between 2017 and 2020 we have lost Lever, Cameron, Betts, Greenwood, Keath, Hartigan, Betts, Atkins, Greenwood, Crouch and we brought in nobody. Where the hell has the money gone?

Surely it wasn't all saved for Dawson's measly 600k year deal from 2022 - 2026?

We clear the space to front end deals, and then target the right players from this year on, the right players being the key.

We don't want a Rockliff, Watts, Motlop, Linday Thomas, etc.

We need guys who will be top 10 or 15 for us.

 

[Thetrader15]

How did Richmond do it? Without losing al their stars?

How did Geelong do it over the past 10 years? Hawthorn?

You are acting like we are the only ones operating under salary cap conditions

Richmond lost their 2nd tier, because they pay their top line players more than we have.

Ellis, Townsend, Chol, CCJ, Markov, Miles, Ellis, Butler...they also had a really good "team", and I'd say each of their role players is good in that environment, rather than being a star player another club may want to attract.

 

[Scorpus]

How did Richmond do it? Without losing al their stars?

How did Geelong do it over the past 10 years? Hawthorn?

You are acting like we are the only ones operating under salary cap conditions

By not over-paying mid-tier players and min-maxing the list. Stars + depth and not much between