Prediction Our Rebuild Will Ultimately Fail - Prove Yourself Correct - 5YR Ladder Prediction

[Scorpus]

We lost by 48 points, I don't think Danger alone makes up that difference. Tigers at home were amazing with their pressure, 2 more flags proved that.

So much tougher for interstate teams.

Part of our big loss was mental. We were in it at quarter time, on the ropes at half time and capitulated after half time when Dusty ran riot.

Having Dangerfield in his prime would have made us much stronger both on field and mentally. The belief of having one of the best players in the competition would have gone a long way especially if we could have asserted that dominance early in the match.

And there's no way Graham could have tagged peak Danger out of the match like he did with Sloane while also kicking goals himself.

I reckon we win it with Dangerfield

 

[1970crow]

I just feel like there is no one really tacking to be elite in the midfield. Who is going to be our Dusty, Petracca, Oliver, Danger? etc

I'm a big Berry fan and he is elite defensively but the proper elite players are elite offensively and he's a long way off that.

I don't see us making the top 4 in the next 5 years. If we didn't make finals all together I wouldn't blink to be honest.

The point of a rebuild is to have a crack at a flag and rip on the 2017 team all you want but I consider it a success. The current rebuilds ceiling is just scraping into the top 8, not a proper threat to anyone. I hope our list management team recognises this and hits the draft/trading hard but that would be conceding that stuffed up the early stage of the rebuild; and we know they won't do that.

Yep, the first picks from a few years ago is why I reckon this version of a rebuild is destined to peak at bottom of the 8, at best. I personally don’t blame talent ID at all, but fact remains that from 5 years of first picks you need more than Fog looking like he’s par for his pick. Milera, Gooch, McAsey and Jones are all miles off performing anywhere near the pick that they were selected at. That is the foundation that our current rebuild is built upon. And then there’s the fact that of the early picks that we’ve used well the last 3 years, none were drafted as a gun mid. We hope Rachele and Rankine transition, but right now only a supreme optimist would be confident that they’ll be beating the current elite mids of the comp over 4 quarters.

We need 2 more years with top 6 picks and we need to select mids and we need them to become elite. If we put everything into getting this list up the ladder then we’re 100% going nowhere fast.

 

[1970crow]

I can't believe how the club hasn't put more emphasis on top line midfielders with our first pick in the dfaft continuously .
It just seems like the first crucial building block in a rebuild

Our midfield has been stacked the last few years.

 

[1970crow]

Part of our big loss was mental. We were in it at quarter time, on the ropes at half time and capitulated after half time when Dusty ran riot.

Having Dangerfield in his prime would have made us much stronger both on field and mentally. The belief of having one of the best players in the competition would have gone a long way especially if we could have asserted that dominance early in the match.

And there's no way Graham could have tagged peak Danger out of the match like he did with Sloane while also kicking goals himself.

I reckon we win it with Dangerfield

Danger would have been battered to s**t and crawled to the GF as many others did.

 

[skittlebrew]

Part of our big loss was mental. We were in it at quarter time, on the ropes at half time and capitulated after half time when Dusty ran riot.

Having Dangerfield in his prime would have made us much stronger both on field and mentally. The belief of having one of the best players in the competition would have gone a long way especially if we could have asserted that dominance early in the match.

And there's no way Graham could have tagged peak Danger out of the match like he did with Sloane while also kicking goals himself.

I reckon we win it with Dangerfield

We definitely play better no doubt, but I think even the best player in the comp isn't worth a 48 point differential.

Take a top side like Geelong now vs a bottom side like North. Geelong would beat them in virtually every 1v1 matchup across the board but lets say Geelong has 3 elite players and North has zero, does Geelong beat North by 150 points when they play each other? Of course not, 1 player isn't that much difference.

I think playing at home is a significant advantage, everyone of our players plays better imo. Does having Danger and a home ground advantage change a 48 point difference? I think the stronger argument is it doesn't. But I will go against the odds and say we could've.

 

[relapse]

We lost by 48 points, I don't think Danger alone makes up that difference. Tigers at home were amazing with their pressure, 2 more flags proved that.

So much tougher for interstate teams.

It's all hypothetical, but I think you have to look at it deeper than just the 2017 GF result in isolation.

We lost by 48 points in 2017 because weren't prepared mentally for the GF.

My belief is that is had we kept Danger we most probably would have made the GF in 2016 and potentially won the flag that year. The experience from 2016 would have made 2017 a completely different scenario.

I honestly think that he cost us a flag in 16 or 17, but at the end of the day we'll just never know.

 

[Golumless]

It's absolutely zero surprise teams with garbage admin (North, Dons etc) have performed so poorly on the field. Look at the havoc Burton caused for us. There's so many moving parts you need to get right but the right list is one of if not at the top.

Lol we wish we would've had a handful of flags. I'm as big of a realist as they come and obviously we got pumped in the granny but I just wonder how it would've gone done if it was held at Adeladie Oval. Tigers always looked like a different team here. Furthermore if we never lost Danger, his inclusion would've really changed the team. Obviously neither would've happened but is a better judge of what we tried to build.

It's kind of why I said we'd jag multiple, because it was a group that survived a hell of a lot of mismanagement (and the rot that it sets in) and still made it to a grand final instead of just stalling out into a mid table side. In a lot of senses we had the talent to morph into a dynasty and completely squandered it due to our inept administration.

Even Burton is more a canary in the coalmine then a club altering force. To get to the point a club is that unattractive to work at that he's considered a viable option for GM showed we've been in the pits for a long time.

 

[Golumless]

We definitely play better no doubt, but I think even the best player in the comp isn't worth a 48 point differential.

Take a top side like Geelong now vs a bottom side like North. Geelong would beat them in virtually every 1v1 matchup across the board but lets say Geelong has 3 elite players and North has zero, does Geelong beat North by 150 points when they play each other? Of course not, 1 player isn't that much difference.

I think playing at home is a significant advantage, everyone of our players plays better imo. Does having Danger and a home ground advantage change a 48 point difference? I think the stronger argument is it doesn't. But I will go against the odds and say we could've.

The point differential doesn't matter, seeing it's more a random, one-off occurance then reflective of where the two clubs were at.

That said, with the same conditions, Dangerfield likely changes Adelaides win condition that match. I.e. they needed to knock out Richmond early (and we were probably 2 misses away from doing so, 7.3 instead of 4.5 early into the second likely turns an 8 goal loss into a 10 goal win with how that Adelaide team snowballed). With Danger, it likely gives Adelaide enough midfield strength to be able to hold out in a slugging match if we didn't, especially as we're less reliant on Sloane who had a very hot/cold streak to his game, in a side who only really had that gear when McGovern (and to a lesser extent Greenwood) were fit.

Though honestly, with Dangerfield, we probably end that season 20-2 and just run away with it all.

 

[AFC979810]

Part of our big loss was mental. We were in it at quarter time, on the ropes at half time and capitulated after half time when Dusty ran riot.

Having Dangerfield in his prime would have made us much stronger both on field and mentally. The belief of having one of the best players in the competition would have gone a long way especially if we could have asserted that dominance early in the match.

And there's no way Graham could have tagged peak Danger out of the match like he did with Sloane while also kicking goals himself.

I reckon we win it with Dangerfield

Grand finals also have the ability to get out of hand very very quickly. Momentum in those games is huge.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

2023 - 12th
2024 - 10th
2025 - 6th
2026 - 11th
2027 - 5th

2x finals in next 5 seasons but not contending

 

[jackster83]

Grand finals also have the ability to get out of hand very very quickly. Momentum in those games is huge.

Teams seem to just give up in GF's these days. The Bulldogs did in the final quarter in 2021, while GWS and Sydney in recent years were truly pathetic.

We tended to give up under Pyke when things weren't going our way, which Nicks to his credit does seem to have addressed.

 

[rabidcrow]

We definitely play better no doubt, but I think even the best player in the comp isn't worth a 48 point differential.

Take a top side like Geelong now vs a bottom side like North. Geelong would beat them in virtually every 1v1 matchup across the board but lets say Geelong has 3 elite players and North has zero, does Geelong beat North by 150 points when they play each other? Of course not, 1 player isn't that much difference.

I think playing at home is a significant advantage, everyone of our players plays better imo. Does having Danger and a home ground advantage change a 48 point difference? I think the stronger argument is it doesn't. But I will go against the odds and say we could've.

The final result was all about momentum. Remember we were in front until half into the second quarter and only 9 points down at half time. We just didn’t have a gun in the middle to wrestle the momentum back - crowd got right behind the Tigers - and they ran away with it.

Personally I think if Douglas’s centre clearance after half time didn’t get smothered and go the other way for a quick goal we could have been right in the game again


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[AFC979810]

Personally I think if Douglas’s centre clearance after half time didn’t get smothered and go the other way for a quick goal we could have been right in the game again


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Absolutely. Similar to Knight not falling over with 1:30 left in the first half. He doesn't slip he walks into an open goal and we go into half time 4 points down with a bit of fire.

 

[WeeBlake]

In Eddie Betts’ book (beautifully light, conversational, straight-talking book) he says the team felt they were beaten at half time, and tried to rev themselves up, but couldn’t really convince themselves.

 

[1970crow]

In Eddie Betts’ book (beautifully light, conversational, straight-talking book) he says the team felt they were beaten at half time, and tried to rev themselves up, but couldn’t really convince themselves.

they would have known tigers were all over them and they couldn't keep up.

 

[GreyCrow]

2023 - 10th
2024 - 8th
2025 - 10th
2026 - 7th
2027 - 6th

Not sure if this constitutes a failure or a pass

But its probably a minimum required. It looks good but it has shaky foundations. I guess the real answer will be in 2028 and whether there is rapid improvement to a top 3 run for 3 years or a backslide again

 

[Rags_118]

Part of our big loss was mental. We were in it at quarter time, on the ropes at half time and capitulated after half time when Dusty ran riot.

Having Dangerfield in his prime would have made us much stronger both on field and mentally. The belief of having one of the best players in the competition would have gone a long way especially if we could have asserted that dominance early in the match.

And there's no way Graham could have tagged peak Danger out of the match like he did with Sloane while also kicking goals himself.

I reckon we win it with Dangerfield

Brodie Smith’s ACL against the Giants in the QF was a huge loss for us …. His long kicking distribution to our spreading runners was important in 2017.

McGovern might have been a wiser pick than Otten.

 

[LoBu]

We are $4.50 to make the top 8 this year.

The first 8 teams are all less than $2.

There are 2 teams (Port and Carlton) that were not in the top 8 last year.

6 teams in the next group including us.

We need to outperform/ beat:

Essendon
Gold Coast
St Kilda
Western Bulldogs
Fremantle

and one more - Port or Carlton, Sydney or Collingwood.

To make the 8 is not beyond possibility this year, but it so take a very good start to the season.








On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

We are $4.50 to make the top 8 this year.

The first 8 teams are all less than $2.

There are 2 teams (Port and Carlton) that were not in the top 8 last year.

6 teams in the next group including us.

We need to outperform/ beat:

Essendon
Gold Coast
St Kilda
Western Bulldogs
Fremantle

and one more - Port or Carlton, Sydney or Collingwood.

To make the 8 is not beyond possibility this year, but it so take a very good start to the season.








On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Odds looks fair enough as we are a very outside chance of playing finals.

We are still likely another year away making finals once most of our players are 50+ games

 

[Mr_Moogle]

In Eddie Betts’ book (beautifully light, conversational, straight-talking book) he says the team felt they were beaten at half time, and tried to rev themselves up, but couldn’t really convince themselves.

That's what it looked like on TV. They looked mentally shot in the HT break.

 

[skittlebrew]

In Eddie Betts’ book (beautifully light, conversational, straight-talking book) he says the team felt they were beaten at half time, and tried to rev themselves up, but couldn’t really convince themselves.

What did he specifically say about the camp?

Also my recollection of the game was the momentum was largely Tigers way for almost all of it. We snuck a few goals early that papered over the cracks big time. Sounds like this is inline with what Bett's is saying.

 

[GreyCrow]

What did he specifically say about the camp?

Also my recollection of the game was the momentum was largely Tigers way for almost all of it. We snuck a few goals early that papered over the cracks big time. Sounds like this is inline with what Bett's is saying.

We played well for not much score and reward in the 1st quarter and went on with it in the 2nd quarter - but we couldnt score goals. It felt like the misses - some easy ones - cracked us along with some interesting umpire calls

 

[skittlebrew]

We are $4.50 to make the top 8 this year.

The first 8 teams are all less than $2.

There are 2 teams (Port and Carlton) that were not in the top 8 last year.

6 teams in the next group including us.

We need to outperform/ beat:

Essendon
Gold Coast
St Kilda
Western Bulldogs
Fremantle

and one more - Port or Carlton, Sydney or Collingwood.

To make the 8 is not beyond possibility this year, but it so take a very good start to the season.

We've got no chance. Blues a shoo in this year. Freo playing good footy. GC a roll of the dice but they're building. Dogs still have a tidy list.

Rankine on it's own isn't enough. This year is all about getting enough games into the youngsters and hopefully some break out.

 

[skittlebrew]

We played well for not much score and reward in the 1st quarter and went on with it in the 2nd quarter - but we couldnt score goals. It felt like the misses - some easy ones - cracked us along with some interesting umpire calls

What the flying * was the free kick for at the start of the game? Gigantic kick in the dick

Less chance of missing when you're at your home ground plus the home ground crowd with the umps. I would've loved to know how it would've went down.

 

[WeeBlake]

What did he specifically say about the camp?

Also my recollection of the game was the momentum was largely Tigers way for almost all of it. We snuck a few goals early that papered over the cracks big time. Sounds like this is inline with what Bett's is saying.

What he said about the camp is what was widely reported when the book was published. Main things were cultishness, forced isolation from family, breach of trust re sensitive things he disclosed being used against him, misuse of Aboriginal culture, whole thing being counter-productive.