Remove this Banner Ad

The 2010 Dynasty Myth

  • Thread starter Thread starter 4#Didak#4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

4#Didak#4

Premiership Player
Joined
May 21, 2007
Posts
3,604
Reaction score
2,717
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Collingwood
Something we see regularly is the belief that after the 2010 flag we were on the edge of a dynasty. One of the youngest aged premiership teams etc etc. This is dragged up a lot including by the former coach, however there is often a reinvention of history and memories of players and teams become better with age.

This is no defense of Nathan Buckley, his coaching methods are a separate issue and the subject of a 3000 page thread. However i don't think in any way he inherited a great list and destroyed a dynasty. In the cold light of day its actually a sub standard one in terms of future planning, but one that was well tuned to succeed at the time and that in itself is a credit to MM.

Our premiership 23 is listed to below and were supposedly going to carry us to some sort of long term period of dominance:

The Soldiers:
All these guys were terrific soldiers and every team needs them. They played their role well. However they were not exactly super talented and quite a few fought their way into the team from the rookie list. Most but for Harry & Dawes played on for us and did OK, but they were never going to be the key to multiple flags. Mostly very young and sadly not talented enough that they could carry us to flage. I think a lot perhaps over rated what Caff, Blair, O'Brien and Dawes could do into the future.
Nick Maxwell (26)
Alan Toovey (23)
Jarryd Blair (19)
Brent Macaffer (22)
Tyson Goldsack* (22)
Harry O’Brien (23)
Chris Dawes (21)

The Oldies:
Now these guys were all terrific in the flag and in general. Their age (especially Ball) does not really scream old, however unfortunately in retrospect they had little left in their bodies. Usually in a flag team we would be listing these as 30+ guys. Sadly injuries (past & future) cut them down way to quick. All these guys were keys to the flag side, but after 2011 they slid away very quickly, very hard to replace. Not old on paper but old in body.
Darren Jolly (28)
Luke Ball (25)
Leigh Brown (28)
Leon Davis (28)
Ben Johnson (28)
Alan Didak (27)

The stars below effectively were supposed to carry the club into an unprecedented dynasty of success. The question is in retrospect is should we have been expecting these players to deliver flags?

The Stars Lost:
Dale Thomas (22) - Probably the major bust of all. Looked to be elite and in 2011 was. However, injuries and perhaps simply being over rated caught up with him.
Dayne Beams (20) - Big but unavoidable loss, better than most in retrospect and on talent hurts the most. No one could forsee his unfortunate circumstances.
Heath Shaw (24) - A trade casualty. Another big loss, but on his own wasn't going to deliver us a dynasty and that was clear by the time he was traded.
Sharrod Wellingham (21) - I rated him very high and maybe I have been proven wrong. Part of the reason people were bullish was Sharrod combining with Beams & Sidey in the future.

The Stars Retained:
Nathan Brown (21) - Maybe star is stretching it but certainly held a key post
Ben Reid (20) - Genuine A grader cursed by injury
Dane Swan (26) - Superstar.
Travis Cloke (23) - Solid, but did not get anywhere near expectations of what we thought he could become and didn't really deliver on his massive contract. This hurts as a lot of eggs were in his basket.
Scott Pendlebury (22) - Superstar
Steele Sidebottom (19) - Star

For me only Swan, Pendles & Sidebottom have ended up delivering performances that matched the high expectations that people including me had of them. The idea that this was a list that was on the verge of delivering a dynasty now seems to me a bit absurd and I am puzzled that it keeps getting dredged up.

When you look at the older players that made up the seconds in that year it was a list on the verge of collapse not on the verge of a dynasty. We topped up with Tarrant & Krak the next year and whilst they were very good they simply accelerated the decline when they added themselves to the young in age but old in body list. Bad injuries played their part, but the list itself was not well structured to take us into the future.
 
Merge? Anyway a couple of minor points.
The dynasty was more a 2011 thing. The demolition we achieved on opposition teams in the first half of the season, mostly by quarter time and not just on the scoreboard but apparently mentally as well, fed the myth as much as that we were the reigning premiers. The fall from grace was particularly sudden because we failed to get longevity out of nearly everyone on that list and rule changes that impacted on Jolly and Ball's effectiveness. Another factor was the rise of the Hawks - who we can now view as an exceptional team, one of the best in history. Finally some might question whether all the soldiers listed in the OP were just that or whether its a reflection on the club/coaching staff that we couldn't develop them into A listers or strong leaders.
 
Last edited:
We could never have had a dynasty under Malthouse with his obsolete game plan. The Hawks and Dockers destroyed us with the possession game and precise kicking for years, it was evident in 2011 that the Hawks had worked out the press and by 2012 we weren't even competitive.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The dynasty thing was a myth, still is.
I recall so clearly that even 2010, sort of just happened.
The planets aligned ( :) ) and after the Melbourne game things clicked, Geelong fell temporarily to less than they were, and voila we ran away with it. Actually St Kilda almost, phew, pinched it that first week of grand finals.
Now 2011 it started well, though Geelong beat us all the time including giving us a frightful whinging in the last round. We were the second best team that year and just overcame a rising hawthorn.
On such things dynasties are not built.
 
Plenty of those soldiers played well under MM but failed to perform under Buckley. Whos fault is that?

We were young and with good list management like Hawks, Sydney, Cats we could have sustained success no doubt in my mind.

Buckley getting in Blokes like Jordan Russell, Lynch, White ect instead of players like Lake, Frawley who performed for Hawks.

Just because plenty of players went backwards under Buckley doesn't mean the same would have happened if Mick was in charge.
 
We could never have had a dynasty under Malthouse with his obsolete game plan. The Hawks and Dockers destroyed us with the possession game and precise kicking for years, it was evident in 2011 that the Hawks had worked out the press and by 2012 we weren't even competitive.
But some how we were 20 points up in a grand final (Yes we lost). Malthouse has been a great coach for a long time to think he couldn't have adjusted the gameplan is stupid.
 
But some how we were 20 points up in a grand final (Yes we lost). Malthouse has been a great coach for a long time to think he couldn't have adjusted the gameplan is stupid.
How'd he go at Carlton with that gameplan?
 
How'd he go at Carlton with that gameplan?
Carlton had a very poor list Mick overated. No doubt. He probably went there for all the wrong reasons.

To say a coach was done after one of the most dominate seasons and a grand final loss which we could have won is laughable. Simple as that.
 
Its funny when you look at every premiership player who has played under Bucks. Not one single premiership player including Swan and Pendlebury has been the same as they were under Malthouse. If i hear this s... about injuries again.. please! I think the entire premiership group is a big enough sample.. that's 100% of em. You can argue that Sidebottom has performed well under Bucks.. but Sidey was only a 19-20 yr old kid under Malthouse. The dynasty was wiped out by stupid decisions made in the board room.
 
Plenty of those soldiers played well under MM but failed to perform under Buckley. Whos fault is that?

We were young and with good list management like Hawks, Sydney, Cats we could have sustained success no doubt in my mind.

Buckley getting in Blokes like Jordan Russell, Lynch, White ect instead of players like Lake, Frawley who performed for Hawks.

Just because plenty of players went backwards under Buckley doesn't mean the same would have happened if Mick was in charge.
Hmmmm, nah.
That group got their flag, good we got one. Then we got fixed by Geelong and Hawthorn well they passed us with their list.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Carlton had a very poor list Mick overated. No doubt. He probably went there for all the wrong reasons.

To say a coach was done after one of the most dominate seasons and a grand final loss which we could have won is laughable. Simple as that.
The signs were there. The press had been worked out by the end of 2011 by Clarkson, and ignoring the corridor to go via the boundary line every time was too predictable and failed to score every season from 2012 onwards, whether with Buckley as coach and having made only minor changes, or Malthouse coaching Carltank.

That gameplan couldn't have won against Hawthorn from 2012 onward. Any "dynasty" would have been 2010/11 max, and Malthouse had as big a part in sabotaging the 2011 season as anyone.
 
Carlton had a very poor list Mick overated. No doubt. He probably went there for all the wrong reasons.

To say a coach was done after one of the most dominate seasons and a grand final loss which we could have won is laughable. Simple as that.
Micks career shows he gets competitive teams going and wins a flag about once in ten years.
You'd take that.
Even with state based WA side, he only got two flags. Good that it was. He's an excellent coach but our list then was nice but not landed with enough elite to stay on top for a few plays.

Buts its 2016 and we won't play another game to 2017.
It's done and Mick ain't returning any time soon.
 
Its funny when you look at every premiership player who has played under Bucks. Not one single premiership player including Swan and Pendlebury has been the same as they were under Malthouse. If i hear this s... about injuries again.. please! I think the entire premiership group is a big enough sample.. that's 100% of em. You can argue that Sidebottom has performed well under Bucks.. but Sidey was only a 19-20 yr old kid under Malthouse. The dynasty was wiped out by stupid decisions made in the board room.
I'm starting to think you don't watch football.
Seriously Swan and Pendlbury haven't been elite under Buckley and even better as it were.
Sorry that's a bridge too far.
The only explanation I can think of is you actually don't watch the games.

Ps injuries are not an excuse but they are a reason. When did injuries suddenly become irrelevant. How ridiculous. People get injured. Even the brilliant Swan got injured this season and that was his end. Oh, sorry that's not a reason he's no longer playing? Love to know what is the reason he's not playing.
 
There are strong kiss albums?

o-GENE-SIMMONS-facebook.jpg
 
I'm starting to think you don't watch football.
Seriously Swan and Pendlbury haven't been elite under Buckley and even better as it were.
Sorry that's a bridge too far.
The only explanation I can think of is you actually don't watch the games.

Ps injuries are not an excuse but they are a reason. When did injuries suddenly become irrelevant. How ridiculous. People get injured. Even the brilliant Swan got injured this season and that was his end. Oh, sorry that's not a reason he's no longer playing? Love to know what is the reason he's not playing.
I'm not saying either of em were not elite under Bucks.. I'm saying they did play better under MM. I can't think of anyone other than Sidey who has improved under Bucks.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I'm not saying either of em were not elite under Bucks.. I'm saying they did play better under MM. I can't think of anyone other than Sidey who has improved under Bucks.
Ahem, Dayne Beams Copeland Trophy was under Buckley.
Maybe not him then?
Travis Cloke made AA for the second time under Nathan by the way.
I'd argue Ben Reid had an outstanding 2013 as well.
 
We could never have had a dynasty under Malthouse with his obsolete game plan. The Hawks and Dockers destroyed us with the possession game and precise kicking for years, it was evident in 2011 that the Hawks had worked out the press and by 2012 we weren't even competitive.

You don't know how right you are TRS. Long story but the man himself (and his manager) was aware of the shelf life of the game plan and was hoping it stretched out from about 18 months to 2 seasons.

Add the fact that MM via his scorched earth approach from June 2011 onwards, went out in the press and talked about his Rhomulus box (sp) or some crap knowing he was leaving and it was torched by start of 2012.
 
Ahem, Dayne Beams Copeland Trophy was under Buckley.
Maybe not him then?
Travis Cloke made AA for the second time under Nathan by the way.
I'd argue Ben Reid had an outstanding 2013 as well.
Dayne Beams was a youngster on the rise under MM.. so doesn't exactly qualify. Any way i get rather upset about this topic.. i should just avoid it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom