The Angry Thread

[arrowman]

 

[Slippery Pete]

I have some grave concerns about this club. Grave concerns. The last ten years we’ve lurched from crisis to crisis to crisis.

We’ve had 7 senior coaches in 10 years – Craig, Bickley, Sanderson, Walsh, Camporeale, Pyke, Nicks. Some forced, some sacked. We’ve had Tippettgate, where for a $300k fine and a bunch of valuable draft picks we were told we’d get the whole story and we didn’t, to Collective Minds and the Camp, the most traumatic weekend getaway since Wolf Creek, Kangatech where we just flat out didn’t read the instruction book, and players running around like they work for Pablo Escobar.

List-wise, we can’t use a first round pick to save our lives; and we’ve forced/lost players like Jarryd Lyons, Ed Curnow, Patrick Dangerfield, Hugh Greenwood, Jack Gunston. What do those guys have in common?

Spoiler

they all got more Brownlow votes than a Crows player last year. Even Ed ******* Curnow!

Also, Alex Keath, Phil Davis, Jake Lever, Ricky Henderson, Josh Jenkins, Mitch McGovern, Eddie Betts, Kurt Tippett, Charlie Cameron, Sam Jacobs, Matthew Wright, Shaun McKernan, Cam Ellis-Yolmen, Kyle Hartigan, Rory Atkins, Brad Crouch. Brad Crouch! Our posturing over Brad Crouch was embarrassing, we folded faster than those nice seats in the grandstand that automatically flip up. We just lost 16 matches in a row, and in the last three years since the GF we’ve come 12th, 11th and stone motherless last.

In the last three years especially, the big names we’ve lost or forced out? Don Pyke, Andrew Fagan, Scott Camporeale & Brett Burton. And Brett Burton, wow, David Noble goes to Brisbane in 2014, now they are good, we got Burton in 2016, we sacked him three years later after an external review. Ben Keays looks like our fittest player and he’s a delistee from Brisbane! We must have the worst footy department in the league. We call a review, it’s football only. August 2019 has Andrew Fagan saying we’re in the last year of our five-year plan. Now I can’t get a copy of the old plan, I can’t get a copy of the new plan. I don’t see any evidence of a plan. Not sure I trust any plan that says come last.

But it’s okay. Whenever there’s a problem, the board and senior management goes missing, and a shiny new propaganda hostage video featuring Tom Doedee comes out, so we know our media department is working fantastic, except when it’s time to spell the name “Malcolm” at an awards night.

We did two things right this decade – we got to a GF, and our Women’s team, and I’m inclined to think on all this evidence we did this by accident, and at the very least we should all go home and pray to Erin Phillips.

So, in this most critical recent period, the chairman who oversaw all of these embarrassments has the board member who was going to replace him leave, so he picks a replacement, and that replacement hired the last CEO we had who oversaw lots of those very embarrassments himself. I mean, there’s insular, and there’s Adelaide Crows insular.

And please delete Twitter from your phones. For the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, we’ve got thankfully ex-employees trying to pick up teenagers. We’ve got board members fighting with ex-players. We’ve got board members saying “Players who don’t want to enter hubs are risking their jobs”. You know who’s not risking their job? The board, it turns out!

We have this illusion of democracy with two elected board members. I recall votes don’t get released because the members will know how much of a stitch-up it is when players nominate? What a revolving door that must be. Greg Griffin said the board was “inherently weak because they’re not playing with your own money”. Does that mean it’s a junket? Is it just for show? Results don’t seem to matter. I guess we’ll have to wait to buy back our license… again… before we can change anything. Bring on 2028!

So, after successfully leading us to our very first wooden spoon, after the last decade and especially the last three years of clown college our club has been, how is it possible that no-one on the board resigned? I mean, I congratulate their ability to turn up for free food and drinks and receive applause like the spoon is a proud achievement, but none of them felt the need to be accountable?

Also, is it just called a spoon, or will the AFL send us an actual spoon, and will it go in the trophy cabinet?

TL;DR

 

[Slippery Pete]

I know you're a respected member of this board, Deaneus! but this is a serious 'Old man yells at clouds' moment for you. Absolute snooze-fest.

We're heading in the right direction, have made a multitude of positive changes, and have a young group that's building nicely.

Don't join the masses of disillusioned pessimists living in the past that continue plague this board in ever-increasing numbers.

I’ll tell you what I hate, that guy with a gun to your head that jumps out of the screen and makes you enter threads you don’t want to read.

I’ve tried CTRL-ALT-DEL but still nothing doing.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Is it partly the supporters fault?

It would be if we had any say.

 

[mistylake]

I know you're a respected member of this board, Deaneus! but this is a serious 'Old man yells at clouds' moment for you. Absolute snooze-fest.

We're heading in the right direction, have made a multitude of positive changes, and have a young group that's building nicely.

Don't join the masses of disillusioned pessimists living in the past that continue plague this board in ever-increasing numbers.

You must be new around here!
How are you finding planet earth?
I know it looks nice from out there from space but we have lots of problems that are hidden from view.
We only know they exist currently because of outcomes.

 

[Interloperer]

Is it partly the supporters fault? Does it all stem from the perception (which seems to be turning into the reality) that Adelaide supporters will never tolerate "bottoming out"? Is the resulting consistent mediocrity, both on and off the field, a consequence of a commercial desire to maintain competitiveness and hence, bums on seats?

I'm not convinced those people are more harmful the group that is delighted with the current state of the club and thinks Adelaide having the #1 draft pick this year is the clubs greatest ever achievement, above the two premierships.

 

[Cap]

TL;DR

I wonder how Pike would have gone with say, Kelly next to him.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Ok so based on some replies here it seems that it is pessimistic to be displeased about being the worst side in the league at the end of an obvious decline that was perpetuated by the corportation's staggering unwillingness to actually do a single ******* thing about it.

Edit: Assuming the decline has come to an end, because there isn't any evidence that it actually has.

 

[WetCrow1991]

Also are we able to pick non-talls with first rounders and have them not be complete spuds? Maybe pick some players that look like they've seen a football at least once in their lives? I'd settle for a photo of a football.

 

[pjcrows]

I wonder how Pike would have gone with say, Kelly next to him.

You mean the bloke who handled the public side of the Brad Crouch situation?

 

[Slippery Pete]

I wonder how Pike would have gone with say, Kelly next to him.

They should’ve tried Martin Pike and Kelly Clarkson. They couldn’t have done any worse.

 

[xazos79]

You take that back, no one respects me!

Headed in the right direction? Well I guess we can’t finish lower than last.
Changes? Agree.
Young group? Yes.
Building nicely? Remains to be seen.

I guess I’m still shocked that after utterly ******* this club, Chapman et al. get a round of applause at the AGM, we extend the tenure of board members who seem to have done sweet fu** all, and everyone moves on.

THIS BOARD HAD THEIR CHANCE, f’ed IT, AND CLAIM THEY’RE THE ONES TO TAKE US TO THE PROMISED LAND?

They should have resigned out of *shame*, but nice seats and free champers goes a long way.

I guess we got to ask ourselves..... will Olsen tolerate underperforming board members?

He seems like a far stronger character than Chapman.

 

[feenix67]

It would be if we had any say.

Come on, you know we have a say - the past 18 months has happened because we have a say - bums on seats.

Here's an example:

West Coast have an average attendance at Subiaco of 36840 since 97. In their last season that they made a GF pre Perth Stadium (2015) their average Subiaco attendance was 35987. In their lean years of 08-10, their average Subiaco attendance was 37653, 36377 and 34931 respectively. They finished 15th, 11th and 16th in those years (out of 16 teams).

Adelaide's average attendance at Football Park was 39640 since 97. In the last season we made the finals during the Footy Park era (2012) our average was 36829. The following year, with a 10/12 record our average was 33613. We finished 1 game out of the 8.

My point being that West Coast have bottomed out a few times in their history, retained the support of their fans, and bounced back to win flags not long after. Adelaide fans have been more fickle, dropping off as soon as it looks like we are not going to make the 8.

I contend that our club's unwillingness to bottom out has been commercially driven, as a result of fans not turning up when the team is s**t. As a result, we are always "around the mark" but lack the currency to draw in top players. Our good times have been on the back of some astute (lucky) mid round and rookie picks. The fans have driven this, because it is clear that we dont turn up when our beloved team is out of contention.

Is it possible that Adelaide fans are their own worst enemy? If we want the club to focus on football, should we do out part when the team is not competitive? Im playing devil's advocate a bit here, but I think a cursory look at these numbers does add some weight to this perspective.

 

[pjcrows]

Come on, you know we have a say - the past 18 months has happened because we have a say - bums on seats.

Here's an example:

West Coast have an average attendance at Subiaco of 36840 since 97. In their last season that they made a GF pre Perth Stadium (2015) their average Subiaco attendance was 35987. In their lean years of 08-10, their average Subiaco attendance was 37653, 36377 and 34931 respectively. They finished 15th, 11th and 16th in those years (out of 16 teams).

Adelaide's average attendance at Football Park was 39640 since 97. In the last season we made the finals during the Footy Park era (2012) our average was 36829. The following year, with a 10/12 record our average was 33613. We finished 1 game out of the 8.

My point being that West Coast have bottomed out a few times in their history, retained the support of their fans, and bounced back to win flags not long after. Adelaide fans have been more fickle, dropping off as soon as it looks like we are not going to make the 8.

I contend that our club's unwillingness to bottom out has been commercially driven, as a result of fans not turning up when the team is sh*t. As a result, we are always "around the mark" but lack the currency to draw in top players. Our good times have been on the back of some astute (lucky) mid round and rookie picks. The fans have driven this, because it is clear that we dont turn up when our beloved team is out of contention.

Is it possible that Adelaide fans are their own worst enemy? If we want the club to focus on football, should we do out part when the team is not competitive? Im playing devil's advocate a bit here, but I think a cursory look at these numbers does add some weight to this perspective.

Excellent points, and further adds to the view that the AFC decision makers are focused on the commercial side rather than the football side. You also point out that the fans need to suck it up and still follow the team, which I can't disagree with.

 

[Scorpus]

Come on, you know we have a say - the past 18 months has happened because we have a say - bums on seats.

Here's an example:

West Coast have an average attendance at Subiaco of 36840 since 97. In their last season that they made a GF pre Perth Stadium (2015) their average Subiaco attendance was 35987. In their lean years of 08-10, their average Subiaco attendance was 37653, 36377 and 34931 respectively. They finished 15th, 11th and 16th in those years (out of 16 teams).

Adelaide's average attendance at Football Park was 39640 since 97. In the last season we made the finals during the Footy Park era (2012) our average was 36829. The following year, with a 10/12 record our average was 33613. We finished 1 game out of the 8.

My point being that West Coast have bottomed out a few times in their history, retained the support of their fans, and bounced back to win flags not long after. Adelaide fans have been more fickle, dropping off as soon as it looks like we are not going to make the 8.

I contend that our club's unwillingness to bottom out has been commercially driven, as a result of fans not turning up when the team is sh*t. As a result, we are always "around the mark" but lack the currency to draw in top players. Our good times have been on the back of some astute (lucky) mid round and rookie picks. The fans have driven this, because it is clear that we dont turn up when our beloved team is out of contention.

Is it possible that Adelaide fans are their own worst enemy? If we want the club to focus on football, should we do out part when the team is not competitive? Im playing devil's advocate a bit here, but I think a cursory look at these numbers does add some weight to this perspective.

I agree with some of this, however I'd say that drop in attendance is probably one of the lowest in the league. Just look at teams like Richmond, Hawthorn and Carlton

 

[1970crow]

Let me put this out there.

Is it partly the supporters fault? Does it all stem from the perception (which seems to be turning into the reality) that Adelaide supporters will never tolerate "bottoming out"? Is the resulting consistent mediocrity, both on and off the field, a consequence of a commercial desire to maintain competitiveness and hence, bums on seats?

We were right to push for major change at the club, however as a supporter group, do we also need to look at ourselves in terms of our role in where we are at?

I think it's time. We have the change we wanted, we have a bunch of kids, we have a good coaching group, reinvigorated back office. I've been a strident critic, but I think it's time to be balanced, realistic and objective. Otherwise we will be complicit in the ongoing failure of the club.

No, that isn't correct. We had our worst season ever and supporters re-signed on in droves. This is bullshit peddled by the club and its apologists as an excuse for no flags in 20 years. The supporters are at fault because they don't hold the club to account, they don't need to look far to find strong support no matter how bad they utensil s**t up.

 

[feenix67]

I agree with some of this, however I'd say that drop in attendance is probably one of the lowest in the league. Just look at teams like Richmond, Hawthorn and Carlton

I think the commercial realities are different outside of Victoria. Also, that drop was when we finished 11th, not basket cases like your examples.

 

[pjcrows]

The club also has responded. Thre have been significant off and on field changes over the last 2 years. We asked for massive turnover and we asked for a genuine "bottom out". We're getting one.

My general interest in AFL has progressively waned each year since about 2015, but if you're going to follow the AFC then time to suck it up for a bit and see what happens.

 

[feenix67]

Excellent points, and further adds to the view that the AFC decision makers are focused on the commercial side rather than the football side. You also point out that the fans need to suck it up and still follow the team, which I can't disagree with.

I'd say WC were smart and "cashed in" those premierships, knowing it would take 3 or 4 years before their fans would drop off. They had higher average attendance the year after their flag year, when they finished last.

The moment they thought their list was cooked, they bottomed out. I'd call that smart, and a very close connection between commercial imperatives and football department needs.

 

[Bearded Clam]

Dont get me *in started..

 

[pjcrows]

I'd say WC were smart and "cashed in" those premierships, knowing it would take 3 or 4 years before their fans would drop off. They had higher average attendance the year after their flag year, when they finished last.

I'd call that smart, and a very close connection between commercial imperatives and football department needs.

West Coast are a smart, ruthless organisation who use their financial clout to improve their football department - i.e. investing in it as a priority, above other things. We settle for "feasible" and for what fits in with the rest of the commercial operations of the club - just ask Don Pyke.

Hawthorn are football-first too. Alistair Clarkson - "the person with the football in their hands at any given moment is the most important person at the club".

Once again it comes back to the the actual function of the Adelaide Football Club since the AO deal.

 

[feenix67]

West Coast are a smart, ruthless organisation who use their financial clout to improve their football department - i.e. investing in it as a priority, above other things. We settle for "feasible" and for what fits in with the rest of the commercial operations of the club - just ask Don Pyke.

Hawthorn are football-first too. Alistair Clarkson - "the person with the football in their hands at any given moment is the most important person at the club".

Once again it comes back to the the actual function of the Adelaide Football Club since the AO deal.

I agree 100%. And I do think our club leaned far too heavily towards commercial viability in the past 10 years. Let's hope that approach changes with new personnel. Im just saying, if we want our club to focus on footy and let the commercial results follow, we have to support the team during lean periods. That's not to say we cant be critical, or hold administrators accountable, but we can't bail on the players/team during bad times.

Interestingly, both West Coast and Hawthorn have benefitted from bottoming out before their successful periods.

 

[1970crow]

I guess we got to ask ourselves..... will Olsen tolerate underperforming board members?

He seems like a far stronger character than Chapman.

And they've pushed Hazel out. And Chappo was sent packing a bit earlier than he'd said as well.

 

[Vhaluus]

Let me put this out there.

Is it partly the supporters fault? Does it all stem from the perception (which seems to be turning into the reality) that Adelaide supporters will never tolerate "bottoming out"? Is the resulting consistent mediocrity, both on and off the field, a consequence of a commercial desire to maintain competitiveness and hence, bums on seats?

We were right to push for major change at the club, however as a supporter group, do we also need to look at ourselves in terms of our role in where we are at?

I think it's time. We have the change we wanted, we have a bunch of kids, we have a good coaching group, reinvigorated back office. I've been a strident critic, but I think it's time to be balanced, realistic and objective. Otherwise we will be complicit in the ongoing failure of the club.

You can't blame the supporters when its clear the club gives 0 shits about what we as supporters think.

They haven't been listening to us and avoiding bottoming out for that reason. They've been ignoring us and not bottoming out because they actually believed the 'make the 8 and anything can happen' bullshit.

A club that cares about the opinion of fans doesn't tell them to go support another team if they don't like how things are run.

 

[CrowInFiji]

I HATE MY MOTHER IN LAW AND HER STUPID BLOODY INDOOR PLANTS STOP BUYING THEM FOR MY HOUSE AND IF THE FATHER IN LAW TRIES TO 'FIX THE GRASS' ONE MORE TIME I WILL ACTUALLY SPEW. IT'S NOT BROKEN, IT'S RENOVATED YOU FOOL.

Thanks for the outlet thread