Universal Love The Hird Cleanout

[kelvin_sheedy]

Mark Williams - was barely played and then retired
Andrew Welsh
Angus Monfries
Mark McVeigh
Henry Slattery
Ricky Dyson
Jay Neagle
Kyle Reimers
Sam Lonergan
Brent Prismall

all gone one way or another.

Pretty much every maligned player over the past 5 years is not with us anymore. Hird .... and Bomber have pruned back the list meticulously and at the right pace.

I like the look of it.

You really can't argue too much with the transformation and what we've done. We now have a list that is capable and its time they started to deliver.

 

[IriDiuM]

Only 1 to go: Stanton

/Trollface

 

[Coopster09]

Michael Ross says hi

 

[Bennett.]

Melksham still got a guernsey?

 

[The Dustbin]

Prismall as well. That was a real save face job.

 

[daz17]

Didn't he clean out all the rookies 2 years ago?

 

[Lord Nicholson]

It seems dramatic, but I'm not sure it's all that drastic compared to what the average low-to-mid table club would go through in a 2-year period.

 

[BrunoV]

Average out the de-listings over the 3 preasons they have been in charge and it is business as usual.

Nothing special or particularly dramatic except that the 2011 and 2012 end of season de-listings both occurred in 2012.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Average out the de-listings over the 3 preasons they have been in charge and it is business as usual.

Nothing special or particularly dramatic except that the 2011 and 2012 end of season de-listings both occurred in 2012.

Yes and if I sold ice-cream at the beach all year I round would think it is an average place to sell them as well.

We haven't had 3 normal years, so to assess as 3 normal years is silly.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

It seems dramatic, but I'm not sure it's all that drastic compared to what the average low-to-mid table club would go through in a 2-year period.

But we aren't avg. when it comes to list management. We hang on to more blokes a lot longer than other teams do.

 

[Slattery_20]

But we aren't avg. when it comes to list management. We hang on to more blokes a lot longer than other teams do.

Really, are we?
We were through the years up to about Knights. Because all of our high picks were broken or peanuts off-field. There was a big cleanout before he came in, and another after 09.

I'm pretty sure 8 recruits - which we took this year - is about the league average.
Last year we took... 8.
Year before... 8.
Year before that... 10.
Year before, 11.

Etc etc.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Really, are we?
We were through the years up to about Knights. Because all of our high picks were broken or peanuts off-field. There was a big cleanout before he came in, and another after 09.

I'm pretty sure 8 recruits - which we took this year - is about the league average.
Last year we took... 8.
Year before... 8.
Year before that... 10.
Year before, 11.

Etc etc.

Depends on whether you include rookies, doesn't it as they are seen as expendable.

I think, also the fact that we kept so many journeymen for so long.....

 

[Slattery_20]

Not incl. rookies, we took 7 this year (that is a LOT)

4 last year (including an upgrade) - not many, admittedly
7 the year before (including an upgrade)
6 before that
6 before that
6
7
etc

So we 'normally' turn over about 6 main list, 3 rookies. Cut-down rookie list this year made it hard to add rookies.

 

[stugots]

It seems dramatic, but I'm not sure it's all that drastic compared to what the average low-to-mid table club would go through in a 2-year period.

What I was about to post - nothing particularly out of the ordinary going on, it's just footy clubs doing what they do.

 

[Nasty Penguin]

The cleanout needed to be done. Had a lot of shit on the list now we have more potential, talented kids and some mature age recruits to mould into the new bomber game style and culture.
*Insert superimposed Hird face on the thumbs up Jesus from Dogma*

 

[Old Campaigner]

Pretty well handled as far as I can see. He got rid of the blatant hacks then gave himself a chance to look at a few guys who were on the edge and ****ed them off when they didn't deliver. It remains to be seen if the players we've replaced them with will amount to anything but hopefully the return of a couple of legends of the club as coaches will help create a culture that gets the best out of developing players a la " """ 'Bloods Culture' """ "

 

[Phone]

It seems dramatic, but I'm not sure it's all that drastic compared to what the average low-to-mid table club would go through in a 2-year period.

yeah this. if anything they goofed up last year by hanging onto lonergan etc, given we ended up not landing a couple of players we probably wanted (oh hey dickson and campbell. ****ing bulldogs)

 

[Kaiser Powser]

We got rid of a lot of the guys that were poor to ok footballers. We were never really in a position to get rid of them until recently, and it is rewarding to see we are getting rid of these guys and other clubs are actually scooping them up.

 

[BrunoV]

We got rid of a lot of the guys that were poor to ok footballers. We were never really in a position to get rid of them until recently, and it is rewarding to see we are getting rid of these guys and other clubs are actually scooping them up.

It is too easy for most to forget this point.

The other thing I don't really understand is how getting rid of these players strengthens the list by default. Given that 99.9% of posters have never seen the new recruits (other than Goddard play) there is a lot of water to flow under the bridge before the list is stronger because of the replacement of the guys that were delisted this year.

 

[Jade]

It is too easy for most to forget this point.

The other thing I don't really understand is how getting rid of these players strengthens the list by default. Given that 99.9% of posters have never seen the new recruits (other than Goddard play) there is a lot of water to flow under the bridge before the list is stronger because of the replacement of the guys that were delisted this year.

True, but I certainly think that Heppell, Daniher, NOB, Zaharakis, Browne, Kav etc LOOK better than Dyson, Pris and co.

Granted, with the exception of Heppell and Zaka none of them have proved anything yet - but I'm certainly happier with the state of the list.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Not only to they look like they have more to offer right now than the guys who got cut did, they're all young and have plenty of room to improve and start pushing for regular games.

 

[Jade]

Not only to they look like they have more to offer right now than the guys who got cut did, they're all young and have plenty of room to improve and start pushing for regular games.

Very excited about Kav, Browne and NOB. From the little I've seen all look like serious players.

 

[Kong]

True, but I certainly think that Heppell, Daniher, NOB, Zaharakis, Browne, Kav etc LOOK better than Dyson, Pris and co.

Have a squiz at threads from 2002-2005, and I can guarantee you'd see something like this:

I certainly think that Winderlich, Stanton, Dyson, Nash, Monfries, Slattery and Lonergan etc LOOK better than Alvey, Haynes, Murphy and co.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

wasn't Nash going to win a Brownlow at one point?

 

[Drummer_19]

Have a squiz at threads from 2002-2005, and I can guarantee you'd see something like this:

A while ago I went and had a look at what the Essendon board was like during those years to see how opinions were of some people. There's some real lol threads/opinions floating around.