Mod note: This thread was created to house the on-going discussion around whether or not we are in a "rebuild", when it started (2023 or 2025?), how it's going (recent list management decisions since 2023/2025), and how long it will last (8 years? 3 years? 4 years?), which has been flaring up across several threads of late. The first ~150 posts were originally posted in other threads.
If everything was so bad why has the list turnover being limited to rookies? Why have we re-signed every one of the question marks and senior players of questionable utility? A lot of this happened very recently, half way through last year. All of it happened while Scott was the coach.
How has Brad Scott not managed to put the breaks on any of it despite having such a dim view of the place? Are we not listening to him, either? If we're not listening to him why give him more time to do things we don't agree with? If it is all being driven by Vozzo and Rosa, what does that say about Brad Scott's judgement?
I don't rate the team, primarily because I don't think the midfield is capable of withstanding pressure. I have no expectations. I am trying to understand what the club thinks based on the decisions it makes, not what it says. I wouldn't wipe my arse with the product of what Essendon people say (they couldn't lie straight in bed). Other than the expressed desire for stability I see no consistency of reasoning in the decisions made. The club produces a constant stream of contradictions and, unfortunately, there is virtually no one in the media who is good enough at what they do to hold Essendon to account - as if they wouldn't want to be putting the heat on Essendon.
It is important because taking this back to the end of Rutten, the view was that the list was underperforming. I don't think there is any real dispute about that, there was no other reason for Barham to overthrow Brasher. This view is pretty clearly consistent with list management decisions of the last few seasons.
What I believe is happening, as a best case scenario, is that someone or something (maybe aliens) has finally gotten through to the dipshits who run the club and they're all now panicking, trying to work out how they're going to explain to the industry and their fans that 5 years into the latest rebuild (on top of a foundation of pretty significant accumulation of talent / mini-rebuild only 5 years earlier) we're still no where near it. The response is a cynical ploy to unnecessarily extend a coach's contract, at significant expense in the event it doesn't work out, the sort of thing that happens when you get the luxury of spending money that isn't yours, while preaching stability to deflect from the reality that they're changing course, again.
And so we have a core group for a best 23 of, what did I count yesterday, 26 or 27 players between the ages of 20 and 28 (the bottom aged players being 1 second, 1 third and 1 fourth year player) and we are still looking at 3 years of drafting (with one of those year have just been completed)?
Some heads should role for the last 2 years, shouldn't they? Someone has just been proven to be entirely incorrect about the quality of the list. Do you really want that person or those people still in positions of power? Why does anyone have any confidence that they will get it right this time? Because of stability?
If everything was so bad why has the list turnover being limited to rookies? Why have we re-signed every one of the question marks and senior players of questionable utility? A lot of this happened very recently, half way through last year. All of it happened while Scott was the coach.
How has Brad Scott not managed to put the breaks on any of it despite having such a dim view of the place? Are we not listening to him, either? If we're not listening to him why give him more time to do things we don't agree with? If it is all being driven by Vozzo and Rosa, what does that say about Brad Scott's judgement?
I don't rate the team, primarily because I don't think the midfield is capable of withstanding pressure. I have no expectations. I am trying to understand what the club thinks based on the decisions it makes, not what it says. I wouldn't wipe my arse with the product of what Essendon people say (they couldn't lie straight in bed). Other than the expressed desire for stability I see no consistency of reasoning in the decisions made. The club produces a constant stream of contradictions and, unfortunately, there is virtually no one in the media who is good enough at what they do to hold Essendon to account - as if they wouldn't want to be putting the heat on Essendon.
It is important because taking this back to the end of Rutten, the view was that the list was underperforming. I don't think there is any real dispute about that, there was no other reason for Barham to overthrow Brasher. This view is pretty clearly consistent with list management decisions of the last few seasons.
What I believe is happening, as a best case scenario, is that someone or something (maybe aliens) has finally gotten through to the dipshits who run the club and they're all now panicking, trying to work out how they're going to explain to the industry and their fans that 5 years into the latest rebuild (on top of a foundation of pretty significant accumulation of talent / mini-rebuild only 5 years earlier) we're still no where near it. The response is a cynical ploy to unnecessarily extend a coach's contract, at significant expense in the event it doesn't work out, the sort of thing that happens when you get the luxury of spending money that isn't yours, while preaching stability to deflect from the reality that they're changing course, again.
And so we have a core group for a best 23 of, what did I count yesterday, 26 or 27 players between the ages of 20 and 28 (the bottom aged players being 1 second, 1 third and 1 fourth year player) and we are still looking at 3 years of drafting (with one of those year have just been completed)?
Some heads should role for the last 2 years, shouldn't they? Someone has just been proven to be entirely incorrect about the quality of the list. Do you really want that person or those people still in positions of power? Why does anyone have any confidence that they will get it right this time? Because of stability?
Last edited by a moderator:
