Uncertain Future

[D Mitchell]

...
I still don't understand the point of his article.

Is he arguing that we should have delisted/traded Lucas, Lloyd and Hird ?
or that we shouldn't be playing them now ?

What exactly have Essendon done wrong ?

He's not arguing against Essendon, he's merely pointing out that Sheedy's prediction is unrealistic against a background of a team in decline for no obvious reason and imminent retirement of the champion core.

It's commonly thought around the district that Essendon didn't draft well from 2001. That's probably right, too. Arguably the same thing happened to Brisbane although it had 4 years at the top then fell in a heap whereas Essendon had 2 then went into decline.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

I reckon our demise has a lot to do with the injury troubles to Rama and Rioli.

We lacked midfield depth and skill and these two would have provided that.

 

[D Mitchell]

Yes it is and chances are you wont but we could end up with stars in a different area.
Watson, Madden and Daniher all retired within a three year period but that didnt leave us with nothing for 4 or 5 years. Star players are not replaceable but you move on and other stars come along.

All true but it's not only the retirement of the champs that Rielly's talking about. It's the demise too.

 

[ant555]

That might be a lot harder than you think. I reckon Essendon's demise has had a lot to do with its inability to replace Mesiti and Mercuri.

Actually the decline was certainly due to not being able to replace Misiti and Mercuri but also players like Wellman and Barnard. This all falls into the fact that we got nothing out of the draft just before they retired and the fact that our choice for replacements flopped as well.

 

[ant555]

He's not arguing against Essendon, he's merely pointing out that Sheedy's prediction is unrealistic against a background of a team in decline for no obvious reason and imminent retirement of the champion core.

There was a real obviuos reason , one look at how many players left on the list from the 1999 to 2001 draft showed it. And no i am not talking about looking now , you could have had a look at the end of 2004 and seen the signs where not so good.

It's commonly thought around the district that Essendon didn't draft well from 2001. That's probably right, too. Arguably the same thing happened to Brisbane although it had 4 years at the top then fell in a heap whereas Essendon had 2 then went into decline.

From 2001 ? If you have a close look 2002 to 2006 has been pretty good.
1999 to 2001 is what you are looking for.
When you say Brisbane had 4 years at the top while we had only had two well there are some reasons apart from poor management. For a start we had three years at the top. In 1999 despite the choke in the Prelim final we where a top team. Secondly if we had Brisbane extra salary cap room we would not had to have started dumping premiership players as soon as we did.
I dont begrugde Brisbane cap concessions but it certainly does help to hang onto players.

 

[D Mitchell]

... For a start we had three years at the top. In 1999 despite the choke in the Prelim final we where a top team. Secondly if we had Brisbane extra salary cap room we would not had to ....

We'll say Grandfinalists, then instead of top. Didn't Essendon get some "unofficial" salary cap room somewhere along the way ?

 

[ant555]

We'll say Grandfinalists, then instead of top. Didn't Essendon get some "unofficial" salary cap room somewhere along the way ?

Think you are talking about a period well before 1999