Coach Welcome to West Coast: Andrew McQualter

[HoneyBadger35]

And this is our average age over the entire season. Coming into the year I recall all the talk being how unbelievably young the Tigers were going to be. Despite the rhetoric on some of Minis selections, those numbers show how unafraid he has been to give the young players a crack.View attachment 2398522

Careful now, definitively proving that we’re the youngest and least experienced side isn’t proof that we’re young or inexperienced to some people around here. Could be in for a long night.

 

[stallon]

View attachment 2398517

Essendon are apparently historically low on availability, record debuts this year, lost 500 games of experience this week on top of it all, and we still easily had them covered on lack of experience. Puts it in a bit of perspective

This is the type of stat the media should bring up when talking about the Eagles, not just taking any excuse to beat into us for having a shit list

That games exp column says it all imo.
76 games avg for us, 88 is 2nd last for the team that copped a huge amount of injuries and ended up taking 5 MSD picks.

Richmond the talked up young inexperienced side is 7th for experience this year lmao, what a joke they get a cop out for being young when we are so much younger and inexperienced than them its not even close.

 

[stallon]

Careful now, definitively proving that we’re the youngest and least experienced side isn’t proof that we’re young or inexperienced to some people around here. Could be in for a long night.

Ginbey isnt a young/inexperienced player if you didnt know

 

[HoneyBadger35]

That Tigers talk was all rubbish. Theyve still got half their team being experienced players in their mid 20s or older, including a heap of premiership players.

Only have to look at them today. Got absolutely destroyed by North, with Sheezel having 54 and LDU having 40.

Most touches by a Tigers player under 23? 16.

Heavy lifting still being done by the vets and they’re not getting any younger.

 

[Tugga27]

We don’t have the cattle to be competitive week in week out I agree but you can move some pieces to stop 94 point blow outs. This is about tactical nous. If that’s Chris Scott with exactly the same team the score doesn’t look like that.

Have you forgotten that the WB beat GWS by 83 points a week ago.

 

[Grahame]

I’ve heard very experienced coaches like BScott, Clarkson and Lyon talk of their sides’ inexperience. Given were the most inexperienced I think it’s a credit to Mini that he doesn’t use that language. He remains pretty level regardless of results.

It will be interesting to see his changes to the coaching panel.

And also how this group - with a core who have now played a few games together - go with another preseason plus the addition of Jake and Yeo.

There is a possibility we might have a better group than many here think. I think we’re closer to the top four than StK, Ess, Melb and NM at least. But it won’t be next year.

 

[frenchconnection]

I’m not expecting him to win the game but McQualter spent a lot of time as an assistant at a triple flag winning club. Should have had more answers than he has on plenty of occasions this year. Today was unacceptable.

I knew it was going to be a blowout before the first bounce as it was obvious we were way outclassed, although did have the loss at about 70 points so I don’t know what others were expecting as would think there may have been a few sore bodies after last weeks effort. Also young players are quite inconsistent particularly as the season grows longer. Where the fault lies is that when Simmo was coaching the development of the younger players was RS as he kept giving games to the credits in the bank so the development of our playing group as a whole is way behind what it should be.

 

[frenchconnection]

A four time premiership coach lost by more a few weeks ago.


This is a very funny way to begin when we ran 1st very close a week ago.

Yes I’m not sure how we managed to do that lol. Maybe Adelaide came into that match with the wrong mindset - who knows!

 

[DanWCE]

View attachment 2398517

Essendon are apparently historically low on availability, record debuts this year, lost 500 games of experience this week on top of it all, and we still easily had them covered on lack of experience. Puts it in a bit of perspective

Not to turn this into a Purples thread but I have been hearing all season how Freo are so young, plenty of time on their side to capitalize on their premiership window opening. They're.... Not really that young. Very little difference to Crows who are sitting on top. Few media types might be caught in 2022 when they last played in finals.

 

[sharps24]

Ginbey isnt a young/inexperienced player if you didnt know

I can't believe that true to my word I unblocked you after Gross finally played a full game. Back on block you go for sympathising with a moron who thinks the 3rd year player who was taken in the first round of the draft for being an all time freak of a man child, who is likely going to win our B&F and who probably should be in the AA squad, deserves to be in the same conversation as Luca Greggo. Pair of absolute clowns.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

 

[stallon]

I’ve heard very experienced coaches like BScott, Clarkson and Lyon talk of their sides’ inexperience. Given were the most inexperienced I think it’s a credit to Mini that he doesn’t use that language. He remains pretty level regardless of results.

It will be interesting to see his changes to the coaching panel.

And also how this group - with a core who have now played a few games together - go with another preseason plus the addition of Jake and Yeo.

There is a possibility we might have a better group than many here think. I think we’re closer to the top four than StK, Ess, Melb and NM at least. But it won’t be next year.

Consdiering many here think we are 10 years away from playing finals at best I think its a bet that its more than just a possibility

 

[sharps24]

Oh cute we're doing the its the same picture thing on me because I've said that Richmond have put more development into their youth this year than us. Cool cool cool cool.

These are the facts:

Richmond have put 75 games into their 2024 draft crop to our 29 games.
Richmond have 4 players who have played more than 10 games from their 2024 draft crop to our 0.

"Oh but Richmond took 7 players in that draft, you can't compare"

Richmond have put more games into their 2024 draft crop than we have put into our 2023 and 2024 draft crop combined.

Richmond have taken 12 players in the main draft in the last 3 years to our 16. In 2025 that cohort have played an average of 10 games each to our 8 games each.

If you take the first player picked by each club in the last 3 drafts out of the equation, Richmond have put 84 games into that cohort to our 77.

Richmond have put 75 games, 6 games, 27 games into their 1st, 2d, 3rd year players compared to our 29, 45, 50 games.

Quick and dirty spreadsheet on this:



Maybe go look tiny bit into the detail instead of the basically useless comparison like "oh we're 24.6 years of age on average and Richmond is 25.0" so that tells the story right there. Well Fremantle are 24.8 years and they are currently in the top 4 so clearly it matters a little bit what the ability of your players is and not just how old or how experienced they are. Richmond have more experience than Fremantle, Fremantle have 10 games per player more experience than us but 10 games per player less experience than North Melbourne. It's just junk analysis to put stock into that level of stuff but I get that for low iq posters its the be all and end all.

Now apart from it just obviously being true that we've invested less games into the 2024 [29] and 2023 [29] draft crop's than we did the 2022s [50] and that this could be seen as an issue if you were inclined to think the investment should be intensifying as we get worse not trailing off, it should be obvious from looking at the team and looking at how McQualter has selected the team in his first year that come 2026 despite maybe being in a position to take 3 first round players and 3 highly rated academy prospects and potentially being in a position to have a similar draft haul as Richmond did last year, there is just no way we are putting 75+ games into that cohort next year.

For the same amount of wins, we could have doubled the amount of games we put into Allan, Gross, Davis and Greggo. We could have doubled the amount of games we put into Hall last year and this year. Just about every game we put into Cole, Hunt, Cripps, Owee's we could have put into these first and second year players to try and get at least some of them the the level of experience we got Harley and Ruben to in their first season. But instead, we are holding onto these guys now apparently because we're still not ready to make the space in the 22.

I just generally can't get my head around what its achieving drafting players who we aren't prepared to pump games into in order to fast track, when the players we are playing instead aren't good players. it'd be one thing if these guys moved the needle, if they were the sort of players who could actually win us games or make us competitive or could go play for another club and improve their 22. To me this was a wasted year. But whatever McQualter gets a pass in his first year. Do whatever you want with the picks we have but don't draft players if you aren't prepared to put 20 games each into at least your top 2 picks. And don't tell me we've been developing the youth when we have 0 draftee's who have played 10 games so far this year. There's 6 players taken last year with 20 or more games to their name and 18 players who have played more than 10 and none of them are ours and that is objectively shithouse for a club thats won 1 game thats supposed to be rebuilding.

 

[Truly Lazuli]

Oh cute we're doing the its the same picture thing on me because I've said that Richmond have put more development into their youth this year than us. Cool cool cool cool.

These are the facts:

Richmond have put 75 games into their 2024 draft crop to our 29 games.
Richmond have 4 players who have played more than 10 games from their 2024 draft crop to our 0.

"Oh but Richmond took 7 players in that draft, you can't compare"

Richmond have put more games into their 2024 draft crop than we have put into our 2023 and 2024 draft crop combined.

Richmond have taken 12 players in the main draft in the last 3 years to our 16. In 2025 that cohort have played an average of 10 games each to our 8 games each.

If you take the first player picked by each club in the last 3 drafts out of the equation, Richmond have put 84 games into that cohort to our 77.

Richmond have put 75 games, 6 games, 27 games into their 1st, 2d, 3rd year players compared to our 29, 45, 50 games.

Quick and dirty spreadsheet on this:
View attachment 2399160


Maybe go look tiny bit into the detail instead of the basically useless comparison like "oh we're 24.6 years of age on average and Richmond is 25.0" so that tells the story right there. Well Fremantle are 24.8 years and they are currently in the top 4 so clearly it matters a little bit what the ability of your players is and not just how old or how experienced they are. Richmond have more experience than Fremantle, Fremantle have 10 games per player more experience than us but 10 games per player less experience than North Melbourne. It's just junk analysis to put stock into that level of stuff but I get that for low iq posters its the be all and end all.

Now apart from it just obviously being true that we've invested less games into the 2024 [29] and 2023 [29] draft crop's than we did the 2022s [50] and that this could be seen as an issue if you were inclined to think the investment should be intensifying as we get worse not trailing off, it should be obvious from looking at the team and looking at how McQualter has selected the team in his first year that come 2026 despite maybe being in a position to take 3 first round players and 3 highly rated academy prospects and potentially being in a position to have a similar draft haul as Richmond did last year, there is just no way we are putting 75+ games into that cohort next year.

For the same amount of wins, we could have doubled the amount of games we put into Allan, Gross, Davis and Greggo. We could have doubled the amount of games we put into Hall last year and this year. Just about every game we put into Cole, Hunt, Cripps, Owee's we could have put into these first and second year players to try and get at least some of them the the level of experience we got Harley and Ruben to in their first season. But instead, we are holding onto these guys now apparently because we're still not ready to make the space in the 22.

I just generally can't get my head around what its achieving drafting players who we aren't prepared to pump games into in order to fast track, when the players we are playing instead aren't good players. it'd be one thing if these guys moved the needle, if they were the sort of players who could actually win us games or make us competitive or could go play for another club and improve their 22. To me this was a wasted year. But whatever McQualter gets a pass in his first year. Do whatever you want with the picks we have but don't draft players if you aren't prepared to put 20 games each into at least your top 2 picks. And don't tell me we've been developing the youth when we have 0 draftee's who have played 10 games so far this year. There's 6 players taken last year with 20 or more games to their name and 18 players who have played more than 10 and none of them are ours and that is objectively shithouse for a club thats won 1 game thats supposed to be rebuilding.

You haven't got a PowerPoint presentation to go with this have you? I'm more of a visual person.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

You haven't got a PowerPoint presentation to go with this have you? I'm more of a visual person.

Here you go mate.



“But, but, Richmond…”

 

[Jeremy McLovin]

Here you go mate.

View attachment 2399258

“But, but, Richmond…”

**** me, that's bleak for Carlton

 

[stallon]

Oh cute we're doing the its the same picture thing on me because I've said that Richmond have put more development into their youth this year than us. Cool cool cool cool.

These are the facts:

Richmond have put 75 games into their 2024 draft crop to our 29 games.
Richmond have 4 players who have played more than 10 games from their 2024 draft crop to our 0.

"Oh but Richmond took 7 players in that draft, you can't compare"

Richmond have put more games into their 2024 draft crop than we have put into our 2023 and 2024 draft crop combined.

Richmond have taken 12 players in the main draft in the last 3 years to our 16. In 2025 that cohort have played an average of 10 games each to our 8 games each.

If you take the first player picked by each club in the last 3 drafts out of the equation, Richmond have put 84 games into that cohort to our 77.

Richmond have put 75 games, 6 games, 27 games into their 1st, 2d, 3rd year players compared to our 29, 45, 50 games.

Quick and dirty spreadsheet on this:
View attachment 2399160


Maybe go look tiny bit into the detail instead of the basically useless comparison like "oh we're 24.6 years of age on average and Richmond is 25.0" so that tells the story right there. Well Fremantle are 24.8 years and they are currently in the top 4 so clearly it matters a little bit what the ability of your players is and not just how old or how experienced they are. Richmond have more experience than Fremantle, Fremantle have 10 games per player more experience than us but 10 games per player less experience than North Melbourne. It's just junk analysis to put stock into that level of stuff but I get that for low iq posters its the be all and end all.

Now apart from it just obviously being true that we've invested less games into the 2024 [29] and 2023 [29] draft crop's than we did the 2022s [50] and that this could be seen as an issue if you were inclined to think the investment should be intensifying as we get worse not trailing off, it should be obvious from looking at the team and looking at how McQualter has selected the team in his first year that come 2026 despite maybe being in a position to take 3 first round players and 3 highly rated academy prospects and potentially being in a position to have a similar draft haul as Richmond did last year, there is just no way we are putting 75+ games into that cohort next year.

For the same amount of wins, we could have doubled the amount of games we put into Allan, Gross, Davis and Greggo. We could have doubled the amount of games we put into Hall last year and this year. Just about every game we put into Cole, Hunt, Cripps, Owee's we could have put into these first and second year players to try and get at least some of them the the level of experience we got Harley and Ruben to in their first season. But instead, we are holding onto these guys now apparently because we're still not ready to make the space in the 22.

I just generally can't get my head around what its achieving drafting players who we aren't prepared to pump games into in order to fast track, when the players we are playing instead aren't good players. it'd be one thing if these guys moved the needle, if they were the sort of players who could actually win us games or make us competitive or could go play for another club and improve their 22. To me this was a wasted year. But whatever McQualter gets a pass in his first year. Do whatever you want with the picks we have but don't draft players if you aren't prepared to put 20 games each into at least your top 2 picks. And don't tell me we've been developing the youth when we have 0 draftee's who have played 10 games so far this year. There's 6 players taken last year with 20 or more games to their name and 18 players who have played more than 10 and none of them are ours and that is objectively shithouse for a club thats won 1 game thats supposed to be rebuilding.

I know you have me blocked again, but im gonna respond anyway.

Why didnt you include 2022 draftees in this?
Why not include Maric?

We have given 87 games to our 2022 draftees(Hewett Ginbey Dewar Long) + Maric(same age as 2022 draftees) just this year

I know you dont consider them to be "kids" or young players but they still are lmfao, theyre taking spots off other kids as theyre still learning the game, theyre not taking the place of experienced leaders

 

[Truly Lazuli]

Here you go mate.

View attachment 2399258

“But, but, Richmond…”

Thanks, love the colours, almost like a rainbow

 

[sharps24]

Here you go mate.

View attachment 2399258

“But, but, Richmond…”

Ok Richmond taking 8 players last year and still putting more games into them than we did the 8 we took over the last 2 years is upsetting you still somehow. How about,

North Melbourne: Finn O'Sullivan 21 games
Brisbane: Levi Ashcroft 22 games
Esseddon: Isaac Kako 21 games, Clarke 12
Fremantle: Murphy Reid 22 games

Melbourne: Harvey Langford 21 games, Xavier Lindsey 18 games
St Kinda: Travaglia 11, Tauru 9, Bosxshall 10
Port Berry: 11, Moraes 13
Bulldogs: Hynes 9, Dolan 11, Davidson 18

The majority of the league have made more of their 2024 cohort than us. But but but West Coast are killing it it's not about draftee's look at Rueben go.

There's a conversation to be had here with people who aren't just deadset assholes and that is that West Coast has a really really unique list profile that came about by unconventional means and to the complete opposite of what you'd assume to be the case, it actually makes it harder for draftee's to get a game than it would be an nearly any other club out there.

This is a headache for list development, it will only be worse next year than it was this year and yes it was actually bad this year to be new to West Coast's list. Bo Allen being stranded on 6 games sucks, Gross on 8 mostly spent as a sub or out of position sucks, Greggo no debut sucks. Shannahan got lucky wouldn't have played a game if Waterman and Allan had been fit [Which Mini likes to bring up every week now it seems] and Davis has been fairly well treated so he'd be happy but he was our last picked lowest ceiling prospect so not sure how much of a win that is next year if he's just another Harvey Johnston. And outside of Harley we did **** all with our draft hand last year as well.

We are bringing them into the club faster than we can develop them. We have a development backlog that's 2 years deep, and now we've found ourselves with a glut of picks in the coming draft. So what's the plan? We seem to be retaining a couple of blokes we planned to delist because they ended up playing nearly every game and we're probably looking to sell out of the top 5 again as well.

We're ranging far off the beaten path here for what ir either normal or even doable in a rebuild and there really isn't a relevant comparison to any other rebuild thats been done. BUT, compared to how lists are usually built and maintained through the draft our 2023 and 2024 kids are underdeveloped and we have big problems finding the time we need to bring these inexperienced players along, especially if we add another 6-7 of them in 3 months time.

Look forward to the next meme that ignores all of that.

 

[sharps24]

Thanks, love the colours, almost like a rainbow

I don't know who you are but it will be my pleasure to add you to the highly esteemed Sharps ignore pile of Bigfooty flogs. The honour is yours. Farewell soldier you have done yourself proud.

 

[Forward Press]

Look forward to the next meme that ignores all of that.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Ok Richmond taking 8 players last year and still putting more games into them than we did the 8 we took over the last 2 years is upsetting you still somehow. How about,

North Melbourne: Finn O'Sullivan 21 games
Brisbane: Levi Ashcroft 22 games
Esseddon: Isaac Kako 21 games, Clarke 12
Fremantle: Murphy Reid 22 games

Melbourne: Harvey Langford 21 games, Xavier Lindsey 18 games
St Kinda: Travaglia 11, Tauru 9, Bosxshall 10
Port Berry: 11, Moraes 13
Bulldogs: Hynes 9, Dolan 11, Davidson 18

The majority of the league have made more of their 2024 cohort than us. But but but West Coast are killing it it's not about draftee's look at Rueben go.

There's a conversation to be had here with people who aren't just deadset assholes and that is that West Coast has a really really unique list profile that came about by unconventional means and to the complete opposite of what you'd assume to be the case, it actually makes it harder for draftee's to get a game than it would be an nearly any other club out there.

This is a headache for list development, it will only be worse next year than it was this year and yes it was actually bad this year to be new to West Coast's list. Bo Allen being stranded on 6 games sucks, Gross on 8 mostly spent as a sub or out of position sucks, Greggo no debut sucks. Shannahan got lucky wouldn't have played a game if Waterman and Allan had been fit [Which Mini likes to bring up every week now it seems] and Davis has been fairly well treated so he'd be happy but he was our last picked lowest ceiling prospect so not sure how much of a win that is next year if he's just another Harvey Johnston. And outside of Harley we did **** all with our draft hand last year as well.

We are bringing them into the club faster than we can develop them. We have a development backlog that's 2 years deep, and now we've found ourselves with a glut of picks in the coming draft. So what's the plan? We seem to be retaining a couple of blokes we planned to delist because they ended up playing nearly every game and we're probably looking to sell out of the top 5 again as well.

We're ranging far off the beaten path here for what ir either normal or even doable in a rebuild and there really isn't a relevant comparison to any other rebuild thats been done. BUT, compared to how lists are usually built and maintained through the draft our 2023 and 2024 kids are underdeveloped and we have big problems finding the time we need to bring these inexperienced players along, especially if we add another 6-7 of them in 3 months time.

Look forward to the next meme that ignores all of that.

You post War and Peace about how we’re not playing the kids just because we’re not playing the specific kids you have set as the parameter.

• Ginbey (20, too jacked) doesn’t count.
• Harley (20, too good) doesn’t count.
• Hall (20, 2023 draftee, too bald) doesn’t count.
• Maric (20, too mid seasony) doesn’t count.
• Shanahan (19, 2024 draftee, wasn’t picked ahead of our captain or reigning AA) doesn’t count.
• AReid (19, 2023 draftee; see Shanahan) doesn’t count.

Every metric has us as the youngest, the least experienced, and relying the most on children for their output of everyone in the league.

But they’re all wrong and we’re not actually doing any of those things because Bo Allan hasn’t played 22 games this year and Murphy Reid has.

There is nowhere for this conversation to go if you ignore the big picture to look at the very minute subsection of data you want to bellyache about.

 

[JackOutback]

You post War and Peace about how we’re not playing the kids just because we’re not playing the specific kids you have set as the parameter.

• Ginbey (20, too jacked) doesn’t count.
• Harley (20, too good) doesn’t count.
• Hall (20, 2023 draftee, too bald) doesn’t count.
• Maric (20, too mid seasony) doesn’t count.
• Shanahan (19, 2024 draftee, wasn’t picked ahead of our captain or reigning AA) doesn’t count.
• AReid (19, 2023 draftee; see Shanahan) doesn’t count.

Every metric has us as the youngest, the least experienced, and relying the most on children for their output of everyone in the league.

But they’re all wrong and we’re not actually doing any of those things because Bo Allan hasn’t played 22 games this year and Murphy Reid has.

There is nowhere for this conversation to go if you ignore the big picture to look at the very minute subsection of data you want to bellyache about.

This one is fair, at least.

 

[THE A5]

You post War and Peace about how we’re not playing the kids just because we’re not playing the specific kids you have set as the parameter.

• Ginbey (20, too jacked) doesn’t count.
• Harley (20, too good) doesn’t count.
• Hall (20, 2023 draftee, too bald) doesn’t count.
• Maric (20, too mid seasony) doesn’t count.
• Shanahan (19, 2024 draftee, wasn’t picked ahead of our captain or reigning AA) doesn’t count.
• AReid (19, 2023 draftee; see Shanahan) doesn’t count.

Every metric has us as the youngest, the least experienced, and relying the most on children for their output of everyone in the league.

But they’re all wrong and we’re not actually doing any of those things because Bo Allan hasn’t played 22 games this year and Murphy Reid has.

There is nowhere for this conversation to go if you ignore the big picture to look at the very minute subsection of data you want to bellyache about.

Jack Williams (21, 2021 draftee, too fat) counts as two

 

[TY24]

HoneyBadger35 any danger of you going one day without summoning the text walls?