Vdubs
Hall of Famer
I don't have that argument at all.
Given the improvement expected of many teams this year, and our lack of, and prospective deterioration, I was going to be happy with 10 wins, and in fact, we have a little more than that.
Analysis When will we actually address our staggering recent record in crunch games?
- Thread starter Seeds
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Given the improvement expected of many teams this year, and our lack of, and prospective deterioration, I was going to be happy with 10 wins, and in fact, we have a little more than that.
- Sep 3, 2011
- 7,891
- 16,941
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Um, they hit bottom and got high draft picks. Something we've never done and something I don't want to see done at GFC.
They didn't just turn over their lists with a concentrated plan, they didn't have choices - players just left for more success - and that dropped them further down. McAvoy, Lake, Dal Santo, Goddard, Griffen, Higgens...
- Sep 3, 2011
- 7,891
- 16,941
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Awesome post. Sums it up.
They had plans to turnover their lists and drop down the ladder, letting their older players go.
The saints especially have had a very clear plan trying to get high draft picks eg letting go of McEvoy and Stanley. Do you think they couldn't have kept Goddard and Dal Santo if they really wanted to?
Both clubs saw that they fell short of flags and made the tough calls.
We won flags and instead of learning that ruthlessness is required we became a retirement home for old and injury prone players.
- Thread starter
- #105
im all for keeping johnson next year but the deal with gws for two top 10 draft picks could of been game changing. it cane late but we could of made it work if we really wanted it to. apparently johno would of agreed if he knew what the tade was. why wasnt he told?
Badtemperedbadger
Team Captain
And yet, a fact which has escaped many, when we played the Saints two weeks ago, they had 12 players under 50 games, we had 9.
They had 9 players under 30 games we had 7. So not really much difference there.
So when another few veterans finish this year and a few more young hopefuls get more games ( possibly GHS, Gore, Jansen, even Cunico) we will in terms of numbers be similar in experience to other young sides.
All that without finishing bottom to get high draft picks.
Our end to this season was terrible, and we have a number of issues to face, yet our team is transforming, which seems to ignored or even unknown to many including our own supporters.
Yes we were crap on Friday night, and Collingwood were crap the week before, let's not ignore the result and also lets not make out as though the Club is not well aware of this.
You are very funny.
But seriously, show me how many flags they have won in the past decade please.
ps. Kelly and co are no doubt grateful of your appreciation for the 3 flags in 5 years they won though!
Just for interests sake-which players do you think we could have retired earlier than they have been?
Last edited:
I think you are dead wrong here. Firstly we finished 3rd in the H&A season in 2014, I don't recall these teams making rebuild decisions after finishing 3rd. Both clubs had already bottomed out before making rebuild decisions. Actually I think had McIntosh panned out we could very well have nabbed another premiership, unfortunately it failed spectacularly.
Secondly we have and are making rebuild decisions. We let Chappy and Hunt go, we are apparently letting a few go now who are unhappy about it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
how does the last decade have any relevance to 2015? quit living in the past
I'd have pushed out lonergan last year to the bulldogs, stokes to anyone, I wouldn't have given Kelly another year last year.
Should have turned over at least 3-5 guys last year.
Would have made it very clear to the oldies that they would be better off changing clubs to get more money and extended contracts.
Better for both parties to get Josh Hunt/Chappie/Pods type deals from other clubs.
We'd have likely finished a few spots lower but we'd be in a much better position.
Kelly and co got 3 flags in 5 years and a lot of money playing AFL, they are professional sportsmen why would I feel bad for them not being able to play an extra year at the club they are loyal to?
The Saints had the whole Scott Watters problem, but the last 2 years since then they have definitely gone on the right path.
The Bulldogs dropped off after their last prelim in 2010 and have been rebuilding since.
We didn't finish 3rd last year we were out in straight sets. In other words we were cooked. Yet we top up with Stanley and Mitch Clark, now we are getting Dangerfield, Henderson and Selwood.
I don't mind the last 3 but I'd have serious question marks over Henderson considering it'll cost us a draft pick. (We could have kept Hamling and Brown and given away lonners last year, had a second rounder and save a second rounder)
I was fine getting HMac and Rivers but when it didn't turn into a flag then I thought we should have gone harder with a youth policy and sooner.
Chris Scott now realises we are s**t but we have been since the end of 2012.
Can you please find me a quote that says they decided to turnover their list and drop down the ladder ?
Both clubs tried to stay in premiership contention for as long as possible , in fact I remember hearing at the start of 2012 a few St Kilda players talk about how they hoped to have a season under their new coach scott waters like we had in 2011 under Scott .But they were not as well coached as us and they fell down the ladder .They than had no choice but to do a full rebuild.
I assume that you don't worry about posting about topics you know nothing about based on this following quote ?
"instead of learning that ruthlessness is required we became a retirement home for old and injury prone players"
Under Scott
-Milburn and Mooney both left out of a premiership side , Milburn especially could of played
-Ling and Ottens probably retire too early
-Chapman, Cory ,Podisaldy and Hunt all told to leave.
-It looks like we will be making so tough calls at the end of this year too.
Can I also suggest that we wait until the Bulldogs and Stkilda actually win a premiership before we use them as an example ?
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
I think you'll find Chris Scott has been under no illusion how good / bad this team is.
- Sep 3, 2011
- 7,891
- 16,941
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Ruthlessness has its own pitfalls.
And our situation is incredibly unique :1) the veterans in question had elevated Geelong to a great club. 2) the veterans were playing very well for the last few seasons. Stokes rejuvenated himself and almost made it to A grade status, SJ nearly won a brownlow etc.
How would we really know if we could have rejuvenated the list by being ruthless? It's too optimistic to assume that our new draft picks would have played well.
Decisions were made to keep older players. I don't think they were entirely correct. But it's all hindsight. We were close, but just didn't have that edge to take us to a Premiership. Who knows where that could have been found. Scott and co certainly didn't die trying.
This I kind of agree with. It would have really worked well for both teams. A part of me thinks it's just hyped up bulls#it. Or GWS just waited till too late to do anything about it.
If we were willing to let Chappy go, then potentially they should have seriously considered trading SJ too.
Yeah, no doubt Chris "our best is good enough to beat anyone" Scott has never misjudged the quality of the team.
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
Coaches say these sort of things all the time to keep the sponsors, coteries, and supporters happy. Our best is good enough to beat anyone. Problem this year is that we only saw the best about three times (against Port Adelaide, GWS and Swans)
id laugh if paul roos came out and said there best is good enough to beat anyone, purely to keep the sponsors and supporters happy. i dont think he has said that thou, maybe he doesnt what his sponsors happy?
- Thread starter
- #117
Third page in the top half. Don't want to embarrass the poster.
You can make upbeat, optimistic statements about the team without explicitly stating that you think your side is good enough to beat that year's grand finalists, despite one of those grand finalists beating you comprehensively on two occasions across three weeks and one beating you by 110 points the last time you played them.
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
Clearly what a Roos would say would be tempered to match the ability and history of the club, e.g., "We expect the boys to play 4 quarters".
But why wouldn't Chris Scott say our best is good enough to beat any team when for the past 9 years that has been the case?
Under Scott
- Recruited McIntosh at age 28 who then in 2 out of 3 seasons failed to play a single game.
- Recruited Mitch Clark at age 27 who has missed most of this season and has massive doubts over his future.
- Re-signed Horlin-Smith and Smedts, yet kept them in the VFL while the form of Kelly and Bartel fell apart.
- Recruited players with injury concerns in McIntosh, Clark and Delaney, while already keeping four players more or less permanently on the long term injury list (Menzel, Vardy, Cowan and McCarthy).
Can you please tell me what relevance it is what Scott says in press conferences ? I couldn't give a stuff .
What Scott says in press conference and what Scott says to the player are 2 different things to be honest anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
If Scott can tell Milburn I am not going to play you in a Grand final ,I am going with Duncan it means he can make the tough decision .
If he can tell Chapman,Hunt and Podsiadly who all wanted to play on that they are no longer required it means he can make the tough call.
-Mcintosh was taken as a risk in an attempt to win a flag in 2013 , the club new he might never play a game for us but it was a punt in order to win a premiership .
-Still early days with Clark , it was also a risk but the truth is Varcoe doesn't make us a better side at all.We did not lose much.
-Bartel and Kelly were our 3 highest disposal getters in our best game of the year against Sydney in round 20.
-A large part of the reason why we have taken a risk with injury prone players is because we haven't given up a massive amount to get them ,Sure there were risks involved but there is always risks involved with going via the draft .To get quality established players we would of had to of given up much more than we have.
Last edited:
I think that to say we're "s**t" overdoes it. 2013 we were top-four material, and could have sneaked it but for a fit full-forward and a fit ruckman. 2014 I felt that sixth is about right, and in 2015 we're an Average Side. We're not s**t, we're not good, we're average. Next year (unless Danger comes and Motlop stays) we'll probably drop a little further.
Look at how the really great sides dropped down - Brisbane bombed like a Stuka, Essendon (who should have won more flags) did similarly. North, West Coast (90s) and Hawthorn (80s/90s) both spent plenty of time as really average bottom-half clubs before any rejuvenation took place. That's just realistic. Things are rarely as good as you think they are (2007, 09 and 11 aside), and rarely as bad as you think they are.
- Mar 6, 2014
- 41,562
- 39,805
- AFL Club
- Geelong
OK, we're turning over our list, we're letting our older players go and we've dropped down the ladder- why all the whinging, whining and gnashing of teeth?
Oh, dumb question- it's Scott's fault, apparently.... whatever it is.
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
How true is that ?
It is applicable to any and every team, AT THEIR BEST. It presupposes that the other team is not at its best as well, which is by definition what happens when a team is at its VERY BEST. It does not allow the opposition to be at its best.
Examples:
Ess beating Hawks
Port beating Hawks
Richmond beating Hawks
Any team beating Hawks
Geelong beating Swans.
Do you not agree with that?
Problem is, we are rarely able to play at our very best, for many reasons- injuries, injuries, and injuries being the top 3 .
When we have a team WITH Stanley, Duncan, Selwood, Blicavs, Taylor, Hawkins, Motlop, Menzel, Caddy, Guthrie, Mackie, Lang, Gregson, Mackie, Johnson, Bartel, Lonergan, Enright, Thurlow, Kolo, Bews, Clarke/Vardy all available, all at their best, of course we could and have beaten any team.
Last edited:
