Opinion Which outcome is better long term?

[hcd199]

My point? We get ****en flogged by ****en Shitmond and make one ****en change......****! And peeps like you will applaud when we finish ninth on the back of playing 35 yr olds and beating the comp dregs while somehow selling that beating Brissy will stop us from becoming a modern day Melbourne. Ffs.

Yeah, sure - why play to win when you could get 'excited' by the 'potential' on display as the cellar-dwelling Lions beat our inexperienced all-under-25 side comfortably instead, and fantasise about all the 'AA guns' you'll take in the draft if you ever feel disheartened by the loss? Melbourne isn't an arbitrary comparison here - it's their playbook you're cribbing from, they who've spent the best part of a decade as a 'young' 'up-and-coming side' 'about to be' the best going around... but no, I'm sure a couple of years finishing 17th will remedy all our ills. The snake oil comparison remains every bit as apt.

Point is, you don't have to agree with every decision the current coaching team makes at the selection table to disagree with your draft-driven dogma (although, and this goes for plenty on here, it helps not to approach 6.25pm on a Thursday with blinkers on, ready to explode with rage if the selection committee hasn't seen the 'common sense' of your armchair agenda yet). No-one's "applauding" our recent mediocrity, but mid-table is a better place to sit while developing a side than plunging into the bottoming-out quagmire like other teams have, and - to make the point once more - the state of the league both now and over the last decade or so bears that out.

 

[lockheed]

NN - your opinion is as valid and as valuable as mine. Nonetheless, I'd reckon only a small number of people on the Board, and a small number of our supporters, would want to tank for a year or two in order to pick some high draft picks.

Most of us would take a more nuanced approach. We'd be inclined to pick the best team on form, rather than the best team on reputation. If a reserves player is playing better than a senior player, and we would be more competitive with that player in the team, well let's play them. If a player is injured or is an extended streak of bad form, and there's someone playing better, then make the change.

We will need to get games into our younger players, for them to get the experience they need to improve and for us to see if they will make us better in the long term. That's a more difficult question, as we all want the team to be competitive and win games. Geelong is a team that seems to have done this reasonably well over the last few years, Fremantle less so. Geelong has had a very generous helping of father-sons, but the other Scott has tried to ensure that a small number of less experienced players are picked each week, whilst maintaining the team's competiveness.

Out of curiosity - imagine you could foretell the future, and had the choice of North winning 10 games this year, by retaining all of Harvey, Petrie, Firrito and Dal, or we winning 7 games, having made the changes that we did. Would you have sacked the four players? If you had chosen to keep the four, would you make the same decision if you knew the consequence was that the beginning of our premiership window would shift back one or two years as a consequence of that decision?

 

[ferball]

My point? We get ****en flogged by ****en Shitmond and make one ****en change......****! And peeps like you will applaud when we finish ninth on the back of playing 35 yr olds and beating the comp dregs while somehow selling that beating Brissy will stop us from becoming a modern day Melbourne. Ffs.

We didn't get flogged by Shitmond. We lost by less than 6 goals. Which is actually our smallest loss of the year if you don't count the close ones by less than a goal.

Other teams get flogged. These days we rarely do and that isn't a bad thing.

 

[Twinkletoes]

We didn't get flogged by Shitmond. We lost by less than 6 goals. Which is actually our smallest loss of the year if you don't count the close ones by less than a goal.

Other teams get flogged. These days we rarely do and that isn't a bad thing.

Yep, it was a s**t 3rd quarter but otherwise a good contest.

 

[Mav]

We didn't get flogged by Shitmond. We lost by less than 6 goals. Which is actually our smallest loss of the year if you don't count the close ones by less than a goal.

Other teams get flogged. These days we rarely do and that isn't a bad thing.

I lol'd.

It was our smallest loss if you don't count the smaller ones. Well it was also out biggest loss, if you don't count the bigger ones!

Yep, it was a s**t 3rd quarter but otherwise a good contest.

We kicked 2 goals in the last half, one goal each quarter. It was no contest after half time.

 

[ferball]

Yep, it was a s**t 3rd quarter but otherwise a good contest.

Yes. That is one thing about us over the last two years. We rarely play like utter s**t. We had 3 ten goal + losses in the first half of 2015 and one since. Admittedly it was in last years final but we were physically and mentally cooked after last year and we've had a 10 goal win over that side in our return match. While they were unbeaten and on top of the ladder. (We also delisted a slue of players from that side.)

I like that.

Playing in a side with that mentality is more important for any players development than 30+ games in a bottom 4 team over multiple seasons. IMO anyway.

 

[ferball]

I lol'd.

It was our smallest loss if you don't count the smaller ones. Well it was also out biggest loss, if you don't count the bigger ones!


We kicked 2 goals in the last half, one goal each quarter. It was no contest after half time.

Yeah but it wasn't a flogging in the way Richmond's loss to Adelaide was. Or Freo's loss to Port or Adelaide. Or a number of other sides this year. I dunno if some of us remember how demoralising a real flogging is. They did all their scoring in the third quarter and only kicked two in the last. If they flogged us they would have kicked 5 or more.

I'm not saying its great we lost to Richmond, but we are not going to win every game from now on till the end of the world (touch wood). As you noted earlier... So its good that lately the games we have lost are not generally walk overs. That gives us more to work with than other teams imo.

There is more to development than game time. How people/players (and staff) approach the game and how the team as a whole do will have a big influence on any player's development.

 

[King Corey]

A win is a win and a loss is a loss.

The rest is spin.

 

[Twinkletoes]

We kicked 2 goals in the last half, one goal each quarter. It was no contest after half time.

1.3 to 2.4 final term after they'd kicked 6.3 to 1.3 in the 3rd. It was just the 3rd in which we were shyte. The game was over by the end of the 3rd quarter (despite us still being within reach, 21 pts, with 12 minutes remaining in the last). The 3rd quarter we seemed to remain in some sort of Zen like trance from the halftime oranges.

 

[naturally north]

So where were we ? Oh that's right I have been accused of wanting us to tank, because apparently that will destroy the very fabric of your club. Firstly I don't want us to tank- hate the thought. 7 wins from our last 26 matches= same result as tanking.

Brad as stated last night believes finals are still a chance- that isn't of course a discussion point for this thread, we have one dedicated for such nonsense.

I should have said, Scott wants us to finish as high on the ladder as possible while playing guys out of form or who not going to be part of any future success this club has, tbh those people may not even be born yet

I should have also said if as we going to continue to get beat by s**t sides, would it not be better getting beaten with guys that could possibly have a future at our club.

Brad is looking after his own interests and that is human nature- someone else should act with the clubs best interest at heart. Finish low and get some games into the youngsters. Or finish low and get some more games into the Waites of this world. Either way it looks likely now the early picks we require will be ours for the next few seasons.

 

[naturally north]

So Kelly and or Martin or Stephenson will be ours. Or we could finish ninth and get a slider who is great, but has issues with disposal or is a bit slow.

2017 is turning out ok

 

[giantroo]

So Kelly and or Martin or Stephenson will be ours. Or we could finish ninth and get a slider who is great, but has issues with disposal or is a bit slow.

2017 is turning out ok

Finish last, get pick 1, get Kelly through PSD and Martin as FA.

 

[naturally north]

Finish last, get pick 1, get Kelly through PSD and Martin as FA.

Geebus GR, that will make us like Melbourne

I concur though. I see no issue with us hitting rock bottom and going form there. We just got beat by another very average side.

fwiw of our last 28 games we have won 7.

We are closing in on a priority draft pick.