Why getting thrashed is a good thing

[Memories]

So you made it up and then went back and deleted the post, but I had already quoted prior to the ninja edit.

Lucky you have the faith of your convictions.

Deleted my post? What are you talking about? You might need some clarity drugs to offset the other ones you're on.

You want to know why not too many coaches are brave enought to do a cleanout - it is because when you don't win games the natives get restless.

Under your plan we would be perhaps the most useless team of all time - I for one think a rebuild is fine, kids getting smashed too early in their careers and reinforcing an even greater losing culture than currently exist ....no thanks.

Only someone who has never played a game in their life or has low self esteem would say a thing like "reinforce a losing culture" like it is something embedded in them. Maybe "losers" with no self esteem get all depressed about losing and that sticks around for life. People with winning mentalities do not think like this though, they take the losses as a way to improve their skills. When I was a kid I was in a team that lost 90% of their games, that didn't stop me from playing well in a grand final winning team a few years later. Playing any game is fun to people like me.

You put a person who is open to learning into anything and they will learn it even if they start off terrible. Put duds that have no heart in there and they will always be terrible. You only sort the duds from non duds by placing them into those kind of positions. You would make a terrible coach/player/recruiter in my opinion.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

KPR - the season to trade might be the following year with GC?

Again if we cut Browne, Headland, Solly, Head, Thornton and Gilmore - that is a lot of experience out of the club - without trading for more kids.

i agree, but it needs to happen, im not saying we should have done it last year, because we couldnt, but this year we should have the same cleanout as last year. of that list i would only keep solomon and maybe headland depending on how his knee looks. browne, thornton, head, gilmore, dodd should all be let go. as they offer us next to nothing and are a wasted spot on the list

 

[Moo]

Like who, Shane Crawford? Few clubs keep players as long as we have that don't perform. It is something we are known for.

Lucky you were not in charge of Brisbanes list manangement in the late 90's.

Also Memories just so I know you know ....which coach is more responsible for the non-performers on the list ..

(a) Harvey
(b) CC

Who has cleaned out more players on average per year?

(a) CC
(b) Harvey
(c) Drum

I don't just blindly back our coaches and players.

I have not agreed with a lot of things our club has done, however Harvey is doing the right thing.

He cut more players than I thought was possible last year. I was on the keep Andrew Browne train as if it is a choice between S Mcand AB - I go with age as there was a 1% chance that Browne could still be there next year.

Regardless whoever stayed it was really a stay of execution whilst the young lads had at least one year in the system.

Cutting 20 players - you are dreaming but you will suck enough in around here but don't expect us all to follow the line as we know that rebuilds take time.

 

[Memories]

The other thing memories, and i do agree with you to a point, is that you have also stated on this board that you dont think we should be playing stephen hill because he is too skinny, but walters, hall etc are all in the same boat, if we had of gotten rid of 20 players and we werent to play all the kids that were ready, then we wouldnt field a team. rebuilding is something that has to be done over 3-5 years and done properly, otherwise you end up with a richmond senario

If we traded some of our stars we could have targeted more ready to go players like Rich, etc. Maybe the fact we got so many skinny, under developed players is because the coaches thought we had the luxury to do such things? I also think we screwed the draft up, so it's kinda pointless using "what I think should have happened" with the "current bunch we got".

Hartlett, Rich, Robinson are 3 players who would easily be in our starting 22, and they can/will play most games this season. There are plenty of others.

 

[Moo]

Deleted my post? What are you talking about? You might need some clarity drugs to offset the other ones you're on.

Sorry mate my error.

 

[Moo]

i agree, but it needs to happen, im not saying we should have done it last year, because we couldnt, but this year we should have the same cleanout as last year. of that list i would only keep solomon and maybe headland depending on how his knee looks. browne, thornton, head, gilmore, dodd should all be let go. as they offer us next to nothing and are a wasted spot on the list

I don't disagree.

 

[freocuz]

Rebuilding is not a 1 season job, Memories. It is simply an impossibility for us to have gotten rid of all the duds last year, as well as trade away our best player, and drafted enough ready-made young players to even finish this season off. There's no good getting rid of all the AFL-ready bodies (despite the fact they are no good) and replacing them with guys who look like Hill.

Honestly, I don't want to trade Pav. However, I'm not completely against the idea, but I don't want the club to initiate it. If Pav goes, I would rather it be at his request than at our insistance.

 

[Memories]

Cutting 20 players - you are dreaming but you will suck enough in around here but don't expect us all to follow the line as we know that rebuilds take time.

Not cutting 20 players has got us to where we are now. A team getting thrashed with less future potential than cutting 20. There is no valid reason not to remove every player from the club if they are all shit, there are no rules restricting this.

Thankfully not everyone in our club had to go, but unfortunately about half of them last year needed to be booted/traded. Our list is/was in an awful position that requires drastic surgery to fix. Instead of having all the operations last year to fix our cancer we have to wait another year. And waiting now means the GC17 and West Sydney influence our future more than they should be.

But hey, supporters like you likely want us to continue losing into the future because that is all you've ever known in your own lives and with the club.

 

[Memories]

Rebuilding is not a 1 season job, Memories.

Rebuilding may not be a 1 season job, cutting the list of shit is though.

The fact we could have been much further along our development goals if we had have traded some of our stars is irrelevant I guess?

The only valid reason not to cut all the senior cancers from the club would be to ensure we don't get thrashed this year. Well we are, so the only reason to keep them didn't turn out well did it.

It is simply an impossibility for us to have gotten rid of all the duds last year, as well as trade away our best player, and drafted enough ready-made young players to even finish this season off. There's no good getting rid of all the AFL-ready bodies (despite the fact they are no good) and replacing them with guys who look like Hill.

No it's not impossible, how can you say such things. Cutting 20 players still means there are ~24 players with at least a year of development into them at the club. With the right drafting we could have easily got at least 6 players who could step immediately into the game and play the full season, and still have another 14+ picks to use on others who will come and go during the season.

 

[Moo]

As it is now players like Hill/Suban/Palmer/Mayne/etc are around duds who are likely influencing them negatively.

Influencing them? What in a cultural sence you mean?

Only someone who has never played a game in their life or has low self esteem would say a thing like "reinforce a losing culture" like it is something embedded in them. Maybe "losers" with no self esteem get all depressed about losing and that sticks around for life. People with winning mentalities do not think like this though, they take the losses as a way to improve their skills. When I was a kid I was in a team that lost 90% of their games, that didn't stop me from playing well in a grand final winning team a few years later. Playing any game is fun to people like me.

You put a person who is open to learning into anything and they will learn it even if they start off terrible. Put duds that have no heart in there and they will always be terrible. You only sort the duds from non duds by placing them into those kind of positions. You would make a terrible coach/player/recruiter in my opinion.

LMAO - you draw a lot of conclusions from a few internet posts don't you?

For the record - what is your highest level of coaching and playing? It must be very high and you very confident for the rocks to be slung at me.

Not cutting 20 players has got us to where we are now.

No poor trading and drafting in the years prior to Harvey got us to where we are at.

But hey, supporters like you likely want us to continue losing into the future because that is all you've ever known in your own lives and with the club.

Again big call- not sure on what it is based on?

You seem very threatened and very keen to pump up your own tyres on a personal note. You question my self esteem - I question your security to make an internet discussion about the future of a team we both support into some personal challenge?

I've always been very confident and my thoughts on club culture come from quite the reverse ...I played for a club which did not have a great culture however it was not until I left and played and then coached for a club that had a very strong culture that I think I understood how much of a factor simply not winning can be.

Harvey is doing a controlled cleanout and by AFL standards it is a big one. If I disagreed I would speak out as I did when we traded for Carr, Tarrant and when we traded our number 1 pick (though I think I wanted Polak so maybe I will be quiet on that one).

However I don't agree - he has done the right thing by the club and list and I want to give him the time to turn it around.

 

[freocuz]

No it's not impossible, how can you say such things. Cutting 20 players still means there are ~24 players with at least a year of development into them at the club. With the right drafting we could have easily got at least 6 players who could step immediately into the game and play the full season, and still have another 14+ picks to use on others who will come and go during the season.

So, either you are suggesting that we could have picked 6 17/18 yo who could have stepped straight into AFL footy, or you are suggesting we could have picked up experienced AFL players. I can only assume you mean the former.

Bear in mind there are 15 other clubs looking to select players in the draft also, some wanting guys to step straight into their sides. I'd be surprised if there were 6 ready to go players who were drafted from pick 60-odd upwards, which is where our other picks would have been.

We have made the best of a bad situation by ensuring we are going to have good picks in 2 consecutive drafts.

 

[muckypup]

I completely agree with you. Time to start again.

How many draft picks do you reckon for Pav? The Vics absolutely love him so I reckon you could be looking at 2 high picks plus an establiched player. McPharlin is quality as well so you would be looking at a good trade deal.

I do take the point there needs to be a couple of old heads around. However the exuberance the young guys showed at the end of last season without Pav there was great. I would love to see that back in the team.

 

[Belnakor]

If we were going to trade Pav, we'd get him to the gold coast and cash on their picks.

 

[Memories]

Influencing them? What in a cultural sence you mean?

Yes in a cultural senSe.

LMAO - you draw a lot of conclusions from a few internet posts don't you?

Yes, I like to believe I'm a good reader of people from limited material.

For the record - what is your highest level of coaching and playing? It must be very high and you very confident for the rocks to be slung at me.

It's not at quite the highest level, but played in a state team winning the GF (not football). I'm a firm believer you are only as good as the challenges you can face though.

Coaching though, not much outside a few kid teams when younger. I'm not quite old enough that all my best years are behind me to be coaching something in my spare time yet.

No poor trading and drafting in the years prior to Harvey got us to where we are at.

Well we can agree on one thing.....

You seem very threatened and very keen to pump up your own tyres on a personal note. You question my self esteem - I question your security to make an internet discussion about the future of a team we both support into some personal challenge?

I've always been very confident and my thoughts on club culture come from quite the reverse ...I played for a club which did not have a great culture however it was not until I left and played and then coached for a club that had a very strong culture that I think I understood how much of a factor simply not winning can be.

Someone who is confident would not think that a losing culture can be instilled in a player from simply losing a game or games. The best way a team/player can improve is from losing, not winning. Someone who is defeated by losing is someone you don't want on the team. Thankfully you have the option of drafting new players and culling the weak ones.

Harvey is doing a controlled cleanout and by AFL standards it is a big one. If I disagreed I would speak out as I did when we traded for Carr, Tarrant and when we traded our number 1 pick (though I think I wanted Polak so maybe I will be quiet on that one).

However I don't agree - he has done the right thing by the club and list and I want to give him the time to turn it around.

Who cares if by someone elses standards it is a "big one". Our club required 20 players to be removed, not 14. I stated this last year, it's been proven over the last 4 games.

Doing it "my" way would have us winning earlier than the *current* way. It might only be my opinion but I think anyone with a working logic center in their brain would also see it that way.

 

[muckypup]

Im not ready to ditch Harvey just yet either. Id be looking higher up the ladder.

Gee! We might end up Tex Wallace as a replacement!

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

i think that with the culling of our list further at the end of this year, and then taking into account the 08 and 07 drafting, i think we will have sufficient talent to progress. and the gc17 coming in, is not the complete demise of recruiting, we just need to make sure that we really make the picks we have count.

by the way... a question. If we dont win more than 4 games this year, and then again next year, with the gold coast coming in, would we still get a priority first round pick?

 

[Moo]

Gee! We might end up Tex Wallace as a replacement!

Don't even joke about it.

 

[Memories]

So, either you are suggesting that we could have picked 6 17/18 yo who could have stepped straight into AFL footy, or you are suggesting we could have picked up experienced AFL players. I can only assume you mean the former.

Bear in mind there are 15 other clubs looking to select players in the draft also, some wanting guys to step straight into their sides. I'd be surprised if there were 6 ready to go players who were drafted from pick 60-odd upwards, which is where our other picks would have been.

We have made the best of a bad situation by ensuring we are going to have good picks in 2 consecutive drafts.

Trading McPharlin, Mundy, MiJo and Pavlich would have netted us something like at least 6 more picks below 50. Likely more. To think those 6 extra picks wouldn't have helped us with the 4 we already had to get AFL ready players is a bit crazy.

The other thing to consider if we are low on "afl ready bodies" is the PSD. I however think we would have had enough players to run out a season, which was your only fear correct?

 

[Memories]

I'm not necessarily stating Harvey should be sacked. But whoever was involved in our recruiting needs to be looked at, seriously. This is 2 years in a row where major mistakes have been made in the drafts/trading period.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

Yes in a cultural senSe.




Yes, I like to believe I'm a good reader of people from limited material.



It's not at quite the highest level, but played in a state team winning the GF (not football). I'm a firm believer you are only as good as the challenges you can face though.

Coaching though, not much outside a few kid teams when younger. I'm not quite old enough that all my best years are behind me to be coaching something in my spare time yet.




Well we can agree on one thing.....



Someone who is confident would not think that a losing culture can be instilled in a player from simply losing a game or games. The best way a team/player can improve is from losing, not winning. Someone who is defeated by losing is someone you don't want on the team. Thankfully you have the option of drafting new players and culling the weak ones.



Who cares if by someone elses standards it is a "big one". Our club required 20 players to be removed, not 14. I stated this last year, it's been proven over the last 4 games.

Doing it "my" way would have us winning earlier than the *current* way. It might only be my opinion but I think anyone with a working logic center in their brain would also see it that way.

memories, what quality did you expect to find from pick 70 onwards? what leads you to believe that we would find players that are any better than the crabs we have now? we arent winning any games now, correct, but if we just picked up an extra 6 duds who realistically are only rookie list players at best, how is that going to help us win games earlier? atleast now, as frustrating as it is to watch, we can let ruffles develop physically in the wafl for a while before we throw him to the wolves... i do agree with you in that the young guys need to be played and put in the deep end from time to time, but not always, and certainly not through 16-22 games when they arent ready which is what would happen if we didnt have a guy like dodd on the list. Dont get me wrong i think these guys need to be dropped and delisted at the end of this year, but only after hill, suban, clarke etc have had atleast one year to develop

 

[Moo]

I'm not necessarily stating Harvey should be sacked. But whoever was involved in our recruiting needs to be looked at, seriously. This is 2 years in a row where major mistakes have been made in the drafts/trading period.

Not a bit too early to call?

 

[Chops_a_must]

You know we backed Browne as a depth player for this year and not as a 5 year contracted player?

That is no absurd it doesn't even deserve a response.

Seriously, are you right in the head to even think like that?

Again if we cut Browne, Head, Thornton and Gilmore - that is a lot of experience out of the club - without trading for more kids.

Oh yeah, we couldn't do without those blistering 20 games.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

I'm not necessarily stating Harvey should be sacked. But whoever was involved in our recruiting needs to be looked at, seriously. This is 2 years in a row where major mistakes have been made in the drafts/trading period.

how can you not be happy with palmer, hinkley and mayne. Hill has all the attributes of a great player, suban looks exceptional, clarke looks as good if not better than warnock. ruffles showed great courage on the weekend, hall looks to have some great skills. and bucovaz's draft report was that of an extremely tough skillful defender/centreman, who if he wasnt injured at the time probably would have been taken between picks 20-40. i know your not wrapped in ballantyne, but he has great skills and can take a good mark, and his coach at peel honestly believes that he could become successful as a midfielder.

to say that 07/08 drafts were failures i think is premature and wrong, i think they have been two of the best drafts we have ever had

 

[Moo]

That is no absurd it doesn't even deserve a response.

Seriously, are you right in the head to even think like that?


Oh yeah, we couldn't do without those blistering 20 games.

So why respond?

Browne is a very decent WAFL player - he is Mr Injury I grant you but the 6 months prior to his re-contracting he had been injury free.

So many experts Chops ...but I must go my beer is getting flat.

 

[Memories]

Not a bit too early to call?

Nope, because of the failure to get value for our senior players whilst they had it (over the last 2 years). The failure to evaluate our list properly and taking a middle ground approach. We aren't fully rebuilding or fully trying to win games. What do you call that? There will be a name for it eventually, Fremantle.

There are "reasonable" excuses on the part of Harvey for taking the middle ground approach but hindsight makes them seem like selfish, stupid reasons. Winning more than 4 games last season was another stupid decision Harvey made. That said, I think he has some decent coaching qualities, and I don't think you can entirely blame him for the recruitments when you have guys whose jobs it is to find these players ... but yeah he should know our list better than anyone you would think and bad decisions have been made.

In all of this I say "Harvey's fault", but god knows who else is involved in these decisions. When our team has been so bad from the start and there are many of these people still at higher levels in the club you have to wonder how deep the rot goes and how much control he actually has. Looking from the outside all the blame is going to go on him though, no one here knows all of the inner workings of the club.