Conclusions:
Port (2004-1st)
Yes, they've won their premiership but the window looks to be closing as players are aging. But they still have enough in support to be thereabouts. That is unless a premiership hangover kicks in. But they might be too experienced and intense to let a good chance slip.
Brisbane (2004-2nd)
The length of the season will take its toll. Brisbane may start well, they may have some great individual wins at home or when they can get a full team together. The away games will be the first sign of Brisbane's decline. I'm sure after a few injuries to key players that the big rut will hit. Brisbane struggling to make the finals for my mind.
Sainters (2004-3rd)
StKilda's major problem last season was their rucks. Last year the rules favoured young ruckmen jumping off a long run-up. This is the year StKilda needed a 200+cm ruckman and they traded Knobel to us. StKilda seems to be in the same boat as Melbourne, very good but inexperienced kpps, lots of runners, but may battle in the ruck. StKilda probably has a better engine by 1 or 2 cylinders but they'll need them if they are to secure that prize they so desperately desire.
Catters (2004-4th)
The major credit to this side is that it didn't have to rely on consecutive seasons as awooden-spooner, unlike another side, to build its list. It has almost been built up from local boys around Geelong and country Victoria. Again, credit to the them.
This side is probably in the best position it has been since 1963. Throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s there were always holes or gaps in the Geelong side. This is a more complete list. Thompson with this list has 4 to 5 years to win a premiership, maybe more than one. Considering the wait, and his patience, he deserves it. They may or may not win one this year, but they should win one in the next 3 years.
Dees (2004-5th)
Melbourne did really well last draft picking up Bate, Dunn & Newton. Moloney too will be very good for them. But the draftees still need time. Melbourne's success will be based on the same players as last year reperforming, or the "newies" performing immediately. And they seem to really be relying on big performances from players in or near the twilight zone. After their trials and tribulations of last year, and their fairytale finals appearance, and of course the tragedy of Troy Broadbridge I do wish Melbourne all the best for 2005. But their list looks very fragile. If EVERYTHING goes right for them in 2005 they'll reappear in the finals. If it doesn't they look like one team that could really fall into a heap.
Sydney (2004-6th)
It looks like the AFL are serious about getting the Swans a flag up in Sydney. The list of 47 players offers depth that few sides can match. And the good spread of players indicate that the list has been chosen wisely. For me, the Swans no lower than last year and probably chasing a top 4 spot come finals.
Weagles (2004-7th)
Very easy. Eagles with a great homeground advantage, good coaching, and very good list wont miss out on the finals, and should start pushing to finish close to or within the final 4. All they need is a good draw, with a good run home at the finish.
Dons (2004-8th)
Bombers are going to have to make some positional changes this year. This is really a case of the baby Bombers once again. Alot of improvement is looking as if it will be coming from their development & junior players. If these players step up then Essendon will be playing in the finals. If they don't, then Essendon will drop out into the lower half of the ladder. The most probable result is that they will just make the finals again, though just making the numbers up, again.
Dockers (2004-9th)
The Dockers have spent an enormous time investing in some of the best juniors in Australia. But I think they're running out of patience. Recruiting 3 experienced midfielders means that they want success this year. They have a good enough defence and midfield to be succesful. But, they will need Sandilands to be in top form all year, and for all their key forwards to fire big time throughout the season.
In the end, that last sentence is probably asking too much. I don't think Fremantle will improve greatly this year. They probably will make the bottom end of the finals. They may just miss out. If they lose Sandilands early they could be in real trouble.
North (2004-10th)
Things seem pretty good for North. They seem as if they should be playing finals this year. But there are 2 areas of concern.
1) The loss of leadership in its playing staff over the last year or two, and
2) The apparent weakness in its coaching staff by way of Laidley's assistants.
The Roos should very nearly be playing finals this year, BUT there just seems to be that gut feel that they are fragile and that Roo supporters may walk away disappointed at season's end.
Bluebaggers (2004-11th)
If this side had a quality CHF in 2005, I would back them for a surprise top 4 finish. They haven’t an already established one. They must still be ruing the fact that we got Simmonds instead of them. May be a junior will suddenly pop up this year. On the other hand, Maclure was less than a star at CHF in 3 Carlton premierships from 1979-82, so they may get along fine without one. Carlton will continue to improve this year. If 2005 is not their entrance to the finals, 2006 will certainly be.
Adelaide (2004-12th)
I'm going way out on this one. I think the Adelaide recruiting staff should be sacked on the spot. To me they have gone in the wrong direction. They lack enough prime & development inside & outside midfielders to get enough run up the ground. Their experienced midfielders, who let them down last season, are one year older. And now other AFL clubs can look at the development of these junior ruckmen, knowing that the Crows cant hold onto them all, and are now licking there lips at the prospect of poaching them in the future.
Yep, the Crows are a year older with not enough of the right types coming through early enough.
Crows for near woodenspooners in 2005.
I know it's a big call, but I can live with it.
Maggots (2004-13th)
The Pies seem relatively easy to place. They will probably have 1 more year like last season. Maybe their juniors and development players may be one year older, but so is Buckley. They rely so heavily on Buckley. That’s why they wanted Stevens so much last year, but Carlton got him, and Carlton improved. Caracella is clearly nowhere near a replacement for Buckley. Why they got him, I don’t know. Yes, the Carringbush will have to be patient until someone grows into Buckley’s shoes.
Dogs (2004-14th)
The Bulldogs seem relatively easy to place. A new but experienced coach with stable assistants. A list that has changed little but is now maturing into the vital development/prime zones in their defence and flanks. They will improve this year, but they will struggle for their wins as they lack those types of players that do move the ball quickly. They'll go up 2 or 3 places but until they really address the area of inside midfielders then they're far from becoming consistent finals contenders in the coming years.
Hawkers (2004-15th)
It is a bit hard to place the Hawks. Their runners are fortunately a year older and closer to the Prime zone, but their Key Position players are clearly underdone. I’d say like us 2005 will be a passing time year, hoping to quickly develop their KPPs. Like us they will be looking to make their mark in 2006. I think their current list is in a position where it can recover a bit quicker than ours and have a red hot go then. If they are training as intensely as we are, then I think that they will do better than us based on their more experienced runners. Also like us they are going to have to learn to spread the load better.
Tiges (2004-16th)
Using history as a predicting tool, the last time Tigerland went through such a big turnover of players was the 1992/1993 seasons. In 1993, John Northey took over the reins and drastically reformed the playing list. New names such as Duncan Kellaway, Jamie Tape, Matthew Richardson, Matthew Rogers and others were given a try. Some succeeded, others didn’t.
In 1993 the Tigers had a big Pre-season making, but losing by 10 points to Essendon, the Final of the Wizrad Cup equivalent. However the length of the season proper found them out. Already in late 2004 the Tigers, under Wallace, have been training very intensely. I predict that they will come out of the blocks with the same intensity, but the length of the season proper will find old legs, and some inexperienced ones, out.
My ladder for 2005:
1) Sydney
2) Port
3) Catters
4) Sainters
5) Dees
6) Brisbane
7) Weagles
8) Bluebaggers
9) Dockers
10) North
11) Dons
12) Doggies
13) Maggots
14) Tiges
15) Hawkers
16) Crows, where they should be.
Port (2004-1st)
Yes, they've won their premiership but the window looks to be closing as players are aging. But they still have enough in support to be thereabouts. That is unless a premiership hangover kicks in. But they might be too experienced and intense to let a good chance slip.
Brisbane (2004-2nd)
The length of the season will take its toll. Brisbane may start well, they may have some great individual wins at home or when they can get a full team together. The away games will be the first sign of Brisbane's decline. I'm sure after a few injuries to key players that the big rut will hit. Brisbane struggling to make the finals for my mind.
Sainters (2004-3rd)
StKilda's major problem last season was their rucks. Last year the rules favoured young ruckmen jumping off a long run-up. This is the year StKilda needed a 200+cm ruckman and they traded Knobel to us. StKilda seems to be in the same boat as Melbourne, very good but inexperienced kpps, lots of runners, but may battle in the ruck. StKilda probably has a better engine by 1 or 2 cylinders but they'll need them if they are to secure that prize they so desperately desire.
Catters (2004-4th)
The major credit to this side is that it didn't have to rely on consecutive seasons as awooden-spooner, unlike another side, to build its list. It has almost been built up from local boys around Geelong and country Victoria. Again, credit to the them.
This side is probably in the best position it has been since 1963. Throughout the 70s, 80s and 90s there were always holes or gaps in the Geelong side. This is a more complete list. Thompson with this list has 4 to 5 years to win a premiership, maybe more than one. Considering the wait, and his patience, he deserves it. They may or may not win one this year, but they should win one in the next 3 years.
Dees (2004-5th)
Melbourne did really well last draft picking up Bate, Dunn & Newton. Moloney too will be very good for them. But the draftees still need time. Melbourne's success will be based on the same players as last year reperforming, or the "newies" performing immediately. And they seem to really be relying on big performances from players in or near the twilight zone. After their trials and tribulations of last year, and their fairytale finals appearance, and of course the tragedy of Troy Broadbridge I do wish Melbourne all the best for 2005. But their list looks very fragile. If EVERYTHING goes right for them in 2005 they'll reappear in the finals. If it doesn't they look like one team that could really fall into a heap.
Sydney (2004-6th)
It looks like the AFL are serious about getting the Swans a flag up in Sydney. The list of 47 players offers depth that few sides can match. And the good spread of players indicate that the list has been chosen wisely. For me, the Swans no lower than last year and probably chasing a top 4 spot come finals.
Weagles (2004-7th)
Very easy. Eagles with a great homeground advantage, good coaching, and very good list wont miss out on the finals, and should start pushing to finish close to or within the final 4. All they need is a good draw, with a good run home at the finish.
Dons (2004-8th)
Bombers are going to have to make some positional changes this year. This is really a case of the baby Bombers once again. Alot of improvement is looking as if it will be coming from their development & junior players. If these players step up then Essendon will be playing in the finals. If they don't, then Essendon will drop out into the lower half of the ladder. The most probable result is that they will just make the finals again, though just making the numbers up, again.
Dockers (2004-9th)
The Dockers have spent an enormous time investing in some of the best juniors in Australia. But I think they're running out of patience. Recruiting 3 experienced midfielders means that they want success this year. They have a good enough defence and midfield to be succesful. But, they will need Sandilands to be in top form all year, and for all their key forwards to fire big time throughout the season.
In the end, that last sentence is probably asking too much. I don't think Fremantle will improve greatly this year. They probably will make the bottom end of the finals. They may just miss out. If they lose Sandilands early they could be in real trouble.
North (2004-10th)
Things seem pretty good for North. They seem as if they should be playing finals this year. But there are 2 areas of concern.
1) The loss of leadership in its playing staff over the last year or two, and
2) The apparent weakness in its coaching staff by way of Laidley's assistants.
The Roos should very nearly be playing finals this year, BUT there just seems to be that gut feel that they are fragile and that Roo supporters may walk away disappointed at season's end.
Bluebaggers (2004-11th)
If this side had a quality CHF in 2005, I would back them for a surprise top 4 finish. They haven’t an already established one. They must still be ruing the fact that we got Simmonds instead of them. May be a junior will suddenly pop up this year. On the other hand, Maclure was less than a star at CHF in 3 Carlton premierships from 1979-82, so they may get along fine without one. Carlton will continue to improve this year. If 2005 is not their entrance to the finals, 2006 will certainly be.
Adelaide (2004-12th)
I'm going way out on this one. I think the Adelaide recruiting staff should be sacked on the spot. To me they have gone in the wrong direction. They lack enough prime & development inside & outside midfielders to get enough run up the ground. Their experienced midfielders, who let them down last season, are one year older. And now other AFL clubs can look at the development of these junior ruckmen, knowing that the Crows cant hold onto them all, and are now licking there lips at the prospect of poaching them in the future.
Yep, the Crows are a year older with not enough of the right types coming through early enough.
Crows for near woodenspooners in 2005.
I know it's a big call, but I can live with it.
Maggots (2004-13th)
The Pies seem relatively easy to place. They will probably have 1 more year like last season. Maybe their juniors and development players may be one year older, but so is Buckley. They rely so heavily on Buckley. That’s why they wanted Stevens so much last year, but Carlton got him, and Carlton improved. Caracella is clearly nowhere near a replacement for Buckley. Why they got him, I don’t know. Yes, the Carringbush will have to be patient until someone grows into Buckley’s shoes.
Dogs (2004-14th)
The Bulldogs seem relatively easy to place. A new but experienced coach with stable assistants. A list that has changed little but is now maturing into the vital development/prime zones in their defence and flanks. They will improve this year, but they will struggle for their wins as they lack those types of players that do move the ball quickly. They'll go up 2 or 3 places but until they really address the area of inside midfielders then they're far from becoming consistent finals contenders in the coming years.
Hawkers (2004-15th)
It is a bit hard to place the Hawks. Their runners are fortunately a year older and closer to the Prime zone, but their Key Position players are clearly underdone. I’d say like us 2005 will be a passing time year, hoping to quickly develop their KPPs. Like us they will be looking to make their mark in 2006. I think their current list is in a position where it can recover a bit quicker than ours and have a red hot go then. If they are training as intensely as we are, then I think that they will do better than us based on their more experienced runners. Also like us they are going to have to learn to spread the load better.
Tiges (2004-16th)
Using history as a predicting tool, the last time Tigerland went through such a big turnover of players was the 1992/1993 seasons. In 1993, John Northey took over the reins and drastically reformed the playing list. New names such as Duncan Kellaway, Jamie Tape, Matthew Richardson, Matthew Rogers and others were given a try. Some succeeded, others didn’t.
In 1993 the Tigers had a big Pre-season making, but losing by 10 points to Essendon, the Final of the Wizrad Cup equivalent. However the length of the season proper found them out. Already in late 2004 the Tigers, under Wallace, have been training very intensely. I predict that they will come out of the blocks with the same intensity, but the length of the season proper will find old legs, and some inexperienced ones, out.
My ladder for 2005:
1) Sydney
2) Port
3) Catters
4) Sainters
5) Dees
6) Brisbane
7) Weagles
8) Bluebaggers
9) Dockers
10) North
11) Dons
12) Doggies
13) Maggots
14) Tiges
15) Hawkers
16) Crows, where they should be.
.may just scrape into the 8
