Agree, we have the players coming through but we need them to develope to above ave & some elite to remain at the top.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Can we create another Hawthorn era?
- Thread starter Bennnny
- Start date
The other problem is that we develop players and other teams pick them up, it is almost what the salary cap was designed to do.
Not easy to stay near the top for any length of time. We are in a great position but bloody hard to stay there.
We'll see, the club is certainly giving it a good shot.
DS
Not easy to stay near the top for any length of time. We are in a great position but bloody hard to stay there.
We'll see, the club is certainly giving it a good shot.
DS
This is something different to what I was looking at, but still an interesting point.
The peak 10% of the list certainly creates headaches when talking about list regeneration.
I’m trying to get at traditional rebuilds / cycles / premiership clocks where clubs usually maximise their time at the top/bottom by trading picks/players in/out.
We’re pretty consistent regardless of ladder position, resulting in a perpetually age-balanced list structure.
This probably helps sustain culture, which is a strength for us, but what I meant by asking if I’m naive is in reference to the valleys not being as deep.
It’s hard to tell when success because the norm
Last edited:
They have confidence in themselves and each other. Makes a huge difference.The other thing is , our bottom players are no longer ordinary ,
The word dud isnt as frequently used as it once was around here
After watching the 1971 GF the cheap hits that Matthews did were matched by the crude work from St. Kilda.
A reals mans game when people just sniped and hit defenseless players.
A reals mans game when people just sniped and hit defenseless players.
It is looking that way but if there is to be a Premier this yr the script is perfect for us to do it considering how salty oppo fans are. it gives them another list of excuses despite it being the same for everyone.
This year's mode of football,
Shorter qtrs, more on the interchange and 6-6-6.
Is the Collingwood game.
They bust open games quickly and have a shorter time to hold on to a lead. They couldn't last 30 minutes,
They can at 20.
It virtually eliminates any 'chocking'
Shorter qtrs, more on the interchange and 6-6-6.
Is the Collingwood game.
They bust open games quickly and have a shorter time to hold on to a lead. They couldn't last 30 minutes,
They can at 20.
It virtually eliminates any 'chocking'
I personally won't be lamenting it too much. It's a first world problem to worry about whether we missed out on a third premiership or not. I guess it would be a shame, but I'm pretty happy with two, and we'll still be in good shape come 2021.
And have been reigning premiers for 3 years of the last 4. In fact, the way it's going we'll be premiers for another 16 months.
No no no. Want (and deserve) another flag this year.
We have the best coach, the best fitness people and the best recruiter.
Who knows where they will be after HQ stops messing around with the soft cap.
We also have the best list, which is going to be decimated if we have to reduce our 44 to 35, this especially if there is also a need to make room for a further minimum 3 draftee’s.
According to the list that TofO provided, the following don’t have contracts beyond this season.
Aarts, Broad, Collier-Dawkins, English, Garthwaite, Graham, Miller, Markov, Nankervis, Houli, Rance, Pickett, Turner and Rance. I think that’s right.
We have a legal obligation to the rest and trading any this year is going to be very very difficult if not impossible, with other clubs in the same position as us.
So at the moment it seems highly likely that on top of our footy dept losses, 9 (players) or if there is a draft 12 would not be re contracted. It is no accident that RFC won two premierships last year.
If we lose such a number and any part of the back house as well, without another flag, we may wander in the desert for years.
We have the best coach, the best fitness people and the best recruiter.
Who knows where they will be after HQ stops messing around with the soft cap.
We also have the best list, which is going to be decimated if we have to reduce our 44 to 35, this especially if there is also a need to make room for a further minimum 3 draftee’s.
According to the list that TofO provided, the following don’t have contracts beyond this season.
Aarts, Broad, Collier-Dawkins, English, Garthwaite, Graham, Miller, Markov, Nankervis, Houli, Rance, Pickett, Turner and Rance. I think that’s right.
We have a legal obligation to the rest and trading any this year is going to be very very difficult if not impossible, with other clubs in the same position as us.
So at the moment it seems highly likely that on top of our footy dept losses, 9 (players) or if there is a draft 12 would not be re contracted. It is no accident that RFC won two premierships last year.
If we lose such a number and any part of the back house as well, without another flag, we may wander in the desert for years.
Reducing the list size is insanity, this must be resisted very strongly. It would decimate us just at the time when out forward planning was at its best. It would not allow clubs to develop players.
Stupid idea, in a large field of stupid ideas coming out of the AFL.
DS
Stupid idea, in a large field of stupid ideas coming out of the AFL.
DS
Reckon reducing lists helps us. You‘ll need guys who aren’t playing who can step in and contribute.
Not all kids will be able to step in and play. We have depth. A player like McIntosh becomes more valuable, list cloggers become vital.
Less kids will get drafted, more 21 year olds with VFL experience.
Not all kids will be able to step in and play. We have depth. A player like McIntosh becomes more valuable, list cloggers become vital.
Less kids will get drafted, more 21 year olds with VFL experience.
That is OK over the medium short term, but doesn’t solve the immediate problem, if we are required to reduce our list at the end of this year.
The AFL won’t call on players and clubs to redraft continuing contracts, there would be chaos and the players wouldn’t agree.
But there is going to be a substantial reduction in the TPP, which can only be accommodated by a reduction in list size.
We are relatively well off compared for instance to Collingwood, who have some of their very best players out of contract at the end of this year.
Rance and Houli apart we are not in that position, but none the less will lose the advantage of having a strong and available list of reasonable size.
Like it or not, we are set to lose a large majority of those players who have not yet signed.
Further to earlier posts on this thread concerning the difficulty we will have with list management this year, there is an article in this mornings Age that tells that more than most, the Pies face a year of hurt.
Pendlebury, Degoey and Moore are all waiting on new contracts and the TPP is expected to come down by $3,000,000.
The CEO is apparently trying to create a new agenda and is already talking about renegotiating the deal they struck with Brodie late last year.
They are going to be at each other and the AFL, all year.
Pendlebury, Degoey and Moore are all waiting on new contracts and the TPP is expected to come down by $3,000,000.
The CEO is apparently trying to create a new agenda and is already talking about renegotiating the deal they struck with Brodie late last year.
They are going to be at each other and the AFL, all year.
While I don't rule out the AFL doing this, they really are that stupid, I can't see it happening, not least because it would be chaos and there would be reneging on contracts.
This whole business about reducing list sizes is just silly, it would cause massive chaos and would penalise teams who have put the work in to get their list in a good position. Effectively means getting penalised for doing a good job.
The thing that worries me about the current proposals is that they may well propose a list size of say 35 as an ambit claim, all the while trying to get it down to say 40. All the while they are shoving other changes in under the radar, like shorter quarters. They really have no feel for what supporters want, or more likely they just don't care. We have had quarters of around 30 minutes forever, even when they reduced the length of quarters some years ago it came with adjustments to time on rules so the quarters ended up a similar length.
With the disruption at the moment surely now is the time to leave the bloody rules alone and return to the familiar game we know and love. There is enough risk that the game will lose supporters over this period, no need to give people other reasons to stop supporting their clubs.
DS
I don’t see how HQ could direct the renegotiation of existing contracts, which are, and will remain, legally binding.
Clubs like Collingwood will face great difficulty in getting the remaining signatures they are after, and will be seeking relief and screaming about it by mid season, whenever that might be.
(The pies tend to make themselves heard).
However scream as they will the TPP must come down.
This has been further complicated by the announcement yesterday, allowing clubs who subscribe to the AFL’s bailout, to put their other creditor’ s above the AFL. In taking this course the AFL has now guaranteed the future of those clubs.
The least worst solution to all of this is to stage the reduction in list sizes, over say a three year period.
This will allow at least some level of list planning and maintenance. And finally, less over all expenditure, at club level.
However if they get the balance wrong the AFL, and those clubs which remain in their debt, could go under.
