Well, he echoes a lot of what has been said on the board here in this article. Read down a bit and you get a pretty damning picture of Richmond and our recruiting etc. - of course, nobody here really needs to be told how sh!te we are.
Normally don't like Mike much, but I'm in agreement here.
Cycle or spiral? Forecast not favourable for most Vic clubs
28 June 2003 Herald Sun
IN 2000, only one non-Victorian team -- Brisbane -- qualified to play finals.
The Lions were sent packing in the second week, thrashed by Carlton by 13 goals.
The natural order returned; finals venues weren't even an issue.
Three years on, five non-Victorian teams, probably all six, will play finals this year.
Is it purely cyclical, or are Victorian clubs as a group on a downward spiral to places from where there is no return?
The popular view suggests the draft and salary cap, principally the draft, will perpetuate the cycle.
Some of us aren't so sure.
Four Victorian clubs -- Geelong, Melbourne, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs -- don't have a flag to fly between them for 36 years.
Add Richmond to that group since the national league was born as an expanded competition in 1987.
The Bulldogs haven't played in a grand final since 1961, Richmond since 1982. St Kilda has made just one appearance in 30 years on the biggest day of all.
Those who support the cycle theory point to St Kilda of 2003, and with some justification.
The Saints, with their bevy of talented youngsters, possibly are the most exciting of the Victorian teams.
Yet, in market terms, they remain a highly speculative stock.
Embrace them at your peril, the analysts say. They are 10th, with a 50 per cent win rate this year. Relatively good rather than good.
We are so desperate to see fresh hope in a Victorian club, people have come from everywhere to claim a seat on the Moorabbin bandwagon.
Perhaps the optimism will prove well founded; hopefully, it does.
It better. No club has invested more heavily in the draft system.
Fremantle also has invested its future in the draft and also seems to be reaping benefits, but the market is interested in bottom lines, not the occasional promising bulletin along the way.
Former AFL Commission chairman John Kennedy used to warn clubs to place more stock on financial health than success on the field.
He deemed it far more important to balance the books than try to survive on premiership points alone.
The Kangaroos and, to a lesser extent, the Bulldogs seem to prove the point.
The Roos were the AFL's best on-field performers of the 1990s, the Doggies were remarkably consistent in the second half of the decade.
Yet, financial health inevitably is at risk when clubs don't have ultimate success during an extended period.
While it wasn't always the case, evidence suggests it might be now.
Take Geelong's case. It has to fight, often beg, supporters to get on board, to stay on board, yet the Cats contested four Grand Finals from 1989-95 and seven finals series from '89-97, a super effort.
But hey didn't pinch a flag.
The Bulldogs had four years in the finals from 1997-2000, with no great reward in membership sales.
Near enough isn't good enough these days.
The draft and, by extension, the AFL, needs St Kilda to go all the way in the next three years.
The draft, plus concessions, helped Brisbane get better; indications are it will provide similar benefits for Fremantle and St Kilda.
It's why Geelong supporters wonder whether their interests might have been better served by a couple of years on the bottom.
Oddly, the Cats are the only club in the competition not to have had at least one year in the bottom four in the 16 years of the national competition. Brisbane, Richmond and St Kilda head that list with eight appearances in the bottom four; Fremantle is next with six.
Three of those four take comfort from the fact the resultant drafting benefits have improved their list.
Richmond is the exception.
The Tigers just haven't made nearly enough of their opportunities.
They are seen to have been far too keen to give up early selections for recyclables, and, when they have used their selections, they chose without great effect.
The club has a dismal record dating back to 1987, when it selected Richard Lounder with the No. 1 selection. The big South Australian moved with the pace and dexterity of a Sumo wrestler and played just four games before he was let go.
The best of their top 10 picks since are, in chronological order, Chris Naish, Brad Ottens and Aaron Fiora.
So, don't believe draft choices guarantee drafting success.
The outlook is bleak for Victoria's clubs. I see sustained success for the four clubs from the other traditional football states -- South Australia and Western Australia -- and Brisbane and Sydney appear to be in good shape, and getting better.
If the non-Victorian clubs don't stuff up off the field, four and perhaps all of them should finish in the top half of the ladder every year.
They have numerous natural advantages, including home grounds, membership strength, corporate support and player amenities, in the task of holding the ground they occupy this year.
Essendon, Collingwood, probably St Kilda, maybe Hawthorn, and Carlton, yes, Carlton, will come again, but how long can history, spirit and hope carry the others?
Except for the Roos, of course.
Normally don't like Mike much, but I'm in agreement here.
Cycle or spiral? Forecast not favourable for most Vic clubs
28 June 2003 Herald Sun
IN 2000, only one non-Victorian team -- Brisbane -- qualified to play finals.
The Lions were sent packing in the second week, thrashed by Carlton by 13 goals.
The natural order returned; finals venues weren't even an issue.
Three years on, five non-Victorian teams, probably all six, will play finals this year.
Is it purely cyclical, or are Victorian clubs as a group on a downward spiral to places from where there is no return?
The popular view suggests the draft and salary cap, principally the draft, will perpetuate the cycle.
Some of us aren't so sure.
Four Victorian clubs -- Geelong, Melbourne, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs -- don't have a flag to fly between them for 36 years.
Add Richmond to that group since the national league was born as an expanded competition in 1987.
The Bulldogs haven't played in a grand final since 1961, Richmond since 1982. St Kilda has made just one appearance in 30 years on the biggest day of all.
Those who support the cycle theory point to St Kilda of 2003, and with some justification.
The Saints, with their bevy of talented youngsters, possibly are the most exciting of the Victorian teams.
Yet, in market terms, they remain a highly speculative stock.
Embrace them at your peril, the analysts say. They are 10th, with a 50 per cent win rate this year. Relatively good rather than good.
We are so desperate to see fresh hope in a Victorian club, people have come from everywhere to claim a seat on the Moorabbin bandwagon.
Perhaps the optimism will prove well founded; hopefully, it does.
It better. No club has invested more heavily in the draft system.
Fremantle also has invested its future in the draft and also seems to be reaping benefits, but the market is interested in bottom lines, not the occasional promising bulletin along the way.
Former AFL Commission chairman John Kennedy used to warn clubs to place more stock on financial health than success on the field.
He deemed it far more important to balance the books than try to survive on premiership points alone.
The Kangaroos and, to a lesser extent, the Bulldogs seem to prove the point.
The Roos were the AFL's best on-field performers of the 1990s, the Doggies were remarkably consistent in the second half of the decade.
Yet, financial health inevitably is at risk when clubs don't have ultimate success during an extended period.
While it wasn't always the case, evidence suggests it might be now.
Take Geelong's case. It has to fight, often beg, supporters to get on board, to stay on board, yet the Cats contested four Grand Finals from 1989-95 and seven finals series from '89-97, a super effort.
But hey didn't pinch a flag.
The Bulldogs had four years in the finals from 1997-2000, with no great reward in membership sales.
Near enough isn't good enough these days.
The draft and, by extension, the AFL, needs St Kilda to go all the way in the next three years.
The draft, plus concessions, helped Brisbane get better; indications are it will provide similar benefits for Fremantle and St Kilda.
It's why Geelong supporters wonder whether their interests might have been better served by a couple of years on the bottom.
Oddly, the Cats are the only club in the competition not to have had at least one year in the bottom four in the 16 years of the national competition. Brisbane, Richmond and St Kilda head that list with eight appearances in the bottom four; Fremantle is next with six.
Three of those four take comfort from the fact the resultant drafting benefits have improved their list.
Richmond is the exception.
The Tigers just haven't made nearly enough of their opportunities.
They are seen to have been far too keen to give up early selections for recyclables, and, when they have used their selections, they chose without great effect.
The club has a dismal record dating back to 1987, when it selected Richard Lounder with the No. 1 selection. The big South Australian moved with the pace and dexterity of a Sumo wrestler and played just four games before he was let go.
The best of their top 10 picks since are, in chronological order, Chris Naish, Brad Ottens and Aaron Fiora.
So, don't believe draft choices guarantee drafting success.
The outlook is bleak for Victoria's clubs. I see sustained success for the four clubs from the other traditional football states -- South Australia and Western Australia -- and Brisbane and Sydney appear to be in good shape, and getting better.
If the non-Victorian clubs don't stuff up off the field, four and perhaps all of them should finish in the top half of the ladder every year.
They have numerous natural advantages, including home grounds, membership strength, corporate support and player amenities, in the task of holding the ground they occupy this year.
Essendon, Collingwood, probably St Kilda, maybe Hawthorn, and Carlton, yes, Carlton, will come again, but how long can history, spirit and hope carry the others?
Except for the Roos, of course.
:-[
