Round 7 - The other games

[GoodOne]

So what does win premierships? 15 teams are failing every year. Crazy to think that having more and better selections in the draft is not an advantage. Do you think those teams that have "bottomed out" are closer than us? Do you think they are likely to have sustained success? Surely you must admit that Kreuzer, Murphy, Gibbs, Judd are in their top 6 or 7 most important players? Scully & Trengove are leading mids already at Melb!!! James McDonald is now there 4th or 5th best mid. Top draft picks seem to be having more immediate and greater impacts.

Every team is closer than us at the moment. What a silly question. When Carlton and Melbourne become consistently competitive in the top 4 over a number of years then come back and argue the point of scraping the floor for an extended period of time as being the cornerstone to success. You seem to think that there is only one important ingredient that wins premierships. You seem to imply that teams that have won premierships and remained competitive for long periods of time have only done so because of their concessions. This is frankly wrong. To win premierships you have to be professional and have the best people in EVERY facet of the game, on filed and off-field. Richmond, of all teams, is living proof that finishing at the bottom of the ladder for long periods of time doesn't automatically make you competitive.

Not sure what admitting that Kruezer, Murphy, Gibbs and Judd are in Carlton's top 6 or 7 most important players. That they are now likely to win a premiership? Maybe if it was touch footy with a 6 a side (as long as they werent playing Geelong). I'm sorry your argument is hollow.

 

[Big Cat Lover]

Every team is closer than us at the moment. What a silly question. When Carlton and Melbourne become consistently competitive in the top 4 over a number of years then come back and argue the point of scraping the floor for an extended period of time as being the cornerstone to success. You seem to think that there is only one important ingredient that wins premierships. You seem to imply that teams that have won premierships and remained competitive for long periods of time have only done so because of their concessions. This is frankly wrong. To win premierships you have to be professional and have the best people in EVERY facet of the game, on filed and off-field. Richmond, of all teams, is living proof that finishing at the bottom of the ladder for long periods of time doesn't automatically make you competitive.

Not sure what admitting that Kruezer, Murphy, Gibbs and Judd are in Carlton's top 6 or 7 most important players. That they are now likely to win a premiership? Maybe if it was touch footy with a 6 a side (as long as they werent playing Geelong). I'm sorry your argument is hollow.

So you think they would be just as good a side with players taken in the 2nd round instead of those guys? Of course it helps if you have the best off-field people but you need the cattle to work with. There is definitely one most important ingredient that wins premierships - players. Great players make great coaches. Nowadays you are more likley to find great players at the top of the draft. You either draft them or trade picks to get them. The better the picks the better your chances. Logical. Hollow is thinking you can strike gold with every pick and nominating to win 3 flags by 2020. Holes everywhere.

 

[IrockZ]

Posters keep going on about the high draft picks Carlscum got and forget Betts, Joseph, Garlett, Jacobs, Hampson, White, O'Hailpin have been rookie picks.

Richmond can rebuild with good recruiting at ALL picks, not rely on high national draft picks and waste rookie picks.

Thats because they have used the Rookie draft for what its there for - development.

Compared to us who think it is an insurance policy for recycled hacks and other limited footballers.

 

[Tygrys]

Yes but to me the definition of success is winning a premiership. Saints haven't done so yet. As for Melbourne and Carlton, they've left us for dead but that's not because they have bottomed out and we haven't. We've had just as many high picks as these teams over the journey. Surely Melbourne and Carlton aren't examples of your proof that you have to bottom out to be successful. HArdly supports your strike rate theory of it being rather impressive. The fact is there is only one team in recent history that has won a premiership after truly bottoming out to the bottom of the ladder for any period of time, and that's Hawthorn. Yet 2 years later they are struggling back at the bottom of the ladder.

Basically your reasoning above is just a list of excuses as to why teams have won premierships; Geelong, Brisbane, Swans, West Coast, Adelaide, Port Adelaide. How many of these have bottomed out for any length of time? None.

So those non Melbourne clubs don't have any advantages? Just a big coincidence the last decade? And even if we have had as many high picks as Melbourne and Carlton (which is debateable), all it proves is that if anything they have made better use of them then we have. It doesn't discredit buttoming out and high end picks, it just discredits not making the most of them (as well as trading picks away in general, and going for recycled hacks, something we have been guilty of). And finally, I can't help but imagine what the Richmond bottomline would be if we had appeared in five of the last six finals series including last years grand final. How big our membership would be, our corporate sponsorship, our attendances, our exposure on free to air and so on. Even without a premiership, that is a fair measure of success in a highly competitive competition - I think the current board would have taken that in a heartbeat along with the vast majority of supporters. Premierships are the ultimate but you have to be in it to win it. Hawks won it, Saints almost did and Carlton and Melbourne are a hell of a lot closer than we are. Again it's a tradegy we don't have the same opportunity now that they did.

 

[GoodOne]

So those non Melbourne clubs don't have any advantages? Just a big coincidence the last decade?

Again I never said that. Non-Melbourne clubs have and do have advantages in many ways. What is shows though is that those advantages far outweigh any theory that becoming a basket-case club and scraping the bottom for years in a row will turn you into a premiership team. As I said Hawthorn are the only team that has taken it all the way yet 2 years later they are at the bottom again. Saints have done well but you could just as easily argue that their success has to do with many many other factors, not simply that they picked up a few high draft picks over the years. Of course they wouldn't be the team they are without Reiwoldt (as is clearly evident right now) but it is depth that makes a team successful. As for Calrton and Melbourne, you cant seriously say that because they are travelling better than Richmond, it is proof that bottom-grovelling is a successful strategy.

Let's get back to your original comment, which was that you have to be delusional to think you can win a premiership without bottoming out at the bottom of the lader. I'd argue its not delusional at all, and history has shown many teams have won the premiership because of other reasons, not bottoming out.

 

[GoodOne]

Hollow is thinking you can strike gold with every pick and nominating to win 3 flags by 2020. Holes everywhere.

No argument there. But drafting successfully is not just about your top picks. Regularly getting the top pick almost takes away the recruiting skill necessary to be a successful club. Successful clubs have depth. You are not going to get depth from your top picks but your other recruitment decisions. You can win premierships without bottom-dwelling. I think history shows that is the case so I stick to my argument that you can be competitive without bottom-dwelling.

 

[Tygrys]

Again I never said that. Non-Melbourne clubs have and do have advantages in many ways. What is shows though is that those advantages far outweigh any theory that becoming a basket-case club and scraping the bottom for years in a row will turn you into a premiership team. As I said Hawthorn are the only team that has taken it all the way yet 2 years later they are at the bottom again. Saints have done well but you could just as easily argue that their success has to do with many many other factors, not simply that they picked up a few high draft picks over the years. Of course they wouldn't be the team they are without Reiwoldt (as is clearly evident right now) but it is depth that makes a team successful. As for Calrton and Melbourne, you cant seriously say that because they are travelling better than Richmond, it is proof that bottom-grovelling is a successful strategy.

Let's get back to your original comment, which was that you have to be delusional to think you can win a premiership without bottoming out at the bottom of the lader. I'd argue its not delusional at all, and history has shown many teams have won the premiership because of other reasons, not bottoming out.

All this proves is how tough it is for Melbourne based teams, not that bottoming out and getting high end draft picks is not the right stradegy. I suppose we can pretend we are an interstate side (or relocate if that is what you are suggesting) but some of those advantages are well neigh impossible for a Melbourne club to copy. It's not an even playing field, and just doing a 'Brisbane', or 'Eagles' or 'Sydney' is earlier said than done. And again four Melbourne Clubs have tried it whole-heartedly, one has won a premiership (the only one in a decade) and the other has been a regular fixture in finals for half a decade and almost won a premiership last year. In regards to Carlton and Melbourne, too early to tell (I said as much) but all the indictions are excellent, with Carlton of course already having played in a finals series. Yes a little too early to tell, but no-one can claim that it has been a failure, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest the exact opposite. You can argue until you blue in the face, but seeing where we sit now, after Wallet having tried your philosphy for five years, that seems pretty impressive to me. And yes of course depth is imperative, no one is debating it, but having a core group of elite players and A-graders is equally important. Depth without them adds up to a middling side. Again delusional to believe you can win a premiership without them and that the greatest likelihood of securing them is not with high draft picks.

PS I noticed you decided not to run further with the premiership or nothing success argument, that unless you've won a premiership you haven't achieved anything. Again like most Richmond supporters I would have killed for St Kilda's 'failure' durinng the last six years.

 

[GoodOne]

All this proves is how tough it is for Melbourne based teams, not that bottoming out and getting high end draft picks is not the right stradegy. I suppose we can pretend we are an interstate side (or relocate if that is what you are suggesting) but some of those advantages are well neigh impossible for a Melbourne club to copy. It's not an even playing field, and just doing a 'Brisbane', or 'Eagles' or 'Sydney' is earlier said than done. And again four Melbourne Clubs have tried it whole-heartedly, one has won a premiership (the only one in a decade) and the other has been a regular fixture in finals for half a decade and almost won a premiership last year. In regards to Carlton and Melbourne, too early to tell (I said as much) but all the indictions are excellent, with Carlton of course already having played in a finals series. Yes a little too early to tell, but no-one can claim that it has been a failure, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest the exact opposite. You can argue until you blue in the face, but seeing where we sit now, after Wallet having tried your philosphy for five years, that seems pretty impressive to me. And yes of course depth is imperative, no one is debating it, but having a core group of elite players and A-graders is equally important. Depth without them adds up to a middling side. Again delusional to believe you can win a premiership without them and that the greatest likelihood of securing them is not with high draft picks.

PS I noticed you decided not to run further with the premiership or nothing success argument, that unless you've won a premiership you haven't achieved anything. Again like most Richmond supporters I would have killed for St Kilda's 'failure' durinng the last six years.

Alot of what you say I agree with. A couple of differences, its not about deducing whether Carlton and Melbourne have failed, it is down the track whether they succeed. You certainly don't need to bottom out to play finals or even be a top 4 team. Again there are many more examples of successful top 4 teams coming from remaining competitive than those that scrape the bottom.

I still maintain that the ultimate success is a premiership. Let's face it that's what everyone plays for, thats what everyone wants to see. I don't see to many saying, gee I am glad I won those Brownlows, winning a premiership really didnt matter to me. Success = premierships, no more no less. That's not to say you can't get a certain amount of satisfaction out of being a well performed team. However its all relative. Talk to Bulldogs or Saints supporters, they're past the competitive stage, they want premierships now. If they don't get there within their current window, it's a failed attempt.

I think minus these points, we are mostly in agreeance. Richmond have wasted numerous past opportunities, mostly related to dishonesty about where our player list actually was, and our recruiting decisions. New era, new leaf, in 3 or 4 years time we will be able to make judgement on the current management and coaches.

 

[Brodders17]

It's funny how, to suit their argument, posters are saying non-Melbourne clubs, rather than interstate clubs.
Also funny posters are using teams sitting 7th and 10th to show tanking works.

 

[Tygrys]

It's funny how, to suit their argument, posters are saying non-Melbourne clubs, rather than interstate clubs.
Also funny posters are using teams sitting 7th and 10th to show tanking works.

I think it's funny how some posters cherry pick and quote one or two items without addressing or acknowleging the context in which they were made and think they have made a worthwhile point. Quite hysterical actually...

 

[Tygrys]

Alot of what you say I agree with. A couple of differences, its not about deducing whether Carlton and Melbourne have failed, it is down the track whether they succeed. You certainly don't need to bottom out to play finals or even be a top 4 team. Again there are many more examples of successful top 4 teams coming from remaining competitive than those that scrape the bottom.

I still maintain that the ultimate success is a premiership. Let's face it that's what everyone plays for, thats what everyone wants to see. I don't see to many saying, gee I am glad I won those Brownlows, winning a premiership really didnt matter to me. Success = premierships, no more no less. That's not to say you can't get a certain amount of satisfaction out of being a well performed team. However its all relative. Talk to Bulldogs or Saints supporters, they're past the competitive stage, they want premierships now. If they don't get there within their current window, it's a failed attempt.

I think minus these points, we are mostly in agreeance. Richmond have wasted numerous past opportunities, mostly related to dishonesty about where our player list actually was, and our recruiting decisions. New era, new leaf, in 3 or 4 years time we will be able to make judgement on the current management and coaches.

Yes a premiership is the ultimate, but I think getting there is still be half the fun. For those that can remember 1980 and 1982, although both years ended differently, they were enjoyable times week in, week out, and even without a premiership, Richmond as a powerhouse would be an awesome force to be reckoned with. For what it's worth I don't believe you 'have to bottom out' and get high draft picks, I just think for a Melbourne club, for all the reasons I've argued it's by far the most effective way. I would just hate Richmond to become another North Melbourne. Middling, competitive, but perpetually stuck in mid-table. But yes on balance, we probably do agree on more than disagree and it is a new era, and again it's all academic, as the West Sydney and Gold Coast leaches have sadly seen to that...oh well...

 

[Big Cat Lover]

It's funny how, to suit their argument, posters are saying non-Melbourne clubs, rather than interstate clubs.
Also funny posters are using teams sitting 7th and 10th to show tanking works.

So whats your solution? Smart recruiting, excellent development, good coaching......funny how all this appears more successful when you have better cattle to start with or select from.

You don't think you'd be happy with Carlton & Melbournes performances (if you were a supporter) this year and their potential moving forward? Both are teams, that in most supporters eyes, deliberately tanked to maximise their ND selections. You think they have any guilt or remorse about "tanking"? Be hard to argue that tanking hasn't improved thier lists and their performances.

It's disappointing for the RFC that we are not tanking and have never really tanked and simply because of timing we are not getting the same benefits that clubs that deliberately manipulated the draft received.

 

[Brodders17]

So whats your solution? Smart recruiting, excellent development, good coaching......funny how all this appears more successful when you have better cattle to start with or select from.

You don't think you'd be happy with Carlton & Melbournes performances (if you were a supporter) this year and their potential moving forward? Both are teams, that in most supporters eyes, deliberately tanked to maximise their ND selections. You think they have any guilt or remorse about "tanking"? Be hard to argue that tanking hasn't improved thier lists and their performances.

It's disappointing for the RFC that we are not tanking and have never really tanked and simply because of timing we are not getting the same benefits that clubs that deliberately manipulated the draft received.

I think most Richmond supporters would be happy with Carlton or Melb performances this year. I'd be even happier with Collingwood, Freo, Geelong or Sydney performances

I think it's funny how some posters cherry pick and quote one or two items without addressing or acknowleging the context in which they were made and think they have made a worthwhile point. Quite hysterical actually...

thats good. it seems we are all amused.
out of interest which context did i miss. as far as i can see posters are saying that if you dont have the advantages interstate clubs have you can't succeed without tanking. except the cats show this to be false, so rather than referring to interstate clubs poster refer to non-melbourne teams.
the other point i have seen is your argument that both carl and melb tanking has been a success. so far based on 1 final series and a combined total of 7 wins from 14 games this year.