Compromised drafts and free agency have helped the strong clubs to remain at the top, but the gap between best and worst is narrowing again.
-
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.
Three-peats
- Thread starter 23.21.159
- Start date
A very good point relating to compromised drafts. A peculiarity of the past 5-7 years. Means the success of Hawthorn over the past few years unlikely to be repeated, leaving their supporters smug for a lifetime.LeeToRainesToRoach said:
The only possibility I can think of is the San Francisco Giants list, as it matures repeating Hawthorn's success. Again, a situation created by the same few years of peculiarities in the draft.
The remedy to "same-ness" at the top of the AFL tree is free agency. More of it. We've hardly scratched the surface.
Don't listen to the clowns in the media who whine about the top clubs dominating the free agent market. Hawthorn has gained Frawley, but lost Franklin, Ellis and Young. That's a net loss. The truth is we've only had three years of free agency and very few big money signings. Even fewer that have actually paid dividends. But this hasn't stopped douchebags in the media from whining about the "problems" of free agency and proclaiming it as a disaster. When every AFL club loses 3 or 4 free agents each year and gains another 3 or 4 from other clubs, then we'll have a more volatile competition.
Major League Baseball has the biggest player movement of any league I can think of - unfettered free agency, year round trading - players picked up and moved on like cattle. They also have a soft salary cap (less restrictive) meaning that cashed up teams can spend money if they want, but they're taxed. Guess what? No team stays up in contention for very long. It's too difficult. It's too competitive. Teams have a short window for success, and then players move on and take the big money on offer elsewhere.
Free agency CREATES competition. Clubs can go out and sign the players they need and improve themselves. If they're short of a ruckman, they can make a big money offer to Matt Leunberger or Stefan Martin and prise one of them loose. The Sydney Swans (with their salary cap concessions) have been able to operate like this for a long, long time and stay up in contention.
Stagnation of player movement is the ENEMY of competition. In the 5 year period prior to free agency, we saw very little player movement. Trade week had become a non-event. Most players just stayed put. This coincided with the rise of Geelong and Collingwood as virtual unbeatable super teams. Nobody could compete with them. Rival clubs were miles off the pace and locked into long-term rebuilding periods via the draft. Free agency would've enabled mid-rung teams to sign players and challenge for Top 4 (as North Melbourne have done these past two years)
During Geelong's reign of success from 2007 to 2009, the Western Bulldogs were a dominant key forward away from winning a flag. Barry Hall arrived a couple of years too late for them. Had they been able to sign a free agent of his ilk when they really needed him, they would never have needed to use Brad Johnson as their focal point at CHF. Look at the scrubbers Ross Lyon had in those Grand Final losses at St Kilda. Allow the Saints to pick up an extra 2-3 quality players via free agency, or someone like Brendon Fevola to help Nick Riewoldt and no doubt, they too would've won a flag.
The biggest problem in the AFL (and the football media) is they're always so reactionary and wanting to change the rules. They never seem to let things settle down for any length of time and allow the clubs to put plans in place, work with the rules and get better. Always chopping and changing. Overreacting. Interstate teams occupy the Top 6 places on the ladder and it's OMG! What's wrong with Victorian footy! A few years later and 5 or 6 Victorian teams are at the top and it's OMG! What can we do to help the struggling interstaters!
How about we stop meddling, stop whining about the "unfairness" of everything and just let the 18 clubs fight it out? And if a club like Melbourne is sh!t for 10 years, that's too bad for them. The onus is on them to improve themselves as a club and stop expecting somebody else to bail them out.
Here's the list of free agent signings (not including the delists)
2012 RFA Brendon Goddard St.K --> Ess
2012 RFA Danyle Pearce PA --> Freo
2012 RFA Troy Chaplin PA --> Rich
2012 RFA Brent Moloney Melb --> Bris
2012 UFA Quinten Lynch WCE --> Coll
2012 UFA Jared Rivers Melb --> Geel
2012 UFA Clinton Young Haw --> Coll
2013 RFA Lance Franklin Haw --> Syd
2013 RFA Dale Thomas Coll --> Carl
2013 RFA Eddie Betts Carl --> Adel
2013 RFA Nick Dal Santo St.K --> NM
2013 UFA Colin Sylvia Melb --> Freo
2013 UFA Xavier Ellis Haw --> WCE
2013 UFA Matthew White Rich --> PA
2014 UFA James Frawley Melb --> Haw
2014 RFA Shaun Higgins WB --> NM
2014 UFA Nick Malceski Syd --> GC
2014 UFA Jarrad Waite Carl --> NM
2014 UFA James Gwilt St.K --> Ess
Don't listen to the clowns in the media who whine about the top clubs dominating the free agent market. Hawthorn has gained Frawley, but lost Franklin, Ellis and Young. That's a net loss. The truth is we've only had three years of free agency and very few big money signings. Even fewer that have actually paid dividends. But this hasn't stopped douchebags in the media from whining about the "problems" of free agency and proclaiming it as a disaster. When every AFL club loses 3 or 4 free agents each year and gains another 3 or 4 from other clubs, then we'll have a more volatile competition.
Major League Baseball has the biggest player movement of any league I can think of - unfettered free agency, year round trading - players picked up and moved on like cattle. They also have a soft salary cap (less restrictive) meaning that cashed up teams can spend money if they want, but they're taxed. Guess what? No team stays up in contention for very long. It's too difficult. It's too competitive. Teams have a short window for success, and then players move on and take the big money on offer elsewhere.
Free agency CREATES competition. Clubs can go out and sign the players they need and improve themselves. If they're short of a ruckman, they can make a big money offer to Matt Leunberger or Stefan Martin and prise one of them loose. The Sydney Swans (with their salary cap concessions) have been able to operate like this for a long, long time and stay up in contention.
Stagnation of player movement is the ENEMY of competition. In the 5 year period prior to free agency, we saw very little player movement. Trade week had become a non-event. Most players just stayed put. This coincided with the rise of Geelong and Collingwood as virtual unbeatable super teams. Nobody could compete with them. Rival clubs were miles off the pace and locked into long-term rebuilding periods via the draft. Free agency would've enabled mid-rung teams to sign players and challenge for Top 4 (as North Melbourne have done these past two years)
During Geelong's reign of success from 2007 to 2009, the Western Bulldogs were a dominant key forward away from winning a flag. Barry Hall arrived a couple of years too late for them. Had they been able to sign a free agent of his ilk when they really needed him, they would never have needed to use Brad Johnson as their focal point at CHF. Look at the scrubbers Ross Lyon had in those Grand Final losses at St Kilda. Allow the Saints to pick up an extra 2-3 quality players via free agency, or someone like Brendon Fevola to help Nick Riewoldt and no doubt, they too would've won a flag.
The biggest problem in the AFL (and the football media) is they're always so reactionary and wanting to change the rules. They never seem to let things settle down for any length of time and allow the clubs to put plans in place, work with the rules and get better. Always chopping and changing. Overreacting. Interstate teams occupy the Top 6 places on the ladder and it's OMG! What's wrong with Victorian footy! A few years later and 5 or 6 Victorian teams are at the top and it's OMG! What can we do to help the struggling interstaters!
How about we stop meddling, stop whining about the "unfairness" of everything and just let the 18 clubs fight it out? And if a club like Melbourne is sh!t for 10 years, that's too bad for them. The onus is on them to improve themselves as a club and stop expecting somebody else to bail them out.
Here's the list of free agent signings (not including the delists)
2012 RFA Brendon Goddard St.K --> Ess
2012 RFA Danyle Pearce PA --> Freo
2012 RFA Troy Chaplin PA --> Rich
2012 RFA Brent Moloney Melb --> Bris
2012 UFA Quinten Lynch WCE --> Coll
2012 UFA Jared Rivers Melb --> Geel
2012 UFA Clinton Young Haw --> Coll
2013 RFA Lance Franklin Haw --> Syd
2013 RFA Dale Thomas Coll --> Carl
2013 RFA Eddie Betts Carl --> Adel
2013 RFA Nick Dal Santo St.K --> NM
2013 UFA Colin Sylvia Melb --> Freo
2013 UFA Xavier Ellis Haw --> WCE
2013 UFA Matthew White Rich --> PA
2014 UFA James Frawley Melb --> Haw
2014 RFA Shaun Higgins WB --> NM
2014 UFA Nick Malceski Syd --> GC
2014 UFA Jarrad Waite Carl --> NM
2014 UFA James Gwilt St.K --> Ess
23.21.159 said:
after everyone in the footy world was calling for draft concessions to be dumped a few years ago, I find it rather curious that people are perhaps suggesting we bring back priority picks (or to manipulate the draft more to help the bottom teams/limit the top teams) now that it appears teams are staying up for longer periods. talk about going around in circles... next year I guarantee everyone will be lamenting about how their team lost a match because an injury meant they were a rotation short after the scrapping of the sub rule :
Not sure but with the Hawks dropping Hartung and bringing in Gunston i think this makes the Hawks the oldest team in VFL AFL history to win a grand final if they get up .
It's an amalgam of the words "three" and "repeat" and I think it's originally an American expression.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-peat
Appears it was first coined in the US in the late 80s. Explains why I haven't really heard of it before now. Typical silly US-terminology.
Appears it was first coined in the US in the late 80s. Explains why I haven't really heard of it before now. Typical silly US-terminology.
Pat Riley, former coach of the LA Lakers first used the term 3-peat in the 1980's and has it trademarked in the US.
As for Free Agency, it's here to stay and it's good for the game.
It's the picks that should go. Too confusing for fans and too compromising for clubs.
As for Free Agency, it's here to stay and it's good for the game.
It's the picks that should go. Too confusing for fans and too compromising for clubs.
exactly ,if we won 3 in a row it is not problem,bin this rubish topic we should aim to be as good as the dorks,unfortunately our club does not have the guts to take us to a flag by making the hard calls on coaches and playersjb03 said:
houdini said:
Correct.
No guts and no football smarts equals a record like ours.
Only seems like yesterday we went Tambling etc.
What happened?
One smart club not afraid of its own shadow.
One pretender.
If we only get Bennell!
Delusional dreaming once again.
The club needs a total injection of talented off field decision makers.
N thats not gonna happen.
Dream on tigers.
The Hawks deserved their 'peats' by being consistent when it counts. We can often match to best but always seem to fade when it counts. The difference between Tigers and Hawks. .
