Message to Mr. Roos, Barham & the hierarchy.

[originalswan]

I would like to ask what your opinion of rebuilding from a lowly position is now Mr. Roos & co. especially after you said it wasn't proven until a team like the Hawks won a premiership.
Well they've beaten the "unbeatable" Geelong with a team built up from "regular failure" and low ladder positions as you say!

So who's position would you rather be in the Swans or Hawks? Yeah we've had success (2005 Premiership and I will be eternally grateful) but they did it by obtaining stars that we never have the opportunity to get. The Hawks also look like challenging for years to come especially with such a young and skillful list. On the other hand we are apparently happy to have relative success ie. finish 5-8th. Sorry, but I say that is not success unless you come from a background that accepts mediocrity.

I know the argument is that the Sydney market will not accept failure or low ladder positions but my argument is 2 or 3 years of suffering will ultimately (if done correctly) lead to an extended period of success

I think we should bite the bullet and trade some older players that may still have some trade value as to rebuild toward the next 3-4 years, not for other medicore players but for up and coming stars that we can get from the draft.

Again, this may not be everyones ideal business plan but think of this: The Hawks got Sam Mitchell and Luke Hodge (Norm Smith medallist) as a direct result of trading Trent Croad to Fremantle a few years back (funny that they picked him up again) now they are starring in the Premiership team with years of good football ahead of them!!!

[Legs Akimbo]

I would like to ask what your opinion of rebuilding from a lowly position is now Mr. Roos & co. especially after you said it wasn't proven until a team like the Hawks won a premiership.
Well they've beaten the "unbeatable" Geelong with a team built up from "regular failure" and low ladder positions as you say!

So who's position would you rather be in the Swans or Hawks? Yeah we've had success (2005 Premiership and I will be eternally grateful) but they did it by obtaining stars that we never have the opportunity to get. The Hawks also look like challenging for years to come especially with such a young and skillful list. On the other hand we are apparently happy to have relative success ie. finish 5-8th. Sorry, but I say that is not success unless you come from a background that accepts mediocrity.

I know the argument is that the Sydney market will not accept failure or low ladder positions but my argument is 2 or 3 years of suffering will ultimately (if done correctly) lead to an extended period of success

I think we should bite the bullet and trade some older players that may still have some trade value as to rebuild toward the next 3-4 years, not for other medicore players but for up and coming stars that we can get from the draft.

Again, this may not be everyones ideal business plan but think of this: The Hawks got Sam Mitchell and Luke Hodge (Norm Smith medallist) as a direct result of trading Trent Croad to Fremantle a few years back (funny that they picked him up again) now they are starring in the Premiership team with years of good football ahead of them!!!

Don't worry, our current drafting and list management policy will probably lead to much the same outcome anyway.

Wonder where Liz has got to?

[Matty10]

I would like to ask what your opinion of rebuilding from a lowly position is now Mr. Roos & co. especially after you said it wasn't proven until a team like the Hawks won a premiership.

I not sure that it changes that much to be honest. All that it means is that a team can win the premiership from going all the way to the bottom of the ladder, or by building themselves up without a great fall.

It doesn't mean that one way is better than the other (it certainly didn't work for St Kilda).

[satchmopugdog]

All I know is that Hawthorn's success makes me want to vomit.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

All I know is that Hawthorn's success makes me want to vomit.

Lol seconded, but it was them or Geelong and I hate both teams.

This is a stupid thread, though. Tanking has worked how often? One flag and it's suddenly the best way. Give me a break!

[Legs Akimbo]

I admire them. They faced their issues front on, hired a young and unproven coach with big ideas, got rid of a lot of dead wood (with help from Nth Melbourne) drafted well, and never lost focus. They deserved theirs just as much as we deserved ours, if for different reasons.

[ShockOfHair]

A good debating point - except you could use the Swans appearance in two successive grand finals to make precisely the opposite point. The Swans are going through a rebuilding phase; the fact that they're bottoming out in the bottom half of the eight rather than the bottom half of the lower eight is a lot more preferable than finishing in the bottom three for several seasons, as the Hawks did, with all the off-field dramas that went with it.

I would have thought today's result underlines the Swans' successes in recent years: it's incredibly hard to win two flags in a row, and the Swans went closer than anyone.

This years we've blooded half a dozen new players and from what Roos has been saying, we can expect a similar turnover in the next couple of years.

I can't see how the Swans' recent record - 11 final series out of 13 - is a failure. Likewise I can't see the Hawks as some kind of unique model for success; it's not as if the Tigers and the Blues, those other famous bottom dwellers, have been shaping finals series in the past eight years.

For those who do embrace the pendulum theory of AFL success, why don't you let us all know: how many years do you want to miss the finals? What's your target position on the ladder? 13th? 14th? Or do you want to go all the way?

[DeadlyAkkuret]

That post was SOH good Seriously, it was.

[ROK Lobster]

fact that they're bottoming out in the bottom half of the eight rather than the bottom half of the lower eight

I reckon that is an assumption at the moment, rather than a fact, but consider that you have a good point.

[NMWBloods]

The Swans are going through a rebuilding phase; the fact that they're bottoming out in the bottom half of the eight rather than the bottom half of the lower eight

Has any team done this before?

[Xie Shan]

Would the Hawks still have won the flag if Richmond had drafted Roughead/Franklin instead of Deledio/Tambling?

[Robbo]

The best way to do it is build from the ground up IMO. Spending one or two (or three) years down the bottom is a small price to pay if you can get a side together who can challenge for the premiership for the next 5 years.

[ugg]

The first bottoming out team to win the flag doesn't necessarily justify the tactic nor does it guarantee success. Look at the list of premiers from this decade, doesn't it make you wonder why none of the others have bottomed out, yet have been very successful. I think all it proves is that it is just one valid method to obtain premiership glory, not an exclusive one nor by any means a guaranteed one.

[DST]

Still doesnt prove bottoming out and tanking works.

Just so happens that the Hawks bottomed out in two great draft years securing Hodge, Franklin and Roughhead.

Don't get me wrong, they drafted really well (from a list structure point of view) but if you go down this route you are not guaranteed of hitting gold with a couple of early picks in one year.

DST

[NMWBloods]

WC bottomed out and won a flag. StKilda bottomed out and should have won a flag. Port spent its first four years down the bottom half. Brisbane finished bottom three years before their first flag.