Geelong in game discussion

[CJK]

Meh, didn't go in thinking we'd win and boy did we not.

So frustrating just watching Cats peel off into space from stoppages whilst our Swans just stand around with their **** in their hands.

You know you've not got much of a change when Ted is you best player out there.

Pretty sure it's going to be Lakeside Membership for me next year, I just can't be dealing with Homebush anymore.

[smasher]

Plugger went back to his footy home on the weekend "St Kilda"

[royboy42]

.

Pretty sure it's going to be Lakeside Membership for me next year, I just can't be dealing with Homebush anymore.[/QUOTE]

Yep...SCG only membership is great!
Not a lot of results joy at the concrete Olympic stadium, where the wind roars right through my (former) platinum seat and the cold fogs up the binoculars I needed to see the game.
Only good thing out there was the hot corn on a cob at the foodstalls outside the ground.

[caj23]

what I am saying is if we bottom out we could win more than one premiership just like the Cats & Lions did. The Cats were bottom at one stage & there were big calls for Bommer Thompson to get the sack, look at them now. When Lethal joined the Lions they were a basket case & with good draft choices they turned it into 4 Grand Finals. Think of this WE COULD BE THE NEXT BIG THING IF WE BOTTOM OUT!!!

Just one small problem with your theory there. The Cats never bottomed out, their highest draft pick in the last 10 years was Andrew Mackie (no 7), in fact they are the perfect example of how to build a dynasty without bottoming out.

The Lions were on the up and had been playing finals football when they had one disastrous season under Northey, he was sacked and Lethal came in. They also benefitted from the merger with Fitzroy.

St Kilda bottomed out 10 years ago and still haven't won a premiership out of it, Richmond are still a mile off. The only team that has successfully bottomed out and won a premiership has been Hawthorn. Not exactly a blueprint for success IMO

[Go Swannies]

Just one small problem with your theory there. The Cats never bottomed out, their highest draft pick in the last 10 years was Andrew Mackie (no 7), in fact they are the perfect example of how to build a dynasty without bottoming out.

The Lions were on the up and had been playing finals football when they had one disastrous season under Northey, he was sacked and Lethal came in. They also benefitted from the merger with Fitzroy.

St Kilda bottomed out 10 years ago and still haven't won a premiership out of it, Richmond are still a mile off. The only team that has successfully bottomed out and won a premiership has been Hawthorn. Not exactly a blueprint for success IMO

Spoilsport! Anyway I've read it somewhere that bottoming out is the way to Premiership success so it must be right.

[Jewels]

Meh, didn't go in thinking we'd win and boy did we not.

So frustrating just watching Cats peel off into space from stoppages whilst our Swans just stand around with their **** in their hands.

You know you've not got much of a change when Ted is you best player out there.

Pretty sure it's going to be Lakeside Membership for me next year, I just can't be dealing with Homebush anymore.

Me too. I live far closer to ANZ then SCG and as such, I've always been quite a big supporter of it as a venue, but I've had enough. We looked beaten before the first ball up on Saturday night, just as we did in the Pies game. The result may not have been any different at the SCG but it most certainly couldn't have been much worse!
I figure the more members that only take the SCG option, the quicker they will take the hint that we don't want to be at Homebush any more and best to just leave it to the laughing clowns.

[Melbournehammer]

Just one small problem with your theory there. The Cats never bottomed out, their highest draft pick in the last 10 years was Andrew Mackie (no 7), in fact they are the perfect example of how to build a dynasty without bottoming out.

The Lions were on the up and had been playing finals football when they had one disastrous season under Northey, he was sacked and Lethal came in. They also benefitted from the merger with Fitzroy.

St Kilda bottomed out 10 years ago and still haven't won a premiership out of it, Richmond are still a mile off. The only team that has successfully bottomed out and won a premiership has been Hawthorn. Not exactly a blueprint for success IMO

On the other hand, with the exception of geelong (who stand unique because of father son selections) each of the major threats this year have received priority picks (or very high draft picks and often both) in the past decade. They may not have won a flag but they are right up there. To say bottoming out is not the answer may be right but equally its not clear to me that its not an answer to be a challenger for the flag.

[Mr Magoo]

.

Pretty sure it's going to be Lakeside Membership for me next year, I just can't be dealing with Homebush anymore.

Yep...SCG only membership is great!
Not a lot of results joy at the concrete Olympic stadium, where the wind roars right through my (former) platinum seat and the cold fogs up the binoculars I needed to see the game.
Only good thing out there was the hot corn on a cob at the foodstalls outside the ground.[/QUOTE]

Yep my family are all doing same next year. Its a rubbish ground in a horribly cold spot. Maybe they should forget putting homebush games on a saturday night as it is always miserable out there at night but the few day games have been nice.

[Yuri H]

Good to hear others do or are going to do SCG-only membership ... it's the option I've taken since joining up and was worried I was revealing myself as not a good enough fan. I love the SCG and really, doesn't it hold enough people for even the level of "blockbuster" games' crowds these days?

Saturday was actually my first game out there in the great big stadium, and I didn't really enjoy it (I mean, aside from us getting thumped). And the bus ride was endless! As we got out at the game, I thought "gosh, we've been going west forever ... so, this is Perth, huh?"

[BSA5]

On the other hand, with the exception of geelong (who stand unique because of father son selections) each of the major threats this year have received priority picks (or very high draft picks and often both) in the past decade. They may not have won a flag but they are right up there. To say bottoming out is not the answer may be right but equally its not clear to me that its not an answer to be a challenger for the flag.

OK, but look at the challengers, and who their key players are:

St. Kilda:

Nick Dal Santo: pick 13
Brendan Goddard: pick 1 (fair enough)
Nick Riewodlt: pick 1 (again, fair enough)
Sam Gilbert: pick 33
Lenny Hayes: pick 11
Steven Milne: rookie elevation
Leigh Montagna: pick 37

Now, don't get me wrong, Goddard and Riewoldt are bloody good players. But they're not the best in the competition. It's quite conceivable that players of equal quality would appear later in the draft. Those picks aren't the reason St. Kilda are where they are now. It's picking the likes of Dal Santo and Hayes with their mid-range first rounders, and getting bargains like Montagna and Gilbert, that have got the team where they are.

Collingwood is much the same story. Some of their important top picks:

Dale Thomas: pick 2.
Alan Didak: pick 3
Scott Pendlebury: pick 5
Ben Reid: pick 8

Now look at their other pieces of drafting:

Luke Ball: pick 30
Dane Swan: pick 58
Leigh Brown: pick 73
Darren Jolly: pick 14 and 46 (trade)
Nick Maxwell: rookie
Harry O'Brien: rookie
Sharrod Wellingham: rookie

Dale Thomas has improved his output this year, but he's far from elite. Didak is brilliant but inconsistent. Pendlebury is probably the most solid of that lot, but does pick 5 qualify as bottoming out? Ben Reid (our Sam's older brother, incidentally!) was pick 8, even less an example of bottoming out (though from memory that pick might have been traded for in the Medhurst/Tarrant trade, I'm not sure). In any case, it's hard to mount a case for high picks establishing the core players.

Meanwhile, they've secured the likes of Darren Jolly, Luke Ball, Dane Swan, Leigh Brown (phenomenal piece of recruiting, he was exactly what they needed), their captain Nick Maxwell, possibly their best defender in Harry O and a solid, consistent young player in Sharrod Wellingham without using a pick below 10, and utilising the rookie list expertly.

Collingwood are a perfect example of how to build a list without bottoming out. Collingwood could lose Thomas and Didak and still compete for a flag, but lose any 2 of Swan, Jolly, Harry O, Maxwell? It would make it much harder. The basis of their side was formed without early picks. The early picks they did get have just a bonus.

As for the Doggies, Ryan Griffen was pick 3, Adam "how on earth did I win a Brownlow" Cooney was pick 1. Other than that, their star players are really mid-late picks or rookies. Boyd, Morris, Harbrow, Giansiracusa, Lake, etc. Higgins was pick 11.

Really, none of the teams competing for a flag this year have done anything like what Hawthorn did a few years back (i.e. a complete cleanout of the list, followed by a few years on the bottom sucking up draft picks), and Hawthorn are the only team we're yet to see to gain anything from it. Carlton did it, and it looks like they're faltering. Richmond have been doing it for ages without getting anywhere. Essendon did it, they're faltering worse than Carlton. Melboure look like they might be going somewhere, but firstly, it's too early to tell, and secondly, how much of that is on the back of early draft picks is very, very unclear. Scully and Trengove won't hit their peak for another 2-3 years yet, Watts looks like he's coming good but there's no guarantee he'll ever dominate.

Put simply, the draft is such a lottery that bottoming out is very meh. Player development seems to be of far greater importance when it comes to forming a premiership-winning side.

[Robbo]

Kirky is really limping to the finish line. If we are out of finals contention prior to the start of round 21 does anyone think he should make the games against the Dogs at the SCG his farewell game? If he plays in round 22 then his last game will be at the Gabba.

[Melbournehammer]

OK, but look at the challengers, and who their key players are:

St. Kilda:

Nick Dal Santo: pick 13
Brendan Goddard: pick 1 (fair enough)
Nick Riewodlt: pick 1 (again, fair enough)
Sam Gilbert: pick 33
Lenny Hayes: pick 11
Steven Milne: rookie elevation
Leigh Montagna: pick 37

Now, don't get me wrong, Goddard and Riewoldt are bloody good players. But they're not the best in the competition. It's quite conceivable that players of equal quality would appear later in the draft. Those picks aren't the reason St. Kilda are where they are now. It's picking the likes of Dal Santo and Hayes with their mid-range first rounders, and getting bargains like Montagna and Gilbert, that have got the team where they are.

Collingwood is much the same story. Some of their important top picks:

Dale Thomas: pick 2.
Alan Didak: pick 3
Scott Pendlebury: pick 5
Ben Reid: pick 8

Now look at their other pieces of drafting:

Luke Ball: pick 30
Dane Swan: pick 58
Leigh Brown: pick 73
Darren Jolly: pick 14 and 46 (trade)
Nick Maxwell: rookie
Harry O'Brien: rookie
Sharrod Wellingham: rookie

Dale Thomas has improved his output this year, but he's far from elite. Didak is brilliant but inconsistent. Pendlebury is probably the most solid of that lot, but does pick 5 qualify as bottoming out? Ben Reid (our Sam's older brother, incidentally!) was pick 8, even less an example of bottoming out (though from memory that pick might have been traded for in the Medhurst/Tarrant trade, I'm not sure). In any case, it's hard to mount a case for high picks establishing the core players.

Meanwhile, they've secured the likes of Darren Jolly, Luke Ball, Dane Swan, Leigh Brown (phenomenal piece of recruiting, he was exactly what they needed), their captain Nick Maxwell, possibly their best defender in Harry O and a solid, consistent young player in Sharrod Wellingham without using a pick below 10, and utilising the rookie list expertly.

Collingwood are a perfect example of how to build a list without bottoming out. Collingwood could lose Thomas and Didak and still compete for a flag, but lose any 2 of Swan, Jolly, Harry O, Maxwell? It would make it much harder. The basis of their side was formed without early picks. The early picks they did get have just a bonus.

As for the Doggies, Ryan Griffen was pick 3, Adam "how on earth did I win a Brownlow" Cooney was pick 1. Other than that, their star players are really mid-late picks or rookies. Boyd, Morris, Harbrow, Giansiracusa, Lake, etc. Higgins was pick 11.

Really, none of the teams competing for a flag this year have done anything like what Hawthorn did a few years back (i.e. a complete cleanout of the list, followed by a few years on the bottom sucking up draft picks), and Hawthorn are the only team we're yet to see to gain anything from it. Carlton did it, and it looks like they're faltering. Richmond have been doing it for ages without getting anywhere. Essendon did it, they're faltering worse than Carlton. Melboure look like they might be going somewhere, but firstly, it's too early to tell, and secondly, how much of that is on the back of early draft picks is very, very unclear. Scully and Trengove won't hit their peak for another 2-3 years yet, Watts looks like he's coming good but there's no guarantee he'll ever dominate.

Put simply, the draft is such a lottery that bottoming out is very meh. Player development seems to be of far greater importance when it comes to forming a premiership-winning side.

oh I agree with all that. I'm not saying player development is not important. the reality is that every club that succeeds does so on the back of picks 30-60 and occasionally rookie listed players and every other club kicks themselves saying - why didn't we pick blah ? (why did we pick tambling not buddy, why didn't we pick rioli, why didn't we pick natanui and so on)

And that is because a list has 30 odd players and 22 who play every week - its pretty hard to have a team which doesn't have a whole sequence of high picks. and your case of hawthorn is (to my mind anyway) made even stronger by referring to the players like dew and guerra who played critical roles.

on the other hand star players are absolutely star players. If you asked carlton who their best players were they would say to you murphy, judd and to a lesser degree yarran, betts, gibbs (and possibly kreuzer and waite). if you ask richmond they'd say deledio, cotchin, martin, riewoldt (and then maybe cousins, moore, tuck). What you put around them matters. And thats the point we'd both agree on surely - dropping down lets you get the cream - but the cream itself is not enough you need (to mix metaphors) the meat and potatoes as well.

I'm not sure we currently have any cream other than goodes. and constantly finishing 6th-10th gets you some pretty decent players but pretty rarely do you get the cream.

[Hartijon]

Geelong were awesome. We matched it with them for most of the game, but they really killed it off in a couple of bursts. They had a massive amount of ball and unlike us they moved it fast and accurately.

Our decision-making was terrible. We repeatedly kicked needlessly to a contest.

McVeigh disappointing, Shaw beyond disappointing, White has issues, Meredith didn't get enough of the ball.

Goodes, Malceski, Kennelly, Hannebery, were all really good, Jetta showed a lot of heart.

Watching Geelong kick in in the first quarter, Nathan Brown on MMM said he couldn't remember the last time he'd seen an opposition team go one-on-one on the kick-ins. Do we always do that? Whatever, our setup for opposition kickins have been ineffective all season. THe way our team kicks for goal we ought to make an effort on defending the kick-ins.

Geelong were awesome but we proved we can match them in hard acountable football and ball posession. In kicking effectiveness they kill us.Their shots on goal were perfectly executed,ours hurried and often missing. However, we might have still been around them 3 quarter time had we kicked straight. We often talk about the x factor. Geelong forwards all seem to have a bit of this led by Johnson. Do we blame Nick Davis for teaching them the need for this in the Preliminary final 2005?? They learnt that lesson the hard way but they learnt it! Boy do we need a forward with flair now and was hoping Bradshaw could be the one this year.

[rojo]

I agree. After watching the replay, the first 2 1/2 quarters were okay, if only those set shots on goal had gone through! Apart from Bevan playing on Stevie Johnson the whole game and McVeigh being AWOL, the disaster period towards the end of the 3rd quarter came about because the Swans could not hold the ball in their forward line. They managed to get it Into the forward line only to see it rebound straight out, through the middle, goal, goal, goal. Not only would Bradshaw have been useful, but a fit Gary Rohan also.

[BSA5]

oh I agree with all that. I'm not saying player development is not important. the reality is that every club that succeeds does so on the back of picks 30-60 and occasionally rookie listed players and every other club kicks themselves saying - why didn't we pick blah ? (why did we pick tambling not buddy, why didn't we pick rioli, why didn't we pick natanui and so on)

And that is because a list has 30 odd players and 22 who play every week - its pretty hard to have a team which doesn't have a whole sequence of high picks. and your case of hawthorn is (to my mind anyway) made even stronger by referring to the players like dew and guerra who played critical roles.

on the other hand star players are absolutely star players. If you asked carlton who their best players were they would say to you murphy, judd and to a lesser degree yarran, betts, gibbs (and possibly kreuzer and waite). if you ask richmond they'd say deledio, cotchin, martin, riewoldt (and then maybe cousins, moore, tuck). What you put around them matters. And thats the point we'd both agree on surely - dropping down lets you get the cream - but the cream itself is not enough you need (to mix metaphors) the meat and potatoes as well.

I'm not sure we currently have any cream other than goodes. and constantly finishing 6th-10th gets you some pretty decent players but pretty rarely do you get the cream.

But who have each team got that makes a significant difference? OK, St. Kilda have Riewoldt and Goddard from bottoming out. I'll give you that. But Collingwood have Thomas and Didak. Good players, but not integral to the side. They'd be a premiership threat with or without them. The Dogs? Cooney and Griffen. Maybe I don't always give Cooney the credit he deserves, but I really don't think those two players would affect the Dogs' chances that much, at least opposed to similar players taken a few picks later.