Hawks & Port

[wolftone57]

I just watched the Hawks absolutely murder Port. If Demetriou thinks this comp isn't becoming lopsided then he's an blind. Melbourne might improve because they have the cattle bur sides like Port, Adelaide and I think eventually the Doggies & Kangas will have real problems. These sides will all be in trouble with the concessions offered to the Suns & GWS & with Free Agency about to begin in 2012. Any player with over 8 years service can decide to go to another club without having to go through the draft & with an automatic clearance & they would fit into the veteran class therefore not in the salary cap.
I know the clubs that will automatically take advantage of this rule Us, Lions, Adelaide & possibly Saints as they are going to be suffering from retirements soon. Clubs without money will now struggle even more and North, Port & Doggies may be doomed & Demons too if they can't keep all the youngsters at their club. I don't think the young guys at Melb will be happy for the slim pickings of an almost bankrupt club when they might be a part of a Premiership at GWS, Suns, Swans, Eagles or Dockers.

[wolftone57]

By the way the Hawks did what we should have done to Port the killed them. We had so many opportunities to do the same & kept relaxing only for them to come back

[SimonH]

Teams becoming uncompetitive chopping blocks is a huge problem. It's a blight on the comp. And even though blowouts were no more common in the first half of 2011 than in any other year, the last few weeks has seen a flurry of shockers; and there may well be more on the way. Even on current form, maybe one involving us in a couple of weeks!

But this is not a draft picks issue. 14 of the 2007 GF side are still on the Port Adelaide list (plus another 2 they traded away who are running around for other sides, and for whom they got market value), excluding Chad Cornes. Leaving aside just plain ol' luck (e.g. career-ending injuries that were unforeseeable) this is an issue in 4 parts, only the last of which the AFL can (practically) control:
a) draft pick selection (getting the right players)
b) list management (knowing when to keep 'em and move 'em on)
c) player development (having them reach their potential and perform to it week-in, week-out); and
d) off-field resources (there's a salary cap limit, but no limit to how much rich clubs can spend on toothbrushing coaches, Arizona altitude camps etc).

It's in category 'c' where Port have performed shockingly over recent years. For whatever reason, a very high proportion of players who were with them in 2007 and are still on their list?and they were a legitimate top 4 club in that year, a fact the disastrous GF can tend to obscure?have plateaued or gone backwards since then. That feeds in to category 'b'?obviously they're now seeing that they've persisted for too long with too many players who looked like potential guns at age 21-23, and are now 24-27 yo list cloggers. As failures go, that is a huge one, because it's the 24-27 yos who are the core of your squad; you simply can't just sack 'em all. And when you look at modestly-resourced clubs who've had a much higher proportion of their kids come on v strongly in that time, I don't think that failure can mostly be put down to inferior resources. But inferior resources do make it much harder to play catch-up.

But despite the hype, GC and GWS have v v little to do with the demise of clubs like Port. At worst, they delay terrible clubs climbing back up the ladder, by up to one year. They have nothing to do with making clubs terrible.

[R-1]

Butcher and Jonas looked alright.

No coincidence that they're first gamers, it speaks volumes for the mood at the club right now. They are broken mentally. That's a bigger issue than the talent.

It's sad.

[Doctor]

Teams becoming uncompetitive chopping blocks is a huge problem. It's a blight on the comp. And even though blowouts were no more common in the first half of 2011 than in any other year, the last few weeks has seen a flurry of shockers; and there may well be more on the way. Even on current form, maybe one involving us in a couple of weeks!

But this is not a draft picks issue. 14 of the 2007 GF side are still on the Port Adelaide list (plus another 2 they traded away who are running around for other sides, and for whom they got market value), excluding Chad Cornes. Leaving aside just plain ol' luck (e.g. career-ending injuries that were unforeseeable) this is an issue in 4 parts, only the last of which the AFL can (practically) control:
a) draft pick selection (getting the right players)
b) list management (knowing when to keep 'em and move 'em on)
c) player development (having them reach their potential and perform to it week-in, week-out); and
d) off-field resources (there's a salary cap limit, but no limit to how much rich clubs can spend on toothbrushing coaches, Arizona altitude camps etc).

It's in category 'c' where Port have performed shockingly over recent years. For whatever reason, a very high proportion of players who were with them in 2007 and are still on their list?and they were a legitimate top 4 club in that year, a fact the disastrous GF can tend to obscure?have plateaued or gone backwards since then. That feeds in to category 'b'?obviously they're now seeing that they've persisted for too long with too many players who looked like potential guns at age 21-23, and are now 24-27 yo list cloggers. As failures go, that is a huge one, because it's the 24-27 yos who are the core of your squad; you simply can't just sack 'em all. And when you look at modestly-resourced clubs who've had a much higher proportion of their kids come on v strongly in that time, I don't think that failure can mostly be put down to inferior resources. But inferior resources do make it much harder to play catch-up.

But despite the hype, GC and GWS have v v little to do with the demise of clubs like Port. At worst, they delay terrible clubs climbing back up the ladder, by up to one year. They have nothing to do with making clubs terrible.

Great post. You can have a great front office and still be very competitive with limited resources but Port have failed to do that. Their problems are off field and have little to do with their list IMO. The bigger problem for the AFL in my opinion is the non-Victorian teams. Remember how much Victoria banged on when the 6 interstate teams were all in the 8? Those same clubs are very quiet now that it's only the amazing West Coast and us (barely) that are competitive. I hold out hope that Adelaide will be revitalised under a new coach, and the early signs are good, but the AFL NEEDS a strong, competitive presence outside Victoria. It would probably be helpful if the Vic-centric AFL media had a more "global" approach to their coverage and analysis programs too, but that's another story entirely...