Geelong Win Hypothetical

[H_T 2,941]

HT - I've seen you ask that question alot, but I personally don't see why it is relevant. I have not seen him play live, but it is obvious you and many others have. He is obvioulsy very good, and will be a great assest to the club for a very long time, if we secure him. It seems the reason you ask is to justify resorting to any means to get him, which is where I and a few others disagree.

I think we will get him, but not out of design. I don't think we are good enough to win 2 more games. On top of that, DB has said the goal this year is to develop players with an eye for the future. I hope by this he means he will be doing everything he can to get this current list closer to a successful period. I also hope DB and the club view Priority Picks and early draft position as a bonus for those that need it, not an objective.

Firstly, thankyou S_T for replying.

I'm not sure why you don't see why it is relevant to obtaining a priority pick or not. Only you can answer that S_T. All I know is if we don't obtain the priority pick there is a more than better chance we won't get him.

I certainly don't see myself building him up to be something he won't be either. Scully's footy will do all the talking.

For a while now on all of these threads, there are many, many posts regarding the lack of leadership and quality players the club has. This kid has both characteristics in bucketloads. We've seen many posts regarding our lack of pace. He fits the mould nicely and he has super endurance. He's ready-made for AFL. He is what you would call "elite".

When and who was the last "elite" player at Melbourne?

One thing is getting lost it seems and is what should mend the bridge and prevent the divide it seems between the "win at all costs because we need a winning culture (pffft)" brigade and what 'they' call the "Pro-tankers" (which is a ridiculous notion and term). That is Tom Scully. If you haven't seen him, go see him play, do some research.

This is what the priority pick is all about. Then, there is the added bonus of another quality pick. Whether that will be an "elite" pick is debatable.

edit: Just saw your edit. I wouldn't blame anyone, knowing we most likely gave it a shot. But I'd be disappointed. I'd probably blame Port Adelaide for .................being Port Adelaide.

Edited July 15, 2009 by High Tower

[Vipercrunch 2,800]

HT - As I said earlier, I have no doubt Scully is something special. My issue with this whole debate is whether the size of the prize (Scully or any future elite, premiership winning footballer) is worth deliberately losing games. Carlton are frequently called cheats becuase many consider they tanked to get Judd and Kruezer.

Edited July 15, 2009 by S_T

[Trisul 636]

Carlton went from a 36% win rate in the first half of the year to 0% in the second.

Even if we lose every game for the rest of the year we will have gone from a 9% first half year win rate to 18% for the second. There is no comparison.

[fuchsia 37]

One question.

Picking up on the theme of a previous question which I and a couple of others have asked.

I'll ask it again. Have any of you guys seen T.Scully play live?

That's all I ask.

[e25 5]

I wonder if there's any correlation between supporters:

- who want to win very game for the remainder of this year

- who are willing to tolerate more losses this year for #1 pick

and

- who like to kick long down the line to a contest

- who like a backwards switch

Wow. I really like this post.

I'd firmly in the latter of both.

I also think it could be related to your definition of 'accepting mediocrity' as so many ppl seem to disagree on this.

[Je Roos Salem 661]

Yea, if we beat Geelong I'd be happy to keep winning for the rest of the season.

We're starting to regain some form, so it's the worst time to tank.

If we don't get Scully then so be it. We might, but we most likely will finish with more than four wins.

[donny williams no 25 0]

I will continue to go because I enjoy watching the development of the players. I expect them to be giving their all.

I won't wear any club paraphernalia as it would be hypocritical - I would usually just have a scarf - and didn't last Sunday. I also didn't sing the club theme song for the same reason.

And I won't barrack for the opposition. Although around a couple of mates we did joke a bit.

I see that you've quoted Flower and Dixon. What are your thoughts on Lyon and Schwarz who think that it's lunacy to win more than one more game ? As does Gerard Healy, but I know he's not popular on here.

As I may have stated earlier, I have no problem with any supporter that wants to win every game their club plays. It makes a lot of sense. Rightly, or wrongly, I see more long-term benefit if we don't. Once again, you disagree. No problem.

One hypothetical question to you, Don, and all the anti tankers. If we win a flag in 7 years time on the back of Scully and whomever ends up at pick 3, and it's conclusive that we wouldn't have won this flag without Scully, who by now is considered a superstar, would any 'list management' have been worth it ?

NB: some will say it's a silly question. Firstly, it's a question that is quite reasonable in content; and priority picks have already resulted in clubs winning flags, and secondly; answer it anyway. Afterall, it's a hypothetical.

I'm happy to answer the question.

Whatever/whoever Scully is he will not be the difference between a premiership and not a premiership.Last year Cooney had a great season and won the brownlow. But he couldn't get W.B up because of errors in team management over several years--an unwillingness to get, by whatever means, key position forwards or backs in an under-sized team.

No one player makes that much difference. I do agree that it's the loss of a priority pick that may hurt us more.

But let's introduce a note of practicality! In W.A Pavlich and Cox ARE injured. It's reasonable that they're not playing. What players could Melbourne REASONABLY omit for an extended period AND WHO WOULD HAVE A BIG DIFFERENCE--ENOUGH TO ENSURE WE DON'T BEAT, EG, FREO AND RICHMOND? Davey? I agree it would affect the team's chances, just as it would destroy his chance of a B and F award at MFC. Reasonable to ask that of him?Who else? Jamar--just back playing again. Bruce?Green--I can't see them agreeing to take a break. Robbo? In my view if Newton came in for him the team would improve! And even the tankers on this web-site [including you] seem to agree that once the team runs out on the ground, it must try as hard as it can.

So, on 2 grounds, I disagree with you. First, I believe it's damaging to the club's OVERALL interests not to attempt to win every match. And secondly I find it hard to see how the machinations of the football staff can achieve much in Melbourne's case

[Hannabal 4]

I'm happy to answer the question.

Whatever/whoever Scully is he will not be the difference between a premiership and not a premiership.

Two things.

1. I completely disagree with your notion that one player can't make a difference in a club's quest for a flag, as they can and do.

Judd was a priority pick and the Eagles wouldn't have won a flag without him. Franklin was a top 5 pick along with Roughead and the Hawks wouldn't have won a flag without him. North wouldn't have won 2 flags without Carey, ....Stars make others around them better. We need to assemble stars. And the best chance is at the pointy end of the draft. If the Saints win the flag this year they will have done so on the back of Roo, Kosi, and Goddard - 3 top 2 picks. And yes, it's a team effort, but throw in Ball who was pick 3 and Hayes who was also a first rounder and a pattern starts emerging.

I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet by referring you to a thread titled "top 6", but that thread explicitly deals with exactly what you've just said. It goes to the crux of where we disagree and I think it goes a long way to disproving your view.

2. You didn't answer the question.

As for the rest of your post; all will be revealed over 7 weeks and you may, or may not be right.

Edited July 16, 2009 by Hannabal

[Rogue 585]

Dropping the likes of Jurrah, Petterd, Jones right now would be cruel and unnecessary punishment... but they're the ones who'll get us closer to winning

Match report 'best players' lists I've seen from the past couple of weeks suggest otherwise - those guys have been good but others have been better. We don't need to drop our youngsters to 'list manage'.

People [many people] on this site say you dont tell your players to lose, you just fix where and when people play.DO you think the players cant recognise this for what it is, just wanting to lose, tell them to put their head over the ball, go in hard, and then fix it with very visible placements so they cant win.

Were the players up in arms when Grimes was gifted a round 22 game last season?

How about when we sent PJ off for surgery with a couple (?) of rounds to go?

[donny williams no 25 0]

Two things.

1. I completely disagree with your notion that one player can't make a difference in a club's quest for a flag, as they can and do.

Judd was a priority pick and the Eagles wouldn't have won a flag without him. Franklin was a top 5 pick along with Roughead and the Hawks wouldn't have won a flag without him. North wouldn't have won 2 flags without Carey, ....Stars make others around them better. We need to assemble stars. And the best chance is at the pointy end of the draft. If the Saints win the flag this year they will have done so on the back of Roo, Kosi, and Goddard - 3 top 2 picks. And yes, it's a team effort, but throw in Ball who was pick 3 and Hayes who was also a first rounder and a pattern starts emerging.

I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet by referring you to a thread titled "top 6", but that thread explicitly deals with exactly what you've just said. It goes to the crux of where we disagree and I think it goes a long way to disproving your view.

2. You didn't answer the question.

As for the rest of your post; all will be revealed over 7 weeks and you may, or may not be right.

Ok, I've now read 'Top 6' and congratulate you for it. Perhaps our points of difference are not all great--I do agree that missing out on a priority pick would be a blow.

Several of the leading 'top 6s' have a number of players within their best 6 who were , by no means, top draft choices. You will have superior knowledge as to some of these but Adelaide, Brisbane and Essendon appear to have significant numbers of mid-level draftees in their best players--perhaps it could be said that they don't appear to be potential premiers in the next 3-4 years, tho Essendonn would surely disagree..

I guess it's an issue of principle. I maintain as do many others that tanking, risk managemnent, etc is, overall, damaging to the club. I'm by no means convinced that Carlton will prosper by their 2007 actions, and without wholesale dropping of our leading players--which gives awful vibes to the majority of supporters who provide the dough which keeps the club alive--I can't see how the tinkering proposed by some, will make much difference. Sorry--we'll still win more than 4.

Finally I think our potential 'top 6 list" is a bit wider than you suggested. I'm v keen on Frawley, indeed I think we have the makings of an excellent defence, with Warnock and Garland as well.Don't you rate Frawley?And I know the Club rates Bennell and now surely Jurrah. And by jove, I'm surprised at Jetta's progeress also. These last 3 really might have got under other Clubs' guards I suspect.

Still, I'm grateful for your analysis

[rpfc 27,391]

I guess it's an issue of principle. I maintain as do many others that tanking, risk managemnent, etc is, overall, damaging to the club. I'm by no means convinced that Carlton will prosper by their 2007 actions, and without wholesale dropping of our leading players--which gives awful vibes to the majority of supporters who provide the dough which keeps the club alive--I can't see how the tinkering proposed by some, will make much difference. Sorry--we'll still win more than 4.

The club paying out Nathan Carroll made us less competitive. We got liam Jurrah with that extra spot on the list.

Nathan Brown, Clint Bizzell, Jeff White, Adem Yze, and Ben Holland were sent to Sandringham even though they would have performed better than young players that replaced them. They were also moved on at the end of 07 and 08 with more to give, to create space for youth. Thus making us less competitive in 2008 and 2009 respectively.

Jack Grimes, Colin Garland, Cale Morton, Neville Jetta, Jack Watts, Jamie Bennell, Jake Spencer, and Liam Jurrah arguably all got elevated to the seniors for unwarranted games in 2008/9. This also made the 22 weaker.

The 'Bailey-era' has never been about winning games, instead it has revolved around developing players and building a list that will one day challenge for winning on the last day in September.

Has the 'Bailey-era' been unprincipled?

If not, why is continuing the policies of the last 18 months 'damaging to the club'?

[Rogue 585]

I guess it's an issue of principle. I maintain as do many others that tanking, risk managemnent, etc is, overall, damaging to the club.

Is it damaging when struggling local sides do it towards the end of every season, bringing in the kids and trying out new things?

I don't see how it's inherently bad just because we'll get a PP - we'd likely give guys gift games to 'give them a taste', try players in different roles etc, anyway.

Finally I think our potential 'top 6 list" is a bit wider than you suggested. I'm v keen on Frawley, indeed I think we have the makings of an excellent defence, with Warnock and Garland as well.Don't you rate Frawley?And I know the Club rates Bennell and now surely Jurrah. And by jove, I'm surprised at Jetta's progeress also. These last 3 really might have got under other Clubs' guards I suspect.

If we're going to be any good Jetta will be nowhere near our top six.

[donny williams no 25 0]

The club paying out Nathan Carroll made us less competitive. We got liam Jurrah with that extra spot on the list.

Nathan Brown, Clint Bizzell, Jeff White, Adem Yze, and Ben Holland were sent to Sandringham even though they would have performed better than young players that replaced them. They were also moved on at the end of 07 and 08 with more to give, to create space for youth. Thus making us less competitive in 2008 and 2009 respectively.

Jack Grimes, Colin Garland, Cale Morton, Neville Jetta, Jack Watts, Jamie Bennell, Jake Spencer, and Liam Jurrah arguably all got elevated to the seniors for unwarranted games in 2008/9. This also made the 22 weaker.

The 'Bailey-era' has never been about winning games, instead it has revolved around developing players and building a list that will one day challenge for winning on the last day in September.

Has the 'Bailey-era' been unprincipled?

If not, why is continuing the policies of the last 18 months 'damaging to the club'?

Brown,Bizzell,White,Yze, Holland,Carroll--these were not the team's best players by the time they found themselves at Sandy. Several were hopelessly out of form ,others failed to get back after legitimate injuries.

Who are the players , who played last Sunday, who could be compared with that bunch of over-the-hill players?

I guess one could announce that as the skipper is not going to go on next year, he'll play, eg, this week or more likely at the G v Richmond but not thereafter. Without being unfair, that wouldn't weaken the team much.

It's not tanking to not play those who are going to retire--but it's very different isn't it, to drop Davey Mc Lean Green,Bruce etc?And as we all agree [i think] that those who run onto the field must try as hard as they can, I doubt that much can be achieved.

Anyway, perhaps we've done this topic to death. I'll conclude by saying that if, in R22, we can beat the Blues and perhaps knock them out of the finals, I won't be crying.

Ansd as to another poster's comment re Jetta, a few weeks ago I would have agreed. I'm now not so sure

[rpfc 27,391]

Brown,Bizzell,White,Yze, Holland,Carroll--these were not the team's best players by the time they found themselves at Sandy. Several were hopelessly out of form ,others failed to get back after legitimate injuries.

Who said anything about 'best' players? They contributed more than the kids who replaced them. I can recall vividly an On The Coach quote from Mike Sheahan saying that Nathan Brown had finished in good form and that the Demons could have kept him on, if not for the rebuild they were about to embark upon.

This has been the policy of the Bailey era: to, at the expense of the current day performances, build a team for the future that might become a top 4 team.

That policy continuing in the last 7 weeks should be encouraged, not discouraged, as we are 3 and 12 an another losing season.

Who are the players , who played last Sunday, who could be compared with that bunch of over-the-hill players?

I guess one could announce that as the skipper is not going to go on next year, he'll play, eg, this week or more likely at the G v Richmond but not thereafter. Without being unfair, that wouldn't weaken the team much.

It may apply to Wheatley, Robbo, and Junior. It has meant Grimes playing ahead of Whelan in the backline, and I love Grimes as much as the next red-and-blue blooded Australian but a better defender than Wheels he ain't.

It's not tanking to not play those who are going to retire--but it's very different isn't it, to drop Davey Mc Lean Green,Bruce etc?And as we all agree [i think] that those who run onto the field must try as hard as they can, I doubt that much can be achieved.

You don't have to think about it, I have already, as many others have, said that player's don't tank. And I'm not in favour of dropping perfectly healthy players who are in form. What I am saying is that if Brock or Brent or Jared are carrying injuries then what is the point of playing them for these last pointless games? Give them a head start for 2010, considering that season is now our focus since finals in 2009 are out of the question.

We embarked on this rebuild in the October 2007, and just when we are nearing the end, people are losing their nerve.

[52k2 0]

Back again tankers, I have a couple of what ifs to keep you all amused. What if after all you tankers sold your soul to the great god Scully, the DEES on draft day do indeed get PP pick, Vlad the impailer says MELBOURNE and we say number.......... Butcher. In other words we in fact dont draft the great god Scully. Do we see mass burnings of membership cards? The odd suicide or two, all threatened by team tank.

Next what if, a much worse option for the MFC. If the club tells DB to list manage, dont worry about winning, get the PP. We do and draft the great god Scully, next year we are sitting 1 win 10 losses, contract talks with DB, sorry your record win/loss isnt good enough.

Can the MFC survive if the ' list management ' gets out to the AFL. Can we survive the possible fines and draft losses? Remember no coach or staff are loyal to the club, they are loyal to who is paying them at the time. If you dont think this is so, I have seen Ron Barrassi jumping for joy at the loss of a game by the MFC. He was sydneys coach at the time.

[pantaloons 2,018]

Back again tankers, I have a couple of what ifs to keep you all amused. What if after all you tankers sold your soul to the great god Scully, the DEES on draft day do indeed get PP pick, Vlad the impailer says MELBOURNE and we say number.......... Butcher. In other words we in fact dont draft the great god Scully. Do we see mass burnings of membership cards? The odd suicide or two, all threatened by team tank.

Next what if, a much worse option for the MFC. If the club tells DB to list manage, dont worry about winning, get the PP. We do and draft the great god Scully, next year we are sitting 1 win 10 losses, contract talks with DB, sorry your record win/loss isnt good enough.

Can the MFC survive if the ' list management ' gets out to the AFL. Can we survive the possible fines and draft losses? Remember no coach or staff are loyal to the club, they are loyal to who is paying them at the time. If you dont think this is so, I have seen Ron Barrassi jumping for joy at the loss of a game by the MFC. He was sydneys coach at the time.

1. The selection of anyone other than Scully at #1 would result in the immediate interjection of another Melbourne staff member, requiring the firing/exorcism/assassination of Barry Prendergast. It isn't going to happen. He's had his one brain fart when he almost botched the reading of Jack Watts' player number at last year's draft.

2. On list management getting revealed to the AFL, we're not doing anything worse than what's been done in the past, or what will happen in the future, draft or no draft. Even if there were no draft picks and Tom Scully at stake, I'd like to see the club, clearly outside the finals race, prepare for the future with regards to selection in the final seven rounds. Even before the draft system was in place, teams out of contention would play the kids late in the season. There is nothing untoward in what Melbourne is doing and no way the AFL could punish us for engaging in prudent list management. It's what happens in professional sport.

[Akum 2,660]

So the equation goes:

The only way we will ever get a premiership is to get Scully.

The only way to get Scully is to tank (or list-manage or put-the-cue-in-the-rack, whatever).

This is based on a guarantee that one day Judd and Kreuzer will reward Carltank with a premiership.

Oh yeh, and tanking/list-management has no possible downside whatsoever.

Therefore anybody who is unwilling to put-the-cue-in-the-rack is depriving the club of a guaranteed premiership.

Sorry, I still don't buy it. I just don't have the faith.

Edited July 17, 2009 by Akum

[timD 994]

Christ! This is really simple. This is ALL about probabilities. Getting more talent = greater chance to have success. It is a nice, direct, straight positive relationship. Not complex.

Our bottom 6 easily cut it with the best in the AFL. Our top six do not. Let's just fix it and move on. Anyone who thinks that the odd win at this point of this season is beneficial to anything other than a tiny unimportant feel good moment also belives in star signs and santa claus.

[Ryan Dee 140]

Christ! This is really simple. This is ALL about probabilities. Getting more talent = greater chance to have success. It is a nice, direct, straight positive relationship. Not complex.

Our bottom 6 easily cut it with the best in the AFL. Our top six do not. Let's just fix it and move on. Anyone who thinks that the odd win at this point of this season is beneficial to anything other than a tiny unimportant feel good moment also belives in star signs and santa claus.

Correct.

Only one more day till Geelong beats us by a lot then this topic can be less dominant on here for a while.

[grant 10]

I love the dees, I love them so much I want them to be thumped by Geelong!

Me must loose and loose big. I want Scully and 3. I want to see our supporters excited! I want to hear opposing teams say "watch out for the dees". I want to see out list feared!

[timD 994]

Mr Morton - you know it; I know it; dozens of others know it...that it is still being discussed confuses me a great deal.

[Sir Why You Little 34,407]

I love the dees, I love them so much I want them to be thumped by Geelong!

Me must loose and loose big. I want Scully and 3. I want to see our supporters excited! I want to hear opposing teams say "watch out for the dees". I want to see out list feared!

YES, but what an outside chance it is now sadly.

[rpfc 27,391]

So the equation goes:

The only way we will ever get a premiership is to get Scully.

The only way to get Scully is to tank (or list-manage or put-the-cue-in-the-rack, whatever).

This is based on a guarantee that one day Judd and Kreuzer will reward Carltank with a premiership.

Oh yeh, and tanking/list-management has no possible downside whatsoever.

Therefore anybody who is unwilling to put-the-cue-in-the-rack is depriving the club of a guaranteed premiership.

Sorry, I still don't buy it. I just don't have the faith.

We have had the cue-in-the-rack since half way through 2007, anyone remember the the banishment of stalwarts like Brown and Bizzell and the chances given to Newton?

Our cue has not been out since, and why the eff would we get the cue out now?

The season's done. Let's see if Valenti, Newton, McNamara, McKenzie, etc. have a future, let's see if Grimes can play RR, let's see if Jetta can play HBF, let's see if Bennell can play FP, let's see if Morton can play CHF etc. Let's make sure that Rivers, Jamar, Moloney, and McLean get a head start for 2010 if they are carrying anything.

Scully might be a good player, I couldn't give a flying - that's up to BP to decide. All I know is that having two picks in the top 4 is worth losing 6 more games.

And if you think there is more honour in going 13 and 53 over the past 3 years rather than 12 and 54 then you have some abstract principles.

I have put up with too much sh!t from this footy club over the past 2 and a half years for them not to take the opportunity offered to rabbles like us.

Edited July 17, 2009 by rpfc

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

So the equation goes:

The only way we will ever get a premiership is to get Scully.

The only way to get Scully is to tank (or list-manage or put-the-cue-in-the-rack, whatever).

For all that is written on this site on the topic, you still cant get it right.

Teams that have won premierships in the past decade have done so when having at least 2 stars or more. If MFC is going to be successful and challenge for a flag it needs to develop stars. It does not have any. We have the opportunity to access the best young talent in the country for the first time in 12 years and who is highly rated and decorated and has evey opportunity ot not only be a star but also to be probably the bext thing to hit our midfield in at least 20 years.

MFC needs to take every opportunity to add further talent to the list of young players we have. Drafting in the future with GC and WS coming means there is not going to be another opportunity to readily accessthe best young talent in the country.

And rpfc is right. MFC has had the rack in the cue since end of 2007. We should not deviate from the further development of our talent pool.

This is based on a guarantee that one day Judd and Kreuzer will reward Carltank with a premiership.

I would have thought Hawthorn, Geelong and St Kilda this year might have provided a worthy test case.

FWIW, I think Carlton are not there with Judd and Kruezer. Outside their top 6 they have too many on their list that are about as good CJ.

[H_T 2,941]

Good post rpfc.