On 06/07/2013 at 07:01, angrydemons said:

it is total rubbish that tanking is why the blues are not winning...

I can only assume you're talking to me, as I think I'm the only one that has brought "tanking" up.

My comment was "tanking has got them nowhere". Interesting that you disagree.

They are a mile from a premiership. Btw, I haven't said that they shouldn't have tanked, or that they haven't stuffed up elsewhere, just that "tanking has got them NOWHERE".

If you're not referring to my post and your comprehension is far better than it appears, I apologise in advance.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:22, mjt said:

No ones further off a flag than US

Unqualified speculation.

Not a fan of the Blues and have them as my second most despised club behind Collingwood

They have some KP gaps to fill and IMO chose the wrong captain AGAIN

Their first priority is Boyd

There midfield is not bad but its not that good either

Most of their big guys are useless at ground level and the trend in selecting tall's these days is not what the Blues have

Mathouse will have already had his broom serviced as he will be giving it a good workout in October

I am quite happy they have issues

Carlton are both a case for and a case against the priority pick.

After their salary cap scandal their mess was an absolute mess. They had an entire team of Rodan's, Byrnes, Magners and co.

I remember when Nick Stevens was their only player who could get a kick. They might have won a few games each year but they were as in as much trouble as we are now for sure. Pagan could undoubtedly coach to a degree and they made him look useless.

The priority picks help them climb out of the hole. In fact they game away Kennedy and pick 3 for Judd so without the bevy of other picks wouldn't have had anything else to come in.

But their recruiting was also pretty weak besides the top picks that they nailed. It left them with this unbalanced list in the fact they didn't have a bunch of players to bring through together.

And their consistently best players of the last few years have been Judd, Scotland, Simpson, Carrazzo and Waite. That's a generation of players all slowing down. Their next generation - Gibbs, Murphy, McLean, Walker, Henderson, Kruezer, Jamison, Betts, Robinson, Garlett, Yarran are now in their prime and are still a nice group but really it's a couple of tall defenders, a half decent ruck and a little bit of midfield and flanker talent. Without the star midfielder in Judd and the midfield depth provided by Carrazzo, Scotland and Simpson at their peaks it's not that special. Plus their are no key forwards.

So do priority picks help you get out of trouble - YES. Do they make you a good side - No.

This Chris Judd and Jarrad Waite window has passed them by and was undone by lacking about 6 decent AFL players. There bottom six over the last couple of years has been rubbish. Now that they have got more depth with some kids underneath and a good coach it all gets undone by Waite, Judd and co going over the hill.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:35, Swampfox said:

Their first priority is Boyd

There midfield is not bad but its not that good either

Amazing error their.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:27, Ben-Hur said:

I can only assume you're talking to me, as I think I'm the only one that has brought "tanking" up.

My comment was "tanking has got them nowhere". Interesting that you disagree.

They are a mile from a premiership. Btw, I haven't said that they shouldn't have tanked, or that they haven't stuffed up elsewhere, just that "tanking has got them NOWHERE.

If you're not referring to my post and your comprehension is far better than it appears, I apologise in advance.

Really tanking got them Kreuzer, because they got pick 1 to go with pick 3 which they dealt for Judd. If they didn't have that pick it would've been no Kreuzer I'm sure.

Kreuzer doesn't really improve them because the gap from him to Warnock isn't really that large although he's still a good player to have.

So I 100% agree with you that it's got them nowhere and then the more realistic question to ask now becomes is tanking worthwhile just for the sake of one draft pick which then becomes Kreuzer?

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:40, the master said:

Really tanking got them Kreuzer, because they got pick 1 to go with pick 3 which they dealt for Judd. If they didn't have that pick it would've been no Kreuzer I'm sure.

Kreuzer doesn't really improve them because the gap from him to Warnock isn't really that large although he's still a good player to have.

So I 100% agree with you that it's got them nowhere and then the more realistic question to ask now becomes is tanking worthwhile just for the sake of one draft pick which then becomes Kreuzer?

I've long since come to the conclusion that tanking is an utter waste of time.

Sydney won a flag in 2005 and 2012 and only 4 players played in both. They've also had no access to decent draft picks. But they do have a fantastic environment.

Need I go on ?

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:43, Ben-Hur said:

I've long since come to the conclusion that tanking is an utter waste of time.

Sydney won a flag in 2005 and 2012 and only 4 players played in both. They've also had no access to decent draft picks. But they do have a fantastic environment.

Need I go on ?

Need you go on ? Why not you always do.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:22, mjt said:

No ones further off a flag than US, it amazes me that people can't deal with that.

Where did I say we were close to a flag? I said Carlton were further than us. I didn't say we were close. There is a difference.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:39, Geddy Lee said:

Amazing error their.

Thank You for your contribution to there thier their the thread

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:47, mjt said:

Need you go on ? Why not you always do.

Any chance in a point to your discussion?

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:48, Generation dee said:

Where did I say we were close to a flag? I said Carlton were further than us. I didn't say we were close. There is a difference.

I understand what you said, have you looked at the AFL ladder, Carlton are a lot closer to glory than us, FMD our list is pathetic.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:52, mjt said:

I understand what you said, have you looked at the AFL ladder, Carlton are a lot closer to glory than us, FMD our list is pathetic.

so by that theory st kilda are closer than the giants?

Growing up in the Carlton zone when they were very successful and the Dees were poor, I hate Carlton like nothing else.

However, I have to disagree about Malthouse. Listen to players from the Bulldogs and West Coast and they say that the whole place changed when Malthouse was coach. It is not so much about institutional culture, but he has an outstanding record of making boys into men. Footballers play for him in a similar way the Hawks played for Alan Jeans. It is great to see Carlton struggling now but history says they will not struggle in 18 months or so.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:53, Generation dee said:

so by that theory st kilda are closer than the giants?

The Saints haven't been on the bottom for 7 years GD, your a better poster than that.

I was not referring to your post presa but I have heard that argument that tanking is bad for footy club culture, and footy cultures over rated there have been lots of teams with bad cultures that have won flags, eagles as an example there are only two kinds of culture a winning culture and a losing culture .

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:27, Ben-Hur said:

I can only assume you're talking to me, as I think I'm the only one that has brought "tanking" up.

My comment was "tanking has got them nowhere". Interesting that you disagree.

They are a mile from a premiership. Btw, I haven't said that they shouldn't have tanked, or that they haven't stuffed up elsewhere, just that "tanking has got them NOWHERE".

If you're not referring to my post and your comprehension is far better than it appears, I apologise in advance.

I was not referring to your post presa but I have heard that argument that tanking is bad for footy club culture, and footy cultures over rated there have been lots of teams with bad cultures that have won flags, eagles as an example there are only two kinds of culture a winning culture and a losing culture .

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:22, mjt said:

No ones further off a flag than US, it amazes me that people can't deal with that.[/Dam I thought we were a shoe in for the 2014 Flag

]

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:43, Ben-Hur said:

I've long since come to the conclusion that tanking is an utter waste of time.

Sydney won a flag in 2005 and 2012 and only 4 players played in both. They've also had no access to decent draft picks. But they do have a fantastic environment.

Need I go on ?

Sure, it can be done with an inflated salary cap and excellent management. But if you are so bad that you have only won four games by Round 20 and an extra win costs you picks #1 and #2 in exchange for #3 it is really a no brainer.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:55, mjt said:

The Saints haven't been on the bottom for 7 years GD, your a better poster than that.

I understand your point. I'm not in anyway saying we are close to a flag- our past 7 years are testament to that. However, Carlton, have missed out on their chance or were never in with one to start with. Which I'm sure that you and I can look at with a sense of satisfaction despite our clubs misfortune!

When Carlton got Judd I always said that they would never win a flag with Judd on their list, with a salary cap, teams can’t pay one player 1 mill a year, and have good depth on their list.

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:43, Ben-Hur said:

I've long since come to the conclusion that tanking is an utter waste of time.

Sydney won a flag in 2005 and 2012 and only 4 players played in both. They've also had no access to decent draft picks. But they do have a fantastic environment.

Need I go on ?

I'm sick of Sydney being put as the perfect model doing it against the odds without the free leg up, when they have always had an extra $800k in the salary cap.

That was pivotal in them not bottoming out. Now they get Tippett after a premiership makes me think I'm over them.

  On 06/07/2013 at 09:48, angrydemons said:

When Carlton got Judd I always said that they would never win a flag with Judd on their list, with a salary cap, teams can’t pay one player 1 mill a year, and have good depth on their list.

Hawthorn? How do you see them?

I reckon Franklin would be on a mill per season.

  On 06/07/2013 at 10:26, jumbo returns said:

Hawthorn? How do you see them?

I reckon Franklin would be on a mill per season.

no i dont think he is on 1 mill yet he would be getting around$750000, his next contract will be around the mill mark, also lots of the core players at hawthone came to the side at around the same time.

  On 06/07/2013 at 10:26, jumbo returns said:

Hawthorn? How do you see them?

I reckon Franklin would be on a mill per season.

also the cap has grown since judd was getting 1 mill,

  On 06/07/2013 at 08:48, Generation dee said:

Where did I say we were close to a flag? I said Carlton were further than us. I didn't say we were close. There is a difference.

I think you are right unless they can pull something out of the hat this trade period, but I'm not sure they have much to give up and also not sure who wants to deal with them.

I'm also not so sure about the Tiges (nothing to do with todays result, have posted this in the past), they have come along well but they have a workman like defence and limited forward line. At least they have enough good young players to build on, reckon Ellis is a real find. Can't see them pushing much further than bottom 8 over the next few years unless something changes, their big problem is finishing mid ladder without access to top talent in a compromised draft.