At least 6 more years before a premiership

[Wiseblood 24,637]

6 more years?

Try 6 months!  DEMONS!!

[H_T 3,049]

Agree with that analysis mauriesy. 2-3 yrs for mine. Earlier would be brilliant.

West Coast appears to be in a good place right now for the next 2-4 yrs.

 

[mauriesy 7,417]

4 hours ago, bandicoot said:

That link is a playing group with an average of 120+ games

Not sure whether you mean the total playing group or the 'best 22'.

120 games x 38 players is 4560 games. No list in the AFL comes anywhere near that level. They'd be 50% geriatrics.

[Chris 2,892]

10 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Not sure whether you mean the total playing group or the 'best 22'.

120 games x 38 players is 4560 games. No list in the AFL comes anywhere near that level. They'd be 50% geriatrics.

Must be best 22. The Hawks with last years flag team with this years replacements for lake etc average about 140 games for the best 22 with 16 of those having over 100 games.. We are averaging 72 this week end for our 22 with 6 players over 100 games. 

[Demonised 1,363]

A Demonland discussion with actual statistics and evidence? Have I stumbled into an alternative dimension? 

[old55 23,836]

one win is all it took ...

[chook fowler 19,694]

Bollocks is my response 

[Goodvibes 3,596]

22 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

one win is all it took ...

Tell me you haven't been thinking about it Old?

[markc 975]

2 hours ago, mauriesy said:

Assuming sufficient quality in the list, I think 6 years is pessimistic.

Here's a calculation of the total number of games played by each club's list at the start of this season. I just added up the number of games played by every player in each club's list (source Age 2016 Footy guide). Here's the data:

North Melbourne 3993
Fremantle 3393
Hawthorn 3377
West Coast 3092
Geelong 2944
Port Adelaide 2942
Collingwood 2791
Richmond 2769
Sydney 2601
Essendon 2573
Western Bulldogs 2556
Adelaide 2500
Carlton 2450
St Kilda 2432
GWS 2415
Gold Coast 2405
Melbourne 2268
Brisbane 2009

So Melbourne is the second-least experienced team at the start of 2016. The teams that would appear to be close to premiership contention (Sydney upwards) have at least 2600 (maybe Bulldogs at 2556). The favourites this year have around 3000+.

How long does it take to get to that level? Each year you can add 22 x 22 = 484 games experience to the list, minus delistings and retirements (we're not liklely to have too many players retire that soon). Players delisted generally don't have many games under their belt. You can also bring in experience through FA and trades. Melbourne's figure also includes Melksham.

So say you can add 300-400 games experience every year to the list. In two years Melbourne could have a total list experience of 2800-3000 games. That's enough to be in contention.

As I said before, this assumes a certain amount of list quality. But experience is a necessity, just look at the top 5-6 teams on the table.

BTW, amazing how old North Melbourne are, although Harvey skews the list)
 

great post thankyou

 

i would hope we looking at 2-3 years time not 6 

 

 

[Akum 2,660]

2 hours ago, Chris said:

Stats for the dogs as they are lining up this week. They are younger by 1.5 years and less experienced by 2.7 games than we are this week end. 

Average Age 22.5       Average Games 69.7                   Back Line           Ave Age   22.0       Ave Games 69.5                   Fol (includes wing)         Ave Age   22.7       Ave Games 64.2                   Fwd           Ave Age   24.3       Ave Games 108.7                   Int           Ave Age   20.5       Ave Games 20.0                   Games     Backline                  Fol            Fwd             Int          total 0-50 3 2 2 3 10 51-100 1 4 2 1 8 101-150 1 0 0 0 1 151-200 0 0 1 0 1 200+ 1 0 1 0 2           22

Haven't seen the Dogs' team this week (and CBF looking it up), but don't MBoyd, Morris & Murphy all play in the back line?

[Akum 2,660]

49 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

Bollocks is my response 

I may not agree with your bollocks, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

[stuie 7,374]

5 hours ago, bandicoot said:

There seems to be a common link between all premiership sides in the last decade.

That link is a playing group with an average of 120+ games and 2/3 of the list at 100 games or more.

With those stats Melbourne is at least 6 years away as our core group has hardly played 50 games. 

This isn't to say that we won't win a final or two but the list will only be really primed after 2020.

Not sure of the maths here.

120 - 50 = 70.

Let's say the "core group" being best 22, play 20 games a season.

That's 3 and a half years.

2 and a half if you want to make it 100 games as stated above.

 

[daisycutter 29,892]

if you can 100% guarantee me 6 years (max) then i'll gladly hang on

[old55 23,836]

1 hour ago, Goodvibes said:

Tell me you haven't been thinking about it Old?

I'm often thinking about it but that has no bearing on whether I get it ... (cue Benny Hill music)

[Chris 2,892]

34 minutes ago, Akum said:

Haven't seen the Dogs' team this week (and CBF looking it up), but don't MBoyd, Morris & Murphy all play in the back line?

Good pick up. I missed putting the 'M' in M Boyd on my spreadsheet so the numbers have changed. Murphy is also listed in the forward pocket. 

The right numbers are:

Average Age		24.0
Average Games		81.5
Back Line
Ave Age		27.5
Ave Games		112.7
Fol (includes wing)
Ave Age		22.7
Ave Games		64.2
Fwd
Ave Age		24.3
Ave Games		108.7
Int
Ave Age		20.5
Ave Games		20.0
Games	Backline	Fol	Fwd	Int	total
0-50	2	2	2	3	9
51-100	1	4	2	1	8
101-150	1	0	0	0	1
151-200	0	0	1	0	1
200+	2	0	1	0	3
					22

 

When compared to our side this week that now makes them the same age and 9.1 games more experienced than us this weekend. They have 1 less player over 100 games but 2 more between 50 and 100. 

 

Sorry for the stuff up, still catching the multiple players with the same surname glitches. 

[Moneider96 1,045]

6 years seems like an awfully long time.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

7 minutes ago, Moneider96 said:

6 years seems like an awfully long time.

Especially when you get to my age.

[daisycutter 29,892]

16 minutes ago, Moneider96 said:

6 years seems like an awfully long time.

yes, but it would mean winning a lot of games and playing finals during that time

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,477]

6 hours ago, CBDees said:

Final eight this year, Top four next year and grand final in 2018 (with an outside chance next year as well). We are on our way to becoming a power Club again and will win successive Premierships with the list that we are putting together!

Can't see us in the 8 this year. Hope I'm wrong but for that to happen we need to start beating sides like North. Rounds 4-7 are all winnable games in Pies, Tigers, Saints and Suns. 

[Members' Wing 1,106]

People don't honestly think we'll be contending for a flag in 2-3 years surely?! It doesn't work like that, there's a progression.

Some of the talk on here this past week I'm afraid has been completely delusional. It was great to have a win to start the season, brilliant. But we were at home playing a team who'd missed finals the year before, and scraped over the line with the opposition having thrown the game away with dreadful kicking for goal.

The how many will Hogan kick this week thread is an embarrassment. I know most/some of the answers have a degree of facetiousness, but let's just win two games in a row for the first time in 5 years first before we start thinking about one of our forwards kicking 10 goals or being ready to contend for premierships.

There's some real light at the end of the tunnel now and the list has a lot of promise but so do a number of others; Dogs, Eagles, Collingwood and the two expansion clubs to name a few, and with free agency it's going to be easier for clubs like Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney to extend their premiership windows.

Suppose I'm trying to say that God knows we've been patient for a long time, and sat through some horrible times, but we're going to need to stay patient for a bit longer. We're not even close to being ready to challenge for a flag just yet!

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

I don't disagree that we're not up to challenging for a flag yet.

But these things can come on quickly. There's no script that has to be followed.

Demons in 87. Challenged for a flag from out of nowhere.

Crows in 97. Way down the ladder the year before.

Cats in 07, were out of the 8 the year before.

Dogs in 08. same.

Teams can and do come from nowhere to be contenders.

[chook fowler 19,694]

2 hours ago, Akum said:

I may not agree with your bollocks, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

I'm glad you understand it was a well considered and thoughtful bollocks

[Sir Why You Little 37,310]

24 minutes ago, Members' Wing said:

People don't honestly think we'll be contending for a flag in 2-3 years surely?! It doesn't work like that, there's a progression.

Some of the talk on here this past week I'm afraid has been completely delusional. It was great to have a win to start the season, brilliant. But we were at home playing a team who'd missed finals the year before, and scraped over the line with the opposition having thrown the game away with dreadful kicking for goal.

The how many will Hogan kick this week thread is an embarrassment. I know most/some of the answers have a degree of facetiousness, but let's just win two games in a row for the first time in 5 years first before we start thinking about one of our forwards kicking 10 goals or being ready to contend for premierships.

There's some real light at the end of the tunnel now and the list has a lot of promise but so do a number of others; Dogs, Eagles, Collingwood and the two expansion clubs to name a few, and with free agency it's going to be easier for clubs like Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney to extend their premiership windows.

Suppose I'm trying to say that God knows we've been patient for a long time, and sat through some horrible times, but we're going to need to stay patient for a bit longer. We're not even close to being ready to challenge for a flag just yet!

We may not be quite ready to win a flag...But i sure am..!

[H_T 3,049]

5 minutes ago, Ted Fidge said:

I don't disagree that we're not up to challenging for a flag yet.

But these things can come on quickly. There's no script that has to be followed.

Demons in 87. Challenged for a flag from out of nowhere.

Crows in 97. Way down the ladder the year before.

Cats in 07, were out of the 8 the year before.

Dogs in 08. same.

Teams can and do come from nowhere to be contenders.

Correct.

Dogs are in contention now, were last year.

Port were in contention, massive turnaround thanks to Hinkley and his team.

 

 

[45HG 1,559]

Leicester City.