4 minutes ago, Dante said:

Mate you are wasting your time, it's brick wall material you are talking too,

I get the feeling that if you argued the other way he'd still disagree with you, I think it's called feeding the troll. Your position is clear and unequivocal, he is arguing without a position of strength and just ignoring your accurate summation of the situation.

 

See you are wrong and Bonkers doesn't have to resort to name calling, he has a point of view and has explained why he has that view, I respect that, but in parts I don't agree with it,.

But he has the right to have that view, you may find it interesting or maybe not, to note that even though I don't agree with him I don't feel the need to call him a fool or a troll.

You say I am arguing from a position without strength, why because you don't agree with it or are there other reasons

8 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

What I think from reading some posts is that some would still prefer a 10 or 12 team league playing in Victoria on suburban grounds,.

We have gone past that, and whatever anybody thinks,  whether they like it or not, and I am not a fan of the AFL either, some of their decisions baffle me.

Broadcast rights money rules, it's the same across all major sports now, so unfortunately we have to wear the consequences if the game is to survive   and thrive.

 Even if clubs have 70000 members the money from them doesn't cut it these days, doubt the membership revenue for MFC would even begin to cover the costs of the Footy Dept, neithet does the sponsorship money from the local real estate agent

Sponsors want to see their name on TV, Western Sydney is a massive market, so everything good and bad was done to establish a foothold, we have to live with it

I support Everton in the Premier League have since I was 5 so a long time   always hoped not to see us owned by an oil baron or the like unfortunately to survive that can't happen

 

, 

You've gone off on a weird tangent here, Saty.  It's kind of like you are grasping at a few straws to support your arguments, but they don't really make much sense.  Plus you are exaggerating the opinions of others - some still want a 10-12 team Vic league?  Hardly.  That's not what we are arguing at all.

All we want is a league that is as equal as possible.  Of course it's never going to be that way, but giving clubs up north academies so they can cherry pick talent and get them through a loophole is not the way to do it and it's something that is avoidable.  They get a leg up - even if it's 2 players in 6 years, as you say, that's still 2 more than everyone else.  Where is our academy?  Why don't we get one?

While they want those clubs up north to succeed, I think it's fair to say that they don't need academies to do it.  Sydney already have a bigger salary cap and attract talent easily, while GWS have more high draft picks than you can poke a stick at that they can either use to draft more top end talent or trade away for big name stars.  Why do they need an academy?  They don't.  It's that simple.

Yes, we have to live with the fact that these clubs are here to stay and that we need to continue to get better to match them in any way we can.  It still doesn't justify why they deserve a free shot at talent that we don't get.

Unfortunately because of the position both financially and footy wise, the 'weaker' clubs were in when tthe expansion clubs, particularly GCS and GWS came into existence, the administration of those weaker clubs had to bend over and accept whatever was offered to them.

We are now wearing the consequencez, unfortunately it will take more thsn a couple of clubs to make change, and this isn't going to happen any time soon as each club has its own agenda

If we had been better prepared like Geelong and Hawthorn we wouldn't be even discussing this we would be discussing an upcoming final,  but hey hindsight is a wonderful thing

22 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

As much of a farce as it is from the AFL, and how much more it will become, GWS really did drive home the advantage of the concessions that they were given. The difference in how they went about it compared to GC shows why the 2 are now so far apart.

They had more concessions than GC plus GC have struggled with injuries. Had Ablett, Omeara, Prestia and Swallow all been playing 20 games a season they would be challenging as well.

5 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They had more concessions than GC plus GC have struggled with injuries. Had Ablett, Omeara, Prestia and Swallow all been playing 20 games a season they would be challenging as well.

Spot on Doc, and it's easy to forget this.  

19 hours ago, hells bells said:

They were given much more than the GC.  From memory GC had access to 1 year at the draft, GWS were given 2.

No doubt GWS have played it very smart, but they weren't the same concessions.

Plus the mini draft concessions and from memory they also had access to more 17yo picks than GC - not to mention being given the Riverina as part of their Academy.

10 hours ago, bingers said:

I have followed the Demons since 1968. 48 years. No premierships. And TBH, none likely in the next few years.

MFC member for years.

AFL set up a brand new club. Concessions + concessions. GWS may well win the flag this year. In their fifth freakin year!! Or if not this year, within the next 2. 

Long suffering and loyal supporters of Melbourne, Footscray + St Kilda haven't seen a flag for 60 years +. (Or, depending on age, not at all.)

A manufactured team is likely to win one within 5 - 7 years of its inception/creation. Something about all this doesn't seem quite right. 

 

At least West Coast, Adelaide and Port came from footy states with mad support while the Lions and Swans had the old Fitzroy and South supporters. A Giants win on GF day will just be so hollow and mean nothing. How could their supporters (the few they have) get any joy or satisfaction out of a flag within a matter of years from entering the comp? They haven't done it the hard way or through smart management - it's just been gifted to them. The only ones cheering will be the AFL and channel 7 execs while the rest of the competition will die a little.

5 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Plus the monitor draft concessions and from memory they also had access to more 17yo picks than GC - not to mention being given the Riverina as part of their Academy.

Then where were the thousands of supporters demonstrating outside of AFL house demanding that this didn't happen.

 I felt so strongly about the concessions given to GWS that I sent an email to both the club and the AFL. Was I a lone voice, who knows, diid anybody else on here. I  understood what it might do to the competition

This is what I love about this board,  looking forward to the next AGM there should be lots of questions from the floor NOT

Just now, Satyriconhome said:

Then where were the thousands of supporters demonstrating outside of AFL house demanding that this didn't happen.

 I felt so strongly about the concessions given to GWS that I sent an email to both the club and the AFL. Was I a lone voice, who knows, diid anybody else on here. I  understood what it might do to the competition

This is what I love about this board,  looking forward to the next AGM there should be lots of questions from the floor NOT

I was actually enjoying this discussion with you Saty, until that last line.  Why can't you keep it to the discussion at hand without a snide remark like that?  Doc wasn't getting personal or making fun of your views - he just had a differing opinion.  Why you need to get stuck into the 'board' as a whole is beyond me - you say you want robust debate, and then you resort to that sort of stuff.  It's silly.  Drop that sort of childish reaction and the good debate we've had over the last few pages would happen more often.

The only way to stop GWS's success is to somehow get Ross Lyon to coach them.

43 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

 

If we had been better prepared like Geelong and Hawthorn we wouldn't be even discussing this we would be discussing an upcoming final,  but hey hindsight is a wonderful thing

Well ironically, if youre talking pure talent coming through, we are probably better prepared than just about anyone to challenge GWS over the coming years.  Only the Bulldogs are better placed than us in that regard.

Geelong and Hawthorn were extremely lucky -  they already had premiership lists when GWS and Gold Coast came in and raped the drafts which set many clubs back years, and they have both benefited from free agency more than any other teams (along with Sydney).

I am glad to see GWS succeed,it is about time we saw a new face in the finals and they play exciting footy. Those players who decided to p.ss off to other clubs may be kicking themselves,kind of reminds me of N.Buckley move from Brisbane to the pies. The draft system may be unfair however having the right people running the joint(GWS) does help,if the Dees had those players under Neeld ( he's people would pick the duds instead) it would be curtains for us. I don't see us bridging the gap between us and GWS next year,no first round pick will make it hard for us. If the AFL gave teams a priority 2nd round pick for not making the finals for 5 yrs that may help. 

29 minutes ago, ENYAW said:

I am glad to see GWS succeed,it is about time we saw a new face in the finals and they play exciting footy. Those players who decided to p.ss off to other clubs may be kicking themselves,kind of reminds me of N.Buckley move from Brisbane to the pies. The draft system may be unfair however having the right people running the joint(GWS) does help,if the Dees had those players under Neeld ( he's people would pick the duds instead) it would be curtains for us. I don't see us bridging the gap between us and GWS next year,no first round pick will make it hard for us. If the AFL gave teams a priority 2nd round pick for not making the finals for 5 yrs that may help. 

If we'd had GWS' concessions under Neeld, we probably would've had Toumpas, Stringer, Macrae AND Wines on our list.

GWS have had their fair share of stinkers along the way in the draft; but the AFL gave them so many picks as a safety net for poor drafting. Basically any idiot could've assembled that list with their draft concessions; any other club's list manager would be fired with first round selections like Boyd at 1, O'Rourke at 2, Plowman at 3, Pickett at 4 (0 games), Buntine at 5, Ahern at 7 (0 games), Haynes at 7, Sumner at 10, Jaksch at 12, Corr at 14, etc.

Especially when you consider every other club only gets one shot at the first round every year. The reason GWS can sustain this every year is because other clubs are willing to give up their first rounders for a handful of decent (but not great) GWS players stuck in the NEAFL. And they're happy to do it because their list size concessions reduce every year until 2019.

14 minutes ago, ENYAW said:

I am glad to see GWS succeed,it is about time we saw a new face in the finals and they play exciting footy. Those players who decided to p.ss off to other clubs may be kicking themselves,kind of reminds me of N.Buckley move from Brisbane to the pies. The draft system may be unfair however having the right people running the joint(GWS) does help,if the Dees had those players under Neeld ( he's people would pick the duds instead) it would be curtains for us. I don't see us bridging the gap between us and GWS next year,no first round pick will make it hard for us. If the AFL gave teams a priority 2nd round pick for not making the finals for 5 yrs that may help. 

While it's good too see other clubs play and have success in the finals I disagree it's good seeing GWS being part of it. Their inception into the AFL system and 7 years worth of draft concessions has and will have a long lasting effect on clubs who are struggling to make finals and be competitive. 

i don't mind in the least if gws win a flag this year or next. would be a pleasant change and good for the game in sydney

what i don't want to see is a top 4 side raking in top 10 draft picks and getting top class academy picks for peanuts for the next 10 years

the draft is supposed to be an equalisation mechanism, but there are now so many loopholes in it

1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

I was actually enjoying this discussion with you Saty, until that last line.  Why can't you keep it to the discussion at hand without a snide remark like that?  Doc wasn't getting personal or making fun of your views - he just had a differing opinion.  Why you need to get stuck into the 'board' as a whole is beyond me - you say you want robust debate, and then you resort to that sort of stuff.  It's silly.  Drop that sort of childish reaction and the good debate we've had over the last few pages would happen more often.

I understand the sentiment Wise, but I have seen and heard all this before, in Liverpudlian 'it is all mouth and trousers', if people don't like something do something about it, I do, I question everything.

I hate where the club has been in the last ten years but I try and do my little bit to help, I am sure others on here do as well, but some just whinge and sit on their hands    no respect for them at all    ask my opinion on anything you will get the answer not [censored] or group think

10 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Grudgingly, I give Sheedy much credit for drafting players with 'mongrel' not just talent.  He knew the type to win finals!  Their traded in players:  Johnson, Mumford, Shaw - all tough experienced hombres with premiership medals. So, I hate to say it but they have recruited and coached for finals. 

But like others I am appalled at GWS's draft concessions.  I'm also surprised by the willingness of other clubs to trade high draft picks for 'second string' players ie highly talented but may not have 'mongrel'.  I wonder if clubs will rue those trades when some turn out to be 'fools gold' - even with Hawthorn's system O'Rourke is mostly playing VFL and they gave their 1st and 2nd rnd pick.

To rub salt into the wound it was reported that GWS want 2017 high draft picks as they have enough for 2016!   If club's don't stop being bedazzled by GWS's apparent 'second string' riches and don't trade high draft picks for them nothing will stop the GWS juggernaut. 

What's strange about this mindset is that either clubs have underestimated GWS, or they overrate their own lists, or they're simply happy building middle of the road lists in the hope that one day they might be able to pinch a flag off GWS if the aforementioned club stumbles.

I've been predicting a GWS flag in 2016 for quite a few months now and they're well on their way.

10 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

My point is, yes they have had assistance, but they also worked to get everything right, it shows what can be done from rock bottom to the top in 5 years if everybody is on the same page and you get everything right.

We are now three years into the same type of trajectory, Sheedy/Roos has gone, new coach schooled properly, a recruiting and development department that has hardly had a fail in the last couple of years.

We are looking at being active in the trade period again, we have already taken the risk with the first round pick this year

The thrashings have stopped, we have young players playing with confidence, we have sorted out the experience we don't and do need etc etc

Let's talk optimistically about us instead of whingeing about something that has already happened

Absolutely no way we've sorted out our experience. The single biggest issue that could prevent us from winning a flag, IMO. We must get decent senior players in ASAP. When you compare the return for us of premiership players in Dawes and Lumumba with Shaw, Mumford and Steve Johnson, they're poles apart. And you cannot deny GWS were able to get these quality ex-premiership players in because they had the near unlimited cap room and picks to satisfy (except perhaps for Steve Johnson).

We're starting from a long way back. I hope GWS' talent continues to get spread around the competition (preferably heading to the MFC, but we can't have it all) and slowly things will even themselves out - see Treloar's trade last year. I just hope these flogs don't all end up at the big Melbourne clubs in Hawthorn, Essendon, Carlton and Collingwood.

And the thrashings have stopped for the most part, although it seems laughable to state it, given our final match saw a 111 point thrashing.

8 hours ago, Macca said:

There are many sides to this story ... 

GWS have been handed a great chance to fast-track their way to success but that 'great chance' required a reasonable dose of luck (in the draft) but also required excellent management from the get-go.  They also needed to trade & recruit well outside of the draft and that's where they've come up trumps.  The more chances a team has with high end draft picks, the greater the chance for success. 

GWS missed on a number of 1st round draft picks but we don't get to read or hear about that because of the success of the rest of their picks ... as for the rest of it, they've played the system extremely well and much much better than many of us thought. 

Like any start-up operation, those pushing the new team were going to want it to work as soon as possible - and that's what has happened.  We shouldn't be surprised with the outcome as the pathway to that outcome was set up from day 1.  We can complain all we like but it is what is is and they're only going to get stronger (unless they lose their way)  We may not like it but from a practical viewpoint, we have to accept it.

And it's not just our club that will almost certainly lag behind them, the same argument goes for many of the clubs.  GWS have been given a great opportunity and so far, they're making the most of it.  I originally thought that the smaller clubs in Melbourne would struggle to cope as a consequence but its interesting that the traditional big 4 clubs in Melbourne are all a good ways off a premiership window (right now) 

North & the Doggies are playing finals, the Saints are on an upward curve and so are we.  Contrast that with Carlton,  Essendon, the Tigers & Pies.  The Cats & Hawks are maintaining a high ladder position and have done so with astute trading and also with the help of free agency.

So, how do we catch up to a (possible) juggernaut like GWS?  Astute trading & free agency ... and we'll need to have a better than reasonable strike rate with drafting - easier said than done of course but Taylor does seem to have a good eye for talent.  So it's do-able.

We also need to push for an academy to match those in the Northern states.  We might see a combined push from a number of clubs in that area in order for that to happen.

 

This is a good post and I think one of the major reasons why we're still a bit behind is that we have to get much better at trading. IMO with the exception of Vince, Cross, Tyson, Frost (you could argue Pedersen too), our trading over the last few years has been a fail. Michie, Lumumba, Kennedy, Riley, Newton, Bugg and going back even pre-Roos to Dawes, Byrnes, Gillies, Rodan (not to mention Clark). There are too many misses there and too many guys who have failed to show that they're anything more than a fringer. We have very little margin for error with these guys and really need 2 or 3 more reasonable experienced leaders injected into our side over the next 2-3 years if we're going to continue upwards.

Without these guys, we're in trouble.

Dear Ethan,the current draft system allows teams that have 1st rd draft picks to purchase good players from GWS and the GC.Fortunately for GWS they have become a class side. In the case of GC the opposite has occurred.The Dees have been in a position to pick up decent players thru the draft and in the past we generally picked up spuds.If a club is run poorly expect bad results. GWS picked up Sheedy as a coach we didn't want him instead we got Neeld and co. Without a no.1 draft pick to trade,the club needs to pick up a couple of "smokeys" like Hunt and Harmes.

6 minutes ago, A F said:

What's strange about this mindset is that either clubs have underestimated GWS, or they overrate their own lists, or they're simply happy building middle of the road lists in the hope that one day they might be able to pinch a flag off GWS if the aforementioned club stumbles.

I've been predicting a GWS flag in 2016 for quite a few months now and they're well on their way.

Absolutely no way we've sorted out our experience. The single biggest issue that could prevent us from winning a flag, IMO. We must get decent senior players in ASAP. When you compare the return for us of premiership players in Dawes and Lumumba with Shaw, Mumford and Steve Johnson, they're poles apart. And you cannot deny GWS were able to get these quality ex-premiership players in because they had the near unlimited cap room and picks to satisfy (except perhaps for Steve Johnson).

We're starting from a long way back. I hope GWS' talent continues to get spread around the competition (preferably heading to the MFC, but we can't have it all) and slowly things will even themselves out - see Treloar's trade last year. I just hope these flogs don't all end up at the big Melbourne clubs in Hawthorn, Essendon, Carlton and Collingwood.

And the thrashings have stopped for the most part, although it seems laughable to state it, given our final match saw a 111 point thrashing.

This is a good post and I think one of the major reasons why we're still a bit behind is that we have to get much better at trading. IMO with the exception of Vince, Cross, Tyson, Frost (you could argue Pedersen too), our trading over the last few years has been a fail. Michie, Lumumba, Kennedy, Riley, Newton, Bugg and going back even pre-Roos to Dawes, Byrnes, Gillies, Rodan (not to mention Clark). There are too many misses there and too many guys who have failed to show that they're anything more than a fringer. We have very little margin for error with these guys and really need 2 or 3 more reasonable experienced leaders injected into our side over the next 2-3 years if we're going to continue upwards.

Without these guys, we're in trouble.

Just watch ALL the finals this weekend. Sustained pressure from the half back line...

how far back are we?

We can do it for the odd Quarter so far. 

17 minutes ago, A F said:

This is a good post and I think one of the major reasons why we're still a bit behind is that we have to get much better at trading. IMO with the exception of Vince, Cross, Tyson, Frost (you could argue Pedersen too), our trading over the last few years has been a fail. Michie, Lumumba, Kennedy, Riley, Newton, Bugg and going back even pre-Roos to Dawes, Byrnes, Gillies, Rodan (not to mention Clark). There are too many misses there and too many guys who have failed to show that they're anything more than a fringer. We have very little margin for error with these guys and really need 2 or 3 more reasonable experienced leaders injected into our side over the next 2-3 years if we're going to continue upwards.

Without these guys, we're in trouble.

The thing that always needs to remembered is that the pool of good players is a lot smaller than the sum of all the players on all the lists combined ... there's any number of underdeveloped players and a host of C & D grade players who are listed every season.

It's actually quite a hard thing to bring in more than 2 - 4 good players every season ... and by good players I mean those types who play to at least a good/very good/excellent standard most weeks. 

And the draft doesn't deliver on the riches that people expect either - there's hits and misses everywhere which leads people to believe that there are just too many bad choices.  I've always believed that drafting is at least somewhat flawed.

So that's why a top-notch recruiting team in our sport is probably more important than any other sport ... as an example, in soccer, there's any number of good players to choose from in any number of leagues.  In our sport, we have to often pick on 'spec' and then develop for 3 - 5 years.  Thus, a top-notch development team is of paramount importance as well.

It's hard work building a good list ... a lot harder than people think.

16 minutes ago, Macca said:

The thing that always needs to remembered is that the pool of good players is a lot smaller than the sum of all the players on all the lists combined ... there's any number of underdeveloped players and a host of C & D grade players who are listed every season.

It's actually quite a hard thing to bring in more than 2 - 4 good players every season ... and by good players I mean those types who play to at least a good/very good/excellent standard most weeks. 

And the draft doesn't deliver on the riches that people expect either - there's hits and misses everywhere which leads people to believe that there are just too many bad choices.  I've always believed that drafting is at least somewhat flawed.

So that's why a top-notch recruiting team in our sport is probably more important than any other sport ... as an example. in soccer, there's any number of good players to choose from.  In our sport, we have to often pick on 'spec' and then develop for 3 - 5 years.  Thus, a top-notch development team is of paramount importance as well.

It's hard work building a good list ... a lot harder than people think.

I agree with all that, but GWS proves we're only 2-3 good experienced players (with preferably premiership success) off fixing the problem. Over a 2-3 year period that's doable if we nail our trades.

1 hour ago, A F said:

I agree with all that, but GWS proves we're only 2-3 good experienced players (with preferably premiership success) off fixing the problem. Over a 2-3 year period that's doable if we nail our trades.

Well after watching our trades over the last few years get a lot better than that previous horror patch, I'm hoping there is more of the same.  But we need to aim big - the bigger the better.  I would prefer if we were to bring in some genuine A grade talent but again, for all sorts of reasons, doing that is a difficult assignment. 

Prior to the first year of free agency (2012 off season) I was advocating that we should be ahead of the game and have any number of players lined up.  In 4 completed free agency periods, we haven't really been a player - often because we were losing free agents previously and therefore we had our compensation to think of. 

But that was then and now we have to get aggressive ... we need to be talking to agents about certain players 2 or 3 years out.  Other clubs will be doing so and if they get in first, we lose out.  Trading for a top player is difficult without currency - we could use next year's 1st round draft pick as part of a deal but free agents only cost salary cap space - unless there is also a compensation factor.

1 hour ago, Macca said:

Well after watching our trades over the last few years get a lot better than that previous horror patch, I'm hoping there is more of the same.  But we need to aim big - the bigger the better.  I would prefer if we were to bring in some genuine A grade talent but again, for all sorts of reasons, doing that is a difficult assignment. 

Prior to the first year of free agency (2012 off season) I was advocating that we should be ahead of the game and have any number of players lined up.  In 4 completed free agency periods, we haven't really been a player - often because we were losing free agents previously and therefore we had our compensation to think of. 

But that was then and now we have to get aggressive ... we need to be talking to agents about certain players 2 or 3 years out.  Other clubs will be doing so and if they get in first, we lose out.

If you look at the experienced heads GWS have landed in Shaw and Griffen, neither I would say were A graders, probably cusp B graders, so whilst A grade leaders would be great, I'd settle for B graders at this stage.

1 hour ago, ENYAW said:

Dear Ethan,the current draft system allows teams that have 1st rd draft picks to purchase good players from GWS and the GC.Fortunately for GWS they have become a class side. In the case of GC the opposite has occurred.The Dees have been in a position to pick up decent players thru the draft and in the past we generally picked up spuds.If a club is run poorly expect bad results. GWS picked up Sheedy as a coach we didn't want him instead we got Neeld and co. Without a no.1 draft pick to trade,the club needs to pick up a couple of "smokeys" like Hunt and Harmes.

Wrong again ENYAW. It was the Gardner admin that overlooked Sheedy in favour of Dean Bailey. Long before we picked Neeld. 

Sheedy would have been as effective at Melbourne as a senior coach as Bailey because we were suffering from poor recruiting and even worse player development. He would not have helped us.

Just now, A F said:

If you look at the experienced heads GWS have landed in Shaw and Griffen, neither I would say were A graders, probably cusp B graders, so whilst A grade leaders would be great, I'd settle for B graders at this stage.

I suppose many of us thought that Clark,  Lumumba & Dawes were around the B grade level or perhaps even better  - well, at least the club would have thought that.  It's hard to see any of those 3 being previously viewed as C grade from the club's point of view.

By the same token Tyson, Vince, Frost & Garlett have been worthwhile additions with Bernie & Dom being terrific value and Frost having a lot of upside.  The jury is out on Bugg,  Kennedy & Melksham but all 3 could work out to some extent.  Garlett has been very good on occasions but goes missing.  It should also be noted that Garlett only effectively cost us pick 61.  Lumumba might still be able to turn things around.

So it's a bit of a mixed bag ... we just need to keep plugging away and hope we uncover a gem or 2.