6 minutes ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

As you've suggested we ended up trading out Petracca, Oliver, Pickett, Rivers, JVR and Fritsch

I never advocated trading out all 6. You've once again misinterpretted what I actually said

Those 6 were candidates only and I talked about 3 or 4 of the 6... not all of them

Do you actually read my posts properly? I know they are a bit long sometimes but twice now you've misread what I've said

1 hour ago, D Rev said:

Look at the Cats, they never go into total rebuild mode, they just do a 'rolling rebuild' continuously.

I reckon we actually started a 'rolling rebuild' after Tracs injury last year. Look at all the young players we brought in. We also drafted really well. Given that we contested well in R1, I suspect that our malaise with our core (elite) group is all above the shoulders. Get that right and we are competitive.

It's an even competition and if your stars don't fire, you're done.

The rolling rebuild is also aided by the Cats having one of the best strategic and game day coaches going around. This is critical for any rebuild.

24 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

  36 minutes ago, Trident22 said:

Harmes - Depth only, mutual decision to part ways.

Harmes and Baker both played excellent games for Footscray on the weekend. The ANB story seems convenient - doesn't excuse accepting unders for a key member of pour leadership group. The ones you say we offered contracts to left because Goodwin was starving them of opportunities, playing his usual favourites. Head out of the sand please.

Even if your 'ratings' were accurate, what have we replaced those players with? Absoluteley nothing!

20 minutes ago, Macca said:

That could easily change

Last season, myself and a few others here were advocating snagging 2 picks in the top 10 ... and it happened

The old group isn't going to win our next flag where as a new group of players can win our next flag

So we need to let go of the past and start afresh (that could be with a new coach as well)

If players absolutely want out, let them go but trade aggressively

It could and should change. They are not on the wrong side of 30. They are in their prime. It is inexcusable.

On paper, they should definitely be part of our next push. Gawn, May, TMac probably not, but Oliver and Trac 100% have the ability to be there. Perhaps the fire in the belly is not there.

1 minute ago, GS_1905 said:

It could and should change. They are not on the wrong side of 30. They are in their prime. It is inexcusable.

On paper, they should definitely be part of our next push. Gawn, May, TMac probably not, but Oliver and Trac 100% have the ability to be there. Perhaps the fire in the belly is not there.

We are not switched on and it is a player & coaching issue

So change is inevitable

16 hours ago, Macca said:

@DeeSpencer has some interesting thoughts on how the 2 or 3 deep forwards are used these days (across the league)

Often used as decoys and used to create more space across half forward by deliberately taking defenders away from the open space

But again, why our Match Committee hasn't addressed our forward line being constantly crowded is baffling

It's fairly obvious that it has to be slow ball movement further afield and our obsession with going forward, via the cape

That largely explains all the long bombs because why would a midfielder try to pinpoint a pass to a mass of bodies?

If you watch the first half especially against the Suns we didn’t move it fast but we did move it from the backline with width and skill.

Very similar to the Brisbane game plan. Make the ground big. Effectively spread all 18 players in to 18 positions.

It wasn’t our usual lament of slowly bombing up the boundary and the other team having 3 on 1 or 4 on 2 and us bombing it to an impossible match up.

Our mids would often have the ball in space with 6 on 6 ahead of them and plenty of room to work with.

Unfortunately unlike Brisbane who know how to find the short or kick long with penetration to a 1 on 1 we panicked and turned it over often with extra handballs as much as kicks.

The good news is our players are actively trying to not blindly bomb it. The bad news is that’s actually a worse result short term and I wonder if Viney, Oliver, Sparrow in particular will ever have any vision and poise in their kicking.

30 minutes ago, Trident22 said:

Harmes and Baker both played excellent games for Footscray on the weekend. The ANB story seems convenient - doesn't excuse accepting unders for a key member of pour leadership group. The ones you say we offered contracts to left because Goodwin was starving them of opportunities, playing his usual favourites. Head out of the sand please.

Even if your 'ratings' were accurate, what have we replaced those players with? Absoluteley nothing!

Re ANB, we will never know if he decided to go home and then went and discussed it with Adelaide or Adelaide approached him and suggested he come home.

We need to target similiar players of experience who might like the idea of coming home. I don’t think we got enough for ANB in our hurry to be a warm fuzzy family Club

The problem we have if we are trying to turn our list around quickly is I just don’t see us being a destination club for the next couple of season. Does anybody really think the likes of Butters will choose us over other Vic teams when our game style is depressing to watch, our stars want out and we are getting poor grounds and very few prime time games?

Hawks were able to do it by developing players from other clubs that nobody else wanted. I’m not sure we are good enough at either trading players in, or at developing them once we get them in for this method to work for us.

21 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

If you watch the first half especially against the Suns we didn’t move it fast but we did move it from the backline with width and skill.

Very similar to the Brisbane game plan. Make the ground big. Effectively spread all 18 players in to 18 positions.

It wasn’t our usual lament of slowly bombing up the boundary and the other team having 3 on 1 or 4 on 2 and us bombing it to an impossible match up.

Our mids would often have the ball in space with 6 on 6 ahead of them and plenty of room to work with.

Unfortunately unlike Brisbane who know how to find the short or kick long with penetration to a 1 on 1 we panicked and turned it over often with extra handballs as much as kicks.

The good news is our players are actively trying to not blindly bomb it. The bad news is that’s actually a worse result short term and I wonder if Viney, Oliver, Sparrow in particular will ever have any vision and poise in their kicking.

An argument could be put forward that the issues with the new game style is a player issue, not a coaching issue

Just now, Colm said:

The problem we have if we are trying to turn our list around quickly is I just don’t see us being a destination club for the next couple of season. Does anybody really think the likes of Butters will choose us over other Vic teams when our game style is depressing to watch, our stars want out and we are getting poor grounds and very few prime time games?

Hawks were able to do it by developing players from other clubs that nobody else wanted. I’m not sure we are good enough at either trading players in, or at developing them once we get them in for this method to work for us.

So go to the draft where the kids go where they are picked to go to

It's a longer wait but we've got JT

Brad Green's speech stating we will walk out rnd1 with Viney, Petracca and Oliver was a show of amazing support. However, it is clear now that these guys are not getting it done. What we do have is the young talent talent to be a top 8 team. Things might change when we stop expecting our '21 stars to win every game for us.

I'm starting Viney and Petracca forward. We need leadership and a genuine threat in the forward half. Let Viney tackle manically and Petracca act a nasty match up for any medium defender. We want to play a forward half game still, so they will have plenty of time on-ball.

I am starting any one of Windsor, Lindsay, Kozzy, Langford and Rivers at centre bounce.

This has to be the midfield of the future.

I am giving the keys to our supremely talented young players.

59 minutes ago, Heart Beats True said:

The rolling rebuild is also aided by the Cats having one of the best strategic and game day coaches going around. This is critical for any rebuild.

best coach this century . plus some outside the cap fringe benefits that attracts top end talent.

Edited March 31Mar 31 by Front and centre

9 minutes ago, Macca said:

So go to the draft where the kids go where they are picked to go to

It's a longer wait but we've got JT

Yep my thoughts exactly. Go to the draft the next two years before Tassie comes in. Bring in a new coaching staff with a new game plan and hopefully be in a position to attract the best players again in a couple of years. Picks for Kossie and Trac with a fair chance of a high pick next year would be a great starting point and we would then have future picks to trade for players.

1 minute ago, Colm said:

Yep my thoughts exactly. Go to the draft the next two years before Tassie comes in. Bring in a new coaching staff with a new game plan and hopefully be in a position to attract the best players again in a couple of years. Picks for Kossie and Trac with a fair chance of a high pick next year would be a great starting point and we would then have future picks to trade for players.

We are going to see some player movement over summer but we here were talking about having a successful season with the result being that are top players wanting to stay!

That's gone out the window as even winning as much as 8 games looks like a bit of a stretch (although who knows, things can change)

Our list is hamstrung by bad, long-term contracts to Oliver, Petracca and Viney. Oliver and Viney can only play midfield and these players are now too slow and poorly skilled to take us to the top of the mountain again. The Petracca and Oliver contracts were the price of doing business to compete from 2022-2024. The Viney extension was just dumb. None of these players are tradable without eating significantly into our salary cap.

We also have limited draft capital so we are going to have to nail the back end of the draft to give ourselves a chance to bounce back.

Viney had us over a barrel - renegotiated amongst the Oliver/Petracca dramas after word "got out" that North were interested. Managed to jag a 4 year deal out of staying loyal. Slightly opportunistic and cheeky.

30 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Our list is hamstrung by bad, long-term contracts to Oliver, Petracca and Viney. Oliver and Viney can only play midfield and these players are now too slow and poorly skilled to take us to the top of the mountain again. The Petracca and Oliver contracts were the price of doing business to compete from 2022-2024. The Viney extension was just dumb. None of these players are tradable without eating significantly into our salary cap.

We also have limited draft capital so we are going to have to nail the back end of the draft to give ourselves a chance to bounce back.

The Trac and Oliver contracts are only bad with hindsight. All clubs sign their elite talent to long contracts. We are no exception, and at the time they were both top 10 players in the league with no reasonable sign of either deteriorating (and Trac was in AA form prior to his injury last year). IMO, both were the right call at the time.

I’m happy to debate the Viney contract though.

100% rebuild

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

The Trac and Oliver contracts are only bad with hindsight. All clubs sign their elite talent to long contracts. We are no exception, and at the time they were both top 10 players in the league with no reasonable sign of either deteriorating (and Trac was in AA form prior to his injury last year). IMO, both were the right call at the time.

I’m happy to debate the Viney contract though.

There have just been a handful of seven-year contracts that have been good for the signing club. I didn't argue that they were the wrong call at the time. I just said that the Petracca and Oliver contracts only made sense to give us a chance from 2022-2024 and we are now paying the price.

When we signed Brayshaw, Petracca, Oliver etc. to long contracts, in face of rumours of the first two leaving, it was seen by most members as a sign of how strong the club had become.

Now they are 'bad contracts'...

Oliver and Petracca need a new coach. I’d be replacing love with reality. Ideally that new coach is at Melbourne.

3 hours ago, D Rev said:

Look at the Cats, they never go into total rebuild mode, they just do a 'rolling rebuild' continuously.

I reckon we actually started a 'rolling rebuild' after Tracs injury last year. Look at all the young players we brought in. We also drafted really well. Given that we contested well in R1, I suspect that our malaise with our core (elite) group is all above the shoulders. Get that right and we are competitive.

It's an even competition and if your stars don't fire, you're done.

Agree they have great list management and refresh when needed. I believe with the focus on frequent early draft picks and playing the kids we are already doing that process. The difference between us and a Geelong recently are the recruitment of high quality established players. Though we were in line to do this with Houston for the first time in years. (Though long term I prefer the players we drafted) We have lots of what appears to be good young talent to keep the team competitive.

The issue is how the talent is being used. Can a different coach with a different philosophy improve the team? Based upon our last 20 games, our current model is not working.

1 hour ago, Trident22 said:

Harmes and Baker both played excellent games for Footscray on the weekend. The ANB story seems convenient - doesn't excuse accepting unders for a key member of pour leadership group. The ones you say we offered contracts to left because Goodwin was starving them of opportunities, playing his usual favourites. Head out of the sand please.

Even if your 'ratings' were accurate, what have we replaced those players with? Absoluteley nothing!

Happy to discuss the points you have raised. Nothing wrong with a full and frank exchange of views.

1 - Harmes will always be revered as a Premiership player and he played well on the weekend. He also played some good games for us, but many more average ones. He was and always will be a foot soldier and his leaving was mutual. I don't believe he would make our team better.

2 - Nobody batted an eyelid when Baker was delisted after 15 mediocre games in five years. He also played well on the weekend, which brings his career tally of good games to a total of ONE. Do you think he'll still get a game once the players of the calibre of Bontempelli, Treloar, Weightman, JJ et al are available again?

3 - Your scepticism of ANB's reasons for leaving is based on the facts of a new father and mother wishing to return home for family support not suiting your narrative. We had no bargaining power and took what we could get. Would you have forced him to stay?

4 - You're shifting the goalposts. The fact remains that we did not choose to trade either of Jordon and Bedford.

5 - What have we replaced these players with? McVee. Windsor. Tholstrup. Langford. Lindsay.

Players change clubs all the time. Not surprisingly, they will have good games at their new clubs. That's football, mate. No doubt there are some sooky fans of the original clubs of May, Lever, BBB, Langdon and Hibberd whinging that they were "let go".

I understand that you, like all of us, are disappointed and frustrated with how our season has started. We all want success for our club, after all.

1 hour ago, Trident22 said:

Harmes and Baker both played excellent games for Footscray on the weekend. The ANB story seems convenient - doesn't excuse accepting unders for a key member of pour leadership group. The ones you say we offered contracts to left because Goodwin was starving them of opportunities, playing his usual favourites. Head out of the sand please.

Even if your 'ratings' were accurate, what have we replaced those players with? Absoluteley nothing!

2 hours ago, Demonstone said:

2 hours ago, Trident22 said:

Harmes - Depth only, mutual decision to part ways.

I can no longer find this last post...

Saying "the decision to depart was mutual" might infer that Harmes was also wanting out.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Heart & soul Demon through & through.

It was well reported at the time that looking at alternatives and leaving was not his preferred course.

Edited March 31Mar 31 by Demon Dynasty

4 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

2 hours ago, Demonstone said:

I can no longer find this last post...

Saying "the decision to depart was mutual" might infer that Harmes was also wanting out.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Heart & soul Demon through & through.

It was well reported at the time that looking at alternatives and leaving was not his preferred course.

Harmes would not have been up for trade if Brayshaw’s retirement was known to be coming