At he end of 2004 the Hawks had won 4 games, sacked Peter Schwab and hired a no name coach that was to leave the Port Adelaide Power just as they were on their way to a Grand Final appearance.

Questions were asked of the coach and they continued to be asked as Hawthorn went through the next 40 games and only won 10 games.

The Hawks stated a mid-season review would settle the future of their coach in 2006 as they decided to extend Clarkson's contract. Bookies at the time questioned what right he still had being head coach of a footy club. They finished the season well (won their last 4) but those 9 games that they won in 2006 (5 in 2005) were against Carlton twice, Essendon twice, and a pathetic Geelong twice with the other three wins coming at 'defacto Glenferrie' Aurora Stadium, Tasmania.

He was pilloried for having an awful gameplan, based on this nonsense of over-possession that was seen as the latest fad. He stuck to his gameplan and overhauled the list to get players to the club that could handball and run and carry the football.

(http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/zero-to-heroes/2007/06/30/1182624227510.html - Lyall Johnson charting the Hawks course)

We have a new coach with a new gamestyle. The birth pangs of this are not unique.

2004 Hawks 4 wins, 82 more kicks than handballs (Clarkson taking over in 2005)

2005 Hawks 5 wins, 53 more kicks

2006 Hawks 9 wins, 59 more kicks

2007 Hawks 13 wins, 44 more kicks

2008 Hawks 6 and 0, 27 more kicks

There is more pain to come, and to lose your head now is only going to make this long journey even harder. Our list requires work and patience is needed. This is not blind faith, if there is such a thing. I trust the process we went through to get Bailey and I see the problems he faces.

For the foreseeable future I will be content to watch for signs of that promising future, all Dean Bailey can do is to stick to the gameplan that he knows best and push for a flag.

Good post. It is abit early to be condemning Bailey, but fact is nothing has been shown yet to suggest we are on the right path. Since he took over, we have won 3 quarters out of 26. 2 of those were last quarters, junk time, where the opposition was 60-100 points up and took the foot off the pedal. Not a good start.

While I agree with you he needs to be given time to develop the players and plan he wants, the problem is we dont have any. We as a club do not have time on our side. Another year at the bottom will see us dead. We are lowest in the league for membership, and next year the money from the AFL stops. We will fall into even further debt and die unless something happens. Even the Roos have crack 34,000 member this year! Roughly 10,000 more than us!

This problem of waiting for it all to fall into place is a tricky one, but we simply dont have the time for that. So what is to be done?

"we have won 3 quarters out of 26". Say what ???

  Tim said:

"we have won 3 quarters out of 26". Say what ???

I think we have featured twice on Channel 10s "the Fifth quarter"

Good post however the difference between the two teams may be recruiting. Hawthorn worked on building a spine first while we took the 'best available' approach.

If I was coach I would have addressed our CHF and CHB issues before anything else, namely Henderson and Rance.

Good post; interesting article.

I see the main difference as financial. Hawthorn got massive financial breaks from the Waverley debacle. Millions of $'s if my memory serves me right.

I doubt we have the time/money to wait so long to be competitive.

  Mono said:

Good post; interesting article.

I see the main difference as financial. Hawthorn got massive financial breaks from the Waverley debacle. Millions of $'s if my memory serves me right.

I doubt we have the time/money to wait so long to be competitive.

Despite what ever breaks Hawthorn had, they were still in financial difficulties. Ian Dicker put alot of his own personal money in at the Hawks to soften the situation.

BTW, we dont have a choice but to make us more competitive on the field.

  Gouga said:

Good post however the difference between the two teams may be recruiting. Hawthorn worked on building a spine first while we took the 'best available' approach.

If I was coach I would have addressed our CHF and CHB issues before anything else, namely Henderson and Rance.

No they did not Gouga. Its a misnomer.

In 2001, the Hawks took the following midfielders Hodge, Ladson,Brown and Mitchell to compliment Crawford, Bateman and VandenBurg. Thats a good midfield in the making. They picked up Brennan and Miller in the following year who have been discarded. They also had Croad in defence.

In 2004, they took who they best available in the draft, Roughhead. And then went the next best in Franklin. They could have gone Griffen and Tambling but they already had the midfield in place. They did take Jordan Lewis with pick they got for Nathan Thompson.

For MFC, Rivers is our CHB. We do need a power forward and I would take one with our no 3 pick in the Top 20 and leave our lower picks for the best available.

  Tim said:

"we have won 3 quarters out of 26". Say what ???

This is the same team of older players & culture as last year. Slight changes have taken place with a few kids coming in & going out as needs be. ?????????? NOW, how many games had last years team with Danners @ the helm won @ this stage?

NONE!

Making long term changes takes time & patience & a degree of lowering expectations for a while while the seeds of change incubate, then eventually sprout, then one Spring Day will Bloom.