The Taciturn Demon

Yes! In the Dean Bailey days, almost every week he talked after losses about winning small parts of the game - halves, quarters or even parts of quarters. He was working with a truly awful inherited list and so had to find positivity somewhere, but I still found it frustrating. Mainly because it ignored the fact that these good patches rarely troubled the opposition. We weren't often wresting back control but merely (usually narrowly) outscoring a team in cruise mode. And apart from anything else, it was so unambitious. The expectations must have been so low. Goodwin saying he was proud of the final three quarters was too reminiscent of this for my liking. And as you said, JJJ, it bizarrely ignored the third quarter, which I think was almost as bad as the first. And even if the third was somehow passable (six goals to two?!), the game was over after the first quarter. We only looked vaguely damaging at the very end of the game when Gold Coast had slowed to a walk. Our team's own non-celebration after goals showed we knew there was no life left in the game. Yes, it's difficult to win with two players down. But it doesn't guarantee massacres. And teams have beaten us with players down far more than I care to remember in the last 20 years. I reckon GWS, on their own, have done it two or three times. I don't like our list. But Goodwin does. (He's said it numerous times over the past few years.) And whatever you say about it, it's a list that still has a large number of battle-hardened, very experienced footballers - many with a Premiership medallion. You can't on the one hand say "I fully believe in this group" and then on the other say "I'm proud we broke even after conceding twelve scores to one in the first quarter". To me, that's not putting a positive spin on a shocker of a game; that's conceding we're back to holding ultra-low expectations.

When you say the list the way it is, you mean in such poor shape?

I'm interested in this, as well. Dropping Lever but not replacing him with McDonald suggests to me the idea that the same 26 to 27 players will come good and turn the season around is starting to erode. So why not take another slightly more adventurous step and give Brown a run? Is his disposal really so bad he's just not a chance? Tholstrup may end up being a player, but at the moment I haven't seen much to warrant being right on the edge of selection all the time. I'm not as down on Sharp as others, but he's in the same category as Tholstrup for me.

Spot on. In footy discussions everywhere, supporters are assuring themselves that their kids are particularly good. I reckon North fans would be saying, we're starting to put together a list of under 24s that complement each other really well: Sheezel the class, McKercher the speed, Wardlaw the grunt, Curtis the forward line brilliance, Comben the aerial strength in the backline - all capable of making a difference with Xerri and LDU still at their best. Richmond fans would be saying we went all in on what we thought was a super draft - and all indications point to it being just that. Brisbane fans would be saying we just won a flag and have three gun father-suns and a gem of a tall(ish) forward under 22. And we're right to be hopeful about our lot. The idea that we have no or very few good young players is just wrong. But exceptional relative to everyone else? I'm not so sure.

I don't think you can underscore this strongly enough. Zach Merrett has career disposal efficiency of 71% listed at "average". His kicking efficiency, also "average", is 62%. Kozzie has "below average" career disposal efficiency of 63% and "below average" kicking efficiency of 56.5%. Jayden Hunt has "average" career disposal efficiency of 73% and "above average" kicking efficiency of 67%. Oscar McDonald is "elite" in both categories.

I agree that our FD's ideal 23 has to change next year. But what kind of trade do you have in mind? I think the problem is good kickers who are also reliable all-round footballers are much rarer than most people think. Our club spoke very openly about how excited we were to get Lachie Hunter and Jack Billings to the club precisely because they were such good kicks or "had high footy IQ". To a lesser extent, I think decent disposal skills played a part in the Grundy and Schache acquisitions. Unless you take a "worth a throw at the stumps" attitude (I don't), none of these trades have worked out. Good clubs know the value of good disposal and don't give up solid footballers with above average skills. It's made all the more difficult by the fact that few players (no matter how disgruntled) would be considering our entreaties at the moment and thinking they're more likely to snatch a flag here than at an alternative destination. I much prefer exploiting Jason Taylor's skills in the draft to giving up low draft picks for players who can kick but are well past their best or never quite AFL standard.

HA HA HA HA HA!

There's a grass is always greener element to this conversation that makes me wary of saying I'm fully in the "goodbye Goodwin" camp. Quite a few people now have talked about the Bulldogs as having done what we can't. And of Luke Beveridge being a really good option to replace Goodwin. Unless I'm misreading the numbers, the Bulldogs have won fewer finals than us since 2016. Since their flag they've either missed finals or lost elimination finals. I do understand one part of the admiration for the Dogs, though. My biggest criticism of the club at the moment is they seem to be in denial about the state of the list. From the outside it seems the Dogs have been under no such illusions. They've changed their list quite drastically over the last ten years - in some cases very bad injuries have forced their hand. But those changes haven't led to good results. For a while I was optimistic about 2026. I didn't think we could race back to the top of the ladder, but I did think it could be a stabilising year, and maybe even a launching pad for a sustained tilt at finals with a refreshed list. My hopes have dimmed significantly, and that's the problem I see for Goodwin. He'll almost certainly coach beyond this year and on the face of it, I think that's OK - it doesn't upset me (if we finished the season with six or seven wins, I'd probably change my mind). But with the list at his disposal, is there any chance of a strong showing next season? Would he maintain the line that he has absolute faith in "this group"? EVERYTHING would have to go right, including some miraculous resolution to the bomb-it-long midfield and the discovery of a solid 30-goal-game contest winner up forward. The other option is that the club makes a big shift and concedes the list isn't right. It makes significant changes and internally lowers expectations. It might be too little too late, but it's probably the right thing to do. But is Goodwin the person to guide us through this rebuild?

I saw Derksen came up on the Harry McKay thread. He seems to have been moved into the backline in the VFL, reflecting the fact GWS has almost as many tall forward options as the Bulldogs. Any VFL watchers know if his form has been good? Would we still be interested in him?

This thread has got very loose. Not long before someone earnestly suggests dropping 12 to 15 players, resuscitating the supplementary list and bringing in 17 and 35 year old from the ammos and Division 3 suburban leagues. Here's my attempt to make it looser still: The two players I'm keenest to see get a game as we limp to the end of the year are Brown and Sestan. Sounds like Sestan's hamstrings will make that unlikely, which is a real pity. Interesting to see whether they keep him on for another season. In the few games I've seen him play at Casey his kicking looks really strong. Brown looks like someone who just goes and goes and goes. Far better judges than me say his disposal is well below "the level" (as Goodwin would say), but three or four players who sit in this category are first-picked for our AFL side. If we can forgive them, can we forgive one more and just see how his intensity looks at the top level? Not averse to Jefferson getting a good AFL run, either, but I just don't think he'll come into his own until we sort out who our number one forward is - the bloke who refuses to get pushed aside by his opponent and even takes a couple of contested marks a game.

I have some fond memories of Jayden Hunt. This may be the fondest. Threw caution to the wind in the last quarter - his run and courage got us over the line.

Nah. Kicking skills were conspicuously absent in just about every media soundbite from the club. I don't think any draft watchers thought his kicking was anything above average and some said it was below average. I really like what he did in his first season. I have high hopes still, but he's not a great kick.

It was a cracker of a thread - a bold idea well argued. I don't think the name is true any more, but it has got some interesting conversations happening.

That's my answer, too. I still hold out some hope. But if the answer is no, you probably need to cut deep. Does that then guarantee you numerous bottom 4 finishes at a time when the top of the draft will be filled with Tassie picks?

I think this is so important. I still have some optimism for 2026. But goodness, if we missed finals three seasons in a row while merely tinkering with the list and saying "We're still working on better forward entries", we're doing a huge disservice to the players. I'm not viciously anti-Goodwin, but I do think the coach, and everyone with an influential role at the club, has to avoid the permanently in-between state of a club like St Kilda, Essendon or Fremantle. If you're not confidently building towards finals with your current list, you've got to be reworking a list so it will in the future. Obviously, nobody ever sits down at he start of the year and says "Let's be mediocre", but some sit down at the start of the year and are completely unrealistic about the state of the list.