Blue Vain wrote: AGRO wrote: Blue Vain wrote: tap in 79 wrote: Henderson & Tuohy are cases in point. They went trophy hunting. Carlton got little in return.
An interesting memory. As for Tuohey, he didn't go trophy hunting at all. We offered him a low contract which he rightly didn't accept. He openly stated he wanted to stay. In return we got Caleb Marchbank. A probable 10 year defender and probably one of our 2 best players until he rolled his ankle. Would you like to take the deal back? If I recall correctly it was Tuohy and pick 20 for Marchbank - not Tuohy for Marchbank. As I said not against getting Marchbank, but we paid David Jones prices. IIRC, We traded Tuohey and our future second rounder (which ended up as 20) for Smedts, Future Geelong first rounder and pick 63. (Polson?) We then used the Geelong first rounder with 45 and 58 for Marchbank, Pickett and the GWS future second rounder. We then on traded that GWS pick for 48, 66 and 70. Williamson, Kerr, Macreadie. So by my calculations, we lost Tuohey, our future second rounder, 45 and 58 to get Smedts, Marchbank, Polson, Macreadie, Williamson, Kerr and Jarrod Pickett. The club told us not to look at the trades in isolation but to look at the end result. The end result isn't David Jones prices to me. In fact, I think we got a bloody bargain. Marchbank is a gun, Williamson looks like a 10 year player, I'm excited by Picketts improvement and Macreadie looks like a future long term defender. Polson I also have hopes for and Patrick Kerr is developing nicely as a key forward.
So Carlton got a bargain by getting rid of an A grade defender (or B plus) and selecting a whole lot of young recruits.
So be it. Marchbank is a gun apparently...he's played less than 50 games, and already one can summarise he will make it. I hope you are right.
Either way, even if all three turn out ok it doesn't change the equation. Tier 1 clubs can pick the eyes out of Tier 3 clubs with ease if any of those players become seriously good under the present system of trading/free agency.
My argument is that something needs to be done to ensure Tier 3 clubs don't stay down the bottom for years on end. Does free agency widen or minimise the gap between top clubs and bottom clubs? has trading between bottom and top clubs helped or hindered top clubs on average in the last 10 years? Is the draft enough of a mechanism to create new hope for tier 3 clubs?
It is in the AFL's interest, surely?, to have matches which are unpredictable.
My query isn't with Silvagni's recruiting. Considering the position he is in, he has done ok. Better than the clown before him...but my query is with equalisation, especially seeing as the PR message out of the AFL is that they are creating this equalised competition.
The NRL doesn't have a draft...is this why it is more EVEN and more prone to upset results? Someone should do a study on it, as $$ will walk out the door if there are 3-4 dead rubbers every week in the AFL.
Sydney - is this a picture of equalisation?
The AFL media tell us each club has to rise and fall, and use the draft to get back up to the top again. Is that true?
I will list the years Sydney has made the finals since 2005.
2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 ,2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 & 2017
I will list the years Hawthorn has made the finals since 2005.
2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016
I will list the years Geelong has made the finals since 2005.
2005, 2007, 2008. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017
I will now list the years Tier 3 clubs have made the finals since 2005.
Brisbane
2009
Carlton
2009, 2010, 2011, 2013
Melbourne
2005, 2006 (the media tell us Melbourne is finals bound this year...we will wait and see)
Now I am not saying Carlton shouldn't pay for their crimes of poor recruiting. That is fine. What I want is genuine hope of improvement, and to be told that the AFL has a policy of equalisation is a lie.
Hawthorn gets 35$ million plus for their AFL endorsed Tasmania experiment, Sydney got salary cap benefits, Geelong picked the eyes out of the father-son scenario up until they changed the rule. And we wonder why all three clubs (barring significant injuries) will make the finals once again this year.
Why did Richmond win the premiership then?
I wouldn't consider them a Tier 3 club. They were not a cellar-dweller for years on end. They played finals in four of the last 5 years.
The core players were exceptional in their positions - Cotchin (a player Carlton should have recruited), Rance, Martin, Riewoldt. Around that core they built a good team, good recruiting put the icing on the cake. Lack of injuries and a good game plan did the rest.
|
