It takes a lot to finsh bottom 4, Bones -- BULLET IN BOARD

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 09:58 16/04/24 Tue
Author: Geek
Author Host/IP: NoHost / 165.225.227.55
Subject: It takes a lot to finsh bottom 4, Bones
In reply to: BH 's message, "Except that apart from Moore , none of those players is a consistent overhead" on 04:10 16/04/24 Tue

You have to be really, really bad either by poor list management, going on too long or tanking.

If all we had was Nick and a bunch of jobbers and journeymen, then sure. North is doing what they are doing with Sheezel and little else (for now). They look incapable of winning much

Richmond are possibly in the same boat, especially with Taranto and Hopper injured and Lynch not firing. WCE has a raft of people well past their best and no real out and out star power yet. Watch as Reid, Ginbey and co find their feet how they go from 100 point losses to competitive. Won't take long.

These are your "bottoming out" sides. Even with our seniors wandering off into retirement, we will be in better shape than they are at the moment. The only way we will be losing 18 games or more per year will be if we are trying to.

Height is important. Around 10 or so years ago Footscray had a squad of quality mids and flankers without anyone decent to kick it to or anyone tall to defend and they were playing finals Tom Boyd got them over the line once they secured him. Went back to upper mid table once he left. The point is that even without dominant aerialists, we can still be competitive, even if we wind up missing the 8.

Once the end comes for our current raft of senior players, our window will close. Maybe the other way round. We might then spend a few years outside the 8. Can't see us properly "bottoming out" though. We'll still win our 8 or 9 games at least. For starters, we would be playing the bottom 4 twice per year and some of them will be bottoming out properly. Tassie will be messing with the draft. That's a concern. But it isn't like they will be taking all the talent and if they do, we can take it right back off the a few years later like we did with GWS.

There's some height coming in the F/S and NGA ranks. Dekka doesn't mind picking them up so much so there's hope. We also can't yet rule out Steene/Eyre/Dean who have all shown a bit and are still very young for talls.

They don't have to be superstars. They just have to be good. There's plenty of spots on the ground to find superstar talent and there's only so much of it you can pay.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Altho I strongly agree with your core point, McStay can make a big diff (hopefully later this yr even) -- Colin Wisbey, 10:16 16/04/24 Tue

Forum timezone: GMT+9
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.