-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Wallace set us back 20 years?
- Thread starter Rosy
- Start date
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
agree completely. we now have a lot of kids in that 50-100 game range. if we dump the old farts and bring in a coach with new philosophies, finals next year, while unlikely, isn't beyond the realms of possibility.
shamekha said:
this is the number 1 reason why wallace failed.
B
Bill James
Guest
Seasons 2008,2007,2006 and 2005 also went where the sun don't shine. Wallace's game plan was never great and it got worse. We bemoan our forwards lack of presentation and our midfielders delivery. In my view they way he set up the game it was extremely difficlut to do either and as he walks out the door he blames our skills. He may be right but we won't know until someone implements a gameplan that moves the ball quickly by foot giving the forwards time and space. When you have 50 more handballs than the opposition week in week out and you are not winning any games it means the opposition have it right.LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Also despite saying we were going for youth he has added almost as many recyled players to the list as his predecessors, cousins, graham, kingsley, marsh, hislop, thomson, ........ I can't name any more it makes me feel sick.
I disagree with Alves that he has put us back 20 years, but he certainly hasn't advanced us anyware in the last 5 years
Bill James said:
This is a sensible post. Still think that everything gets back to our footy department spend and yes the rest is ego. Not enough info, (so you take older players) and not enough risk taking by the coaching and recruitment staff.
Thank goodness the next guy has a better set up. Of course there won't be anyone there for him to take but RFC will know a lot more about the players going to the new clubs.
SCOOP said:
That's my worry,
.... that they might be looking for a coach that promises to take us into the finals in 2010.
You know our Board, they get very excited at the prospect of instant success.
You, know, if you had to pick one factor that has been a major factor in Richmond's mediocrity over 20 years,
... it's our Board's obsessive desire for instant & painless success.
Phantom said:
Lets just hope Caro in her article today is on the money where she states the board and executive plan to cull the list as savagely as is possible under the AFL system.
Phantom said:
Simmonds, Brown, Johnson, Bowden, JON, Hughes, Polak, Pettifer would be a good start. That's 9. Pretty Easy nine too. I don't think there is many hard calls in there. Offer them up to anyone for a fourth round pick. If you get a nibble take it. Otherwise chop them.
That would be a cull for me. That would be a changing of the guard.
20 years is a bit of a stretch, especially considering that some of the draftees haven't been born. Anyone who believes they can predict that far into the future is allowing their ego to get the better of themselves.
Wallace hasn't set the club backwards but he has failed miserably at getting a competitive team on he park within the 5 yr time me frame. His first big mistake was to ignore the need for talls in the 2004 and 2005 drafts, and in doing so left himself little time to develop the likes of Riewoldt, Vickery, Post and Gourdis.
Had we picked up any one of Franklin, Roughead or Clark, the story may be somewhat different. Others gone begging have been Maric and Tippet.
By my reckoning, the doomsday scenarios will eventuate if this problem isn't addressed immediately. Those calling for the tank now have my support because I fear that beyond Butcher, the 2009 draft looks to be very thin when it comes to highly talented bigmen.
If ever there was a time to wipe the decks and play the kids, it's now. Geez, I say it every year but there couldn't be a more important draft in the clubs history, let's just hope we get it right.
Wallace hasn't set the club backwards but he has failed miserably at getting a competitive team on he park within the 5 yr time me frame. His first big mistake was to ignore the need for talls in the 2004 and 2005 drafts, and in doing so left himself little time to develop the likes of Riewoldt, Vickery, Post and Gourdis.
Had we picked up any one of Franklin, Roughead or Clark, the story may be somewhat different. Others gone begging have been Maric and Tippet.
By my reckoning, the doomsday scenarios will eventuate if this problem isn't addressed immediately. Those calling for the tank now have my support because I fear that beyond Butcher, the 2009 draft looks to be very thin when it comes to highly talented bigmen.
If ever there was a time to wipe the decks and play the kids, it's now. Geez, I say it every year but there couldn't be a more important draft in the clubs history, let's just hope we get it right.
Who are the people that aren't listening Phantom?Phantom said:
Is it the noisy bastards on here rattling the cage or the people in power at Punt rd. thinking they can kick back and cruise for the next few years.
Punt rd keeps telling us they are doing a massive review and weeding out and restructuring with heaps of in depth best practice work going on to drag us out of the wilderness. Marchfly has punted Miller and Plough so he must think there's something not working right.
Perhaps they should save all the stuffing around and hype and just throw all their spare dollars and energy into recruiting and development of the kids they recruit.
Or perhaps they should throw all their dollars at an expensive experienced super coach and just expect him to fix it all
whilst i lament the 99 draft it can be argued geelong built a premiership on the back of two drafts 99 and 01. the fact remains the only players left at the dogs from drafts while wallace was there is hahn hargrave taken with rfc picks murphy giansiracusa and gilbee from 1999.the only other player i can see is wight.SCOOP said:
what makes me laugh is wallace claiming credit for their current success.
he left them a shambles just like hes left us a shambles.
from 02 to 04 12th 16th 14th place finishes enabled the dogs to rebuild lucky for them they have decent people in charge of key areas of their club.from 05 they have had their ups and downs but with the 99 draft and these three drafts they have managed to make themselves a top 4 side how long they can stay up without quality kpps i dont know. one thing for sure they wont win a gf without them.
three good drafts should turn things around but we arent smart enough to see this, always the quick fix at richmond it rules the club the supporters it rules everything we do.
people we have the worst list in the comp still.
the claw said:
Claw, if you take a close look at the Bulldogs 02-04 draft history of who they drafted then none of them were particularly good and they weren't a 'rebuld'. If Williams establishes himself 04 was a decent year and obviously Cooney is a champ but outside that they were a team built over a long period of time. The Bulldogs 1999 draft must remain one of the best of all time, they got 5 still active 150 game players, even the cats only got four that year. Whether Wallace can take the credit for it, who knows? I find it hard to believe he would have wanted to trade Cameron
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Oh my, that is an extraordinary comment.
They should list that comment under "baseless" in the dictionary...
Spanish Prisoner said:
Just my opinion, based on the fact that we have several players at an age where improvement is likely, with a significant number of games under their belts. I don't do "baseless". If all the 30+ players are moved on then it probably won't happen next year.