Western Bulldogs Devoid of Stars

[GVGjr]

A week or so before our Grand Final Victory Nathan Burke said the Bulldogs would never have a dynasty because they were devoid of star players.

I remember being very dismissive of the article but looking back after two very lean years since the grand final is it time to acknowledge that he was right?

It also begs some questions:
Why did we drop off the cliff after the win?
What could we and what should we have done differently after the Grand Final?
Did we get ahead of ourselves?
Did we fluke the win?
Did we just overachieve?
Did we not have that strong of a list?

I've read a lot of articles that have tried to explain why we slipped back so far but I'm still not close to certain of why we fell away.

I'd be very interested to read why you think we fell backwards so quickly? and if you think the article was accurate?

Below is the article by Burke

ST KILDA great Nathan Burke has dismissed the Western Bulldogs chances of an AFL dynasty, saying the club is devoid of stars and marquee players.

The former Saints captain tipped the Bulldogs to reach this year’s Grand Final but didn’t believe the club was set up for sustained success.

Burke said the club’s historic lack of finals success pointed to another narrow premiership window.

“You look at GWS and you say, look, there’s going to be a dynasty there for four or five years,” he said.

“The history of the Western Bulldogs Football Club tells me that they don’t have dynasties.

“It’s been the longest drought of any team making a Grand Final in the history of the game, they’ve got to seven preliminary finals and haven’t got to the Grand Final and then they’ve gone backwards.

“The history of the club tell me ... they don’t stay up for four, five, six, ten years in a row.

Preliminary finals haven’t been kind to the club, losing in 1985, 1992, 1997, 1998, 2008, 2009 and 2010, last making the Grand Final in 1961 when they lost to Hawthorn.

The Bulldogs had three players in the AFL Players’ Association 22Under22 team this season, including captain Marcus Bontempelli, Jake Stringer and Lachie Hunter while Caleb Daniel and Jack Macrae were in the 50-man squad.

Stringer was captain of the 2015 team before being named All-Australian for the first time while Bontempelli is among this year’s Brownlow Medal favourites and Daniel finished runner-up in the AFL Rising Star Award.

The Dogs have also had 10 Rising Star nominations since 2012 with nine still on the list; Mitch Wallis (2012), Macrae (2013), Bontempelli, Stringer, Nathan Hrovat (2014), Mitch Honeychurch, Tom Boyd (2014), Daniel and Josh Dunkley (2015).

However, Burke was adamant the Bulldogs didn’t have the star power to become an AFL power.

“I know it’s a young list. It’s a list a little bit devoid of stars and marquee players who can carry them through for long periods of time like we’ve seen Hawthorn have,” he said on Fox Sports News.


“They’ve (Hawthorn) got their four or five outright stars, the Bulldogs don’t have that, they are just playing very well as a team.

“For me, to have that dynasty you need four or five stars to build around.”

St Kilda has suffered a similar finals and premiership drought since its sole flag in 1966, losing Grand Finals in 1971, 1997, 2009 and 2010 and winning nine wooden spoons.

[FrediKanoute]

Nathan's article was less about lack of star players and more a critique of our club's history which is marginally better than St.Kilda's.

Yes he says that we need 4 or 5 star players for a dynasty and yes his words have proved prophetic, but I can't agree that we have no star players and hat you need this for a dynasty. Star players certainly help, especially if they are of the forward or explosive mid type, but you also need luck, and a good strong core of 30+ players who can swap in and out seamlessly.

Yes 2017 and 2018 were disappointing. 2018 more so in my opinion because we were so far of the pace from Round 1 it was almost like we hadn't done the work in the off season. When you look deeper though both 2017 and 2018 have been cruelled by injury to key player at the wrong time. The bonus though has been we have probably unearthed the next generation.

I would be happy winning a flag dropping down for 3 to 5 years and bobbing up and winning another. If we did that over a 10 year period, a little like Sydney have to me that is more likely to breed longer terms success

[Twodogs]

Bourke had a massive tanty that we won a flag and his pathetic club are still going around in circles. We won a flag in 2016, we have gone backwards since and we are STILL closer to a flag than St Kilda are.

Bourke would do well to concentrate on his own club and what they can do to improve themselves instead of taking pot shots at clubs that actually achieve things.

[SonofScray]

It also begs some questions:
Why did we drop off the cliff after the win?
What could we and what should we have done differently after the Grand Final?
Did we get ahead of ourselves?
Did we fluke the win?
Did we just overachieve?
Did we not have that strong of a list?



First port of call, Burke's article was trash. Even if you accept that we don't have the stars, the idea that that determines capacity for a dynasty hasn't quite hit the mark elsewhere either. I wouldn't give him too much credit.

1. 15/16 we had plenty of things fall our way. Tactically we got the jump on many teams and game styles diversified a bit. Demographics of the list were terrific for a new coach to run with. Injuries and game style proved taxing. Retirements. Rule changes. Entire club's narrative and identity got shaken up. There was a risk we'd drop off.

2. Could have made a few harder decisions earlier to cut into the list and shift the volume of injured, speculative talent on the list.

3. A little, yes.

4. No fluke, though it was exceptional in the true sense of the word. I hate people talking how we "just" hit our straps at the right time, or "just" had a good team etc. It won't be repeated for some time, what we did. Our best footy across 15/16 was pure. In an era of negativity around Aussie Rules we shone a beacon for how the game should be played.

5. No such thing as overachieve. Footy is full of true-isms. So many facts hold true until they don't.

6. It was strong, but has been weakened, including immediately post GF.

[GVGjr]

Does some of the comments made by our Bob Murphy in some way support Burkes view?
I remember Murphy saying something like it was a bigger climb for us when compared to clubs like the Hawks.
At the time I thought that was just very dismissive of what the club achieved and it sounded like a convenient excuse to explain poor performances. Still drunk from the flag success I don't many of our fans would have challenged it.
Then there was an article from Chris Grant saying that given the playing list there was a level of expectation from the club that we could fall away.

Both comments from our own club legends seem to support at least some of what Burke wrote.

[GVGjr]

Bourke had a massive tanty that we won a flag and his pathetic club are still going around in circles. We won a flag in 2016, we have gone backwards since and we are STILL closer to a flag than St Kilda are.

Bourke would do well to concentrate on his own club and what they can do to improve themselves instead of taking pot shots at clubs that actually achieve things.

I think the article was written the week before the GF and it was written as a journo not as a Saints man.
It's easy to dismiss it. because I think I did at the time, but looking back our chance of having sustained success on the field was a complete failure. We are very lucky that Gordon and the management team have turned around our fortunes off the field.

[Mofra]

In some ways he is right - although the Saints did have a dynasty late last decade that got them close but not quite over the line, and they had structured their cap so that when they fell away they crashed hard. I prefer our story.

Who are our stars? Bonti. That's one.

Macrae is an accumulator and brilliant at what he does but is he a star? He seems more 'club champion' than 'competition champion' despite some of his incredible achievements (43 touches and 2 goals as a 19 year old).

Lachie Hunter won our B&F but again like Macrae he's an accumulator. He reminds me of Lachie Neale who won a B&F, the came second, then won a B&F again yet was still largely in Fyfe's shadow because Fyfe's ceiling is incredible.

We had Stringer for 2015 and the first half of 2016 before injury, but he's gone.
Who else on the list comes close to star factor? Schache looks set to become a genuine no 1 KPF but more as a solid workhorse than genuine star. Boyd has shown it in one game and will be lucky to get on the park this year.

Naughton is a brilliant intercept & contested mark but was Lake considered a star?
Richards is one because he genuinely takes on (and beats the opposition) and on top of that has hurt factor in his disposal but he's a couple of years away.
Daniel doesn't even have a best position, he's miles away from star factor.

The one guy who can step into the star role - and is absolutely admired by opposition midfielder who see him up close - is Libba. He just needs to get some continuity though after two knee recos.

[Remi Moses]

Fair points from Burke , but Sydney got a star, ( in fact a champion) added to their side and didn’t win a flag

[Remi Moses]

I don’t think you’re going to see “a dynasty”from anyone soon
GWS was meant to be a dynasty

[westbulldog]

Yes the planets did align in 2016 . We won and we deserved to win. We currently have a great list who will likely do rather well. I didn't know that a dynasty was essential to anything, Burke as a journo just wanted some publicity, his comments were a total non-starter.

[Twodogs]

I think the article was written the week before the GF and it was written as a journo not as a Saints man.
It's easy to dismiss it. because I think I did at the time, but looking back our chance of having sustained success on the field was a complete failure.

I've just reread the article and you are right it was written on the 21st September. He also said that GWS would have a dynasty and he got that wrong too.



We are very lucky that Gordon and the management team have turned around our fortunes off the field


That was an important part to the equation that often gets overlooked. Yep we win a flag, yep we fell away afterwards but one thing we did do was to ensure the future of the club. No more waking up and wondering if this is the day that the AFL switch the tap off.

[The Pie Man]

Why did we drop off the cliff after the win?

Mainly form/injuries (JJ, Dahl, Stringer, Boyds, Rough, Dickson, Smith, Biggs, Roberts) some rule changes (ruck) and some senior players came to the end. Matty Boyd was huge in 2016, and the Roughhead / Boyd combo was very effective in the finals. We started 2017 well enough, beating Richmond and nearly pinching it against GWS in Canberra & West Coast in Perth. After the bye in 2017, our pressure around the ground just fell away (that Melbourne game was horrific)

What could we and what should we have done differently after the Grand Final?

Who knows – yes, a Dogs flag was like heading to the moon, but Richmond’s flag in 2017 probably felt pretty similar, and they backed up well in 2018 (learning from our mistakes perhaps)

Did we get ahead of ourselves?

It does appear so – you hope that Stringer, Dahlhaus & Biggs all leaving since addresses the perception around this….still think it’s a real shame Jake couldn’t stay and become an absolute monster for us (which draws on Burke’s point) but it was clearly best for both parties.

Did we fluke the win?

No – the prelim & GF were as hard and tough as they come. We did perhaps benefit the most from the week off, but commentators concerns around this are the teams from the top 4 that win their QF and only play twice in 5 weeks come prelim round. Safe to say it didn’t hurt GWS in 2016, they were very good that night (if I’m being generous, perhaps they were slow out of the blocks…though I don’t really buy it)

Did we just overachieve?

I wouldn’t phrase it like that – while we finished 7th, we were two wins & % from top spot, and no chance to finish top 4 when we played Freo last round so our intensity dropped off markedly. North finished 8th 5 wins back of top. Finals throw up surprises, and once we surprised everyone by beating West Coast, it seemed anything was possible (and we were 4 + goals behind Hawthorn in the 2nd quarter the next week)

Did we not have that strong of a list?

It seems the planets aligned – so many were playing their best footy, we didn’t carry anyone in the last two weeks other than maybe Caleb Daniel, who still had his moments. The bookends that worked in September/October 2016 didn’t again (Roberts / Boyd)
I like our mini rebuild / refresh though – but Burke’s point about stars is probably more true now than it was then (in 2016 I'd argue JJ & Bont were massive, and Stringer was coming off an All Australian year – now…..I’ve got high hopes for Bailey Smith in a few years)

Stars certainly help, but that old champion team over a team of champions thing still rings true to me. Old school I guess.

[Sedat]

Nathan's article was less about lack of star players and more a critique of our club's history which is marginally better than St.Kilda's.
Our club has won 11 flags since it was formed in the 19th century. His pissant team has won one during the same period. They were fodder in the VFA and have remained that way in the VFL/AFL.

The original article had absolutely nothing to do with our perceived star power and our inability to forge a dynasty, and everything to do with envy. I am happy to discuss reasons for our regression since 2016 (have done on numerous excellent threads on the topic) but I would never use this piece of shit article as a basis for such discussion.

[bornadog]

Our club has won 11 flags since it was formed in the 19th century. His pissant team has won one during the same period. They were fodder in the VFA and have remained that way in the VFL/AFL.

The original article had absolutely nothing to do with our perceived star power and our inability to forge a dynasty, and everything to do with envy. I am happy to discuss reasons for our regression since 2016 (have done on numerous excellent threads on the topic) but I would never use this piece of shit article as a basis for such discussion.

Don't forget the 27 odd wooden spoons and the shit culture at that club.

[The Adelaide Connection]

Does some of the comments made by our Bob Murphy in some way support Burkes view?
I remember Murphy saying something like it was a bigger climb for us when compared to clubs like the Hawks.
At the time I thought that was just very dismissive of what the club achieved and it sounded like a convenient excuse to explain poor performances. Still drunk from the flag success I don't many of our fans would have challenged it.
Then there was an article from Chris Grant saying that given the playing list there was a level of expectation from the club that we could fall away.

Both comments from our own club legends seem to support at least some of what Burke wrote.

From memory Bob’s comments were more around the emotional impact of the flag on our club (versus a Hawthorn who has won a bunch in the last 50 years).

He talked about it like climbing the mountain for the Hawks, going to the moon for us. I don’t think this was a commentary on the personnel (or comparison of our playing group versus the Hawks etc).

[dukedog]

Cracker of a post. Enjoying the thread. Not really fussed on the thought of star power being what's needed for a dynasty. Competition is so tight these days you only need to make finals and have good games in the gritty end of it. Bont has been average last 2 years. MacRae is consistent as they come. I would pick him over Bont currently at first pick.

[GVGjr]

I don't mind the fact that Burke is a Saints man and it appears to me that he got it right questioning our ability to handle a sustained successful period. I'm now not as quick to dismiss his opinion and it doesn't matter to me how successful or otherwise the Saints are.

I think we took our eye off the ball and lowered the expectations on the playing group which was a massive mistake. Too many players and maybe some on the coaching team backed away from being 100% committed and were in the main allowed to do it.

I look to this season as ground zero for us and hopefully it will go a long way to getting us back on track in terms of being a successful club.

Thanks to those so far who have tried to explain why they think we dropped away so alarmingly.

[Go_Dogs]

At the moment our stars are Bont and JJ. They are players who have can and will tear games a part.

Macrae is the Mr Reliable that all good teams need, who in time becomes known as a star because his floor is so high and his consistency is unrivalled. He keeps adding little parts to his game so I think he gets there.

We really need one or all of English, Richards, Naughton and Smith to become stars. They will be pivotal in us taking the next step, which is a lot of expectation but they all have the potential.

We're not devoid of stars, but last year our stars had middling years by the lofty standards they are capable of.

[bulldogtragic]

Our ‘stars’, some of them, were the ones letting us down with a dynasty. Not necessarily a lack of them. Be it excessive partying, poor training, poor form, poor attitudes, shocking examples (up to & inc. dumb Tatts in-season) to others and rumours of bullying. The main two (Libba with a knee gets a reprieve last year) being Stringer & Dahl who are now elsewhere.

I’m not as eloquent as Sister Mary Stigmata of Saint Helen, of the Blessed Shroud, who articulates my view on these two best:

You two are such a disappointing pair. I prayed so hard for you both. It saddens and hurts me that the two young men whom I raised to believe in the Ten Commandments have returned to me as two thieves with filthy mouths, and bad attitudes. Get out! And don't come back... (until you've redeemed yourselves).



But them going has given us a chance to shoot back up with some good work. Without going into fine points of all the trades, Stringer helped bring in Schache & Richards. Dahl helped in netting us Rhylee West and St Kilda’s 2019 3rd rounder. Plus freeing up about $1,000,000 in salary cap. So our star generation is improved and the cap to retain them. So things are looking better for this hard period. I think our talent profile is better now. Fact is we did blow a chance to keep things going, but since we didn’t we needed to make good moves with the list and we did.

As for Burke, if he wants to contrast Dog-Saints lists in 2016 and 2019 feel free.

Now here’s hoping this year goes as well as it possibly can. Oh, Boyd’s back is still stuffed 7 months on... Well best as we can after this.

[NoseBleed]

At the moment our stars are Bont and JJ. They are players who have can and will tear games a part.

Macrae is the Mr Reliable that all good teams need, who in time becomes known as a star because his floor is so high and his consistency is unrivalled. He keeps adding little parts to his game so I think he gets there.

We really need one or all of English, Richards, Naughton and Smith to become stars. They will be pivotal in us taking the next step, which is a lot of expectation but they all have the potential.

We're not devoid of stars, but last year our stars had middling years by the lofty standards they are capable of.

I reckon you forgot a bloke with a 7 on his jumper

[Mofra]

I reckon you forgot a bloke with a 7 on his jumper
He's akin to Macrae for mine - super reliable and a very important cog but to me a 'star' is a guy who will a game off his own boot with a period of play where they are just unstoppable. Macrae and Hunter are hard runners and accumulators but death of 1000 cuts types, not 'tear a game open' types.

It's a major reason why I believe Richards has real potential to be a star - in his first season he showed good form as a HB, then on a wing where he takes the game on and breaks the opposition zone by leg and by foot, then he was thrown forward and kicked 3 goals in a quarter. 3 goals in a quarter is a match-winning burst. That's star quality.

[hujsh]

The outcome might have been correct but there's little to back up his reasoning since he highlighted GWS as an example of a dynasty in making.

[GVGjr]

The outcome might have been correct but there's little to back up his reasoning since he highlighted GWS as an example of a dynasty in making.

You don't think at the time that he wrote the article that GWS looked to have a 5 year window of success in front of them?

[hujsh]

You don't think at the time that he wrote the article that GWS looked to have a 5 year window of success in front of them?

Much in the same way we did. As it turns out neither club has set the world alight so his reasoning looks shoddy at best.

[Mofra]

Much in the same way we did. As it turns out neither club has set the world alight so his reasoning looks shoddy at best.
GWS still made a prelim in 2017 and played finals last year.
Their problem is the opposite to ours - we're a young team that needs to bring in/develop stars, they need to stop their stars from leaving and they continue to lose very good players every year.

If we can hold onto all three of Richards, English and Naughton and Schache continues his upwards trajectory, with Bailey Smith we'll be in a very good place.
I really hope the rumours about Adelaide chasing Bailey Williams are false too.

[hujsh]

GWS still made a prelim in 2017 and played finals last year.
Their problem is the opposite to ours - we're a young team that needs to bring in/develop stars, they need to stop their stars from leaving and they continue to lose very good players every year.

If we can hold onto all three of Richards, English and Naughton and Schache continues his upwards trajectory, with Bailey Smith we'll be in a very good place.
I really hope the rumours about Adelaide chasing Bailey Williams are false too.

Personally I consider a dynasty to involve more than one premiership and more than 2 GF appearances in a relatively short(5-6 years maybe) period. Neither club looks like achieving this with the lists from 2016 despite the difference in 'star power'.

The path the two clubs have taken is different but I still consider Burke wrong on both fronts.

[craigsahibee]

Nathan Burke talking of dynasty's is like Donald Trump, Steve Smith and Dave Warner hosting a syposium on ethics.

[The Pie Man]

I don't mind the fact that Burke is a Saints man and it appears to me that he got it right questioning our ability to handle a sustained successful period. I'm now not as quick to dismiss his opinion and it doesn't matter to me how successful or otherwise the Saints are.

I think we took our eye off the ball and lowered the expectations on the playing group which was a massive mistake. Too many players and maybe some on the coaching team backed away from being 100% committed and were in the main allowed to do it.

I look to this season as ground zero for us and hopefully it will go a long way to getting us back on track in terms of being a successful club.

Thanks to those so far who have tried to explain why they think we dropped away so alarmingly.

Wouldn't mind something close to Hawthorn's ten years since 2008 - some even predicted it might take us 3 + years to reach the same heights again as 2016. That's still within our reach

[GVGjr]

Wouldn't mind something close to Hawthorn's ten years since 2008 - some even predicted it might take us 3 + years to reach the same heights again as 2016. That's still within our reach

Could you imagine what it might do to membership numbers if were to build a successful period of say 4 years.
We were super competitive for 4 years under Rocket but now we are in such a stronger position off the field we would really benefit of a good stint around the mark of the top 4.

[S Coast Simon]

One thing I can not understand.

The bulldogs in 2016 bought back a love for the game for so many people. The buzz around football and the feelings from all fans of other teams was amazing. It was the romantic story from the western suburbs against all odds. What a finals series it was.

So the bulldogs united football fans and and rejuvenated the game with how exciting they played. This did wonders for the AFL and the game itself. And how were we rewarded, they changed the rules to combat our advantage. Instead of embracing the doggies for rejuvenating the game they f$&@€#g punished us. This is just so ridiculous in so many ways

sorry a bit off topic but had to get it out.

[Topdog]

Out of interest how many stars do Richmond and West coast have?

[bornadog]

Out of interest how many stars do Richmond and West coast have?

No more than us.

[soupman]

No more than us.

Well for the most part we seem to be in agreement that we have one genuine star (Bontempelli), 2 very very good accumulators (Macrae and Hunter) who aren't really stars and a star in a version of the game that doesn't involve taggers (JJ).

We can compare that to Martin, Riewoldt, Rance or Kennedy, McGovern and maybe Niatanui.

I think I'm comfortable saying they have more than us.

[Twodogs]

One thing I can not understand.

The bulldogs in 2016 bought back a love for the game for so many people. The buzz around football and the feelings from all fans of other teams was amazing. It was the romantic story from the western suburbs against all odds. What a finals series it was.

So the bulldogs united football fans and and rejuvenated the game with how exciting they played. This did wonders for the AFL and the game itself. And how were we rewarded, they changed the rules to combat our advantage. Instead of embracing the doggies for rejuvenating the game they f$&@€#g punished us. This is just so ridiculous in so many ways

sorry a bit off topic but had to get it out.

And at the same time Essendon were dragging the game's reputation through the mud with the drug cheating and refusal to accept their right whack.

But out of those two clubs which one gets rewarded with, frankly, ridiculous rule changes to favour them? That's right it was Essendon who got to keep the top up players they wanted to keep (after being told they would have to go back into the draft and every club would have a chance to pick them up) and being allowed to treat the salary cap as an aspirational target rather than a fixed limitation on how much they can pay their players.

What a *!*!*!*!ing joke.

[Topdog]

Well for the most part we seem to be in agreement that we have one genuine star (Bontempelli), 2 very very good accumulators (Macrae and Hunter) who aren't really stars and a star in a version of the game that doesn't involve taggers (JJ).

We can compare that to Martin, Riewoldt, Rance or Kennedy, McGovern and maybe Niatanui.

I think I'm comfortable saying they have more than us.

I'm not comfortable saying Rance is a star.

Nic-Nat could be but isnt yet as he hasnt spent enough time on the ground.

You really dont need a whole lot of stars but once you win 2 premierships everyone becomes labelled as a star.

[Twodogs]

I'm not comfortable saying Rance is a star.

Nic-Nat could be but isnt yet as he hasnt spent enough time on the ground.

You really dont need a whole lot of stars but once you win 2 premierships everyone becomes labelled as a star.

Rance is a showpony. He's far too easily put off his game, I've never seen a player argue with crowd members the way he does. Lake ran rings around him as a key defender.

[bornadog]

Well for the most part we seem to be in agreement that we have one genuine star (Bontempelli), 2 very very good accumulators (Macrae and Hunter) who aren't really stars and a star in a version of the game that doesn't involve taggers (JJ).

We can compare that to Martin, Riewoldt, Rance or Kennedy, McGovern and maybe Niatanui.

I think I'm comfortable saying they have more than us.

In my opinion Macrae is a star, an underrated one. As others have said Rance is no star, so who does that leave for Richmond, Martin and Riewoldt which I agree on.

[Mofra]

I'm not comfortable saying Rance is a star.

Nic-Nat could be but isnt yet as he hasnt spent enough time on the ground.

You really dont need a whole lot of stars but once you win 2 premierships everyone becomes labelled as a star.
Rance (who should be a Bulldog player, stupid AFL changing rules) has made the past 5 AA teams on the trot, was AA captain in 2017 and until McGovern's rise was considered the best backman in the game. He is absolutely a star.

[Axe Man]

If Rance isn't a star then no key backmen can be stars. Cotchin is another for Richmond I would have thought.

[Axe Man]

Rance (who should be a Bulldog player, stupid AFL changing rules) has made the past 5 AA teams on the trot, was AA captain in 2017 and until McGovern's rise was considered the best backman in the game. He is absolutely a star.

Murray only played 40 games for us so Alex wouldn't have qualified under the old 50 game rule either.

[Mofra]

Murray only played 40 games for us so Alex wouldn't have qualified under the old 50 game rule either.
Damn, I thought he clocked up 50.
IIRC we would have been likely to take him over Ward (we rated both highly) until Richmond got him just before our pick.

[Topdog]

If Rance isn't a star then no key backmen can be stars. Cotchin is another for Richmond I would have thought.

A star stops Mason Cox from kicking 5 goals in a prelim final IMO.

[soupman]

Rance (who should be a Bulldog player, stupid AFL changing rules) has made the past 5 AA teams on the trot, was AA captain in 2017 and until McGovern's rise was considered the best backman in the game. He is absolutely a star.

Yep. If Rance isn't a star then there is one star backman in the league in McGovern. He is absolutely a star, even if at times he is slightly overrated. If Easton Wood continued his 2016 form for the last two seasons then i believe everyone here would consider him a star, but he hasn't. Meanwhile Rance has done that and possibly more, and isn't a star? Please.


If Rance isn't a star then no key backmen can be stars. Cotchin is another for Richmond I would have thought.

Yeah Cotchin is borderline but I don't think is quite in the realm of the others. He does go to my next point though.


In my opinion Macrae is a star, an underrated one. As others have said Rance is no star, so who does that leave for Richmond, Martin and Riewoldt which I agree on.

Macrae is just shy of being a star, but i wouldn't say he is one yet. However, if we include him then Cotchin definitely comes in, as does Gaff. So the number difference doesn't change.



Nic-Nat could be but isnt yet as he hasnt spent enough time on the ground.


Nic Nat definitely was, it remains to be seen if he still is after two knees.

[Axe Man]

A star stops Mason Cox from kicking 5 goals in a prelim final IMO.

IMO a player is judged over their career, not 1 game. Every great player has had games they would rather forget.

[GVGjr]

The top end of our playing list is strong enough and I think we are very even through the middle but time will tell this year if we have the genuine depth most successful clubs need

[jeemak]

Jacko's a star, just an underrated one.

[GVGjr]

Jacko's a star, just an underrated one.

Most opposition supporters I talk to really rate him but I think from a competition POV he does fly under the radar just a bit.

If he could improve a bit on his fields kicks and especially his goal kicking there would be no doubt on if he was a star player or not.

I do like the fact that most of us think he in underrated.

[bornadog]

Rance (who should be a Bulldog player, stupid AFL changing rules) has made the past 5 AA teams on the trot, was AA captain in 2017 and until McGovern's rise was considered the best backman in the game. He is absolutely a star.

A media darling

[Go_Dogs]

Most opposition supporters I talk to really rate him but I think from a competition POV he does fly under the radar just a bit.

If he could improve a bit on his fields kicks and especially his goal kicking there would be no doubt on if he was a star player or not.

I do like the fact that most of us think he in underrated.

I thought he made good progress with his ability to get dangerous in the front half with his kicking and ability to impact the scoreboard, although I may be inflating it a bit. He only kicked 8 goals, but that’s 4x what he managed in the prior two seasons. If he can get that number up to 15 and be nearly a goal a game player it will help his standing.

[boydogs]

I don't agree that star power is what makes a dynasty, but I do agree that we do better as the hunter than the hunted

One player that hasn't been mentioned much is JJ, he was the Norm Smith medallist but if you look at his output since, it's no wonder we have dropped off

Then count the number of games played in 2016 by our GF forwardline, compared to in the two years since

[Twodogs]

IMO a player is judged over their career, not 1 game. Every great player has had games they would rather forget.


Ranch has a lot of games where his opposition torch him.

[GVGjr]

I thought he made good progress with his ability to get dangerous in the front half with his kicking and ability to impact the scoreboard, although I may be inflating it a bit. He only kicked 8 goals, but that’s 4x what he managed in the prior two seasons. If he can get that number up to 15 and be nearly a goal a game player it will help his standing.

I think that is about the right number we should expect from him.

As good as he is I think he can get a bit better

[GVGjr]

I don't agree that star power is what makes a dynasty, but I do agree that we do better as the hunter than the hunted

One player that hasn't been mentioned much is JJ, he was the Norm Smith medallist but if you look at his output since, it's no wonder we have dropped off

Then count the number of games played in 2016 by our GF forwardline, compared to in the two years since

I looked at this the other day and I think it was about 11 players that really dropped off from their 2016 form. JJ isn't close to being back to his best but if he can pick it up it will be huge for us

[The Underdog]

Well for the most part we seem to be in agreement that we have one genuine star (Bontempelli), 2 very very good accumulators (Macrae and Hunter) who aren't really stars and a star in a version of the game that doesn't involve taggers (JJ).

We can compare that to Martin, Riewoldt, Rance or Kennedy, McGovern and maybe Niatanui.

I think I'm comfortable saying they have more than us.

Not forgetting that Richmond just added Tom Lynch, who may not be quite a star, but he's in the discussion and by the end of this year probably will be, given the team he's moving to. He'd be the best tall on our list by a fair margin.

I love our players and wouldn't swap them, but if you were to ask me if I'd want to start 2019 with our list, Richmond's or West Coast's, we're running 3rd and a lot of that is the quality of their top end players.

It's interesting, I didn't see a lot that was controversial in Burke's article. I like our list profile this year and think it's got huge potential, but we've dropped a fair way back from the top end.

[mjp]

Why did we drop off the cliff after the win?

Because we tried to be too clever with game-plan and positional 'tweaks'. Clarkson always talks about re-inventing his game-style and I think Bevo made too many changes to a team-plan that was still being 'perfected'.


What could we and what should we have done differently after the Grand Final?

Not too much. A bit of consistency in the public messaging coming out of the club (to go along with some fantastic initiatives such as 'The Ride') would have been good and at least given the club a bit of support from the media pack too eager to 'follow the script' (which is 'The bulldogs are scrappy triers who always have a go but ultimately fall-short'...aka the script from the Malthouse, Wheeler, Plough and Eade regimes).

Did we get ahead of ourselves?

Of course.

Did we fluke the win?

No such thing. What we DID do was WIN the grand final when we got there...and if you get there, you had better win because there is no guarantee you will ever get back.

Did we just overachieve?

Of course we did. Just like West Coast did last year and Richmond in 17. Name a premier that didn't over-achieve? Hawks getting three in a row out of THAT list? That is the very definition of 'over achieving'.

Did we not have that strong of a list?

Our list is great...you could even say it was good enough to win a flag. There were some genuinely unlucky players on GF day (Jong, Suckling) who could have further strengthened the side.

[Remi Moses]

Excellent write up Mike

[Topdog]

IMO a player is judged over their career, not 1 game. Every great player has had games they would rather forget.

Yeah generally agree but the premise was that you can't win multiple premierships without many stars so a star failing in the prelim is a big deal

[AshMac]

We’re living proof that you don’t need an a grade list to win a premiership, you need a good team. History would suggest though that the lists with 4-5 genuine A graders, the elite, are the teams that win more premierships than others.

I’d agree we have a list devoid of stars, despite having a lot to look forward to in the future w the kids.

Bonti and Jacko are the only two true elite players IMO, with Maclean right on the verge. Add in Libba, Wally, JJ to have great years and we are there - let alone the futures of Naughton and Richards.

I’ll go down swinging to the bitter end when I hear it suggested we “flukes a flag” because we played the best finals campaign of all time, though we did it with a list that played above themselves for four weeks.

[Bulldog Joe]

We’re living proof that you don’t need an a grade list to win a premiership, you need a good team. History would suggest though that the lists with 4-5 genuine A graders, the elite, are the teams that win more premierships than others.

I’d agree we have a list devoid of stars, despite having a lot to look forward to in the future w the kids.

Bonti and Jacko are the only two true elite players IMO, with Maclean right on the verge. Add in Libba, Wally, JJ to have great years and we are there - let alone the futures of Naughton and Richards.

I’ll go down swinging to the bitter end when I hear it suggested we “flukes a flag” because we played the best finals campaign of all time, though we did it with a list that played above themselves for four weeks.

I always struggle with that concept.

Nobody plays above themselves, they just get closest they can to their maximum. You just can't do better than your maximum, but it is basically impossible to maintain close to maximum over any extended period.

What we had was a team that got close to their maximum in that vital 4 week period.

[hujsh]

I always struggle with that concept.

Nobody plays above themselves, they just get closest they can to their maximum. You just can't do better than your maximum, but it is basically impossible to maintain close to maximum over any extended period.

What we had was a team that got close to their maximum in that vital 4 week period.

And was fit. Our team was real good when on the park.