If we are not going to make the finals I hope we can finish as low as possible.

[Ghost Dog]

Good call / bad call?


Bad Call. Swans don't do it that way. It's one way of doing it but unneccessary.
Don't rip out your engine if you don't have to. Just fix the problem.

( apologies to Chef ^_^ it's an interesting point however. )

[LostDoggy]

What if the problem is the engine ? Continue to lose by 100+, then there is major problems that can't be fixed by just sacking the coach.
Swans are a bad comparison as they have received a leg up numerous time and they bottomed out in the 90s

[chef]

As it was my call, I say good call.

As long as it means we are getting games into as many pups as possible the results shouldn't matter. Players who are playing with injury should get the surgeries they need as early as possible and some older players should be put out to pasture. I want us to get a head start on 2012 and as good of draft picks as possible.

[The Coon Dog]

As it was my call, I say good call.

As long as it means we are getting games into as many pups as possible the results shouldn't matter. Players who are playing with injury should get the surgeries they need as early as possible and some older players should be put out to pasture. I want us to get a head start on 2012 and as good of draft picks as possible.

To do that, you need continuity with the coach.

I guess what I'm trying to say is what benefit is it to Rodney Eade to play kids & lose games as a result if he's not going to be the one to get the long term benefit out of those kids?

Being off contract at the end of the year, he's coaching for his life right now & needs wins, desperately.

If the club extended his contract right now (not going to happen), I assume he'd look at the longer term, wouldn't he?

[chef]

To do that, you need continuity with the coach.

I guess what I'm trying to say is what benefit is it to Rodney Eade to play kids & lose games as a result if he's not going to be the one to get the long term benefit out of those kids?

Being off contract at the end of the year, he's coaching for his life right now & needs wins, desperately.

If the club extended his contract right now (not going to happen), I assume he'd look at the longer term, wouldn't he?

This is where my theory gets complicated as I think it's time for a change in terms of coaching.

I honestly can't see it panning out the way I want.

[LostDoggy]

To do that, you need continuity with the coach.


Being off contract at the end of the year, he's coaching for his life right now & needs wins, desperately.


If he's doing that then is that necessarily right for the club? Obviously all coaches go out to win as many as possible. Does that then cloud his selection process, putting in the tried and tested names because he know what they are capable of, even though they may be injured, ahead of youth, the playing future of the club?

[Maddog37]

Rocket is already playing kids and resting blokes that are sore/old.

Maybe he is already moving on...........

[Curly5]

As it was my call, I say good call.

As long as it means we are getting games into as many pups as possible the results shouldn't matter. Players who are playing with injury should get the surgeries they need as early as possible and some older players should be put out to pasture. I want us to get a head start on 2012 and as good of draft picks as possible.

You're talking tanking in fact. You say this prior to Round 10 - I think you would be alone in being content to watch us get flogged for the next 14 rounds, in order to achieve some uncertain advantage in 2012. GWS will get the top picks anyway and if it's a thin draft...


To do that, you need continuity with the coach.

I guess what I'm trying to say is what benefit is it to Rodney Eade to play kids & lose games as a result if he's not going to be the one to get the long term benefit out of those kids?

Being off contract at the end of the year, he's coaching for his life right now & needs wins, desperately.

If the club extended his contract right now (not going to happen), I assume he'd look at the longer term, wouldn't he?

That's cynical. There's no reason to think in those terms. If he's coaching for his life, well, it's not working too well atm. We ALL want wins. It's of no benefit to the CLUB to be losing games, for any reason. Supporters (some) are already calling for Smorgon's head, and Eade's, after one big loss (and a few crappy performances, true, but some good ones too, don't forget). Imagine how feral they would become after a string of floggings a la GC. I think of Richmond and shudder.

[Dry Rot]

Wouldn't as low as possible mean about 13th or 14th given the likely quality/success of Brisbane, Port and the Suns?

If so, then we 'd get a draft pick around #10 - 12 in a heavily compromised draft and another around pick #30.

Doesn't look too flash to me as a strategy.

Also the likes of Power, McMahon, Everitt, Walsh and Williams (maybe even Howard and the injury plagued Higgins) make me wonder about our first round picks.

[The Coon Dog]

That's cynical. There's no reason to think in those terms.

It well may be, but its also reality.

[1eyedog]

To do that, you need continuity with the coach.

I guess what I'm trying to say is what benefit is it to Rodney Eade to play kids & lose games as a result if he's not going to be the one to get the long term benefit out of those kids?Being off contract at the end of the year, he's coaching for his life right now & needs wins, desperately.

If the club extended his contract right now (not going to happen), I assume he'd look at the longer term, wouldn't he?

Certainly the entire MC has a say in this rather than just listening to what Eade wants, doesn't it? Especially when we are not getting the return we would like from our senior players anyway.

I think we need to look at what happens against Hawthorn this week and then against Geelong down there to assess whether we'll make the finals and then sum up our options regarding team selection from there. Strangely, I am still optimistic about our chances of making the finals comfortably and even winning a final if we find good September form. I still think we have the list to do it.

Many will argue that the WC game has provided this already but I think the game against Hawthorn will test the mettle of the club and provide a good indicator for whether this is a deep seeded mental issue in which case we should draw a line through the season or whether there is a flicker of a flame.

[GVGjr]

Before Rohdes sacking the clubs strategy was to ignore form and play the younger guys.
Players like Croft and Garlick despite their form only got token games. Despite what I have reading on forums for 12 years when push comes to shove supporters won't tolerate losses even if the younger guys are getting a game. It would be a disaster for us to tank games and as a member I would have to reconsider the type of commitment I would make if the club chose to effectively finish as low as we could on the ladder.

[ratsmac]

Bad call. With GWS getting first pickings of the cream of the draft, it doesn't make any sense to tanking this year. I hate tanking anyway, it ruins the sport as a spectacle. Unless both teams are trying to lose, that would have a comedy aspect to it :)

[The Coon Dog]

Strangely, I am still optimistic about our chances of making the finals comfortably and even winning a final if we find good September form. I still think we have the list to do it.

I thought I was the only one who still thought that. Admittedly, hard to forget about last Sunday's debacle, but I'd like to see us up & running with a full compliment available.

[westdog54]

Good call / bad call?


I'll borrow the Footy Classified way of responding:

Bad Call, Too early in the sason call, forgetting the compromised draft call.

As has been rightly pointed out, if we take this strategy we may not even end up with a top 10 pick, and that's without considering the players that GWS/Gold Coast have been able to pre-list over the last couple of years.

And GVG has it dead right, as supporters our tolerance to losses is pretty non-existent. We're already 'playing the kids' to a large extent. How bad do people want it to get?

[ratsmac]

I thought I was the only one who still thought that. Admittedly, hard to forget about last Sunday's debacle, but I'd like to see us up & running with a full compliment available.

I wish I had your optimism. This year is going pretty much how I thought deep down it might. I had hope though, with Libba, Marcovic and Sherman showing a bit and the likes of Wallis and Ves coming through. In saying that I wouldn't have thought in a million years that West Coast would beat us by 123 points. I still think we will improve before seasons end but a premiership threat, I don't think so :(

[DragzLS1]

Rather win a few then loose as many as possible.. we have great talent they are just not performing or pushing hard enough for long enough. I still beleive we can make top 8 and give the top teams a run for their money if we can gel as a team. Gold coast are not the best but see what they can do when they back eachother up and play hard. If we played with half the heart/effort Richmond plays with we would be top 4 again this year no doubt!

[LostDoggy]

Our fixtures for the rest of the season - Wins or losses based on current Bulldogs/other teams form IMO
Haw (E) - Loss
Geel (Skilled) - Loss
StK (E) - Loss
Adel (E) - Win
Gold Coast (Carrara) - Win
Melb (E) - Win
Carlton (E) - Loss
NM (E) - Win
Syd (SCG) - Loss
WCE (E) - Win
BYE
Essendon (E) - Loss
Port (AAMI) - Win
Haw (MCG) - Loss
Freo (E) - Win

14 games left and i reckon (on the criteria above, which is crystal balling of course), that we can square the rest of the season. We could realisically pick up another one or two wins later in the season with a fit Cooney/Lake/Hall.

On previous years that would just have us outside the top eight or edging into an 8th depending on other results (fit key players as above). We all know we're not going to tank and in a compromised draft that has us in no mans land like the teams finishing higher. Thoughts?

[chef]

You're talking tanking in fact.





I see it more as player developmt and list management. I am not happy we are in this position

[bornadog]

Before Rohdes sacking the clubs strategy was to ignore form and play the younger guys.
Players like Croft and Garlick despite their form only got token games. Despite what I have reading on forums for 12 years when push comes to shove supporters won't tolerate losses even if the younger guys are getting a game. It would be a disaster for us to tank games and as a member I would have to reconsider the type of commitment I would make if the club chose to effectively finish as low as we could on the ladder.

I agree supporters want wins and hate the rebuild phase. I bet the membership drops off considerably and then we are fighting for our financial stability.

[AndrewP6]

As others have already said, in a compromised draft, I'm not sure this strategy would work. And I'd spew if it was being planned that way.

[LostDoggy]

Fotty and the workings of a AFL Club is still a business, and
"Low as possible" can not be good for business?

How would our sponsors and future business parteners react to Tanking a season?

[LostDoggy]

Fotty and the workings of a AFL Club is still a business, and
"Low as possible" can not be good for business?

How would our sponsors and future business partners react to Tanking a season?

Yes, and the Club made a point that we are 8,000 members down , so apart from sponsors etc, how are the 8,000 members going to be interested in re-signing or even attracting more members if we Tank the season. There enough positives to say we can fight our way into the 8. We need to meet the development needs of the younger players we have coming through, and the last thing they want to be part of is 14 games of negative football

.

[KT31]

If we are not going to make the finals I hope we can finish as low as possible.
We win the FLAG !!