Eagleton revisited

[Dry Rot]

Eagleton was a popular whipping boy here for his last few seasons for being too outside, running ahead of the ball etc.

Now we probably have enough inside mids for almost two good midfields, and few good outside mids.

Would Eagleton have come into his own in this team this season? Would his inclusion (when he was younger) in 2014 really improve our team?

[jeemak]

He was easily good enough to get a game in our teams leading up to 2010, and he was probably good enough to get a game in any of the sides that beat us those years.

Each premiership team has players who can be seen as a weak link for whatever reason, but they still carve out a spot one way or another due to the attributes they carry.

Eagleton could run all day, could carry the ball, and could use it well long or short. Yes, he had his deficiencies in that he struggled overhead and with body on body work in a contest, but leveled out his pros outweighed his cons.

A player of his type would be very useful to us right now.

[boydogs]

A player of his type would be very useful to us right now.

I agree, but it comes back to what wins finals? Eagleton was too easily closed down when the pressure was on. Give me Clay Smith & Koby Stevens over Nathan Eagleton in a clutch final.

[Ghost Dog]

Hasn't been a better whipping boy since! Equal first with Mitch Hahn.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Cue Mantis. :D

Different game styles. Although we think we need more outside types it's clear that the coaching panel want players to be able to win the ball on the inside as well as use it on the outside. Macrae and Bontempelli are seemingly the perfect examples of this in terms of 'style'.

[Remi Moses]

The Eagle was the quintessential important cog in a good team.
The cream on top of the cake type in a good side.

[bulldogtragic]

I nominated him for the next team of the century squad, refer the bio in that thread. He's in esteemed company in the history of our club for games played, goals kicked and more. It's a shame when you read his bio of his contribution to our club that he's not regarded as highly as he should be in my opinion. At his best, in his prime, he was an automatic selection. If he was 27yo right now, he would again be best 22.

[always right]

I liked the Eagle but what hurt him was people's belief that he didn't produce in finals. Not sure why but even his kicking appeared to go off.

[Mofra]

I agree, but it comes back to what wins finals? Eagleton was too easily closed down when the pressure was on. Give me Clay Smith & Koby Stevens over Nathan Eagleton in a clutch final.
They'd possibly be great (until they fell in a heap at 3/4 time and we had no run in the last quarter).

Clay is a couple of pre-seasons away from being able to match Eagleton's run even without knee rehab (I think he could get close endurance wise) but has nowhere near his footskills, and Stevens had below average TOG in our midfield rotation and is miles away from Eagle's endurance. Neither could play anything like his role.

The sheer fact that opposition teams planned to shut Eagleton down in the first place speaks volumes - weren't plenty of people complaining that we had too many inside mids on the field for most of 2012 and the first half of 2013?

[Maddog37]

Eagleton was what we want Tutt to be. I know who I would rather have in my team!!

[Sedat]

I liked the Eagle but what hurt him was people's belief that he didn't produce in finals. Not sure why but even his kicking appeared to go off.
He didn't exactly do anything to dispel this perception with his September performances. Classic Eagle conundrum can be articulated in the SF and PF in 2008. In the SF, we were home and hosed against Sydney late in the game and he sunk 2 monster goals on the run from 60m - classic junktime goals in a dead final. The following week he had a simple set shot in the 3rd qtr from 35m out to hammer home our period of dominance against the Cats, and he failed to even make the distance.

I reckon the purely outside players are a dying breed in the modern game - they need to be able to at least compete inside otherwise they will be suffocated in September.

[Greystache]

He didn't exactly do anything to dispel this perception with his September performances. Classic Eagle conundrum can be articulated in the SF and PF in 2008. In the SF, we were home and hosed against Sydney late in the game and he sunk 2 monster goals on the run from 60m - classic junktime goals in a dead final. The following week he had a simple set shot in the 3rd qtr from 35m out to hammer home our period of dominance against the Cats, and he failed to even make the distance.

I reckon the purely outside players are a dying breed in the modern game - they need to be able to at least compete inside otherwise they will be suffocated in September.

Spot on.

You could also throw in his 3 goal 30 possession effort against mediocre a Brisbane in the 2009 semi followed by a 10 possession 0 goal effort in the Prelim final. In his 6 finals against fellow top 4 teams he managed 1 goal in total and never got 25 possessions in a single game. He was just irrelevant when games got tough, which is why he has so little support and why I wouldn't want him in the team now. I've seen enough home and away specialists to last me a lifetime and he was a shining example of one.

[LostDoggy]

Spot on.

You could also throw in his 3 goal 30 possession effort against mediocre a Brisbane in the 2009 semi followed by a 10 possession 0 goal effort in the Prelim final. In his 6 finals against fellow top 4 teams he managed 1 goal in total and never got 25 possessions in a single game. He was just irrelevant when games got tough, which is why he has so little support and why I wouldn't want him in the team now. I've seen enough home and away specialists to last me a lifetime and he was a shining example of one.

Yep. You could start a thread on H & A specialists, who faded in tough finals.

Gia, Hahn and Eagle top the list.

At the other end, Ryan Griffen, a standout performer in finals even from when he was young.

Eagle was devastating against mediocre opposition, but when it got tough he went missing. Perhaps the final against the Hawks' in their 08? premiership year was a shining example.

[Remi Moses]

Tough players come to the fore in finals.
Dylan Addison was best on at half time in the 2010 prelim.

[Greystache]

Yep. You could start a thread on H & A specialists, who faded in tough finals.

Gia, Hahn and Eagle top the list.

At the other end, Ryan Griffen, a standout performer in finals even from when he was young.

Eagle was devastating against mediocre opposition, but when it got tough he went missing. Perhaps the final against the Hawks' in their 08? premiership year was a shining example.

People don't like to talk about it because he's a good bloke and a loyal Bulldog, but Brad Johnson tops that list comfortably.

11 finals against top 4 teams (which is a massive number BTW)

12 goals in total

Never above 20 possessions in a single game.

Just awful.

[jeemak]

I don't recall who Eagleton was playing on in each of the 08 and 09 prelims.

BTW - Where's the best place to source stats for these games?

[bornadog]

I don't recall who Eagleton was playing on in each of the 08 and 09 prelims.

BTW - Where's the best place to source stats for these games?

http://www.footywire.com/

[Sedat]

Tough players come to the fore in finals.
Dylan Addison was best on at half time in the 2010 prelim.
Callan Ward was not too shabby in that match either. He also more than held his own in matches against the likes of Geelong. If he ever gets the chance to play finals for the Giants, he'll be their go-to guy in September.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

People don't like to talk about it because he's a good bloke and a loyal Bulldog, but Brad Johnson tops that list comfortably.

11 finals against top 4 teams (which is a massive number BTW)

12 goals in total

Never above 20 possessions in a single game.

Just awful.

Unfortunately, it's spot on.

His only solid game that I recall was v St. Kilda in the 09 Prelim when he did kick some important goals at important stages. Think he finished with 3?

Aside from that game, he really did struggle.

Aker was a big failure in finals for us too.

[jeemak]

Thanks BAD. I usually use Footywire.

Just a cursory viewing of his numbers in the 2008-2010 finals shows he really had two games that stand out as being very poor. Preliminary final in 2009 and the qualifying in 2010.

[bornadog]

Unfortunately, it's spot on.

His only solid game that I recall was v St. Kilda in the 09 Prelim when he did kick some important goals at important stages. Think he finished with 3? .

Are we talking goals or his contribution in the finals. Pretty sure he averaged over 18 disposals most finals. People forget he didn't always play in the forward line.

[bornadog]

Thanks BAD. I usually use Footywire.

Just a cursory viewing of his numbers in the 2008-2010 finals shows he really had two games that stand out as being very poor. Preliminary final in 2009 and the qualifying in 2010.

You can also go here (http://stats.rleague.com/afl/stats/players/B/Brad_Johnson.html)

[Greystache]

Are we talking goals or his contribution in the finals. Pretty sure he averaged over 18 disposals most finals. People forget he didn't always play in the forward line.

Take your choice;

If you're talking goals he averaged one a game across finals, or if you're talking possession he never got above 20.

[bornadog]

Take your choice;

If you're talking goals he averaged one a game across finals, or if you're talking possession he never got above 20.

His career average possessions in home and away was 19.7, his finals average was 18.53, yeah he was down by one per game. :rolleyes:

[jeemak]

His career average possessions in home and away was 19.7, his finals average was 18.53, yeah he was down by one per game. :rolleyes:

I wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of players attracted less ball during finals.

[chef]

Very good player, always enjoyed watching the Eagle play. Would be handy right now.

[jeemak]

Here's EAGLETON's 2008-2010 finals:

2008
D M G T
QF - 24, 8, 0, 1,
SF - 20, 7, 2, 3,
PRE - 19, 8, 1, 6,
AVG - 21.0, 7.7, 1.0, 3.3,

2009
D M G T
QF - 22, 3, 0, 1,
SF- 30, 9, 3, 2,
PRE - 10, 3, 0, 2,
AVG - 20.7, 5.0, 1.0, 1.7,

2010
D M G T
QF - 11, 1, 0, 5,
SF - 18, 5, 0, 2,
PRE - 20, 2, 0, 0,
AVG -16.3, 2.7, 0.0, 2.3,


His career average:

D - 18.1
M - 5.4
G - 0.9
T - 2.2

Sorry about the format.

[Greystache]

His career average possessions in home and away was 19.7, his finals average was 18.53, yeah he was down by one per game. :rolleyes:

So you're happy with the captain of a team averaging a goal a game and never getting more than 20 touches in a final :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Plus you conveniently ignored I'd mentioned against TOP 4 teams for the hundredth time. Junk finals against also-rans were excluded

There's no point even trying to discuss some things with some people. :rolleyes:

[jeemak]

Adjusted for finals against top 4 teams.

It's a bit of a mixed bag.

What stands out for me is the drying up of scoring opportunities against the better sides, which I'd expect for the most part. However, with his ability to get forward to score being curtailed his overall effectiveness diminishes.

For an outside running player I'd expect him to receive less opportunities in tight finals. How much of that boils down to intent, marking by the opposition and poorer performances by those supplying the ball I don't know.

I think the off the cuff pasting he gets for his finals performances is a bit harsh in some respects. We had deficiencies across the board in those years.

[Greystache]

Johnson 2008-2010 in 6 finals against top 4

2008 ave- 17 possessions, 1 goal

2009 ave- 17.0 possessions, 2 goals

2010 ave- 13.5 possessions, 0 goals

6 goals in 6 games, highest number of possessions was 19. His stats earlier in his career in the late 90's as a midfielder was even poorer.

[jeemak]

I'd say 2009 is where I'd hope and expect him to be. The other years are disappointing, though in 2010 he was cooked.

[bornadog]

So you're happy with the captain of a team averaging a goal a game and never getting more than 20 touches in a final

Plus you conveniently ignored I'd mentioned against TOP 4 teams for the hundredth time. Junk finals against also-rans were excluded

Possessions these days are way up on what players had in the past. These days 20 possessions is just above average. In the past 20 was considered pretty good. Maybe you just don't like Johnno at all but his H&A stats are about the same as in finals over his total career. I agree he didn't star in finals, but then who did against the top 4? I can only think of Griffen and Ward.


Johnson 2008-2010 in 6 finals against top 4

2009 ave- 17.0 possessions, 2 goals

6 goals in 6 games, highest number of possessions was 19. His stats earlier in his career in the late 90's as a midfielder was even poorer.

2009 Prelim, 19 disposals, two goals out of the 7 we kicked and 5 tackles. Pitty we didn't have a power forward.



There's no point even trying to discuss some things with some people. :rolleyes:

Yes that is true


It's a bit of a mixed bag.

What stands out for me is the drying up of scoring opportunities against the better sides, which I'd expect for the most part. However, with his ability to get forward to score being curtailed his overall effectiveness diminishes.

For an outside running player I'd expect him to receive less opportunities in tight finals. How much of that boils down to intent, marking by the opposition and poorer performances by those supplying the ball I don't know.

I think the off the cuff pasting he gets for his finals performances is a bit harsh in some respects. We had deficiencies across the board in those years.

Totally agree with your comments Jeemak. Firstly, Johnno only played up forward in the latter part of his career and secondly we know that small men don't excel in finals towards the end of a game. You need your monster forwards which we never had in most of the years Johnno played up forward.

[jeemak]

Totally agree with your comments Jeemak. Firstly, Johnno only played up forward in the latter part of his career and secondly we know that small men don't excel in finals towards the end of a game. You need your monster forwards which we never had in most of the years Johnno played up forward.

Sorry mate, my comments you quoted and the stats I provided were for Eagleton.

I'll modify the post to ensure folk distinguish between the two.

Acting as our only dangerous key target, Johnno was always up against it against the better sides in finals.

Our ball usage was stifled, meaning he got less supply and it was dirtier than in the H&A season. I don't doubt with cleaner ball movement and greater supply that his numbers would have been better.

[boydogs]

There's no point even trying to discuss some things with some people. :rolleyes:

Necessary?

[Twodogs]

Yeah let's focus on the ball.

[stefoid]

If you cant produce your game under pressure, then whats the point?

[azabob]

Yeah let's focus on the ball.

Or the Eagle in this case...

[jeemak]

If you cant produce your game under pressure, then whats the point?

Who are you referring to Stefoid?

[stefoid]

Who are you referring to Stefoid?

Anyone, but eagleton in particular. He was always mentioned as a 'barometer' - if he played well the team usually won... but it was more like if the team was dominant, he could get free under little pressure.

[jeemak]

I don't agree with you that Eagleton should be singled out.

In all of our finals I can't think of many players who were consistent throughout, against the very good sides or the sides around us or a bit below us.

Eagleton was much like many others. He played well in some games against good sides, and poorly in others. Like a lot of our players in those years he did well against the weaker finals sides due to being able to take advantage of the overall dominance of our team in those games.

To be honest, he's easy to single out for many because he has attributes that are perceived to be born from natural talent and physical attributes rather than hard work, determination and grit.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

To be fair to Eagleton and Johnson, they really weren't alone. Aker struggled badly as mentioned, but so too did Gia, Hahn and at times Murphy - although the latter contended with injuries during that time period.

As BAD said, the only two who were consistent and stepped up against the best were Griffen and Ward. You could throw Lake in there too, whilst Hargrave/Gilbee were so-so at best. Morris did his best but was badly undersized against the likes of Buddy and Riewoldt.

Hopefully the next time we make finals, our senior core will lead the way. I'm pretty confident in the character of our young guys, but we'll never know until we get there.

[bulldogtragic]

I don't agree with you that Eagleton should be singled out.

In all of our finals I can't think of many players who were consistent throughout, against the very good sides or the sides around us or a bit below us.

Eagleton was much like many others. He played well in some games against good sides, and poorly in others. Like a lot of our players in those years he did well against the weaker finals sides due to being able to take advantage of the overall dominance of our team in those games.

To be honest, he's easy to single out for many because he has attributes that are perceived to be born from natural talent and physical attributes rather than hard work, determination and grit.
Same boat. Our performances as a team were below par, across the board.

If our inside mids are getting defeated, be it hard ball gets, clearances, stoppages etc, etc. No amount of hard running, handball receive attempts etc will get you stats. He wasn't in the team as a goal kicker, he was pure outside run. His role was being fed by others. If you show me stats with abnormal reduction in disposal efficiency then so be it. BMac seems to have a very high footy IQ and was in the coaching teams, strategy sessions and boxes when we should have beaten Geelong, twice. I'm guessing purely he rated our talent back then but not the style of recruitment of BIG big bodies and more inside game proficiency. I know if I was BMac I'd look at the difference between why the dogs lost and focus on addressing that while bringing in players in the draft to further address it.

If finals performances alone make the player Shane Ellen and Nick Davis are getting AFL legend status next year.

Eagleton played a specific role. He never was asked to be any different and neither club or player held out anything different. Rocket was playing smaller running players like McMahon and Eagleton, and the gameplan was that of the match committee is selecting Eagleton over 200 times. They wanted a role player, Eagleton was a great servant, but the deficiency seems to be in the gameplan, selections and strategies if their must be identification. These types of players tend to be hit and miss as they rely on being fed, ie the team is playing well when Eagleton plays well. That is the team is playing well because for Eagleton's 17km run every game he gets more handball receives and has the potential do more. And on that you'd be surprised where he sits on our all time club goal kicking list.

We were below seasons standard in our finals series virtually across the board. It would be easier to name who rose to the occasion in these games than didn't. I find it hard to hear Eagleton specific criticism when his role as set by the MC and coach was dependent on many others who under performed in the process line before him.

I'm certain if you footywired all our finals series since the 60's you'd see underperformance across the board from many legends of the club, including Eagleton. That's why we haven't won a premierships in two of my life times. We need more big time players and recruiting and keeping them is not our strong suit. I think we have a good crop to turn this issue around, and a gameplan that does not include small outside mids as similar premiership campaigns have had. So at least the next tilt is something different at least!

[boydogs]

To be fair to Eagleton and Johnson, they really weren't alone. Aker struggled badly as mentioned, but so too did Gia, Hahn and at times Murphy - although the latter contended with injuries during that time period.

I thought Sam Reid arrived in that game against Geelong, didn't turn out that way unfortunately.

[bulldogtragic]

I thought Sam Reid arrived in that game against Geelong, didn't turn out that way unfortunately.
And Hooper's inspiration goal, see his wiki:

Hooper instead made his AFL debut in the Western Bulldogs' semi final match against Sydney.[7] In doing so, he became the first player to make his debut in a finals match in 25 years.[1] Described as having a "giant influence", Hooper had five possessions and kicked a goal, which sparked the Bulldogs' comeback.[7] The Herald Sun claimed that, after his performance, Hooper would "no doubt be back [next week]".[7] However, he was dropped for the preliminary final match against St Kilda[8] and the Bulldogs lost, ending their finals campaign.


I agree with the wiki entry, the non selection of Hooper was why we lost the pre lim.

Case closed :)

[Greystache]

To be fair to Eagleton and Johnson, they really weren't alone. Aker struggled badly as mentioned, but so too did Gia, Hahn and at times Murphy - although the latter contended with injuries during that time period.

As BAD said, the only two who were consistent and stepped up against the best were Griffen and Ward. You could throw Lake in there too, whilst Hargrave/Gilbee were so-so at best. Morris did his best but was badly undersized against the likes of Buddy and Riewoldt.

Hopefully the next time we make finals, our senior core will lead the way. I'm pretty confident in the character of our young guys, but we'll never know until we get there.

I think you have to look at how a player is rated, what they delivered during the home and away, then how they performed during the real finals game. Griffen enhanced his reputation, Lake was at least equal, then a couple of fringe players at the time also did well; eg Addison, Ward.

So many senior players were consistently under performers, Eagleton, Johnson, Hargrave, C Grant, Gilbee, Murphy. Aker, and numerous others are amongst that list. People can argue as much as they like that such players were only marginally below their average or worse, but premiership teams are littered with players who stepped up when it counted and our club has a laundry list of players who didn't. The basis of this thread is Eagleton, but he's hardly in the minority. The fact is many of our supporters refuse to see it and blame our lack of success solely on bad lack or lack of quality. It's a pure cop out, but they will argue it to death.

[boydogs]

The fact is many of our supporters refuse to see it and blame our lack of success solely on bad lack or lack of quality. It's a pure cop out, but they will argue it to death.

Look at our ladder finish in the prelim years.

[Dry Rot]

So many senior players were consistently under performers, Eagleton, Johnson, Hargrave, C Grant, Gilbee, Murphy. Aker, and numerous others are amongst that list. People can argue as much as they like that such players were only marginally below their average or worse, but premiership teams are littered with players who stepped up when it counted and our club has a laundry list of players who didn't.

Any theories why our players don't step when it counted?

[Go_Dogs]

Interesting discussion, thanks to all involved.

Griffen, Lake and Cross standout to me as perhaps our more consistent performers in finals across the 2008-2010 period. A few others had some good moments too.

Looking back I'm not sure if I'd say Gilbee was a poor performer, he had some good games, 2010 wasn't perhaps his best year but he played well in 2009 from memory particularly against Geelong as far as the more important matches go.

The major problem we had was that the big, must win games we just floundered. For some reason, be it nerves, or something else, we just never came to play and got blown out of the water. Hawks 2008 was possibly one of the most disappointing games I've seen us play. Collingwood 2010 right up there too. Those poor performances really stand out and players who managed to hold their own in those games when most of the side went to water are generally the guys that demonstrated the ability to handle finals pressure.

I'm really looking forward to seeing how our next group goes in the finals. Guys like Libba, Wallis, Smith, Dahlhaus - these are the guys who you want to go to war with. Determined players who will be able to go at it until they get the game on their own terms.

[always right]

Surprisingly....by my recollection, Higgins has been a good finals performer when he's played.

[GVGjr]

When we first traded for Eagleton and gave up two good players in Powell and Montgomery it really did highlight that Wallace wanted him too badly.
It took a long while for Eagleton to repay the faith but in the long run I think we got the best of the deal.

Eagleton probably played a season or two too long but Eade preferred the senior guys because we were contending for a flag.

I respected Eagleton's abilities especially his kicking skills. I was told on a number of occasions how hard he trained and how coaches used to use him to do a lot of the one on one contests with the new draftees. Eagleton would cut them no slack which was exactly what the coach wanted. I always thought Addison became a such a tough so and so because he was often paired up with Eagleton in boxing and wrestling drills.

[Maddog37]

I always felt Eago gave his all though. He may have struggled at times due to the nature of the game especially in finals but he always tried.

This thread reminds me of when Macca first came on board and stated he wanted to build a game plan that stood up in finals which translated to our existing game plan not being up to it.

[bornadog]

People can argue as much as they like that such players were only marginally below their average or worse, .

But they were, our problem in finals is we didn't have the players to take us to the ultimate success. We rate our players highly because we support the team, but in the end we were a few A graders short to win big finals. Yes there is an element of luck, injuries etc, but in the end we just haven't had the right players.

[Mofra]

So many senior players were consistently under performers, Eagleton, Johnson, Hargrave, C Grant, Gilbee, Murphy. Aker, and numerous others are amongst that list. People can argue as much as they like that such players were only marginally below their average or worse, but premiership teams are littered with players who stepped up when it counted and our club has a laundry list of players who didn't. The basis of this thread is Eagleton, but he's hardly in the minority. The fact is many of our supporters refuse to see it and blame our lack of success solely on bad lack or lack of quality. It's a pure cop out, but they will argue it to death.
Perhaps a lot of those players relied on time, space and uncontested possession which tend to dimisnish in finals games? Structurally we seemed to be a side that played for normal H&A conditions (ignoring the fact we were only ever the third best side at best during the Eade era). Our best performers in recent history tend to be those who thrive on a contest.

Wherever you stand on the thread topic, step back and look at the Brisbane Lions teams of 2001-03 (heck, even the GF team of 04 that lost to Port). They were not a dominant H&A side and didn't finish on top of the ladder at the end of the H&A season once from memory - they simply didn't play H&A football, they played finals football. I don't expect any Bulldog side under B-Mac to be a dominant H&A side because he simpy doesn't seem to be building the side that way, but seems to be building a finals-style gameplan (slowly).

Will it work? Personally, I struggle to see a side finishing outside the top four winning a flag so there is a balancing act required and time will tell whether we got the balance right (ignoring the billions of draft & salary cap concessions given to Northern teams).

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Any theories why our players don't step when it counted?

A distinct lack of quality forwards was the most obvious reason. We simply didn't have enough players to kick goals when needed. Hall and Akermanis were recruited too late. I always felt that Chris Grant was a better player at CHB than as a forward. We simply scrambled goals when going forward, without power forwards, which win finals. Crameri will be a welcome addition in 2014, but I am still to be convinced about enough quality depth in attack.

[Guido]

The fact is many of our supporters refuse to see it and blame our lack of success solely on bad lack or lack of quality. It's a pure cop out, but they will argue it to death.
Of course it comes down to quality.

Geelong had 17 All-Australian level players rotating through their 2008-2012 premiership squads, while we were depending on Wights, Tillers, Hoopers, Skippers and Tim Callans (all played in finals) to get us into a GF.

That we got so close with clearly outclassed squads would maybe indicate that there was something very right with that game plan, but that's for another thread on another day.

And in defence of Brad Johnson, judging him on performances in prelims at the age of 32, 33 and 34 won't do him justice on how he could/would have performed at his best (aged between 22-29). Six AAs between 99-2007 would indicate he was clearly an elite player who unfortunately, through no fault of his own, didn't get the opportunity to show his wares in the big finals while at the top of his game.

[Greystache]

Of course it comes down to quality.

Geelong had 17 All-Australian level players rotating through their 2008-2012 premiership squads, while we were depending on Wights, Tillers, Hoopers, Skippers and Tim Callans (all played in finals) to get us into a GF.

That we got so close with clearly outclassed squads would maybe indicate that there was something very right with that game plan, but that's for another thread on another day.

And in defence of Brad Johnson, judging him on performances in prelims at the age of 32, 33 and 34 won't do him justice on how he could/would have performed at his best (aged between 22-29). Six AAs between 99-2007 would indicate he was clearly an elite player who unfortunately, through no fault of his own, didn't get the opportunity to show his wares in the big finals while at the top of his game.

The Bulldogs had 14 All Australians rotating through their 2006-2010 squads (I assume you're counting 2006 since Skipper and Wight didn't play in any finals between 2008-2010), while Geelong had to rely on players like Blake, Prismall, Hogan, N Ablett, Laidler, and Duncan to beat our team packed with All Australians. That they managed to do so speaks incredibly highly for their coaching and game day tactics. Pretty ridiculous argument you've got there.

Johnson was 23 in 1999 and had over 100 games under his belt including many finals. We played top 4 finisher Brisbane, we got thrashed and he managed 16 possessions and no goals as a midfielder.

[Remi Moses]

Geelong had a better deeper side than we had in that period.
Most would attest to that, and I think Stkilda's high end talent was better than ours.
I think player for player we had a better list than them, but they were drilled to military type precision.

[Guido]

The Bulldogs had 14 All Australians rotating through their 2006-2010 squads (I assume you're counting 2006 since Skipper and Wight didn't play in any finals between 2008-2010), while Geelong had to rely on players like Blake, Prismall, Hogan, N Ablett, Laidler, and Duncan to beat our team packed with All Australians. That they managed to do so speaks incredibly highly for their coaching and game day tactics. Pretty ridiculous argument you've got there.
No it's not ridiculous. On every measure, they were a much better outfit.

Ok, I went back to 2006 to include Wight (could have sworn Skipper played in the loss to Hawthorn in 2008, he didn't) - but given you then include - I'm assuming - the likes of Chris Grant, Scott West, Rohan Smith in our AA list (not one of them participated in any of the 3 prelims), and we STILL fall short in total numbers of AA standard players in comparison to what we were up against in 08/09/10, doesn't that suggest that there was a significant difference in quality?

In 2008, IMO they had half a dozen more top shelf players on the ground than we did - and their AAs included 5 of the top 20 players in the comp, including the clear #1 player of the last 10 years.

No observer in the country would suggest we had a more balanced squad than they did, so they had us well and truly covered on that front to ... but nah, your right, quality had FA to do with it, it's a cop out, it was all our players with weak characters unable to stand up in finals.


Johnson was 23 in 1999 and had over 100 games under his belt including many finals. We played top 4 finisher Brisbane, we got thrashed and he managed 16 possessions and no goals as a midfielder.
23 touches and a goal, following up from 27 touches in a final a week earlier.

I'm not here to do a game by game analysis. Chris Judd has had quite a number of finals below 20 touches, it doesn't speak of his overall quality. There's players that put in a stinker in the first 2010 GF who killed it in the second, and vice versa.

Neither am I arguing that Johnson's finals record is excellent - I am arguing that, being part of very poor team during the best 5 year period of his career, he was robbed of the opportunity - whether he would have performed or not is up to conjecture. But IMO saying "look at how poor he was in prelims at 32, 33 and 34, simply a player who never stepped up when it counted" is unfair. Same with Aker - judging the bloke on his rubbish performances at the age of 31/32 in our prelims is a disservice to the 24/25 year old version whose 25 touches would include 3/4 goals that proved the difference in prelims and Grand Finals.

[Maddog37]

The teams that beat us were better. Plain and simple.

[Sedat]

Guido and Greystache both make their arguments very well but I would lean towards Guido's assessment that we had less top end quality cattle compared to Geelong, Hawthorn and St Kilda in that time. Every champion modern day player has stunk it up in finals from time to time - Hird was pantsed in the 2001 GF by Brad Scott, Buckley likewise in the 2003 GF by Robbie Copeland (from memory). And if we are talking Chris Grant, are we talking about the same guy who was BOG as a 20yo key forward in the SF in 1992, while luminaries such as Loewe, Harvey, Winmar and Lockett were all torn apart in that game? Loewe by Keenan Reynolds, Lockett by Tony Campbell - neither of them were exactly Glen Jakovich or Chris Langford. That is probably the single worst game Rob Harvey has ever played, but it doesn't detract from his champion status IMO.

[bulldogtragic]

Great discussion.

For me, I tend to look back at moments, in big finals, at clutch times. And my memory we've won an many as our national cricket side have won 9 wickets down and not many runs to score.

Eg:
- Mark West going for goal and not hitting Cook lace out miles from his opponent in 99
- Hudson's non Sheppard of Grant near the point line in 99
- The missed set shots when we were coming back against Geelong in 08, 4 from memory, Eagletons miss was bad by his standards
- Brian Lake assuming a stupid instruction with a threat of a free and certain goal from an umpire wouldn't be followed through in 09
- Akermanis kicking 50 metres to go out of bounds deliberately in the dying minutes when he had inside runners if he had looked in board in 09
- A goal kicking accuracy percentage of 33% accuracy in the 2010 prelim

I don't know if one can mount an argument to link them. Maybe it's consistent bad luck or maybe it's something else. When I look back at why we keep failing in pre lims, I recall specific moments where we didn't do what needed to be done. All Australians or better players, mean little when it's deep into the final quarters and in the moment we need a precise decision, action, play, whatever, we don't seem to do it. So that is what I think about in reflection. As for Geelong vs Bulldogs players, I thought we were the one team that could beat them in their reign, and we should have beaten them in both finals.

[bornadog]

Great discussion.

For me, I tend to look back at moments, in big finals, at clutch times. And my memory we've won an many as our national cricket side have won 9 wickets down and not many runs to score.

Eg:
- Mark West going for goal and not hitting Cook lace out miles from his opponent in 99
- Hudson's non Sheppard of Grant near the point line in 99
.

You really have erased the memory of 97 :D

[BornInDroopSt'54]

[QUOTE=bulldogtragic;361796]Great discussion.

For me, I tend to look back at moments, in big finals, at clutch times. And my memory we've won an many as our national cricket side have won 9 wickets down and not many runs to score.

Also when James Cook made that unnecessary late charge on whoever, got reported but stupidly contested the ban and got a week (a final) extra!

[bulldogtragic]

You really have erased the memory of 97 :D
What happened in 1997?

I've gone to that doctor from 'eternal sunshine of the spotless mind'. All fixed now.

[Happy Days]

09 we were good enough.

"Finals football" is a term made up to make legends out of injury prone flukes like Clark Keating. I can't think of one year where a legitimately great H&A season team didn't win the flag. Were we not playing finals football in 08, or were Hawthorn (the premiers) and Geelong just better?

We shit the bed in the qualifying final and got jobbed in the prelim. It was not because we weren't playing "finals football".

[Remi Moses]

Do you mean Aaron Keating ? Clarke was pretty handy.
I think 97 we were good enough, but 08-10 we weren't .

[stefoid]

09 we were good enough.

"Finals football" is a term made up to make legends out of injury prone flukes like Clark Keating. I can't think of one year where a legitimately great H&A season team didn't win the flag. Were we not playing finals football in 08, or were Hawthorn (the premiers) and Geelong just better?

We shit the bed in the qualifying final and got jobbed in the prelim. It was not because we weren't playing "finals football".

cant agree. Finals and the grand final in particular are played with much inflated levels of intensity and pressure. Players react to that pressure and intensity in different ways. Some maintain their standard, some collapse and a few even raise their performances to a higher level.

What I remember from the wallace and eade years even when we made the finals, our season consisted of a lot of wins where, if the opposition didnt put manic amounts of pressure on us, we dominated in high scoring styles of game, and when they did, we struggled big time to score and generally, inevitably, lost. And it tended to be the same couple of teams that always did it to us.

edit:

this reminds me of a long running argument I have had with a mate who reckons its a travesty whenever the best performed home and away team doesnt go on to win the grand final. To the point where he reckons they shoud just award the premiership to whoever is on top of the ladder at the end of the season like they do in english soccer.

does that seem as insane to you as it does to me?

[bornadog]

this reminds me of a long running argument I have had with a mate who reckons its a travesty whenever the best performed home and away team doesnt go on to win the grand final. To the point where he reckons they shoud just award the premiership to whoever is on top of the ladder at the end of the season like they do in english soccer.

does that seem as insane to you as it does to me?

No it doesn't, its just another way of awarding the premiership. The finals system hasn't always been the way the premiership was won in the past 100 pus years.

[jeemak]

cant agree. Finals and the grand final in particular are played with much inflated levels of intensity and pressure. Players react to that pressure and intensity in different ways. Some maintain their standard, some collapse and a few even raise their performances to a higher level.

What I remember from the wallace and eade years even when we made the finals, our season consisted of a lot of wins where, if the opposition didnt put manic amounts of pressure on us, we dominated in high scoring styles of game, and when they did, we struggled big time to score and generally, inevitably, lost. And it tended to be the same couple of teams that always did it to us.



What else do you expect from the side that was either the clear third best that played a free flowing game in two of three years, or the side that on their day in one year could have won it playing the same style?

Our team in 2008 and 2009 completely rooted itself with its insipid performances in the first week of the finals. By rooted, I mean embarrassed and almost shamed. Each start in each qualifying final was a disgrace, and played a massive part in us having to play an extra game that each of our opponents in the third week of finals didn't.

Talk about the intangibles of finals footy, and look back at each of those games and think if we accounted for ourselves better in them, half the psychological battle for each preliminary final would have been eliminated, and we may have executed reasonably well instead of falling.

I'm still completely livid by our performance in the two qualifying finals in each of 2008 and 2009. I don't know what went wrong within the club during these weeks, but whatever did really hurt us.

[Twodogs]

What else do you expect from the side that was either the clear third best that played a free flowing game in two of three years, or the side that on their day in one year could have won it playing the same style?

Our team in 2008 and 2009 completely rooted itself with its insipid performances in the first week of the finals. By rooted, I mean embarrassed and almost shamed. Each start in each qualifying final was a disgrace, and played a massive part in us having to play an extra game that each of our opponents in the third week of finals didn't.

Talk about the intangibles of finals footy, and look back at each of those games and think if we accounted for ourselves better in them, half the psychological battle for each preliminary final would have been eliminated, and we may have executed reasonably well instead of falling.

I'm still completely livid by our performance in the two qualifying finals in each of 2008 and 2009. I don't know what went wrong within the club during these weeks, but whatever did really hurt us.


1985 was worse. It was our first final at the MCG since 1961, we'd beaten Hawthorn a few weeks before,it was a beautiful day and then the game started. I've never seen a brutalising like it

Then there was Billy's 50 metre winning goal on the siren in 1992. That's almost the worst of them all. It's like being beaten by Krusty the Clown.

Then There was 1999. So many chances thrown away to win a game we lost by less than a goal.

[always right]

1985 was worse. It was our first final at the MCG since 1961, we'd beaten Hawthorn a few weeks before,it was a beautiful day and then the game started. I've never seen a brutalising like it

Then there was Billy's 50 metre winning goal on the siren in 1992. That's almost the worst of them all. It's like being beaten by Krusty the Clown.

Then There was 1999. So many chances thrown away to win a game we lost by less than a goal.

At least you can understand 1985. We were simply overawed by the occasion having endured such a long drought of finals appearances. We then bounced back strongly to beat North and then really should have beaten Hawthorn the following week if some individuals had shown a bit more discipline.

[jeemak]

1985 was worse. It was our first final at the MCG since 1961, we'd beaten Hawthorn a few weeks before,it was a beautiful day and then the game started. I've never seen a brutalising like it

Then there was Billy's 50 metre winning goal on the siren in 1992. That's almost the worst of them all. It's like being beaten by Krusty the Clown.

Then There was 1999. So many chances thrown away to win a game we lost by less than a goal.

1994.

Just another finals game in which we gave the opposition a strong lead early.

I'm glad I was only 6 in 1985, even though I went to the game I've managed to remember other things from my childhood.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I'm still completely livid by our performance in the two qualifying finals in each of 2008 and 2009. I don't know what went wrong within the club during these weeks, but whatever did really hurt us.

I could live with it happening in 2008, only because you could use the old "we didn't have the experience" routine (even though that's not true, we played 2 finals in 2006) but our form going into that game was poor. I think we only won 1 or 2 of our last 6 or so games in the H&A season?

However, for it to happen again the following year when we were in season best form was downright disgraceful and a real reflection on the group as a whole. I was so bitterly angry and disappointed with us that day.

[Twodogs]

1994.

Just another finals game in which we gave the opposition a strong lead early.

I'm glad I was only 6 in 1985, even though I went to the game I've managed to remember other things from my childhood.


Yeah, You are right. It was '94. Then we threw away a 5 goal lead against Geelong a fortnight later.


To be fair we conceded the early break that night because Ablett sr eye gouged Steven Kretiuk and Critter couldn't see anything for a quarter and a half.

[Maddog37]

Ths thread is very depressing. Reading it makes me feel like I am wallowing in a pit of collective self misery.

[Greystache]

Yeah, You are right. It was '94. Then we threw away a 5 goal lead against Geelong a fortnight later.

No the following week we got slaughtered by Melbourne and were out of the finals series. Garry Lyon kicked 10 that day.

[bulldogtragic]

Yeah, You are right. It was '94. Then we threw away a 5 goal lead against Geelong a fortnight later.


To be fair we conceded the early break that night because Ablett sr eye gouged Steven Kretiuk and Critter couldn't see anything for a quarter and a half.
I remember Osborne kicking our last goal against Geelong and for a fleeting second I was hopeful.

Then 97 I thought in was hopeful when Libba kicked a goal according to everyone but he goal umpire.

I've learned to never even think about winning deep into finals games now. Losing is one thing, but it stings when you think we could win. I always knew in 2009 fate or umpires would intervene. We all talk about Brian's free kick, which I will never forgive, but the holding the ball on Shaggy when he disposed of the ball legally (correct me if I'm wrong on the player) and resultant goal was the sort of gut wrenching moment expected by me now.

Going over this stuff is showing me why we have membership problems. But hopefully before I die, being a part of the journey will make the taste of ultimate success even sweeter.

[bulldogtragic]

No the following week we got slaughtered by Melbourne and were out of the finals series. Garry Lyon kicked 10 that day.
Crap day at the footy that was! My mind had blocked the memory of that game, it was shattering but in a different sense to say 97 or 09.

[Twodogs]

No the following week we got slaughtered by Melbourne and were out of the finals series. Garry Lyon kicked 10 that day.

Yeah I remember that. David Schartz took twenty something (proper) marks at CHF. The Ox could play a bit.

[Before I Die]

I remember Osborne kicking our last goal against Geelong and for a fleeting second I was hopeful.

Then 97 I thought in was hopeful when Libba kicked a goal according to everyone but he goal umpire.

I've learned to never even think about winning deep into finals games now. Losing is one thing, but it stings when you think we could win. I always knew in 2009 fate or umpires would intervene. We all talk about Brian's free kick, which I will never forgive, but the holding the ball on Shaggy when he disposed of the ball legally (correct me if I'm wrong on the player) and resultant goal was the sort of gut wrenching moment expected by me now.

Going over this stuff is showing me why we have membership problems. But hopefully before I die, being a part of the journey will make the taste of ultimate success even sweeter.

I hear you loud and clear.

[stefoid]

geez, I didnt mean to start that.

The point is that finals are different from most H&A games. The best H&A games are invariably described as 'like a final'.

But that above goes to show that if an individual or team cant play at their best in a game with finals intensity, then what is the point? 'pretenders' is the term, I believe.

I think its pretty obvious that our current team is being moulded from the ground up to play with and withstand, finals intensity. If you pa every game like a final, then when the rea finals come around, you shouldnt get bushwhacked and/or bundled out in the prelim, because youre used to it.

[Mofra]

I think its pretty obvious that our current team is being moulded from the ground up to play with and withstand, finals intensity. If you pa every game like a final, then when the rea finals come around, you shouldnt get bushwhacked and/or bundled out in the prelim, because youre used to it.
This, I'm guessing this is part of the reason we took Bonty in the draft, B-Mac wanted the toughest inside mid he could find in his first draft (Clay Smith), established contested football as teh base upon which the team would be built, etc etc.

We're clearly building a team that will never finish on top of the ladder but will not have to change our primary gameplan when we get the chance to play finals.

[jeemak]

This, I'm guessing this is part of the reason we took Bonty in the draft, B-Mac wanted the toughest inside mid he could find in his first draft (Clay Smith), established contested football as teh base upon which the team would be built, etc etc.

We're clearly building a team that will never finish on top of the ladder but will not have to change our primary gameplan when we get the chance to play finals.

I don't know about that, or honestly know how anyone can tell at this early point.

Take the second part of the statement on board, and hope you're dead right.

[Mofra]

I don't know about that, or honestly know how anyone can tell at this early point.

Take the second part of the statement on board, and hope you're dead right.
We've never finished on top of the ladder so admittedly it's a pretty laxy prediction - the Brisbane lions side of 2001-04 never finished on top either, a classic case of finals specialists.
Arguably, they suffered from a lack of outside easy run during the H&A series which diminished during finals as space & time shrinks markedly.

[Greystache]

We've never finished on top of the ladder so admittedly it's a pretty laxy prediction - the Brisbane lions side of 2001-04 never finished on top either, a classic case of finals specialists.
Arguably, they suffered from a lack of outside easy run during the H&A series which diminished during finals as space & time shrinks markedly.

In fact only 2 of the past 6 premiers have finished the season in first place. It's a pretty overrated position. Certainly nothing to justify taking the view that they beat us in a final because they were simply better. The team playing better footy in the finals wins the premiership, it's simple as that.

[Mantis]

In fact only 2 of the past 6 premiers have finished the season in first place. It's a pretty overrated position. Certainly nothing to justify taking the view that they beat us in a final because they were simply better. The team playing better footy in the finals wins the premiership, it's simple as that.

The fact that the draw can be so lob-sided with respect to the teams you play twice, travel and breaks as well as injuries & form means that the team that finishes top isn't always a true indication of the best team through the year.. As suggested the team that hits form during Sept wins the flag, but as history suggests a top 4 finish is a neccessity.

[Happy Days]

The fact that the draw can be so lob-sided with respect to the teams you play twice, travel and breaks as well as injuries & form means that the team that finishes top isn't always a true indication of the best team through the year.. As suggested the team that hits form during Sept wins the flag, but as history suggests a top 4 finish is a neccessity.

Is it a necessity or is it just that the top 4 teams are usually the best teams?

It's all self fulfilling prophecy.

[LostDoggy]

At least you can understand 1985. We were simply overawed by the occasion having endured such a long drought of finals appearances. We then bounced back strongly to beat North and then really should have beaten Hawthorn the following week if some individuals had shown a bit more discipline.

What do you mean, surely Rick standing on Dunstall
is exceptable. :rolleyes:

[Twodogs]

What do you mean, surely Rick standing on Dunstall
is exceptable. :rolleyes:


He probably means Hardie going kick chasing and leaving Matthews to kick goals from the square in the last quarter.

[bornadog]

He probably means Hardie going kick chasing and leaving Matthews to kick goals from the square in the last quarter.

Don't remind me.