Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"
I'd rather 1 year of Lower on the list than 5 years of Mulligan, or 3 years of Panos, or 4 years of Hooper, or 4 years of Moles...you get the picture.
FFC: Established 1883
Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.
Western Bulldogs: 2016 Premiers
We're going in circles here, but I do want to throw the question back at you: Why does it have to be viewed as a mistake? Why are you so keen to highlight the folly of the decision with the benefit of hindsight, without looking at the decision in the context of the period it was made and the perceived state of the club at that time?
If it was a mistake (and I don't believe it was) it was the right mistake to make.
But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.
If you see the team as constantly in development / improvement phase, then it stands to reason that you will get players who improve faster than others and who are superseded by others. As players are developed and screened against the best opposition, we see their weaknesses and whether they can learn and overcome them. Video sessions with the coach.......competition with their team mates. It's natural progression. It's hitting the ceiling for some; it's exponential growth for others.
In such a world it is entirely feasible that we trade in players who are excellent choices at the time, but who are replaced by others whose trajectory is much greater. It is not a mistake - but what it shows is that we are improving such that players who used to get a game no longer can.
Take Tory Dickson for example. I am a fan of his because I think he does a lot of unrecognised work. I think he has been great for the team, given the injury he suffered. But if I was honest with myself, I'd have to say that, unless he makes further progress and works on his weaknesses, I would not expect him to be in a grand final team. I would have thought other players - either by being traded in or through natural growth - would have taken his place.
At the start of the journey we therefore need players like Lower who provide that competition. If we weren't improving he would still be getting a game.
It's how I see us getting to be a premiership side. The gradual but continuous lifting of the bar making it harder and harder to get a game.
GWS;
200+ games - Chad Cornes (Did Chad even play this year?) Include McDonald if you want.
150-200 games - Bret Thornton (only played 1 game), Dean Bogan
100-150 games- Gilham
=4 (2 of which played 1 game or less)
Bulldogs;
200+ games Gia, Boyd, Cross, Murphy
150-200 games- Cooney, Griffen, Minson and Morris
100-150 games - Picken, Higgins.
=10 (8 of which have played over 150 games).
Yeah, pretty sure.
But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.
We were not too dissimilar, and we got 13 games out of a guy who didn't cost us a draft pick and constantly flew the flag for the younger kids on the paddock.
I'd take 12 months of Lower over the majority of our late round draft picks - heck, I'd take 12 months of Lower over most of Clayton's first rounders!
Western Bulldogs: 2016 Premiers
Clayton's first rounders were once rated. Lower never was.