A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

[The bulldog tragician]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Our age profile doesn’t really fit with the idea of rebuilding. Against Freo our average age was 26 yrs 8 months, theirs is only 24.8. In fact we’ve been older than our opponents in most matches.

With the less than 50 games metric as mentioned by BAD I wonder how things end up with those players going on to be established. That’s probably the more significant stat I’d think. Playing kids or recycled players who don’t make the grade (re-reading some of the above from GVJ makes depressing reading) might mean you are technically rebuilding but no better off.

For example when we played Geelong they only had one player less than 50 games, we had three, but they had six in 50-99 and we had just one. Their introduction of youth is always somehow balanced with the old blokes who’ve been extraordinarily durable but have also been able to pass on a winning culture and game plan that works.

[Bornadog]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Our age profile doesn?t really fit with the idea of rebuilding. Against Freo our average age was 26 yrs 8 months, theirs is only 24.8. In fact we?ve been older than our opponents in most matches.

With the less than 50 games metric as mentioned by BAD I wonder how things end up with those players going on to be established. That?s probably the more significant stat I?d think. Playing kids or recycled players who don?t make the grade (re-reading some of the above from GVJ makes depressing reading) might mean you are technically rebuilding but no better off.

For example when we played Geelong they only had one player less than 50 games, we had three, but they had six in 50-99 and we had just one. Their introduction of youth is always somehow balanced with the old blokes who?ve been extraordinarily durable but have also been able to pass on a winning culture and game plan that works.

WE had NINE with less than 50

Total Players By Games
	Western Bulldogs	Games	Geelong
9	Less than 50	3
1	50 to 99	6
5	100 to 149	6
4	150 to 200	3
4	200 or more	5

[Bornadog]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

2017 and 2018 was not all about distracted players. We lost a lot of experience which effected the team and were forced to play inexperienced players. We played the youngest team on the park for most of those two years. That was also due to the long injury list we had.

These are not excuses but rather facts.

Matthew Boyd (ret)
Travis Cloke (ret)
Stewart Crameri (del)
Declan Hamilton (del)
Robert Murphy (ret)
Josh Prudden (del)
Jake Stringer (trd)
Tristan Tweedie (del)
Marcus Adams (trd)
Shane Biggs (ret)
Tom Campbell (del)
Kieran Collins (del)
Luke Dahlhaus (FA)
Mitch Honeychurch (del)
Nathan Mullenger-McHugh (del)
Jack Redpath (ret)
Jordan Roughead (trd)
Clay Smith (ret)

[The bulldog tragician]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

WE had NINE with less than 50

Total Players By Games
	Western Bulldogs	Games	Geelong
9	Less than 50	3
1	50 to 99	6
5	100 to 149	6
4	150 to 200	3
4	200 or more	5

Typo from me, sorry

[GVGjr]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Our age profile doesn’t really fit with the idea of rebuilding. Against Freo our average age was 26 yrs 8 months, theirs is only 24.8. In fact we’ve been older than our opponents in most matches.

With the less than 50 games metric as mentioned by BAD I wonder how things end up with those players going on to be established. That’s probably the more significant stat I’d think. Playing kids or recycled players who don’t make the grade (re-reading some of the above from GVJ makes depressing reading) might mean you are technically rebuilding but no better off.

For example when we played Geelong they only had one player less than 50 games, we had three, but they had six in 50-99 and we had just one. Their introduction of youth is always somehow balanced with the old blokes who’ve been extraordinarily durable but have also been able to pass on a winning culture and game plan that works.

I think the younger group we are seeing now is a reflection that for a long period we've been topping up with experienced players like Jones, Lobb, Keath, Bruce, O'Brien and Harmes because we have rated our playing list as a very competitive one.
It's interesting that it's not necessarily a younger list that's being played it's more that the players who have been in the system a while like Garcia, Khamis, Vandermeer, West, Bramble, Baker and Poulter are light on for senior game experience but it's not like they haven't been in the system for a good while.
Even Coffield just ticked over the 50 game mark and the same with Ugle-Hagan
Sure Sanders, Darcy, Gallagher and O'Donnell are young and inexperienced but they're earning their spots and not being gifted games.

We need to look a bit deeper at the age-profile of the 0 - 50 games experience players as it paints a slightly different story.

[Go_Dogs]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Great post G. Really interesting to read all the draft selections set out like that. A couple of things come to mind:

1. We’ve been really good at identifying talent in the first round but have struggled to find value late which we did relatively well pre-2016

2. We’ve focussed some of those later picks or list spots on mature age players either via VFL pathway or delisted players from elsewhere. While this has its benefit in some cases (for depth in certain areas) we have been risk adverse in swinging for the fences and no doubt that means we miss a few of the M Boyd, J Harbrow, Dahl, JJ etc types of players who come with some development needed but have higher upside. Now that we’ve got more investment in development coaches hopefully we revert to what we’ve done historically.

3. We do hold onto some players too long (or allow a long time for them to push others out). In some cases this is ok, but it should be clear to us within year one or two what a players floor is (and likely ceiling) so we need to be a bit more aggressive turning over players and finding the next.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

With all due respect to the opinions expressed throughout this thread, I strongly believe that embarking on any rebuild of the current playing list is at most a secondary consideration.

When you look at the resurgence over the last 3 seasons in GWS and Collingwood, it has been built on a change of philosophy from the coaching ranks.

We need to rebuild the coaching list before the playing list and what we did last year DID NOT address the real problem.

Changing deck chairs is futile if we are still sailing towards the same iceberg.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

With all due respect to the opinions expressed throughout this thread, I strongly believe that embarking on any rebuild of the current playing list is at most a secondary consideration.

When you look at the resurgence over the last 3 seasons in GWS and Collingwood, it has been built on a change of philosophy from the coaching ranks.

We need to rebuild the coaching list before the playing list and what we did last year DID NOT address the real problem.

Changing deck chairs is futile if we are still sailing towards the same iceberg.

So Bevo out? When?

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

So Bevo out? When?

Last year was when it should have happened.

Today if we don't win.

Although it is not dependent on Bevo going.

If Bevo can change and get them playing a cohesive plan that allows the TEAM to be at its best most of the time, that would indicate the change in attitude/philosophy I am looking for.

Today is a hiding to nothing for Beveridge.

A comprehensive win is merely what should be expected, so he gets no credit today for a positive, but if they underperform the pressure for him to be gone becomes immense.

[chef]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

The fear is the longer we take to do it the more likely a few players will make their mind up to leave.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

Leave Bont, I won’t hold it against you. We can’t win close games and the board won’t make the hard calls and we are down for the count.

[josie]

Re: A rebuild hypothetical (might trigger rage)

I?d rather Bont stays and Bevo goes.