AFL Draft thread 2005

[meltiger]

Have they?

Hay, Holland, Beaumont, Thompson, Graham, McCabe, Tallis, Barlow are a pretty experienced clump to go. Although we are holding on to Barker, Lekkas & Dixon, I suppose.

Hawthorn did leak experienced (but not necessarily very good) footballers across previous years, which is part of the reason why they had the biggest clump of 21-24 year old footballers in the comp this season.

I haven't seen the comparison figures, although I'd imagine the turnover would be similar.

"When you look at the change to the two clubs’ senior playing lists after a poor season last year, Hawthorn slashed 742 games senior games experience from its list, while Richmond slashed 1019 from its list. The end result was that both clubs’ lists were extremely young and inexperienced"

When you add on Campbell's 297 odd games this year, I doubt Hawthorn would have bridged the gap.

I was actually suprised too. With Hawthorn going the 'Youth' policy & Richmond 'Working with what we have' Policy - I actually expected Hawthorn to be ahead by a long stretch on that score.

 

[meltiger]

No, separate bodies.

As it works in SA, half the SANFL clubs are linked to the Power and the other half are linked to the Crows, meaning that "reserve" players at the two clubs are distributed across the SANFL competition.

Similarly, with father/son rulings, the Power can take youngsters whose fathers played enough games with any of their specific feeder clubs, and likewise for the Crows.

What about the Administration though?


Are they run by the essentially the same board?

 

[CyberKev]

What about the Administration though?


Are they run by the essentially the same board?

No, they're seperately run.

The club does indicate that the AFL club is the extension of the old club and the SANFL club (post 1996) is the new club:

"In 1997 the Port Adelaide Football Club joined the Australian Football League, in many ways the crowning achievement of more than 100 years of unrivalled success. It maintained its presence in the SANFL through the formation of the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club, who share the records and history from 1870 to 1996."

This may be technically correct, but it doesn't wash with me, given the SANFL club kept the majority of players from the time, it kept the traditional colours and jumper; it kept the playing base; it kept the established nickname.

For mine, just as clubs from the old VFL do not lay claim to premierships won in the VFA; and just as clubs like North Ballarat do not claim their multitude of BFL premierships in the higher standard new VFL competition, neither should Port claim premierships won in the lesser SANFL (especially when it is effectively claiming all 33 flags, across two concurrently running sides, in two totally separate competitions).

That's definitely having your cake and gorging it too.

 

[CyberKev]

"When you look at the change to the two clubs’ senior playing lists after a poor season last year, Hawthorn slashed 742 games senior games experience from its list, while Richmond slashed 1019 from its list. The end result was that both clubs’ lists were extremely young and inexperienced"

When you add on Campbell's 297 odd games this year, I doubt Hawthorn would have bridged the gap.

I was actually suprised too. With Hawthorn going the 'Youth' policy & Richmond 'Working with what we have' Policy - I actually expected Hawthorn to be ahead by a long stretch on that score.

Given that Hawthorn traded Trent Croad for 3 no-game youngsters at the end of 2001, and lost experienced players like Rehn & Chick at the end of 2002, followed by Rawlings at the end of 2003; and also discarded dodgy but experienced journeymen like Simon Cox, Kingsley Hunter its probably not entirely surprising.

Hawthorn would have been operating under a younger long term base too, given the enormous weight of experience that had been turned over during the Judge years in the late 90s.

Effectively they've moved-on a large core of "younger veterans" over the past few years, with these Judge era youngsters stagnating due to prolonged injury speels and the poor coaching methods of the Schwab regime.

In single year terms, Richmond definitely turned over more experience last season, which was aided by the club rolling over some 12 players in one bang, compared to Hawthorn's 7.

 

[CyberKev]

Finalised draft order for NAB Draft on November 26

CLUB NUMBER OF SELECTIONS SELECTION NUMBER
Adelaide (5) 16, 17, 32, 48, 62
Brisbane Lions (4) 9, 25, 41, 56
Carlton (5) 1, 4, 20, 36, 64
Collingwood (6) 2, 5, 21, 23, 37, 52
Essendon (7) 7, 19, 39*(J. Neagle), 50, 66, 72, 76
Fremantle (3) 10, 26, 42
Geelong (5) 15, 31, 35, 47, 61
Hawthorn (7) 3, 6, 14, 18, 22, 38* (T. Tuck), 65
Kangaroos (5) 28, 43, 45, 69, 73
Melbourne (4) 12, 53, 60, 68
Port Adelaide (5) 30, 44, 58, 70, 74
Richmond (4) 8, 24, 40, 67
St Kilda (5) 33, 49, 63, 71, 75
Sydney (3) 51, 54, 59
West Coast (3) 13, 29, 34
W/Bulldogs (5) 11, 27, 46, 55, 57
TOTAL: 76