Josh Bruce to be traded?

[takeaway]

Cho was at the club for 6 years. They even extended him.

That's one coach! Hooray!

Cho's extension was as a result of "we can't keep turning over coaches at the rate we have in the past - we can't keep being that club" but he did have a couple of 50% w/l years, and turned things around for us in 2016. So his extension wasn't a hard decision to make.

So what's your point then? We churn coaches over - but we don't churn coaches over??

What are you even talking about??

GT coached for 5+ years.
Lyon coached for 5 seasons (including an extension).
Cho for 6 including an (extension).

We had to put up with 5 years of Summers, Finnis and Cho being on exactly the same page. The players were on the same page as no one left. Everyone was on the same f****** page for 5 years and it netted us sweet f*** all!

Bottom line ...
The Hawks were all on the same page - players, admin, coaches, everyone. - they had available salary cap space to go after the top-end talent even during their successful periods, when they already had plenty of star players.

They were able to sustain their success on the back of that.

We on the other hand have a wide-receiver not willing to sign this year and holding out for $900,000 per annum - we are not on thre same page.

WTF does that even mean?

They recruited Lake, Frawley, Burgoyne and Hale during their '3-peat' which cost them f*** all. Only Frawley was sought after by anyone else in terms of any sort of bidding match. Money wasn't the factor for any of them. They wanted to play in big games, big finals, under a freak coach and in a team that had drafted Hodge, Mitchell, Roughead, Franklin and Lewis as their core. These guys went there to play with these guys and win a flag.

The salary cap space had nothing to do with it. The only time the salary cap came into play, was when they couldn't afford Franklin and he walked out.

So once again, you're just speaking complete s***.


How do you propose we lure 'big fish' to the club?

Who have we ever lured to the club? In the past 40 years, who have we been able to lure?

The only time we've picked up sought after players was when Hamill, Gehrig and Lawrence came because they wanted to play under Blight. The only other one I can think of is Carlisle, who funnily enough chose us over Hawthorn.


Are you seriously delusional enough to think that everyone at the club 'being on the same page' is going suddenly make these guys choose us over other clubs that can offer:

• Blockbuster games

• 70k crowds most weeks

• MCG games every 2nd week

• Big bucks

• Gun coaches

• The go-home factor

We can't offer any of that. We never have been able to. We never will. That's why for the past 50 years we've never lured anyone to the club. It's not some conspiracy, or mystery. Who the f*** would want to play for St Kilda? It's not some failure happening on yearly basis that other clubs have unlocked the key to and we haven't.

I would agree that if it came to a crunch, a "big fish" would probably choose one of the bigger clubs rather than clubs like Saints, Nth Melb, etc for the reasons you listed.

Anyway I am against the Saints, at least at this stage, going for a "big fish", because it would cost a lot in picks and $, and we probably would not be able to get much else in the way of talent. What "big fish" have lead to a flag? Can't think of any. Franklin, Dangerfield, Treloar, Shiel - nope. Better off trying to bolster our list with 2-3 B+ to A grade players to fill needs, and Hill is one. Richmond did that with Nankervis, Caddy & Prestia, who were not "big fish", although Prestia is almost there now. Hawthorn have not really lured any big fish - Mitchell was not in that category when he left Syd, Frawley probably the best known, Burgoyne came with an injury cloud, Lake good player near the end of his career, and brought in to fill a need, which he did very well. Scully & Wingard had issues, but are solid players now at Hawks, although you never know with Wingard. Hawks have topped up well, and having Clarkson as coach would help, but they still didn't make finals this year, and need to fill a few gaps again.

Saints have brought in Roberton, Bruce, Membrey, Steele, Carlisle, Savage, Stevens, Austin and others, so plenty are happy to play for the Saints. If we can get Hill, a decent 2nd ruckman/forward, perhaps a DFA to fill a need (not Tomlinson), a couple of young draftees, that would do me

[BarryGrogan]

Saints have brought in Roberton, Bruce, Membrey, Steele, Carlisle, Savage, Stevens, Austin and others, so plenty are happy to play for the Saints. If we can get Hill, a decent 2nd ruckman/forward, perhaps a DFA to fill a need (not Tomlinson), a couple of young draftees, that would do me

How many of them were wanted by other clubs though?

Skimming over that list, all were discards aside from Carlisle.


There are just some people that love to poke s*** at the club and blame their ineptitude for everything. In many cases, it's simply not true.

We were in rebuild mode during 3 compromised Drafts. We didn't get heaps wrong with our selections - it's just that all the decent players went to the Gold Coast and GWS before we had our picks. And when the inevitble suqqeze came and these gun draftees left GWS and the Suns, funnily enough they all landed at the 'big clubs' where they can play on ANZAC Day and in front of big crowds in big games every week.

We've actually done really well in picking up discards from other clubs, as you listed above.

But people whining and moaning about how s*** the club is because we can't get every star free agent that comes on the market - are just full of it.

We can't lure big players to the club. We never have. We simply can't match what the other clubs can offer.

The Saints being s*** is what it is. I understand people don't like it - but this armchair expert bulls*** that it's a simple fix and if we just do the obvious things that deadshits on here sprout as gospel - we'll suddenly be a big successful and powerful is just ridiculous.


I actually read on here from some wad once that we just need to 'wine and dine' Coniglio and we'll get him. And moaning that 'why aren't we into him like Hawthorn is??!'

Seriously, that sort of s*** that denigrates the club pisses me off.

[st.byron]

Saints have brought in Roberton, Bruce, Membrey, Steele, Carlisle, Savage, Stevens, Austin and others, so plenty are happy to play for the Saints. If we can get Hill, a decent 2nd ruckman/forward, perhaps a DFA to fill a need (not Tomlinson), a couple of young draftees, that would do me

How many of them were wanted by other clubs though?

Skimming over that list, all were discards aside from Carlisle.


There are just some people that love to poke s*** at the club and blame their ineptitude for everything. In many cases, it's simply not true.

We were in rebuild mode during 3 compromised Drafts. We didn't get heaps wrong with our selections - it's just that all the decent players went to the Gold Coast and GWS before we had our picks. And when the inevitble suqqeze came and these gun draftees left GWS and the Suns, funnily enough they all landed at the 'big clubs' where they can play on ANZAC Day and in front of big crowds in big games every week.

We've actually done really well in picking up discards from other clubs, as you listed above.

But people whining and moaning about how s*** the club is because we can't get every star free agent that comes on the market - are just full of it.

We can't lure big players to the club. We never have. We simply can't match what the other clubs can offer.

The Saints being s*** is what it is. I understand people don't like it - but this armchair expert bulls*** that it's a simple fix and if we just do the obvious things that deadshits on here sprout as gospel - we'll suddenly be a big successful and powerful is just ridiculous.


I actually read on here from some wad once that we just need to 'wine and dine' Coniglio and we'll get him. And moaning that 'why aren't we into him like Hawthorn is??!'

Seriously, that sort of s*** that denigrates the club pisses me off.

Barry, not taking issue with your opinions, but your delivery could be better.

Referring to other posters as “deads***s and wads” is abusive mate. Pav suggested in another thread that you pull your head in a bit with the abuse and I second that motion.

[takeaway]

Saints have brought in Roberton, Bruce, Membrey, Steele, Carlisle, Savage, Stevens, Austin and others, so plenty are happy to play for the Saints. If we can get Hill, a decent 2nd ruckman/forward, perhaps a DFA to fill a need (not Tomlinson), a couple of young draftees, that would do me

How many of them were wanted by other clubs though?

Skimming over that list, all were discards aside from Carlisle.


There are just some people that love to poke s*** at the club and blame their ineptitude for everything. In many cases, it's simply not true.

We were in rebuild mode during 3 compromised Drafts. We didn't get heaps wrong with our selections - it's just that all the decent players went to the Gold Coast and GWS before we had our picks. And when the inevitble suqqeze came and these gun draftees left GWS and the Suns, funnily enough they all landed at the 'big clubs' where they can play on ANZAC Day and in front of big crowds in big games every week.

We've actually done really well in picking up discards from other clubs, as you listed above.

But people whining and moaning about how s*** the club is because we can't get every star free agent that comes on the market - are just full of it.

We can't lure big players to the club. We never have. We simply can't match what the other clubs can offer.

The Saints being s*** is what it is. I understand people don't like it - but this armchair expert bulls*** that it's a simple fix and if we just do the obvious things that deadshits on here sprout as gospel - we'll suddenly be a big successful and powerful is just ridiculous.


I actually read on here from some wad once that we just need to 'wine and dine' Coniglio and we'll get him. And moaning that 'why aren't we into him like Hawthorn is??!'

Seriously, that sort of s*** that denigrates the club pisses me off.

I agree to an extent, but also trying to argue that we don't necessarily need a big fish, just better targeted recruiting. As with all topics, some posters do not look at the issue in depth, and whinge when we "aren't into a player", or the gun player goes elsewhere or even stays.

[BarryGrogan]

Saints have brought in Roberton, Bruce, Membrey, Steele, Carlisle, Savage, Stevens, Austin and others, so plenty are happy to play for the Saints. If we can get Hill, a decent 2nd ruckman/forward, perhaps a DFA to fill a need (not Tomlinson), a couple of young draftees, that would do me

How many of them were wanted by other clubs though?

Skimming over that list, all were discards aside from Carlisle.


There are just some people that love to poke s*** at the club and blame their ineptitude for everything. In many cases, it's simply not true.

We were in rebuild mode during 3 compromised Drafts. We didn't get heaps wrong with our selections - it's just that all the decent players went to the Gold Coast and GWS before we had our picks. And when the inevitble suqqeze came and these gun draftees left GWS and the Suns, funnily enough they all landed at the 'big clubs' where they can play on ANZAC Day and in front of big crowds in big games every week.

We've actually done really well in picking up discards from other clubs, as you listed above.

But people whining and moaning about how s*** the club is because we can't get every star free agent that comes on the market - are just full of it.

We can't lure big players to the club. We never have. We simply can't match what the other clubs can offer.

The Saints being s*** is what it is. I understand people don't like it - but this armchair expert bulls*** that it's a simple fix and if we just do the obvious things that deadshits on here sprout as gospel - we'll suddenly be a big successful and powerful is just ridiculous.


I actually read on here from some wad once that we just need to 'wine and dine' Coniglio and we'll get him. And moaning that 'why aren't we into him like Hawthorn is??!'

Seriously, that sort of s*** that denigrates the club pisses me off.

Barry, not taking issue with your opinions, but your delivery could be better.

Referring to other posters as “deads***s and wads” is abusive mate. Pav suggested in another thread that you pull your head in a bit with the abuse and I second that motion.

Barry's angry!!!

[To the top]

The Cartel which dominates the AFL Board table act in the interests of their Clubs

Hence the nonsense of Free Agency being to the benefit of Clubs lower down the Premiership ladder and to equalise the competition

Simply the players go to the Cartel Clubs, those with the large memberships and who exclusively play the “blockbuster” games such as ANZAC Day and other fixtures

Regardless of their position on the Premiership ladder

Look at the decimation of Gold Coast

Geelong, the beneficiary of Father/Son until it became just too much of an advantage and the rules were changed, is a Cartel Club because of the market gardener (whose IPO is travelling well!)

St Kilda do not rank

As do not others

They merely make up the numbers

The only player who has not come to St Kilda for more playing opportunity is Carlisle - and probably now Hannebery

That is the magnitude of the task St Kilda are confronted with - before you get to our Balance Sheet which is indicative of making up the numbers

All these things are linked

Then you have the Draft, so you take your turn

And you seek FA players, who will go to Cartel Clubs as history instructs

And, if you trade, you are getting like for like because you have to give your best to get the best

Where exactly is the trade up value

Barrot, who coached West Torrens, passed by St Kilda in exchange for Stewart

Like for like?

We can not throw out the baby with the bath water

Courtesy of having 2 Draft Picks to come into the side in 2020 in King and Bytel we are, in my view, positioned to hand over 5/6 for Hill Full stop

So we potentially improve by Hill, King and Bytel aiming at that bottom 7 or 8 in the side that list to Carlton and Sydney

It will take time - there is no messiah

Read what Ratten has said - it is a journey

And we do have a group of young players with class, the older grade now crossing 100 games

[barneyboyz]

The Cartel which dominates the AFL Board table act in the interests of their Clubs

Hence the nonsense of Free Agency being to the benefit of Clubs lower down the Premiership ladder and to equalise the competition

Simply the players go to the Cartel Clubs, those with the large memberships and who exclusively play the “blockbuster” games such as ANZAC Day and other fixtures

Regardless of their position on the Premiership ladder

Look at the decimation of Gold Coast

Geelong, the beneficiary of Father/Son until it became just too much of an advantage and the rules were changed, is a Cartel Club because of the market gardener (whose IPO is travelling well!)

St Kilda do not rank

As do not others

They merely make up the numbers

The only player who has not come to St Kilda for more playing opportunity is Carlisle - and probably now Hannebery

That is the magnitude of the task St Kilda are confronted with - before you get to our Balance Sheet which is indicative of making up the numbers

All these things are linked

Then you have the Draft, so you take your turn

And you seek FA players, who will go to Cartel Clubs as history instructs

And, if you trade, you are getting like for like because you have to give your best to get the best

Where exactly is the trade up value

Barrot, who coached West Torrens, passed by St Kilda in exchange for Stewart

Like for like?

We can not throw out the baby with the bath water

Courtesy of having 2 Draft Picks to come into the side in 2020 in King and Bytel we are, in my view, positioned to hand over 5/6 for Hill Full stop

So we potentially improve by Hill, King and Bytel aiming at that bottom 7 or 8 in the side that list to Carlton and Sydney

It will take time - there is no messiah

Read what Ratten has said - it is a journey

And we do have a group of young players with class, the older grade now crossing 100 games

The Cartel would have, say 5 - 6 clubs at most? It would be rediculous if they all just played themselves, right? So, we remain as viable and as important as we want to be, it's the same game that the UN has been playing for years

Our biggest problem to date, is not having enough genuinely smart people sitting around that table and for long enough. St Kilda FC is and can be at any stage that they get their act together for long enough, one of those clubs. But geez, we haven't been represented well at all for nearly 150 years

[BarryGrogan]

St Kilda FC is and can be at any stage that they get their act together for long enough, one of those clubs.

That's just complete nonsense.

The reason big clubs are big, is because they generate huge numbers through the gate, and huge numbers watching on TV.

As a result, they get the fixtures to maximise their customer base.


The only way to become a big club, is to magically find an additional 50-100k supporters somewhere - wjilst the big clubs supporters suddenly drop off.

Then, they all have to start showing up to games and watching games.


No trying doing that when you're on the Sunday arvo timeslot each week whilst the big clubs play Friday nights and blockbusters at the G in primetime.



Such folly. It's delusional thinking.

[barneyboyz]

St Kilda FC is and can be at any stage that they get their act together for long enough, one of those clubs.

That's just complete nonsense.

The reason big clubs are big, is because they generate huge numbers through the gate, and huge numbers watching on TV.

As a result, they get the fixtures to maximise their customer base.


The only way to become a big club, is to magically find an additional 50-100k supporters somewhere - wjilst the big clubs supporters suddenly drop off.

Then, they all have to start showing up to games and watching games.


No trying doing that when you're on the Sunday arvo timeslot each week whilst the big clubs play Friday nights and blockbusters at the G in primetime.



Such folly. It's delusional thinking.

Sorry Baz, you must be angry, you have messed it up I get what you mean though.

Look, we've been on the wrong end of this since long before we got all the Sunday games, and long before you had to be a Cartel club to get Friday games. There's a little from all camps in this. We do really need to get ourselves together. There's no folly in that, OR delusion mate

My thinking around this wouldn't be too different from many others. Get it 'right' and we'll have sustained success

[BarryGrogan]

Sorry Baz, you must be angry, you have messed it up I get what you mean though.

Look, we've been on the wrong end of this since long before we got all the Sunday games, and long before you had to be a Cartel club to get Friday games. There's a little from all camps in this. We do really need to get ourselves together. There's no folly in that, OR delusion mate

My thinking around this wouldn't be too different from many others. Get it 'right' and we'll have sustained success

It's wrong.

And what it does it create unnecessary and unreasonable expectations on the club.

They can win games, and hire good people - but will never land big fish over other clubs as a rule.

We will never, ever be a big club.


That's not to say we can't pinch a flag - but it won't ever result in us being a big club.

Forget it. It's folly. Fantasy stuff.

[barneyboyz]

Sorry Baz, you must be angry, you have messed it up I get what you mean though.

Look, we've been on the wrong end of this since long before we got all the Sunday games, and long before you had to be a Cartel club to get Friday games. There's a little from all camps in this. We do really need to get ourselves together. There's no folly in that, OR delusion mate

My thinking around this wouldn't be too different from many others. Get it 'right' and we'll have sustained success

It's wrong.

And what it does it create unnecessary and unreasonable expectations on the club.

They can win games, and hire good people - but will never land big fish over other clubs as a rule.

We will never, ever be a big club.


That's not to say we can't pinch a flag - but it won't ever result in us being a big club.

Forget it. It's folly. Fantasy stuff.

Sorry you feel that way really. What hope do we have?

Nah mate, I'm not going to believe that. You can, if you want...just

[BarryGrogan]

Sorry you feel that way really. What hope do we have?

Nah mate, I'm not going to believe that. You can, if you want...just

Why do you care if we're a big club? Why does that matter?

I honestly don't understand why Saints fans pine to be relevant.

I love that we're a battler. I love that we have no right to even exist - yet here we are.

I actually think it's somewhat of a miracle that we do still exist.

[st.byron]

Saints have brought in Roberton, Bruce, Membrey, Steele, Carlisle, Savage, Stevens, Austin and others, so plenty are happy to play for the Saints. If we can get Hill, a decent 2nd ruckman/forward, perhaps a DFA to fill a need (not Tomlinson), a couple of young draftees, that would do me

How many of them were wanted by other clubs though?

Skimming over that list, all were discards aside from Carlisle.


There are just some people that love to poke s*** at the club and blame their ineptitude for everything. In many cases, it's simply not true.

We were in rebuild mode during 3 compromised Drafts. We didn't get heaps wrong with our selections - it's just that all the decent players went to the Gold Coast and GWS before we had our picks. And when the inevitble suqqeze came and these gun draftees left GWS and the Suns, funnily enough they all landed at the 'big clubs' where they can play on ANZAC Day and in front of big crowds in big games every week.

We've actually done really well in picking up discards from other clubs, as you listed above.

But people whining and moaning about how s*** the club is because we can't get every star free agent that comes on the market - are just full of it.

We can't lure big players to the club. We never have. We simply can't match what the other clubs can offer.

The Saints being s*** is what it is. I understand people don't like it - but this armchair expert bulls*** that it's a simple fix and if we just do the obvious things that deadshits on here sprout as gospel - we'll suddenly be a big successful and powerful is just ridiculous.


I actually read on here from some wad once that we just need to 'wine and dine' Coniglio and we'll get him. And moaning that 'why aren't we into him like Hawthorn is??!'

Seriously, that sort of s*** that denigrates the club pisses me off.

Barry, not taking issue with your opinions, but your delivery could be better.

Referring to other posters as “deads***s and wads” is abusive mate. Pav suggested in another thread that you pull your head in a bit with the abuse and I second that motion.

Barry's angry!!!

Fair enough. Be angry. Doesn’t mean you can be abusive though.

[samoht]

We can't offer any of that. We never have been able to. We never will. That's why for the past 50 years we've never lured anyone to the club. It's not some conspiracy, or mystery. Who the f*** would want to play for St Kilda? It's not some failure happening on yearly basis that other clubs have unlocked the key to and we haven't.

After we tasted success in 2009, we didn't have the nous, the vision and the commitment to sustain it and build on it.

Our players continue to look after no.1 ... e.g., Billings - a wide-receiver - holding out for $900,000 per annum, etc. - this typifies us as a club.
(Luckily for us, Billings' last 6 games - all under Ratten - have been very, very ordinary - hopefully, it has brought him back down to earth, and given him a different perspective on things).

We will never be a club like the Hawks - because we don't go about it the way the Hawks do or Geelong, and Collingwood do for that matter - these teams have managed to sustain their success, and there's a good reason for it - and it's not just because of their coach, who is chosen by the club, anyway - they don't pop up from nowhere - and how is it that we're always getting our coaches wrong?
How is it, that we never have a coach that someone wants to play for.

Success begets success- - once we learn how to sustain it, our membership numbers will swell and we'll become one of the clubs hosting those blockbuster games.

Getting back to Bruce - if we are looking to trade him out, it shows we're getting desperate - and it's all because we haven't been going about things in the right way to sustain our success.

[mbogo]

So why are there no discussion points about Bruce in this thread, just a lot of arguing about other stuff? Bruce needs to stay, end of story!!

[CURLY]

We can't offer any of that. We never have been able to. We never will. That's why for the past 50 years we've never lured anyone to the club. It's not some conspiracy, or mystery. Who the f*** would want to play for St Kilda? It's not some failure happening on yearly basis that other clubs have unlocked the key to and we haven't.

After we tasted success in 2009, we didn't have the nous, the vision and the commitment to sustain it and build on it.

Our players continue to look after no.1 ... e.g., Billings - a wide-receiver - holding out for $900,000 per annum, etc. - this typifies us as a club.
(Luckily for us, Billings' last 6 games - all under Ratten - have been very, very ordinary - hopefully, it has brought him back down to earth, and given him a different perspective on things).

We will never be a club like the Hawks - because we don't go about it the way the Hawks do or Geelong, and Collingwood do for that matter - these teams have managed to sustain their success, and there's a good reason for it - and it's not just because of their coach, who is chosen by the club, anyway - they don't pop up from nowhere - and how is it that we're always getting our coaches wrong?
How is it, that we never have a coach that someone wants to play for.

Success begets success- - once we learn how to sustain it, our membership numbers will swell and we'll become one of the clubs hosting those blockbuster games.

Getting back to Bruce - if we are looking to trade him out, it shows we're getting desperate - and it's all because we haven't been going about things in the right way to sustain our success.

After 2009 we were in the middle of s string of compromised drafts. Picks in the teens pushed out to mid 30 type picks.

[samoht]

We can't offer any of that. We never have been able to. We never will. That's why for the past 50 years we've never lured anyone to the club. It's not some conspiracy, or mystery. Who the f*** would want to play for St Kilda? It's not some failure happening on yearly basis that other clubs have unlocked the key to and we haven't.

After we tasted success in 2009, we didn't have the nous, the vision and the commitment to sustain it and build on it.

Our players continue to look after no.1 ... e.g., Billings - a wide-receiver - holding out for $900,000 per annum, etc. - this typifies us as a club.
(Luckily for us, Billings' last 6 games - all under Ratten - have been very, very ordinary - hopefully, it has brought him back down to earth, and given him a different perspective on things).

We will never be a club like the Hawks - because we don't go about it the way the Hawks do or Geelong, and Collingwood do for that matter - these teams have managed to sustain their success, and there's a good reason for it - and it's not just because of their coach, who is chosen by the club, anyway - they don't pop up from nowhere - and how is it that we're always getting our coaches wrong?
How is it, that we never have a coach that someone wants to play for.

Success begets success- - once we learn how to sustain it, our membership numbers will swell and we'll become one of the clubs hosting those blockbuster games.

Getting back to Bruce - if we are looking to trade him out, it shows we're getting desperate - and it's all because we haven't been going about things in the right way to sustain our success.

After 2009 we were in the middle of s string of compromised drafts. Picks in the teens pushed out to mid 30 type picks.

We weren't the only ones disadvantaged by that string of compromised drafts that you're referring to..
What difference did this make to the Hawks, Collingwood and Geelong - who have all managed to sustain and build on their success?

[CURLY]

We can't offer any of that. We never have been able to. We never will. That's why for the past 50 years we've never lured anyone to the club. It's not some conspiracy, or mystery. Who the f*** would want to play for St Kilda? It's not some failure happening on yearly basis that other clubs have unlocked the key to and we haven't.

After we tasted success in 2009, we didn't have the nous, the vision and the commitment to sustain it and build on it.

Our players continue to look after no.1 ... e.g., Billings - a wide-receiver - holding out for $900,000 per annum, etc. - this typifies us as a club.
(Luckily for us, Billings' last 6 games - all under Ratten - have been very, very ordinary - hopefully, it has brought him back down to earth, and given him a different perspective on things).

We will never be a club like the Hawks - because we don't go about it the way the Hawks do or Geelong, and Collingwood do for that matter - these teams have managed to sustain their success, and there's a good reason for it - and it's not just because of their coach, who is chosen by the club, anyway - they don't pop up from nowhere - and how is it that we're always getting our coaches wrong?
How is it, that we never have a coach that someone wants to play for.

Success begets success- - once we learn how to sustain it, our membership numbers will swell and we'll become one of the clubs hosting those blockbuster games.

Getting back to Bruce - if we are looking to trade him out, it shows we're getting desperate - and it's all because we haven't been going about things in the right way to sustain our success.

After 2009 we were in the middle of s string of compromised drafts. Picks in the teens pushed out to mid 30 type picks.

We weren't the only ones disadvantaged by that string of compromised drafts that you're referring to..
What difference did this make to the Hawks, Collingwood and Geelong - who have all managed to sustain and build on their success?

That list was built in 200-2003 drafts the others you talk about where later. Geelong got a free hit in 2006 adding Hawkins for free.

[samoht]

The others have cups to show for it... and managed to continue/sustain their success.
The Hawks got 3 in a row - "that's what I'm talking about!"

[takeaway]

We can't offer any of that. We never have been able to. We never will. That's why for the past 50 years we've never lured anyone to the club. It's not some conspiracy, or mystery. Who the f*** would want to play for St Kilda? It's not some failure happening on yearly basis that other clubs have unlocked the key to and we haven't.

After we tasted success in 2009, we didn't have the nous, the vision and the commitment to sustain it and build on it.

Our players continue to look after no.1 ... e.g., Billings - a wide-receiver - holding out for $900,000 per annum, etc. - this typifies us as a club.
(Luckily for us, Billings' last 6 games - all under Ratten - have been very, very ordinary - hopefully, it has brought him back down to earth, and given him a different perspective on things).

We will never be a club like the Hawks - because we don't go about it the way the Hawks do or Geelong, and Collingwood do for that matter - these teams have managed to sustain their success, and there's a good reason for it - and it's not just because of their coach, who is chosen by the club, anyway - they don't pop up from nowhere - and how is it that we're always getting our coaches wrong?
How is it, that we never have a coach that someone wants to play for.

Success begets success- - once we learn how to sustain it, our membership numbers will swell and we'll become one of the clubs hosting those blockbuster games.

Getting back to Bruce - if we are looking to trade him out, it shows we're getting desperate - and it's all because we haven't been going about things in the right way to sustain our success.

Billings is contracted to 2021, when I think he will be a restricted free agent. Just doing the same as most players nowadays, contract till Free Agency, just a sensible commercial decision, of course in his best interests, same as most AFL players. Is he "holding out" for $900,000? Hope he's worth that by then. His last 6 games have hardly been ordinary - in the best 4 out of the 6, the actual best player in 2, over 26 disposals in all games except vs Sydney. Think you'd better delete that paragraph.

[To the top]

I note that a response to my contribution is attributed to me.

I hold by my assessment of where and why the AFL competition is where it is at.

Yes, we did not consolidate our List thru the Lyon period (not that we had high picks AND Free Agency had not been proposed by the Cartel Clubs plus Geelong had the advantage of Father/Sun, hence their List and success)

One of the first things which I noticed upon coming to Victoria was attending the President's Lunch at Collingwood (which was then on the verge of collapse, the Brewery wanting a Bank Cheque before delivering match day beverage).

Those at the top table represented the Captain's of Industry and Commerce.

Then back to similar functions at St Kilda where there was Gerry Ryan.

And back to Bruce

I have put before that I consider WB as a direct competition to St Kilda (noting we beat them a few weeks back).

Yet WB are said taking Bruce from us - and in front of us re Keath, who had a medical at St Kilda.

So WB move ahead of us on the pecking order - and to our direct disadvantage.

This is a dog eats dog world and a kick them whilst they are down world.

The AFL is reliant on broadcast rights, the Liberal Party fundraising Company, 9 Entertainment divulging that the state of the Australian economy and business conditions means they cannot recoup what they are paying for Rights to sporting events.

So the AFL is in line for a haircut - and defending by promoting the Cartel Clubs with their supporter numbers.

You do not give the opposition free kicks - and particularly to your direct disadvantage.

Then there is St Kilda, giving free kicks at it (St Kilda) to a direct competitor.

Go back to what Ferguson from Manchester United said - and did.

[To the top]

List the players on the Lists of Hawthorn, Collingwood and Geelong - including what their status was at the Clubs they left.

These 3 Clubs are Cartel Clubs (Geelong due to the Market Gardener) and successful on field accordingly

St Kilda are not a Cartel Club.

The Broadcast Rights dictate an 18 Club competition.

[poatina]

A couple of weeks ago the present Worlds Worst Coach, B Scott, made a hammy point on AFL 360 of saying how very close ( in fact said “ very fringe “ which was more accurate than he intended) Constable was in a clear attempt to talk up his trade value. Let’s see if he gets a game this week after last week’s usual Cats finals effort , before we think it’s clever to let Jack Steven go FROM HIS CONTRACT for Constable .
Where are we going to get a better player than Bruce ? Now, not potential . He is contracted to us for another year. Why are we not holding him to that with a view to attracting him long term sometime next year? Is it because certain people want to be the Big Swinging Dicks of the trade period that it was let be known - to Bruce’s surprise and disappointment- he could be traded?

[poatina]

Sorry, it was C Scott ( geee they look similar don’t they ? Why’s that? )

[BarryGrogan]

The others have cups to show for it... and managed to continue/sustain their success.
The Hawks got 3 in a row - "that's what I'm talking about!"

So Geelong lured the best player in the comp due to an advantage only 7 clubs have. Then Ablett. Then Dalhaus.

Hawthorn had a freak core. They led them to the 3-peat. We played in a prelim, two GFs and a final whilst our core was at their peak.

Naturally, Hawthorn are now mediocre.

It's a very similar path. They were just better during their prime. They won 3. We were runners up twice.

It happens.

The big difference is that when we were on top of the ladder - we still couldn't draw crowds.

Funny that. Our crowds when we were a finalist for a decade with league's best and most marketable player , still didn't match the big clubs down the bottom of the ladder.

Whaddya know.

We do not have a large supporter base. Nrver have. And will never have one even close to that of the big clubs.

And the supporters we do have, are not rabid losers that have their lives hinging on the footy like Essendon, Collingwood and Richmond. The average Saints fan really couldn't give a f*** deep down.

And that's not a dig. It's a compliment!