It's hardly the new year and far too early to be naming best 23s etc but the memes and ridicule have already started...any CFC supporter who shows the merest sign of optimism is instantly a lightning rod for a pile on. I could, possibly tolerate it, but being on the receiving end of Norf, Tiggers, sniffers or Dees supporters is a bit much. Voss wouldn't want a repeat of losing early to the Tiggers, that would initiate the usual crisis that ****s this club on about a three year cycle. 30+ years of crap, when is this ship going to turn around? I'm with Kruddler - we lack critical depth and foresight for season's down the track and much of what we brought in isn't exactly A-grade clas.
We are more susceptable to injuries this year, than any year in the past. With a large amount of luck, we might be ok. With an average amount of luck, we'll be lucky to match last years efforts.
Long term i think we will be ok.
Now, and unless some things change, the next couple years, it will be lower expectations and cross your fingers.
I'm fine with that. I feel for others who don't follow the same logic as they are the ones who will jump up and down, pitchforks in hand demanding more from the club. That cycle will hurt the club, like it has in the past. Carltons biggest issue is impatient supporters, forcing our hand before it needs to be forced, perpetuating cycle of unending rebuilds.
Weitering is a no brainer. Haynes is the next best. How do you fit both young and dean in the backline as well....and everyone needs to stop with the haynes on the wing nonsense, its not a legitimate position change. ....and there is always a potential for mcgovern as well.
To me, young just cant get in ahead of dean for any length lf time.
It's a shame we don't have tall depth in the backline.
We have Weitering. We have a guy that will retire at the end of the year We have a guy who hasn't played a game. We have a guy who has played 6 games and done his knee We have a guy who was told to look elsewhere, but is still around.
We haven't had this many options for a while, but its hardly what you would call solid depth.
With a bit of luck Dean and HOF turn out as good as we all want and Weitering plays on for another 7 years. Anything short of that we still need to give ourselves options.
It wouldn't surprise to see L Young playing first up. They may use Dean off the bench in the early stages, but I think he'll be somewhere in the Round 1 side.
Weitering is a no brainer. Haynes is the next best. How do you fit both young and dean in the backline as well....and everyone needs to stop with the haynes on the wing nonsense, its not a legitimate position change. ....and there is always a potential for mcgovern as well.
To me, young just cant get in ahead of dean for any length lf time.
Zero Hangar have done one..... https://www.zerohanger.com/selecting-every-afl-teams-best-23-for-2026-carlton-blues-171945/ FB: Harry Dean, Jacob Weitering, Nic Newman HB: Adam Saad, Nick Haynes, Oliver Hollands C: Jagga Smith, George Hewett, Adam Cerra HF: Ben Ainsworth, Harry McKay, Will Hayward FF: Jesse Motlop, Brodie Kemp, Zac Williams FO: Marc Pittonet, Patrick Cripps, Sam Walsh I/C: Lachlan Cowan, Oliver Florent, Campbell Chesser, Francis Evans, Hudson O'Keeffe
Stiff to miss: Liam Reidy, Mitch McGovern, Blake Acres, Lachie Fogarty, Matthew Cottrell, Cooper Lord, Ashton Moir
One needs to mediate carefully between the group and the individual. There may be a small element of truth to certain groups conforming to certain behaviors, but that needs to be measured against that fact we are individual minds, and you need to be wary of flattening or erasing any nuance or legitimate difference that exists between members of a group.
In terms of parental pushiness, my experiences were decidedly mixed, with 2 children involved in soccer, cricket, swimming, ballet, fencing, drama, choir, art classes, gymnastics. Pushy parents come in all shapes and skin colors, as do chill parents.
This is wise words.
That being said, our work has put on 2 'indian cultural days' where the goal is to help understand the differences between Indians and 'traditional' clients and how to navigate this without being offensive.
It was run by an indian woman who has been in Melbourne for almost 2 decades now.
Summarised best by explaining India is so big and varied its best thinking about it essentially as different countries. Wealth, education, language, religion, mannerisms all change depending on where you are.
However, take home message is this. As a general rule, "if you don't ask, you don't get" and "You can't say 'no' to indians" put a lot of people offside from our end. Culturally, they are 'pushy' because they need to be. There's a billion other people they are competing with. While as a group/company, we acknowledge this, but its poor form to bow down to such demands in comparison to any other client. Why should they get favouritism simply because they are pushy??
Obviously, within that individual personalities vary, just like other cultures, but they acknowledge themselves its part of theirs. This certainly does show up in sports and with pushy parents.
For those interested in movies, 'Dangal' is an indian movie based of real events of an overbearing parent going against tradition and training his daughters up to be world class wrestlers, competing at commonwealth and olympic games as a result. A great standalone movie in its own right, but gives you a look at 'the other side'.
Re recruits, just because we get them, didn't mean we think they are best 23 starters.
Eg look at the ruck. Tdk left, we needed someone to come in. Obviously we try and get someone with great talent but had we not been able to trade for one, we would've got one another way (draft, ssp)
So with that in mind, a ruck was coming one way or another. So does that make Reidy a starter? I don't think so. Will he play some games? IMO absolutely.
Another way of looking at recruits is this. What did it cost us? What could we get with that same value elsewhere?
Eg chesser. He cost us pick 41. Could we get a ready made player with pick 41 at the draft? Unlikely. So he was recruited as it was better than we could expect to get otherwise. Sure, he would have some desirable attributes and fills a position of need etc (debatable, but i digress). But ultimately, it's simply about value.
Every year we get sucked into included all our recruits into our best 22 (23) and every year we get disappointed.
I can't see how someone like cheeser gets a game in our side after only managing 4 in a very poor Eagles side in 2025... and not much more in years before that. Even if it's simply down to injury history.
I note that we were rated as third most affected by injury to senior players in 2025, as just posted on afl.com.au. That in a season where we were a quantum leap better than what we were in 2024.
Now, if we can improve by the same amount in 2026, then maybewe'll have enough ammunition to argue about our list management properly. Certainly, we should play closer to our potential with a fitter list.
That is about the most backwards way i've ever seen to calculate 'injuries'.
For instance, if Cripps got injured and missed the year, he wouldn't finish in the top 5 coaches votes, thus wouldn't be included in the list. The more injured you are, the less games you play, the less chance of getting you in the coaches votes meaning the less 'important' you are. Bollocks.
Hang on! You can't have it both ways. You can't say 2023 is SOS's team and then in the next breath say Austin has had six years. The only one moving goal posts around is your good self.
All list managers build on their predecessors list to some extent. Cripps and Docherty were part of that for Silvagni so was Ed Curnow You can't just dismiss the players that Austin added for 2023. And the real fruits of Austin's tenure are yet to hit their peak.
lol.....i'm trying to follow YOUR rules and you won't let me.
If i'm trying to follow my rules, you wont let me.
Why am i not surprised.
Current list management team is infallable. Now i see the light.
The list position we found ourselves in was a combination of the efforts of both. You can't have one without the other. And two injury hit and disrupted seasons later you want the one left gone.
Crash mentioned 2002 but there was another injury hit season in 2014 when many of our best players including Judd and Kreuzer missed big chunks....and Robinson and Garlett went off the rails. The brains trust at the time decided we needed a rebuild and the incoming list manager cut the list and sent the club into oblivion.
Hang on, we can't judge the current crop for years, but we can give them kudos for piggybacking on the previous guys efforts within a couple years??
Geez these goal posts are moving so often i don't even know which way i'm kicking now!
From a previous list....these players were NOT SOS's from 2023.....
Hewett Saad Cerra Acres Docherty - Before SOS Cripps - Before SOS O. Hollands Motlop Jordan Boyd Cincotta
From that list, 2 are not by either. 1 is already delisted 2 are on the outs (Boyd and Acres) ...and Motlop was rumoured to be on the way out to PA this past trade period (Durdin got booted instead).
How well did we do with Charlie doing nothing? Imagine if we get him up to speed and added depth around him, rather than losing depth. Thats not so 'magical' now is it?
Results did worsen, but thats about the playing list rather than the coaching. Even Docherty said as much post retirement.....thats if you don't want to take my word for it which was well documented at the time as well.
....and one last thing. The result 'proves' we were brittle?
In case you are unaware, that team that showed how 'brittle' we were, were a goal off having a 3-peat.....and we had them 5 goals down on their home deck early. Doesn't seem brittle to me. Seems to have been beaten by the best side in the modern game right now
So are you saying our list manager had built a side capable of winning a flag
I would argue that as a prelim side, drastic measures were not required, but rather staying the course wouldve yielded better results.
And I would argue that as a preliminary final side in '23, we were brittle as evidenced by the result. How did Charles perform in that finals series? The cracks were there to the objective observer. In terms of the coaching group (leadership)... we did stay the course and the results for 2024/5 worsened each year.
To assume that because you make a preliminary final you'll just naturally, even magically, improve the next year is naive at best... hubris at worst.
2 sides to every coin.
How well did we do with Charlie doing nothing? Imagine if we get him up to speed and added depth around him, rather than losing depth. Thats not so 'magical' now is it?
Results did worsen, but thats about the playing list rather than the coaching. Even Docherty said as much post retirement.....thats if you don't want to take my word for it which was well documented at the time as well.
....and one last thing. The result 'proves' we were brittle?
In case you are unaware, that team that showed how 'brittle' we were, were a goal off having a 3-peat.....and we had them 5 goals down on their home deck early. Doesn't seem brittle to me. Seems to have been beaten by the best side in the modern game right now
