BlueMark wrote:
I find it interesting that some of late have come out and stated that last years wins and the Wizard Cup were aberrations, that we ‘over achieved’. Some have further claimed that it would have been ‘better’ for the club to have finished nearer the bottom last year and not won the pre-season competition.
This view is revisionist and short sighted. Some key questions have to be asked. Given that the club, in the last six months have been able to secure a major sponsor, had a longterm sponsor increase it sponsorship, successfully increased secondary corporate sponsors, grown the coteries and achieved a record membership, do the revisionists believe this would have happened if the club finished poorly and had lost the first round of the Wizard Cup?
Let’s examine the Wizard Cup win first. The 250 000 first prize was nice but the add on benefits had been worth a lot more in dollar terms. Prior to the competition our membership numbers were not meeting expectations and we were still looking for a major sponsor. At the end of the competition we were ahead of projections on membership and had secured a new sponsor. So let’s do the figures
250 000 1st Place
500 000 new sponsor
200 000 Increased memberships
950 000 total.
None of this would have happened if we spent March playing in the regional series.
Now to the claims we should have finished near the bottom and picked some early draft picks. I have two issues with this. The first is that as supporters we expect those that represent the club out on the field do the best that they can and win as many games as they can. It is a compact between supporters and players. Thus we cannot be critical when the playing group achieves to its ability. While some will claim that last years group did not ‘represent’ their idea of a club, the fact remains that the group represented the club as a whole and did pretty well given the circumstances of the manner in which they were drawn together. For this they should be congratulated not condemned. (Note this year’s group has been criticised because of poor performance and given the results it is justifiable) My second issue with the revisionist view of last season is this. If we had finished last do the revisionists seriously think that the coach would have been re-signed to an extended contract or that Fevola would have re-signed if Pagan was not staying. A big price to pay for a couple of unproven youngsters.
It is my view that last season gave the club some much-needed breathing space. It allowed us to shore ourselves up off field and give a bit of joy to supporters. It gave the club time to gather itself and plan better for the future. Yes I would agree that there is a long way to go and much work to be done. But lets also enjoy the victories when we have them because the road is dark enough as it is.
Just another example of how number of posts does not equal knowledge. 915 posts on talking carlton and probably over 5000 on tbv and the same nonsense is waffling out of the mouths of the sheep.
Oh yes it was so much better to have won ten games than to have deledio and tambling running around for us this year. We have so much talent in abundance, particularly in the midfield and we simply do not need draft picks such as these.
It is true over time some of you have seen the light however the majority probably still believe we should be playing every game at optus and whitnall is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Time to wake up and realise it is 2005 and not 1985. The funniest thing is if we did have Deledio and Tambling you'd be saying what guns they are and how good it was we got the priority pick last year.
Once again you have had the pleasure of learning from the great one,
Was, is and always will be the messiah of football,
Carlton God
AKA footy expert.