I don't care that they aren't winning games, I don't go for either. I'm just sick and tired of people making up the comparisons between GCS, GWS to Port, Freo etc.
Again Port were dominant in the SANFL winning 5 grand finals in 10 years before entering the AFL. So they obviously had the ability to be competitive. Why they weren't tipped to win any games I'm not sure.
But the state leagues aren't anywhere near afl level for GWS and Gold Coast. Back when Adelaide, Freo, West Coast joined to the AFL, the WAFL and the SANFL were almost as strong as the VFL making it so there was less of a step up. If you're talking about AFL they didn't really get that many players, the majority of their teams are young and inexperienced. All in all you can't really compare them as the amount of inexperience is a lot higher in GWS and GCS.
SANFL** sorry. I was talking about West Coast and Adelaide... They took players from there respective state leagues sure they weren't as a team as I said originally but they were 'AFL ready' with experience playing at a simular level. Where these 'kids' playing for GCS, GWS don't have that experience yet, hence having to give them a few more years before you can expect them to do well. Well Well Freo have always been shit..., but jokes aside I thought east and south freo were in the WAFL?
Fremantle did not have a WAFL team, and I don't know what "SAFL" is. You replied to the comment where I was talking about West Coast and Adelaide, so you're just completely ignoring that, and coming out with bullshit. Seriously, why are you ignoring my comment that you replied to? You can't handle one where it completely disregards your comment, so you bring up a comment, which I made ages ago.
You also can't compare a team that has been established for a couple of years to a team thats been around for decades. Port, Freo etc. would've known how to play as a team as they already had years of experience compared to a team (GCS) that had little to none at all.
This was because they were already developed in other leagues. Port, Adelaide, Freo and West Coast were all in the SAFL and the WAFL before they joined the AFL as it used to be the VFL. There wasn't much difference between each league either. Gold Coast and GWS have had to start from complete scratch, the majority of the players are under 21, needing a couple of more seasons to actually have an impact in the AFL.
Yeah, because players are obviously going to alive today, from the 1800's... Your point in still invalid. Adelaide was founded in 1990, and won 21 games in their first two seasons. West Coast won 24 in the their first 2. I mean, even Fremantle won 15 games in their first two season, as well! And they were established in 1994. Port Adelaide in their AFL form, was established in 1996. So you can't really use this "they were around for a century" excuse, when other expansion clubs could win games.
they are a young team and like most young teams they have to get used to the AFL and the competition, there bodies will become stronger in a few years time.
callum2112 Says:
16/07/2012 4:18:24 PM
I don't care that they aren't winning games, I don't go for either. I'm just sick and tired of people making up the comparisons between GCS, GWS to Port, Freo etc. Again Port were dominant in the SANFL winning 5 grand finals in 10 years before entering the AFL. So they obviously had the ability to be competitive. Why they weren't tipped to win any games I'm not sure.
ViolentSpring Says:
16/07/2012 4:05:30 PM
Keep making up your excuses. Port were tipped not to win a game in their first year and they ended up winning 10 games.
callum2112 Says:
16/07/2012 4:01:11 PM
But the state leagues aren't anywhere near afl level for GWS and Gold Coast. Back when Adelaide, Freo, West Coast joined to the AFL, the WAFL and the SANFL were almost as strong as the VFL making it so there was less of a step up. If you're talking about AFL they didn't really get that many players, the majority of their teams are young and inexperienced. All in all you can't really compare them as the amount of inexperience is a lot higher in GWS and GCS.
ViolentSpring Says:
16/07/2012 7:41:09 AM
They did the same thing for GWS and Gold Coast -_-
callum2112 Says:
16/07/2012 1:11:07 AM
SANFL** sorry. I was talking about West Coast and Adelaide... They took players from there respective state leagues sure they weren't as a team as I said originally but they were 'AFL ready' with experience playing at a simular level. Where these 'kids' playing for GCS, GWS don't have that experience yet, hence having to give them a few more years before you can expect them to do well. Well Well Freo have always been shit..., but jokes aside I thought east and south freo were in the WAFL?
ViolentSpring Says:
14/07/2012 5:34:16 PM
Fremantle did not have a WAFL team, and I don't know what "SAFL" is. You replied to the comment where I was talking about West Coast and Adelaide, so you're just completely ignoring that, and coming out with bullshit. Seriously, why are you ignoring my comment that you replied to? You can't handle one where it completely disregards your comment, so you bring up a comment, which I made ages ago.
callum2112 Says:
12/07/2012 12:44:44 AM
You also can't compare a team that has been established for a couple of years to a team thats been around for decades. Port, Freo etc. would've known how to play as a team as they already had years of experience compared to a team (GCS) that had little to none at all.
callum2112 Says:
12/07/2012 12:41:34 AM
This was because they were already developed in other leagues. Port, Adelaide, Freo and West Coast were all in the SAFL and the WAFL before they joined the AFL as it used to be the VFL. There wasn't much difference between each league either. Gold Coast and GWS have had to start from complete scratch, the majority of the players are under 21, needing a couple of more seasons to actually have an impact in the AFL.
Natcam3 Says:
9/07/2012 7:17:06 PM
Yeah agreed, a lot of this sounds like the kind of stuff an u16/18s coach would say. not like we got any professional insight
ViolentSpring Says:
9/07/2012 6:29:38 PM
Yeah, because players are obviously going to alive today, from the 1800's... Your point in still invalid. Adelaide was founded in 1990, and won 21 games in their first two seasons. West Coast won 24 in the their first 2. I mean, even Fremantle won 15 games in their first two season, as well! And they were established in 1994. Port Adelaide in their AFL form, was established in 1996. So you can't really use this "they were around for a century" excuse, when other expansion clubs could win games.
cannavo69 Says:
9/07/2012 6:15:57 PM
True but Port has been around since the late 1800s so they're structured nicely, but taken a turn since 2007 Gold Coast only founded in 2009
Payka1992 Says:
9/07/2012 4:22:48 PM
I didn't agree with you. Do you have anything to add? Calling my rebut a "bitch fit" doesn't really achieve anything.
CHUNDERTHUNDER99 Says:
9/07/2012 3:49:57 PM
this is a really good insight!
ViolentSpring Says:
9/07/2012 3:48:02 PM
It's funny how you agree with me and then go on a bitch fit to me. "Is it really needed?"
ViolentSpring Says:
9/07/2012 3:15:47 PM
Port Adelaide won 19 games, between their first two years...
PalaDrocks Says:
9/07/2012 3:11:51 PM
they are a young team and like most young teams they have to get used to the AFL and the competition, there bodies will become stronger in a few years time.
Payka1992 Says:
9/07/2012 3:11:46 PM
They don't NEED to do anything, and nobody's forcing you to watch it. It has some likes, so obviously people enjoyed it.
Payka1992 Says:
9/07/2012 2:50:58 PM
Your point? If there's two shit teams, then one of them has to win.
ViolentSpring Says:
9/07/2012 2:27:31 PM
Did they really need to do this?