Virtually no rebuild is starting from scratch. Eg Hawks picked up Hodge and Mitchell in 2001. But I wouldn’t say their rebuild started until they actually bit the bullet and accepted it. Which was at the end of 2004.
If we’d traded Merrett and/or Ridley last year, I’d say we were in year 2. But we didn’t. I think this is the first year the club has recognised (maybe) what needs to be done.
Obviously, we’re starting with some good picks from the last three years.
If recently drafted players succumb to the anti development Essendon program, we could see Essendon contend for the wooden spoon every year for the next decade.
Wouldn’t surprise me.
All we are saying is Give Spike a chance…
Surely you have to look at the age profile of a list as an indicator of a rebuild.
Stop promising us a good time.
Yes and no, we’ve done it with no planning or proper “investment” for so long, we’ve got piles of late picks who aren’t really coming or going.
All fine to chop Guelfi and Tom Edwards etc, but if we’re replacing them with pick 60 and 80, we won’t go very far forward.
Man it annoys me we didn’t take the Zerrett deal last year, absolute hubristic idiocy.
And Ridley.
Yes. I agree.
I’m not arguing whether the rebuild will be effective or not, just that an age profile is an indicator that it’s occurring.
I guess my point is yes, but you also need to look at both parts.
Every year more or less we’ve changed 8-10 players, and our list profile has been towards the bottom of the league.
Shuffling out one D grade kid for another doesn’t really move the needle. Not when (eg) the player actually getting games in the 22 is a 29yo C grader who’s under no pressure.
So that’s a 3rd data point - age profile of the (average) team being put out.
If you’ve got an old 22, but everyone outside the 22 is a kid, but taken late picks… you don’t have a rebuild, you’ve got a precipice. (The one we just went over).
Remember the Baby Bombers ??
I do.
You may also remember the ‘whiz kids from Windy Hill’ ?
The Age profile of the Essendon team being put out in 2026 for your third data point was 24.2 years. Lowest in the AFL. West Coast 24.6 yrs and Richmond 25.1 yrs.
Essendon’s per-match team age ranged from 23.43 to 25.22 during 2026.
One thing this club has lacked is good leaders, not just mature players but actual leaders.
Kindergarten ?
The sad part is that the Essendon side that played in a final under Rutten in 2021 had and avaerage age of 24 and that there were games this year where we had a more experienced lineup than what we had in that final.
Incorrect - Essendon’s fielded side for their 2021 Elimination Final against the Western Bulldogs had an average age of 24.79 years. Well above the average of 24 that you claim. Nothing to be sad about, really.
It was just a pure guess for starters as I didn’t crunch the numbers but it’s still a lower average age than some games we played this year.
The sad part of it was that we had a young side back then that played finals and we’ve gone backwards since. You would hope that some of those kids back then would go on with it but most didn’t.
You can thank Claude Ai for crunching the numbers and keeping you honest 
Ben Rutten was a good coach - he just didn’t have the support at the top of the Club to put the boot into the recalcitrant senior players, as he needed to do. We treated him badly.
What will the club offer for Arthur Jones?