One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on December 14, 2013, 03:17:36 AM
-
Richmond's change of recruiting philosophy drives change of fortunes at Punt Rd
Jay Clark
From: Herald Sun
December 14, 2013
WHEN Richmond took a punt on a player it had never seen compete live in 2005, the decade of draft disasters was complete.
It seems almost inconceivable now, but the Tigers were going solely off the tape when they selected Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls (13 AFL games), with pick No.8.
Until that point, Richmond was the bunny of the AFL draft. A club flying blind with a horribly under-resourced recruiting department.
But when Richmond made Brighton Grammar school teacher Francis Jackson full-time recruiting manager in 2006, and appointed Blair Hartley, from Port Adelaide, as list analyst in 2010, it laid the pillars to a spectacular turnaround.
According to Champion Data's 2014 AFL Prospectus, the Tigers deserve big ticks for eight of their last nine top-20 selections. Ben Griffiths, a developing tall taken with pick No. 19, carries the only question mark.
Along with Hartley's free agency genius, the string of early draft hits - based on a revamped theory of taking players with quality characters and decent foot skills - has rebuilt a basket case into a top-four contender.
Former president Gary March knew the transition period - which left the club wallowing in 2009-10 - would be painful. But he said a change in the club's draft philosophy was critical for setting up sustained success.
"We didn't have to pick superstars," March said.
"We just wanted to get players who we knew would be A-Grade.
"Guys who you knew would play 200 games."
In a nutshell, the Tigers stopped gambling on players' upside and put greater emphasis on consistency of performance.
While Trent Cotchin and Dustin Martin were obvious midfield jewels, Reece Conca, Nick Vlastuin, and Brandon Ellis were less flashy foot soldiers. But the club backed them in. The last three played at least 17 games in each of their first seasons.
Instead of failing to watch players, Jackson knew them all back to front, watching Vlastuin in the flesh no less than 40 times before calling his name out.
March said Hartley's licence to fill needs using free agency and state league pick-ups at the back end of the draft - delivering them Steve Morris, Shaun Grigg, Ivan Maric, Troy Chaplin and most recently Shaun Hampson among others - helped balance a list profile that was awfully out of whack.
"We knew we had to do a complete rebuild given our age profile was all askew," he said.
Hartley's mature-age pick-ups also allowed Jackson to focus squarely on a simple principle with their early picks.
"It meant we could go and just pick the best young player available, rather than fit for needs purpose," he said.
"But we had to create an environment where the Ivan Maric's and Troy Chaplin's wanted to come.
"A lot of work and resources went in to the coaching and development side of things.
"With our development structure pre-2006, it was difficult for those kids who did come in."
After breaking their finals drought last season, Champion Data predicts the Tigers will stay in the eight.
"There aren't too many pieces left in the Richmond jigsaw puzzle. Seven years of very solid recruiting should see sustained success at Punt Rd," The Prospectus says.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/richmonds-change-of-recruiting-philosophy-drives-change-of-fortunes-at-punt-rd/story-fndv8t7m-1226782710641?from=trendinglinks
-
#standbygriff
-
The secrets out :shh
-
Agree with the last sentence and the most important word "sustainability", sustainability is crucial for our success over the next 10 years and further. We must continue to recruit smart including using the trade and FA period to our benefit.
I still think Griff will come on, finding his best position on the field must be dealt with now, he must be given the time in one position to show if he has it. I would prefer him forward but if that doesn't work, then back might be the last option. Either way Griff has to do something next year.
-
Clearly the Hun hasn't been reading Claws position on List Management :banghead
Maybe this dude is another Tiger blogging sycophant?
:banghead
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
-
KB was on the right track all those years ago when he was coaching, the only difference is that we have money to recruit experienced players to help the kids coming through. KB from memory had to bring back Cloke to give the side experience AND of course the facilities are different but KB was on the right track and sacking him was wrong.
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
he doesn't generally deal well with facts, seriously FJ's got a better record of picking winners than Venezuela does Miss universe contestants, :shh
-
:lol :lol :lol..Bo your grasp of the world stage is mind blowing
-
The pont I like from this article is that we are not gambling any longer and if that means not going for a high risk (flop)/high reward(star) player over a consistent quality A Grader then we'll take that option every time. We've really gone with the strategy of developing a quality team over finding a collection of superstars.
Huge change from the past
-
McIntosh Grimes. Chaplin.
Deledio. ARance. Morris.
Ellis. Vlastuin. Arnot.
Lennon. Vickery. Mcbean.
Cotchin. Riewoldt. Mcdonuts.
Maric. Martin. Conca.
Helbig. Ohanlon.
Foley. mDea.
... :shh
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
he doesn't generally deal well with facts, seriously FJ's got a better record of picking winners than Venezuela does Miss universe contestants, :shh
If it were any more locked and loaded it'd be a Chinese battleship
(http://images.indiatvnews.com/maininternational/New-missile-fri15323.jpg)
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
ive actually praised their first round selctions and i agree we have found at the worst decent players with them in the main.
why not francis jacksons entire record though.
he started with us in 05 yes while he had other commitments he was still watching kids but could only work with us on a part time basis. greg miller was part time as well in the role they are both still responsible for the decisions they made.
he was very much responsible for jon and just as responsible as miller for the rest of that draft.
05 - jon 8. big fail and it still remains the most galling pick of them all for me. a blind man could see jons weaknesses if you actually watched him play.
06 - riewoldt 13. well he was easily the best kpf left in the draft. he lasted to us despite us trading out of pick 8. there was a few busts this draft so well done.
07 - rance end of first round pp at 18. hes slowly become servicable thats about as much as im prepared to concede. still has too many flaws for the role we want him to play imo. pass mark.
07 - cotchin 2 its widely conceded by all kruezer and cotchin were easily the best two kids going in that draft. it was a no brainer that a bloke off the street would have taken. pass.
08 - vickery 8. imo this pick by no means can be claimed as a pass mark yet. it could still go either way. we drafted him as a ruckman so that part is a fail.
09 = martin 3. another no brainer. there was just 4 in contentention and we had to make a decision on just 2 imo. trengove,scully was going to melbourne we all knew it.it was martin or morabito. so its a pass hardly tough decisions to make.. i still think if injury had not hit so hard morabito would have been the pick of the lot. now he may be a total bust but no one can plan for injurys like hes had.
09 - griffiths 19. was always a risk this pick kills me. i argued strongly for lots of talls but had bastinac pencilled in here. i argued if we go tall it had to be carlisle or black and boy did i cop poo over it. fail.
10 - conca 6. a solid pick up but im in the camp of we probably could have done better. based on performance i thought him a reach i still do. but hes performed servicably to date and under difficult circumstances. so pass. just for the record my choice here was elliot kavanagh. so im behind the 8 ball.
11 - ellis. 15. a good pick up should be at least a good consistent player for us. pass
12 - vlastuin im going to give em credit here imo he was a top 5 pick and a very safe bet. thing is there was a fair few very good choices here and it would have been damn hard to stuff up. if grundy was not there he would have been my choice and he was certainly my choice of the mids that were left to us. i still think stringer will become something out the ordinary but he was gone.
13 - lennon 12. not my choice here and i have reservations about what he will offer thru the midfield. but saying that hes a highly thought of kid by a lot and a worthy pick here i think. pass. if chasing a mid acres dunstan or jones were available. shame sharenburg did not get to us or dom sheed. acres was my choice here of those that were left.
yes our top 20 picks have been decent but you should not be getting too many of these picks wrong ever.
the real complaints over jackson and our recruiting have come after the first rnd or top 20 as the article puts it.
the only player taken in these rounds 2nd 3rd that has remotely come close to making a decent contribution is shane edwards and boy he has his knockers and rightly so.
the entire list of 2nd and 3rd rounders under jackson.
gordon, mcintosh, mcbean, mcdonough, elton, arnot, batchelor, helbig, macdonald, astbury, dea, taylor 51 4th. post putt, edwards, connors 51/4th, hughes, casserley.
no wonder we are so keen to trade out of these picks. thats our lot after 9 yrs of francis jackson 2nd and 3rd round picks bloody hell thank god we have found some decent players in the first round eh.
one point id make is how do you define an a grader the top mark we can give a player.
finding good consistent players doesnt make em a graders. with such early picks you really should find your fair share though. thing is how man have proven themselves to be A graders.
i query the decent footskills comment as well. thats patently wrong.
i also ask why only mention the success stories for hartley and jackson that makes it nothing but a feel good story and totally unbalanced.
i have a question. how many state league and players from other clubs has blair hartley taken in his short time at the club???. that is if hes responsible for taking these types.
by my count there are 22 mature players who fall under hartleys umbrella. yet we only hear about the 4 or 5 to date that have made a decent contribution.
yet when someone questions just how effective hes really been or if we ask could we be doing better that person cops abuse.
i dont think anyone on here in the last 3 or so yrs has argued we have improved in most areas. ffs we could not have been worse. the argument remains should we be doing better.have we done as well as we could should we be further along than we are. dont just look at recent yrs when answering this look at the entire history under jackson and hartley.
just for the record correct me if i have any wrong but the mature players we bought into the club under hartley.
farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller, jakobi, a maric, lonergan, petterd, stephenson, this list is made up of poor choices .
thomas, banfiels, miles gordon, lloyd this list is wait and see.
i maric, morris, chaplain, houli, grigg, knights, a edwards. all have added in varying degrees. all bar ivan have knocks on their game.
anyway as usual im just trying to balance out the argument and get people to look past the feel good spin that that article is.
-
tldr
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
ive actually praised their first round selctions and i agree we have found at the worst decent players with them in the main.
why not francis jacksons entire record though.
he started with us in 05 yes while he had other commitments he was still watching kids but could only work with us on a part time basis. greg miller was part time as well in the role they are both still responsible for the decisions they made.
he was very much responsible for jon and just as responsible as miller for the rest of that draft.
05 - jon 8. big fail and it still remains the most galling pick of them all for me. a blind man could see jons weaknesses if you actually watched him play.
06 - riewoldt 13. well he was easily the best kpf left in the draft. he lasted to us despite us trading out of pick 8. there was a few busts this draft so well done.
07 - rance end of first round pp at 18. hes slowly become servicable thats about as much as im prepared to concede. still has too many flaws for the role we want him to play imo. pass mark.
07 - cotchin 2 its widely conceded by all kruezer and cotchin were easily the best two kids going in that draft. it was a no brainer that a bloke off the street would have taken. pass.
08 - vickery 8. imo this pick by no means can be claimed as a pass mark yet. it could still go either way. we drafted him as a ruckman so that part is a fail.
09 = martin 3. another no brainer. there was just 4 in contentention and we had to make a decision on just 2 imo. trengove,scully was going to melbourne we all knew it.it was martin or morabito. so its a pass hardly tough decisions to make.. i still think if injury had not hit so hard morabito would have been the pick of the lot. now he may be a total bust but no one can plan for injurys like hes had. hi
09 - griffiths 19. was always a risk this pick kills me. i argued strongly for lots of talls but had bastinac pencilled in here. i argued if we go tall it had to be carlisle or black and boy did i cop poo over it. fail.
10 - conca 6. a solid pick up but im in the camp of we probably could have done better. based on performance i thought him a reach i still do. but hes performed servicably to date and under difficult circumstances. so pass. just for the record my choice here was elliot kavanagh. so im behind the 8 ball.
11 - ellis. 15. a good pick up should be at least a good consistent player for us. pass
12 - vlastuin im going to give em credit here imo he was a top 5 pick and a very safe bet. thing is there was a fair few very good choices here and it would have been damn hard to stuff up. if grundy was not there he would have been my choice and he was certainly my choice of the mids that were left to us. i still think stringer will become something out the ordinary but he was gone.
13 - lennon 12. not my choice here and i have reservations about what he will offer thru the midfield. but saying that hes a highly thought of kid by a lot and a worthy pick here i think. pass. if chasing a mid acres dunstan or jones were available. shame sharenburg did not get to us or dom sheed. acres was my choice here of those that were left.
yes our top 20 picks have been decent but you should not be getting too many of these picks wrong ever.
the real complaints over jackson and our recruiting have come after the first rnd or top 20 as the article puts it.
the only player taken in these rounds 2nd 3rd that has remotely come close to making a decent contribution is shane edwards and boy he has his knockers and rightly so.
the entire list of 2nd and 3rd rounders under jackson.
gordon, mcintosh, mcbean, mcdonough, elton, arnot, batchelor, helbig, macdonald, astbury, dea, taylor 51 4th. post putt, edwards, connors 51/4th, hughes, casserley.
no wonder we are so keen to trade out of these picks. thats our lot after 9 yrs of francis jackson 2nd and 3rd round picks bloody hell thank god we have found some decent players in the first round eh.
one point id make is how do you define an a grader the top mark we can give a player.
finding good consistent players doesnt make em a graders. with such early picks you really should find your fair share though. thing is how man have proven themselves to be A graders.
i query the decent footskills comment as well. thats patently wrong.
i also ask why only mention the success stories for hartley and jackson that makes it nothing but a feel good story and totally unbalanced.
i have a question. how many state league and players from other clubs has blair hartley taken in his short time at the club???. that is if hes responsible for taking these types.
by my count there are 22 mature players who fall under hartleys umbrella. yet we only hear about the 4 or 5 to date that have made a decent contribution.
yet when someone questions just how effective hes really been or if we ask could we be doing better that person cops abuse.
i dont think anyone on here in the last 3 or so yrs has argued we have improved in most areas. ffs we could not have been worse. the argument remains should we be doing better.have we done as well as we could should we be further along than we are. dont just look at recent yrs when answering this look at the entire history under jackson and hartley.
just for the record correct me if i have any wrong but the mature players we bought into the club under hartley.
farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller, jakobi, a maric, lonergan, petterd, stephenson, this list is made up of poor choices .
thomas, banfiels, miles gordon, lloyd this list is wait and see.
i maric, morris, chaplain, houli, grigg, knights, a edwards. all have added in varying degrees. all bar ivan have knocks on their game.
anyway as usual im just trying to balance out the argument and get people to look past the feel good spin that that article is.
Is that all you have to say claw?
You must me one of those glass one thousandth empty sort of guys....
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
ive actually praised their first round selctions and i agree we have found at the worst decent players with them in the main.
why not francis jacksons entire record though.
he started with us in 05 yes is.
he started in a full time capacoty in 2005 and he is on record that the first pick he made in an afl draft was jack riewoldt in 2006
Claw you dont have the emotional maturity to be a richmond supporter when the tigers are winning, don't stress, I get that, 30 years of the crap being served up to us has clearly taken its toll.
The fact is, you and some others , ramps for example, are the types that if we do win the premiership, call for everyones head if we don't go back to back.
Its ridiculous
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
he doesn't generally deal well with facts, seriously FJ's got a better record of picking winners than Venezuela does Miss universe contestants, :shh
:lol :lol :lol..Bo your grasp of the world stage is mind blowing
:lol :lol :lol
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
the new kinnear beatson :clapping
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
yep good correction. Claw in his efforts to "enlighten" the rest of us has mashed his facts. Love how now every single mature pickup is hartleys decision now. :)
-
actually hartley was working for port and screwed us ( richmond ) for Shultz and offloaded both Thomson for a second round pick and farmer for Shultz
-
I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
ive actually praised their first round selctions and i agree we have found at the worst decent players with them in the main.
why not francis jacksons entire record though.
he started with us in 05 yes is.
he started in a full time capacoty in 2005 and he is on record that the first pick he made in an afl draft was jack riewoldt in 2006
Claw you dont have the emotional maturity to be a richmond supporter when the tigers are winning, don't stress, I get that, 30 years of the crap being served up to us has clearly taken its toll.
The fact is, you and some others , ramps for example, are the types that if we do win the premiership, call for everyones head if we don't go back to back.
Its ridiculous
Yep thats correct you gotta make hay whilst the sun shines. Winning is everything and if we dont go back to back after winning the 11th tin mug I will consider it a failure. You can support everything the club does if you like but Claw and people like him just call it how they see it. :cheers
-
Just because people call it as they see it doesn't mean what they are saying is correct.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/columnists/2010/9/28/1285673864580/Monty-Python-006.jpg)
-
Just because people call it as they see it doesn't mean what they are saying is correct.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/columnists/2010/9/28/1285673864580/Monty-Python-006.jpg)
Are yoouuu the braaaiinnn specialist?!
-
We added to that recruiting recently
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-12-16/tiger-talent-scout-coup
-
Just because people call it as they see it doesn't mean what they are saying is correct.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/columnists/2010/9/28/1285673864580/Monty-Python-006.jpg)
That must have been Richmonds recruiting team prior to Damien Hardwicks arrival as coach ;D
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
yep good correction. Claw in his efforts to "enlighten" the rest of us has mashed his facts. Love how now every single mature pickup is hartleys decision now. :)
Just a pity it's wrong. What a surprise!
Hartley joined Richmond in December 2009, shortly after Hardwick joined, as Opposition List Analyst.
All these attacks on Claw and his opinions and you can't even get right the basic facts like when a guy started working for the club.
Hardly makes your statements worth much.
-
the new kinnear beatson :clapping
Shutup with your Sydney propaganda. GTFO. :banghead
;D
-
So When people defend the club they are 'sheep' and bullies but when people criticise the club they are courageous truth heroes?
'Co-ordinated attack'
:lol
Maybe people who are generally supportive of the club are calling it as they see it too? maybe they tend to defend the club more often than not currently because they see evidence of success in the upward trend in nearly every key indicator on and off the field over the last four years?
I was outwardly critical of the club during the Wallet years. Won't hear me complaining too much at the minute though. This is not due to blind faith. This is because i can 'see' the strides made and have faith in the current administration. My posts will reflect this.
I ain't no sheep.
-
Or maybe those who are generally supportive are you know, supporters :shh I may not agree with everything the club does but I'll support them regardless.
-
claw does support the club, but. :shh
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
yep good correction. Claw in his efforts to "enlighten" the rest of us has mashed his facts. Love how now every single mature pickup is hartleys decision now. :)
Just a pity it's wrong. What a surprise!
Hartley joined Richmond in December 2009, shortly after Hardwick joined, as Opposition List Analyst.
All these attacks on Claw and his opinions and you can't even get right the basic facts like when a guy started working for the club.
Hardly makes your statements worth much.
I know Hartley is opposition analyst - I was taking the pee bc claw heaped every single mature aged player taken in previous drafts at hartleys feet. Identifying and getting players like Maric, Grigg, Houli, Chaplin who were coming out of contract is a different process to drafting the likes of Oren and A.Edwards, Pettard and lonergan.
Lumping all of them together at hartleys feet to try and "keep it real" for us lemmings is distorting the truth a wee bit more than someone missing hartleys start date by a season. But you keep fighting the crusade bc we're all just blindly attacking claw for fun
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
hartley was the national recruiting manager at port in 09 and was replaced by geoff parker that yr. he arrived at richmond the end of the 09 season.. we got him in specifically to target mature types straight off the bat.
so in effect i have not listed every mature recruit from every draft at his feet just the ones that have come to us in his time.
it is so well known that greg miller wanted travis varcoe at 8 in 2008. we took jon on the back of francis jacksons opinion. this comes from a person who was actually on our draft table in 2005.
its also well known miller was so keen on varcoe he went had a long chat to the geelong boys at the end of the draft.
we blame miller for a lot of things but we cant blame him for jon.
its really funny when it comes to jackson and hartley. everyone it seems wants to talk about the successes but no one wants to talk about the many failures.
im just pointing people to their whole records and basically asking is their records as good as most seem to want to paint it.
i could join in with most others and join the back slapping but that would just help paint the unbalanced picture that is being painted.
i will ask again when it comes to jackson in particular
how many 2nd 3rd 4th rounders has he got right how many rookie picks has he found if its possible our rookies have been worse than those nd picks .
really in all honesty what great insight did he need to take cotchin and martin ffs they were picks 2 and 3. just how good has his first rounders be outside of those gimmes.
its just my opinion but still that opinon is we should be doing much better in these areas.
i think recruiting was so poor for so long most are prepared to hang their hat on average recruiting performances i think most are just happy to be getting getting decent players with 1st rounders which even i have said has happened.
i for one was hopeful that full and critical revues were done every 2 or 3 yrs on all positions of the running of the club by totally independent people. especially with recruiting and list management. ive been saying that since 01.
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
hartley was the national recruiting manager at port in 09 and was replaced by geoff parker that yr. he arrived at richmond the end of the 09 season.. we got him in specifically to target mature types straight off the bat.
so in effect i have not listed every mature recruit from every draft at his feet just the ones that have come to us in his time.
it is so well known that greg miller wanted travis varcoe at 8 in 2008. we took jon on the back of francis jacksons opinion. this comes from a person who was actually on our draft table in 2005.
its also well known miller was so keen on varcoe he went had a long chat to the geelong boys at the end of the draft.
we blame miller for a lot of things but we cant blame him for jon.
its really funny when it comes to jackson and hartley. everyone it seems wants to talk about the successes but no one wants to talk about the many failures.
im just pointing people to their whole records and basically asking is their records as good as most seem to want to paint it.
i could join in with most others and join the back slapping but that would just help paint the unbalanced picture that is being painted.
i will ask again when it comes to jackson in particular
how many 2nd 3rd 4th rounders has he got right how many rookie picks has he found if its possible our rookies have been worse than those nd picks .
really in all honesty what great insight did he need to take cotchin and martin ffs they were picks 2 and 3. just how good has his first rounders be outside of those gimmes.
its just my opinion but still that opinon is we should be doing much better in these areas.
i think recruiting was so poor for so long most are prepared to hang their hat on average recruiting performances i think most are just happy to be getting getting decent players with 1st rounders which even i have said has happened.
i for one was hopeful that full and critical revues were done every 2 or 3 yrs on all positions of the running of the club by totally independent people. especially with recruiting and list management. ive been saying that since 01.
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
Claw, it's all well to criticise our club for it's failures. However, you must acknowledge ALL clubs have failures in drafting. Why don't you dissect our arch enemy Carlton and their drafting since 2004 (10 years)? Just as a comparison, why don't you put your investigative skills to some other use?
-
He isn't emotionally involved with Carlton
Our drafting and trading over the last 4 years has been outstanding.
How else could we have gone from 4 wins to 15?
-
Claw - Hartley did not arrive until 2010 so realistically only made his first impact on recruiting in 2011 so none of these players can be included to your list - farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller and jakobi.
He has more than enough runs on the board to make him a trading superstar for mine. :bow Maric, Morris, Chaplin, Grigg, Houli, A.Edwards have all strengthened our side immeasurably. I now have faith 'his' new batch - Hampson, Gordan, Lloyd and Thomas, will do the same. He has a better track record than almost every other recruiter in his role across the rest of the competition.
hartley was the national recruiting manager at port in 09 and was replaced by geoff parker that yr. he arrived at richmond the end of the 09 season.. we got him in specifically to target mature types straight off the bat.
so in effect i have not listed every mature recruit from every draft at his feet just the ones that have come to us in his time.
it is so well known that greg miller wanted travis varcoe at 8 in 2008. we took jon on the back of francis jacksons opinion. this comes from a person who was actually on our draft table in 2005.
its also well known miller was so keen on varcoe he went had a long chat to the geelong boys at the end of the draft.
we blame miller for a lot of things but we cant blame him for jon.
its really funny when it comes to jackson and hartley. everyone it seems wants to talk about the successes but no one wants to talk about the many failures.
im just pointing people to their whole records and basically asking is their records as good as most seem to want to paint it.
i could join in with most others and join the back slapping but that would just help paint the unbalanced picture that is being painted.
i will ask again when it comes to jackson in particular
how many 2nd 3rd 4th rounders has he got right how many rookie picks has he found if its possible our rookies have been worse than those nd picks .
really in all honesty what great insight did he need to take cotchin and martin ffs they were picks 2 and 3. just how good has his first rounders be outside of those gimmes.
its just my opinion but still that opinon is we should be doing much better in these areas.
i think recruiting was so poor for so long most are prepared to hang their hat on average recruiting performances i think most are just happy to be getting getting decent players with 1st rounders which even i have said has happened.
i for one was hopeful that full and critical revues were done every 2 or 3 yrs on all positions of the running of the club by totally independent people. especially with recruiting and list management. ive been saying that since 01.
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
you are wrong about Hartley.There is a difference between targeting opposition players in Maric, Grigg, Houli and Chaplin and redrafting marure types like Orren, Petterd, Lonergan, Morris. Think about the differences in process and you have your answer. Lumping the latter at Hartleys feet for you to show everyone he has had misses is just wrong.
-
i think a comparison to make is our side pre 08 to our side now.. Do that and you have your answer.
He's done well.
-
I cant believe that some are debating whether Blair and Frank have done good jobs, is this a joke?
Do your research s far as what players have actually cost us, and how many games they have played.
Its very easy to throw bombs from the cheap seats
-
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
He's got more right than your esteemed self..
-
I cant believe that some are debating whether Blair and Frank have done good jobs, is this a joke?
Do your research s far as what players have actually cost us, and how many games they have played.
Its very easy to throw bombs from the cheap seats
:clapping
-
I cant believe that some are debating whether Blair and Frank have done good jobs, is this a joke?
Do your research s far as what players have actually cost us, and how many games they have played.
Its very easy to throw bombs from the cheap seats
:clapping
:cheers :clapping :clapping
Agree entirely. Everywhere in the press the Tigers are being lauded for getting most of it right (and no-one is getting it all right). It is now clear to everyone, including some perceptive people on this forum :clapping that we are trying to recruit very good, consistent players who will play 150-200 games and play a role rather than try for superstars. very different perspective. Incidentally Claw, Jackson had little say in selecting JON. I attended the draft soiree that year and it was all Miller's push. I recall Jackson saying that we just didn't have enough resources at that time either.
-
:cheers :clapping :clapping
Agree entirely. Everywhere in the press the Tigers are being lauded for getting most of it right (and no-one is getting it all right). It is now clear to everyone, including some perceptive people on this forum :clapping that we are trying to recruit very good, consistent players who will play 150-200 games and play a role rather than try for superstars. very different perspective. Incidentally Claw, Jackson had little say in selecting JON. I attended the draft soiree that year and it was all Miller's push. I recall Jackson saying that we just didn't have enough resources at that time either.
While I accept that Richmond's recruiting resources were abysmal in the period you're talking about, the fact is that the decision to recruit JON ignored what objective resources pointed to - that Shannon Hurn was a better pick in terms of skill, athletic ability, leadership, commitment and most importantly, exposed form.
As posted previously on this subject
which expert's advice would he have been ignoring?
Shannon Hurn
AIS Academy selectors - 2004 AIS Academy.
Central District coaches - 2004 & 05 Premierships (named in best for '05 GF).
SA U18 Selectors - 2005 SA state rep.
SA Coaches - 2005 SA Captain.
AA Selectors - 2005 AA team.3
Also had a rookie contract with SA to play cricket as a junior in 2004 and passed on another in 2005.
Jarrod Oakley -Nichols
WA Selectors - 2005 State Rep.
"He started the year in the Colts and while he doesn't get a lot of the footy he can be very damaging with 15 possessions across half back-midfield"
East Perth football manager, Jarrod Chipperfield from Inside Football 9/11/05.
-
I think Richard Lounder was a wasted pick
-
Hurn was widely touted as the #1 for a while
when he was still there @ 8, it was bizarre to over look him
-
We shouldn't underestimate the influence Wallet had on our recruiting. I recall reading an article where wallet hoped we would draft him after seeing him play.
-
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
He's got more right than your esteemed self..
has he???. has he really. 2005 to 2013 one finals appearance says a lot. thats one yr shy of two five yr plans.. in 9 yrs how many draft picks are actual success stories. we are filling the failed yrs up with mature players now to compensate.
look all im saying is yes hes an improvement on what we had and we have improved. lets face it we could not have ever been worse.
but imo we should be doing much better than what we are when it comes to the nd overall.
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
so francis failed abysmally in his first 5 yrs and in his next 4 yrs we managed to make finals once. even in his last 4 yrs we have won just 39 of 88 games. no emotion just facts.
my point is we would not have had to cut most of the list from 2009 if francis had an inkling in 05 06 07 08 09. hence the real need to judge people, the players and the club on the whole of their time not just one yr windows or selective 4 yr periods. imo we should have at the least been playing finals 5 yrs ago if the recruiters had done their job.
finally i would argue strongly that the players who have driven the 15 wins this yr are the very few we took prior to 2010. and the experienced mature recruits like chaplin and maric.
cotchin deledio even jackson this yr martin newman rance and riewoldt thats 7 and 4 of em are jacksons. thats just 4 good footballers from the nd in a 5 yr period. we want to hope the next 5 yr period doesnt pan out the same way.
nope id argue to the cows come home, that we can and should be doing better in the nd.
what i dont get is why so many are averse to aiming for beytter and we do need to be better and continually improve if we wish to properly compete in this comp.
-
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
He's got more right than your esteemed self..
has he???. has he really. 2005 to 2013 one finals appearance says a lot. thats one yr shy of two five yr plans.. in 9 yrs how many draft picks are actual success stories. we are filling the failed yrs up with mature players now to compensate.
look all im saying is yes hes an improvement on what we had and we have improved. lets face it we could not have ever been worse.
but imo we should be doing much better than what we are when it comes to the nd overall.
yep and thats around how long it took Hawthorn and Geelong to turn over their list and rise to the level they're at.
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
so francis failed abysmally in his first 5 yrs and in his next 4 yrs we managed to make finals once. even in his last 4 yrs we have won just 39 of 88 games. no emotion just facts.
my point is we would not have had to cut most of the list from 2009 if francis had an inkling in 05 06 07 08 09. hence the real need to judge people, the players and the club on the whole of their time not just one yr windows or selective 4 yr periods. imo we should have at the least been playing finals 5 yrs ago if the recruiters had done their job.
finally i would argue strongly that the players who have driven the 15 wins this yr are the very few we took prior to 2010. and the experienced mature recruits like chaplin and maric.
cotchin deledio even jackson this yr martin newman rance and riewoldt thats 7 and 4 of em are jacksons. thats just 4 good footballers from the nd in a 5 yr period. we want to hope the next 5 yr period doesnt pan out the same way.
nope id argue to the cows come home, that we can and should be doing better in the nd.
what i dont get is why so many are averse to aiming for beytter and we do need to be better and continually improve if we wish to properly compete in this comp.
i supppose at the end of the day we accept the diffculties and hit/miss that is THE DRAFT. yes, we all would like every pick to work out and for them to play 200 games and finals every year.. unfortunately thats not reality and its not what sport is about. If the same team was on top for 20 years it would be boring (and they would try to charge us to watch training). If we didnt have the successes and failures, it would be boring.. FACT.
Claw you say you try to bring balance to the arguments.. What you do is bring the same argument everytime you post.. list management/drafting!!
sit back and enjoy the ride once in a while, enjoy the succes or failure and always, yes always, remember.. its only a game. (that generates millions of dollars and overpays people that are merely entertainers and contribute nothing really to the fabric of what is a disfunctional society)
-
I'm with claw on this...
You can't dismiss anyone's support. Our love for the club is such that we just turn up even though it's been totally hopeless.
But until we start consistantly beating the sides that have made us look stupid over the last 10-20-30 years I will never be satisfied.
Its payback time for the Scum....what happened last September was the blackest day in football, no doubt about it. I still wake up in cold sweats & night terrors.
The filth have had our measure too, memories of the Jack Dyer tribute game is still well and truly etched in my mind.
The drug cheats have been laughing at us for too many years now its time to give them some well deserved payback.
The cats have been treating us like fools for ages and who can blame them?
Its time to square the ledger and start to inflict some pain into the hearts and minds of opposition supporters across the country. No more shall they smile or chuckle when I tell them I support the tigers.
I'm sick of the laughter and until we are envied, respected and feared then I might be less critical of the club too. FFS its stuffing embarrassing that the ninth place team beat us in a final!
I'm sick of being everyone's second favorite team too. When the stuff did this happen?
Criticism is a healthy part of life. Do we want to be like those blind faith bombers supporters that still don't see the wrong and damage that Hird has inflicted on their club?
Did you see the fellow at the bombers AGM criticize his club for paying Hird whilst he's suspended? He got booted off the stage!
Less face facts here... We've all been through the numerous rebuilds. We've had a taste of success to be let down again. The club doesn't deserve blind faith anymore. They must earn our respect just as much as they must earn the respect of all our enemies.
We should NEVER be satisfied with second best or gradual improvement, no one at the club should be satisfied until they've achieved the premiership and we're the biggest, most feared club in the land just like it used to be.
...I DEMAND SATISFACTION!
-
Mr Tigra that post gives me goose bumps. a passionate post from the heart. I hope that we all experience the payback this year . Go Tiges!!!!!!!
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
so francis failed abysmally in his first 5 yrs and in his next 4 yrs we managed to make finals once. even in his last 4 yrs we have won just 39 of 88 games. no emotion just facts.
my point is we would not have had to cut most of the list from 2009 if francis had an inkling in 05 06 07 08 09. hence the real need to judge people, the players and the club on the whole of their time not just one yr windows or selective 4 yr periods. imo we should have at the least been playing finals 5 yrs ago if the recruiters had done their job.
finally i would argue strongly that the players who have driven the 15 wins this yr are the very few we took prior to 2010. and the experienced mature recruits like chaplin and maric.
cotchin deledio even jackson this yr martin newman rance and riewoldt thats 7 and 4 of em are jacksons. thats just 4 good footballers from the nd in a 5 yr period. we want to hope the next 5 yr period doesnt pan out the same way.
nope id argue to the cows come home, that we can and should be doing better in the nd.
what i dont get is why so many are averse to aiming for beytter and we do need to be better and continually improve if we wish to properly compete in this comp.
Lol, Fj s goes back 9 years hey, heck why not blame him for our failed premiership defense in '44 :lol...this argument needs to be hardened up with some facts, cock and bull simply won't wash :shh
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
so francis failed abysmally in his first 5 yrs and in his next 4 yrs we managed to make finals once. even in his last 4 yrs we have won just 39 of 88 games. no emotion just facts.
my point is we would not have had to cut most of the list from 2009 if francis had an inkling in 05 06 07 08 09. hence the real need to judge people, the players and the club on the whole of their time not just one yr windows or selective 4 yr periods. imo we should have at the least been playing finals 5 yrs ago if the recruiters had done their job.
finally i would argue strongly that the players who have driven the 15 wins this yr are the very few we took prior to 2010. and the experienced mature recruits like chaplin and maric.
cotchin deledio even jackson this yr martin newman rance and riewoldt thats 7 and 4 of em are jacksons. thats just 4 good footballers from the nd in a 5 yr period. we want to hope the next 5 yr period doesnt pan out the same way.
nope id argue to the cows come home, that we can and should be doing better in the nd.
what i dont get is why so many are averse to aiming for beytter and we do need to be better and continually improve if we wish to properly compete in this comp.
I'd respond by saying that if you look at the club 5 years on from Wallace we are just better. Better p&l, better list, better player development and better on field results.
Noone would be adverse to the principle of continuous improvement but the issue with your posting is that it is to fixated on the destination without acknowledging the departure point. I wonder what you were posting in 2010? Did it factor in the clubs ability to invest in recruiting resources or development coaches or even training facilities?
The impact of those improvements will take time and we will continue to benefit as a club and a team by having the proper support for our recruiters to make better decisions.
Finally, analysis is only truly useful in context of how it serves the bigger picture.
Sometimes I wonder if in being caught up in the detail, you struggle to see the forest for the trees.
-
Good post Hard Roar
-
Amazing - can anyone explain why other clubs are picking up our delisted and fringe players.
Actions speak louder than words!!!
-
Amazing - can anyone explain why other clubs are picking up our delisted and fringe players.
Actions speak louder than words!!!
:clapping
-
bottom line is claw will always think he knows better than the recruiters.
To prove it he will name 5-6 players where the recruiters can only name one, thus having a 6 fold chance of getting it right.
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
so francis failed abysmally in his first 5 yrs and in his next 4 yrs we managed to make finals once. even in his last 4 yrs we have won just 39 of 88 games. no emotion just facts.
my point is we would not have had to cut most of the list from 2009 if francis had an inkling in 05 06 07 08 09. hence the real need to judge people, the players and the club on the whole of their time not just one yr windows or selective 4 yr periods. imo we should have at the least been playing finals 5 yrs ago if the recruiters had done their job.
finally i would argue strongly that the players who have driven the 15 wins this yr are the very few we took prior to 2010. and the experienced mature recruits like chaplin and maric.
cotchin deledio even jackson this yr martin newman rance and riewoldt thats 7 and 4 of em are jacksons. thats just 4 good footballers from the nd in a 5 yr period. we want to hope the next 5 yr period doesnt pan out the same way.
nope id argue to the cows come home, that we can and should be doing better in the nd.
what i dont get is why so many are averse to aiming for beytter and we do need to be better and continually improve if we wish to properly compete in this comp.
I'm with you here Claw. For quite some time I've suspected Jackson of being an average to poor recruiter. I think Hartley is quite good but it is a team effort, or it is these days as we have a recruiting team. I was willing to give Jackson a break for 05 06 as we weren't a full time team of recruiters. Since then it is worrying the number of second rounders who are barely making it. Generally I hope for 2 or more players from each draft, 1st, 2nd rounders and one of the rest. If you can't get that hit rate then after 6 or 7 years you don't have enough of a team and players are getting too old and injured or leaving.
I think the notable weaknesses in ND recruiting has been KPP, jack and Rance being the best two finds, Vickery being acceptable when not injured but not a gun with a pile of possibilities failing, Post, or being marginal Astbury, Griffiths, Moore etc
I thought Batchelor with his strength would come on better and he still may but he seems to be the stereotype of a Jackson second rounder. Thereabouts, maybe , maybe not. I hope he does come on and be the next Chris Johnson or Brad Scott.
What you ideally want its to find a Chapman at pick 35 every year and someone better at pick 8 but that's dreamland. Not even Geelong do that.
-
I think Richard Lounder was a wasted pick
What about Wayne Hernaman?
-
. if we are going to praise jackson for getting nothing but 1st rounders right, ( and i say again most people who follow the kids would get a good percentage of 1st rounders right with all the information that is about today. ) then we really do have the bar set too low.
He's got more right than your esteemed self..
has he???. has he really. 2005 to 2013 one finals appearance says a lot. thats one yr shy of two five yr plans.. in 9 yrs how many draft picks are actual success stories. we are filling the failed yrs up with mature players now to compensate.
look all im saying is yes hes an improvement on what we had and we have improved. lets face it we could not have ever been worse.
but imo we should be doing much better than what we are when it comes to the nd overall.
yep and thats around how long it took Hawthorn and Geelong to turn over their list and rise to the level they're at.
was it revisionism is alive and well. and im accused of not keeping things real, go figure.
-
Most recruiters point to a 5 year time frame to assess success.
Process is one things, the facts are another - the only fact worth looking to is the win/loss column over the last 5 years vs the prior 5 years along with absolute list turn over.
Facts are we've removed almost everyone from the 2009 list and gone from 4 wins to 15.
Facts speak for themselves, emotions do as well they just have a much lower impact on the argument
so francis failed abysmally in his first 5 yrs and in his next 4 yrs we managed to make finals once. even in his last 4 yrs we have won just 39 of 88 games. no emotion just facts.
my point is we would not have had to cut most of the list from 2009 if francis had an inkling in 05 06 07 08 09. hence the real need to judge people, the players and the club on the whole of their time not just one yr windows or selective 4 yr periods. imo we should have at the least been playing finals 5 yrs ago if the recruiters had done their job.
finally i would argue strongly that the players who have driven the 15 wins this yr are the very few we took prior to 2010. and the experienced mature recruits like chaplin and maric.
cotchin deledio even jackson this yr martin newman rance and riewoldt thats 7 and 4 of em are jacksons. thats just 4 good footballers from the nd in a 5 yr period. we want to hope the next 5 yr period doesnt pan out the same way.
nope id argue to the cows come home, that we can and should be doing better in the nd.
what i dont get is why so many are averse to aiming for beytter and we do need to be better and continually improve if we wish to properly compete in this comp.
i supppose at the end of the day we accept the diffculties and hit/miss that is THE DRAFT. yes, we all would like every pick to work out and for them to play 200 games and finals every year.. unfortunately thats not reality and its not what sport is about. If the same team was on top for 20 years it would be boring (and they would try to charge us to watch training). If we didnt have the successes and failures, it would be boring.. FACT.
Claw you say you try to bring balance to the arguments.. What you do is bring the same argument everytime you post.. list management/drafting!!
sit back and enjoy the ride once in a while, enjoy the succes or failure and always, yes always, remember.. its only a game. (that generates millions of dollars and overpays people that are merely entertainers and contribute nothing really to the fabric of what is a disfunctional society)
i thinbk the first thing that should be made clear here is the fact noone is expecting every pick to be a winner. all we ask for is a reasonable percentage.
i keep on saying it most average punters who follow the kids would get most first rounders right today. it should be expected today that we will get our first rounders right.
but what about all of our other nd picks? oh i know when talking the draft lets just ignore them.
you want to know why i mainly focus on recruiting and list managment. its not hard to see. get these two things right and you will have onfield success no matter what else happens.
let me put it this way. if we had a bloke come to our club as the new head of recruitment and we were near the bottom of the ladder how long would be a reasonable time frame to recruit and build the list enough to make finals. 3 yrs 4 yrs 5 yrs. well francis has had 9. and half way thru his tenure we had to cut the players he drafted in the first half of his reign and start from scratch.
but hey according to most on the back of an iffy finals apperance hes been great freakin great. wake up to yourselves.
we can and must go for the best person in this area. francis jackson is a long way off what we want going by nopthing but his record. its like comparing vickery to cox we settle for the barely up to it type and hang on for grim death rather than aiming for better.
-
Claw, surely you can see that he had virtually no recruiting resource for those first few years and no list management strategy either?
-
Amazing - can anyone explain why other clubs are picking up our delisted and fringe players.
Actions speak louder than words!!!
so how many are there and how well have they done.
jon - went to wce as a rookie and failed there as well.
white - has just gone to port after we rightly refused to give him more money and a longer contract.
graham - went to adelaide has he played a game has he even been retained,
morton - went to sydney and was very lucky to play in a premiership. how long did he last up there.
nahas - has been picked up by north i feel sorry for em, but rejoice in their stupidity.
schulz - we traded to port and he is the only real loss we have had. yet we got rid of him at the very start of hardwicks reign.
the only others i can think of are raines polo patterson mcguane and tambling all players taken by us before jackson came and proof that we only let go mainly putrid players in the main both before and after jackson.
just 6 players i can think of taken in jacksons 9 yr time at our club has ended up on another clubs list.
yep other clubs are falling over themselves to get francis jacksons rejects sheesh. and such high quality rejects at that ::)
-
Amazing - can anyone explain why other clubs are picking up our delisted and fringe players.
Actions speak louder than words!!!
so how many are there and how well have they done.
jon - went to wce as a rookie and failed there as well.
white - has just gone to port after we rightly refused to give him more money and a longer contract.
graham - went to adelaide has he played a game has he even been retained,
morton - went to sydney and was very lucky to play in a premiership. how long did he last up there.
nahas - has been picked up by north i feel sorry for em, but rejoice in their stupidity.
schulz - we traded to port and he is the only real loss we have had. yet we got rid of him at the very start of hardwicks reign.
the only others i can think of are raines polo patterson mcguane and tambling all players taken by us before jackson came and proof that we only let go mainly putrid players in the main both before and after jackson.
just 6 players i can think of taken in jacksons 9 yr time at our club has ended up on another clubs list.
yep other clubs are falling over themselves to get francis jacksons rejects sheesh. and such high quality rejects at that ::)
have to admit Claw has a pretty strong case here
-
bottom line is claw will always think he knows better than the recruiters.
To prove it he will name 5-6 players where the recruiters can only name one, thus having a 6 fold chance of getting it right.
you still got ya knickers in a twist because old clawsy refused to go on your silly thread. in fact i didnt see too many participate in that little bit of stupidity.
maybe most thought just like me that they had made it patently clear who they wanted and where without going on a thread where the bloke who started it didnt have the balls to put one name up.
-
The fact though, despite their records after being picked up, other clubs are keen to grab our 2013 discards. Almost every player that moved from our list this year was snatched up by other clubs including even Derickx :o This would certainly indicate to me that other clubs see value in these players to either add to their depth (or as potential backup ups if everything goes to the poo if you prefer) or believe they can mold them into role players.
Players such as White will become a role player much the same way he was evolving into one at the Tigers. Out of all the players that exited this year I am most disappointed at losing White because he gave us a great deal of run off the HF line and was a wonderful sub at the least.
McGuane is the other that could come back to haunt us as he really does have potential as a third forward. He is strong, leads well and can smash a pack. He will never be a superstar but he is, once again, a handy depth player who can step straight in if injuries hit and can assist young forwards learning their craft in the seconds.
Nahas is another player who could be damaging in a less defensive side and if space is created for him. I think he is a good out for us but again he could be good depth as a rookie for North with their style of game and with so few elusive/fast players on their list.
I think you are missing the point Camboon is making here - the simple fact that other clubs are taking them should be seen as a positive to our list development and the strength of the squad our coaches and recruiters have put together. How they turn out elsewhere is not here or there really.
-
now lets get back to the debate without all the hisrtionics from the drama queens.
lets say we grade all of the clubs choices since jackson has been there. lets place em all into 3 basic categories.
1/ failures. speaks for itself
2/ passes speaks for itself
3/ 50/50 development players youngsters etc. players yet to establish themselves.
including the 05 draft to today. a time where francis jackson if not in charge of recruiting has played a significant role in recruiting every yr.
in this time we have utilised all up 91 nd picks, rookie picks, psd picks, trades and recently free agency picks. all up 91 choices from 05 to today. that is if ive counted correctly. forgive me if ive missed the odd one.
being generous and passing players i would normally fail i have by my judgement and remember it is just my opinion.
51 failures. that is 51 players you can categorically say have failed. this is not hard to do.in fact its staggering at how poor so many have been.
20 passes. that is players who have proved themselves over a decent period of time and managed to play good consistent footy. as i said ive included some who dont fit the bill to save arguments.
20 what i call 50/50 players. which includes all of this yrs recruits and 99% of all kids taken going back to 2009 - 2010. again ive been generous here some im reasonably sure wont make it but will give them more time.
this is my take on our recruiting trading record from 05 to now. little wonder i dont rate what jackson has done.
how any one who actually does this exercise for themselves can argue we should not be doing better is beyond belief.
for those who insist we only judge jackson on recent yrs do it for yourselves from 09 to now. there will be a disproportinate number who fall into the 50/50 category.
to be fair to all parties all trade/draft yrs need time to prove or disprove themselves.
for me 09 to now
all up 55 picks in the nd, rookie draft, psd draft, trades and free agency if ive counted right.
24 failures.
11 passes.
20 50/50
-
now lets get back to the debate without all the hisrtionics from the drama queens.
lets say we grade all of the clubs choices since jackson has been there. lets place em all into 3 basic categories.
1/ failures. speaks for itself
2/ passes speaks for itself
3/ 50/50 development players youngsters etc. players yet to establish themselves.
including the 05 draft to today. a time where francis jackson if not in charge of recruiting has played a significant role in recruiting every yr.
in this time we have utilised all up 91 nd picks, rookie picks, psd picks, trades and recently free agency picks. all up 91 choices from 05 to today. that is if ive counted correctly. forgive me if ive missed the odd one.
being generous and passing players i would normally fail i have by my judgement and remember it is just my opinion.
51 failures. that is 51 players you can categorically say have failed. this is not hard to do.in fact its staggering at how poor so many have been.
20 passes. that is players who have proved themselves over a decent period of time and managed to play good consistent footy. as i said ive included some who dont fit the bill to save arguments.
20 what i call 50/50 players. which includes all of this yrs recruits and 99% of all kids taken going back to 2009 - 2010. again ive been generous here some im reasonably sure wont make it but will give them more time.
this is my take on our recruiting trading record from 05 to now. little wonder i dont rate what jackson has done.
how any one who actually does this exercise for themselves can argue we should not be doing better is beyond belief.
for those who insist we only judge jackson on recent yrs do it for yourselves from 09 to now. there will be a disproportinate number who fall into the 50/50 category.
to be fair to all parties all trade/draft yrs need time to prove or disprove themselves.
for me 09 to now
all up 55 picks in the nd, rookie draft, psd draft, trades and free agency if ive counted right.
24 failures.
11 passes.
20 50/50
I'm with you on this Claw, I don't rate FJ at all. Never have. If you take out our first pick in those years (which has been mostly top 10 picks and some very early top 10 picks, which almost anyone with half a brain could get right, even with a months notice before the draft just watching Youtube, listening to other recruiters and the draft combine you would be able to pick a good kid 9 out of ten times)
And then more recently take out the FA/trades (Grigg, Houli, Chaplin, Maric) which I would give Hartly more credit for, then those numbers you came up with look a lot worse.
FJ drafting outside of the first round has been a disgrace to put it nicely!
Just my opinion of course.
-
Claw your list is very compelling but how's about comparing FJ to another recruiter from another club who has a similar tenure.
-
the club itself has for many years bemoaned the lack of funds it needed to put into recruiting and development,maybe the fault is there rather than poor individuals who were /are around and had to cope with what was a skeleton crew.
Recently that has changed,and we are starting to see the results now
-
Claw your list is very compelling but how's about comparing FJ to another recruiter from another club who has a similar tenure.
Or breaking it down into 2 or 3 year clusters so we can gauge a trend of improvement? In addition to this why not add Blair Hartleys recruitment on mature aged rookies and then we could really assess improvement.
Otherwise, we could just look at the players who played more than 15 games this year and see how many have been at the club for more than 5 years to identify the source of on field improvement.
Either way, it's a much more balanced way to assess recruiting and list management that your one dimensional, cynical analysis.
-
the club itself has for many years bemoaned the lack of funds it needed to put into recruiting and development,maybe the fault is there rather than poor individuals who were /are around and had to cope with what was a skeleton crew.
Recently that has changed,and we are starting to see the results now
:clapping That's the salient point G. Jackson can make recommendations about who to recruit and draft but to blame him wholly for the failure of the club to develop a significant number of top picks over the first few years of his tenure is unfair. Blame must be apportioned fairly and FJ is not 100% responsible. He made many more recommendations apart from those chosen and he had a reasonable expectation (falsely in hindsight) that the club was capable of developing those drafted. Praise where praise is due and blame where is blame due.
-
bottom line is claw will always think he knows better than the recruiters.
To prove it he will name 5-6 players where the recruiters can only name one, thus having a 6 fold chance of getting it right.
you still got ya knickers in a twist because old clawsy refused to go on your silly thread. in fact i didnt see too many participate in that little bit of stupidity.
maybe most thought just like me that they had made it patently clear who they wanted and where without going on a thread where the bloke who started it didnt have the balls to put one name up.
why would i put i name up? i never claimed that i have any real idea about the youngsters playing around the country, let alone more than those paid to do so.
Of the four or so people who constantly critisised the decisions, two had the balls to put it on the line.
I dont give a stuff about whether you post or not, but by not you have shown youself up. you had a chance to go against the recruiters under similar circumstances, but as i said, you would much prefer to name a list of blokes thus vastly increasing your chances of getting one right, as you do every other year.
so in the future when you start saying how you prefered player X at pick Y, it will be meaningless tripe.
-
Jackson can make recommendations about who to recruit and draft but to blame him wholly for the failure of the club to develop a significant number of top picks over the first few years of his tenure is unfair. Blame must be apportioned fairly and FJ is not 100% responsible. He made many more recommendations apart from those chosen and he had a reasonable expectation (falsely in hindsight) that the club was capable of developing those drafted. Praise where praise is due and blame where is blame due.
Building a straw man and then knocking it down.
Nobody is blaming Jackson for "the failure of the club to develop a significant number of top picks".
Posters correctly blame him for poor RECRUITING, particularly in "the first few years of his tenure".
-
bottom line is claw will always think he knows better than the recruiters.
To prove it he will name 5-6 players where the recruiters can only name one, thus having a 6 fold chance of getting it right.
you still got ya knickers in a twist because old clawsy refused to go on your silly thread. in fact i didnt see too many participate in that little bit of stupidity.
maybe most thought just like me that they had made it patently clear who they wanted and where without going on a thread where the bloke who started it didnt have the balls to put one name up.
why would i put i name up? i never claimed that i have any real idea about the youngsters playing around the country, let alone more than those paid to do so.
Of the four or so people who constantly critisised the decisions, two had the balls to put it on the line.
I dont give a stuff about whether you post or not, but by not you have shown youself up. you had a chance to go against the recruiters under similar circumstances, but as i said, you would much prefer to name a list of blokes thus vastly increasing your chances of getting one right, as you do every other year.
so in the future when you start saying how you prefered player X at pick Y, it will be meaningless tripe.
so you do still have ya knickers in a knot . and yes you had no balls. yes you do give a stuff because i refused to post on that silly silly thread why the reply if not true why not just ignore the post.
cmon just be honest just once. that thread was aimed at me or at the least started because of me. and i refused to bite. what was it i said at the time, ah yes.
why would i contribute to a thread started by a poster i dislike and have little time for. some one who is totally disingenuous. but hey lets do an al and just ignore what dont suit eh.
anyway get over it its not worth all the angst son. theres more to a footy forum than trying to point score over other posters. you know you can actually have an opinion on footy topics and put it out there. now theres a novel idea for you.
so two critical people put a name up on your golden thread, i have to ask was there even 4 people in total who made a comment. just shows what most people thought of it.
you know al im real comfortable with what ive posted and said. i dont have to prove a thing. i couldnt care less what you think. thats the difference between us.im happy to put it out there regardless.
its funny watching you, claw refused to go on your thread, so that somehow means he never passed comment on who he wanted out side of your gutless and pathetic little thread.thats typical of you.
oh boo hoo, if he didnt say it on MY THREAD., HE COULDNT HAVE SAID IT AT ALL lol . cmon you have to do better than that old chum.. are you really that pathetic that you cant acknowledge i put it out there on other threads.
you only need look al and you will find. but seeing as you are incapable of looking outside of your own threads ::) this is the last time i will say it, and just for you big balls on the line al.
scharenburg was the player i wanted most. so scharenberg is my player of choice pre draft. because scharenburg was gone at our pick blake acres became my choice as he was the player i liked the most who was still available. . now these words must be on numerous threads al you could have looked up for yourself. in fact iknow you have read them elsewhere.
so may i suggest you quote these words put em aside and you can bring em up when i get em wrong. i can just see ya now with a mad look on ya face, hand on the old codger feverishly bringing up my words. hallelujah eh al. claw got one wrong. yep pathetic sums you up.
you know i think you try and compensate for your failings a tad much al. its called little dick syndrome i think.
again i ask as i did back then, why would i even contribute to a thread started by a poster who i dislike and have little time for. you knew this then but still whine like a baby because big bad claw refused to go on your thread.
go away al and grow up just a little eh. it gets monotonous dealing with such disingenuous ##@##* s every other post.
-
Nobody is blaming Jackson for "the failure of the club to develop a significant number of top picks".
Posters correctly blame him for poor RECRUITING, particularly in "the first few years of his tenure".
And if you don't see the important connection between the 2 then the conversation becomes quite moot.
-
The fact though, despite their records after being picked up, other clubs are keen to grab our 2013 discards. Almost every player that moved from our list this year was snatched up by other clubs including even Derickx :o This would certainly indicate to me that other clubs see value in these players to either add to their depth (or as potential backup ups if everything goes to the pooe if you prefer) or believe they can mold them into role players.
Players such as White will become a role player much the same way he was evolving into one at the Tigers. Out of all the players that exited this year I am most disappointed at losing White because he gave us a great deal of run off the HF line and was a wonderful sub at the least.
McGuane is the other that could come back to haunt us as he really does have potential as a third forward. He is strong, leads well and can smash a pack. He will never be a superstar but he is, once again, a handy depth player who can step straight in if injuries hit and can assist young forwards learning their craft in the seconds.
Nahas is another player who could be damaging in a less defensive side and if space is created for him. I think he is a good out for us but again he could be good depth as a rookie for North with their style of game and with so few elusive/fast players on their list.
I think you are missing the point Camboon is making here - the simple fact that other clubs are taking them should be seen as a positive to our list development and the strength of the squad our coaches and recruiters have put together. How they turn out elsewhere is not here or there really.
i believe the point being made stripes, was the fact we have had limited amount of players taken by other clubs prior to jackson as well as in jacksons time. its nothing new. both prior to and in jacksons time there are few due in the main to quality.
i would also argue strongly you cant develop players if they arent good enough to start with. can i ask what type of player are we aiming for with 2nd and 3rd rounders. nothing but role players geez i hope not.
i will take his record even further.
lets look at the rookie draft.
by my figures we have used 35 rookie picks in jacksons time at the club.
by my count there are 25 out right failures.
i only count 3 players who you would classify as passes. king, nahas, and petterd. i also include miller and stephenson based on a pure needs and experience basis. all mature picks.
by my count that leaves 5 50/50 players banfield, miles, thomas, williams, darrou.
just to finish can i ask how do people on here go about judging jacksons last 3 or 4 yrs. do we really try and rate these drafts or is it too early.
for me ive shown patience with t all of our picks from 2010.
2010 -
conca - pass. yes hes a decent player. but there is the question about who we didnt take.
batchelor - 50/50. yep this is where i place him. i dont rate him and think he will struggle because of the weaknesses i see in his game. he could go either way.
helbig - 50/50. just hant been able to make the step up. he is borderline and needs a good yr.
macdonald - fail. well hes gone.
2011
ellis - pass. as we all agree hes taken a decent player in the first rnd.
elton - 50/50. another development player who can say what he will become or even if he will make it.
arnot - 50/50 a small mid who has managed 4 senior games. he may or he may not make it. its what we say about 90% of development players.
2012
vlastuin - pass. see ellis.
mcintosh - 50/50 likely development player.
mcbean - 50/50. some will say pass he looks a likely type.
mcdonough - 50/50again looks likely but hes yet to play a game. how do we judge these kids .
2013
lennon 50/50 hes yet to play game and we dont know what we have at afl level. of all our last 5 first rounders i have most concern over him.
so i will ask again just how do we rate jacksons last 3 or 4 drafts.
-
Iirc Donuts played one game
-
Nobody is blaming Jackson for "the failure of the club to develop a significant number of top picks".
Posters correctly blame him for poor RECRUITING, particularly in "the first few years of his tenure".
And if you don't see the important connection between the 2 then the conversation becomes quite moot.
i think the argument is just maybe the recruiting has not taken enough players who can be developed hence we fail so badly.
i have to say tall development in particular, under all parties including hardwick has been terrible.
but the question to ask is. is it development, recruitment or a combination of both.
think about it. the only talls that have started as kids and really come thru are riewoldt, rance. imo we have taken too few with too little. what i really fail to see is where development has, as people keep on telling me improved so much.
it still seems to me the early more well rounded picks who dont need a lot of development are making it but those who need some work 2nd 3rd 4th rookie picks continue to fail.
the way i see it is. we have improved on the back of 1st rounders and mature recruits. there is very little in between.
-
Iirc Donuts played one game
well done sir. hardly relevant to what is being said but well done.
-
Has there been any other clubs 2013 whose discards were picked up by other clubs to the same degree as ours were?
-
Lol @ some- say mcbean is a pass
Closer to a pass than a fail at this stage
What expectations did you have of a man if vis dimensions in year #1?
-
Lol @ some- say mcbean is a pass
Closer to a pass than a fail at this stage
What expectations did you have of a man if vis dimensions in year #1?
yes he hasnt even played a game and has yrs of work to do on his size. where did i place him judge. thats right 50/50. hes certainly no pass and hes certainly no failed pick either. ive got no idea how he will turn out and no one else does either.
are we going to give pass marks based on nothing but potential before they have even played a game. may as well just pass em all then eh.
i have most of our picks from 2010 onwards in the 50/50 category or development category if you like.
-
60/40
-
the change has come from the philosophy of who we recruit, we have changed the mentality on who we recruit, we're not picking the talented, damaged players, like Taylor for example (could have been anything this kid, sadly). As the article states and is the root of the improvement. We pick guys who arent the most talented but are the most reliable, 200 gamers, Even Dusty! Solid guys who are loyal (ignoring stupid managers).
Its this change in the recruiting that has pushed us into the finals.. We have a team that genuinely likes to play together and we dont have the clique the likes of Nathan brown bought to the club.
Its this bond that wins games, its having guys around the club that may not have the talent but gel a team together like Jake King. Think of the past of what happened when we lost barrot and co, it destroyed the side on an emotional level..
Its what Hungry was doing, alas never to see the fruit of his work.
Whats happening with the players they are getting, is they're adding to a team, not adding ego's.
As is the old adage, a champion team will always win against a team of champions..
Claw you can have your team of champions, im happy with my champion team thats getting built..
If you want to go into what makes great teams and how to put a great team together, the psychology of matching the personalities is as important if not more important than your goddam age, height, weight, experience and stupid list management crap that you really have no clue about as you live in WA and hardly see a game of TAC, VFL or even RICHMOND and yet still profess to say you know who the greatest juniors are.. (from watching tapes eh.. lol)
Give me a spell :sleep im done
-
with where we are at and the way the season is unfolding and comments made in other recent threads about hartley and jackson i thought this thread worth revisiting
if we are to improve the club must revisit these areas and find a way to do better.
-
with where we are at and the way the season is unfolding and comments made in other recent threads about hartley and jackson i thought this thread worth revisiting
if we are to improve the club must revisit these areas and find a way to do better.
1. We went way too far.
We needed mature players. We got some on the cheap. But then went and got way too many of them. Firstly they eat salary space. Secondly it stopped us picking youth when I think the recruiters had figured what type of players to recruit on the rookie list. Small forwards, KPD's, rucks IMO. 2011 that was what we mainly drafted. Then all of a sudden 2012 = the recycled dud path. ::)
2. We didn't try upgrade the guys we got
We settled on what we had rather than trying to upgrade the upgrades like Grigg, Houli etc.
3. Holding back development
With so many retreads, who may be slightly ahead on form, we haven't been able to blood more youth.
The idea is solid but not every pick. And the idea was as back-up not first team. Why that went out the window I don't know.
-
agree with all of that 2011.
unlike most who are now reacting like the situation now its a bolt out of the blue i believe we had to
1/ take some mature players and must continue to take mature recruits along with the right quota of juniors. when we take mature players ensure we go thru a good process and ensure those we take tick enough boxes. i think in a big way we have moved away from this.
2/ i cant agree more. there was good cause for us to take grigg houli etc when we did there is nothing wrong with value adding and addressing short comings. our trouble is we ignored the weaknesses of these recruits and stopped looking for better more well rounded players. we also failed to adequately recruit enough juniors for positions these mature players had thus we are now back where we started from no kids coming thru and needing to look to a mature upgrade.
i would have thought one of the biggest reasons you take a mature player is to allow you time to develop what is hopefully a very good junior in that position.you cant do that if you dont have the same type even on your list.
3/ i agree again. but i think it goes further. it not only has stifled the desire to play kids it has affected recruitment as well. what is alarming and i can in all honesty ask in a lot of cases what kids.
just to finish. finals in my opinion is now a pipe dream in fact i have thought them an improbability since rnd 1 and a tough thing to achieve even before the yr started.
we now have to find out what the following have to offer so we can make a proper decision on them.
arnot, banfield, darrou, dea, elton, gordon, griffiths, grimes, helbig, knights, lloyd, mcbean, mcdonough, mcintosh, miles, ohanlon , and williams. but we have to do it in a way where we can at least remain competetive beltings wont do any good to anyone and we need an environment where these blokes have some sort of chance of showing what they have.
-
Why do you think the club got ahead of itself again and over rated this list? Are the people n the club under such inordinate pressure t they can't admit the true standard of the list? Is it just collective wishful thinking? Is Not Just this lot that have done it, we have done it under Frawley too.
Are we too collegiate with players we know in order to avoid the spitefulness of the past
-
Why do you think the club got ahead of itself again and over rated this list? Are the people n the club under such inordinate pressure t they can't admit the true standard of the list? Is it just collective wishful thinking? Is Not Just this lot that have done it, we have done it under Frawley too.
Are we too collegiate with players we know in order to avoid the spitefulness of the past
just the way we went about the off season tidyman and the list itself.
its simple i rate players on some pretty simple criteria. strengths weakness and performance are the keys for me. even in making the finals we had far too many players who were what i call glass half fulls. the list was also shallow lacking depth and quality in far too many areas.
for me we were still very much in rebuild mode yet we ignored youth and went down an over the top top up path. it was often stated that making finals last yr would just paper over the very obvious cracks that were there.it was stated even in winning 15 games far too much was too often left to too few. it was also stated that a lot of players would revert to type because of their performance history and weaknesses in their games.
as it is most of it has come home to roost it wasnt hard to see it coming.
i still think to get better and improve enough to become a real contender, we must first and foremost get the horse in front of the cart and address our recruiting and list managment issues, because if we dont it will just be a mute point useing nd picks if we get most of them wrong. hence i bought this thread back up.
i strongly question both jackson and hartley and the job they have done.
-
agree with all of that 2011.
unlike most who are now reacting like the situation now its a bolt out of the blue i believe we had to
1/ take some mature players and must continue to take mature recruits along with the right quota of juniors. when we take mature players ensure we go thru a good process and ensure those we take tick enough boxes. i think in a big way we have moved away from this.
2/ i cant agree more. there was good cause for us to take grigg houli etc when we did there is nothing wrong with value adding and addressing short comings. our trouble is we ignored the weaknesses of these recruits and stopped looking for better more well rounded players. we also failed to adequately recruit enough juniors for positions these mature players had thus we are now back where we started from no kids coming thru and needing to look to a mature upgrade.
i would have thought one of the biggest reasons you take a mature player is to allow you time to develop what is hopefully a very good junior in that position.you cant do that if you dont have the same type even on your list.
3/ i agree again. but i think it goes further. it not only has stifled the desire to play kids it has affected recruitment as well. what is alarming and i can in all honesty ask in a lot of cases what kids.
just to finish. finals in my opinion is now a pipe dream in fact i have thought them an improbability since rnd 1 and a tough thing to achieve even before the yr started.
we now have to find out what the following have to offer so we can make a proper decision on them.
arnot, banfield, darrou, dea, elton, gordon, griffiths, grimes, helbig, knights, lloyd, mcbean, mcdonough, mcintosh, miles, ohanlon , and williams. but we have to do it in a way where we can at least remain competetive beltings wont do any good to anyone and we need an environment where these blokes have some sort of chance of showing what they have.
Well said. Just to add to 1. I think we need to target state league mature's who haven't been tried rather than tried and failed guys on the rookie list. Or at least young delisted guys like Miles. Guys who have a chance to become something better than they've shown.
There are some decent 19/20 yo blokes running around who would offer us some potential upgrades on what we have.
Darcy Cameron (future ruck)
Shannon Taylor (upgrade on well...no one)
Isaiah Miller (potential upgrade on Houli - personally think he is better than Langdon who goes alright)
There will be other young guys from the new teams that shake free like Miles did too. No more 27-30 year old hacks.
Wouldn't mind forking out the cash for a Mundy type who is a hard worker and could help shape the culture for a few years.