The Fighting Tiger Fund - "Giving 110%" [merged]

[HKTiger]

Francis Jackson has also learnt the caper as time has gone on.  No different to any other job.  It is rare that someone comes in from day 1 and stars unless he was a star elsewhere.

Just like our players, coaches, administrators and the like are learning form their mistakes, so is Francis.  And isn't that all we can expect?

You're doing a great job mate.  Keep it up!

Spot on and a point not discussed ot acknowledged up to this point.  CC, BH and FJ are developing metrics and ratings system that take much of the "guesswork" out of the process.  Some of this is league wide practise, some of it is RFC IP.  (Note:  Some clubs aren't anywhere near as scientific as us.)  But building that mountain of data takes time.  It is also a progression.  If your decisions improve over time then the empirical data you have gathered is working.

We're also drafting for different needs.  In 2006 we were drafting for "now".  Clearly stated by the club.  We preferred Jack over Reid becaus we would get a footballer in 2008  and not 2010.  And yes I know Collingwood took Reid first but we weren't going to take Reid unless Jack and one or two others were gone first.  We had a clear ranking and Jack was #1 by so much it wasn't funny.  In 2011 we drafted one player, B. Ellis, for now.  O'Hanlon and Elton were clearly drafted for 2013/14 and beyond.  Plus the rookies where we clearly drafted 4 gusy for development.  We managed the other players for "now" with Morris and Maric.  As TfT states we ahve a higher ratio of recently drafted players in our side (hence our youth).

Anyone who thinks that the club has just stopped "managing the list" isn't actually watching what's happening.  Look at the evidence not some jibber-jabber from years ago.

[Smokey]

at the end of the day you will defend his record becausse hes at richmond me i will be critical because i think over all hes been pretty average.

No, I'll defend his record because it stacks up.  I'll have a crack at Richmond as good as anyone if I think we deserve it but I don't think your witch hunt on Jackson is fair or justified.

[Loui Tufga]

his first rnd picks are
05 - jon fail and this was his pick. i know for a fact greg miller wanted varcoe at 5 so theres no blaming him.

Now you are really becoming deluded Claw Miller was our HEAD recruiter when JON Picked, the buck stopped with him! so how on earth can it be that he was over ruled by a part time guy in his first season at the Club??
Also Miller has admitted HIMSELF that he got the JON pick wrong, He never seen JON play a single game and took the word of the WA scout at the time that JON was the real deal.

There is one person that could help us clear all this up, he was a scout for the club at the time that was also responsable for bringing Tambling , Meyer and Patterson  to the club.....Where is Jackstar BTW

[Coach]

Francis Jackson has also learnt the caper as time has gone on.  No different to any other job.  It is rare that someone comes in from day 1 and stars unless he was a star elsewhere.

Just like our players, coaches, administrators and the like are learning form their mistakes, so is Francis.  And isn't that all we can expect?

You're doing a great job mate.  Keep it up!

Spot on and a point not discussed ot acknowledged up to this point.  CC, BH and FJ are developing metrics and ratings system that take much of the "guesswork" out of the process.  Some of this is league wide practise, some of it is RFC IP.  (Note:  Some clubs aren't anywhere near as scientific as us.)  But building that mountain of data takes time.  It is also a progression.  If your decisions improve over time then the empirical data you have gathered is working.

We're also drafting for different needs.  In 2006 we were drafting for "now".  Clearly stated by the club.  We preferred Jack over Reid becaus we would get a footballer in 2008  and not 2010.  And yes I know Collingwood took Reid first but we weren't going to take Reid unless Jack and one or two others were gone first.  We had a clear ranking and Jack was #1 by so much it wasn't funny.  In 2011 we drafted one player, B. Ellis, for now.  O'Hanlon and Elton were clearly drafted for 2013/14 and beyond.  Plus the rookies where we clearly drafted 4 gusy for development.  We managed the other players for "now" with Morris and Maric.  As TfT states we ahve a higher ratio of recently drafted players in our side (hence our youth).

Anyone who thinks that the club has just stopped "managing the list" isn't actually watching what's happening.  Look at the evidence not some jibber-jabber from years ago.

Do we rate our older blokes with this rating system?How does a player like Jake King rate on this system? There would be blokes with more natural ability playing in state leagues. Not having a whack at Kingy (quite happy to have him at the club, especially when he plays like he did saturday)but surely sometimes you just watch a bloke play football and decide whether or not he's any good. You don't need a rating system to see if a bloke is lazy, can get a kick or put his head over it.

Just asking you HK because you keep a close eye on this sort of thing.

[Loui Tufga]

Do we rate our older blokes with this rating system?How does a player like Jake King rate on this system? There would be blokes with more natural ability playing in state leagues. Not having a whack at Kingy (quite happy to have him at the club, especially when he plays like he did saturday)but surely sometimes you just watch a bloke play football and decide whether or not he's any good. You don't need a rating system to see if a bloke is lazy, can get a kick or put his head over it.

Just asking you HK because you keep a close eye on this sort of thing.

I would say yes, that's why 30 of them have been shown the door in the past 3 years There are still a few to go

[Hellenic Tiger]

Claw you can't blame Jackson for some prior to 2010.
Wallet was coach and he had a different plan with regards to the list.
Trading for blokes like Kingsley, Patrick Bowden, Thompson, McMahon, Hislop all relics from the Wallet era.

If anything you can blame Jackson in your opinion and lay claim to the fact that even our Granny could have picked Martin but the Wallet era's legacy was signed when they picked Tambling at 4 and the used duds and draft duds have still maligned our list to this day.

Jackson at least in Dimma's tenure at the least has done more than well IMHO given that Dimma has a clear plan with some sort of blueprint.

[HKTiger]

claw,

you go on and on about FJ and 2005.  What knowledge do you have of when he was appointed and what his role was.

I have been informed that FJ was approached in mid-2005 to assist Miller.  He came on board in August/September 2005 to review tapes and provide advice.  That is what he did.  No more.  You have some different role for him that I have had categorically stated is not correct.

In 2006 when he started, we had no data.  Repeat NO DATA.  FJ working with Hayden Hill started compiling the data.  In spreadsheets.  By all accounts we were 10 years behind the league in such areas.

So apart from recruiting FJ started the building of basic processes and measurements to support his recruiting.  Despite that he got Jack and Edwards.  And your rating of Edwards is not shared by anyone at the club so live with teh fact that you're wrong.

In 2007 he lined up Cotch (no brainer all will concede) Rance and Selwood.  The fact that Wallace had forced the issue of McMahon when Miller and FJ were against it (again on public record) does not discredit FJ as a draft lead.  In 2008/9 the club reviewed the Footy Dept. processes (remember that) appointed CC as head, identified process gaps and appointed BH.  (At that tiem one of teh first clubs to identify teh role and hire someone to it.)  So in 5 years from a nearly dysfunctionaly Footy Dept, with respect fo development and recruiting we are probably at "standard".  In some ways, given our improvement vs our age and experience levels, we are close to leading.  Our blend of trade, recruit and draft is working.  We're even now discarding players quicker.

You keep harping on about guys in the 22.  They're not the problem.  It's players 23 to 30 that are the problem.  when they force themselves past the bottom 6 in the 22 then the problem is solved.  Darrou, O'Hanlon, Helbig, Arnot,  Elton indicate that the club knows that as well.

Getting beat up about a future event when all indicators are that the club is continuing a process is bordering on bizarre.  twisiting facts to suit your own view, when there is no support for such a view is beyond bizarre.

[bojangles17]

Bloody tough on Jackson including the '05 draft given that he was only assisting the recruiting dept on a part time basis at the time.  Was appointed full time Recruiting Manager in Feb '06 so in all fairness you should remove all reference to '05 from his CV. 

Heard that excuse a LOT and it still sounds like crap.
He was the Recruiter but shouldn't be judged on his recruiting? 
Especially as a part timer one would think you look at AIS lists OR State Lists OR All Australian lists.
No, you totally overlook AIS members, All Australians and State Captains in Hurn and Swallow and recommend this bloke at pick 8: Jarrod Oakley-Nichols

Crap?  He was a part time recruiter who was also full time Sports Master at Brighton Grammar at the same time.  He was appointed to this part time role in Feb '05 and part of his charter was to oversee 3 administrative and 6 field recruiters, all in part time roles themselves, as well as having an individual responsibility of forward scout.  This was all then managed by Greg Miller in his full time role as Recruiting Manager as well as Director of Football, with significant input (no doubt) from the senior coach Terry Wallace.  All this part time work so the club could compete at the highest level of professional AFL football.  And the failure to identify the best recruits in the 2005 draft was all Jackson's fault?  His jobs as public school house master and AFL talent scout would have demanded high public scrutiny and professional output, and I can't even begin to think how he made that happen at any level, let alone to a standard deemed satisfactory by his peers and employers.  And the club gets it's pick #8 wrong in the National Draft and you find Jackson wholly and totally to blame?  Just as well for our club that you're not doing the hiring and firing I think.

Well summed up smoke

[HKTiger]

Francis Jackson has also learnt the caper as time has gone on.  No different to any other job.  It is rare that someone comes in from day 1 and stars unless he was a star elsewhere.

Just like our players, coaches, administrators and the like are learning form their mistakes, so is Francis.  And isn't that all we can expect?

You're doing a great job mate.  Keep it up!

Spot on and a point not discussed ot acknowledged up to this point.  CC, BH and FJ are developing metrics and ratings system that take much of the "guesswork" out of the process.  Some of this is league wide practise, some of it is RFC IP.  (Note:  Some clubs aren't anywhere near as scientific as us.)  But building that mountain of data takes time.  It is also a progression.  If your decisions improve over time then the empirical data you have gathered is working.

We're also drafting for different needs.  In 2006 we were drafting for "now".  Clearly stated by the club.  We preferred Jack over Reid becaus we would get a footballer in 2008  and not 2010.  And yes I know Collingwood took Reid first but we weren't going to take Reid unless Jack and one or two others were gone first.  We had a clear ranking and Jack was #1 by so much it wasn't funny.  In 2011 we drafted one player, B. Ellis, for now.  O'Hanlon and Elton were clearly drafted for 2013/14 and beyond.  Plus the rookies where we clearly drafted 4 gusy for development.  We managed the other players for "now" with Morris and Maric.  As TfT states we ahve a higher ratio of recently drafted players in our side (hence our youth).

Anyone who thinks that the club has just stopped "managing the list" isn't actually watching what's happening.  Look at the evidence not some jibber-jabber from years ago.

Do we rate our older blokes with this rating system?How does a player like Jake King rate on this system? There would be blokes with more natural ability playing in state leagues. Not having a whack at Kingy (quite happy to have him at the club, especially when he plays like he did saturday)but surely sometimes you just watch a bloke play football and decide whether or not he's any good. You don't need a rating system to see if a bloke is lazy, can get a kick or put his head over it.

Just asking you HK because you keep a close eye on this sort of thing.

OK I'll bite.  But yes apparently we rank/rate every player in the league this way.  The Hawks definitely did this as well.  In 2008 Pelchen knew they had a "points" score that would allow them to win the flag.  He revealed this, admittedly after the fact, at a Canberra function according to the verbatim report posted on BF (and subsequently pulled).

But it will also allow us to identify the Houli's and Maric's of the AFL.  Something I suggest that we have got right in the past 2 years.  And given how that has improved on Thomson, Hislop and Farmer is pretty tellimg in my opinion.  But that would indicate that CC has learnt, applied lessons and improved.  As well as now administering a concept he understood but could not adequately undertake.  So he appointed the right guy, BH to do the job.  But that would mean giving CC credit.  A concept not allowed here as I understand it.

[RedanTiger]

A few points.

I don't know when Jackson came on board since Smokey says Feb and HKTiger says August/Sep.
I do know that Cameron got the Head job in 2008. http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=7602.msg109902#msg109902
I also know that Hartley got the scout job after the 2009 draft and after Hardwick was appointed.

The rating system has only been used over the last year or two and will by necessity also largely rely on subjective opinion like all recruiting, although I do agree with HKTiger's point that it takes time, is a progression and the quality of your decisions over time show whether it's working. I have doubts about calling it "empirical" data however.

I agree with Y&B Blood that Jackson's choices seem to be improving but he still seems to have a couple of continuing flaws:
Going back to recruit players that he liked years ago despite what they have done since - Collard, Hislop, Thompson, A Maric, Jakobi, Nason and Farmer (?)
Going for that X factor pick from left field - Taylor, Webberley, Dea, Derickx, McDonald.

 

[HKTiger]

A few points.

....... I have doubts about calling it "empirical" data however.

.......

Yeah good point.  Should have called it baseline.  It is RFC's baseline data.

[Smokey]

Getting beat up about a future event when all indicators are that the club is successfully continuing a process is bordering on bizarre.  twisiting facts to suit your own view, when there is no support for such a view is beyond bizarre.

Dead right HKT.  I've added a word to your quote just to indulge myself!   

[Coach]

Francis Jackson has also learnt the caper as time has gone on.  No different to any other job.  It is rare that someone comes in from day 1 and stars unless he was a star elsewhere.

Just like our players, coaches, administrators and the like are learning form their mistakes, so is Francis.  And isn't that all we can expect?

You're doing a great job mate.  Keep it up!

Spot on and a point not discussed ot acknowledged up to this point.  CC, BH and FJ are developing metrics and ratings system that take much of the "guesswork" out of the process.  Some of this is league wide practise, some of it is RFC IP.  (Note:  Some clubs aren't anywhere near as scientific as us.)  But building that mountain of data takes time.  It is also a progression.  If your decisions improve over time then the empirical data you have gathered is working.

We're also drafting for different needs.  In 2006 we were drafting for "now".  Clearly stated by the club.  We preferred Jack over Reid becaus we would get a footballer in 2008  and not 2010.  And yes I know Collingwood took Reid first but we weren't going to take Reid unless Jack and one or two others were gone first.  We had a clear ranking and Jack was #1 by so much it wasn't funny.  In 2011 we drafted one player, B. Ellis, for now.  O'Hanlon and Elton were clearly drafted for 2013/14 and beyond.  Plus the rookies where we clearly drafted 4 gusy for development.  We managed the other players for "now" with Morris and Maric.  As TfT states we ahve a higher ratio of recently drafted players in our side (hence our youth).

Anyone who thinks that the club has just stopped "managing the list" isn't actually watching what's happening.  Look at the evidence not some jibber-jabber from years ago.

Do we rate our older blokes with this rating system?How does a player like Jake King rate on this system? There would be blokes with more natural ability playing in state leagues. Not having a whack at Kingy (quite happy to have him at the club, especially when he plays like he did saturday)but surely sometimes you just watch a bloke play football and decide whether or not he's any good. You don't need a rating system to see if a bloke is lazy, can get a kick or put his head over it.

Just asking you HK because you keep a close eye on this sort of thing.

OK I'll bite.  But yes apparently we rank/rate every player in the league this way.  The Hawks definitely did this as well.  In 2008 Pelchen knew they had a "points" score that would allow them to win the flag.  He revealed this, admittedly after the fact, at a Canberra function according to the verbatim report posted on BF (and subsequently pulled).

But it will also allow us to identify the Houli's and Maric's of the AFL.  Something I suggest that we have got right in the past 2 years.  And given how that has improved on Thomson, Hislop and Farmer is pretty tellimg in my opinion.  But that would indicate that CC has learnt, applied lessons and improved.  As well as now administering a concept he understood but could not adequately undertake.  So he appointed the right guy, BH to do the job.  But that would mean giving CC credit.  A concept not allowed here as I understand it.

My main problem with Cameron are the contracts he hands out/signs off on. Did Mick Malthouse think Collingwood had enough points to win the Grand Final last year?

[HKTiger]

CD I hear the comment on CC's contracts.  I take a slightly different view.
 
Between needing to balance the salary cap (i.e. you must pay 95% minimum) and working on who stays on the list and who doesnt't you then have to sit down and negotiate contracts.  CC does that on average about 5 to 8 times a year where it counts.  All the draftees are on set amounts for the first two years so that doesn't even get considered.  So CC does it about 8 tiems ayear that counts.  But the agent sitting opposite him is doing it about 30 or 40 times a year.  That's why he's an agent.  Clubs are always behind the 8ball in that regard.

The AFLPA contracts are also pretty standard.  X games before age Nn, -$bbbK.  Y games across one or two seasons, automatic contract extension.  So by playing so many youngsters and giving them so many games you get forced to provide new contracts.

I hear the criticism and agree that some of it is justified, but without an objective ranking system (now in place) you end up making subjective judgements and then negotiations end up being "emotive" not logical.  I would hope (believe) that going forward there are more measured and objective contracts in place.  I would suggest that this years contracts (Lids and Foley) would support that view.

[HKTiger]

Getting beat up about a future event when all indicators are that the club is successfully continuing a process is bordering on bizarre.  twisiting facts to suit your own view, when there is no support for such a view is beyond bizarre.

Dead right HKT.  I've added a word to your quote just to indulge myself!   

Thanks and agree.  But that is a red rag to a claw I would believe.