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.
you dont get ny better information than someone who was on our table in 2005. i can categotically say fj wanted jon and miller wanted varcoe. miller even went over to the geelong table later and spoke about varcoe.
the rookie club night that used to be run with miller we had lots of highlights and footage on jon and others personally i groaned out loud when i heard his name any blind fool could see he was not a first rnd pick.
the talk was hurn would slip and he was my choice at that pick. the knock on him was he was a boy in a mans body playing against boys trouble was he could bloody play. give me big and skillful over skinny and whatever it was jon had any day.
i made a comment that outside of 1st rnd picks jacksons nd picks have been average at best. not too many clubs get first rounders wrong and even fewer with the early 1st rounders like we have had.
on edwards im sorry mate but ive never ever worried about who the club rates and with justification. edwards for a real good second round pick has battled for consistency his performances mostly not good enough and he has glaring weaknesses that he has never overcome or bought something to the table to compensate them. i dont need the club to tell me who is performing and who is not i can see very well for myself. i wonder where shane edwards is rated in the scheme of things something that i have done with our players over the yrs.
on cameron i have to ask what has players like jackson ever done to warrant more than one yr contracts and there is a string of these types. surely if tuck can be kept on 1 yr deals these others who mostly underperform can also.
since 05 jackson has just 3 second rounders that are lets say proven and that includes edwards who is ordinary. so if you asked me it would be just 2. hughes, edwards, rance, post, griffiths, batchelor, elton. granted some of the later picks are promising but you can hardly put em in the bank, and that been the trouble with supporters they show a glimpse they are stars. a glimpse does not mean proven.
since 05 jackson has no third rounders that are proven, casserly, dea, macdonald, helbig, arnot, again some promise there but only dea who has played a a dozen games or so.
since 05 jackson has no fourth rounders that are proven. connors, peterson, putt, hislop, taylor, derickx,
since 05 jackson has no fifth rounders that are proven collins, webberley nason,
as i said hes done okay with first rounders but from there average at best is being kind imo. for sure
we can do psd picks if you like young psd picks he must have a say in.these drafts start at 06 because ie thursfield while taken in the 05 rookie draft was taken at the start of 05 not the end.
06 white lol. 07 kingsley, 08 gourdis, 09 cousins, 10 grimes hooray we got one, 11 houli hooray we got another but we know hes one of hartleys.12 o hanlon.
rookie picks
06 graham, humm, howat.
07 clingan king.
08 collard, sivester, cartledge, howat lol.
09 gourdis, browne, gilligan,
10 hicks, contin, roberts, westhoff, polak,orielly.
11 jakobi, miller, hislop lol,
12 a maric, darrou, verrier, turner, wright, heslin.
yep i reckon im well within my rights to question what jackson has done especially after the first round. not a lot of first rounders get stuffed up. theres no hiding with draft picks. you take em you live or die on how they perform.
jackson is now heavily reliant on picks from 09 10 and 11 to make it to even get a pass mark.
while i think we are getting better at it i really would like to see someone like rendell in there as well to help jackson out if you like. your recruiters are the life blood of your on field success what possible harm would another like rendell cause.
