Claw, who said Gordon was the only player we were tracking, could have been tracking 10 and the other 9 were taken , a fairly simple minded assumption he was the only player in Australia we were following 
no one not even me. they took gordon at 50 because they thought someone else might take him when clearly this was not likely. i always thought you take kids with your better picks and mature types with with basically nothing picks unless they are are outstanding.it does look like every other club has followed this rule. no matter how well state league players have performed the vast majority have been taken way past pick 50 usually in the rookie draft.
in essence what are we arguing about here.
i wanted us to actually take at the minimum 2 kids ideally 3 with picks 12 and 50 possibly 66 after trading for a 26 yo with pick 32.
im certain it would have been possible to achieve
12 lennon, 50 sicily/templeton/marsh. 66 templeton marsh darcy. id be happy with anyone of them. then at 78 gordon. 88 lloyd.
or another way
12 lennon, 50 gordon, 66 marsh, 78 templeton, 88 lloyd. people dont get it its the overall process.
i had a mate ring me up today a wce supporter and he asked. were you happy with who you took??. i said yes and no. he asked what do you mean. and i explained we took just one kid in the trade nd period and he was totally gobsmacked.
i dont know about others but i remember 1995 clearly and 2001. we made finals both yrs had high finishes but a blind man could see the lists on both occasions was ordinary, yet we proceeded to trade for players and assume the list was good enough on both occasions harsh reality hit us hard.
come 2013 and the similarities are scary.
its not the taking of mature players that has seen improvement though that has helped but the process of going thru enough top 50 picks on kids that has seen us grow. we have been good at keeping a balance between mature players and kids and where we have taken each group, that has changed. it is as if we are locked and loaded thats to me is unbelievable.
why change something that has worked and taken us from a laughing stock to pretty competetive most of the time.
rebuilding our list is only 50 60% done if we want to win a premiership we had damn well better improve significantly each yr over the next 3 or 4 seasons. you can bet your bottom dollar our competitors will.
