'Tanking' would give us 3 picks at this more profitable pointy end hence the argument for us to 'tank'.
Also the lessons from Geelong's rebuild is to keep your picks and in fact trade for more.
In many ways mt, this argument that we should 'tank' is actually disproved by the Geelong experience. Yes, we should keep our picks and trade for more, no question about that. We have made huge mistakes in our trading for 'experienced' players who appear to fill a gap. Furiously agree there.
But IMO, the problems that we have now have much more to do with what we do with players once they are drafted than how high our draft picks are. If you look at Geelong, the highest draft pick they have had in your scenario is pick 7 (Selwood). Many of their really good players were drafted in the 20s and 30s or later. Is this good recruitment, or good player education and management AFTER drafting? Probably a combination of both, and that's part of the the point.
The longer we pin our hopes on high draft picks, or even a new coach, turning around our culture, the longer we will stay at the bottom of the ladder.
We must work much harder on inculcating our entire club personnel with an attitude of leaving absolutely no stone unturned in striving to improve our performance. This means players, admin staff, trainers, fitness people, development people, receptionist, doctors — absolutely everyone who wears a bit of yellow and black. We must not fall into the trap of believing any one person can change things — including a coach or a Cotchin or a Deledio. The sooner we start with this attitude, the better. If that means that we win 7 out of our next 12 games, so be it. Culture change won't come from laying down — by all means play the kids and see who has got what to take us forward, but prepare them as meticulously and with a winning attitude as far as is humanly possible, and if they win, then that is so much more important that getting pick 3 or pick 8 it's not funny.
People forget about Geelong's father-sons who were rated top 10 picks before their respective drafts. The Cats were effectively getting two top 10 picks in those years ...
2001: Bartel (8 ) and G.Ablett
2004: The traded their first rounder for Ottens but they knew they had N.Ablett up their sleeve later in the draft.
2007: Selwood (7) and Hawkins
They already had Scarlett prior to Thompson becoming their coach.
The new F/S rule was brought in so clubs couldn't have both their first round pick and then their F/S choice if the F/S was a young gun. Take Bartel, Selwood and Ottens off the Cats' list and the dynamics of their midfield change.
You need the most talented kids first and plenty of them. Sure our recruiting and development resources have been poor but it's no coincidence that our two most talented youngsters Lids and Cotch were both top 2 picks. Our last priority pick gave us Rance. I doubt people who are 'anti-tankers' would give them away now for 2 more wins in 2004 or 2007. We don't have the bonus of top quality father-sons walking en masse into our club as Geelong did. So we need the earlier picks instead to grab the best talent in numbers especially that extra priority pick which would give us 3 picks in the top 20.
You need to get bring as many talented kids as possible to the Club as the first building block otherwise you're wasting your time in terms of their development into a successful team. You still need to do all those other areas you mentioned FFV but recruiting the best kids in number comes first. Picking up only 2-3 kids a year in the National draft like we have because we finished 9th-10th and ending up with picks 8, 24 plus trading away our 3rd pick for a recycled dud isn't enough in quantity and quality to cull and turn over your list quickly and change the culture of the playing list. You need plenty of picks and the higher the better to get the best kids. If we win no more than 4 games this year and trade a player or two away for even 30-40ish draft picks then you have say draft picks 2, 18, 19, 30ish, 35, 40ish. 6 new kids instead of just 2 and more talented kids to boot. Do that a couple of years in a row (I would tank next year as well) and you clean the deadwood out of our list quickly and evoke real change to the playing list in terms of quantity, quality and structure rather than what we have now which is basically the same group of players each and every year failing us with just a few changes around the seams.
I don't see a consistent recruiting policy at Richmond even though we're having this review and we've changed footy managers and now senior coach. There's mixed messages coming out of the club. One minute we're rebuilding, the next promising finals or bust, then its back to youth but we'll trade draft picks away for older fringe players. We make it up as we go along
. The direction of the club needs to come from the Boardroom and the head of the footy dept. They need to stand up, show some leadership and make up their minds if we are truly rebuilding or not. Changing coaches, fitness staff, etc... and then still repeating the same dumb recruiting mistakes won't help improve our list or side.
