Moved Thread Adrian Dodoro - Lodged a dispute with FairWork. Paid out. Gone. #putoutyourjackets

[Here_we_come]

I feel that Dodo has more responsibility than a lot of people give him credit for. This is an article that was posted on blitz that I found very insightful. Speaks to the relationship between the coach, list managment, and other key roles.

When list manager is the AFL's most important job

It's known as the "silly season" or "meat market", when 18 AFL clubs trade draft picks and players to build new hope for a new football season. It's also a time when one club official becomes the most important person in the game, writes Michelangelo Rucci.

indaily.com.au

Perhaps things haven't operated like this at Essendon, I agree we are a total basket case. I still want dodo gone though.

 

[fairbump_playon]

I don't think there is any issue with acknowledging that we probably would have been better off from a talent perspective had we traded out players and torn the thing down.

I think it's also important to understand that was never ever going to happen. As much as it may have been the "right move" the climate at the time meant there probably wasn't a world where that would ever have been able to occur.

Agreed.

Also - painful as it is, perhaps once the saga damage was done everything has progressed as well as it could.

Because of stupid crap the club did, we had a majority of our players banned for a year, many in the prime of their careers. Maybe even worse in my eyes was having the club’s favourite son’s (and son of the club’s favourite son) Brownlow removed.

That is as traumatic as footy gets. The fact we are all used to it maybe stops us retaining a grip on how deeply messed up it was.

The Adelaide coach was murderered. And yet, this was worse, in terms of impact on a club’s psyche. At least in Adelaide the club could stick together once the terrible thing happened.

To put it in people terms this isn’t just your dad cheating on your mum, it’s your dad cheating with your teacher and then all the kids in the family getting kicked out of school, and the whole small town knowing and then ostracizing the whole family. While at home mum no longer eats dinner at the table and has taken to drinking a couple of boxes of Chardonnay a week.

Dad then doesn’t get a lot of traction when he starts saying you kids need to knuckle down with your studies.

IMO the trauma would have been far worse and gone on for far longer if the club didn’t look after that group of players in the years that followed. Some healing needed to happen before we could again figure out how to be ruthless.

Welcome to where we are.

You could argue we should have cut some careers much shorter or paid less. But just because the playing group came back doesn’t mean all was forgiven. I can only imagine they were hanging by a thread. The hard list calls that we can all imagine now were not just concepts, they were people, and people who had already been shafted once. That group had stuck together and shown loyalty. Burn even a few of them and players would have been outright angry I reckon.

Then we would have had new players coming in not to wobbly mediocrity but absolute chaos, and playing group that was openly distrustful and hostile towards the club. That just would have delayed the start of the healing stage.

The only way things could have improved more quickly for Essendon would have been if more players had not come back to us in 2017. Cleaner slate for them and a rebuild starts for us.

Even then, I can’t help but be glad they returned. I think the display of club loyalty by that group should be treated as a very special Essendon moment, and reckon it’s culturally better in the long run for the club than the alternative of rats deserting the ship. When the next premiership lands, that group of players should be acknowledged for what happened to them and what they then did. I really believe those who came back are the foundation of our future success.

We do of course find ourselves deep in the aftermath of all this. How much does it suck? Massively, it sucks. We are trying to improve. It’s going to at best take a few more years. It’s useful to have some acceptance of how badly we fkked ourselves but also necessary to demand and expect steps forward.

Yep we sucked in the late Sheedy and Knights eras. But that’s just normal decade in the wilderness stuff. Clubs can bounce back from that, it happens. The saga on the other hand was a truly monumental screw up. The worst thing ever to happen to our club, by miles.

That next flag will really be something huh.

 

[ant555]

I feel that Dodo has more responsibility than a lot of people give him credit for. This is an article that was posted on blitz that I found very insightful. Speaks to the relationship between the coach, list managment, and other key roles.

When list manager is the AFL's most important job

It's known as the "silly season" or "meat market", when 18 AFL clubs trade draft picks and players to build new hope for a new football season. It's also a time when one club official becomes the most important person in the game, writes Michelangelo Rucci.

indaily.com.au

Perhaps things haven't operated like this at Essendon, I agree we are a total basket case. I still want dodo gone though.

This basically outlines what Dodoro's role now is other than we have signed a coach that will have a decent say on the list as that is what he was signed for as the senior coach. You notice that no one is talking drafting here . It is all about dealing with trades and list managers and the salary cap. That is the point I have been making. Before Mahoney Adrian was doing it all and not very well. Now they have him working with Scott on list strategy and building really good relationships with the player managers which they was a bit hit and miss in the past. A lot of the stuff mentioned has been his poor drafting but that is where his influence has been pulled back. He is not seeing the same amount of under 18 footy. RFK and his team are doing that. The real issue has been we did not have anyone controlling what was going on.

 

[eighties_bomber]

#sackdodoro TODAY!

 

[brain taylor]

i don’t mind the “best available” thing for top picks as long as later picks are used to address needs, problem is dodoro does things like spend second rounders on alex morgan

Alex Morgan

Age

28

Ht

182cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.0

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

7.0

4star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.0

3star

MG

131.0

2star

No current season stats available

D

12.0

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

7.0

5star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.0

3star

MG

131.0

3star

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

i don’t mind the “best available” thing for top picks as long as later picks are used to address needs, problem is dodoro does things like spend second rounders on alex morgan

Not sure if it's just Dodoro but historically as a club we've had way, way too much faith in drafting flawed players with the expectation we'll be able to change them. This also extends to drafting players that have had a good junior career in one position but expecting them to play somewhere totally different. Langford, Laverde, Francis, Morgan, McGrath, Begley, Clarke etc. the list goes on. You can forgive some of the late round speculative picks like Clarke or genuine best available picks like Langford but the McGrath and Francis selections were straight up howlers at the time and have never turned better.

 

[Inspecta Gadget]

What kind of draft capital would it cost us to trade for a list manager from a better run club?

 

[NAB777]

Watching McCluggage have a ripper of a game last week was a beautiful reminder that everyone could see he was the obvious #1 pick in 2016... until we got the Dodoro special

I might be wrong, but I'm sure I saw a compilation a few years back of the pre draft picks, and McGrath was the consensus.

 

[Here_we_come]

I might be wrong, but I'm sure I saw a compilation a few years back of the pre draft picks, and McGrath was the consensus.

My memory was that it started to become more of a consensus closer to the draft, as McCluggage suffered some injuries late that impeded his testing. Although it was never consensus. That's how I remember it at least.

But therein lies the problem, it doesn't change the fact that McGrath was the least suited of the trio for our list at the time and we selected the best available rather than on needs. Generally I wouldn't mind this strategy so much if there is a standout, but when there's really not that much more than a coin flip about who will end up the better player, we should have prioritized needs.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

I might be wrong, but I'm sure I saw a compilation a few years back of the pre draft picks, and McGrath was the consensus.

He became the consensus due to rumours we were going to select him. I think a lot of people convinced themselves on this board because it was who we were taking and wanted to be positive. The wider draft board people didn't think he was the standout.

 

[Zach Package]

McGrath over Taranto and McCluggage was a bad decision. But in my mind the really bad decisions came after that.

Trading out of the subsequent drafts so that we had no high selections from 2017-2019, and then trading in to 2020, which was a complete unknown given the pandemic. 2020 is really looking like a disaster for us as we only have one player who's shown he can be half decent. The rest are looking doubtful at this stage.

I really feel like the void of talent from 2017-2020 is going to come back to bite us hard.

Nuh, other way around.

Bad decisions came before it when we decided to blow up the club, that forced us into drafting the only one of the 4-5 in the pick one frame that was an absolute sure thing with no risk associated with it. I'm not sure why anyone is begrudging it, it was the only move that we could make.

Although I will cede that there was a bad decision made after that which is trying to turn him into a midfielder when it looked like he was going to be the dominant small defender in the competition by the length of the Flemington straight.

 

[DonsRule]

My memory was that it started to become more of a consensus closer to the draft, as McCluggage suffered some injuries late that impeded his testing. Although it was never consensus. That's how I remember it at least.

But therein lies the problem, it doesn't change the fact that McGrath was the least suited of the trio for our list at the time and we selected the best available rather than on needs. Generally I wouldn't mind this strategy so much if there is a standout, but when there's really not that much more than a coin flip about who will end up the better player, we should have prioritized needs.

I think too its that we too often and almost always go with the best player rather than best suited which leads to some of out problems now

 

[The Donners]

I think too its that we too often and almost always go with the best player rather than best suited which leads to some of out problems now

The Sheedy rule. Sheedy had star teams or at least a star core group so could afford to pick best available.

 

[BrunoV]

The real error in 2016 is not splitting the pick.

When you're faced with an unconvincing top 5 to 10 split the pick.

Two picks in the teens. One in the teens and 2 in the 20s. That's a range that produced English, Bolton, Ridley and Berry.

Take future picks.

Have some balls. Don't cower to convention and commentary that cares about the NAB rising star.

 

[DonsRule]

The Sheedy rule. Sheedy had star teams or at least a star core group so could afford to pick best available.

Its probably not helped by the fact we probably haven't picked an absolute stand out in that time too, often I think very good players not I don't thin a generational talent

But over all its lead to our weakness I think of a one dimensional side that lacks balance

 

[The Donners]

Its probably not helped by the fact we probably haven't picked an absolute stand out in that time too, often I think very good players not I don't thin a generational talent

But over all its lead to our weakness I think of a one dimensional side that lacks balance

Only match winner we have is Stringer and he’s cooked.

 

[Westlo]

Trading into 2020 was a bit out of our hands.
Perhaps a carlton f1 to trade to the dogs for dunkley would have been the go.
The club as a whole made a mess of daniher and fantasia in '19

Saad and Daniher pissing off wasn't hit fault.

But trying to use those picks with a club who was going to have their NGA player bid on pick 1 is beyond stupid, that's entirely on him.

Either do the work yourself and turn them into Future firsts and try again or move on to a different player.

 

[Lore]

The Sheedy rule. Sheedy had star teams or at least a star core group so could afford to pick best available.

Sheedy was a great coach and got the best out of his players, but the recruiting and list management deck was also stacked in his favour in the days when half the talent in the country was undiscovered or underpaid in some backwater and you could buy enough starpower to put GWS's mid-2010s list to shame (and it likewise had many advantages...).

He wouldn't know a thing about how to build a list without those advantages, which have been steadily eroded since the mid-1990s, while we still have a list manager who learnt the job in 1997.

 

[thepokey]

"Picking the best available" just seems like a such a privileged position that you'd think a team that has all their ducks in a row and just need the cherry on top should be doing. It reeks of sorting supercoach scores by highest and just choosing whoever is on top. I can do that and I'll do it for half dodo's salary, **** it, hire me EFC

 

[jdstorm]

"Picking the best available" just seems like a such a privileged position that you'd think a team that has all their ducks in a row and just need the cherry on top should be doing. It reeks of sorting supercoach scores by highest and just choosing whoever is on top. I can do that and I'll do it for half dodo's salary, * it, hire me EFC

I feel like picked “best available “ is just a plausible deniability thing.

Who decided they were the best available, what criteria is that judged by. It’s a deflection to avoid accountability more than anything else.

A shiny distraction to draw focus away from an unbalanced list… they were the best available…. They just happened to be a 175cm mid/forward or a 200cm beanpole who could play anywhere if they could ever get on the park.

 

[Yoda_]

It feels like this club is always backfilling for a missed period of 3-4 drafts. I ******* swear I've read the same thing since at least 2004.

It's like a self inflicted purgatory.

now that you say it, how often do we hear "Essendon is a young and exciting team" ?

Feels like it's been that way since 2010

 

[DonsRule]

We've been that club that is a few year away for nearly 15 hears now I thin...probably closer to 10 but still

I will believe we changed when it happens I think

 

[Lore]

We've been that club that is a few year away for nearly 15 hears now I thin...probably closer to 10 but still

I will believe we changed when it happens I think

It would be helpful if we were actually less than "almost" for once. "Almost" seems to absolve responsibility for not actually being "good", with the result being that we never actually get to "good".

 

[DonsRule]

It would be helpful if we were actually less than "almost" for once. "Almost" seems to absolve responsibility for not actually being "good", with the result being that we never actually get to "good".

Yep its been no mans land for years I think not bad enough that you seriously look at a major rebuild. Good enough that we're often we can work on things from here.

 

[mike ross]

now that you say it, how often do we hear "Essendon is a young and exciting team" ?

Feels like it's been that way since 2010

And not being able to run out a season feels like it's been going on forever too