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

[man in outer]

When you look at teams who've had a crack at 3 or 4 premierships in a row...in the modern years, one thing is clear. That's simply that they've had a great number of midfielders where two or three of them are brownlow medalists.

It's staggering how many have no idea of how the modern game works, and what's our real standout concerns.

We've targetted highly talked about KPPs and drafted them. We've got more than what we require in our list. Yes, with Laycock going down and Bock not coming on, we require another ruckman. But not in the expense of a gun on baller with our first two picks.

Look at Melboure...they got Scully and Trengove, but instead of drafting a tall with pick 11, they went for Gysberts and then they followed that up with Tapscott at 19. I almost fell off the chair listening to the draft.

They already have Grimes, Morton, Blease, Strauss, Bennell...that too on top of Davey, Sylvia, Jones, Maloney. I mean, they are not trying to build the 8th best midfield in the comp..nor are they busy building an okay midfield to finish 12th. You don't hear the Melbourne recruiting people saying what the DUD was saying, do you?

They are in the process of building the best midfield group in the competition...they are really set now. And that's the key to sustained success in this modern era.

Who's the DUD picked up that make him this top shot, giving interviews like that? It's not about getting Melksham last year, with a couple of rookies and saying we've drafted enough...

We need to build the best midfield group in the comp, because we are going to face that Melbourne group for the next 10 years, with Martin, Cotchin, Foley, Deledio at Rich...Swallow, Cunnington, Ziebell, Bastinac, Adams at North....Gibbs, Murphy, Judd, Simpson, Yarran, Lucas at Carlton.
Swann, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Beams, Wellingham and Co at Collingoood. Bulldogs, St Kilda, Geelong...the bloody GC ...What hope do we have?

It will be another 10 years of horror, if we don't start addressing this in the draft for next 2-3 years and build a group of great midfielders.

We also need find a better way to develop our recruits...as equally. As they are not developing in the rate where other clubs are devloping their youngsters.

You should be recruiting manager!!! You are exactly right, ruckman can easily be added to side once a midfielders are there....i.e. how easy would it be to get last year's premiership ruckman right now (Blake) but you need $10m to get the midfielder. Jobe was not unlucky he is just below AA level (Lenny Hayes missed out guys). We need a goal kicking midfielder!!!! Go Bombers. Sorry about the extra thread WHOMB

 

[lemon chicken]

When you look at teams who've had a crack at 3 or 4 premierships in a row...in the modern years, one thing is clear. That's simply that they've had a great number of midfielders where two or three of them are brownlow medalists.

It's staggering how many have no idea of how the modern game works, and what's our real standout concerns.

We've targetted highly talked about KPPs and drafted them. We've got more than what we require in our list. Yes, with Laycock going down and Bock not coming on, we require another ruckman. But not in the expense of a gun on baller with our first two picks.

Look at Melboure...they got Scully and Trengove, but instead of drafting a tall with pick 11, they went for Gysberts and then they followed that up with Tapscott at 19. I almost fell off the chair listening to the draft.

They already have Grimes, Morton, Blease, Strauss, Bennell...that too on top of Davey, Sylvia, Jones, Maloney. I mean, they are not trying to build the 8th best midfield in the comp..nor are they busy building an okay midfield to finish 12th. You don't hear the Melbourne recruiting people saying what the DUD was saying, do you?

They are in the process of building the best midfield group in the competition...they are really set now. And that's the key to sustained success in this modern era.

Who's the DUD picked up that make him this top shot, giving interviews like that? It's not about getting Melksham last year, with a couple of rookies and saying we've drafted enough...

We need to build the best midfield group in the comp, because we are going to face that Melbourne group for the next 10 years, with Martin, Cotchin, Foley, Deledio at Rich...Swallow, Cunnington, Ziebell, Bastinac, Adams at North....Gibbs, Murphy, Judd, Simpson, Yarran, Lucas at Carlton.
Swann, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Beams, Wellingham and Co at Collingoood. Bulldogs, St Kilda, Geelong...the bloody GC ...What hope do we have?

It will be another 10 years of horror, if we don't start addressing this in the draft for next 2-3 years and build a group of great midfielders.

We also need find a better way to develop our recruits...as equally. As they are not developing in the rate where other clubs are devloping their youngsters.

Cool story bro. Jack Watts ringing any bells.

They also took 2 rucks in the last draft and have about 4 others on the main and rookie lists.

 

[Smyth94]

When you look at teams who've had a crack at 3 or 4 premierships in a row...in the modern years, one thing is clear. That's simply that they've had a great number of midfielders where two or three of them are brownlow medalists.

It's staggering how many have no idea of how the modern game works, and what's our real standout concerns.

We've targetted highly talked about KPPs and drafted them. We've got more than what we require in our list. Yes, with Laycock going down and Bock not coming on, we require another ruckman. But not in the expense of a gun on baller with our first two picks.

Look at Melboure...they got Scully and Trengove, but instead of drafting a tall with pick 11, they went for Gysberts and then they followed that up with Tapscott at 19. I almost fell off the chair listening to the draft.

They already have Grimes, Morton, Blease, Strauss, Bennell...that too on top of Davey, Sylvia, Jones, Maloney. I mean, they are not trying to build the 8th best midfield in the comp..nor are they busy building an okay midfield to finish 12th. You don't hear the Melbourne recruiting people saying what the DUD was saying, do you?

They are in the process of building the best midfield group in the competition...they are really set now. And that's the key to sustained success in this modern era.

Who's the DUD picked up that make him this top shot, giving interviews like that? It's not about getting Melksham last year, with a couple of rookies and saying we've drafted enough...

We need to build the best midfield group in the comp, because we are going to face that Melbourne group for the next 10 years, with Martin, Cotchin, Foley, Deledio at Rich...Swallow, Cunnington, Ziebell, Bastinac, Adams at North....Gibbs, Murphy, Judd, Simpson, Yarran, Lucas at Carlton.
Swann, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Beams, Wellingham and Co at Collingoood. Bulldogs, St Kilda, Geelong...the bloody GC ...What hope do we have?

It will be another 10 years of horror, if we don't start addressing this in the draft for next 2-3 years and build a group of great midfielders.

We also need find a better way to develop our recruits...as equally. As they are not developing in the rate where other clubs are devloping their youngsters.

We've drafted Myers, Zaka, Melksham, Colyer and Long in the past three seasons so it's not as if we're not drafting mids at all!

 

[Towno78]

Scott Lucas should have made AA, I was also unaware that he didn't. Ridiculous that he didn't. But he was drafted under the old recruiting manager - Noel Judkins IIRC. Same with Hird.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

I was also unaware Lucas never made AA, but you are right, he was drafted in 94, so I have no idea why Yaco brought it up.
Understandable though, Cameron Moonee is a far better player and more deserving of the AA title.

 

[Towno78]

When you look at teams who've had a crack at 3 or 4 premierships in a row...in the modern years, one thing is clear. That's simply that they've had a great number of midfielders where two or three of them are brownlow medalists.

It's staggering how many have no idea of how the modern game works, and what's our real standout concerns.

We've targetted highly talked about KPPs and drafted them. We've got more than what we require in our list. Yes, with Laycock going down and Bock not coming on, we require another ruckman. But not in the expense of a gun on baller with our first two picks.

Look at Melboure...they got Scully and Trengove, but instead of drafting a tall with pick 11, they went for Gysberts and then they followed that up with Tapscott at 19. I almost fell off the chair listening to the draft.

They already have Grimes, Morton, Blease, Strauss, Bennell...that too on top of Davey, Sylvia, Jones, Maloney. I mean, they are not trying to build the 8th best midfield in the comp..nor are they busy building an okay midfield to finish 12th. You don't hear the Melbourne recruiting people saying what the DUD was saying, do you?

They are in the process of building the best midfield group in the competition...they are really set now. And that's the key to sustained success in this modern era.

Who's the DUD picked up that make him this top shot, giving interviews like that? It's not about getting Melksham last year, with a couple of rookies and saying we've drafted enough...

We need to build the best midfield group in the comp, because we are going to face that Melbourne group for the next 10 years, with Martin, Cotchin, Foley, Deledio at Rich...Swallow, Cunnington, Ziebell, Bastinac, Adams at North....Gibbs, Murphy, Judd, Simpson, Yarran, Lucas at Carlton.
Swann, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Beams, Wellingham and Co at Collingoood. Bulldogs, St Kilda, Geelong...the bloody GC ...What hope do we have?

It will be another 10 years of horror, if we don't start addressing this in the draft for next 2-3 years and build a group of great midfielders.

We also need find a better way to develop our recruits...as equally. As they are not developing in the rate where other clubs are devloping their youngsters.

I'm unsure why citing Melbourne's strategy adds to any discussion. Yes it seems they are aiming to develop the best midfield in the comp. But since they haven't actually won a premiership yet or come close, I don't see how it can be used as evidence to what we should be doing.
I am very happy we have mostly targeted KPPs the last few years and similarly very happy we appear to have done a fantastic job of it. Our rise might be delayed relative to Melbourne, but I believe we are better placed to rise higher.
That said, now that we have secured our KPP stocks for some time. We do need to add quality midfielders to that group, and I agree we need to use our first 2 picks on mids this year. Then look at a ruck later in the draft.

 

[man in outer]

I'm unsure why citing Melbourne's strategy adds to any discussion. Yes it seems they are aiming to develop the best midfield in the comp. But since they haven't actually won a premiership yet or come close, I don't see how it can be used as evidence to what we should be doing.
I am very happy we have mostly targeted KPPs the last few years and similarly very happy we appear to have done a fantastic job of it. Our rise might be delayed relative to Melbourne, but I believe we are better placed to rise higher.
That said, now that we have secured our KPP stocks for some time. We do need to add quality midfielders to that group, and I agree we need to use our first 2 picks on mids this year. Then look at a ruck later in the draft.

What part of yesterday's match did not highlight to any poster that it is a depth of midfield runners that it needed to compete. Collingwood KPP arent that flash but having 6 quality mids that see it with the cup.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

Happy with Ryder and Hille. Beyond that there's trouble.

Happy to address the ruck issue. Just don't believe we should be addressing it with pick 8.

Agreed 100%.

I have no idea where this talk of pick 8 is coming from.

 

[yaco55]

I was also unaware Lucas never made AA, but you are right, he was drafted in 94, so I have no idea why Yaco brought it up.
Understandable though, Cameron Moonee is a far better player and more deserving of the AA title.

It was in response to Whomb's post No 69.

 

[Towno78]

It was in response to Whomb's post No 69.

No, you brought it up in post 62. As Lucas was drafted prior to JJ... Irrelevant point.

 

[Towno78]

What part of yesterday's match did not highlight to any poster that it is a depth of midfield runners that it needed to compete. Collingwood KPP arent that flash but having 6 quality mids that see it with the cup.

That was 1 game of football, deciding the premier for 1 season. Do you honestly think there is only 1 formula to success? Ridiculous.
St Kilda has been bloody close for 2 years, what do you conceive to be their strength? Sure they have a reasonable midfield, but it is players like Riewoldt and Goddard in particular that make them so strong.

 

[yodellinhank]

What part of yesterday's match did not highlight to any poster that it is a depth of midfield runners that it needed to compete. Collingwood KPP arent that flash but having 6 quality mids that see it with the cup.

And let's have a look at the first 2 rounds of their drafting for the decade...

2000: 3 Alan Didak, 19 Jason Cloke
2001: 11 Richard Cole, 27 Tom Davidson
2002: 21 Bo Nixon, 29 Luke Shackleton
2003: 17 Billy Morrison, 32 Brayden Shaw
2004: 10 Chris Egan, 23 Sean Rusling
2005: 2 Dale Thomas, 5 Scott Pendlebury, 21 Danny Stanley
2006: 8 Ben Reid, 10 Nathan Brown, 28 Chris Dawes
2007: 31 John McCarthy, (Traded their first rounder for a ruckman: Wood)
2008: 11 Steele Sidebottom, 29 Dayne Beams
2009: 30 Luke Ball (Traded their first rounder for a ruckman: Jolly)

So, in 10 years of drafting there are 2 drafts that stick out in which they have taken mids that fit into the current spread. You may be generous and throw Ball as a retread and Didak who is more of a flanker in there, but it seems to show; they have either taken keys, traded for keys, or drafted players who haven't made it with many of their early picks. And won a premiership. Sack Dodoro/Hine?

 

[lemon chicken]

What part of yesterday's match did not highlight to any poster that it is a depth of midfield runners that it needed to compete. Collingwood KPP arent that flash but having 6 quality mids that see it with the cup.

Didnt they trade their first round pick for Jolly .

 

[man in outer]

And let's have a look at the first 2 rounds of their drafting for the decade...

2000: 3 Alan Didak, 19 Jason Cloke
2001: 11 Richard Cole, 27 Tom Davidson
2002: 21 Bo Nixon, 29 Luke Shackleton
2003: 17 Billy Morrison, 32 Brayden Shaw
2004: 10 Chris Egan, 23 Sean Rusling
2005: 2 Dale Thomas, 5 Scott Pendlebury, 21 Danny Stanley
2006: 8 Ben Reid, 10 Nathan Brown, 28 Chris Dawes
2007: 31 John McCarthy, (Traded their first rounder for a ruckman: Wood)
2008: 11 Steele Sidebottom, 29 Dayne Beams
2009: 30 Luke Ball (Traded their first rounder for a ruckman: Jolly)

So, in 10 years of drafting there are 2 drafts that stick out in which they have taken mids that fit into the current spread. You may be generous and throw Ball as a retread and Didak who is more of a flanker in there, but it seems to show; they have either taken keys, traded for keys, or drafted players who haven't made it with many of their early picks. And won a premiership. Sack Dodoro/Hine?

Cant believe that you would use that as an arguement to support AD. Hine has come in and in 3 of the past 5 years used draft picks for mids and in the 2008 draft when he didnt it did not contribute to the premiership at all!!!!

Clearly has a strategy of getting quailty mids now as demonstrated by getting Ball this year. Anyway I have had my say. Hope Hirdy drafts mids and looks very closely at the player development area. Enjoy the summer.

 

[Bomberman86]

posted a similar quote of the afl website from him in the draft thread

Id damn nearly neck myself if I find out theyre even CONSIDERING taking another tall.

 

[Slattery_20]

They've really had 3 "hits" in terms of runners in the last 3 years, and 2 rookies the year before that.
Ball can tongue mine, he doesn't run.
They used first rounders on talls, and on smalls, and traded them for spuds. Long-term strategy? Can't see one.

Smalls in 05
Talls 06
Trades & fails in 07
Smalls in 08
Traded out of 09.

It's almost like they're just appraising what the best option is every year, not sticking to some stupid mantra and chasing something that's not there.

 

[yodellinhank]

It's almost like they're just appraising what the best option is every year, not sticking to some stupid mantra and chasing something that's not there.

Very well said.

 

[reincarnated]

The more you look at the talent pool, there is no doubt in my mind that we need to snag a midfielder. It looks like the 2001 draft for mids.

Also, with the change to interchange rule, it looks like the death of the second ruckman. Everyone will follow the Collingwood mould of L.Brown type.

I don't think we even need another ruckman now, may be rookie list one, like Ned Daniher.

 

[Slattery_20]

I don't think we even need another ruckman now, may be rookie list one, like Ned Daniher.

The people I've spoken to who've watched him reckon he's about 3 years away from being at CBock standard. The term giraffe was used.
How about not.

 

[Smokin]

The more you look at the talent pool, there is no doubt in my mind that we need to snag a midfielder. It looks like the 2001 draft for mids.

Also, with the change to interchange rule, it looks like the death of the second ruckman. Everyone will follow the Collingwood mould of L.Brown type.

I think we have to take a mid, no doubt about it and the club knows this. It would take me 3 months to pick my jaw off up off the ground if we didnt.

Your second point is very important going forward, and IMO all clubs simply have to look at this.

The new rule theoretically reduces the interchange by 25%, from 4 to 3. Forget the sub in the big scheme of things, this can only be used once and most clubs will hold it to the 2nd half in case actual injury etc.

The obvious trend, before the rule for teams such as Coll, Geel, St. K to an extent is the 2nd ruckman being a forward come ruckman...the 2nd ruck position is already a casualty of ensuring the maximum number of midfield rotations.

Malthouse said this on the coach last night - sorry forwards, sorry defenders we have to give the mids the max rotations - words to that effect.

I see this even more pronounced going forward - not only will lumbering rucks become more and more irrelevant. The rotations will continue to be used for the mids, forcing keys to play more time on ground, rucks to be able to go forward etc.

I think we are exceptionally placed with the new rule, IMO Ryder is the perfect ruck for this, very flexible. A slower game will help Watson and Hurley no end IMO - Hurley especially as he is more of the old school key position player. I think it also helps keys with naturally big tanks like Riewoldt (and gumby for us) as key defenders are going to be able to rotate less and less off them.

I think that going forward, 2-3 genuine rucks may be the max on a list, at any given time. More time will be put into the forward/defender come ruck position, as teams will sacrifice the 2nd ruck who can only ruck. Effectively a waste of a position.

Interestingly, already on the Adelaide board they are already questioning Jacobs - as the lumbering type have to be the absolute gun #1 ruck, as they may get squeezed out.

Just a school of thought going forward, may be worth while sitting back on the ruck position until the game naturally evolves a bit more. This new rule may have a bigger effect on the game than most rules ever have, in terms of list and game structure.

Not that we will, surely, but definitely not the time to go after a ruck with pick #8.

I now nearly would subscribe to the Malthouse/Roos school of thinking - let another develop the ruck, and trade them in later. It is a bit of a waste having a guy develop for 5-7 years on your list, unless he is an exceptionally mobile young gun ruck who can multi-position. Not many of them.

 

[Slattery_20]

Apparently Dean Cox (ie rucks who chase kicks) was also the death-knell of "lumbering ruckmen" about 5 years ago too.
I remain unconvinced.

 

[Smokin]

well the landscape, especially with the new rule has had a massive shift from 5 years ago.

But it isnt so much the first ruck which cant be lumbering, it's that 2nd ruck. We have already seen it with a fair few of the top teams, this rule with force us down this track even further.

You dont want too many on the list who can only play ruck. You will need flexibility, as the mids will still be rotated, take that to the bank. Its the others who will be rotated less and less.

 

[Slattery_20]

well the landscape, especially with the new rule has had a massive shift from 5 years ago.

But it isnt so much the first ruck which cant be lumbering, it's that 2nd ruck. We have already seen it with a fair few of the top teams, this rule with force us down this track even further.

You dont want too many on the list who can only play ruck. You will need flexibility, as the mids will still be rotated, take that to the bank. Its the others who will be rotated less and less.

Yeah yeah, I read the HS too, I just don't believe everything in it.

St K played 2 rucks almost all the year. Bulldogs 2 (and one of them a spud) all year. Sydney played 2 rucks (and one of them a fair unco) all the year. Hawks too, Blues. So there's more than half your final 8. This is the first time I can remember a flag side not having 2 proper rucks. Just wait and see, Leigh Brown will go out of form, Pies will play 2 rucks, "death of the bit-parts ruckman"....
Essentially, it's just fashions changing. This bitsa ruckman thing will probably last 1-2 years, until a side dominates with 2 proper ruckmen, then the fashion will swing back the other way again.

Talent > type. 2 good ruckmen > 1 good one and a shit bitsa. Likewise, 1 good one and a good bitsa > 2 shit proper ones.

 

[Smokin]

Yeah yeah, I read the HS too, I just don't believe everything in it.

St K played 2 rucks almost all the year. Bulldogs 2 (and one of them a spud) all year. Sydney played 2 rucks (and one of them a fair unco) all the year. Hawks too, Blues. So there's more than half your final 8. This is the first time I can remember a flag side not having 2 proper rucks. Just wait and see, Leigh Brown will go out of form, Pies will play 2 rucks, "death of the bit-parts ruckman"....
Essentially, it's just fashions changing. This bitsa ruckman thing will probably last 1-2 years, until a side dominates with 2 proper ruckmen, then the fashion will swing back the other way again.

Talent > type. 2 good ruckmen > 1 good one and a shit bitsa. Likewise, 1 good one and a good bitsa > 2 shit proper ones.

havnt even read the sun today, seriously.

It isnt so much not playing 2 ruckmen, its at least one of them has to have another string to offer. And it isnt 2 good rucks v 1 good and shit bitsa...you have to add an intangible like 1 good, 1 part time plus X number of rotations allowed for the midfield. Very hard to quanity obviously.

St. Ki I think worked out by GF time that 2 ruckman was not the go, they could have played Gardiner and McEvoy if they wanted. Bulldogs ordinary there but that is what they have, Syd had the Seaby injury but do play a fwd come ruck often, Hawthorn dont play bitsa ruckmen? do they have anything else??? Carlton will play Kruezer when fit 100% - he is the extremely mobile.

If teams dont have 2 good enough, that is a totally different story than the overall trend of the game - which is giving midfields as many rotations as possible.

Anyway, time will tell. I see it is fairly obvious that 2nd ruck spot is now highlighted mosted with the rule change.

Lets see what happens.

 

[Towno78]

Massive overreaction. This rule won't change anything for rucks. All it will do will bring rotations down to about 100 per game.
Teams will still need to play 2 rucks each game as they will need a backup for injury and rotations. Whether that's a bit part ruck who can provide a chop out or its a second ruck who can go forward, doesn't matter, but that hasn't changed from what is already the case.
Player 22 will be a midfielder who will provide fresh legs in the second half irrespective of whether there has been an injury or not. Those fresh legs will be used. No impact on rucks.

 

[Slattery_20]

We could argue semantics all day on this.
You're right about it affecting rotations, my point is at some point a club will again have 2 good ruckmen who can both clearly win their match-up; which makes the difference between the midfielders resting 19 mins and 20 mins pg nigh-on irrelevant.

Wait and see. 2 years down the track, a side will win a flag with 2 full-time ruckmen again. Then Sheahan etc (who really only follow & comment on trends) will bang on about the end of the in-betweener. 3 years later, the opposite will happen. Happens time and time again.
Guarantee it.