I am sorry Scott I got it wrong

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by Libba_39
Clayton is a very good recruiter but perhaps not as great as some think.
However poor coaching is the main reason why some of our young recruits have not progressed as well as we would have hoped.
Spotting talent is one thing , good management is another.
More of the blame lies with the coaches and management of players.

Fair call. I never said he ewasnt good. The club and the media refer to him as the best in the Biz an analysis of the results say other wise. He lack of results and missed opportunities have hurt us. As they say you have to have the cattle and we dont.

Average recruiting has been part of the problem when it could have been a very big part of a solution.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by LondonBulldog
Bit harsh Starship.

I think your focusing on the wrong draft. Our number 10 selections in 2000 and 2001 were poor. Two light weight outside running players in McMahon and Power. That's were Clayton has aired and even bind freddy can see that.

p.s. Out of your 1999 list, I'd take Cameron Bruce any day, especially at 64. I also watch a bit of melbourne games and the guy is pure silk with the ball. Reads well, disposes well.

Yes LB I agree. I am saving those drafts for latter.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by Ching
Where's progrocker when you need backup?

West was also useless against the Saints and should learn how to ruck.
Grant needs to join the footy show regulars just so he can speak rubbish more often.

Bugger-we missed Luke Livingstone as well!

Your my role model.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by Sporty Spice
selective sampling is a wonderful thing

Stay tuned for the 00, 01 & 02 drafts

 

[Rocco Jones]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I am sorry Scott I got it wrong

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
A **** weak reply from a light weight.
Well smart arse why do we not win if we have such a good list. Oh yes I forgot its Rhodes fault.

I didn't say we had a good list clown shoes. I just think that 1999 was a good draft for us.

It's like saying if Scott West is so good, why don't we win? The years prior to Clayton, our drafting was awful. If you are gonna blame someone for problems with our list, blame Kleinman.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I am sorry Scott I got it wrong

Originally posted by Rocco Jones
I didn't say we had a good list clown shoes. I just think that 1999 was a good draft for us.

It's like saying if Scott West is so good, why don't we win? The years prior to Clayton, our drafting was awful. If you are gonna blame someone for problems with our list, blame Kleinman.

and bored.

 

[Rocco Jones]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I am sorry Scott I got it wrong

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
and bored.

What are you confused by?

I'm guessing its either:

-ou don't know who Kleinman is/was. If so he was in charg of recruiting before Clayton.

-don't get my West comment. Just cause we aren't winning doesn't mean everything is wrong with our list. West is a gun, but we still don't win. 1999 draft was good for us, but we still don't win.

 

[Westy_Boy]

Re: Re: Re: I am sorry Scott I got it wrong

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Gia is a an average at best player.

I'm sure blokes like Wheelan and O'keefe instead of Gia and Hahn would have us fighting for a top 4 spot.

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
So you justify our errors by pointing to other clubs failures. What a success in life you must be.
We should only be interested in the absolute success at our club. Justifying poor results in light of others failing is what is endemically wrong with the club "we can be mediocre because others are". You my friend are ordinary.

No recruiter in the past 20 years has come out of a draft with 'absolute success'. With at least one or two picks, you can always find a better option that was available, with any recruiter, in any draft.

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Stay tuned for the 00, 01 & 02 drafts
Yes LB I agree. I am saving those drafts for latter.

You seem to be getting some kind of perverse enjoyment out of this. You've already started 10 topics on this subject - you think Clayton is overrated and Rohde is a mastermind who doesn't have the cattle. We get the friggen point. Start another few and all you'll be doing is coming across as an obssessive tool.

 

[Ching]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Your my role model.

Thanks
Remind me to teach you how to get a clue.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Why dont you pull the thread if you dont like what I have to say. Thats your usual form, I am sure that you must have been bullied as a kid or your just a sook.

So you want to live in a fantasy world? Fair enough, just let us know when you come back into the real world so we know to start taking you seriously.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by Ching
Thanks
Remind me to teach you how to get a clue.

Let me know when you get one, I would be very interested.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by localyokel
So you want to live in a fantasy world? Fair enough, just let us know when you come back into the real world so we know to start taking you seriously.

Looks like I hit a raw nerve.

Do you mean to say that this amateurish cyber board dominated by a an anonimous cheer squad "mafia" mentality isnt the real world. Well I'll be stuffed.

 

[Borgsta]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Looks like I hit a raw nerve.

Do you mean to say that this amateurish cyber board dominated by a an anonimous cheer squad "mafia" mentality isnt the real world. Well I'll be stuffed.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by Borgsta
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Yet you took the trouble to reply.

Time to get a hobby dont you think

 

[Borgsta]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Yet you took the trouble to reply.

Time to get a hobby dont you think

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Looks like I hit a raw nerve.

Do you mean to say that this amateurish cyber board dominated by a an anonimous cheer squad "mafia" mentality isnt the real world. Well I'll be stuffed.

Youre a bit like the energiser bunny. You just go on and on and on.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by localyokel
Youre a bit like the energiser bunny. You just go on and on and on.

And individuals like you keep replying. Says more about you doesnt it.

 

[OldSchool]

Rocco / Trooper,

I have removed a couple of your contributions. Please cease with the banter.

 

[Rocco Jones]

Originally posted by OldSchool
Rocco / Trooper,

I have removed a couple of your contributions. Please cease with the banter.

But I genuinely wanted to know whether it tastes better when you have had pineapple.

Sorry for being a SNAG

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by OldSchool
Rocco / Trooper,

I have removed a couple of your contributions. Please cease with the banter.

Good move.
Yes it does get a bit childish. I am not pleased about retaliating. But it seems that you cannot have a unfashionable ( in this place) stance without either being told by a moderator to find the door or being personally attacked.(as much as it is possible in the world of anonimity)

 

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Good move.
Yes it does get a bit childish. I am not pleased about retaliating. But it seems that you cannot have a unfashionable ( in this place) stance without either being told by a moderator to find the door or being personally attacked.(as much as it is possible in the world of anonimity)

Do you think it might have something to do with the way you are critical of the club ?
At times it appears that you intentionally take the sledgehammer approach to the club in some form to provoke a heated response.

If that was what you were after then you shouldn't be surprised however, if you are after more genuine type debate then having a sarcastic jab at Clayton in the in thread title and calling his first draft effort a pack of duds will never encourage it.


I noticed in one of your earlier posts you made a reference about posts being removed by the mods, well we normally don't do that and when we do we normally advise the person concerned. I have however been merging 'like threads' in an effort to keep the board in order. When I see two or three recent threads on the same subject I merge them together. That might explain why you think things have been removed.

PM me if you want to discuss it further.

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by OldSchool
Do you think it might have something to do with the way you are critical of the club ?
At times it appears that you intentionally take the sledgehammer approach to the club in some form to provoke a heated response.

If that was what you were after then you shouldn't be surprised however, if you are after more genuine type debate then having a sarcastic jab at Clayton in the in thread title and calling his first draft effort a pack of duds will never encourage it.


I noticed in one of your earlier posts you made a reference about posts being removed by the mods, well we normally don't do that and when we do we normally advise the person concerned. I have however been merging 'like threads' in an effort to keep the board in order. When I see two or three recent threads on the same subject I merge them together. That might explain why you think things have been removed.

PM me if you want to discuss it further.

Nothing suprises me in this medium.
Not interested in debate on this occassion simply answering abuse received under another thread hence the Tittle. In context.

Claytons results (or lack of) speaks for it self I didnt invent those selections. I would not be so strong on it if it were not for the club, suppoters and media pumping him up for something is is not Quote "the best in ths Business' David Smorgon AGM 03. I have heard it from Kb, Smorgo,Wallace, Healy and Walls. and numerous posters on this forum. Clayton seems competent enough but the results show that he is at best and average performer when it comes to recruiting since joining the WB.

"Duds' maybe a bit strong but they are certainly not world beaters. Compared to what we missed out on most are plodders.

 

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER
Nothing suprises me in this medium.
Not interested in debate on this occassion simply answering abuse received under another thread hence the Tittle. In context.

Trooper are you not interested in footy discussions ?

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER

Claytons results (or lack of) speaks for it self I didnt invent those selections. I would not be so strong on it if it were not for the club, suppoters and media pumping him up for something is is not Quote "the best in ths Business' David Smorgon AGM 03. I have heard it from Kb, Smorgo,Wallace, Healy and Walls. and numerous posters on this forum. Clayton seems competent enough but the results show that he is at best and average performer when it comes to recruiting since joining the WB.

I regularly have a good look at all things to do with the draft and think Clayton is one of the better recruiting managers going around. Hindsight is a very powerful weapon when you want to compare draft picks but when I looked at the class of 99 last year I really only think he got one selection wrong and that being Wiggins over Biglands. Clayton is far better than average.

Originally posted by STARSHIPTROOPER

"Duds' maybe a bit strong but they are certainly not world beaters. Compared to what we missed out on most are plodders.

Using the term 'plodder' to describe the class of 99 is not much of a concession if it was meant to be.

 

[Rocco Jones]

A question to the man with the caps, do you think maybe Kleinman is to blame at all for our current problems?

 

[STARSHIPTROOPER]

Originally posted by OldSchool
Trooper are you not interested in footy discussions ?



I regularly have a good look at all things to do with the draft and think Clayton is one of the better recruiting managers going around. Hindsight is a very powerful weapon when you want to compare draft picks but when I looked at the class of 99 last year I really only think he got one selection wrong and that being Wiggins over Biglands. Clayton is far better than average.



Using the term 'plodder' to describe the class of 99 is not much of a concession if it was meant to be.

Then you are far more accepting than I am. As for hindsight the entire premise of these types of forums is reflective comment with a bit of 'what if' thrown in. As for concession I am happy to stay with "duds" ...... hoping like hell that I am proved wrong.