List Mgmt. State of the list

[craig crowing]

Look it is ok to want to push these draftees up but they have to perform first in SANFL. Yes we have been slow to push players into team and keeping Douglas - Mackay etc . But currently not one is demanding to be picked ,not even Greenwood really saying pick me. When CEY gets in our top players our future AFL players not progressing .
Simple our picks since Milera- Doedee just haven't shown anything and we trade in players that not fit.
Even Jones not done enough really to stay in team , but hope given another week.

 

[Elite Crow]

Cant it retain players because of the physcological profile of those they are picking up were never going to stay or because its a shit place to be?

Given we’ve lost key players dating back to Bock, I would say we haven’t developed a culture that they want to stay.

Davis, Gunston and Danger were all Rendell’s so unless you want to blame him and Ogilvie, it has to be the club.

 

[Cap]

West Coast also have more players returning home, Jetta, Cripps and Yeo.

They retain their players better, even the interstates.

Oh and their management hasn’t lost them 5 quality picks.

Its funny, i have family and friends in Perth and they just seem to be drawn back to Perth more than SA kids/people seem to be.

Not sure if it is the distance? Perth is nice but it has nothing on Adelaide.

 

[marty36]

Given we’ve lost key players dating back to Bock, I would say we haven’t developed a culture that they want to stay.

Davis, Gunston and Danger were all Rendell’s so unless you want to blame him and Ogilvie, it has to be the club.

IM happy to blame whoever, What are your thoughts on lever gov and CC leaving

I know you are blaming tippetgate for the list and its predicament due to the last picks but since then do you believe we have recruited well

 

[Cap]

Cant it retain players because of the physcological profile of those they are picking up were never going to stay or because its a shit place to be?

I would love to know if the club has reviewed the draft notes of the Dangers et al and ensure we don't make the same mistakes again.

Lever and Dangerfield have some fairly obvious similarities, but im sure there'd be something in it if they did investigate it.

 

[marty36]

I would love to know if the club has reviewed the draft notes of the Dangers et al and ensure we don't make the same mistakes again.

Lever and Dangerfield have some fairly obvious similarities, but im sure there'd be something in it if they did investigate it.

All angles need to be investigated

 

[Cap]

All angles need to be investigated

I agree, but have they!

 

[marty36]

I agree, but have they!

We will never know

 

[Elite Crow]

IM happy to blame whoever, What are your thoughts on lever gov and CC leaving

I know you are blaming tippetgate for the list and its predicament due to the last picks but since then do you believe we have recruited well

Yes

 

[GreyCrow]

Look it is ok to want to push these draftees up but they have to perform first in SANFL. Yes we have been slow to push players into team and keeping Douglas - Mackay etc . But currently not one is demanding to be picked ,not even Greenwood really saying pick me. When CEY gets in our top players our future AFL players not progressing .
Simple our picks since Milera- Doedee just haven't shown anything and we trade in players that not fit.
Even Jones not done enough really to stay in team , but hope given another week.

Again , this comes back to personal philosophy and the player themselves.

You can throw 3 kids into the deep end of the pool and 1 will make the edge. It gets back to Marty and his psychological profile. Rory Sloane got picked because of a competitive desire , Chayce Jones, I see has the same, so I play him every game I can until he collapses.

Darcy Fogarty played against men as a 16 year old. I would play him even if it means sitting him on the bench and be part of the forward rotation. Get him in the side and find out what he can do.

Gallucci looks to struggle in the SANFL yet seems to be better in the AFL.

Sometimes it shouldnt be about demand but about getting games into players.

 

[arrowman]

I actually think this is the entire argument of both sides of the fence

Some want the slow develop in the SANFL and replace the injured/retired/traded. Others want to break up the band as soon as they start going to bed at 9pm. Bring in the kids early

I do think our SANFL development has its merits and for the right player can work wonders, but I also see other players that are wasted in the SANFL and can be just as good if not better at a higher level.

Again its not about identifying talent, its identifying the right time to bring them forward and let the old go. And this goes back to the coaches philosophy of continuity that you identified in your previous post.

I'll use this post as a hook for my thoughts.

In general, and without breaking it down player-by-player, I don't think it was wrong to approach 2019 basing our team around the best 22-26 from the last couple of years including 2017, for one more shot at it. Of course there was a risk (a high risk, maybe) that some of those players, especially the seniors, wouldn't have it in them - and some would say that's what is turning out to be true - but the alternative would have been to give up on 2019 from the outset and "play the kids" a year early, if you like. I don't think it would have been justified to take that tack from the start of 2019.

Where are we now? Well, I don't think we're a serious shot in 2019 (miracles aside), but that doesn't mean that as of round 3 we should start on "play the kids" mode. It does mean - IMO - that we should be putting some games into our recent draftees, that we won't be contenders in 2020, and hopefully we're looking at a reset / refresh rather than complete rebuild, to attack the thing seriously from 2021.

(Edit: And that's assuming that the list / selected 22 are the major part of the problem as opposed to coaching / gameplan / structures, and I'm not at all convinced of that.)

There are enough recent draftees who haven't been exposed yet, plus our 2019 picks 1 & 19 to make it an open question as to how quickly that reset/refresh might show fruit. I hope we start 2020 without having to play too many youngsters in their first game. 3rd-4th-8th game maybe, but not their first.

 

[GreyCrow]

In general, and without breaking it down player-by-player, I don't think it was wrong to approach 2019 basing our team around the best 22-26 from the last couple of years including 2017, for one more shot at it. Of course there was a risk (a high risk, maybe) that some of those players, especially the seniors, wouldn't have it in them - and some would say that's what is turning out to be true - but the alternative would have been to give up on 2019 from the outset and "play the kids" a year early, if you like. I don't think it would have been justified to take that tack from the start of 2019.

I dont disagree with the premise that there is 'one more shot' and nor do I have a major philosophical disagreement in having a core best 22-26. The issue is the lack of recognition of when a player is not at that 2017 standard. ''Backing them in'' is ok for a little while but the trend line on some players is obvious to see, even for us not close to the club

Maybe it is just about dropping them to remind them of the standard they need to be at, or dropping them from this 22-26 list

 

[Ramify]

No
That is what I am trying to point out
We boxed him in for a certain position
He had contested marking and athleticism we could have given him games
Of what I spotted on SAFL streaming
He had versatility

Or we could have gone full balls to the wall outside the box type thinking and played him alongside Lever instead of persisting with this "ideal" positional structure B.S where someone like Hartigan,Otto or Cheney are essential components.

When your entire football philosophy is built upon the foundation of continuity you’re completely stuffed. Pyke is a Craig clone. Continuity equals unaccountability. Nobody is held accountable for poor performance. It starts at the very top with ferret face and unfortunately Pyke slipped in seamlessly.

This isn't Pykes (TM) mantra, it's an AFC mantra that Pyke has simply jumped on board with. The same shit has been happening with every coach since Blight.
It is ingrained within our stupid bloody culture.
.

 

[Jirkago75]

I actually think this is the entire argument of both sides of the fence

Some want the slow develop in the SANFL and replace the injured/retired/traded. Others want to break up the band as soon as they start going to bed at 9pm. Bring in the kids early

I do think our SANFL development has its merits and for the right player can work wonders, but I also see other players that are wasted in the SANFL and can be just as good if not better at a higher level.

Again its not about identifying talent, its identifying the right time to bring them forward and let the old go. And this goes back to the coaches philosophy of continuity that you identified in your previous post.

SANFL is good for developing smaller to mid size players but unfortunately if you are tall there is a difference. Look at Fog as an example, because we have 2 or 3 ruckman. Fog can’t play forward as it will make us to tall and he’s put in the backline, he’s our best hope up forward and he’s not going to develop there.

Mids and hf and hub can be moved anywhere and still be ok. This won’t change because we can’t not play a listed player like Hunter.

For Fog to develop into a good player he should be our only tall up forward with smalls around him.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[King Elvis]

This isn't Pykes (TM) mantra, it's an AFC mantra that Pyke has simply jumped on board with. The same shit has been happening with every coach since Blight.
It is ingrained within our stupid bloody culture.
.

I was a huge Neil Craig fan; should've won a flag, but clearly lost his way towards the end.

Seems like he was such a strong and influential figure, that his approach and methodology became ingrained in the culture of the AFC; and we still operate under it.

 

[marty36]

I was a huge Neil Craig fan; should've won a flag, but clearly lost his way towards the end.

Seems like he was such a strong and influential figure, that his approach and methodology became ingrained in the culture of the AFC; and we still operate under it.

Craigy was mr competitive and was exceptionally good at it but didnt have that elite factor that takes you to being the best

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[King Elvis]

Craigy was mr competitive and was exceptionally good at it but didnt have that elite factor that takes you to being the best

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

As a coach?

I disagree, he was elite for a few years, and he changed the face of the game.

 

[marty36]

As a coach?

I disagree, he was elite for a few years, and he changed the face of the game.

As player and coach the guy is unbelievably competitive but fails going all the way probably because he is too conservative

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ramify]

Have to agree with this.
Have said plenty of times on here that I believe premiership coaches need a touch of eccentricity or the crazies in order to relate to the players in their side with the same personality traits I.e those with xfactor or maniac like hardness which often are the difference in a GF, not so much your Nathan van Berlo types.

 

[Big Crow]

Minimal list development this year, in terms of blooding new players. Calling it right now, this how the season will play out. Warning: This started as an attempt at humour and ended up bleak.

Phase 1:
Not a prediction. As part of a disappointing start to the year with many underperforming senior players, we make minimal changes other than those required due to injury. End up 1-2, refuse to swing the axe.

Phase 2:
Hit a softish run in the draw and by round 9 we’re back in finals contention at let’s say 6-3. The old line of “you can only beat who you play” is trotted out on 5AA. No need to change the lineup, we’re winning after all.

Phase 3:
Soft run ends. We lose a few games on the trot, but pinch a couple here and there when we remember how to football. Now back in the pack but still in the hunt for a top 8 finish and “our focus remains on playing finals” so we are going to back the same lot in to get the job done.

Phase 4:
Rounds 17-20, a few more soft ones and we find ourselves with a sneaky chance at the top four. Back ‘em in!

Phase 5:
We do not take our sneaky chance. West Coast and Collingwood tear us apart with their speed and skills, but we do knock off the Western Bulldogs in round 23 despite some extremely questionable umpiring. I chuck several items at my new TV while listening to the commentators barrack for the dogs.

Phase 6:
We play finals but ultimately are off the pace against the best. Bow out in week 2 of the finals. Do it all again next year.

 

[King Elvis]

As player and coach the guy is unbelievably competitive but fails going all the way probably because he is too conservative

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Craig should've won a flag in 05 or 06; the amount of factors that conspired against us was insane... but I agree with your general premise.

 

[Golumless]

My mate Marty reckons we’ve got a great list and there are no issues with it.

In reality, our list is short of 2 first rounders, 2 seconds and Tippett compensation which should have been a first.

That’s 5 players quality picks that would be 24-25 and in their prime.

Throw in losing Lever, Cameron and Gov in recent years. All of these players would be in our best 22.

Yes we have been compensated with decent picks but they take time.

This is going to hinder us for years to come.

As Tex and co move on we haven’t got ready to go replacements because they haven’t played or are still young, again I refer back to our lost picks and players, these guys should be filling these spots, not a 19 year old Fog, he should be played as part of his development sure but he’s not going to reproduce Tex’s best form for a few years yet.

The kids we have mostly can’t get a look in especially up forward as Lynch, Tex, Jenkins and Betts occupy 4 spots and despite declining aren’t going anywhere in a hurry. That’s 4 spots tied up.

We also prefer to recreate roles for senior players like Douglas and to get Mackay to 250 games.

Ogilvie has done a great job with what he’s had to work with, turning late picks into players and players that have left we’ve improved their value at the trade.

But Trigg, Reid and our off -field management by not retaining players have ****** our club. We needed to have taken our chance in 2017, but the players and coaches ****** it in the GF.

Anyway, not sure what the point of this thread is but I needed a rant.

Right now the state of our list is it should really sitting on a precipice. Get deepish into finals this year, or blow it up and begin restructuring. Unfortunately, there are a lot of bad contracts there if we opt for that restructure which may see us in no mans land for 2-3 years longer then we should be. Tex, Lynch, Sloane for starters. Mind you there is value in having veterans around a rebuilding side, so it's not the worst thing in the world.

That said, you did hit the point about why I was super critical of that Lynch contract - was our last chance to fix that issue you mentioned with kids up forward. I'd say Betts is done end of this year though (or after the mid season depending on our team record), seeing he's a 2020 OOC, we've traded for his long term replacement already who is showing signs of being ready and really Betts is just an average small forward now. I can't see us giving him much game time next year outside of a farewell game against Carlton or something like that no matter our situation. Jenkins, Lynch, Tex we're stuck with for a while, which is an absolute **** up with a talent like Fogarty in the wings.

Player retention is just going to be a permanent problem for everyone from herein and it's only going to get worse as it becomes even more accepted. The question is more how can a club negate the loss when it occurs, not prevent it. Nothing will, or even can prevent it, outside of being a consistent threat of winning premierships or dishing out terrible contracts.

That said, there is no point that losing Lever has ever been a loss to this club. We dodged a massive bullet there considering we would have been paying someone 6-800k (depending on when we tendered a 600k offer) for production that was achieved by a rookie player.

 

[Klug]

Minimal list development this year, in terms of blooding new players. Calling it right now, this how the season will play out. Warning, bleak.

Phase 1:
Not a prediction. As part of a disappointing start to the year with many underperforming senior players, we make minimal changes other than those required due to injury. End up 1-2, refuse to swing the axe.

Phase 2:
Hit a softish run in the draw and by round 9 we’re back in finals contention at let’s say 6-3. The old line of “you can only beat who you play” is trotted out on 5AA. No need to change the lineup, we’re winning after all.

Phase 3:
Soft run ends. We lose a few games on the trot, but pinch a couple here and there when we remember how to football. Now back in the pack but still in the hunt for a top 8 finish and “our focus remains on playing finals” so we are going to back the same lot in to get the job done.

Phase 4:
Rounds 17-20, a few more soft ones and we find ourselves with a sneaky chance at the top four. Back ‘em in!

Phase 5:
We do not take our sneaky chance. West Coast and Collingwood tear us apart with their speed and skills, but we do knock off the Western Bulldogs in round 23 despite some extremely questionable umpiring. I chuck several items at my new TV while listening to the commentators barrack for the dogs.

Phase 6:
We play finals but ultimately are off the pace against the best. Bow out in week 2 of the finals. Do it all again next year.

Or we roll into the round 14 bye at 4w (Syd Saints Freo Suns) and 9 losses. Finals are shot.

Seedsman hasn't been sighted despite Ben Hart declaring him a possibility to play after 4 weeks, and neither has Luke Brown.

Over the r14 bye weekend, the club use this as an opportunity to host an encore performance of a Burton & Pyke press conference to address supporter angst about missing the finals, and stubbornly refusing to make wholesale changes.

 

[Golumless]

I would love to know if the club has reviewed the draft notes of the Dangers et al and ensure we don't make the same mistakes again.

Lever and Dangerfield have some fairly obvious similarities, but im sure there'd be something in it if they did investigate it.

How on earth could you consider Dangerfield and a drafting mistake as a legitimate thought? There is no point drafting one of the best players in the league could ever be considered a mistake, even if he left in FA. It's not like we lost him first contract either when it could be considered a mistake (Though, I wouldn't call Lever a mistake either).

That said, on Dangerfield. I do wonder if we keep him if we don't have draft sanctions seeing he did stay because he believed we were a genuine premiership shot. Potentially with that talent influx it's possible we look close enough that you could influence that decision still instead of looking like a club in no mans land which we were in 2015 (pretending we sacked Sando still). After all, hindsight states even then we were closer then Geelong were.

 

[BunjiMac]

Look it is ok to want to push these draftees up but they have to perform first in SANFL. Yes we have been slow to push players into team and keeping Douglas - Mackay etc . But currently not one is demanding to be picked ,not even Greenwood really saying pick me. When CEY gets in our top players our future AFL players not progressing .
Simple our picks since Milera- Doedee just haven't shown anything and we trade in players that not fit.
Even Jones not done enough really to stay in team , but hope given another week.

Its called taking risks.

The great organisations, companies, and teams know how to take calculated risks. Yes, there is a potential to fail, and not all these risks work out, but you learn and you continue to have courage and take these risk because when they work out, that's when you stand to gain the most.

I'm not saying we need to go absolutely crazy, but we need an framework in which we can make these courageous decisions. At the moment, we play it completely 100 percent safe. Our results reflect this approach and always will.

We are forever indebted to that golden generation that produced our 2 premierships but I feel that great and deep respect we had for that group unintentionally started a culture of complacency which has escalated over the years to what we have now.

I think this administration has forgotten that we climbed that mountain twice because we took some inspired risks.

They need to remember.