The first part doesn’t follow at all, SOS wasn’t appointing him. Lethlean was promised the job though.
Opinion Stephen Silvagni
- Thread starter PP34
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The first part doesn’t follow at all, SOS wasn’t appointing him. Lethlean was promised the job though.
- Sep 5, 2011
- 8,372
- 16,291
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys, STL Blues
SOS couldn't appoint a CEO, but given his relationship with our president, he was in a position to influence the decision.
Need to keep in mind that at the time we'd surprisingly sacked Trigg, and as you've stated, Lethlean reportedly had a handshake deal with MLG (which was overruled by the board).
Big stretch to say that it was due to SOS’s influence
Rosscoe
Cancelled
- Sep 28, 2018
- 1,949
- 2,943
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Sep 5, 2011
- 8,372
- 16,291
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys, STL Blues
Agree its not one-to-one but smoke/fire etc.
- Sep 2, 2017
- 1,606
- 5,928
- AFL Club
- Carlton
If so let’s hope SOS doesn’t sign up any Blues or we are screwed when it comes to re-signing them.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Yes I saw your interaction, claiming SOS has reached for players and should have drafted the likes of Robertson ahead of Philp and Richards ahead of O'Brien
Then when questioned, you use your son in law as evidence, due to he supposedly being a recruiter
That's hilarious
Perhaps you and your son in law should post rankings prior to a draft
It’s not hilarious, but what is funny is that my son-in-law has an AFL job, and SOS doesn’t.
But you go and wallow at the alter of your grief.
This is getting better all the time, but stop deflecting, next time post your rankings and that of your son in law, then we too can judge the outcome
I don't worship a single person, I support/critique the club as a whole
BTW it's altar
Still deflecting?
Respond with some substance/evidence of which recruiter/list manager would have done a considerably better job and I will dissect it with you. Maybe share your son in laws thoughts on who would have done a better job
While SOS has had some misses and or me preferring other draftees at said selections, his record seems to be above industry standards, but time is a great indicator
Your the one making broad sweeping statements - you provide the evidence of SOS’s above industry standards.
Better still send them to MLG and Liddle, they might just re-hire him.
That's all fine, but as one of the 'big 4' clubs, we currently sit last by way of revenue, membership & table standing and have done so for some time now.
Of course we're doing better as we couldn't have been doing much worse, but it's going to be hard work just catching up to others let alone surpassing them.
I just don't see much that showcases to me just how well we're being run and if we aren't putting that squarely on the board, who else have we to blame?
And there we have it, you make a point of SOS should have selected different players, then used your son in law as evidence, while not actually stating any analysis
As for my statement, every recruiter's hits and misses are accessible to everyone, go head, refute my statement
Pick any recruiter, perhaps your son in law
- Aug 22, 2014
- 14,017
- 51,135
- AFL Club
- Carlton
(PRE-SCRIPT - this got long, sorry folks...)
"apologies but I haven't read many of the other comments so I don't know what everyone elses was. Based on media reports though..."
There's issue number one - appreciate this is an emotional situation for dedicated fans, but it would really be in your best interests to hold off on the rant wall of text until you've done a little more broad reading on what's happened.
"This is a direct quote out of The Age "A more cohesive football club would have found a way to navigate the differences between Silvagni, a favourite son, and his chief executive""
This statement is a load of shite. How much more "cohesive" would a club need to be to have avoided this? Perhaps the club is now more cohesive for having made the decision? Would a "more cohesive" club have remained as cohesive with these particular individuals involved? It's a pointless, self-perpetuating statement that says absolutely nothing of any worth. More cohesive clubs don't have these issues, until they do at which point they become less cohesive and other more cohesive clubs would handle it better.
"the conflict over recruiting Ellis appears to be the number 1 conflict of interest between the 2" and "although some club insiders say these differences – most notably over free agent Brandon Ellis – were exaggerated"
How have you arrived at the conclusion Ellis was the biggest issue, given you've also quoted a statement that says reports of conflict over Ellis were exaggerated?
"Do you honestly think it would have been a smart decision to recruit Ellis from a list standpoint?"
Ultimately, no, but he was worth meeting with to discuss what kind of offer he'd be looking at. And according to Liddle's documented responses at the Member Forum, the List Management team discussed Ellis as a potential target and agreed that Liddle should be involved in the tour. SOS may have been a dissenting voice on that point, not sure.
"Do you also think its right that personal relationships should determine someones value within a football club?"
We still don't know if that's what has happened. Ultimately though, yes, people in a workplace need to be able to work productively with their colleagues. If relationships break down and can't be mended (it's naive to think a "better" president or board could have guaranteed everyone would kiss and make up), then people need to either move roles or leave. SOS's contract ended, he was offered a different role instead, he declined.
"As they say a picture tells a thousand words"
How many other Richmond players did Liddle hug when they won the flag? You reckon it's relevant that a photographer happened to snap this one?
"Liddle is no different than Malthouse in bringing across Daisy and Wood, how did that work out for us in the first few years?"
Wood was solid enough for what he was recruited for, Daisy suffered additional injuries after joining us but was playing good footy by the end and many would agree he was a bit stiff to be let go. Remind me, which club is Ellis playing for in 2020?
"I think the president and CEO's from all football clubs should be elected by the members, considering were the football clubs most valuable assets after the players."
Your initial post, off the back of articles you read in The Age or other publications, is exactly why members shouldn't be voting in key senior personnel. What on earth does the average member know about the capabilities of a senior executive they've never heard of? This is, possibly, the worst idea I've come across.
"I still don't buy this argument that SOS had conflicts with others in the football department. Where's the proof? Why haven't we heard about any of this throughout the whole season. Why is it all these issues with Silvangi only start to emerge after Liddle throws a fit about not getting Ellis?"
Once again, I don't think you've come to the right conclusion with this whole "Liddle knifed SOS cause he wouldn't recruit Ellis" thing, and it's had a flow-on effect to many of your other points. The conflicts are about the inability for the GM of List Management and Strategy to be involved in particular conversations with and about particular players. There has been no suggestion that SOS did anything untoward, that he favoured his kids, that they were favoured by others because SOS was watching. What there is though, is a clear indication from the senior leadership at the club that the existence of that conflict of interest has become more of a concern.
My assumption here is that the draft process was pretty straightforward - the recruiters rate the players, we don't reach for the boys if a bid comes unreasonably early, but if the recruiters rate them (which they appear to have done, fairly) we'll take advantage of the F/S discount and match with late picks. The initial contracts weren't a huge concern, the dollars are locked in and it's a fixed 2 year term. The resigning of JSOS is probably the first point at which someone high up (or lower down in LM) starts to think "Hmm, this could be a little awkward", but SOS assures them he won't be involved in any talks and they all let it slide. New CEO, new GM of Footy come in. They're charged with ensuring the club is run well and professionally, and something that catches their eye is that the GM of List Management and Strategy is now needing to excuse himself from any conversations about 2 players, which might rise to 3 players in 12 months (particularly awkward if the recruiters don't think Tom is up to scratch...). On top of that, they need to be mindful that it's not just those two/three players, it's "Is there a potential conflict if SOS is discussing contract renewals and terms for players in the same position? What about recruiting new players that might squeeze one of his boys out of the side or off the list?
There's an argument to be made that "If it hasn't happened yet, we shouldn't be doing anything". But that really doesn't hold up, does it. Prevention is better than punishment. So, there are a number of staff responsible for ensuring the club is run well, who identify that the senior member of a particular team has a significant risk of being compromised, or his direct reports being compromised. That individual has a contract expiring this year. Add to that, the position he holds is, in some ways, surplus to requirements - plenty of confusion amongst fans about why we have a List Manager and a GM of List Management. And the rebuild is 98% done, with things moving back towards a more normalised approach to drafting and trading. So....they decide not to renew his contract, the board recognises his contribution and status and attempt to retain him in a different capacity, but SOS takes offense and tells them to jam it.
Working on the theory that this all happened months ago - SOS's autonomy on recruitments is watered down. The coach and CEO are able to pull strings to get Betts back to the club. The CEO is allowed to use his existing relationship with a Richmond free agent to get him across for a tour, but ultimately the LM sub-committee determine that his contract requirements are too dear and we withdraw our interest. SOS is still involved in all conversations and presentations, but so are others. This also explains Teague's increased involvement in the draftee interviews. SOS is still given free rein to blitz the comp on draft night with live trading.
Nobody has done anything wrong, there, have they? CEO, GM of Football, Board have proactively removed a potential integrity risk in our LM team, SOS has gotten upset at losing his job (who wouldn't) but stuck it out and still did right by the club on draft night. Maybe there were other clashes and arguments and name calling and whatever, but the club realises that there is nothing to be gained in tarnishing any names, and instead sanitise the announcement and focus purely on the CoI concerns.
Last edited:
SOS isn't anything more special than other clubs list managers.
He got super lucky when he came back to us because he was the first person in that kind of roll at the club that was given full licence to gut the list and attempt a full rebuild.
Everyone else before him was constrained big time by other internal factors and views.
He got super lucky when he came back to us because he was the first person in that kind of roll at the club that was given full licence to gut the list and attempt a full rebuild.
Everyone else before him was constrained big time by other internal factors and views.
Opine
Norm Smith Medallist
- Aug 30, 2018
- 7,352
- 12,278
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Are you happy with the resulting quality of the list that’s been manufactured on the back of our “non special” “lucky” LM arrangement over the last 4 or so years?
I doubt anyone is saying SOS is a considerably better list manager compared to his cohorts, yet nor is he any worse
As for lucky, surely the club finally willing to undertake a list rebuild has nothing to do with his record, unless they too interfered in the latter stages of his tenure
It's probably a load of shizen, but Waldron on MacSport earlier this week suggested that the AFL have earmarked SOS to be part of the newly formed club from Tassie into the future.
This coming from a bloke though that said a month ago the Demons were up to their ears in Jack Martin.
This coming from a bloke though that said a month ago the Demons were up to their ears in Jack Martin.
T2B_
The Avo King
- Feb 13, 2011
- 54,700
- 93,447
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Tasmania Devils, Dragons FFC
As a Taswegian who wants a team, I would certainly not complain with this.
- Aug 22, 2014
- 14,017
- 51,135
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Makes a mountain of sense.
The bloke seems perfectly suited to big picture list building.
GWS - build from the ground up.
Carlton - strip back to foundations and rebuild on the go.
Tassie - another new team to build from the ground up.
Could see him spending a year or two at another club, or even just living quietly if he's flush enough, then being handed the keys to the city for the next club being added to the comp.
Too early to tell. It hasn't achieved anything yet.
When we start making and winning finals then we can look back and say he did an awesome job.
Are you denying that our unwillingness to go for a full rebuild made the job of his predecessors far more difficult to build a young competitive team?
- Aug 22, 2014
- 14,017
- 51,135
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I suppose the flip side of that last question is - were those predecessors making a case to go for a full rebuild because they knew the list was ordinary, were they convinced the list was strong enough that it didn't need to, or did they know the list was ordinary but felt "safer" maintaining the status quo?
His predecessors had an appalling hit rate, if SOS is lucky, they must have been woefully unlucky
- Apr 20, 2006
- 9,746
- 13,218
- AFL Club
- Carlton
SOS has done a great job imo and I’m sure there would be dozens of people out there who could do the job equally as good under the same circumstances but there was absolutely no luck involved in him getting the conditions he had to work under. He demanded it and that was one of the best things that came out of this whole rebuild and SOS deserves great credit for that
