Time to get M Rendell SIMPLE!

[leo the tiger]

Most of those failed players I did mention are picks 60+ or rookie picks, again no clubs have great success with picks that late in the drafts. Everyone once in a while you'll pull out a gem, like we have with Grimes.

The picks we need to get right are the ones in the 20-60 range and for the most part we have over the last 3 off seasons. That is where you get the role players who are needed to allow the stars to shine. I realise that you have your reservations about FJ, but with the extra money that we're spending on the football dept I'm becoming more comfortable in their ability to produce results.

Didn't both Haw and Coll have some 7 players in their premeriship teams that were originally rookies, including the captain?
That would suggest some reasoanble success with the late picks

 

[theflea]

Interesting post which i am not sure I entirely agree with everythng you have said.
We only have some 8 people involved nationally(full time and part time) compared to Hawthorn who have 24 and Collingwood who have 25t, we have the smallest recruiting team in the AFL, deliberately orchastrated by FJ. He said in an interview last year for the RFC website, that his staff watch up to 6 games per weekend( can you believe that?). Richo asked him why we don't have more staff and he bascially said (paraphasing) that people don't know what they are looking at.

So we are still miles behind the leading clubs in terms of resources. I understand FJ has been ofered more resources in terms of scouts but has refused as he believes too many opinions complicate matters. He may well be right but it is a very different model and it puts FJ under pressure to deliver.

RE his track record..well I reckon he has had some hits and misses. At the moment we have two of his top 10 draft picks not in the senior team (Conca and Vickery) and Pick 18 Griffiths has a long way to go to justify this early number in my view. Both Conca and Griffths were seen as significant gambles for different reasons and remember Conca had to be flown in at the last minute to the draft as nobody expected him to go top ten-nobody.

Jury still well and truly out on Bachelor and the calamatous Dea, who was another left field choice. Happy to give him grimes as a ripper and I think Astbury has a long way to go as well.

All in all, there are still a lot of question marks for mine. It is too easy to dismiss the late selection failuers as not important because they were late picks, as it put FJ in a no lose situation. If they fail (refer taylor, nason etc) then it doesn't matter because they were late picks and if they work out he is a genius.

we have a different model than other clubs which doesnt mean we worse off at all. the hawks with all their resources still picked musten and thorpe.picking on wether top ten players are in the team or not bc of injury or a form slump to point to bad recruiting is a poor argument considering all of think they are top 22 players. conca in our eyes was not a left field selection. you must remember he was the u/18 vc and did his ankle mid way thru the year so this is the reason he was percieved to slide a little. griffiths was also seen to slide purely on his injuries. i also dont think batch is 'jury is out' on him. i dont think he has been perfect but all arent either.

remember is a speculative auction and nobody can predict was happens in the future. i still beleive our drafting of the last 30 odd years is no way worse than our DEVELOPMENT which was shite.

 

[theflea]

Didn't both Haw and Coll have some 7 players in their premeriship teams that were originally rookies, including the captain?
That would suggest some reasoanble success with the late picks

it would also indicate that they had failures of nd picks that the so called guru recuiters have had.

 

[_RT_]

Didn't both Haw and Coll have some 7 players in their premeriship teams that were originally rookies, including the captain?
That would suggest some reasoanble success with the late picks

Those players would have come from nearly a decade worth of drafting and on the back of well funded football depts. The players I listed have come from 3 seasons worth of drafting, granted not all will make it either, but its no coincidence that with the increased money being spent our success rate is getting better.

 

[leo the tiger]

we have a different model than other clubs which doesnt mean we worse off at all. the hawks with all their resources still picked musten and thorpe.picking on wether top ten players are in the team or not bc of injury or a form slump to point to bad recruiting is a poor argument considering all of think they are top 22 players. conca in our eyes was not a left field selection. you must remember he was the u/18 vc and did his ankle mid way thru the year so this is the reason he was percieved to slide a little. griffiths was also seen to slide purely on his injuries. i also dont think batch is 'jury is out' on him. i dont think he has been perfect but all arent either.

remember is a speculative auction and nobody can predict was happens in the future. i still beleive our drafting of the last 30 odd years is no way worse than our DEVELOPMENT which was shite.

Interesting you didn't mention Collingwood' record just a few that the hawks have stuffed up. Of course Cocna in our eyes wasn't left field-we chose him. Nobody invovled with a finger on the pulse had him top ten-check all the phantom drafts. Whatever the reason(ie injury) my point was that he wasn't rated by any experts (other than ours!) and it is a fact that he was flown in at the last minute by the AFL who had no idea he was about to go top 10, unlike the other they had already decided to fly in. I remind you all that Cleve Hughes as an all australian CHF..so what? When you pass on Heppel and Tom Lynch for Conca as a surprise, you ahd better have got it right
The hesitation over griffiths was also his hardness and his hunger. I can tell you that for a fact as my uncle was heavily invovled in that draft as a recruiter. Also, he was a risk due to unjury as was Troy Taylor as was Dean Macdonald..all risks FJ was happy to take.

Sorry, jury out n bchelor as there remains serious questions over his pace, competitveness and urgency . Too easily beaten in contests for mine.

I agree it is speculative I just don't see the wisdom in having our recruiters watch 6 games per weekend, something you didn't comment on.

 

[Bojangles17]

Tom lynch...lol, yeah we dipped out there

 

[Strawbs]

The hesitation over griffiths was also his hardness and his hunger. I can tell you that for a fact as my uncle was heavily invovled in that draft as a recruiter. Also, he was a risk due to unjury as was Troy Taylor as was Dean Macdonald..all risks FJ was happy to take.

Joel Selwood (knee) - risk. Chris Judd (shoulders) - risk. Jack Darling (off-field issues) - risk. Interstate draftees (go home factor) - risk..................

 

[tigs2010]

Interesting post which i am not sure I entirely agree with everythng you have said.
We only have some 8 people involved nationally(full time and part time) compared to Hawthorn who have 24 and Collingwood who have 25t, we have the smallest recruiting team in the AFL, deliberately orchastrated by FJ. He said in an interview last year for the RFC website, that his staff watch up to 6 games per weekend( can you believe that?). Richo asked him why we don't have more staff and he bascially said (paraphasing) that people don't know what they are looking at.

So we are still miles behind the leading clubs in terms of resources. I understand FJ has been ofered more resources in terms of scouts but has refused as he believes too many opinions complicate matters. He may well be right but it is a very different model and it puts FJ under pressure to deliver.

RE his track record..well I reckon he has had some hits and misses. At the moment we have two of his top 10 draft picks not in the senior team (Conca and Vickery) and Pick 18 Griffiths has a long way to go to justify this early number in my view. Both Conca and Griffths were seen as significant gambles for different reasons and remember Conca had to be flown in at the last minute to the draft as nobody expected him to go top ten-nobody.

Jury still well and truly out on Bachelor and the calamatous Dea, who was another left field choice. Happy to give him grimes as a ripper and I think Astbury has a long way to go as well.

All in all, there are still a lot of question marks for mine. It is too easy to dismiss the late selection failuers as not important because they were late picks, as it put FJ in a no lose situation. If they fail (refer taylor, nason etc) then it doesn't matter because they were late picks and if they work out he is a genius.

I do remember hearing FJ saying that to Richo but I'm not sure what he said was entirely accurate. As we have just put on another recruiter I believe or are about to. Can't remember. We just don't have the funds to compete yet.

With regards to players not in the team I stated in another post that Vickery is currently injured has been injured all year plus missed a significant part of pre-season injured. At full fitness he kicked 36 goals last year.

2009 is still too early to call on any tall players IMO but Griffiths is starting to get some continuity and has played some good games and some average games at AFL level this year. Astbury won't hit his straps for quite a while (unfortunately) but I think people forget how promising he was in 2010 as a KPD in a shit team. Are you calling Dea calamitous due to his game on the weekend, which I agree was horrible. But he has also played some good games and has some good attributes (size, strength, clean ball handling, foot skills are decent and leadership) We all have to remember the kid would be lucky to have played 20-30 games at any level let alone AFL.

2010 is also way too early to tell. Conca has only had 1 pre-season compared to others his year having 2. If you look on the drafts and trading board opposition supporters rate both Conca/Batchelor in the top 15-20 of a re-done draft. The problem I see with Conca at the moment is that he is more an inside mid and isn't big enough yet and is forced to a flank which isn't ideal. We just have to be patient which is not a forte of Tiger fans. Unfortunately Helbig copped his injury as I had heard he would have been in the seniors within the next week or 2 of doing it. IMO he will be the feather in the cap that we can call 2010 a success. MacDonald and Derickx both picked on needs and haven't worked out. My concern will be if Derickx gets another year. After pick 50 I'm all for them picking for needs but turn them over when they don't work.

2011 looks fine by me and a distinct change in philosophy has taken place with regards to our rookies. (except Verrier) All small forwards and big bodied medium/tall defenders. These (along with ruckman) are the successful types teams get from the rookie draft. FJ has struggled with his rookie picks over the years but I for one am happy to acknowledge that he seems to have woken up to what the successful rookie types are. Also the fact we originally went in with kicking skills and high character. We have now added ball-winning ability to the list. Arnot's, Darrou's etc over Nason's and Webberley's.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Most of those failed players I did mention are picks 60+ or rookie picks, again no clubs have great success with picks that late in the drafts. Everyone once in a while you'll pull out a gem, like we have with Grimes.

The picks we need to get right are the ones in the 20-60 range and for the most part we have over the last 3 off seasons. That is where you get the role players who are needed to allow the stars to shine. I realise that you have your reservations about FJ, but with the extra money that we're spending on the football dept I'm becoming more comfortable in their ability to produce results.

Recruiters need to get every pick right not just those that fall within a certain bracket , you actually need to be able to gain best 22 players from all forms of list management and that includes both high and low draft picks . Naturally the expectation from lower draft picks is less , however that expection shouldn't be non existent .
I think our best additions to the club in recent times have been Blair Hartleys doing .
I'll wait and see another year or two on a few that remain at the club , but the current lack of midfield depth is a direct result of recruiting the wrong type of player, something I'm happy to except is more than likely a full football list management decision and also something I've been querying for a little while .
I have my reasons , but like any position I don't think the club should be so dismissive should another option arise .

 

[Bojangles17]

The comment abut hawthorn with 24 recruiters, you do realise many of those are in fact volunteers that contribute reports in return for tickets/memberships. Its arguable what benefit accrues from that. Knowing where weve come from to where we are now...FJ has had a fair amount to do with that. To pick 1 or two players as fizzers is a fairly shallow case, there wouldnt be a recruiter i the league that is bulletproof.....in relative terms i reckon we are on he right side of he ledger for a change

 

[_RT_]

Recruiters need to get every pick right not just those that fall within a certain bracket , you actually need to be able to gain best 22 players from all forms of list management and that includes both high and low draft picks . Naturally the expectation from high draft picks is less , however not non existant.
I think our best additions to the club in recent times have been Blair Hartleys doing .
I'll wait and see another year or two on a few that remain at the club , but the current lack of midfield depth is a direct result of recruiting the wrong type of player, something I'm happy to except is more than likely a full football list management decision and also something I've been querying for a little while .
I have my reasons , but like any position I don't think the club should be so dismissive should another option arise .

Anyone expecting recruiters to get every pick right is just setting themselves up to be disappointed. It just doesn't happen.

 

[bollo]

I think our drafting has been better over the last 2-3 drafts, there are always going to be hits and misses but compared to our past blunders we are getting smarter at the draft table. I think sometimes you have to go with what you need and not purely next best available. Let's all remember since Hardwick and Hartley have joined RFC we have had to deal with compromised drafting with all the gun 17yr olds and ND top picks all going to the expansion clubs, thus making it a lot harder to hit our picks. If we can draft well in the next 2-3yrs, pick up more rookies like Morris, grimes etc and targeting mature players from other teams like Grigg and Maric it can only bode well for the future. I strongly believe this club is in the right direction with a great CEO Benny Gale (has been the best thing at Richmond for 30 years) a good coach, and now more money going into our football department finally. Things are happening at this club, it won't happen overnight, but it will happen

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Anyone expecting recruiters to get every pick right is just setting themselves up to be disappointed. It just doesn't happen.

They are paid to get every pick right , that doesn't mean every player they pick has to prove to be the best player available , just simply the best player available to suit the criteria laid out to them by list management .

 

[_RT_]

They are paid to get every pick right , that doesn't mean every player they pick has to prove to be the best player available , just simply the best player available to suit the criteria laid out to them by list management .

Disagree, IMO recruiters are paid to find the best available players. Obviously as you get further into the draft the quality of player is going to make it harder and harder to find AFL quality players. Every now and then you'll find a gem, but facts show that more often than not players taken past 50 in the draft aren't going to be that good or have long careers.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Disagree, IMO recruiters are paid to find the best available players. Obviously as you get further into the draft the quality of player is going to make it harder and harder to find AFL quality players. Every now and then you'll find a gem, but facts show that more often than not players taken past 50 in the draft aren't going to be that good or have long careers.

Best available players based on the criteria set out to them by the club they work for . There are plenty post 50 picks that have worked out to be great players and yes the percentage of great players reduces as you get further into drafts, however lists are built in 5-6 years maximum and clubs just don't get enough under 20 picks in that time, to rely solely on getting under 20 picks . Keep in mind also that some clubs on occassion don't use their later picks and often despite a player being pick xxxxx they are only the xxx player picked within that draft .

 

[_RT_]

Best available players based on the criteria set out to them by the club they work for . There are plenty post 50 picks that have worked out to be great players and yes the percentage of great players reduces as you get further into drafts, however lists are built in 5-6 years maximum and clubs just don't get enough under 20 picks in that time, to rely solely on getting under 20 picks . Keep in mind also that some clubs on occassion don't use their later picks and often despite a player being pick xxxxx they are only the xxx player picked within that draft .

My point is that from 20-60 you get 2-3 picks each year, if you ensure you get them right, along with your first round pick each year, over a 6 year period you're going to have a core group of 18-24 players to build a side around. BTW sides are not built in 5-6 years maximum. Sides are constantly being rebuilt to a certain degree.

Lets not forget that from that group of 18-24 you're going to get 6-8 that become 10+ year players. So your 6 year period in fact becomes a 10 year period where you will have a group of 24-32 players who form the week to week side. That then allows for the late round picks and rookies to be given a shot and if you're lucky you will unearth the odd gem.

This is the way I look at it, you don't bank on finding AFL quality players with late picks as more often than not they have multiple areas of concern which sees them fall that far, be it lacking skill or character issues. These guys are the high risk high reward low cost players that the latter rounds and rookie draft are there for.

 

[theflea]

Interesting you didn't mention Collingwood' record just a few that the hawks have stuffed up. Of course Cocna in our eyes wasn't left field-we chose him. Nobody invovled with a finger on the pulse had him top ten-check all the phantom drafts. Whatever the reason(ie injury) my point was that he wasn't rated by any experts (other than ours!) and it is a fact that he was flown in at the last minute by the AFL who had no idea he was about to go top 10, unlike the other they had already decided to fly in. I remind you all that Cleve Hughes as an all australian CHF..so what? When you pass on Heppel and Tom Lynch for Conca as a surprise, you ahd better have got it right
The hesitation over griffiths was also his hardness and his hunger. I can tell you that for a fact as my uncle was heavily invovled in that draft as a recruiter. Also, he was a risk due to unjury as was Troy Taylor as was Dean Macdonald..all risks FJ was happy to take.

Sorry, jury out n bchelor as there remains serious questions over his pace, competitveness and urgency . Too easily beaten in contests for mine.

I agree it is speculative I just don't see the wisdom in having our recruiters watch 6 games per weekend, something you didn't comment on.

i didnt use collingwood as i just remembered the hawks of late. so the pies you say bearing in mind that hine is supposed to be a 'guru', 05 p21 stanley p23 cook, 07 p31 macarthy etc( and there is more). there are plenty of picks that just dont make and to paint fj as the only recruiter that gets it wrong is just plain folly. i have to laugh that you refer to phantom drafts to validate your assertion that he wasnt on any club radar as this is mostly no reflection an actual afl draft considerations. i know for a fact that conca was very high in freo's thoughts but since they didnt have a pick until 20 it is largely forgotten. you seem to forget that it was a surprise the pies too pendleberry also. i keep hearing heppell but if he was so good then why didnt gc take him? tom lynch doesnt do it for me either. yes griff was a risk injury wise but as has pointed out some absolute guns have also been suspect before the draft so that theory doesnt wash. i would also like batch to have more urgency but competetiveness and lack of pace is not a concern for mine so his selection is not questioned. just on the 6 games a week, i think it has been said after you posted last that they will add more staff which i was un aware of but you have to have a baseline of reference to guide you so to have 15/20 different opinions isnt necessarily good either as the base may be different. as long as the recruiters can get to all tac games, then the state league games who cares.

 

[theflea]

They are paid to get every pick right , that doesn't mean every player they pick has to prove to be the best player available , just simply the best player available to suit the criteria laid out to them by list management .

like all boards/committee's/recruiters you make the best decision you can with the available info at the time. remember is a speculative auction.

if you want a guarentee buy a sidcrome socket set.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

My point is that from 20-60 you get 2-3 picks each year, if you ensure you get them right, along with your first round pick each year, over a 6 year period you're going to have a core group of 18-24 players to build a side around. BTW sides are not built in 5-6 years maximum. Sides are constantly being rebuilt to a certain degree.

Lets not forget that from that group of 18-24 you're going to get 6-8 that become 10+ year players. So your 6 year period in fact becomes a 10 year period where you will have a group of 24-32 players who form the week to week side. That then allows for the late round picks and rookies to be given a shot and if you're lucky you will unearth the odd gem.

This is the way I look at it, you don't bank on finding AFL quality players with late picks as more often than not they have multiple areas of concern which sees them fall that far, be it lacking skill or character issues. These guys are the high risk high reward low cost players that the latter rounds and rookie draft are there for.

By your sums RT your saying that out of every draft less than 1 will become a 10 year player yet 3-4 will become 6 year players ? I apologise I losely used the term build a list in 6 years rather than re-build a list in 6 years. We started our last re-build in 2010, at that time we had possibly 4-7 , lets say at best 10, players upon the list who will be capable of playing finals on the list in 2016. From 2017 our list will need to be able to start progressively replacing those players , with miminal lost if we wish to remain as competitive.
IMO you need to have list of 30-32 capable of playing senior AFL. So within the rebuild phase you need to be able to pick up around 20-25 players in six years , somewhere between 3-4 players per year .
Can you give me the names of the 3-4 per year, we have picked up who'll be around from 2017 on , without using mature age trades as although they may be around then , they'll also retire quicker, which will mean that average at some stage will need to increase.

 

[Delids]

Need to learn the difference between a recruiter and a scout.



Anyone else see the funny side of the bolded parts?

I can't even be bothered but:

2006: I didn't say Grigg was his work but we got Grigg for a direct swap with his pick 70-odd. Connors is playing first team football for a guy taken at 58.
So u still think Connors is playing team first football. And now FJ has only 2 from 2006 draft and 1 from 2007

By the way this is post 20 of the thread and no one has agreed with you?

There are now over 60 replies and i have more support than u first thought. And again we are embarrassed during the week by other club recruiters who have said Dan Connors had the talent but attitude was always an issue hence the reason we didnt select him. Prior to the draft D Connors had to face charges with a group of friends as they bashed someone at a pub. ALARM BELLS
FJ - Connors, Troy Taylor, Roberts, Peterson, I DONT GIVE 2 hoots what number we pick them up. We cannot excuse recruiters in picking spuds if they are picked past 20.
This is how clubs improve, there middle to lower picks , are treated seriously and good recruiters will hit.
FJ is a cowboy! We cant be wasting picks! Our footy club at the moment is young and not strong enough to take in 1 or 2 troubled kids.

 

[tigs2010]

There are now over 60 replies and i have more support than u first thought. And again we are embarrassed during the week by other club recruiters who have said Dan Connors had the talent but attitude was always an issue hence the reason we didnt select him. Prior to the draft D Connors had to face charges with a group of friends as they bashed someone at a pub. ALARM BELLS
FJ - Connors, Troy Taylor, Roberts, Peterson, I DONT GIVE 2 hoots what number we pick them up. We cannot excuse recruiters in picking spuds if they are picked past 20.
This is how clubs improve, there middle to lower picks , are treated seriously and good recruiters will hit.
FJ is a cowboy! We cant be wasting picks! Our footy club at the moment is young and not strong enough to take in 1 or 2 troubled kids.

I can't even be bothered. What about Matt Dea and Collingwood again? I missed your reply to that.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

There are now over 60 replies and i have more support than u first thought. And again we are embarrassed during the week by other club recruiters who have said Dan Connors had the talent but attitude was always an issue hence the reason we didnt select him. Prior to the draft D Connors had to face charges with a group of friends as they bashed someone at a pub. ALARM BELLS
FJ - Connors, Troy Taylor, Roberts, Peterson, I DONT GIVE 2 hoots what number we pick them up. We cannot excuse recruiters in picking spuds if they are picked past 20.
This is how clubs improve, there middle to lower picks , are treated seriously and good recruiters will hit.
FJ is a cowboy! We cant be wasting picks! Our footy club at the moment is young and not strong enough to take in 1 or 2 troubled kids.

even that idiot Wallace summed it up well.

once you reach a certain point of the draft, ALL players have deficiencies. Be it lack of tank, too one sided, skills, or off field issues, everyone has a problem. Goal is to pick the guy you think you can help overcome that problem.

We bitch about picking poor kicks, undersized kids, and one sided kids, and now you want role models. How many fitting this description are still in the draft at 40+?

 

[Delids]

Forget abt finals while this guy has anything to do with recruiting. Been there since 2005. Had early picks and we still havent got the right crop, to make finals another clean out at years end. Webbrely, Gus, Browne, D Mcdonald, Maguane, Connors, White, J Post, Miller. Who is up for another mini rebuild??? It wouldnt surprise me if lions go past us, Until we get the best person in job or best available ( Rendell) we will continue to accept failure
Lets give FJ another few years...... Coz we havent seen what he has done in the past 7???

 

[dktm]

This football club needs someone who has the ability to build a list.
Rendell has bona fides with his efforts at Adelaide, Francis Jackson has 0.

 

[superfreak]

Rendell has already signed with a club for next year. Collingwood is the short priced favorite. Can't be announced until after the season due to his previous contract with Adelaide.