Jury is out i say. But the university of football will work it out.

Brian Cook is one of Australia’s most respected Sporting Administrators having spent the last twelve years as Chief Executive Officer of the Geelong Football Club. In that time, Brian has been able to overhaul the Clubs business operations and assisted in a dramatic turn around of its financial situation.

Under his management, the Geelong Football Club cleared its 1999 interest bearing debt of $7 million, after posting eleven consecutive profits and has been responsible for a raft of new initiatives, including $102 million redevelopments of Skilled Stadium.

Geelong Football Club, during Brian’s time as CEO, has played in four Grand Finals and won three premierships in 2007, 2009 and 2011.

I rate Cooky ... interesting reading for some. But I love CS as well. Go Demons

Edited March 17, 201213 yr by Dr Who

Brian Cook is one of Australia’s most respected Sporting Administrators having spent the last twelve years as Chief Executive Officer of the Geelong Football Club. In that time, Brian has been able to overhaul the Clubs business operations and assisted in a dramatic turn around of its financial situation.

Under his management, the Geelong Football Club cleared its 1999 interest bearing debt of $7 million, after posting eleven consecutive profits and has been responsible for a raft of new initiatives, including $102 million redevelopments of Skilled Stadium.

Geelong Football Club, during Brian’s time as CEO, has played in four Grand Finals and won three premierships in 2007, 2009 and 2011.

I rate Cooky ... interesting reading for some. But I love CS as well. Go Demons

And how did Geelong clear that debt?

That's a murky one.

That said i do admire Costa & cooky. But they hit the jackpot with the bank manager concerning the debt.

Edited March 17, 201213 yr by why you little

Neeld will have told them what the list is lacking i have no doubt. Why else would mature bodies be picked at that draft.

The coach is the first to get knifed. We all know that. You don't think Neeld and our FD Head did not have long nights with a whiteboard and coffee before the draft?

Our whole drafting team would have had long nights. Neeld is only a component of the team. As I said above when the coach is the start & finish of your recruiting decisions you are FINISHED. You employ a drafting team to draft - you employ a coaching team to coach. I'm really starting to question if you understand what happens at our club.

Our whole drafting team would have had long nights. Neeld is only a component of the team. As I said above when the coach is the start & finish of your recruiting decisions you are FINISHED. You employ a drafting team to draft - you employ a coaching team to coach. I'm really starting to question if you understand what happens at our club.

And your are telling me the draft team did not move focus between Bailey to Neeld?

Please.

Our whole drafting team would have had long nights. Neeld is only a component of the team. As I said above when the coach is the start & finish of your recruiting decisions you are FINISHED. You employ a drafting team to draft - you employ a coaching team to coach. I'm really starting to question if you understand what happens at our club.

Dear Doctor Who .

I seriously question if I understand what happens at our club .

Could you enlighten me further when you get some time ?

Could you rate the merits of our drafting team and draftees .

And how did Geelong clear that debt?

That's a murky one.

That said i do admire Costa & cooky. But they hit the jackpot with the bank manager concerning the debt.

not to mention the then premier.

not to mention the then premier.

Aah yes hiemy. Forgot about him!

An excellent Geelong signature.

The call from the more intelligent supporter is to come back in 10 years. Geelong is the classic example. Remember how their list was built? http://afl.com.au/ne...80/default.aspx In the fifth year after Ablett, Bartel, Kelly and Steve Johnson arrived at the club and in the seventh year after Mooney was traded for and Corey, Chapman, Ling and Enright were drafted Geelong finished 10th and Thompson almost lost his job. I don't need to remind anyone here what happened to Geelong in 2007 - 2011. How was Ablett rated after 3 years? Were Bartel, Kelly and Steve Johnson certain to emerge as superstars? Was Mooney considered a great trade option? The 1999 crew (Corey, Chapman, Ling and Enright) were entering their peak. At the end of 2006 did many anticipate they'd become multiple premiership and All-Australian players? I'm not suggesting that Blease, Strauss, Watts, Grimes, Trengove, Tapscott, Bennell, McKenzie, Bail, Gawn and Morton will necessarily go on to match the Geelong players I've mentioned above but clearly coming back "in a few years" is still too soon.

What a great perspective on Geelong's recruiting and player development: player development being an area in which we have, to date (and remembering we have a new coach and FD this year) been chronically deficient. Can we emulate the Geelong of 2007-2011? Time will tell.

Rewind to the end of round 5, 2007 - Geelong 2 wins, over Carlton and Melbourne. Many were after Thompson's head. I remember the vehement arguments. A few months later they win the flag in the most emphatic manner.

I am not saying that is what will happen to us, though one can dream. But a great look at can happen to one team when the players decide to click together.

Michael Hurley-Jack Watts. Would happily trade.

hehehe But would Hurley happily do the trade?

Here you go drafting experts, NT Grand Final, pick who out of these is going to be elite:

http://www.youtube.com/ABCGrandstand

Stafford and Tungatalum for me.

Here you go drafting experts, NT Grand Final, pick who out of these is going to be elite:

http://www.youtube.com/ABCGrandstand

Stafford and Tungatalum for me.

Ross was pretty quiet tonight, flashed in and out. Although I couldnt see up the other end!! Im about to write a report and put pics up unless you were planning to???

I wrote a piece this morning on Tungatalum in the small forward thread if you want a look?

Edited March 17, 201213 yr by Hells Gates

Dear Doctor Who .

I seriously question if I understand what happens at our club .

Could you enlighten me further when you get some time ?

Could you rate the merits of our drafting team and draftees .

No problems. Football is no longer a simplistic game, like it or lump it, footy science has taken over - footy science, like it or lump it costs money, big money. I certainly could rate our drafting team and draftees if we were spending $18+ million dollars a year allowing them to compete on a level playing field until then the names are irrelevant because the outcome would be the same. As your Dr I've said it before but I will say it again - I will address the cause long before treating the symptoms all else is a band-aid. But feel free to seek the advise of any other Dr - if he wants to teat your symptoms hope like shivers he gets it right other wise hope your wife has health insurance.

I also appreciate many dont have the time or the passion to get to the real source of the issue. It bores them and have little time for science. No problems I enjoy reading their views.

2 years ago I has us pinned for 'the magnificent seven' in

Watts, Scully, Jurrah, Trengove, Frawley, McKenzie and Morton

in my mind, these were going to be the all-australians in our premiership side in about 2014

aiding them of course would have been another 20 solid footballers.. jones, gysberts, bennell, etc

it appears now that at least 3 of my 'elite' 7 are write-offs and that we would be lucky to find 5, not 20, solid players amongst the rest

there are perfectly good reasons why we have about 3 star footballers in the last 20 years at this club, and NONE of them have anything to do with names being read out on draft night - it's about what happens once they are on our list. I think you all know deep down that Watts and Morton wouldnt be travelling the way they are now if they had gone to the eagles, hawks or pies.

No problems. Football is no longer a simplistic game, like it or lump it, footy science has taken over - footy science, like it or lump it costs money, big money. I certainly could rate our drafting team and draftees if we were spending $18+ million dollars a year allowing them to compete on a level playing field until then the names are irrelevant because the outcome would be the same. As your Dr I've said it before but I will say it again - I will address the cause long before treating the symptoms all else is a band-aid. But feel free to seek the advise of any other Dr - if he wants to teat your symptoms hope like shivers he gets it right other wise hope your wife has health insurance.

I also appreciate many dont have the time or the passion to get to the real source of the issue. It bores them and have little time for science. No problems I enjoy reading their views.

Yes there is a lot of science involved in recruiting and that's why those with the biggest budget will have more information than those on much smaller budgets, but that more than likely involves the later picks not the top ten or twenty. There is ample information available and certainly enough exposure of the top twenty draft selections up to two years prior to the draft itself, so to get it wrong is inexcusable.

I would very much doubt that the average punter on here wouldn't have picked the same players in the top 20 that BP did but therein lies the problem, he gets/got paid to get it right and in many cases he didn't. There are recruiters at other clubs that have reaped the benefit of our misses and you can blame sports science, or deficient budgets or whatever excuse you like, but put simply he missed many opportunities to set us up for the future and that's a fact.

Neeld will have told them what the list is lacking i have no doubt. Why else would mature bodies be picked at that draft.

The coach is the first to get knifed. We all know that. You don't think Neeld and our FD Head did not have long nights with a whiteboard and coffee before the draft?

Hiya WYL

From memory your posts reflect what I read (and watched on DeeTV)

Neeld stated prior to the draft something along the lines of there being deficiencies identified in the list and looking to fill them. BP stated in a post draft interview that certain picks (think was the couch and magner) were Neeld's or coaching picks

Yes there is a lot of science involved in recruiting and that's why those with the biggest budget will have more information than those on much smaller budgets, but that more than likely involves the later picks not the top ten or twenty. There is ample information available and certainly enough exposure of the top twenty draft selections up to two years prior to the draft itself, so to get it wrong is inexcusable.

I would very much doubt that the average punter on here wouldn't have picked the same players in the top 20 that BP did but therein lies the problem, he gets/got paid to get it right and in many cases he didn't. There are recruiters at other clubs that have reaped the benefit of our misses and you can blame sports science, or deficient budgets or whatever excuse you like, but put simply he missed many opportunities to set us up for the future and that's a fact.

Good honest post Robbie. That's exactly right and yep that's where we are at.

Yes there is a lot of science involved in recruiting and that's why those with the biggest budget will have more information than those on much smaller budgets, but that more than likely involves the later picks not the top ten or twenty. There is ample information available and certainly enough exposure of the top twenty draft selections up to two years prior to the draft itself, so to get it wrong is inexcusable.

I would very much doubt that the average punter on here wouldn't have picked the same players in the top 20 that BP did but therein lies the problem, he gets/got paid to get it right and in many cases he didn't. There are recruiters at other clubs that have reaped the benefit of our misses and you can blame sports science, or deficient budgets or whatever excuse you like, but put simply he missed many opportunities to set us up for the future and that's a fact.

Big reds post was great and most of you missed the point

Over 50% of people recruited after our picks were undeniably bigger duds than the ones we got

Looking at his analysis there are two selections that hurt. Sculls for Martin and tapscott for fyfe. Too my mind these are the only superstars we might have missed and both of the demon selections over the next ten years might match these two. Apart from that there are swings and round a outs in that later selections might have been better but not much better ( Morton excluded and as I understand it at te time we was considered a top three selection and arguably at the time might have gone top two).

Stop blaming the recruiting. Development arguments have a point but even the best have some pretty big blunders. See hawthorns recruiting. They stuffe up some of there early picks too. A high pick is less than 50% chance of getting a good player ( top 3 picks excluded )

Big reds post was great and most of you missed the point

Over 50% of people recruited after our picks were undeniably bigger duds than the ones we got

Looking at his analysis there are two selections that hurt. Sculls for Martin and tapscott for fyfe. Too my mind these are the only superstars we might have missed and both of the demon selections over the next ten years might match these two. Apart from that there are swings and round a outs in that later selections might have been better but not much better ( Morton excluded and as I understand it at te time we was considered a top three selection and arguably at the time might have gone top two).

Stop blaming the recruiting. Development arguments have a point but even the best have some pretty big blunders. See hawthorns recruiting. They stuffe up some of there early picks too. A high pick is less than 50% chance of getting a good player ( top 3 picks excluded )

So what do you think was our biggest problem since '98? (Danners/Bailey)

The message communication. Danners was a roller coaster. Bailey lost deal sometime mid 2010. Was it communication or $$$ or a whole lot of things. Was our recruiting network to small?

So what do you think was our biggest problem since '98? (Danners/Bailey)

The message communication. Danners was a roller coaster. Bailey lost deal sometime mid 2010. Was it communication or $$$ or a whole lot of things. Was our recruiting network to small?

My view was recruiting has been fine. In Danners years we were one of the better performing Vic teams

My view is that we were missing $ spent on footy department. There is a pretty good correlation between high spending team and success

Btw. Baily did ok. He had a young young team with out any quality in the 25 to 30 year bracket. ( this was caused by a range of reasons including. Scott Thompson going home, draft penalties for salary cap breaches and trades for established players by Danners)

You obviously missed the bit where I said its too early to tell. This is a no excuses look based on if you drafted now. It shows in my opinion that in no case with the exception of maybe Trengove have we picked the best of the bunch. However in most cases we have done ok comparative to at least half the other players taken within ten picks. I did not take into consideration Scullys departure I just dont rate him very highly and think we will in the future see as fortunate the picks we received and the money we saved.

I did.

I skimmed and concentrated on the players you said you'd take instead.

But I don't agree with some of your assessments, and I think you may have provided evidence that contradicts the point you were trying to make.

Michael Hurley-Jack Watts. Would happily trade.

I wouldn't.

My view was recruiting has been fine. In Danners years we were one of the better performing Vic teams

My view is that we were missing $ spent on footy department. There is a pretty good correlation between high spending team and success

Btw. Baily did ok. He had a young young team with out any quality in the 25 to 30 year bracket. ( this was caused by a range of reasons including. Scott Thompson going home, draft penalties for salary cap breaches and trades for established players by Danners)

I agree about Bailey. He worked bloody hard, but it started to go pear shaped in the 2nd part of 2010...was this because the FD was know longer able to ramp up? If so 2011 was wasted completely.

This has been a great converstaion to follow. Thanks all contributors

I am still confused who/how I would have chosen

I appreciate it is a collegiate matter and all parties would have some input.

As a former HR Manager it was difficult to get it right against a relatively stable output position description but the football industry has the additional churn of changing strategies and structures.

The need for runners and therefore aerobic fitness was a key driver the press required hard body impact style and with talls/ smalls mids etc there was a fair amount of forward planning.

It seems that we have always had a 5 year plan which we reject and renew every3 years ans so lose consistency.

I still support the club and hope that the existing footy department coaches and players can combine to give us improvement that can be sustained. I still reckon we have some excellent depth and flexibility to respond to many of the opposition structures and styles that will be pitted against us this season

I am hoping that all the new coaches structures can be absorbed by our existing playing group to give some occaisonal immediate success before some prolonged consistent success

Big reds post was great and most of you missed the point

Over 50% of people recruited after our picks were undeniably bigger duds than the ones we got

Looking at his analysis there are two selections that hurt. Sculls for Martin and tapscott for fyfe. Too my mind these are the only superstars we might have missed and both of the demon selections over the next ten years might match these two. Apart from that there are swings and round a outs in that later selections might have been better but not much better ( Morton excluded and as I understand it at te time we was considered a top three selection and arguably at the time might have gone top two).

Stop blaming the recruiting. Development arguments have a point but even the best have some pretty big blunders. See hawthorns recruiting. They stuffe up some of there early picks too. A high pick is less than 50% chance of getting a good player ( top 3 picks excluded )

Thanks for seeing the main point. If Hawthorn hadn't landed Buddy and Rioli everyone would be talking about their 2005 misses Ellis at 3 ahead of Pendlebury at 5, Dowler 6 ahead of Ryder at 8 and Thorp the year after ahead of Selwood. Landing a star or two certainly makes the whole picture look brighter.