FWIW, Martin is a very good footballer but is no great personality. He wont blow you away in an I/V as such. With picks 1 and 2, MFC chose the best available talent in the junior levels. Scully was a lock in and there was no possible indication that he would have walk to GWS even though the resident Dland psychologists and hindsight crystal ball gazers will tell you otherwise.

Pick 2 was Trengove who was assessed as the 2nd best player in the draft and I recall at the time he exuded leadership and maturity at the I/V stage. Its no wonder that has resulted in him being one of the youingest captains at AFL level.

Given our next pick was pick 11 (Gysberts) and we knew Richmond would take Martin at 3 then it is plausible and reasonable that Martin may not have been interviewed.

Excellent summary there of what actually happened at the time.

I am at a loss as to why we go round and round this "we didn't even interview Martin" line. It's obvious why, and was the correct decision at the time. I also feel that it would be the correct decision even today. Martin is very good, but whether he can keep it together as a professional footballer over 10+ years remains to be seen. For me, 2-3 years is still much too early to be assessing drafts and slashing wrists. Let's wait at least 5-7 years (e.g. Nathan Jones) to see what level players are really going to be able to reach - and to hold.

Another day, another (bumped) thread lamenting desicions made in the past. Doing this does nothing to help the situation nor does it help anyone's mental health and outlook about the club.

As I have said before on here, we can only change the now and to some extent the future so let's focus on that.

And by the looks of some of the players alteady rumoured and confirmed to be gone CHANGE is happening.

So let's just focus on this and the upcoming draft/trade period as anything before is just a waste of time for us to have to keep on reading and watching you guys waste your lives arguing about.

Craig Cameron & Barry Predergast - What have they done?

CC was "head hunted" by the Tigers after a failed attempt to get Chris Pelchen. CC now heads up the RFC's football department where he over seas long term head of recruiting Francis Jackson (& expanded team) and the genius in Blair Hartley. Tigers have made huge in roads in the area of sports science especially in the field of injury prevention and recovery. **** News Flash Now relating that back to us - in future trading periods we might closely follow many of Blairs principles. CC is doing a fine job.

BP was "head hunted" by the Blues to take over their opposition analysis position. However, another news flash - thats a modern bull [censored] term & smoke screen for his real job. Again the Blues identifying a weakness in the area of trading & free agency. BP too early to say at Carlton - more internal politics than you can find in any parliament.

Both are very well respected in the industry.

What have the done to us - both left. The rest is history

Edited September 6, 201213 yr by Rassilon

Craig Cameron & Barry Predergast - What have they done?

CC was "head hunted" by the Tigers after a failed attempt to get Chris Pelchen. CC now heads up the RFC's football department where he over seas long term head of recruiting Francis Jackson (& expanded team) and the genius in Blair Hartley. Tigers have made huge in roads in the area of sports science especially in the field of injury prevention and recovery. **** News Flash Now relating that back to us - in future trading periods we might closely follow many of Blairs principles. CC is doing a fine job.

BP was "head hunted" by the Blues to take over their opposition analysis position. However, another news flash - thats a modern bull [censored] term & smoke screen for his real job. Again the Blues identifying a weakness in the area of trading & free agency. BP too early to say at Carlton - more internal politics than you can find in any parliament.

Both are very well respected in the industry.

What have the done to us - both left. The rest is history

LOL.

Craig Cameron & Barry Predergast - What have they done?

CC was "head hunted" by the Tigers after a failed attempt to get Chris Pelchen. CC now heads up the RFC's football department where he over seas long term head of recruiting Francis Jackson (& expanded team) and the genius in Blair Hartley. Tigers have made huge in roads in the area of sports science especially in the field of injury prevention and recovery. **** News Flash Now relating that back to us - in future trading periods we might closely follow many of Blairs principles. CC is doing a fine job.

BP was "head hunted" by the Blues to take over their opposition analysis position. However, another news flash - thats a modern bull [censored] term & smoke screen for his real job. Again the Blues identifying a weakness in the area of trading & free agency. BP too early to say at Carlton - more internal politics than you can find in any parliament.

Both are very well respected in the industry.

What have the done to us - both left. The rest is history

Our list shows what they have done to us; what do you think of it?

We have a list that is not up to AFL Standard, thanks boys.

Surely people don't believe that so-called recruiting managers act in isolation from the rest of the FD.

Decisions are made on recruitment, under the scrutiny of the head coach and FD, together with the contingencies that are thrown up come the actual selections during trade week and at the draft table.

It is naive in the extreme to believe that any perceived failings are down to one person that happens to carry the word "recruiting" in his job title. Strategy planning starts at the top, not 2 or 3 levels below.

Coaches have an input on player type - tall, medium small, back fwd, mid etc.

But the ultimate identifier of the talent is the "head of recruiting".

I have a problem with a coach have too greater influence on the actual individual we recruit as much as I would have concerns about a recruiting manager having too much input in match gameday moves.

Ultimately, a recruiting manager lives or dies on the outcome of his selections. Similarly a coach lives or dies on the outcomes on the field.

Coaches have an input on player type - tall, medium small, back fwd, mid etc.

But the ultimate identifier of the talent is the "head of recruiting".

I have a problem with a coach have too greater influence on the actual individual we recruit as much as I would have concerns about a recruiting manager having too much input in match gameday moves.

Ultimately, a recruiting manager lives or dies on the outcome of his selections. Similarly a coach lives or dies on the outcomes on the field.

And we all die if either of them screw up.

they just P--- off and the supporters are left holding the bag

And we all die if either of them screw up.

they just P--- off and the supporters are left holding the bag

The bit that irks me OD. We are left with the mess. These guys just pack their bags...

Coaches have an input on player type - tall, medium small, back fwd, mid etc.

But the ultimate identifier of the talent is the "head of recruiting".

I have a problem with a coach have too greater influence on the actual individual we recruit as much as I would have concerns about a recruiting manager having too much input in match gameday moves.

Ultimately, a recruiting manager lives or dies on the outcome of his selections. Similarly a coach lives or dies on the outcomes on the field.

And what is the greatest contributing factor to outcomes on the field? The player stock I would humbly suggest. If a coach "lives and dies on the outcomes on the field" then it behoves every coach to ensure that their recruiting managers act under that coach's direction and not carte blanche. You have a serious problem in any enterprise if the line of report is not supervised by the 'boss'

Our list shows what they have done to us; what do you think of it?

We have a list that is not up to AFL Standard, thanks boys.

Superficially, it would be easy to blame CC & BP. However, is it possible it may go deeper than that? Best current example is only two days ago. Listen to what Boak said about why & how he came to his final decision.

beefing up the club's notoriously lean football department and focusing primarily on the development of younger players - Boak will put pen to paper as early as today.

Sadly, recruiting personnel are only human & normally recruit to suit a game-plan. Sorry, they have no tarot cards, feng-shui or numerology techniques.

Talent identification in modern times is well-document, holy shivers even the "lay-person" can have a good crack. But they lack the incite into game-plans and trying to pick the future trends in football. Quality development can disguise some of the mistakes. Poor development and your a sitting duck for your critics.

Again listen to Boak Why did he choose Geelong or North? The answer is simple.

And what is the greatest contributing factor to outcomes on the field? The player stock I would humbly suggest. If a coach "lives and dies on the outcomes on the field" then it behoves every coach to ensure that their recruiting managers act under that coach's direction and not carte blanche. You have a serious problem in any enterprise if the line of report is not supervised by the 'boss'

This is a very interesting point. Exactly why some clubs Football departments are now not allowed to make some decisions without board approval. Sadly, some clubs have found from past experiences "coaches" think very much in the here and now. However, is that in the best interests of the club in the long term? I will leave you to answer that.

Edited September 6, 201213 yr by Rassilon

I think what gets up most fans noses, is that everyone seems to know who we should get early on in a draft and when we don't and then that player becomes a star and the one we took is going nowhere, the recruiter has gone and we are left in sh-t.

The bit that irks me OD. We are left with the mess. These guys just pack their bags...

CC followed his heart - you cant blame a man for that.

BP well maybe saw the writing on the wall got offered an opportunity to be part of the future in a very "modern role" - hard to knock that back.

Re - your mess comments. maybe its goes deeper than them, maybe they both picked & new something that many wont accept around here.

But hell its more fun listening to the innuendo & bs that some choose to listen too around here. (I have a feeling it will continue - just a hunch)

Edited September 6, 201213 yr by Rassilon

I think what gets up most fans noses, is that everyone seems to know who we should get early on in a draft and when we don't and then that player becomes a star and the one we took is going nowhere, the recruiter has gone and we are left in sh-t.

I honestly feel we have learned from our mistakes. Now I'm not sure if thats wishful thinking or positive thinking. But one thing I do know is we cant change the past.

Edited September 6, 201213 yr by Rassilon

CC followed his heart - you cant blame a man for that.

BP well maybe saw the writing on the wall got offered an opportunity to be part of the future in a very "modern role" - hard to knock that back.

Re - your mess comments. maybe its goes deeper than them, maybe they both picked & new something that many wont accept around here.

But hell its more fun listening to the innuendo & bs that some choose to listen too around here. (I have a feeling it will continue - just a hunch)

Still doesn't answer why 3-5 year project players were chosen above players who were ready to play senior football.

Once these guys leave it ceases to be their responsibility.

Still doesn't answer why 3-5 year project players were chosen above players who were ready to play senior football.

Good point. Why I think we have learned from our mistakes. Listen to what Neeld says we are going down the "Moneyball" project for a reason. We are showing the door to certain players for a reason.

Once these guys leave it ceases to be their responsibility.

Your big into 186 it was a turning point in more ways than 1.

Good point. Why I think we have learned from our mistakes. Listen to what Neeld says we are going down the "Moneyball" project for a reason. We are showing the door to certain players for a reason.

Your big into 186 it was a turning point in more ways than 1.

Yes it was for a plethera of reasons. Maybe for the better. Maybe those at the top realized that if we don't get decisions right the MFC is in danger of extinction from the AFL.

The Cook & Gysberts drafting at 11-12 is just pure amateur hour.

Neither was anywhere near ready for topline AFL. Those recruiters are paid to see this.

Meanwhile us mug supporters are asked to dig deep again.

And what is the greatest contributing factor to outcomes on the field? The player stock I would humbly suggest. If a coach "lives and dies on the outcomes on the field" then it behoves every coach to ensure that their recruiting managers act under that coach's direction and not carte blanche. You have a serious problem in any enterprise if the line of report is not supervised by the 'boss'

I explained that the coaches input is into the type of footballer he needs given the list management, game plan etc. The coach cant possible know the full population of junior talent and needs to rely on the skills of his recruitment team for talent, fitness team for fitness. There is no doubt that the recruitment manager would have to justify his beliefs or opinions. Who said anything about "carte blanche"? Please re read my earlier email.

I explained that the coaches input is into the type of footballer he needs given the list management, game plan etc. The coach cant possible know the full population of junior talent and needs to rely on the skills of his recruitment team for talent, fitness team for fitness. There is no doubt that the recruitment manager would have to justify his beliefs or opinions. Who said anything about "carte blanche"? Please re read my earlier email.

I strongly suspect that Neeld will have a pretty big say (or influence, however you want to put it) in who we pick up this year. One can pretty much guarantee that there will be no "nice skinny athletic gentlemen" amongst our 2013 newbies.

Bring it on - skip the finals and fast forward to the draft and the pre-season.

I strongly suspect that Neeld will have a pretty big say (or influence, however you want to put it) in who we pick up this year. One can pretty much guarantee that there will be no "nice skinny athletic gentlemen" amongst our 2013 newbies.

Bring it on - skip the finals and fast forward to the draft and the pre-season.

that means we won't presumably be picking up young Jarrod Fuschia from Waverley Gardens? Only 55kgs, but sinewy and whippet-like.

Edited September 6, 201213 yr by bush demon

I think what gets up most fans noses, is that everyone seems to know who we should get early on in a draft and when we don't and then that player becomes a star and the one we took is going nowhere, the recruiter has gone and we are left in sh-t.

What also gets up my nose is our seeming propensity to overlook kids with the slightest question mark on the character for the 'best kids' in the draft.

I don't want the best kids, I want the best footballers. They are teenagers - they should be arrogant flogs - let's turn them into decent human beings while they playing good footy for us...

I think what gets up most fans noses, is that everyone seems to know who we should get early on in a draft and when we don't and then that player becomes a star and the one we took is going nowhere, the recruiter has gone and we are left in sh-t.

That may well be the truest thing you have said in 2012 Redleg

Spot on

What also gets up my nose is our seeming propensity to overlook kids with the slightest question mark on the character for the 'best kids' in the draft.

I don't want the best kids, I want the best footballers. They are teenagers - they should be arrogant flogs - let's turn them into decent human beings while they playing good footy for us...

Agree rpfc

Memo to MFC Please take the choir boy requirement off the check list.

But one thing I do know is we cant change the past.

Agree with that. We should learn from it though.

Agree with that. We should learn from it though.

Nah, let's just repeat it.

Easier, and we know all the moves.