As I've said many times buck stops with the Coach. BP doesn't make decisions on his own.

There are exceptions to most rules Jose.

That we can only pluck a few names spanning two decades is more the point.

See bing's post.

Selective memory on your part RR.

A guy who allegedly [censored] on a bar, another who drives his car into a car yard while under the influence of something or other, another who's just been suspended for being out drinking while in rehab, another who was suspended because he couldn't be bothered attending a meeting, both our captains suspended by the AFL for illegal (and dangerous) tackles, and to top it all, a guy up on a jailable charge for attacking someone with a machete. Not sure what kinds of choirs you hang with, but if this is your definition of "nice boys" ...

Hang on a minute, it was proven that Beamer didn't [censored] on the bar and the Police confirmed that Sylvia wasn't driving the car when it crashed.

See bing's post.

Selective memory on your part RR.

Two decades of watching hardened teams stand-over us like schoolyard bullies. That's my overarching memory Jose, however many isolated examples you and Bing want to come up with.

And having a drinking/attitude/gambling problem doesn't make you a 'diamond in the rough'. Being a hard-nosed, win-at-all-costs type does. On that score, do Sylvia, Moloney, Johnstone and Jurrah even qualify? Moloney maybe but the rest? Hmmm.

Edited April 18, 201213 yr by Range Rover

According to the The AGE last week we have recruited poorly and/or the evolution of the press defeated our recruiting.

Barry P slunk off rather quietly and I wondering whether this was a Neeld driven situation after arriving and assessing all of the draftees of the past 5 or 7 years? Or did he see the writing on the wall?

It's clear there has been a lot of clearing out of the footy dept (with the exception of Mahoney and Royal) so has anyone heard anything concrete on BPs departure?

don't know, but glad he's gone

You're a hilarious human being RP. How much of a spin do you want to put on it thanks to hindsight....

The simpletons seem to be the one's on forums who want to take anything and everything the MFC say as gospel. Are you guys heavily religious?

Where's my malicious intent!?

Where have my 'thoughts' been presented as 'facts'!? Enlighten me?!

What spin?

My view was that I would simply, if naively, trust the word of 20 year old Demon. RR and many others were happy enough to listen to and believe the, obviously now confirmed to be veracious, rumours that circulated.

The 'maliciousness' was poetical licence on my behalf, but the issue many people have is when many on here, and you aren't alone, write suppositions as if they are fact when they are simply what the poster 'thinks' happened.

ahhhh - you obviously missed a few ittle gems hidden in some of the articles - but yes we do agree in the importance of development.

Lets take our dominant team of the last 2 years

Now I wonder if the facts point to its how you are selecting your WHOLE list that counts!!!

"I am saying that the most talented players are found at the pointy end of the draft and that it is effing important for a recruiter to get them right"

Lets also look at two players vital to their performance Brown & Jolly - both recruited by Collingwood at the "pointy end" of the draft where they? Trade table my friend - trade table.

I'm saying you can find quality players anywhere in the draft system if you are spending the money to develop YOUR WHOLE list. (massive difference)

Now lets see what Jimmy asked for - "Melbourne president Jim Stynes raised the issue during the week when he suggested a minimum expenditure level be introduced to allow his club to catch up to powerhouses such as Collingwood."

But if your argument is correct why did Jimmy not ask for more picks at the pointy end of the draft? Thats where the most talented players are!!!! (according to you)

But wait what did he ask for? A cap on spending! Why because that effects their WHOLE list.

Now lets look what the AFL actually did - they removed the priority pick system. why? This does not support your argument again.

Instead they started to offer the lesser clubs more money to develop their WHOLE list.

Edit sorry wrote the wrong player

Well, I appreciate you actually profiting an argument but you are far from convincing. Swan, Jolly, Maxwell, and Brown are/were important players but that team relies/relied on the class and skill found at in Ball, Pendlebury, Didak, Thomas, and Cloke. All found, or would be found, at The Pointy End of The Draft.

Again, yes, we need money to develop players. But getting better players helps in that regard.

Recruiters live and die with that task.

A guy who allegedly [censored] on a bar, another who drives his car into a car yard while under the influence of something or other, another who's just been suspended for being out drinking while in rehab, another who was suspended because he couldn't be bothered attending a meeting, both our captains suspended by the AFL for illegal (and dangerous) tackles, and to top it all, a guy up on a jailable charge for attacking someone with a machete.

Not sure what kinds of choirs you hang with, but if this is your definition of "nice boys" ...

Funny bing181 that you missed the next line which said

"God deliver us a fit narsty pricks who just want to win at all costs in the next draft"

who just want to win at all cost is the important part, not too many of them around at the Dees.

As well not all of what you describe is true, does being too lazy to attend a meeting make you a bad nasty type?

I doubt it just makes you lazy and you do not have the win at all costs attitude.

There are exceptions to most rules Jose.

TGVITHODL

Hope you enjoy the reading -

Hang on a minute - speaking of monkeys - I think the penny might have dropped!

Two decades of watching hardened teams stand-over us like schoolyard bullies. That's my overarching memory Jose, however many isolated examples you and Bing want to come up with.

And having a drinking/attitude/gambling problem doesn't make you a 'diamond in the rough'. Being a hard-nosed, win-at-all-costs type does. On that score, do Sylvia, Moloney, Johnstone and Jurrah even qualify? Moloney maybe but the rest? Hmmm.

What the hell are you talking about?

Shifting the goalposts to make what you said correct?

What the hell are you talking about? Shifting the goalposts to make what you said correct?

Indeed. I thought we passed on Darling because he was a naughty boy off the field. Oh wait - we've recruited heaps of naughty boys before and a few of them are still on the list? No no no, we've got it all wrong - what Rangey meant was being a hard-nosed, win at all costs type whatever. *nod* Yep, that's what he said.

It's all about perceptions; we're perceived as a weak club with players that aren't prepared to put up when the going gets tough.

Now whether that's true or not it's what the average football supporter sees our club as, in fact a lot of our own supporters have a perception of our club as being soft.

There's the the odd player that we pick up that has a certain element of toughness about him, Natan Carroll springs to mind, but it's not generally mental toughness the type that's required when the chips are down and the result of the game is on the line.

Our bad boys are the type that will sneak out and have a drink during the week, not like say a Robinson from Carlton who'll do anything to win a game, we fall down in that area and quite badly.

And that's all to do with the type of player we recruit; maybe it's all a coincidence or maybe they fall in to line when the come to the club.

Edited April 18, 201213 yr by RobbieF

Well, I appreciate you actually profiting an argument but you are far from convincing. Swan, Jolly, Maxwell, and Brown are/were important players but that team relies/relied on the class and skill found at in Ball, Pendlebury, Didak, Thomas, and Cloke. All found, or would be found, at The Pointy End of The Draft.

Again, yes, we need money to develop players. But getting better players helps in that regard.

Recruiters live and die with that task.

Ball was found when every team in the league passed on him - not sure if he qualifies for your pointy end argument. The deal would have been done at the trade table had the aints/ ross lyon not been so stubborn. Ball interestingly struggled to perform at A-class level in St Kilda side when he was pointy - but had to move to get the ultimate.

Cloke was actually a father and son - again I'm not convinced that supporters your arguments about getting it right. That was a no brainer.

Didak - Collingwood a few years before Collingwood had agreed to trade him. The only reason Didak was still in the team was he refused to move.

That leaves Scotty & Thomas - but geez thats a mighty small sample. Would have they been premiership players without Brown, Jolly, Maxwell (Captain), Harry O etc - I dont think so.

However, what I will say - I'm not sure if I said this directly to you before - I would have agreed with your comments 3-4 years ago but the evidence is mounting the key to premiership list is obtaining players thru-out the whole process.

Your big on on-field leadership you cant get much better than a quality captain - Geelongs last two captains Harley & Ling - one traded in the other pick 38. Again not pointy end. Hawthorns premiership captain - Sam Mitchell far from the pointy end.

Edited April 18, 201213 yr by Dr Who

Indeed. I thought we passed on Darling because he was a naughty boy off the field. Oh wait - we've recruited heaps of naughty boys before and a few of them are still on the list? No no no, we've got it all wrong - what Rangey meant was being a hard-nosed, win at all costs type whatever. *nod* Yep, that's what he said.

I thought we passed on him because of head injuries (bleeding in the brain) and a very poor U18 carnival, had not grown and at 191cm could he play 1st or 2nd key tall.

But you learn something everyday.

Hang on a minute - speaking of monkeys - I think the penny might have dropped!

Thanks MR Moderator - I have no idea WTF you talking about.

I thought we passed on him because of head injuries (bleeding in the brain) and a very poor U18 carnival, had not grown and at 191cm could he play 1st or 2nd key tall.

But you learn something everyday.

What Nasher is saying, is that RR was contending that.

Then he changed his tune.

But it was probably a factor in the decision not to take him.

In one of the articles, Darling did say that the Melbourne recruiter (unnamed) as him if he was "a bit of a lad?"

I thought we passed on him because of head injuries (bleeding in the brain) and a very poor U18 carnival, had not grown and at 191cm could he play 1st or 2nd key tall. But you learn something everyday.

That's precisely why, but unfortunately we can't call the club soft and blame it on 50 years of poor culture for that.

"Greener pastures". There's the rub.

Fact: Head of recruitment at Melbourne to opposition analyst at Carlton.

Fact: Story fluffed out in the Hun that he's pursuing a "coaching career" at Carlton when he's doing no such thing.

What's so hard to understand?

I'm not having a personal go at BP but yes ... shock horror ... people do get the flick from their jobs from time to time!

Who said he is not a key player in the Carlton recruiting process?

Edited April 18, 201213 yr by Dr Who

Who said he is not a key player in the Carlton recruiting process?

The key players in Carlton's recruiting process are, according to the Blues' website ...

National Recruiting Manager

Shane Rogers

Recruiting Manager

Wayne Hughes

I don't know what 'key player' means to you but to me it means the person makes key decisions at or very near the top of the tree.

... defending our recruiting is a hiding to nothing.

I'd like you to point out what BP did wrong - so wrong that Carlton head hunted him to lead a key component of their recruiting & drafting team.

Obviously you know more than Carlton I would love to hear it.

I'd like you to point out what BP did wrong - so wrong that Carlton head hunted him to lead a key component of their recruiting & drafting team.

Obviously you know more than Carlton I would love to hear it.

I think they wanted the trifecta, they already had Brock and Chris and Bazza was the final link in the chain.

They really have pillaged us haven't they?

What the hell are you talking about?

Shifting the goalposts to make what you said correct?

Indeed. I thought we passed on Darling because he was a naughty boy off the field. Oh wait - we've recruited heaps of naughty boys before and a few of them are still on the list? No no no, we've got it all wrong - what Rangey meant was being a hard-nosed, win at all costs type whatever. *nod* Yep, that's what he said.

Shifting goalposts? No, Just clarifying a point.

But there's really no need to is there. Our recruiting record and on-field performance speaks for itself.

I'd like you to point out what BP did wrong - so wrong that Carlton head hunted him to lead a key component of their recruiting & drafting team.

Obviously you know more than Carlton I would love to hear it.

Apparently our boot studder is also set to join Carlton and will form a key component of their fitness team.

Shifting goalposts? No, Just clarifying a point.

But there's really no need to is there. Our recruiting record and on-field performance speaks for itself.

Yes RR the scoreboard has a habit of making all the conjecture pointless.