we [censored] it up, your delusional of you think otherwise.

Hindsight of the tallest order - we stuffed up Cook - we stuffed up Strauss - these were picks taken well in advance of where the so called experts of the day had them rated.

You wonder where the papers get the ideas on where most players will be drafted - most papers are only feeding off recruiters and talent watchers who actually go and watch the games. ( Sheahan and Emma Quayles opinions are somewhat different as I believe both are avid watchers of the TAC - both rated Toumpas ahead of Wines).

The one I find the most laughable is the thought of taking Dustin Martin over Scully. I understand that Martin is showing himself to be the superior footballer but not a recruiter in the land would have taken Martin over Scully at the time.

I hope no one gives me the nonsense that recruiters are paid big dollars to be able to pick the right players. To espouse this theory is to suggest that recruiting is an exact science - it just isn't.

Edited August 4, 201411 yr by nutbean

I am starting to think its a development issue more and more as I think about it.

What are the chances of being so wrong so many times? I just noticed Luke Breust was taken at pick 47 in a rookie draft and right now he would have a field day playing on any of our high picks.

I am starting to think its a development issue more and more as I think about it.

What are the chances of being so wrong so many times? I just noticed Luke Breust was taken at pick 47 in a rookie draft and right now he would have a field day playing on any of our high picks.

Like your post....

We have certainly picked some odd selections (as previously posted - Cook and Strauss we used picks well in advance of their rankings) but I have said this before - how is it possible to get soooo many sooo wrong.

I absolutely believe we have been hamstrung by

1/ Poor development coaches or lack of focus on development

2/ our recruits being being placed in a team with poor footballers and poor leaders will certainly have a detrimental effect on your development. Of course Bruest is going to develop nicely having the likes of Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis and Hodge driving the ball into Roughhead, Franklin ( previous years), Gunston and Rioli. Makes it much easier for a recruit to sit in that forward line. If you are put into a well structured and well disciplined it makes it much easier to do the right things and run to the right spots - it also helps that when you do run to the right spots your teamate is going to hit you lace out.

3/ Poor culture - I firmly believe that even during our "successful" period of Daniher, close enough was good enough . We were happy to sneak into the 8 - when finishing in 8th was just over a 50% pass mark. We have had many recruits that have either shone brightly for a small period of time or more worrying - became pretty good footballers and then hit a ceiling and never climbed any higher. From yesteryear - the likes of Green, Bruce, White etc all were pretty good footballers - who never went that one step further and become stand-outs. This has continued and we need Roos and his cohorts to put a stop to the rotand put a structure in place where success is reward but improvement on any success is expected( ultimately it is up to the players)

To me it is combination of all of the above 3.

Not by choice though.

How do you know this? Have not seen any proof yet unless Todd told you so.

Right now two years into their respective careers we have clearly picked the wrong one.

I am hoping like hell that our selection will come on strong in year three.

Right now it is all hope as I have low expectation.

How do you know this? Have not seen any proof yet unless Todd told you so.

I heard it from someone else, not Todd.

Comparisons are odious.

Comparisons are odious.

especially if you have the poor one in the comparsion

I am starting to think its a development issue more and more as I think about it.

What are the chances of being so wrong so many times? I just noticed Luke Breust was taken at pick 47 in a rookie draft and right now he would have a field day playing on any of our high picks.

He wouldn't have a field day playing on arguably the in-form small defender in the competition - Neville Jetta - who was overlooked 100+ times in last years drafts. He was the last pick in the rookie draft, IIRC. Dean Kent was pick 48 but looks a better prospect than Toumpas (pick 4) and others taken in the early rounds. Just proves the point of the poster above who says recruiting is far from an exact science and never will be.

Like your post....

We have certainly picked some odd selections (as previously posted - Cook and Strauss we used picks well in advance of their rankings) but I have said this before - how is it possible to get soooo many sooo wrong.

I absolutely believe we have been hamstrung by

1/ Poor development coaches or lack of focus on development

2/ our recruits being being placed in a team with poor footballers and poor leaders will certainly have a detrimental effect on your development. Of course Bruest is going to develop nicely having the likes of Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis and Hodge driving the ball into Roughhead, Franklin ( previous years), Gunston and Rioli. Makes it much easier for a recruit to sit in that forward line. If you are put into a well structured and well disciplined it makes it much easier to do the right things and run to the right spots - it also helps that when you do run to the right spots your teamate is going to hit you lace out.

3/ Poor culture - I firmly believe that even during our "successful" period of Daniher, close enough was good enough . We were happy to sneak into the 8 - when finishing in 8th was just over a 50% pass mark. We have had many recruits that have either shone brightly for a small period of time or more worrying - became pretty good footballers and then hit a ceiling and never climbed any higher. From yesteryear - the likes of Green, Bruce, White etc all were pretty good footballers - who never went that one step further and become stand-outs. This has continued and we need Roos and his cohorts to put a stop to the rotand put a structure in place where success is reward but improvement on any success is expected( ultimately it is up to the players)

To me it is combination of all of the above 3.

Hooray, finally someone who has hit the nail on the head. The problem isn't that our recruits lack talent or ability. The problem is that they go to a club with no culture, no leaders, no development system, no expectations of anything. When they aren't being exposed to what is required of the elite, how are they meant to learn?

Hindsight of the tallest order - we stuffed up Cook - we stuffed up Strauss - these were picks taken well in advance of where the so called experts of the day had them rated.

You wonder where the papers get the ideas on where most players will be drafted - most papers are only feeding off recruiters and talent watchers who actually go and watch the games. ( Sheahan and Emma Quayles opinions are somewhat different as I believe both are avid watchers of the TAC - both rated Toumpas ahead of Wines).

The one I find the most laughable is the thought of taking Dustin Martin over Scully. I understand that Martin is showing himself to be the superior footballer but not a recruiter in the land would have taken Martin over Scully at the time.

I hope no one gives me the nonsense that recruiters are paid big dollars to be able to pick the right players. To espouse this theory is to suggest that recruiting is an exact science - it just isn't.

Emma doesn't watch any TAC Cup really. Just talks to recruiters.

Toumpas and Wines are both good footballers.

Wines is obviously an absolute gun. But it's not as though Toumpas would've been picked at no.76 had we not selected him.

The reality is, for a very long time (ie, at least the 8 years prior to Roos and PJ), we were a tres ordinaire club.

Edit - added the words 'at least'.

Edited August 4, 201411 yr by Ron Burgundy

Emma doesn't watch any TAC Cup really. Just talks to recruiters.

I saw her at most matches I attended,,, & she did also hang out with Scotty Clayton & others in that group & Shifter Sheehan.

Should we ask if toumpas will come good?

Over reading about the toumpas comparisons.

Give the kid a go.
If in time he does indeed end up being a 'mistake', well so be it.

atm he is a young player with some injury issues affecting his footballing ability.

Toumpas and Wines are both good footballers.

Wines is obviously an absolute gun. But it's not as though Toumpas would've been picked at no.76 had we not selected him.

The reality is, for a very long time (ie, at least the 8 years prior to Roos and PJ), we were a tres ordinaire club.

Edit - added the words 'at least'.

I actually think Toump has been a little bit stiff this year, both times he has been dropped he has played a pretty good game with over 15 touches and used the ball well

Salem got so many opportunities where he had 5-8 touches

Roosy must see some holes in Toumps game, I reckon his tackling had improved, he just needed to get amoungst the contested football a little bit more

Toumpas is a dud spuddddd. Get rid of

him ASAP.

Toumpas is a dud spuddddd. Get rid of

him ASAP.

Oh my Wow.

Ignorance is bliss

I wonder if the GWS and Bulldogs fan forums [censored] and moan as much as we do.

None of the first 3 picks for GWS have hit the mark like Wines has and McCrae is not up to Wines standard so the Bullies missed out as well.

I will judge their careers when they are more than two seasons old but again all those who are whining weren't whining pre-draft about the possibility of Toumpas.

Its a turkey shoot and every year one or two players pop up who were passed up by many and there are some that taken early because of their TAC pedigree that never make it.

You can only take what you believe to the best at the time.

I'm just glad we took Salem over Freeman, who has spent the ENTIRE year out with a hamstring injury. Just imagine the meltdown on here if we'd gone down the other path.....

Yeah...but Salem has done a quad, and Toump had appendicitis. Should have seen both of those coming :-) Obviously poor choices. PS: And Hogan was a shocker - hurt his back.

Yeah...but Salem has done a quad, and Toump had appendicitis. Should have seen both of those coming :-) Obviously poor choices. PS: And Hogan was a shocker - hurt his back.

Is there a message there?

I wonder if the GWS and Bulldogs fan forums [censored] and moan as much as we do.

None of the first 3 picks for GWS have hit the mark like Wines has and McCrae is not up to Wines standard so the Bullies missed out as well.

I will judge their careers when they are more than two seasons old but again all those who are whining weren't whining pre-draft about the possibility of Toumpas.

Its a turkey shoot and every year one or two players pop up who were passed up by many and there are some that taken early because of their TAC pedigree that never make it.

You can only take what you believe to the best at the time.

I think the bullies would have been more worried about Stringer until recently. For what it's worth I think Stringer (if they don't lock him in the forward half) could still end up the pick of that draft and did at the time although I was fully behind our taking Toumpas.

I know he needs time but I have been disappointed in Toumpas to date. He had some really good exposed form in the SANFL playing senior football and it's really surprised me how hard it's been for him to adapt to the AFL. Others like Dunstan and Aish haven't missed a beat.

People need to get off Toumpas' case.. The kid had both hips operated on and then was thrown to the wolves in his first year when he should have spent a year at casey and playing a few senior games if form warranted it just like Salem this year. In the games he played this year he was far from disgraceful.. He obviously was sent back to casey to work on areas of his game that needed improvement which should have been ironed out last year, if not for the appendicitis he probably would be back in the side atm. The kid will be a good footballer and most importantly can kick the ball... Write him off at your peril becauseim backing him in to be a very good footballer for this club

People need to get off Toumpas' case.. The kid had both hips operated on and then was thrown to the wolves in his first year when he should have spent a year at casey and playing a few senior games if form warranted it just like Salem this year. In the games he played this year he was far from disgraceful.. He obviously was sent back to casey to work on areas of his game that needed improvement which should have been ironed out last year, if not for the appendicitis he probably would be back in the side atm. The kid will be a good footballer and most importantly can kick the ball... Write him off at your peril becauseim backing him in to be a very good footballer for this club

Is that Mrs Toumpas??

Is that Mrs Toumpas??

No, I'm just not an impatient moron and can see why Toumpas has had a slow start to his career and can see his upside/potential

I wonder if the GWS and Bulldogs fan forums [censored] and moan as much as we do.

None of the first 3 picks for GWS have hit the mark like Wines has and McCrae is not up to Wines standard so the Bullies missed out as well.

I will judge their careers when they are more than two seasons old but again all those who are whining weren't whining pre-draft about the possibility of Toumpas.

Its a turkey shoot and every year one or two players pop up who were passed up by many and there are some that taken early because of their TAC pedigree that never make it.

You can only take what you believe to the best at the time.

Disagree I think Mcrae has been every bit as impressive as Wines, and Stringer has players some very good games this year, I think they would be extremely comfortable with where they are sitting