Toumpas v Stringer v Wines

[jumbo returns 6,737]

the way they start (new draftees) is imperative. It forges they're attitudes for their careers. These boys were unlucky they came to melbourne at the time they did, which had an existing rotten culture, that was mediocre, with some talented players who had ability, but amateur attitudes.

there is no guarantees for draftees re making it, but sure as hell its much tougher at clubs with soft cultures.

Mebbe DL......but you want to recruit leaders too.....

[Sir Why You Little 36,891]

You fly off the handle about anything and everything - constantly. That says to me that you lack experience ... I've given you some curry today because you continue to utter malicious lies about my drafting opinions. You chose that path, I'm just reacting.

Now, you either lack the intelligence to figure out what I'm saying or you're just looking for an argument because of your misplaced anger. Which one is it

So what is your alternative to a draft system that all teams use??

Rich Clubs buy up exactly what they want

That's how the VFL went broke...

[Sir Why You Little 36,891]

The draft should be altered - all eligible players should be 2 years removed from high school.

The number of terrible decisions made by clubs would go down dramatically.

I have argued this for years and I know it scares people but the usefulness of the draft as a measure of equalisation would only increase if this were the case.

2 years is too long for a teenager to do something else

Soccer would swoop in.

[Macca 16,900]

So what is your alternative to a draft system that all teams use??

Rich Clubs buy up exactly what they want

That's how the VFL went broke...

This, just 2 posts back ... you didn't notice? Of course you didn't ... again, probably proving that you read in a selective way. Unlike you, I don't just talk about the problem ... one day, you might bother to stick your neck out and offer up some ideas.

The post below was in response to rpfc's idea of lifting the draft age. Hope it's not too much for you ...

I agree and here's how I see things working if the draft age was lifted by 2 years ... just some random ideas ...

• Either an Australia wide under 20 competition being formed or just leaving the TAC as it is but lifting it to under 20's ... the national under age championships could be expanded though ... other interstate comps could stay as they are. I'd favour a nationwide under 20 competition though.

• The top 80-100 juniors to be paid a decent "youth allowance" (from a certain age) to offset those juniors being swept away by other sports. It should be remembered that the Sheffield shield in Australian cricket is heavily subsidised by CA - it must cost CA an absolute fortune to run that competition but it's vital money, well spent. The AFL is cash rich so it's a no-brainer in many ways.

• A certain amount of the under 20 players could be aligned with an AFL club - along the lines of an academy and/or zone ... these players could be "listed" by the clubs that they are aligned with at draft time ... they would still however all play predominately in the feeder comp until drafted. These players could simply be listed by the clubs at draft time instead of using an actual draft number to attain them (up to a maximum of 3-4 players per club) The actual draft could be reserved for those players who aren't aligned with an AFL club.

• These same pre-listed players could spend some time at their AFL aligned club before draft time. Perhaps a number of these players could play a certain amount of games with a clubs reserves team or such-like.

• We could also lift the draft age by 2 years in an incremental way ... say, 3-6 months at a time. Again, this could be done to offset the threat from other sports.

There would obviously need to be other things done if the draft age was lifted by 2 years but the above covers the bare necessities. Whether the AFL actually acts or not is another question - there may be other ways of fixing things or perhaps we could just accept the way the draft is right now (flaws and all) Again, the above is not a template, just some random thoughts.

[Sir Why You Little 36,891]

This, just 2 posts back ... you didn't notice? Of course you didn't ... again, probably proving that you read in a selective way. Unlike you, I don't just talk about the problem ... one day, you might bother to stick your neck out and offer up some ideas.

The post below was in response to rpfc's idea of lifting the draft age. Hope it's not too much for you ...

Teenagers change their mind on future plans far too often to raise the draft age by 2 years. It is too long regardless of what a new system might be. I actualy agree with what you have put up. But in reality it won't work

You must grab the kids early. Too many other sports offering good money.

[Macca 16,900]

Teenagers change their mind on future plans far too often to raise the draft age by 2 years. It is too long regardless of what a new system might be. I actualy agree with what you have put up. But in reality it won't work

You must grab the kids early. Too many other sports offering good money.

The AFL just signed on for a 2.508 billion dollar deal with their broadcast partners

You don't believe they could heavily subsidise a feeder comp with multiple millions of dollars? ... to me, it's a no-brainer. Let's not forget that only about 80 players are drafted each year so my idea of actually paying the top juniors before they are drafted wouldn't be that costly.

Most or all the other under 20 players could be paid a match fee so as to keep them aligned with the sport ... soccer is a real threat anyway but my pathway approach doesn't necessarily make it any easier for soccer.

I see an under 20 Australia-wide competition as one that many fans of sport would embrace ... cable or free-to-air could broadcast the games and certain rules could be put in place so as to make the games aesthetically pleasing. Align all the teams with an AFL team and there would even more support for such a concept.

And Wyl, I don't dislike you ... I just took offence at you painting me in the wrong light re the drafting debate. By the way, the AFL are looking at the way drafting works but whether they act or not is another question. They'd be fearful of other sports, I agree with you on that point but there's a way around things if the right decisions are made.

[Sir Why You Little 36,891]

The AFL just signed on for a 2.508 billion dollar deal with their broadcast partners

You don't believe they could heavily subsidise a feeder comp with multiple millions of dollars? ... to me, it's a no-brainer. Let's not forget that only about 80 players are drafted each year so my idea of actually paying the top juniors before they are drafted wouldn't be that costly.

Most or all the other under 20 players could be paid a match fee so as to keep them aligned with the sport ... soccer is a real threat anyway but my pathway approach doesn't necessarily make it any easier for soccer.

I see an under 20 Australia-wide competition as one that many fans of sport would embrace ... cable or free-to-air could broadcast the games and certain rules could be put in place so as to make the games aesthetically pleasing. Align all the teams with an AFL team and there would even more support for such a concept.

And Wyl, I don't dislike you ... I just took offence at you painting me in the wrong light re the drafting debate. By the way, the AFL are looking at the way drafting works but whether they act or not is another question. They'd be fearful of other sports, I agree with you on that point but there's a way around things if the right decisions are made.

The AFL need to buy out Etihad Stadium before they will subsidize a full second feeder comp. The TAC comp should stay as it is

Personally i think our recruiters need to study psychology as well as football skills to nail the right players

[Demonsone 2,029]

You continually say the Draft is all luck

That is a perfect MFC cop out

So many of our past Top Picks have shown nothing once in the senior side.

That to me says it is an MFC problem where the club has failed to capitalize on the system the entire competition uses.

One thing to draft top young talent ... The real challenge is how you develop them.....culture of a club...

No doubt some of our picks were misses ... But our development process prior to Roos was terrible....

[Macca 16,900]

The AFL need to buy out Etihad Stadium before they will subsidize a full second feeder comp.

They could do both ... at the same time.

They might buy Etihad but there's ways of buying an asset without spending all their reserves, all at once. And what if they decide to not buy out Etihad right now? What would they then spend the billions of dollars on?

Stick it in the bank?

.

Edited August 30, 2015 by Macca

[rjay 24,808]

The draft should be altered - all eligible players should be 2 years removed from high school.

The number of terrible decisions made by clubs would go down dramatically.

I have argued this for years and I know it scares people but the usefulness of the draft as a measure of equalisation would only increase if this were the case.

It's not going to happen though 'rpfc' due to the draw on talent from other sports. The competition is already getting stronger from soccer and cricket are back in the game with 20/20.

[Sir Why You Little 36,891]

They could do both ... at the same time.

They might buy Etihad but there's ways of buying an asset without spending all their reserves, all at once. And what if they decide to not buy out Etihad right now? What would they then spend the billions of dollars on?

Stick it in the bank?

.

You can't have some clubs owning "Clean" Stadiums whilst 4-5 others are on a drip feed.

If the AFL think it is possible then they are more foolish than i thought possible!

10 years to go...

[Little Richard 6,232]

The AFL need to buy out Etihad Stadium before they will subsidize a full second feeder comp. The TAC comp should stay as it is

Personally i think our recruiters need to study psychology as well as football skills to nail the right players

I'm absolutely certain that there is plenty of psychological thinking in the questions that the recruiters ask. Unfortunately, psychology is not an exact science.

[Sir Why You Little 36,891]

I'm absolutely certain that there is plenty of psychological thinking in the questions that the recruiters ask. Unfortunately, psychology is not an exact science.

No it isn't. But if you look for the right signs at the right times you can be pretty confident.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

One thing to draft top young talent ... The real challenge is how you develop them.....culture of a club...

No doubt some of our picks were misses ... But our development process prior to Roos was terrible....

I'd say it's 90% drafting and 10% development.

I just can't see Morton, Gysberts, Cook, Blease, Maric, Strauss, Tapscott, Watts, Taggert, Grimes, Trengove, Tynan or Toumpas being any better if recruited by other clubs.

[titan_uranus 24,963]

I'd say it's 90% drafting and 10% development.

I just can't see Morton, Gysberts, Cook, Blease, Maric, Strauss, Tapscott, Watts, Taggert, Grimes, Trengove, Tynan or Toumpas being any better if recruited by other clubs.

A list that long, to me, indicates the opposite.

The common thread in all those players is that they were forced to start their careers at Melbourne.

We can never know what they would have been like at other clubs, but I'm confident that a significant number of them would have been better (not necessarily the next Chris Judds, but better) had they had the chance to start their careers at Geelong or Hawthorn or Sydney.

In addition, even if they shouldn't have been drafted where we picked them, they all would have been drafted at some point. For them all to fail, ignoring their draft position, is indicative of the club being systematically incapable of developing young kids properly.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

A list that long, to me, indicates the opposite.

The problem is for so long there we were looking for the wrong type of player, aside from Trengove, Grimes and Watts the rest had no chance of succeeding.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Mebbe DL......but you want to recruit leaders too.....

we need all the talent we can get & some will be leadership material, & other will learn to lead in their own ways as well.

it's the group internal culture that sets the standards; & the clubs overall culture, the one heard from the coteries, to the in-the-rooms after-games, to the big one heard across the matchday surface from the grandstands, that sets the tone for this clubs players to follow...

..... lets not let them be lazy or soft,,, but lets encourage that chase down, big tackle, & sacrificial team act, just as hard as the high mark, or that long goal ???

.

[dee-luded 2,959]

They could do both ... at the same time.

They might buy Etihad but there's ways of buying an asset without spending all their reserves, all at once. And what if they decide to not buy out Etihad right now? What would they then spend the billions of dollars on?

Stick it in the bank?

.

Land for a boutique stadium, out at Dandenong Sth... in between the 2 rail lines... the Sth Gippsland rail line, & the East Gippsland rail line. a major growth corridor & region.

.... then the AFL can have the 'G', Geelong's boutique stadium, & a Boutique stadium in the heart of the Sth-Eastern suburbs, servicing the Mornington Peninsular & Southern suburbs, & the Eastern suburbs, & the East & Sth Eastern regions of this state, all easily accessible by Rail & by Freeways.

.

Edited August 30, 2015 by dee-luded

[Redleg 40,773]

I'm absolutely certain that there is plenty of psychological thinking in the questions that the recruiters ask. Unfortunately, psychology is not an exact science.

I would prefer less psychology and more football assessment. I could accept a few not so nice, but great footballers, for a change.

Edited August 30, 2015 by Redleg

[Macca 16,900]

Land for a boutique stadium, out at Dandenong Sth... in between the 2 rail lines... the Sth Gippsland rail line, & the East Gippsland rail line. a major growth corridor & region.

.... then the AFL can have the 'G', Geelong's boutique stadium, & a Boutique stadium in the heart of the Sth-Eastern suburbs, servicing the Mornington Peninsular & Southern suburbs, & the Eastern suburbs, & the East & Sth Eastern regions of this state, all easily accessible by Rail & by Freeways.

.

Whatever they do with the stadiums is probably best left for another thread dl ... the crux of my argument is improving the way we draft young players - the connection to Jimmy Toumpas is therefore relevant. I'd raise the draft age amongst other things but I've already expressed those views previously on this thread.

I'm just happy that we've given him a 2 year deal so that he and the club can get on with the business. He's got a fair way to go but as I've said previously, there are a number of max'd out others that should be let go before him. And that now looks like happening.

Depending on how one views things, he's either got a lot of upside or varying degrees of upside. Those who want to write him off completely should direct their comments at Roos & Goodwin et al ...

[dee-luded 2,959]

Whatever they do with the stadiums is probably best left for another thread dl ... the crux of my argument is improving the way we draft young players - the connection to Jimmy Toumpas is therefore relevant. I'd raise the draft age amongst other things but I've already expressed those views previously on this thread.

I'm just happy that we've given him a 2 year deal so that he and the club can get on with the business. He's got a fair way to go but as I've said previously, there are a number of max'd out others that should be let go before him. And that now looks like happening.

Depending on how one views things, he's either got a lot of upside or varying degrees of upside. Those who want to write him off completely should direct their comments at Roos & Goodwin et al ...

I want to see 17Yr olds taken Via zones, to be given scholarships, to be schooled & taught footy in our academy, so these would be the best of the U-17's, & the academy squads should be kept to a low number, & still played in the U-18 competition, & also in the VFL competition on occasions when ready.

as far as draft age, If a player is ready for AFL & some rare ones are at 16 yrs .

the key here is to not play them before they are ready,,, Or make all draftees rookies, ineligible to play seniors unless elevated to the senior list, when a spot has become available.

This gives some protection to the kids, in that the clubs have to go past the AFL first, to do the registering of documents on elevation.

[titan_uranus 24,963]

The problem is for so long there we were looking for the wrong type of player, aside from Trengove, Grimes and Watts the rest had no chance of succeeding.

Classic Melbourne, wasn't it.

We did it with our coaches, going from Bailey who was too easy on the players, to Neeld who was too harsh on the players, a massive overcorrection.

We did it with the drafting too. First we went for players who were stocky/well-built but for whom skill was not the highlight - Dunn, N Jones, Bartram, Bate. Then we overcorrected and went for skilful players who didn't really have the bodies for AFL - Morton, Watts, Strauss, Blease, Gysberts, Cook.

We're finding players with more balance between the two now, it seems (maybe).

[Little Richard 6,232]

I would prefer less psychology and more football assessment. I could accept a few not so nice, but great footballers, for a change.

I think in this case WYL is probably referring to the will to compete, be better etc. I hope and believe we've truly passed the 'choir boy' phase.

[CBDees 3,167]

Time to shut this thread now that we are rumoured to have resigned Toumpas!