We got Toumpas and not Wines. Now it's up to Jimmy and the club to make him the best player he can be. That is where the future lies, not with lamenting what might have been. That is so pointless.

Natanui Vs Watts

Dangerfield, Rioli Vs Morton

Martin Vs Scully, Trengove

Vines Vs Toumpas

These things are in the past. The future is the future

We got Toumpas and not Wines. Now it's up to Jimmy and the club to make him the best player he can be. That is where the future lies, not with lamenting what might have been. That is so pointless.

Natanui Vs Watts

Dangerfield, Rioli Vs Morton

Martin Vs Scully, Trengove

Vines Vs Toumpas

These things are in the past. The future is the future

So far the ledger for the above is three losses and one undecided but we are off to a slow start.

Not good results so far

It is what it is.......no amount of gassbagging is going to change a thing.

It is what it is.......no amount of gassbagging is going to change a thing.

I never saw that coming!

We got Toumpas and not Wines. Now it's up to Jimmy and the club to make him the best player he can be. That is where the future lies, not with lamenting what might have been. That is so pointless.

Natanui Vs Watts

Dangerfield, Rioli Vs Morton

Martin Vs Scully, Trengove

Vines Vs Toumpas

These things are in the past. The future is the future

jesus, that second one will haunt me for a long time, Dangerfield was a victorian boy too!

Yes just like the Silvia haters and the Morton haters

I dont want to put the Toump in the same basket as either of those players but I get your thinking.

We got Toumpas and not Wines. Now it's up to Jimmy and the club to make him the best player he can be. That is where the future lies, not with lamenting what might have been. That is so pointless.

Natanui Vs Watts

Dangerfield, Rioli Vs Morton

Martin Vs Scully, Trengove

Vines Vs Toumpas

These things are in the past. The future is the future

And if you cant learn FROM the past youre doomed in the future.

A well and succintly presently abject lesson in our failings

Edited March 11, 201411 yr by beelzebub

To me you have good footballers, inside and out has nothing to do with it.

in the context of what I was replying to it has everything. it was suggested you dont have TWO of the same type... but I would have thought you might try to do exactly that. So a team would baulk at two Selwoods, two Chapmans, two Mitchells etc...ie. its not about collecting a 'set' its about creating a formidable lineup.

Maybe that coach in Echuca had never heard of Chess

And if you cant learn FROM the past youre doomed in the future.

A well and succintly presently abject lesson in our failings

Yes, but we have new people in charge. I don't think they are reading all this and changing their plans as a result. So what is the point of endlessly banging on about past errors.

Edited March 11, 201411 yr by sue

in the context of what I was replying to it has everything. it was suggested you dont have TWO of the same type... but I would have thought you might try to do exactly that. So a team would baulk at two Selwoods, two Chapmans, two Mitchells etc...ie. its not about collecting a 'set' its about creating a formidable lineup.

Maybe that coach in Echuca had never heard of Chess

Agree with you, if they can play they can play. This inside/outside label just muddies the waters.

Yes, but we have new people in charge. I don't think they are reading all this and changing their plans as a result. So what is the point of endlessly banging on about past errors.

I think because Sue part of it will be, if ever confronted by similar choices again, always go for the Junk yard dog over and well groomed Cavalier King Charles. As the great KORGIS song goes "And everybodies gotta learn sometime"

I think because Sue part of it will be, if ever confronted by similar choices again, always go for the Junk yard dog over and well groomed Cavalier King Charles. As the great KORGIS song goes "And everybodies gotta learn sometime"

I suppose an example is in 2005, Collingwood went for Scott Pendelbury and Dale Thomas, both skinny lads, when there were other ready to go players, and as a result they won a premiership in 2010, and nearly another in 2011, so the junk yard dog as you say isn't always the right way to go, sometimes patience works just as well, the obvious difference being they had a much better culture, development and recruiting team than we have had previously but still.

Unbelievable. It's March 2014, and the same people still making themselves appear even less in touch with football than they were in 2013 by continuing this Wines nonsense.

We got Toumpas and not Wines. Now it's up to Jimmy and the club to make him the best player he can be. That is where the future lies, not with lamenting what might have been. That is so pointless.

Natanui Vs Watts

Dangerfield, Rioli Vs Morton

Martin Vs Scully, Trengove

Vines Vs Toumpas

These things are in the past. The future is the future

You do learn from the past.

What those names tell me is that had we gone the other way we would have been the bravest club in the AFL defying what was being touted by recruiters and experts alike. ( except Watts vs Niknat - where most "experts" and recruiters were split with a slight leaning to NikNat).

Now if you said

Cook vs lots of others

Gysberts vs lots of others

Strauss vs lots of others

Then you have some lessons.

I find it amusing that the recruiters get lambasted over the Scully/Trengove vs Martin decision on here - that decision was an absolute lock. But then recruiters went "left field" with Cook and Gysberts and since that also went pear-shaped the recruiters get slapped around for picking players who were not as highly ranked as other selections that could have been made. You can't have it both ways - you pick the higher rated in Toumpas and get kicked, you pick what was considered a smoky in Cook and you get kicked.

The lessons from all of this is obvious - When it comes to recruiting, it doesn't matter what the rationale for picking a player is. The only expectation is for the recruiter to defy all research and popular wisdom from those who watch,rate and report on players and have a crystal ball to know exactly what a player will turn out like two years down the track. Get the inexact Science of recruiting correct and you are a hero - get it wrong and you are a goose - no matter what the reason.

You do learn from the past.

What those names tell me is that had we gone the other way we would have been the bravest club in the AFL defying what was being touted by recruiters and experts alike. ( except Watts vs Niknat - where most "experts" and recruiters were split with a slight leaning to NikNat).

Now if you said

Cook vs lots of others

Gysberts vs lots of others

Strauss vs lots of others

Then you have some lessons.

I find it amusing that the recruiters get lambasted over the Scully/Trengove vs Martin decision on here - that decision was an absolute lock. But then recruiters went "left field" with Cook and Gysberts and since that also went pear-shaped the recruiters get slapped around for picking players who were not as highly ranked as other selections that could have been made. You can't have it both ways - you pick the higher rated in Toumpas and get kicked, you pick what was considered a smoky in Cook and you get kicked.

The lessons from all of this is obvious - When it comes to recruiting, it doesn't matter what the rationale for picking a player is. The only expectation is for the recruiter to defy all research and popular wisdom from those who watch,rate and report on players and have a crystal ball to know exactly what a player will turn out like two years down the track. Get the inexact Science of recruiting correct and you are a hero - get it wrong and you are a goose - no matter what the reason.

Two things Nutbean

- Change lots of others to almost anyone

- We have been blessed with lots of Geese.

Two things Nutbean

- Change lots of others to almost anyone

- We have been blessed with lots of Geese.

Anyone is more accurate.

We have been blessed with geese.

We have seen a smattering of "good gets" taken before their rating ( Howe and McDonald - then go back to the likes of Davey, Robertson) - we have had little success with our top draft picks that were taken exactly where pundits thought they would go - Sylvia, Brock M, Morton, Watts, Trengove, Scully ( even though he isnt with us - he is yet to prove that he is a number one pick), Toumpas (disclaimer - some are still in the formative stages and could yet prove that they were taken at the right pick).

So we have had high picks taken at the right pick that haven't come on, we have had speculative picks taken high that haven't come on.

Again this all poses that thorny question - have the recruiters got it so badly wrong or have we just not had the workplace, the culture and the development programs to allow players to thrive ?

Possibly all of the above Nut but if you dont have the right fabric in the first place youll only ever end up with a 2nd rate suit no matter whos cutting the cloth.

Two quotes from my learned Posters Beezlebub and Nutbean,

"So we have had high picks taken at the right pick that haven't come on, we have had speculative picks taken high that haven't come on.

Again this all poses that thorny question - have the recruiters got it so badly wrong or have we just not had the workplace, the culture and the development programs to allow players to thrive ?

"Possibly all of the above Nut but if you dont have the right fabric in the first place youll only ever end up with a 2nd rate suit no matter whos cutting the cloth"

I think you are both right.I use that word culture again.

I reckon two things are in play here,

1 It must be a combination of right player psche and type, of player needed ( with Volition the key ingredient) and

2 Right people who can engender a really fine winning environment (Coaching and support staff)

Can anyone really argue the last time we had the right mix of players and coaches were the Northey years?

We were desperately unlucky not to Pinch a Flag during his time desperately unlucky!

Now I ask this question, what type of player did Swooper Northey have the most success with, a Wines Type Or a Toumpas Type?

Edited March 12, 201411 yr by picket fence

Brian Wilson would have enjoyed playing with Wines PF....

what ppl are discussing is effectively the reverse side of the same coin. Its the coin in reality under discussion....i.e how we got tails instead of heads or vice versa

To discuss Wines is to discuss Toumpas

Then let's change the title to Jimmy Toumpas then at least, we would be talking about one of OUR players.

Now I ask this question, what type of player did Swooper Northey have the most success with, a Wines Type Or a Toumpas Type?

Probably not a relevant question - at the beginning of his reign he recognised our depth of skill problems so he opted for a one handball and then a long kick. As we improved skillwise the gameplan did move to more possession but he was never one to believe in a high possession game.

Swooper had a combination of both types of players - some skilled and but the majority not so skilled. What he did manage to do was to extract every last bit of talent out of players - whether you were a plodder or had some skill.

Players would run through brick walls for swooper.

Brian Wilson would have enjoyed playing with Wines PF....

Everyone would enjoy playing with Wines - he has shown plenty - what does that mean ?

Everyone would enjoy playing with Wines - he has shown plenty - what does that mean ?

It means WYL is aimlessly rambling again...

It means WYL is aimlessly rambling again...

not at all. Brian Wilson was as tough as any other midfielder going around. Yes a showman but a dam good footballer.

Better than any of the choirboy midfielders we have recruited over the last 10 years. Jones not withstanding.

Edited March 14, 201411 yr by why you little

not at all. Brian Wilson was as tough as any other midfielder going around. Yes a showman but a dam good footballer.

Better than any of the choirboy midfielders we have recruited over the last 10 years. Jones not withstanding.

Agreed - still not sure of why you said Wilson would enjoy playing with Wines ? I would think that Wilson would have enjoyed playing with Howe but that doesn't bring anything to the debate either. If you are suggesting that he would enjoy playing with Wines more than Toumpas - well ..agreed again because at this moment Wines is way more progressed/shown lots more.