Is Lucas Cook the biggest of the MFC's recent recruiting blunders?

Jack Darling says Yes. Although Daniel Talia says Gysberts has a fair argument to make.

It was more-so off-field issues. Darling had been touted as a top 5 pick (at least) 12-18 months out from his draft. His talent wasn't in question, although he was considered perhaps a tad undersized. To say that he was "thought a second round selection at best" just shows your ignorance.

Also the fact that most other clubs were looking for midfielders rather than a 3rd tall/key forward option.

The issue in the main re Darling was talent v risk.

His "issues" discounted his appeal and in reality his appeal slipped.

Many clubs felt others a better pick was there for their 1st round.

By default for many he best fit a 2nd round selection . The balance of ability v risk came back to worth a punt.

It's 3 years later and I still don't understand where the risk was...

Did we actually talk to the kid and work out his work ethics and ambitions? I don't think so.

I hear a lot of these sorts of comments, and it makes me wonder what they're expecting the kid to say. "Yeah, nah, look, I was named the AA CHF, my game's perfect. There's nothing I need to work on and if there is, I can't really be bothered working on it anyway"? I expect if they asked the kind of questions Demonlanders wanted, they'd get platitudes and the answers they wanted to hear every single time.

How much can really be taken away from talking to the players? Genuine question. I suppose I don't really have any concept of what gets discussed in these interviews.

You're onto something there.

First thing I'd do is sack whoever recruited this Cook bloke with pick #12.

Next thing is I'd sack the board that appointed the recruiting bloke.

Anyone know their names?

hows about sacking those who elected the board members to. we've all been aboard the hmas stink ship.

its time to get on with Footy Smart people, from the directors thru to the far corner of the footy dept.

& lets see plenty of bruises along our journey. on ours & on the others.

BP did such a job didn't he.l...He is one man i would love to eyeball...Just sit in the waiting room...there is a queue of you all.

you keep playing the One individual all the time when its a systematic problem of who hired who, & who elected those hirers as well. It ends up with Us. all of Us.

voting. eyes open.

We done the right thing getting rid of Gysberts, Morton, Jurrah, Cook.

They are too slight on.

And judging by Neeld getting rid of those types, I am gobsmacked we didn't take Wines.

Its not all Neelds decisions.

we are/were not just short on physical strength & aggression, but all areas of the mids including class.

Neeld will be the making of the new Mfc. maybe not the true headcoach, but was the right tough love at the time we needed to clear the ballast & start sailing again. IMO he did the dirty work required chopping off much of our problems.

You're onto something there.

First thing I'd do is sack whoever recruited this Cook bloke with pick #12.

Next thing is I'd sack the board that appointed the recruiting bloke.

Anyone know their names?

Agree and we should delist the two players he took with subsequent picks in that draft.

Agree and we should delist the two players he took with subsequent picks in that draft.

Jeremy Howe remains, but Troy Davis has already been delisted. I assume the other player you're referring to, though, is Tom McDonald.

Or taken Cook in the second round and developed him properly and maybe today he'd be a decent B grade option at least.

I hate this argument. "Developed him properly". The guy was a spud. How is that our fault (apart, from Prendergast picking him in the first place, of course)?

Agree and we should delist the two players he took with subsequent picks in that draft.

We know that recruiting is an inexact science but if the best BP could come up with was a 50% "success" rate after three years then it's nowhere near good enough. He really had to do better with his first pick in 2010 because, although punters like me might have been satisfied with the AA CHF, from information and intelligence apparently available to people in the recruiting industry, some aspects of Cook's psychological make up were overlooked and he should never have been taken with pick 12.

Add this to the number of other fails with his early draft picks, one can only conclude, that this bloke was a disaster (and that's without taking into account what has to be regarded as the hostile evidence he was said to have given to the tanking enquiry and stories of poor interreaction with other staff).

A club's recruiting people are said to be every bit as important as the coach so I think Chelly had every right to question how it was that this bloke was appointed in the first place.

I hear a lot of these sorts of comments, and it makes me wonder what they're expecting the kid to say. "Yeah, nah, look, I was named the AA CHF, my game's perfect. There's nothing I need to work on and if there is, I can't really be bothered working on it anyway"? I expect if they asked the kind of questions Demonlanders wanted, they'd get platitudes and the answers they wanted to hear every single time.

How much can really be taken away from talking to the players? Genuine question. I suppose I don't really have any concept of what gets discussed in these interviews.

If you know what you are looking for you could get a feel for his confidence levels, ambition and leadership abilities. You ask the kid to give examples where he has taken a lead role etc. if you looked at his CV you would be looking to see if he had captained most of his junior sides. Is he a leader or a follower. These are attributes Todd Viney has spoken about in draft selections. If the kid has not got these attributes, he better have some other big positives going for him.

The idea is that he does most of the talking, you listen. You soon get an idea of a kids confidence and maturity.

Of course you are right because BP would not know what he should be looking for in a kid.

Cook could play, nice kick, good decision maker, quick thinker, an ok mark for his size, a bit slow. His big problem was above the shoulders. Watching him play I thought yeah he's got something to work with but the first time I heard him interviewed I was concerned with him having the right mental toughness to play at AFL level. He was talking about spending time at Casey to develop his game, well that might be what ends up happening but it's not what you should be thinking about. I can't see Hogan thinking about spending time at Casey to develop his game, he's going to be doing everything in his power to play and rip the game up first game of next season.

Cook was still ambling about developing himself at Casey when he was given his marching orders and when they came did he work his ....off to prove everyone wrong, no he ambled about for a year in Ballarat and now he's off home.

I am a rap for Rory Taggert, got a lot of ability but one thing consistently bothered me with him and again it was above the shoulders. A few times I heard him talk of some of his teammates and how they are going to be guns as though they are above him as a player. It was like he was in awe of them. He has the talent himself but not the consistent application, it will be interesting to see if he pushes back to prove the club wrong or heads off into the wilderness and easy life picking up a few bucks in local footy wherever that be.

We know that recruiting is an inexact science but if the best BP could come up with was a 50% "success" rate after three years then it's nowhere near good enough. He really had to do better with his first pick in 2010 because, although punters like me might have been satisfied with the AA CHF, from information and intelligence apparently available to people in the recruiting industry, some aspects of Cook's psychological make up were overlooked and he should never have been taken with pick 12.

Add this to the number of other fails with his early draft picks, one can only conclude, that this bloke was a disaster (and that's without taking into account what has to be regarded as the hostile evidence he was said to have given to the tanking enquiry and stories of poor interreaction with other staff).

A club's recruiting people are said to be every bit as important as the coach so I think Chelly had every right to question how it was that this bloke was appointed in the first place.

He was appointed because he was a highly respected football figure - VFL coach et cetera with a resume better than most recruiters. I actually don't think he was a good recruiter, just think he is far better than the consensus view.

The fact that people besmirch him constantly I find utterly ludicrous and I actually use people thinking he is the essence of the clubs current problems as a basis to believe they have no idea.

His first draft: Obviously Watts is still in the debate zone but I don't think it's a bad pick. Blease and Strauss have had injury nightmares and they haven't worked out that well. Bennell I think was hastily delisted but I can concede its an average pick. Jetta and Bail have performed above variance at their respective draft spots and Jurrah and McKenzie were excellent PSD draft and Rookie Picks.

Had the picks in that year been

1. Watts

17. Jurrah

19. Blease

35. McKenzie

55. Strauss

70. Bennell

80. Bail

85. Jetta

Thats not the performance of an utterly incompetent recruiter.

2009

Well Scully has turned out to be a marvellous pick, we got a king's bounty for him. Trengove is the captain and hopefully he can overcome his issues to become a very good player. I dont think that's a bad pick. Gysberts has turned out to a bad pick and the Tapscott selection, as well, seems a poorish pick, countered by us getting Gawn and Fitzpatrick, who are big guys of reasonable potential about to hit their prime.

2010: Lucas Cook turned out to be a bad pick, but he's made two terrific picks - Howe is a fantastic smokey pick that could become anything as a player if he can improve his consistency and find a role and Tom McDonald looms as a 10-year promising key defender. Pick 12 went astray but its countered because at pick 33 and 52, where youre not really expected to find quality players, he redeemed himself. He also found a player a lot think can play in Michael Evans in the rookie draft

2011: Is a wipe of a draft and a highly compromised one. Taggert, Tynan, Sellar not great picks, but people blue about those selections yet its a battle to find difference makers taken after them, with the exception of maybe Jack Newnes. We got Mitch Clark with our first pick, which is genius without luck.

Basically I just think the ribbing of him is completely unfair and premature. He battled a bit a bit with late first round picks and did well at other spots. His predecessor destroyed better drafts a lot worse than that and made far more grievous errors, as have Hawthorn and Sydney at various points.

Hawthorn:

2005. Pick 3 Xavier Ellis Pick 6 Beau Dowler, Pick 22 Beau Muston

2006: Pick 6 Mitch Thorp

Sydney Swans:

2004 Pick 15 Josh Willoughby

2006: Pick 15 Dan O'Keefe

2008: Pick 12 Lewis Johnston

2007: Pick 11 Pat Vespremi, Pick 26 Brett Meredith

Prendergasts batches havent even hit the magic 22yo mark where the players have hit the maturity to impact games of football consistently at a high level, yet he cops the blame as if Cook who should only really be mature to play now and Gysberts not being good have destroyed the team.

I hate this argument. "Developed him properly". The guy was a spud. How is that our fault (apart, from Prendergast picking him in the first place, of course)?

Our development has been rubbish. Only a small amount of players under the latter Bailey and Neeld years made any progress. Be it coaching, training standards, psychology or fitness we've been miles off the mark. Not saying Cook would ever had made it but he might have been at least a VFL seniors player at the end of his MFC career.

Our development has been rubbish. Only a small amount of players under the latter Bailey and Neeld years made any progress. Be it coaching, training standards, psychology or fitness we've been miles off the mark. Not saying Cook would ever had made it but he might have been at least a VFL seniors player at the end of his MFC career.

In the never ending nature versus nurture debate I believe that nurture (development) is important but it can be irrelevant if the nature part is deficient.

When you meet certain levels of ability, self confidence, work ethic and ambition then development can take you further. If you are lacking in basic ability or the want to succeed development wont get you much further.

He was appointed because he was a highly respected football figure - VFL coach et cetera with a resume better than most recruiters. I actually don't think he was a good recruiter, just think he is far better than the consensus view.

Thanks goodoil. You've made a good case but in justifying his record I don't think it's fair to juggle the selections in 2008 to support a better outcome. We were wooden spooners that year and had a priority pick so in order to assess them you have to take them as they came out. The reality is that leaving pick 1 aside, the next four were all ordinary picks that ignored better credentialled recruits across the board and Jurrah and McKenzie fell into place in the PSD and rookie draft.

The fact that the Scully pick has resulted in us getting the benefit of a much delayed compensation bonus doesn't speak to the efficacy of his drafting prowess. As I mentioned in my earlier post, his best effort came in 2010 when after completely stuffing up pick 12, he finished with a 50% success rate. He had a bad rap in 2011 because he lost the first pick (but had minimal input in Clark's recruitment) and the rest of his picks were in the speculative zone. Even then, that's what recruiters have to deal with - sometimes you get the early picks and sometimes you don't. I think his "wins" were definitely Howe and McDonald but he still comes out on the negative side of the ledger.

And yes, I agree that the Hawks and the Swans have had their share of recruiting failures but they've also had more rolled gold successes as well.

Prendergast still gets the thumbs down from me.

Juggling the order serves the purpose of asking the question how can people lament the 2010 draft when if it went 12 Howe 33 McDonald 50 Cook etc they'd be lauding it. The fact is he missed an opportunity at pick 12 to have a genius draft instead of a solid one which has netted two presumptive 200 gamers. If Gawn was pick 11 and Gysberts 34 the same, there wouldn't even be an issue with that draft and that makes no sense versus the malicious comments. The same people would battle to make picks in 2011 at our spots even with the benefit of hindsight. The other years whilst not great are not atrocities either and he gets slammed for picking Scully who was rated by the market as the best player in football at the end of his second season. Not necessarily giving him the thumbs up but the pasting he cops is unfair in my opinion.

He was appointed because he was a highly respected football figure - VFL coach et cetera with a resume better than most recruiters. I actually don't think he was a good recruiter, just think he is far better than the consensus view.

The fact that people besmirch him constantly I find utterly ludicrous and I actually use people thinking he is the essence of the clubs current problems as a basis to believe they have no idea.

His first draft: Obviously Watts is still in the debate zone but I don't think it's a bad pick. Blease and Strauss have had injury nightmares and they haven't worked out that well. Bennell I think was hastily delisted but I can concede its an average pick. Jetta and Bail have performed above variance at their respective draft spots and Jurrah and McKenzie were excellent PSD draft and Rookie Picks.

Had the picks in that year been

1. Watts

17. Jurrah

19. Blease

35. McKenzie

55. Strauss

70. Bennell

80. Bail

85. Jetta

Thats not the performance of an utterly incompetent recruiter.

2009

Well Scully has turned out to be a marvellous pick, we got a king's bounty for him. Trengove is the captain and hopefully he can overcome his issues to become a very good player. I dont think that's a bad pick. Gysberts has turned out to a bad pick and the Tapscott selection, as well, seems a poorish pick, countered by us getting Gawn and Fitzpatrick, who are big guys of reasonable potential about to hit their prime.

2010: Lucas Cook turned out to be a bad pick, but he's made two terrific picks - Howe is a fantastic smokey pick that could become anything as a player if he can improve his consistency and find a role and Tom McDonald looms as a 10-year promising key defender. Pick 12 went astray but its countered because at pick 33 and 52, where youre not really expected to find quality players, he redeemed himself. He also found a player a lot think can play in Michael Evans in the rookie draft

2011: Is a wipe of a draft and a highly compromised one. Taggert, Tynan, Sellar not great picks, but people blue about those selections yet its a battle to find difference makers taken after them, with the exception of maybe Jack Newnes. We got Mitch Clark with our first pick, which is genius without luck.

Basically I just think the ribbing of him is completely unfair and premature. He battled a bit a bit with late first round picks and did well at other spots. His predecessor destroyed better drafts a lot worse than that and made far more grievous errors, as have Hawthorn and Sydney at various points.

Hawthorn:

2005. Pick 3 Xavier Ellis Pick 6 Beau Dowler, Pick 22 Beau Muston

2006: Pick 6 Mitch Thorp

Sydney Swans:

2004 Pick 15 Josh Willoughby

2006: Pick 15 Dan O'Keefe

2008: Pick 12 Lewis Johnston

2007: Pick 11 Pat Vespremi, Pick 26 Brett Meredith

Prendergasts batches havent even hit the magic 22yo mark where the players have hit the maturity to impact games of football consistently at a high level, yet he cops the blame as if Cook who should only really be mature to play now and Gysberts not being good have destroyed the team.

...and where is your defence? forget the other clubs, they have had some busts with a lot of wins. Apart from Watts, who probably should have been NikNat the others are all busts.

BP was no good mate, for ....sake.

I dont get all the grief for BP.

Yes, he was an out an out dud but it was management opting to give the recruiting role to BP rather than getting a proven, experienced recruiting manager from outside the club. Whether we couldn't get who we wanted or we couldn't afford them, I don't know, but in hindsight it was up there as one of the more shocking decisions of the MFC. It was always going to take sometime to find out BP was a dud because the draftees wouldn't necessarily come on straight away and then there's the poor development to cloud the issue.

Juggling the order serves the purpose of asking the question how can people lament the 2010 draft when if it went 12 Howe 33 McDonald 50 Cook etc they'd be lauding it. The fact is he missed an opportunity at pick 12 to have a genius draft instead of a solid one which has netted two presumptive 200 gamers. If Gawn was pick 11 and Gysberts 34 the same, there wouldn't even be an issue with that draft and that makes no sense versus the malicious comments. The same people would battle to make picks in 2011 at our spots even with the benefit of hindsight. The other years whilst not great are not atrocities either and he gets slammed for picking Scully who was rated by the market as the best player in football at the end of his second season. Not necessarily giving him the thumbs up but the pasting he cops is unfair in my opinion.

Further I think it's still too early to judge him. Strauss, Tapscott and Blease are misses at the moment but still on the list and there is a chance they will progress. Bennell has been promoted so he too is still a chance.

The reality is people need a simple target to aim at. Prendergast is the target but as I've said often he was asked to target a type of player with early picks and then the club changed direction and that player was ill suited to the next coaches game plan.

Interestingly he bats well above average with his later picks when the targeting of types diminishes and he was just looking for footballers who could play.

He was also playing with a limited budget compared to many other clubs. Like you 'oil, I don't think he was great but he wasn't as bad as is being made out.

t it was management opting to give the recruiting role to BP rather than getting a proven, experienced recruiting manager

This is an excellent point. Given we were going the youth path then an experienced head recruiter was essential.

We didn't do it, perhaps we just weren't an attractive enough organization. At the time we worked out of the Junction Oval on a shoe string budget and we couldn't attract one. I'm not even sure he had a management structure in place at the time that could find one. Daniher, Fagan and Cameron had all left within a short time Connolly and Bailey were both new to their respective roles.

Juggling the order serves the purpose of asking the question how can people lament the 2010 draft when if it went 12 Howe 33 McDonald 50 Cook etc they'd be lauding it. The fact is he missed an opportunity at pick 12 to have a genius draft instead of a solid one which has netted two presumptive 200 gamers. If Gawn was pick 11 and Gysberts 34 the same, there wouldn't even be an issue with that draft and that makes no sense versus the malicious comments. The same people would battle to make picks in 2011 at our spots even with the benefit of hindsight. The other years whilst not great are not atrocities either and he gets slammed for picking Scully who was rated by the market as the best player in football at the end of his second season. Not necessarily giving him the thumbs up but the pasting he cops is unfair in my opinion.

Fair enough. We can agree to differ on those points but you do make a good point about people rushing to judgement when it comes to football. Because the sport is so competitive and the craving for success is so intense, the industry can be brutal and people often won't have the time to achieve their aims. We see that on an almost daily basis in this game whether we're talking about boards, coaches, personnel and players.

The water has passed under the bridge.

We have made huge mistakes; we have moved on.

Sure, if you don't learn from history you are doomed to repeat it, but it is now time to look forward. We have a new recruiting, development and coaching structure.

I am optomistic, and will be very happy to have learned from failure but to move ahead, as have the German and Japanese as nations!

Juggling the order serves the purpose of asking the question how can people lament the 2010 draft when if it went 12 Howe 33 McDonald 50 Cook etc they'd be lauding it. The fact is he missed an opportunity at pick 12 to have a genius draft instead of a solid one which has netted two presumptive 200 gamers. If Gawn was pick 11 and Gysberts 34 the same, there wouldn't even be an issue with that draft and that makes no sense versus the malicious comments. The same people would battle to make picks in 2011 at our spots even with the benefit of hindsight. The other years whilst not great are not atrocities either and he gets slammed for picking Scully who was rated by the market as the best player in football at the end of his second season. Not necessarily giving him the thumbs up but the pasting he cops is unfair in my opinion.

But if you're going to use that hindsight approach then it's also worth highlighting who he missed out with his selections as well. Blease ahead of Shuey, Strauss ahead of Hannebery, Zaharakis etc You could go on and on about selections made that also bring his judgement into question.