Geelong recruiting guru Stephen Wells has been around for a long time and is one of the most respected of the AFL’s recruiting fraternity. 

This is a great story for those wondering how Geelong has managed to stay among the leading pack of AFL clubs year after year. It’s about a period of 39 days in October/November 2016 when Wells was busy wheeling and dealing his way to securing the players who are now one win away from delivering his club a premiership. 

The Architects: How Geelong tapped into a junior footy team to build a premiership-contending list

And of course, he’s already secured one of the prize recruits of this year’s trade, free agency and draft period in GWS Giant forward Jeremy Cameron plus probably Higgins from North.

I can’t get passed the paywall but if it’s about the Geelong Falcons it’s clear the Cats have a wonderful advantage.

I’ve often thought a club like the Saints should’ve been super bold and moved to Frankston (with a stadium and not Seaford) and set up as the Mornington Peninsula team with guys like Nath Jones, Weitering, Hunter Clark, Hibberd, Tom Lynch etc. 

Footballers get married and have kids earlier than most people these days. They can’t go clubbing. They settle down. Regional life and family is a huge appeal. 

They have natural advantages but have been very smart recruiters and have obviously planned long term.

Wells is a great operator.  How many teams have 2 high performing category B rookies running around for them?

The only big trade in was danger. And he’s a former falcon so can’t say it was for the money. And they traded out Kelly for 2 first round picks who cost them nothing.

I hate them but begrudgingly admire them at the same time.

Respect Wells obviously excellent recruiter!

Cats have major salary cap advantage, probably 20% - 40% house pricing plus lifestyle.

Add huge home ground advantage, should almost never miss finals!

51 minutes ago, D4Life said:

Respect Wells obviously excellent recruiter!

Cats have major salary cap advantage, probably 20% - 40% house pricing plus lifestyle.

Add huge home ground advantage, should almost never miss finals!

They don't. They are the team that have avoided the bottom 4 the longest.

I have this argument all the time with people and generally lose, but most team sports have a few dominant teams and the rest make up the numbers. There are clubs that develop talent only for the bigger clubs to pay massive salaries to bring them across and continue to rule the competition.

The AFL has some rules in place to keep this in check which is good and may be as good as it gets. Some people already complain at the equalisation structures the AFL already has in place. It's not easy for the AFL to come out and say they will be continually interfering with the draft or free agency in order to make it harder for the top teams to stay at the top and to constantly look to get the bottom sides back up the ladder. It would be political suicide though, they would get undermined and voted out by the stronger clubs. Also the majority of people don't want it because the majority of people barrack for the top teams. 

I still maintain that its not just talent that keeps the top teams up the top but development of the talent, retention of good players, well structured playing lists on well structured pay that is equitable to talent and output. 

There is a myriad of ways the AFL can [censored] clubs that are successful.

Lets say the top 2 can't get in top talent without at least paying some sort of penalty . So for Geelong they can get Cameron but they have to pay overs in their salary cap. ie 10% so if they pick up Cameron and pay him $700,000 a year then given they are a top team their salary cap reflects a yearly cost of $770,000. Or the opposite. If a bottom club persuades Cameron to come and play for them and has to pay him $1,000,000 a year they get a reduction of 10% only reflecting a payment of $900,000 in their salary cap.

I believe the draft should be much further skewed towards the bottom teams. The top teams have great players who are very handy at developing talent both on field and as future father/sons, so arguably they don't need the ready made players. Imagine if Geelong had our recruits Jackson, Kossie and Rivers. They would be future champions of the game. It is certainly no guarantee of that happening at Melbourne. So the top two teams should be locked out of the first round and their first pick should maybe be around pick 27 or so. The bottom team might already be getting 2 picks say 1 and 16 before some of the top teams have even had a pick. This at least gives the supporters of lowly clubs some hope, as we know. But if Geelong win the premiership and then on top of that have the best off season recruiting as well I can only suggest the system even with its equalisation triggers in place, hasn't gone far enough. 

They can paint it any way they like, but thinking about supporters of these two teams sitting around gorging on another feast of wins and silverware, well fair dinkum, it's just not sport. Boring!

1 hour ago, deespicable me said:

They don't. They are the team that have avoided the bottom 4 the longest.

I have this argument all the time with people and generally lose, but most team sports have a few dominant teams and the rest make up the numbers. There are clubs that develop talent only for the bigger clubs to pay massive salaries to bring them across and continue to rule the competition.

The AFL has some rules in place to keep this in check which is good and may be as good as it gets. Some people already complain at the equalisation structures the AFL already has in place. It's not easy for the AFL to come out and say they will be continually interfering with the draft or free agency in order to make it harder for the top teams to stay at the top and to constantly look to get the bottom sides back up the ladder. It would be political suicide though, they would get undermined and voted out by the stronger clubs. Also the majority of people don't want it because the majority of people barrack for the top teams. 

I still maintain that its not just talent that keeps the top teams up the top but development of the talent, retention of good players, well structured playing lists on well structured pay that is equitable to talent and output. 

There is a myriad of ways the AFL can [censored] clubs that are successful.

Lets say the top 2 can't get in top talent without at least paying some sort of penalty . So for Geelong they can get Cameron but they have to pay overs in their salary cap. ie 10% so if they pick up Cameron and pay him $700,000 a year then given they are a top team their salary cap reflects a yearly cost of $770,000. Or the opposite. If a bottom club persuades Cameron to come and play for them and has to pay him $1,000,000 a year they get a reduction of 10% only reflecting a payment of $900,000 in their salary cap.

I believe the draft should be much further skewed towards the bottom teams. The top teams have great players who are very handy at developing talent both on field and as future father/sons, so arguably they don't need the ready made players. Imagine if Geelong had our recruits Jackson, Kossie and Rivers. They would be future champions of the game. It is certainly no guarantee of that happening at Melbourne. So the top two teams should be locked out of the first round and their first pick should maybe be around pick 27 or so. The bottom team might already be getting 2 picks say 1 and 16 before some of the top teams have even had a pick. This at least gives the supporters of lowly clubs some hope, as we know. But if Geelong win the premiership and then on top of that have the best off season recruiting as well I can only suggest the system even with its equalisation triggers in place, hasn't gone far enough. 

They can paint it any way they like, but thinking about supporters of these two teams sitting around gorging on another feast of wins and silverware, well fair dinkum, it's just not sport. Boring!

It’s impossible to ensure equality of outcome. No matter how much you attempt to equalise the better operators will always rise to the top. Too much engineering just dis-incentivises the good teams for being well run. That road leads to lada’s. I think your suggestions penalise successful teams too much. I'd leave the system as is.

There is no reason why the MFC can’t be successful within the current framework. We carry the name of the city we hail from, play at the G, have a large latent following (see crowd numbers at the 2018 finals games) and for the time being at least are financially secure. We have talented top end players. A good trade period to address needs and we’re in the reckoning for Top 4.

It’s not that long ago that Richmond were a rabble. There’s hope for us.

Irony. The AFL designed free agency on the assumption that players only cared about money, and as a result the clubs with the most resources/money are able to get advantage from the nobler sentiments, ambitions and professional pride of the top players.

But that's not to take away from Geelong; a well run and well respected club getting rewards for being well run and respected isn't so controversial.

The trouble is the other sentiment, that AFL clubs shouldn't be allowed to die. Right now there isn't enough professionalism and respectability available to sustain all 18 at the top level.

Imagine if a club run 1980s style tried to compete in 2020s football!

Cheats.

Dank, The Weapon, Bomber Thompson...

How did they get Dangerfield for a  way lower salary than he would have gotten elsewhere?  And dont give me  that home town bull [censored]

Cheats.

6 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Cheats.

Dank, The Weapon, Bomber Thompson...

How did they get Dangerfield for a  way lower salary than he would have gotten elsewhere?  And dont give me  that home town bull [censored]

Cheats.

They don't cheat.

They're just very good at what they do.

They have a significant advantage in terms of lifestyle/cost of living, they're culturally ingrained in the Western Districts which is a footy-rich area and known for developing good talent, and they've developed a culture within the club (led significantly by Joel Selwood) by which players accept lower salaries than what the market would otherwise give them to keep the team together.

To assist with that strategy, they target established A-graders from other clubs, often weaker clubs, who want to taste success. Players like Dangerfield, Steven, now Cameron, all spent years at weaker clubs getting paid plenty (thanks to the minimum salary cap requirement) but not winning. Having banked plenty of cash, Geelong sells them a lifestyle and success, but not money. They take it because they're comfortable living off, say, $400,000 instead of $600,000 (I mean, it's not like $400,000 is not a comfortable living wage).

Coupled with a good drafting and development program which sees them get decent kids in the door with whatever picks they've got, and then building those kids up with good coaching and leadership (there's Selwood again), they're able to maintain their performance level.

14 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Cheats.

Dank, The Weapon, Bomber Thompson...

How did they get Dangerfield for a  way lower salary than he would have gotten elsewhere?  And dont give me  that home town bull [censored]

Cheats.

Very harsh. They recruit well, develop their players and are well coached.

Arrogant/dislikeable - yes

Cheats - no

$177m of taxpayer money over the course of 15 years to help them monetize their stadium - from which they earn 100% of the signage and naming rights - has been a tremendous 'assistance' in terms of them becoming and maintaining their position as a big club

they have massive advantages that no other club has, from lifestyle through to training venue (their own home ground) and facilities, not to mention the constant rumours that cotton on deals 'help' with recruitment and retention

from wikipedia re the stadium:

A A$28 million redevelopment of the ground was announced in 2003, with A$13.5 million in funding from the Victorian Government, A$4.5 million from the Geelong Football Club, and A$2 million from the AFL.

In September 2007, Skilled Stadium received a further total of A$25 million towards the rebuilding of the Ross Drew Stand on the south western side of the ground. Funding for the project included A$14 million from the Federal Government and A$6 million from the Victorian Government.

April 2011: redevelopment cost $33 million, of which $11.7 million was spent on the new lighting.

The total cost of the fourth stage of redevelopment was $91 million, of which $75m came from the Victorian Government, $6m from the City of Greater Geelong, $6 million from the Geelong Football Club and $4 million from the AFL.

In April 2017, the Victorian Government announced an investment of $3.9 million in the upcoming state budget to fund the planning and design stage for Stage 5 of the redevelopment. The proposed redevelopment would be the final part of the more than decade-long process to increase the capacity of Kardinia Park to 40,000 and will result in the Ford Stand and Gary Ablett Terrace being removed for the new stand to ring around the remaining open-air section of the stadium.

4 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

I can’t get passed the paywall but if it’s about the Geelong Falcons it’s clear the Cats have a wonderful advantage.

I’ve often thought a club like the Saints should’ve been super bold and moved to Frankston (with a stadium and not Seaford) and set up as the Mornington Peninsula team with guys like Nath Jones, Weitering, Hunter Clark, Hibberd, Tom Lynch etc. 

Footballers get married and have kids earlier than most people these days. They can’t go clubbing. They settle down. Regional life and family is a huge appeal. 

So true, and to applies somewhat to a Club establishing at Casey with its large growing population and  the Gippsland towns and coastal areas for Country liking players and families.

1 hour ago, Better days ahead said:

It’s impossible to ensure equality of outcome. No matter how much you attempt to equalise the better operators will always rise to the top. Too much engineering just dis-incentivises the good teams for being well run. That road leads to lada’s. I think your suggestions penalise successful teams too much. I'd leave the system as is.

There is no reason why the MFC can’t be successful within the current framework. We carry the name of the city we hail from, play at the G, have a large latent following (see crowd numbers at the 2018 finals games) and for the time being at least are financially secure. We have talented top end players. A good trade period to address needs and we’re in the reckoning for Top 4.

It’s not that long ago that Richmond were a rabble. There’s hope for us.

Must diagree. 

Carry the name of the city means nothing when the suburban names are themselves Clubs. Others play at the G, no advantage. Financially secure until we spend and maintain  a home base. We are nowhere near Top 4.  The rise to be Richmond like starts with an honnest assessment.

2021  Our best player and coach will likely be gone if we dont go deep into  finals.

Wells is a bit of a myth. Got it right and had unbelievable drafting in 1999 and 2001 but after that just average hits and misses like everyone else.

11 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

Wells is a bit of a myth. Got it right and had unbelievable drafting in 1999 and 2001 but after that just average hits and misses like everyone else.

If you get to the unbelievable stage I’m not sure you can be a myth! Especially when you back it up with Selwood, Taylor, Duncan etc to keep that list going. 
 

Then in recent years add Tim Kelly, Stewart, Menegola, Parfitt, Guthrie (who then brings Blicavs), Miers to get this side to stay up. 

30 minutes ago, Half forward flank said:

So true, and to applies somewhat to a Club establishing at Casey with its large growing population and  the Gippsland towns and coastal areas for Country liking players and families.

Casey makes a decent training ground but no one wants to head there to watch games. 
 

Frankston as the Geelong of the South East really should be more of a city. Especially if it ever got the transport links it needs - electrified rail to Cranbourne/Berwick/Pakenham, Rosebud and Hastings.

Geelong have defied AFL gravity for a long time through great management, but just like Brisbane, Sydney and Hawthorn their fall is coming.

3 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

Geelong have defied AFL gravity for a long time through great management, but just like Brisbane, Sydney and Hawthorn their fall is coming.

Eventually it’ll happen. They can only replace so many stars. Cameron will help ease the blow but when the best players in your side are all over 30, and there is a lot of them, eventually you’ll drop off. You can bring in one maybe two quality players a year, you can’t bring enough to replace half the side. 

Also Geelong is a literal dump. I have no idea why anyone would be attracted to the lifestyle down there unless they surf or have a job at Cotton On. 

7 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

If you get to the unbelievable stage I’m not sure you can be a myth! Especially when you back it up with Selwood, Taylor, Duncan etc to keep that list going. 
 

Then in recent years add Tim Kelly, Stewart, Menegola, Parfitt, Guthrie (who then brings Blicavs), Miers to get this side to stay up. 

......and in the same time has burnt first rounders picks on the likes of Lachlan Fogarty (pick 22),N.Cockatoo (10) , D.Lang (16) , J.Thurlow (16)  B.Smelts (15)  and Mitch Brown.(15)

4 hours ago, Better days ahead said:

It’s impossible to ensure equality of outcome. No matter how much you attempt to equalise the better operators will always rise to the top. Too much engineering just dis-incentivises the good teams for being well run. That road leads to lada’s. I think your suggestions penalise successful teams too much. I'd leave the system as is.

There is no reason why the MFC can’t be successful within the current framework. We carry the name of the city we hail from, play at the G, have a large latent following (see crowd numbers at the 2018 finals games) and for the time being at least are financially secure. We have talented top end players. A good trade period to address needs and we’re in the reckoning for Top 4.

It’s not that long ago that Richmond were a rabble. There’s hope for us.

I do agree we can be successful, but ours is like the Bulldogs, it will be an outlier, a once off, hard to maintain for the very reason others have made clear (stadium, lifestyle and success over money). But the thing that is a worry and not right is the probability that Geelong finish at least top two and have an era of success, as much as any Melbourne supporter or at least 10 other clubs would love to see and then after that they go into 2021 STRONGER.

That's wrong. I understand it's important to incentivise clubs and give them something to work for but the fact Geelong enter the next season even stronger than their successful 2020 campaign is a complete disincentive to every club below about 6th. Supporters are an optimistic bunch but geez that is just wrong. The very system that was set up to equalize the competition is being manipulated to create a constant outcome that nobody except Geelong supporters want to see.

Wells is a nice bloke and good at what he does, but like most put on pedestals his ability is overstated.

And Geelong certainly bends the rules, but they aren’t the only club to do this.

1 minute ago, Mach5 said:

Wells is a nice bloke and good at what he does, but like most put on pedestals his ability is overstated.

And Geelong certainly bends the rules, but they aren’t the only club to do this.

Good to hear from you "Mach'...hope all is well.

3 minutes ago, rjay said:

Good to hear from you "Mach'...hope all is well.

All good on this end, just busy. You’d think with COVID life would slow down, but it’s been anything but.

4 hours ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

$177m of taxpayer money over the course of 15 years to help them monetize their stadium - from which they earn 100% of the signage and naming rights - has been a tremendous 'assistance' in terms of them becoming and maintaining their position as a big club

they have massive advantages that no other club has, from lifestyle through to training venue (their own home ground) and facilities, not to mention the constant rumours that cotton on deals 'help' with recruitment and retention

from wikipedia re the stadium:

A A$28 million redevelopment of the ground was announced in 2003, with A$13.5 million in funding from the Victorian Government, A$4.5 million from the Geelong Football Club, and A$2 million from the AFL.

In September 2007, Skilled Stadium received a further total of A$25 million towards the rebuilding of the Ross Drew Stand on the south western side of the ground. Funding for the project included A$14 million from the Federal Government and A$6 million from the Victorian Government.

April 2011: redevelopment cost $33 million, of which $11.7 million was spent on the new lighting.

The total cost of the fourth stage of redevelopment was $91 million, of which $75m came from the Victorian Government, $6m from the City of Greater Geelong, $6 million from the Geelong Football Club and $4 million from the AFL.

In April 2017, the Victorian Government announced an investment of $3.9 million in the upcoming state budget to fund the planning and design stage for Stage 5 of the redevelopment. The proposed redevelopment would be the final part of the more than decade-long process to increase the capacity of Kardinia Park to 40,000 and will result in the Ford Stand and Gary Ablett Terrace being removed for the new stand to ring around the remaining open-air section of the stadium.

It's not all tax payer money then, some of it is public money. ;) States put their tax revenue back into circulation, but the Fed spends by crediting settlement exchange accounts at the RBA.

No doubting they have a lot of Government money backing them though. It helps that their local member is a Geelong supporter (Richard Marles, leading Labor Right figure). Pumps money into them. Pity we don't have a few Federal members that are in our court.

8 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

Wells is a nice bloke and good at what he does, but like most put on pedestals his ability is overstated.

And Geelong certainly bends the rules, but they aren’t the only club to do this.

Most clubs have their own paper bags it would seem. Farms and livestock?