Machsy

Clarkson has developed leaders like Hodge and Mitchell, who reinforce what he coach says and take feedback on board. If Clarkson said what McCartney did to a player, and then Hodge heard a player whinging about it, he'd tell the player to pull their head in and that coach is telling them that for a reason, "we're here to get better and win premierships" sorta thing. Cooney, Griffen, Murphy et al, instead were the ones leading the charge in having a sook. That's where your problem is. They shouldn't have been in leadership positions in the first place, or they should have had better training to be leaders in the past. It's a cultural thing. I'm confident Jones, Grimes and others won't make the same mistakes.

That's a good point. I can see in the past with Cook, it seemed like BP handballed the responsibility by justifying the pick with his selection as AA U/18 CHF. I think most people would have been a bit surprised at the time when they found out Cook had been awarded that honour.

Do you really think McCartin is that good as a KPF? I think he's ridiculously overhyped, personally.

So... You can't see it yet, but it could be there... So lets take a punt?

Laverde looks good, but he's not an inside player. Doesn't win his own footy.

2. Is not that cut and dried though. Like I said, what if you've got a kid who is 95% certain to give an output like Daniel Jackson (long-ish career, a B&F, solid but unspectacular role player) or a kid who has 65% chance of becoming Daniel Wells, but could also be a Richard Tambling... It's not even as scientific as the hypothetical I've just thrown up there. So what's the philosophy?

McCartney may have been ultimately unsuccessful as a senior coach (by the key performance indicator, but not if you're judging the way the dogs' list is poised for the future), but everywhere he has worked as an assistant or development coach, the man has walked away whilst being lauded for his abilities and is held in the highest of regard. I dare say his downfall could be attributed to the sins of bulldogs coaches past, in allowing a group of poor leaders run the asylum. The thing about good leadership is not simply whether people will follow you or not; you need to have the good character to set a path that will lead to success. Someone like David Schwarz, god love him, was good at getting people to follow him, but that path wasn't leading us anywhere good. He's not alone and it doesn't make him a bad person.

The American college system has it's own drawbacks, with the NCAA comin under a lot of scrutiny for exploitation of the kids playing in their competitions.

The idea has merit, but the AFLPA will never allow years of potential earning to be taken away from players who already have short careers on average.

Amazing skills and awareness, but he's exactly what we DON'T need at this stage. We need a midfield, solid bluechip mids. Could easily be every bit as good as Cyril Rioli though.

You really think it's his hips that are holding him back..? Well, I guess you never do have anything football-related worth adding, only poor attempts at comedy...

We went for the kid who had a proven track record of performing against men...

More champs highlights from before the ACL injury (as a bottom-aged in 2013): http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-12-13/lever-pulled-on-jakes-year

Seriously can't recall even one half-decent post from you...

Like Rockliff training with us prior to the PSD..?

Wow. I thought to myself "McCartney sacked? Stupid bulldogs. If only we could bring in for a development role, but we'd never have the room or the money..." Very pleased with this development.

You can't say that with so much certainty. But I can tell you that St Kilda have said they were a chance to have taken Frost before Membrey, if Frost was in the PSD. Believe me, Blease will be at Geelong. Newton may also go there, but they'd both be signed as delisted FAs; the PSD doesn't come into it. And where the hell does this groupthink come from that says Membrey is any good?

Surely there is some sort of difference between the potential of a player and the likelihood he will fulfil his potential? So then, who do you take? A player who is a certainty to become as good as Grimes, or a player who could be as good as Tyson? I think you look for players who exhibit the qualities needed to "make it", and then from there you look to see who matches them with the most "talent" or "potential."

Another one, like Frost, who St Kilda would and should take ahead of Membrey.

Not always. Peter Jackson is obviously an exception to the rule.

De goey?

And... /thread

Bad jokes aside, I think Oscar would be a good pick at 40. Ideally I'd like Brayden Maynard, but I'm not confident he will last that long. I know it's not good business, but I'm really hoping that we move on a guy like Evans so we can use pick 53.

He has red hair?

I like it regardless.