warren dean

Bingers, I appreciate your caution, but the Barassi era was the precursor to our 5 consecutive finals appearances under Northey. The vast majority of that team were brought together by Barassi and Slug Jordan. Perhaps his 5 year plan should have been 7!

Bate is an established player; Dunn flits between MFC and Sandringham, Newton has played a hand full of games. The jury would have to still be out on Dunn and Newton; Meesen doesn't even come into the equation yet. Players who have achieved more than Dunn who was taken at pick 15 (a trade for Darren Jolly) imo- Rusling(injury aside), Van Berlo (7th in Crows B&F this year), Rosa(22 games this season) and perhaps Le Cras(19 games this season). Can't count Cloke, Blackwell and Jesse Smith (all F/S). I agree that Dunn has significant scope for improvement and could turn into a good utility player, and may well turn out to be a better player than some of the aforementioned, but he's not there yet. He managed 12 games in a shocking year for the club when there were opportunities aplenty. I'm not convinced that Newton is much more than a one trick pony - time will tell.

You are right, Jarka! It's interesting that people rate his last 5 years as his finest - that would be this current draft where not one game has yet been played, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003. On page 10 of the sport liftout of "The Sunday Age" the day after the draft CAC is quoted thus" At this time we're always happy but in three years time we'll actually know how it all turns out". Some premature celebrations from those claiming his best work has been the last five drafts. By his own admission, only now can we say with any certainty how the 04 draft panned out - and how does it look? I think CAC has escaped the same level of scrutiny as the rest of the footy department. Most supporters would agree he is now well into his second rebuilding phase (the first commenced with the 99 draft) and he has been pretty much solely responsible for all of our recruiting since 1997 - 10 years is a footy lifetime.

I love this stuff! I was talking to my brother the other day about something similar. There is no doubt Jako was a greater talent, and he dragged people through the gates, especially in the second half of 91 when absolutely dominated the competition. 71 goals, 14 Brownlow votes in effectively half a season. If I needed someone to play for my life, I'd take Neitz over Jako though, because at least I could be sure he'd be making every effort to stay out on the ground. The guy has played with some serious injuries (including a broken bone in his leg) and never shirked; Jako on the other hand was not highly regarded for his pain threshold. However, Schwarta would have been the best of them all - just an outstanding capacity to turn a game - his efforts over the 94 finals series are quite rightly the stuff of legend. Unfortunately, that was the last we saw of his brilliant best. I remember when he got injured late in the semi against Footscray and the journos asked Balme why he hadn't taken him off earlier - his answer - "Because I just like watching him play!" Didn't we all. He eventually came back as a smart, courageous, bullocking forward when he should be remembered for his efforts pre-knee injuries.

He was actually named on the bench in the 1995 AA side - Glen Jakovich got the nod at CHB. Neita had played most of the season at CHF after Schwarta did his knee (once before the season and then again in his second game back). He kicked in excess of 30 goals and finished second in the B&F to Stynes.

Maybe Davey with the All Stars, and possibly Rivers if he has a good start. White might be a chance for the Vics as a lot of the better ruckmen would be All Star players (Cox, Lade, Ottens). Can't think of many others. Probably depends on how Bruce starts the year, but I've always thought he'd be the sort of bloke to rise to the big occasion. It's a thin list though.

It's an interesting question, isn't it? He is probably our second or third best full-forward as you rightly point out, and would have almost certainly been a better CHB than Hardeman had been allowed to play there for a reasonable amount of time - Carey did rate him alongside Jakovich as his toughest opponent. Unfortunately, injury to Schwarz over the 94/95 off season meant he had to play CHF for most of 1995 (when he was named AA and finished runner up in the B and F); and then continual injury problems with Lyon meant he had to move to FF. His first few of years under Daniher he became an exceptional utility player until he really settled at FF from 2002. IMO his best position was definitely CHB, but he has certainly been a very effective key forward. I'd have him at least on the bench and ahead of Viney who was a very good player but not in Neita's class.

Correct weight, Hannabal! A good leader will step up no matter whether they are "ready" or not. McLean looks the man for the job-and why not next year? New coach, new captain, new era!

I think you'll find it was Danny Corcoran.

This is becoming repetitive and boring, Hannabal! My opinion, for the last time on this post, is that CAC has been a moderate success. Nothing you say will change that view, as nothing I say will change yours. I am happy that you have felt challenged enough to continue the interrogation. My view is just that- an opinion. Whether or not you believe it is informed, superficial, blah blah et etc is really irrelevant. I am not out to change anybody else's mind, just give a view. People who are keen enough will do the research and come to their own conclusion, without any biased input from you or I. We have had at least two major areas of contention as I recall - this one, and the issue of th eimportance of the club versus the importance of winning. Let's face it, you were right when you once wrote that you didn't think we would agree on much at all. I'm happy to leave it at that. My view has been aired, and I apologise to the mods and other members for taking up so much time on something that really has very little to do with whether or not Rhys Palmer will go to MFC. Let's hope CAC does his best work in 5 weeks time and lands that "big fish".

It's all pretty simple really, Hannabal. I made an assertion that I didn't think CAC's record was as impressive as some would like to believe. Never called him an outright failure and pointed to the fact that in 10 years he hadn't landed the big fish. I'm not exactly sure what it is I was caught out about. Unless having an opinion different to yours is some type of offence on Demonland. I believe I have answered all of your questions, and in context. You are yet to rebut my suggestion that there are a number of clubs who have done better, instead sidestepping on the Hine issue, which really isn't an issue for me at all. As I said way back, and still believe, it is too early to make accurate assessments about the relative worth of players selected in the last couple of drafts. Answer me this, given your obvious preoccupation with Hine. Do you believe he made good use of those choices? Because really that is the crux of the whole thing. You play the hand you are dealt. The whole reason I posted here was because Diablo, I think it was, expressed faith in CAC's recruiting record over 10 years. I pointed out my opinion that he had been a moderate success. Is six finals appearances in nine years a moderate success? I'd say so. It didn't save ND - with the list that CAC built! By the way, we've used basically the same facts and interpreted them differently. It's called a difference of opinion. It's a bit like like looking a the official interest rates and you saying, "gee, they're low, I'm voting for Howard" and me looking at the same rates and saying, "gee housing affordability is tough at the moment, I'm voting for Rudd". Some people here obviously find you worth reading, I think you are just a bit full of yourself! As for what I've lied about, I'm not sure to what you are referring, but I can't say as it concerns me. Emubitter - I worked for a Victorian club on an honorary basis in 99 and 00. My qualifications were/are a trained schoolteacher with a degree in Applied Science (Human Movement). I played in the Footscray Junior Development Squad in 1984 and 1985 in the old days of zoning. Chronic lack of ability and a knee injury (twice reconstructed) made a playing career at a high level impossible. I completed a number of coaching courses (currently level 2 qualified). I was asked to submit a profile on a student at my school by a club prior to the 1998 draft. I gave them a detailed report. I was asked would I be interested in assisting with a little bit of scouting- I had previously worked as a junior coach up to U17 level. I said yes and spent the next 18 months checking on the progress of players who had been overlooked in previous drafts. These were players who the club was looking at as possible rookies. As I said, it was no big deal-just interesting and somewhat time consuming. I did not sit in on meetings discussing list management or recruiting. I was given a detailed list of things to look for and basically ticked boxes. Does it make me an expert? No. Do I consider myself a recruiter? No. Does it entitle me to express an opinion here on Demonland? I think everyone has that entitlement. I hope that answers your question(s). Sorry, I won't disclose the club.

Thanks Jarka! A good read. The bloke I know who is with the Saints is all over Masten and Henderson. Says he has no doubt who the first 3 will be and that MFC should take Masten if they want best available, or Henderson if they want the best KPP prospect. Your link seems to back up what he has been saying.

Mo, if you go right back to my early posts on this topic, you will see that I left out our recruiting in the last couple of years because I felt it was a bit early to make a judgement. For some reason, some posters thought this unfair. Hannabal asked on what basis I rated Hine's performance as reasonable. I prefaced my response with the fact that he had the benefits of the Pies tank in 05. I did not choose to include this period, others did. Irrespective of the hows and whys of Pies early picks (2 and 5 in 05; 8 and 10 in 06), he appears to have chosen wisely. He passed on Ellis in favour of Thomas when most thought it would go the other way. He picked Pendlebury far earlier than most predicted. He traded well for early picks to land Reid and got Brown, when we possibly would have taken him at 12. The thing is, who knows who will come out the other end better. It's about where your picks are and what you do with them. My view of drafting and list management is very realistic, not simplistic. I am hoping that CAC performs a miracle and lands us some guns. By the way, how do you compare his efforts to those at Sydney, Port and Geelong over the past 5-8 years? Just interested in your opinion as nobody seems to have addressed this at all. Hannabal, I think we have agreed to disagree, again!

Apart from the sanctimonious way in which you often present your arguments, the thing I disagree with mostly is your inability to accept an opinion other than your own. I don't agree that CAC has been as good as most posters to Demonland believe. I have said he has been adequate. My naming of Derek Hine was in response to somebody asking who's better? If I recall correctly I mentioned a few clubs (Port, Geelong, and specifically Ricky Barham at Sydney) - all clubs without the benefit of early picks over a long period. I then mentioned that Hine had done a reasonable job at Collingwood, although he had the benefit of the Pies tank in 05. If you want to narrow it down to the past two drafts we'll have to wait and see. Thomas, Pendlebury, Reid, Brown, Marty Clarke, Goldsack, O'Brien etc Versus Jones, Bartram, Buckley, Frawley, Petterd, Garland, Weetra. Only time will tell, but even you would be hard pressed to argue that atm the Pies haven't had the best of that. And Hannabal, that's about it, I think!

I assume you are talking about opinions here, Old. They are never right or wrong. They are people's views based on interpretation of data. I have given you mine. You disagree. That's the way of things. Whatever way you want to dress it up, there are currently no players still on our list from the national drafts of 1998, 2000, 2001 (except Miller). That is fact. Thompson is proving to be a good player at Adelaide - fact. In 4 years with us he played 39 games - he looked promising, but was always likely to go home. The club tried to change his mind - it couldn't. I assume those you name are heavy hitters because they present opinions you often agree with! That's great. This forum needs different opinions otherwise it just becomes the domain of sycophants. I have given you mine, you have given me yours- I take nothing personally. Jarka, I think you are correct and I have posted this elsewhere. They are,however difficult to find, as Old points out. I have posted here before about a Saints spotter believing that Lachlan Henderson is the best KPP talent in this draft, not withstanding his issues with injury. He believes MFC will look at him and/or Masten assuming that Cotchin is gone by our first pick. Once again, just an opinion. As for your other question, I was asked in my role as a teacher to provide a report to a club on a prospective draftee some years ago. They didn't draft the kid, but obviously thought I knew a little about it because they asked me to to do some work in a few local competitions focusing mainly on kids who had played TAC in the previous year or two but hadn't been drafted. I was asked to follow up with them and report on their progress Basically a lot of watching local footy and giving written feedback. I did it for about 18 months - quite enjoyable but time consuming!!!

I respect your opinion, Hannabal - don't agree with it, but respect it none the less. The Johnny come lately line is a bit rich though- I don't know of, nor care about, your history with CAC, but I have been a MFC member for the best part of 20 years except for a brief period of time when I worked as a spotter at another club. (which, by the way is not particularly relevant to my opinions on MFC's recruiting as my job was to profile a range of players from suburban leagues, so I was nothing particularly important in terms of recruitment, just suggesting and writing reports on blokes worth looking at). I would say I would be as knowledgable about the factual history of trading and drafting as anyone else on this site, and I use these facts to form opinions. You may or may not agree with them and that is fine- My point is that CAC has not been the salvation of the Club that many people make him out to be. Recruiting is an inexact science and he has made mistakes and in 10 years he is yet to land the really big fish! These are the facts - you know them and I know them and we choose to form different views based on these. As always, I have enjoyed the intellectual stimulation! Oh, and I am more than happy in 12 months to come back to this topic and say I was wrong and CAC is the greatest recruiter of them all - if it can be justified!! Cheers

Depends who else is available. If he is the best player available at our pick then we'll get him. I think he could turn into a reasonable player. I have seen him play a few good games and big players generally take a little longer. The flip side is, if the Bombers thought he was any good they would have kept him!

Well thanks, Hannabal. I think you've endorsed everything I said. I said in my original post that CAC has been unlucky in that 03 and the current years were our best draft picks in the worst draft! You can't disregard his first few drafts because then you would be cherry picking! You agree he needs to find a star, and you are right, we were excluded from rounds 2 and 3 of the 2000 draft, as well as round 1 of 1999. My point about the last couple of drafts stands, notwithstanding Bate and Jones coming second and third in the B&F with vote tallies that would have barely qualified for our top 12 in 2006. It is too early to label either a success. The history of players having a stellar first year or two and then disappearing from view.... Phil Walsh, Frank Marchesani, Greg Madigan, Mark Dwyer (Fitzroy version) etc etc. Let's wait and see before we pass judgement on them. To say the drafting of 8 years ago is no longer relevant is a bit of a worry given that the 99 draft currently provides us with most of our senior leadership group. I am pleased that you are pleased with CAC's performance. For a guy who wants success as much as you say you do, you are easily pleased! And to think you once said we wouldn't agree on anything!

If you re read my post you will see that I didn't use Collingwood's acquisition of Thomas and Pendlebury as a pointer to their recruiting acumen, rather they were simply rewarded for the tank. They have, however, made other wise drafting decisions to rebuild their list. Those same players who lack "testicular fortitude" were the players good enough to get us into the positions you highlighted. You can't have it both ways. My point in summary, is that the whole football club has underperformed. This includes Admin, Coaching, Recruitment and playing list (and probably supporters for that matter as well). If CAC gets more resources we may get better results. Ditto for the coachig staff! Player development would have been compromised in much the same way and for much the same reasons as recruiting if your statement about the review is correct. If the club puts appropriate resources into all areas of the club, then maybe our story will be different into the future! Whether or not most Demonland supporters think CAC is a success or not is irrelevant! The ultimate proof is in performance. I have given you an abbreviated review of his draft history. What do you make of it? Do you agree or disagree with my assertions? Why or why not? That is really the point!

Firstly, I said he has been moderately successful. Secondly, being chased by Collingwood is no recommendation. They chased and got Noel Judkins from Essendon a few years ago when he was the premier recruiting man in the comp and then promptly warehoused him when things went belly up. You base the assumption that he is a good recruiter on incomplete season results - 2004 - lost elimination final 7th; 2005 - lost elimination final 8th; 2006 - lost semi-final 5th. Result - ND sacked; CAC stays. Let's examine the recruiting. In fairness to the players involved we will disregard the last couple of drafts as it is either too early to tell or players have already exited the club, e.g Heath Neville. So we'll start at 2003 and work our way backwards. Recruited Sylvia at 3, McLean at 5, traded for Holland for pick 20 and got CJ under father-son. Read preseason and Davey off the rookie. ATM - Sylvia - disappointing; McLean - promising but has been injury prone (not CAC's fault); Holland - serviceable; CJ - hasn't come on; Davey - a bargain; Read - gone! 2002 - Bell at 14 - showing some good signs; 426 at 15 - gone; Rivers at 26 - gun rest - gone! 2001 - the superdraft - guys like Dal Santo went after we picked (wait for it) Molan at 9 - gone; Steve Armstrong at 25 - gone; Aaron Rogers at 26 - gone; the only bloke left on our list from that draft - Miller at 55. 2000 - nobody left - best was Thompson at 16 - now gone; the rest were rubbish who went within 2 years. 1999 - CAC's best draft and ironically the year we lost our first round pick due to draft penalties. Green at 19; Wheatley at 20; Whelan at 50 and Bruce at 64 as well as Godfrey in the preseason. Clark never made it. 1998 - SFA- Chris Lamb at 13 - gone and not much else. 1997 - Trapper at 1; Troy Longmuir at 22; Luke Ottens - dud; Nathan Brown at 66 and Guy Rigoni at 77 were steals and provided good value. etc etc. Yze and Neitz were at the club before CAC, as were Robbo (first drafted in 96, then delisted then rookied), JMac off the rookie list. We traded picks 2 and 18 in the 97 draft to acquire White. Now, I'll grant you that we have a couple of promising players in Bate and Jones; I'd say the jury is still out on Dunn, Frawley, Petterd and the like, and Bartram looked good in his first year but we need to see how he returns from injury. Who has done better in terms of recruiting? - You'd have to look at Stephen Wells at Geelong; and I'd think WCE and Port Adelaide have been quite good considering they have never really had a lot of low picks. Derek Hine has done well at Collingwood even though they did tank in 05 to get Thomas and Pendlebury. The Hawks have had the benefit of a few early picks but have also used some of their later picks astutely. Sydney have not had a really poor year since before Eade became coach. Very few early picks but a lot of success. I have always rated Ricky Barham as an astute recruiter. As I said, I rank CAC as a moderate success. He has one stellar performance to his name (99), some absolute shockers (98, 00, 01) and since then has been up and down. He has been unlucky in that this draft (07) and 03 were relatively weak drafts, when we have had our lowest finishes, and of course losing pick 5 in 99 due to draft penalties. We have done OK out of the rookie draft. I guess what I am saying is after 10 years in the caper he is yet to unearth a genuine champion player! Now, whether or not I persuade you or anyone else is totally irrelevant to me. The basis of any argument should be fact. These are the facts of CAC's time in recruiting at the MFC. A moderate performance - no more, no less!

He absolutely glistens in a court of law or a bar!! Multiple BOG's!

It certainly does! He started with us in 1997 when Schwab moved back into the club - we were last. 10 years later, we are third last. He is the only one who seems to have escaped scrutiny and is still with us. If his recruitment and list management is so great, why after 10 years are we in the position we are in. And if anyone says, "yes but we have been finalists six out of the last 10 years" etc, etc, my answer is it wasn't enough to save Daniher. I've heard before the ridiculous argument that it is CAC's job to recruit the talent and then the role of the Coaches to turn them into good players. He has selected an array of underachievers for a long time now. I think CAC is very overrated by posters on this board. He has been moderately successful in his role - nothing more, nothing less.

For those having numeracy issues 10th means he finished top 10! Get back to me on how many top 10 finishes Des Headland has had, or Josh Fraser, or Clive Waterhouse, or Michael Gardiner, or Brendan Goddard for that matter! Number 1 guarantees nothing other than a spot on an AFL list!

I've said it elsewhere, a Saints scout has told me that there is a clear top 3 this year - Kreuzer, Morton and Cotchin. After that he rates a group about equal but thinks Melbourne will take Masten or Henderson. He says Masten is the next best ball winning mid fielder (OP not withstanding) and that Henderson is the most promising KPP.(Has been struck by injury this year). He believes one of those 2 will go at 4. He also likes Palmer but thinks these two are better. Take it for what it's worth. I believe him!

Spot on Big Kev. He was just about our best player in the 2000 GF and played some ripping finals games - a couple in 02 stand out, but was also good in others. While we're at, I've read countless times on this site about two top 10 finishes in the B&F in 10 years. That is BS given that he has been top 10 3 times since 02 - 02 (3rd), 05 (1st), 06 (a very harsh 10th). His 03 and 04 seasons were decimated by injury and he played only 15 games this year. I agree he is a bit of a wasted talent, but he certainly hasn't been as bad as everyone has made out.