rpfc

Matthew - there is no need to answer a question that will never be asked of you.

Yes, I do not envision there to be a List Manager position at the club next year. It should be absorbed by another role. GMFO (Head of the FD) Head Coach Recruiting/Player Personnel Head 3 Assistant Coaches 1 or 2 Development Coaches Player Welfare/Development Manager High Performance Manager (Head Trainer) I would be making List Managment apart of the Recruitment/PP Head's job. BTW - We need to get industry leading people in these positions and save money on those below them. From 2012 we have had: GMFO (Head of the FD) - No-one Head Coach - Neeld Recruiting/Player Personnel Head - Harrington, and Viney. 3 Assistant Coaches - Brown, RAWLINGS, and Royal. 1 or 2 Development Coaches - Satterley, Nichol, and Greaves Player Welfare/Development Manager - Viney High Performance Manager (Head Trainer) - MISSON Only Misson and Rawlings would be considered industry leading in that chosen area. Assistant/Dev coaches are hard to measure obviously but I chose Rawlings as IIRC he was the only one of those we coaxed from another club. I calculate the payment of those people to be around the $2-2.3m a year. That's a lot to pay for a largely untried group (add another $300-400k for Craig in his Sports Performance role - I have made it defunct in my set up). And one without a boss.

Coastguard?

I would give us Pick 11 (mid first round) and Pick 20 (end of first round) with the instruction that one or both had to be traded out. Just like the AFL have their secret measurement for FAs they should have a ranking system for any Priority Picks. Hell, I will help them out with one as I am sure they made up the FA rules as they went last spring - it was a haphazard joke. With that ranking system the Dogs might qualify for one or the Saints next year. The problem with Priority Picks is the perception. Suddenly you are given the best teenager in the land. It doesn't even up the competition for years (until that player is ready to give a performance worthy of his talent). Even up the comp by giving clubs assets (picks) they are told to move out - it gets players from good teams to those who need help.

The AFL can stipulate that if the deal isn't good enough we can keep the pick - the NBA gets involved all the time in trades to make sure that teams don't get fleeced. And I don't think that the GWS tried very hard with trading those picks.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/if-port-adelaide-can-turn-it-around-surely-so-can-demons-20130625-2ovb3.html EQ says we probably shouldn't get Pick 1. To me, this isn't about Pick 1. We need a leg up, we are too far away from the pack. We cannot continue to turn over 10 players a year and hope we can get some diamonds in the rough and get above average in the early picks - we need help. EQ mentions what we have discussed here: pick that must be traded, later picks, state league preference, and help to chase a FA. I love the pick-to-trade idea, am ambivalent to later picks or state league preference, and hate the salary cap help idea.

We can't interview contracted people till the season is over. How workable is that? I don't know but I assume fines will be on the way for anyone who breaches that. Whenever the Tigers and Pies bomb out of the finals might be the start of the end...

He couldn't polish the turd quick enough? I am sorry - it isn't so easy. We did not have a great list before he came and we don't have one now. Just because his job was made redundant doesn't mean he should shoulder the blame. There is plenty to go around to over a decade of coaches, recruiters, and administrators.

mjt - I see only losers.

What a pair of blowhards those two are. That wasn't a 'weighing of the pro's and con's of Williams and Craig' that was a bitter regurgitation of why the tenures of those two ended at the Adelaide clubs. Williams is insecure, Craig is too trusting. Boo-hoo. They now can't coach. Nevermind they won football games.

You can do what you want. But if want a united club... Get over it.

Love your avatar, MO...

Again, I don't think you understand the role that Harrington played. He was the bloke who negotiated the contracts and also the one that did this 'frontloading' of contracts to meet the minimum. The Coach and the recruiter chose the players, and they advised the length of the contract.

Maybe it is a ploy to damage the investigation? It is very strange for a player to admit to taking a banned drug and for him to just 'suit up' for the next game. Surely, the question of whether he should be playing next week should come up?

You bring a strong argument, Tim. I do wonder what light Craig would be seen in if he wasn't at the Dees right now. I think he would be seen on a par with Eade and possibly Williams. I hope the players respond in these last 9 games, his fate is tied to that - no matter how unfair that is. But it does give Jackson an incrediable insight into how he would be a Head Coach. Frankly, my mood is always hopeful but I am very glad that I can say that we will be coached next year by either Paul Roos, Mark Williams, Rodney Eade, or Neil Craig.

I interpreted it as simply removing a wage from the FD. Viney can do it, whether he should do it is another question, but as you say, a List Manager does not decide the 'who' or even the 'how long' but the mechanics and negotiation of the deal. Frankly, I see List Management as something that should be an aspect of another role - you don't need someone dedicated to it.

And you don't have to understand. And you can be horrified. And you can still forgive those Melbourne people and move on.

And now we are in Conflict of Interest territory... I was wondering what was going to happen to Viney and Harrington. Harrington won't see a hefty pay out as he was not on a big contract. I don't know what we are going to do with Todd. Interim FD Head - Mahoney Interim Head Coach - Craig Head Recruiter - Taylor ????? - Viney Maybe List Manager and Recruitment Strategy? And he recuses himself form negotiating Jack's contract? I hope this doesn't 'end in tears' so to speak.

Too bad. We are in a socialised competition with a structure that allows bad teams to get better. We are going to get draft assistance. Deal with it.

If that was the bar for conversation on here there would be tumbleweeds floating across the screen. I don't care about his gait - but it looks terrible. I know that Campbell Brown used to run in a similar fashion and Hawthorn got a running expert to change it. He managed to get more speed as a result. He will be a fine player - will he be the star we need? Only time answers that question.

He has a terrible gait but I am patient. The thing about kids is that you need them to bring something to the table straight away and he has very good skills. We should have groomed him as a HBF for this year and brought him in after a few rounds to get some easier footy.

Yes, I have no inside knowledge but this is going to drag out. I mean we can't even talk to any of our 'fallbacks' for at least 9 weeks.

You can only re-sign those that you can re-sign. If some are stalling, you should not be behoven to them. And we have so much salary cap space it isn't funny. We will most likely frontload contracts again - unless Jackson has an issue with it. Or we could spend it on FAs and trades...

Are you talking about Ian Ridley? Well, that's a shame ex52k2. We remain a fractured club. Crippled by emotion and chained to memory and ill-feeling on a subject consigned to history. Perhaps, jnrmac is right, we will only forgive and forget when we start winning. Perhaps in our current predicament all we have is the stirred passion of moments like this. Oh, and the 'swallowing' of Hawthorn was told to me personally by those who wrote those clauses you just posted - using the MCC as a proxy MFC. A hardly independent arbiter of the Hawks downfall. But it is irrelevant now, just as it was a day after that day and has been for 17 years. Let it go. Ian Ridley has gone, but many Demons remain who thought they were doing the best thing by the club. When do you forgive them?

lol Interesting analogy. I have made a similar point and I agree with what you say but the enviroment of hiring a new coach has changed - we cannot interview anyone contracted elsewhere until their season has finished. This really gives Jackson the leg-room to delay until the end of the season and that means that Roos has time to make a decision. Maybe he just realises that? And that is why he isn't considering it at the moment? It's all supposition...but I agree with you and Craig; passion is pre-requisite for a coach. I don't want to be Blight-ed. Especially if it involves Grant Thomas taking over as caretaker, being involved in the process for his successor and effectively selecting himself...