If it weren’t Bass we wouldn’t have got Fanta
Don’t even bother going through the rest of the misses.
He’s had some bad ones as recent at Parish and Francis whilst Curnow is the most exciting young player in the league.
18 years in the job, way too long
Agreed. What’s the opposite of props?
As I’ve said before, regardless of the circumstances that he’s faced, and how good of a job people feel that he’s done, he has been there a very long time.
Does he have a job for life?
If he does, why?
If he doesn’t, then at what point of us still being sh*t do we at least ‘try something else,’ in regards to list management and recruiting?
Bullshit
It’s common knowledge that when Bass came to us he highly recommended Ray because he was his coach at SANFL the year before.
2 Likes
It’s not like most of these picks were considered reaches… at the time Parish and Francis were basically considered “can’t miss” prospects.
I’m starting to think we simply just don’t know how to coach or develop guys anymore.
3 Likes
Parish was not a bad pick. He is exactly the type of midfielder we need 4-5 more of. No he doesn’t look at this point to have xfactor but I have no doubt at all that he will continue to get better & be a valuable part of our future midfield. the problem is that he’s more the type of mid other clubs have found with later picks whereas we simply don’t & haven’t had that depth. Development is a big part of the equation but not having a strong midfield group to work his way into is a major part of that. We have had to throw him into the deep end through necessity & I don’t think thats the ideal way to develop kids. Who exactly at the club is his role model?
Francis is an interesting one, sure he was rated highly by most & you only need to see him play to witness there’s talent but its the inside knowledge we should have had on him that concerns me. When his fitness wasn’t up to scratch there had to be reasons for it. He either had to have had serious injuries, work ethic problems or possibly some other undiagnosed reasons. Did we do due diligence in this area, did we factor his fitness into our calculations or were we lazy. I’d like to think we were professional & doing everything every other club could & would have but I just don’t have that level of confidence in anything Dodoro does.
2 Likes
I like that the 500 times we’ve passed on someone due to concerns off-field it’s a mark against disco, but when we take someone despite concerns off-field it’s also a mark against disco.
6 Likes
When our concerns are not actually related to their ability to play football then yes it is absolutely a mark against disco. Passing on a player because they have a few tats, come from a broken home, not leadership quality etc is moronic, overlooking serious fitness shortfalls or at least factoring them in when using a top 6 draft pick is poor practice. They may have been satisfied the fitness issues were not a problem, they may have rated his talent so high that the fitness could be overcome easily, they may have been wrong & we may be paying for these type of wrong decisions over the last 20 years.
List changes
Out: Watson, Kelly
IN: Stringer, Smith, Saad
Stringer in as a forward is good, but Joey has fallen off a clifff, so kind of cancels stringer out.
Smith has been good, but Zerrett has been quieter and tagged out of games.
Saad has been handy, but lacked Kellys leadership in the backline. Saad lacks a bit of mungrel, and sometimes his second efforts are half hearted and doesnt use his pace IMO, but he has been targeted by opposition and received multiple corkies to slow him down.
Also think we have lost some toughness back there in the backline.
And stringer couldnt make the conversion to gun inside mid. to cover Watson,
Myers has been injured and in/out of side, doesnt reallly seem to help cover Watson loss
Langford has been in/out of side. 1 win and a loss I think, hasn’t covered watson.
We look to slow with Heppell and Goddard plus Myers in there.
Clarke needs to be given a run. in the square play on Mitchell this week.
Heppells kicking has fallen off a cliff as well. hes had a couple of good gams but also a couple not so good.
Our list is in better shape than last year. Its just players are out of Form
- Daniher and Hooker werent working as forward combo. Hooker gone back and been ok. Daniher still lost his Mo-Jo
- Heppelll Down on form, played ok, but mainly his turnovers are costly
- Merrett Down on form, but working back.
- MCGrath down on form and struggled with midfield introduction
- Parish hasnt improved dising up same as last year
It all lies down in the midfield.
Smith has been a good get.
Merrett is finding form
Laverde has had 1 good game off a small sample size
Zaharakis and Heppell are matching last years output, Hep just needs to tidy up disposal
If we can get Langford or Clarke to come in and perrform consistently to a good level it is porbably enough
Or even get Parish or McGrath to improve to a 24-25 disposal average.
We probably miss a bit of Colyers run, he played 22 games last year and helps transition backline to forwardline. A bit why ive been calling for Long to get a game.
Our first two picks this year must be the best available mid. This must be based on exposed form not on hope that a rangy type will become a gun mid.
3 Likes
Exactly. We’re in good shape for talls, plus small forwards. Apart from that, I reckon we should almost exclusively be drafting mids. Some of them will turn into defenders/flankers. Better to do it that way then try and convert guys into mids
2 Likes
I actually think dodoro learned a lesson when he went off the beaten path that draft (I think we all know which one im talking about). he learned our club ■■■■■■■ stinks and can’t help players in rough situations change chapters in their life.
Can you give me specific examples where that type of decision is actually feesible? I get that it’s been joked about here for a long time but I don’t know of any specific players that were not picked purely because of off-field concerns. Benfti has talked about our risk aversion with indigenous kids from remote communities but that’s not club specific
This is pure hindsight. Parish was always going to be selected at pick 5 if Oliver was already gone. As for our pick 6, it was predicted to be Curnow however he got done for refusing a breathe test and few other incidents with the police days out from the draft. Frang was the next best talent available.
What a load of BS. Melksham was picked because he played damn well through the midfield through the TAC finals. Yes, he got some goals - as a midfielder. Remember how we wanted that good kick, goal kicking midfielder? Melksham was meant to be it. I did a quick look on BigFooty for old Phantom Drafts, and here is Quigley’s write up:
i.e. he was seen as a midfielder who could get his own ball, compared to Hayes & Dal Santo, and seen as a good user of it. Given we had Watson, Myers, Howlett, Hocking at the time, this sounds like exactly the type of midfielder we needed.
His best season for us was 2013, where he played more through the midfield and averaged 20 disposals and 3.1 clearances. If you recall, he was extremely good during the end of the season when other midfielders were injured and he got more time there. His issue was that the midfield was reasonably strong through that period, and so he didn’t get the opportunities he could have.
We gave him stuff all midfield time. He didn’t get a go in front of Watson, Stanton, Hocking, Howlett, Winders (when fit), Zaha, and Heppell (because he went past him). He nearly always played off the HFF.
To now say he wasn’t a genuine mid at TAC level, and then say we never played him as a forward are both just categorically wrong statements.
Yep. I think some hard looks need to be given to our development coaches.
1 Like
A lot comes down to maturity.
Melksham was a ratbag at EFC off field, now settled down has a kid etc.
I will say that both Melk & Hibbo are very physically competitive though. We lack a lot of that type.
I know Melk wanted to go as was confused by the message from Bomber Thompson. He loved Hird.
And we didn’t come to the party on Hibbos $$
1 Like
Yep, instead we should have got one of the other guys who went around and after them. Like Boekhurst. Or Goddard. What about McKenzie, McKenna, Nielson or Webb?
In fact, the only guys who went in the 15 (live) picks after Langford who have turned out any good are Toby McLean and Touk Miller. McLean is a flanker, so Blitz would have had a field day with that, and Miller is a short-■■■■, so we’d probably be complaining about that as well.
With Parish, we were all thrilled at him after 2016, and still pretty pleased last year. So the fact he’s gone backwards in Blitz’s estimations, is that the pick or the development?
Interesting you focus on Curnow and Francis. Curnow had big risks around him due to his injury, can you imagine what would have been said here if he hadn’t worked out? But other than Curnow, none of Schache, McKays (x2), Weideman or Collins have shown a lot more than Francis. Does that mean they were all duds, or that we should be giving talls more time?
5 Likes