It’s not easy and just clicking fingers and problems can be magically solved.
5 years ago they probably had Mozzie and Tippa squared away as the clubs small forward prospects. They would’ve then put their draft attention into other needs, replacing Hooker / Hurley etc.
Then, Mozzie does an ACL during Covid, can’t cope with isolation and loneliness / grind and goes home. Timing just wasn’t on our side with him, as talented as he was.
Then Tippa enjoys life and loses interest unexpectedly. That’s two unusual occurrences that ended two careers short.
So, they had to recalibrate and clearly it’s not easy. Even Carlton don’t really have small forwards so they aren’t easy to get. They tried to get Bobby Hill and depending on which version of story we believe he didn’t land.
So, we have to keep looking as it’s still a hole in the list to fill.
I don’t care how good the environment is or what development those players received, they were never going to be the quality of players we could build a midfield around.
Our fitness has been an issue I am not denying that. But our failure to replace Watson is recruiting, not development.
Hooker was a better player than Hurley imo. By a fair way too. Did it at both ends and over a long period, Hurley was ordinary in the second half of his career, couldn’t even play key position on the big forwards.
There is no team in the AFL that has a perfectly based list. Every team has holes. GWS is probably the closest but think they are short in the midfield once they get 1 or 2 injuries in there.
Poor injury management, poor fitness and poor development has quite reasonably lowered the peak output of SOME of our players.
Say a draftee a year was lowered by half a notch, a potential B+ lowered to a B, a potential A lowered to a B+, a valuable B dropped to a C+ and delisted. Not every player was going to become a star, but the anchor of the club environment messed with some of them to some extent.
In a competitive competition, that cumulative impact to the list makes a real difference. I can’t prove it, there’s no way to know for sure who would have had a successful career in a sliding doors scenario, but it’s fair to take into account when judging the players of the last 15 years.
I see poor development as having the biggest impact on how fast players develop. Players like Redman, Langford, Parish and McGrath took way too long to become reliable AFL players.
Recruiting decisions certainly impact development though, it has to be noted. For instance, if McGrath was drafted to a club with a stronger midfield and just kept at halfback he probably got to his current level years ago.
Dunno… there’s players like Ham who had the skills but not the psychological mindset to succeed. Could that have been changed? Could Nick O’Brien fix his kicking issues? Could Dylan Clarke? How many times have we had a player who could have made it if only for one thing they couldn’t fix?
We saw how Jobe’s kicking devolved back into a dire state without the right environment. Why would we expect players to achieve the same heights with a poor development system? We look at GC as a place where talent goes to die, why should we think we are any different based on what we’ve seen of the club’s history?
Plus a raft of players (Gumby, Winders, D Daniher, Myers, Dempsey, Winderlich, etc.) had their early years injury ravaged. Would they have been successful, or better players, at another club?
We’ve also seen a host of players retire for us in their late twenties or just after getting to 30. If they played for Geelong, would they have had 2+ more years of good footy?
I’m not sure what you’re even on about now? Where did I ever mention Durham? What argument?
Meanwhile your argument that development/culture has been the issue conveniently ignores the fact that players like Merrett and Watson actually became great in that environment. Why did development fail other players but not Merrett/Watson? Did we put our resources into those two players at the expense of others?
A much more parsimonious answer is that our recruiting has been generally poor and along the way we have found some good players. I’ll happily concede that players like Merrett and Langford are A graders will give credit to dodo for that. Durham may eventually fall into that category but is not there yet.
Mcgrath as a number 1 selection should be the type of player we try to build a team/midfield around, not the type of player who needs to be elevated by others to achieve an AA.
will be interesting when AA Squad announced, you would think that we have 3 blokes who make the squad.
Merrett
Langford
McGrath
Also in the 22 under 22 no selections last year, (must be 22 or under for entire season)
Rules out Durham + Martin.
last year team, think could have picked Archie.
With a few falling off does Archie make the team this year? He’s likely our only hope, Cox eligible too. I guess Will ashcroft wing available.
Will Day, Jai Newcombe, Bailey Smith, Chad Warner, Noah Anderson, Caleb Serong, kysiah Pickett, Sam De Koning, Cody Weightman, Hayden Young, Tom Green
all drop out due to age.
maybe Luke Jackson if grand final after 29 september
LOL. Which just shows what you know about drafting. How many #1 picks does that apply to? How many players in the entire 2016 draft does that apply to? Maybe English. The other best players in Stewart and Bolton aren’t players to build a team around.
And I never said he needed others to elevate him. He needed a side who didn’t have too many similar types in the midfield.
Luggage might be slightly in front over the journey but Mc Grath is likely offering more in terms of leadership attributes and building culture.
Mc Grath each day becoming more acceptable as the pick. It wasn’t a great draft at the high end so Dodoro looks to have picked well as time goes on.
Our midfield isn’t missing a midfield alternative that could’ve been taken that year. Taranto hasn’t gone to next level. Then Luggage. But we’re not regretting but getting him at this point.
I think partially it’s because it’s generally easier to be sympathetic to the recruiters than the rest of the staff. We all see the players when they start playing, and we see the little glimpses of quality, and what needs improving, which is fundamentally the job of a recruiter. So when a player doesn’t get better at what they’re good at or doesn’t improve their deficiencies, the natural instinct for a lot of people is to assume the player has been let down. We don’t know if a player isn’t improving because they don’t listen to the coaches, or get bored and zone out during film review, or don’t do their rehab properly. And if the recruiters were wrong when they thought he’d make it, that means we were wrong when we thought he’d make it, so probably it’s not the recruiters’ fault because if they’re stupid then we’re stupid.
