He hasn’t given us a list capable of winning a final for longer than any other list manager in the league. Do you have some other form of benchmark or standard that might ever convince you? Maybe even an example from another club where they resisted the temptation to replace a guy who had failed for 19 years but finally after 20,30,40 years of failure the same approach finally worked. FFS even the clubs who have been successful make changes in these key areas. We know, surely we all know by now that the entire club was poorly run & resourced post 2000 - what exactly is there to believe that keeping the key element of the list management from that era is in any way the right decision. Not winning games of football especially finals is the ONLY way we should be judging our list. Unless you somehow believe that we’ve had a great list but 5 coaches now couldn’t get them to perform anywhere near ability, then you simply have to concede our list hasn’t been good enough. Eventually when all the other excuses fail, you might want to attribute some level of responsibility for the list on to the list manager.
So in other words you don’t have a better argument. Ok.
You have NO argument. The facts are the facts. You’ve avoided addressing the facts through this entire thread but they remain the constant.
Agreed. Not good enough to get a few good players here and there. What’s the overall draft strategy over the last decade? Our midfield has been ■■■■ for that period and still is.
Lol. You think I’ve avoided facts and arguments? Have you read my posts in this thread???
Dodoro recruits. He doesn’t develop. He doesn’t ■■■■ players like Houli or Crameri off. He doesn’t choose the fitness staff. He doesn’t cause our (past hopefully) injury woes. He didn’t employ Dank and then not monitor him or document the program. He didn’t completely screw up the way we reacted to the saga. He (probably) doesn’t set our strategy such as not to trade players out or to take back every Saga player lucky enough to still be on the list. He doesn’t decide game plan or weekly team line ups.
All of that feeds into having a good enough list to win a final. All of that you’ve conveniently ignored.
I just find it hard to believe that 4 coaches have told him to recruit running HBF who can pinch hit in the middle as opposed to just midfielders.
Stopped reading after the highlighted above.
What a nonsensical argument to make.
If we do not try and recuit inside mids this trade period he should be sacked.
Where have I ignored ANY of that? This is the Dodoro thread & the discussion is about HIS performance. I get that you want to deflect to everything but his actual performance but again this is his thread. His drafting has been poor, his trading has been poor & his list management has been poor. In spite of all the other factors that go into making a club successful I don’t believe you have ever made any reasonable case to suggest we had a flag capable list. You throw up hypotheticals like they are a reasoned defence of actual outcomes & you continually move the goalpost on forming any actual standard. So I ask again - what benchmark or standard would convince you if not actual outcomes? Is there any point, 20 years without a finals win maybe 30 years that would make you at the very least consider that our list hasn’t been good enough or is there some other measure you want to set? Is drafting less than 3% of the All Australian sides over your career maybe some evidence you’d consider? I’m open to the idea that you can set the standard & I’ve been asking for a standard for some time but again you ignore this & instead grasp on to the saga, Sheedy, Dank & more recently its this idea that Dodoro is only the List manager so we shouldn’t hold him responsible for anything.
The facts are the club is currently a failure. We have finished out of the finals 9 of the last 13 years & in the 4 finals we’ve made we’ve lost by a total of 236 points. I believe you simply have to acknowledge that a significant factor in that outcome is the state of the list. You can argue all you like about what % the coaches, the fitness staff, the sports scientist & the boot studder plays in the ultimate success of a club but surely at some point you have to place some level of importance on the list & its management. We’ve replaced every other aspect of the club several times over. Would we have done that wad we won finals most years - no, so why do we not persist with the only constant?
We always hear stories like if AFL didn’t change the draft rule we would have picked up Selwood. But I can guarantee you Carlton would have gone Leunberger pick 3 and we would have gone Hansen with pick 4.
Another story going we would have picked Oliver if Melbourne picked Parish. We probably would have overlooked him for Weideman or someone.
Is there an inside gun around pick 11 range in this draft?
Ill bet whatever that we would have taken Jetta at 4
Another ■■■■■■■ midget…
The time has come for a fresh set of eyes. Now is the time for change. It must happen before all our good players are past it. That time is approaching rapidly.
And who would you replace him with?
We’ve poached a lot of coaches for little return.
Hooker, Hurley and Heppell are not our best players.
I thought Caracella was a coach?
My bad I posted in the wrong thread. Carry on.
Charlie Prior. Leo McCormick maybe.
Admittedly I made those names up, but would you have known whether they were highly rated recruiting assistants at other clubs or not?