Adrian Dodoro - Flankers into Mids since 2000


#1098

Best article I’ve read in a while. Can somebody personally make sure Dodoro reads it. COMMENT: Callum Twomey says Dons need new player strategy


#1099

That article brings up the ‘Myers and Colyer for Melbourne’s pick 2’ trade scenario in 2013, which I thought was just blitz rumour.

The interesting part of that is Melbourne eventually traded that pick to GWS in the Dom Tyson trade.

GWS took Josh Kelly with that pick.


#1100

ouch.


#1101

I refuse to accept that rumour as true at the risk of my head exploding


#1102

Hindsight is a wonderful thing


#1103

"It’s also believed player agents have, on occasions, steered prospective players to other clubs because they weren’t confident Essendon would get a deal done if their clients nominated the Bombers as their preferred home. "
I hope there isn’t any truth to that or at least its something the club’s looking at changing.


#1104

If that’s true (doubt it is) then dodoro should be sacked by 12pm today.


#1105

If he can’t bring in at least 2-3 good mids this trade period he should be sacked


#1106

It depends who said no to the deal.

It’s hard to imagine it was Melbourne’s idea.


#1107

Yeah, read that part again and it comes straight after the part about us being hard to deal with which suggests that we were stupid enough to think those two players would give us pick 2.


#1108

What the article said was “David Myers and Travis Colyer were linked as a swap for Melbourne’s pick No.2 in 2013”. It doesn’t say who did the linking (a journalist), it doesn’t say who initiated (if its real). For example, maybe Essendon offered those two for pick #2, and Melbourne laughed it off. Or maybe Melbourne asked about what it would cost to get those two, Essendon said #2, and Melbourne laughed it off.

Without more details, its a nothing phrase.


#1109

What a disgraceful thread. This place is a joke


#1110

Attendance isn’t compulsory.


#1111

cgates is discos #1 fan.


#1112

I reckon Neeld should take Dodos job.
What dya reckon?


#1113

Sorry been slow to reply, it takes a long time and there are a lot of threads going ape at the moment. Also, I do have some life outside of Blitz! :wink:

Look, I think its pretty fundamentally clear that we have some pretty different views on some things. Some of that neither are in a position to truly know, so it will always be an opinion. An example is that we’ve both heard the stories on Sheedy, how much credence we give them is going to up to the individual. Neither of us have any proof on Sheedy & Davies, beyond the stories. So we both give it a weight based on our individual opinions.

But a few points I think are worth arguing, or clarifying my position on.

On Sheedy, I’d clarify I’m not saying he did all the list management and the recruiting team did nothing. I’m saying that Sheeds would occasionally over-rule the list manager. It’s why Judkins left, he got angry about it. A question for you - given it caused Judkins to leave, why do you think it suddenly stopped happening with Dodoro? If they had been willing to cut Sheedy out of the process at that time, Judkins would presumably (I’m guessing) have stayed.

I just don’t get this. If a club brings in a player, they must rate them. Nobody brings in a player expecting them to be rubbish (unless its part of a salary dump, or a Veale deal). So they must have rated the talent and thought they could get an AFL player out of them. How is that not vindication of Dodoro’s picks? A second team’s manager rated them enough to recruit them even after they’d done little (often) for Essendon.

And the reference to the top clubs matches my points. People target the fringe players of successful clubs because they rate the drafting and development.

On Milne, I did put a (?) after him. I wasn’t sure of him.
On Houli, you don’t get much for players the coach wouldn’t select who’ve played VFL. The reasons we didn’t ask for anything and sent him via the PSD is well documented.

I’ve debated before on the definition of rebuild. In my mind a rebuild is not finishing mid-table or higher and taking your 4-5 picks in the draft. That’s just a regeneration (as I called it in the original post). A rebuild is spending time down the bottom of the ladder, clearing out average players even if they’re best 22, and often trading out some assets for additional picks. Its having the intent to focus on development and the future over the here and now. That is at least my definition of a rebuild.

It is something we never did. Just drafting 4-5 players a year doesn’t make it a rebuild IMO. A regeneration is by its nature usually a slow process, and for us it was also extremely slow.

But we didn’t have elite draft picks. Of those top 20 picks, only 5 were top 10 picks. Four more were in the 17+ range. And then to exacerbate our lack of access to good picks, a #2, #10 and #11 picks (Winders, Gumby and Laycock) all had major injury issues. It was a combination of bad luck, bad timing and insufficient picks.

I can only think of two clubs with less access and better recruiting - Sydney and Adelaide. If we can poach the main guy from one of them, I’m all for showing Dodoro the door. So unless there are a raft of clubs I’ve missed, other clubs haven’t really challenged with more success than EFC off lower pick quality.

On fixing the issue of lack of picks, this is where I think the Board/EFC goals got in the way. You can’t get more/better picks without finishing low or trading good players out. In both situations the Board was against this philosophy (I talk about this more below).

I said 2002 and 2003 were weak drafts. I’m not sure how Dodoro is responsible for Jackson stuffing the salary cap in 2002, or Jacobs requesting to leave in 2003. Or that the 2005 draft when Richards insisted on leaving was so weak in the late teens/twenties as well.

I believe it played out in several ways. It meant we kept average players as they boosted the strength of our bottom 12, even if the overall best 22 wasn’t good enough to win. It meant we went for recycled players who could (potentially) have an immediate impact. So guys like Zantuck, McPhee, Cupido, Alan, Murphy, Salmon, Heffernen, Camporeale, Michael. It meant we didn’t trade out anyone unless our hand was forced (either by their request or salary cap). It meant less development time to kids as the focus was on winning finals.

Now, maybe Dodoro was a huge fan of this approach. I have no idea. What I do know is that the Board set clear goals which were known, and our approach aligned with those goals. And that those goals are ones likely to help the now over the option to do a full rebuild.

These are poor logic. They are mixing causation and correlation. If Dodoro’s hands were often tied, if our development was rubbish, if our injury management was rubbish, if the salary cap (early 00’s) or saga (recently) restricted the ability to do trades, if it wasn’t list management that meant Richards, Jacobs, Houli, Jenkins, Crameri left, if a saga impacted team performance as we were peaking, then it is quite possible Dodoro and Keane could be good list managers and we still not win a final in 13 years. All of those things impact how well players develop, stay, and stay on the park, which impact success.

To want to simplify it down to “we haven’t won in 13 years, this guy’s been here 13 years in an area that has an impact, therefore he automatically isn’t any good” is bad logic.


#1114

Is that you Disco? Get us a midfield bull. Cheers.


#1115

Extinction? Hmmmm.


#1116

Sydney so smart they gave Shaunye a third chance.


#1117

I disagree strongly with the comment that Geelong is the blueprint. They’ve gone way overboard and are heading for a big fall soon