This doesn’t make any sense. You seem to be implying that any team can just click their fingers and get a Judd, Dangerfield, or Mitchell. Most teams can’t get in star players from other clubs. Those who do usually have some type of advantage. Yet in your mind, any manager who doesn’t has somehow failed.
And you seem to think the Judd deal was a good move for Carlton???
Its more that its completely unquantifiable so really has no place in the discussion other than to try to blur responsibility. If the coaching staff changes coincided with noticeable changes in the younger players development then sure thats a very likley area that needs addressing. In our case we have had numerous changes to every coaching role & still can’t get a side that can regularly make let alone win finals. Is it more likely that all those coaches were the issue or is it the one constant?
NO, only clubs that have very good recruiting managers can land these deals. You seem to be completely ignorant to the fact we’ve tried to but failed. And yes Judd was a good move for Carlton, drafting poorly around him was the mistake.
I’m not ignorant to the fact we’ve tried and failed. You seem to be ignorant over how seldom those players move and how every single club’s recruiting teams have failed multiple times. You also seem ignorant over the plethora of factors that lead to a player (a) leaving and (b) selecting a particular club. Simply saying “oh, club X got the player because of their recruiting manager” shows a very shallow understanding of what goes on.
And Judd was a terrible trade for Carlton. Obviously their subsequent trading and drafting hurt as well.
What? TD left in 2003, the rot had already started. Are you really suggesting if he’d stayed our almost total miss of the superdraft wouldn’t have happened? We know we had picks good enough to have drafted much better than we did so again your excuses are baseless. Are you actually suggesting that injuries stopped Dyson being more than a plodder? he played 10 games his 1st year, 11 his second, 17 his 3rd - what injuries? Laycock was lazy hence why he kept getting injured. Again you like to hang on to these whatifs but have nothing of substance.
How exactly was Davies a Sheedy pick? Did Dodoro rate him as a late pick rookie at best but Sheedy didn’t listen? is there anything of any substance at all to substantiate this claim? As we’ve well established you will happily grasp on to myth but ignore reality when it come to defending the dud. As for Dodoro doing a match day role was that actually different to every other club? Was he the only recruiting person also involved in match day? Of course the level of professionalism has changed a lot since 2000 - I just want to see us embrace that change & get a new recruited who shows signs that he understands what required in the modern game.
Richmond giving a second shot to Lonergan & Hislop doesn’t mean they were good players - it means Richmond thought they could get some value but were wrong. Can you name a player poached from us who has gone on to play in any other teams midfield? You stated earlier you rate Carlton near the bottom as far as drafting goes does that mean you wouldn’t have poached Gibbs or Murphy?
Again you grasp onto failure like a security blanket. Oh others have failed so it doesn’t matter that only the successful clubs & Carlton & Collingwood have done what we have needed to do for 20 years. Its not supposed to be easy, its supposed to be hard & its supposed to be part of what sets some clubs apart from others its also what we’ve failed at & Dodoro is the 1 constant part of that failure.
Just curious, do you credit Dodoro for getting Smith? How many other sides knowing he would be a good pickup does it take before it becomes a no brainer & therefore somehow not an achievement. Its important for future reference to establish some standards.
To be honest, most of Dodoros job is more behind the scenes, Merv does a lot more of the on the ground stuff. I went to the 18 and 16s champs games that where in Brisbane last year and I saw Merv at both of them
i’m not trying to hint at anything or read into anything you’re saying just my thought.
Is it possible that a head scout/recruiter (merv) has to adhere to the philosophy of the last manager (dodoro) when it comes to draft day? what i mean is, we clearly draft certain types in certain areas of the draft, i’m talking picks 1-20 are x, 20-50 are y, 50+ are z. sorts. in that x= best available according to our parameters, y= could be anything, z= what we shouldve gone for in the y region.
mostly the crux of this ramble was, why the ■■■■ aren’t we drafting contested mids with our 2nd round area picks?
So do I interpret this as you saying you think Dodoro has done better than Richmond & WB’s recruiting? Seriously thats the position you want to argue from? We haven’t won a final in 13 years they are the last 2 premiers & you are trying to argue we’ve recruited better than them? How do you even begin to justify that to yourself?
OK lets try something different. It should be obvious to you that Dodoro’s really great drafting hasn’t correlated with on-field success. Can we agree on that? Maybe we just have so much talent that it can’t possibly function together & the club is suffering excessive talent fatigue. Don’t you think its possible the only real solution is to get another recruiter who doesn’t keep filling our list with all these supremely talented players. Maybe we need some duds because obviously to you we haven’t drafted any. Maybe Dodoro’s done too good a job & we have more talent than the coaches can handle. We’ve had lots of coaches poached over the years so obviously that means other clubs rate our development work right so maybe the key to success is drafting worse that we have, you know like how Richmond & the Dogs did it .