Very Interesting article on recruiting

[Reggi]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/30/1075340844593.html

[DST]

Very intersting article Reggi.

You could say that Barhams strategy of picking younger less mature bodied kids over the last couple of years with our later picks is a similar concept, in that he is trying to overcome the lack of lower picks by hopefully securing kids who would have gone higher a year or two later.

DST

[rngclhtr9]

That is a great article, just thought I'd make a comment to relate this to the AFL.

On the other side of the spectrum, the New York Rangers ice hockey team annually has the National Hockey League's highest payroll, signs the best free agents and has a star studded roster, yet has failed to make the playoffs for the past six years and will most probably miss this season.
Thank God we have a strictly enforced salary cap and no free agency in the AFL. As anyone who follows professional sport in the US would know, players are swapped and traded like cattle with franchise players frequently changing clubs, usually to the highest bidder. The perrenial contenders every year are the big market clubs who simply buy the best players (like Carlton used to) , the example of the Oakland A's is a rarity. European Soccer has gone the same way, only a handful of clubs able to contend for the Champions league or the league titles.
Every year after the AFL trade period, with all the innuedo and speculation about players moving clubs, we whinge and whine about there being no loyalty in football anymore. That's rubbish. Compared to other sports there is relatively very little swapping of players in the AFL.
The socialist line the AFL Commission has taken is the correct path to the survival of all our 16 teams. Each team is on a level playing field (though the Lions and us have cap concessions). It is hard to see anyone matching Brisbane's current streak of premierships the way our game is structured now. I just think that we are so lucky that our game allows all teams to at least have an opportunity to play finals.

[Steve]

It makes you wonder how important the role of recruiting manager really is these days.

Carlton, Port Adelaide and Hawthorn only in the last few months have made somewhat surprising changes with those leaving having long and/or successful stints as recruiting managers.

With so much info publicly available (eg. statistics, physical testing results, U/18 titles on Fox Footy etc etc), on top of those issues beyond recruiters control (eg. 'quality' of draft picks due to position finished, uncertainty about 'go-home' players etc etc), it makes you wonder how bad things could actually get if you paid one of the 13 y/o d!ickheads on BigFooty $50 to make your draft selections.

Obviously its more complicated than that, particularly when coaches request advice on whether to trade draft picks for established players (ie. whether it is a good move as the available youngsters aren't of great quality etc), and I guess also the fact that one 'good get' (eg. if Matthew Davis becomes a player) CAN make a difference. But it makes you think anyway.

We seem to go for the obvious targets so often:

i) U/18 GF BOG's - Goodes, Buchanan, McGlone
ii) AIS/AFL Academy players - Schnieder, Willoughby, Schmidt, Ericksen, Hunt, LRT, Powell, Rogers

Which given that all other than LRT and possibly Willoughby were overlooked many times before we drafted them is quite interesting.

Although I guess if guys like Fixter, O'Keefe, Saddington, Dempster, Sundqvist etc go on and become excellent players then they'd be good recruiting gets.

[chammond]

it makes you wonder how bad things could actually get if you paid one of the 13 y/o d!ickheads on BigFooty $50 to make your draft selections.

I know a much older dickhead who would do it for nothing!

We seem to go for the obvious targets so often

That's interesting, because I've always had the feeling that Sydney looks outside the box when recruiting, probably because of the dearth of home-grown talent.

Certainly the Irish experiments have been very speculative . . . and I wonder how many clubs would have taken a chance on Brett Kirk? Or John Stevens? Or even Cresswell or Dunkley for that matter?

[Reggi]

Personally leave it to the professionals - but it makes sense. It's likely that recruiters will 'play it safe' and recruit players everyone rates rather than take risks.

That is the point of the article - there is benefit in not following the herd on choices - we often haven't with success.

McVeigh cs Salopek could be an interesting one