Dayle Garlett?

Remove this Banner Ad

Marlin01 said:
The article quotes Garlett's mentor stating clubs were right not to have recruited him last year. Surely that's got to carry some weight.
Click to expand...

That's his opinion now and assumes that all the positive developments since early this year wouldn't have happened if he was in the AFL system. It's also what you'd expect him to say given not being drafted has happened - I.e putting a positive spin on it.

We understand the reasons; we understand the call our club and others made - I just don't agree that we needed everything Bennell might bring to the team more than we needed what Garlett could bring. That's the choice we made.

The way things are shaping now we'll be proved wrong but sure, we'll be able to console ourselves that we helped make him by putting the responsibility for the turnaround on Swans rather than us and hell, we got Bennell. :)

Strong clubs with strong leadership can take risks at times, especially when they are such low risks v such high rewards. We are very conservative.
 
Marlin01 said:
The article quotes Garlett's mentor stating clubs were right not to have recruited him last year. Surely that's got to carry some weight.
Click to expand...
you are just being silly now! Just because someone who is close to him and knows him says it was the best thing for him not to be recruited, doesn't make it right! West Coast are inept, the rest of the league are silly's and poor old Dayle should have been taken regardless of whether he was out on the town every night getting up to who knows what.

Essendon threw him a lifeline, all he had to do was stay home for three days and they would have drafted him last year, he couldn't even do that! Hopefully he now understands what it takes and goes on to have an AFL career, if it is not with us, so be it.
 
West Coast 06 said:
Essendon threw him a lifeline, all he had to do was stay home for three days and they would have drafted him last year, he couldn't even do that! Hopefully he now understands what it takes and goes on to have an AFL career, if it is not with us, so be it.
Click to expand...



Maybe he thought his dealer was better?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I don't think Thomson is trying to put a positive spin on things. I think he's merely stating his informed opinion. It seems quite probable to me that being rejected by every club in the AFL, despite being so gifted, may have been a major factor in changing his outlook on life. Perhaps if Garlett had been recruited, he may never had to confront the fact that he can't get by on genious alone.
 
Marlin01 said:
I don't think Thomson is trying to put a positive spin on things. I think he's merely stating his informed opinion. It seems quite probable to me that being rejected by every club in the AFL, despite being so gifted, may have been a major factor in changing his outlook on life. Perhaps if Garlett had been recruited, he may never had to confront the fact that he can't get by on genious alone.
Click to expand...

That will certainly be the line every club runs if he turns into the star he is capable of being. As I said in my previous post.

Personally I reckon being rookied at 80+ with a "one and done" threat + our mentoring and support system could have achieved the same result. And we'd get the benefit.
 
Eagle87 said:
That will certainly be the line every club runs if he turns into the star he is capable of being. As I said in my previous post.

Personally I reckon being rookied at 80+ with a "one and done" threat + our mentoring and support system could have achieved the same result. And we'd get the benefit.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day I'll trust the 18 clubs that passed after assessing a lot more information than we have over randoms on Bigfooty. You have to think there was a lot more going on we haven't seen.

Here's hoping he does turn his life around, and that he ends up on our list. But if he does turn it around it doesn't mean the decision not to pick him up last year was the wrong one.
 
Happy Mastenator said:
At the end of the day I'll trust the 18 clubs that passed after assessing a lot more information than we have over ransoms on Bigfooty. You have to think there was a lot more going on we haven't seen.

Here's hoping he does turn his life around, and that he ends up on our list. But if he does turn it around it doesn't mean the decision not to pick him up last year was the wrong one.
Click to expand...

Because we pick guys in the draft/especially the rookie list solely based on character?

Isn't the idea to use the rookie list for project type players? Isn't a guy with loads of talent but some off field issues just as much a project as a straight arrow who can't kick?

Much (but not all of the flak re Garlett) came out very late in the piece and it wasn't like he was followed around by spies. Clubs don't make fully informed infallible decisions based on 100% absolute information. Rumours of dirt become self-perpetuating and I'm his case they caused him to fall - at some point those drafting start thinking like you do "s**t, if no one else is picking him it must be bad"...

He was/is an 18 year old kid from a tough background who is/was immature and make some poor judgements - especially in the company of some of his closest friends.

Hardly unsalvageable and I think some are missing the point as to how good this kid is and can become. His ball use is better than Yarrans; he can kick goals and he is a mid. He can be in the best couple at an AFL club IF he realises his potential .... we couldn't take that punt because why? What's the worst that happens if he didn't progress?
 
The Falcon Strike said:
Wasn't the passing on Jetta just a talent/form issue? I.e he was fringe at best so was around the mark but hardly screaming pick me.

Pavlich was also passed over from memory in his first draft.

Everyone in the country knew Garlett was a top 10 talent..... if clubs can have blokes convicted of assaults on their books and convicted druggies on their books....
Click to expand...

Not many clubs will draft a palyer they know is a druggie. Also, as crazy as it sounds, being convicted of assault doesn't actually alter your ability to play football. Drinking, smoking, and being unable to not go out on the turps when you are hopeful of getting drafted might indicate you don't want it enough to take the opportunity seriously.

Even after the "wake up call" of not getting drafted he still didn't get his act together:

Garlett, touted as a top-10 draft pick on talent, was overlooked in last year's AFL national, rookie and pre-season drafts amid concerns over his lifestyle.
Despite pledging to "knuckle down" in a December interview with _The Weekend West, _ Garlett arrived at Swan Districts for training last month a long way off the club's fitness standards.
Click to expand...

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/wafl/16373447/harding-keeps-faith-in-garlett-newman/

I'm not saying I wouldn't love him at the club, but for people to imply the club dropped the ball with not drafting him last year is pretty harsh.
 
the harry said:
Not many clubs will draft a palyer they know is a druggie. Also, as crazy as it sounds, being convicted of assault doesn't actually alter your ability to play football. Drinking, smoking, and being unable to not go out on the turps when you are hopeful of getting drafted might indicate you don't want it enough to take the opportunity seriously.

Even after the "wake up call" of not getting drafted he still didn't get his act together:



http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/wafl/16373447/harding-keeps-faith-in-garlett-newman/

I'm not saying I wouldn't love him at the club, but for people to imply the club dropped the ball with not drafting him last year is pretty harsh.
Click to expand...


It's not a matter of "dropping the ball" - we didn't save pick 15 or whatever.

As I asked earlier, if we'd used our last rookie pick on him what was the downside? I mean what was the worst thing that happens if he didn't turn things around?
 
Eagle87 said:
Because we pick guys in the draft/especially the rookie list solely based on character?

Isn't the idea to use the rookie list for project type players? Isn't a guy with loads of talent but some off field issues just as much a project as a straight arrow who can't kick?

Much (but not all of the flak re Garlett) came out very late in the piece and it wasn't like he was followed around by spies. Clubs don't make fully informed infallible decisions based on 100% absolute information. Rumours of dirt become self-perpetuating and I'm his case they caused him to fall - at some point those drafting start thinking like you do "s**t, if no one else is picking him it must be bad"...

He was/is an 18 year old kid from a tough background who is/was immature and make some poor judgements - especially in the company of some of his closest friends.

Hardly unsalvageable and I think some are missing the point as to how good this kid is and can become. His ball use is better than Yarrans; he can kick goals and he is a mid. He can be in the best couple at an AFL club IF he realises his potential .... we couldn't take that punt because why? What's the worst that happens if he didn't progress?
Click to expand...

Much of what you say makes logical sense - however football clubs dont just operate in a vacuum based on potential anymore, especially WC who are now strongly "principle driven", since the happenings 6-7 years ago.

Apart from the fact that they he was a known party boy, the real issue is he simply didnt take his football seriously which was not only portrayed in his demeanor and application, but also in his interviews. Recruiters are well known to each other and whilst some topics are obviously kept in house, others funnily enough are discussed quite openly. Suffice to say, Garlett didnt present himself well in an interview and that was well known amongst clubs who were actively looking for a reason NOT to draft him. I am aware that one club with a particularly strong leadership group and strong indigenous support group, actually spoke with their club about Dayle Garlett prior to the draft.

WC were (and probably still are ) well aware of what Garlett can bring to the football field but at the time they werent confident that would ever be realized, and believed the negatives outweighed the positives.
 
Eagle87 said:
It's not a matter of "dropping the ball" - we didn't save pick 15 or whatever.

As I asked earlier, if we'd used our last rookie pick on him what was the downside? I mean what was the worst thing that happens if he didn't turn things around?
Click to expand...

I mentioned earlier that, even though they spend considerable time together as is, having Newman and Garlett at the same club could magnify the risk of one or both not taking it all seriously. Suddenly then it becomes a risk not only of a rookie pic, but also a frist rounder from the previous year.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

the harry said:
I mentioned earlier that, even though they spend considerable time together as is, having Newman and Garlett at the same club could magnify the risk of one or both not taking it all seriously. Suddenly then it becomes a risk not only of a rookie pic, but also a frist rounder from the previous year.
Click to expand...

I'd argue having them both on the payroll makes the issue of their friendship easier to handle rather than harder......

Garlett at 80+ rookie pick is no risk of anything. The damage Newmans done to himself was before the rookie draft....

We can all create possible negatives but this is a Top 10 talent who was available almost 200 picks after that
 
BOND 007 said:
Much of what you say makes logical sense - however football clubs dont just operate in a vacuum based on potential anymore, especially WC who are now strongly "principle driven", since the happenings 6-7 years ago.

Apart from the fact that they he was a known party boy, the real issue is he simply didnt take his football seriously which was not only portrayed in his demeanor and application, but also in his interviews. Recruiters are well known to each other and whilst some topics are obviously kept in house, others funnily enough are discussed quite openly. Suffice to say, Garlett didnt present himself well in an interview and that was well known amongst clubs who were actively looking for a reason NOT to draft him. I am aware that one club with a particularly strong leadership group and strong indigenous support group, actually spoke with their club about Dayle Garlett prior to the draft.

WC were (and probably still are ) well aware of what Garlett can bring to the football field but at the time they werent confident that would ever be realized, and believed the negatives outweighed the positives.
Click to expand...

I'm well aware clubs don't operate in a vacuum. I already raised the comparison with the NFL in the states where annually their are highly rated talents who fall based on off-field matters. The difference is clubs will eventually pick them in later rounds based on talent on a risk/reward basis...

The Patriots are regarded as a character club, with strong leadership and culture and therefore prepared to take on some flakier characters as they believe the culture will assist them...

Aaron Hernandez had a party boy reputation and misdemeanour drug possession and he dropped to about the 4th round as a result. NE picked him based on the possible reward (great talent) v the risk (loved weed)...

That's what organisations who operate in a genuinely professional, corporate, business like environment do. The AFL is relatively amateur hour by comparison.

I understand the arguments against. I just think they aren't arguments that stack up. This is a bloke who could be elite as a mid and he was available, basically, for free.... and we (and others) squibbed it for some pretty quaint reasons.
 
Eagle87 said:
The Patriots are regarded as a character club, with strong leadership and culture and therefore prepared to take on some flakier characters as they believe the culture will assist them.... and we (and others) squibbed it for some pretty quaint reasons.
Click to expand...

Can we lay claim to having a strong culture?

Are there any sanctions hanging over heads from the good old days?
 
Marlin01 said:
Can we lay claim to having a strong culture?

Are there any sanctions hanging over heads from the good old days?
Click to expand...

The Patriots have built that rep over a decade....

We've been a very different club since 2007. I'd argue we have been an off field trendsetter since then - thats 5+ years. It's a strong culture now as regards behaviour and accountability.

The sanctions were lifted 4.5 years ago:
http://news.smh.com.au/sport/afl-lifts-sanctions-threat-on-eagles-20081202-6poe.html
 
Eagle87 said:
I'd argue having them both on the payroll makes the issue of their friendship easier to handle rather than harder......

Garlett at 80+ rookie pick is no risk of anything. The damage Newmans done to himself was before the rookie draft....

We can all create possible negatives but this is a Top 10 talent who was available almost 200 picks after that
Click to expand...
Can you set out your qualifications in football so I can understand if your strident claims as to what football professionals should have done holds much weight!
 
Happy Mastenator said:
Can you set out your qualifications in football so I can understand if your strident claims as to what football professionals should have done holds much weight!
Click to expand...

What a genuinely bizarre response.

I run businesses in 3 countries and now employ in excess of 100 people directly. I have been making judgement calls on people and on risk/reward issues for many years. I have worked with the WAFC in the recent past and am on close terms with 3 former Board members at West Coast and I am good friends with several premiership players at our club.

How about you?

FWIW I reckon its been a good discussion and I do understand those who agree with the clubs stance. I just see a lost opportunity and its such a potentially huge win I reckon we should have taken said opportunity.
 
Eagle87 said:
What a genuinely bizarre response.

I run businesses in 3 countries and now employ in excess of 100 people directly. I have been making judgement calls on people and on risk/reward issues for many years. I have worked with the WAFC in the recent past and am on close terms with 3 former Board members at West Coast and I am good friends with several premiership players at our club.

How about you?

FWIW I reckon its been a good discussion and I do understand those who agree with the clubs stance. I just see a lost opportunity and its such a potentially huge win I reckon we should have taken said opportunity.
Click to expand...
I ask because I'm wondering what insight you have above those heavily involved in the process. I still think without inside knowledge of all that was going in with him it's impossible to second guess them.
 
Happy Mastenator said:
I ask because I'm wondering what insight you have above those heavily involved in the process. I still think without inside knowledge of all that was going in with him it's impossible to second guess them.
Click to expand...

Define "inside knowledge"? I've got a couple of very good friends who have a lot of serious contacts at Swans. One was a former coach. I don't think there's too many stories about Garlett that haven't been pretty widely circulated in footy circles.

The issue is whether narrow thinking types making drafting decisions (together with some administrators) ruled out someone super talented based on flawed criteria. Maybe not, just wish he was a rookie for us...
 
Eagle87 said:
What a genuinely bizarre response.

I run businesses in 3 countries and now employ in excess of 100 people directly. I have been making judgement calls on people and on risk/reward issues for many years. I have worked with the WAFC in the recent past and am on close terms with 3 former Board members at West Coast and I am good friends with several premiership players at our club.

How about you?

FWIW I reckon its been a good discussion and I do understand those who agree with the clubs stance. I just see a lost opportunity and its such a potentially huge win I reckon we should have taken said opportunity.
Click to expand...

I am presuming you are in private enterprise where the cost of a 'mistake' is generally easily solved and with a minimum of fuss. Unfortunately WC operate in the public eye & with where they have come from, they simply didn't need the issues that were likely to come with Garlett & have to explain that to supporters, sponsors & indeed the general public when it was known beforehand.
As a person who has operated with the WAFC you of all people should know how public perception drives policy at this level of hierarchy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top