Opinion Do you have confidence in Chris Scott and the coaching staff?

[ATSAM]

No I don't. Mid group have not developed, and older players -who by the way are not that old- don't look interested and there is no on field leadership other than Selwood playing like a maniac for one game. And CS told us for three years that 2015 was -not sure of the words- our year/ winning the next GF.
Now we know that not only won't it be but we probably won't make the 8.

 

[CatAttack84]

^ That's it in a nutshell.

 

[AM]

Seriously, we don't have the cattle. This was THE youngest team Scott has coached at Geelong in 5 1/4 years.

At some stage this year this young group will gel and we'll start winning more than we lose

Shhh! Common sense is not wanted here.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

You always make very informed and useful comments. Nothing wrong with showing your passion.
You have your points, I have mine. Not in any order,
1.I object to the junior footy reference for obvious reasons.

It's very simple. Players are taught to maintain their position and not just chase the ball at all costs back in Auskick, which is why they get bibs with certain positions on them. If you're offended by that, well, I'm not sure what to tell you.

2. Waite was recruited to help their assault on the top 4 for he next 2 years, BS believes he will assist their flag aspirations. What is your point about Waite being 32?

That we were beaten by a team 'on the way up'. Looked like it was Nahas, Waite, Thompson, Goldstein, Swallow, Harvey...even Firrito had his moments and Wright played a blinder. Not the players that we would expect to be considered when talking about 'on the up'.

3. Those Geelong players you refer to are just not that good. What is so hard to accept ? If you are referring to Guthrie, Duncan, Motlop, Caddy, GHS, can I presume that?
Of that group, only Guthrie looks the goods. I fear the rest will never be the A graders we would like them to be. Time is on their sides though, and we have a well established development of players at Geelong.

Well, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. Duncan has gone ninth (at age 20-21), ninth (21-22), third (22-23) in Geelong's B&F since playing in the 2011 premiership. I don't see why we wouldn't/shouldn't expect and demand a lot from him as approaches the midway point of his career.

Motlop made an AA squad at age 22, was in blistering form the following year when he wasn't hampered by injuries, or coming back from injuries and has been quite solid this year, his off field indiscretion aside. He gets a pass and no, I certainly don't accept that he is 'just not that good'. In fact, I think that's an absolutely absurd statement.

As for Caddy, time will tell, but, as with Stanley, we've paid a pretty high price for someone that I'm apparently placing unfair expectations on.

I think the problem with expecting people like me to 'just face it, our younger players are ordinary' is that I'm told time and again that Stephen Wells is a genius and that our player development is amazing. And I'm pretty sure that if our younger players are indeed plodders, that would have to mean that Wells isn't a genius and/or our list development isn't so crash hot.

 

[kicksome]

I'm concerned, what's the plan ?

Handball to someone standing still who will get pinged ?

correct. Then if we manage to get it forward - bomb it to the top of the goalsquare where hawkins is outnumbered and we have no crumbing small forwards.
No I do not have faith in chris scott

 

[THE CAT WRANGLER]

No faith has not developed Duncan,Caddy,a ruck,

Blitz is the only player to improve

Football careers stagnated like Smedts,Kersten.

 

[DangerHere]

correct. Then if we manage to get it forward - bomb it to the top of the goalsquare where hawkins is outnumbered and we have no crumbing small forwards.
No I do not have faith in chris scott

Mission Accomplished !

 

[strauchnyy]

No.

And not just our coaching staff, but list management staff.

Here is a post i made in the NM review thread.

Our current problems can be categorized into the following 2:

1. lack of high draft picks/poor recruitment and list management

Lack of high draft picks has left us dry for top end talent, which has only resulted from our success. So this is the problem I am the least losing sleep over. I.e. it's not our fault. Injuries to Menzel and Vardy have been significant. However the following list management blunders have cost us big time:

- Recruitment of McIntosh. injury prone ruck on high salary that played 8 games in 2 years was hardly a good decision. This recruitment also caused our blunder of not drafting Grundy. Before I get attacked, I recognise Thurlow is showing promise, but Grundy is going to be a premier ruckman and is starting to show it and it is a lot easier to find a hbf. As promising as Thurlow is, no rational follower of AFL would choose him over Grundy right now, especially given our insipid ruck.

- Not signing Chappy to another year was a mistake. Burbury (replacement) lasted 1 year anyway. We signed Enright, we shouldve signed Chappy.

- Failure to go out and trade for a number 1 ruck when it is as clear as day that it is causing us massive problems on field. Stanley was/is never going to be a no.1 ruck.

- Failure to go out and hunt for a contested winning midfielder.

- Our soft trading approach (Taylor Hunt, Chappy, Pod, Christensen, West all for NOTHING is absolutly putrid.) No other team acts as a charity the way we do. While other clubs are ruthless (pies, hawks etc), we are giving away players for free and trading Pick 21 for Stanley?? a second ruck when we already have that position covered? I wouldvnt have put Bundy before the team either.

How to improve this: No more soft trading, its time to be ruthless, go out and address on field weaknesses, chase out of contract players that can fill holes on our list YEARS in advance so we are in their ear like the hawks do. Trade out the dead would on our list like Murdoch and HS.

2. Poor coaching

This issue is more terminal for mine. Firstly, I don't care that Scott won a flag in his first year, he should be judged on a longer time scale and frankly, his coaching moves have been deplorable to say the least. Chappy as sub Vs freo in 13 (dafuq?), Failure to implement a game plan suitable to the players, failure to fix our weaknesses - its the same problems week in week out that cause us to lose games, failure to have structured and practiced plan Bs on match day and various positional fails week in week out - SJ sub for example.

The poor coaching also comes from the assistant coaches. Where is the development of duncan, Caddy, Guthrie, Motlop? It's non existent. HS and Murdoch? their best was in their first seasons and have fallen off a cliff. Why are out of form youngsters who are not deserving of games getting named each week and ultimately getting their confidence destroyed (kersten, Murdoch and now Cockatoo?).

Scott and these assistant coaches are feeding off the success of Bomber, Hinkley, McCartney and have hardly any runs on the board.

Our continious failure to address and improve on field weaknesses, our failure to implement a sustainable game plan, our stagnant development in young players and the fact that our players are not playing for each other as a team are a direct result of our horrible coaching staff.

How to improve this: Do what the best teams do and go out and poach the best teachers of the game from rival clubs. Galvanise the younger playing group so they can begin playing for each other. Maybe that leadership program we did in 2006. I would get the best coaches to support Scott and give him a chance. If the same problems exist in 2016, it's thank you and goodbye scotty.

 

[Cosmic Energy]

I don't buy that. That's dumb football, junior footy stuff. Everyone desperately chasing the ball carrier and ignoring everything else. It's a standard drill at training, draw the extra defender and then get it off to your teammate, that is subsequently in the clear. It happened constantly. And if the coach isn't responsible for that, I'd like to know what he is responsible for.

I was pondering that a little bit yesterday, quite a few chains where North could handball over the top to a free guy who would do the same until they got it to a guy had a lot of space in front of them to deliver inside 50 etc. I was thinking it is more a fitness/effort thing than a technique/coaching thing. The really young guys probably can't be expected to run to defend those passages all day long, and unfortunately there's a couple of older guys who don't always put in the effort either. Sometimes it's easier to run in and stick your hand up or bump a guy after he gets rid of it than it is to run hard to cover where there ball is going. You can 'appear' to be applying pressure when you're not really. Motlop needs to improve that area of his game, very one way at the moment, has much slower teammates sprinting past him to apply pressure, not a good look. There were a couple of broken tackles that lead to those passages as well, again maybe more a fitness/strength/attitude issue than a coaching technique one perhaps.

Although obviously the coach absolutely has control of the attitude of the group, and in that regard I'm seeing a team that seems less willing to put itself in harms way to benefit the team than in past years. Maybe its because we don't believe we're really in it this year, so perhaps some guys are thinking they'd rather live to fight another day. Also on the weekend we were undisciplined team at times. I would like to occasionally see some public comments from Chris that are designed to sting a couple of guys into action in that regard. He does tend to go glass half full all the time, in public at least. That's obviously designed to convey a sense of calm & unity, and he certainly does that when he speaks. You'd think he would deliver the necessary feedback privately, but coaching does require a bit of PR where you need to be seen to be addressing the concerns of your supporters, whether you think they are ill-informed or not.

It'll be interesting watching this year.

 

[Topper]

Scott needs to put his ego aside and admit to a rebuild, a full rebuild. Not a half rebuild while still trying to contend, that's just going to hurt us for many many years. It's just bullsh1t and arrogance for Scott to think that way

Get used to the fact we'll be down the bottom for a few years, get some decent draft picks and go again in about 4 years.

 

[mcwilrob]

No.

And not just our coaching staff, but list management staff.

Here is a post i made in the NM review thread.

Our current problems can be categorized into the following 2:

1. lack of high draft picks/poor recruitment and list management

Lack of high draft picks has left us dry for top end talent, which has only resulted from our success. So this is the problem I am the least losing sleep over. I.e. it's not our fault. Injuries to Menzel and Vardy have been significant. However the following list management blunders have cost us big time:

- Recruitment of McIntosh. injury prone ruck on high salary that played 8 games in 2 years was hardly a good decision. This recruitment also caused our blunder of not drafting Grundy. Before I get attacked, I recognise Thurlow is showing promise, but Grundy is going to be a premier ruckman and is starting to show it and it is a lot easier to find a hbf. As promising as Thurlow is, no rational follower of AFL would choose him over Grundy right now, especially given our insipid ruck.

- Not signing Chappy to another year was a mistake. Burbury (replacement) lasted 1 year anyway. We signed Enright, we shouldve signed Chappy.

- Failure to go out and trade for a number 1 ruck when it is as clear as day that it is causing us massive problems on field. Stanley was/is never going to be a no.1 ruck.

- Failure to go out and hunt for a contested winning midfielder.

- Our soft trading approach (Taylor Hunt, Chappy, Pod, Christensen, West all for NOTHING is absolutly putrid.) No other team acts as a charity the way we do. While other clubs are ruthless (pies, hawks etc), we are giving away players for free and trading Pick 21 for Stanley?? a second ruck when we already have that position covered? I wouldvnt have put Bundy before the team either.

How to improve this: No more soft trading, its time to be ruthless, go out and address on field weaknesses, chase out of contract players that can fill holes on our list YEARS in advance so we are in their ear like the hawks do. Trade out the dead would on our list like Murdoch and HS.

2. Poor coaching

This issue is more terminal for mine. Firstly, I don't care that Scott won a flag in his first year, he should be judged on a longer time scale and frankly, his coaching moves have been deplorable to say the least. Chappy as sub Vs freo in 13 (dafuq?), Failure to implement a game plan suitable to the players, failure to fix our weaknesses - its the same problems week in week out that cause us to lose games, failure to have structured and practiced plan Bs on match day and various positional fails week in week out - SJ sub for example.

The poor coaching also comes from the assistant coaches. Where is the development of duncan, Caddy, Guthrie, Motlop? It's non existent. HS and Murdoch? their best was in their first seasons and have fallen off a cliff. Why are out of form youngsters who are not deserving of games getting named each week and ultimately getting their confidence destroyed (kersten, Murdoch and now Cockatoo?).

Scott and these assistant coaches are feeding off the success of Bomber, Hinkley, McCartney and have hardly any runs on the board.

Our continious failure to address and improve on field weaknesses, our failure to implement a sustainable game plan, our stagnant development in young players and the fact that our players are not playing for each other as a team are a direct result of our horrible coaching staff.

How to improve this: Do what the best teams do and go out and poach the best teachers of the game from rival clubs. Galvanise the younger playing group so they can begin playing for each other. Maybe that leadership program we did in 2006. I would get the best coaches to support Scott and give him a chance. If the same problems exist in 2016, it's thank you and goodbye scotty.

This

 

[Partridge]

Scott needs to put his ego aside and admit to a rebuild, a full rebuild. Not a half rebuild while still trying to contend, that's just going to hurt us for many many years. It's just bullsh1t and arrogance for Scott to think that way

Get used to the fact we'll be down the bottom for a few years, get some decent draft picks and go again in about 4 years.

Strangely enough, they're the two words I think of when I see Scott's press conferences now. I haven't watched yesterday's yet, I'm sure it's of the same high standard.

 

[catempire]

1. lack of high draft picks/poor recruitment and list management

Lack of high draft picks has left us dry for top end talent, which has only resulted from our success. So this is the problem I am the least losing sleep over. I.e. it's not our fault. Injuries to Menzel and Vardy have been significant. However the following list management blunders have cost us big time:

- Recruitment of McIntosh. injury prone ruck on high salary that played 8 games in 2 years was hardly a good decision. This recruitment also caused our blunder of not drafting Grundy. Before I get attacked, I recognise Thurlow is showing promise, but Grundy is going to be a premier ruckman and is starting to show it and it is a lot easier to find a hbf. As promising as Thurlow is, no rational follower of AFL would choose him over Grundy right now, especially given our insipid ruck.

- Not signing Chappy to another year was a mistake. Burbury (replacement) lasted 1 year anyway. We signed Enright, we shouldve signed Chappy.

- Failure to go out and trade for a number 1 ruck when it is as clear as day that it is causing us massive problems on field. Stanley was/is never going to be a no.1 ruck.

- Failure to go out and hunt for a contested winning midfielder.

- Our soft trading approach (Taylor Hunt, Chappy, Pod, Christensen, West all for NOTHING is absolutly putrid.) No other team acts as a charity the way we do. While other clubs are ruthless (pies, hawks etc), we are giving away players for free and trading Pick 21 for Stanley?? a second ruck when we already have that position covered? I wouldvnt have put Bundy before the team either.

How to improve this: No more soft trading, its time to be ruthless, go out and address on field weaknesses, chase out of contract players that can fill holes on our list YEARS in advance so we are in their ear like the hawks do. Trade out the dead would on our list like Murdoch and HS.

A lot of this is a snowball effect with the ruck situation.

At the end of 2011 when Otto retired we had West and Simpson who looked promising but Simpson looked raw so we also brought in Stephenson. Stephenson actually showed a bit but was squeezed out at the end of that season because of list spot squeeze. Simpson debuted and West battled on.

We knew we weren't going to be able to compete for a flag with West and Simpson so at the end of 2012 we added McIntosh. This was terrible trading strategy and I would argue is central to our ruck woes even to this day because everything else has hinged off it. He didn't play a game in his first year which meant everything had to go right since to make it worthwhile and it has been far from that. At the same time, this was the draft year for Grundy/Thurlow - given we brought in McIntosh and we already had West, Simpson and Vardy we were never any chance to draft Grundy (as an aside, I'm very happy with Thurlow anyway).

So in 2013, with McIntosh sidelined, we had West leading the way for most of the year until Simpson comes in mid way through and has a break-out of sorts. In 5 games he amasses about 170 hitouts, gets 13 or more possessions 3 times and is marking the ball around the ground. Finally we appear to have our number 1 to which West can play second fiddle. What happens? Simpson hurts his knee in the sixth game and at that moment I texted a friend saying "Simpson knee - there goes our season".

Vardy stepped up in that same game Simpson was injured and played one of his best for the club. He went on to play 10 games which looked promising given his previous hip troubles. We also uncovered Blicavs who I don't think we ever planned to ruck but he surprised on the upside and was preferred toward the end of the year when patience was lost with West who was a serviceable ruckmen but wasn't going to be the long term #1 answer.

We come to draft/trade time 2013 and we have McIntosh, West, Vardy and Simpson. Simpson looks like if he can recover from his knee he will be great. Vardy showed glimpses. And McIntosh still had 2 years to go on his contract. West looked surplus and when Brisbane came knocking we really had no choice but to wave goodbye given we went with Vardy and Blicavs over him in the recent finals series anyway. We took Jake Kolodjashnij with the pick received for West, by the way.

In 2014, Vardy does his knee pre-season but McIntosh finally plays and at the mid-way point of the season is looking OK. He's probably averaging about 25 hitouts and 15 possessions. We also have Simpson who comes in and racks up the hitouts. But Simpson is clearly less mobile than he was pre-knee injury. He hardly touches the ball around the ground and is averaging about 2 marks a game. He ends up re-injuring his back and that's that.

We get to the end of 2014 and McIntosh is STILL contracted, Simpson is on his final chance (we still pine for 2013 form) and Vardy is in no-mans land with knee recovery. Blicavs is still improving but is clearly a stop-gap. Pick 21 lands in our lap. I've got no doubt we decided we would get the best available ruckman with that pick, be it trade or draft. We dangled it before St Kilda and they gave us Stanley. The story goes that the guy who got him to St Kilda thinks he's a ruckman who has been played out of position at the Saints and he can flourish there with us.

So here we are in 2015. McIntosh and Simpson look washed up and barring some miracle will be gone at season's end. It's early days with Stanley but we now must persist. With two ruck spots freed up at the end of the year we can have another dip. Finally the weight of the McIntosh recruiting mistake will be lifted and we can try to fix the problem properly. First criteria on the list is a ruckman who can stay on the park for 20+ games a year.

 

[Partridge]

I was pondering that a little bit yesterday, quite a few chains where North could handball over the top to a free guy who would do the same until they got it to a guy had a lot of space in front of them to deliver inside 50 etc. I was thinking it is more a fitness/effort thing than a technique/coaching thing. The really young guys probably can't be expected to run to defend those passages all day long, and unfortunately there's a couple of older guys who don't always put in the effort either. Sometimes it's easier to run in and stick your hand up or bump a guy after he gets rid of it than it is to run hard to cover where there ball is going. You can 'appear' to be applying pressure when you're not really. Motlop needs to improve that area of his game, very one way at the moment, has much slower teammates sprinting past him to apply pressure, not a good look. There were a couple of broken tackles that lead to those passages as well, again maybe more a fitness/strength/attitude issue than a coaching technique one perhaps.

Well said, good observation. For the part in bolded, my response would be something like this:

THEN THOSE PLAYERS SHOULDN'T BE OUT THERE.

If you're too young, and you haven't built that finish, then you don't play. You build it in the VFL. If you're too old, and you can't be bothered, then you don't play. You either play VFL or find another job.

The club really needs to find some steel and stop being a charity.

 

[Partridge]

So in 2013, with McIntosh sidelined, we had West leading the way for most of the year until Simpson comes in mid way through and has a break-out of sorts. In 5 games he amasses about 170 hitouts, gets 13 or more possessions 3 times and is marking the ball around the ground. Finally we appear to have our number 1 to which West can play second fiddle. What happens? Simpson hurts his knee in the sixth game and at that moment I texted a friend saying "Simpson knee - there goes our season".

And ironically (or not, given what we know now about Scott), the ideal ruck combination for us that year - Simpson first ruck, West second ruck - took the field exactly 0 times.

We come to draft/trade time 2013 and we have McIntosh, West, Vardy and Simpson. Simpson looks like if he can recover from his knee he will be great. Vardy showed glimpses. And McIntosh still had 2 years to go on his contract. West looked surplus and when Brisbane came knocking we really had no choice but to wave goodbye given we went with Vardy and Blicavs over him in the recent finals series anyway. We took Jake Kolodjashnij with the pick received for West, by the way.

True, but it must be said in the games with the Vardy / Blicavs combation our rucks got annihilated pretty frequently too.

Great summation though, and the crux of it - recruiting an already damaged McIntosh - has just devastated a key area of the ground for us. We've now got both McIntosh and Simpson fit, and they won't play either. What does that tell you?

 

[Partridge]

1. lack of high draft picks/poor recruitment and list management

Lack of high draft picks has left us dry for top end talent, which has only resulted from our success. So this is the problem I am the least losing sleep over. I.e. it's not our fault. Injuries to Menzel and Vardy have been significant.

Yes and no. It's not our fault for one injury. When Menzel is retained year after year it's a lot more like bad management than bad luck. Vardy was not a high draft pick either.

 

[catempire]

And ironically (or not, given what we know now about Scott), the ideal ruck combination for us that year - Simpson first ruck, West second ruck - took the field exactly 0 times.

For memory they gave West a "rest" and allowed Simpson to play in the middle of that year. Not sure why but West didn't play again until after Simpson did his knee.

True, but it must be said in the games with the Vardy / Blicavs combation our rucks got annihilated pretty frequently too.

They did. But at that point, having just said to West that they prefer two part timers over him, they couldn't deny him a trade.

We've now got both McIntosh and Simpson fit, and they won't play either. What does that tell you?

Tells me they have had enough of them.

 

[Bobby_]

Before I get attacked, I recognise Thurlow is showing promise, but Grundy is going to be a premier ruckman and is starting to show it and it is a lot easier to find a hbf. As promising as Thurlow is, no rational follower of AFL would choose him over Grundy right now, especially given our insipid ruck.

The poor coaching also comes from the assistant coaches. Where is the development of duncan, Caddy, Guthrie, Motlop? It's non existent. HS and Murdoch? their best was in their first seasons and have fallen off a cliff.

Thurlow looks a rippa though. I can understand your reasoning for wanting a quality ruck, though Grundy looks like he will only ever be an average ruckman, but the recruitment of Thurlow is turning out to be a much needed acquisition given the slow decline of Mackie, and to a lesser degree, Boris.

The one which obviously hurt was losing Mumford to Sydney back in 2009. But then again, would he have improved to the level he did when he went to Sydney?
Sydney are notorious for turning players careers right around.
His breakout season for us, he wasn't able to run out games, but no doubt he always showed great toughness, and a desire to get down and dirty which is what made Ottens such a wonderful ruckman.

There have been a few rucks hit the draft after McIntosh and Simpson looked to be forced into early retirements due to continuing injury.
From Apeness, Leslie, Lobb, Nankervis, Aliir, Brown, Wright, Dear, Frampton, Pittonet.
As is usually the case with young rucks, they take so long before you do start to see any consistency.

The other part of your post in regards to the development of our players, has Chris Scott lost the faith of some of those players?
For example, Duncan's omission from the leadership group has seen him looking rather lackluster to start the year.

 

[Cosmic Energy]

Well said, good observation. For the part in bolded, my response would be something like this:

THEN THOSE PLAYERS SHOULDN'T BE OUT THERE.

If you're too young, and you haven't built that finish, then you don't play. You build it in the VFL. If you're too old, and you can't be bothered, then you don't play. You either play VFL or find another job.

The club really needs to find some steel and stop being a charity.

Well said, good observation. For the part in bolded, my response would be something like this:

THEN THOSE PLAYERS SHOULDN'T BE OUT THERE.

If you're too young, and you haven't built that finish, then you don't play. You build it in the VFL. If you're too old, and you can't be bothered, then you don't play. You either play VFL or find another job.

The club really needs to find some steel and stop being a charity.

Sometimes too it can be just the flow of the game, we had a few energy-sapping missed shots at goal, costly turnovers, & free-kicks against (some dubious) I guess only the very strong willed keep giving their all & chasing hard for the entire game under those circumstances. At the moment we're the sort of team that needs to make the most of every chance or we do end up chasing tail for a lot of the game.

But yeah watching a bit of the Port v Hawks game I thought I just couldn't see our team running out a game like that at the moment, we just don't seem to have that running power to break lines going forward or cover the space going the other way. It wouldn't be such an issue if we could win the ball more often and retain it but we're struggling there also, all over the ground. You think could Murdoch for example be playing like Smith or Polec (to pick a couple of pacy hard running left footers) if we won more of the ball and he had a bit of space to work in? How would those two go in our team at the moment?

 

[cynical]

there is no clear direction, which means those at the top have no idea what they are doing

Chris Scott is a reactive coach not a proactive one

The main problem right now is a lot of our kids seem to be going backwards. Duncan, Caddy, GHS, Guthrie, Murdoch all seem to be a lot worse than last year.

 

[Whit3y]

And ironically (or not, given what we know now about Scott), the ideal ruck combination for us that year - Simpson first ruck, West second ruck - took the field exactly 0 times.



True, but it must be said in the games with the Vardy / Blicavs combation our rucks got annihilated pretty frequently too.

Great summation though, and the crux of it - recruiting an already damaged McIntosh - has just devastated a key area of the ground for us. We've now got both McIntosh and Simpson fit, and they won't play either. What does that tell you?

west was a serviceable #1 ruckman and a very handy backup ruckman, the fact he wasnt on par with ottens was his undoing.

i wonder now in hindsight if we could have found a way to give mumford a better offer?

 

[Partridge]

west was a serviceable #1 ruckman and a very handy backup ruckman, the fact he wasnt on par with ottens was his undoing.

i wonder now in hindsight if we could have found a way to give mumford a better offer?

Mumford was too long ago, and the fact that he has since walked out on Sydney means he may not have hung around that long anyway. Not to mention that he wasn't anywhere near as good at Geelong (and he wasn't), we weren't necessarily going to miss him when he left (and we didn't, and won another flag), and there are too many variables.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yes and no. It's not our fault for one injury. When Menzel is retained year after year it's a lot more like bad management than bad luck. Vardy was not a high draft pick either.

This argument again...

Couldn't disagree more, but you already know that...

 

[Lana]

Thurlow looks a rippa though. I can understand your reasoning for wanting a quality ruck, though Grundy looks like he will only ever be an average ruckman, but the recruitment of Thurlow is turning out to be a much needed acquisition given the slow decline of Mackie, and to a lesser degree, Boris.

The one which obviously hurt was losing Mumford to Sydney back in 2009. But then again, would he have improved to the level he did when he went to Sydney?
Sydney are notorious for turning players careers right around.
His breakout season for us, he wasn't able to run out games, but no doubt he always showed great toughness, and a desire to get down and dirty which is what made Ottens such a wonderful ruckman.

There have been a few rucks hit the draft after McIntosh and Simpson looked to be forced into early retirements due to continuing injury.
From Apeness, Leslie, Lobb, Nankervis, Aliir, Brown, Wright, Dear, Frampton, Pittonet.
As is usually the case with young rucks, they take so long before you do start to see any consistency.

The other part of your post in regards to the development of our players, has Chris Scott lost the faith of some of those players?
For example, Duncan's omission from the leadership group has seen him looking rather lackluster to start the year.

Half of those aren't even ruckmen. And three of the other four are no better prospects then Read.

 

[Partridge]

This argument again...

Couldn't disagree more, but you already know that...

When he comes back and justifies the faith shown you'll be correct.