Our recycled four

[LondonBulldog]

You need to look up the word "fact". Goodes wasn't recycled, and Stevens was head hunted, he was no more recycled than Crameri. Young and Lower are the only players that can be claimed to have been recycled.
The real facts are that, that draft was extremely shallow and we decided to find some role players (Goodes and Lower) and a couple of non-traditional long-term prospects (Stevens and Young). Lower, Goodes and Stevens worked out okay and Young didn't. No harm done really.

Last time I checked in footy terms, recycled means played for another AFL club first. Young, Lower and Stevens all did, granted your right with Goodes. Anyway your arguing about a technically. You are happy with the four players taking spots on the list, of which 3 are now gone.
I'm not, believed it was poor by the club and the time and still do now.
Extremely shallow draft. There are potential players everywhere, open your eyes look at some of the successful rookie of that year. Lower we had plenty of players of his type, Young was never going to be quick enough for AFL. All poor decisions in my mind. The clubs that make the least amount of bad decision are successful. If your so happy with all the clubs decisions why have we spent 3 year down the bottom.

 

[Butane]

We're not in a court of law, i don't think we need to have a pedantic argument about what recycled players mean. We all understand what we're talking about when we say Goodes was a (very)mature aged player and Young, Stevens and Lower were 'recycled' because they were unwanted by other clubs.

 

[immortalmike]

Last time I checked in footy terms, recycled means played for another AFL club first. Young, Lower and Stevens all did, granted your right with Goodes. Anyway your arguing about a technically. You are happy with the four players taking spots on the list, of which 3 are now gone.
I'm not, believed it was poor by the club and the time and still do now.
Extremely shallow draft. There are potential players everywhere, open your eyes look at some of the successful rookie of that year. Lower we had plenty of players of his type, Young was never going to be quick enough for AFL. All poor decisions in my mind. The clubs that make the least amount of bad decision are successful. If your so happy with all the clubs decisions why have we spent 3 year down the bottom.

To answer your last question first. It takes longer than three years to build a list. Also at what stage have I said I was happy with all our list management decisions? What I said was if it was a mistake it was a relatively benign one, one made due to a sound strategy.
On the recycled players topic. By your logic Buddy is a recycled player, if that's cool with you I have nothing further to add.

 

[LondonBulldog]

To answer your last question first. It takes longer than three years to build a list. Also at what stage have I said I was happy with all our list management decisions? What I said was if it was a mistake it was a relatively benign one, one made due to a sound strategy.
On the recycled players topic. By your logic Buddy is a recycled player, if that's cool with you I have nothing further to add.

Gee you are a pedantic one aren't you. Recycled is players let go by another club, Buddy was not let go or neither was Crameri, little bit of a dumb argument don't you think?

 

[ErnieSigley]

So you do agree that our current predicament with our list is the responsibility of more than one person so the majority of the football department needs to be replaced to achieve the results you desire

Yes but no idea what you are trying to prove or why?

 

[lachy]

Yes but no idea what you are trying to prove or why?

Just clarifying your position Ernie.