News Shane Rogers has quit Carlton

[ShanDog]

Even now , the inordinate power and faith given to SOS by the board fills me with trepidation. If he fails to live up to his hype and half our recent recruits are busts, then this will just be more of the same. Can you imagine what will be written about sos in 3 years if Weitering turns out to be just average, that curnow is too slow, that mckay is not mobile enough, that Cuningham cant handle a tag, AND we recruited his son, who never got a game? Will history show that SOS was the problem or the board? Tail or Dog?

Someone has to be selected and equipped to do the job.

 

[thylacine60]

Which other Recruitment Team wouldn't have taken Weitering at 1? Imagine the hubbub if he had passed on Weitering?

 

[HBF]

Liam Jones is an explosive beast at training.

Thomas has runs on the board, Jones doesn't. And Dale's effort at the footy is miles ahead of Jones.

 

[HBF]

I don't get the Thomas hate here. In year one at the footy club he hadn't played for ages and he was always going to take time. Last year he got injured in the first minute. Yes he cost us alot, but he can seriously play.

 

[HBF]

Which other Recruitment Team wouldn't have taken Weitering at 1? Imagine the hubbub if he had passed on Weitering?

There was some talk towards the end of last season that Brisban would have taken Schache at #1.

 

[gbatman]

How on earth would you know what conversations took place in regards to the players not developing as expected?

Wasn't Hughes demoted early 2012? Sounds like they were asking questions to me.

You would have expected more substantial measures. It was like we seemed to think there was a problem but didn't take it seriously. We've only done something about the recruiting/management issues the last few years. Making Rogers the top guy may have been a small improvement. Most recruiters pick one or two competent players per year, the better ones tend to find ways to pick more.

 

[AceAndy]

I don't get the Thomas hate here. In year one at the footy club he hadn't played for ages and he was always going to take time. Last year he got injured in the first minute. Yes he cost us alot, but he can seriously play.

I dont get all the Daisy Thomas deal lovers that we see on this board. His best was five years ago and he is unlikely to go close to that in the next 2 years.

 

[TheCoach16]

The problem is that you are continually attacking this one deal. And yet the facts are out and are indisputable that the clowns that were running the club back then have made countless similarly bad deals for the club. You go from the Thomas deal, to the cloke deal if it ever happened, to the Warnock deal, to the renewal of list cloggers too many to mention, to the fact that we drafted half our list in the first place. These guys have(had) an indelible sense of their own superior judgement and an arrogance to go with it. THEY are the problem. Clear as day. Even now , the inordinate power and faith given to SOS by the board fills me with trepidation. If he fails to live up to his hype and half our recent recruits are busts, then this will just be more of the same. Can you imagine what will be written about sos in 3 years if Weitering turns out to be just average, that curnow is too slow, that mckay is not mobile enough, that Cuningham cant handle a tag, AND we recruited his son, who never got a game? Will history show that SOS was the problem or the board? Tail or Dog?

I'm not "attacking" anything, I'm expressing my disgust at the decision.

There isn't one person in the footy world that wouldn't have taken Weitering at pick 1.
But there was NO ONE in the footy world that wanted to sign Daisy for 700k a year. Except us.

That's the difference between best intentions and just a s**t decision.

 

[KnobHead]

I don't get the Thomas hate here. In year one at the footy club he hadn't played for ages and he was always going to take time. Last year he got injured in the first minute. Yes he cost us alot, but he can seriously play.

havent seen anyone say they hate Thomas, just supporters who thought it was a bad pick up at his price - hadn't been on the park for two years, very suspect ankle & we throw rolls Royce money at him.

and not Thomas' fault we paid him so high - good luck to him - but it was an extremely risky decision at the time which hasn't paid off. don't see why members can't question that.

if he came at $350 / $400 k, no problem

 

[ShanDog]

I dont get all the Daisy Thomas deal lovers that we see on this board. His best was five years ago and he is unlikely to go close to that in the next 2 years.

They are two seperate conversations (the deal that brought him here and his actual ability as footballer) which is why I think some people arc up a bit.

I don't think there are many who are happy about how much we paid to get him here, but a lot still think he has plenty to offer the club and can play.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

You would have expected more substantial measures. It was like we seemed to think there was a problem but didn't take it seriously. We've only done something about the recruiting/management issues the last few years. Making Rogers the top guy may have been a small improvement. Most recruiters pick one or two competent players per year, the better ones tend to find ways to pick more.

I was more replying in the context that Ratten as the one responsible for building and developing the list should have questioned things quicker.

Thank god Silvagni is responsible for all of that now and Bolton can just coach.

 

[AceAndy]

They are two seperate conversations (the deal that brought him here and his actual ability as footballer) which is why I think some people arc up a bit.

I don't think there are many who are happy about how much we paid to get him here, but a lot still think he has plenty to offer the club and can play.

I am not sure i am on the same page here Shan. Your statement that he can play seems at variance with his last two years here and his last year at Collingwood. While he was a player five years ago not sure it follows he still is.

 

[KnobHead]

Who is Shane Rogers??!!!!

Rogers started out as a musician writing musicals with a bloke called Hammerstein, like Pirates of the Penzance.

he then got bored & went solely, becoming a country & western singer / songwriter with great success. he loved the strumming of the guitar, & would team up with legends like Dolly Parton.

at this point, having conquered the music world, he decided to sail his talents into uncharted waters, broaden his horizons altogether. he moved to Western Australia and developed - then marketed - a beer simply named "Rodgers." mild tasting, great on a hot summers days.

he was last seen yesterday afternoon, at a 7/11, protesting against child labor

 

[Aphrodite]

Who is Shane Rogers??!!!!

Roy's brother.

Now time to get some new material sheesh!

 

[The Bighouse]

Funny how Macca has slipped under the radar here, been involved in a lot of decisions and escapes the critism as our main list / football manager over the journey.

As for Shane Rogers, think we should all tell our favourite story of Shane so we can become better acquainted with our former recruiter.
Mine: Drafting Patrick Cripps (and happily pre-casting our intentions pre-draft).

 

[KnaveyBlue]

Who recruited big bad bustling Bootsma?

 

[The Bighouse]

Who recruited big bad bustling Bootsma?

Think that was the last of the Wayne Hughes HR themed mock drafts (but Shane was 2IC).

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I am not sure i am on the same page here Shan. Your statement that he can play seems at variance with his last two years here and his last year at Collingwood. While he was a player five years ago not sure it follows he still is.

True. He still has the desperation and his experience is invaluable. Whether he has the athleticism, pace or kicking penetration is the issue. We are hoping so but haven't really seen it in our colours yet.

 

[TheCoach16]

Roy's brother.

Now time to get some new material sheesh!

I'm not doing schtick Aph, I seriously never heard of him before this thread.

But you have to admit, my question has prompted some imaginative and creative responses...

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The problem is that you are continually attacking this one deal. And yet the facts are out and are indisputable that the clowns that were running the club back then have made countless similarly bad deals for the club. You go from the Thomas deal, to the cloke deal if it ever happened, to the Warnock deal, to the renewal of list cloggers too many to mention, to the fact that we drafted half our list in the first place. These guys have(had) an indelible sense of their own superior judgement and an arrogance to go with it. THEY are the problem. Clear as day. Even now , the inordinate power and faith given to SOS by the board fills me with trepidation. If he fails to live up to his hype and half our recent recruits are busts, then this will just be more of the same. Can you imagine what will be written about sos in 3 years if Weitering turns out to be just average, that curnow is too slow, that mckay is not mobile enough, that Cuningham cant handle a tag, AND we recruited his son, who never got a game? Will history show that SOS was the problem or the board? Tail or Dog?

I don't really get where the board should come into this.

For a long time we are told that the board should not interfere in the football side of things and when they do they are roundly criticised for it. Yet, here we are saying the board are ultimately responsible for trades and if the guy hired to manage the list mucks it up, it's the board's fault for hiring him.

I appreciate 'the buck stops here' and due diligence and stuff like that, but you can only hire people with a good reputation for doing what you hired them for. The board don't have superior knowledge to identify junior talent or assess the structural needs of the side. If they did, we should save some money and not hire a List Manager or recruiting staff.

Sometimes you have to go well it was a sound business decision at the time but he simply didn't work out based on the information we now have before us, that we didn't have when we hired him. I love SOS but if he doesn't recruit for structure it is his fault. If he doesn't build our depth it is his fault. If we get stuck with stupid contracts, it is his fault. If a player he recruits doesn't come on, we start looking between him and the development coaches.

If the situation goes on too long and it is obvious it isn't working, then the board need to put their hand up. I'm mindful of what too long means in the context of our rebuild though. We need time.

 

[TheCoach16]

True. He still has the desperation and his experience is invaluable. Whether he has the athleticism, pace or kicking penetration is the issue. We are hoping so but haven't really seen it in our colours yet.

The problem is the strength and the shortcomings you've listed didn't happen during his time with us. That was all information we knew when we bent over backwards to give him a 700k a year (reportedly) contract.
That's why the decision doesn't make sense to me.
By the way, if I read your post in isolation, you could easily be describing Dennis Armfield, but WITH pace. Is Dennis on 700?

 

[Aphrodite]

I'm not doing schtick Aph, I seriously never heard of him before this thread.

But you have to admit, my question has prompted some imaginative and creative responses...

This guy!

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The problem is the strength and the shortcomings you've listed didn't happen during his time with us. That was all information we knew when we bent over backwards to give him a 700k a year (reportedly) contract.
That's why the decision doesn't make sense to me.
By the way, if I read your post in isolation, you could easily be describing Dennis Armfield, but WITH pace. Is Dennis on 700?

I'm not defending him here. The deal aside, just looking at the player ... the expectation was he would get over his injury. I accept that year 1 was a part of that long return. I accept that year 2 he was injured seconds in. When I watched him train, I see the benefit of experience. I also see that he lacks strength and is not the move smoother Murphy and Gibbs are. He's more energetic and prone to pull off some glaring errors. If he doesn't use his smarts to find space and kick goals and generally exhibit that x factor he is known for, he may just be a run of the mill midfield rotation player. He'd need to be an occasional match winner for us to justify the money he is on.

Quite simply, I don't know what he is right now. His name looks good on paper.

Think about early 2015. Judd, Murphy, Gibbs, Thomas and up and comer Cripps. Look at those first 4 names and think back to their best. If we had those guys in 2011, we may have gone an extra step. It's hard to imagine a side that started the year with those 5 mids, being stone motherless last.

Have to forget about the romance of the players and think about the reality of them I guess. Daisy is in debit right now and he doesn't have time to ease into the side. Top 5 B&F is a minimum requirement.

 

[JustaBattler]

The greatest strategy in competitive endeavour is to make sure your house is in order and ticking along - whilst you set up a lovely picnic basket alongside a river ..and watch your enemies floating upside down go by. Ultimate success ( read flags) is transient and the amount of success is as directly proportional to where your opposition is relative to you - many of the factors involved are totally out of your control.

What you can control - the only thing really is what modern hipsters call 'culture' - and what older types call good management of good people. The Club has made many difficult decisions under extremely trying circumstances in the last year. What matters now is the way we go about things - logical/rational/considered and based on sustainable development and maintenance of good management and good people.

 

[Azul]

I don't think there are many who are happy about how much we paid to get him here, but a lot still think he has plenty to offer the club and can play.

Chalk it up as a bad investment, ala Brock McLean.

Brock recovered from chronic injury conditions and ended up being a contributor and we'll see some of that with Dale but 28 going on 29, he's just about ready for the knackers anyway.