board tells sheedy must make 8

[Tambu]

Reasonably well thought out statement . I pretty much agree with most of it but i have to jump in and pull you up on one part
Stanton - first round pick.
Monfries- first round pick.
Dempsey- First round pick.
Jetta- priority pick at the start of the second round so it was pretty much a first round pick.
In the last 4 drafts we have picked Davey , Dempsey , Dyson , Hislop, Houli ,Lonergan , Monfries , Nash ,Reimers , Slattery , Stanton and Hocking on the rookie list . One would suggest we are looking at the midfield.
Yes we have taken some talls with our overall first picks but i has been when we have had other first rounders or a priority pick to spend on midfielders first round.
Yes we took Bradley but if we had taken Tenace instead of Bradley then we would not have looked at taking Stanton at 13 .
We took Ryder and then took Dempsey at pick 19. I think Ryder is working out well.
Then this year everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon early and say why didnt we take Sellwood. Yes Sellwood is a star on the rise but we did take 5 midfielders after Gumbleton. It was too bad that the changes in priority picks stuffed us up as i know that we had Sellwood and Jetta picked out as players we wanted after Gumbleton. If we had pick two and four chances are we may well of had Sellwood but im still reasonably happy with getting Jetta.
Overall i think the last 5 drafts have been very calculated. Picking highly rated up talls in a couple of the drafts and then drafting a number of midfielders to build on.
Seriuosly who apart from the premature Gumbleton v Sellwood argument who else should we have picked up ?

Good post
I'm very happy with our choice of Gumbleton over Selwood, Gumby will be an absolute gun CHF and a player, along with Ryder, who we could build a team around. Already it's looking very promising with the young mids we've picked up in the last couple of years.

 

[sen entertainment bloke]

thats the crust of it we make the 8 sheeds stays if we dont his gone

Horsburgh was puffing a bit (needs to trim down a bit) but said last night the key criteria was list devlopment. I took this to mean that Sheedy had to justify past draft choices as well as oversee their ability to develop once they are at the club.

Don't think the board will be able to completely divorce them selves from the next six weeks though. Every game that is played is a guide of some sort to list development.

The interesting one is Freo. If they run all over us with Harvey as coach, think it will create a unanimous board voice in favour of change. Harvey could well be the deciding factor against Sheedy's 28th.

 

[Don Envy]

Reasonably well thought out statement . I pretty much agree with most of it but i have to jump in and pull you up on one part
Stanton - first round pick.
Monfries- first round pick.
Dempsey- First round pick.
Jetta- priority pick at the start of the second round so it was pretty much a first round pick.
In the last 4 drafts we have picked Davey , Dempsey , Dyson , Hislop, Houli ,Lonergan , Monfries , Nash ,Reimers , Slattery , Stanton and Hocking on the rookie list . One would suggest we are looking at the midfield.
Yes we have taken some talls with our overall first picks but i has been when we have had other first rounders or a priority pick to spend on midfielders first round.
Yes we took Bradley but if we had taken Tenace instead of Bradley then we would not have looked at taking Stanton at 13 .
We took Ryder and then took Dempsey at pick 19. I think Ryder is working out well.
Then this year everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon early and say why didnt we take Sellwood. Yes Sellwood is a star on the rise but we did take 5 midfielders after Gumbleton. It was too bad that the changes in priority picks stuffed us up as i know that we had Sellwood and Jetta picked out as players we wanted after Gumbleton. If we had pick two and four chances are we may well of had Sellwood but im still reasonably happy with getting Jetta.
Overall i think the last 5 drafts have been very calculated. Picking highly rated up talls in a couple of the drafts and then drafting a number of midfielders to build on.
Seriuosly who apart from the premature Gumbleton v Sellwood argument who else should we have picked up ?

I'm very happy with last years draft. Let's face it with the picks we had, we were always going to do well. I'm still glad we took Gumby over Selwood as he is very highly rated and should be a marquee player for us in the post Lloyd era. It's more to do with our drafting between 2000-2005 that worries me.

In 2000, we took James Davies with pick#17, Daniel Kerr went at #18

2001, we took Shane Harvey with pick#18, could've had any one of Jason Gram (#19) Matt Maquire (not a midfielder, but taken at #21), Steve Johnson (#24), Sam Mitchell (#36)

2002 we took Laycock and Winders at #10 and #11 and although this looked ordinary for some time, looks to be ok choices now. Nontheless, Troy and Adam Selwood both went after these two.

2003 we took Kepler Bradley at #6. Beau Waters (#11) and Michael Rischitelli (#61) would've been better choices

2004 we took Angus Monfries at #14. I'm not quite sure if he is going to ever be an A Grade midfielder and possibly Matt Rosa at #29 would've been a better choice

My point is that we seem to have made many wrong calls at the draft between 2000-2005 (I think this is Dodoro's first 5 drafts after Judkins left) and we're paying the price for it now. Whether this is Sheedy's or Dodoro's fault I'm not too sure, but to me, there was ample time for Sheed's to address the issue and as Dodoro is still there, the situation has still not been addressed to this day. Dodoro can spot an good player (and if I had the job so could I), but the gun recruiters can spot a player who's going to be good but may not be there yet. I don't think Dodoro has this ability.

I don't think that it's any coincidence that Collingwood is playing good footy now either and it's players taken deeper in the draft that Judkins spotted that are making a difference for them.

 

[The Dustbin]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[Don Envy]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Yes hindsight is a wonderful thing. Making consistently poor decisions for 5 years in a row and not doing anything about it is poor management

 

[Tambu]

Our drafting in 2000-2001 was woefull.

2002 we picked up Laycock and Winderlich:
Laycock has been injured a lot, but when fit, we all know how good he could be. He's still relatively young, generally big guys take longer to develop, but the signs are there.
Winderlich has become one of our best midfielders and was badly missed against the pies. The wait was well worth it.

2003 - Kepler Bradley:
I haven't written this kid off. He's been rippin it up in the VFL as a forward target and I think he'll very good in the forward line for us eventually.

2004 - Angus Monfries:
While their may have been better options, Gus is still only 20 and with most young players comes inconsistency. He's shown what he's capable of and I've got no doubt in a couple of years he'll become a pretty important player for us.

 

[rusty14]

I wouldn't re-sign him.

And finals are an indicator, but deciding his fate on whether we make the finals or not is a deciding factor. How can it be anything but?

Hypothetically, we beat Adelaide, Freo, Richmond, Carlton. We get to Perth and need to be West Coast to make the finals.

We're five points up and Lynch marks on the siren. He misses, Sheedy stays, he kicks straight and Sheedy goes.

Dramatic example, no doubt. But that's effectively what the club is saying, that's the situation they are putting themselves in and it's weak as piss. We as a club should be better than that.

Three clubs are already looking for new coaches, if we wait to the end of the season, we're behind the eight ball, well behind. If we want to get the best man for the job, we can't do that when three clubs get a jump start.

There is nothing Sheedy can do in the last seven weeks that can change whether or not he's the best man for the job going forward. They should know whether or not that is the case already.

They're taking the soft option and as a supporter I expect more.

If thats your example then we will have sheey next season cause Llynch is the most overrated player in the comp. The big Q isen good not even good enough to make a vfl list! Hansen is the danger forward.

 

[stander]

and I can remember Barry Davis, Billy Stephen, Des Tuddenham, John Birt and Jack Clarke ...and we never looked like it.

I still have not heard about anyone who would do the job better ...and don't give me untried novices ...it makes no sense to compare them with the master.

What are you talking about- Tuddenham got the Dons into an eliimination final in his first year and breathed some life into a cadaver. There's a few masters apprentices going around who compare very well.

 

[Don Envy]

What are you talking about- Tuddenham got the Dons into an eliimination final in his first year and breathed some life into a cadaver. There's a few masters apprentices going around who compare very well.

Agreed, Sheed's was a nobody in coaching ranks when he started too remember.

 

[ant555]

In 2000, we took James Davies with pick#17, Daniel Kerr went at #18

2001, we took Shane Harvey with pick#18, could've had any one of Jason Gram (#19) Matt Maquire (not a midfielder, but taken at #21), Steve Johnson (#24), Sam Mitchell (#36)

I didnt bring up these drafts becasue i didnt see the tall v small comparison that you made. I have written several times before that these drafts where terrible and i think everyone knows that is the case.

2002 we took Laycock and Winders at #10 and #11 and although this looked ordinary for some time, looks to be ok choices now. Nontheless, Troy and Adam Selwood both went after these two.

Dont think that either of the Sellwood twins add the same strengths that Winderlich does. I would have either of them in my side there is no question about that but they dont add the pace that Winderlich has this year.

2003 we took Kepler Bradley at #6. Beau Waters (#11) and Michael Rischitelli (#61) would've been better choices

Yes we did and we took Stanton at 13 . It is eary to play what iffs now but if we hadnt taken Bradley we would have taken Tenace who at the time was seen by a vast majority as the next best mid. It is easy to simply look at draft lists after 3 seasons and pick out players who went late in the draft as players who we should have picked up. You could hardly blame us for missing Rischitelli , at pick 61 most other clubs missed him several times as well.

2004 we took Angus Monfries at #14. I'm not quite sure if he is going to ever be an A Grade midfielder and possibly Matt Rosa at #29 would've been a better choice

Not sure now but what did you think before this season ? Was seen by most football followers as a great midfield prospect until this year when he has struggled to move to a new level.

My point is that we seem to have made many wrong calls at the draft between 2000-2005 (I think this is Dodoro's first 5 drafts after Judkins left) and we're paying the price for it now. Whether this is Sheedy's or Dodoro's fault I'm not too sure, but to me, there was ample time for Sheed's to address the issue and as Dodoro is still there, the situation has still not been addressed to this day. Dodoro can spot an good player (and if I had the job so could I), but the gun recruiters can spot a player who's going to be good but may not be there yet. I don't think Dodoro has this ability

.

I think you have opened the window too far. Now if you manage to draft 3 players that end up playing 100 or so odd games you have had a good draft if you look at the draft history.

Tell me what was so wrong with the 2002 draft where we had a bit of a midfield spot and got Laycock, Winderlich, Watson and Johns as a rookie.

In 2003 we got Bradley,Stanton,Nash,Dyson plus Lovett and Lovett-Murray as rookies.

2004 doesnt look overly sucessful with Monfries and Slattery the pick and Lee still on our list but not as bad as 1999 to 2001

2005 is a bit early to tell .Ryder looks good. Dempsey is still in the potential stage. Neagle the same. Lonergan may be off the list soon and Hocking was taken as a rookie that year.

Seriously i dont see huge problems with 2002 to 2005.
The other thing is the club hasnt helped much by having our recruiting manager involved in match day activities and footy department roles as well as being recruiting manager. I think last years draft showed that given the resources and the time to dedicate himself to one area Dodoro can find decent draftee's.

I don't think that it's any coincidence that Collingwood is playing good footy now either and it's players taken deeper in the draft that Judkins spotted that are making a difference for them.

Not this chestnut again. The same Judkins that did well finding us some good players but also unearthed some jems like Tim Williams ,Bolton ,Lalich ,Doering ,Eastaugh ,Ladhams and Henneman just to name a few from his last couple of years with us.
Also the gun recruiter who got Collingwood such greats as
Cam Cloke,Jason Cloke,David King,Mathew Lokan,Luke Mullins,Bo Nixon,Luke Shackleton etc. i could go on and in fact i will by putting a few of the drafts up in order of the years you have given it to Dodoro in.

2000- Didak , J Cloke ,R Lonie , G Richards ,Wakelin
2001- Cole ,T Davidson , M Mgough , D Swan
2002- B Nixon , L Shackleton , C Cloke , D King
2003- W Morrison , B Shaw , B Hall , H Shaw , J Rowe
2004- C Egan , S Rusling , T Cloke , A Iacobucci
2005- D Thomas , S Pendlebury , D Stanley , R cook , J Anthony
In this time Maxwell, Obrien, M Clarke ,S Cox and Toovey have come from the rookie list.
As you can see your saviour in Judkins can also have a two or three year spell where he didnt produce much for the Pies.

 

[Bombs Away]

I didnt bring up these drafts becasue i didnt see the tall v small comparison that you made. I have written several times before that these drafts where terrible and i think everyone knows that is the case.

Dont think that either of the Sellwood twins add the same strengths that Winderlich does. I would have either of them in my side there is no question about that but they dont add the pace that Winderlich has this year.

Yes we did and we took Stanton at 13 . It is eary to play what iffs now but if we hadnt taken Bradley we would have taken Tenace who at the time was seen by a vast majority as the next best mid. It is easy to simply look at draft lists after 3 seasons and pick out players who went late in the draft as players who we should have picked up. You could hardly blame us for missing Rischitelli , at pick 61 most other clubs missed him several times as well.

Not sure now but what did you think before this season ? Was seen by most football followers as a great midfield prospect until this year when he has struggled to move to a new level.

I think you have opened the window too far. Now if you manage to draft 3 players that end up playing 100 or so odd games you have had a good draft if you look at the draft history.

Tell me what was so wrong with the 2002 draft where we had a bit of a midfield spot and got Laycock, Winderlich, Watson and Johns as a rookie.

In 2003 we got Bradley,Stanton,Nash,Dyson plus Lovett and Lovett-Murray as rookies.

2004 doesnt look overly sucessful with Monfries and Slattery the pick and Lee still on our list but not as bad as 1999 to 2001

2005 is a bit early to tell .Ryder looks good. Dempsey is still in the potential stage. Neagle the same. Lonergan may be off the list soon and Hocking was taken as a rookie that year.

Seriously i dont see huge problems with 2002 to 2005.
The other thing is the club hasnt helped much by having our recruiting manager involved in match day activities and footy department roles as well as being recruiting manager. I think last years draft showed that given the resources and the time to dedicate himself to one area Dodoro can find decent draftee's.

2000- Didak , J Cloke ,R Lonie , G Richards ,Wakelin
2001- Cole ,T Davidson , M Mgough , D Swan
2002- B Nixon , L Shackleton , C Cloke , D King
2003- W Morrison , B Shaw , B Hall , H Shaw , J Rowe
2004- C Egan , S Rusling , T Cloke , A Iacobucci
2005- D Thomas , S Pendlebury , D Stanley , R cook , J Anthony
In this time Maxwell, Obrien, M Clarke ,S Cox and Tovvey have come from the rookie list.
As you can see your saviour in Judkins can also have a two or three year spell where he didnt produce much for the Pies.

well said ant. I think the point you make is clear for all to see and has been supported.

It was all due to 1998-2000 drafts which is why we are in the present situation, give the players 5 years to make real impacts and you will see why we struggled in years 2004, 2005, 2006 - The rule of 5 years (the time it takes to get 50+ games into players)

Now that we have had off field changes to recruiting etc we can expect better results (even though this years draft is thin).

With doddoro being full time we expect better results..

 

[Don Envy]

well said ant. I think the point you make is clear for all to see and has been supported.

It was all due to 1998-2000 drafts which is why we are in the present situation, give the players 5 years to make real impacts and you will see why we struggled in years 2004, 2005, 2006 - The rule of 5 years (the time it takes to get 50+ games into players)

Now that we have had off field changes to recruiting etc we can expect better results (even though this years draft is thin).

With doddoro being full time we expect better results..

I think you all make good points against my argument regarding our recruiting. At the end of the day, this thread is about Sheedy and whether or not we should have him as coach next year. I may have carried the point too far, but all I was trying to do was highlight that our recruiting on the whole over the 2000-2005 period was below par and Sheed's had the opportunity to do something about this and he didn't.

I've always been one for keeping Sheed's whenever he has come out of contract in the past, however, the past few seasons have swayed me and it's time for a change. All good things must come to an end and with Hirdy retiring, the timing is perfect for the dawn of a new era.

 

[AsIfYouCare]

thats the crust of it we make the 8 sheeds stays if we dont his gone

Well, if he is to go, he must be given due recognition for his service to the club. Among other things, this means he should not be sacked mid-season EVEN IF it would be better for the club if he was.

We are Essendon and we have a bit of class.

And, for heavens sake, it is "crux" not "crust"!

 

[ant555]

Well, if he is to go, he must be given due recognition for his service to the club. Among other things, this means he should not be sacked mid-season EVEN IF it would be better for the club if he was.

We are Essendon and we have a bit of class.

And, for heavens sake, it is "crux" not "crust"!

in this case it is crust becasue making the 8 isnt a factor.
However how we play in the next 3 weeks will be.

 

[Lovett Lover 13]

this thread is no longer needed
shattered