Somehow like most BF discussions there's a line being drawn here and you are either one side or the other...
Like
dlanod I think that this issue is way bigger than just us... the frontier clubs simply don't appeal to some players - particularly A grade quality players - who see the bright lights and theater, the media, and general fawning and oohing and aahing that players receive in Melbourne in particular, but footy states in general.
Frontier clubs could have all the best systems, facilities and staff in the world but if a player feels he's missing attention and the spotlight there is zero that can be done to hold them away from that circus. Its particularly true for high end talent who have been in that spotlight their whole lives.
For us, add to that a lack of success, resources and facilities and our job becomes even harder than the rest. Our situation is exacerbated because we are the worst of a "bad" bunch off the field.
But are those things systemic? How do you define that?
Is losing systemic? Players will more likely stay if we are winning regardless of the rest. Its a trickle down effect really... win and the tolerance for other stuff is high. Lose and lose often and everything becomes an issue. And to be honest, I'm not sure even a retention allowance and extra salary changes that for some.
I think we have issues off the field in the sense that it may be time to revisit certain areas and methods. Things that to the outside world at least, that haven't seemed to change - and the footy department review is probably just that.
People argue about our welfare and fitness areas - fine lets review them. If we can improve them do it. If things are wrong and have been wrong for long periods then yes its systemic. But if things aren't genuinely "faulty" then its hard to argue any change would see a higher retention rate.
Systemic implies, to me at least, things are horribly out of step with best practice and that we willingly ignore the issue, when I can't really see that being the case to any major extent. This issue like all others is a myriad of things all combining to create a perfect storm - for us anyway.
If Aish or Martin or whoever goes, and it gives us the ability to draft players, then our priority has to be picking a player who wants to be part of this club and the inherent "disadvantages" that brings.
Maybe our systemic failure is simply picking "the best talent available" like we have instead of being way more selective with our first round draft picks.