Luke Edwards Father/Son Discussion

[Scorpus]

Look we are all into bashing the club currently but this is way off the mark.

For all we know the club said "right Jackson, you're on the very edge of our list. We will give you 12 months to show us you deserve a spot"

Guess what, he didn't. Again, we made the error, big deal. The hysterics on this are just that, hysterical.

The question is whether we did, in fact, give him a fair go. Or did we give him a charity spot with no interest in whether he would improve?

Taking Jackson at face value we did the latter, which is not good enough.

Making errors and giving players one year on the list is fine, but it sounds like there's more to it than that

 

[MRB37]

We either should have not drafted him if we didn't think he was good enough; or drafted him and genuinely invested development time in him like any other draftee.

Doing neither is of course going to make the player angry. It's wasting a year of their life. The player has hope they will make it, while the club all along knows they won't and strings them along.

It's s**t behavior. I don't blame Edwards at all for "sooking" over this.

On top of that the club is wasting their own time and resources listing a player they don't rate. It's a big waste for everyone involved

To suggest that we drafted a player and then intentionally ignored him is ludicrous. He'd of been treated the same way as every other guy in his position on the list. They invested 12 months in him, he didn't do anything to suggest he warranted any more time than that, that's how football works and I doubt any other club would have done differently.

 

[hey shorty]

The question is whether we did, in fact, give him a fair go. Or did we give him a charity spot with no interest in whether he would improve?

Taking Jackson at face value we did the latter, which is not good enough

Jackson hasn't said much, but he has every right to feel disappointed. Any chance he had of a career is gone.

 

[Scorpus]

To suggest that we drafted a player and then intentionally ignored him is ludicrous. He'd of been treated the same way as every other guy in his position on the list. They invested 12 months in him, he didn't do anything to suggest he warranted any more time than that, that's how football works and I doubt any other club would have done differently.

I think the truth is somewhere between the club did everything right, and what Jackson has said publicly

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Plenty of guys last 1 year in a system. I agree the mistake was drafting him, but we did the right thing by getting rid of him.

Which rookies have we given only one year to recently?

 

[marvin]

We either should have not drafted him if we didn't think he was good enough; or drafted him and genuinely invested development time in him like any other draftee.

Doing neither is of course going to make the player angry. It's wasting a year of their life. The player has hope they will make it, while the club all along knows they won't and strings them along.

It's s**t behavior. I don't blame Edwards at all for "sooking" over this.

On top of that the club is wasting their own time and resources listing a player they don't rate. It's a big waste for everyone involved

That's rubbish.

We've delisted plenty of rookies, even main draft picks after one year. Go back to the early 90s and some mid year draft selections got about 4 months to impress.

What "genuinely invested development time" are you implying Edwards didn't get? Was he barred from the weight room or something?

 

[hey shorty]

QUOTE="Drugs Are Bad Mackay?, post: 60356862, member: 26163"]Which rookies have we given only one year to recently?[/QUOTE]
Not us specifically, but we wouldn't be the only club who has done it.

 

[MRB37]

Which rookies have we given only one year to recently?

Anthony Wilson, Alex Spina, James Battersby.

 

[Bicks]

The question is whether we did, in fact, give him a fair go. Or did we give him a charity spot with no interest in whether he would improve?

Taking Jackson at face value we did the latter, which is not good enough.

Making errors and giving players one year on the list is fine, but it sounds like there's more to it than that

Well apart from a neat left foot kick though definitely not a penetrating kick with little hurt factor, a lack of genuine pace [3.18 20m], considered having a very outside game and not winning enough contested ball what makes you think we should have given him another "charity" year.

 

[Scorpus]

Well apart from a neat left foot kick though definitely not a penetrating kick with little hurt factor, a lack of genuine pace [3.18 20m], considered having a very outside game and not winning enough contested ball what makes you think we should have given him another "charity" year.

I'm saying if we didn't rate him to begin with we shouldn't have drafted him at all.

 

[Cap]

We knew that too, but we are into charity list management.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Especially on bigfooty

 

[Bicks]

I'm saying if we didn't rate him to begin with we shouldn't have drafted him at all.

And like I've said either way the club was in a no win position with Edwards Senior.

 

[Scorpus]

And like I've said either way the club was in a no win position with Edwards Senior.

Tend to agree with this. However I always prefer an honest and upfront approach. So I wish we communicated this to the family from the start. Maybe we did?

 

[Pugsley]

Firing on all cylinders

Surely we could at least have maintained a cordial relationship with a 300 game champion of our club

That's what made him angry initially. Too much cordial.

 

[1970crow]

Doesn't look like Jackson had anything to write home about yesterday playing in what is basically the ammos against the bottom team Albion [the easybeats]
http://websites.sportstg.com/round_info.cgi?a=MATCH&fixture=125240804&c=1-25-0-516660-0&pool=1
SPOTSWOOD
Goal Kickers: W. Patak 4, D. Callard 4, C. Bettiol 3, M. Boyd 3, J. Beilby 3, S. Harvey 2, B. Hodgson 2, C. Nastasi 2, J. Boyd 2, A. Cooney, J. Edwards, S. O''Bryan, D. Iaccarino
Best Players: B. Hodgson, S. O''Bryan, C. Nastasi, H. Walshe, M. Boyd, W. Patak

I don’t give a s**t that Jackson isn’t an AFL quality player. It’s entirely irrelevant. We’ve had a couple of AFL quality players leave with a bit of bad blood recently. Players that are staying look to be phoning it in, there’s a pattern emerging and it starts with the board and filters down through the organisation.

 

[1970crow]

Jackson was drafted on name only, and given the boot because we realised he was no good.

You haven't heard any whinging coming from the Jarman family.

They pre-whinged. Ben got a couple of years and never got near it fitness wise. Perhaps the Jarman’s were happy with everything we did. Just because one family is happy doesn’t mean that we get everything right. We make a lot of mistakes, it’s quite plausible that we stuffed this up. It’s equally plausible that the Edwards’ are a family of w***ers.

What I read in the article though was more that they think being too keen on the FS route if you’re not a definite draftee limits the amount of clubs that look into you. Where Jackson was at you probably only get 1 shot, so us being kind of taking him under sufferance may have been to his detriment had he had the opportunity to speak to more clubs. He likely wouldn’t have made it, but he might have gotten a bit more personal coaching and perhaps an extra year. What I thought he was saying is that they’re not going down that route because they want maximum interest and engagement with club recruiters. He might stagnate and be looking at a rookie contract as well and they’ll want him at the club that sees the most in him so he gets the best chance to develop into an AFL quality footballer.

 

[Bicks]

Tend to agree with this. However I always prefer an honest and upfront approach. So I wish we communicated this to the family from the start. Maybe we did?

Surely the Edwards' should have started to cotton on that Jackson wasn't that highly rated by the people that matter the most [recruiters] when he failed to even get an invite to the National Draft Combine testing and only received a State Combine invite, then undrafted in the National Draft and it's highly doubtful any other clubs would have taken him in the Rookie Draft IMO. That would tend to indicate we along with every other AFL club made all efforts to make it pretty clear where Jackson sat in the scheme of things. Either way I'm not interested in jumping on the conspiracy theorists bandwagon that so many on this site seem so keen to do at every opportunity. We didn't rate him and until he proves us wrong by his on field pursuits I couldn't give a continental.

 

[Apsaalooke]

To suggest that we drafted a player and then intentionally ignored him is ludicrous. He'd of been treated the same way as every other guy in his position on the list. They invested 12 months in him, he didn't do anything to suggest he warranted any more time than that, that's how football works and I doubt any other club would have done differently.

Was he mentored properly and given the time and resources we give to a high draft pick? Was he made to feel part of a team?
It’s not inconceivable his card was marked early, perhaps even with good reason, and left to fend for himself and now feels bitter. We’ll probably never know

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Didn't Doc Clarke at one stage do some work in our admin department because there's not enough going on for full time assistant coaches to fill their days?

Surely one of these blokes could have spent a bit of time to keep the Edwards onside, for the sake of Luke if anything.

Let's hope he's not a gun.

 

[Vhaluus]

Edwards was the second father-son rookie pick that we should never have realistically been bothering with.

 

[marvin]

I'm saying if we didn't rate him to begin with we shouldn't have drafted him at all.

You make it appear that draft ratings are binary.

 

[Bicks]

They pre-whinged. Ben got a couple of years and never got near it fitness wise. Perhaps the Jarman’s were happy with everything we did. Just because one family is happy doesn’t mean that we get everything right. We make a lot of mistakes, it’s quite plausible that we stuffed this up. It’s equally plausible that the Edwards’ are a family of w***ers.

What I read in the article though was more that they think being too keen on the FS route if you’re not a definite draftee limits the amount of clubs that look into you. Where Jackson was at you probably only get 1 shot, so us being kind of taking him under sufferance may have been to his detriment had he had the opportunity to speak to more clubs. He likely wouldn’t have made it, but he might have gotten a bit more personal coaching and perhaps an extra year. What I thought he was saying is that they’re not going down that route because they want maximum interest and engagement with club recruiters. He might stagnate and be looking at a rookie contract as well and they’ll want him at the club that sees the most in him so he gets the best chance to develop into an AFL quality footballer.

Every club that had any interest in Jackson had every opportunity to speak to him if they had even a fleeting interest especially when from a fair way out from the National Draft we made it very clear we weren't taking him as a father/son nomination in the National Draft. It will be no different with Luke whether he decides to takes up or decline a father/son nomination, it will solely be down to the AFL recruiters perception of the lad's relevant footballing ability.

 

[MRB37]

So Tyson Edwards reckons others clubs didn't bother with Jackson because they knew we would take him as a rookie and teams assumed he wouldn't want to play elsewhere and they don't want that to happen to Luke.

I guess he's going to think his son could have still made it elsewhere, the fact he can't even make a VFL side at the moment might say otherwise.

 

[relapse]

Last I heard Jackson was playing for Werribee this year, apparently Mark Williams (who is coaching Werribee) has offered to mentor him.

If Edwards is mates with Choco then I am sure that Choco would have convinced him that it was the Crows faults that Jackson didn't make it etc

 

[SaltPeter]

Last I heard Jackson was playing for Werribee this year, apparently Mark Williams (who is coaching Werribee) has offered to mentor him.

If Edwards is mates with Choco then I am sure that Choco would have convinced him that it was the Crows faults that Jackson didn't make it etc

He mentioned in the video that he played football with Choco's son in primary school. Choco also happened to be the coach.