Our recruiting

[Korn]

Actually, looking at our recruitment department:

This is ours:
National Recruiting Manager
Shane Rogers

Recruiting Manager
Wayne Hughes


And compare it with Hawthorn's:

Recruiting and List Management

Graham Wright National Recruiting Manager
Geoff Morris South Coast Recruiting Manager
Gary Buckenara West Coast Recruiting and Operations Manager
John Wardrop Opposition Analyst
Dale Bleach Pro Scout
Mark McKenzie Recruiting and Special Projects Manager
Michael Porter Video Coordinator


We are a bit understaffed aren't we?

 

[stuckinhill]

I think Robbo instead of Rounds (Collingwood), Banfield (Brisbane), Banner (Port), Anthony (North), Bennell (Melbourne), Blight (Collingwood), Heyne (St Kilda), Lisle (Hawthorn), Jetta (Melbourne) demonstrates by that stage of the draft the pickings were quite slim, with these players being taken just before, or just after Robbo in the draft.

Duigan was very good last year in a relatively settled defence. He was clearly best 22, but unfortunately has been restricted by injuries this season.

FWIW, how come recruiters from other clubs get credit for finding 'gems' late in the ND, or in the rookie draft, yet according to you other people have involvement in these picks at Carlton? The word 'agenda' comes to mind.

The vast majority of posters in this thread think Hughes has not done a fantastic job (being polite here). Hughes is now no longer head recruiter at Carlton, so clearly the discussion has been had at the highest levels.

 

[Silvagnis]

Posters have tried to question our recruiting previously but were always shut down pretty quickly by posters such as Splendini.

MCB has another account.

 

[zhoung]

Problem with a poor appointment, is the longer you stick to your guns, the deeper the damage to the list.
We had bombers recruiter, supposed guru and it was a disaster. The club backed him for more than one to many seasons, based on reputation and we ended up with a 3 year hole in our list,at one stage none age 23-26 y.o. due to the amount of draft busts.
So important is recruiting, that I believe rec. departments should face internal review on an annual basis.
At least that way these problems could be identified earlier, with far less and possibly only short term list damage.
Notwithstanding that development dept.has t work hand in hand with recruitment in a role that is equally important.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Always interesting when new posters talk about years gone by. You have to wonder why they are no longer posting under their original usernames.

Debate on recruiting is not stifled. Constructive debate is never stifled.

If posters are repetitively negative and display a common agenda with very little input into other areas, they are not considered to be contributing to constructive debate and their motives are questionable. They are urged to be more objective but by and large they refuse. Moderators fault or something else?

This will never be a hate forum and will not become our facebook page which is bordering on feral most of the time. Any supporter that cares about the club, can care enough to choose their words appropriately, even if expressing a negative opinion.

 

[Krooooze]

Actually, looking at our recruitment department:

This is ours:
National Recruiting Manager
Shane Rogers

Recruiting Manager
Wayne Hughes


And compare it with Hawthorn's:

Recruiting and List Management

Graham Wright National Recruiting Manager
Geoff Morris South Coast Recruiting Manager
Gary Buckenara West Coast Recruiting and Operations Manager
John Wardrop Opposition Analyst
Dale Bleach Pro Scout
Mark McKenzie Recruiting and Special Projects Manager
Michael Porter Video Coordinator


We are a bit understaffed aren't we?

Surely that can't be right? We only have two men at the helm with recruiting? If that is, that's a major concern. Surely you need guys who observe the WAFL SANFL and the QLD and NSW football leagues.

 

[Penetrator]

I think Robbo instead of Rounds (Collingwood), Banfield (Brisbane), Banner (Port), Anthony (North), Bennell (Melbourne), Blight (Collingwood), Heyne (St Kilda), Lisle (Hawthorn), Jetta (Melbourne) demonstrates by that stage of the draft the pickings were quite slim, with these players being taken just before, or just after Robbo in the draft.

Duigan was very good last year in a relatively settled defence. He was clearly best 22, but unfortunately has been restricted by injuries this season.

FWIW, how come recruiters from other clubs get credit for finding 'gems' late in the ND, or in the rookie draft, yet according to you other people have involvement in these picks at Carlton? The word 'agenda' comes to mind.

No agenda at all just concerned that after 7 years of recruiting by hughes surely we should have some more talent/depth on our list. Jamienson pick was attributed to Cossica , Betts was picked after our first choice Knobel was taken by Richmond and shane rodgers was instrumental in getting gartlett. The other picks in rookie draft have not been to bad without been outstanding but surely his main pay check was to deliver in the main draft and apart from Robbo what gem in 7 years of trading has he delivered with a late pick ??

The only bloke as bad as him at recruiting from another club in his time is the melbourne bloke Barry Prendergast and amazingly we go and get him to be involved with our club

 

[Silvagnis]

Club responses to the KPP debate would annoy the hell out of me. They were even referencing Setanta at one point as a reason why we don't need to worry about our bigman stock. Then in one draft, they go reaching for talls, seemingly as a response to criticism from the previous year. And even then, they went with Watson over Darling (sorry Watto, but I was pissed at the time).

Huge assumption. Perhaps you spend too much time arguing with the great unwashed on the main board and the Bay. It appears to be influencing your thinking.

These players weren't reaches at 18, 34 and 42. Henderson was holding down CHF before we went for Watson. Watto showed last night that he will be a player.

Grigg is another to make us sit up and take notice this year. There's a few blokes who seem given a favourable run while others have to work harder for their chances and that sucks at a footy club.

Grigg won't go down as a massive loss. Sulked and left. He still bombs it long as games get longer. Running around without a tag beside Cotchin, Martin, Deledio, Foley and Tuck would be the easiest gig in the AFL. Poor awareness after Armitage caught him twice on Friday night.

 

[blue gunslinger]

Grigg has kicked more goals outside of 50m than our entire team combined. Not a tick for Grigg exactly but a cross for us!

 

[stuckinhill]

Always interesting when new posters talk about years gone by. You have to wonder why they are no longer posting under their original usernames.

Debate on recruiting is not stifled. Constructive debate is never stifled.

If posters are repetitively negative and display a common agenda with very little input into other areas, they are not considered to be contributing to constructive debate and their motives are questionable. They are urged to be more objective but by and large they refuse. Moderators fault or something else?

This will never be a hate forum and will not become our facebook page which is bordering on feral most of the time. Any supporter that cares about the club, can care enough to choose their words appropriately, even if expressing a negative opinion.

The only thing I want is for the absolute best recruiters in the AFL to be at Carlton. If that's an agenda then it is an agenda I have with pride.

As Mick Malthouse says

"Mark my words, the most important person in a football club is your recruiting manager. He and his division supply the coach with the team.Collingwood's national recruiting manager Derek Hine is one of the great men in football and has kept that club replenished. He looks at footballers at 17 and sees what they will be like at 22. He even looks at them at 12 and visualises them at 17.
Geelong also have replenished beautifully and Stephen Wells has proved to be an excellent recruiting officer who has done very, very well for them.
The opportunities Hine and Wells have given those clubs were no fluke - it's about being well resourced and doing your homework."


http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...e-stragglers-set-to-be-stuck-down-the-bottom/


I want Wells or Hine at Carlton, and if we can't have them, I want the next best. And that's an agenda all Carlton fans should have.

 

[Monkey King]

So the later picks you mean the rookie draft picks where i would argue other people have more involvement with those selections than Hughes.

Mate, you're just going to have to cop it I'm afraid. They are all Wayne Hughes smokies, all late and all pretty decent picks. He's done well early, he's done well late. He's generally been pretty average with mid-range picks IMO and hasn't built a very balanced list overall, but now you're just trying to pretend his successes aren't his successes at all, which isn't being very straight-up.

 

[mediumsizered]

The only bloke as bad as him at recruiting from another club in his time is the melbourne bloke Barry Prendergast and amazingly we go and get him to be involved with our club

So who is appointing these people? Greg Swann? Steven Icke/Andrew McKay?

Richard Pratt entrusted these people to run the club before he passed on. Was he a poor judge? Was his statement of getting the best, not the best available just a furphy?

Having been on BF for almost 7 years I have seen a lot of supporters from different camps proclaim new saviours/potential new saviours for our club, but here we are in 2012 again questioning those running the club, both the on-field & off-field side of things.

How many times to we need to change our personnel before we see some success? Or do we go for some stability, like most of the recent successful clubs have done, & show some faith that those running our club are working towards the ultimate success. If Rex Gorell had his way, the board would have been voted out at Geelong at the end of 2006, along with Bomber Thompson & the Cats would most likely be still in the middle of a premiership drought longer than any of us would care to endure.

 

[stuckinhill]

Mate, you're just going to have to cop it I'm afraid. They are all Wayne Hughes smokies, all late and all pretty decent picks. He's done well early, he's done well late. He's generally been pretty average with mid-range picks IMO and hasn't built a very balanced list overall, but now you're just trying to pretend his successes aren't his successes at all, which isn't being very straight-up.

Agree. Although in reality, it's difficult to know who had input into what picks from the outside. If we want to be objective as the moderators call for, then all we know is Hughes used to have the final say, but no longer does. Objectively... that says a lot. I think the best thing for Greg Swann to do would be to get all our recruiters to submit a list of rankings before each draft and analyse it in coming years. He might already do that, but certainly we need some way of assessing the performance of our recruiters and that might be one way.

 

[Monkey King]

Huge assumption. Perhaps you spend too much time arguing with the great unwashed on the main board and the Bay. It appears to be influencing your thinking.

So how do you want me to respond to this tripe? Perhaps you spend too much time here with your head up the arses of other unrealistic Blues supporters. Is that how it's done? You have a rep on the Main Board for this very thing and for good reason.

It is a big assumption, I concede that, but it's mine to make with full entitlement and I stand by it. Perhaps reached is too strong a word, but they definitely appeared to be affected by what went down the previous year; along with perhaps the realisation that we really did need to start drafting talls for the sake of our list. Watson was a safe bet IMO and I'm not convinced he has a terrific future at AFL level yet; I've seen some really nice things from him, I've seen some concerning things.

Grigg won't go down as a massive loss. Sulked and left. He still bombs it long as games get longer. Running around without a tag beside Cotchin, Martin, Deledio, Foley and Tuck would be the easiest gig in the AFL. Poor awareness after Armitage caught him twice on Friday night.

He's playing a key role in a winning side. Would have been of worth to Carlton if we were able to utilise him as well as Harwick has. I'm not that fussed over it tbh, as you said he sulked and walked; but when it comes to the topic of developing players at Carlton, he is one example that springs to mind. Gibbs is another.

 

[stuckinhill]

So who is appointing these people? Greg Swann? Steven Icke/Andrew McKay?

Richard Pratt entrusted these people to run the club before he passed on. Was he a poor judge? Was his statement of getting the best, not the best available just a furphy?

Having been on BF for almost 7 years I have seen a lot of supporters from different camps proclaim new saviours/potential new saviours for our club, but here we are in 2012 again questioning those running the club, both the on-field & off-field side of things.

How many times to we need to change our personnel before we see some success? Or do we go for some stability, like most of the recent successful clubs have done, & show some faith that those running our club are working towards the ultimate success. If Rex Gorell had his way, the board would have been voted out at Geelong at the end of 2006, along with Bomber Thompson & the Cats would most likely be still in the middle of a premiership drought longer than any of us would care to endure.

Agree about the need for stability. Difficult issue is where you draw the line between stability/continuity and the need for changes to be made because it can also go the other way.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I'm sorry but debate on recruiting and constructive debate was stifled for years.

That is your opinion and one you can afford to have if you only have to worry about yourself and your own posts.

The number of threads, the timing of threads, the wording of posts, the history of posters and our attempts to get people to provide balance in their posting are all factors we take into account.

Zero value in airing your moderation grievances publicly and without context.

 

[stuckinhill]

That is your opinion and one you can afford to have if you only have to worry about yourself and your own posts.

The number of threads, the timing of threads, the wording of posts, the history of posters and our attempts to get people to provide balance in their posting are all factors we take into account.

Zero value in airing your moderation grievances publicly and without context.

Fair point and I will edit them out.

 

[Monkey King]

In reality, it's difficult to know who had input into what picks from the outside. If we want to be objective as the moderators call for, then all we know is Hughes used to have the final say, but no longer does. Objectively... that says a lot.

A lot of the input comes from the recruiters network. Like in business, your network is actually part of what you bring to the table. If Hughes is going to cop it for poor selections, then he at least deserves kudos for the good ones. Share victory, share defeat I say!

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Reminder to ALL, veteran posters and rookies, to steer clear of going the poster and not the post. If you have concerns over a poster, report the post and we will decide. You are only contributing to the hostility and given there is a lot going on around here at the moment, our patience is going to be tested.

There are no superior posters with a licence to skirt the rules. Do not place yourself in that position.

 

[stuckinhill]

A lot of the input comes from the recruiters network. Like in business, your network is actually part of what you bring to the table. If Hughes is going to cop it for poor selections, then he at least deserves kudos for the good ones. Share victory, share defeat I say!

Yes agree. That's part of my concerns, we don't seem to have the depth of recruiters that Collingwood and Hawthorn have for example. Collingwood have an extensive network in every state. We need far more resources in our recruiting department to establish that.

 

[Monkey King]

Yes agree. That's part of my concerns, we don't seem to have the depth of recruiters that Collingwood and Hawthorn have for example. Collingwood have an extensive network in every state. We need far more resources in our recruiting department to establish that.

I'm not sure about that. Just because the club hasn't gone out of their way to categorically list the full national contribution on our website doesn't mean we don't have one. Surely you don't think it's really just those two blokes doing all the work? I know another Carlton forum that has a poster having paid involvement with our recruiting, so there are other blokes involved. True though, that I have no idea what the extent is.

 

[stuckinhill]

I'm not sure about that. Just because the club hasn't gone out of their way to categorically list the full national contribution on our website doesn't mean we don't have one. Surely you don't think it's really just those two blokes doing all the work? I know another Carlton forum that has a poster having paid involvement with our recruiting, so there are other blokes involved. True though, that I have no idea what the extent is.

Wasn't based on that list. I just know Collingwood and Hawthorn have extensive networks, with recruiters full time in most states. I hope we match that. We might match it already, and I hope that is the case, but from what I have read it is not the case and we need to match it.

 

[Monkey King]

Reminder to ALL, veteran posters and rookies, to steer clear of going the poster and not the post.

I apologise for my bite-back ODN. I don't wanna make your job harder than it will be with a thread like this. I just found TG's jibe somewhat uncalled for and on BF I tend to operate under Woodrow Wilson's principle - “If you come at me with your fists doubled, I think I can promise you that mine will double as fast as yours ..."

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

A lot of emotions around now and vastly different personalities and opinions. It's up to all of us to manage ourselves to avoid the powderkeg going up. That's why we drive home the constructive posting policy. Take the heat out of it, put the diplomacy hat on and express the negative or positive in a constructive manner.

Some posters are sick of what they perceive as over the top negativity and other posters are sick of not being able to discuss areas they think are wrong. The first group have seen these arguments before but fail to recognise that we have new breeds of posters applying it to here and now, not last year or 5 years ago.

Patience is a virtue and if you believe your opinion is right, then why would you not be passionate enough and assured enough to follow a debate through to common ground. If it becomes hostile then you have probably lost the debate already.

 

[Penetrator]

Mate, you're just going to have to cop it I'm afraid. They are all Wayne Hughes smokies, all late and all pretty decent picks. He's done well early, he's done well late. He's generally been pretty average with mid-range picks IMO and hasn't built a very balanced list overall, but now you're just trying to pretend his successes aren't his successes at all, which isn't being very straight-up.

Okay lets pretend that all the rookie draft pick and ND draft pick can be attributed to Hughes then he has done quite well compared to other clubs but as i stated early surely his main job is to snag some quality in the main draft. Apart from robbo at pick 40 the 7 years of his tenure has been a massive failure with any picks after the first round just like he was at fremantle. First round picks should not be on his resume as the quality of picks he has had any recruiter would be able to at least as well if not better.

I would hate to see what he would have delivered to us if he had the same picks that Wells has had to use at Geelong...