Doing something different doesn't mean it's right.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
List Mgmt. The "We Should Have Kept Brander" Tears Thread
- Thread starter Truckosaurus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Doing something different doesn't mean it's right.
Bender_
X
Yes, that's correct, obviously. Doing what everyone else does would be more likely to be wrong I'd think though.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,349
I reckon the under 16's thing would be pretty widespread in recruitment circles across the league... and indeed across all sports.
You see a guy when he was young (14 or 15) and you reckon he's got the goods and no matter what, he's gonna be your guy when he gets into professional circles and you just ignore any evidence that he isn't quite as good as you thought he was because that would mean conceding you weren't quite as on point as you thought you were. There's a huge amount of ego in scouting - YOU picked this guy as a teenage star and YOU knew he was the real deal from day one and YOU are the reason he is at the club.
Us fans do it ourselves except our first impression is formed usually when they have already been drafted. You see a bloke in his first handful of games and think he looks like he's going to be a real find, only to be surprised when he gets delisted 3 years later with only another 15 games under his belt. "I don't understand why {insert club} didn't give him more of a chance. Maybe the Eagles should look at him in the rookie draft". Once you think a guy is going to be a good footballer, it's actually pretty hard to let it go and concede that what you thought you saw just wasn't there.
You see a guy when he was young (14 or 15) and you reckon he's got the goods and no matter what, he's gonna be your guy when he gets into professional circles and you just ignore any evidence that he isn't quite as good as you thought he was because that would mean conceding you weren't quite as on point as you thought you were. There's a huge amount of ego in scouting - YOU picked this guy as a teenage star and YOU knew he was the real deal from day one and YOU are the reason he is at the club.
Us fans do it ourselves except our first impression is formed usually when they have already been drafted. You see a bloke in his first handful of games and think he looks like he's going to be a real find, only to be surprised when he gets delisted 3 years later with only another 15 games under his belt. "I don't understand why {insert club} didn't give him more of a chance. Maybe the Eagles should look at him in the rookie draft". Once you think a guy is going to be a good footballer, it's actually pretty hard to let it go and concede that what you thought you saw just wasn't there.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Not our fault that Venables had his brains knocked out... not our fault that Murray Newman belts a bloke and ends up in prison... and it's not our fault that Chesser picks up an injury in his first year (and hey, he still has time to prove himself). But at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter who is at fault... the end result is still the same. It's hard to build a quality team with such a low strike rate at the top end of the draft.
- Apr 23, 2020
- 622
- 3,137
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Wisconsin Badgers Women's Volleyball
I've been very curious of the Brander situation about drafting him recently. As I said earlier on this thread in hindsight we should've taken Allen at 13, Kelly at 21 and Ryan at 26. Heck we could've even taken Worpel at 32 (was rated well here).
I wasn't around on BF in 2017 so I read the 2017 draft megathread.
At the time, a lot of us wanted Jaidyn Stephenson at 13. Come draft day Collingwood were always going to take him and if they didn't then the Saints would've with pick 8. Once Stephenson was off the board most of us wanted Higgins (not many wanted Allen though but would've been happy if we took him at 13) so basically pick 13 for the fans was either Higgins or Allen. Then the club took Brander and we rightfully melted at the time since we did not need a tall and a mid was a priority. A lot of us had Kelly in the 30s.
Comments when we first drafted him was "He's gonna be a JK replacement" when in reality it was always Allen (he was 191 cms at the time but hasn't finished growing likely the reason why the club took Brander over him). Brander was 195 cms who's finished growing.
My guess is the recruiters were tossing up between Brander and Allen at 13 but ultimately went for Brander. Their reason (just a guess though) was that Brander is taller and can play both ends of the ground even though Allen was the better and more consistent player back then. Both of them were just as talented. I think the club wanted Higgins next especially if Allen was off the board before our pick 21 but once Richmond took him then Allen was the next choice. I wonder who would've we taken if Allen was off the board by pick 21 (Kelly seems like the obvious choice in hindsight)?
There was a good reason why Brander dominated U16s but was inconsistent as an U18 and failed to live up to his potential in the AFL (he didn't even dominate the WAFL like what Waterman does by being a class above the WAFL).
The club in hindsight should've never taken him in the first place however Brander should've worked harder and not over rely on his physical gifts and natural talent. If he had the work ethic especially sorting out his toughness and hardness issues then I have no doubt he would still be with us today and be a best 22 player. He should've been a key defender who can go forward if needed. Key defensive depth in 2018 was Gov, Barrass and Schoey with Emac always injured. The club should've told him when he first arrived to the club "You will be playing as a key backman who can swing forward" and focused him on that only. With Gov being constantly injured these days, I'm sure he would've held down the CHB or third KPD spot. Heck even in 2022 with Darling's vax fiasco, Allen being injured for the whole year and JK also getting injured at times plus nearing the end, he would've had opportunities up forward (I'm sure he would've frustrated a lot of us when his squibbing out of the contests and failing to bring the ball to ground let alone take a contested mark I50).
What he lacked was the toughness and hardness needed to be an AFL KPP which was important in crashing packs and taking contested marks against fully grown men. The club coaches needed to tell him that he needs to take risks in crashing the pack but it was clear in training that he squibs one too many contests when training as a KPP so eventually the club turned him into a wingman where less contested ball happens.
In juniors the club saw a physically developed and talented kid who dominated juniors. As the other kids grown up and were grown into physical developed bodies, he started to lose his dominance and started becoming more inconsistent however as mentioned he still had the talent to be a top 20 prospect rather than a clear top 3 pick if he maintained his U16s form showing that it wasn't being physically ahead of everyone as a junior. Once he reached AFL level, he struggled with his physicality once he was up against grown men. He did show glimpses of his talent at times at AFL level such as being clean with ball in hand but he lacked the toughness to be an AFL level KPP overall as mentioned plenty of times here.
He had to earn his spot with work ethic and can no longer coast on his physical and natural talent gifts (like what Jack Watts did). However Brander had some sort of entitlement and that because he was naturally talented he believed he should be given the starting spot because he was drafted higher even though he did not look a class above the WAFL like what Waterman does. I'm sure he secretly resented Allen because he was getting games ahead of him as a forward because Allen was picked lower than him likely because he was shorter even though he was better than Brander in his draft year while Brander was stuck in the WAFL (Allen was the better player and should've been taken at 13, all the melts back then were justified when we took Brander and I can guarantee we would NOT be melting if we took Allen at 13 heck we could've even taken Higgins not ideal thinking now though).
Rather than put things aside and work hard to get selected, he instead threw a tantrum and when the club offered him a new contract he declined and wanted to take the easy way out and expects GWS to put him in their starting lineup having been their academy player. However GWS saw the same issues that he had at West Coast and that was his sense of entitlement for being naturally talented and expected to start without having the work ethic, they saw what we already saw that he lacked the toughness to be a AFL level key forward and they put him on the wing.
My guess is he was one of those players who was last in first out of training and didn't put in any extra work when there wasn't training or staying back to improve on something. He just came in training and in non training or match days he wants nothing to do with football since he believes that his talent can get him far which in the end proved to be his downfall and now is no longer in an AFL team.
Conclusion.
At the end, the club saw someone who dominated juniors due to being physically ahead of everyone and failed to see it was because he was physically ahead of the competition that he was better. When getting drafted the club saw the same potential in him and Brander believed he was talented than everyone (FIGJAM). He did not have the work ethic to take him to the next level to cement his spot in the best 22 team potentially becoming a star and then he threw a tantrum when he did not get his way being a first round pick. His natural talent still showed at times at AFL level though but the lack of toughness and hardness unfortunately remains.
As The Wily Weagle perfectly put it "All the physical tools and a lot of talent, but none of the willpower."
Lessons for future drafts 2023 and beyond.
Just because someone dominated in juniors, the club's recruiters need to look at is their dominance because of being physically developed early. Still question marks if H.Reid's dominance is because he's more physically developed than his peers or because he's far more talented and skilled then everyone in the field. Assuming no injury issues in juniors, there needs to be a comparison between juniors and draft year. Injuries makes things more complicated in assessing talent.
If they perform well in juniors but drop off in their draft year then there's a good chance that player is more physically developed and may struggle at AFL level unless they have the work ethic to take their game to the next level (if they don't have the work ethic then there's a good chance that top pick may become a spud assuming no injuries).
If the player dominates in juniors and still dominates in their draft year then the next stage is do they have the work ethic to become a star at AFL level. If not then they'll likely become a solid role player, if they genuinely show determination to work hard then there's a good chance he will be a star.
I wasn't around on BF in 2017 so I read the 2017 draft megathread.
At the time, a lot of us wanted Jaidyn Stephenson at 13. Come draft day Collingwood were always going to take him and if they didn't then the Saints would've with pick 8. Once Stephenson was off the board most of us wanted Higgins (not many wanted Allen though but would've been happy if we took him at 13) so basically pick 13 for the fans was either Higgins or Allen. Then the club took Brander and we rightfully melted at the time since we did not need a tall and a mid was a priority. A lot of us had Kelly in the 30s.
Comments when we first drafted him was "He's gonna be a JK replacement" when in reality it was always Allen (he was 191 cms at the time but hasn't finished growing likely the reason why the club took Brander over him). Brander was 195 cms who's finished growing.
My guess is the recruiters were tossing up between Brander and Allen at 13 but ultimately went for Brander. Their reason (just a guess though) was that Brander is taller and can play both ends of the ground even though Allen was the better and more consistent player back then. Both of them were just as talented. I think the club wanted Higgins next especially if Allen was off the board before our pick 21 but once Richmond took him then Allen was the next choice. I wonder who would've we taken if Allen was off the board by pick 21 (Kelly seems like the obvious choice in hindsight)?
There was a good reason why Brander dominated U16s but was inconsistent as an U18 and failed to live up to his potential in the AFL (he didn't even dominate the WAFL like what Waterman does by being a class above the WAFL).
- As an U16 he was much bigger, stronger, more physically developed and had natural talent than his peers.
- As an U18 the kids started to catch up with their bodies but he was still slightly ahead of some and his physical attributes and talent made him a top 20 prospect.
- In the senior team, once everyone was physically developed and were just as strong as him. He struggled. As The Wily Weagle put it in his post.
The club in hindsight should've never taken him in the first place however Brander should've worked harder and not over rely on his physical gifts and natural talent. If he had the work ethic especially sorting out his toughness and hardness issues then I have no doubt he would still be with us today and be a best 22 player. He should've been a key defender who can go forward if needed. Key defensive depth in 2018 was Gov, Barrass and Schoey with Emac always injured. The club should've told him when he first arrived to the club "You will be playing as a key backman who can swing forward" and focused him on that only. With Gov being constantly injured these days, I'm sure he would've held down the CHB or third KPD spot. Heck even in 2022 with Darling's vax fiasco, Allen being injured for the whole year and JK also getting injured at times plus nearing the end, he would've had opportunities up forward (I'm sure he would've frustrated a lot of us when his squibbing out of the contests and failing to bring the ball to ground let alone take a contested mark I50).
What he lacked was the toughness and hardness needed to be an AFL KPP which was important in crashing packs and taking contested marks against fully grown men. The club coaches needed to tell him that he needs to take risks in crashing the pack but it was clear in training that he squibs one too many contests when training as a KPP so eventually the club turned him into a wingman where less contested ball happens.
In juniors the club saw a physically developed and talented kid who dominated juniors. As the other kids grown up and were grown into physical developed bodies, he started to lose his dominance and started becoming more inconsistent however as mentioned he still had the talent to be a top 20 prospect rather than a clear top 3 pick if he maintained his U16s form showing that it wasn't being physically ahead of everyone as a junior. Once he reached AFL level, he struggled with his physicality once he was up against grown men. He did show glimpses of his talent at times at AFL level such as being clean with ball in hand but he lacked the toughness to be an AFL level KPP overall as mentioned plenty of times here.
He had to earn his spot with work ethic and can no longer coast on his physical and natural talent gifts (like what Jack Watts did). However Brander had some sort of entitlement and that because he was naturally talented he believed he should be given the starting spot because he was drafted higher even though he did not look a class above the WAFL like what Waterman does. I'm sure he secretly resented Allen because he was getting games ahead of him as a forward because Allen was picked lower than him likely because he was shorter even though he was better than Brander in his draft year while Brander was stuck in the WAFL (Allen was the better player and should've been taken at 13, all the melts back then were justified when we took Brander and I can guarantee we would NOT be melting if we took Allen at 13 heck we could've even taken Higgins not ideal thinking now though).
Rather than put things aside and work hard to get selected, he instead threw a tantrum and when the club offered him a new contract he declined and wanted to take the easy way out and expects GWS to put him in their starting lineup having been their academy player. However GWS saw the same issues that he had at West Coast and that was his sense of entitlement for being naturally talented and expected to start without having the work ethic, they saw what we already saw that he lacked the toughness to be a AFL level key forward and they put him on the wing.
My guess is he was one of those players who was last in first out of training and didn't put in any extra work when there wasn't training or staying back to improve on something. He just came in training and in non training or match days he wants nothing to do with football since he believes that his talent can get him far which in the end proved to be his downfall and now is no longer in an AFL team.
Conclusion.
At the end, the club saw someone who dominated juniors due to being physically ahead of everyone and failed to see it was because he was physically ahead of the competition that he was better. When getting drafted the club saw the same potential in him and Brander believed he was talented than everyone (FIGJAM). He did not have the work ethic to take him to the next level to cement his spot in the best 22 team potentially becoming a star and then he threw a tantrum when he did not get his way being a first round pick. His natural talent still showed at times at AFL level though but the lack of toughness and hardness unfortunately remains.
As The Wily Weagle perfectly put it "All the physical tools and a lot of talent, but none of the willpower."
Lessons for future drafts 2023 and beyond.
Just because someone dominated in juniors, the club's recruiters need to look at is their dominance because of being physically developed early. Still question marks if H.Reid's dominance is because he's more physically developed than his peers or because he's far more talented and skilled then everyone in the field. Assuming no injury issues in juniors, there needs to be a comparison between juniors and draft year. Injuries makes things more complicated in assessing talent.
If they perform well in juniors but drop off in their draft year then there's a good chance that player is more physically developed and may struggle at AFL level unless they have the work ethic to take their game to the next level (if they don't have the work ethic then there's a good chance that top pick may become a spud assuming no injuries).
If the player dominates in juniors and still dominates in their draft year then the next stage is do they have the work ethic to become a star at AFL level. If not then they'll likely become a solid role player, if they genuinely show determination to work hard then there's a good chance he will be a star.
Branders selection was a complete shock at the time and catastrophic in hindsight. There was never a time in his entire tenure with us where an AFL career seemed assured for Brander. Never had the competitiveness or toughness you need to succeed in a key position and was unsuited anywhere else.
Right from the get go he was the opposite of Kelly, Allen and Ryan who were all taken after him who have all taken to AFL like pigs to shit. It's not really hindsight to say we should have gone down that line, either. Allen was clearly a Rolls Royce and Kelly and Liam were destroying WAFL to the point of parody.
Geelong will flog us tomorrow after being perpetually on top of AFL partly because they don't made stupid decisions like Brander and do play hardball with the likes of Kelly.
Right from the get go he was the opposite of Kelly, Allen and Ryan who were all taken after him who have all taken to AFL like pigs to shit. It's not really hindsight to say we should have gone down that line, either. Allen was clearly a Rolls Royce and Kelly and Liam were destroying WAFL to the point of parody.
Geelong will flog us tomorrow after being perpetually on top of AFL partly because they don't made stupid decisions like Brander and do play hardball with the likes of Kelly.
Last edited:
- Sep 28, 2009
- 25,232
- 37,496
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Reading FC
I was worried with Allen being too short. Basically another Waterman. No one would know if he would keep growing. Lucky he did.
- Oct 9, 2009
- 13,888
- 16,252
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Very true, I don't many were thrilled about using a pick in the 20's for mature age players.
There's a perception that mature age players should only be taken with a late pick or rookie listed.
Everyone thought Allen would be pick #1. He was already a Larke medalist (aka the best under 18 in Australia based on the carnival) was WA under age captain and obvious leader. It's not just that we jumped at Brander, we could have lost Allen and did loose Kelly. In hindsight was impetuous and stupid.
I melted hard when we took Brander but I also melted when we took Allen so what do I know
This. And we probably only grabbed Ryan when we did because Cats blinked first with TK
**** all
Ideally (and obviously now) we'd have gone Allen and then Kelly, but if we had taken Kelly at our 2nd pick this board would've melted down at the time. It's easy to say otherwise but go back to the 2017 draft thread and it was a handful of people saying he was worth that high.
As it was, people still melted hard about picking Ryan where we did
Keys
Looking for a cloud to yell at
- Moderator
- #192
Geelong aren’t infallible and still make mistakes like Brander, all clubs do
Kelly wasn’t the first person they took in that draft, the player that was is no longer on an AFL list
Their strike rate with early draft picks isn’t great but they’ve made up for that with some late round/rookie list gems and astute FA/trade acquisitions.
Remember when geelong wanted brander as part of a trade for kelly.
We should have taken that
We should have taken that
Geelong have a terrible history with recent first round draft selections.
They are good with late selections and rookiees. Have also used free agency well but they have an advantage over non Vic teams with that (we could never do what they did).
Also have a food S&C department. They've managed to keep a lot of over 30s on the park.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
I'm really not getting all the BigBBQ hidden messages going around right now, what did I miss?
Similar threads
- Locked
