Ross Lyon

[plugger66]

RL obviously made a decision when he came to the Saints that we were 3-5 players short of winning a GF and he could probably see a window open for around 5 years. He then made a decision to basically trade for certain types of players but also use the draft but not as much as most clubs.

We have traded or drafted many experienced players over the last 5 years and as many keep saying, mostly for bugger all cost. But what it did do is probably so the development of many younger players. having said that I am in no doubt had he not recruited some of the experienced players we would have struggled to have made the last 2 GF's. The problem is we didnt win one of them so apart from waking up happy in the last Saturday in September in the last 2 years we are still to win a second flag so in that regard we failed at the final hurdle.

Because of those decisions I have no doubt we now have many years of ordinary football ahead of us because we have not one very good player under 25 years of age. So after that rant the question is has RL been good to our footy club and could he have done things differently. I am of the belief that short term he was great for our club but I must say long term I really worry. As for what he could have done differently, well I suppose you could argue in 2009 when it was obvious we were going to finish top 2, he could have played some younger guys but really there isnt much I think he would change.

[saintsRrising]

because we have not one very good player under 25 years of age. .

IMO that is more to do with Bevo staying too long (as well as being under-resourced in his later years) ...and then his replacement only being so. Last years would seem to be the first year ina while where the kids we have drfating look ok for their drafting cost (though it is early days yet).

Pies recruiting of kids was poor...then they got the right recruiter.

[plugger66]

because we have not one very good player under 25 years of age. .

IMO that is more to do with Bevo staying too long (as well as being under-resourced in his later years) ...and then his replacement only being so. Last years would seem to be the first year ina while where the kids we have drfating look ok for their drafting cost (though it is early days yet).

Pies recruiting of kids was poor...then they got the right recruiter.

Yes but you could also argue we have not one good player under 25 because they werent getting played to see if they are good enough and we also traded picks that could have been used on young kids. I do agree with recruiting could have been better but we have also taken a punt on Elshaug as he isnt experienced in that area either.

[desertsaint]

was always my worry with ross - thought he'd go close to stuffing this group, and he has - but to his credit he came damn, damn close. now we wear the fallout.

would've been a lot easier to face the inevitable decline if we'd snagged a flag - but that's life.

don't think he can reload after the current group are gone - it's a final shot for ross and this group in 2012. unlikely.
he always said he's a one team coach with an expiry date - let's see if that intended expiry date gets postponed if he thinks he can develop a new group into the future.

[Thinline]

I still maintain that our 'window' was relatively injury free, so opportunities to filter players while we were excelling were few and far between.

I emphasise 'relatively'.

So perhaps that sets us apart from the stereotypical 'cycle'.

Fact is now we have some guys who may well adapt faster as a result of being held back slightly longer (ie Lynch, Stanley, Simpkin, Archer, Smith, Johnson, Winmar) and at first glance last year's crop shows at least some hint of being a reasonable one. Maybe, anyway. They all may be duds. We'll have a fair idea by Rd 20 or so won't we.

We'll also land a couple of higher choices at the end of this season. For all the doom and gloom attached to GC/GWS cherrypicking, there's still Heppell, Darling, and Gaff floating about and as for GC's selections, Bennell is (from reports) wayward and Caddy's body's failed him. Point is there'll be talent there, perhaps ready made, perhaps not in the most obvious places.

We can build a really competitive group, but its success or faliure in the shorter term will largely depend on the willingness of Roo, Montagna, Goddard, Fisher, Dal Santo, Schneider, Gilbert and even Arimitage, Gwilt, Dawson and McEvoy to commit to the process of regeneration while they still have a chance to claim a piece of the end result WITHOUT dropping their heads when it doesn't go their way.

[Spinner]

If we had the right coach from the beginning and not one that was appointed through a imaginery process we wouldnt have had to take a couple of steps back in 06 and 07.

RL only jumped on the ride half way through.

I know who I do and always will blame for not getting this group a premiership.

[Thinline]

If we had the right coach from the beginning and not one that was appointed through a imaginery process we wouldnt have had to take a couple of steps back in 06 and 07.

RL only jumped on the ride half way through.

I know who I do and always will blame for not getting this group a premiership.

I blame Tony Delaney.

Experimenting with him in the back pocket has brought us to our knees.

I said it at the Essendon game in 2000. 'We need TD at FF.' No one listened. Now look what's happened.

[maverick]

At the end of the day, we had a red hot crack, and the team to pull it off in 2009.

Riewoldt getting hurt in 2010 has cost us that one and if we are honest with ourselves the next couple of years of competing for one.

Barring some stage fright in 2009, the strategy was a winning one, history will prove otherwise.

You can blame whoever you want, I suppose if you think GT contributed to the injury toll, then maybe it warrants a thought. In my mind GT would never have got us that close so RL was the man for the time.

Let's see what St Kilda stands for now, because right now we could be 1971 heading into the 80's, or we can get some ticker and change our tragic culture.

[SaintPav]

RL needs to get as many games into Cripps and Sipposs as he can. At some stage soon Winmar and Ledger need to be given game time. Lynch also needs to be given a couple of games to see what he can do. Ditto Archer and Johnson. At some stage of this season, and it could be sooner that expected, we could have up to 7 new players out of the 22 players who played in GF1.

But, I wouldn't have a figgin clue if any of these young guys are good ebough and how far we will fall and for how long.

We still have a sound core (I think) and with a bit of cunning trading and maneuvering and some good recruiting we might be ok. I just hope we don't have to bottom out.

[SaintPav]

apart from waking up happy in the last Saturday in September in the last 2 years we are still to win a second flag so in that regard we failed at the final hurdle.

Really? I felt sick on both days. BJ taking that screamer and slotting it through is the closest thing I have ever had to St Kilda ectasy and I'm not talking about taking a little trip down Grey St.

[meher baba]

If we had the right coach from the beginning and not one that was appointed through a imaginery process we wouldnt have had to take a couple of steps back in 06 and 07.

RL only jumped on the ride half way through.

I know who I do and always will blame for not getting this group a premiership.

Oh god, don't tell me that people are going to start suggesting that it was GT's fault that we didn't win a GF in 2009 and 2010?

[saintsRrising]

Yes but you could also argue we have not one good player under 25 because they werent getting played to see if they are good enough and we also traded picks that could have been used on young kids. .

You could..plus that by trading we have had less picks.

However the players that we have had have largely not been good enough to demaond a lot more games. Unfortunately Steven and Armo could both yes have had more games...but both also have had a number of injury runs which have held them back.

Geary, Eddy etc got games...largely because they were better than some of our "kids'. And I also mean under GT too...our drafting of kids has been below the better clubs.

I just don't think that we have had that many kids who have demanded a game.

And as stated..when you are playing off in GF's it is harder for kids to geta crack as well.

I do agree with recruiting could have been better but we have also taken a punt on Elshaug as he isnt experienced in that area either.

Must admt that I was not to impressed with that as recruiting is an art/scrience in itself these days. Big risk to go for Elshaug.

[SaintPav]

Yes but you could also argue we have not one good player under 25 because they werent getting played to see if they are good enough and we also traded picks that could have been used on young kids. .

You could..plus that by trading we have had less picks.

Apart from Lovett, trading did not cost us any high picks. Schneider was the highest in the 20's I think but we have done well out of him.

[plugger66]

Yes but you could also argue we have not one good player under 25 because they werent getting played to see if they are good enough and we also traded picks that could have been used on young kids. .

You could..plus that by trading we have had less picks.

Apart from Lovett, trading did not cost us any high picks. Schneider was the highest in the 20's I think but we have done well out of him.

Thats true but low picks can sometimes fluke players. Matter of fact over the last 8 years we probably have a better record with low picks than high picks. Jimmy and Chips versus Ben and Armo. This year Siposs versus Cripps.

[Thinline]

Yes but you could also argue we have not one good player under 25 because they werent getting played to see if they are good enough and we also traded picks that could have been used on young kids. .

You could..plus that by trading we have had less picks.

Apart from Lovett, trading did not cost us any high picks. Schneider was the highest in the 20's I think but we have done well out of him.

Thats true but low picks can sometimes fluke players. Matter of fact over the last 8 years we probably have a better record with low picks than high picks. Jimmy and Chips versus Ben and Armo. This year Siposs versus Cripps.

As mentioned above all that glitters is not gold. Early days and all, but I reckon GC will be rueing taking Harley Bennell - he's a selfish nutter they say, a disaster waiting to happen - and Josh Caddy has broken down severely twice. Now both may come good of course, I don't wish ill-will, but GC could just as easily have picked up Darling, Conca, Cripps, Polec, Heppell, Sipposs etc etc...

Similarly there's some good rookies on the edges of the GWS and GC systems that present us with opportunities.

There's a ripper of a kid called Todd Grayson tearing it up for Labrador up here who was on the GC roster but was let go (probably to appease G Ablett) by keeping N Ablett. Jesse Haberfield and Matt Fowler were also a bit stiff to miss out on a spot, more a team balance thing than an indication of their abilities. And that's just here in Qld. They're out there. Go get em.

You never know what's around.

[SinCitySaint]

Our trading and drafting of recycled players has generally been poor. There have been some successes, Ray is a win, Dempster/Schneider is a huge win but then it goes back to Penny, Fraser and Hamill for any unqualified successes. Gardiner has been good when he has played but he has missed far more games than he has played while with us so he just gets a pass mark.

The down side has been that we have often paid heavily for these trades. Barry Brooks cost us a proverbial arm and a leg. We should have picked up a young guy instead of him with our number 7 pick.
We gave pick 17 for Fergus Watts in what could only be described as pure nepotism. What other club would have given up their first round pick for a slow lumbering unproven key position player just because his father works for the club. Enough has already been said about the Lovett trade.
Then there was Ackland, McGough, Birss, Clarke etc... None of whom gave us any real value maybe Birss but he only played 20 games with us. These were all selected instead of youngsters who may or may not have made it but at least they would have been a chance.

Now I am not saying what they should have done differently as hindsight is 20/20 and that is just cheap and easy. However, the decisions made have been proven to have been the wrong ones and have contributed to the position we are in today that we do not have enough decent under 25s ready to play where most other clubs do.

We have been hurt badly by our drafting and trading between 2003 - 2007 during that period we drafted only one player who you would say was an out and out star and that was Sam Fisher. We also got the can be brilliant but more often than not just servicable or a liability in Sam Gilbert and Raph Clarke and a couple of guys with some potential in Armo and McEvoy. We also got the sometimes passable but usually invisible McQualter. That is not a great strike rate in fact it is abysmal. Thank god for Sammy Fisher I say.

[SainterK]

I am pleased he appears to have indicated he is in for the long haul.

[Thinline]

I am pleased he appears to have indicated he is in for the long haul.

Yes. Pleasing.

[Megsie]

Coach bashers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SaintPav]

Coach bashers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

easy Megsie....eaazzzie...

[3rd generation saint]

What Ross should be doing now, other than seeing who hew wants to keep and who goes, is to really formulate a new game plan that makes what Collingwood etc are doing now obsolete.

[BallBanger]

Our trading and drafting of recycled players has generally been poor. There have been some successes, Ray is a win, Dempster/Schneider is a huge win but then it goes back to Penny, Fraser and Hamill for any unqualified successes. Gardiner has been good when he has played but he has missed far more games than he has played while with us so he just gets a pass mark.

The down side has been that we have often paid heavily for these trades. Barry Brooks cost us a proverbial arm and a leg. We should have picked up a young guy instead of him with our number 7 pick.
We gave pick 17 for Fergus Watts in what could only be described as pure nepotism. What other club would have given up their first round pick for a slow lumbering unproven key position player just because his father works for the club. Enough has already been said about the Lovett trade.
Then there was Ackland, McGough, Birss, Clarke etc... None of whom gave us any real value maybe Birss but he only played 20 games with us. These were all selected instead of youngsters who may or may not have made it but at least they would have been a chance.

Now I am not saying what they should have done differently as hindsight is 20/20 and that is just cheap and easy. However, the decisions made have been proven to have been the wrong ones and have contributed to the position we are in today that we do not have enough decent under 25s ready to play where most other clubs do.

We have been hurt badly by our drafting and trading between 2003 - 2007 during that period we drafted only one player who you would say was an out and out star and that was Sam Fisher. We also got the can be brilliant but more often than not just servicable or a liability in Sam Gilbert and Raph Clarke and a couple of guys with some potential in Armo and McEvoy. We also got the sometimes passable but usually invisible McQualter. That is not a great strike rate in fact it is abysmal. Thank god for Sammy Fisher I say.

You failed to mention the disgraceful decision to draft Howard a smokie with such a high pick in a strong draft...this was the dumbest decision since selecting frost (dropped off bullies list of 58) with our first pick...
Howard was a smokie and we could have taken him 126 and if we missed than what did we lose?? someone you rated 27 instead of 26.

We also gave up our 2nd pick for Brooks not just the first...strange when you think the experts at the time though him to be a good pack mark but not ruckman..

2nd pick for ackland 3rd pick for mcgough etc etc

Please no more wasted picks on ruckman..get a strong tall big bodied no-one from the major leagues for nothing and develop him to compete..

Ruckman have cost us so much...

We need to develop a running brigade something we have never had

[saintsRrising]

Thats true but low picks can sometimes fluke players. Matter of fact over the last 8 years we probably have a better record with low picks than high picks. Jimmy and Chips versus Ben and Armo. This year Siposs versus Cripps.

And that is the problem for while it is not an exact science...you earlier picks should be the more certain ones.


I get the feeling that many of our early draft picks were passed over by others for points we failed to evaluate properly.


But with the later "lucky dip" picks where all players have some form of deficiency we then even out


However Cripps is showing good signs of being a pick worth where he was taken.