The lost years

[Con Gorozidis]

[quote=tan"]Don't forget that Geelong had about 5 "cheap" draft picks under the father-son rule (before they changed it about 2 years ago). That got them some gun players and left their early/fisrt round picks to get the best available.

I really think that gave them a huge advantage.[/quote]
Two of those three are long gone and they are still miles ahead of us.
What about freo or the pies ?
Also father sons kept them up there?
Swans? Father sons as well?

[stinger]

Its easy to answer.
you guys simply wont accept any fault from the club no matter how obvious.
'Bevo' is not a club legend and the worlds best bloke.
he was well past it and out of his league and s*** at his job.
we were under resourced and our draft strike rate was a dead set disgrace.
how did geelong end up with 5 top 50 picks if they didnt trade? Did god slip them 3 extras?
Also hard for me say who id trade because that entirely depends on what was offered.
Its not just bad luck we are on the bottom. Its is s*** management.
you cant pretend otherwise. If people want the glory for success surely they are also accountable for failure?
Everyone in a mgt position at the club from 08 to 2011 should be held accountable for where we are today.
and its not hindsight. Many warned of this years ago.

pick 17 was theirs....28 came from sydney for shane mumford...., picks 40, 42 and 56 they got from port for some reason.....the records state that they got those three picks for giving pick 88 to port...but i'm obviously missing something....

[White Winmar]

I can tell you for a fact that Bevo was ignored and patronised by his "masters" from 2003 to 2011. He would've taken Rioli and Darling, but was over ruled. He was paid a pittance under Grant Thomas, as little as 60,000 a year, with a total recruiting budget of 70,000 for most of his tenure. No interstate scouts, while the filth and Geelong paid their recruitment managers up to 300K a year and gave them full time spotters in every state of the country.

Don't Blane Bevo, he was treated like shyte, and the accompanying results followed. I hope the trout is up to it, but he's hardly qualified. That is my fear. A bloke chosen on the "good bloke" criteria and not demonstrated expertise. I have everything crossed that we get it right in the next few years, because if we don't, we're screwed. We already may be.

[stinger]

I can tell you for a fact that Bevo was ignored and patronised by his "masters" from 2003 to 2011. He would've taken Rioli and Darling, but was over ruled. He was paid a pittance under Grant Thomas, as little as 60,000 a year, with a total recruiting budget of 70,000 for most of his tenure. No interstate scouts, while the filth and Geelong paid their recruitment managers up to 300K a year and gave them full time spotters in every state of the country.

Don't Blane Bevo, he was treated like shyte, and the accompanying results followed. I hope the trout is up to it, but he's hardly qualified. That is my fear. A bloke chosen on the "good bloke" criteria and not demonstrated expertise. I have everything crossed that we get it right in the next few years, because if we don't, we're screwed. We already may be.

good to read....glad he was at least a good a judge as some on here.....

[Old Mate]

I can tell you for a fact that Bevo was ignored and patronised by his "masters" from 2003 to 2011. He would've taken Rioli and Darling, but was over ruled. He was paid a pittance under Grant Thomas, as little as 60,000 a year, with a total recruiting budget of 70,000 for most of his tenure. No interstate scouts, while the filth and Geelong paid their recruitment managers up to 300K a year and gave them full time spotters in every state of the country.

Don't Blane Bevo, he was treated like shyte, and the accompanying results followed. I hope the trout is up to it, but he's hardly qualified. That is my fear. A bloke chosen on the "good bloke" criteria and not demonstrated expertise. I have everything crossed that we get it right in the next few years, because if we don't, we're screwed. We already may be.

I think with The Pelican swooping over Trout we should do okay.

[plugger66]

I can tell you for a fact that Bevo was ignored and patronised by his "masters" from 2003 to 2011. He would've taken Rioli and Darling, but was over ruled. He was paid a pittance under Grant Thomas, as little as 60,000 a year, with a total recruiting budget of 70,000 for most of his tenure. No interstate scouts, while the filth and Geelong paid their recruitment managers up to 300K a year and gave them full time spotters in every state of the country.

Don't Blane Bevo, he was treated like shyte, and the accompanying results followed. I hope the trout is up to it, but he's hardly qualified. That is my fear. A bloke chosen on the "good bloke" criteria and not demonstrated expertise. I have everything crossed that we get it right in the next few years, because if we don't, we're screwed. We already may be.

You have had issues with Trout for some time. i know nothing about those issues and dont care but at least he has started well. Certainly better than that hack in Peake. First para seems pretty correct to me apart from the Rioli and darling thing. have no idea about that. I do know we missed Judd because we were a little smart for our own good. We thought there was no way WCE were going to take him so we thought we would get Judd and Ball. That is direct from Bevo's mouth.

[jamesmc]

Its easy to answer.
you guys simply wont accept any fault from the club no matter how obvious.
'Bevo' is not a club legend and the worlds best bloke.
he was well past it and out of his league and s*** at his job.
we were under resourced and our draft strike rate was a dead set disgrace.
how did geelong end up with 5 top 50 picks if they didnt trade? Did god slip them 3 extras?
Also hard for me say who id trade because that entirely depends on what was offered.
Its not just bad luck we are on the bottom. Its is s*** management.
you cant pretend otherwise. If people want the glory for success surely they are also accountable for failure?
Everyone in a mgt position at the club from 08 to 2011 should be held accountable for where we are today.
and its not hindsight. Many warned of this years ago.

+1

[White Winmar]

I can tell you for a fact that Bevo was ignored and patronised by his "masters" from 2003 to 2011. He would've taken Rioli and Darling, but was over ruled. He was paid a pittance under Grant Thomas, as little as 60,000 a year, with a total recruiting budget of 70,000 for most of his tenure. No interstate scouts, while the filth and Geelong paid their recruitment managers up to 300K a year and gave them full time spotters in every state of the country.

Don't Blane Bevo, he was treated like shyte, and the accompanying results followed. I hope the trout is up to it, but he's hardly qualified. That is my fear. A bloke chosen on the "good bloke" criteria and not demonstrated expertise. I have everything crossed that we get it right in the next few years, because if we don't, we're screwed. We already may be.

You have had issues with Trout for some time. i know nothing about those issues and dont care but at least he has started well. Certainly better than that hack in Peake. First para seems pretty correct to me apart from the Rioli and darling thing. have no idea about that. I do know we missed Judd because we were a little smart for our own good. We thought there was no way WCE were going to take him so we thought we would get Judd and Ball. That is direct from Bevo's mouth.

P66, I have no issues with the trout, other than he was appointed without any proven track record or demonstrated expertise as a recruiter. Many on here treat him like some sort of messiah. He is anything but, and has a long way to go before proving anything. I can't believe how willing some are willing to accept he's some sort of guru, when he's done nothing to support that. Yes, we are looking better this last year, but with picks, 3,18 and 19, you and I could've got it right. The jury is out anyway. As for 2011-12, we're a long way from making a definitive call. The trading is the responsibility of the Pelican, so the trout takes no credit there. Just asking for a bit of realism, that's all. I still maintain Bevo was treated poorly and patronised, even by the trout.

[plugger66]

I can tell you for a fact that Bevo was ignored and patronised by his "masters" from 2003 to 2011. He would've taken Rioli and Darling, but was over ruled. He was paid a pittance under Grant Thomas, as little as 60,000 a year, with a total recruiting budget of 70,000 for most of his tenure. No interstate scouts, while the filth and Geelong paid their recruitment managers up to 300K a year and gave them full time spotters in every state of the country.

Don't Blane Bevo, he was treated like shyte, and the accompanying results followed. I hope the trout is up to it, but he's hardly qualified. That is my fear. A bloke chosen on the "good bloke" criteria and not demonstrated expertise. I have everything crossed that we get it right in the next few years, because if we don't, we're screwed. We already may be.

You have had issues with Trout for some time. i know nothing about those issues and dont care but at least he has started well. Certainly better than that hack in Peake. First para seems pretty correct to me apart from the Rioli and darling thing. have no idea about that. I do know we missed Judd because we were a little smart for our own good. We thought there was no way WCE were going to take him so we thought we would get Judd and Ball. That is direct from Bevo's mouth.

P66, I have no issues with the trout, other than he was appointed without any proven track record or demonstrated expertise as a recruiter. Many on here treat him like some sort of messiah. He is anything but, and has a long way to go before proving anything. I can't believe how willing some are willing to accept he's some sort of guru, when he's done nothing to support that. Yes, we are looking better this last year, but with picks, 3,18 and 19, you and I could've got it right. The jury is out anyway. As for 2011-12, we're a long way from making a definitive call. The trading is the responsibility of the Pelican, so the trout takes no credit there. Just asking for a bit of realism, that's all. I still maintain Bevo was treated poorly and patronised, even by the trout.

Im not sure that is true about Trout and bevo. Why would he still work for him if that is the case? I certainly dont treat trout as a god but he seems like he going ok and i also think you are harsh on who he trecruited at 3, 19 and 20 this year. There were many in the picture at those picks. Who knows if he is right yet. As I said he is going well at the moment and certainly better than when peake stuffed us up completely.

[stinger]

isn't elshaug the guy we picked up in the 1989 pre-season draft who then promptly retired stating that he didn't want to play with losers like us??????...think he was....

[White Winmar]

We'll see, P66. As for the patronising part, sometimes people don't tell you what they really think of you to your face. Just say in', that's all.

[stinger]

We'll see, P66. As for the patronising part, sometimes people don't tell you what they really think of you to your face. Just say in', that's all.

[plugger66]

We'll see, P66. As for the patronising part, sometimes people don't tell you what they really think of you to your face. Just say in', that's all.

Maybe but I think bevo could see it afterall he has been involved with all types over the year. Think he is pretty street smart.

[Sainternist]

Why is the news of four years ago news today? We are all aware of this and why it's the main reason the club is where it's at today.

Fair dinkum! It's as though the footy press is repeatedly hitting us over the head with a mallet. Fingers crossed our beloved club is learning from the mistakes of the past.

[Bluthy]

Our recruiting was outstanding to build our core team - from the top picks all the way to players like Hayes and Dal Santo who were lower down to the more creative pickup ups like Gram and Gwilt. And then we made the mistake of going into "top up for a tilt at flag" mode instead of keeping the young quality kids flowing in. If we were more patient and got a better bottom six together we would have been unstoppable. There's a real lesson to learn there.

[plugger66]

Our recruiting was outstanding to build our core team - from the top picks all the way to players like Hayes and Dal Santo who were lower down to the more creative pickup ups like Gram and Gwilt. And then we made the mistake of going into "top up for a tilt at flag" mode instead of keeping the young quality kids flowing in. If we were more patient and got a better bottom six together we would have been unstoppable. There's a real lesson to learn there.

Still think it was the drafting more than the trading. It was terrible. Nearly disgusting.

[Sainternist]

The thing is, we probably wouldn't be looking back at it with disgust we had have got a flag in those two years we made the GF. We were so close to getting one. It's excruciating to look back on it. I'm tired of this whole retrospective.

Time to move on!

[hayes66]

Well lets look at him then. He was delisted and wasnt picked up in the draft and spent all year at a WAFL club. He may have spent all year at Sandy and then would have been delisted anyway if he had stayed with us. Anyway the last thing we need is another slow inside mid. We need pace outside. Why do you think our contested ball is ok but our uncontested is disgusting?[/quote]

That's a pretty could effort predicting 12months ahead if Hutchings had stayed. Any chance you could let us know the tats lotto results?
While you were predicting the future why didn't you let the club know that they would be drafting Seb Ross and Luke Dunstan? That way they need not of wasted the pick on Hutchings.
Finally one serious question, when you are assessing club success and failure at the draft do you factor in where the clubs picks are?

[plugger66]

Well lets look at him then. He was delisted and wasnt picked up in the draft and spent all year at a WAFL club. He may have spent all year at Sandy and then would have been delisted anyway if he had stayed with us. Anyway the last thing we need is another slow inside mid. We need pace outside. Why do you think our contested ball is ok but our uncontested is disgusting?

That's a pretty could effort predicting 12months ahead if Hutchings had stayed. Any chance you could let us know the tats lotto results?
While you were predicting the future why didn't you let the club know that they would be drafting Seb Ross and Luke Dunstan? That way they need not of wasted the pick on Hutchings.
Finally one serious question, when you are assessing club success and failure at the draft do you factor in where the clubs picks are?[/quote]


Yes I certainly do. You have too. And I base the Hutchings thing on having both hips operated on at the end of the season and a late start to the next season and the fact that he was slow ball winner. Something RL wasnt a fan of. And I also said may. You know what that means surely?

[ace]

Its easy to answer.
you guys simply wont accept any fault from the club no matter how obvious.
'Bevo' is not a club legend and the worlds best bloke.
he was well past it and out of his league and s*** at his job.
we were under resourced and our draft strike rate was a dead set disgrace.
how did geelong end up with 5 top 50 picks if they didnt trade? Did god slip them 3 extras?
Also hard for me say who id trade because that entirely depends on what was offered.
ffs.

Con why didnt you answer the two simple questions I asked instead of going on some rant that was obvious for everyone to see. by the way just for your info the worst years were when Peake was in charge. Yes geelong did trade Con. They traded Mumford and kept Blake. Probably cost themselves another premiership. And your last 2 lines proves how silly your first comment was. As you said you have no idea what was offerred for our players. And how do you know anything about Bevo. You really do make up a lot Con but dont say much of any substance.

so whose fault is it we are bottom? Just bad luck?.

Whose fault is it?
The draft selection team from 2004 through to 2011 and probably as far back as 2002.
You tell me who they are and I will put them in front of the firing squad.

I suspect that there would probably be a chief and plenty of his close friends. - his network.

[citywest]

People might be laughing at us now but that's ok. "The lost years" as they are calling them will be the catalyst for our next premiership/s. Mark my words!!!! We gave it our best shot between 2004 and 2010 and with a little luck could have won 2 or maybe even 4 premierships (04,05,09 &10). The fact that we have crashed down to the bottom is ok by me. I prefer it this way than hanging around the middle of the ladder for another 3 or 4 years.

What we must do now is to trade away as much as we can to grab another 3 picks in the top 20 this year. Then for the next 3 drafts (while we are still in the bottom 4), keep drafting the best youngsters in the land. Yes, it is going to be painful for another 3 years but this is our chance to load up and be top 4 again come 2020. Then we will be able to compete for a flag for a decade this time instead of just 6 or 7 years. The timing is also very good because by 2020 the Suns and the Giants would have both won a flag each by then and (hopefully) be either in decline or at least back to being beatable (and not power houses as they will be between 2015 and 2020.

So I say embrace the "Lost years" and remember they will be the catalyst for our second and third premierships come 2021 and 2022.


Mods, please bookmark this and roll it out when we win the flag in 2021.

[hayes66]

Well lets look at him then. He was delisted and wasnt picked up in the draft and spent all year at a WAFL club. He may have spent all year at Sandy and then would have been delisted anyway if he had stayed with us. Anyway the last thing we need is another slow inside mid. We need pace outside. Why do you think our contested ball is ok but our uncontested is disgusting?

That's a pretty could effort predicting 12months ahead if Hutchings had stayed. Any chance you could let us know the tats lotto results?
While you were predicting the future why didn't you let the club know that they would be drafting Seb Ross and Luke Dunstan? That way they need not of wasted the pick on Hutchings.
Finally one serious question, when you are assessing club success and failure at the draft do you factor in where the clubs picks are?

Yes I certainly do. You have too. And I base the Hutchings thing on having both hips operated on at the end of the season and a late start to the next season and the fact that he was slow ball winner. Something RL wasnt a fan of. And I also said may. You know what that means surely?[/quote]
Well Geelong having five picks inside 56 and St Kilda having one does make it a little more difficult for the recruiters then? Agree?

[Sainternist]

Mods, please bookmark this and roll it out when we win the flag in 2021.

Granted, it's good to be optimistic, but we have to see through a successful rebuild first. Not into making Nostradamus-type predictions when it's very much still early days.

[stinger]

Well lets look at him then. He was delisted and wasnt picked up in the draft and spent all year at a WAFL club. He may have spent all year at Sandy and then would have been delisted anyway if he had stayed with us. Anyway the last thing we need is another slow inside mid. We need pace outside. Why do you think our contested ball is ok but our uncontested is disgusting?

That's a pretty could effort predicting 12months ahead if Hutchings had stayed. Any chance you could let us know the tats lotto results?
While you were predicting the future why didn't you let the club know that they would be drafting Seb Ross and Luke Dunstan? That way they need not of wasted the pick on Hutchings.
Finally one serious question, when you are assessing club success and failure at the draft do you factor in where the clubs picks are?

Yes I certainly do. You have too. And I base the Hutchings thing on having both hips operated on at the end of the season and a late start to the next season and the fact that he was slow ball winner. Something RL wasnt a fan of. And I also said may. You know what that means surely?

Well Geelong having five picks inside 56 and St Kilda having one does make it a little more difficult for the recruiters then? Agree?[/quote]



slow ball winner..??what does that mean?...he was a prodigeous ball winner......an accumulator of possessions...who was give f*** all chances at the saints.....this for an under 18's state captain...unbelievable imhfo......his only option was to go back to state league level where it was obvious he would catch the eye of both wa sides...and he did.....poor show by the saints.....obvious to me that a few on here have not caught on.....or caught up with his true history

[hayes66]

Well lets look at him then. He was delisted and wasnt picked up in the draft and spent all year at a WAFL club. He may have spent all year at Sandy and then would have been delisted anyway if he had stayed with us. Anyway the last thing we need is another slow inside mid. We need pace outside. Why do you think our contested ball is ok but our uncontested is disgusting?

That's a pretty could effort predicting 12months ahead if Hutchings had stayed. Any chance you could let us know the tats lotto results?
While you were predicting the future why didn't you let the club know that they would be drafting Seb Ross and Luke Dunstan? That way they need not of wasted the pick on Hutchings.
Finally one serious question, when you are assessing club success and failure at the draft do you factor in where the clubs picks are?

Yes I certainly do. You have too. And I base the Hutchings thing on having both hips operated on at the end of the season and a late start to the next season and the fact that he was slow ball winner. Something RL wasnt a fan of. And I also said may. You know what that means surely?

Well Geelong having five picks inside 56 and St Kilda having one does make it a little more difficult for the recruiters then? Agree?

slow ball winner..??what does that mean?...he was a prodigeous ball winner......an accumulator of possessions...who was give f*** all chances at the saints.....this for an under 18's state captain...unbelievable imhfo......his only option was to go back to state league level where it was obvious he would catch the eye of both wa sides...and he did.....poor show by the saints.....obvious to me that a few on here have not caught on.....or caught up with his true history[/quote]
Yes I agree. This whole thing about having an operation and then getting delisted because of it is a red herring. If that's the case let's hope none of our new draftee's have operations.
He was delisted because the match committee under valued him. It is the same as Tom Lynch. Yes we received pick 37 for him but he would be handy for us now. Where we are crying out for a lead up third tall forward. The match committee didn't rate him.