3 Decisions That Cost The Club History

[Mr Magic]

Butterss coached Judd in under 14's and urged Thomas to take him BEFORE Ball, but Thomas wanted his love child first!

What?!! The president getting involved in the draft because he coached a 13yo old kid!!

You're kidding right?

The president wasn't involved in the draft Johnny, just that he suggested that in his opinion we should use our first pick on Judd, but obviously he had no say in the final decision!

Having coached Judd in the under 14's RB had seen enough to know in his opinion Judd should have been our first selection!

A good mate of mine played with Judd in the U18s and is close friends with him. He told me that he'd be a freak and was far better than anyone else in that draft.

He felt Judd was the standout that year in the draft, Hodge second then Ball behind him.

Anyone, what's done is done!


I wonder if we made a big play for Judd the second time around when he went to Carlton?

We couldn't afford him - no room in our salary cap for a new million dollar player.

[Moccha]

Butterss coached Judd in under 14's and urged Thomas to take him BEFORE Ball, but Thomas wanted his love child first!

What?!! The president getting involved in the draft because he coached a 13yo old kid!!

You're kidding right?

The president wasn't involved in the draft Johnny, just that he suggested that in his opinion we should use our first pick on Judd, but obviously he had no say in the final decision!

Having coached Judd in the under 14's RB had seen enough to know in his opinion Judd should have been our first selection!

A good mate of mine played with Judd in the U18s and is close friends with him. He told me that he'd be a freak and was far better than anyone else in that draft.

He felt Judd was the standout that year in the draft, Hodge second then Ball behind him.

Anyone, what's done is done!


I wonder if we made a big play for Judd the second time around when he went to Carlton?

Did he go the wedding?

[meher baba]

Everyone involved in footy down here in Tassie was confident Jack R would make it big. I have no problem with the argument that we didn't need another player of his type, but he was a known quantity (and quality). Armo, who I believe will eventually make it (but probably never near the star that Jack R already is) was a bit of a lucky dip: the mail on him at the time was that he was a tad slow and perhaps lacked the engine to become a first rate mid.

So I think Jack was the better bet: I reckon that, in the draft, you should always use your first round pick on a known high performer, and save the later picks for roughies.

Anyway, my Tassie mail on Archer (as a forward, not a ruckman) is also very good, so we'll see what we'll see.

[Dr Spaceman]

Butterss coached Judd in under 14's and urged Thomas to take him BEFORE Ball, but Thomas wanted his love child first!

What?!! The president getting involved in the draft because he coached a 13yo old kid!!

You're kidding right?

The president wasn't involved in the draft Johnny, just that he suggested that in his opinion we should use our first pick on Judd, but obviously he had no say in the final decision!

Having coached Judd in the under 14's RB had seen enough to know in his opinion Judd should have been our first selection!

A good mate of mine played with Judd in the U18s and is close friends with him. He told me that he'd be a freak and was far better than anyone else in that draft.

He felt Judd was the standout that year in the draft, Hodge second then Ball behind him.

Anyone, what's done is done!

I wonder if we made a big play for Judd the second time around when he went to Carlton?

We couldn't afford him - no room in our salary cap for a new million dollar player.

Plus he didn't want us

[SENsei]

Blah blah blah. Yada yada yada.

Could someone please answer me this?

Can the past be changed?


Look through your windscreen people, not the rearview mirror. You get nowhere by looking behind you all the time.

Don't dwell on the past. Focus on what is ahead.

And have a great day!

[SainterK]

And have a great day!

Thanks, you too

[SaintPav]

A feature of our finals failures since and including 1997 has been the unwillingness of Saints coaches to take a risk -throwing players around in different positions to stimulate play. Compare that to Sheedy and Blight- they played players out of position in finals to get play happening, and the gamble took off. I am a bit worried that RL will not step outside the box and try something different..he could have tried it last week.

playing players out of position is the most overrrated tactic and does not work most times according to the marshmellow martian at GWS.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Everyone involved in footy down here in Tassie was confident Jack R would make it big. I have no problem with the argument that we didn't need another player of his type, but he was a known quantity (and quality). Armo, who I believe will eventually make it (but probably never near the star that Jack R already is) was a bit of a lucky dip: the mail on him at the time was that he was a tad slow and perhaps lacked the engine to become a first rate mid.

So I think Jack was the better bet: I reckon that, in the draft, you should always use your first round pick on a known high performer, and save the later picks for roughies.

Anyway, my Tassie mail on Archer (as a forward, not a ruckman) is also very good, so we'll see what we'll see.

No everyone rated him, or he would have gone earlier.
This is what David King had to say about him, when he arrived at Richmond (where King was on the coaching panel):
"Big rump. Way too much puppy fat. And possessing footy's cardinal sin - a lack of pace.

"When he got drafted, I just wasn't sure about Jack," King said.

"He looked undersized for a key post. He was slow. He was incredibly gifted in the way he could kick the ball, but he looked to me like another one of those players who in a few years' time would be either a third tall or a player without a position."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/j ... 6031692591

So it's fair to say there were some very big question marks about him and it also seems like he's grown a few centimetres since then, as he's now almost as tall as Nick, which it seems was pretty clearly not the case back then.

[degruch]

^^^ Also the 'hype' I remember at the time too. I don't remember much being mentioned about him other than his surname. As I mentioned, even my Tigers mates have been very pleasantly surprised he's turned out this well to date...evidently, they knew much less about him than the Saintsational Draft Selectors.

[plugger66]

Everyone involved in footy down here in Tassie was confident Jack R would make it big. I have no problem with the argument that we didn't need another player of his type, but he was a known quantity (and quality). Armo, who I believe will eventually make it (but probably never near the star that Jack R already is) was a bit of a lucky dip: the mail on him at the time was that he was a tad slow and perhaps lacked the engine to become a first rate mid.

So I think Jack was the better bet: I reckon that, in the draft, you should always use your first round pick on a known high performer, and save the later picks for roughies.

Anyway, my Tassie mail on Archer (as a forward, not a ruckman) is also very good, so we'll see what we'll see.

I think Armo won the 3K time trial at the draft camp.

[SENsei]

Milan 'Pathetic' Faletic - 18 possies in a half of footy aginst Melbourne, half a dozen possies for the rest of his career.

And couldn't moderate a footy forum if he life depended on it!

[Schillaci]

I like this thread and I also like the way the OP put it out there.
**** hindsight, it is still interesting to imagine what may have been if certain draft picks had of been made.

I wonder why some posters have appeared to have been a bit upset by this thread.???

Insecure?

I've only just started reading this thread and this is as far as I've got so far...interesting that all everyone wants to do is slam the OP...I agree with the What If...? Same thought process as you Fireman.

[Schillaci]

Been through the whole thread now...and yes hindsight is a wonderful thing and with some perspective we've had our share of wins with late picks but the Judd/Ball decision has cost us and will continue to so for a few years yet.
That is the one I wish we'd got right.
Who knows if it would have delivered us a flag or not?
My opinion is that it would have.