[i]When Ross Was Boss - The Recruiter[/i]

[ace]

Pillar 5 can a guy hit a target etc.

If I am interrupting the Pillars correctly I think you’ll find that comes under Pillar 1.
Can he play?

Then why can't our guys "play".

[ace]

Pillar 5 can a guy hit a target etc.

If I am interrupting the Pillars correctly I think you’ll find that comes under Pillar 1.
Can he play?

Then why can't our guys "play" (hit a target).

[Scollop]

There's another bloke from that period...Geary has been overlooked too

It's not like he is the invisible man you know

[rodgerfox]

Regards only Steven and Armitage only came through it that time.
Can I ask for clarification?
I actually assess that period a little differently. I believe these players came through that time
McEvoy(Dual premiership ruckman), Steven (4 time B&F) Hutchings (Premiership player), Cripps (Premiership player), Stanley (Inconsistent ruckman for a finals time)
I concede only Armitage and Steven are at St Kilda but I just don’t believe from 2007 to 2010 Recruiting of young players were that bad. Especially when you consider the picks we had.

Cripps left - but the rest were sent on their way either because of their underwhelming performance and/or their abilities weren't recognised or developed.

Funny enough, at different clubs they have been developed far better.

Isn't that the whole point of the discussion?

[hayes66]

Pillar 5 can a guy hit a target etc.

If I am interrupting the Pillars correctly I think you’ll find that comes under Pillar 1.
Can he play?

Then why can't our guys "play" (hit a target).

Little unsure of the implication here so oppologises if I miss the target. (Little joke there).
If a player is such a poor kick then I think Peake would say,”He can’t play or he is only gets an average in Pillar 1 and therefore will not be a a great player.

[kosifantutti]

The saints would have recruited Rioli and Darling if I had had any say in recruitment at the Saints.

It was as obvious as dog's balls and just shows how incompetent Tosser Lyin was.

If I had any say in recruiting we would have taken Judd @ #2 & Bartel @ #5 in 2001 and not swapped #17 for Heath Black and would have grabbed James Kelly with that pick.
Instead of Josh Houlihan I would have taken Dane Swan @ #49 and as much as I liked Goose I'd have secured Stevie J @ #21.

Judd, Bartel, Kelly, Swan & Stevie J on top of our group from 2002 - 2012 = 6 x Premierships.

It's pretty easy being captain hindsight though

Yours maybe hindsight. Mine's not. Said so at the time when we overlooked Darling and Rioli, and have maintained that line ever since. Blind Freddy would have made those selection and I could never understand why we didn't go with them

Now I understand. f****** Ross the flosser tosser overruled our selection guy.

Oh, and I would have selected Judd, which was another obvious f*** up at the time.

You should have posted something in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=67127&p=1023395#p1023395
I notice some people weren't so keen on Darling.

[hayes66]

The whole point of the discussion???
I’ll admit I not sure what the whole point is??
I just wanted clarification on only two players came though so I assumed, maybe incorrectly, you were blaming recruiting.
My view and it’s only an opinion is St Kilda’s recruiting of young player through 2007 to 2010 was reasonable considering where the picks were.
Now I know that is not an opinion held by many I just disagree.
And I am trying to see and understand the assessment of how pathetic our recruiting during that period was so poor.

[rodgerfox]

The whole point of the discussion???
I’ll admit I not sure what the whole point is??
I just wanted clarification on only two players came though so I assumed, maybe incorrectly, you were blaming recruiting.
My view and it’s only an opinion is St Kilda’s recruiting of young player through 2007 to 2010 was reasonable considering where the picks were.
Now I know that is not an opinion held by many I just disagree.
And I am trying to see and understand the assessment of how pathetic our recruiting during that period was so poor.

Given you replied to my post, I assumed it was in relation to the discussion I was having.

My focus was more around the whole package of List Management and development, as opposed to recruitment specifically.

On that basis alone though, your point is valid.

For all the Matthew Clarkes, Charlie Gardiners, Andrew Lovetts, Tommy Walshs etc. that we brought in, our Recruiters did find some decent ones later in the Draft.

It's just a shame that the list management and development during the Lyon era reeked so much.


The 'coming through' comment relates to 'coming through the ranks' - not merely being selected by the Recruiters.

[hayes66]

Great. Well done. I am slow but I now get it.
Cheers.

[Enrico_Misso]

St Kilda's drafts 2007-10
2007
Ben McEvoy (9), Jack Steven (42), Fraser Gehrig (57), Eljay Connors (70)
2008
Tom Lynch (13), Rhys Stanley (47), Nick Heyne (48), Alistair Smith (62), Paul Cahill (74), Colm Begley (83)
2009
Nick Winmar (32), Jesse Smith (60), Adam Pattison (64), Will Johnson (77)
2010
Jamie Cripps (24), Sam Crocker (43), Tom Ledger (59), Arryn Siposs (75), Ryan Gamble (90), Dean Polo (103)

That says it all.
2008-2010 = the three wasted years

Terrible recruiting.
Terrible development.
Terrible trading.

[Moods]

Respectfully Rodger I believe you are over simplifying the root cause.

If the report is correct, we have Lyon pushing for the Dempster/ Schnieder trade and wanting Cripps & McEvoy over Darling & Rioli. Cripps and McEvoy may not be Darling and Rioli but they were hardly busts and Schnieder & Dempster go down in history as one of the best ever saints trades IMO.

I think Cyril went @ #10 and Darling in the 20's so plenty of other clubs had picks and did not take these two. A bigger question should have been how did none of the top 10 picks identify Dangerfield.

Lyon caused damage by not developing players and it was a costly mistake, also the recruiting of Lovett was a disaster, but I struggle to think this was the primary cause of our demise. Was our Board, Football Management, Administration etc so poor that Lyon controlled all football related decisions?

Keep in mind our picks in the Lyon era were mid to high teens not top 5 like we are enjoying (or enduring) now.

Was the last 7 seasons not enough time to undo the damage?
Why do we feel this now, was this purported to be an issue when we set about the re-build and 5 year plan in 2013?

I believe Ross in isolation is a contributing factor but over played by many of the above posts.
I also not and agree compromised drafts have hurt clubs who did not have the recruiting talent team to look outside the traditional recruitment grounds.

I don't know what the root cause was.

But I'm certain, and have been crapping on about it for ages, that the recruiting and development during the Lyon era is why we're rubbish now.

Unfortunately, due to the compromised drafts on the back of it, we were unable to do much about it.

Which left us with a gross lack of talent. Which, we had no choice to address by recruiting kids through the draft from 2014 onwards. I think we've done very well since then - however we've been left with a list devoid of senior players as a result.

People wonder why Brown gets a game. It's obvious why.

Young guys develop totally differently when surrounded by senior guys doing the heavy lifting. It's just a fact.


The root cause of why the recruiting and development during the Lyon was so putrid is up for debate. I haven't weighed into it, because aside from the article in the OP I have no idea.

But I'm certain that the root cause of our current list issues is the recruiting and development during the Lyon era, and the compromised drafts that followed it.

So the root cause of our problems is blamed on a bloke who left 7 years ago??

Are you asking me that? Or telling me?

Because that's clearly not what I said.

I don't know what the root cause was.

But I'm certain, and have been crapping on about it for ages, that the recruiting and development during the Lyon era is why we're rubbish now.



You say you don't know what the root cause was, but you say the reason we're crap is because of the Lyon era. I say that's rubbish. The Lyon era definitely has impacted why we have been crap after he left, but I say it's time to move on and stop blaming him for how we're going now.

[hayes66]

St Kilda's drafts 2007-10
2007
Ben McEvoy (9), Jack Steven (42), Fraser Gehrig (57), Eljay Connors (70)
2008
Tom Lynch (13), Rhys Stanley (47), Nick Heyne (48), Alistair Smith (62), Paul Cahill (74), Colm Begley (83)
2009
Nick Winmar (32), Jesse Smith (60), Adam Pattison (64), Will Johnson (77)
2010
Jamie Cripps (24), Sam Crocker (43), Tom Ledger (59), Arryn Siposs (75), Ryan Gamble (90), Dean Polo (103)

That says it all.
2008-2010 = the three wasted years

Terrible recruiting.
Terrible development.
Terrible trading.

Yep. Fantastic analysis. You’ve really looked at that closely with a forensic eye.
2008 Lynch, Stanley and Ray (A trade) No good because at least other clubs got four players in one year.
2009 No good because no other club got just one player. Mark Hutchings who happened to play in a premiership tagging a gun and doing a good job
2010. Yep. No good just one player. Jamie Cripps. Who happened to be a premiership player.
I’ve added up over a three year period St Kilda obtained 5 players. What a disgrace. No other club had that low a number. All other clubs got at least six or more players over that period.
And if you believe all that analysis could you study the reason for global warming as you obviously have a very astute analytical eye?

[hayes66]

Now I have got that off my chest can I try this as the narrative?
At the end of 2006 StKilda could see the chance for winning that next flag slipping away.
They appointed a coach with an astute mind in regards game plan.
Not a visionary but a for now coach.
The team after a slow start and adjusting to this very driven coach started to excel.
Consequently as their position on the ladder rose their early draft picks evaporated.
They didn’t invest heavy into developing as the club was not a power club in regards to money.
The club still drafted players but without high picks or the willingness to trade into drafts because they needed senior players for the now.
Consequently draft picks were lost
Yes. mistakes were made in their quest for that elusive flag.
Please name one club who did not make a mistake or mistakes over that period.
They gave meembers and fans three grand finals.
They lost two of them one by anguishing small margin. Against a side who incidentally won three flags in five years. And drew one.
So, because they didn’t win one of those Grand Finals.
The narrative becomes terrible drafting, terrible trading and terrible development.
I ask this question would the narrative be different if the bounce of the ball went in another direction and St Kilda had won that elusive flag, would we still say terrible trading and terrible drafting?
Or would it be considering the circumstances drafting was ok. We did drop off but it was worth it because we have our second flag and I liked the fact we went for the now whilst we had a group of super players.

[Moods]

Now I have got that off my chest can I try this as the narrative?
At the end of 2006 StKilda could see the chance for winning that next flag slipping away.
They appointed a coach with an astute mind in regards game plan.
Not a visionary but a for now coach.
The team after a slow start and adjusting to this very driven coach started to excel.
Consequently as their position on the ladder rose their early draft picks evaporated.
They didn’t invest heavy into developing as the club was not a power club in regards to money.
The club still drafted players but without high picks or the willingness to trade into drafts because they needed senior players for the now.
Consequently draft picks were lost
Yes. mistakes were made in their quest for that elusive flag.
Please name one club who did not make a mistake or mistakes over that period.
They gave meembers and fans three grand finals.
They lost two of them one by anguishing small margin. Against a side who incidentally won three flags in five years. And drew one.
So, because they didn’t win one of those Grand Finals.
The narrative becomes terrible drafting, terrible trading and terrible development.
I ask this question would the narrative be different if the bounce of the ball went in another direction and St Kilda had won that elusive flag, would we still say terrible trading and terrible drafting?
Or would it be considering the circumstances drafting was ok. We did drop off but it was worth it because we have our second flag and I liked the fact we went for the now whilst we had a group of super players.

I have no problem with the club going for broke to win a flag. BUT, Hawks, Swans and Cats and to a lesser extent the pies have managed to go for flags but remain competitive over decades.

No doubt the Dogs will say that the recruiting of Boyd on ridiculous money was worth it because of the way he played in the GF. Hindsight tells us that as things stand now, he is a dud of a footballer who had a stand out GF. they won the flag though. There's still plenty of gnashing of teeth going on out at Western Oval now though despite that flag.

I think it's fair to say that Lyon was a terrific coach but a terrible list manager. He should NEVER have been given that sort of power. Was almost like the club didn't know how to handle the success that was coming our way and didn't want to upset Lyon.

I don't like the fact that we went for broke and are now crap. It's not good enough.

[saintspremiers]

Since Winmar left we’ve been hopeless developing full blooded Aboriginal players. I reckon Cyril would’ve walked out on us early had we drafted him. We simply wouldn’t have been able to manage him properly like the Hawks did.

I know some will point to Gresh, but he isn’t full blooded like Cyril.

[rodgerfox]

You say you don't know what the root cause was, but you say the reason we're crap is because of the Lyon era. I say that's rubbish. The Lyon era definitely has impacted why we have been crap after he left, but I say it's time to move on and stop blaming him for how we're going now.

I'm not blaming him necessarily - because I don't know the root cause of why our list management and development sucked so bad during his era.

But it did.

Follow that with compromised drafts to rebuild from...And hey presto! Shitness.


Identifying why you're s***, has nothing to do with 'moving on'.

If anything, it helps you to move on as you know what not to do going forward.

Besides, this thread is literally about that era - which is why it is being discussed.

[hayes66]

Now I have got that off my chest can I try this as the narrative?
At the end of 2006 StKilda could see the chance for winning that next flag slipping away.
They appointed a coach with an astute mind in regards game plan.
Not a visionary but a for now coach.
The team after a slow start and adjusting to this very driven coach started to excel.
Consequently as their position on the ladder rose their early draft picks evaporated.
They didn’t invest heavy into developing as the club was not a power club in regards to money.
The club still drafted players but without high picks or the willingness to trade into drafts because they needed senior players for the now.
Consequently draft picks were lost
Yes. mistakes were made in their quest for that elusive flag.
Please name one club who did not make a mistake or mistakes over that period.
They gave meembers and fans three grand finals.
They lost two of them one by anguishing small margin. Against a side who incidentally won three flags in five years. And drew one.
So, because they didn’t win one of those Grand Finals.
The narrative becomes terrible drafting, terrible trading and terrible development.
I ask this question would the narrative be different if the bounce of the ball went in another direction and St Kilda had won that elusive flag, would we still say terrible trading and terrible drafting?
Or would it be considering the circumstances drafting was ok. We did drop off but it was worth it because we have our second flag and I liked the fact we went for the now whilst we had a group of super players.

I have no problem with the club going for broke to win a flag. BUT, Hawks, Swans and Cats and to a lesser extent the pies have managed to go for flags but remain competitive over decades.

No doubt the Dogs will say that the recruiting of Boyd on ridiculous money was worth it because of the way he played in the GF. Hindsight tells us that as things stand now, he is a dud of a footballer who had a stand out GF. they won the flag though. There's still plenty of gnashing of teeth going on out at Western Oval now though despite that flag.

I think it's fair to say that Lyon was a terrific coach but a terrible list manager. He should NEVER have been given that sort of power. Was almost like the club didn't know how to handle the success that was coming our way and didn't want to upset Lyon.

I don't like the fact that we went for broke and are now crap. It's not good enough.

Ah now we are getting somewhere.
I am starting to see your point.
Just on Geelong and I think Swans are similar.
Yes Swans and Cats have stayed competitive longer than the Saints.
But it’s happening. They are falling.
I don’t think either of those clubs will make the eight next year.
St kilda’s fall was partly manufactured by the trading off of players.
Goddard, Dal Santo, McEvoy, Lynch, Stanley etc.
In my opinion this was done because a new regime came in.
This was not the case with all those other clubs you mentioned.
Yes, there was changes to off field staff but not too the extent of the Saints.
What tends to happen when new regimes come in is they throw out what the previous regime did.
Why? That’s a little harder to explain but I think it’s partly because they want to justify their position and never forget it helps fed their ego.
Now this is just an opinion but I would have liked some of those administrators that were there during those heady days of 2007 to 2010 to have stayed.
Change is necessary yes but when you have massive change you tend to really run the risk of long periods in the wilderness.
Your point about us being crap now is valid.
My hope is the old saying, “Things are never as bad as they seem.”
Whilst we aren’t a great side I think bottom four isn’t right.
We are a middle of the road side.
I am very confident we will see an improved performance next season. 6 to 10th I am predicting.

[rodgerfox]

The narrative becomes terrible drafting, terrible trading and terrible development.
I ask this question would the narrative be different if the bounce of the ball went in another direction and St Kilda had won that elusive flag, would we still say terrible trading and terrible drafting?

No. It would have been the same.

And we would be in the same place as we are now (barring the 'sliding doors' factor).

But no one would have cared. That's the only difference. The facts remain the facts.

[Ghost Like]

Since Winmar left we’ve been hopeless developing full blooded Aboriginal players. I reckon Cyril would’ve walked out on us early had we drafted him. We simply wouldn’t have been able to manage him properly like the Hawks did.

I know some will point to Gresh, but he isn’t full blooded like Cyril.

I'm sorry saintspremiers, I have to strongly disagree with your assertion. That is simply inflammatory, without basis against the St Kilda football club. St Kilda, I believe, have a proud, respectful history when it comes to developing and playing indigenous footballers.

For your statement to be true you need to tell us of an indigenous player with Cyril's skills that we ruined or drove away.

Cyril spent 4 years at Scotch College, following initial teething problems, thanks to his support network was able to knuckle down and focus on becoming the AFL player he wanted to be. Whatever club Cyril went to he was going to shine. He was lucky enough to be chosen by a club on the verge of a dynasty.

It appears only Lyon's perception and shortcomings, misgivings were the issue, not the club's.

[rodgerfox]

St kilda’s fall was partly manufactured by the trading off of players.
Goddard, Dal Santo, McEvoy, Lynch, Stanley etc.
In my opinion this was done because a new regime came in.

This is the interesting part.

The idea was spot on. Brave. The execution even was fine.

However the circumstances weren't!

Getting rid of quality senior guys to 'rejuvenate' your list is great - doing it to rebuild is not.

Hawthorn for example flicked 4 or 5 old guys over two years for the same purpose. The big difference though, is that due to bringing guys like Isaac Smith, Puopolo, etc. etc. etc. through whilst the old blokes were at their prime meant that they had new senior guys ready to step straight in as the others left.

They lost quality, which is not avoidable in sport. But they didn't lose quantity.

We lost both as we didn't have a new layer of senior guys coming through.

The other obvious issue, is that we played this card during compromised drafts.

[dragit]

full blooded

not really a kosher term mate.

[Yorkeys]

And the subsequent contributions of Messers Pelchen, Bains and Watters? Is Mr Pelchen still asked for expert comments on radio? Actually I just felt a pang of sympathy for Alan.

[hayes66]

The narrative becomes terrible drafting, terrible trading and terrible development.
I ask this question would the narrative be different if the bounce of the ball went in another direction and St Kilda had won that elusive flag, would we still say terrible trading and terrible drafting?

No. It would have been the same.

And we would be in the same place as we are now (barring the 'sliding doors' factor).

But no one would have cared. That's the only difference. The facts remain the facts.

No. Your narative would be the same not mine.

[hayes66]

The other obvious issue, is that we played this card during compromised drafts.

Excellent point. When you fire, you fire!!
I remember reading in the press how St Kilda will have so many draft picks inside 20 and how many picks here and there.
And I remember thinking nowhere did it mention this will be done after we assess the strength of the drafts.
Geelong’s great era was basically built around two drafts. ‘99 & ‘01. Have a look at the depth of those drafts!!! Outstanding.
You can’t pick them if they aren’t there.
Ever tried going to the Supermarket and think I’ll buy some strawberries but none are there?

[dragit]

I wasn't against letting a few players go as Ross finished up, but we really gained very little from letting some quality players walk… if we had of held onto most of them it was still a pretty decent side around 2013, no way we would have won a spoon with this side:

Roberton Fisher Gilbert
Goddard Dempster Newnes
Montagna Ball Dal Santo
Schneider Riewoldt Lynch
Billings Stanley Cripps

F McEvoy Hayes Steven

Int from Ross Armitage Geary Milne Ray Hickey Minchington Blake