Bill James said:Hampson blows that theory away
But Hampson can’t hit the curve ball, it's a work in progress
Bill James said:Hampson blows that theory away
Tigertough1974 said:A lot of stuff in your post, the question i have is do you think good character is not important? as your making a point of this... football ability is eye of the beholder especially young ability, hence many many at each club watching them, needless to say FJ got a lot wrong, being of good character is vital to them maximizing their potential IMO
Going for blokes who are talented but have iffy character risks you getting blokes like garlett from hawksRedanTiger said:We are all sitting here trying to understand how and if the recruiting philosophy will change with this change in personnel.
My post was only about the contrast between Jackson and Clarke.
In looking at my previous posts I now realise that I used the wrong quote about the addition of Williams rather than this one about Clarke's philosophy.
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2014-10-02/tigers-go-oneonone-with-draft-hopefuls
I do not think good character is unimportant (few double negatives there), however I don't think it's essential as Clarke says in that article.
“Good people in good football clubs, make great football clubs.”
IMO if you recruit any staff, rejecting the ones who do not exhibit GOOD character, you may limit your results.
Examples of juniors who did not show GOOD character and were downgraded due to it would be both Franklin and Darling.
I think character is a key aspect. Note I have not said GOOD character.
IMO it takes all types to be successful.
GOOD character tends to lead to solid citizens (as I put it previously). The ones who don't rock the boat.
IMO Having an entire team of that type can be as bad as having too many "bad boys" or "loose cannons".
Finally I agree with you that judgement of football ability is in the eye of the beholder.
I'd even extend it out from there into personal qualities like character.
All recruitment eventually comes down to subjective opinion.
It's why we're all still trying to get a handle on Clarke.
Prince Gwilliam said:Talking to a mate the other night who's friend is a Dogs recruiter.
He was saying their main criteria and mantra is elite decision making and explained that's why they took Daniel when all others shied away because of height.
Can't argue with their process in last five years. Shame we didn't pay credence to the same skillset.
spook said:So in 2013, Williams wanted McCarthy, Clarke wanted Cripps, and Frank chose Lennon?
If Clarke has more hits like that it's easy to see why he got the job.
Prince Gwilliam said:Talking to a mate the other night who's friend is a Dogs recruiter.
He was saying their main criteria and mantra is elite decision making and explained that's why they took Daniel when all others shied away because of height.
Can't argue with their process in last five years. Shame we didn't pay credence to the same skillset.
I assume you mean 2010-13. In 2014 we drafted Menadue, Drummond, Butler, Short, Castagna, who are all quicker than Ellis. Then again, so is McIntosh (2012), so do you mean in the first round?bullus_hit said:That's a good sign, if Clarke realises the importance of recruiting genuine midfielders then he's half way there. That was always going to be Frank's undoing, he also ignored a lot of the athletic testing which makes turning a flanker into a midfielder even more improbable. From 2010 - 2014 the quickest player we recruited was Ellis, all the rest were in the bottom 30% for pace and all were average distance runners. It's certainly possible to overcome these limitations but there must be some other compelling qualities such as contested ball winning ability and overall production. These measures also need to be assessed against the quality of opposition. Hopefully we have turned the corner now that Clarke is calling the shots.
spook said:I assume you mean 2010-13. In 2014 we drafted Menadue, Drummond, Butler, Short, Castagna, who are all quicker than Ellis. Then again, so is McIntosh (2012), so do you mean in the first round?
Leysy Days said:Can vouch this is correct.
Can also 100% say they were mad keen on Vlastuin and projected him to play midfield ala Heppell's full time move there.
This will continue to be an interesting comparison for years, I reckon.bullus_hit said:I still contend we should have taken Weller & Blakely who seem to be progressing much faster than Ellis & Menadue.
Weller maybe, blakley nospook said:This will continue to be an interesting comparison for years, I reckon.
wammo said:Off topic, but if Ellis made the AA under 22 squad 3 years running, wouldn't that put him close to being a straight swap for Prestia? Or is my impatience with Brandon's game getting the better of me.?