Worst List in the Comp for the Next few years

[Liverpool]

Garbage. Get your picks right and the rest follows. Get a well paid recruiting network. Get smarter with what you have. Push all spare money into the recruiting department. Have some footballing morals and stick to them. Invest in youth, invest in skillful players, trade at a high (push Jackson and McGuane for extra thrid and fourth rounders), have a plan, give it team. The Richmond supporter base will gave a rebuild time if it is done the right way.

I think you are putting the cart before the horse mate.
We've had top picks before and either wasted them on the likes of Fiora (3), JON (8), or Pettifer (9) or traded them away for recycled players....thats because we haven't had a decent recruiting and/or devlopment infrastructure in place.

If you get that right FIRST then regardless of whether you get pick-1, pick-2, or pick-3 in the draft...you will still be able to spot and draft a very good young player as well as develop him into an elite AFL player.

 

[jb03]

Has anyone posting in this thread read Emma Quayle's article comparing where North and Richmond could be in 2012? Take a deep breath and have a look, she makes a lot of sense.

She is comparing us to the only other list in the comp that is perhaps as bad as ours. Try comparing our list to the other 14 clubs. It is depressing.

 

[Liverpool]

excuses. something we are good at is making excuses and if premierships were awarded for excuse making our trophy cupboard would be busting at the seams.
it hasn't stopped clubs like the bulldogs, st.kilda, north being competitve when they've been underesourced. harwthorn too nearly went bust and nearly merged. where were their finances when they stuck to a rebuilding process axed duds and won a flag?
had we axed overpaid duds instead of signing them up on more money year after year, contract after contract we would have been able to replace them with kids on less money and financed the football department with the change. doesn't take a genius to figure that out - obviously no geniuses at punt rd
stop making excuses and just admit we have never stuck to a proper process of rebuilding the list.

Harry,
Its not excuses....its fact.
You look at the interstate clubs who have a recruiting network where they can squirrel away the likes of Cox, Sandilands, Bock, etc onto rookie lists for them to develop under their tutelage until they are ready to be let loose as senior AFL players.
They are spotted early on before any Victorian clubs (especially someone like Richmond who Wallace said didn't have a full-time recruiter until 2005.....let alone a network of them scouring the country!!) even get a glimpse of them.

You mention Saints (1 flag in their history), Bulldogs (1 flag in their history), and North (on the back of Carey who Miller apparently got and we had at the club for a number of years).....then Hawthorn, who got their OFF-FIELD stuff in order first before going around using their high draft picks.

as a pro tanker i have doubts about both cameron and jackson but i realise and recognise that we have to take part in the nd we might as well have early picks than late picks and make it easier on ourselves.

This is what I am saying Claw......you and others want us to lose games, have people you don't even trust use (or waste) these draft picks, and then we find ourselves in exactly the same position again....then what?
You copy/paste the tanking thread again in 2011 when you and others determine our list to be sh!t and we need to tank to get more draft picks? :
Its cart before the horse stuff.

Its like a company having the best machinery and the best personnel on the floor....yet a board and a CEO who couldn't run a p!ss-up in a brewery...do you think that company is going to survive?
Its the same with the footy club...you can have all the top-10 picks you like each year but if you haven't got a good recruitment network and then a development coaching network to get these players from good juniors to elite AFL players, then you are wasting your time tanking....because in the end it ruins the corporate dollar and membership numbers as well.

 

[Harry]

Harry,
Its not excuses....its fact.
You look at the interstate clubs who have a recruiting network where they can squirrel away the likes of Cox, Sandilands, Bock, etc onto rookie lists for them to develop under their tutelage until they are ready to be let loose as senior AFL players.
They are spotted early on before any Victorian clubs (especially someone like Richmond who Wallace said didn't have a full-time recruiter until 2005.....let alone a network of them scouring the country!!) even get a glimpse of them.

You mention Saints (1 flag in their history), Bulldogs (1 flag in their history), and North (on the back of Carey who Miller apparently got and we had at the club for a number of years).....then Hawthorn, who got their OFF-FIELD stuff in order first before going around using their high draft picks.

geez your full of it greenburg. how have the saints, bulldogs and north managed to be competitive while we've been a joke? how can these clubs play regular finals and manage top 4 finishes while we look for the next excuse?

 

[Liverpool]

geez your full of it greenburg. how have the saints, bulldogs and north managed to be competitive while we've been a joke? how can these clubs play regular finals and manage top 4 finishes while we look for the next excuse?

Its pretty simple Harry....have a look at pick-19 in 2007 as an example...we use it to get McMahon...the Bulldogs use it to get a good young player.

These clubs have used their draft picks wisely....we haven't.

No point having top draft picks if we don't know how to use them.

 

[Harry]

Its pretty simple Harry....have a look at pick-19 in 2007 as an example...we use it to get McMahon...the Bulldogs use it to get a good young player.

These clubs have used their draft picks wisely....we haven't.

No point having top draft picks if we don't know how to use them.

so where did the dogs find all this money to enable them to trade mcmahon to us and recruit a kid with the pick they got? must have cost them a fortune becuase by your reasoning it takes alot of finances to utilise the draft to its optimum.

 

[the claw]

fair dinkum its like pulling teeth.no ones arguing with you livers we all agree almost to a man i would say that we have to get recruiting right this more than anything get recruiting right and you will find most development issues will take care of themselves.

how long have i been saying fix recruiting and the rest will take of itself.

the problem is right at this minute right now this moment we have recruiting problems. but at the same time we have to participate in the draft. what do you propose we do until we fix our recruiting problems you never answer this. you surely have an alternative for the interim.
with the problems we have we are better of having early picks than later picks. this is true even if you have good personell in place but its even more true when you dont. i keep asking what other option do we have this yr to grow the list other than the nd.
we still have to use pick 7 or what ever and risk getting it wrong it would have been better to go with pick 3 and 17 19 than the picks we will get.
good people there or bad we have to go thru the process livvers. you dont seem capable of grasping this. going thru the correct process would at least be recognition that they realise what they have got wrong.
i would rather go thru the right process and fail than the wrong one and do what we have done for the past 27 yrs.
what is the right process is what this debate is all about. to a few of us that is easy and clear.

and livvers ffs by all means go all out to fix footy dept issues.its not what we are debating we all know we have to be better in this area.as i said ive been on about it since 2002.

the club has shown even with a poor footy dept it can get top 4 picks right deledio tambling and cotchin prove this. poor recruiting staff or good we could hardly stuff up picks 2, 1, 3, 1, 4. picks 19, 18, 19. 18. are other picks we could have had on top of the firt rounders the last 3 drafts with a proper bottoming out process. we may have got a couple of these wrong but even then i doubt it.

finally livers you want to get the cart behind the horse where it belongs. cattle first culture and winning will take care of itself.

in this regard we do have to get recruiting right its the life blood of all footy teams and is the biggest determining thing of success or failure. when we climb and are stuck with pick 14 as our first pick our recruiters will then have to earn their money.
mate i hope you grasp what is being said this time around i hate going around in circles no one anywhere is arguing about recruiting development its not the dbate we all agree the question is what do we do in the interim give up on the process i dont think so.

oh finally finally the mcmahon scenario. again process livvers yeah those bozoes got it wrong. but if we went thru the right process 19 would have been used on selwood.the club admitted as much. even if we used it in the draft and got it wrong it would have been the right process.

 

[Harry]

costs nothing to stick to the right recruiting process. costs money executing it but costs nothing sticking to it.

 

[Brodders17]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

allen: hasnt impacted
armitage: 21 yr old midfielder who has struggled for a game this year.
baker: too small. too old. average kick.
ball: no2 pick who cant get a game.
begley: lions reject.
blake: 189cm ruckman/kpd. too small.
clarke r: high draft pick who has done little. PREnders would have called for trade
clakre x: ditto.
del santo: dropped last year. PREnder wouldve traded. would be howled at for being soft
dawson: hawks reject.
dempster: swans reject
eddy: average player
fisher l: has played 55games in 6 years.
fisher s: didnt consolidate his spot until he was 23yrs old.
gardiner: wce reject. recruited as a 28yr old after playing no games the previous year, and 18 the previous 4.
geary: rookie pick. going well.
gilbert: 194cm flanker.
goddard: pick 1 who took 4 years to be considered a good player, and 6 to be a star. PREnders wouldve traded.
gram:lions reject
gwilt: flanker who is just starting to consolidate his spot in the team as a 22yr old.
hayes: star pick 11. is nearly 30. PREnders wouldve tried to trade.
hudgton: 33yr old. shouldve been pensioned off.
jones: cant kick. missed by all other clubs til he was 24.
king: reject, recruited at 29, behind blake!
koschitzke: failed to live upto no2 pick. PREnders would have calling for his trade.
macquire: injured. PREnders would have wanted his delisting.
mcevoy: good young ruckman.
mcqualter:glass half full type.
milne: until this year had no defensive game. PREnders wouldve traded post 2007, when he kicked 32goals, and aver 12 possies. similar to his 06 year.
montagna: in 2005 was a 22yr old, averaging 15possies and less than a goal a game. PREnders wouldve have traded/delisted.
ray: doggie reject. soft flanker.
riewoldt: star. cant kick a goal tho. mentally soft??
schneider: swan reject.
stevens: promising kid. very small.

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

 

[Ridley]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

allen: hasnt impacted
armitage: 21 yr old midfielder who has struggled for a game this year.
baker: too small. too old. average kick.
ball: no2 pick who cant get a game.
begley: lions reject.
blake: 189cm ruckman/kpd. too small.
clarke r: high draft pick who has done little. PREnders would have called for trade
clakre x: ditto.
del santo: dropped last year. PREnder wouldve traded. would be howled at for being soft
dawson: hawks reject.
dempster: swans reject
eddy: average player
fisher l: has played 55games in 6 years.
fisher s: didnt consolidate his spot until he was 23yrs old.
gardiner: wce reject. recruited as a 28yr old after playing no games the previous year, and 18 the previous 4.
geary: rookie pick. going well.
gilbert: 194cm flanker.
goddard: pick 1 who took 4 years to be considered a good player, and 6 to be a star. PREnders wouldve traded.
gram:lions reject
gwilt: flanker who is just starting to consolidate his spot in the team as a 22yr old.
hayes: star pick 11. is nearly 30. PREnders wouldve tried to trade.
hudgton: 33yr old. shouldve been pensioned off.
jones: cant kick. missed by all other clubs til he was 24.
king: reject, recruited at 29, behind blake!
koschitzke: failed to live upto no2 pick. PREnders would have calling for his trade.
macquire: injured. PREnders would have wanted his delisting.
mcevoy: good young ruckman.
mcqualter:glass half full type.
milne: until this year had no defensive game. PREnders wouldve traded post 2007, when he kicked 32goals, and aver 12 possies. similar to his 06 year.
montagna: in 2005 was a 22yr old, averaging 15possies and less than a goal a game. PREnders wouldve have traded/delisted.
ray: doggie reject. soft flanker.
riewoldt: star. cant kick a goal tho. mentally soft??
schneider: swan reject.
stevens: promising kid. very small.

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

Interesting post. In what season can we expect this RFC list to win a minimum of 19 games?

 

[Brodders17]

Interesting post. In what season can we expect this RFC list to win a minimum of 19 games?

i think we already have enough rejects. we just need a couple more years to pick up some aging rucks, and for the rest of the list to come good. 2012 i think we will be close to undefeated.

 

[Tigers of Old]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

Guilty as charged and a good post Brodders.

What's been the single biggest change in their turnaround?

The coach IMO. Lyon has done a splendid job since coming out of Paul Roos school.

 

[CK]

the following is the saints list, who many said had missed the opportunity and would need to rebuild.

allen: hasnt impacted
armitage: 21 yr old midfielder who has struggled for a game this year.
baker: too small. too old. average kick.
ball: no2 pick who cant get a game.
begley: lions reject.
blake: 189cm ruckman/kpd. too small.
clarke r: high draft pick who has done little. PREnders would have called for trade
clakre x: ditto.
del santo: dropped last year. PREnder wouldve traded. would be howled at for being soft
dawson: hawks reject.
dempster: swans reject
eddy: average player
fisher l: has played 55games in 6 years.
fisher s: didnt consolidate his spot until he was 23yrs old.
gardiner: wce reject. recruited as a 28yr old after playing no games the previous year, and 18 the previous 4.
geary: rookie pick. going well.
gilbert: 194cm flanker.
goddard: pick 1 who took 4 years to be considered a good player, and 6 to be a star. PREnders wouldve traded.
gram:lions reject
gwilt: flanker who is just starting to consolidate his spot in the team as a 22yr old.
hayes: star pick 11. is nearly 30. PREnders wouldve tried to trade.
hudgton: 33yr old. shouldve been pensioned off.
jones: cant kick. missed by all other clubs til he was 24.
king: reject, recruited at 29, behind blake!
koschitzke: failed to live upto no2 pick. PREnders would have calling for his trade.
macquire: injured. PREnders would have wanted his delisting.
mcevoy: good young ruckman.
mcqualter:glass half full type.
milne: until this year had no defensive game. PREnders wouldve traded post 2007, when he kicked 32goals, and aver 12 possies. similar to his 06 year.
montagna: in 2005 was a 22yr old, averaging 15possies and less than a goal a game. PREnders wouldve have traded/delisted.
ray: doggie reject. soft flanker.
riewoldt: star. cant kick a goal tho. mentally soft??
schneider: swan reject.
stevens: promising kid. very small.

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

Outstanding work Brodders, output off-field just as good as your work on-field.

Gee we could do with Brodders on-field at the moment. Great player.

And Scoop, get your own Avatar!!!

 

[Big Cat Lover]

Harry,
Its not excuses....its fact.
You look at the interstate clubs who have a recruiting network where they can squirrel away the likes of Cox, Sandilands, Bock, etc onto rookie lists for them to develop under their tutelage until they are ready to be let loose as senior AFL players.
They are spotted early on before any Victorian clubs (especially someone like Richmond who Wallace said didn't have a full-time recruiter until 2005.....let alone a network of them scouring the country!!) even get a glimpse of them.

You mention Saints (1 flag in their history), Bulldogs (1 flag in their history), and North (on the back of Carey who Miller apparently got and we had at the club for a number of years).....then Hawthorn, who got their OFF-FIELD stuff in order first before going around using their high draft picks.


This is what I am saying Claw......you and others want us to lose games, have people you don't even trust use (or waste) these draft picks, and then we find ourselves in exactly the same position again....then what?
You copy/paste the tanking thread again in 2011 when you and others determine our list to be sh!t and we need to tank to get more draft picks? :
Its cart before the horse stuff.

Its like a company having the best machinery and the best personnel on the floor....yet a board and a CEO who couldn't run a p!ss-up in a brewery...do you think that company is going to survive?
Its the same with the footy club...you can have all the top-10 picks you like each year but if you haven't got a good recruitment network and then a development coaching network to get these players from good juniors to elite AFL players, then you are wasting your time tanking....because in the end it ruins the corporate dollar and membership numbers as well.

So are you saying with the right coach and development personnel with our current list we can challenge the best sides in the comp?

So the likes of players King, McGuane, White, Jackson, Hislop, Pattison and Polo who all play regularly in the "1sts" are capable of being developed into B+/A- type footballers? Do you really think that?

All these guys give nothing less than 100% when they play (and I assume train) but all have significant deficiencies that no amount of "development" will improve enough to help Richmond compete for a premiership. If they are in your starting 22 premierships are a pipe dream.

Same goes for the likes of Schulz, Hughes, JON, Polak, Silvester. These guys are not up to it.

Players like Edwards, Graham & Connors show talent but it is unknown if they will make it to be "good" footballers.

We don't know if Post, Vickery, Reiwoldt & Collins will go on to be very good footballers although they appear to have the tools necessary.

All of Rance/Post/Reiwoldt/Graham or Browne & Vickery need to make the grade for us to be competitive in the next 3-5 years. IMO much more important they make it than the Collins, Connors, Edwards etc. If your big guys are no good forget it.

I am definitely a pro tanker given the lack of depth on our list. There are no guarantees with drafting but 3 picks in the top 20 meant a better chance of adding to our depth than 2 - simple logic really.

In 2 years time when Melbourne climb past us on the ladder will you be wondering how they did it? Or will you put it down to superior recruiting and developing?

 

[seven]

not saying the tiges are anywhere near the saints, but its not exactly what PREnders would consider a well drafted,well constructed list. they have traded picks. only have one high-top 5- pick making a real impact. held onto aging players. recruited aging players. have a few average kicks. their key defenders are rejects, dawson, too short, blake-189cm, too old and short, maxie, 84kgs, gilbert, or injured, macquire. and they are 19-0.

Wasn't all beer and skittles when he first started. But to his credit and the players they got themselves on top of the ladder looking very good.

 

[Liverpool]

so where did the dogs find all this money to enable them to trade mcmahon to us and recruit a kid with the pick they got? must have cost them a fortune becuase by your reasoning it takes alot of finances to utilise the draft to its optimum.

No, it doesn't cost a lot of money....only the money you spend on the right personnel.

For example, how much did the Dogs spend on Scott Clayton?
Who did we spend our money on?

We look back and scratch our heads at the draft picks and who we drafted......and who other clubs drafted after us......when maybe instead, we should be looking at our "recruiting" of off-field personnel even more stringently.

 

[Liverpool]

fair dinkum its like pulling teeth.no ones arguing with you livers we all agree almost to a man i would say that we have to get recruiting right this more than anything get recruiting right and you will find most development issues will take care of themselves.

how long have i been saying fix recruiting and the rest will take of itself.

finally livers you want to get the cart behind the horse where it belongs. cattle first culture and winning will take care of itself.

Sorry Claw...I'm not into the "development will take care of itself" and other really important factors 'just happening'.

Nothing 'just happens' or 'takes care of itself'.....in fact, I would think it was this attitude that has put us in this position to begin with.

Look at the Saints......they pretty much have the same personnel that Grant Thomas had but players that were not unlike some of the so-called "duds" we have are now playing bloody good footy. Mainly due to the coaching staff, the game-plan, and the culture of the club changing.
All off-field decisions.

You can say that Lyon had the cattle to begin with......well, I could turn and say if you think Richmond haven't got the cattle then don't you think its is very important to get the right coach, right recruiter, and right devlopment staff in place FIRST so we DO get the right cattle and do utitlise our draft picks right?
And who knows....if we do that...maybe some of the cattle we actually have now aren't as bad as people think...ala the Saints and some of their players (Gilbert, Jones, Gardiner, McQualter, etc).....some of those players might not be there now if Lyon didn't come in.

As for development "taking care of itself"......nah, I think if we had a proper development and fitness staff at the club, we'd be in a lot better shape.
The young players coming through, like Lids and Bling, who have been at the club 5 years would be better and more consistent players I reckon as a result.
Better physically....able to hold tackles, run hard...as well as being better mentally.

These things just don't care of themselves.

 

[Scoop]

And Scoop, get your own Avatar!!!

Hahahah. Just saw that myself and had a chuckle. Fair play to ya Calvin Klien you had Dr Nick first.

Time to move the avatar to another area of Richmond that is a mockery.

 

[Liverpool]

So are you saying with the right coach and development personnel with our current list we can challenge the best sides in the comp?
So the likes of players King, McGuane, White, Jackson, Hislop, Pattison and Polo who all play regularly in the "1sts" are capable of being developed into B+/A- type footballers? Do you really think that?
All these guys give nothing less than 100% when they play (and I assume train) but all have significant deficiencies that no amount of "development" will improve enough to help Richmond compete for a premiership. If they are in your starting 22 premierships are a pipe dream.

The that thing mate....is the current list giving 100% every week?
According to Rawlings...the answer is no...."losing culture"....and going on about Cousins turns up every week to play and questioned the other players.

You could say that maybe the likes of Gilbert, Jones, McQualter, Gardiner, Dawson, etc were in the same boat with St.Kilda before even this season.
heck, last season they were struggling to make the top-8 halfway through and dropped Milne and Dal Santo.

When you get the right people in place....the right structures...the right training (are they training at 100% compared to other clubs?)...the right development...the right mentality...then all of a sudden things can change.

Look at Collingwood....a team with 2 or 3 really good players.....yet because of the TEAMWORK and how strong they are off-field, they are in the top-4.
On paper...dare I say it...our list is more talented that Collingwoods....but teamwork..they *smile* all over us.

 

[IanG]

fair dinkum its like pulling teeth.no ones arguing with you livers we all agree almost to a man i would say that we have to get recruiting right this more than anything get recruiting right and you will find most development issues will take care of themselves.

Absolute crap considering the struggle for Lids and Bling to get the best out of themselves. And you can bet of we got Franklin or Mitch Clark the following year we would have had to get the development spot on to get them in the same situation they are in right now.