James Fantasia

[GVGjr]

I've read a lot of criticism and frustration leveled at Eade, Smorgon and the players but nothing directed to the Football Operations Manager. How does Fantasia escape the same level of scrutiny?
No doubt he has done some good things at the club but we have bungled a couple of trades since Clayton left and now we are having a bad run so surely Fantasia should be put under the microscope as well.

[Sedat]

Excellent thread topic GVGjr.

Fantasia is largely derided by Adelaide supporters for being a poor recruiter, and I personally struggle to come up with anything of value he has brought to the table at the Dogs other than to lighten Rocket's non-core footy load (which to be fair was out of control in 2007, so someone was needed to fill this role).

Upgrading Mulligan and giving a fringe player like DJ a 3 year deal rank among the more ridiculous decisions that Fantasia has signed off on - 3 years!! I don't think DJ has even played 3 games in the last 3 years.

He certainly didn't handle the Lake contract negotiations particularly well either to be honest. Clayton's expert contract negotiation skills have been missed as sorely as his eye for talent, perhaps even more so.

When it was Rocket and Clayton together, I had supreme confidence during trade week that we won't get reamed (we never did) and that we will keep everyone we want to - I don't feel anywhere near as confident with Fantasia and Dalrymple behind the wheel alongside Rocket.

[ledge]

I would Imagine that the coach would surely get together with the recruiters and contract makers in some form to discuss worth of a player.

[chef]

I've read a lot of criticism and frustration leveled at Eade, Smorgon and the players but nothing directed to the Football Operations Manager. How does Fantasia escape the same level of scrutiny?No doubt he has done some good things at the club but we have bungled a couple of trades since Clayton left and now we are having a bad run so surely Fantasia should be put under the microscope as well.

And Dalrymple as well?

[chef]

Excellent thread topic GVGjr.

Fantasia is largely derided by Adelaide supporters for being a poor recruiter, and I personally struggle to come up with anything of value he has brought to the table at the Dogs other than to lighten Rocket's non-core footy load (which to be fair was out of control in 2007, so someone was needed to fill this role).

Upgrading Mulligan and giving a fringe player like DJ a 3 year deal rank among the more ridiculous decisions that Fantasia has signed off on - 3 years!! I don't think DJ has even played 3 games in the last 3 years.

He certainly didn't handle the Lake contract negotiations particularly well either to be honest. Clayton's expert contract negotiation skills have been missed as sorely as his eye for talent, perhaps even more so.

When it was Rocket and Clayton together, I had supreme confidence during trade week that we won't get reamed (we never did) and that we will keep everyone we want to - I don't feel anywhere near as confident with Fantasia and Dalrymple behind the wheel alongside Rocket.

The even crazier thing is we even traded for him when we could have just picked him up for nothing.

[GVGjr]

And Dalrymple as well?

He would report to Fantasia and yet we have been caught out with some trades. Now I can accept a miss or two by the new boy but recruiting was Fantasia's main claim to fame and we have made at least one too many errors.
In this instance I'm more interested in why the Footy Operations Manager isn't copping the same heat in the media and by our supporters.

[GVGjr]

Upgrading Mulligan and giving a fringe player like DJ a 3 year deal rank among the more ridiculous decisions that Fantasia has signed off on - 3 years!! I don't think DJ has even played 3 games in the last 3 years.

He certainly didn't handle the Lake contract negotiations particularly well either to be honest. Clayton's expert contract negotiation skills have been missed as sorely as his eye for talent, perhaps even more so.

When it was Rocket and Clayton together, I had supreme confidence during trade week that we won't get reamed (we never did) and that we will keep everyone we want to - I don't feel anywhere near as confident with Fantasia and Dalrymple behind the wheel alongside Rocket.

He upgraded or signed off on Mulligan when we clearly had the opportunity to just give him another season as a rookie.
We upgraded Hooper too early from my perspective. 3 year to DJ is an unnecessary risk and really our list management isn't great. As you say, the Eade and Clayton partnership was a good one although my views have been that we never cut into the list deep enough before Clayton's departure.

Rocket might be part of the problem with some player retention etc but in my opinion if Rocket doesn't get another contract Fantasia's position should be untenable as well.

[chef]

He would report to Fantasia and yet we have been caught out with some trades. Now I can accept a miss or two by the new boy but recruiting was Fantasia's main claim to fame and we have made at least one too many errors.
In this instance I'm more interested in why the Footy Operations Manager isn't copping the same heat in the media and by our supporters.

That's fair enough and understandable.

[Greystache]

It's a good question GVGjr, to be honest it's probably because the average supporter calling for Eade's head doesn't actually know what Fantasia's job is.

Like we've discussed in other threads, there's been some strange list decisions in the past 2 years and Eade wasn't the final decision maker.

[LostDoggy]

I've read a lot of criticism and frustration leveled at Eade, Smorgon and the players but nothing directed to the Football Operations Manager. How does Fantasia escape the same level of scrutiny?
No doubt he has done some good things at the club but we have bungled a couple of trades since Clayton left and now we are having a bad run so surely Fantasia should be put under the microscope as well.

In my opinion, the whole football department, management, coaches and leadership are at fault for Sundays performance. So Fantasia should be a big part of a review.

[Maddog37]

So what does he actually do?

[boydogs]

The list is fine, the application has been inconsistent. I read last week we had won more quarters than anyone, and just been smashed in lapses. Eade hasn't got the players following instructions. The list is not that different to last year, its underachieving this season.

I'm not calling for Eade's head, but he and the players have a job ahead of them.

[alwaysadog]

He would report to Fantasia and yet we have been caught out with some trades. Now I can accept a miss or two by the new boy but recruiting was Fantasia's main claim to fame and we have made at least one too many errors.
In this instance I'm more interested in why the Footy Operations Manager isn't copping the same heat in the media and by our supporters.

I have considerable support for the main thrust of this thread and I would expect a thorough review of the Football Department to occur at season's end, but I don't think that recruiting is responsible for recent performances.

It might not help in seasons to come, but for now we need to look closer to the coal face.

[bornadog]

So what does he actually do?

I was thinking the same thing. Is he responsible for hiring the assistants or does he leave that to Rocket? Does he have the final say at the MC meetings?

I know for a fact that in recruitment, Rocket doesn't have a lot to do with it. He will indicate the type of players he feels he needs, and the recruiters will come back with a list. Rocket may go through a few tapes and give his input and opinion but has to rely on the recruiters assessment on the player. But things like list management, salary cap contract negotiation is down to Fantasia.

[GVGjr]

I have considerable support for the main thrust of this thread and I would expect a thorough review of the Football Department to occur at season's end, but I don't think that recruiting is responsible for recent performances.

It might not help in seasons to come, but for now we need to look closer to the coal face.

Neither do I. From my perspective, Eade's boss has been under performing and I believe the example of two trades periods where Dalrymple didn't quite nail the agreements is a direct reflection on Fantasia's management. Surely someone who comes from a recruiting background like Fantasia did hasn't lost the art of dotting the i's on trades.

He's been getting an easy passage as far as I am concerned.

Lets hope any review of the footy department is independent to Fantasia's position.

[Ghost Dog]

Good thread and interesting reading. clearly alot of ins and outs.
Hooper decision has been a bit of a balls up hasn't it. 2 years......

[Remi Moses]

I for the life of me can't work out why we haven't implemented the Forward press !
Also would like to know why the players went against Eade's instructions not to handball through it. We've either got non thinking players or they're given up listening to the message.
Sidenote. How the he'll did Nathan Djkuerra get a three year contract!!
Mind boggling:eek:

[bornadog]

I for the life of me can't work out why we haven't implemented the Forward press !
Also would like to know why the players went against Eade's instructions not to handball through it. We've either got non thinking players or they're given up listening to the message.
Sidenote. How the he'll did Nathan Djkuerra get a three year contract!!
Mind boggling:eek:

The first part of your post is in the wrong thread, but your second part = Fantasia's negotiating skills.

[Sockeye Salmon]

The even crazier thing is we even traded for him when we could have just picked him up for nothing.

Had we kept pick 57 I know we would have selected Schofield anyway, so no harm done.

[boydogs]

Had we kept pick 57 I know we would have selected Schofield anyway, so no harm done.

I thought Puopolo was above Schofield on our list, but was taken at 66 by Hawthorn before we selected Schofield at 74

[GVGjr]

Had we kept pick 57 I know we would have selected Schofield anyway, so no harm done.

It's not really the point. The fact is the mistake shouldn't have been made and Fantasia should have made sure it wasn't.

[chef]

Had we kept pick 57 I know we would have selected Schofield anyway, so no harm done.

That depends on who we would have taken with pick 74.

[Sockeye Salmon]

That depends on who we would have taken with pick 74.

Skinner

The other two we wanted were Jeremy Howe of Melbourne (pick 30-ish) and Ariel Steinberg (?) of Essendon who went about pick 40.

Puopolo was further down the list.

[Mofra]

And Dalrymple as well?
Dalrymple still is in the "wait and see" period, having only had two drafts; 2009 he took longer term players (jury still out, Thorne already cut but Markovic looks an inspired choice) and in 2010 he really just had scraps to work with, as he can't (and shouldn't) get credit for Wallis & Libba.

Pretty happy with the reports on Schofield and Dalhaus as a rookie though - they both showed a bit during the intra-club game at the start of the year and both could realistically debut this year.

[ratsmac]

^^ totally Agree with this ^^

[LostDoggy]

I've read a lot of criticism and frustration leveled at Eade, Smorgon and the players but nothing directed to the Football Operations Manager. How does Fantasia escape the same level of scrutiny?
No doubt he has done some good things at the club but we have bungled a couple of trades since Clayton left and now we are having a bad run so surely Fantasia should be put under the microscope as well.

Gary, you know that I've posted about being consistently frustrated with our performance during trade week, contract negotiations and drafting periods. Not necessarily with the end result with specific players (which is largely out of the hands of the front office anyway) but with the actual performance in terms of negotiations, decision making etc. -- while Clayton at GC was wheeling and dealing his way through a dozen loopholes in the last couple of years, we seemed very reactive and the focus seemed to be around one or two players (Everitt, Hill), topping up with fringe players (or trying to replace aging club legends by trading in non-performing youngsters at other clubs) or wasting time dealing with recalcitrants at Hawthorn rather than any clear, long-term strategy, sometimes ending up with the right decisions only by default or luck rather than any proactive one-upmanship on our part.

Our Howard draft, ironically the one that we HAD to get right considering the decline of the class of '99, has been dire (only Markovic, a mature-age punt taken at 70+ can be considered any kind of success at all at this point) -- long-termism is fine, but a draft also has to help address some shorter term needs, and neither our first or second picks from that are anywhere near AFL standard yet and probably won't be for another year, no matter how much we would like to hope. 4 years, nearly half a decade, is FAR too long to wait for a couple of mid-sized half-back flankers (and we are none the wiser as to whether they'll make it) -- those two picks should be already consistently contributing to the senior team, which would make a hell of a difference (imagine another Ward-type in the middle, for example, or a good little goalsneak).

In isolation, one or two puzzling decisions are just that, but when clubs only have a handful of opportunities every year to get the jump on everyone else, and a limited list from which to extract performances, one or two mistakes a year add up pretty quickly, especially in terms of depth -- our not-that-great first and second round recruiting leaves us looking a little bit like Richmond in the Wallet years, some inconsistent rookie list grunt here and there but largely class-deficient and relying on players with significant and difficult-to-rectify flaws.

--

Having said all that, we are operating on a relative shoestring -- would a larger scouting network have helped? (Ironically also, precisely because we are cash-strapped, smart recruiting or innovative off-field strategies would have gone some way to help make up the disadvantage while on the other hand, indifferent recruiting and front office performance, while obviously a symptom of not having enough resources, compounds the rich-poor gap -- maybe this was inevitable: for all the talk of equalisation, the playing field is as skewed as ever.)

[MrMahatma]

Gary, you know that I've posted about being consistently frustrated with our performance during trade week, contract negotiations and drafting periods. Not necessarily with the end result with specific players (which is largely out of the hands of the front office anyway) but with the actual performance in terms of negotiations, decision making etc. -- while Clayton at GC was wheeling and dealing his way through a dozen loopholes in the last couple of years, we seemed very reactive and the focus seemed to be around one or two players (Everitt, Hill), topping up with fringe players (or trying to replace aging club legends by trading in non-performing youngsters at other clubs) or wasting time dealing with recalcitrants at Hawthorn rather than any clear, long-term strategy, sometimes ending up with the right decisions only by default or luck rather than any proactive one-upmanship on our part.

Our Howard draft, ironically the one that we HAD to get right considering the decline of the class of '99, has been dire (only Markovic, a mature-age punt taken at 70+ can be considered any kind of success at all at this point) -- long-termism is fine, but a draft also has to help address some shorter term needs, and neither our first or second picks from that are anywhere near AFL standard yet and probably won't be for another year, no matter how much we would like to hope. 4 years, nearly half a decade, is FAR too long to wait for a couple of mid-sized half-back flankers (and we are none the wiser as to whether they'll make it) -- those two picks should be already consistently contributing to the senior team, which would make a hell of a difference (imagine another Ward-type in the middle, for example, or a good little goalsneak).

In isolation, one or two puzzling decisions are just that, but when clubs only have a handful of opportunities every year to get the jump on everyone else, and a limited list from which to extract performances, one or two mistakes a year add up pretty quickly, especially in terms of depth -- our not-that-great first and second round recruiting leaves us looking a little bit like Richmond in the Wallet years, some inconsistent rookie list grunt here and there but largely class-deficient and relying on players with significant and difficult-to-rectify flaws.

--

Having said all that, we are operating on a relative shoestring -- would a larger scouting network have helped? (Ironically also, precisely because we are cash-strapped, smart recruiting or innovative off-field strategies would have gone some way to help make up the disadvantage while on the other hand, indifferent recruiting and front office performance, while obviously a symptom of not having enough resources, compounds the rich-poor gap -- maybe this was inevitable: for all the talk of equalisation, the playing field is as skewed as ever.)
The Howard choice is the on Dalrymple needs to be judged on. A hail Mary many other clubs didn't have on their radar. Great if it turns out, stupid if not. Im still surprised with the hit/miss nature of first rounders, and for mine it's not the place to risk it.

I'm not confident in our drafting under Dal - and given we're trading a lot lately, maybe the rest of the footy dept aren't either...

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Gary, you know that I've posted about being consistently frustrated with our performance during trade week, contract negotiations and drafting periods. Not necessarily with the end result with specific players (which is largely out of the hands of the front office anyway) but with the actual performance in terms of negotiations, decision making etc. -- while Clayton at GC was wheeling and dealing his way through a dozen loopholes in the last couple of years, we seemed very reactive and the focus seemed to be around one or two players (Everitt, Hill), topping up with fringe players (or trying to replace aging club legends by trading in non-performing youngsters at other clubs) or wasting time dealing with recalcitrants at Hawthorn rather than any clear, long-term strategy, sometimes ending up with the right decisions only by default or luck rather than any proactive one-upmanship on our part.

Our Howard draft, ironically the one that we HAD to get right considering the decline of the class of '99, has been dire (only Markovic, a mature-age punt taken at 70+ can be considered any kind of success at all at this point) -- long-termism is fine, but a draft also has to help address some shorter term needs, and neither our first or second picks from that are anywhere near AFL standard yet and probably won't be for another year, no matter how much we would like to hope. 4 years, nearly half a decade, is FAR too long to wait for a couple of mid-sized half-back flankers (and we are none the wiser as to whether they'll make it) -- those two picks should be already consistently contributing to the senior team, which would make a hell of a difference (imagine another Ward-type in the middle, for example, or a good little goalsneak).

In isolation, one or two puzzling decisions are just that, but when clubs only have a handful of opportunities every year to get the jump on everyone else, and a limited list from which to extract performances, one or two mistakes a year add up pretty quickly, especially in terms of depth -- our not-that-great first and second round recruiting leaves us looking a little bit like Richmond in the Wallet years, some inconsistent rookie list grunt here and there but largely class-deficient and relying on players with significant and difficult-to-rectify flaws.

--

Having said all that, we are operating on a relative shoestring -- would a larger scouting network have helped? (Ironically also, precisely because we are cash-strapped, smart recruiting or innovative off-field strategies would have gone some way to help make up the disadvantage while on the other hand, indifferent recruiting and front office performance, while obviously a symptom of not having enough resources, compounds the rich-poor gap -- maybe this was inevitable: for all the talk of equalisation, the playing field is as skewed as ever.)

This is a very good response. Your last paragraph reference to operating on a shoestring budget is a big factor as this has been a major problem we have had going right back as I can recall, when Michael Malthouse was senior coach at the Bulldogs. In recent times we have also sought the continued support of generous supporters to finance rookies with Williamstown also now weighing in with financial support in this area. The topping up with rejects from other clubs rarely works as we have experienced this year and previously.
The bonus for us has been the father/son rule with Liberatore and Wallis and also potentially Ayce Cordy, with possibly others to come like Mark Hunter's son.

[Topdog]

It's a good question GVGjr, to be honest it's probably because the average supporter calling for Eade's head doesn't actually know what Fantasia's job is.


I'm not calling for Rockets head but I was never 100% certain what Fantasia does and thus he has escaped my radar

[Grantysghost]

Sidenote. How the he'll did Nathan Djkuerra get a three year contract!!
Mind boggling:eek:

I cant believe this either! Tells you how much notice i take 3 years seems too much for a guy who has no senior experience. Someone at the Cats must have sold him well, either that or we were so desperate for speed we paid over the odds.

[Desipura]

I believe GWS were looking at him so I don't know whether we would look at trading him for a pick in the next year or two

[Ghost Dog]

Fantasia! is it his real name?

[LostDoggy]

Fantasia! is it his real name?

Yes, the origin comes from Venice Italy from the Fantuzzi Family , just some useless trivia I picked up roundabout

.

[Ghost Dog]

Excellent thread topic GVGjr.

Fantasia is largely derided by Adelaide supporters for being a poor recruiter, and I personally struggle to come up with anything of value he has brought to the table at the Dogs other than to lighten Rocket's non-core footy load (which to be fair was out of control in 2007, so someone was needed to fill this role).

Upgrading Mulligan and giving a fringe player like DJ a 3 year deal rank among the more ridiculous decisions that Fantasia has signed off on - 3 years!! I don't think DJ has even played 3 games in the last 3 years.

He certainly didn't handle the Lake contract negotiations particularly well either to be honest. Clayton's expert contract negotiation skills have been missed as sorely as his eye for talent, perhaps even more so.

When it was Rocket and Clayton together, I had supreme confidence during trade week that we won't get reamed (we never did) and that we will keep everyone we want to - I don't feel anywhere near as confident with Fantasia and Dalrymple behind the wheel alongside Rocket.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/portals/0/images_bulldogs/2010%20player%20pics/FANTASIA_James_246.jpg

Agreed
Where are we at with DJ? if he doesn't play soon, reflects poorly on this choice of player.
As it says in the OP, up to fans to learn about how the club works, not just lump it on the coach, identify who the weak links are in our club and hold them to account.

[azabob]

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/portals/0/images_bulldogs/2010%20player%20pics/FANTASIA_James_246.jpg

Agreed
Where are we at with DJ? if he doesn't play soon, reflects poorly on this choice of player.
As it says in the OP, up to fans to learn about how the club works, not just lump it on the coach, identify who the weak links are in our club and hold them to account.

Isn't it funny how things turn around? After the 2007 season it was highlighted Eade was doing "too much" from a media perspective and from an overall football operations perspective.
When we got back on track in 2008, 2009 and 2010 Im sure majority commented how well Fantasia has performed and helped Eade out.

As earlier said we as a club have made a few interesting trade choices and contract offers.
If I recall correctly Scott Clayton helped with contracts and did all trading by himself (with assistance from Eade).
Clayton and Wells (geelong) are the two clear standouts when it comes to all things recruiting and trading.

My point being it was always going to be very hard to replace Clayton, but it doesn't excuse errors that are occurring.

Did Fantasia lead the football department review at the end of 2010?

[SonofScray]

I am not familiar with his role in the nuts and bolts sense so he escapes my criticism. Should the role be more prominent in fans thinking around the team?

[Happy Days]

The Howard choice is the on Dalrymple needs to be judged on. A hail Mary many other clubs didn't have on their radar. Great if it turns out, stupid if not. Im still surprised with the hit/miss nature of first rounders, and for mine it's not the place to risk it.


The Howard choice is even more curious given that players selected after him (Pittard and Tapscott) who play the same role were both more proven performers at u/18 level, and have proven thus far to be better at AFL level.

Clayton picked his share of smokies, but this, so far, just seems as if Fantasia and Dal overthought their first draft.

[LostDoggy]

The Howard choice is even more curious given that players selected after him (Pittard and Tapscott) who play the same role were both more proven performers at u/18 level, and have proven thus far to be better at AFL level.

Clayton picked his share of smokies, but this, so far, just seems as if Fantasia and Dal overthought their first draft.

I doubt Fantasia has any say in drafting

[GVGjr]

I am not familiar with his role in the nuts and bolts sense so he escapes my criticism. Should the role be more prominent in fans thinking around the team?

I guess my belief is that if Eade is coming under fire it has to be a reflection on Fantasia as well.

[Remi Moses]

Dalrymple still is in the "wait and see" period, having only had two drafts; 2009 he took longer term players (jury still out, Thorne already cut but Markovic looks an inspired choice) and in 2010 he really just had scraps to work with, as he can't (and shouldn't) get credit for Wallis & Libba.

Pretty happy with the reports on Schofield and Dalhaus as a rookie though - they both showed a bit during the intra-club game at the start of the year and both could realistically debut this year.

Agree with this. Can anyone tell me why as a collective our group is such a poor kicking side now? This has to be a priority at the draft table, Hawthorn showed us up big time Sunday.

[Sedat]

Just for the public record, it was Fantasia's call to reject Pelican's late offer of picks 37 and 66 for Josh Hill, and justified this decision by stating that other clubs think he is worth a top 20 pick in a diluted draft. Sure thing James :rolleyes:

We heard from Fantasia every week when we were flying in the top 4 and he has completely disappeared from public view in 2011 now that we are struggling, with Rocket hung out to dry. I am struggling to rationalise what value Fantasia has added to our club since he arrived, other than to relieve Rocket of some meanial duties that were detracting from his coaching priorities in 2007. Our contract negotiations have been a shambles since Fantasia took over this function from Clayton. Fantasia's negotiations during trade week have been poor to say the least, and he has made some very questionable contract decisions and list management decisions that have already been well documented on this thread.

Rocket is in the gun but even his biggest detractors acknowledge that he is a coach of genuine quality and compares well with his compatriots. How does Fantasia compare with Geoff Walsh? How does he scrub up against Neil Balme? If we are serious about sweeping the broom through the kennel, Fantasia should be the first one gone IMO.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Just for the public record, it was Fantasia's call to reject Pelican's late offer of picks 37 and 66 for Josh Hill, and justified this decision by stating that other clubs think he is worth a top 20 pick in a diluted draft. Sure thing James :rolleyes:

We heard from Fantasia every week when we were flying in the top 4 and he has completely disappeared from public view in 2011 now that we are struggling, with Rocket hung out to dry. I am struggling to rationalise what value Fantasia has added to our club since he arrived, other than to relieve Rocket of some meanial duties that were detracting from his coaching priorities in 2007. Our contract negotiations have been a shambles since Fantasia took over this function from Clayton. Fantasia's negotiations during trade week have been poor to say the least, and he has made some very questionable contract decisions and list management decisions that have already been well documented on this thread.

Rocket is in the gun but even his biggest detractors acknowledge that he is a coach of genuine quality and compares well with his compatriots. How does Fantasia compare with Geoff Walsh? How does he scrub up against Neil Balme? If we are serious about sweeping the broom through the kennel, Fantasia should be the first one gone IMO.

This.

[LostDoggy]

Yep, Sedat: agreed. You've tied up all my post-season, contract and trade complaints over the past couple of years into one post -- as an under-resourced club the last thing we need is to coast along in the one area where creativity and negotiation skill can be a great leveller. GVG has been vocal for a few years now about the need to cut deeper -- in a year where we were going to get two father-sons, an opportunistic thinker would have seen it as a real chance to trade for a few more first/second round picks and bolster that age group and give our 2010 draft a leg up on every other club's (bar GC). On the other hand, a bog-standard status quo thinker sees every draft as the same: a chance to get an even spread of one first draft, one second draft etc. etc., and was thus happy enough that we were getting Mitch and Libba. Collingwood, which brought in quality players via creative negotiations with GC, were opportunistic. We, in relaxing with the knowledge that we were getting two kids we ALREADY HAD IN THE BAG FOR YEARS, were just status quo observers (unless you count trading for players who were going to be delisted anyway).

[Sedat]

Our trade week work from 2005 to 2008 was outstanding under the stewardship of Scott Clayton/Rocket. Getting Aker for pick 34 (ridiculous steal at the time as his on-field output proved), doing whatever it took to offload Rawlings and salary cap space off our books, picking up McDougall for 2 minor pick downgrades (it didn't work out but it was creative thinking and cost bugger-all to do), establishing Ben Hudson's trade value at between pick 22 (our current pick at the time) and 30 and then ensuring that we had a pick 30 to give to Adelaide for Hudson (we did this with some crafty pick exchanges with West Coast that allowed us to upgrade our picks in almost every round of that draft), McMahon for pick 19 (nuff said), not being shy about trading away fringe players like Sam Power and Shane Birss for lower picks (I guess Fantasia would think these guys were top 20 picks in that draft year as well :rolleyes:).

I certainly don't have any level of comfort in trade week under Fantasia's guidance, nor has he given me any reason to have any.

[Mofra]

I certainly don't have any level of comfort in trade week under Fantasia's guidance, nor has he given me any reason to have any.
Trade week I can almost call a pass (getting Sherman cheaper than the Swans offer helps) - it's the contracts which erode my confidence in his ability.

Mulligan under contract, signing up Hooper after one game, 3 years for Djerkurra (does anyone seriously think he wouldn't have signed on for two?).
Some puzzling decisions that aren't entirely logical to the outside observer.

[Sedat]

Trade week I can almost call a pass (getting Sherman cheaper than the Swans offer helps) - it's the contracts which erode my confidence in his ability.
I'll come clean and state that I've never been a Sherman fan but I do understand the logic behind getting a player with his skill set to the club. What I didn't like about this trade was that the Harbrow pick could have been used to lure Andrew Walker to the club, a player I rate infinitely higher than Sherman (as this season has borne out). When Hawthorn used their Campbell Brown compo pick on David Hale, it limited our ability to trade into a position with the Hawks for Josh Hill that would have gotten us a pick to satisfy Carlton's needs for Walker. I'd never put myself in a position to rely on Pelican's goodwill to then orchestrate a follow-up trade elsewhere - it just won't happen, and we were left twiddling our thumbs as expected until 1.50pm on the last day of trade week. Commiting to Sherman for the Harbrow pick diluted our options to trade for Walker even further.

[LostDoggy]

I'll come clean and state that I've never been a Sherman fan but I do understand the logic behind getting a player with his skill set to the club. What I didn't like about this trade was that the Harbrow pick could have been used to lure Andrew Walker to the club, a player I rate infinitely higher than Sherman (as this season has borne out). When Hawthorn used their Campbell Brown compo pick on David Hale, it limited our ability to trade into a position with the Hawks for Josh Hill that would have gotten us a pick to satisfy Carlton's needs for Walker. I'd never put myself in a position to rely on Pelican's goodwill to then orchestrate a follow-up trade elsewhere - it just won't happen, and we were left twiddling our thumbs as expected until 1.50pm on the last day of trade week. Commiting to Sherman for the Harbrow pick diluted our options to trade for Walker even further.

THIS.

By all accounts Walker was desperate to come over too and would have busted a gut to contribute (as he is doing at Carlton) -- instead we're stuck with a lacklustre Hill (although I have to admit I love his super-clean little lightning handballs out of traffic - wrong thread though).

[Sedat]

THIS.

By all accounts Walker was desperate to come over too and would have busted a gut to contribute (as he is doing at Carlton) -- instead we're stuck with a lacklustre Hill (although I have to admit I love his super-clean little lightning handballs out of traffic - wrong thread though).
Oh and we couldn't even use our 3rd round pick as a sweetener because we threw this away without any fight to get DJ, a player that was about to get chopped by the Cats in any event. We could easily have done a Tim Callan/Andrew McDougall style 'trade down a few spots' type trade for DJ and kept that (slightly lower) 3rd round pick, and use this as a sweetener on another trade. You never know, might have come in handy. It's the little things like this that Fantasia is all at sea with compared to Clayton. Little things in isolation don't mean a great deal, but added together collectively creates a perception that our key negotiator in trade week is a complete pushover.

[LongWait]

Are we seriously blaming Fantasia for our current performance? Offering DJ a three year deal and not trading Hill (who seems to have had Rocket's support) is the reason we are bloody awful? And have we forgotten the Clayton legacy of wasting numerous first round draft picks?

Sure we need to conduct a thorough review of all aspects of the club and all key personnel. But to identify Fantasia as being the first to go when those who wish to do so can't describe his role at the club is a bit puzzling to me.

And as for peer comparisons... Rocket will be the longest serving coach in league history never to have won a premiership by the year's end. He is truly in a class of his own by that measure.

[The Underdog]

I'll come clean and state that I've never been a Sherman fan but I do understand the logic behind getting a player with his skill set to the club. What I didn't like about this trade was that the Harbrow pick could have been used to lure Andrew Walker to the club, a player I rate infinitely higher than Sherman (as this season has borne out). When Hawthorn used their Campbell Brown compo pick on David Hale, it limited our ability to trade into a position with the Hawks for Josh Hill that would have gotten us a pick to satisfy Carlton's needs for Walker. I'd never put myself in a position to rely on Pelican's goodwill to then orchestrate a follow-up trade elsewhere - it just won't happen, and we were left twiddling our thumbs as expected until 1.50pm on the last day of trade week. Commiting to Sherman for the Harbrow pick diluted our options to trade for Walker even further.

My understanding was that we couldn't fit Walker into the salary cap. Once the Minson deal with GC fell through and with the Harbrow pick committed to Sherman, there was no way we could either afford him or pay him. Walker may have been your choice (and maybe the right choice) but we targetted Sherman and made him the priority. To be honest, given where were at at the time, I can't really question what the club did in this instance.

[LostDoggy]

What's Fantasia good at then? I remember him riding on the coattail on the crows premierships but how much was he involved?

[LostDoggy]

My understanding was that we couldn't fit Walker into the salary cap. Once the Minson deal with GC fell through and with the Harbrow pick committed to Sherman, there was no way we could either afford him or pay him. Walker may have been your choice (and maybe the right choice) but we targetted Sherman and made him the priority. To be honest, given where were at at the time, I can't really question what the club did in this instance.

Wait -- Collingwood, with a Premiership list, managed to get Tarrant and Krakeour in under the cap and offloaded Fraser's contract in the process.

What kind of money are we spending on fringe players that our cap is overflowing? Be that as it may, isn't this precisely the job of the front office -- ie. to balance our cap so that we can be competitive at trade week? If we don't have space in our cap to trade for Walker, that would be Fantasia's remit as well -- it's having the ability to plan forward and not just be reactive -- if we don't have space in the cap because of contracts to the likes of Hooper, DJ, Mulligan, Moles etc. that really brings into question the competence of our scouts -- one solid AFL player is worth much more than a handful of second-hand fringe players that will never cement a spot in any side.

[Sedat]

Are we seriously blaming Fantasia for our current performance? Offering DJ a three year deal and not trading Hill (who seems to have had Rocket's support) is the reason we are bloody awful? And have we forgotten the Clayton legacy of wasting numerous first round draft picks?
I'm asking for some accountability to be thrust in the direction of the person that our senior coach reports to and who is in charge of our entire footy dept, not an unreasonable request I'd have thought.


Sure we need to conduct a thorough review of all aspects of the club and all key personnel. But to identify Fantasia as being the first to go when those who wish to do so can't describe his role at the club is a bit puzzling to me.
I'm in complete agreeance with you that all aspects of the club need to be reviewed at season's end.


And as for peer comparisons... Rocket will be the longest serving coach in league history never to have won a premiership by the year's end. He is truly in a class of his own by that measure.
That is a spurious stat that does not prove in any way, shape or form that Rocket cannot coach. He has proven over 14 years to be an above-average practitioner in the art of coaching. He is not without fault but his achievements should not be swept under the carpet due to one misleading and largely irrelevant stat.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Oh and we couldn't even use our 3rd round pick as a sweetener because we threw this away without any fight to get DJ,

We gave them a pick they didn't even use.

[LongWait]

I'm asking for some accountability to be thrust in the direction of the person that our senior coach reports to and who is in charge of our entire footy dept, not an unreasonable request I'd have thought.

I was objecting to the wholesale blame-shifting that I perceived to be going on - absolving Eade and scapegoating Fantasia. Everyone needs to be examined and I think we agree on that.

I'm in complete agreeance with you that all aspects of the club need to be reviewed at season's end.

Yep.

That is a spurious stat that does not prove in any way, shape or form that Rocket cannot coach. He has proven over 14 years to be an above-average practitioner in the art of coaching. He is not without fault but his achievements should not be swept under the carpet due to one misleading and largely irrelevant stat.

Again, I was pointing out to those who argue that Fantasia doesn't stack up against the best of his peers, that Eade's record doesn't stack up well against the best of his peers. Not saying that Rocket can't coach, simply that it is hard to argue with the facts. In a few weeks time he will have coached for longer without achieving a Premiership than anyone in the history of the game. The stat is not misleading at all - how is it misleading for goodness sake? I am not "sweeping Eade's achievements under the carpet" but trying to express an opinion that Fantasia is not the only figure in the football department whose performance must be questioned. Rodney Eade has had 7 pre-seasons and 6 full home and away seasons as coach and therefore probably should shoulder the majority of the credit for our on-field successes and the majority of the blame for our on-field failures.

[Topdog]

This thread is about James Fantasia hence the heading 'James Fantasia'.

There are already 5 or 6 other threads about Eade's coaching ability or lack there of.

No one has shifted blame onto James as he has a different role but we must review all facets of the club and at the moment it would appear that James hasn't done particularly well.

[Jasper]

I contacted GVG about the thread when he first posted it as I thought it was out of character and he provided me with a good explanation.
Sedat has now chimed in strongly and a few others, normally 100% pro Eade/Club etc, have also followed and endorsed the anti Fantasia theme.
Is there a bit more to this focus on Fantasia that I'm not aware of?

Anyway it's good to see a critique of the club without the likes of Bornadog shouting it down.

[comrade]

I contacted GVG about the thread when he first posted it as I thought it was out of character and he provided me with a good explanation.
Sedat has now chimed in strongly and a few others, normally 100% pro Eade/Club etc, have also followed and endorsed the anti Fantasia theme.
Is there a bit more to this focus on Fantasia that I'm not aware of?

Anyway it's good to see a critique of the club without the likes of Bornadog shouting it down.

There are (rightly) a number of threads discussing Rodney Eade's performance. Why shouldn't there be a thread about Fantasia, the man 'manages' our football department?

In defence of bornadog, he only really shouts down criticism when there is no justification. Any moron can pot someone, but backing it up with some rationale goes a long way - just as it has in this thread.

The whole 'pro Club/pro Eade' diss is getting really boring - aren't we all pro-Club at the end of the day?

[azabob]

Reading through this thread it obvious with all the little things added up he has made some blunders.

Was he in charge of the 2010 review? If so did Rose put him in charge of it?

Assuming there is another review at years end who should Garlick get to head it up?

[LongWait]

This thread is about James Fantasia hence the heading 'James Fantasia'.

There are already 5 or 6 other threads about Eade's coaching ability or lack there of.

No one has shifted blame onto James as he has a different role but we must review all facets of the club and at the moment it would appear that James hasn't done particularly well.

If you are having a crack at me please read my first post on this thread. I only made one brief reference to Eade and that was in response to the inference that Fantasia compared poorly when judged against his peers whereas Eade is undoubtable a good coach when compared to his peers. Those who seek to pot Fantasia are the ones who (as usual) mount a lengthy argument about how good Eade is and how any criticism of him is unwarranted, unwelcomed and bordering on disloyal.

[comrade]

any criticism of him is unwarranted, unwelcomed and bordering on disloyal.

:rolleyes:

Puhlease.

I'm happy for you to trawl through any recent posts and dig up any instance where someone has said it was 'disloyal' to criticise Eade.

[LongWait]

:rolleyes:

Puhlease.

I'm happy for you to trawl through any recent posts and dig up any instance where someone has said it was 'disloyal' to criticise Eade.

I'm happy for you to trawl through any recent posts and dig up any instance where I have accused you or anyone of actually saying it is disloyal to criticise Eade.

I was making the point that any questioning of Eade is unwelcomed by some and that the calls to get rid of Fantasia smack a little of deflection - place some of the heat on Fantasia because Rocket is a good coach and responsibility for our on-field performances surely couldn't be the responsibility of the coach? Someone else must be at fault!

[Jasper]

:rolleyes:

Puhlease.

I'm happy for you to trawl through any recent posts and dig up any instance where someone has said it was 'disloyal' to criticise Eade.

If you define within the last year as 'recent' I've got a doozy for you...

11-07-2010, 07:52 PM
BornInDroopSt'54
Senior Player Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 327

Re: Eade Article - Confirms Suspicions, Raises More Concerns

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"After that interview, and I recall hearing Smorgo say anything less than a GF would be a failure, I am thinking that the board needs to look at a new coach as early as next year." Kelvinator.
There are supporters and there are knockers/whingers.It's so easy and powerful to be negative. It's much harder and more noble to have heart/character and faith. So as we approach the finals Kelvinator is calling for the head of Eade, our coach. He wasn't to know, especially as he is challenged in the heart,intuition and faith department, but we have just beaten the Blues by 76 points and are no doubt favourites to make the top four. I had to contain my anger when this thread called for the head of Eade. Now the anger has grown to contempt.
To call for the head of Eade is the act of a traitor and disqualifies the member from being a supporter and from being part of the 2010 premiership.

[LongWait]

If you define within the last year as 'recent' I've got a doozy for you...

11-07-2010, 07:52 PM
BornInDroopSt'54
Senior Player Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 327

Re: Eade Article - Confirms Suspicions, Raises More Concerns

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"After that interview, and I recall hearing Smorgo say anything less than a GF would be a failure, I am thinking that the board needs to look at a new coach as early as next year." Kelvinator.
There are supporters and there are knockers/whingers.It's so easy and powerful to be negative. It's much harder and more noble to have heart/character and faith. So as we approach the finals Kelvinator is calling for the head of Eade, our coach. He wasn't to know, especially as he is challenged in the heart,intuition and faith department, but we have just beaten the Blues by 76 points and are no doubt favourites to make the top four. I had to contain my anger when this thread called for the head of Eade. Now the anger has grown to contempt.
To call for the head of Eade is the act of a traitor and disqualifies the member from being a supporter and from being part of the 2010 premiership.

QED Comrade.

[Topdog]

If you are having a crack at me please read my first post on this thread. I only made one brief reference to Eade and that was in response to the inference that Fantasia compared poorly when judged against his peers whereas Eade is undoubtable a good coach when compared to his peers. Those who seek to pot Fantasia are the ones who (as usual) mount a lengthy argument about how good Eade is and how any criticism of him is unwarranted, unwelcomed and bordering on disloyal.

Not so much a crack but more posting in disbelief. My main gripe was with this comment.


I was objecting to the wholesale blame-shifting that I perceived to be going on - absolving Eade and scapegoating Fantasia. Everyone needs to be examined and I think we agree on that.

Again no one shifted blame and again there are 5 or 6 threads commenting on Eade and plenty saying that if things don't improve dramatically by seasons end that he should be sacked.

[comrade]

QED Comrade.

I was more referring to this current wave of coach bashing, rather than those wanting to sack him last year prior to our 3rd consecutive top 4 finish.

[Jasper]

There are (rightly) a number of threads discussing Rodney Eade's performance. Why shouldn't there be a thread about Fantasia, the man 'manages' our football department?

In defence of bornadog, he only really shouts down criticism when there is no justification. Any moron can pot someone, but backing it up with some rationale goes a long way - just as it has in this thread.

The whole 'pro Club/pro Eade' diss is getting really boring - aren't we all pro-Club at the end of the day?

I'm happy to read about Fantasia positive or negative and I think it's refreshing that it's been allowed to run it's course.

Back to Fantasia and maybe I'm reading more into this than I should be but I think there has to be more to this issue than what you and GVG are indicating.

[GVGjr]

Guys, lets keep the discussions to Fantasia and not defend or belittle other contributors.
I'll clean off any further comments not directed to the thread title.

There has been some excellent contributions on the thread and I won't have it derailed.

I've cleaned off a couple of posts so contact me if your posts are missing.

[Topdog]

Guido from BF had the following to say.


Every player has their strengths and weaknesses, and in some cases those weaknesses will be in the form of a lack of commitment, intensity and hunger for the contest - they are who they are, and if they're unable to change their ways despite your best efforts, IMO there's not much point in tearing in to them.

But as a club, the focus needs to be on best managing the situation and finding people (replacements) who are capable. Which brings us to the 2010 trade period - the club turned down an offer of a second round plus a fourth round draft pick for Josh Hill.

Fantasia's and Dalrymple's "thinking" was that if Hill was delisted and available in that draft, he would have been picked up in the top 20 (!).

Absolutely delusional, if not incompetent.

Fantasia's and Dalrymple's "thinking" was that it was a weak draft and pick 37 was not worth much. Well, the fourth rounder alone could have recruited Puopolo or Duigan, both of whom would have been absolute walk up starts in our starting 18, both of whom have the intensity to be part of a premiership group, which Hill does not. (And the old "well we wouldn't have picked those players at that pick anyway" argument does not make it the right decision!)

This is where the criticism should lie - the player is who he is, but the footy department's assessment and decision making on that player is what has cost the club. If a player has time and time again proven to not have the capacity to improve his intensity to an AFL acceptable level, and you get a valuable offer, decline it, and a year later he's continued on the same path that he was always destined to continue on, proves worthless on the market and let go for nothing, then questions have to be asked not of the player, but of the competency of the recruiting and list management staff.

[Jasper]

Some history about James Fantasia's judgement some may find bemusing...if anyone wonders where Cam Faulkner got the next Andrew McLeod tag...

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/12/03/1038712935762.html

"Fantasia said: "We've used that analogy, that he's got a bit of Andrew McLeod about him because (like) Andrew McLeod, he can get into the play, take the ball cleanly, run off and make it look easy but with that little special touch. I think Cameron's certainly got that quality about him.

"They're the kind of players that you think, 'How did they do that?' "

The Bulldogs are mindful of the comparison but want to see Faulkner flourish in his own right. "He's got some terrific, exciting attributes which Andrew McLeod has certainly got, but to label someone with that, you just hope that it's not going to impinge on him because we don't want to put that sort of pressure on him," Clayton said."

Here's another example of Fantasia's effective use of the media, and his overall effectiveness...

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/crows-told-to-please-explain/story-e6frecrl-1111112308298

"Fantasia is quoted as saying: "We'll be making every effort possible to make sure Bryce Gibbs plays the majority of his career at the Adelaide footy club.

"That's on notice and I think the Gibbs family is very happy with that concept. Bryce is the one who will make the decision and that will be two years down the track. We will do everything in our power to get him home and, if it's not that time, it will be the time after until we do it.

"We make no bones about it. He should be with the Adelaide footy club. We're the victim here."

Here's another article summarising Adelaide's drafting while Fantasia was at Adelaide...troubling

http://www.afc.com.au/season2009/blogs/blogarticle/tabid/9768/newsid/97099/default.aspx

[Sedat]

Is there a bit more to this focus on Fantasia that I'm not aware of?
The players (in particular the leadership group), the coach and the president are all being discussed and dissected ad nauseum in relation to our dramatic form slump. I think it is for the most part healthy discussion, just as I think such discussion on the performance of the head of our footy dept is also very healthy. It is obviously not as high profile a role as that of senior coach but it is no less important.

[jeemak]

Reading through this thread it obvious with all the little things added up he has made some blunders.

Was he in charge of the 2010 review? If so did Rose put him in charge of it?

Assuming there is another review at years end who should Garlick get to head it up?

I think it's time for a review now. I don't think we can afford to wait until the end of the season, we have some talented players on the list that desperately require more development and clear direction on the areas that require improvement from them as soon as they are allowed to begin training after their break.

Fantasia can't be involved in the steering of the review. As many posters have highlighted there is strong evidence to suggest he is a contributor to the issues we're facing and likely to face over the next year or so due to missed opportunities and contracting players to the club unnecessarily. He along with all members of the football department need to be analised by an independent person or group.

I've read interesting comments surrounding Fantasia's current profile, or lack thereof over the last month or so. He seems to have dropped off the face of the earth.

[Sedat]

Time for Fantasia to earn his keep - Callan Ward is a massively important part of our on-field future, and contract negotiations are Fantasia's 'grand final'. He certainly struggled badly with the Lake and Harbrow contract negotiations so I sincerely hope he can achieve a positive result for the club in relation to Ward. I know the new clubs are placing inflationary pressures on the rest of the competition but no other club lost an under 23 that was heavily required to GC apart from us. Would be a massive blow to the club if Fantasia failed to retain yet another crucial plank in our team for the next 8-10 years, or paid such a ridiculously high premium to retain him that we lost other crucial players in the ensuing years.

[The Underdog]

Wait -- Collingwood, with a Premiership list, managed to get Tarrant and Krakeour in under the cap and offloaded Fraser's contract in the process.

What kind of money are we spending on fringe players that our cap is overflowing? Be that as it may, isn't this precisely the job of the front office -- ie. to balance our cap so that we can be competitive at trade week? If we don't have space in our cap to trade for Walker, that would be Fantasia's remit as well -- it's having the ability to plan forward and not just be reactive -- if we don't have space in the cap because of contracts to the likes of Hooper, DJ, Mulligan, Moles etc. that really brings into question the competence of our scouts -- one solid AFL player is worth much more than a handful of second-hand fringe players that will never cement a spot in any side.

We would have offloaded Minson's contract if a philosophical difference at GC had gone that way instead of Fraser, from all reports. We'd just had to upgrade the money paid to Lake, Cooney & Griffen in recent years and a lot of the money coming off our books was in veteran's list players. Despite Krakouer's past he wouldn't be on huge money and Tarrant would have comfortably fit into the hole left by Fraser, Lockyer, O'Bree and Prestigiacomo.
Not saying they haven't done a great job, but most of their young stars (Swan, Thomas, Pendlebury) were coming out of contract post 2011. I have no doubt they will sign who they need to now but give it a couple more years after the premiership glow has worn off and we'll see where they sit and who is left then.
In all I don't disagree with you, particularly on Hooper & Mulligan and I do have doubts over our list management overall.

[The Underdog]

Time for Fantasia to earn his keep - Callan Ward is a massively important part of our on-field future, and contract negotiations are Fantasia's 'grand final'. He certainly struggled badly with the Lake and Harbrow contract negotiations so I sincerely hope he can achieve a positive result for the club in relation to Ward. I know the new clubs are placing inflationary pressures on the rest of the competition but no other club lost an under 23 that was heavily required to GC apart from us. Would be a massive blow to the club if Fantasia failed to retain yet another crucial plank in our team for the next 8-10 years, or paid such a ridiculously high premium to retain him that we lost other crucial players in the ensuing years.

To be honest, I think if the difference in what they offer him and what we can offer him is half a million for 5 years, it's going to come down purely to whether Cal wants the cash or to stay in Melbourne. We can't go anywhere near matching that and it would seriously hurt our ability to retain players for the next 3-5 years.
I'd hate for him to go, but I don't think I'd put that one on Fantasia or anyone else at the club aside from Ward.

[Sedat]

To be honest, I think if the difference in what they offer him and what we can offer him is half a million for 5 years, it's going to come down purely to whether Cal wants the cash or to stay in Melbourne. We can't go anywhere near matching that and it would seriously hurt our ability to retain players for the next 3-5 years.
I'd hate for him to go, but I don't think I'd put that one on Fantasia or anyone else at the club aside from Ward.
Dustin Martin and Andrew Swallow have been offered similarly ridiculous sums of money to head to GWS and both had little hesitation in staying put - both are also better credentialed players than Cal currently is, and are a similar age to Cal (slightly younger in Martin's case, slightly older in Swallow's). That's the true value of an astute footy operations manager. Fantasia can either just throw his hands in the air like it is all too difficult, or actually get to work on retaining Ward for a fair price, espousing the attractiveness of our club, our facilities, and our city in the process.

If we can't put this to Fantasia, who is directly responsible for contract negotiations and list management, then who should we put this to? It's a bloody big job but that is what Fantasia is paid handsomely by the club to do. Fantasia's equivalent at Richmond and North got the job done with little fuss or fanfare, so hopefully he can get a win on the board in his direct area of responsibility - he sure as hell needs it.

[The Underdog]

Dustin Martin and Andrew Swallow have been offered similarly ridiculous sums of money to head to GWS and both had little hesitation in staying put - both are also better credentialed players than Cal currently is, and are a similar age to Cal (slightly younger in Martin's case, slightly older in Swallow's). That's the true value of an astute footy operations manager. Fantasia can either just throw his hands in the air like it is all too difficult, or actually get to work on retaining Ward for a fair price, espousing the attractiveness of our club, our facilities, and our city in the process.

If we can't put this to Fantasia, who is directly responsible for contract negotiations and list management, then who should we put this to? It's a bloody big job but that is what Fantasia is paid handsomely by the club to do. Fantasia's equivalent at Richmond and North got the job done with little fuss or fanfare, so hopefully he can get a win on the board in his direct area of responsibility - he needs it.

Given that both are better credentialled players though there is likely to be less of a gap in what they will get at Richmond and North (who also have less money tied up in well credentialled players because they don't have many) than what there will be with Cal. I have no doubt that the club are working on Cal and want him to sign and are doing what you've suggested, but Ward's manager is clearly putting it out there that it's going to take big dollars to sign Cal and I'm not sure we can afford on a number of levels to do that.
A lot of it will come down to what Ward himself wants. If it's cash (which it doesn't appear to have been with Martin and Swallow, both possibly captains of their teams within 3 years) then Fantasia is pushing shit uphill no matter how good or bad he is at his job.

[Topdog]

If anyone believes the $800k a year for Callan stories than they have rocks in their head.

[The Underdog]

If anyone believes the $800k a year for Callan stories than they have rocks in their head.

Perhaps, but Connors is clearly trying to drive up the price for his clients using the media and whichever way you look at it, that isn't good for us.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Given that both are better credentialled players though there is likely to be less of a gap in what they will get at Richmond and North (who also have less money tied up in well credentialled players because they don't have many) than what there will be with Cal. I have no doubt that the club are working on Cal and want him to sign and are doing what you've suggested, but Ward's manager is clearly putting it out there that it's going to take big dollars to sign Cal and I'm not sure we can afford on a number of levels to do that.
A lot of it will come down to what Ward himself wants. If it's cash (which it doesn't appear to have been with Martin and Swallow, both possibly captains of their teams within 3 years) then Fantasia is pushing shit uphill no matter how good or bad he is at his job.

It might also be a case of "let's offer Martin $500K" and he turned them down.
"Let's offer Swallow $600K then" and he turned them down.
"Bugger it. Let's offer Ward $800K..."

[azabob]

Posters seem to think Fantasia has a weakness in negotiation and identifying players worth.

Thinking outside the box could we look to try and attract a players manager to come work for the club and do the negotiations?

One problem with my suggestion is the player manager would most likely have to take a pay cut.

[The Coon Dog]

One problem with my suggestion is the player manager would most likely have to take a pay cut.

I reckon that might just be a sticking point.

[Greystache]

Today didn't help Fantasia's standing, to give a 3 year contract and give up a 3rd round draft pick for a guy who looks at best a project player just seems bizare.

To give a 3 year contract to a player who's been in the AFL system for 4 years, you'd want to be certain he's a sure thing.

[ledge]

On the other end of the scale, love this Dahlhaus kid.

[GVGjr]

Today didn't help Fantasia's standing, to give a 3 year contract and give up a 3rd round draft pick for a guy who looks at best a project player just seems bizare.

To give a 3 year contract to a player who's been in the AFL system for 4 years, you'd want to be certain he's a sure thing.

Just on this, Dalrymple did mentioned that we watched him every week last year so our recruiting team should be measured against if he adds value or not.
The 3 year deal seems at best to be optimistic.

[The Underdog]

Just on this, Dalrymple did mentioned that we watched him every week last year so our recruiting team should be measured against if he adds value or not.
The 3 year deal seems at best to be optimistic.

Hopefully he's cheap:)

[Topdog]

gee he looked poor.

[LostDoggy]

Who decision was it to promote Barlow? Can we de-promote him and list Panos?

[GVGjr]

Who decision was it to promote Barlow? Can we de-promote him and list Panos?

Once a player is promoted you can't just change your mind

[Topdog]

I didn't think Barlow was that bad last night. Thought he had a good first half.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I must have been at another game. I thought Barlow was Nick Bruton standard with his spudiness last night. The God knows how many deer-in-the-headlights moments he had but there were 3 htb in about 10 minutes at one stage.

My other problem is I don't understand what his role is supposed to be. We thought Everitt was a player without a role, Barlow has the same problems but with about 10% of Everitt's ability.

[Ghost Dog]

I must have been at another game. I thought Barlow was Nick Bruton standard with his spudiness last night. The God knows how many deer-in-the-headlights moments he had but there were 3 htb in about 10 minutes at one stage.

My other problem is I don't understand what his role is supposed to be. We thought Everitt was a player without a role, Barlow has the same problems but with about 10% of Everitt's ability.

Disagree. Barlow made some shocking errors by why single him out?
Did the man or did he not have a dip last night in a way Dre would not have?
Can't remember the last time I saw Dre on his knees, under a pack or putting his head over the ball like Barlow was.

What's Goddard's role?

[ledge]

Yeah I thought Ed tried his heart out and was good early but late in the game was slow and tired. just needs to get up with the game speed after so long in the VFL.

[bornadog]

Yeah I thought Ed tried his heart out and was good early but late in the game was slow and tired. just needs to get up with the game speed after so long in the VFL.

I think your right here ledge, I thought he was ok until the last quarter when he got caught a few times due to hesitating. Delivered some magnificent passes early on. The pass to Jones in the third quarter was fantastic, too bad Jones dropped it and they went forward and kicked a goal.

[Topdog]

well that kind of makes sense. I didn't watch the last qtr.

[lemmon]

I think your right here ledge, I thought he was ok until the last quarter when he got caught a few times due to hesitating. Delivered some magnificent passes early on. The pass to Jones in the third quarter was fantastic, too bad Jones dropped it and they went forward and kicked a goal.

The only real role I could see him playing is as a hit up centre-half forward, rotating ruck. He's got the tank, skills look fine and was willing to jump at the footy, rotating through the middle like he was at points last night was a waste of a player and time.

[ledge]

The only real role I could see him playing is as a hit up centre-half forward, rotating ruck. He's got the tank, skills look fine and was willing to jump at the footy, rotating through the middle like he was at points last night was a waste of a player and time.

Thats a good thought Lemmon, could make a CHF considering that no one else seems to be anywhere near that role at the minute.

[lemmon]

Thats a good thought Lemmon, could make a CHF considering that no one else seems to be anywhere near that role at the minute.

He'd be more Ash Hansen then Wayne Carey but it looks like something he has the tools for

[Maddog37]

The only real role I could see him playing is as a hit up centre-half forward, rotating ruck. He's got the tank, skills look fine and was willing to jump at the footy, rotating through the middle like he was at points last night was a waste of a player and time.



Good call. Maybe a Staker type third tall etc to take advantage of match ups.

[AndrewP6]

I must have been at another game. I thought Barlow was Nick Bruton standard with his spudiness last night.

I'm with you on this, I didn't think much of his game. Had a dip, but that's it.

[LostDoggy]

Well James , can you please keep an eye on Joel Hamling the current West Australian Under 18 Ruckman , 194cm 80kg , technically good tap work , clean possessions off the ground , kicked 5 goals in the last two matches of the National Under-18 Championship

.

[azabob]

Well James , can you please keep an eye on Joel Hamling the current West Australian Under 18 Ruckman , 194cm 80kg , technically good tap work , clean possessions off the ground , kicked 5 goals in the last two matches of the National Under-18 Championship

.

Your memo should be addressed to Simon D. ;) He is our recriuting guy.

[The Underdog]

Well James , can you please keep an eye on Joel Hamling the current West Australian Under 18 Ruckman , 194cm 80kg , technically good tap work , clean possessions off the ground , kicked 5 goals in the last two matches of the National Under-18 Championship

.

I hope he can do more than ruck at 194cm. He'd need to be able to play a key position.

[LostDoggy]

Your memo should be addressed to Simon D. ;) He is our recriuting guy.

Yes, for some reason I get the two swapped around


I hope he can do more than ruck at 194cm. He'd need to be able to play a key position.

For his size and agility the view to Joel Hamling's development would be as a HF who could be the backup ruckman , this season we have seen the value of the athletic tall who can make a contribution in the ruck and go forward , I am only looking at Joel as a possible draft pick as he most likely will be a second or third round but if he continues to put in a good performance in the National Under-18 Championship he may be rated a bit higher , in the last game as a HF he had 11 possessions at 72% efficiency and kicked 3.2 . The only other information I have about Joel is that he is an indigenous player from Broome currently playing with Claremont . Just one to watch

.

[Topdog]

Mike any more info?

[LostDoggy]

Joel Hamling playing for Claremont over the 7 games his stat average is

Gm-7 Disp- 12.7 Kck- 6.0 Mrk- 3.0 Hbl- 6.7 Tkl- 1.7 Gls- 0.4 Bhd- 0.3 F/F- 0.6 F/A- 0.4 H/O- 10.4 In50- 1.7

As far as I,m concerned he is a better long term prospect than the WA Under-18 first ruckman Myles Bolger 199cm 80kg , GWS are likely to pick him up despite the fact he missed a large part of last season with a navicular break in his foot

For the WA Under-18 side Joel is being used as the third tall at HF , it's a new role for him and hasn,t let the coach down

As I said , one to watch for Mr Dalrymple

.

[Bulldog Joe]

Good call. Maybe a Staker type third tall etc to take advantage of match ups.

Requires us to play 2 better tall forwards and we don't seem to have those at the moment.

[Ghost Dog]

In light of today's events, want to bump the sentiment in the the OP in this thread.

Fantasia needs to come under more scrutiny for his role in our messy season.
IMO any coach would have suffered similar losses this year, given our list and circumstances.

[Rocco Jones]

In light of today's events, want to bump the sentiment in the the OP in this thread.

Fantasia needs to come under more scrutiny for his role in our messy season.
IMO any coach would have suffered similar losses this year, given our list and circumstances.

I think it's naive to place such a vast majority of the list management issues blame on Fantasia. This isn't an auto one is wrong, the other is right scenario IMO. I want Eade there ahead of him but as long as things are done in the right manner, I think it's a good decision to have both out of the club at the year's end.

[comrade]

I think it's naive to place such a vast majority of the list management issues blame on Fantasia. This isn't an auto one is wrong, the other is right scenario IMO. I want Eade there ahead of him but as long as things are done in the right manner, I think it's a good decision to have both out of the club at the year's end.

Fantasia is part of the internal review. I doubt he's going to give himself the arse.

[azabob]

Fantasia is part of the internal review. I doubt he's going to give himself the arse.

For some reason I thought he was part of the coaching review only and separate to the footy department review?

[comrade]

For some reason I thought he was part of the coaching review only and separate to the footy department review?

He might be, but what a ridiculous notion. A bloke can influence the sacking of a coach, then get sacked himself.

What a rabble.

[Rocco Jones]

Fantasia is part of the internal review. I doubt he's going to give himself the arse.

Yep I know. It's way I am saying I agree with the decision but not how it was made. Fantasia reminds me of Richmond.

[Rocco Jones]

He might be, but what a ridiculous notion. A bloke can influence the sacking of a coach, then get sacked himself.

What a rabble.

Yep.

[azabob]

He might be, but what a ridiculous notion. A bloke can influence the sacking of a coach, then get sacked himself.

What a rabble.

Totally agree.

[Ghost Dog]

I think it's naive to place such a vast majority of the list management issues blame on Fantasia. This isn't an auto one is wrong, the other is right scenario IMO. I want Eade there ahead of him but as long as things are done in the right manner, I think it's a good decision to have both out of the club at the year's end.


Why? He is the general manager of football operations.
Things have not been done in the right manner. That's what's so frustrating.

How is it possible to have an objective coaching panel without any kind of external objectivity?
and in reference to the OP, what has fantasia done for us?

Just like Melbourne, the coach carries the can while the people in the background , schwab, fantasia, get to keep their jobs.

[mjp]

Well James , can you please keep an eye on Joel Hamling the current West Australian Under 18 Ruckman , 194cm 80kg , technically good tap work , clean possessions off the ground , kicked 5 goals in the last two matches of the National Under-18 Championship

.

Have you seen Joel play?

Technically good tap work? Give me a break. He is a kid from Broome and is raw as raw can be...my goodness, the kid has some athletic potential but keep in mind he played in the u18 champs as a 19yo and if the likes of Kersten and McInnes were available wouldn't have played at all.

Rookie selection (and I would take the chance) but go into it knowing he will need a rookie contract extension because 2 years on the list will not be long enough to get him ready.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Our trade week work from 2005 to 2008 was outstanding under the stewardship of Scott Clayton/Rocket. Getting Aker for pick 34 (ridiculous steal at the time as his on-field output proved), doing whatever it took to offload Rawlings and salary cap space off our books, picking up McDougall for 2 minor pick downgrades (it didn't work out but it was creative thinking and cost bugger-all to do), establishing Ben Hudson's trade value at between pick 22 (our current pick at the time) and 30 and then ensuring that we had a pick 30 to give to Adelaide for Hudson (we did this with some crafty pick exchanges with West Coast that allowed us to upgrade our picks in almost every round of that draft), McMahon for pick 19 (nuff said), not being shy about trading away fringe players like Sam Power and Shane Birss for lower picks (I guess Fantasia would think these guys were top 20 picks in that draft year as well :rolleyes:).

I certainly don't have any level of comfort in trade week under Fantasia's guidance, nor has he given me any reason to have any.

We shouldn't be happy with either Clayton or Fantasia.The inability of Clayton to identify strong big key players apart from Lake is well known. The inability to identify Hudson 3 years earlier when at Werribee was a grave error. As was the Pods who had been highly recommended to the MC, when playing with Werribee. Using Malthouse as a good example ultimately it should be the senior coach who has final responsibility for recruitment.

[Mantis]

We shouldn't be happy with either Clayton or Fantasia.The inability of Clayton to identify strong big key players apart from Lake is well known.

Please don't confuse the role of list management & recruiter.

Clayton's record as a recruiter was hit & miss, his record as a list manager was outstanding.


The inability to identify Hudson 3 years earlier when at Werribee was a grave error.

Our then coach Peter Rohde was the person who didn't want Hudson, Clayton & his recruiters rated him.


As was the Pods who had been highly recommended to the MC, when playing with Werribee. Using Malthouse as a good example ultimately it should be the senior coach who has final responsibility for recruitment.

Pods was overlooked by everyone year after year, not just us.

The senior coach cannot have the final say as they don't have time to see all potential players in action, it's the recruiter who lives and dies by his selections and has to make the call.

[macca]

You can add Barlow(Freo), Faukls, Curnow to that list as well. For heaven sake, didnt Barlow train with us for 2 pre-screenings and we missed him ?

[Maddog37]

Did we need any more slow accumulating mids though?

[Sedat]

So just to clarify where things stand at the moment, media reports suggest that the club has not even started negotiations with any of Boyd, Cross and Gia. Meanwhile Callan Ward remains very much unsigned. I wonder if Fantasia has taken a hardball approach with our veterans, and whether or not this might have been noted by our young midfield gun as a portent of things to come later in his career if he signs with us?

Last year we lost Harbrow with about as much resistance as a dandelion in a hurricane, and the year before we made the Lake contract negotiations look about as painful and protracted as the Thrilla in Manilla. Poor signs abound for the 3rd consecutive year - when will the club reach its tipping point with our head of football ops?

With Rocket now gone, Fantasia absolutely needs to be kept on notice while critical decisions on our list are being played out with him firmly in charge of that particular ship. Dogs supporters need to make sure that Smorgon and Garlick are keeping a foot on Fantasia's head. If it is good enough for our senior coach to be held accountable to his results, the same accountability sure as hell needs to apply to our head of footy operations, and his particular scoreboard makes for some tragic reading thus far.

[Swoop]

So just to clarify where things stand at the moment, media reports suggest that the club has not even started negotiations with any of Boyd, Cross and Gia. Meanwhile Callan Ward remains very much unsigned. I wonder if Fantasia has taken a hardball approach with our veterans, and whether or not this might have been noted by our young midfield gun as a portent of things to come later in his career if he signs with us?

Last year we lost Harbrow with about as much resistance as a dandelion in a hurricane, and the year before we made the Lake contract negotiations look about as painful and protracted as the Thrilla in Manilla. Poor signs abound for the 3rd consecutive year - when will the club reach its tipping point with our head of football ops?

With Rocket now gone, Fantasia absolutely needs to be kept on notice while critical decisions on our list are being played out with him firmly in charge of that particular ship. Dogs supporters need to make sure that Smorgon and Garlick are keeping a foot on Fantasia's head. If it is good enough for our senior coach to be held accountable to his results, the same accountability sure as hell needs to apply to our head of footy operations, and his particular scoreboard makes for some tragic reading thus far.
Perhaps they were all unsigned depending on the Callan Ward decision and everything else was put aside depending no his decision?

[Mofra]

I agree with Sedat - we've heard nothing from Fanmtasia, he's invisible in the media (we see more of Peter Rhode FFS!), and all we have is a litany of screw ups and "incidents" to judge him by.

Even if he is doing good work behind the scenes (jury still strongly out) his communication to members is deplorable.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I agree with Sedat - we've heard nothing from Fanmtasia, he's invisible in the media (we see more of Peter Rhode FFS!), and all we have is a litany of screw ups and "incidents" to judge him by.

Even if he is doing good work behind the scenes (jury still strongly out) his communication to members is deplorable.

Just in case someone has missed them:

Contracts

Dragged out the Brian Lake saga and cost us more than we needed to pay
Lost Jarrod Harbrow (Scott Clayton admitted had we been more diligent he wouldn't have got a look in)
Gave GWS a look in with Cal Ward by offering him unders to start with



Trading

Gave Geelong a draft pick for Djerrkura that Geelong didn't even use (hello Paul Puopolo)
Insisted on Veszpremi and a 'draft pick' for the better performed Everitt then accepted pick 93.
Not trading Josh Hill for picks 37 & 60



List Management

Gave Nathan Djerrkura 3 years when no-one else wanted him.
Upgraded James Mulligan and Andrew Hooper when both could have been retained on the rookie list another year.
Veteran listed both Lindsay Gilbee and Ryan Hargrave to 2 year deals knowing that Brian Lake and Robert Murphy were one year away from being eligible and were on much bigger money

[Ozza]

Just in case someone has missed them:

Contracts

Dragged out the Brian Lake saga and cost us more than we needed to pay
Lost Jarrod Harbrow (Scott Clayton admitted had we been more diligent he wouldn't have got a look in)
Gave GWS a look in with Cal Ward by offering him unders to start with



Trading

Gave Geelong a draft pick for Djerrkura that Geelong didn't even use (hello Paul Puopolo)
Insisted on Veszpremi and a 'draft pick' for the better performed Everitt then accepted pick 93.



List Management

Gave Nathan Djerrkura 3 years when no-one else wanted him.
Upgraded James Mulligan and Andrew Hooper when both could have been retained on the rookie list another year.
Veteran listed both Lindsay Gilbee and Ryan Hargrave to 2 year deals knowing that Brian Lake and Robert Murphy were one year away from being eligible and were on much bigger money


It really is a 'cover your eyes' kind of wrap sheet.
What a disaster.

[Swoop]

For the record I agree with Sedat, their have been some terrible decisions made and someone needs to be held accountable. Ideally this is something a list manger would be responsible for and provide parameters to work within however in the absence of one I can only assume James Fantasia is the person who has been responsible for this.

His inability to do his job well has made us fall down and make poor decisions on two fronts. Firstly, his inability to successfully identify and appoint a list manager is his first mistake (how long has he had to appoint this role?). Secondly due do his own incompetency on the first point he has been forced to play list manager and made a number of poor decisions with Djerrkura & Mulligan an example of this.

He should be overseeing a succesful operation instead he is forced to fill gaps & perform duties of another role from his own incompetence.

My final fear is how someone with a proven track record of poor decisions is now part of the selection process to appoint our next coach.

[Desipura]

Just in case someone has missed them:

Contracts

Dragged out the Brian Lake saga and cost us more than we needed to pay
Lost Jarrod Harbrow (Scott Clayton admitted had we been more diligent he wouldn't have got a look in)
Gave GWS a look in with Cal Ward by offering him unders to start with



Trading

Gave Geelong a draft pick for Djerrkura that Geelong didn't even use (hello Paul Puopolo)
Insisted on Veszpremi and a 'draft pick' for the better performed Everitt then accepted pick 93.



List Management

Gave Nathan Djerrkura 3 years when no-one else wanted him.
Upgraded James Mulligan and Andrew Hooper when both could have been retained on the rookie list another year.
Veteran listed both Lindsay Gilbee and Ryan Hargrave to 2 year deals knowing that Brian Lake and Robert Murphy were one year away from being eligible and were on much bigger money

Would love to send this to him and let him know what I think of his decision making.

[Swoop]

Also looking at the whole expansion in isolation both us and Adelaide appear to have been the worst hit, most other clubs have been able to limit any damage. I think not being able to secure our young talent in the face of this would also have to be one of his downfalls.

[Bulldog Revolution]

It really is a 'cover your eyes' kind of wrap sheet.
What a disaster.

However that is assuming it's all Fantasias fault

I personally find that hard to believe

[LostDoggy]

However that is assuming it's all Fantasias fault

I personally find that hard to believe

Everyone of those issues fall within Fantasia's remit and not one within Eade's.

[LostDoggy]

However that is assuming it's all Fantasias fault

I personally find that hard to believe

Wait -- the senior coach takes the rap for the performance of the team, despite there being a million assistant coaches, medicos, physios etc.

But holding the head of the football department accountable for the performance of the football department, no, no we can't do that.

[bulldogsman]

I'm certain Dalrymple has a lot to do with trading and list management though too, but it's really Fantasia's fault for not appointing a full time list manager in the first place.

[G-Mo77]

Just in case someone has missed them:

Contracts

Dragged out the Brian Lake saga and cost us more than we needed to pay
Lost Jarrod Harbrow (Scott Clayton admitted had we been more diligent he wouldn't have got a look in)
Gave GWS a look in with Cal Ward by offering him unders to start with



Trading

Gave Geelong a draft pick for Djerrkura that Geelong didn't even use (hello Paul Puopolo)
Insisted on Veszpremi and a 'draft pick' for the better performed Everitt then accepted pick 93.
Not trading Josh Hill for picks 37 & 60



List Management

Gave Nathan Djerrkura 3 years when no-one else wanted him.
Upgraded James Mulligan and Andrew Hooper when both could have been retained on the rookie list another year.
Veteran listed both Lindsay Gilbee and Ryan Hargrave to 2 year deals knowing that Brian Lake and Robert Murphy were one year away from being eligible and were on much bigger money


How do the incompetent continue to keep their jobs?

[dogman]

The biggest disspointment is that Garlick, some board members and coaches thing he is doing a great job and is now playing an important part of our future, which is selecting a senior coach.

Makes me question these people who continue to endorse him.

[Desipura]

Do it.
I just may do it.

[bornadog]

I just may do it.

Send it to Garlick

[ledge]

Send it to James and I bet no one sees it.

[Maddog37]

Compelling argument Sedat. As TCD stated on another thread it would be good to get a view from an opposing view. Do you think he has done anything well?

[Sedat]

Compelling argument Sedat. As TCD stated on another thread it would be good to get a view from an opposing view. Do you think he has done anything well?
He certainly eased the burden of tasks that bogged down Rocket's day-to-day in 2007, which allowed Rocket to focus purely on coaching - 3 consecutive PF's would suggest it was a structural change that the footy dept needed. But you have to perform in the role you have been assigned to - Rocket learned that the harsh way 3 weeks ago - and in the key areas of list management and player contract negotiations (areas that Scott Clayton, Fantasia's predecessor, excelled in) Fantasia has undeniably performed very poorly. Ultimately it's a results-driven business, and the results speak for themselves.

Anyway it is refreshing to see some factual and detailed discussion taking place on the performance of our head of football. It is a critically important role at the club, and it should be reviewed with forensic care by our CEO and board. I sincerely hope that it is.

[ledge]

From my understanding the club was looking for a list manager for next year, maybe its a lack of funds that stopped us getting one this year or mid season.
Its certainly starting to stick out that we need one now though.

[Bulldog Revolution]

Wait -- the senior coach takes the rap for the performance of the team, despite there being a million assistant coaches, medicos, physios etc.

But holding the head of the football department accountable for the performance of the football department, no, no we can't do that.

I never suggested we shouldn't hold Fantasia accountable

I just find it difficult to believe that Eade was not aware of a lot of the decisions being made, and so I think its joint responsibility.

Do you really think Fantasia would have contracted Hooper, Mulligan or Djerkerra without consulting Eade as to whether he saw them as part of his plans?

I've been very clear in my views that sacking Eade and hiring a new coach will not fix all of our problems and its clear that there are other issues that need to be addressed in the footy department of which Fantasia is one

[comrade]

Anyway it is refreshing to see some factual and detailed discussion taking place on the performance of our head of football. It is a critically important role at the club, and it should be reviewed with forensic care by our CEO and board. I sincerely hope that it is.

I'll think you'll be disappointed.

[Go_Dogs]

Trading

Gave Geelong a draft pick for Djerrkura that Geelong didn't even use (hello Paul Puopolo)


Agree with your whole post, but isn't it the case we wouldn't have picked Puopolo anyway? Either way, we got sucked in big time - and it doesn't paint a good picture that we were cool on Puopolo, given the year he's had and the immediate impact he would have given us.



Back on Fantasia, it appears as though he's safe, which means we have bigger problems as his poor performance has either, not been noticed or we're not willing to pull the trigger on him. I'm thinking it's the former, which is a huge concern.

[GVGjr]

Gave Geelong a draft pick for Djerrkura that Geelong didn't even use (hello Paul Puopolo)


I might be wrong, but didn't you previously say that the draft pick stuff up with the DJ trade during the trade week didn't really matter because we weren't going to use that pick on Puopolo anyway and that we still would have selected Schofield?

[boydogs]

Agree with your whole post, but isn't it the case we wouldn't have picked Puopolo anyway?

I thought we were going to pick Puopolo at #74 and not Schofield until the Hawks got him at #66

[Greystache]

I might be wrong, but didn't you previously say that the draft pick stuff up with the DJ trade during the trade week didn't really matter because we weren't going to use that pick on Puopolo anyway and that we still would have selected Schofield?

That's how I remember it as well. We were told that SS knew for a fact Schofield was our next best available regardless of selection position.

[GVGjr]

That's how I remember it as well. We were told that SS knew for a fact Schofield was our next best available regardless of selection position.

Post 19# (http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showpost.php?p=217147&postcount=19)

[Sockeye Salmon]

That's how I remember it as well. We were told that SS knew for a fact Schofield was our next best available regardless of selection position.

Of the guys we thought we were a chance with, our order was something like Schofield, Howe, Steinberg, Puopolo.

Perhaps we would have needed that draft pick upgrade from Sydney for Everitt...

[Ghost Dog]

Of the guys we thought we were a chance with, our order was something like Schofield, Howe, Steinberg, Puopolo.

Perhaps we would have needed that draft pick upgrade from Sydney for Everitt...

Puopolo does well in the current list at Hawthorn. But I'm happy with Schofield at the moment. Has the pep we need IMO

[Maddog37]

Puopolo does well in the current list at Hawthorn. But I'm happy with Schofield at the moment. Has the pep we need IMO

Agree with this. Long term I think we will win on this one. Especially how our list sits now drafting the younger player is a better choice.

[azabob]

What are peoples thoughts on Paul Hamilton from Essendon as possible general manager of footy operations?

Not sure why he has left, or what he is going to.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/148428/default.aspx

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

What are peoples thoughts on Paul Hamilton from Essendon as possible general manager of footy operations?

Not sure why he has left, or what he is going to.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/148428/default.aspx

A good thought as Paul Hamilton is regarded as a good football person with experience at Essendon, North Melbourne and Port Adelaide. He has been replaced because James Hird wanted his mate Danny Corcoran in the job.

[Greystache]

A good thought as Paul Hamilton is regarded as a good football person with experience at Essendon, North Melbourne and Port Adelaide. He has been replaced because James Hird wanted his mate Danny Corcoran in the job.

And a lot of the Essendon supporters are filthy about it. The honeymoon period is very quickly coming to an end for Jimmy.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

And a lot of the Essendon supporters are filthy about it. The honeymoon period is very quickly coming to an end for Jimmy.

Do you think Hamilton would be a good fit for the Bulldogs?

[Greystache]

Do you think Hamilton would be a good fit for the Bulldogs?

Nor sure, I don't know much about him.

[GVGjr]

In Fantasia's position? We would have to sack him first and I can't see it happening soon.


Like Eade, his contract will eventually expire and he will have to apply. Not many contractors get sacked.

[ledge]

Like Eade, his contract will eventually expire and he will have to apply. Not many contractors get sacked.

Anyone know when it expires?
Paul Hamilton being an Essendon boy Macca might want to grab him, not that it's Maccas decision.

[boydogs]

Anyone know when it expires?
Paul Hamilton being an Essendon boy Macca might want to grab him, not that it's Maccas decision.

Sounds like Hird made the call at the Bombers.

Not everything in footy clubs and other corporations is completely confined to a single person's responsibility.

[Sedat]

What are peoples thoughts on Paul Hamilton from Essendon as possible general manager of footy operations?
If it meant getting rid of Fantasia, I'd bring in George Hamilton.

I've got a Bomber mate who talks highly of Hamilton as a quietly effective operator. While we're at it, would love to see us replace Dalrymple with Rendell. Looking at Dangerfield, Sloane, Talia, etc.. he has a great eye for young talent

[azabob]

If it meant getting rid of Fantasia, I'd bring in George Hamilton.

I've got a Bomber mate who talks highly of Hamilton as a quietly effective operator. While we're at it, would love to see us replace Dalrymple with Rendell. Looking at Dangerfield, Sloane, Talia, etc.. he has a great eye for young talent

Sedat, we missed the boat with Rendall, as soon as he was sacked, Collingwood had already signed him up.

Yes he has a great eye for talent, but I am ok with Dalrymple in the drivers seat at the moment (hopefully Im right, as we badly need to nail these drafts).

PS - Last night I was googling Fantasia contract length to add some more context to this discussion and I came across a Grant Thomas article that was written at the time Rodney Eade's contract wasn't renewed, and Thomas wasn't very complementary about Fantasia at all and low and behold, one of the "readers comments" was by a bloke called Sedat, and I swear it could have been lifted from woof by our very own Sedat! ;)

PPS - Also during my googling I found an article from late August this year and it was about Hawkins wanting both Garlick and Fantasia sacked... interesting.

[bornadog]

Former Crows recruiting boss James Fantasia returns to SANFL club Norwood (http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/local-footy-sa/sanfl/norwood/former-crows-recruiting-boss-james-fantasia-returns-to-sanfl-club-norwood/news-story/312ed91a2869e5532f82dc3bce95ec97)


FORMER Crows recruiting boss James Fantasia is returning to day-to-day football as Norwood’s new chief executive.Fantasia will take charge of the SANFL Redlegs from Monday, replacing retiring chief executive Geoff Baynes.
Baynes leaves The Parade on Friday after planning his exit with a succession plan in the past six months.
Fantasia — an unsuccessful candidate for the SA Football Commission earlier this year — will be back in daily football operations for the first time since he had to leave AFL club Hawthorn in 2013 with ill health.
His resume not only includes significant AFL portfolios at the Adelaide and Western Bulldogs and a senior role in the SANFL administration, but also major business and commercial acumen and study. He also is a former Norwood and Woodville league player.

[bulldogtragic]

Former Crows recruiting boss James Fantasia returns to SANFL club Norwood (http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/local-footy-sa/sanfl/norwood/former-crows-recruiting-boss-james-fantasia-returns-to-sanfl-club-norwood/news-story/312ed91a2869e5532f82dc3bce95ec97)

Don't let him control player contract retention... Caro said the other night Hawthorn made a very costly mistake hiring him. Arguably we did too.

[Templeton31]

Good on him for, presumably, recovering from ill health.

[Twodogs]

Don't let him control player contract retention... Caro said the other night Hawthorn made a very costly mistake hiring him. Arguably we did too.

There isn't much room for argument. We did, it was.

Good to see he is over his health problems.