jimmae wrote:
Synbad wrote:
Lol why hire him if it's OK?
We've covered this a few times now, that they might just be comfortable with the current situation compared to what they are happy to shake loose from elsewhere.
No one's going to come in for a one-year contract, so you're essentially looking for someone superior to Brodie. How many are?The Kick Inside wrote:
I'm guessing it works the same in my line of work where essentially - I'm an advisor. I advise my director. She can choose to take my advice or ignore it. In part because she's the director. There's always a director.
I'd suggest the responsibility ultimately falls on SOS, but they're a team, and they'll work as a team. They have enough eyes and ears to be incredibly thorough this year, both in terms of casting a wider net and in getting second and third opinions on more draftees.
Brodie has been suspended until December 1, 2016. So that's two years worth of drafts (drafts that will go a long way to deciding whether or not the club has any kind of on field future for the next 15 years, that we have a stand-in head recruiter).
I reckon that may have been worth figuring out who's next-best and thinking about a 3 year contract for them.
I found a small interview from SOS pretty telling, just a few days after the trade period. When asked about our picks in the upcoming draft, he said something akin to "We'll get some very good talent at 1, 8 and 11 (big pause) we'll get something good too at 19."
I know it's dangerous to imagine you know what's going on inside someone's head, but he sounded just like a guy who just sold a couple of picks at 20/21 for a single earlier pick because he has no faith (for whatever reason) that the club would be able to recruit effectively at early second round. I know nothing about drafting, but I reckon I could spend a couple of weeks researching and pick decently for us with an average likelihood of success at 1, 8 and 11.
You earn your money when you get to 19, 20, 21 etc.
I really hope Paul Brodie is very good. Because the club is making do without a head of recruitment for two years worth of drafting, seemingly just to get this guy. I actually hope he's the second coming of Christ, because the opportunity cost of getting this guy is astronomical.
You could give me a dozen reasons why this has occurred. But the bottom line is that a professional organization just wouldn't be in this situation. It all (again) comes back to the board. Our club is terribly led.
I don't see the big change that some others see. I see a continuum of all the behaviors that got us into this shit. I quite like Bolton's appointment, and it's obvious we've finally seen the need to rebuild. But these are total no-brainers. Even our board wouldn't have brought in a Worsfold and tried to top up for a flag tilt after last year. Well, Sticks may have but thankfully we exchanged possibly the least intellectually capable person to have ever run a VFL/AFL club for someone who could best be described as comfortably mediocre.
Harold Mitchell is the kind of person an underperforming board should not only be actively wooing, but willing to resign en-masse for, in order to facilitate the transition. If they could put their ego aside, which they clearly cannot.
Sad.