Ross Lyon recruiting finally getting smelly?

[saintsRrising]

10, why stop at 10? Let's get a whole list of them then if that is all it takes for a premiership cakewalk.

So Con, Darth, BigMart etc you reckon the Saints should sack our entire list and then just sign up only players that once upon a time were nominated as AA no matter what their current age, form, or injury status is and then get Billy Brownless in to coach them to a lay down mazaire Premiership?

You guys are absolute genuises.

It is just mindblowing that no one else thought of doing this before.

PS: Yes King was AA. He had over 370 HO's in that year compared to the 200 odd he had in a pretty decent year with us. But evidently once an AA, always an AA eh?

[Johnny Member]

Lyon was, and absolutely is now, incredibly overrated.

He's clearly elite at getting the players to buy in.

But he's the closest thing to a one trick pony you'll ever see in a coaches box.


His strategy and approach is flawed.

It has been since the latter part of 2009. Individual ability and the old 'most of the team playing 100-150 games together' recipe for success nearly won two grand finals despite the flawed game plan.

He still hasn't been able to come up with anything different.


His reliance on the superstars is extreme. Once their input diminishes even a little bit, his teams struggle badly.



He bluffed the footy world whilst at the Saints, and did the same at Freo. He cons people into believing he can take a team of hacks and turn them into a champion team. It's a myth.


He should be under far, far more scrutiny than he's under currently. His coaching without Fyfe has been pertty close to pathetic.

His teams can't score in finals. 6 years on - they still can't score in finals!



I could understand some not accepting the 'Lyon is overrated' thing when he left us. And I can understand them not accepting it when he made a GF at Freo.

But to not accept after yet another Lyon team couldn't score in a GF is just puzzling. And to still not accept after his teams still can't kick more than 10 goals in a final is perplexing. But, to still not accept it when his team without McPharlan and Fyfe and Sandilands is sitting at 0 and f****** 9 - it just outright illogical!

[SainterK]

Thread needs more Spinner and Rogerfox



Wait for it.....

[saintsRrising]

Thread needs more Spinner and Rogerfox



Wait for it.....

I was thinking more past their best AAs as they evidently are what you need for foolproof success. Maybe we can recruit them as forumites?

[samoht]

GT was a better coach than RL - he almost got a team of youngsters into a GF which would have given us a certain win vs the Lions.

We need to consider that by comparison it's taken GWS years and years to get their high-draft-picks to the level they are right now .... their young bodies have finally matured to the point where, together with the infusion of talented and experienced mature bodied recruits - they finally have a realistic chance of advancing deep into the finals.

GT got us there much quicker. If young Kosi didn't play injured and had Hamill been fit to play in that final vs Port - instead of Guerra who didn't get a touch - the flag would have been ours for the taking.

[Johnny Member]

Thread needs more Spinner and Rogerfox



Wait for it.....

I was thinking more past their best AAs as they evidently are what you need for foolproof success. Maybe we can recruit thm as forumites?

You're being antagonistic. You're also simplifying the point that was made (by whomever it was that made it). Petty, some would call it.


The point was valid. The list not only was laden with class, talent and ability (as indicated by the amount of AA's in it) - it was also at that stage where the bulk of it had played 100-150 games together. We all know that that is the recipe for success and generally when teams start to deliver on potential.

So obviously simply having AA's, or good players on a list is not what equals success. But when you combine it with 5-10 seasons together as a group - then it is absolutely the recipe for success. And under Lyon, due to Lyon's flawed game plan and beliefs, we blew it.

[mad saint guy]

Look through Lyon had available to him. What young talent was not played that was any good?

Otherwise can you provide a list of the young talent that was ignored?

Steven, Armitage, Lynch, Stanley stand out.

And I'm not saying that we definitely would have selected these players if we had gone for youth instead of recycling duds, but here are some players who were available in the drafts when we instead opted for the players I listed earlier (all went very late in the national draft, or in the pre season/rookie draft, so they cost about the same price as Lyon's recycled duds)

Sam Jacobs
Sharrod Wellingham
Jarrod Harbrow
Nick Smith
Matt Suckling
Michael Jamison
Sam Gibson
Tom Lonergan
Jeremy Laidler
Pearce Hanley
Ed Curnow
Shane Mumford
Jeff Garlett
Liam Picken
Luke Bruest
Mike Pyke
Michael Barlow
Majak Daw
Stewart Crameri
Matthew Jaensch
Taylor Durea
Josh Jenkins
Luke Dahlhaus
Jason Johannisen
Jeremy McGovern
Will Langford
Michael Hibberd
Tom Rockliff
Tom Bellchambers
Stefan Martin

We had the opportunity to draft every single one of those players under Lyon's reign but he kept on going for the known, limited players other teams had tried and decided they didn't want. If we we had have been less enamoured with recycled duds then maybe we just would've plucked two or three of the players on that list who could have helped us get over the line in '09 or '10 instead of our deplorable bottom few players that were in the team. And most of the players on that list would be in our current best 22. Taking a dud with pick 100 isn't 'free', it's costing a spot on the list which could have gone to someone with the potential to actually become a quality AFL player.

[samoht]

re: "GT had a better team than RL" - you can only say that after what the youngsters went on to achieve once they matured. The youngsters had immature bodies and were playing in a prelim. final at a very young age and at a ridiculously early stage of their careers.
It's a huge achievement .... I mean how long has it taken GWS and their youngsters (with the inclusion of talented mature age recruits) to get there?

I also notice that apart from Hamill missing the final in 2004 against Port Adelaide - young Goddard was injured early - only had 2 possession for the game!

So we were 1 short on the bench and without the talented Hamill - who was built for finals!
Guerra might as well have not played - he was no substitute for Hamill. Guerra had 3 useless possessions in that final - including that useless toe-poke (or did he miss that?)!!!

GT>RL ... but for a bit of luck he would have showed him up big time!

[longtimesaint]

re: GT had a better team than RL - you can only say that after what the youngsters went on to achieve once they matured. The youngsters had immature bodies and were playing in a prelim. final at a very young age and at a ridiculously early stage of their careers.
It's a huge achievement .... I mean how long has it taken GWS and their youngsters (with the inclusion of talented mature age recruits) to get there?

I also notice that apart from Hamill missing the final in 2004 against Port Adelaide - young Goddard was injured early - only had 2 possession for the game!

So we were 1 short on the bench and without the talented Hamill - who was built for finals!
Guerra might as well have not played - he was no substitute for Hamill. Guerra had 3 useless possessions in that final!!!

GT>RL ... but for a bit of luck he would have showed him up big time!

GT was affected because we under resourced in the fitness/conditioning and was hampered with injured players in 2004 and 2005.
If we had had a better conditioning team we would have won one under GT.

[samoht]

GT was affected because we under resourced in the fitness/conditioning and was hampered with injured players in 2004 and 2005.
If we had had a better conditioning team we would have won one under GT.

Yes.
The one thing I credit RL for was he got the soft-tissue injuries sorted out.

But as far as coaching goes, what GT managed to achieve early on with the young immature bodies was more remarkable than what RL subsequently achieved with a team that was ready to play finals - some 5 years later. Luck was certainly not on GT's side.

[saintsRrising]

Look through Lyon had available to him. What young talent was not played that was any good?

Otherwise can you provide a list of the young talent that was ignored?

Steven, Armitage, Lynch, Stanley stand out.

And I'm not saying that we definitely would have selected these players if we had gone for youth instead of recycling duds, but here are some players who were available in the drafts when we instead opted for the players I listed earlier (all went very late in the national draft, or in the pre season/rookie draft, so they cost about the same price as Lyon's recycled duds)

Sam Jacobs
Sharrod Wellingham
Jarrod Harbrow
Nick Smith
Matt Suckling
Michael Jamison
Sam Gibson
Tom Lonergan
Jeremy Laidler
Pearce Hanley
Ed Curnow
Shane Mumford
Jeff Garlett
Liam Picken
Luke Bruest
Mike Pyke
Michael Barlow
Majak Daw
Stewart Crameri
Matthew Jaensch
Taylor Durea
Josh Jenkins
Luke Dahlhaus
Jason Johannisen
Jeremy McGovern
Will Langford
Michael Hibberd
Tom Rockliff
Tom Bellchambers
Stefan Martin

We had the opportunity to draft every single one of those players under Lyon's reign but he kept on going for the known, limited players other teams had tried and decided they didn't want. If we we had have been less enamoured with recycled duds then maybe we just would've plucked two or three of the players on that list who could have helped us get over the line in '09 or '10 instead of our deplorable bottom few players that were in the team. And most of the players on that list would be in our current best 22. Taking a dud with pick 100 isn't 'free', it's costing a spot on the list which could have gone to someone with the potential to actually become a quality AFL player.

Look quite frankly this is garbage. What do you not understand about our recruiters being absolute crap in the period that Lyon was there and in the last part of GT's reign? You are just in denial and in fantasy land about the demonstrated ability of our drafting team of that period, including the years before which should have had young talent ready to play for when Lyon was appointed.

Mike Pyke yes was there, BUT our recuiters went for Tommy Walsh.. Lyons fault according you . Laughable. Also Mike Pyke was actually a "recycled" player as he played rugby first.

YES there was available young talent, but NO our recruiters could not identify and draft it it. We recruited young kids. I have listed them earlier in the thread. But we missed making the right decision a lot more than we got it right (or at least ok) over a sustained period including the several years BEFORE Lyon arrived as our recruiters kept selecting the wrong young kids.

Do you seriously think for example that Lyon personally picked Brad Howard just after he arrived?

Do you seriously believe that Lyon had the time and ability to research, interview and source every young kid in the land?

This whole concept that Lyon was inept for not drafting the correct young talent is quite frankly "tinfoil" hat thinking.

The main problem was that year in year out for over half a decade our recruiters picked two many of the wrong young players.

Getting King at pick 100+ was not the problem. Selecting Howard, Sweeney etc was.... Selecting Ben instead of Dangerfield or Rioli was..(either pick would probably have gotten us over the line in one or both Grand Finals).

If we had of used less recycled players, and more kids we would just have had more duds, as that is what our recuiters picked time and time again.Plus most of our recycled picks were very late picks (listed by me earlier) or picks in the 40's (or even just pick downgrades. Given the record of our recruiters in this period do you genuinely believe that they would have out-performed with kids? No they would not have.

Fergus Watts our first pick in the 2005 draft only got to play 1 game before a career ending injury.

There was a huge talent hole in our playing list BEFORE Lyon arrived and our crap recruiters kept making it bigger and bigger till only just recently.

[Con Gorozidis]

I find it interesting that Lyon suddenly loves giving media interviews. Kind of seems like someone has told him to control the narrative.

[saintsRrising]

Both Lyon and GT had to compete against clubs with vastly more resources in staff and money as well as training facilities.

Geelong's, Hawthorn's and the Swan's recruiting staff were vastly superior to ours...and indeed apart from the Dees probably every other clubs was.

No good FS picks for us. Two priority picks was about the only additional benefit we had, but even this was less than other clubs. The Blues had more No 1 selections than us.

We were set up in the early naughties when for rare period we had a stable board and good admin. Good people and good players were attracted to us. We actually did reasonabaly well at a couple of drafts but just imagine if we had of taken Judd and Bartel instead of Ball and Clarke.

But then the infighting began, yet again. And ouur recruiting department remained using processes from the the 80's. Gut feel recuiting completely oblivious to aspects like whether a player could actually kick or not.

All the successful clubs of the naughties and indeed probably ever, with the only exception being St Kilda, had good and stable admins . It is no coincidence that when the Saints were a strong club in the 60's that we had a brilliant offield team with Huggins and Co.

And what support did Lyon have? Greg Westaway arguably the worst President that StKilda ever had and Nettlefold, arguablly the worst CEO StKilda ever had. This deadly duo drove stKilda into the ground.


But according to most of the experts on this Forum it was Lyon and Lyon alone that destroyed the Saints. Spare me.

[Scollop]

Do you seriously believe that Lyon had the time and ability to research, interview and source every young kid in the land?

No. Don't twist things. No one is arguing that Lyon should have taken control of recruiting. You are creating arguments that are non existent.

The point is that Lyon had a philosophy that was flawed and he's reluctantly changing his thinking now only because their results have forced his hand. You can't continue to ridicule us when posters like mad saint guy produces a list of late draft picks as long as your arm and provides evidence that there are jewels available with young talent. If Lyon as senior coach had a plan to recruit young talent in 2009, wouldn't the club have supported him? Wouldn't the club have provided resources to a coach who has helped your team get into a grand final?

Lyon's game plan and his philosophy has come unstuck on the only day that matters and you and a chorus of sycophants still want to defend the bleeding obvious.

Have a look at the Dockers 2013 Grand Final team. The only changes to his current line up have been forced on Lyon due to retirements. He refused up 'til now to acknowledge that young talent in a team can help you win finals. He had Lachie Neale as the sub in the 2013 GF and only gave him a run in the 4th quarter once the horse...and the Hawks had bolted.

How the hell would Zac Dawson have been recruited by Freo if not for Lyon. Ross Lyon would probably not even drafted Neale if he had his way...there would have been too many tempting options for recycled rejects at pick #57. The irony is that he's probably going to struggle to keep Neale at the Dockers in 2017.

[Goose is king]

[quote="Con Gorozidis"]I find it interesting that Lyon suddenly loves giving media interviews. Kind of seems like someone has told him to control the narrative.[/quote]

Struggling coaches need to give the media and fans a bit of hope and positivity.
Malthouse gave Carlton fans no hope last year in interviews. He was so bitter and negative there was only ever one outcome.

[samoht]

But according to most of the experts on this Forum it was Lyon and Lyon alone that destroyed the Saints. Spare me.

Those you're referring to as experts may be simply responding to the "other so-called experts/provocateurs" on this forum who are overly aggrandising Lyon .... lionising the man.

Nothing is black and white - RL had his good points .... but that he left us in a worse state than when he started may be more than a moot point?

Can we honestly and safely say that he left us in a better state?

The title "great" coach should be reserved for someone who leaves a legacy to emulate and build on. I'm not sure that he's done that.

[st.byron]

Thread needs more Spinner and Rogerfox



Wait for it.....

I was thinking more past their best AAs as they evidently are what you need for foolproof success. Maybe we can recruit them as forumites?

Perhaps we could recruit Barks4eva. He was an AA poster back in 2005.

[saintsRrising]

Thread needs more Spinner and Rogerfox



Wait for it.....

I was thinking more past their best AAs as they evidently are what you need for foolproof success. Maybe we can recruit them as forumites?

Perhaps we could recruit Barks4eva. He was an AA poster back in 2005.

I think delisting Rix broke his heart.

Now Rix at Pick 49 was oviously another player that Lyon underachieved with. I mean between him and Phil Raymond were Patful, Sam Lonergan, Clint Bartram, Matthew Stokes. So Lyon must clearly be to blame that Rix never RoxRux like Barks4eva wanted him too. Our recruiters were clearly materful and Only Lyon was at fault, oh and GT too for not playing him more (Still one of the funniest incidendents in StKilda fandom history wasn Barks4eva lodging those rucking stats in GT's coaching box!).

[saintsRrising]

. You can't continue to ridicule us when posters like mad saint guy produces a list of late draft picks as long as your arm and provides evidence that there are jewels available with young talent. .

Can we apply some logic here and reasoned argument. Even I can pick the winning Tatlotto number after they are drawn.

Yes any "harry hindsight" can go through and pick out players we missed afterwards. But to then state that if we had not taken any recycled players that we would have magically picked those diamonds is fanciful indeed. The actual record at that time was that our recruiters were poor at recruiting. More picks would based on the evidence of our draft picking history have had the same ratio of securing talent which would have mainly meant more duds.

Meanwhile the recycled players taken in the main, and in particular, if you look at the picks used to secure them delivered great benefit.


So what evidence can you and madsaintguy offer up that if we had of picked only kids, that we would have started picking the right ones?

Also how many team that views itself in a GF window only keeps picking up kids?

Did the Hawks? No
Did the Swans? No

Did the Cats? They did less more than the others, but also had a huge FS bounty. However with the Cats on the dip in recent years they have become one of the biggers aquirers of recycled players in the AFL. Why have they done so, and not just picked up kids? A = They did not want to bottom out.

[samoht]

SaintsRising ...
I don't think we would be complaining if we had recruited a Dangerfield or Lake or a Burgoyne .... someone of that calibre.
They'd still be playing for us (Lake gave great service, and has retired of course) - but the thing is we were after short-term fixes!!

Schneider and Dempster were worth getting - but what about the other 20 or so recycled players?

The Hawks and Geelong have standards.... they have exclusively targeted quality (established) players and have done well as a result of that - they have not bottomed out/fallen away the way we did.

This bad recruiting coincided with Lyon's term. .. I'm sure he would have had a bit of input and influence in the recruiting - how much, who knows?

[saintsRrising]

The title "great" coach should be reserved for someone who leaves a legacy to emulate and build on. I'm not sure that he's done that.

Digressing OT , firtsly my view of Lyon was that he was the right man, at the right time. His gameplan that he evolved greatly suited our list of the time which had a magnificient top end, but a so so middle and poor bottom.

However like GT before him he has not been able to move on from what a good plan for him, and the team. And the way Lyon departed certainly left a sour taste.



Great St Kilda Coach and Great Man = Jeans.
By your great coaches definition few would measure up. Clubs tend to go backwards after good eras. Matthews won flags at the Pies and Lions, but both clubs were not that flash afterwards.

However this thread was on Lyon and his "recruiting". I just find it odd that so many think that Lyon had the sole call on all things to do with recruiting. I am sure he influenced things but I very much doubt that he was in the drivers seat to the extent that many claim. Westaway certianly put a stop to Cousins playing at StKilda. Plus we made many bad picks ups before he arrived. The previous Board wanted GT to narrow down to just coaching and so I would find it most surprsing that that the Footy First Crew gave Lyon free reign in setting the Recruiting Strategy of the time, and indeed when I have heard Bourke or Andrew Thompson speak on this topic they never seemed to paint the picture that some in this thread are painting.

Personally I just do not see that you can have ultimate success with only one man. Lyon was not perfect by any means, but he had very little competent support at the Saints when he was with us and certainly not from our recruitment department.

[Con Gorozidis]

Lyon arrived with 9 AA players and left us with no new ones.

Slice and dice it anyway you like.

[Johnny Member]

The title "great" coach should be reserved for someone who leaves a legacy to emulate and build on. I'm not sure that he's done that.

Digressing OT , firtsly my view of Lyon was that he was the right man, at the right time. His gameplan that he evolved greatly suited our list of the time which had a magnificient top end, but a so so middle and poor bottom.

However like GT before him he has not been able to move on from what a good plan for him, and the team. And the way Lyon departed certainly left a sour taste.



Great St Kilda Coach and Great Man = Jeans.
By your great coaches definition few would measure up. Clubs tend to go backwards after good eras. Matthews won flags at the Pies and Lions, but both clubs were not that flash afterwards.

However this thread was on Lyon and his "recruiting". I just find it odd that so many think that Lyon had the sole call on all things to do with recruiting. I am sure he influenced things but I very much doubt that he was in the drivers seat to the extent that many claim. Westaway certianly put a stop to Cousins playing at StKilda. Plus we made many bad picks ups before he arrived. The previous Board wanted GT to narrow down to just coaching and so I would find it most surprsing that that the Footy First Crew gave Lyon free reign in setting the Recruiting Strategy of the time, and indeed when I have heard Bourke or Andrew Thompson speak on this topic they never seemed to paint the picture that some in this thread are painting.

Personally I just do not see that you can have ultimate success with only one man. Lyon was not perfect by any means, but he had very little competent support at the Saints when he was with us and certainly not from our recruitment department.

Another myth: That Lyon inherited a top heavy list and he had to make do with it.

MYTH.


Lyon loves the 'duds'. He recruits them. He plays them. He loves them.

He's done the same thing at Freo. Fyfe even spoke about it in his Brownlow speech. He spoke of the strategy to use guys like Suban and DeBoer purely to free up guys like Fyfe.

Lyon doesn't have to make do with a 'top heavy' list. He creates a top heavy list on purpose!!

He has his stars who win games, and he has his Robert Eddy's and Jason Blake's, and Nick Suban's that are in the team - hand picked by Lyon himself in order to carry out Lyon's game plan. It's why he loves 'hard bodied' spuds ahead of young guns that 'haven't done their 4 year apprenticeship' (whatever the f*** that means!).

No one has 22 stars.

Getting the violin out for Lyon like you do for the top heavy lists he has supposedly been burdened with, is a total nonsense.

No one has 22 stars - but almost all coaches try to replace lesser quality players on their list with better ones. Lyon doesn't add better quality though. He adds players that are better at a specific role than someone else.

And that's what cripples a list.


And it's also what cripples a team when the stars our either out of form or not in the team. The spuds that are purely there to play their support role, just don't have the ability to play good footy in their right when they need to.

[saintsRrising]

SaintsRising ...
I don't think we would be complaining if we had recruited a Dangerfield or Lake or a Burgoyne .... someone of that calibre.

They'd still be playing for us (Lake gave great service, and has retired of course) - but the thing is we were after short-term fixes!!

Schneider and Dempster were worth getting - but what about the other 20 or so recycled players?

The Hawks and Geelong have standards.... they have exclusively targeted quality (established) players and have done well as a result of that - they have not bottomed out/fallen away the way we did.

Both teams also did not have as many holes to fill!

Quality established players = Stanley, Mithchell Clark?

The Hawks and Cats also have very good recruiting teams. So have the Swans in addition to a salary cap advantage. But the Swans still unerathed some really good players who were not really good before they arrived at the Swans.

Well the thread has been about not just what we traded for, but that it was Lyon who was solely responsible for it. So you are mixing now two different discussions.
Is using recycled players bad? = no. Every team does it.
Is drafting kids bad? = no. Every team does it.

I just personally see that our recruiters were dismal and in particular at picking kids where it is harder to gets things right, and that if we had only drafted kids that the most likely result given the record of our recuiters would have beena bigger mess. YES it may well have left a few more reasonable players nowby weight of numbers, but lets be serious here when Lyon was hire the strategy was to wina flag within years. To take the next step I think was the terms used at his first press conference by the club.

Well Dangerfield actually chose the Cats, rather than the Cats choosing him. He fell into their waiting arms. The only such gift I can recall for the Saints was possibly Hamill. Thank you "Pigs arse" Elliot.

The Hawks have done really well. And yes Clarkson is clearly a great caoch, but has their success only been due to him? = no.

Free Agency was a great boon to the Hawks to extend their reign when otherwise they may have been declining.

But prior to that they also picked up players like Guerra, Gibson, Hale and others. Dogs fans actually thought Lake was "gone". Again this goes back to quality of recruiting team and not just what the coach does after they arrive. They certainly turned around some risky aquisitions

Do you think that Clarkson or Scott personally picks the players? Or do you think that perhaps the Hawthorn and Cats recruiting team would have been at work?

I just find it odd that all the sins are supposedly meant to be Lyons and Lyons alone at StKilda.

My personal view is that if we did not have arguably the worst recruiting team in the AFL for much of the naughties that we would pobaly have wona flag or three.

[Johnny Member]

I just find it odd that all the sins are supposedly meant to be Lyons and Lyons alone at StKilda.

I find it odd that you personally blamed GT for all the sins at St. Kilda during his time. Him, and him alone.

But when the prodigal son f***ed up, it's everyone else's fault.



Fact is, Lyon is very flawed as a coach and hasn't managed to fix those flaws in 6 years.

Fact is, regardless of all the other f*** ups at the club, the team was still good enough to be on the big stage on GF day for successive seasons - but out of 8 quarters, Lyon only coached well in 2 of them. And it was that that cost us a flag.