I get the reality of where we are at, I'm sure many Carlton supporters do. But my biggest gripe is that things are like groundhog day at Carlton. We spent last trade period begging our own players to stay and we recruited a 3rd string ruckman that can't ruck in the PSD - this year we have done exactly the same thing.

Why should I just accept the recruitment of Ackland as inevitable because we are an unattractive place for decent players to come to? Why are we unattractive? Why are we begging our own players to stay?

I don't believe the answer to that is because we are poor on field. Hell, St Kilda were poor for 100 pathetic years of existence and yet they could still attract decent players over to them.

We need to fix the brand, we need to fix the club image. We need to provide a united front. You know we need to do all these things, I know it, the average supporter knows it. It seems we've all known we've had to do them for a long time - but is the club doing them? They've only just hired a PR company. This is after the board has spent the last 2 years devaluing our brand in the media. Our own coach just said the other day we didn't trade for Ackland b/c we "didn't have any players St Kilda would want" - what sort of comment is that??? Sheedy would never make a comment like that. Never. Hell, he goes and makes Dustin Fletcher captain of the Aust team and nobody says boo.

Will we have to endure another trade period next year where we are still an unattractive place for our own players to stay? And will we recruit another 3rd string ruckman that can't ruck next year because we have failed to manage our list properly? And should we really be forced to accept that?

It's one thing to understand the reality of our current situation. But I will never be accepting of it. The sooner this board is replaced with a stronger, focussed, united board, the better off we'll be. Because all those actions we know need to be taken to turn the club around are beyond this current board IMHO. And if things are a basket case at the top, there isn't a chance in hell they can be right anywhere else in the organisation.

Thats a good point MM.. There is a lot of de ja vu in this seasons effort! but I think a lot of that is dictated by the way the system works. You just very rarely get good players willing to leave their clubs these days, outside of the go-home factor. concious of this, I bet a lot of interstate teams very quickly signed up their melbourne based players (given that melbourne teams loitered near the bottom).

There just isnt' a lot of talent around in most off seasons, beside in the National draft, where we have pick 1 in the superdraft.

I totally understand that there are a lot of similarities with McLaren, but I hope that the ruck situation is something that the club are aware of as a broader problem, and they have a plan in place that includes this draft (and future ones).

I think this ruck situation is such a catalyst for change in our thinking on the ruck that only a complete moron would continue to disregard it. I realise that in saying that that doesn't mean we'll do anything about it though

i suppose for me the question is: is Ackland better than what we have in that position? the answer (for me) is yes. Therefore, given the derth of talent available in the PSD for impact in that position day 1, he seems a good pick-up. the money and contract may tip that equation toward "bad", but lets wait and see.

_________________
Love Cricket? Love me

I understand where you're coming from. I'd say he's a necessary pick up, and it's a shame we couldn't have done 20% better, because really he's only 5% better than McLaren.

5% for a 3 year deal.

and what, next year we get one 5% better than Cain

By 2016 we should be alright then.

And this makes the whole' no one over the age of 24' or whatever the stupid cut off poiint is, silly.

If we are going to recruit stop gaps then why not pick up an older player like an Everitt? ( if they thought that for 2 years he'd given a lot more than Cain, or if they thought Gardiner would for that matter).

Why limit the age of a recruit without the proviso that he is a long term prospect?

Or do they think Cain is long term?

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

I guess for me the Ackland signing is just representative of my issue. 2 years in a row we have wasted our trade period running around after our own players. Instead of trying to manufacture an advantageous trade by utilising the threat of pick 1 in the PSD, we have used it as a threat to sign our own players. And after going through it last year, the club didn't learn. We didn't get our house in order. We didn't ensure a player we deem to be "untradeable" was signed, we were sleeping when Hawthorn can sniffing and we went through it all again this year. To me there is no excuse for that. Imagine we don't get our house in order again, and West Coast come sniffing for Kennedy????? Could you blame the kid if he wanted to go home and as an added bonus play for the Eagles? I couldn't.

And to top it all off, we're now on our 6th or 7th attempt to get a ruckman into the club via any means other than drafting and developing our own. We've paid over the odds for this one as I'm sure we paid over the odds for McLaren.