James Fantasia

[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.

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]

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

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

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 ).

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.