For many footy fans, the first time they learn anything about a recruit to their club is on draft night.

Other new players don’t become household names until they’ve played an AFL game, or 10.

But by the time an AFL recruiter leans into the microphone to fulfil the dream of an aspiring footballer at the draft, he knows all there is to know about that player – or at least as much as he can.

Crows National Recruiting Manager, Hamish Ogilvie, calls it ‘doing your homework’.

Ogilvie and his nation-wide network of recruiters, which includes people from various backgrounds including teaching and the police force, start ‘studying’ these players from age 15 or 16.

There are exceptions for those who come from outside the conventional draft pathways. But the majority of players are known to recruiters a few years before they’re eligible to be drafted.

Recruiting is a big business. A club’s recruiting team is tasked with finding the best talent in the country and sometimes overseas. The challenge is there are 17 other clubs trying to do the same.

Good (or bad) selections, particularly over an extended period of time, can shape a club’s future, making recruiters among the most important people within the organisation.

Recruiting is far from an exact science. In fact, part of the job requires looking into a crystal ball.

A prospective draftee can’t be judged on performance alone.

With the exception of a standout few every year who seem to have been born ready for AFL football, recruiters must also try to predict a player’s potential – is the best player now necessarily going to be the best player in 5-10 years’ time?

In 2009, a skinny kid by the name of Nat Fyfe was selected by Fremantle with pick No.20 in the National Draft. Wind the clock forward five years and it’s hard to fathom there were 19 players considered better than Fyfe – an All Australian, best-and-fairest winner and the 2014 AFLPA MVP.

Of the ‘09’ draft crop, only Adelaide’s No.13 pick Daniel Talia, who is an All Australian, Club Champion and Rising Star winner, has a resume comparable to Fyfe.

Unlike Talia, Fyfe wasn’t a standout at Under-18 level. He wasn’t considered in the top 30 juniors in the country as part of the AIS-AFL Academy and didn’t earn All-Australian selection at the Under-18 Championships, where he represented West Australia. In Year 11, he couldn't even force his way into his school, Aquinas College, first XVIII.

That’s not to say Fyfe didn’t show glimpses of brilliance. He kicked six-goals in the grand final for Claremont's colts side, and booted eight goals from 34 possessions in another underage match.

But there were concerns he was too light (he weighed just 74kg on draft day) and that he wasn’t capable of playing as a genuine midfielder. Other clubs rated Fyfe but hadn’t seen enough of the raw talent, who split his time between school, colts and state commitments, to take him in the first round.

Whether it’s size, speed or kicking ability, recruiters must make a judgement on whether a player can overcome or improve his ‘deficiency’ to cut it at AFL level. The League is littered with stories of players who have gone onto become stars after initially being told they were ‘too slow’ or ‘too small’.

Not only do AFL recruiters have to try to forecast how a player will develop both physically and mentally, they often have to imagine a prospective draftee in a different position. A key forward at under-age level might be better suited as a key back or vice-versa.

Patrick Dangerfield is a good example.

As a bottom-age player in the Under-18 competition, Dangerfield played predominantly in defence. It’s almost impossible to envisage now, but the star Crow was actually accused of not being ‘attacking enough’, as he focused on shutting down his opponent.

Like Fyfe, Dangerfield didn’t have a brilliant draft year (2007), but Ogilvie and co. liked the athletic teenager’s power, speed and x-factor and thought he had the potential to become a big-bodied midfielder in the AFL. Not put off by Dangerfield’s decision to remain in Victoria to finish his schooling like some other clubs, the patient Crows selected Dangerfield with pick No.10 in 2007.

Dangerfield also had another attribute the Crows value above all else – character.

AFL clubs today demand the whole package. Talent is a must, but it will only get you so far at the elite level.

A considerable part of a recruiter’s homework is about what makes a prospective draftee tick.

Is he driven to succeed? Is he willing to learn? What’s his background?

How does he handle adversity? How will he fit in with the current playing group?

Not all of this information can be gleaned from just watching a prospective draftee play.

Countless interviews are conducted for each player – interviews with family, coaches, teammates, opponents and even school principals. It’s often the responsibility of coaches or team managers to spruik their players, so recruiters speak to a variety of people to get a balanced view.

Then there are interviews with the players themselves, where every answer and change in their body language is critiqued and recorded. All these interviews are then compiled with two years of on-field results, psychological and physical testing and school report cards for recruiters to make an assessment.

This process is undertaken for every single player on a club’s draft radar.

It might sound like a lot of work for just three or four draft picks and a few rookies, but insufficient homework can lead to bad selections. This extensive research can also be of value down the track in future drafts, at the trade table or if a player becomes eligible for free agency years later.

A club’s specific needs are also considered, but the trade period is viewed as a better vehicle for addressing needs than the draft, where ‘best available talent’ is king.

It’s a sound policy. Crows fans only have to look back to ‘09’ to see the benefit.

With All-Australian defenders Ben Rutten and Nathan Bock in their prime, and young centre half-back Phil Davis emerging, the last thing Adelaide needed in the National Draft was a key backman.

But when Talia was still available at the Club’s first pick, Adelaide thought the disciplined defender was too good to pass up. The Crows recruiters had no way of knowing that within three years Bock and Davis would both be gone, propelling Talia into a key defensive post. He’s since established himself as a vital member of the Adelaide team and star of the competition.

In consultation with the coaching staff, recruiters must also keep an eye on where the game is going.

The introduction of the substitute rule has placed a premium on players with aerobic power. Speed and precise foot skills are also required to break an opposition’s defensive press, while the emergence of taller forwards, like Crow Josh Jenkins, Essendon duo Jake Carlisle and Joe Daniher, and GWS spearhead Jon Patton are creating a need for taller defenders.

The coach’s wish list is also a major factor, as is a player’s ability to fit into the team structures.

As well as looking into the future, it’s important for recruiters to revisit the past.

It’s fun for footy fans to go back through the drafts and – with the benefit of hindsight – identify the hits and misses. Adelaide’s recruiting team undergoes the same exercise, comparing the background and information they had on a player at the time to what they know now.

The team assesses what went right, like the selections of Talia, Dangerfield and Rory Sloane, who was a gem at pick No.44 in the 2008 National Draft, delving into why the club made those selections.

They also review what went wrong. In order to improve, they must ask what they can do in the future to make a better decision.

Then some of it just comes down to luck.

Anthony Morabito was judged by several clubs to be the best player in the ’09’ draft.  The WA midfielder was snapped up by Fremantle with pick No.4 (before Fyfe), but three knee reconstructions have limited the luckless onballer to only 26 AFL games. Morabito had no previous history of knee injuries.

In contrast, a number of clubs were warned off taking Joel Selwood by their medical staff, who assessed his knee injury to be a serious concern. As a result, Selwood slipped to Geelong at No.7 in the 2006 National Draft. Ironically, the inspirational three-time premiership player and All Australian has missed only a handful of matches in his decorated 184-game career.

By the time the draft rolls around, the recruiting team has complied and reviewed all the information. Together, they’ve watched in excess of 2,000 games of football live and thousands more hours of vision. Reports have been filed on hundreds of players and countless of pieces of data stored.

The recruiters compare notes and work together to put a list of players in order. Even though the team is working towards a common goal, there can be differences in opinion. In the end, it’s Ogilvie’s call but he relies on valuable input from his state managers – it was SA/WA Recruiting Manager Phil Bunn who pushed for Charlie Cameron to be selected last year.

The recruiters also make a lot of phone calls to decipher which players other clubs might like in order to determine which players might be available at their respective picks.

As they walk into the Gold Coast Convention Centre on the evening of November 27, Ogilvie and his team will have a fair idea which players will be Crows by the end of the night.

In a few years’ time, we’ll see how well they did their homework.