Pagan almost smashed into my car last night! I'd usually give the finger but i just laughed at him!
If anybody was gonna smash into my brand new jeep wrangler, ir would have to be Denis! - LOL!

Anyway, back to the topic at hand...................

I'll answer your question with another question................................

"What HAS he done?"

And if i hear 'Oh well, he turned Fev's career around' i'll scream!

Look at this for example. Everybody is talking about how much depth we now have, especially down back. We're all like 'Oh Thornton can take Brown and if that doesn't work we'll use Waite and if that doesn't work we'll use Setanta".................................we had those players last year too? What's changed?

For the past 2 seasons Denis, or should i say the entire coaching staff (yes - including my mate Barry Mitchell) has shown nothing. Back in 2004 we mixed a few things up and tried players in different positions and showed more emphisis on attacking (to a certain degree).

Since then there really has been nothing bar one or two games last year. No real inteligent play / inventive moves / nothing at all. In fact all we really did for the past two years is show a consistant game plan of 'Kick Long & hope for the best and Flood to the max'.

There was a game last year that we got slaughterd in, against Freo at the dome. My whole family and friend left minutes into the 3rd when we were down by almost 10goals (???).

I stayed....................

And i'm glad i did too because in the last quater, we didn't flood once (well, not true, we actually did flood once or twice but only for a short period of time and it wasn't a total flood like we normaly did).
We mixed it up, We had other options up forward, told runners to have a run, took opposistion players on.....................all of a sudden we were a different team, albeit with the EXACT same players we've had for the previous 3 quaters.

We still lost, but jesus what a great quater. Took the margin back to just 3 goals or so. Only 20,000 people there but you could swear there was 40,000 by the way the crowd came alive so much.

So what happened? Why all of a sudden to we become a team that would have most likley won the game if only for an extra 5 or so mnutes?

It was all a change in the way we played our football.

A coach is payed to make decisions that can do exactly what our coaching staff did in that 3quater time huddle! The problem is our coaching staff, for whatever reasons, never did it! We'd just continue on loosing, Flood to try and stop the barrarge of goals that are clicking over against us & kick long to Fev and hope for the best.

When that happens in one or two games, i call it a bad day.
When is happens in 5 or 6, i call it a poor run and we should look at other options.
When it happens CONSTANTLY throughout the season, TWO seasons for that matter, i call it a lack of imagination from our coaching staff and demand changes!

That's enough Denis bashing though because everybody knows that i've done heaps of that in the past............................

I have offered Denis (personalally) my full support this season and will back him 100%. I WANT him to proove me wrong, no really - I do!

But at seasons end, if it is more of the same lack-luster style of the past 2 seasons then it's only reinforced my view that Denis has lost the creativity that is required as a coach in todays AFL.

While i am a MASIVE fan of Barry Mitchells, he is as much to blame for last years form as Denis is, as was the two Tony's. Barry & Denis had the worst body launguage last year when talking to each other - and as a player that's Not something that you'd want to see from your coaches when waiting for instructions at a quater time huddle.

But 07' brings an entirly different coaching staff to the table and hopefully some new idea's on how to play the 'modern' game. I'll support them! But reserve the right to demand changes if the same old crap of last year continues!

_________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit"
- Aristotle

What are the options?
They have the money to remove him now and have'nt done so.
The fact is Denis has been retained and you must look how to utilise him most effectively. Having him offering advise and suggestions in an overseeing role is far better than having him run the show totally.

The situation is'nt ideal but as in any business relationship, you do your best to make it work as constructively as possible.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Agree

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Yup, aggree with that!

_________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit"
- Aristotle

In my view, DP has to demonstrate that he has the tools to win a day premiership or two, when our window of opportunity comes. Which by the way should not be too far (probably circa 2009).

The criteria for me is not the no. of wins, but rather the :
* Tactical nous to come up with game plans and innovative set ups to beat the best opposition strategies;
* Become an inclusive coach - has to take steps towards bridging the divide with Mitchell, develop sound professional relationships with all players and staff not just a selected few, and continue to remain open to ideas by asst coaches;
* Is open to technology and other ideas that can give an edge

If DP is unable to demonstrate these attributes then no matter how many games we win this season, he has to go. This would give the incoming coach at least 12 months to settle down with the team prior to the window of opportunity.

you reckon thats bad. 3 of the 8 or so games i fly interstate see in the last two years and seen the 05 99pt loss to the dons, the 98 pts 06 loss to the saints and the 98 point loss to the swans also in 06.

the saints game we have 1 goal scorer.

simon wiggins was our second leading scorer for the day with 2 behinds, rushed also scored twice.

Love the patter between you 2, BV and SB. BV suggests that Pagan has been sidelined, and then SB wonders why he should get the money he is then, so BV comes back with the notion that you have to make do.

If only the premise hadn't been nonsense, then the patter would have had some value.

The fact that Pagan stood back during the preseason is totally unremarkable, both for him and for other senior coaches in the AFL.

Anyone who thinks that he wasn't in control during matchdays in the NAB Cup matches is kidding themselves. Anyone who thinks he won't exert more control over training in the season proper is also deluded. That's not to say that he will personally run each training drill - he won't and he shouldn't. But he will take a more active interest.

He has also influenced recruiting ever since he took over. Right from the time he took over, Pagan has been seeking tall and fast key position and utility players to build the side that he wants. Walker, Deluca, Norman, Setanta and more lately Russell, Hartlett, Bower, Hampson, and Edwards.

It would be a mistake to say that Wayne Hughes makes his decisions without Pagan having any influence. Hughes attends match committee meetings every week and well knows what Pagan is trying to do. Hughes' recruitment in itself may well have been a result of the consistency in their vision as well. But the fact that we've had around half or more of our players standing at 190 cm and above doesn't just happen by accident.

Now that the team is developing consistently with this vision, the direct style of football that Pagan has favoured is also coming to the fore. Even Braddles prior to the NAB Cup GF suggested that we needed to become more direct than last year.

If you can't acknowledge the possibility that Pagan has had some influence in building the side we have now and directing the direct style of football we will implement this year, then you will be able to draw the conclusions that you do. But I don't accept your assumptions.

I was fascinated by Pagan's comment a week or two ago about telling the board that 'a lot of these players will not be here in a couple of years' in reference to the big recycled recruitment of 2004.

Does this suggest that Pagan did not have the final say in recruitment in that year and that another influence, maybe in the board, or maybe in the football department (or maybe both ) was the force behind the extent of the recycled recruitments?

Or is Pagan just foxing?

Would have been great to be a fly on the wall and know for sure.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

The timing of those comments is interesting.

It had a link to this NAB Cup success because the media was interested in why this NAB Cup win should be seen as more promising than in 2005. And it was better to make it after some success rather than when Pagan and the club are on the defensive after losses.

But I reckon that the main reasons he came out with it now are that Smorgon has now gone, and so are most of the players of whom he was talking.

The problem for Pagan was that Smorgon had tried to seize the political high ground by claiming that he and the Board wanted a youth policy: . Blues ordered Pagan to recruit youth 'too late'

But Smorgon's insinuation that the Board had been horrified by the recruitment of recycled players didn't seem to fit with the position of the powerful members of the Board only 1 year earlier: The story of Pagan's purge.

We saw what happened when Pagan had the temerity to say that the Board vetoed Zantuck's selection late last year - Smorgon went on the offensive and a retraction of sorts resulted.

So Pagan would feel more at liberty now to talk of the background to the draft of 2003 now. But he still has to be wary given that Sticks is still powerful.

I would think at the very least that Pagan discussed the trades he was envisaging with Sticks and Collo before they happened. I would imagine he would have discussed the pros and cons of replacing those senior players with mature players or TAC level players. It seems quite likely that Pagan would have pointed out that either strategy wouldn't have delivered too many players who would still be around in 2 years time.

I would have thought there would have been broad agreement that both strategies had their risks as we had little bargaining power when it came to organise trades, particularly as we weren't allowed to trade into the 1st 2 rounds of the draft. I'm sure the other clubs knew that we needed to get rid of certain players no matter what the cost (as the Lions needed to do with Aker), so we didn't have hand in negotiations.

To what extent Pagan accepted feedback from Collo and Sticks is the interesting issue. Did Collo and Sticks express a preference for mature players to make us competitive in the short-term to bolster our image and parlous financial position? If so, did that influence Pagan's trading decisions?

Then you have some currency to trade for lower picks in the draft - currency we have not had for the past 4 years.

And if you start on about, where's the loyalty to players etc etc. Dont blame me. Blame the AFL who created the Salary Cap and Draft System.

The Draft System - now thats a good one - would love to see how many parents will entrust their 17 year old sons to the AFL when they see them get dispatched from their home states to drug infested cultures elsewhere.

If my son was an AFL Draft prospect - I would be telling any interstate club dont bother drafting him because he would not be going.

The Draft is going to be flowered because of the Ben Cousins issue - just watch this space.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

Please don’t think I’m having a go here but if you look at some of the people here seems to blame Pagan when things goes wrong and praise his assistants when things go right in my book no matter what Pagan do he is always wrong to some people, OK maybe the Club cant afford him and that’s another matter but coaching Carlton was always going to be hard with all the unnecessary hurdles put in front of him, lets hope it’s all behind us now.

Dick has already stated publicly that he believes the Blues will finish 10th. Therefore Dick has set his performance benchmark for the team this season.

If you read between the lines, if we finish below 10th then it is goodbye Pagan.

_________________
It is not as bad as you are lead to believe.......it is %$#^& worse!!!

You never know, we might even surprise Dick & finish in the eight. GO BLUES.

Well said

If YOU read between the lines, that is!

What if we finish 9th or higher, is it an extended contract?

Lets get serious, ATM Dick can't help but be impressed with the recent results.

What a lot of people aren't aware of, is that Dick has been spending a lot of time with Denis lately.

My sources tell me that one of the topics canvassed has been "Who can I hire to help you/what facilities do you need to make us more competitive the next couple of years until these good kids come on?"

Sounds to me that Dick understands the factors that have conspired against Pago Pago since he accepted the job and is willing to support him unlike the previous 2 boards!

_________________
2002:> "In their Masters Chambers
They Gathered for their Feast
They Stabbed us with their Steely Knives
But They Just Can't Kill The Beast!" <2016

THE BLUEBAGGER BEAST IS BAACKK!!

Absolutely NOT!!! He gets to serve his contract out and the performance bar for next year is raised even higher.

_________________
It is not as bad as you are lead to believe.......it is %$#^& worse!!!

That's a mixed blessing though BB. It means that he'll have no excuses for poor results (unless we are decimated by injury or have a number of unlucky losses - touch wood).

Allright Kiddies, just a hypothetical:

Whilst I would be delighted if we won more than 8 games this year, I still reckon we are a touch short of class and experience yet (agreeing with Grumpy Guts)[AGRO]. That being said, what if the kids come on quicker than expected and with confidence riding high, we win say 10 or even make the 8?

Who gets the credit? Take ya pick of the possibilities!

Wayne Hughes/Denis Pagan/Assistant Coaches/Barry Mitchell/Dick/Players

So far anybody but Pagan seems to be getting the credit for the NAB Cup.

It's easy to have canned him over the past 4 years or so, but now when things appear to be turning around, he is still the reason for our plight since he arrived. Give me a friggin break!

_________________
2002:> "In their Masters Chambers
They Gathered for their Feast
They Stabbed us with their Steely Knives
But They Just Can't Kill The Beast!" <2016

THE BLUEBAGGER BEAST IS BAACKK!!

I'll give Pagan the credit for winning a practice match that no one else cared about

And we haven't acheived nothing yet

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

For mine, I want to SEE a gameplan. My two efforts at live footy were Bulldogs and Hawks. Never been so frustrated with guys getting the pill then having to think and wonder just what they do with it next.

And watching us move the ball down the corridor to CHF then go wide when we have the best FF in the league was just lunacy.

There appeared no plan, no drilled strategy that players were following no matter what. We were simply, a rabble.

_________________
Everything before the word "but" is horseshit - J Snow