Hey Doc are you saying relationship management occurs at Carlton? Maybe Essendon* can learn something form is

Chris Judd made the switch from Oral-B to Colgate toothpaste last week and an email was sent up the line all the way to the Pres. On the off chance it got lost in the ether, the Comms staff were instructed to send smoke signals that would be visible from Greg Swann's office. An Iroquois Indian was flown in on Jeannie Pratt's private plane to relay the message to the board. The message was also delivered in Morse Code and in good old-fashioned pen and paper which was sent via Cobb and Co. That letter is yet to arrive. Adrian Gleeson is investigating. The AFL and ASADA have both been informed.

I think it was lost in translation when Sticks interpreter was away on leave.

No, he's not the best person.
Wiley would be a fantastic asset as a coaching mentor and working with the players. He has a great manner and enormous experience.
Unfortunately he is filling the role of director of development and coaching. The role deserves better than someone who's been out of the system for 8 years.

I'm interested to see people posting he was the WA state Under 16 coach. Can anyone tell me who the Victorian state under 16 coach is and what knowledge and experience he had prior to obtaining the role?
Its usually a token role given to young up and coming coaches or to an ex player who is looking to get into the system. Its hardly the role leading up to a director of coaching position.
Lets call it as it is. The club wanted a director of coaching and Mick wanted someone who was happy to be a loyal lieutenant.
Unfortunately the opportunity was lost to get a young ambitious person who has a better understanding of the modern game.
As EFFES states, Alan Richardson was the perfect person and we sacked him because he didn't meet Micks criteria of being a yes man who will sit in the background and do everything Micks way.
Its the players loss.

Just my opinion.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Why not have some continuity? Wiley isn't going to leave. Richardson didn't want to work with Malthouse. Why force it?

I'm more interested in getting a Nathan Bassett type to the club next year as Senior Assistant...we're about 3 coaches short of where we should be, but that happens when the budget is a little tight.

If you fail to understand the difference, just come out with it. dont belt yourself over the head.
The director of coaching and development devises, directs and manages the development program for the players. We have a director who hasnt been involved at the highest level for 8 years.
Have a think about how much the game has changed in the past 8 years.
Our players deserve someone who is at the cutting edge of player development. How can Wiley construct a program when he's doesnt have a comprehensive understanding of recent and current tactics and strategies?

Its also ridiculous to have someone as a director of our coaches when most of them would have a far more intimate knowledge of the modern game than the program director.

If you want to succeed, you need the best possible people performing the roles they are best suited to. This role robs the club and players of a quality candidate in an integral role. Even Collingwood understood that and they appointed the best person. They didnt allow the coach to appoint a person that best suits his agenda.

As I said, Wiley will be a fantastic acquisition to the club but we've dropped the ball badly with this position.
IMO.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Malthouse didnt want Richardson. Theres a big difference.
And the budget gets tight when you pay in excess of a million dollars to get rid of coaches who are superior to the ones you replaced them with.
Another stupid decision by a board that excels in making stupid decisions.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

My memory says that Collingwood appointed Malthouse to be director of coaching and that had nothing to do with getting the best person but more to do with trying to keep everyone happy. That was probably the dumbest decision they ever made because it was never going to work.

No point having the greatest assistant coach/developer of talent in the history of mankind IF he doesn't work well with the head coach.

All you end up with is two unhappy, underperforming managers in a dysfunctional relationship.

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.

yeah agree .. its not too dissimilar to the Tiger Woods and Elin Nordegren marriage...

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

If one finals win is testament to their superiority then we're in real trouble with the current group...

_________________
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman

What is it about wiley that offends some of these armchair experts. There is more than one way to coach a side. Older wiser heads can often see the woods and the trees. Young bucks might be ok with modern team theory and strategy, but often it takes years to develop the experience, that allows someone to be able to mentor, encourage and motivate in a sustainable way.
The mental side of the game is often underrated. Its not just about skills and strategy. Wiley was appointed to be sort of an extension of mick. IMO malthouse is the perfect blend of old and new. There is no shortage of ex players who "understand the modern game" its not that difficult. Executing it is. Mental toughness is the key ingredient. Look at jeffy.

6 rounds in...........development?

How the hell could we judge him to be a success or otherwise?

Those bagging at this early stage are only being emotive.

I think RW has a fair pedigree in the game & varied roles through his 4th decade in the caper be it as a successful player, involved @ successful clubs.
Development role through the 16's in WA would be a great role with modern game & also dealing with youngsters. I see him as a perfect fit for the role.
He's a quality football person & would be assisting in creating a development process for the whole club as per his interviews. Juddy just said how much he'd enjoyed working again with Wiley. The respect is there & that would be through Rob's diligence.
I think there has already been improvements across the list & MM/RW have plenty to do with that. Hopefully there's still plenty of improvement left as the year progresses with the players in the NB's & into the seniors.
Roles for everyone, and RW will play his well.

You talk about people being emotive?
No one is "bagging" Wiley or judging him after 6 rounds.
I expressed the same opinions when he was appointed. He is a fantastic acquisition for the club and I rate him highly. I dont however think a person who's been out of the game for 8 years can come in and be an effective director of coaching and development.



Its a professional environment. If Malthouse cannot work well with someone unless they're his best mate, surely you have to re-assess your decision to appoint him. Remember Dick Pratts mantra? Get the best person, not the best available person.
Does anyone think Rob Wiley fits either criteria for the position of director of coaching and development?
We shouldnt compromise any aspect of our program to keep Mick "happy".
Especially a key role like this.

Some people here need to harden up. Just because someone expresses a view contradictory to the clubs doesnt mean we're 'bagging the club. It also doesnt mean I think I'm an "armchair expert".
This forum isnt just for club patsys who'll let one person have full control over the club without daring to question. 'In Mick we trust" and thats it. Give me a break.
We saw what that mindset can do to the club in the early 2000s.

If you disagree. Give me reasons why. I'm amused at the theory a state under 16 coaching role has any credibility to jump up to an AFL director of coaching role. As I asked earlier, who are the current Under 16 coaches and how is the role allocated and administered.
How does the role sit in the scheme of development coaches within the AFL system?
Have a look and you'll see what a quantum leap it is to pluck someone from that role to an AFL director of coaching.
These roles are usually given to recently retired players or up and coming TAC level assistant coaches to further encourage them.
Think about how far that is from a director of coaching at a $50m AFL elite club.

Best person for the job? Not even close.
Lets call it as it is. Wiley was given the job because Mick trusts him and knows he wont step on his toes.
The role wasnt created for that. Putting Rob wiley there is shortchanging the development of the players. By all means give him a role as Micks senior assistant or whatever but dont place him in a crucial role to shore up the powerbase of the senior coach.

We need to achieve best practice to become a premiership club. Compromises like this are counter productive to that.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

Sorry BV, new admins often bring in their own people.

You can talk all you like about professionals being able to work together but if there are people Ina position you firmly believe you can't work with, you move them on.

I will add that not all the coaches got moved on and some of them seem to be doing well.

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.

i accept that. If Malthouse didnt want Richardson, so be it. But I expected the club to have a job description for the director of coaching and for them to source the best available person.
Instead they let Mick put in Rob Wiley.

Was he the best available candidate? We'll never know.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

He might just be the right man for now.
Like the list is the right list for now.

Doesn't mean he won't be moved into another role, or the role changes or new people are brought in.

_________________
I hope Essendon* folds.

But you dont really accept anything. Mm is in the best position not you or anybody else, to assess who is the best available person to work with him. Rats needs were far different to micks. But who is best placed to decide what mick needs if not mick himself?