fraser murphy wrote:
JohnM wrote:
It's an interesting topic, IMO.
For what it's worth, specifically in the case of Roos, I see him as having a progressive outlook (more specifically, I see him as seeing himself having a progressive outlook) and the feeling I get from Carlton is that it's an organisation that's relatively old-school in its approach to things.
We've got nice new facilities, but I don't think we've got the mindset to go with them really. Not the the extent that would make a Paul Roos feel comfortable.
Just my opinion, based on nothing more than Denis Denuto's 'vibe'. But I tend to trust my vibes.
I get that 'vibe' too, but I posed the question because in all honesty I have no idea what goes on inside the club. I simply like watching my team play footy.
Not to knock your post John, but I was wondering if you could clarify/elaborate what you mean by the terms "progressive" and "old-school" in regards to how an organisation is run?
Sure.
In large part, I think every traditional Victorian club (merely by the weight of their history) is going to be a little more weighed down (or at least influenced) by their past. So in some way, the organisation can't help but be defined by what's gone before. Same for Richmond and Collingwood and Essendon* too, it's not just us. So when a guy like Roos comes in, he's part of a chain that stretches back a long, long way. And he'd know it too.
You know - you take the coaching role at Collingwood, and on Day 1 some 90 year old is going to bale you up about Jock McHale. And at Richmond, it'll be Tommy Hafey and the 1960's and all that stuff.
But a club like West Coast, or Adelaide, or the Sydney Swans (forget the fact they used to be SMFC, they were a brand new entity up in the harbour city) doesn't really have the past. Not so many old ex players, or old deeds. Only the hope for what's to come. Any history they have is modern history.
So there's that (which is all very wanky new-age stuff. But I reckon that's what Roosy is into.
Then there's the feeling I get that Carlton still has a way to go in regards to embracing the new era it finds itself in. We seem like a club that isn't all that comfortable embracing change. After the shock of our first wooden spoons and the culture-shock of Pagan, it appears as if we deliberately decided to return to our roots for a while... to follow more comfortable old patterns and behaviours.
The Patriarch in Pratty. The Gun Signing in Juddy. The coach who barracked in the box. Very navy blue, very Carlton. Maybe not so very appealing to an individual like Roos.
I'm not saying that what we're doing is wrong - I'm a great believer in embracing your history (but more importantly, learning from it) and not denying who you are and what makes you strong. But just putting forward why I think that a guy like Roos wouldn't necessarily see Carlton as 'his' kind of club.
I also get the feeling that he doesn't think too highly of us, from his pressers. You can sometimes sense grudging admiration or respect from opposition coaches... but from Roos, I sense a degree of animosity. I genuinely don't think he likes our club all that much. Again, it's the Denuto Defense.
Thanks for elaborating John.
Supposing for a moment that the ''vibe'' we both feel is an accurate representation of the club's culture (and once again I must reiterate that I have NFI if it is the case), it greatly decreases the amount of options we have in choosing applicants for any position at the club. I would wager that Carlton at the present moment has very little admiration or respect (grudgingly given or otherwise), from outside the club. The animosity, I would imagine, remains strong however.
If true, this is a very poor position to be in.