They dont need to tell us when they take a piss.. but they can give us a vision???

Like the Hawks have done????

Dont you reckon???

Visions are ok right???

So we have an idea on what were trying to do???

After all we do donate money to them...

_________________
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.

You're going to get a warning for that!

Crap! So am I now!

I would've thought the AGM is the most appropriate forum for the board to present its "vision" to members.

verbs so what is the vision then???

Weve had 3 since Elliot and two that they have had time to explain one...

What are we trying to do???

Can you explain ???

I must have missed something..

_________________
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.

Yes Pagan is the coach but why should anyone wait until the end of his fourth year before questions are asked?
I'd love to believe he has all the answers and has a comprehensive plan in place but what is it?
Dont give me mission statements or philosophies, give me the nuts and bolts of his plans and how they are right.

IMO which is obviously diametrically opposed to whats happening, the coaches role is to take advantage of the strengths of his list.
When Rodney Eade took over the Bulldogs, he assessed the strengths and weaknesses of his list and developed a playing style to maximise their strengths.
They had young, quick but slight youngsters with a couple of possession accumulators to feed it out.
He encouraged his players to use space, run with the ball and burn off their opponents.
In 2005 they had the most possessions yet the second least amount of contested ball.
They had the most uncontested possession, the least contested marks yet easily the most bounces.
They based a game style on their strengths yet with telling injuries made big improvements and played exciting football.

What's Denis' plan?
What strengths are we establishing and how are we doing it?
Did he identify any strengths when he entered the club and how did we maximise them?
What type of structure are we creating and what type of game plan will that lend itself to?

Are we entitled as members to be asking those questions after 3 years?
If I can see the plan at the Bulldogs after 1 year why cant I see a consistent direction at Carlton after 3 years?

Anyone?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

The question is, what is the appropriate forum? I put a suggestion forward. Logically, for a multi-million dollar organization, the AGM is most effective means of the board of directors to present it's summary of the year gone, and its expectations for the year ahead, to a large number of stakeholders.

As far as I understand it, if enough of those stakeholder have a problem, an extraordinary general meeting is called and such things are rarely addressed at the AGM. Normally this is to resolve a dispute or problem, quite substantive in nature.

Footy clubs have the added advantage of social functions throughout the year at which speeches are made (eg, The Best & Fairest) where a member of the board usually makes a speech.

Are they that inexperienced at handling a list as bad as now that they don't even have a plan to sell us..? And if they make one up for the sake of it and don't follow through then we will KNOW they have no idea and not buy our memberships...no news is good news..?

_________________
The problem will be made. for the solution to be sold, to your face before your eyes, tolerance is now the new danger

Not close enough to them to make a real assessment but still reckon that this board should be commended for the job they have done picking up the pieces after the Eliott debacle.
Having said that they may not be the board to take the next step into the future in seeking to resurrect the Carlton brand on field off field and in the market place.
By virtue of the circumstances of the genesis of the Carlton One Board successionist planning was always going to be difficult.
Other clubs dont find this very difficult because they have systems in place to capture potential or prospective directors.For example Hawthorn and other boards set up a committee made up of supporters and influential and business people which act as a sounding board for the directors and over time the present directors identify people of talent who will be the next generation of club directors.I have mentioned this a number of times over the last 3 years but it seems to have fallen on deaf ears
Moreover without being derogatory you can have too many ex footballers on boards particularly today when football clubs are million dollars businesses.They obviously can make fantastic contributions but there needs to be a wide variety of skills when dealing with these businesses and taking them in the future.

No news to members of a sporting organisation when youre at the bottom suggests cluelessness..

_________________
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 members are entitled to ask those questions, then they should. Try writing to the club. If you want answers, go looking for them. You won't find them on here. Go directly to the club itself.

However, if 30,000 members bombarded the club with reams of questions, I hazard a guess it would be quite detrimental to the club's operations as no-one would have time to address anything else.

Blue Vain wrote:


Pagan clearly articulated when he arrived at Carlton that his aim was to teach the football team how to play successful finals football - ie, what's the point of making the 8 if you're no good when you get there.

Well clearly, he has not had the cattle to achieve his ultimate goal, BUT - IMO, he's not interested in short-term gain for negligible long-term gain. Yes, he recruited some recycled players 2 years ago, but his aim was still to play, quick, direct, efficient & skillful football with these recycled players! Alas, the majority were not up to it - this was probably always going to be the case & I think Dennis was hoping that he might be able to jag a couple of long-term servants of the club ala Bell & King at North. At the time, I don't think he had much choice.

However I still reckon with another 2 years of quality draft picks, his goal will eventually be realised. We are slowly ridding our list of those players not up to Pagan game-plan challenge. And fortunately for us, they are being replaced by quality, 1st & 2nd round draft picks! Give me 3 more picks below 20 next year & I still reckon our list will be in a lot better shape in 2008 than most other clubs.

In my view, the delisting of Clarke, Bowyer, Morrell etc, the full participation in the very stages of the draft and the phasing out of the fat cats means that the youth policy officially kicks off in 2006.

Party lines and Paganisms.
Pagan can clearly articulate whatever he wants.
What are the facts?

How many grand finalist or premiers in the past few years have played "efficient" football?
If Pagan wanted to play "skillful football", why did we pick up Clarke, Bowyer and Martyn?

We have sacrificed, burnt and alienated champions of our club yet protected and backed proven liars and thieves.
Why? Because they offer something the "game plan" requires.
Character and principles are sacrificed.

What's the actual plan?
What do you see?
Dont tell me what Pagans telling you.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

It is all getting very deep in here. That is good. But a couple of things:

1. If someone is making a political pitch for Directorship they should advise as part of their posts. I want to know if I'm reading someone's genuine concerns or a pitch for my vote.

2. Picking 1-off recruitments, even 3-off, to prove a point is not relevant to these arguments. We all know why the Club had to recruit retreads, perhaps people want to forget about it but it happened. the recruitement of Martyn, geesh, for what - pick 85? We lost nothing and it didn't work. It was stupid but not an indictment on anything or anyone in the club, surely? The footy world was in agreement that Bowyer was a very good player before he left it, it was a worthy try-out given where our list was. Clarke - well, no defence here. I can only assume Beaumont is the absolute turd some posters make him out to be.

Talk about direction all you want, I encourage it, but every club tries recruits that don't work. It is not endemic to Carlton.

So the upshot of this is that there is an unhappiness about the Board not making our 5 year turnaround a 3 year turnaround and maybe even a 7 year turnaround, and that there is a new ticket forming? Or am I missing something>

I lpove the way history is so fluid it can be re-written every year.

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

Doesnt the winner normally write the history? Who'd have thought that there were so many winners on here!

Gave my thoughts on these questions months ago BV,

I will pick out a couple though as I have limited time today.

Fev, questioned the need to re-sign him at the time as I believed he had not played any decent footy for 12 months.

Stated some months ago that more money and resources needed to be given to the recruiting dept.

Wrote a piece that Synbad tore apart that questioned Pagans coaching and the entire football dept operation, again months ago.

Also wrote more than one piece on the struggles re attacting sponsorship on TBV one of which was highly critical of the then sponsorship manger.

As I said BV, Synbad is a Johhny come lately on many of these issues. In fact he has done a major backflip on many points in the last few weeks. He has gone from attacking anyone who questioned the board and Pagan to 'leading' the charge against both. But then thier is no-one more fanatical than a 'convert'

_________________
A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty" -Winston Churchill

L.M 35-06

I will back Pagan's gameplan after watching what happened to the Swans on GF day. The Swans have always been about contested footy, but can play uncontested when necessary to close the game down a bit. Their method of play towards the end of the season was always kick it long to a contest, they knew they had the small forwards in Buchanan, Davis and the mids running forward to give options on the ground if Hall and O'Loughlin couldn't mark.

I don't think Pagan's game plan is a problem as such, direct corridor football is what it's about, hard-running, creation of space - but I think that the way he deals with players is the problem. Yes, he won't bag his players out in public but I don't think he's engendered a team spirit of any reasonable magnitude.

Having said that, I think it's the player leaders who should help the coach in this - the coach and the captain/leadership group MUST see eye to eye and it was no coincidence that the "leaders" of the past couple of years in Koutoufides and Camporeale haven't seen eye to eye with Pagan.

Look at the relationship that successful sides' coaches have had with the captain.

Voss and Lethal - no real problems there it would seem
Hird and Sheedy during their successful period - no real problems
Carey and Pagan - enough said
Thomas and the captains of the past 3 years in Riewoldt, Hayes and Hamill
Worsfold and Cousins - seems to be ok
Leadership group including Darcy and West at the Dogs and Eade - seems to be ok
Roo and Craig - seems fine.

The most strained relationship in the AFL between captains and coaches is Kouta and Pagan in my opinion. Having Camporeale imply problems with Pagan as the reason for leaving reinforces this view. I personally think this has a detrimental effect on the rest of the playing group if the captain cannot see eye to eye with the coach because otherwise the coach has no connection with the playing group.

IMO a new captain who does see eye to eye with Pagan must be appointed, whether it be Stevens, Waite or whoever. Having Koutoufides and Camporeale on the leadership team just because they were older and more experienced is poor management and poor understanding of leadership dynamics in my opinion. Whoever made that decision has made a bad miscalculation. If it's Pagan, then he must take the blame, if it's the board, then they have to cop it, if it's the football department, then they have to blamed. The failure of this vital dynamic to be made right has been a key factor IMO in Pagan not having as much of an influence over the playing group as he might have. Until Kouta goes IMO, we will be no closer.

There is no unity of spirit out there, we are the worst "team" in the AFL make no mistake. And until a positive dynamic between captain and coach exists, this will not be engendered amongst the players.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky

BM, perhaps instead of hitting Synbad with a stick because he has changed his mind, you could commend him on being flexible enough to form opinions on events as they happen.

He was behind Pagan and the board at the beginning of their tenure, but now feels that they are not doing enough, or are not doing the things that need to be done, so he is speaking out.

As can be seen by the forums, a lot of people are asking the question lately.


It might also make them sit up and pay attention.

Does the Wizard cup victory influence the topic/discussion of this thread in anyway?

_________________
You can just smell that fresh Carlton arrogance coming back into the air