Malthouse contract discussion: EXTENSION DENIED!

The Normal One · **Joined:** Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:35 pm **Posts:** 20076

Rexy wrote:

King Kenny wrote:

Rexy wrote:

King Kenny wrote:

Rexy wrote:

Anything less than a full board spill is inadequate.

You can spill a board, but what is the outcome? Another Collins/Smorgan era?

In order to improve you must change...

Only if change is for the better. Who is the alternative? What are they going to do better?

My thought is a board spill would be disastrous without any perspective of the alternative.

Change is no good if the root cause is not addressed with the change.

I could pick a board of 8 TCers who'd show up the current board as hacks.

We all could, but we don't, so it's the status quo.

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

Rexy wrote:

King Kenny wrote:

Rexy wrote:

King Kenny wrote:

Rexy wrote:

Anything less than a full board spill is inadequate.

You can spill a board, but what is the outcome? Another Collins/Smorgan era?

In order to improve you must change...

Only if change is for the better. Who is the alternative? What are they going to do better?

My thought is a board spill would be disastrous without any perspective of the alternative.

Change is no good if the root cause is not addressed with the change.

I could pick a board of 8 TCers who'd show up the current board as hacks.

I'll go you one better and give you Hotcox, Goltzenberg, Surrey, pew1, Pafloyul, Michael Jezz, Dodo and TBM and you'll still get your desired outcome.

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

This board of very powerful and well-connected business people has effectively frozen out any potential (unaligned) board candidate who may provide a fresh alternative.

This is the sickness that a full spill could heal.

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

The Rhino wrote:

Rexy wrote:

King Kenny wrote:

Only if change is for the better. Who is the alternative? What are they going to do better?

My thought is a board spill would be disastrous without any perspective of the alternative.

Change is no good if the root cause is not addressed with the change.

I could pick a board of 8 TCers who'd show up the current board as hacks.

I'll go you one better and give you Hotcox, Goltzenberg, Surrey, pew1, Pafloyul, Michael Jezz, Dodo and TBM and you'll still get your desired outcome.

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

We're a club addicted to the Messiah complex, on and off the field.

I reckon its more likely any candidate of merit (at least in perception) will be brought in to "take control" of the existing board rather than take it over. It's more appealing.

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

just sakcing Mick alone would simply be another deflection away from the true sickness

azza? · **Joined:** Wed May 30, 2007 11:10 am **Posts:** 1084

It's sad but it feels like I can't see the light at the end of the tunnel. It's depressing!

kingkerna · **Posted:** Sat May 23, 2015 2:31 pm

Rexy wrote:

just sakcing Mick alone would simply be another deflection away from the true sickness

So just keep him then eh?

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

kingkerna wrote:

Rexy wrote:

just sakcing Mick alone would simply be another deflection away from the true sickness

So just keep him then eh?

no, but it won't fix things

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

Agreed.

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

azza? wrote:

It's sad but it feels like I can't see the light at the end of the tunnel. It's depressing!

frustrating thing is that a new beginning and a fresh start is just a few administrative steps away....

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17959

jimmae wrote:

To be fair BV, if we'd kept Richardson for much longer he'd almost be getting paid in the same bracket as an entry level senior coach, which is silly money for an assistant, especially under current AFL rules.

And you're basing that on what exactly Jim?

AGRO · **Posted:** Sat May 23, 2015 4:09 pm

azza? wrote:

It's sad but it feels like I can't see the light at the end of the tunnel. It's depressing!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lærdal_Tunnel

jimmae · **Posted:** Sat May 23, 2015 4:11 pm

Blue Vain wrote:

jimmae wrote:

To be fair BV, if we'd kept Richardson for much longer he'd almost be getting paid in the same bracket as an entry level senior coach, which is silly money for an assistant, especially under current AFL rules.

And you're basing that on what exactly Jim?

The way he was chasing every head coach job under the sun?

Do you think we would have held onto him this year and last?

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 17959

jimmae wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

jimmae wrote:

To be fair BV, if we'd kept Richardson for much longer he'd almost be getting paid in the same bracket as an entry level senior coach, which is silly money for an assistant, especially under current AFL rules.

And you're basing that on what exactly Jim?

The way he was chasing every head coach job under the sun?

Do you think we would have held onto him this year and last?

So are you suggesting we are better of without him anyway because he was well credentialed and ambitious?
I'm unsure of your point.
AFAIC, you hold on to good people as long as you can. Getting rid of them because they'll probably get poached down the track anyway makes zero business sense to me. Mind you, I suspect Mick might be on your wavelength.

Wangers · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:26 pm **Posts:** 1763

Rexy wrote:

Anything less than a full board spill is inadequate.

Correct. However, there needs to be an alternative with a clear mandate for the future. I think Sayers and Fahour from the current board should only be considered for retention, and Tom Elliott as Prez along with 4 new fresh faces. Prendergast as Football Director could be considered.

camel · **Posted:** Sat May 23, 2015 5:52 pm

Rexy wrote:

Anything less than a full board spill is inadequate.

Who or where are the alternates?

Not much point tipping everyone out only to have to let them seap back in where they came from.

Synbad · **Posted:** Sat May 23, 2015 5:55 pm

Don't fall into the trap of naming names until the board is gone new people put their hands up and tell us what they're about

camel · **Posted:** Sat May 23, 2015 5:58 pm

Without names where will the genuine/credible momentum for a board spill come from?

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

Most of the current board members have a wide and powerful reach of influence in the business community.

I'm suggesting that other potential board candidates would rather not piss them off by challenging, for professional reasons.

If the board were vacant, I'm tipping candidates would pop up all over the place.

Malthouse contract discussion: EXTENSION DENIED!

Who is online