See how rumours get started?

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)

I seriously hope Hinkley is not ahead of Teague.
I have never been impressed by him as a coach apart from his one time trick of convincing his players and the comp that they were the fittest team (which only lasted half a season anyway until other teams started realising that it was just rhetoric...).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wouldn't worry about Cheryl.
We have this great new thing called email and you can send directly to whomever you want at CFC. They might even answer you!
As for trusting those who decide

Yeah
kind of lost that vibe when they appointed Malthouse.
I am loving the people power adding steam to the Teague Train. I love the passion and creativity of some supporters. Good on them. It seems ro be working too as per 360 last nite. The media are actually helping us...mostly.
Teague is a feel good story and they get to pitch him against bad 'Old School' Carlton who may shove him aside for a 'name' once again.

_________________
That’s not a political statement — it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,” she said. “He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.”

Bring back POW

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

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

It gets in my craw how senior players can just stop trying and then avoid the fallout.

Sigh.
I have no words BS.
Nada.

_________________
That’s not a political statement — it’s a harsh reality, and we must act,” she said. “He is a clear and present danger to the things that keep us strong and free. I support impeachment.”

The news of Scott even getting an interview makes me ill.

I don't want Voss, but Voss >>>> Scott

_________________
T E A M

Happy for them to interview everyone. Not a fan of Scott, but Voss working with Wallsy would sit ok with me. I'm not a massive fan of players endorsing a caretaker but they haven't been asked to stop so there's something in that.

With regards to the mosche - Sidex debate above one thing we can all agree on, and that includes the wider football world outside TC, Teague has brought about change for the better.

If the 2 kids Fisher and Dow haven't grown since Teague took the reigns I would say their roles have changed and they have been relieved of the duties not usually expected of 18-20yo recruits in the coal face against fully developed alpha males. Can't see how Teague gets any blame for the form of Fisher and Dow.

Furthermore, as for blaming DT for the lack of functionality of the forwardline during Bolts reign, it has been mentioned adnauseam DT worked within the guidlines of Boltons philosophy and game plan. He had constraints as to what he could do. However, since DT took the coaching reigns and match day planning we have kicked winning scores, so he's doing something right, especially given we have 2 key forwards out: Charlie out injured, McGovern managed.

I'd like to see what David Teague creates with the forwardline over a preseason with the addition of a fit Curnow and McGovern and possibly a Papley to work with Gibbons.

I'm not sure but it seems Sidex is not a fan of Teague? If so, interested why. Good to have 2 sides of thinking.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Years ago I had a really terrible manager at work, he was impacting the way that everyone under him was performing. One of the business owners asked a couple of us "senior" guys why we weren't performing to expectations and we were completely honest in saying the manager wasn't up to the task and was actually making our jobs harder. I felt terrible when he was let go because he was a genuinely lovely guy. He just wasn't cut out for the role and had "lost his players".

His replacement wasn't as nice a bloke but he knew how to manage and we returned to performing to expectations because of this.

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

Just because they're interviewing someone doesn't mean they're a serious candidate.
You've always got one or two making up numbers....

Part of the exhaustive process where you actually interview more than one person.

Teague has won me over ...but I still want to see what happens over the next three weeks.

He started out coaching very young; he has coached his own team; he has breadth and depth of experience; he has impressive exposed form (albeit small sample size over the past 8 games); has responded well on match day; and he seems smart.

I keep coming back to the thought that the coach selection committee has the most at stake and therefore if they pick someone else, it would have to be for a VERY good reason. But Teague would have lifted the bar for anyone else.
(I just hope they don’t remain bloody minded about their ‘experienced coach’ principle).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spot on BG. I have little, (if any) confidence in either the process or the committee. Seems to me anyone with a "name" and/or the skill of "corporate speak" is likely to have the inside running. Doesn't mean they're going to be the coach we need.

Personally I'd rather they just give DT the job. His coaching CV is solid. The players seem to want to play for him. The assistant coaches like him. IMO we're now playing football that is actually worth watching and last, but definitely not least, we're winning a lot more games than we used to.

What else is there? A vision? A grand plan? Stuff that. For two decades I've been hearing this sort of talk. I'd rather just be watching them win games of football.

Thank you Bondi, finally some sensible rhetoric.

Whilst I agree with all on the fresh change and it's great to be wining games and more importantly looking forward to them. I do still have concerns with DT being able to take the next step to be our head coach. And it's not because I am not a fan of his, but more I'm questioning his changes and the sustainability of them in the long term. We can all agree he relates to the players really well and has also implemented his own mini culture change but this then beckons the next big question. If we have a block of 5 or so losses what happens when the 'belief' starts to fade? According to Moshe, we already know what happens when the senior players start to lose 'belief', the tail then wags the dog.

We also know the big changes he has made, moving senior bodies from the forward line where they have pretty much been ineffective to the middle and playing more of a pressure forward of the centre game plan. The concerns I have are two fold, what effect does this have on the speed of development of the kids that are mids and what happens when one of the seniors sustains a long term injury like last year? This is why I am confused to our need to look for a small forward when we should be looking to bolster the mature body midfield depth.

As for Bolts forward line philosophies and what DT was told to do, I can't really comment unless I was privy to the conversations directly between them. But to me, the structure still looks the same with our key forwards leading all the way down to HB and pretty much for the most part being ineffective in the F50. And we are still targeting players like Gibbons as our full forward on either the turnover or the next kick from one of the talls. But what has changed is the pressure to lock the ball in the forward half of the ground creating repeat entires, this has primarily been done by putting Murph and Ed in the middle to lock the midfield off. This is probably more of a reflection of our scoring and winning games than anything and this has been my opinion all year with our lack of mature bodies in the middle. And is directly why Walsh and Setterfield have been developing well with more game time on the wing, which suits younger bodies. This again is the reason we still need mature mids to come to the club over a small forward.

With all of the above information, the biggest question still is...if we appoint DT as our head coach is this enough to bring in the A-grade midfield talent we desperately need?

So in summary, it's not that I'm not a fan of DT it's more I'm question the durability in the long run of his changes and if he is better for us than say Clarkson (if we can get him).

I am also concerned in us returning to old Carlton and bring back the boys club at the expense of our kids development and sustained success after so many years of pain in this rebuild. e.g. This article...... https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-08-06/ ... eup-begins

I hope this clears things up a little.

The forward structures changed against Brisbane. It was like a smack in the face to me in the first quarter even as we got belted. Immediately noticeable, and said so in the game day thread.

We played deeper and didn’t let everyone get dragged down the field.

Probably the most obvious change from the first 11 games.

So do you still feel this was the case on the weekend?

I didn’t get to see this weeks game, only got to listen, so cannot comment.

It has been evident every other week though.

We definitely regressed with our forward structure on the weekend against the Weagles, let’s hope that this was an aberration and the players fell back into bad habits under pressure. Perhaps Harry was feeling the pressure to perform and went looking for easy possessions. We will find out this weekend.

Fair point, but some of our senior guys have stopped trying for a number of senior coaches, and they've avoided the fallout. When is it 'not the coach' but 'it's the players' ..?