thryleon wrote:
@bondiblue its not about winning. Ive faced a lot of criticism in the last 10 days for my views. I am simply expressing my frustration at this footy club.
We have form. In malthouses last season, we publically announced a rebuild in round 2. We declared his last season over before it began. We sacked mick 8 weeks later. The boys were lifeless on field.
I saw us repeating that mistake with the review. We declared a year before it was truly over and got wavering performances as the pressure mounted.
Thing is that turmoil would have existed already. We all knew lo giudice was out come end of season, and the rhetoric about Teague going started early when our record was poor 3 and 9 was something that I accepted as possible when we had lost 2 games and looked at the fixture.
Its a pattern that plays out at out club and its defined by our culture. We get into a position and then decide that things aren't working and rather than digging in we allow the pressure to amplify. Im not sure about this modus operandi as it puts people in self preservation mode. All of a sudden getting wins is more important than doing the right thing (Murphy to 300 is seen to be a point of weakness but I think if you look after your players, they will look after you).
Change itself isn't the issue, because there are factors involved that are harder to measure from the outside. So we go looking at things and cling to signs of why someone was moved on, like playing Murphy instead of a kid, or 5 goal run ons.
Leigh matthews came out with a statement when he was coaching Brisbane. Footy is a simple game. First to 100 points wins. Stats show this is true 97% of the time. Its also bullshit because teams don't score 100 points every week anymore, but it s a pressure valve release. Games not over until your opposition scores 100 points.
Anyway, until our club works out that these scenarios are more club defining than we think they are, we won't get further.
Back on topic. Im no Teague apologist. I think he might have done ok, but don't think he had the right amount of time to iron out inconsistencies in his game plan. I mean 10 of his games were about resetting after Bolton left and getting the players in a better headspace to attack games head on, and then we had the covid season which meant that the focus was a bit different and 2020 was marred by uncertainty. In essence covid hit at precisely the wrong time for an immature list and an immature coach. Better teams than ours showed covid cracks more than we did (West Coast being one).
Whats done is done though. Can't change it and I still respect the decision because a new president, potentially new ceo, new football department manager and then a new senior coach means you get people on boarding together and its something that plays out when you get senior leadership changes in almost all walks of life. The quicker it happens the better.
So now that all that has been said, we can get back on topic. Its becoming increasingly apparent to me, that the experienced coach handover to an apprentice in waiting is yielding better results than any other setup (of course that is a dependant on what the senior coach wants to do as mick and clarko didn't work in a forced environment with pressure). Paul roos into a coach in waiting is my preference.
Thing is in about 2 to 3 years when pressure mounts on the back of some undesirable results that's when we get tested to see if we can back our man in despite the downfalls.
Great post. seriously.
We have to wait it out for 3 years and see.
The pressure thing is real.
I don't think the players played as if pressure on their position/ status was a thing.
I think the whole place needed a shake up.
I believe in the list.
The Board had the courage to do the BIG rebuild.
Like coaches may need the extra year or two to tweak their game plan, so does the club.
Now it seems we are lining the ducks off field and on field.
Spotlight on CEO and Football manager. Pressure on to get the best out of them, or get people that are better.
I'm sure the level of urgency for high performance has hit the players where it should: between the ears.
Lets see. We haven't got a crystal ball. But what we do know is what we have, and its a list of a lot of first rounders and few current, ex and potential AA's and an eye for talent to fill gaps this and the next Trade period...that would be desirable for any coach.
Lyon's rejection is an issue with him and our process.
Clarkson wants a break and it sounds like Gil and the AFL Commission is interfering with the market forces. Lets see.
Has any young coach on the rise rejected Carlton? There's still 3 weeks before the season is over.
Lets hope the dominoes start to fall after cats lose this weekend. Fingers crossed.
Thanks for the post. I was beginning to think you may have been a disruptive plant on a high horse not able to see trees for wood.
No worries, I am very much my own man, and I think the how is almost as important (if not more so) than the why these days.
We'll see how this all pans out, but I've run out of belief, I am now waiting and seeing.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
. Probably a helathier approach anyway...)
