Kouta blasts Pagan (Denis' reply p4)

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:04 am

There is a lot of poison at the club from the period of 2002 to 2007 and most of it wont be expelled until we put a good season on the scoreboard.

As they say about poison - better out than in.

Collo was the only alternative at the time came in and trimmed a lot of deadwood, he cut and burned and had to make some tough decisions.

He made some wrong ones including extending Pagan's contract.

Pagan, clearly not the right coach of the time.

Kouta clearly not the right leader but the most senior player at the club.

I think the main problem was that Pagan felt that Kouta should be doing "Carey-esque" things on the field and Kouta's body was not up to it - I think that is the underlying cause of all this tension.

In 3 months Kouta's book like most Sportman's memoirs will be gathering dust on bookcases - and hardly likely to be put on the curriculum for VCE English.

In the words of Pagan (master of the cliche) time to move forward.

4thchicken · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am **Posts:** 3136

The Duke wrote:

He was a great player but probably ranked 16th in the comp for leadership, but thinks he knows how to coach

.

Let's be honest - we had NO skillful players and we saw in 2002 what happens when you try the possession game when you don't have skills.

with respect, what we saw in 2002 was what happens when a list is crippled by injuries - at times we had our entire starting midfield and our best forwards out injured. And there were ocassions when only had 23 or so players from which to select 22 men.

The performances in 2003 was a LOT worse than 2002 in my book

4thchicken · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am **Posts:** 3136

AGRO wrote:

Collo was the only alternative at the time came in and trimmed a lot of deadwood, he cut and burned and had to make some tough decisions.

He made some wrong ones including extending Pagan's contract.

Collo was a horrible choice and hardly a viable alternative. More useless than tits on a bull - EVERY time he opened his mouth he spouted negativity in a time when the club was crying out for something to be positive about.

Elliot was ousted in 02 on the back of the spoon (and at a stretch alleged salary cap breaches which were still being investigated) - and in a last pathetic attempt to save his ass, brittain was jettisoned (probably our biggest mistake in this whole sorry saga for numerous reasons).

If the shit stirrers (widely reported to be the USC but no doubt others as well) had any balls they would have moved to dump the board and coach at the end of 03, 05 and 06 seasons.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:07 am

When does the footy season start again?

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:18 am

4thchicken wrote:

AGRO wrote:

Collo was the only alternative at the time came in and trimmed a lot of deadwood, he cut and burned and had to make some tough decisions.

He made some wrong ones including extending Pagan's contract.

Collo was a horrible choice and hardly a viable alternative. More useless than tits on a bull - EVERY time he opened his mouth he spouted negativity in a time when the club was crying out for something to be positive about.

Didn't see too many other alternatives put up their hand that night at Crown Casino in November 2002.

As the Greek saying goes "you shit in the frypan, you have to eat it". :wink:

The Duke · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 10:33 am

4thchicken wrote:

The Duke wrote:

He was a great player but probably ranked 16th in the comp for leadership, but thinks he knows how to coach

.

Let's be honest - we had NO skillful players and we saw in 2002 what happens when you try the possession game when you don't have skills.

with respect, what we saw in 2002 was what happens when a list is crippled by injuries - at times we had our entire starting midfield and our best forwards out injured. And there were ocassions when only had 23 or so players from which to select 22 men.

I agree about the injuries, but it doesn't alter the fact that we played in-experienced, un-skilled players that couldn't pull off that style of game.

Playing the style that Kouta wanted, the chip chip possession game, requires accuracy and nerve - something that couldn't be taught overnight - we saw this in 2002.

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 18042

4thchicken wrote:

The Duke wrote:

He was a great player but probably ranked 16th in the comp for leadership, but thinks he knows how to coach

.

Let's be honest - we had NO skillful players and we saw in 2002 what happens when you try the possession game when you don't have skills.

with respect, what we saw in 2002 was what happens when a list is crippled by injuries - at times we had our entire starting midfield and our best forwards out injured. And there were ocassions when only had 23 or so players from which to select 22 men.

Exactly right.
In 2000, we won 13 straight and won a semi final by 82 points!
In 2001, we won an elimination final by 68 points.

We still had players like Ratten, Koutoufides, Bradley, Camporeale etc on our list.
Yet somehow our skills vanished overnight! :roll:

Injuries can kill any team off and we had much more than our share.

Elwood Blues1 · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am **Posts:** 4827

This has been the longest book launch ever....give it a break Kouta and lets all move on...

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 18042

The Duke wrote:

I agree about the injuries, but it doesn't alter the fact that we played in-experienced, un-skilled players that couldn't pull off that style of game.

Playing the style that Kouta wanted, the chip chip possession game, requires accuracy and nerve - something that couldn't be taught overnight - we saw this in 2002.

In 2002, we lost 2 games by 10 goals or more.....with a team decimated by injury.
In 2003, we lost 7 games by in excess of 10 goals with less injuries.

Obviously the long kicking, low possession game was a roaring success.

4thchicken · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am **Posts:** 3136

The Duke wrote:

4thchicken wrote:

The Duke wrote:

He was a great player but probably ranked 16th in the comp for leadership, but thinks he knows how to coach

.

Let's be honest - we had NO skillful players and we saw in 2002 what happens when you try the possession game when you don't have skills.

with respect, what we saw in 2002 was what happens when a list is crippled by injuries - at times we had our entire starting midfield and our best forwards out injured. And there were ocassions when only had 23 or so players from which to select 22 men.

I agree about the injuries, but it doesn't alter the fact that we played in-experienced, un-skilled players that couldn't pull off that style of game.

Playing the style that Kouta wanted, the chip chip possession game, requires accuracy and nerve - something that couldn't be taught overnight - we saw this in 2002.

that comes down to a choice of game plan though - a coach's role is to build experience/skills in the side - i think kouta's point is that we opted for a bomb it to carey game plan - which didnt suit our side (no carey), and there wasnt any real effort to build skills/develop the side. if setanta/aisake/hampson are able to build footskills at their age (and spalding/leowe etc in previous eras) then it would stand to reason that skills can be improved via good coaching/confidence - you need only look the number of teams/players that miraculously lose/discover skills each season (both between seasons and in the middle of seasons).

My issue with the club at the time was that the coach appeared to put little effort in building skills and both coach and administration (collo) did nothing to try to build the confidence of the playing group (particularly collos negative rubbish)

Jarusa · **Joined:** Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am **Posts:** 23123

Blue Vain wrote:

The Duke wrote:

I agree about the injuries, but it doesn't alter the fact that we played in-experienced, un-skilled players that couldn't pull off that style of game.

Playing the style that Kouta wanted, the chip chip possession game, requires accuracy and nerve - something that couldn't be taught overnight - we saw this in 2002.

In 2002, we lost 2 games by 10 goals or more.....with a team decimated by injury.
In 2003, we lost 7 games by in excess of 10 goals with less injuries.

Obviously the long kicking, low possession game was a roaring success.

It must never be forgotten that the 2003 team had about 10 senior players in it who were getting paid about 25% less than they were a year earlier.

Game plan or not, these guys were never going to give 100% after what happened to them in the off season.

4thchicken · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am **Posts:** 3136

AGRO wrote:

4thchicken wrote:

AGRO wrote:

Collo was the only alternative at the time came in and trimmed a lot of deadwood, he cut and burned and had to make some tough decisions.

He made some wrong ones including extending Pagan's contract.

Collo was a horrible choice and hardly a viable alternative. More useless than tits on a bull - EVERY time he opened his mouth he spouted negativity in a time when the club was crying out for something to be positive about.

Didn't see too many other alternatives put up their hand that night at Crown Casino in November 2002.

As the Greek saying goes "you shit in the frypan, you have to eat it". :wink:

I agree somewhat - no one else stood up in 02 (perhaps in the interests of presenting a united front for the new administration) - However, I'll reiterate my point

If the shit stirrers (widely reported to be the USC but no doubt others as well) had any balls they would have moved to dump the board and coach at the end of 03, 05 and 06 seasons.

We lost our way as a club and mediocraty became accepted - it was easier to blame the draft penalties and the AFL rather than to recognise that we had serious issues with the coaching and administration staff throughout those years

Sydney Blue · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:52 pm

Jarusa wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

The Duke wrote:

I agree about the injuries, but it doesn't alter the fact that we played in-experienced, un-skilled players that couldn't pull off that style of game.

Playing the style that Kouta wanted, the chip chip possession game, requires accuracy and nerve - something that couldn't be taught overnight - we saw this in 2002.

In 2002, we lost 2 games by 10 goals or more.....with a team decimated by injury.
In 2003, we lost 7 games by in excess of 10 goals with less injuries.

Obviously the long kicking, low possession game was a roaring success.

It must never be forgotten that the 2003 team had about 10 senior players in it who were getting paid about 25% less than they were a year earlier.

Game plan or not, these guys were never going to give 100% after what happened to them in the off season.

Yes you would think that would have had an effect - It's only human nature for it

But the gameplan, the loss of control and input would have hurt us more.

Its one thing to cop a pay cut - its another to be start to be told to do things differently and an entirely another to have self control removed
Its not hard to see why they were pissed off .

Pagan had a chance to gell this group the moment he stepped into the place the entire footballing world had turned against them it would have been easy to motivate them - He chose a different path - it was the wrong path at the wrong time-

worst coach ever

Jarusa · **Joined:** Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am **Posts:** 23123

Sydney Blue wrote:

Jarusa wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

The Duke wrote:

I agree about the injuries, but it doesn't alter the fact that we played in-experienced, un-skilled players that couldn't pull off that style of game.

Playing the style that Kouta wanted, the chip chip possession game, requires accuracy and nerve - something that couldn't be taught overnight - we saw this in 2002.

In 2002, we lost 2 games by 10 goals or more.....with a team decimated by injury.
In 2003, we lost 7 games by in excess of 10 goals with less injuries.

Obviously the long kicking, low possession game was a roaring success.

It must never be forgotten that the 2003 team had about 10 senior players in it who were getting paid about 25% less than they were a year earlier.

Game plan or not, these guys were never going to give 100% after what happened to them in the off season.

Yes you would think that would have had an effect - It's only human nature for it

But the gameplan, the loss of control and input would have hurt us more.

Its one thing to cop a pay cut - its another to be start to be told to do things differently and an entirely another to have self control removed
Its not hard to see why they were pissed off .

Pagan had a chance to gell this group the moment he stepped into the place the entire footballing world had turned against them it would have been easy to motivate them - He chose a different path - it was the wrong path at the wrong time-

worst coach ever

I'm not going to argue over which factor was the most important. That is very subjective and pointless. My argument is it is silly just to blame the coaching for 2003.

Well basically over one pre season the playing group copped a massive pay cut and also a massive change in game plan that also involved less empowerment than they had been used to. They basically got hit over the head by both the administration and the football department.

In retrospect, less money, less power, different gameplan equalled a disasterous 2003. It was by far the worst season performance wise out of any of the past six.

Sydney Blue · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:09 pm

It's easy to make excuses for 2003 considering the circumstances the playing group faced . Its harder to explain 2005 , 2006 and 2007

Sedat · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 2:30 pm

Goltzenberg wrote:

Hangon, Pagan turned the club around. It was shit when he got it, and he kept it shit for 3-4 years to get young talent in.

If it wasn't for Pagan, we wouldnt have Judd, Kruzer, Gibbs, Murphy

We wouldn't of had JK for the Judd deal

Pagan no doubt was trying to lose so the club could ressurge next year with more gun draft picks. Why would someone use a gameplan that didnt work for 3 - 4 years?

Instead of criticising pagan, we should be thanking him for putting one foot in front of the other and setting the club up for a crack at the finals next year

This strategy is also known as "Post Rohdernism" :wink:

For a non-Blues supporter, I've found the vastly contrasting opinions on this thread a very interesting read. Sounds like both Kouta and Pagan were paid well in excess of their respective performances during that period, and that as coach and captain, they are both equally culpable. Too simplistic a view?

4thchicken · **Joined:** Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:44 am **Posts:** 3136

Sedat wrote:

Goltzenberg wrote:

Hangon, Pagan turned the club around. It was shit when he got it, and he kept it shit for 3-4 years to get young talent in.

If it wasn't for Pagan, we wouldnt have Judd, Kruzer, Gibbs, Murphy

We wouldn't of had JK for the Judd deal

Pagan no doubt was trying to lose so the club could ressurge next year with more gun draft picks. Why would someone use a gameplan that didnt work for 3 - 4 years?

Instead of criticising pagan, we should be thanking him for putting one foot in front of the other and setting the club up for a crack at the finals next year

This strategy is also known as "Post Rohdernism" :wink:

For a non-Blues supporter, I've found the vastly contrasting opinions on this thread a very interesting read. Sounds like both Kouta and Pagan were paid well in excess of their respective performances during that period, and that as coach and captain, they are both equally culpable. Too simplistic a view?

slightly too simplistic - had kouta not suffered the knee injuries one would have expected him to maintain the 1999/2000 form throughout those lean years - in otherwords, he would have remained within the top 5 players of the comp for an additional 5 seasons.

I would have imagine that most supporters would have had no problem with his contract as it played out had he not been so severely limited by injury.

Pagan had no such 'excuses'

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2007 3:18 pm

4thchicken wrote:

AGRO wrote:

4thchicken wrote:

AGRO wrote:

Collo was the only alternative at the time came in and trimmed a lot of deadwood, he cut and burned and had to make some tough decisions.

He made some wrong ones including extending Pagan's contract.

Collo was a horrible choice and hardly a viable alternative. More useless than tits on a bull - EVERY time he opened his mouth he spouted negativity in a time when the club was crying out for something to be positive about.

Didn't see too many other alternatives put up their hand that night at Crown Casino in November 2002.

As the Greek saying goes "you shit in the frypan, you have to eat it". :wink:

I agree somewhat - no one else stood up in 02 (perhaps in the interests of presenting a united front for the new administration) - However, I'll reiterate my point

If the shit stirrers (widely reported to be the USC but no doubt others as well) had any balls they would have moved to dump the board and coach at the end of 03, 05 and 06 seasons.

We lost our way as a club and mediocraty became accepted - it was easier to blame the draft penalties and the AFL rather than to recognise that we had serious issues with the coaching and administration staff throughout those years

The USC stirred the pot no doubt and were the catalyst that got the Elliott Administration tossed.

"Carlton One" were the united board that was put in place at the AGM at the Crown Casino in November 2002.

As I recall there was definitely a lot of love in that room that evening (I am actually being serious) - and the honeymoon period that Collins and the Carlton One Board got from that evening was quite a lengthy one.

We were told that a lot of deadwood needed to be trimmed and player salarys had to be trimmed as we were still over the salary cap and they were.

We were then told by Denis Pagan at the Big Rally at Princes Park in December of 2002 - that he expected Finals Action in 2003 - we didn't get it obviously - but we did know that our list was crap after and we needed an injection of something,

Pagan went for the quick fix at the end of 2003 with the "Bowyers, Harfords, Bannisters" etc etc - and we finished a miraculous 10th and then we won the 2005 Pre-Season Competition.

Then Collo extended Pagan's contract without consulting the Board.

We all fell for it - you only have to look at the posts at "The Blue View", "Talking Carlton" and "CSC" at the time - the majority ALL fell for it - including me :oops:

.

As they say in a democracy - you get the representation you deserve - and we deserve what we got with the Board we put in place - and we deserved Smorgan because he was part of "Carlton One" as well.

All we can say now is thank god for Richard Pratt - the rest of the board may be fair to mediocre right now - but at least we got Dicky - and at least he has put the administration in place to keep us moving forward in a positive direction.

Clayman · **Joined:** Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:02 am **Posts:** 1770

BrizzyBlue wrote:

Sam Lane with more from Kouta on the subject: :wink:

http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/throw ... 32713.html

Koutoufides has also logged, for all the world to see, a story that he still said left him "shattered". At the three-quarter time break of his 200th match which he played in 2003, Pagan, according to the player's recollection, told him "if you don't start jumping, you're better off retiring".

Denis Pagan - he was on the money here. Kouta's reaction is soft and I can't believe he played 200 games of AFL if he was hurt by that comment. Pagan obviously thought he wasn't trying.

With a huge contract like the one he was on, what incentive did he have to put his body on the line for his team mates? What incentive did he have for retiring?

Blue Vain · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am **Posts:** 18042

Jarusa wrote:

I'm not going to argue over which factor was the most important. That is very subjective and pointless. My argument is it is silly just to blame the coaching for 2003.

Couldnt agree more.
Thats why I get frustrated by supporters blaming Wayne Brittain for 2002 results.
Yet some foolishly do.

(Not you of course Jars) :wink:

Kouta blasts Pagan (Denis' reply p4)

Who is online