 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Bomber's not hungry enough. Wouldn't want him even if we did have a vacancy.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
 |
uncanny
Joined: 04 Mar 2014
Location: Castlemaine
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Bomber can stay with Hird and the rest of the lying mob that thought they could get the jump on the rest of us by getting on the juice. Then defending the undefendable in courts to this day. Hearing him try to take the high moral ground about the show cause notices hanging over their players after their pitiful loss last night confirmed to me that he should never coach anywhere again. Same goes for the golden boy.
_________________
woodsmen rule |
|
|
|
|
Member 7167 
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| collie dog wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Your Buckley poll thread presently has 4,012 views and it's still running 84% against you. QED. |
Yeah, the anti-Buckley crowd have stopped going to the footy. There might have been as few as 8,000 Pies fans there last night (assuming 40,000 were Hawks) so I'd say a great number of the unwashed Collingwood fan base have made their mind up on the Buckley era. Next year will be a case of win again or bust (literally). Good luck getting 50,000 members next year. |
And what facts do you have to substantiate that claim. I would suggest it is sheer speculation by someone who always twists things in a manner to make Buckly or the club look bad. Pathetic. |
|
|
|
|
Leggie 
Bucks for PM.
Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Location: Perth
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Member 7167 wrote: | | collie dog wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Your Buckley poll thread presently has 4,012 views and it's still running 84% against you. QED. |
Yeah, the anti-Buckley crowd have stopped going to the footy. There might have been as few as 8,000 Pies fans there last night (assuming 40,000 were Hawks) so I'd say a great number of the unwashed Collingwood fan base have made their mind up on the Buckley era. Next year will be a case of win again or bust (literally). Good luck getting 50,000 members next year. |
And what facts do you have to substantiate that claim. I would suggest it is sheer speculation by someone who always twists things in a manner to make Buckly or the club look bad. Pathetic. |
Yep Pathetic. His comments are as accurate as a blind mans darts competition.
_________________
Bring Back Tranquilli |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Leggie wrote: | | Member 7167 wrote: | | collie dog wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Your Buckley poll thread presently has 4,012 views and it's still running 84% against you. QED. |
Yeah, the anti-Buckley crowd have stopped going to the footy. There might have been as few as 8,000 Pies fans there last night (assuming 40,000 were Hawks) so I'd say a great number of the unwashed Collingwood fan base have made their mind up on the Buckley era. Next year will be a case of win again or bust (literally). Good luck getting 50,000 members next year. |
And what facts do you have to substantiate that claim. I would suggest it is sheer speculation by someone who always twists things in a manner to make Buckly or the club look bad. Pathetic. |
Yep Pathetic. His comments are as accurate as a blind mans darts competition. |
THE ignore button comes in very handy lads, in the case of hound dog Collie.  
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
35forever
"I feel sick - dada dada dada da"
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Location: Physical=Sunshine Coast -- Mental=Vic Park
|
| Post subject: | |
|
First let me say that my "anti-Buckley" poll was never intended to show that everyone wanted to get rid of him, I was fully aware that the majority want to keep him, that's pretty obvious, I just wanted to see what the split was so it can be compared to other data sets, like the one I plan to run in mid-2015 when we'll be on the edge of the 8 and having pretty much the same year we had in 2014.
How do I know next year won't see any great improvement? Simple really, if you change nothing then nothing will change. We'll have the same coaches, the same training staff, though quite a few different players. (That's been Buckley's style from day 1, blame the players.) Having watched the game for several decades you get to know how it works, and history has consistently proven the best tool for forecasting future trends & events. Sides which are having problems have very few tools at their disposal to turn things around. The biggest & most effective of these is turning coaches over. Many times I've seen a side turn it's fortunes around by swapping coaches, in several of these cases the old coach really wasn't the problem. Sometimes there's nothing at all wrong with their coaching, but in this game perception is everything. This is a lesson Collingwood - and many of it's supporters - seem unwilling to learn. We've all seen how the mental aspect of the game can affect results, it happens several times each round, in fact it can happen several times in a game. One of the most famous was Jezza's speccy in the 1970 GF. A mark which hurt every one of us alive at the time. A happier one was Heath Shaw's spoil on Riewoldt in 2010, or Terry Daniher's foolish hit on 'Rowdy' Brown in 1990. On a smaller scale I've seen a judiciously timed free kick turn a game time & time again, seldom in Collingwood's favour. At the high end of the scale we've seen a newly appointed coach cause an upset win in his first match, and we've seen the great coaches turn a side's fortunes in the space of a couple of seasons.
This doesn't mean the new coach is especially gifted, or even better than the old one, but it does mean the players believe he has a magic formula for winning and believe in his leadership completely.
Our players won't attain the heights their ability deserves until they believe that the coach is infallible. When that happens the players don't have to worry about anything except playing their best footy, and they generally do. But again, it's not the brilliance of the coach which makes the difference, it's the perception the players have. For that reason the best coach can fail, and the worst can succeed.
That's why I urged sticking with Buckley and getting behind him until the end of 2013. That was when I realised that he'd lost the players. When that happens a team will fail until something changes. It's possible that the change might come in some other way, maybe Bucks will totally change his approach and become someone the players believe in. It's not impossible! But it is unlikely. I believe he's too invested in the rightness of his methods. If so only his removal will see us back where we belong, but not if it's left too late. I believe that the time was now, and we've let it pass. Eddie has too much invested in his favourite to make the change.
Does anyone here seriously believe we could be flag contenders in 2015? Really? Or are you all just of the view that "we'll give him one more year"
All that view can possibly do is waste another season. For the youngsters here that may be no biggie, but some of us know there's only so many seasons, and tossing one away is seriously criminal.
But don't take my word, go look at history, look at the winning sides, look at the losing sides, look at the sides who've turned their fortunes around. You'll see patterns emerge.
_________________
"If at first you dont succeed...
... oh who cares, we did it!!!!!"
-me, 2010
"The pies are going to the big dance!"-P.Daicos 2010
Visit My Website! |
|
|
|
|
Albert Parker
Joined: 13 Dec 2012
|
| Post subject: | |
|
35, you may be right, but surely there is some improvement from
- managing injuries and fitness better (although Davoren and Buckley remain)
- the young players in our team maturing?
I do not think I am a premiership contender in 2015, but I remain cautiously optimistic that we can return to finals football.
_________________
One team, one dream - the Pies and this year's premiership |
|
|
|
|
ThePieMind
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 35forever wrote: | First let me say that my "anti-Buckley" poll was never intended to show that everyone wanted to get rid of him, I was fully aware that the majority want to keep him, that's pretty obvious, I just wanted to see what the split was so it can be compared to other data sets, like the one I plan to run in mid-2015 when we'll be on the edge of the 8 and having pretty much the same year we had in 2014.
How do I know next year won't see any great improvement? Simple really, if you change nothing then nothing will change. We'll have the same coaches, the same training staff, though quite a few different players. (That's been Buckley's style from day 1, blame the players.) Having watched the game for several decades you get to know how it works, and history has consistently proven the best tool for forecasting future trends & events. Sides which are having problems have very few tools at their disposal to turn things around. The biggest & most effective of these is turning coaches over.
Incorrect - GEEL, HAWKS, COLL and now even RICH (having learnt their lesson) have persisted with coaches against howling protests from outsiders.
This is recent history and therefore more relevant as a trend than your advocacy that only change get results.
Many times I've seen a side turn it's fortunes around by swapping coaches, in several of these cases the old coach really wasn't the problem. Sometimes there's nothing at all wrong with their coaching, but in this game perception is everything.This is a lesson Collingwood - and many of it's supporters - seem unwilling to learn.
Breath taking hubris here - you actually think that only your opinion counts. The collective intelligence of the majority has far more profound relevance and insight.
This doesn't mean the new coach is especially gifted, or even better than the old one, but it does mean the players believe he has a magic formula for winning and believe in his leadership completely.
PAUL FLETHAM - lead BNE Lions to a win his first game as coach but in the end was spectacularly unsuccessful. Do some research and you will find such wins ARE NOT predictors of long term coaching success.[/color]
Our players won't attain the heights their ability deserves until they believe that the coach is infallible.
Really - why did MM, Clarkson and Bomber survive and win flags - you would simplistically want us to believe it was because the players finally saw their "INFALLIBILITY", - Why were they hiding their INFALLIBILITY before hand?
So on that basis why do you discount the that the INFALLIBILITY of Bucks will also magically appear.
When that happens the players don't have to worry about anything except playing their best footy, and they generally do. But again, it's not the brilliance of the coach which makes the difference, it's the perception the players have. For that reason the best coach can fail, and the worst can succeed.
That's why I urged sticking with Buckley and getting behind him until the end of 2013. That was when I realised that he'd lost the players. When that happens a team will fail until something changes. It's possible that the change might come in some other way, maybe Bucks will totally change his approach and become someone the players believe in. It's not impossible! But it is unlikely. I believe he's too invested in the rightness of his methods.
Most successful coaches ARE - eg MM with his stubborness over the game plan.
Leadership and conviction (rightness of methods) are inseparable, I am very surprised that your study of AFL history has missed this important point in the success of coaches.
But don't take my word, go look at history, look at the winning sides, look at the losing sides, look at the sides who've turned their fortunes around. You'll see patterns emerge
Give us some recent examples - I fear there are none compared to clubs who [color=red]have stuck with their coaches and won flags.
St.K is a good example of your approach failing - they changed 2 coaches in a premiership window and STILL failed -
MM has failed to get CARL into the finals compared to Ratten.
Saints, BULL, WCE, ADEL, MELB, have had no success with a coach change.
So your theory just doesn't stand scrutiny in the modern game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
35forever
"I feel sick - dada dada dada da"
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Location: Physical=Sunshine Coast -- Mental=Vic Park
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| ThePieMind wrote: | | 35forever wrote: | First let me say that my "anti-Buckley" poll was never intended to show that everyone wanted to get rid of him, I was fully aware that the majority want to keep him, that's pretty obvious, I just wanted to see what the split was so it can be compared to other data sets, like the one I plan to run in mid-2015 when we'll be on the edge of the 8 and having pretty much the same year we had in 2014.
How do I know next year won't see any great improvement? Simple really, if you change nothing then nothing will change. We'll have the same coaches, the same training staff, though quite a few different players. (That's been Buckley's style from day 1, blame the players.) Having watched the game for several decades you get to know how it works, and history has consistently proven the best tool for forecasting future trends & events. Sides which are having problems have very few tools at their disposal to turn things around. The biggest & most effective of these is turning coaches over.
Incorrect - GEEL, HAWKS, COLL and now even RICH (having learnt their lesson) have persisted with coaches against howling protests from outsiders.
This is recent history and therefore more relevant as a trend than your advocacy that only change get results.
Many times I've seen a side turn it's fortunes around by swapping coaches, in several of these cases the old coach really wasn't the problem. Sometimes there's nothing at all wrong with their coaching, but in this game perception is everything.This is a lesson Collingwood - and many of it's supporters - seem unwilling to learn.
Breath taking hubris here - you actually think that only your opinion counts. The collective intelligence of the majority has far more profound relevance and insight.
This doesn't mean the new coach is especially gifted, or even better than the old one, but it does mean the players believe he has a magic formula for winning and believe in his leadership completely.
PAUL FLETHAM - lead BNE Lions to a win his first game as coach but in the end was spectacularly unsuccessful. Do some research and you will find such wins ARE NOT predictors of long term coaching success.[/color]
Our players won't attain the heights their ability deserves until they believe that the coach is infallible.
Really - why did MM, Clarkson and Bomber survive and win flags - you would simplistically want us to believe it was because the players finally saw their "INFALLIBILITY", - Why were they hiding their INFALLIBILITY before hand?
So on that basis why do you discount the that the INFALLIBILITY of Bucks will also magically appear.
When that happens the players don't have to worry about anything except playing their best footy, and they generally do. But again, it's not the brilliance of the coach which makes the difference, it's the perception the players have. For that reason the best coach can fail, and the worst can succeed.
That's why I urged sticking with Buckley and getting behind him until the end of 2013. That was when I realised that he'd lost the players. When that happens a team will fail until something changes. It's possible that the change might come in some other way, maybe Bucks will totally change his approach and become someone the players believe in. It's not impossible! But it is unlikely. I believe he's too invested in the rightness of his methods.
Most successful coaches ARE - eg MM with his stubborness over the game plan.
Leadership and conviction (rightness of methods) are inseparable, I am very surprised that your study of AFL history has missed this important point in the success of coaches.
But don't take my word, go look at history, look at the winning sides, look at the losing sides, look at the sides who've turned their fortunes around. You'll see patterns emerge
Give us some recent examples - I fear there are none compared to clubs who [color=red]have stuck with their coaches and won flags.
St.K is a good example of your approach failing - they changed 2 coaches in a premiership window and STILL failed -
MM has failed to get CARL into the finals compared to Ratten.
Saints, BULL, WCE, ADEL, MELB, have had no success with a coach change.
So your theory just doesn't stand scrutiny in the modern game.
|
|
TPM: Are you reminding us of this because I didn't respond? Frankly I missed it but looking through it there really isn't much to respond to. It's just repetition in red text!
But, just for you, I'll once again put these fatuous arguments to the sword.
First Geelong & the Hawks have resisted calls to dump the coach. I never heard them unless you're talking about Jeff Kennet who no one, especially at Hawthorn, listens to. Who's calling for Scott to leave Geelong? And in both cases why on earth would they listen to any such calls when they're both on top of the ladder! What a pointless comparison! Why would anyone want Clarkson out? He has two flags and they're still playing GFs, Hardly Apples for Apples, is it??? I haven't heard the calls to axe Dimmy from Richmond either, he got them into their first finals in over a decade, this is really a silly point. If you're on top you'd be stupid to change... Unless you're Collingwood of course!!
Next: "Breath taking hubris" Hahaha! I probably have been guilty of that many times, but this? What a poor argument, like many of these points it's simply semantics. I absolutely believe that many at Collingwood don't get the importance of perception, if they did they wouldn't make themselves look idiotic by constantly lying, to us, to the players, and to the media. And nothing changes, look at the farce of a question night they put on with 2 days notice so they could read prepared bullshit to answer the questions they knew were coming. It's just preposterous to think you can act with such cynicism and be taken seriously. Whether you noticed it or not our dishonesty has made us a laughingstock.
Next you mention Paul Feltham (not Fletham! read the stats web sites properly). Paul is actually a very good mate of my uncle & I've met him several times, very nice guy. He won his first game and then lost a lot coz the Bears were crap. SO??? What's your point? A single 25 year old fact tells us what exactly???
Honestly, the rest is just more of the same, childish semantics and unrelated factoids mean nothing, it's among the poorest attempts at rebuttal I've ever read, sorry, none of it is worth my time. I think anyone reading will agree, however regretfully
_________________
"If at first you dont succeed...
... oh who cares, we did it!!!!!"
-me, 2010
"The pies are going to the big dance!"-P.Daicos 2010
Visit My Website! |
|
|
|
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Joined: 26 Sep 2013
Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right
|
| Post subject: | |
|
lord help us
_________________
All Aboard!! Choo Choo!!! |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 35forever wrote: |
First Geelong & the Hawks have resisted calls to dump the coach. I never heard them unless you're talking about Jeff Kennet who no one, especially at Hawthorn, listens to. Who's calling for Scott to leave Geelong? And in both cases why on earth would they listen to any such calls when they're both on top of the ladder! What a pointless comparison! Why would anyone want Clarkson out? He has two flags and they're still playing GFs, Hardly Apples for Apples, is it??? I haven't heard the calls to axe Dimmy from Richmond either, he got them into their first finals in over a decade, this is really a silly point. If you're on top you'd be stupid to change... Unless you're Collingwood of course!!
|
There were definitely calls to get rid of Bomber Thompson before Geelong became an undisputed winning machine. Same for Clarkson at Hawthorn.
Here's proof of just how close Bomber came to being sacked:
| Herald Sun wrote: | GEELONG legend Matthew Scarlett believed assistant coach Daryn Cresswell had been told he would replace coach Mark Thompson when the Cats defender threatened to walk out on the club.
Scarlett publicly threatened to leave Geelong if the Cats did not reappoint Thompson during the club's 2006 review, with the long-time coach winning the following year's premiership.
Gambling addict Cresswell was later jailed for fraud.
He tells Fox Footy's Open Mike on Monday night he had a gut feel about Cresswell, urging club management to stay the course with Thompson. |
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/matthew-scarlett-reveals-he-threatened-to-walk-out-on-geelong-if-they-sacked-mark-thompson/story-e6frf9lo-1226612770660
Clarkson was definitely under threat when the Hawks were near the bottom of the ladder before 2008 and Dawson was being slaughtered week in week out at full back. But even after the 2008 triumph Clarkson was close to being sacked:
| AFL Site wrote: | | But it can now be revealed how close he came to being sacked in 2010, as the Hawks stumbled out of the blocks with six losses in their first seven matches. |
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-02-15/clarko-almost-sacked-in-2010
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
Cam 
Nick's BB Member #166
Joined: 10 May 2002
Location: Springvale
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | 35forever wrote: |
First Geelong & the Hawks have resisted calls to dump the coach. I never heard them unless you're talking about Jeff Kennet who no one, especially at Hawthorn, listens to. Who's calling for Scott to leave Geelong? And in both cases why on earth would they listen to any such calls when they're both on top of the ladder! What a pointless comparison! Why would anyone want Clarkson out? He has two flags and they're still playing GFs, Hardly Apples for Apples, is it??? I haven't heard the calls to axe Dimmy from Richmond either, he got them into their first finals in over a decade, this is really a silly point. If you're on top you'd be stupid to change... Unless you're Collingwood of course!!
|
There were definitely calls to get rid of Bomber Thompson before Geelong became an undisputed winning machine. Same for Clarkson at Hawthorn.
Here's proof of just how close Bomber came to being sacked:
| Herald Sun wrote: | GEELONG legend Matthew Scarlett believed assistant coach Daryn Cresswell had been told he would replace coach Mark Thompson when the Cats defender threatened to walk out on the club.
Scarlett publicly threatened to leave Geelong if the Cats did not reappoint Thompson during the club's 2006 review, with the long-time coach winning the following year's premiership.
Gambling addict Cresswell was later jailed for fraud.
He tells Fox Footy's Open Mike on Monday night he had a gut feel about Cresswell, urging club management to stay the course with Thompson. |
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/matthew-scarlett-reveals-he-threatened-to-walk-out-on-geelong-if-they-sacked-mark-thompson/story-e6frf9lo-1226612770660
Clarkson was definitely under threat when the Hawks were near the bottom of the ladder before 2008 and Dawson was being slaughtered week in week out at full back. But even after the 2008 triumph Clarkson was close to being sacked:
| AFL Site wrote: | | But it can now be revealed how close he came to being sacked in 2010, as the Hawks stumbled out of the blocks with six losses in their first seven matches. |
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-02-15/clarko-almost-sacked-in-2010 |
Bomber and Leigh Matthews have few things in common other than premierships. And not related to footy.
_________________
Get back on top. |
|
|
|
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Joined: 26 Sep 2013
Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | 35forever wrote: |
First Geelong & the Hawks have resisted calls to dump the coach. I never heard them unless you're talking about Jeff Kennet who no one, especially at Hawthorn, listens to. Who's calling for Scott to leave Geelong? And in both cases why on earth would they listen to any such calls when they're both on top of the ladder! What a pointless comparison! Why would anyone want Clarkson out? He has two flags and they're still playing GFs, Hardly Apples for Apples, is it??? I haven't heard the calls to axe Dimmy from Richmond either, he got them into their first finals in over a decade, this is really a silly point. If you're on top you'd be stupid to change... Unless you're Collingwood of course!!
|
There were definitely calls to get rid of Bomber Thompson before Geelong became an undisputed winning machine. Same for Clarkson at Hawthorn.
Here's proof of just how close Bomber came to being sacked:
| Herald Sun wrote: | GEELONG legend Matthew Scarlett believed assistant coach Daryn Cresswell had been told he would replace coach Mark Thompson when the Cats defender threatened to walk out on the club.
Scarlett publicly threatened to leave Geelong if the Cats did not reappoint Thompson during the club's 2006 review, with the long-time coach winning the following year's premiership.
Gambling addict Cresswell was later jailed for fraud.
He tells Fox Footy's Open Mike on Monday night he had a gut feel about Cresswell, urging club management to stay the course with Thompson. |
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/matthew-scarlett-reveals-he-threatened-to-walk-out-on-geelong-if-they-sacked-mark-thompson/story-e6frf9lo-1226612770660
Clarkson was definitely under threat when the Hawks were near the bottom of the ladder before 2008 and Dawson was being slaughtered week in week out at full back. But even after the 2008 triumph Clarkson was close to being sacked:
| AFL Site wrote: | | But it can now be revealed how close he came to being sacked in 2010, as the Hawks stumbled out of the blocks with six losses in their first seven matches. |
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-02-15/clarko-almost-sacked-in-2010 |
So Bucks is destined to rise from the ashes like a blazing phoenix - wow it suddenly all make sense now - tyvm - cheers!!
_________________
All Aboard!! Choo Choo!!! |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I would rather have root canal work done at my dentist, than read some of these "perceptive fellow" posts. sigh.
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 35forever wrote: | First let me say that my "anti-Buckley" poll was never intended to show that everyone wanted to get rid of him, I was fully aware that the majority want to keep him, that's pretty obvious, I just wanted to see what the split was so it can be compared to other data sets, like the one I plan to run in mid-2015 when we'll be on the edge of the 8 and having pretty much the same year we had in 2014.
How do I know next year won't see any great improvement? Simple really, if you change nothing then nothing will change. We'll have the same coaches, the same training staff, though quite a few different players. (That's been Buckley's style from day 1, blame the players.) Having watched the game for several decades you get to know how it works, and history has consistently proven the best tool for forecasting future trends & events. Sides which are having problems have very few tools at their disposal to turn things around. The biggest & most effective of these is turning coaches over. Many times I've seen a side turn it's fortunes around by swapping coaches, in several of these cases the old coach really wasn't the problem. Sometimes there's nothing at all wrong with their coaching, but in this game perception is everything. This is a lesson Collingwood - and many of it's supporters - seem unwilling to learn. We've all seen how the mental aspect of the game can affect results, it happens several times each round, in fact it can happen several times in a game. One of the most famous was Jezza's speccy in the 1970 GF. A mark which hurt every one of us alive at the time. A happier one was Heath Shaw's spoil on Riewoldt in 2010, or Terry Daniher's foolish hit on 'Rowdy' Brown in 1990. On a smaller scale I've seen a judiciously timed free kick turn a game time & time again, seldom in Collingwood's favour. At the high end of the scale we've seen a newly appointed coach cause an upset win in his first match, and we've seen the great coaches turn a side's fortunes in the space of a couple of seasons.
This doesn't mean the new coach is especially gifted, or even better than the old one, but it does mean the players believe he has a magic formula for winning and believe in his leadership completely.
Our players won't attain the heights their ability deserves until they believe that the coach is infallible. When that happens the players don't have to worry about anything except playing their best footy, and they generally do. But again, it's not the brilliance of the coach which makes the difference, it's the perception the players have. For that reason the best coach can fail, and the worst can succeed.
That's why I urged sticking with Buckley and getting behind him until the end of 2013. That was when I realised that he'd lost the players. When that happens a team will fail until something changes. It's possible that the change might come in some other way, maybe Bucks will totally change his approach and become someone the players believe in. It's not impossible! But it is unlikely. I believe he's too invested in the rightness of his methods. If so only his removal will see us back where we belong, but not if it's left too late. I believe that the time was now, and we've let it pass. Eddie has too much invested in his favourite to make the change.
Does anyone here seriously believe we could be flag contenders in 2015? Really? Or are you all just of the view that "we'll give him one more year"
All that view can possibly do is waste another season. For the youngsters here that may be no biggie, but some of us know there's only so many seasons, and tossing one away is seriously criminal.
But don't take my word, go look at history, look at the winning sides, look at the losing sides, look at the sides who've turned their fortunes around. You'll see patterns emerge. |
2 counterpoints to that argument -
Number 1. the Cats in 04/05/06 were having their share of problems. there was a belief it was the coaches faults, players were not playing to their potential and they kept missing the finals. Instead of firing the coach, they stayed the course, identified weaknesses in their list and addressed them (ottens for one), recruited another a-grader in Selwood and helped the coach improve as a coach as he developed his own team. We know what happened next to Bomber and his men.
Number 2. Collingwood in 05/06. Mick had overseen the creation of and then destruciton of a GF worthy team and we were back down the bottom. We stayed the course, addressed our weaknesses through the father/son and two drafts in a row and then saw a jump to the second rung of the ladder in 07/08.
Number 3. Pies looked like they had peaked in 08/09. their best looked just below the best of Geelong and St.Kilda and it looked like we were no shot at a flag. Malthouse was done and everyone wanted him sacked. we know how that story ends.
Things change pretty quickly. I am almost certain we wont feel the same in 12 months time. there is an unknown quantity about our list. Sometimes, one extra pre-season is all it takes from being a team that competes well for 10 weeks (as we did this year from round 2-11) to a team that competes for the entire season.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
