GBN! Get Bomber Now!!!

[AN_Inkling]

[35forever]

My god it amazes me to see there are still folks who think the succession was a good idea! How many years of failure will it take? 5? 10? 32?
The history of MMs time at Collingwood hasn't been rewritten, it's all there in Black & White, he took a Wooden Spoon side and got them to successive Grand Finals in just 3 years, nothing can change those facts. That we didn't win one was heartbreaking, but the AFL did everything they could to make Brisbane a success, as usual we were the AFLs bitches. Fortunately Mick hadn't bet everything on those finals and we were back in the mix after just two years in the crapper. From there we played finals 8 years straight including a flag. Not many could do that, in fact no one has in the modern era.
It's taken Bucks just three year to take that side from Minor Premiers (our first back to back minor Premierships since the twenties!) to probably missing finals. I can tell you now we WILL finish 12th-14th next year. Footy goes in cycles and I've seen this all before several times. I told you all the succession would see us missing the finals within a few years, what kills me is we'll be doing it with one of the best lists in the game. How do you explain that other than poor leadership? The best the "keep Buckley" brigade can do is suggest our list is weak, but it just don't hold water. After the succession was a fait d'accompli I said that the best thing to do was stick with Bucks. Back him to the hilt and give him every chance. A big reason for that was there were no other top coaches up for grabs, and the fact that we'd look ridiculous if we didn’t back Buckley. But those days are firmly in the past. He's had plenty of time to show what he can do, and now it's time to follow the ONLY plan that has worked for us in the last 50+ years. Bring in a proven coach from our worst enemies and enjoy the instant success. If Bomber came to us next season we'd be playing deep into September within 2 seasons, no long term misery, no wasting some of the best players in the game, no mile-long injury lists, just Collingwood playing in the 2016 Grand Final. It worked with Hafey, it worked with Matthews, it worked with Malthouse, it would work with Thompson.

But what we'll actually do is watch meekly while Bomber takes StKilda or Gold Coast to successive Grand Finals, and we'll be watching all this from around 14th simply because we don't like change and because Eddie & Co have too much invested in Bucks. Eddie bet everything, our hard-won success, our talented list, and the happiness of millions of people on his idol like it was his to risk, and we'll be praying the price for years to come. Eventually, after between four & god-knows-how-many years Buckley will get us to about 4th and we'll win a final, and Eddie will crow about his brilliant plan, and I will be here every damn year to shower you with "I told you so".

Essendon's clusterf*ck is still to come, my guess is that Bomber has already turned them into a winning side just like he did for Scott, a team Goofy could get to the finals. The Melbourne cluster*ck is long in the past, but so similar to ours it ain't funny. They sacked a proven, successful coach with several flags to his name and replaced him with the clubs best player who coached for years without success until he moved to another club. Very similar story, as will be the outcome.

God I wish I was wrong.

I'm not.

.
(PS: @ September Zeroes: Nice one! Sorry about the length, I'll look into supplying an abstract, but I've written scientific papers and half a page IS an abstract! )

[Breadcrawl]

You also said that the ladder won't change after about round 10 - that if you aren't entrenched in the eight you won't make it.

West Coast and Richmond say g'day.

So, for the wrong reasons, do we.

You were wrong, wrong, wrong just like I knew you were at the time

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

[SuperStar Beams]

If i recall after our win against GWS i recall one of the younger players praising Bucks as a coach and saying that they love playing under him. if i read that wrong well then fair enough but surely if they players like playing under him why move him on.

35forever you said in your previous post that footy goes in cycles, who is to say this wouldn't of happened under MM??

We don't have that good of a list anymore, we probably made mistakes in Dawes and Shaw, Maxy is a big loss in leadership and therefore we need to keep Ball for next year but belief it or not leadership plays a massive part in footy, we need about 3 generals in the team, we had Cloke, Ball and Maxy, soon we will have Cloke left and that doesn't help out our mids or backs.

I will say this, i believe the team we have has finally been caught up to speed, we had players that played roles and did the team things, but this is now 3 years after those grand finals and those players that play in those positions need to do more in this age of footy and they just cant do it, this is in regards to Blair, Goldsack, Toovey, H to name a few from those years who still do what they did then to now but now its not quite good enough, yes they may play a good game every now and then but not nearly as much as they should

[ThePieMind]

@35forever

I dont have the skill to cut and paste like you so I will answer your reply to my last post below.

Injuries caused by Bucks - you agree there is no fact to substantiate your allegation and you provide some circumstantial evidence - correlation IS NOT causation. Further you chose to ignore my statement that Sport scientists rule the roost to the extent that all coaches complain they can't give extra drills to their groups due to the power of the scientists.

So clearly your contention regarding injuries is completely unlikely given the above.

Tactical nous - you now feel this is far less important and that man  management is the key. I agree man management is important but you need to understand that Bucks has acknowledged the reliance on a "messiah" is not in the long term interest of the club and brought in Leading Teams to establish a culture to survive beyond the charisma of the last coach.
Consequently motivation, shifts from fire and brimstone speeches to self motivation and group values and group motivation.
This is a work in progress and the results at GEEL and HAW are enough justification for Bucks to  try the process with CFC.
I applaud him for this because, lurching from the motivational abilities of one coach to another is fraught with danger and opting for establishing self reliance and group motivation via a culture change is far more enduring, and will produce a culture of success independent of the charismatic coach.

Isn't that what we all want - an enduring winning culture?

You criticize Bucks for blaming the players after last years final. This board and virtually all commentators were highly critical of our performance that day, the players deserved a spray - it's that simple and MM would have done the same.

Give me a stable 22 and I'll give you a game plan.
This is an undisputed fact you cannot ignore. 
Our lowest turnover of players in recent years occurred in 2010.
A coach cannot shuffle a team when the cupboard is bare or full of inexperienced players - find me a team that has had our mix of injuries and youth and still succeeded and I will happily reconsider my position.

Finally - you have made no comment on the fact Club boards that backed coaches( bomber, williams, Clarkson and even us with MM) despite huge criticism have succeeded and actually won flags.

You want to opt for the Rich coaching merry go round which doesn't work - recent history shows backing the incumbent works.

So really there is no compelling case for dumping Bucks - there are far to many variables that have compromised his tenure, which in combination are, by any reasonable and detached assessment, more likely to explain poor results.

[Piesnchess]

^ All good and well reasoned arguments, well said, trouble is, 35er only wants the old man back, in reality.

[35forever]

Again, my apologies for the length, but I have to address each poster
@breadcrawl: Yes, I did say the ladder don't change much after Rd.10. Glad you remembered that! So you're giving me Richmond & West coast. Both can't make it, can they? So you're saying that Richmond hanging on for 8th,(maybe), and ONLY because we performed far worse than ANYONE could've guessed DISproves my point? Seriously? I'd say I nailed it, yet again!

@ SuperstarBeams: the cycle would've continued under Mick? Hmm, how do I say this without appearing disrespectful? I'm just gonna guess maybe you're a younger fan & don't really understand the game all that well. The simple fact is that success breeds success. If sanity had prevailed & MM had've been allowed to continue his tenure as easily the most successful Magpie coach since Phonse & Jock we would've won the 2011 flag. Again, people don't understand the mental game, and that has cost us success more than once. Despite what one player might have said (with a gun to his head like at last years Copeland) the players simply haven't taken to Buckley, just as I predicted. We had young stars like Daisy, Heater, and Wellingham who loved MM, 2 of those 3 were a long way from home and Mick had an avuncular quality which Buckley simply doesn't have, or understand. Players aren't stupid, they know how their clubs work, they see what's happening around them, and usually play accordingly. I promise you the reason we've failed to continue our incredible run was the adherence to the humoungously idiotic 'succession' (oh the irony of the first 7 letters of that word!). NOT because Mick was a tactical genius (though he was pretty good), but because he had the guys 100% behind him, and they played 100% for each other. Remember that 'Band of Brothers' who stood around the centre circle of the 'G and belted out the song? They came out next year and tore the competition a new one, their confidence was sky high, and confident sides win games. But your premise is not entirely wrong, the cycle could have come around under Mick, but only after several years of dominating the competition, and only if the recruiting team had stopped drafting so brilliantly, causing us to lose a bunch of players at once without good replacements. But we had kids like Beams, Sidey, Wellers, Fasolo & Blair set to fill the shoes of retirees, so it wouldn't have happened quickly. I simply cannot believe that we wouldn't have only gotten better under Mick, the 2011 side was WAY better than 2010, it defies logic and history.

@ThePieMind: Yes mate, I provided circumstantial evidence, is there another kind available? Should I have set up a double blind? Most murderers are convicted on circumstantial evidence absent a confession. If our injury run continues for five more years and then suddenly stops the minute we get a coach it's still circumstantial! I can't imagine Bucks will sign a confession, can you? Your statement here is wrong, the correct way to put it would be that "Correlation isn't always causation, but is often used to identify it."

Next point: It doesn't really matter how good your tactical nous is if you don't have the players, Leading Teams was ALWAYS going to be a mistake for us given the circumstances. PS: Your suggestion that LT were behind the success of Geelong and Hawthorn is even more circumstantial than my point about injury! It would help if no other, losing sides employed them, or if ALL flag-winning teams of the last half dozen years had employed them, but it would STILL be circumstantial, now wouldn't it?

Next: YES, we DO all want an enduring winning culture, and guess what?
WE HAD ONE! The Magpies of 2010-11 had the best internal culture I've ever seen at a footy club, it was absolutely perfect! The players would've killed for each other & for the coach. They were happy with the board & admin, how could a culture be better than that!? Like I keep saying, go look at episodes of "The Black & White Show" from those years (available at CFC), and tell me what you see. Please, just look, and compare it with now. They're still kinda funny, but look at the interaction! The core of that culture were Mick, Daisy & Heater, all gone.
Unfortunately history doesn't provide many examples of dumping a coach on an incredible winning streak, coz no one else has ever done anything that stupid. The closest is Melbourne's sacking of Norm Smith in '65, and they re-hired him the next week, What happened to Melbourne after that? They call it a 'curse' because it seems more palatable than calling it the dumbest thing ever done in Melbourne's history!
What we've effectively done is favour "Long term Pain over Short Term gain" No one's ever done it, and no one ever will again. Notice how all the other clubs applauded us for sticking to the contract? Talk about all your Christmases coming at once!!!

Next: you repeat your 'stable 22' argument, and again I tell you the simple fact that it's not a non-sequitur. It isn't a fact, and it's eminently disputable!
Injuries provide opportunities for young players, look at last week's win. JT, who was best afield wouldn't have got another run without the injury debacle of the Lions game. Where will you be if we beat hawthorn with even more kids?
Sure it's highly unlikely and I wouldn't put the farm on it, but you never know!
But I get where you're coming from. Lots of injuries are undesirable and the only reason anyone has put up for keeping Bucks is the injuries he's had to deal with, so if the 'Keep Buckley Brigade' were to consider, even for a moment that Bucks could bear some responsibility for those injuries the whole argument for keeping him becomes shakier than a Travis Cloke set shot 20 metres out, dead in front!

Next: there were several points I didn't address because of the constant bitching about my long posts, but for Collingwood the "rich merry-go-round" DOES work, in fact it’s the ONLY thing that's worked for us in over 50 years!!!! The big difference with the sides you mentioned is that in each case the coaches overwhelmingly had the support of the players which Buckley does NOT have.

To finish: No case for dumping Bucks?!?!
3 years of successively worse results
3 years of successively worse injury lists
3 years of successively lower scores
3 years of successively lower attendances
3 years of successively worse player turnarounds
He clearly doesn't have the players
He clearly takes no responsibility for any of the above
He's clearly failed to display any coaching brilliance.

That’s hardly 'no case'. Yours rests entirely on Bucks having no part in the injury toll. If he does only crazy people would keep him on. But only crazy people dump the clubs most successful coach in 50 years while he's on a winning streak, so you will get your wish. Bucks will stay, Collingwood will drop to 10th or 12th in 2015.

On the bright side, 3 years of successively better draft picks!!!!

[HAL]

Where do you think? I don't think that's very polite.

[SuperStar Beams]

yes i am a younger fan but to say i don't understand the game is a big cry, success breeds success you say Hawks fans from 2009 say hello, went from winning a flag to not making the Grand Final when they still probably had one of the best lists around at that time, yes they are back up again now and i still believe we will one day in the next cpl of years, maybe thats where my youthfulness comes in, i always hope and believe no matter what, i will back any decision my club makes even if it is the wrong one because every person makes mistakes, but sometimes mistakes can still become a success, it just needs time and thats what i believe so anyone can say whatever they what but in the end you have your opinion and this is my opinion and i will always stick by it

[AN_Inkling]

I've gotta say, 35's not wrong. I'm not on the sack Bucks or get Bomber bandwagon, but there's no disputing that the handover ripped the heart out of an incredibly close and successful team. It did not bring the seamless transition and continued success it promised, and has therefore failed.

If things went bad, as they have, it was never going to be possible to bring all players and all supporters along. And for that reason, among others, the handover was always a mistake. The Malthouse era should have been allowed to come to a natural end, at that point a club is ready to renew and reinvigorate, forcing such change was always going to result in lost years. So far we've had three of those as well as 5 or 6 Premiership heroes leaving before their time. We can't be certain that Malthouse would have met continued success after 2011, but even if not, we would have had a much cleaner break at the end of it.

So the handover was a major mistake, but that does not mean we sack Buckley. Having abandoned the path of continued success following the Malthouse era, Buckley is now engaged in a rebuild of the list and a shift in culture. Having started this process at the end of 2012, we need to be seeing results during the 2015 season. If not, then it may be time to act, but not before.

[David]

I can't be bothered reading through the whole thread right now, but I really have to question the judgement of people who think we should hire a man who allegedly helped oversee the doping of nearly an entire playing list. If he knowingly had any hand in that, he should be banned for life, and hopefully ASADA will do just that.

Either way, I'd prefer not to have cheaters working for the club I support. And certainly not to be in a position of authority over impressionable young men.

[SuperSwede]

Dear 35forever
You certainly do give the impression of turning yourself inside out just to prove that Buckley can’t coach, or that you were right all along or whatever it is you want to prove.
A few weeks ago you were claiming that you “knew” for an absolute fact that we had the best list in the competition! And that the fault for what had gone wrong lay with the coach. Regrettably nobody seems to have explained to you the difference between fact and opinion. As an opinion you are entitled to it although I believe that on this one a great many would not share that opinion.
You state in a very factual way that re-builds never bring success but that new coaches do. In 2005 we plummeted from a Grand final two years earlier to 15:th spot and almost picked up a wooden spoon in the process. To the best of my knowledge we did not replace the coach but we did bring in a lot of new young players in the ensuing years. If this qualifies as a rebuild or not I don’t know but it looks awfully like one. Already the following year we missed out on top 4 on percentage alone. The year after we lost a very tight preliminary final. And in 2010 we won the premiership with very few players remaining from 2005.
I suppose that this must have dawned upon you later on because next thing you are saying that you were one of the few who argued against sacking Malthouse ! Despite the fact that you knew that rebuilds don’t work and that new coaches do. Or didn’t you know that at the time? Or wasn’t this an established fact at the time?
When the groundswell of opposition failed to materialize you say that if it had been an outsider instead of Buckley the result would have been the other way round. This is of course possible, we will never know. However the results of this poll seem to be that for every person who wants us to get rid of Buckley now there are five or six others who don't want that. Now isn’t it just possible that when these people are voting, they are actually voting for some sort of stability in the coaching position?
35forever, why don’t you just go out and enjoy life as it is? Don’t take yourself so seriously. I for one have a pretty simplistic attitude to footy, I have barracked for Collingwood an awful long time. When we win games I’m happy and upbeat about the future. When we lose I’m despondent and wonder how on earth we will turn this around. But that feeling only lasts a couple of days. This means that out of 21 games so far I’ve been happy on 11 occasions. I guess that makes me one of the glass half full brigade. I’m a little sad that we are not playing finals, but in all honesty I don’t expect that to happen every year. However what has given me a lot of joy over the years is the knowledge that I support this wonderful club with all its glory and all its shortcomings. And what’s more I’m confident that I will continue to enjoy supporting the Magpies.
Maybe Buckley is useless as a coach. Maybe he isn’t, he might even in fact be quite good. Fortunately the people entrusted with the welfare of the club, i.e. the board, probably wiser heads than both yours and mine, will have to decide that question and perhaps act on it.
You might call me a simpleton, or one who has NFI, that’s OK that’s your privilege, but I will leave you with another simplistic view. Eddie McGuire has in my book been terrific for turning this club around and he probably knows a hell of a lot more than both you and I about how to run an AFL club. If Buckley enjoys Eddie’s confidence then he enjoys mine. Floreat Pica.

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

[die4pies]

AFL Coaches Records & Statistics Past Coaches | All Coaches

(Coach, Games, Wins, Losses, Draws, Win %)

1 Chris Scott 94 72 22 0 76.6%
2 John Longmire 95 65 28 2 68.4%
3 Ross Lyon 191 124 62 5 64.9%
4 Mark Thompson 281 173 105 3 61.6%
5 Alastair Clarkson 229 140 88 1 61.1%
6 Nathan Buckley 69 42 27 0 60.9%
7 Ken Hinkley 45 27 18 0 60.0%
8 Mick Malthouse 640 366 268 6 57.2%
9 Brenton Sanderson 68 38 30 0 55.9%
10 Paul Roos 223 120 101 2 53.8%
11 Brad Scott 110 58 52 0 52.7%
12 Adam Simpson 21 10 11 0 47.6%
13 Damien Hardwick 110 50 58 2 45.5%
14 Justin Leppitsch 21 7 14 0 33.3%
15 Brendan McCartney 65 20 45 0 30.8%
16 Guy McKenna 87 24 63 0 27.6%
17 Leon Cameron 21 5 16 0 23.8%
18 Alan Richardson 21 4 17 0 19.0%