 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Lone Ranger wrote: | | Fatui Attata wrote: | | Lone Ranger wrote: | | I dont think he has "lost the players". I just dont think he has the ability to inspire, to instill confidence, to get the best out of people as a coach. |
So, what factual evidence do you have that will help shed light on Buckley not inspiring, instilling confidence and getting the best out of people? Literal examples of things that Bucks has/hasn't done that supports your argument. Us finishing outside the 8 this year is a result of things not going to plan, so don't cite that as evidence. That represents the 'what happened', or outcome. I wanna know the 'how it happened', or method Buckley used that, in your eyes, has failed. Be very specific, or you will quickly gain a reputation for being bogus. |
Have you not been to many of our games and seen the lack of confidence? The way players avoid tacking risks. The way we always go backwards and sideways rather than take the game on. The way skills are down which is a key indicator of lack of confidence.
Three years of steady decline seems to not be enough evidence for you. Everyone's entitled to their own view.
Bucks is very robotic for want of a better word. If we had 22 players with a mindset just like him or Pendlebury, he would be a magnificent coach. Unfortunately we dont so man management becomes a key skill. Thats where I feel he is lacking.
Compare us to Port who take risks, play with flair, run, and take the game on. The huge lift in confidence instilled by Hinkley is the big change for them. |
Thanks for that, here I was thinking that playing 10-11-12-13 kids with less than 50 games experience may have been behind that lack of confidence, reassuring to know that it's just Buckley's fault.
Bucks is very robotic... and you garnered this insight during all those training sessions you participated in... and that acute awareness allows you to critique his coaching... phew, I'm glad someone picked that up!
Compare us to Port... yes, please do! Which Port do we compare, the Port that won 10-1 in the first half of the season and was sitting pretty atop the ladder, or the Port that went 4-7 in the second half of the season even losing to the Pies. Personally, I think we align very closely with Port, other than the fact they've loaded up on very high draft picks in 2008 (13th), 2009 (10th), 2010 (10th), 2011 (16th), and 2012 (14th) while we've had to make do best we could because we were finalists in all of those years. |
|
|
|
 |
Lone Ranger
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Location: Macedon Ranges
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Of course it isnt just Buckleys fault, but the coach plays a large part in how much confidence a team has. It was seperates the really good coaches.
I garnered this by seeing that being somewhat robotic was part of why Buckley was such a champion player week in week out. I garnered it by seeing us get rid of blocks who dont fit the mould. Its a pretty common assessment but its fine if you dont agree.
No use comparing a small stretch of games. I compare the Port Adelaide who made a huge jump in 2013 and got even better in 2014 by playing attacking, confident football. |
|
|
|
|
Deja Vu
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I would say fitness (or lack thereof) plays more of a role in confidence than a coach does.
Watching the way we played against North, Essendon and Sydney in the first half of the year, I saw a team that was committed and had bought in to the coach's plan.
What happened in the second half of the year I think had more to do with young bodies getting tired and mounting injuries, rather than the coach losing the players.
_________________
http://youtu.be/hvtdbfI1sqQ |
|
|
|
|
Lazza
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Deja Vu wrote: | | What happened in the second half of the year I think had more to do with young bodies getting tired and mounting injuries, rather than the coach losing the players. |
This makes perfect sense to me. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Lone Ranger wrote: | Of course it isnt just Buckleys fault, but the coach plays a large part in how much confidence a team has. It was seperates the really good coaches.
I garnered this by seeing that being somewhat robotic was part of why Buckley was such a champion player week in week out. I garnered it by seeing us get rid of blocks who dont fit the mould. Its a pretty common assessment but its fine if you dont agree.
No use comparing a small stretch of games. I compare the Port Adelaide who made a huge jump in 2013 and got even better in 2014 by playing attacking, confident football. |
Players make coaches. Even the very best have had teams that drag them into the mire, circumstances compound or enhance that.
To assume personality traits exhibited in 1 aspect of the game dictate performance in others is extremely flawed. Clarkson was an average footballer, seems to do okay as a coach, Matthews, Sheedy, and Malthouse were thugs, seemed to do okay as coaches, Blight was hot and cold with unimaginable flair, seemed to do okay as a coach.
That aside, Buckley was anything but robotic as a player, driven yes, gifted yes, robotic never.
As for "getting rid of blokes" the only 1 that comes to mind is Heater or are you refering to all the blokes who've retired because they'd reached their use by dates, or the couple who've chosen to move on?
Port, yeah they made a huge jump in 2013... after FIVE years of cellar dwelling and cherry picking the draft. We've just missed the finals for the first time in 9 years. Slightly different dynamic but again, I think we align pretty well with Port. |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Lone Ranger wrote: | Of course it isnt just Buckleys fault, but the coach plays a large part in how much confidence a team has. It was seperates the really good coaches.
I garnered this by seeing that being somewhat robotic was part of why Buckley was such a champion player week in week out. I garnered it by seeing us get rid of blocks who dont fit the mould. Its a pretty common assessment but its fine if you dont agree.
No use comparing a small stretch of games. I compare the Port Adelaide who made a huge jump in 2013 and got even better in 2014 by playing attacking, confident football. |
Most people have recognised that one of the first changes to our game plan under Bucks was the abandonment of the slow defensive movement around the wings, which was the hallmark of MM's strategy. Instead, under Bucks, players have been encouraged to use the centre corridor to move the ball by hand or foot. That's attacking football in anyone's language. Our problem, to date, has been our lack of elite runners to match this attacking style. Buckley is building that team, and I am excited at what's in store next season and beyond. |
|
|
|
|
Lone Ranger
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Location: Macedon Ranges
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | Lone Ranger wrote: | Of course it isnt just Buckleys fault, but the coach plays a large part in how much confidence a team has. It was seperates the really good coaches.
I garnered this by seeing that being somewhat robotic was part of why Buckley was such a champion player week in week out. I garnered it by seeing us get rid of blocks who dont fit the mould. Its a pretty common assessment but its fine if you dont agree.
No use comparing a small stretch of games. I compare the Port Adelaide who made a huge jump in 2013 and got even better in 2014 by playing attacking, confident football. |
Players make coaches. Even the very best have had teams that drag them into the mire, circumstances compound or enhance that.
To assume personality traits exhibited in 1 aspect of the game dictate performance in others is extremely flawed. Clarkson was an average footballer, seems to do okay as a coach, Matthews, Sheedy, and Malthouse were thugs, seemed to do okay as coaches, Blight was hot and cold with unimaginable flair, seemed to do okay as a coach.
That aside, Buckley was anything but robotic as a player, driven yes, gifted yes, robotic never.
As for "getting rid of blokes" the only 1 that comes to mind is Heater or are you refering to all the blokes who've retired because they'd reached their use by dates, or the couple who've chosen to move on?
Port, yeah they made a huge jump in 2013... after FIVE years of cellar dwelling and cherry picking the draft. We've just missed the finals for the first time in 9 years. Slightly different dynamic but again, I think we align pretty well with Port. |
I think Port made huge improvements with much the same list as under Primus. I put 95% of that down to Hinkley. Clearly you dont.
Lets agree to disagree |
|
|
|
|
jdpie1970
Joined: 26 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Lone Ranger wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | Lone Ranger wrote: | Of course it isnt just Buckleys fault, but the coach plays a large part in how much confidence a team has. It was seperates the really good coaches.
I garnered this by seeing that being somewhat robotic was part of why Buckley was such a champion player week in week out. I garnered it by seeing us get rid of blocks who dont fit the mould. Its a pretty common assessment but its fine if you dont agree.
No use comparing a small stretch of games. I compare the Port Adelaide who made a huge jump in 2013 and got even better in 2014 by playing attacking, confident football. |
Players make coaches. Even the very best have had teams that drag them into the mire, circumstances compound or enhance that.
To assume personality traits exhibited in 1 aspect of the game dictate performance in others is extremely flawed. Clarkson was an average footballer, seems to do okay as a coach, Matthews, Sheedy, and Malthouse were thugs, seemed to do okay as coaches, Blight was hot and cold with unimaginable flair, seemed to do okay as a coach.
That aside, Buckley was anything but robotic as a player, driven yes, gifted yes, robotic never.
As for "getting rid of blokes" the only 1 that comes to mind is Heater or are you refering to all the blokes who've retired because they'd reached their use by dates, or the couple who've chosen to move on?
Port, yeah they made a huge jump in 2013... after FIVE years of cellar dwelling and cherry picking the draft. We've just missed the finals for the first time in 9 years. Slightly different dynamic but again, I think we align pretty well with Port. |
I think Port made huge improvements with much the same list as under Primus. I put 95% of that down to Hinkley. Clearly you dont.
Lets agree to disagree |
You are both correct.... have either of you considered this ? There have however been some pretty significant additions to Ports list since the arrival of Hinkley. Also Hinkley benefited from the players having an enormously galvanising (albeit horrendously sad) experience that probably made them gel as a group outside of any coaches ability to impact. |
|
|
|
|
dalyc 
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Just as an aside:
Clarkson had 8 seasons at the Hawks before winning a flag
Malthouse had 10 ( for us ) before winning one
Roos had 8 seasons at the Swans for one flag ( though he got one within 3 of him starting )
Thompson got his first after 8 with the Cats
My point I guess is that winning a flag is not easy and requires a combination of coach, players, luck with injuries, luck with the draw, terrific recruiting ( draft and trades ) and good administration.
If the clubs above had lost their bottle after 3 years, would they have gone to be powerhouses they are now? Who knows but I don't think its time for us to lose our bottle.
_________________
Four legged animals good, two legged animals better |
|
|
|
|
Flashman
Joined: 11 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| dalyc wrote: | Just as an aside:
Clarkson had 8 seasons at the Hawks before winning a flag
Malthouse had 10 ( for us ) before winning one
Roos had 8 seasons at the Swans for one flag ( though he got one within 3 of him starting )
Thompson got his first after 8 with the Cats
My point I guess is that winning a flag is not easy and requires a combination of coach, players, luck with injuries, luck with the draw, terrific recruiting ( draft and trades ) and good administration.
If the clubs above had lost their bottle after 3 years, would they have gone to be powerhouses they are now? Who knows but I don't think its time for us to lose our bottle. |
Spot on. Strong clubs don't blink it's as simple as that.
I recall my brother who is a mad Cats fan dropping his bundle after 2006 and wanting Terry Wallace brought in to fix Bombers mess. Of course that didn't happen and Geelong achieved a dynasty and my brother feigns ignorance when I remind him of this hissy fit.
Good sides have to be built over time and it takes a lot of planning, development and spot on recruiting and list management. We need to see clear signs of development this year of young players and a viable game plan and irrespective of ladder position if this occurs Buckley is given the time necessary.
Chopping and changing just because some impatient ingrates are dropping their shit achieves precisely nothing in the long run. |
|
|
|
|
Lone Ranger
Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Location: Macedon Ranges
|
| Post subject: | |
|
But dont you have to take what they started with into account?
Those coaches started with lowly teams and had to build them. Bucks inherited a team that didnt need building as it was already a top 4 team, young, and on the improve. Thats where I see the difference.
Anyway, we all see things differently.
I just hope like hell that I am proved wrong!!! |
|
|
|
|
Lazza
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: Bendigo, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Lone Ranger wrote: | But dont you have to take what they started with into account?
Those coaches started with lowly teams and had to build them. Bucks inherited a team that didnt need building as it was already a top 4 team, young, and on the improve. Thats where I see the difference.
Anyway, we all see things differently.
I just hope like hell that I am proved wrong!!! |
Yeah but it has been posted and explained so many times that the team Buck's inherited ALSO had players on the older side, players like Shaw who was undisciplined and players who for whatever reason wanted to leave Collingwood. I won't repeat all that but this had an effect on the team this year.
My gut feeling is that they will improve next year but become a flag contender in 2016 and then onwards. I have no idea about the intangibles like injuries, suspensions and my biggest hate, umpires with a sub conscious bias against Collingwood. Time will tell. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Lone Ranger wrote: | But dont you have to take what they started with into account?
Those coaches started with lowly teams and had to build them. Bucks inherited a team that didnt need building as it was already a top 4 team, young, and on the improve. Thats where I see the difference.
Anyway, we all see things differently.
I just hope like hell that I am proved wrong!!! |
Do you have any conditions I should know about? |
|
|
|
|
Fatui Attata
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| dalyc wrote: | Just as an aside:
Clarkson had 8 seasons at the Hawks before winning a flag
Malthouse had 10 ( for us ) before winning one
Roos had 8 seasons at the Swans for one flag ( though he got one within 3 of him starting )
Thompson got his first after 8 with the Cats
My point I guess is that winning a flag is not easy and requires a combination of coach, players, luck with injuries, luck with the draw, terrific recruiting ( draft and trades ) and good administration.
If the clubs above had lost their bottle after 3 years, would they have gone to be powerhouses they are now? Who knows but I don't think its time for us to lose our bottle. |
^^^^Great post.
And Jackass, appreciate you being my unofficial ghost writer in response to The Lone Ranger. The blind judgments some people make from afar, and then back it up with 'clutching at straws' reasoning is astounding. I asked for proof from the Lone Ranger and the best he could offer was that Bucks is "robotic". Akin to treating a celebrity in the flesh as if they're your best mate because you've seen em on telly quite a bit. I don't see much harm in sharing rumours about the draft/trades, but personal assessments based on imagination is pretty much gossip dressed up as fact.
_________________
I'm not the pheasant plucker I'm the pheasant plucker's son, and I'll be plucking pheasants til the pheasant plucker comes! "Try saying that with a mouthful of peanuts!!" Lou Richards |
|
|
|
|
Donny 
Formerly known as MAGFAN8.
Joined: 04 Aug 2002
Location: Toonumbar NSW Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Some replies in this thread were deleted, as they became meaningless, following the deletion (for whatever reason) of the post/s being referred to.
Please follow the guidelines in The Rules re. contacting the Mods' team about this matter or anything else.
_________________
Donny.
It's a game. Enjoy it.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
