| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| In order to gain a contract extension what does Collingwood have to achieve at a minimum in 2016? |
| Win a final |
|
27% |
[ 24 ] |
| Make finals |
|
50% |
[ 44 ] |
| 10 or more wins |
|
5% |
[ 5 ] |
| Give him a contract extension now and reassess at the end of 2017 |
|
17% |
[ 15 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 88 |
|
| Author |
Message |
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Like it or not, football, like all sports, is a results driven industry.
Re-building a team is fair enough and taking a step or two back in order to go sustainably forward is fair enough too, but at some stage we need to become a winning side again, including winning finals. Bucks has demonstrated he's got the youth of this team on his side and we should be optimistic about our medium term future. However, it's hard to envisage Bucks coaching beyond next year if we miss out on a finals berth for the 3rd consecutive year. For the sake of clarity and to send a message to the team as well as to keep the media off his back, I'd be in favour of giving him a 1 yr contract extension to the end of 2017 right now, with the proviso that if we 'fail' next year he'd most likely be paid out his final year and replaced as coach.
Last edited by RudeBoy on Wed Aug 26, 2015 11:18 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
 |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| What is your credit card number? |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Finals at a Minium
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar 
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Fascinating that it is 34-7 against extending him at the time of this post.
Yet it seems all 7 have posted.
These magnificent 7 are the leaders of the bully brigade, the ones who lead any charge against criticism of the coach.
Well I think we have clear evidence that commitment and bloodymindlessness has no limits for some.
I reckon if we polled the players we would get roughly the same result.
On a serious note, look at what Carlton have done with Bolton.
No contract, just a normal employee relationship.
4 weeks notice either way.
If we paid Bucks quarterly he would get 3 months notice.
This is the way of the future, so any talk of 1 year, 2 year extensions are completely unnecessary at any stage - any more.
If we were 8-3 again in 2016 we could simply announce that Collingwood have entered into an arrangement with Bucks for 2017 similar to that of Bolton.
Where is the downside? |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| CarringbushCigar wrote: | Fascinating that it is 34-7 against extending him at the time of this post.
Yet it seems all 7 have posted.
These magnificent 7 are the leaders of the bully brigade, the ones who lead any charge against criticism of the coach.
Well I think we have clear evidence that commitment and bloodymindlessness has no limits for some.
I reckon if we polled the players we would get roughly the same result.
On a serious note, look at what Carlton have done with Bolton.
No contract, just a normal employee relationship.
4 weeks notice either way.
If we paid Bucks quarterly he would get 3 months notice.
This is the way of the future, so any talk of 1 year, 2 year extensions are completely unnecessary at any stage - any more.
If we were 8-3 again in 2016 we could simply announce that Collingwood have entered into an arrangement with Bucks for 2017 similar to that of Bolton.
Where is the downside? |
Actually the poll question is completely flawed so I haven't voted at all... nobody at the club should be exempt from at least annual reviews regardless of their contract status... guess that means I'm not some member of this horrid bully brigade.... |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | CarringbushCigar wrote: | Fascinating that it is 34-7 against extending him at the time of this post.
Yet it seems all 7 have posted.
These magnificent 7 are the leaders of the bully brigade, the ones who lead any charge against criticism of the coach.
Well I think we have clear evidence that commitment and bloodymindlessness has no limits for some.
I reckon if we polled the players we would get roughly the same result.
On a serious note, look at what Carlton have done with Bolton.
No contract, just a normal employee relationship.
4 weeks notice either way.
If we paid Bucks quarterly he would get 3 months notice.
This is the way of the future, so any talk of 1 year, 2 year extensions are completely unnecessary at any stage - any more.
If we were 8-3 again in 2016 we could simply announce that Collingwood have entered into an arrangement with Bucks for 2017 similar to that of Bolton.
Where is the downside? |
Actually the poll question is completely flawed so I haven't voted at all... nobody at the club should be exempt from at least annual reviews regardless of their contract status... guess that means I'm not some member of this horrid bully brigade.... |
squib. why wouldn't you want to be a part of the magnificent seven? 
given who the authour is, the poll was always going to lean a particular way. push polling to some extent.
i am not sure how cigarhead can be sure that all of his magnificent seven voted to extend the tenure.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Monco Matt 
Do it to THEM before THEY do it to YOU
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Location: Sittin, Drinkin, Reloadin & Waitin
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think just making finals is a pass mark, but just a pass is still not very good. A D- in high school is still pretty crap.
Given how we pissed away probably 4 games this year and maybe won a game we probably shouldn't have (possibly the North game was a lucky one to mow them down) we should have 12 wins right now and we should beat the Dons in R23 which means we should have won 13 games THIS year if we were just a little more experienced which we SHOULD be next year.
So, to improve on 13 games means 14 wins should be our expected result if we are to improve. So, this is probably going to be a 5th or 6th place finish and that should be the goal. Very achievable but we have to live up to our own expectations and deliver in the face of adversities.
_________________
RED "BABY" CAVANAUGH: Didn't hear what the bet was.
MONCO: Your life. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: Re: Pass mark for Nathan Buckley in 2016 | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | swoop42 wrote: |
He's signed to the end of 2016 so why the need?
Coaches should stop being so precious about it and just get on with the job they're paid very well to do.
|
who said he is being precious about it? i still contend we extend bucks' contract so that he has three years of certainty.
i see us being closer than many think. save for winning half of those during the last 9 week period of losses we would be playing finals. spare me the reminder that we didn't. it demonstrated that we have improved considerably. |
Come on you know full well that coaches are always seeking out an extension when they still have a full season to run on there present one.
If you're Clarkson then fair enough on the back of consecutive flags but if you're Malthouse murmuring to the media about it at the end of 2014 then no you can wait.
I like you think we're closer than many believe and expect to be making finals next year so it will be a given Buckley will win his contract extension anyway but I don't see why a coach with some question marks still surrounding him should be treated differently to a player in his twilight having to meet a certain level to be afforded a new contract.
That level mightn't be finals in the mind of the CEO and President but whatever it is until season 2016 is done and dusted they will have no idea if it'll be met.
The club could afford it but if our season was to go pear shaped I'd rather not be faced with a million plus pay out when it all could have been avoided with a delay to a new contract decision. |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
You blokes simply can not help yourselves can you?
2 questions:
1. How is the poll flawed?
2. Why not simply put Bucks on the normal employee agreement? |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| CarringbushCigar wrote: | You blokes simply can not help yourselves can you?
2 questions:
1. How is the poll flawed?
2. Why not simply put Bucks on the normal employee agreement? |
1. I answered this by stating that no employee should be subjected to anything less than at least an annual review. Poll question states "reassess at the end of 2017".
2. Just what constitutes "the normal employee agreement"? The right wing version that squashes all rights and promises below minimum wages and next to no growth, or the left wing version that's all about rights and nothing about responsibilities which promises substantial wages growth, or any of the myriad in between.
Seriously, if qualifying for the "bully brigade" requires little respect for people who clearly don't read posts or those who make ridiculous generalist and unsupportable statements then you can count me in JW. |
|
|
|
|
5150 
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Win a final. just scraping into the top 8 is not enough. |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
JA
1. The poll response option states "Give him a contract extension now and reassess at the end of 2017"
This clearly implies give him a 1 year extension right now.
The 'reassess at the end of 2017' is unnecessary commentary, agreed.
This does not make the question flawed.
Are you a public servant or law-clerk?
Geebers!
2. WTF? - its the version that pays you $20,000-00 per week whilst you are performing. We are not talking minimum wage. And Im sure he can cover his Coaches' Union Subs.
3. Don't worry you not only qualify, you are in the running for President! |
|
|
|
|
mudlark
Joined: 19 Mar 2002
Location: Maroochydore Qld
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It's interesting to do a comparison with Malthouses first 5 years and although his first 3 years saw a steady climb ,years 4 & 5 saw us drop to 13 then 15 before the obvious rebuild and youth coming through started to take effect. I can't for the life of me see any difference here. I'm expecting us to finish top 4 and I feel we could have achieved it this year except for another horrid run with injuries.Top 4 AND win a final and if we achieve that then we coud go all the way.  |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The difference is Year 5 of MMs reign came with a pre-season warning.
Supporters were not under any illusion that it was going to be a tough year.
There was a clear implication that we were going to tank.
Not 'we could sneak a flag'.
How the hell we lost that game to North, which ended up getting us Thomas/Pendlebury (a premiership) - well sheer luck or coaching genius.
90% of us are bullish on this current list.
Most of us are over the bullshit that comes with it.
It is a statistical fact that 37 out of 44 Australians can spot a fake salesman. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| CarringbushCigar wrote: | JA
1. The poll response option states "Give him a contract extension now and reassess at the end of 2017"
This clearly implies give him a 1 year extension right now.
The 'reassess at the end of 2017' is unnecessary commentary, agreed.
This does not make the question flawed.
Are you a public servant or law-clerk?
Geebers!
2. WTF? - its the version that pays you $20,000-00 per week whilst you are performing. We are not talking minimum wage. And Im sure he can cover his Coaches' Union Subs.
3. Don't worry you not only qualify, you are in the running for President! |
Reassessing at the end of 2017 isn't "unnecessary commentary" at all and is merely a reflection of the mindset that I believe many people who believe in giving him a contract extension now have expressed on Nick's.
Given he is contracted till the end of 2016 I don't see the point of giving him an extension now only to "reassess at the end of 2016".
If you want to reassess at the end of 2016 then surely you let his current contract play out and make a decision then on whether he should remain coach of Collingwood. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
