 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Nathan Buckley: what should the club do with him? |
| Sack him now and pay him out |
|
18% |
[ 28 ] |
| Sack him at season's end and pay him out |
|
14% |
[ 22 ] |
| Wait and see until season's end, then review (inclined to sack) |
|
14% |
[ 22 ] |
| Wait and see until season's end, then review (inclined to keep) |
|
17% |
[ 26 ] |
| Keep him until mid-season 2017, then reassess |
|
5% |
[ 9 ] |
| Keep him until end of 2017, then reassess |
|
17% |
[ 27 ] |
| Back him for as long as it takes! All We Can Be with NCB! |
|
9% |
[ 15 ] |
| Other (please outline in the thread) |
|
1% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 151 |
|
| Author |
Message |
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | | Crickets Chirping |
No that is the social club!
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
 |
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | | Krakouer Magic wrote: | | Bob Sugar wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | The 2006-2009 squads were vastly more experienced and established - and more basically talented - than the sides we have been putting out there over the last two or three years. In 2007, to use one year as a case in point, we had Thomas, Davis, Didak, Clement, Buckley, Cloke, Swan, Rocca, Licuria, Fraser, Tarrant, Prestigiacomo, Wakelin, Lockyer Maxwell and a young Pendlebury. That is more than an "OK list" - it was a team built from the draft picks of 1999-2001. They were well-coached, though that did not stop the Dunning Kreugers on this board from calling for Malthouse to be sacked on a regular basis.
Those teams of hardened vets cannot remotely be compared in their development cycle with the group of rookies we have had to put out there since the Footscray game. Maynard, Crocker, Grundy, Marsh, Goodyear/phillips, Cox and Smith and Degoey are all trying to build their careers. No coach would make that side, at this stage of their development, into a team that was much above bottom 4. When we had three or four good players back in, we beat the Cats and had the Dogs "dodging a bullet".
I understand that these days are frustrating, but there are plenty of reasons -on exposed form - to be hopeful, and i believe that the best way to disrupt that development is probably to sack the coach. Am i certain ? No, I do not share the ludicrous certainty of the torchlight and pitchforks brigade - but on the data, on some positive victories when we were half-way to well-equipped - I judge it is worth fighting for. |
Buckley's had 5 years to build a list, Mick took over a wooden spoon team, **** off! |
The rewriting of history by some is just astounding. The list has been in far better shape than in 06-09 years. We used plenty of players in those years and had plenty of injuries. Not to mention the retirees in that period included bucks, burns, clement, wakelin, Caracalla, holland, licuria, Rocca and Tarrant was shipped off to Fremantle. The team should have bottomed out. It didn't. We stayed in the top 8 during the rebuild and dominated 2010/11 seasons as a result. That's what a great coach can do.
Bucks has proven he can't produce results when the chips are down. Our team are front runners. Downhill skiers. When it gets hard they give up. There is no resilience as demonstrated by the 2006-09 sides. That's no opinion. Just fact. |
Absolutely correct.
The only barnyard noises we hear from the "perceptive fellow" is... hee haww! |
At least we are not as djumb and silly enough to compare the cats list of injuries too our long list, On yours, I saw only one player I had heard of and that was duckwoods brother the rest were just unknowns,. You failed miserably on that one, good n proper.  |
You didn't understand what I was talking about.
I was talking about the quantity not the quality!
Wishful thinking about me being dumb!
I could really let it rip but I won't. |
So you compare unknown dudes to guys like Moore, fasolo, taylor adams, swan, Elliott, sorry, you have failed yet again, we have young guys like ramsay injured too. If you lack facts, you can hardly let rip. 
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar 
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | | Crickets Chirping |
No that is the social club! |
Classic  |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | | Krakouer Magic wrote: | | Bob Sugar wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | The 2006-2009 squads were vastly more experienced and established - and more basically talented - than the sides we have been putting out there over the last two or three years. In 2007, to use one year as a case in point, we had Thomas, Davis, Didak, Clement, Buckley, Cloke, Swan, Rocca, Licuria, Fraser, Tarrant, Prestigiacomo, Wakelin, Lockyer Maxwell and a young Pendlebury. That is more than an "OK list" - it was a team built from the draft picks of 1999-2001. They were well-coached, though that did not stop the Dunning Kreugers on this board from calling for Malthouse to be sacked on a regular basis.
Those teams of hardened vets cannot remotely be compared in their development cycle with the group of rookies we have had to put out there since the Footscray game. Maynard, Crocker, Grundy, Marsh, Goodyear/phillips, Cox and Smith and Degoey are all trying to build their careers. No coach would make that side, at this stage of their development, into a team that was much above bottom 4. When we had three or four good players back in, we beat the Cats and had the Dogs "dodging a bullet".
I understand that these days are frustrating, but there are plenty of reasons -on exposed form - to be hopeful, and i believe that the best way to disrupt that development is probably to sack the coach. Am i certain ? No, I do not share the ludicrous certainty of the torchlight and pitchforks brigade - but on the data, on some positive victories when we were half-way to well-equipped - I judge it is worth fighting for. |
Buckley's had 5 years to build a list, Mick took over a wooden spoon team, **** off! |
The rewriting of history by some is just astounding. The list has been in far better shape than in 06-09 years. We used plenty of players in those years and had plenty of injuries. Not to mention the retirees in that period included bucks, burns, clement, wakelin, Caracalla, holland, licuria, Rocca and Tarrant was shipped off to Fremantle. The team should have bottomed out. It didn't. We stayed in the top 8 during the rebuild and dominated 2010/11 seasons as a result. That's what a great coach can do.
Bucks has proven he can't produce results when the chips are down. Our team are front runners. Downhill skiers. When it gets hard they give up. There is no resilience as demonstrated by the 2006-09 sides. That's no opinion. Just fact. |
Absolutely correct.
The only barnyard noises we hear from the "perceptive fellow" is... hee haww! |
At least we are not as djumb and silly enough to compare the cats list of injuries too our long list, On yours, I saw only one player I had heard of and that was duckwoods brother the rest were just unknowns,. You failed miserably on that one, good n proper. |
The suggestion that our season was de-railed by injury is rather undercut by looking at the ladder positions of the garbage that we played early in the season and how poorly we performed against it. Swans aside, we were rather lucky to beat Richmond by a point (they have 5 wins and 7 losses and are 13th) and lost to St Kilda (5 and 7 - and 12th), even though they were cut down by injury during the game, and Melbourne (6 and 7, and 10th - and it is worth observing that two of their wins have been against Collingwood).
In truth, our form was horrible before the run of injuries. |
P4S, that is the actual case for the prosecution. It is a pity that the negativist cheer squad (let's call it the sad squad) do not engage in this kind of evidential discussion more often, preferring instead one-liners, slogans and barnyard noises.
We were horrible in the first part of the year, and it's much more reasonable to question Buckley's competence over the performance at that time than it is to whine about the performance post Footscray, which has been based on a side where the bottom 6 would expect to be running around in the scoobies.
I'm prepared to indulge the idea that the first part of this year was a function of a newish team of players, many of whom had not played together before, and I think the loss of Elliott and Swan, and injury to Pendlebury weighed very heavily. Pendlebury was playing way below par with a cracked rib, and Collingwood without a firing Pendles has been an iffy proposition since 2010.
I recognise that this is accepting excuses, and it is probably a matter of one's natural disposition toward Buckley, and towards changing coaches. For me, following Collingwood always means more when there is loyalty involved. I would rather be loyal and pretty successful than a mere business with a greater degree of success. It's why I will always love Pendlebury and Swan many times more than Thomas. And Nathan Buckley deserves loyalty for what gave this club, and until there is no doubt that he cannot coach, I'll keep the faith.
He also acts, looks and bears himself like a leader, and that matters. I still believe that time and personnel will heal this, and we'll be grateful we kept him because it is a Collingwood thing to do.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | | Krakouer Magic wrote: | | Bob Sugar wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | The 2006-2009 squads were vastly more experienced and established - and more basically talented - than the sides we have been putting out there over the last two or three years. In 2007, to use one year as a case in point, we had Thomas, Davis, Didak, Clement, Buckley, Cloke, Swan, Rocca, Licuria, Fraser, Tarrant, Prestigiacomo, Wakelin, Lockyer Maxwell and a young Pendlebury. That is more than an "OK list" - it was a team built from the draft picks of 1999-2001. They were well-coached, though that did not stop the Dunning Kreugers on this board from calling for Malthouse to be sacked on a regular basis.
Those teams of hardened vets cannot remotely be compared in their development cycle with the group of rookies we have had to put out there since the Footscray game. Maynard, Crocker, Grundy, Marsh, Goodyear/phillips, Cox and Smith and Degoey are all trying to build their careers. No coach would make that side, at this stage of their development, into a team that was much above bottom 4. When we had three or four good players back in, we beat the Cats and had the Dogs "dodging a bullet".
I understand that these days are frustrating, but there are plenty of reasons -on exposed form - to be hopeful, and i believe that the best way to disrupt that development is probably to sack the coach. Am i certain ? No, I do not share the ludicrous certainty of the torchlight and pitchforks brigade - but on the data, on some positive victories when we were half-way to well-equipped - I judge it is worth fighting for. |
Buckley's had 5 years to build a list, Mick took over a wooden spoon team, **** off! |
The rewriting of history by some is just astounding. The list has been in far better shape than in 06-09 years. We used plenty of players in those years and had plenty of injuries. Not to mention the retirees in that period included bucks, burns, clement, wakelin, Caracalla, holland, licuria, Rocca and Tarrant was shipped off to Fremantle. The team should have bottomed out. It didn't. We stayed in the top 8 during the rebuild and dominated 2010/11 seasons as a result. That's what a great coach can do.
Bucks has proven he can't produce results when the chips are down. Our team are front runners. Downhill skiers. When it gets hard they give up. There is no resilience as demonstrated by the 2006-09 sides. That's no opinion. Just fact. |
Absolutely correct.
The only barnyard noises we hear from the "perceptive fellow" is... hee haww! |
At least we are not as djumb and silly enough to compare the cats list of injuries too our long list, On yours, I saw only one player I had heard of and that was duckwoods brother the rest were just unknowns,. You failed miserably on that one, good n proper. |
The suggestion that our season was de-railed by injury is rather undercut by looking at the ladder positions of the garbage that we played early in the season and how poorly we performed against it. Swans aside, we were rather lucky to beat Richmond by a point (they have 5 wins and 7 losses and are 13th) and lost to St Kilda (5 and 7 - and 12th), even though they were cut down by injury during the game, and Melbourne (6 and 7, and 10th - and it is worth observing that two of their wins have been against Collingwood).
In truth, our form was horrible before the run of injuries. |
P4S, that is the actual case for the prosecution. It is a pity that the negativist cheer squad (let's call it the sad squad) do not engage in this kind of evidential discussion more often, preferring instead one-liners, slogans and barnyard noises.
We were horrible in the first part of the year, and it's much more reasonable to question Buckley's competence over the performance at that time than it is to whine about the performance post Footscray, which has been based on a side where the bottom 6 would expect to be running around in the scoobies.
I'm prepared to indulge the idea that the first part of this year was a function of a newish team of players, many of whom had not played together before, and I think the loss of Elliott and Swan, and injury to Pendlebury weighed very heavily. Pendlebury was playing way below par with a cracked rib, and Collingwood without a firing Pendles has been an iffy proposition since 2010.
I recognise that this is accepting excuses, and it is probably a matter of one's natural disposition toward Buckley, and towards changing coaches. For me, following Collingwood always means more when there is loyalty involved. I would rather be loyal and pretty successful than a mere business with a greater degree of success. It's why I will always love Pendlebury and Swan many times more than Thomas. And Nathan Buckley deserves loyalty for what gave this club, and until there is no doubt that he cannot coach, I'll keep the faith.
He also acts, looks and bears himself like a leader, and that matters. I still believe that time and personnel will heal this, and we'll be grateful we kept him because it is a Collingwood thing to do. |
Plus 1. Well said Mugwump. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | Piesnchess wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | | Krakouer Magic wrote: | | Bob Sugar wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | The 2006-2009 squads were vastly more experienced and established - and more basically talented - than the sides we have been putting out there over the last two or three years. In 2007, to use one year as a case in point, we had Thomas, Davis, Didak, Clement, Buckley, Cloke, Swan, Rocca, Licuria, Fraser, Tarrant, Prestigiacomo, Wakelin, Lockyer Maxwell and a young Pendlebury. That is more than an "OK list" - it was a team built from the draft picks of 1999-2001. They were well-coached, though that did not stop the Dunning Kreugers on this board from calling for Malthouse to be sacked on a regular basis.
Those teams of hardened vets cannot remotely be compared in their development cycle with the group of rookies we have had to put out there since the Footscray game. Maynard, Crocker, Grundy, Marsh, Goodyear/phillips, Cox and Smith and Degoey are all trying to build their careers. No coach would make that side, at this stage of their development, into a team that was much above bottom 4. When we had three or four good players back in, we beat the Cats and had the Dogs "dodging a bullet".
I understand that these days are frustrating, but there are plenty of reasons -on exposed form - to be hopeful, and i believe that the best way to disrupt that development is probably to sack the coach. Am i certain ? No, I do not share the ludicrous certainty of the torchlight and pitchforks brigade - but on the data, on some positive victories when we were half-way to well-equipped - I judge it is worth fighting for. |
Buckley's had 5 years to build a list, Mick took over a wooden spoon team, **** off! |
The rewriting of history by some is just astounding. The list has been in far better shape than in 06-09 years. We used plenty of players in those years and had plenty of injuries. Not to mention the retirees in that period included bucks, burns, clement, wakelin, Caracalla, holland, licuria, Rocca and Tarrant was shipped off to Fremantle. The team should have bottomed out. It didn't. We stayed in the top 8 during the rebuild and dominated 2010/11 seasons as a result. That's what a great coach can do.
Bucks has proven he can't produce results when the chips are down. Our team are front runners. Downhill skiers. When it gets hard they give up. There is no resilience as demonstrated by the 2006-09 sides. That's no opinion. Just fact. |
Absolutely correct.
The only barnyard noises we hear from the "perceptive fellow" is... hee haww! |
At least we are not as djumb and silly enough to compare the cats list of injuries too our long list, On yours, I saw only one player I had heard of and that was duckwoods brother the rest were just unknowns,. You failed miserably on that one, good n proper. |
The suggestion that our season was de-railed by injury is rather undercut by looking at the ladder positions of the garbage that we played early in the season and how poorly we performed against it. Swans aside, we were rather lucky to beat Richmond by a point (they have 5 wins and 7 losses and are 13th) and lost to St Kilda (5 and 7 - and 12th), even though they were cut down by injury during the game, and Melbourne (6 and 7, and 10th - and it is worth observing that two of their wins have been against Collingwood).
In truth, our form was horrible before the run of injuries. |
P4S, that is the actual case for the prosecution. It is a pity that the negativist cheer squad (let's call it the sad squad) do not engage in this kind of evidential discussion more often, preferring instead one-liners, slogans and barnyard noises.
We were horrible in the first part of the year, and it's much more reasonable to question Buckley's competence over the performance at that time than it is to whine about the performance post Footscray, which has been based on a side where the bottom 6 would expect to be running around in the scoobies.
I'm prepared to indulge the idea that the first part of this year was a function of a newish team of players, many of whom had not played together before, and I think the loss of Elliott and Swan, and injury to Pendlebury weighed very heavily. Pendlebury was playing way below par with a cracked rib, and Collingwood without a firing Pendles has been an iffy proposition since 2010.
I recognise that this is accepting excuses, and it is probably a matter of one's natural disposition toward Buckley, and towards changing coaches. For me, following Collingwood always means more when there is loyalty involved. I would rather be loyal and pretty successful than a mere business with a greater degree of success. It's why I will always love Pendlebury and Swan many times more than Thomas. And Nathan Buckley deserves loyalty for what gave this club, and until there is no doubt that he cannot coach, I'll keep the faith.
He also acts, looks and bears himself like a leader, and that matters. I still believe that time and personnel will heal this, and we'll be grateful we kept him because it is a Collingwood thing to do. |
Does the loyalty question then mean one cannot be dispassionate concerning decision making about coaches?
Mugwump, is there a critical mass at which point loyalty becomes self defeating? Is there a point where the greater collinggood is being compromised by said loyalty?
I've had more positions than than the karma sutra re Buckley & not infrequently in the one match. I think he needs to move on now & let it be at the end of the year.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
let what be at the end of the year?
im agreeing with you, i just dont understand that last bit! cheers
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | let what be at the end of the year?
im agreeing with you, i just dont understand that last bit! cheers |
Sorry, this year. although should we lose to Carton again at the G then I might not be so patient
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | P4S, that is the actual case for the prosecution. It is a pity that the negativist cheer squad (let's call it the sad squad) do not engage in this kind of evidential discussion more often, preferring instead one-liners, slogans and barnyard noises.
We were horrible in the first part of the year, and it's much more reasonable to question Buckley's competence over the performance at that time than it is to whine about the performance post Footscray, which has been based on a side where the bottom 6 would expect to be running around in the scoobies.
I'm prepared to indulge the idea that the first part of this year was a function of a newish team of players, many of whom had not played together before, and I think the loss of Elliott and Swan, and injury to Pendlebury weighed very heavily. Pendlebury was playing way below par with a cracked rib, and Collingwood without a firing Pendles has been an iffy proposition since 2010.
I recognise that this is accepting excuses, and it is probably a matter of one's natural disposition toward Buckley, and towards changing coaches. For me, following Collingwood always means more when there is loyalty involved. I would rather be loyal and pretty successful than a mere business with a greater degree of success. It's why I will always love Pendlebury and Swan many times more than Thomas. And Nathan Buckley deserves loyalty for what gave this club, and until there is no doubt that he cannot coach, I'll keep the faith.
He also acts, looks and bears himself like a leader, and that matters. I still believe that time and personnel will heal this, and we'll be grateful we kept him because it is a Collingwood thing to do. |
Well said. |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: |
He also acts, looks and bears himself like a leader, and that matters. I still believe that time and personnel will heal this, and we'll be grateful we kept him because it is a Collingwood thing to do. |
no he doesn't
wow what a great argument for clinging on to the most failed coach in the history of the club, because it is a 'collingwood thing to do'
turn it up !
oink oink |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I'm backing Bucks because we have shown under his coaching that we can match or beat the top sides, when we've got a healthy list. Imo, no other coach is likely to get better performances from our current list. My main frustration is not with Bucks but with our recruiting. Until we recruit a dominant ruckman who can give our midfielders first use of the ball, we will not become a top 4 side. |
|
|
|
|
CarringbushCigar
Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Location: wherever I lay my beanie
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Are you talking about 2012?
Or the side that blitzed Geelong after not trying against Carlton.
All the players are doing is letting us know they can do it, they just don't want to do it for Bucks.
What else explains the Carlton - Geelong - Port Adelaide variation in effort ? |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I wouldn't entirely ignore the possibility that Geelong were in a flat spot - they were also beaten by Carlton the following week - it just might be that the Port and Carlton games were a more accurate indication of the progress of our team. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| RudeBoy wrote: | | I'm backing Bucks because we have shown under his coaching that we can match or beat the top sides, when we've got a healthy list. Imo, no other coach is likely to get better performances from our current list. My main frustration is not with Bucks but with our recruiting. Until we recruit a dominant ruckman who can give our midfielders first use of the ball, we will not become a top 4 side. |
Haven't Hawthorn just been a top 4 side 5 years in a row without a dominant ruckman? |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | I'm backing Bucks because we have shown under his coaching that we can match or beat the top sides, when we've got a healthy list. Imo, no other coach is likely to get better performances from our current list. My main frustration is not with Bucks but with our recruiting. Until we recruit a dominant ruckman who can give our midfielders first use of the ball, we will not become a top 4 side. |
Haven't Hawthorn just been a top 4 side 5 years in a row without a dominant ruckman? |
Hale, McEvoy and even Ceglar are all better tap ruckmen than any of our rucks. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
