The Nathan Buckley retention debate thread

[watt price tully]

[ROB]

Quite clearly, objective evidence gained by Walsh and considered by the board pointed to Buckey remaining. I have been an advocate of an objective approach to the decision - if the review determined Buckley was to go, then I would have supported that decision also. And so it is time for the club to put in place/improve all that has been identified as the root cause(s) of the lack of success all are searching for. The umpires whistle has blown - the decision will not be reversed - now lets get on with the show and stop carping about it. Like at the end of a game, in 2 years time we will either be able to say the umpire got it right or wrong. Go 'Pies - SBS.

[swoop42]

The simple and harsh reality is that Nathan Buckley remains coach of Collingwood tonight purely because he is Nathan Buckley.

Outside of having continued player support and being an excellent media communicator he as senior coach has failed to date in the area of most importance and that's on field results.

It doesn't matter how one tries to spin it 4 years of consecutive non finals appearances is a lackluster result for any coach and would generally result in a dismissal even prior to the point we found ourselves in.

If you look at the records of the premierships coaches during the AFL era it shows only 1 out of the last 14 have produced this same result as Nathan and still gone on to guide a side to there first flag.

As it stands Buckley is Mr. 7%.

I found it quite bemusing that less than a week after being told the Walsh review would stop short of making a recommendation about the coaching position we were informed via the press conference that in fact he did just that and his recommendation was Nathan.

Well surprise surprise.

Now I'm sure the "silent majority" who choose to show there support for the club by ratifying any decision they make as the correct one will be rejoicing and see this as a justification for his retention, those of us however who dare to question those in power, seek transparency and believe no one is infallible see it as anything but.

I get the distinct feeling we may have actually sought out experienced coaches for Nathans position but in being knocked back sought out a way to justify his retention and this is what the review provided perfect cover for.

In my opinion Nathans position was never in doubt with the Walsh review and the outcome surrounding him was written before it even commenced.

This review will hopefully help identify and rectify problem areas within the football department that will lead to better outcomes for the club going forward but I find it somewhat dishonest that the review has supposedly found many areas that need improvement which will ultimately lead to the dismissal or demotion of individuals and yet leave the senior coach seemingly unscathed.

The other thing that should be noted is that McGuire, Buckley and Pert would be the very architects themselves of many of the problems identified with only Pert being held to account to date.

So here we are, a club at the crossroads and about to implement significant changes to the football department to support a coach who in all honesty remains primarily in the position based on his stellar playing career at Collingwood, being a man of "integrity" and a remaining hope to see him succeed.

While I believe McGuire has made the decision an emotional and selfish one I'm prepared to be open minded for one more season and support Buckley and hope the off season changes implemented prove successful and we return to finals.

Still it's a massive high stakes gamble by McGuire and the board.

If it doesn't result in the same Richmond "bounce" they have been trying to sell in recent weeks as a positive example of coach retention then enough is enough and the coaches contract must be torn up.

Miss finals next season then I'm afraid Buckley will find himself Mr. 0% and the dream is over.

[Piesnchess]

[Mugwump]

^ Swoop, that's all fine, but your analogy with other premiership coaches is not a fair one. I presume none of them took over a side that had just played off in two premierships, and had played finals in each of the previous five years, and was facing a wall of senior retirements with very, very little fresh talent coming through. Unless you have a similar base, it is not a fair comparison.

Where I think Buckley can reasonably be faulted is firstly, in overestimating the quality of the list, and not managing expectations as a result ; and secondly, in failing to build good defensive structures in the first few years (iirc he has never had a back line coach who was an actual quality backman).

[swoop42]

[AN_Inkling]

[watt price tully]

[eddiesmith]

Those wanting the discussion shut down might have a point if they didn't have a history of attacking Collingwood players they don't like...

Cant claim blind faith must be followed, but only when it suits you!

Its going to take something of a miracle for next year to be any better and the knives will be out yet again, don't you worry. I am glad some people are such loyal Collingwood supporters they support the club taking the decision to continue being shit for 2 more years. Some fans love the club but would like to see some success, maybe those who love failure truly are Carlton fans?

[Peponi]

The answer to a simple question on this issue sums this decision up perfectly. If Buckley wasn't a former champion player and Eddie's mate, would he had been given an extension of 2 years having taken the club backwards since taking over and left the side without finals for four consecutive seasons?

[5 from the wing on debut]

[Ioannina]

great decision to extend bucks contract..with hard work and bucks game plan strategy culture we can, with great effort, finish 14th next year and why not win the wooden spoon...

[What'sinaname]

[Ioannina]

[MatthewBoydFanClub]