|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | AN_Inkling wrote: | ^^Dunno, but Melbourne shutdown Mitchell and got beat much worse than we did. |
The best way of beating Mitchell is we winning the ball before Mitchell winning the ball. The other way is having a good stopper to play on him like Levi Greenwood. I don't see the reasoning behind playing Nathan Jones on him who is an attacking mid himself. What happened to Vince playing on him which is what we were all speculating to happen? Goodwin obviously goofed but no one criticises him, yet when Adams, Treloar and Pendlebury fail to quell Mitchell, it's all Buckley's fault. |
The mistake with Mitchell is not forcing him to be the kicker. A decent football side will just cut him off 30 yards down the field when he kicks what (for him) passes as a long bomb and misses his target by 40 yards. |
|
|
|
|
PyreneesPie
PyreneesPie
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Redlight wrote: |
I think we all need to realise that we cannot not make these judgements accurately from this side of the fence. We do not know more than the AFL professionals that work with him day in and day out. He didn't survive this long and remain as coach (even after a review) because he speaks well. . |
I believe this one of the most significant statements made throughout the whole Buckley debate.
No-one here (as far as I can determine anyway) knows what actually goes on within the four walls of the club. Posters can theorize and guess about Bucks and his football brain, his attitude, his techniques, his personality etc etc all they want, but really, none of us have much idea.
Even Paul Roos, who strikes me as one of the most arrogant commentators around, acknowledged last night that no-one really knows how a coach is performing on the inside of the club. |
|
|
|
|
PyreneesPie
PyreneesPie
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Apologies, I double posted by mistake. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
PyreneesPie wrote: | Redlight wrote: |
I think we all need to realise that we cannot not make these judgements accurately from this side of the fence. We do not know more than the AFL professionals that work with him day in and day out. He didn't survive this long and remain as coach (even after a review) because he speaks well. . |
I believe this one of the most significant statements made throughout the whole Buckley debate.
No-one here (as far as I can determine anyway) knows what actually goes on within the four walls of the club. Posters can theorize and guess about Bucks and his football brain, his attitude, his techniques, his personality etc etc all they want, but really, none of us have much idea.
Even Paul Roos, who strikes me as one of the most arrogant commentators around, acknowledged last night that no-one really knows how a coach is performing on the inside of the club. |
In truth, no one really knows inside the club for certain, either. Ultimately, results have to come, and they come from sound people following sound processes. But no one can be precise as to the timing of when things will turn, and no one can be certain -in advance of the actual results - whether the processes and people are sound. It is an act of faith and judgement. This is true in business and many other spheres of human activity, and it is true in football.
Two seasons ago there were suggestions in the media, from a number of we’ll-credentialled judges, that Collingwood were building “a dynasty” and about to be a major force. I think Buckley thought so too, and it is why he made his infamous “no way I will remain coach if we do not make finals” comment.
Prediction is a matter of probabilities, never certainty. Only when something has happened do we tell ourselves that it was predictable and certain. It’s one of the many delusions that accompanies being human.
I continue to have enough faith and judgement that Buckley and the team that is developing, and the processes they are learning, can get the job done - but the wheels could certainly fall off again. It would not surprise me to see us lose our next two games, at which point doom and despair will again descend over this board, though little will have changed in the fundamentals. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
PyreneesPie wrote: | Redlight wrote: |
I think we all need to realise that we cannot not make these judgements accurately from this side of the fence. We do not know more than the AFL professionals that work with him day in and day out. He didn't survive this long and remain as coach (even after a review) because he speaks well. . |
I believe this one of the most significant statements made throughout the whole Buckley debate.
No-one here (as far as I can determine anyway) knows what actually goes on within the four walls of the club. Posters can theorize and guess about Bucks and his football brain, his attitude, his techniques, his personality etc etc all they want, but really, none of us have much idea.
Even Paul Roos, who strikes me as one of the most arrogant commentators around, acknowledged last night that no-one really knows how a coach is performing on the inside of the club. |
That not quite true. We all know about Buckley's career as a Collingwood player. Most of us have read his autobiography and so know his basic philosophies and feeling for the game. He gives extensive interviews in the media and you can see for yourself how he interacts with his players on the training track. There's nothing particularly secretive about the way Buckley operates as a coach. You should therefore be able to make valued judgements as to whether he can coach or not. But you shouldn't be making calls on Buckley's coaching immediately after a win or a loss because the emotions take over and winning or losing depends as much on the way the opposition plays, as the way we play. |
|
|
|
|
Jpies
Joined: 09 Apr 2016
|
Post subject: | |
|
BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | PyreneesPie wrote: | Redlight wrote: |
I think we all need to realise that we cannot not make these judgements accurately from this side of the fence. We do not know more than the AFL professionals that work with him day in and day out. He didn't survive this long and remain as coach (even after a review) because he speaks well. . |
I believe this one of the most significant statements made throughout the whole Buckley debate.
No-one here (as far as I can determine anyway) knows what actually goes on within the four walls of the club. Posters can theorize and guess about Bucks and his football brain, his attitude, his techniques, his personality etc etc all they want, but really, none of us have much idea.
Even Paul Roos, who strikes me as one of the most arrogant commentators around, acknowledged last night that no-one really knows how a coach is performing on the inside of the club. |
That not quite true. We all know about Buckley's career as a Collingwood player. Most of us have read his autobiography and so know his basic philosophies and feeling for the game. He gives extensive interviews in the media and you can see for yourself how he interacts with his players on the training track. There's nothing particularly secretive about the way Buckley operates as a coach. You should therefore be able to make valued judgements as to whether he can coach or not. But you shouldn't be making calls on Buckley's coaching immediately after a win or a loss because the emotions take over and winning or losing depends as much on the way the opposition plays, as the way we play. |
But even that's not certain. The way he operates as a coach might seem to an outsider to be a bad way of coaching, but the players at the club might think it's a great way of coaching and respond well to it. And they might not respond well to how outsider thinks coaching should be approached. Ultimately, the players support for Buckley last year (in my opinion) said all that needed to be said. To the point that even the simple win/loss factor isn't really a determining factor of coaching ability. The players have even admitted that the pressure of Buckley's contract situation last year affected them. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
Post subject: | |
|
Jpies wrote: | ...
But even that's not certain. The way he operates as a coach might seem to an outsider to be a bad way of coaching, but the players at the club might think it's a great way of coaching and respond well to it. And they might not respond well to how outsider thinks coaching should be approached. Ultimately, the players support for Buckley last year (in my opinion) said all that needed to be said. To the point that even the simple win/loss factor isn't really a determining factor of coaching ability. The players have even admitted that the pressure of Buckley's contract situation last year affected them. |
I don't think this is a convincing argument. First, there is no more certainty about the level of player support than about any of the other things (which are allegedly too uncertain to comment on). Maybe less certainty. There's no real reason to believe he has significantly more or less player support than Bevo, or Bolton, or whoever. When his types praise him, it doesn't say much: they are his people. And if "difficult" people don't like their coach, they are not going to admit it publicly.
The president's statement last year along the lines of "the only reason to sack the coach is if he's lost the players" was a bit silly. If that were true, arguably no AFL coach should have been sacked since Pagan at the Blues, whose players were not far from openly revolting.
It makes far more sense to say something like "the only reason to sack the coach is if there's someone else available who'll do a better job". |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
K wrote: | Jpies wrote: | ...
But even that's not certain. The way he operates as a coach might seem to an outsider to be a bad way of coaching, but the players at the club might think it's a great way of coaching and respond well to it. And they might not respond well to how outsider thinks coaching should be approached. Ultimately, the players support for Buckley last year (in my opinion) said all that needed to be said. To the point that even the simple win/loss factor isn't really a determining factor of coaching ability. The players have even admitted that the pressure of Buckley's contract situation last year affected them. |
I don't think this is a convincing argument. First, there is no more certainty about the level of player support than about any of the other things (which are allegedly too uncertain to comment on). Maybe less certainty. There's no real reason to believe he has significantly more or less player support than Bevo, or Bolton, or whoever. When his types praise him, it doesn't say much: they are his people. And if "difficult" people don't like their coach, they are not going to admit it publicly.
The president's statement last year along the lines of "the only reason to sack the coach is if he's lost the players" was a bit silly. If that were true, arguably no AFL coach should have been sacked since Pagan at the Blues, whose players were not far from openly revolting.
It makes far more sense to say something like "the only reason to sack the coach is if there's someone else available who'll do a better job". |
My mail is many of the players at the scum can't stand Bolton. |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
You say that like it might be a bad thing that the Carlton players don’t like their coach? |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | AN_Inkling wrote: | ^^Dunno, but Melbourne shutdown Mitchell and got beat much worse than we did. |
The best way of beating Mitchell is we winning the ball before Mitchell winning the ball. The other way is having a good stopper to play on him like Levi Greenwood. I don't see the reasoning behind playing Nathan Jones on him who is an attacking mid himself. What happened to Vince playing on him which is what we were all speculating to happen? Goodwin obviously goofed but no one criticises him, yet when Adams, Treloar and Pendlebury fail to quell Mitchell, it's all Buckley's fault. |
The mistake with Mitchell is not forcing him to be the kicker. A decent football side will just cut him off 30 yards down the field when he kicks what (for him) passes as a long bomb and misses his target by 40 yards. |
The plan to tag Mitchell was fine on the day. Statistically it worked but their game style makes them one of the least likely clubs who should play a tag on an opposition mid. The criticism of the Demons is that Goodwin has them to negative because he likes to play his wingers behind the ball as extra defenders ( which he also did against Hawthorn )
That effectively means not only do you have less players at any contest between arcs but Jones who is at least there, doesn’t have eyes for the footy first.
How else could OMeara and Shields pick up 30 disposals each.
Terrible coaching by Goodwin. He should have freed up one of his wingers to play at the stoppages and improve the Dees numbers.
Why didn’t Goodwin make a change ? Like most coaches, they know it’s an option but they refuse to concede their game plan won’t hold up after 6 months of planning over the preseason. That sound familiar. |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies2016 wrote: | ...
Why didn’t Goodwin make a change ? Like most coaches, they know it’s an option but they refuse to concede their game plan won’t hold up after 6 months of planning over the preseason. That sound familiar. |
Bob Murphy wrote: | ...
We live in a different time now. Dramatic tactical “one-offs” like that would be scoffed at by modern football thinking as wishy-washy. This is the generation of structure, process and structured process, but have we over-corrected? In a sense, I agree with the modern thinking. The problem with an extreme tactical change like a super flood or a “crunch game” is that it might give a lift in emotional and physical response for that week, but what about the next week? And the week after that? Coaches and clubs rightly hang their hats on a repeatable style. But are there special circumstances?
My question for modern football thinking is: can we marry the two? Is there room to inject an emotional or tactical buzz into your playing group that doesn’t betray your style, “DNA” or, dare I say it, “brand”?
...
A quick look at the list of the great coaches from the past 25 years is intriguing. A pattern of risk-taking, progressive coaches emerge, but I acknowledge that it’s not an absolute.
...
Collingwood did something special last week in Adelaide. But what was it? Has Nathan Buckley, himself a poster boy for the more orthodox approach to football, stuck solely to his football doctrine? Or has he reached for a higher gear this season with something outside the box? We can’t know that for sure. But the decision by captain Scott Pendlebury to bring his coach and the entire football department together for the song in the Adelaide changerooms was telling. |
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/remember-blues-and-saints-every-dog-has-its-day-20180418-p4za9y.html
Re. the last paragraph, I don't find that "telling" at all. Bob may be reading too much into things there. I also get the impression that Bob's "list of great coaches" is considerably longer than mine. |
|
|
|
|
scoobydoo
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | scoobydoo wrote: | The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | scoobydoo wrote: | The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | scoobydoo wrote: |
The part where you write “we all know” in completely wrong . You don’t know
And in fact are not even close. As Most on here |
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but we'll have to agree to disagree then because if your mind is closed there is not much I or others can do about it - it's a simple as that. |
Actually your wrong again maybe coz your guessing again.
If you don’t know just say so, don’t make out like you do when you don’t.
And that’s not an opinion |
No not in the room with them so no I have never heard it from either Eddie or Bucks - but there is _no other logical explanation_ as to why Bucks has kept his job this long and Eddie is not one to break deals - so I'll bet my soul on it - how's that. And for all you know, I could be 100% right. As I said, we'll have to agree to disagree - end of story.
And it's 'you're' |
Actually I know your 100% wrong. You should just admit your guessing |
Nope 100% right. And it's still 'you're' - learn to spell |
Instead of crying wolf just tell the truth. Don't make stuff up.
Your(😂😂) wrong again |
|
|
|
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Joined: 26 Sep 2013 Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right
|
Post subject: | |
|
scoobydoo wrote: |
Instead of crying wolf just tell the truth. Don't make stuff up.
Your(😂😂) wrong again |
Learn to spell _________________ All Aboard!! Choo Choo!!! |
|
|
|
|
piedys
Heeeeeeere's Dyso!!!
Joined: 04 Sep 2003 Location: Resident Forum Psychopath since 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Is Buckley coaching better than we think...?
Stay tuned kids - we are about to Mythbust that one either way! _________________ M I L L A N E 4 2 forever |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
What would it mean to you if it were? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|