Knights interviewed by Richmond

[Mr Mosquito]

Has been reported on SEN that Matthew Knights has or is going to be interviewed by Richmond for the head coaching job.

Ox and Francis both believe it to be true and say that Knights is at loggerheads with some influential people at the club.

I would hate for this to be true, however if it is true it would be furious at these so called influential people and could understand Knights wanting to leave. The only thing that would be a suitable replacement and quench my fury would be..........James Hird

[Nuke]

Has been reported on SEN
Would it be wrong of me to say that I stopped reading after there?

[Skeeta Olly]

Disappointing if true. Considering he is supposed to be coaching a team to make the finals.

Then again, it is SEN.

[Mr Mosquito]

I know its only SEN but im sure they must of heard it somewhere to say it

[Spikey]

Would it be wrong of me to say that I stopped reading after there?

I made it to 'Ox'

[kelvin_sheedy]

Yeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

[Nuke]

I know its only SEN but im sure they must of heard it somewhere to say it
Now I'm not listening to SEN or anything, but I did duck out to the Tigers board on this subject and read this:
Ox just said that Gary March called him to say they have not spoken with Knights, so I guess for now this is off.
So, umm, yeah... :o kelvin, you can put the balloons, champers and streamers away for the time.

[Wahooti Fandango]

Yeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

Who do you want as a replacement? Please do not say Sheeedy. The man is senile.

[Spluff]

Heard he was interested in the job two or three weeks ago, though I dismissed it as a rumour. Maybe I was wrong.

[Skeeta Olly]

Epic Thread.

[Mr Mosquito]

This aint a good thing Kelvin

[thebigboy]

Doubtful that the rumor is true but if he is prepared to interview for the Richmond job, we should then let him go.

Once you start looking at other jobs, your no longer fully committed to the club.

Hopefully its not true and he stays.

[Smokin]

I dont believe this rumour.

but

IF true, we dont think about it, we have no choice but to get rid of him A.S.A.P. There is nothing to contemplate there.

Not even if he actually gets interviewed, just agrees to it, is enough to cut ties IMO. Simply not acceptable.

But I dont buy this.

[DaSawx]

I dont believe this rumour.

but

IF true, we dont think about it, we have no choice but to get rid of him A.S.A.P. There is nothing to contemplate there.

Not even if he actually gets interviewed, just agrees to it, is enough to cut ties IMO. Simply not acceptable.

But I dont buy this.

Agree 100%.

Although I don't believe it.

[bombersno1]

Hardly a bad thing to be honest. Knights is fine but his consistent picking of ordinary sides with injured players included has worn me thin. Hardwick would be a great get for our club!

[The_Young_Gun]

BRING ON JAMES HIRD!!!

lol

[kelvin_sheedy]

Who do you want as a replacement? Please do not say Sheeedy. The man is senile.

Not sure about replacements.

I like Laidley but he has a poor marketing head and demeanor. Tactically and hardness he'll bring.

We are pretty much guessing with the untried guys but Hardwick has a bit of romance about him.

[The_Young_Gun]

Bombers can still target Laidley.

Maybe he's not a great head coach, but him as an assistant is something for everyone to consider.

[The Donners]

Now I'm not listening to SEN or anything, but I did duck out to the Tigers board on this subject and read this:

Ox just said that Gary March called him to say they have not spoken with Knights, so I guess for now this is off.

So, umm, yeah... :o kelvin, you can put the balloons, champers and streamers away for the time.

I was listening to SEN, after Ox said that, the question was posed, "has Richmond spoken to Knights' management?"

Schwarz didn't ask Gary March the right question perhaps? Not suggesting it's true, however.

[Godzke]

lol

Knights isn't leaving. He isn't dumb, he would've had a good hard look at where richmond are now and realised they're going through what we were last year and the year before. Some good youngsters coming through but they're going to be culling a number of 28yo+ players, like we did with m.johnson, peverill, soloman, etc.

Then he'll realise that rebuilding essendon will be quicker because we're already on the path whereas richmond will begin theirs during the GC17 era which will slow down the pace of rebuilding.

He'd be a idiot to turn his back on any club, let alone a club with strong financial figures and strong backing (at least he's always said he's been given free reigns at the club since arriving).

[DapperDon]

If he even thinks about sitting for an interview terminate his contract, I doubt this is true though.

Can't wait for Fatpricks next article.:rolleyes:

[bombermick]

I doubt very much that this is true. I call bullshit on this rumour.

[Bomber57]

Knights to Richmond---------------------Hardwick to Essendon that sounds ok. :thumbsu: :thumbsu:

[Donakebab]

Hardly a bad thing to be honest. Knights is fine but his consistent picking of ordinary sides with injured players included has worn me thin. Hardwick would be a great get for our club!

You claim to know everything about everything yet still show that you have no clue! Knights doesn't just pick the side he wants. Selection committee!

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr, stop posting! :mad:



I call bullshit on this story. Knights is a professional coach so the whole romantic thing about returning to his original club wouldn't be an appeal that would make him leave his current job.

[footycool]

Knights to Richmond---------------------Hardwick to Essendon that sounds ok. :thumbsu: :thumbsu:
+1, i agree. Hardwick remeber was favourite to coach the dons after sheedy

[Ben the Gooner]

Everyone seems so blase about dropping Knighter for Hardwick, but the transition period for a new coach will basically **** 2010 up for us, and set us further back in development.

It's not as easy as one in, one out, no sweat.

[nicko99]

+1, i agree. Hardwick remeber was favourite to coach the dons after sheedy

Until his laptop ****ed up. lol :p

[The Donners]

Everyone seems so blase about dropping Knighter for Hardwick, but the transition period for a new coach will basically **** 2010 up for us, and set us further back in development.

It's not as easy as one in, one out, no sweat.

Michael Voss.

P.S. Sorry BtG! :D

[Spikey]

Seriously, is everyone still pissed off our favourite son Hardwick didn't get the job over that terribly devil from Richmond? **** just because he once played for us doesn't mean he will be a good coach.

[Ben the Gooner]

Michael Voss.

P.S. Sorry BtG! :D

For every Voss, there's a Ross (Lyon).

And I should be sorry for mauling you in the SC Elimination final, even without half my team.;)

[Kong]

Everyone seems so blase about dropping Knighter for Hardwick, but the transition period for a new coach will basically **** 2010 up for us, and set us further back in development.

It's not as easy as one in, one out, no sweat.Exactly.

Voss already arguably had a semi-developed side when he took over; Leigh Matthews has said as much. Voss wouldn't have gotten us any further this year, in my opinion.

Losing Knights now would without doubt set us back a year or two in our development; the impatient supporters (we know who they are) would no doubt be throwing hissy fits at going backwards.

[The Donners]

For every Voss, there's a Ross (Lyon).

And I should be sorry for mauling you in the SC Elimination final, even without half my team.;)

Haha I was missing Goddard, Chapman, Higgins, Gilbert, Lovett, Bock, Guerra and Grimes!

[kelvin_sheedy]

Exactly.

Voss already arguably had a semi-developed side when he took over; Leigh Matthews has said as much. Voss wouldn't have gotten us any further this year, in my opinion.

Losing Knights now would without doubt set us back a year or two in our development; the impatient supporters (we know who they are) would no doubt be throwing hissy fits at going backwards.

As opposed to our semi developed in Watson, McVeigh, Lovett, Winderlich, Slattery, Welsh, McPhee, Fletcher, Monfries, Davey, Lloyd, Lucas, NLM, Stanton,Dyson,Hille,Laycock.

They've finished 10, 10, 13, 11 and we have 12,12, 15, 13. Not much difference but it points to us getting better draft picks right? So we should be nudging ahead :confused:

[Lance Uppercut]

lol @ this thread :D

This reminds me of the great Hird come-back of '08

[SirJimi05]

As opposed to our semi developed in Watson, McVeigh, Lovett, Winderlich, Slattery, Welsh, McPhee, Fletcher, Monfries, Davey, Lloyd, Lucas, NLM, Stanton,Dyson,Hille,Laycock.

They've finished 10, 10, 13, 11 and we have 12,12, 15, 13. Not much difference but it points to us getting better draft picks right? So we should be nudging ahead :confused:


Why are you still posting? I thought you were gone for the year?

[yaco55]

Not sure about replacements.

I like Laidley but he has a poor marketing head and demeanor. Tactically and hardness he'll bring.

We are pretty much guessing with the untried guys but Hardwick has a bit of romance about him.

I am unsure about Laidley's so called tactical acumen.

His teams tend to play boring, plodding football which is suspect under finals pressure.

[Knight Ryders]

I think Knights has done a good job and we should at least give him the chance to see how he brings it altogether in the next couple of years.

Very rarely do coaches peak in the first couple of years. It took Bomber Thompson over 5 years to hit his straps with a good unit of players.

[Kong]

As opposed to our semi developed in Watson, McVeigh, Lovett, Winderlich, Slattery, Welsh, McPhee, Fletcher, Monfries, Davey, Lloyd, Lucas, NLM, Stanton,Dyson,Hille,Laycock.

They've finished 10, 10, 13, 11 and we have 12,12, 15, 13. Not much difference but it points to us getting better draft picks right? So we should be nudging ahead :confused:Yes but they also had an established spine in Merret, Patful, Black, Charman, Brown and Bradshaw.
Compare that to Pears, Hooker, Watson, Hille, Gumbleton and Neagle.

Then take into consideration that Gumbleton and Neagle have been injured or unfit (meaning a passed-it Lucas has had to play and Lloyd has had to play out of position), Hille has been missing for 90% of the season, and you have a more accurate comparison.

[Godzke]

Only thing that's semi developed about us is our midfield (because that was completely underdeveloped for the last 5-6 years -- thanks ****ing sheedy). Backline is developing strongly but the forward line is at it's weakest in god knows how long.

Desperately need Gumby and Neagle in there and ripping it up, and if they cant, then at least we'll know quicker and move for a KP forward.

[Kong]

No mention on Footy Classified. If there was any sniff of truth to this story, you'd think Craig 'The Leech' Hutchison would be all over it.

[stay true]

After reading the OP I thought bollocks and it turns out I was right.

I don't understand this talk of it being good news either. Rome wasn't built in a day. Have some patience.

[table tennis]

I agree Stay True.

Knights has done a good job up until now, and he is only going to get better.

Under Knights, there have been significant development in players that were stale under the old regime.

I believe we are in for a bit of pain in the next year too, If Llyody goes.

Neagle will be ok, Hopefully Gumby and Still get up and running.

Daniher looks like he is improving in the magoos, Hurley, pears & hooker have been revelations, Lovett has gone to another level, as has Winders, Watson & Dempsey.

I think we have a mix of players that will take us so far, hopefully we land a gem of a midfielder.

[Seb78]

I'm sure Knights would have the final say on who plays and who doesn't. The selection committee is purely their to make recommendations on who should be up for selection and who should miss. The buck stops with the coach

[ant555]

Maybe they have their wires crossed because i know that Richardson has been in the initial interviews.
Personally i think they already have their coach. Rawlings has had good reviews coming from anyone i have spoken to about his time at Coburg and so far he seems to be doing a good job at AFL level.

[Mad Bomber Sean]

Sounds to me that this is a rumor started by a disgruntled Dons supporter as part of a campaign to get rid of knights. It is all stupid really.

Either that or it might be' another Hutcho "exclusive"....

Personally I reckon its a bucket of horse
turdie

[~RFM~]

Also glad to hear this is bullshit. I agree with those who call for patience. Give things time to all come together! If we have a crap year next year with no improvement then the grumbling can begin.

[strategy]

Hird to replace Knights if he goes ?

cant see Knights going

[daffo]

I can't see this happen. Knights is contracted next year.

[yodellinhank]

I agree Stay True.

Knights has done a good job up until now, and he is only going to get better.

Under Knights, there have been significant development in players that were stale under the old regime.

I believe we are in for a bit of pain in the next year too, If Llyody goes.

Neagle will be ok, Hopefully Gumby and Still get up and running.

Daniher looks like he is improving in the magoos, Hurley, pears & hooker have been revelations, Lovett has gone to another level, as has Winders, Watson & Dempsey.

I think we have a mix of players that will take us so far, hopefully we land a gem of a midfielder.

You mean, the regime with Knights as development coach?

[table tennis]

You mean, the regime with Knights as development coach?


No the regime where youngsters would not get extended runs in the seniors and dropped without getting time to develop at the top level.

Unlike Knights who has given all our players a chance to show thier stuff.

Just ask Teddy Richards what it was like trying to develop at old essendon.....

[kelvin_sheedy]

No the regime where youngsters would not get extended runs in the seniors and dropped without getting time to develop at the top level.

Unlike Knights who has given all our players a chance to show thier stuff.

Just ask Teddy Richards what it was like trying to develop at old essendon.....

What a load of crap!

Teddy was given just as much game time as Houli, Myers, Jetta, etc, etc.

He was not good enough and never has been.

Knights has selected pretty experienced sides when all have been fit and available - see round 1 last year, last few weeks. The only reason he is playing kids is because everyone else is injured.

It's just plain wrong and utter crap.

[table tennis]

What a load of crap!

Teddy was given just as much game time as Houli, Myers, Jetta, etc, etc.

He was not good enough and never has been.

Knights has selected pretty experienced sides when all have been fit and available - see round 1 last year, last few weeks. The only reason he is playing kids is because everyone else is injured.

It's just plain wrong and utter crap.


Kelvin, obviously your eyes are painted on.

Teddy got one week here, one week there, and was playing forward one week and back the next. Was never given a position to settle.

Jetta and Myers are not up to it, Houli has worked his way into the side. Richards has played some pretty good and consistent footy at Sydney, so to say that he is not good enough, is the only plain wrong and utter crap that has been posted.

Kelvin, you and Patrick Smith should get a room, lock the doors and cuddle each other, until the both of you can come out of that room accecpting that Kevin Sheedy is no longer the coach of our great football club.

You are quite clearly the minority on this board and about as well informed as indonesian boat people before 100's of them board a small leaking boat.

[yodellinhank]

Kelvin, obviously your eyes are painted on.

Teddy got one week here, one week there, and was playing forward one week and back the next. Was never given a position to settle.

Ted played 33 games in 4 years. Figures Similar to both Leroy Jetta and Bachar Houli. Ted had the misfortune of being a young player in a strong, finals contending side. It can be harder for youngsters to get a game. Your point on position is however noted.


Jetta and Myers are not up to it, Houli has worked his way into the side. Richards has played some pretty good and consistent footy at Sydney, so to say that he is not good enough, is the only plain wrong and utter crap that has been posted.Houli has only just worked his way back into the side, and were it not for injuries, who knows if he would. Its easy to dismiss players as not being up to it, and therefore not warranting selection. And the same argument could have been made for Ted Richards back in 2005. My point being; you accuse "the old regime" of not giving blokes a go (and only provide a solitary example), and yet you dismiss several examples as flippantly as "they are not up to it".

Kelvin, you and Patrick Smith should get a room, lock the doors and cuddle each other, until the both of you can come out of that room accecpting that Kevin Sheedy is no longer the coach of our great football club.
Well, this bit could have some merit. :D However, you cannot expect to criticize one of the greatest servants of our club and not expect retorts from some of the posters on this forum. Whilst I myself am happy to look forward, I take umbrage at those who look at our past so negatively.

You are quite clearly the minority on this board and about as well informed as indonesian boat people before 100's of them board a small leaking boat.Hmmm.

[Ben the Gooner]

As a hypothetical, if Knighter was to go for the Richmond job, and get sacked because of it, who wouldn't want Hardwick?

I, for one, would want Richardson to be our next coach if Knighter was to go.

[Kong]

As a hypothetical, if Knighter was to go for the Richmond job, and get sacked because of it, who wouldn't want Hardwick?

I, for one, would want Richardson to be our next coach if Knighter was to go.I would be worried about Hardwick based on the assumption that he would implement a game plan similar to that of Clarkson.

For our players to go from a Geelong-style style to a Hawthorn-style game plan after only 2 years of learning the former surely would be detrimental to our team's development.

[Donakebab]

What a load of crap!

Teddy was given just as much game time as Houli, Myers, Jetta, etc, etc.

He was not good enough and never has been.

Knights has selected pretty experienced sides when all have been fit and available - see round 1 last year, last few weeks. The only reason he is playing kids is because everyone else is injured.

It's just plain wrong and utter crap.


I thought you'd given up for the year?

[TheDon35]

Yes but they also had an established spine in Merret, Patful, Black, Charman, Brown and Bradshaw.
Compare that to Pears, Hooker, Watson, Hille, Gumbleton and Neagle.

Then take into consideration that Gumbleton and Neagle have been injured or unfit (meaning a passed-it Lucas has had to play and Lloyd has had to play out of position), Hille has been missing for 90% of the season, and you have a more accurate comparison.

Good to see you took a balanced view of this arguement :rolleyes:

As Kelvin said, Fletcher, Lloyd, Lucas, Winderlich, Watson, Welsh, Mcphee, McVeigh, Slattery, Lovett, NLM, Hille, Stanton, Prismall, Skipworth, all very much established players, many of whom could form a part of a spine.

Really the only difference is Brown who is still very much a star of the game. Bradshaw has shown this year that he's probably played his best footy. Black though still a good player has had better seasons and no better season than Watson. Charman has barely played and Hille is better than him anyway. Patful has hardly been a star. Fletcher has had a better year than Merret...

[yaco55]

As a hypothetical, if Knighter was to go for the Richmond job, and get sacked because of it, who wouldn't want Hardwick?

I, for one, would want Richardson to be our next coach if Knighter was to go.

You are generous.

Richardson is our forward line coach - And it has hadly been a raging success.

[yaco55]

What a load of crap!

Teddy was given just as much game time as Houli, Myers, Jetta, etc, etc.

He was not good enough and never has been.

Knights has selected pretty experienced sides when all have been fit and available - see round 1 last year, last few weeks. The only reason he is playing kids is because everyone else is injured.

It's just plain wrong and utter crap.

Kelvin

Knights has played lots of young players in his 2 years.

One could argue that some have been selected with little form at Bendigo.

Extended game time given to

- Lonergan
- Hocking
- Pears
- Hocking
- Reimers
- Hurley
- Hooker

Knights couldn't select MYERS because of your objections.

[table tennis]

Kelvin

Knights has played lots of young players in his 2 years.

One could argue that some have been selected with little form at Bendigo.

Extended game time given to

- Lonergan
- Hocking
- Pears
- Hocking
- Reimers
- Hurley
- Hooker

Knights couldn't select MYERS because of your objections.

Under Sheedy, Lonergan and Dyson were gone. I can see peoples point.

I loved sheeds as much as the next bomber crazy person. However towards the end, as it is with most people, it was time to move on, as we were on a downward spiral. And kids with talent, were not developing as they should be. Game plan was shot to shit & too much deadwood playing senior footy that was preventing the future. Changes needed to be made, and they were.

I find it frustrating that Knights has put the time and effort into bringing this side from a bottom 4 side that we were midway through last year, to a probable 9th place finish and people like Kelvin shit can him. To me, and most Essendon supporters, we would have taken 9th at the start of the year. So Knights has done a good job, whilst learning the craft at the same time. So the upside in Knights is massive, just like the young players on our list. Let them develop together.

Unstability is for clubs like Richmond. Kelvin, Sheeds is at Richmond this season, why didn't you follow him?

[Ben the Gooner]

You are generous.

Richardson is our forward line coach - And it has hadly been a raging success.

The work he's done with Marty Clarke, Michael Quinn, Cale Hooker and Tayte Pears should not be underestimated.

[The Dustbin]

I'd be disappointed if we lost Richardson after one season. Good luck to him with the Richmond job, deep down I hope he misses out.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Kelvin

Knights has played lots of young players in his 2 years.

One could argue that some have been selected with little form at Bendigo.

Extended game time given to

- Lonergan
- Hocking
- Pears
- Hocking
- Reimers
- Hurley
- Hooker

Knights couldn't select MYERS because of your objections.

What is the point you are trying to make?

[Ben the Gooner]

I'd be disappointed if we lost Richardson after one season. Good luck to him with the Richmond job, deep down I hope he misses out.

Ditto.

[Knight Ryders]

I'd be disappointed if we lost Richardson after one season. Good luck to him with the Richmond job, deep down I hope he misses out.
:thumbsu:

[The Donners]

Kelvin

Knights has played lots of young players in his 2 years.

One could argue that some have been selected with little form at Bendigo.

Extended game time given to

- Lonergan
- Hocking
- Pears
- Hocking
- Reimers
- Hurley
- Hooker

Knights couldn't select MYERS because of your objections.

Under Sheedy:

- Stanton
- Bradley
- Dyson
- Ryder
- Monfries
- Watson
- Slattery
- Nash

Sheedy was finished don't get me wrong, just an observation that Knights hasn't really played any more youngsters than what Sheedy was playing. There are mitigating circumstances (i.e. injury to Gumbleton) for Knights but the same argument can be made for Sheedy (i.e. injuries to Gumbleton, Dempsey, Neagle).

[Kong]

Good to see you took a balanced view of this arguement :rolleyes:

As Kelvin said, Fletcher, Lloyd, Lucas, Winderlich, Watson, Welsh, Mcphee, McVeigh, Slattery, Lovett, NLM, Hille, Stanton, Prismall, Skipworth, all very much established players, many of whom could form a part of a spine.Yes but they don't.

We may have Lucas, Lloyd and Fletcher on our list, but none are part of our spine going forward.

If it weren't for injuries, none would have played key position for the majority of the year.

Really the only difference is Brown who is still very much a star of the game. Bradshaw has shown this year that he's probably played his best footy. Black though still a good player has had better seasons and no better season than Watson. Charman has barely played and Hille is better than him anyway. Patful has hardly been a star. Fletcher has had a better year than Merret...Black and Watson are about on par this year, although Black is still a better player.

Fletcher has played 2, maybe 3 games as a key backman - much to the disgust of people such as yourself. He is not part of our spine. Pears and Hooker/Hurley have played as our key backs, who all have 2 years or less experience.

Bradshaw kicked 75 goals last year, and has 42 so far this year. He may not be as effective this year, but he's still offered more than any of Gumbleton, Neagle, Lucas or Lloyd. Brown, as you said, is a star.

Patfull has been pretty damn reliable for them, has taken some scalps, and is an established key back at the age of 24.

Clark has been a huge bonus for them, much like Ryder for us. Our ruck positions are very similar this year.

So when you look even closer, you have this comparison:

Pears: 19 y.o. <20 games.
Merrett: 24 y.o. >70 games.

Hooker: 20, <20.
Patfull: 24, >60.

Watson: 24, >70.
Black: 30, approx. 250.

Hille/Ryder: 28, approx. 150; injured. / 21, approx. 50.
Charman/Clark: 27, >120; injured. / 21, approx. 40.

Gumbleton: 21, 5.
Brown: 27, approx. 180

Neagle: 21, <20.
Bradshaw: 30, >200.

That's massive difference, no matter how you look at it.
Thus, the Brisbane spine is overall more developed than ours.
End of discusssion.

[stay true]

I'd be disappointed if we lost Richardson after one season. Good luck to him with the Richmond job, deep down I hope he misses out.
Yeah agreed.

[kelvin_sheedy]

You forgot Henderson, Leuenberger. Maybe you should compare Henderson to Hooker.

McPhee is the same height as Patful and they play similar roles at times.

If you look at our midfield core compared to theirs we have rebuilt a lot more.

Power is 30, Black is 31, Johnston 29, Notting finished. Where's the rebuild there? I only see Rich.


If it weren't for injuries, none would have played key position for the majority of the year. Huh :confused:

You can twist and turn it whichever way you like but they are exactly in the same boat as us. They go out to win every game and it's the Voss way. We go out to experiment and rebuild.

[Pevers-Legend]

If you look at our midfield core compared to theirs we have rebuilt a lot more.

Power is 30, Black is 31, Johnston 29, Notting finished. Where's the rebuild there? I only see Rich.

Huh :confused:



Kelvin, I think you aree confused. Their midfield is much better than ours and with Brown and Bradshaw, they are a better team.

You are right they are not as far in the rebuild, but rather are a more developed team hence they are performing better than we are.

[Kong]

You forgot Henderson, Leuenberger. Maybe you should compare Henderson to Hooker.Leuenberger was their 2nd choice ruckman at the start of the year, so maybe I should've included him.
Henderson hasn't played Key Back nearly as often as Hooker. Patfull's been the man more often than not.

McPhee is the same height as Patful and they play similar roles at times.McPhee's played Key Back 2-3 times this year, maybe? More often than not he's played Fletcher's role while he was out, or elsewhere.

If you look at our midfield core compared to theirs we have rebuilt a lot more.

Power is 30, Black is 31, Johnston 29, Notting finished. Where's the rebuild there? I only see Rich.Rischi..., Sherman, Adcock, Selwood and Dalziell also are key components to their midfield.

Huh :confused:If Hooker/Hurley, Gumbleton and Neagle were all fit this year, I can almsot guarantee they would've been playing Key Position; Fletch, Lucas and Lloyd have had to cover these positions at times due to said hypothetical not occurring.

You can twist and turn it whichever way you like but they are exactly in the same boat as us. They go out to win every game and it's the Voss way. We go out to experiment and rebuild.Point is, their ruck is probably on par with ours, with ours possibly a little more 'developed'. From there, their midfield and spine is years ahead of ours, reiterating my notion that Voss took over a side more advanced than the one Knights did.

I can see you're going to hold firm on this issue - just for something different - so there's not a whole lot else we can say on the matter, I guess.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Rischi..., Sherman, Adcock, Selwood and Dalziell also are key components to their midfield.


That reads as a very poor midfield. Dalziell was dropped for our game. Selwood a battler, Sherman is a crab. It's a bottom 4 group that.

As someone else pointed out the difference is the colossus that is Jonathon Brown.... nothing more nothing less.

In fact I'd be concerned if I was a Brisbane supporter as Brown has been battered for years, is 28 and could at any stage start to become a non factor.

In fact I would say the group of Brown, Bradshaw, Black, Power, TJ will not be a part of their next flag. Do they have replacements for all? Not in my mind.

[The Dustbin]

In fact I would say the group of Brown, Bradshaw, Black, Power, TJ will not be a part of their next flag. Do they have replacements for all? Not in my mind.

I agree Kelvin. The players you named carry them every week.

[Kong]

As someone else pointed out the difference is the colossus that is Jonathon Brown.... nothing more nothing less.[

In fact I'd be concerned if I was a Brisbane supporter as Brown has been battered for years, is 28 and could at any stage start to become a non factor.No doubt he's crucial to them. Bradshaw helps a lot, though.

In fact I would say the group of Brown, Bradshaw, Black, Power, TJ will not be a part of their next flag. Do they have replacements for all? Not in my mind.That's another matter branching off this one, I guess.
I didn't expect the Lions to go as well as they have this year based mostly on the fact that Voss was a new coach. However I always thought as long as they contained players of the calibre of Brown, Black and co. they'd be a quality side on paper.

I think Brown, Black, Power could be around for their next crack. Bradshaw's a tough one with his knee history, and I don't really rate TJ as a player. Realistically they could be an outside chance next year, but who knows.

[1980GFVideo]

I know its only SEN but im sure they must of heard it somewhere to say it

Mate they are desperate for ratings down there and no one pays the price these days for getting it wrong so if you are trying to keep your integrity then you are just giving up ratings.

These blokes make a mockery of football news.

[SDR223]

Under Sheedy:

- Stanton
- Bradley
- Dyson
- Ryder
- Monfries
- Watson
- Slattery
- Nash

Sheedy was finished don't get me wrong, just an observation that Knights hasn't really played any more youngsters than what Sheedy was playing. There are mitigating circumstances (i.e. injury to Gumbleton) for Knights but the same argument can be made for Sheedy (i.e. injuries to Gumbleton, Dempsey, Neagle).

Sheedy would bring the younger players in for a game or two then they would be dropped in favour of an older player. Besides Stanton and Monfries who got reasonable game time in their first and second years nearly all the other players you have mentioned hardly got regular games.

For example

Watsons first 3years - 1game, 7games, 5 games
Slattery 0,4,8
Dyson 0,11,10
Nash 0,2,7


Knights has clearly been playing more youngsters.
First year players
Hurley 5 games - would have played more but injured
Quinn 3 games
Zaharakis 10 games

Second Year Players
Pears First year 5games (injured) Second Year - 19 games
Hooker 2, 13

Third Year players
Lonergan 1st yr 1game(sheedy) 2nd yr 19games 3rd yr15games Hocking 1 game (sheedy) 3, 19
Reimars 3games (sheedy) 15,9

Under Knight's we've had three rising star nominations Houli, Zaharaki and Pears.
The last nomination under Sheedy was Laycock in 2005

[Kong]

Under Knight's we've had four rising star nominations Houli, Zaharaki, Reimers and Pears.
The last nomination under Sheedy was Laycock in 2005Edited for accuracy.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Sheedy would bring the younger players in for a game or two then they would be dropped in favour of an older player. Besides Stanton and Monfries who got reasonable game time in their first and second years nearly all the other players you have mentioned hardly got regular games.

For example

Watsons first 3years - 1game, 7games, 5 games
Slattery 0,4,8
Dyson 0,11,10
Nash 0,2,7


Knights has clearly been playing more youngsters.
First year players
Hurley 5 games - would have played more but injured
Quinn 3 games
Zaharakis 10 games

Second Year Players
Pears First year 5games (injured) Second Year - 19 games
Hooker 2, 13

Third Year players
Lonergan 1st yr 1game(sheedy) 2nd yr 19games 3rd yr15games Hocking 1 game (sheedy) 3, 19
Reimars 3games (sheedy) 15,9

Under Knight's we've had three rising star nominations Houli, Zaharaki and Pears.
The last nomination under Sheedy was Laycock in 2005

Wrong, wrong, wrong...

Watson was perennially injured in his first 3 years and was overweight and could not run. Not sure how many games you could give him.

Have you forgotten about Sheedy playing Ryder, Jetta, Davey immediately?

Sheeds wanted to play Dempsey but he was always injured.

Lonergan is one he didn't give a go to when form warranted. Maybe he was right as Lonergan's form this year has been ordinary.

Sheeds played Houli. Houli succumbed to OP and was nursed throuhg his first year. Knights hasn't given the kid a break and has dropped him and overlooked him.

The problem with Sheeds last few years was a lack of talented kids. You can't play them when they have no chance of succeeding. He knew that and he was right in all of them.

[DapperDon]

Wrong, wrong, wrong...

Watson was perennially injured in his first 3 years and was overweight and could not run. Not sure how many games you could give him.

Have you forgotten about Sheedy playing Ryder, Jetta, Davey immediately?

Sheeds wanted to play Dempsey but he was always injured.

Lonergan is one he didn't give a go to when form warranted. Maybe he was right as Lonergan's form this year has been ordinary.

Sheeds played Houli. Houli succumbed to OP and was nursed throuhg his first year. Knights hasn't given the kid a break and has dropped him and overlooked him.

The problem with Sheeds last few years was a lack of talented kids. You can't play them when they have no chance of succeeding. He knew that and he was right in all of them.

Sheedy in regards to Watson was against him doing extra work to get fit, Jobe and Timmy went out of their way to do extra work and we saw the results. So if Sheeds had his way Jobe would still be a plodder and most likely not on the list anymore.

Sheeds also played Ryder down back, low and behold when Knights put him in the ruck he becomes a much better player and not the laconic player we saw under Sheeds.

Sheeds never played Dyson, Lonergan and even dropped Hille and Watson in his last year but continued to play Laycock who just doesn't give a **** because he was one of Sheeds high draft picks so he had to make it look like he was worth it.

Knights has made Houli a better player, he has made him start playing defensive instead of looking for a cheap kick in the backline all the time.

Where the big win for Knights is

Sheeds drafted Kepler
Knights delisted him:thumbsu:

[ant555]

Watson was perennially injured in his first 3 years and was overweight and could not run. Not sure how many games you could give him.

True. Watson had too many soft tissue injuries and was not in shape. Sheedy actually played him too early as he had not done enough to deserve his first game. I think that selection was all about the romance of playing Tim's son.

Have you forgotten about Sheedy playing Ryder, Jetta, Davey immediately?

Ryder was played early becasue we where down a ruckman and there was no one else. He was dropped back to Bendigo one Laycock returned. He would not have played much if we did not have the injury probelm with the rucks.
He only played 9 games anyway so it is not like he played a full year straight away.

Davey came to us as a ready made player at 21 years old. He had played a fair bit of SANFL footy so it was expected when he was drafted that he would play straight away.

Jetta only played 4 games under Sheedy so i dont know why he is in the conversation. He played more games under Knights (18) in 2008.

Sheeds wanted to play Dempsey but he was always injured.

Give you this point. He certainly did want to play him.

Lonergan is one he didn't give a go to when form warranted. Maybe he was right as Lonergan's form this year has been ordinary.

Well done captain hindsight. Anyway it is only you and a couple of others that are saying his form is ordinary and you have been known to change your mind almost as much as bombersno1 :eek:
Anyway Lonergan was good last year. This year he has been patchy. Played some good games but has also had a few average ones. He is probably down about 4 or 5 possessions a game from where he needs to be.

Sheeds played Houli. Houli succumbed to OP and was nursed throuhg his first year. Knights hasn't given the kid a break and has dropped him and overlooked him.

Absolute total rubbish. 4 games in 2007. 11 games last years before he could not play becasue of a rib probelm and then a groin op to help ease his OP.
Knights has given him a go but has also dropped him becasue his problem with accountability. You aare going on like he is some sort of star who has been left out. The fact is he stuggled with his defensive side, he has been very soft when it comes to front on contact and his disposal by hand is very questionabl under pressure.
You have no base to comment anyway becasue you dont see him play with Bendigo and you have a habit of being very loose when it comes to actual facts!!


The problem with Sheeds last few years was a lack of talented kids. You can't play them when they have no chance of succeeding. He knew that and he was right in all of them.

Well whos bloody problem is this ? maybe if he did not try and plug holes with used players or try and convert head cases like Zantuck, Cupido and Cole he may have had more kids to work with.
The fact that he was getting involved in who we drafted between 1998 and 2004 may also have something to do with it as well.
Sheedy was a legend and i think he still could coach another club but he has to take the his share of the blame for the situation we are currently in.
You should read Tim Watsons book "The Jigsaw Man". Some interesting stuff in it and they are quotes from people involved with the club.

I wrote a letter to Sheeds after it was announced he would not be coaching in 2008 thanking him for what he had given us supporters over the journey. I even managed to have lunch with him near the end of the year. I loved the guy as a coach for most of his time and i will be forever gratefull for what he gave us between 1981 and 2003 but IMO he stayed 3 years too long.
A lot of supporters may not have thought this was the case but those insdie the club knew.

This whole argument is really rubbish anyway. Young players develop differently. there is no model for all under 18 kids coming into the system.
Shhedy ahd his success stories and failures just as much as any other coach will.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Sheeds drafted Kepler
Knights delisted him:thumbsu:

I can't be bothered going through the all as we'll go round in circles and if you look at it like for like then you'll see there's really not much difference. The main point is that people are now happy to be labelled as young and rebuilding and use that as an excuse for losses.

Knights drafted Skipworth which is really a strange on. Sheeds had no choice in Bradley because he was the next best as the prime target in McLean was snapped up one pick before us.

Sheeds barely played Bradley in the last year when some of us thought he should get a go after good form at VFL level.

[SDR223]

I can't be bothered going through the all as we'll go round in circles and if you look at it like for like then you'll see there's really not much difference. The main point is that people are now happy to be labelled as young and rebuilding and use that as an excuse for losses.

Knights drafted Skipworth which is really a strange on. Sheeds had no choice in Bradley because he was the next best as the prime target in McLean was snapped up one pick before us.

Sheeds barely played Bradley in the last year when some of us thought he should get a go after good form at VFL level.

The rebuilding process should have started in 2003 or at the very latest 2004.
The main point is that we have more exciting young players on our list than we have had for a very long time. I don't know too many people using this as an excuse merely as a positive step towards the clubs future.

[TheDon35]

Yes but they don't.

We may have Lucas, Lloyd and Fletcher on our list, but none are part of our spine going forward.

Lloyd is as much a part of our spine going forward as what Bradshaw is.

If it weren't for injuries, none would have played key position for the majority of the year.

An arguement for the strength of our key position stocks. I dare say Lloyd would have though.

Black and Watson are about on par this year, although Black is still a better player.

Has no doubt had a better career though I'd have Watson now.

Fletcher has played 2, maybe 3 games as a key backman - much to the disgust of people such as yourself. He is not part of our spine. Pears and Hooker/Hurley have played as our key backs, who all have 2 years or less experience.

Bradshaw kicked 75 goals last year, and has 42 so far this year. He may not be as effective this year, but he's still offered more than any of Gumbleton, Neagle, Lucas or Lloyd. Brown, as you said, is a star.

Patfull has been pretty damn reliable for them, has taken some scalps, and is an established key back at the age of 24.

As have Hurley, Pears and Hooker to a lesser extent.

Clark has been a huge bonus for them, much like Ryder for us. Our ruck positions are very similar this year.

So when you look even closer, you have this comparison:

Pears: 19 y.o. <20 games. With improvement shown, will be close to Merret next year.
Merrett: 24 y.o. >70 games.

Hooker:. Replace with Hurley - Already a better player than Patful
Patfull: 24, >60.

Watson: 24, >70. Better Player Now.
Black: 30, approx. 250.

Hille/Ryder: 28, approx. 150; injured. / 21, approx. 50. Draw
Charman/Clark: 27, >120; injured. / 21, approx. 40.

Gumbleton: 21, 5. Brown will slaughter anyone from any team IMO
Brown: 27, approx. 180

Neagle: 21, <20. Replace with Lloyd
Bradshaw: 30, >200.

That's massive difference, no matter how you look at it.
Thus, the Brisbane spine is overall more developed than ours.
End of discusssion.

Responses in bold above

probably the problem with this arguement is that it's taking a very old fashioned view of football in reffering to 2 x key backs, 2 x key forwards, a ruck and a centre man as a spine. The reality of todays footy is completely different.

As for Fletcher, I don't think you'll find any negativity from my end towards him on this board. I think he's one of the best players to play for the club. My arguement has been a generic one that we need to look at players, in particular NLM, Skipworth, Lucas, who are not good enough to take us to the next level and replace them with the likes of Houli, Neagle, Myers who whilst we don't know if they are good enough, at least have a chance to be.

Mcveigh, mcphee, Lucas, Skipworth, NLM, etc aren't going to get much better, infact most will get worse.

Probably got a bit of the track with this arguement with realtion to the thread.

Rediculous rumour anyway. Matthew Knights would have to be the worlds most brain dead human if he sacrificed the biggest job in coaching for just a chance to have a shot a the Tigers job.

[yodellinhank]

Ryder was played early becasue we where down a ruckman and there was no one else. He was dropped back to Bendigo one Laycock returned. He would not have played much if we did not have the injury probelm with the rucks.
He only played 9 games anyway so it is not like he played a full year straight away.

Earlier it was posted (not by you), that moving Ryder into the ruck was Knights' masterstroke. I thought Sheedy was always keen to play Ryder, pretty sure he was one of Sheedy's favourite players, he always spoke glowingly of him.

Davey came to us as a ready made player at 21 years old. He had played a fair bit of SANFL footy so it was expected when he was drafted that he would play straight away.Like Hocking, who others are claiming as Knights giving a young kid a go

Jetta only played 4 games under Sheedy so i dont know why he is in the conversation. He played more games under Knights (18) in 2008.Jetta was always struggling with injury under Sheedy's reign IIRC. He played round 1, got injured and simply couldn't string enough games together at Bendigo to get himself picked.



Well whos bloody problem is this ? maybe if he did not try and plug holes with used players or try and convert head cases like Zantuck, Cupido and Cole he may have had more kids to work with.
The fact that he was getting involved in who we drafted between 1998 and 2004 may also have something to do with it as well.My problem with this commonly held belief that we suffered by plugging holes and drafting the wrong players is that people never provide an alternative, even with the benefit of hindsight, except "We should have drafted more kids".

Where are these kids we should have drafted playing now? At other AFL clubs, or still in obscurity making big bucks in a country league somewhere? I'd be interested in your opinion Ant, as you may be capable to provide an informed answer to this...

It is my belief we simply lost players at a time we had late draft picks in weak drafts. From a list management point of view more trading could have been done, Sheedy has since said he should have traded more and earlier.

Sheedy was a legend and i think he still could coach another club but he has to take the his share of the blame for the situation we are currently in.And should also receive his share of the credit. I feel many posters on this forum sink the boots into Sheeds for the fact we are at a low point at the moment, when in reality football these days is a cyclic thing.

You should read Tim Watsons book "The Jigsaw Man". Some interesting stuff in it and they are quotes from people involved with the club.Its a very good read indeed.

[yaco55]

The work he's done with Marty Clarke, Michael Quinn, Cale Hooker and Tayte Pears should not be underestimated.

But that is as a Development Coach in which he has an excellent record.

A bit different to being a Head Coach.

[Ludwig van Bertstare]

Under Knight's we've had three rising star nominations Houli, Zaharaki and Pears.
The last nomination under Sheedy was Laycock in 2005

Ryder was nominated in round 1 of 2007.

[yaco55]

What is the point you are trying to make?

Simple

Knights has given lots of opportunities to the younger players on our list.

Some have been promoted on potential - instead of good form for Bendigo, but if they perform their role at AFL level, Knights will continue to play them

[M29]

The problem with Sheeds last few years was a lack of talented kids.

Lack of!? Like when he drafted Richard ****ing Cole right? Christ on a bike.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Lack of!? Like when he drafted Richard ****ing Cole right? Christ on a bike.

He got Dempsey for Richards and then the extra pick on Cole. Pretty much a free hit if you like. It was a mistake but Cole had talent.

Knights has drafted two mature guys in Atkinson and Skipworth who aren't in our best 22. Why does no one look at that now?

[Teak_Pies]

What a load of bullshit

[The Governor]

I have heard the rumour from a very good source that Tony Free has asked Matthew Knights to throw his hat into the Richmond coaching ring!!

There is a huge amount of turmoil at Essendon. My source told me that the Essendon Football Department and Essendon Fitness Staff cannot reconcile their differences whilst some senior players and junior players do not like Matthew Knight's coaching style.

Could James Hird or Neale Daniher be asked to coach Essendon in 2010?

Matthew Knights is a Peter Jackson person and from my source, Ray Horsborough and a number of Essendon employees would be very happy to see him leave Essendon at the end of the season.

When the annoucement of Ian Robson's appointment to Essendon, the phone went silent when Ray Horsborough rang up Peter Jackson to inform him of his replacement. Peter Jackson wanted to have a say in who would succeed him and he was not entitled to partipate in the selection process.

The Essendon Football Club is not a unite club at the moment, with different factions being present within all levels of the organisation.

Ian Robson could be the man to unite the factions into one united organisation.


THE GOVERNOR

[The Donners]

That reads as a very poor midfield. Dalziell was dropped for our game. Selwood a battler, Sherman is a crab. It's a bottom 4 group that.

As someone else pointed out the difference is the colossus that is Jonathon Brown.... nothing more nothing less.

In fact I'd be concerned if I was a Brisbane supporter as Brown has been battered for years, is 28 and could at any stage start to become a non factor.

In fact I would say the group of Brown, Bradshaw, Black, Power, TJ will not be a part of their next flag. Do they have replacements for all? Not in my mind.

Yep, I agree with that.

[The Donners]

I have heard the rumour from a very good source that Tony Free has asked Matthew Knights to throw his hat into the Richmond coaching ring!!

There is a huge amount of turmoil at Essendon. My source told me that the Essendon Football Department and Essendon Fitness Staff cannot reconcile their differences whilst some senior players and junior players do not like Matthew Knight's coaching style.

Could James Hird or Neale Daniher be asked to coach Essendon in 2010?

Matthew Knights is a Peter Jackson person and from my source, Ray Horsborough and a number of Essendon employees would be very happy to see him leave Essendon at the end of the season.

When the annoucement of Ian Robson's appointment to Essendon, the phone went silent when Ray Horsborough rang up Peter Jackson to inform him of his replacement. Peter Jackson wanted to have a say in who would succeed him and he was not entitled to partipate in the selection process.

The Essendon Football Club is not a unite club at the moment, with different factions being present within all levels of the organisation.

Ian Robson could be the man to unite the factions into one united organisation.


THE GOVERNOR

Thanks Hutchy.

[willie dick]

Governor, just how good is your source?

A Richmond or Essendon person?

[yaco55]

My only comment is that Knight's wouldn't be asked to throw his hat into the ring - He would be offered the job.

There is no sane reason for Knight's to go through a formal interview process - He would have to be HEAD HUNTED because once EFC got a whiff of Knight's entertaining Richmond he would have no job at Essendon.

[MarkJohnson#1]

This (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25921852-19742,00.html?from=public_rss) article should put the Knights/Richmond coaching rumour to bed (if it wasn't already fast asleep...).

[SDR223]

This (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25921852-19742,00.html?from=public_rss) article should put the Knights/Richmond coaching rumour to bed (if it wasn't already fast asleep...).

Good work. I'm getting sick of these types of rumours trying to destabilise the club. I'm assuming it's mostly from other clubs but if it is coming from someone internal they should be dealt with harshly.

[Valve Bounce]

My only comment is that Knight's wouldn't be asked to throw his hat into the ring - He would be offered the job.

There is no sane reason for Knight's to go through a formal interview process - He would have to be HEAD HUNTED because once EFC got a whiff of Knight's entertaining Richmond he would have no job at Essendon.

I agree. These rumours appear to be based on hearsay without any logical forethought. Anyway, I'm sure Hutchy will clear it all up tonight as part of his "denials of delusion" section of The Footy Show. :p