News Knights signs 2-year contract extension [Archive]

GoldenboyHird_5

29 Sep 2009, 16:46

Knights signs contract extension

http://www.essendonfc.com.au/images/spacer.gif Tuesday, 29 September 2009
Craig Rowston for essendonfc.com.au
Page 1 of 1
Essendon chief executive Ian Robson today announced that senior coach Matthew Knights has signed a two-year contract extension. The new contract will expire at the end of 2012 after what will be Knights’ fifth year at the helm of the Bombers.
“The club believes that this young Essendon squad is clearly heading in the right direction,” Robson said.
“We are confident that Matthew will continue his good work with them as we build towards our next period of sustained success
“He has taken the team into the finals in just his second year as coach and has the squad playing exciting football so this signing is great news for the club.
“We believe that the next few years will be very exciting for all Essendon supporters and this contract extension gives Matthew time to bring this young group through together.”
Click here (http://www.essendonfc.com.au/bombertv/login.asp) to watch the Matthew Knights discuss his new contract.

Knights said he was pleased the club was backing his vision for the club.

“I am very excited about the direction this football club is heading,” he said.

“We have unearthed a number of talented young players this season but there is still a lot of hard work to be done – we are under no illusion about that.

“I want to thank the club for the opportunity to keep working with the playing group to try and achieve premiership success.”

Interesting decision. Looks like the pressure valve has been released.

I think the club is quietly considering the backlash if the club fails to make finals next year.

DapperDon

29 Sep 2009, 16:46

Fantastic news.:thumbsu:

Even more fantastic will be Kelvin when he arrives:D

swifty

29 Sep 2009, 16:46

not dissapointed with that.

ghostdog

29 Sep 2009, 16:48

Approved.

abers47

29 Sep 2009, 16:49

That should take us through to our next premiership!

Tailypo

29 Sep 2009, 16:50

"Essendon chief executive Ian Robson..."

I had forgotten all about that!

I like the direction that Knights is heading in, good to see the club has faith in him too:thumbsu:.

On a side note, how many posts before this turns into a Knights/Lloyd/Fabric debate..

Amazing Bombers

29 Sep 2009, 16:51

HELL YEAH! I'm a big fan of knights.:D

Ben the Gooner

29 Sep 2009, 16:51

Fantastic news.:thumbsu:

Even more fantastic will be Kelvin when he arrives:D

I endorse this product and/or promotion.

fishguts

29 Sep 2009, 16:57

"Essendon chief executive Ian Robson..."

I had forgotten all about that!

I like the direction that Knights is heading in, good to see the club has faith in him too.

On a side note, how many posts before this turns into a Knights/Lloyd/Fabric debate..

:D

I endorse this product and/or promotion.

Yep, the anticipation of Kelvin's reply has me on the edge of my seat.

Enki

29 Sep 2009, 17:02

A particularly good move in regards to player development, recruiting and list management. Should help us long term.

The Donners

29 Sep 2009, 17:04

Congrats Knights, well deserved! :thumbsu:

They are exciting times ahead, all must remain patient.

Godzke

29 Sep 2009, 17:12

Excellent. Now focus on trade week Knightsy.

Ludwig van Bertstare

29 Sep 2009, 17:13

Good news.

The Donners

29 Sep 2009, 17:18

I endorse this product and/or promotion.

Thanks BtG...

Spikey

29 Sep 2009, 17:22

Thanks BtG...

I for one am offended by Ben and DD's behaviour. Kelvin has quite possibly 'raged' upon hearing this news and gone on a rampage throughout his house, smashing glasses and walls and stuff. And you guys are joking about it. Poor form guys.

Ben the Gooner

29 Sep 2009, 17:23

Thanks BtG...

Simpsons quote.;)

bipolarbeaR

29 Sep 2009, 17:45

I will take a while to compile my thoughts on this, mixed reaction, 85% positive.

The Donners

29 Sep 2009, 18:16

I for one am offended by Ben and DD's behaviour. Kelvin has quite possibly 'raged' upon hearing this news and gone on a rampage throughout his house, smashing glasses and walls and stuff. And you guys are joking about it. Poor form guys.

Hahaha... ahem... very true Spikey, I shall put on my serious face...

Tailypo

29 Sep 2009, 18:20

I can see why some might deem it negative:

*too soon
*unnecessary
*10.5 wins= asterisked 8th spot (:rolleyes:)
*inflexible

But I think there are more positives:

*demonstrates faith in Knights and the future of the club
*we actually did well this year to make the finals given our injuries and the sub-standard form of some senior players, IMO
*allows Knights to keep developing the list, especially given pre-season setbacks with Lloyd and Lovett, without the lingering threat of being fired should we not make the finals- there is the possibility that we could not make the 8 and still win more games!
*avoids instability next year if Knights is uncontracted and the media circus kicks in
*sends a message to the playing group that the club endorses Knights principles and methods, incluing his hard-line stance on form and indiscretions
*re: inflexible...it would surely have performance-based clauses?

If the Patrick Smith-esque rumblings about player/coach disharmony are true then I wonder what the implications of this decision could be...:o

mantis

29 Sep 2009, 19:05

Congrats Knighter, barring another hideous run with injuries next year, am looking forward to a great year.

OH & don't suspend Hurley from the H&A matches just the NAB Cup, we need him. :thumbsu:

SirJimi05

29 Sep 2009, 19:14

I can't believe they didn't consult Kelvin prior to making such an important decision.

Lance Uppercut

29 Sep 2009, 19:46

I can't believe they didn't consult Kelvin prior to making such an important decision.

:cool: haha

I think it's a brave, but good decision.

Now, if I may:

YOU HEAR THAT PHATPRICK? NOW STFU MMKAY? NO RIFT AT ESSENDON!!11

centurion

29 Sep 2009, 20:09

Oh come on, fatprick will always find things to talk about.

Not a hundred percent sure about this, think its a bit soon. But at least it brings stability to the club at the right time.

kelvin_sheedy

29 Sep 2009, 20:31

wow, jumping the gun a bit me thinks.

Either this is a genius decision or we have made a mistake of biblical proportions. Not sure why we can't wait till the end of next year. It's not as if people are banging down his door.

Tony Delaney

29 Sep 2009, 20:35

Too soon IMO but it avoids the media carrying on next year which would have been his last.

Hope we go better but think we may drop down next year. We have lost Lloyd and Lovett two very good player so to get back to where we were we need 2 players of quality. Yes we had injuries but not a heap more than a lot of clubs. Hille and Gumbleton were big ones though.

Also think that every player in the side has to want to play 100% for the coach and i have a feeling that wont be the case.

Lance Uppercut

29 Sep 2009, 20:35

Not sure why we can't wait till the end of next year.

to make a point that Essendon are committed to Knights & his coaching philosophies; and to eradicate a year of unnecessary speculation & white-anting, presumably

kelvin_sheedy

29 Sep 2009, 20:59

to make a point that Essendon are committed to Knights & his coaching philosophies; and to eradicate a year of unnecessary speculation & white-anting, presumably

Yep and if we are 2-6 next year? Do we soldier on Terry Wallace style?

If the rumours of player unrest start to manifest? If it all goes pear shaped will we have to pay him out?

Are we basically saying that results don't matter next year because we are still rebuilding and now the coach has another 2 years to get things going again.

Who cares about speculation? Just ignore it and move on like most professionals do.

bacon buster

29 Sep 2009, 21:06

good decision. avoid a media circus (like at north, richmond and port) this year. also tells any player that doesn't get along with knights, that his days are numbered. i like what knights is doing, and it's a show of support from the club. i'm happy for any player that disagrees with the way knights is running the show to **** off anyway.

good decision. and to anyone disagrees with the decision, it's not like he'd be on massive money. we'd be able to pay him out no worries, if your theories on him being shit are correct.

bacon buster

29 Sep 2009, 21:07

Who cares about speculation? Just ignore it and move on like most professionals do.

players do. especially young, impressionable players (which we have)

Smyth94

29 Sep 2009, 21:28

Can someone please give me a reason why we shouldn't have extended Knight's contract WITHOUT saying "too soon"?

Give me a real reason, not that rubbish.

The Donners

29 Sep 2009, 21:29

Yep and if we are 2-6 next year? Do we soldier on Terry Wallace style?

If the rumours of player unrest start to manifest? If it all goes pear shaped will we have to pay him out?

Are we basically saying that results don't matter next year because we are still rebuilding and now the coach has another 2 years to get things going again.

Who cares about speculation? Just ignore it and move on like most professionals do.

How many coaches have we had in the past 30 years?

Let's stick with that tradition and have faith in the administration of the most successful club in 113 years of football.

Lance Uppercut

29 Sep 2009, 21:38

If the rumours of player unrest start to manifest? If it all goes pear shaped will we have to pay him out?

see, this is the problem.

The fact that Robson & the board have appointed him for another 2 years would probably seem to indicate that in fact there isn't a significant problem with "player unrest".

Yet you draw the opposite conclusion because of your biases. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Robson knows a fair bit about bringing a team together and building success.

You might just have to acknowledge that they have a much better idea about the internal machinations of the EFC than you or any other BF poster do

Big Blow Hard

29 Sep 2009, 21:39

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y215/jbombelli/mrburns.jpg

GuzzLG

29 Sep 2009, 21:51

Can't believe the amount of garbage being thrown Knights' way. I am thrilled that he will be leading us for at least 3 more years. I would be more than happy for us to lose 10,000 members next year if all of the morons who insult our coach piss off and support another club.

bipolarbeaR

29 Sep 2009, 21:53

Yep and if we are 2-6 next year? Do we soldier on Terry Wallace style?
Whilst it does worry me a little bit Kelv, I think of these points.

1. Knighter and Wallace are completely different coaches, Knights has implemented a game plan that works perfectly for our players, Wallace coached every club the same way regardless of their players.

2. Knighter always gets response from his players, Wallace rarely did. Remember the 2008 Dreamtime match after half time?

3. Knighter couldn't get a tan if he tried.

Jaymin

29 Sep 2009, 23:08

Was anyone listening to 3AW tonight? 10 Essendon 'supporters' called. 8 of them saying it was an apalling decision to extend his contract.

Reasons:-

We are a basketcase
We have become like Richmond
We have no plan B
The Adelaide final un-did every good thing that happened during the season
Not playing Bellchambers in the final
We only won 10.5 games
We were thrashed in too many games

One of the callers was....Ron. Surprise surprise.

Enki

29 Sep 2009, 23:15

We have no plan B

So there really is a cross over audience between internet forums and radio talk show programs. Who knew?

Jaymin

29 Sep 2009, 23:55

So there really is a cross over audience between internet forums and radio talk show programs. Who knew?

I reckon most of the callers are just Kelvin using different voices.

yaco55

30 Sep 2009, 00:01

Good call.

Knights has been given 5 years to turn a rabble into a premiership team or close to it.

Colin D'Cops

30 Sep 2009, 00:07

Either this is a genius decision or we have made a mistake of biblical proportions.

Big call Kelvin. Big call.

eth-dog

30 Sep 2009, 10:47

I reckon most of the callers are just Kelvin using different voices.
Jaymin goes BANG! great call, probably true

TheDon35

30 Sep 2009, 13:02

Disagree with it but....

The best thing is that it gves him enough time to purely focus on developing this list into a premiership team, rather than a focus on short term success

BrunoV

30 Sep 2009, 13:51

BrunoV

30 Sep 2009, 13:56

Three years seems like a long time. The weels may fall off, as some people have pointed out, but it really wont be that big a problem. We have $ and can just pay him out. Like Dr Turff said this morning, there is no such thing as being stuck with a coach for the duration of his contract if you can pay him out.

That is all a little bit negative for me anyway. Knights has made his mistakes (so does every other first time coach) but he seems to be making the right decisions more often than not.

I have complete faith in Jackson-Robson to make the right call on a coach. They are only two of the best CEOs of the last few years.

daffo

30 Sep 2009, 14:01

Can someone please give me a reason why we shouldn't have extended Knight's contract WITHOUT saying "too soon"?

Give me a real reason, not that rubbish.

I'll give it a crack

- No advantage to Essendon signing him this early. No one would of chased him at the end of 2010.
- Eliminates our chance of chasing another coach at the end of next year EG Hird or if Thompson came up
- May increase the amount of in-house arguments we have had recently
- Personally I don't think he has done enough to warrent an extention. If this backfires next year (eg players wanting to walk out like Lovett) then we'll be stuck with him for two more years
- He'll be pushing Fletch out the door end of 2010.
- May spell the end to his disliked players (Houli & Jetta)

Positives
- Lets him coach worry free next year
- Give confidence to him and the young playing group

Smokin

30 Sep 2009, 14:45

see, this is the problem.

The fact that Robson & the board have appointed him for another 2 years would probably seem to indicate that in fact there isn't a significant problem with "player unrest".

Yet you draw the opposite conclusion because of your biases. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Robson knows a fair bit about bringing a team together and building success.

You might just have to acknowledge that they have a much better idea about the internal machinations of the EFC than you or any other BF poster do

this!

If there was player unrest, we had to extend Knights or sack him.

The club has made a statement. That should be bolded, and underlined, like this:

The club has made a statement.

If a certain few players are upset (they are probably not going to be there next year in any event) this sends a statement straight between the eyes. Obviously the board, football department in general and coach are on the same page. If you, as an individual are not, it's time to make a decision son.

Bomber57

30 Sep 2009, 15:18

[quote=The Donners;15892497]How many coaches have we had in the past 30 years?

Now that is funny, let me think here, (3)

Matthew Knights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Knights) 2008
Kevin Sheedy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Sheedy_%28Australian_footballer%29) 1981-2007
Barry Davis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Davis) 1978-1980

:D

King Solomon

30 Sep 2009, 16:09

Not sure why we would do it now??? What's the rush???

Big Blow Hard

30 Sep 2009, 16:42

I'll give it a crack

- No advantage to Essendon signing him this early. No one would of chased him at the end of 2010. Not neccesary, if we go well, the media will be carrying on that we should have resighned him earlier. There is risk but it is calculated.
- Eliminates our chance of chasing another coach at the end of next year EG Hird or if Thompson came up Hird has never stated he wants to coach, nor has Thompson said he wants to come back. You cant plan ahead and worry about WHAT IFs?
- May increase the amount of in-house arguments we have had recently Robson now oversseing things, and what in-house arguments?
- Personally I don't think he has done enough to warrent an extention. If this backfires next year (eg players wanting to walk out like Lovett) then we'll be stuck with him for two more years Again, a calculated risk by some of the best brains in the bussiness, much better insights into the goings on at the club, and how the players feel than any of us could ever have.
- He'll be pushing Fletch out the door end of 2010. Fletcher will retire on his own, just like Lucas and Lloyd.
- May spell the end to his disliked players (Houli & Jetta) You mean it could spell the end of players who have not improved, and are not good enough for AFL football.

Positives
- Lets him coach worry free next year
- Give confidence to him and the young playing group

You sounded a hell of a lot like you were just channelling the Mike Sheahan article, but there are my thoughts on those points.

boncer34

30 Sep 2009, 16:42

Who says we can't still sack him at the end of next year? Surely all we'd have to do is pay him out? Big deal, we can afford that.

daffo

30 Sep 2009, 16:52

You sounded a hell of a lot like you were just channelling the Mike Sheahan article, but there are my thoughts on those points.

I don't read his stuff that much, kinda disapoints me that I had the same opinions as him.

Personally I don't hate Knights as a coach but would of loved Essendon to leave the extention until mid next year.

SDR223

30 Sep 2009, 16:58

This is great news and means that we don;t have to worry about any bulls...t about his contract next year.

The fact that the coach is stable for the next few years should ensure stability for the whole team. Although I think the talk of unrest is crap, if there is any ounce of truth to these stories, it will be ironed out immediatly and players will have to move on.

Can;t see Hird being a great coach - even if he is interested, at least not within this period of time. Just becasue it worked with Voss doesn't mean every gun player can become a gun coach without doing any assistant coaching. As for Bomber Thompson - he has stated many times that when he finishes up at Geelong, coaching will be over for hime and he'll get back into the buisness with his brother.

Mike is just pissed because he misses out of a potential story next year.

eastaugh36

30 Sep 2009, 18:13

Don't agree with it. Sure,I wasn't happy with the appointment in the first place but if he starts well next year then myself and other critics will happily admit "Ï was wrong". What if we miss the finals next year and have a decent run with injury? The club will be a laughing stock. If we are travelling ok mid next year, which obviously those in charge are confident we will be, then why couldnt we have done it then?

Smyth94

30 Sep 2009, 19:24

I'll give it a crack

- No advantage to Essendon signing him this early. No one would of chased him at the end of 2010. Not relevant
- Eliminates our chance of chasing another coach at the end of next year EG Hird or if Thompson came up Thompson ain't going no where, Hird isn't ready to coach yet
- May increase the amount of in-house arguments we have had recently You got any evidence to support this?
- Personally I don't think he has done enough to warrent an extention. If this backfires next year (eg players wanting to walk out like Lovett) then we'll be stuck with him for two more years - I think making the finals in his 2nd year w/out key contributions from Hille, Lloyd, Lucas, McVeigh, Welsh + a host of other players who had injury interrupted pre-seasons
- He'll be pushing Fletch out the door end of 2010. LOL - Our backline is one of the youngest in the league and Knights is going to get rid of our most experienced defender?
- May spell the end to his disliked players (Houli & Jetta) - You got evidence to support this?

Answers above.

Your reasons were pretty poor really...

Ya Can't See Me!

30 Sep 2009, 23:16

Mike asks why? i ask why not? Cleary they are rewarding for turning the club around in the space of two years from a clearly struggling bottom four side to a side playing finals. New Essendon chief executive Ian Robson told the website Essendon's young player group is going in the right direction. Mike's comment was "Yeah? Isn't that the direction all young squads go?" Well id say have a good look at Melbourne and Fremantle Mike, clearly Melbourne and Fremantle are not going in the right direction and in the case of melbourne are losing there better players mainly becasue they see no progression or improvement in the club.

Knights come in with a plan and has slowly but surely devolped that gameplan over the last two years to make it one of the highly rated and succesfully ones going around he stuck with through thrashing and now Essendon are reaping the rewards of it. He cleaned out all of the uneccasary fringe players and has brought in fast exciting bunch of youngsters over the past two years, his drafting and trading has been spot on.

"But, winning 10 of 23 games this year (one draw) hardly is stunning progress. Particularly when the season ended with a 96-point loss in the club's only final" well mike considering the year before we struggled to win a game (including a streak of 8-9 loses??) 10 wins (including ones against top four sides collingwood and Stkilda) of course it is great progress!!! In two years he has managed to build a game plan and a team and take them from the bottom to playing in september.

He also goes on to say about Hird coaching Essendon in the near future and that he will now be unable to till 2013 but do ou really think as good as he is that he can just come back after 3 years out of the game and coach just like that, also a Malthouse/Buckley deal could be struck and would give Hird the proper amount of time to be involved with the group befroe he took over. Cause lets face it the team has dramitcally change since his depature! I think Mike you must be struggling for ideas for articles mate cause i think the point of this article is in fact "unecessary"

Big Blow Hard

1 Oct 2009, 10:52

Knight Ryders

1 Oct 2009, 11:10

Sheedy was great for the club. Took us from a surburban team to an out and out force in the AFL (plus 4 premierships:thumbsu:), but his time was up probably around 2004. I strongly feel that Sheedy coached for himself the last few years, trying to hold on grimly to a job and club that he loved. It's human nature.

I felt very melancholy when Knights was appointed but to his credit, I think he has done a very good job to date. We have performed above expectations and it's the first time I've been really excited about our club since 2001. We are on the way up and a lot of this is to do with Knights and his support staff. Everyone needs to remember we achieved 10.5 wins with a very significant injury list for most of the season and players with less than perfect pre-seasons. Hawthorn, last years premiers, were unable to make finals with a very similar injury list.

He deserves his chance and I can only think that the club wants stability for the young group we've got, instead of all the Hird speculation that would have occurred next year if Knights hadn't been signed on an extension. I'm definitely not convinced that Hirdy wants to coach - I would have thought he'd have more of a role to play in management at Essendon than the coaching sides given his well known intelligence and business acumen.

Re the punters who have said Houli didn't get a fair go, he was given his chance and he took it only to get injured and crook. He'll get another chance next year if he puts in on the track like he apparently does. Jetta obviously isn't working hard enough and needs to step up, why else would a Irishmen get a go ahead of him? Fletcher would have a ticket to play as long as the body lets him.

sen entertainment bloke

1 Oct 2009, 11:14

Makes me feel better so that's a pretty good reason in its self.

TheDon35

1 Oct 2009, 12:38

Ben the Gooner

1 Oct 2009, 12:45

SDR223

1 Oct 2009, 12:56

Anyone who doesn't believe there's been an element of unrest from some of the players towards Knights is dillusional.

There is always going to be a small element of unrest in every football club. Alot of players not getting games or nearing the end of their careers at any club may cause a little bit of unrest towards the coach.
There was even an element of unrest at Geelong when Thompson took over.

My point was that It's rubbish to suggest there is a larger amount of unrest at Essendon toward Knights than there is at any other club. If there was, why did the board sign him up again.

Lovett was obviously disgruntled about being put up for trade last year and possibly Llyod and Lucas were disappointed that their careers finished (Although I would be very suprised if Lloyd or Lucas both being great club man and good blokes would be behind any unrest) but the majority of the team have blossomed under Knights and have been given alot of opportunity.

The signing of Knights for another 2 years should expose any further unrest with players either being traded or delisted.

caboose

1 Oct 2009, 19:06

It's official.

The club has lost the plot. :thumbsd:

stay true

2 Oct 2009, 03:18

If you want a good laugh, try following Essendon FC's official facebook page. If you thought some of the comments here were ridiculous, you should read some of the posts about Knights by tghe great unwashed on Facebook.

One stupid bitch even said, and I roughly quote from memory, " Mattew Knights has pushed out Lloyd and Lovett, and it is well known he is intent on trading all the Koori players from the club, which is half the team"

Not only is he a shit coach :rolleyes:, apparently he is racist as well, lol. :eek:
Haha tell me about it. That facebook thing is the worst thing the club could have done. Full of monday experts and complete **** wits constantly shit talking the club and the coach.

As for Knights' contract extension, I struggle to see how it's anything but good news. He's doing a good job and it's not like he doesn't deserve it.

Pevers-Legend

2 Oct 2009, 14:04

It's official.

The club has lost the plot. :thumbsd:

Why? Rather than make a generic comment a 10 year old could make, why don't you explain why the "Club has lost the plot"?

caboose

2 Oct 2009, 18:17

Why? Rather than make a generic comment a 10 year old could make, why don't you explain why the "Club has lost the plot"?

Because it was almost impossible to know where to begin.

But, as a starting list:

- Because, contrary to the pre-pubescent ravings on here, Knights has been a bog ordinary coach and has done little to prove to many supporters like me that he is the person best qualified to continue to coach the team long term.

- Because he has won only 18 of 45 games, including coaching the club to its worst-ever finals loss.

- Because, even if you are of the view he should ultimately be reappointed, it makes almost no sense to do it now.

- Because there's now a perception rightly or wrongly that there's growing player unrest under his leadership and he can not seem to put this to bed.

- Because his relationship with (and treatment of) Lovett seems to have been an absolute shambles from start to finish, and his ability to generally manage senior players has now been made to look even worse by what happened with his handling of Lucas and Lloyd.

- Because the 'gameplan' we use, quite frankly, will never win us a premiership. Kamikaze running and handballing looks great when it comes off but, as his coaching record already suggests, we'll be lucky if that happens successfully even 50% of the time.

- Because his media performances as the club's no.1 spokesman and salesman are average, at best.

- Because it significantly diminishes the possibility that James Hird will ever coach the club - and that's something I'm sure far more Essendon supporters (and potential new members) than not want to see happen.

- Because it increases the chances of the club losing a considerable sum of money by being forced to pay Knights out at some point. (Hilarious that some people on this thread are saying this is a non-issue. Especially when they're in some cases the same people who accuse Lovett of wanting too much money.)

- And because it continues a pattern of poor decision-making at upper echelons of the club that began at about the time of the bungled handling of Sheedy's departure and continued soon after with the disgraceful leaking of information from Hardwick's interview.

Is that good enough? Or should I rephrase this so only persons under the age of 10 can understand? :rolleyes:

eth-dog

2 Oct 2009, 18:46

Because it was almost impossible to know where to begin.

But, as a starting list:

- Because, contrary to the pre-pubescent ravings on here, Knights has been a bog ordinary coach and has done little to prove to many supporters like me that he is the person best qualified to continue to coach the team long term.
How? he has cleaned out the dead-wood and started building up youth, something a lot of coaches wouldn't have the guts to do. He is playing a risk-taking game where it is very easy to make mistakes. Once his kids develop there will be less errors and we will be a force

- Because he has won only 18 of 45 games, including coaching the club to its worst-ever finals loss.
explained above

- Because, even if you are of the view he should ultimately be reappointed, it makes almost no sense to do it now.
agreed

- Because there's now a perception rightly or wrongly that there's growing player unrest under his leadership and he can not seem to put this to bed.
says who? you? Phatprick Smith?

- Because his relationship with (and treatment of) Lovett seems to have been an absolute shambles from start to finish, and his ability to generally manage senior players has now been made to look even worse by what happened with his handling of Lucas and Lloyd.
He tried to fix Lovett, but Andy didn't fit into the culture which he set, and thus will be traded. Don't make this Lloyd and Lucas s*** up please

- Because the 'gameplan' we use, quite frankly, will never win us a premiership. Kamikaze running and handballing looks great when it comes off but, as his coaching record already suggests, we'll be lucky if that happens successfully even 50% of the time.
Works for Geelong, why not us?

- Because his media performances as the club's no.1 spokesman and salesman are average, at best.
please STFU, this is not true

- Because it significantly diminishes the possibility that James Hird will ever coach the club - and that's something I'm sure far more Essendon supporters (and potential new members) than not want to see happen.
The Hird argument. If Jimmy wanted the job, he would have gone for it.

- Because it increases the chances of the club losing a considerable sum of money by being forced to pay Knights out at some point. (Hilarious that some people on this thread are saying this is a non-issue. Especially when they're in some cases the same people who accuse Lovett of wanting too much money.)
Lucky the Club won't have to pay him out.

- And because it continues a pattern of poor decision-making at upper echelons of the club that began at about the time of the bungled handling of Sheedy's departure and continued soon after with the disgraceful leaking of information from Hardwick's interview.
Another imaginary thing that caboose has made up. Hardwicks interview was a computer mistake, not the clubs fault.

Is that good enough? Or should I rephrase this so only persons under the age of 10 can understand? :rolleyes:
answers in bold

caboose

2 Oct 2009, 19:58

- How? he has cleaned out the dead-wood and started building up youth, something a lot of coaches wouldn't have the guts to do. He is playing a risk-taking game where it is very easy to make mistakes. Once his kids develop there will be less errors and we will be a force

What absolute tosh. Any coach who inherited the same list he did would have cleaned out some of the older players and concentrated on bringing a number of younger players through. That's a no-brainer. Albeit to varying degrees, it's what every club and every coach does, for Pete's sake. Suggesting he has done anything revolutionary in that respect is a complete laugh. As for his alleged nous in imposing on us a risk-taking game, again, there's nothing particularly special about it. Even you admit only a few sentences below that it's essentially based on Geelong's game. The fundamental problem is that, in two years, we've won only 40% of matches with it - and were so hopelessly outclassed in most of our last six or seven games in '09 that it's bloody hard to argue we've progressed any further over the last two years than we would have if someone else had been appointed or Sheedy had stayed.

- says who? you? Phatprick Smith?

If you're going to adopt that sort of attitude, you might just as easily ask yourself the same set of questions.

- He tried to fix Lovett, but Andy didn't fit into the culture which he set, and thus will be traded. Don't make this Lloyd and Lucas s*** up please

He tried to fix Lovett? Even ignoring the completely condescending inference about Lovett there, the efforts to which you're referring re Knights only came after he tried to dump Lovett from the club in the first place. And what a fat lot of good that apparently did in any case. Losing a player of Lovett's class and ability from the side is an unmitigated disaster, make no mistake about it.

As for Lloyd and Lucas, what am I making up? Regardless of whether or not you think Knights did the right thing by either of these great champions of the club, I don't see how anyone can convincingly argue these 'retirements' were handled anything other than poorly. Lloyd's press conference (when Sheeds was thanked and Knights wasn't, and when Knights was completely sidelined and Lloyd chose to sit next to Jackson instead) said everything that needed to be said.

- Works for Geelong, why not us?

Err, you don't think you've missed something here? Like the word 'kamikaze', perhaps? Geelong's game is based on a high level of skill. The kind of skill level we don't even remotely possess yet. Despite Knights' grand assurances when he was appointed that greatly increasing our players' skills was a massive priority for him.

- please STFU, this is not true

What the ..?

- The Hird argument. If Jimmy wanted the job, he would have gone for it.

How exactly? You expect him to have applied for the coaching job at the same time as he was still playing for the club, do you?! Laughable.

- Lucky the Club won't have to pay him out.

Please read what is written before criticising it. I did not say the club would necessarily pay him out; I said it increased the chances. Which is undoubtedly true, when they're effectively giving 3 more years to someone whose worth as a top-level coach is still quite unproven.

- Another imaginary thing that caboose has made up. Hardwicks interview was a computer mistake, not the clubs fault.

So the story of Hardwick telling the board that the club wasn't on track to make the finals making its way into multiple media outlets was just some figment of my imagination, was it? Yeah, ok, pull the other one. At least you had the decency not to dispute the point that the handling of Sheedy's departure was a total embarrassment, which is something.

Answers also in bold.

eth-dog

2 Oct 2009, 21:24

What absolute tosh. Any coach who inherited the same list he did would have cleaned out some of the older players and concentrated on bringing a number of younger players through. That's a no-brainer. Albeit to varying degrees, it's what every club and every coach does, for Pete's sake. Suggesting he has done anything revolutionary in that respect is a complete laugh. As for his alleged nous in imposing on us a risk-taking game, again, there's nothing particularly special about it. Even you admit only a few sentences below that it's essentially based on Geelong's game. The fundamental problem is that, in two years, we've won only 40% of matches with it - and were so hopelessly outclassed in most of our last six or seven games in '09 that it's bloody hard to argue we've progressed any further over the last two years than we would have if someone else had been appointed or Sheedy had stayed.

Maybe, we don't know. What he did is give our team a simple game plan to follow, and thus giving them confidence in their own ability. he's done well considering

He tried to fix Lovett? Even ignoring the completely condescending inference about Lovett there, the efforts to which you're referring re Knights only came after he tried to dump Lovett from the club in the first place. And what a fat lot of good that apparently did in any case. Losing a player of Lovett's class and ability from the side is an unmitigated disaster, make no mistake about it.
so a guy who went in and out of games and who was very lazy is an unmitigated disaster? get a clue

As for Lloyd and Lucas, what am I making up? Regardless of whether or not you think Knights did the right thing by either of these great champions of the club, I don't see how anyone can convincingly argue these 'retirements' were handled anything other than poorly. Lloyd's press conference (when Sheeds was thanked and Knights wasn't, and when Knights was completely sidelined and Lloyd chose to sit next to Jackson instead) said everything that needed to be said.
They both went on their terms, so I don't see the problem with that? please, they chose to retire, so that's that. they wanted to retire, it was past them. nothing to do with Knights

Err, you don't think you've missed something here? Like the word 'kamikaze', perhaps? Geelong's game is based on a high level of skill. The kind of skill level we don't even remotely possess yet. Despite Knights' grand assurances when he was appointed that greatly increasing our players' skills was a massive priority for him.
Skill isn't a thing you can fix in a short amount of time, it takes a long time to fix skill errors, watch and we'll improve again

How exactly? You expect him to have applied for the coaching job at the same time as he was still playing for the club, do you?! Laughable.
Everyone knew he was retiring, he had announced it ffs, he could've made the move, BUT he didn't

So the story of Hardwick telling the board that the club wasn't on track to make the finals making its way into multiple media outlets was just some figment of my imagination, was it? Yeah, ok, pull the other one. At least you had the decency not to dispute the point that the handling of Sheedy's departure was a total embarrassment, which is something.
The reason Hardwick didn't get the job is because his laptop failed and had to use an unfamiliar one and he stuffed up his presentation because he was unfamiliar with it. get over it.

answers in bold again

caboose

2 Oct 2009, 22:34

Maybe, we don't know. What he did is give our team a simple game plan to follow, and thus giving them confidence in their own ability. he's done well considering

"He's done well"? "Considering"? Uh? Considering what exactly?

so a guy who went in and out of games and who was very lazy is an unmitigated disaster? get a clue

Lovett has some weaknesses, sure. But the loss of his explosive pace and excellent skills will really hurt us. If you don't believe that, you're kidding yourself.

They both went on their terms, so I don't see the problem with that? please, they chose to retire, so that's that. they wanted to retire, it was past them. nothing to do with Knights

"Nothing to do with Knights"? Bwahaha.

Skill isn't a thing you can fix in a short amount of time, it takes a long time to fix skill errors, watch and we'll improve again

I've watched this point particularly closely for two years since Knights first vowed he would markedly improve our skills, because I was annoyed at how bad the skill level was in the last couple of seasons under Sheeds and therefore heartened by Knights' comments. But they have turned out to be nothing more than a pipedream so far and, other than for players like Jobe and Dustin, I'm more frustrated than ever at the basic errors many of our players still make in most games. You might cling to some hope that we'll improve; I meanwhile am basing my thoughts on the practical evidence of what has happened under his watch so far.

Everyone knew he was retiring, he had announced it ffs, he could've made the move, BUT he didn't

You honestly think Hird was in any position to apply for the coaching job in 2007? Or that he would have been in the right frame of mind to begin senior AFL coaching immediately upon his retirement as a player? That's one of the most absurd things I've ever heard. And yet you're telling me to 'get a clue'; go figure.

The reason Hardwick didn't get the job is because his laptop failed and had to use an unfamiliar one and he stuffed up his presentation because he was unfamiliar with it. get over it.

I'm not sure why it is you've headed off on such a tangent or what it is you're even trying to argue or sermonise to me about here. But, whatever it is, you've somehow interpreted my comments about what happened after Hardwick's interview as some sort of complaint from me that he didn't get the job. In so doing, you've totally missed the point. My argument was that someone leaked details of what happened at Hardwick's interview to the media. It wasn't a comment about the merits of whether he got the job or not; it was a statement about the way the process was conducted. The basic right of an applicant for the job to expect privacy and confidentiality was abused, and whoever was responsible not only displayed an extreme lack of professionalism but also a gobsmacking lack of respect for the individual concerned.

....

Tailypo

2 Oct 2009, 22:53

*Judging by an article he wrote for the Record + his speech at the B&F, Knights will be gradually adding to this so-called kamikaze gameplan, placing emphasis on physical and defensive aspects. The running gameplan is the foundation as it enables him to utilise our strongest asset- speed. I don't think the gameplan can be held against him.

*Safe to say that the club and its officials etc have more information and knowledge about tensions and 'unrest', and would have weighed up the disadvantages that seem so glaring and indictable to certain posters, and would make an educated, informed opinion based upon this.

SDR223

2 Oct 2009, 23:09

I can;t believe that the brilliant buisness skills and football nous of people like Peter Jackson and Ian Robson who have been involved in great success's as CEO's of football clubs, and are involved in the day to day operations of football clubs, knowing better than most people
what KPI's need to be achieved by coaches in order to develop and built a strong team, can make these sort of decisions.

Kong

3 Oct 2009, 14:17

That's enough.

No more off-topic personal abuse. Back on track.

UpTheGuts

27 Apr 2010, 13:15

If you all loved him only a year ago, stick with him!

He'll get there, plenty of talent that is still very young at Windy Hill. Patience, grasshoppers!

The Donners

27 Apr 2010, 13:52

Because it was almost impossible to know where to begin.

But, as a starting list:

- Because, contrary to the pre-pubescent ravings on here, Knights has been a bog ordinary coach and has done little to prove to many supporters like me that he is the person best qualified to continue to coach the team long term.

- Because he has won only 18 of 45 games, including coaching the club to its worst-ever finals loss.

- Because, even if you are of the view he should ultimately be reappointed, it makes almost no sense to do it now.

- Because there's now a perception rightly or wrongly that there's growing player unrest under his leadership and he can not seem to put this to bed.

- Because his relationship with (and treatment of) Lovett seems to have been an absolute shambles from start to finish, and his ability to generally manage senior players has now been made to look even worse by what happened with his handling of Lucas and Lloyd.

- Because the 'gameplan' we use, quite frankly, will never win us a premiership. Kamikaze running and handballing looks great when it comes off but, as his coaching record already suggests, we'll be lucky if that happens successfully even 50% of the time.

- Because his media performances as the club's no.1 spokesman and salesman are average, at best.

- Because it significantly diminishes the possibility that James Hird will ever coach the club - and that's something I'm sure far more Essendon supporters (and potential new members) than not want to see happen.

- Because it increases the chances of the club losing a considerable sum of money by being forced to pay Knights out at some point. (Hilarious that some people on this thread are saying this is a non-issue. Especially when they're in some cases the same people who accuse Lovett of wanting too much money.)

- And because it continues a pattern of poor decision-making at upper echelons of the club that began at about the time of the bungled handling of Sheedy's departure and continued soon after with the disgraceful leaking of information from Hardwick's interview.

Is that good enough? Or should I rephrase this so only persons under the age of 10 can understand? :rolleyes:

Thought I'd quote this so we could re-visit it.

The Donners

27 Apr 2010, 13:54

If you all loved him only a year ago, stick with him!

He'll get there, plenty of talent that is still very young at Windy Hill. Patience, grasshoppers!

Soft pea-hearted player, ditto coach.

WeAreEssendon

27 Apr 2010, 14:09

Andrew_5

27 Apr 2010, 14:32

Caboose, Kelvin and Eastaugh were on the money.

I could never understand why someone would get a contract extension when there's absolutely no need. It's not like he's going to have people knocking on his door. It would not have made any difference whatsoever if we succeeded and held off till the end of this year, none.

It's backfiring big time on the club and Peter Jackson has a lot to answer for.

While I agree with you, I'm thinking there might of been a clause in his contract to say if Knight's made the finals there would be an extension..
If that was the case, would they put in another clause if he never did the year after??

Kong

27 Apr 2010, 14:45

Caboose, Kelvin and Eastaugh were on the money.Of course you'd say that.I could never understand why someone would get a contract extension when there's absolutely no need. It's not like he's going to have people knocking on his door. It would not have made any difference whatsoever if we succeeded and held off till the end of this year, none.Despite being optimistic about Knights throughout all of this (with the exception of his actual appointment in the first place), I agree that the contract extension was extremely premature. If it hadn't have occurred, he'd be under intense pressure right now, and rightfully so.It's backfiring big time on the club and Peter Jackson has a lot to answer for.It's round 5.

If things are just as bad by Round 11, I'd expect the appropriate people (led by Evans and Hamilton) to sit down and say "this isn't working. It's time to move on."

Valve Bounce

27 Apr 2010, 15:11

Of course you'd say that.Despite being optimistic about Knights throughout all of this (with the exception of his actual appointment in the first place), I agree that the contract extension was extremely premature. If it hadn't have occurred, he'd be under intense pressure right now, and rightfully so.It's round 5.

If things are just as bad by Round 11, I'd expect the appropriate people (led by Evans and Hamilton) to sit down and say "this isn't working. It's time to move on."

If things are as bad by Round 11, half of us would have flown to Sydney and jumped off the Bridge. :eek:

Andrew_5

27 Apr 2010, 15:20

If things are as bad by Round 11, half of us would have flown to Sydney and jumped off the Bridge. :eek:

and the other half would be on BigFooty impolding...

rines

27 Apr 2010, 15:37

Hopefully Kelvin_Sheedy is in his new guise and can read this thread again. Along with Caboose and several others.

They were spot on then, put their opinions in writing.. got lambasted for it and are now having to sit here with a sinking feeling.

Was a woeful decision then and still is..

What do we learn in round 11? by then we will most likely be about 2-9 or 3-8.. does that take pressure off knights? do we wait until we are 4-18? I mean seriously it is not just he wins and losses.. its the way we are playing. Those rumours of player rifts seem a little more real now. A contract extension did not have the effect of making him safer it actually increases the pressure because now we have made two bad calls.. appointing him and keeping him.

Kong

27 Apr 2010, 15:45

What do we learn in round 11? by then we will most likely be about 2-9 or 3-8.. does that take pressure off knights? do we wait until we are 4-18? I mean seriously it is not just he wins and losses.. its the way we are playing.Things could start to turn around with a win against a side playing no better than us this weekend, and by Round 11 we could have really perfected whatever it is we're trying to do. We could be 6 and 5, for all we know. I really liked what I saw for two and a half quarters against Geelong, and if we could replicate that for four quarters every week, we'd do a lot of damage.

Of course that is all a near-best case scenario, and me trying to be optimistic in a dark and depressing period.

However I think we owe it to our side to at least wait until the half-way point, to see if our players can at least pick up the basics, and hopefully, dramatically improve.

As I said, if things are just as bad by the half-way mark, and unfortunately it wouldn't surprise me, that's when we need to have "the talk".

All my opinion, of course.

rines

27 Apr 2010, 15:55

Yeah fair call whomb. I guess I always prefer, in all aspects of my life, to jump in early and stop the rot. To me all it does is give our club another 6 weeks of intense media pressure.. articles with bad press etc etc.

Bit like the terry wallace fiasco last year.

Much better to make the call earlier, free the players up from the pressure and the growing/mounting tension they clearly have with the coach.

Gives the caretaker (most likely?) coach a decent run. We can try to put some players in the correct positions, like houli in the guts/wing or hf.

Essentially we can start to get the positive energy flowing. Otherwise it will be this same depression and arguments for another 6 weeks.

And we may well win against hawthorn.. but does that really change things? A side who has to ruck Luke Hodge? So then its the next week and the next and so on.

Look at the line up (done in another thread too)
Hawks (maybe)
Port (at home - depends on which port shows up but unlikely)
Rich (if we lose this then surely it ends here)
Doggies (don't even dream about it)
Swans (at SCG - keep away from the danger zone)
Geel (maybe if they blow the whistle after we score the first goal)
Hawks (maybe if they haven't got their list back but don't count on it)
Adel (at aami - our best chance of a win except it involves travel. Don't put your house on it)

Do you really want our club going through another 8 weeks of this BS to sit at a likely 2-11?

Willow76

27 Apr 2010, 15:56

Things could start to turn around with a win against a side playing no better than us this weekend, and by Round 11 we could have really perfected whatever it is we're trying to do. We could be 6 and 5, for all we know. I really liked what I saw for two and a half quarters against Geelong, and if we could replicate that for four quarters every week, we'd do a lot of damage.

Of course that is all a near-best case scenario, and me trying to be optimistic in a dark and depressing period.

However I think we owe it to our side to at least wait until the half-way point, to see if our players can at least pick up the basics, and hopefully, dramatically improve.

As I said, if things are just as bad by the half-way mark, and unfortunately it wouldn't surprise me, that's when we need to have "the talk".

All my opinion, of course.

I agree and you never know what is around the corner but perusing our fixture a moment ago our best case scenairo is win 5 more games for the year.

6 Hawks- loss
7 Port- win
8 St Kilda-loss
9 Richmond- win
10 Dogs- loss
11 Swans- loss
12 Cats- loss
13 Hawks- loss
14 Crows- loss
15 Demons- win
16 Eagles- win
17 North- win
18 Saints- loss
19 Blues- loss
20- Pies- loss
21- Lions- loss
22- Dogs-loss

And to be honest I cannot realistically see a 3 game streak mid season but figure we will lose one of those and sneak a win against one of the blues lions or hawks

rines

27 Apr 2010, 16:04

you really think we can beat port willo?

If they port that just beat St K turns up we are in trouble. I guess they don't travel well which is in our advantage.

I give us about a 55-60% chance in this..

Also North might push us but otherwise agree with your list.

4-5 wins doesn't exactly speak premiership does it?!!

Towno78

27 Apr 2010, 16:19

rines

27 Apr 2010, 16:40

LOL, isn't this the optimists thread. "Likely to be 2-11", "our best case scenairo is win 5 more games for the year."

Things aren't good at the mo, but if either of these are close then I'll eat my hat.

Ok.. then you go through our season.. put your predictions in writing..

what kind of hat do you wear? Hope it isn't expensive cause your going to be eating.

When we see your prediction game by game and why.. then we put a wager on it..

thecotch

27 Apr 2010, 16:42

I agree and you never know what is around the corner but perusing our fixture a moment ago our best case scenairo is win 5 more games for the year.

6 Hawks- loss
7 Port- win
8 St Kilda-loss
9 Richmond- win
10 Dogs- loss
11 Swans- loss
12 Cats- loss
13 Hawks- loss
14 Crows- loss
15 Demons- win
16 Eagles- win
17 North- win
18 Saints- loss
19 Blues- loss
20- Pies- loss
21- Lions- loss
22- Dogs-loss

And to be honest I cannot realistically see a 3 game streak mid season but figure we will lose one of those and sneak a win against one of the blues lions or hawks

Dude, with all due respect I've actually pencilled our first win against the bombers. We've shown a fair bit in large patches this year and only a 20 min period here and there has bought about our downfall. I don't think you can beat the demons on current form either just quietly.

rines

27 Apr 2010, 16:46

Dude, with all due respect I've actually pencilled our first win against the bombers. We've shown a fair bit in large patches this year and only a 20 min period here and there has bought about our downfall. I don't think you can beat the demons on current form either just quietly.

Mate don't... we CAN beat you.. we HAVE to beat you.. oh please let us beat you..

we need to beat someone.. Liked your first quarter against Freo though.. but you are young and I think we will match up ok against you. Time will tell.. you definitely have had the wood over us past couple of seasons.

And melbourne.. maybe I just couldn't bring myself to admit they have gone past us.. I'm still trying to hold my confidence together..

stugots

27 Apr 2010, 16:50

However I think we owe it to our side to at least wait until the half-way point, to see if our players can at least pick up the basics, and hopefully, dramatically improve.

As I said, if things are just as bad by the half-way mark, and unfortunately it wouldn't surprise me, that's when we need to have "the talk".

im sure many would agree with this, its to early to neck knights now but give him till mid season as by then we will have faced off against fellow strugglers in hawks, port & richmond.

if we happen to lose 2 of those 3 & the rest of the games go as expected then sionara, thanks for coming but now gtf out of here.

like many i traveled a fair way to watch that abysmal effort on sunday & dont know what anyone else thinks, but there was a sense of resignation amongst bomber supporters when leaving the ground - no real anger or surprise, was pretty ****ed up to be honest, & i dont want to feel that way again for a while when leaving a football match.

Ludwig van Bertstare

27 Apr 2010, 18:30

Good news.

You idiot.

Skeeta Olly

27 Apr 2010, 19:13

the PILL

27 Apr 2010, 19:50

you idiot.

lulz

yaco55

28 Apr 2010, 00:29

Some of you need to toughen up.

It is not a 'God Given' right to expect continual success.

I started supporting the Dons in the early 70's and it was a barren period until the 1980's.

We are lucky to support a well run, financially viable club that has achieved the most success of any club in the AFL.

Ludwig van Bertstare

28 Apr 2010, 00:31

yaco55

28 Apr 2010, 00:46

Does this mean we should accept mediocrity on the field?

It happens in every club for a period of time.

We are lucky that it hasn't happened for long periods at Essendon.:)

lamaros

28 Apr 2010, 01:13

This thread has too much hyperbole.

I think Knights has a lot to improve still - he needs to give up on the way we are moving the ball out of the half back - but I still think he deserves the chance to see if he can make the necessary changes. You only have to look at Harvey and Bailey this year to see how quickly a coach can go from the sack heap to being in charge of a performing team.

And seeing how no one is being realistic, let me remind you:

Best Case:

6 Hawks- win
7 Port- win
8 St Kilda- win
9 Richmond- win
10 Dogs- win
11 Swans- win
12 Cats- win
13 Hawks- win
14 Crows- win
15 Demons- win
16 Eagles- win
17 North- win
18 Saints- win
19 Blues- win
20- Pies- win
21- Lions- win
22- Dogs- win

Worst Case:

6 Hawks- loss
7 Port- loss
8 St Kilda- loss
9 Richmond- loss
10 Dogs- loss
11 Swans- loss
12 Cats- loss
13 Hawks- loss
14 Crows- loss
15 Demons- loss
16 Eagles- loss
17 North- loss
18 Saints- loss
19 Blues- loss
20- Pies- loss
21- Lions- loss
22- Dogs- loss

I think we will most likely be sitting at 4-7 after 11, but on the good side I'd say 6-5, and the bad 3-8.

2-11 and I think Knights will lose his job.