Mega Thread The 2015 Buckley coaching megathread

[MISFITS]

As Leigh Matthews said, Malthouse had a game plan to get you into the finals but not to win one. The boundary led reverse induction oven plan. Put a clog in the forward line which was a great innovation, although we can't really say where the innovation came from despite Mick claiming it. Apparently it was the Spartans, which immediately sounded sus as dogs' balls. Was it a support coach, lessons gleaned from Collingwood funded sports trips overseas or Mick burying his nose in the annals of the ancients? Probably the latter, sounds plausible.

Are we talking about the same L.Matthews?
I seem to recall Matthews labelling nothing but praise to Malhouse and Collingwood back in 2010 and 2011!
He quoted that 'this Collingwood team should go in to win multiple premierships!'
He also suggested in 2011 that Buckley should do the honourable thing and step aside for Malthouse to continue coaching Collingwood!

 

[Kilmo]

Half of the 2002 GF team Mick inherited in 1999 (11). In addition we traded out 3 best 22 players: Paul Williams, Mal Michael and Sav Rocca. Retiring greats included another 4: Brown, Crossisca, Monkhorst and Richardson (form). Add the rookies and we're talking 52% 'scrubbed' in reality over 3 years.

But let's not make excuses now given where Mick stepped in. He started from the bottom with a charmed run and enjoyed some pure plunder in the 2000 draft in securing Didak with pick 3, Clement and Holland for 8 & 39 and then stuffed that move by trading out Michael and pick 22 for Molloy. In 2001 outside of Swan that was a cluster****. Then in 2002 we have the other fat-arse wombats like Woewodin for pick 14, Nick Davis leaving for Bo Nixon. Some of the list and trade interventions he made were spun out of the purest s**t.

Let's also not forget the father-son advantage of the Clokes and Shaws as 3rd rounds. Mick inherited a very good list, scrubbed no more than most teams and had the opportunity to trade in very good players in the draft. That's kind of the point of the competition, to allow struggling teams to rise back up quickly by way of early draft picks for finishing low.

Buckley on the other hand started a/. in an 18 rather than 16 team competition b/. at the top of the ladder curve and consequently with lower picks c/. during the period of expansion clubs and therefore lower picks than usual d/. inherited a poisonous elements in the player group thanks to Mick's petulance and e/. needs the latitude that Mick was given.

Here's the 1999 team.

Damien Adkins
Craig Anderson
Rupert Betheras (2002 GF)
Gavin Brown (retired)
Nathan Buckley (2002 GF)
Scott Burns (2002 GF)
Gavin Crossisca (retired)
Scott Crow
Nick Davis (2002 GF)
Glenn Freeborn (2002 GF)
Brad Fuller
Michael Gardiner
Luke Godden
Craig Jacotine
Clinton King
Ben Kinnear
Troy Kirwen
Tyson Lane
Paul Licuria (2002 GF)
Tarkyn Lockyer (2002 GF)
Alex McDonald
Mal Michael (traded)
Damian Monkhorst (retired)
Brad Oborne
Ricky Olerenshaw
Mark Orchard
Stephen Patterson
Simon Prestigiacomo (2002 GF)
Frank Raso
Mark Richardson (form)
Anthony Rocca (2002 GF)
Sav Rocca (traded)
Andrew Schauble
Heath Scotland (2002 GF)
Jeremy Sharpen
Brad Smith
Jamie Tape
Chris Tarrant (2002 GF)
Brent Tuckey
Cameron Venables
Lee Walker
James Wasley
Shane Watson
Jason Wild
Paul Williams (traded)
Nick Wilson

Agree with most if not all of this, but Sav Rocca was delisted, not traded.

He was then picked by North at around pick 30 if memory serves and went on to play over 100 games for them which gives an idea of his trade value.

 

[Kilmo]

Are we talking about the same L.Matthews?
I seem to recall Matthews labelling nothing but praise to Malhouse and Collingwood back in 2010 and 2011!
He quoted that 'this Collingwood team should go in to win multiple premierships!'
He also suggested in 2011 that Buckley should do the honourable thing and step aside for Malthouse to continue coaching Collingwood!

No in fact it was Leigh Matthews who was one of the few who kept a cool head after '10 and reminded everyone that dynasties are recognised in retrospect. And he would know about dynasties.

[url]http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2010-10-04/lethal-warns-against-dynasty-talk/2283848[/url]

 

[ksardog]

No in fact it was Leigh Matthews who was one of the few who kept a cool head after '10 and reminded everyone that dynasties are recognised in retrospect. And he would know about dynasties.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2010-10-04/lethal-warns-against-dynasty-talk/2283848

He also suggested buckley not take over in 2012, this was half way through 2011 when he said this on 3AW. His thoughts were why would u want to change things when everything is going so well. So that was after his quote about dynastys.

 

[Maggie5]

Was Mathews sacked by Collingwood?

 

[ksardog]

Was Mathews sacked by Collingwood?

Yes, after being given a job for life after 1990 by mccalistair.

 

[Maggie5]

Yes, after being given a job for life after 1990 by mccalistair.

Well then I would take his comments with a grain of salt.

 

[Kilmo]

He also suggested buckley not take over in 2012, this was half way through 2011 when he said this on 3AW. His thoughts were why would u want to change things when everything is going so well. So that was after his quote about dynastys.

View attachment 104559

Well that is completely different to saying that we should have won a whole bunch of flags.

Furthermore, at the risk of flogging a dead horse, he is merely stating what was at the time, in my opinion, the obvious: "the best thing for Collingwood in 2012" would be to not change coach after consecutive grand final appearances. However the board does not act upon what is "the best thing for Collingwood in 2012", they do what they think is best for Collingwood...

 

[ksardog]

Well that is completely different to saying that we should have won a whole bunch of flags.

Furthermore, at the risk of flogging a dead horse, he is merely stating what was at the time, in my opinion, the obvious: "the best thing for Collingwood in 2012" would be to not change coach after consecutive grand final appearances. However the board does not act upon what is "the best thing for Collingwood in 2012", they do what they think is best for Collingwood...

Ok, so even if we had a better chance to win a premiership in 2012 thats not the most important thing. Its more important that we hope to compete with GC and GWS in 2017-18 while not taking full advantage of our standing as the best team in 2011-12.
Yep ok

Ever heard the term, u strike while the iron is hot

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

Yeh ok, u got to make them to win them.
1st grand final- lose jason cloke suspended, was probably the difference
2nd grand final-lose rocca to suspension, fwd line was stuffed with just taz
3rd grand final-we win after replay after we almost squander drawn gf with inaccurate kicking.
4th grand final-limped into it with i juries to key personal and a s**t load of background in fighting. Led by 24 points before halftime, ranout of legs after huge games against WC and hawks

2007 prelim lose by 5 points with ball in a forward line against cats. They go on to win easily in gf.

U may say gettingthere is not good enough, but at least we got there.

We've made them and haven't won enough of them in the past 50+ years. You can point to the bad luck of
McKenna getting knocked out in 1970.
Hafey flogging the players at training in the week leading up to the replay in 77.
Harmes knocking the ball back in from the 5th row in 1979
Running out of legs in 81
Rocca's controversial point in 02
Rocca missing in 03 although MM's playing of Cloke at CHF was a master stroke. Brisbane had quite a few injuries.
Poor kicking in 2010 GF.
It's interesting to point to injuries in 2011 as an issue. You giving Buckley the same concessions when his side has suffered worse injuries over a space of 3 years?
In each of those bar 02 and maybe 79, where were the master coach moves to turn the result?
Blaming poor kicking in 2010 can point to the coach as much as the players. It was an issue for a couple of seasons before that. Not addressed? Malthouse has to wear that. Having said that, if you think that poor kicking is the only reason why we drew that GF, you haven't watched the game closely enough.

 

[ksardog]

We've made them and haven't won enough of them in the past 50+ years. You can point to the bad luck of
McKenna getting knocked out in 1970.
Hafey flogging the players at training in the week leading up to the replay in 77.
Harmes knocking the ball back in from the 5th row in 1979
Running out of legs in 81
Rocca's controversial point in 02
Rocca missing in 03 although MM's playing of Cloke at CHF was a master stroke. Brisbane had quite a few injuries.
Poor kicking in 2010 GF.
It's interesting to point to injuries in 2011 as an issue. You giving Buckley the same concessions when his side has suffered worse injuries over a space of 3 years?
In each of those bar 02 and maybe 79, where were the master coach moves to turn the result?
Blaming poor kicking in 2010 can point to the coach as much as the players. It was an issue for a couple of seasons before that. Not addressed? Malthouse has to wear that. Having said that, if you think that poor kicking is the only reason why we drew that GF, you haven't watched the game closely enough.

Whats his pass mark end of 2017 ( if he lasts that long)
Agree to disagree. Time will be the judge

 

[iGNITER]

Unreal some of the things being said about Bucks.
The same people hanging it on him will be quick to jump on the wagon when we start winning games and building a top tier side with young talent.

 

[ksardog]

Unreal some of the things being said about Bucks.
The same people hanging it on him will be quick to jump on the wagon when we start winning games and building a top tier side with young talent.

Gladly be proven wrong, doesnt mean i dont support the club whatsover, all im saying is i think things could of and should of been done different.

 

[Kilmo]

Ok, so even if we had a better chance to win a premiership in 2012 thats not the most important thing. Its more important that we hope to compete with GC and GWS in 2017-18 while not taking full advantage of our standing as the best team in 2011-12.
Yep ok

Ever heard the term, u strike while the iron is hot

That may be so but the decision was not made in mid 2011, was it? It was made years before that when we had a flag-less coach, a team seemingly ready for change and a heir in the wings. The only problem with the plan was if we managed to win a flag in the intervening years it would get a bit awkward - imagine raising that problem at the board meeting! "Wait, hang on - what if we win a flag before 2012?" - imagine the laughter. A quality problem, they would say.

Besides, what was Buckley supposed to do, wait until the team declined and became terrible enough for Malthouse to finally get the unceremonious sack and then take over the ruins? Or take over a North Melbourne side on the rise?

In my opinion Bucks did what he thought was best for Collingwood - tell North where to shove it, sign the succession plan, learn under Mick and take over in a few years time with Mick as supervisor.

In my opinion the board did what was best for Collingwood - I strongly believe in the words I once heard uttered by Craig Kelly: Buckley will go down in history as a great and successful coach, I just hope that it is with Collingwood. So IF, as I believe, Buckley is the right coach for Collingwood, then the board was right to not let him go, and therefore everyone has done what is best for the Club.

Finally, do we win the flag in 2012 under Malthouse? Who knows.

Anyway, that's what I think on the matter. I hope 2015 and beyond make us all forget about this nonsense. I think we will surprise a few. Go pies.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Unreal some of the things being said about Bucks.
The same people hanging it on him will be quick to jump on the wagon when we start winning games and building a top tier side with young talent.

Worse, they will run away from their own words and just say "it was only a throw away line" or "oh well I was mistaken" but they will never be as balanced in their acknowledgement that they were wrong compared to their original condemnation of him

 

[Hagla]

Gladly be proven wrong.

That's just an excuse to jump back on the bandwagon

 

[Markfs]

Agree with most if not all of this, but Sav Rocca was delisted, not traded.

He was then picked by North at around pick 30 if memory serves and went on to play over 100 games for them which gives an idea of his trade value.

He was delisted because the club wanted to give him the best chance of getting picked up by a club that wanted him, and that he wanted to go to... I think that we made pretty clear at the time.

 

[ipswichpies]

Whats his pass mark end of 2017 ( if he lasts that long)
Agree to disagree. Time will be the judge

What was Malthouse pass mark after 5 years,Malthouse was as big a factor in our team,s lack of focus and subsequent derailment in the 2nd half of 2011 as any and thank god he did go.Malthouse shot himself and the club in the foot before he left but he did not leave a minute too soon.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

What was Malthouse pass mark after 5 years,Malthouse was as big a factor in our team,s lack of focus and subsequent derailment in the 2nd half of 2011 as any and thank god he did go.Malthouse shot himself and the club in the foot before he left but he did not leave a minute too soon.

I think it was generally acknowledged that he did ok with the team he inherited but it was also acknowledged that he needed to rebuild.
Funny because it is exactly the same position Bucks finds himself but he is not given the same acknowledgement.
So we (those of us capable of thinking) know that some people have an agenda to get rid of Bucks no matter what, fortunately though, those who make decisions about our coach, don't even know that those who don't want Bucks, are even alive

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

Whats his pass mark end of 2017 ( if he lasts that long)
Agree to disagree. Time will be the judge

I think the team goes deep into the finals. By that stage the young crew should be performing more consistently. Most things considered, I believe that to be reasonable. At the same time, I won't be satisfied as a supporter because I want to see a flag. Does it mean that I would want Bucks to be sacked because of it? No.
I know some are predicting GC and GWS dominance but we all should know that it's far from a given. I think it's too simplistic to think that they will be flag winning machines because of the manipulated drafts. There are more variables that have to come together in order to win flags.

 

[Maggie5]

I think it was generally acknowledged that he did ok with the team he inherited but it was also acknowledged that he needed to rebuild.
Funny because it is exactly the same position Bucks finds himself but he is not given the same acknowledgement.
So we (those of us capable of thinking) know that some people have an agenda to get rid of Bucks no matter what, fortunately though, those who make decisions about our coach, don't even know that those who don't want Bucks, are even alive

But, but, that is because he already inherited a great team!
Forgot to add that on list.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

Unreal some of the things being said about Bucks.
The same people hanging it on him will be quick to jump on the wagon when we start winning games and building a top tier side with young talent.

Just curious what are the things that have been said that you disagree with?

 

[Robroy22]

God I'm glad they didn't have the internet and BF back in the Bobby Rose days! When will it ever be ok just to move on??

 

[PTpie]

God I'm glad they didn't have the internet and BF back in the Bobby Rose days! When will it ever be ok just to move on??

Never. We must continue to revisit the past. Day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. A club with a history as rich, proud, convoluted and machiavellian as ours thrives on its past and derides the future.

No team can possibly compare to what has gone before, we have a premiership cup to prove that. 2010 best Collingwood team in the 21st century by far. Best on field and best off field. See my trophy? It means we did everything right.

Now we have a new coach, new players and we don't win and guess what? No trophy. We suck. Sack someone fast or I'm not renewing my membership.

Classic thread. Personally I prefer the "If a tree falls in the woods" argument, but this will do for now because at least it is football related.

Sort of.

Sometimes.

 

[Krueger]

Half of the 2002 GF team Mick inherited in 1999 (11). In addition we traded out 3 best 22 players: Paul Williams, Mal Michael and Sav Rocca. Retiring greats included another 4: Brown, Crossisca, Monkhorst and Richardson (form). Add the rookies and we're talking 52% 'scrubbed' in reality over 3 years.

But let's not make excuses now given where Mick stepped in. He started from the bottom with a charmed run and enjoyed some pure plunder in the 2000 draft in securing Didak with pick 3, Clement and Holland for 8 & 39 and then stuffed that move by trading out Michael and pick 22 for Molloy. In 2001 outside of Swan that was a cluster****. Then in 2002 we have the other fat-arse wombats like Woewodin for pick 14, Nick Davis leaving for Bo Nixon. Some of the list and trade interventions he made were spun out of the purest s**t.

Let's also not forget the father-son advantage of the Clokes and Shaws as 3rd rounds. Mick inherited a very good list, scrubbed no more than most teams and had the opportunity to trade in very good players in the draft. That's kind of the point of the competition, to allow struggling teams to rise back up quickly by way of early draft picks for finishing low.

Buckley on the other hand started a/. in an 18 rather than 16 team competition b/. at the top of the ladder curve and consequently with lower picks c/. during the period of expansion clubs and therefore lower picks than usual d/. inherited a poisonous elements in the player group thanks to Mick's petulance and e/. needs the latitude that Mick was given.

Here's the 1999 team.

Damien Adkins
Craig Anderson
Rupert Betheras (2002 GF)
Gavin Brown (retired)
Nathan Buckley (2002 GF)
Scott Burns (2002 GF)
Gavin Crossisca (retired)
Scott Crow
Nick Davis (2002 GF)
Glenn Freeborn (2002 GF)
Brad Fuller
Michael Gardiner
Luke Godden
Craig Jacotine
Clinton King
Ben Kinnear
Troy Kirwen
Tyson Lane
Paul Licuria (2002 GF)
Tarkyn Lockyer (2002 GF)
Alex McDonald
Mal Michael (traded)
Damian Monkhorst (retired)
Brad Oborne
Ricky Olerenshaw
Mark Orchard
Stephen Patterson
Simon Prestigiacomo (2002 GF)
Frank Raso
Mark Richardson (form)
Anthony Rocca (2002 GF)
Sav Rocca (traded)
Andrew Schauble
Heath Scotland (2002 GF)
Jeremy Sharpen
Brad Smith
Jamie Tape
Chris Tarrant (2002 GF)
Brent Tuckey
Cameron Venables
Lee Walker
James Wasley
Shane Watson
Jason Wild
Paul Williams (traded)
Nick Wilson

Paul Williams left because he couldnt stand Buckley.