Mega Thread Buckley coaching mega thread volume II

[Apex36]

Yeah, there was a real danger we could have become like Sydney, Hawthorn or Geelong too, and we wouldn't wanna go down that path.

You can't see the forest for the trees.

 

[MarkT2]

I find it hard to be an advocate of the play for the coach line.
As a player, I listened to my coach's instructions regardless of whether I felt an affinity with him or not. I only had one coach who was disliked by most and we played out of our skins that year. What he did well was instil in us a sense of responsibility to each other. So on the ground, he was furthest from our thoughts when doing the hard things for our mates. First and foremost was to protect and help out your mates.
So if what you say is true and 'playing for the coach' is a real thing, the players(any club) need to punch the living s**t out of each other for not looking after each other.

Actual AFL players say it is real. The 80/20 rules says you are generally correct. At one end you have the ultimate success that requires a lot to go right and the players and coach to be 100% on the same track and in sync. At the other end you have the Melbourne/Neeld scenario. At Collingwood we had both ends of the spectrum with Hafey and then Mathews. Listenning to Paul Couch last night there was a similar scenario at Geelong under Blight.

 

[Maggie5]

Ask the Port Adelaide players if it's a crock.

What do the PA players have in common? Youth and enthusiasm! Haven't held on to aging players (Cornes who is still playing well).

 

[MarkT2]

This is a simplistic statement that links results exclusive to the perceived desire of players to play for a coach. What a crock!

No it isn't. It is a widely held view of people in the media, people who have played for MM and people who have been at clubs with MM including our president and it is based on one of the longest coaching careers in the history of the game at teh top level and probably any level.

 

[MarkT2]

Like Garlett, Robinson, Laidler and Waite? Probably add Judd and McLean to that.

no.

 

[Maggie5]

Yeah I try not to get too caught up in all that, it's not ideal that players are moved on, but it's kind of inevitable with a change of coach. It's easy to forget as Malthouse was around for years, but look back to when he took over:

Andrew Schauble - traded 1999 (Sydney: 88 games 1x bf)
Damian Monkhorst - delisted 1999 (picked up by St Kilda: 10 games)
Paul Williams - traded 2000 (Sydney: 117 games 2x bf, all australian, premiership)
Saverio Rocca - delisted 2000 (North Melb: 101 games, 234 goals, 3x leading goal kicker)
Mal Michael - traded 2000 (Brisbane: 140 games, 3x premierships)
Gavin Brown - retired 2000
Gavin Crosisca - retired 2000

Whether Brown and Crosisca had more in them in is debatable and possibly the same argument could be had over the recent retirements. The others along with over a dozen more lesser likes who didn't kick on else where were delisted or traded for various reasons. The Williams trade ended up netting us Clement and Holland and we bought in a lot of recycled players. The only difference this time around is where we were prior to the change of coach a wooden spoon vs runners up, however thats hardly Buckley's fault.

Can you add H. Scotland and R. Shaw to the list please?

 

[rustyg70]

I've often wondered how Bucks would have gone IF Malthouse had not reneged on the contract HE sign.
Having MM there to help Bucks through the first 3 years of his coaching career surely would have been a huge boost for Bucks.
With Mick there to bounce ideas off, it would no doubt have been a huge plus for the inexperienced coach.
When MM chose not to fulfill his contract and walked, it would have thrown a huge spanner in the works
It forced us to get Rocket in to play the part.
Mick knew the players intimately and knew what fired them up, how to get the best out of each player.
Rocket didn't.


Would we still be having this argument if Mick had stayed and assisted Bucks?

 

[rustyg70]

Can you add H. Scotland and R. Shaw to the list please?

I felt for Scotland when Malthouse went to Carlton.
IIRC, Malthouse was the reason the he left the Pies in the first place.
It's a shame he retired, because he would be handy in our backline right now.

 

[jmac70]

I've often wondered how Bucks would have gone IF Malthouse had not reneged on the contract HE sign.
Having MM there to help Bucks through the first 3 years of his coaching career surely would have been a huge boost for Bucks.
With Mick there to bounce ideas off, it would no doubt have been a huge plus for the inexperienced coach.
When MM chose not to fulfill his contract and walked, it would have thrown a huge spanner in the works
It forced us to get Rocket in to play the part.
Mick knew the players intimately and knew what fired them up, how to get the best out of each player.
Rocket didn't.


Would we still be having this argument if Mick had stayed and assisted Bucks?

I am pretty sure that Bucks did not want Mick at the club. Certainly not in the box on match days. The whole succession plan was flawed for the simple reason that Mick did not want to stop coaching. There were two options in 2009:

1. Re-sign Mick
2. Replace Mick with Buckley

Unfortunately Eddie came up with a third option to try and appease both men. It seemed a fantastic coup at the time but in hindsight it was nothing more than a fanciful dream. Damage has been done to the club because of it.

 

[Maggie5]

I felt for Scotland when Malthouse went to Carlton.
IIRC, Malthouse was the reason the he left the Pies in the first place.
It's a shame he retired, because he would be handy in our backline right now.

Rhyce hasn't done too badly either.
Funny how MM lovers forget these things.

 

[eddiebankbalance]

Hi fellow magpie bloggers..Im new...ok....I follow the pies and have done so for many years.
The coach is poor. Great communicator and speaks beautifully but I dont think he can coach. Time will tell.

How do you think he went up until round 11? With all due respect to injuries???

 

[DolphinMan]

How do you think he went up until round 11? With all due respect to injuries???

I think we were terrible quite frankly...the play mostly was average at best. Poor game plan. Poor skills. The coaching was even worse.
I think we beat some teams that were not playing well themselves. That standard was never going to get us anywhere. Be realistic. Being realistic does not equate to being negative

 

[Wooljay]

I think we were terrible quite frankly...the play mostly was average at best. Poor game plan. Poor skills. The coaching was even worse.
I think we beat some teams that were not playing well themselves. That standard was never going to get us anywhere. Be realistic. Being realistic does not equate to being negative

Being realistic also means acknowledging successes.

If you can only find negatives from the first 11 rounds of this season then you aren't being 'realistic' at all, no matter how much you'd like to think you are.

 

[DolphinMan]

Look at the team. It has a lot of great young potential. Now ask yourself this. Do you trust the current coaching set up to develop them and bring them to success? I do not.
My fear is that we will waste this group. Why do I say this? The coaching is poor. This list should be way better than this. Most players are now worse.
Exceptions are Elliot ( has a ton of natural talent) and possibly Frost ( great young backman) and langdon.The vast majority are going backward.
This belongs in another thread I agree.
We MUST trade and see if we can get CHF and some goal scoring forwards.

 

[popin]

I think we were terrible quite frankly...the play mostly was average at best. Poor game plan. Poor skills. The coaching was even worse.
I think we beat some teams that were not playing well themselves. That standard was never going to get us anywhere. Be realistic. Being realistic does not equate to being negative

Realistic you make us laugh, We had bad injuries for 3 years now and the pies missed the finals one time. time to get over MM champ as MM is copying bucks now at carlton doing trades to build a list like we had to cos dids, krak, jolly were all cooked and co we traded that have done nothing at other clubs.

 

[eddiebankbalance]

I think we were terrible quite frankly...the play mostly was average at best. Poor game plan. Poor skills. The coaching was even worse.
I think we beat some teams that were not playing well themselves. That standard was never going to get us anywhere. Be realistic. Being realistic does not equate to being negative

Mate, I think you trolled yourself. You need to contact the Collingwood moderation staff - effective immediately and request a LIFE banning.

 

[Wooljay]

Look at the team. It has a lot of great young potential. Now ask yourself this. Do you trust the current coaching set up to develop them and bring them to success? I do not.
My fear is that we will waste this group. Why do I say this? The coaching is poor. This list should be way better than this. Most players are now worse.
Exceptions are Elliot ( has a ton of natural talent) and possibly Frost ( great young backman) and langdon.The vast majority are going backward.
This belongs in another thread I agree.
We MUST trade and see if we can get CHF and some goal scoring forwards.

Of our 'great young potential', half of it spent large chunks - in some cases the majority - of the season on the bench with injuries. I'm talking about Elliott, Freeman, Scharenberg, Adams, Broomhead, Karnezis, Fasolo, Sinclair, etc. Seriously, have a look at all this 'young talent' you're hyping up, and tell me how many of them played decent length seasons beside Frost, Langdon, Witts and Grundy?

And surprise surprise, they all had great seasons. Not much to complain about when the team isn't crippled by injury now is there.

 

[DolphinMan]

Being realistic also means acknowledging successes.

If you can only find negatives from the first 11 rounds of this season then you aren't being 'realistic' at all, no matter how much you'd like to think you are.

The coach himself stated that the level of play at that stage was a concern and that it would not be good enough. Yes some wins. They were scratchy and no cohesion. We are far away from sustained success at this stage. Positives are that the team hasnt given up. We have a great young list. We couldnt get any more disorganised up forward. The kick ins cannot get worse and their is a lot of upside after the injury problems. But we have had MAJOR injuiry issues for 3 years. Something is wrong.

 

[DolphinMan]

Of our 'great young potential', half of it spent large chunks - in some cases the majority - of the season on the bench with injuries. I'm talking about Elliott, Freeman, Scharenberg, Adams, Broomhead, Karnezis, Fasolo, Sinclair, etc. Seriously, have a look at all this 'young talent' you're hyping up, and tell me how many of them played decent length seasons beside Frost, Langdon, Witts and Grundy?

And surprise surprise, they all had great seasons. Not much to complain about when the team isn't crippled by injury now is there.

We finished 11th....major injuries and terrible coaching. This list is a good list

 

[Wooljay]

We finished 11th....major injuries and terrible coaching. This list is a good list

And then you take away the injuries, and suddenly maybe we finish 6th or 7th? Maybe even we press for top 4 like we were mid way through the year which you reckon was so poor.

This list is a good list when we have a best 22 on the pitch. I agree the last 3 years of injuries needs to be scrutinized, but some people just blindly label it bad coaching and froth at the mouth when in reality they can't figure out exactly what is bad about the coaching besides our forwards and kick ins...

 

[good4footy]

Hi fellow magpie bloggers..Im new...ok....I follow the pies and have done so for many years.

Just wanted to say a few things:
1 I also follow the NFL and like to see how they do things
2 WRT our trades, if Clarke is fit then its a no brainer, we must get him. Our forward line has been dysfuntional for 3 long years and that is on the coach.
The coach is poor. Great communicator and speaks beautifully but I dont think he can coach. Time will tell.
We have Cloke and Elliot up forward and the rest are NOT premiership standard at this point in time. many are young.
3 If most of the bloggers here are wanting a team full of choir boys or altar boys ie very well behaved then that is good but it wont necessarily translate to success. There is NO correlation. Dont confuse a healthy team and club environment with being squeeky clean.Most exceptional people are NOT squeaky clean.
The greatest and most successful teams are many times made up of people you wouldnt not like your sister to go out with.
So can we get over the RAT pack thing. They were actually GREATS !!. Lets see if a sanitised clean cut group can do better. It is no indicator of anything.
In fact in the NFL they say you got to have "DOG" in you to be any good.....many times that doesnt have anything to do with correct beahaviour.

"Our forward line has been dysfuntional for 3 long years and that is on the coach.
The coach is poor."

"We have Cloke and Elliot up forward and the rest are NOT premiership standard at this point in time. many are young."

You need to make up your mind.

 

[Smoothness]

And then you take away the injuries, and suddenly maybe we finish 6th or 7th? Maybe even we press for top 4 like we were mid way through the year which you reckon was so poor.

This list is a good list when we have a best 22 on the pitch. I agree the last 3 years of injuries needs to be scrutinized, but some people just blindly label it bad coaching and froth at the mouth when in reality they can't figure out exactly what is bad about the coaching besides our forwards and kick ins...

What was our win loss ratio after round 11 this year? Injuries played a part yes, but there were plenty of games we should of one too.The loss to bulldogs and gold coast were the killers

 

[Apex36]

Look at the team. It has a lot of great young potential. Now ask yourself this. Do you trust the current coaching set up to develop them and bring them to success? I do not.
My fear is that we will waste this group. Why do I say this? The coaching is poor. This list should be way better than this. Most players are now worse.
Exceptions are Elliot ( has a ton of natural talent) and possibly Frost ( great young backman) and langdon.The vast majority are going backward.
This belongs in another thread I agree.
We MUST trade and see if we can get CHF and some goal scoring forwards.

Agreed. Beams, Sidebottom and Witts to name a few have clearly gone backwards under Buckley.


Or you could have no clue. Take your pick.

 

[Smoothness]

Agreed. Beams, Sidebottom and Witts to name a few have clearly gone backwards under Buckley.


Or you could have no clue. Take your pick.

I disagree with you on Sidebottom.I thought he had a outstanding year, became very consistent.

 

[Apex36]

I disagree with you on Sidebottom.I thought he had a outstanding year, became very consistent.

I was being facetious. All three have flourished under Buckley. I thought that was pretty obvious.