Smoothness
Senior List
Leigh mathews replaced by tony shaw.Tony shaw replaced by mick malthouse. Its not so much winning a premiership its constantly getting your team into top 4 then its up to the players to want to win a flag.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Golden boy coaches.Watson -fail.Hird -fail. Voss-fail Buckley? Looking like a fail. A lot of defender players make good coaches for some reason.
Yeh they have been terrible, HOWEVER Sir Alex Ferguson retired out of his own free will. We on the other hand basically sacked Mick Malthouse. Just go to show when you make changes when you are at or near the top the consequences can be disastrous.
The other teams are still laughing at what we did. Simply idiotic management.
You could probably make your point without havingSorry jmac didnt want to come across too rough.I guess it goes against my name.You could probably make your point without having to nail anyone's clacker.
Actually we didn't basically 'sack' MM but we should have. That's what you can blame Eddie for.Yeh they have been terrible, HOWEVER Sir Alex Ferguson retired out of his own free will. We on the other hand basically sacked Mick Malthouse. Just go to show when you make changes when you are at or near the top the consequences can be disastrous.
The other teams are still laughing at what we did. Simply idiotic management.
Good defensive units win flags. Since Bucks came he took an All Australian out of the back line and started using Keeffe back there which has been a huge failed in regards to defence.Golden boy coaches.Watson -fail.Hird -fail. Voss-fail Buckley? Looking like a fail. A lot of defender players make good coaches for some reason.
The system is designed for teams to rise and fall. You need to accept that at some stage the system will get you. Doesn't mean you have to like it but it is virtually inevitable.
How long are you willing to wait for?I'm aware of the system we have, but to keep evoking it as the reason for our downfall is a bit of a cop out.
It's a matter of working the system by having an effective in-house system at the club to mitigate the "fall" and capitalise on the "rise".
Geelong, Hawthorn, Sydney are examples of clubs that have managed to rejuvenate their lists - when by your account they should've fallen ala the league's rise/fall system - and still remain competitive/contenders.
West Coast is an example of a team that fluctuates quite spectacularly - falls dramatically low, then rises and snatches a flag every so often.
What model are we trying to pursue, and what increases our chances of winning a flag - which is difficult to win, as you say?
Should we take a 2004-2005-like crash so we can be competitive for the next 7 years? Or should we transition our list while remaining competitive?
I think the point of contention here is that we had a list post-2011 that was competitive, if not contending. Ed/Bucks argument is that that list was only going to provide short-term success, and thus have decided to take a dive in ladder position in order to prepare for long-term success.
I'm not entirely sold by that argument, given the calibre of players we had, but I'm willing to wait and see how it unfolds.
6 monthsHow long are you willing to wait for?
He would have to go if that was the case.They (eddie and co) would have to come clean and say weve mucked this up and apologize.Say we start our season like we ended the last 10-12 games of 2014 does Bucks keep his job?
First 10 games 2-8 would that be enough?
I'm aware of the system we have, but to keep evoking it as the reason for our downfall is a bit of a cop out.
It's a matter of working the system by having an effective in-house system at the club to mitigate the "fall" and capitalise on the "rise".
Geelong, Hawthorn, Sydney are examples of clubs that have managed to rejuvenate their lists - when by your account they should've fallen ala the league's rise/fall system - and still remain competitive/contenders.
West Coast is an example of a team that fluctuates quite spectacularly - falls dramatically low, then rises and snatches a flag every so often.
What model are we trying to pursue, and what increases our chances of winning a flag - which is difficult to win, as you say?
Should we take a 2004-2005-like crash so we can be competitive for the next 7 years? Or should we transition our list while remaining competitive?
I think the point of contention here is that we had a list post-2011 that was competitive, if not contending. Ed/Bucks argument is that that list was only going to provide short-term success, and thus have decided to take a dive in ladder position in order to prepare for long-term success.
I'm not entirely sold by that argument, given the calibre of players we had, but I'm willing to wait and see how it unfolds.
I could list 'non golden boy' coaches who have failed. The issue is whether he can coach and until he has a better list and better run of injuries we cannot really judge.
Malthouse as an experienced coach took 10 years to win a flag. How long you going to give Buckley?
Three of 18 clubs in the last 10 years. If we have a look at Geelong and their unusually high father/son allocation and the profile of their team in 07, they were primed for a 5 year run. As for Sydney, well.....9.8 reasons why they can keep a good list. Hawthorn's job in remaining up the top is the most admirable of the three IMO. They took some calculated risks and they paid off.Geelong, Hawthorn, Sydney are examples of clubs that have managed to rejuvenate their lists - when by your account they should've fallen ala the league's rise/fall system - and still remain competitive/contenders.
West Coast is an example of a team that fluctuates quite spectacularly - falls dramatically low, then rises and snatches a flag every so often.
Eddie may have been privy to the results of the conversations rather than be involved in them. Buckley, Hine, Walsh etc all sat down and decided that the 2012 list was not going to win a flag. I'm pretty sure they would have looked outside of the club, assessed other teams' lists and decided that our current crop were going to struggle short term.I think the point of contention here is that we had a list post-2011 that was competitive, if not contending. Ed/Bucks argument is that that list was only going to provide short-term success, and thus have decided to take a dive in ladder position in order to prepare for long-term success.
It took Malthouse 3 years to get Collingwood into a Grand Final. How long do you think it would take for Buckley to get Collingwood into another Grand Final?
Sigh, this chestnut again.
Did Sydney sack Paul Roos when they signed him to that succession plan? Or Melbourne for that matter?
Stop talking rubbish.
Gee,Collingwoods fall down the ladder happened because Malthouse left.Now knowing this, I suppose Carlton must be disappointed they replaced Rattan,a coach who regularly got them into the finals,with a coach who compared with Rattan's efforts could only be described as a disappointing failure.Ah Mick Malthouse rose like a rocket fell like a stick.
Say we start our season like we ended the last 10-12 games of 2014 does Bucks keep his job?
First 10 games 2-8 would that be enough?
Nice to see the point went straight over your head.Roos was all for the succession plan at Sydney and he let Longmire basically call the shots in his last season. Similar at Melbourne now. Do some research before you post you imbercile.
Lol the way you talk Alastair Clarkson can walk in to GWS tom and take them to a GF next year. The fact we were a machine in 2011 with only Geelong able to challenge. I have no doubt if it wernt for the injuries, the betting scandal and that bs succession plan we would have gone back to back.
The point was you dont change a winning formula especially in our case when we were at the top. The cheats have gone backwards too but they lost 6 games by two goals or less and drew another this year.
Does Malthouse need to be brought up in EVERY conversation of yours? It was only yesterday you were sooking at me for doing it!Why is it that Mick is allowed excuses for injury and Buckley isn't?
Lol the way you talk Alastair Clarkson can walk in to GWS tom and take them to a GF next year. The fact we were a machine in 2011 with only Geelong able to challenge. I have no doubt if it wernt for the injuries, the betting scandal and that bs succession plan we would have gone back to back.
The point was you dont change a winning formula especially in our case when we were at the top. The cheats have gone backwards too but they lost 6 games by two goals or less and drew another this year.