When does west coast and adam simpson start to face criticism

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
WC lured by charisma - they should have gone with the guy with a funny voice who actually knew some of the playing group well but was spending time in another club so he was fresh with ideas.
 
Was announced as coach on 3 October
Free Agency period: 4-18 october
Trade period 7 - 25 october
National draft - 21 November

I give you the free agency and trade period but was definately around long enough to be involved in the draft period
Certain players were already delisted or upgraded to the senior list before Simpson was at WC.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

He's an untried coach, so he obviously only has the standing of an assistant taking on his first senior gig.

As a player he has a pretty good standing with North, but that's not that important. I'd argue that Simpson was a better player than Clarkson, both Scott brothers, Sanderson, Richardson at least. Again, that's not really important.

He can be high profile, low profile - it doesn't really matter. What matters is whether he can get West Coast playing premiership winning footy again.
Maybe I pooed on Simpson, because I see him as inferior to a Malthouse, Worsfold type figure.
 
I'm happy for any criticism. Things definitely need to change. Simmo is safe for a year or two still. But Nisbett and the rest are fair game. They need a shake up, either change what they're doing or wall tbh. We aren't exactly a struggling club financially. If we aren't performing they need to seriously be looked at, or at least be placed on notice that they aren't safe. The running of our club is deplorable at best. For a rich club, we sure know how to stuff things up.
 
7 pages in and not one word on vozzo. speaks volumes
He has been criticised roundly on the WC board. Ultimately though, we don't know who is setting the agenda, whilst skills, development and recruitment seem like an issue it is difficult to know where responsibility lies.

Certainly we have been good at retaining players, but bad at extracting value from those who leave.
 
He has been criticised roundly on the WC board. Ultimately though, we don't know who is setting the agenda, whilst skills, development and recruitment seem like an issue it is difficult to know where responsibility lies.

Certainly we have been good at retaining players, but bad at extracting value from those who leave.

and to take it a step further. how is he qualified to run a football dept?
 
and to take it a step further. how is he qualified to run a football dept?
Truthfully, we don't know. I don't agree with all of the decisions we have made at the trade table, however decisions at football clubs aren't made unilaterally.

Vozzo is part of a larger team. A more fundamental question worth asking, is there anything inherently wrong with our recruiting or trading, or is it player development. Look at guys like Stevens and Ebert, I was a firm believer that both had the talent, however neither realised it at WC.
 
Truthfully, we don't know. I don't agree with all of the decisions we have made at the trade table, however decisions at football clubs aren't made unilaterally.

Vozzo is part of a larger team. A more fundamental question worth asking, is there anything inherently wrong with our recruiting or trading, or is it player development. Look at guys like Stevens and Ebert, I was a firm believer that both had the talent, however neither realised it at WC.

Stevens was never really given the chance, appeared unrated by Woosha and co. Ebert played okay for us as a young player. He has improved his tank since going to Port. I don't think his skills have improved all that much, he is just playing more within his limitations.
 
Stevens was never really given the chance, appeared unrated by Woosha and co. Ebert played okay for us as a young player. He has improved his tank since going to Port. I don't think his skills have improved all that much, he is just playing more within his limitations.

ebert seemed almost always be destined to go back home. he was given a pretty good go IMO

stevens on the other hand was playing very good WAFL football and couldnt get a look in. was horribly managed
 
Ebert barely missed a game with WCE and in his last season with us was becoming a really good player. But he was always suspect to going home, not our fault. I seem to remember us being in an unfair position regarding compensation for Ebert as well. Ebert was always going to continue improving and be a great player for us if he stayed (despite previous dodgy disposal by foot), although I don't think many expected him to advance so rapidly after leaving WCE.

Stevens was just behind several similar players. By the time he had been around for 3 years and might have been given more of a go, he went.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Stevens has been okay for the Bulldogs but not exceptional. I don't think you could really chalk him up as a major loss. Ebert has been outstanding the last couple of seasons though. I wish he'd stuck around but like others have said, it seemed fairly inevitable that he would go home.
 
its not priddis' fault other midfielders haven't stepped up. thats where energy should be directed towards. all these guys are faster, have a bigger tank and have better skills. so why can't they dislodge priddis?.

Because the taps keep getting directed to him because opposition mids leave him alone. He is then not creative or skillfull enough to get it to other mids, instead he just helicopters it forward. He is also not quick or damaging enough himself to create his own space or to draw opponents to him to free up other mids. Whenever he has the ball the opposition mids just stay off him covering his handball options knowing that he won't run anywhere and his only other option is to butcher the ball forward and most likely turn it over.

Oppositions must absolutely love that we keep picking him. Probably why they keep giving him coach's votes.
 
Because the taps keep getting directed to him because opposition mids leave him alone. He is then not creative or skillfull enough to get it to other mids, instead he just helicopters it forward. He is also not quick or damaging enough himself to create his own space or to draw opponents to him to free up other mids. Whenever he has the ball the opposition mids just stay off him covering his handball options knowing that he won't run anywhere and his only other option is to butcher the ball forward and most likely turn it over.

Oppositions must absolutely love that we keep picking him. Probably why they keep giving him coach's votes.

do you seriously believe that s**t?
 
Bull$hit

He's a butcher. The Posters in the know saw this coming 7 years ago. A player that gets the ball at will and then is not involved any constructive play for the team whatsoever. A turnover merchant.

He's a flog.
Pretty obvious who the flog is.
 
I remember in 2009, maybe Rnd 1, Dennis used the term "Priddis-like" to refer to an ineffectual but statistically impressive performance (inspired by that 45 possession performance he had against Hawthorn in 2008).

Funny to think this debate is still raging several years later.
 
Not that I cared to mention before. But the hiring of Simpson I thought was an unusual one. He just doesn't seem like a "West Coast coach". Hard to explain. Just saying.
I know what you mean. It appears to me he doesn't like the club much, or the players. Mouths a few platitudes at press conferences but his heart doesn't seem to be in it.
It would be nice to see some energy and excitement in the coaches box and at press conferences.
I'm probably misreading his character but his body language aint great. I hope I'm wrong and I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt for a couple of years.
 
I actually like him in press conferences, something fresh about him.

I also relate to the Simpson as West Coast coach appointment feeling a bit unnatural. Always liked him as a player, but West Coast, I don't know.

I think the most alarming thing at times is how young the coaching box often looks. Needs an old campaigner in there to fit our visual expectation. It's like the coaching box's cumulative age must stay below 100 or something.
 
ebert seemed almost always be destined to go back home. he was given a pretty good go IMO

stevens on the other hand was playing very good WAFL football and couldnt get a look in. was horribly managed

That's a damn lie and you know it. How many seasons was he at the club and how many of those were impacted by injury? In his final year at the club, when he was finally over his OP he still was performing average at WAFL level, rarely gathering big numbers and Swift was offering more.

Slow, lack of any distance in his kicking, and low possession counts. What a fantastic mix!
 
Personally if I was going to nab an assistant from Hawthorn I would've gone for Bolton.

Has a 100% record as a fill-in doesn't he? And his press conferences aren't dull.

You didnt even know who Bolton was 3 months ago. Nor did he apply for the job
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top