Mega Thread The 2016 Buckley Coaching Discussion

[Quicky]

Not sure if it has been discussed and I don't want to open a can of worms.

Watched the replay last night......What are peoples thoughts on Bucks interaction with Fasolo at 3 quarter time??

He "seemed" to me like he was challenging Fas to get back on the field.

It wasn't a good look IMO and Fas at one stage in the last qtr on the phone looked like he was in shock pleading his case!

Maybe those at the ground could explain it better.......or maybe I am reading too much into it

I noticed both those exchanges. I didn't think it was that at all. I think Fasolo was saying his shoulder was no good, as soon as Buckley got his answer he charged on looking a little ill tempered at the bad news. I took it more as Buckley accepting what Fasolo said, and immediately switching his attention to the task at hand which was addressing the players at the break. I think it was Buckley being curt if anything.

 

[doodles98]

I really wish we could stop with the labels of "lovers" or "haters" when opinions aren't so (pardon the pun) black and white. For that matter, I think you have your descriptions of the factions backwards. This conversation started because Johnno suggested that if we get a new coach, we will be top 4. There was no reason, logic or factual information behind it and people rightfully questioned it.

Ironically it's the "lovers" who appear to be the sensible thinkers. I don't think that any aren't considering that there should be a review and possible change of coach at the end of the season. It's sensible and logical.

The thought process of: 1 New coach 2 start winning, is if anything, the most illogical and irrational thought in the argument. It's the Bolton/Beverage effect. Except that people don't seem to reference that for every Bolton, you have 2 Waters. For every Beverage, you have 2 Neelds. Three years ago it was the Hinkley effect and we can all see how that's working out.

If you can logically and rationally explain to me how a change of coach will improve the club's position, then I am on board, because I am yet to see one argument that doesn't have a giant plot hole in the middle of it.

Jasper, the highlighted sentence above shows that you may have some issues with logic and rationality, so it may be difficult for me to explain. Your question is worded in definitive terms; "how a change in coach WILL improve the clubs position". Obviously you are asking for an impossibility here Jasper. Nobody can tell you that a change of coach will definitively bring a positive result unless they are ancient Druid oracles. This should be obvious to you so I'm not sure why you ask the question or why you view the obvious uncertainty of future outcomes as a "giant pothole" in decision making. If you need certainty of future outcomes before you make a decision... suggests you will never make a decision. However decisions (judgement calls) are necessary. This is what people in power and authority do all the time.. make judgement calls in the hope of achieving a better outcome in the future; based on their knowledge of the present and past.

A logical and rational question for you to have asked in this instance would be something along the lines of "So after what we know of Bucks as a coach after 5 years, and what we know about the teams performances under him; are we now in a position to make a judgement call about whether or not it is time to look for an alternative to get us to where we want to be?. The ancillary questions attached to this then are: 1. are there any better alternatives currently available?; or; 2. is Bucks still the man for the job and he's just been unlucky so far?".
You would note that there is no talk of a nonsensical definitive guarantee about future outcomes in the wording of this question... because you cannot ever get this... but you can judge where we are now and what has been achieved over the last 5 years and make a logical and rational judgement call about what direction to take for the future. There are cold hard facts backing that up and there are also all the extenuating factors of unbelievable injuries and the MM transition fallout.

So it is a judgement call. 5 years is a big sample size to make that call on. These are the sorts of strategic and far seeing decisions that people in power have to make. The board will be making these deliberations about Bucks at years end Jasper.. whether you like it or not.. that's their job.

Apart from the obvious uncertainty of the future outcomes... what is the "giant pothole" with the club changing coaches then please Jasper?

 

[Quicky]

I'm over the simplistic labelling too.
Good point.

I find the labeling of posters as "lovers" or "haters" really divisive and unconstructive. Hate it.

 

[CLUBMEDhurst]

I find the labeling of posters as "lovers" or "haters" really divisive and unconstructive. Hate it.

I love it

 

[Quicky]

A logical and rational question for you to have asked in this instance would be something along the lines of "So after what we know of Bucks as a coach after 5 years, and what we know about the teams performances under him; are we now in a position to make a judgement call about whether or not it is time to look for an alternative to get us to where we want to be?. The ancillary questions attached to this then are: 1. are there any better alternatives currently available?; or; 2. is Bucks still the man for the job and he's just been unlucky so far?".
You would note that there is no talk of a nonsensical definitive guarantee about future outcomes in the wording of this question... because you cannot ever get this... but you can judge where we are now and what has been achieved over the last 5 years and make a logical and rational judgement call about what direction to take for the future. There are cold hard facts backing that up and there are also all the extenuating factors of unbelievable injuries and the MM transition fallout.

How would you answer your questions doodles98?

• after what we know of Bucks as a coach after 5 years, and what we know about the teams performances under him; are we now in a position to make a judgement call about whether or not it is time to look for an alternative to get us to where we want to be?
• are there any better alternatives currently available?
• is Bucks still the man for the job and he's just been unlucky so far?

What I am most encouraged about with Bucks is the last 3 weeks. Issues in our game style that I have been grumbling about since 2012 seem to have been addressed. We are now transitioning the ball better out of defense than I can recall under Buckley. We are winning or breaking even in the clearances against very good sides. The structure is holding up, but it is only a really small sample size.

I do wonder how much better off we would be if we could just get our players fit more often and more consistently, this has hurt us badly.

 

[Collingwoodity]

Before the match started one of the boundary riders asked one of their stupid questions to Buckley, Buckley responded "If we need to go man on man all around the ground, we are happy to do that" or words to that effect.

For me, this is evidence that Buckley has changed his game plan.

 

[Quicky]

Before the match started one of the boundary riders asked one of their stupid questions to Buckley, Buckley responded "If we need to go man on man all around the ground, we are happy to do that" or words to that effect.

For me, this is evidence that Buckley has changed his game plan.

I think Axl the great explained the adjustment really well and really simply recently. We have been going man-on-man with the players in the immediate vicinity of the ball, with the zone set up about 40 metres down field. This gives the players close to the ball a better chance of impacting (tackling, spoiling, intercepting) the play close to them. The zone is more effective because it allows those in it the time to close down their opponents because the ball has to travel a greater distance allowing this to occur. I find it hard to tell without a ground wide view from the TV though, it's one of those things that you benefit from being at the ground for.

 

[doodles98]

How would you answer your questions doodles98?

• after what we know of Bucks as a coach after 5 years, and what we know about the teams performances under him; are we now in a position to make a judgement call about whether or not it is time to look for an alternative to get us to where we want to be?
• are there any better alternatives currently available?
• is Bucks still the man for the job and he's just been unlucky so far?

What I am most encouraged about with Bucks is the last 3 weeks. Issues in our game style that I have been grumbling about since 2012 seem to have been addressed. We are now transitioning the ball better out of defense than I can recall under Buckley. We are winning or breaking even in the clearances against very good sides. The structure is holding up, but it is only a really small sample size.

I do wonder how much better off we would be if we could just get our players fit more often and more consistently, this has hurt us badly.

I feel similarly.. there's been a very interesting and dramatic shift which was long overdue but has me interested again. The first 7 weeks were disgusting though and the obvious disconnect between players and coach at the start of the year is something I will find hard to forget. I also feel that Bucks has just been an unusually unlucky coach with injury and some of the other shit he's had to deal with since taking over. But I'm also strongly of the opinion that luck or bad luck is as good an indicator of performance as anything else.. some believe you make your own luck and continual bad luck cannot be used as any kind of excuse at the end of the day. 5 years in and I am still not sure if Bucks is the man for the job. He's like the Jesse White of coaches.. a tease.. there's something there to like a lot but then at the end of the day the overall outcomes leave a lot to be desired.

The only alternative I am interested in at the moment would be Ratten. If he wasn't available then I'd probably stick with Bucks (depending on results/performance for the rest of the year). If we return to playing like we did in the first 7 rounds though I'd be happy to see Bucks gone immediately and we take a punt on the next best available. If the team continues with current form and effort... then it becomes a very difficult question at years end.. because once again we miss finals, once again we have horrendous injuries and patches of the year where we are terrible; and once again we have patches of the year where we look really good... this seems to be our "consistent level" under Bucks.
Should Bucks coach another year or be replaced?...Short answer.. I don't know but I'm leaning towards one more year now. (note: this leaning may be subject to week to week change at posters discretion)

Do I think we will win a flag under Bucks?... no I don't.. (don't know why.. just don't). That is purely just my gut feeling and has no relevance other than it is my gut feeling so it influences my stance somewhat. Perhaps I think this because you always need a hell of a lot of luck to come your way to win a flag .. Bucks and luck aren't on good terms.

 

[Mame]

... But I'm also strongly of the opinion that luck or bad luck is as good an indicator of performance as anything else...

Jasper, the highlighted sentence above shows that you may have some issues with logic and rationality, so it may be difficult for me to explain...

So you strongly think that luck, chance, the uncontrollable, is an indicator of performance and Jasper84 is the one with logic and rationality issues. OK

 

[Quicky]

Do I think we will win a flag under Bucks?... no I don't.. (don't know why.. just don't). That is purely just my gut feeling and has no relevance other than it is my gut feeling so it influences my stance somewhat. Perhaps I think this because you always need a hell of a lot of luck to come your way to win a flag .. Bucks and luck aren't on good terms.

Is it bad luck that Buckley became our coach at the same time we decided to reduce the size of our recruiting team, get rid of important development coaching roles and fail to address the issues in our medical, fitness and conditioning teams? Actually it probably is

I think more scrutiny should be put on those making these decisions within our football department as I think they are among the biggest factors that have impacted our last few seasons.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Watched the 360 show, Nathan just smacked the poor Robinson delivery to the boundary, David Gower style.
Effortless. unfortunately Robinson isn't much, struggles. Though he does seem to take things very personally.
But he is a single guy my guess he's never had a girlfriend (or boyfriend) so gets cut up easily.
Sob sob

 

[domin8tors]

this thread should be merged with the "Our 5 year injury crisis! Is it a curse or just bad luck? " thread. because whilst back in 2013-14 it was soft tissue injuries and could draw a long bow and said Bucks hired the fitness staff. the majority of our injuries last year and this year are impact injuries. and Bucks has never had a chance to coach a near full strength team. I'd like to see Hawks without the arguably their equivalent players

Mitchell - Swan
Rioli - Elliott
Stratton - Williams
Bruest - Fasolo
Shoemaker - Brown
Lewis - Adams
Gunston - Moore
Shiels - Langdon
Duryea - Shazareberg
Hartung - Broomhead
Birtchall - Toovey
Smith - Ramsay

Roughheaed - Cloke****

 

[Snag Breac]

this thread should be merged with the "Our 5 year injury crisis! Is it a curse or just bad luck? " thread. because whilst back in 2013-14 it was soft tissue injuries and could draw a long bow and said Bucks hired the fitness staff. the majority of our injuries last year and this year are impact injuries. and Bucks has never had a chance to coach a near full strength team. I'd like to see Hawks without the arguably their equivalent players

Mitchell - Swan
Rioli - Elliott
Stratton - Williams
Bruest - Fasolo
Shoemaker - Brown
Lewis - Adams
Gunston - Moore
Shiels - Langdon
Duryea - Shazareberg
Hartung - Broomhead
Birtchall - Toovey
Smith - Ramsay

Roughheaed - Cloke****

Very valid point. How different things might have been if we'd had fewer ACLs, hammies, shoulders and sundry other bits getting crushed and cracked.

 

[Axl the great]

I think Axl the great explained the adjustment really well and really simply recently. We have been going man-on-man with the players in the immediate vicinity of the ball, with the zone set up about 40 metres down field. This gives the players close to the ball a better chance of impacting (tackling, spoiling, intercepting) the play close to them. The zone is more effective because it allows those in it the time to close down their opponents because the ball has to travel a greater distance allowing this to occur. I find it hard to tell without a ground wide view from the TV though, it's one of those things that you benefit from being at the ground for.

That is exactly what's happening Quicky, There is a definite zone a kick to a kick and a half away, including covering the switch in play.
Previously we were happy to give up that 20 to 30 metre pass short to teams but Patient teams like Richmond and Hawthorn were happy to do that and move the footy that way.
You could see the last 2 weeks a change and players closer to the kicker screaming at team mates to man up during a stop play or slow build up.

 

[Markfs]

Watched the 360 show, Nathan just smacked the poor Robinson delivery to the boundary, David Gower style.
Effortless. unfortunately Robinson isn't much, struggles. Though he does seem to take things very personally.
But he is a single guy my guess he's never had a girlfriend (or boyfriend) so gets cut up easily.
Sob sob

sound observation. Only a woman can harden a man up..... ummm I mean make him more resilient...

 

[WalterBlaknWhte]

Effortless. unfortunately Robinson isn't much, struggles. Though he does seem to take things very personally. But he is a single guy my guess he's never had a girlfriend (or boyfriend) so gets cut up easily. Sob sob

Tiger will be very jealous when Robbo's robo girlfriend arrives.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Tiger will be very jealous when Robbo's robo girlfriend arrives.

Tiger is walking in a mall Christmas time,
Hears Santa say: ho ho ho
Tiger says: where?bwhere? Where?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I think Axl the great explained the adjustment really well and really simply recently. We have been going man-on-man with the players in the immediate vicinity of the ball, with the zone set up about 40 metres down field. This gives the players close to the ball a better chance of impacting (tackling, spoiling, intercepting) the play close to them. The zone is more effective because it allows those in it the time to close down their opponents because the ball has to travel a greater distance allowing this to occur.

That was me.

We were zoning this week too. Players closest to the ball had direct opponents, and the zone was set up around 40m from the ball carrier with players guarding space at that range.

It appeared to me that we were manning up the short targets and zoning, say, 40m out. It makes sense, at that range the ball will take longer to get there and the defender will have time to react.

 

[Jasper84]

Jasper, the highlighted sentence above shows that you may have some issues with logic and rationality, so it may be difficult for me to explain. Your question is worded in definitive terms; "how a change in coach WILL improve the clubs position". Obviously you are asking for an impossibility here Jasper. Nobody can tell you that a change of coach will definitively bring a positive result unless they are ancient Druid oracles. This should be obvious to you so I'm not sure why you ask the question or why you view the obvious uncertainty of future outcomes as a "giant pothole" in decision making. If you need certainty of future outcomes before you make a decision... suggests you will never make a decision. However decisions (judgement calls) are necessary. This is what people in power and authority do all the time.. make judgement calls in the hope of achieving a better outcome in the future; based on their knowledge of the present and past.

A logical and rational question for you to have asked in this instance would be something along the lines of "So after what we know of Bucks as a coach after 5 years, and what we know about the teams performances under him; are we now in a position to make a judgement call about whether or not it is time to look for an alternative to get us to where we want to be?. The ancillary questions attached to this then are: 1. are there any better alternatives currently available?; or; 2. is Bucks still the man for the job and he's just been unlucky so far?".
You would note that there is no talk of a nonsensical definitive guarantee about future outcomes in the wording of this question... because you cannot ever get this... but you can judge where we are now and what has been achieved over the last 5 years and make a logical and rational judgement call about what direction to take for the future. There are cold hard facts backing that up and there are also all the extenuating factors of unbelievable injuries and the MM transition fallout.

So it is a judgement call. 5 years is a big sample size to make that call on. These are the sorts of strategic and far seeing decisions that people in power have to make. The board will be making these deliberations about Bucks at years end Jasper.. whether you like it or not.. that's their job.

Apart from the obvious uncertainty of the future outcomes... what is the "giant pothole" with the club changing coaches then please Jasper?

I said "plot hole" not pothole", referring to people who are saying that getting a new coach will fix everything. The plot hole is like what you said about just hoping that you achieve a better outcome. It's a huge call to oust the head coach which can have long reaching ramifications (good or bad). A decision that should be based on more than hope and the whole "Well, the last few years we have gone backwards" thinking. You have now said that after having 5 years of evidence, you are undecided what to do and are a week to week proposition, so the question probably doesn't apply to you but I will ask again next week in case you have changed your mind.

There are usually a few reasons why a club brings in a new coach.

The current coach has lost the desire and wants to hand over the reigns. (Roos, Thompson)

The current coach has lost the support of the playing group. (McCartney, Sanderson)

The club has decided they do not have a side capable of winning a premiership in the next few years and go the rebuild. (Clarkson, Hardwick)

A veteran coach wants to join the fray again and the club believes that they can get a premiership with their experience. (Malthouse, Lyon)

I'm sure there are more but those are the staples and looking at the side at this very moment, I don't think we fit any of those criteria though we may at the end of the season after extensive review. I know it's pretty irrational thinking, but I have always been a bit of a loose cannon.

 

[Buckley is my hero]

"Buckley is my hero".. no need to post it twice.. wasn't worth reading the first time. I am a big admirer of Bucks.. but that has nothing to do with my view on him remaining as coach. What you guys don't seem to be able to grasp is that for many like me.. it's not about Buckley.. never has been, never will be. Some of us love the Collingwood Football Club and not so much the individuals who come and go through it. For us it's about Collingwood achieving success as an entity and adding to the trophy cabinet. We don't really give a shit who gets us there.. we just want someone who can.

And that's the typical response of the politician to attack the poster for accidentally posting a double poster. Don't say you love the Collingwood Football Club because you don't because all you care about is the number of trophies in the trophy cabinet. I would like to think that maybe one day you might appreciate the sacrifices certain individuals including Nathan Buckley have made to the CFC but I guess that's hoping for too much, because as you say, that may not have added to the trophy cabinet. Don't bother responding to this post. Life is too short mate. I've just added you to my ignore list.

 

[jadami1973]

"Buckley is my hero".. no need to post it twice.. wasn't worth reading the first time. I am a big admirer of Bucks.. but that has nothing to do with my view on him remaining as coach. What you guys don't seem to be able to grasp is that for many like me.. it's not about Buckley.. never has been, never will be. Some of us love the Collingwood Football Club and not so much the individuals who come and go through it. For us it's about Collingwood achieving success as an entity and adding to the trophy cabinet. We don't really give a shit who gets us there.. we just want someone who can.

Spot On !!!

 

[Proper Gander]

Not exactly coaching as such but I want him to be retained specifically so he can continue as coaches night guest on 360. Genuinely compelling viewing watching him tear shreds of Robbo. Last nights effort up there with the best. Robbo sulking means Robbo not talking

 

[TW Sherrin]

Not exactly coaching as such but I want him to be retained specifically so he can continue as coaches night guest on 360. Genuinely compelling viewing watching him tear shreds of Robbo. Last nights effort up there with the best. Robbo sulking means Robbo not talking

TBH, Bucks has made his point and continuing to treat slobbo with contempt is below him. It's time he moved on.

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

It's pretty interesting to hear them talk the talk, without any pretense.

Watch, listen and then think about about the connection with the players.

 

[Anzacday]

sound observation. Only a woman can harden a man up..... ummm I mean make him more resilient...

I know some posters, (not me) would disagree with that