Mega Thread The 2016 Buckley Coaching Discussion

[Maggie5]

There are many who believe that too much credit or discredit is given to leaders in all areas of life. Just out of curiosity, considering your views on both Bucks and Roos, do you believe that a coach plays a significant role in a team's success or lack thereof?

I have already mentioned it somewhere in the thread and expressed it in terms of percentages. It really is not that different to business really.
No matter how good a coach is you must have the cattle. Coach has the vision and the plan, others implement it.
Think it went along the lines of 50% players, 25% medical/fitness/support staff, 25% coach (or something similar). So in total 75% people 25% coach.

 

[Maggie5]

Bucks said he had Coaches that don't get close. That is the Opposite what MM did

Think that what he said was right, consistency is the big issue, you never know which Collingwood will turn up.
I also associate consistency with confidence, and because of the high turnover in selection and missing some key players,
I daresay that confidence and risk taking is down.
That will change especially since it has given others the opportunity to get a games.

 

[TradeDraft]

Think that what he said was right, consistency is the big issue, you never know which Collingwood will turn up.
I also associate consistency with confidence, and because of the high turnover in selection and missing some key players,
I daresay that confidence and risk taking is down.
That will change especially since it has given others the opportunity to get a games.

Injuries has made that bit hard but I don't believe you can use it as a Total Excuse for our Up and Down Performances

 

[good4footy]

I was most interested in his reaction to the Hurley question at the end.

 

[Anzacday]

I was most interested in his reaction to the Hurley question at the end.

So were Scott & Robbo

 

[Maggie5]

Injuries has made that bit hard but I don't believe you can use it as a Total Excuse for our Up and Down Performances

But I am not using it as the total excuse.
We introduced 3 new players with previous experience but new to the club and its training methods and game plan, Treloar, Howe and Aish, then either because of form or injuries we played another 16 that had little or no senior experience, players need time to build up chemistry and confidence in playing with one another. Not sure how you can build consistency with this type of revolving door.
I think I mentioned in this or another thread that we have had only four players that have played every game, to be consistent, you need a few more than that. I personally think that you can get a way with 9 players at the minimum playing every game.

 

[daicosdemis]

So would you break that 80% player group down further into x% recruitment and y% development, or does development come out of the 10% coach/ 10% other factors? I don't see clubs putting 80% of their FD funds into recruitment and you'd think they'd have the best idea as to how important each factor is in terms of winning premierships. Gut feeling you may be underestimating the importance of the coaching group with a 10% value and same with the other factors value.

Attributing only 10% value to the coaching group contradicts everything we know and have seen by the historically great coaches.
Only this week Bomber Thompson on 360 said he enjoyed his first flag as a coach more than the one he won as captain of Essendon.
Asked why by Slobbo he replied "There was a lot more that I had to do as a coach". So there you go, just confirmation of what most of us knew.

 

[good4footy]

So were Scott & Robbo

I wasn't watching the show, just the clip that was attached. Was there more on the issue?

 

[Schraderbrau]

Bucks said he had Coaches that don't get close. That is the Opposite what MM did

yeah i thought that was a strange comment. must have been talking about robert walls

 

[Anzacday]

I wasn't watching the show, just the clip that was attached. Was there more on the issue?

I only saw that too.
Huddo says so tomorrow Collingwood makes it's bid and Scott says that what it sounded like, that's what I read it into it and Robbo laughed in agreement.

 

[CFC2010]

I wasn't watching the show, just the clip that was attached. Was there more on the issue?

It was Robbos attempt at humour!

 

[Roverjg]

I only saw that too.
Huddo says so tomorrow Collingwood makes it's bid and Scott says that what it sounded like, that's what I read it into it and Robbo laughed in agreement.

Robbo asked Bucks would the Pies be interested in Hurley. Bucks replied all 17 clubs would be interested in a 27 year old AA CHB/FB. Huddo then stated that the back page of the paper will say Collingwood makes a bid for Hurley. Scott laughed and said that's what he heard. Bucks smirked

 

[noideaatall]

Attributing only 10% value to the coaching group contradicts everything we know and have seen by the historically great coaches.
Only this week Bomber Thompson on 360 said he enjoyed his first flag as a coach more than the one he won as captain of Essendon.
Asked why by Slobbo he replied "There was a lot more that I had to do as a coach". So there you go, just confirmation of what most of us knew.

Yeah as I understand it the point SV was making is that we over estimate the importance of a coach. I tend to agree somewhat. However, when you consider a player group then recruitment, desired structure or list balance, development, playing group/club culture and selection - for example - are all key factors and the coach has a hand in every single one. Bit like salt or flavouring in cooking: not important in quantity but a fraction too much or too little makes all the difference. I know it was a different era but the difference between our performance in 1976 and 1977 had little to do with the player group and demonstrated how important it is to get those periphery aspects right.

Never watched 360 before. In that interview Bucks stated the biggest challenge could be improving performance against lesser teams. Does this undermine the argument expressed by some posters that its our wins against the top teams that we should be using as an indicator of improvement?

 

[Leigh Lowther]

The importance of a coach determined by the coach itself. He decides how much instructions he wants to give and he chooses the scope of his demands.

 

[CFC2010]

I have already mentioned it somewhere in the thread and expressed it in terms of percentages. It really is not that different to business really.
No matter how good a coach is you must have the cattle. Coach has the vision and the plan, others implement it.
Think it went along the lines of 50% players, 25% medical/fitness/support staff, 25% coach (or something similar). So in total 75% people 25% coach.

Hypothetical to you and Saintly Viewed who don't hold the coach on a high pedestal like I do.

Hawthorn win the 2016 Premiership (booooooo) and Eddie with the help of Jeff Kennett and James Packer make him a deal he can't refuse.

Does your percentage for potential success increase under Clarkson or remain the same under Bucks?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Hypothetical to you and Saintly Viewed who don't hold the coach on a high pedestal like I do.

Hawthorn win the 2016 Premiership (booooooo) and Eddie with the help of Jeff Kennett and James Packer make him a deal he can't refuse.

Does your percentage for potential success increase under Clarkson or remain the same under Bucks?

Because Clarkson has won numerous flags he has AUTHORITY that can only come via such success.
This means like Leigh Mathhews there is far less doubt when he speaks etc.
However, like Pagan and Malthouse at Carlton if that natural authority were to be trashed or broken the. It's natural free fall anyway.
So does my % change, perhaps at the margins, initially anyway.
But one thing is certain in my mind, our list today with Clarkson would not be winning flags circa 2016.
He'd need to build the list far more.
He'd have the authority to do so, and if success didn't come, no fear he would be bagged too.

NB his success gives him revered status, certainly in the beginning.

But cattle poor, the eating of the steak is poor.....

 

[CFC2010]

Because Clarkson has won numerous flags he has AUTHORITY that can only come via such success.

NB his success gives him revered status, certainly in the beginning.

But cattle poor, the eating of the steak is poor.....

I guarantee if Clarkson had the same cattle this year the "sauce" he would have added would have made it a lot tastier than it was...........Bucks has a long way to go to cook that perfect steak.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

I guarantee if Clarkson had the same cattle this year the "sauce" he would have added would have made it a lot tastier than it was...........Bucks has a long way to go to cook that perfect steak.

After reading that I blame Bucks for making me go to the fridge, oh & you.

 

[PicaBoo]

I guarantee if Clarkson had the same cattle this year the "sauce" he would have added would have made it a lot tastier than it was...........Bucks has a long way to go to cook that perfect steak.

We could have played Caff and Goldsack and such a lot more. Only 1 ruck at all times. Leave the kids in the VFL. Guaranteed a few more wins but still not the finals birth but and less suited for the next seasons.

 

[CFC2010]

After reading that I blame Bucks for making me go to the fridge, oh & you.

It's always Bucks fault O A......329 pages proves that.

By the way being Obese nothing wrong with you going to the fridge

 

[PieBeast]

We could have played Caff and Goldsack and such a lot more. Only 1 ruck at all times. Leave the kids in the VFL. Guaranteed a few more wins but still not the finals birth but and less suited for the next seasons.

lulz, was waiting for someone to play the Bucks is playing the side with a view to the future excuse card, guess that's why Blair has been a mainstay of the side, Caff was given a promotion on the back of **** all, Phillips has hardly had a look in and Rupe took an eternity to get a game

 

[GreekLunatic]

Next year we could reach this page too 1000

 

[Toecrusher]

Robbo asked Bucks would the Pies be interested in Hurley. Bucks replied all 17 clubs would be interested in a 27 year old AA CHB/FB. Huddo then stated that the back page of the paper will say Collingwood makes a bid for Hurley. Scott laughed and said that's what he heard. Bucks smirked

I hate that smirk. It's not like he has achieved anything worth smirking about since taking over as coach. It's been a disaster.

It's a pity we can't get a smirk from Bucks for actually achieving something worthwhile, like coaching a team to perform at their best. Instead, we get Bucks smirking about chasing a star, that he secretly plans to convert into a mediocre player, just like he's converted our entire squad into a mediocre team.

Sure, we've had injuries, but that doesn't make us kick straight to the opposition like we do so often. It doesn't stop individual players developing & improving. We've heard all the excuses, what we haven't heard, is what's being done to change things. The players are always coping the blame, not the coach, and not the game plan.

It seems our "game plan" is to tackle the opponents often enough, that their skill level will drop down match to ours, then we'll snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. From now until the start of 2017 needs to be entirely about improving our skills and developing a modern game plan.
Save the smirks for when our win loss record moves above 50/50.

 

[PieBeast]

Next year we could reach this page too 1000

And 999 of them will consist of how the horror that's befallen us has nothing to do with Bucks yet the success of the sides leapfrogging us isn't due to their coaches.

 

[mike123]

We could have played Caff and Goldsack and such a lot more. Only 1 ruck at all times. Leave the kids in the VFL. Guaranteed a few more wins but still not the finals birth but and less suited for the next seasons.

That sounds more like a good way to tank.