Mega Thread The 2017 'Buckley's Chances' Thread

[Saintly Viewed]

When?

Usually when I reply to you

 

[DoubleDraw7710]

Four years really if one is being pedantic.
The first two made finals but let's not quibble that wasn't his side, so making finals doesn't count even a prelim doesn't count.

Like building a business or racing stable if you like, can take a while to get all the pieces together before the business is strong and thriving.

But I get the alternative point of view.

My own view is this year we have actually improved, competitive in games, closer results, some games we should have (could have, would have, didn't win!) won.

I'd think more seasons with the group with further maturity, additions of better talent we may just get there.

I've been wrong before, but doubt I've panicked before though.

2011 22 wins (includes winning 2 finals)
2012 17 wins (includes winning 1 final) <- Buckley begins
2013 14 wins we lost the final we played in
2014 11 wins no finals
2015 10 wins no finals
2016 9 wins no finals
2017 5 +? wins (no finals most likely outcome)

It's six years of regression no one is being pedantic just accurate.

As for the could have, should have, Hawthorn should never have lost to us and we were lucky against Sydney so we could have been 3-10.

With more seasons our only true A graders Pendlebury and Reid retire no one seems to make it much past 30 at Collingwood. I see a deficit in top end talent for many years.

We need a coach to maximise the talent we have, hopefully with game plan ahead of the competition otherwise it's going to feel like the 90's again. (I consider 1990 to be the end of 80's)

 

[Saintly Viewed]

2011 22 wins (includes winning 2 finals)
2012 17 wins (includes winning 1 final) <- Buckley begins
2013 14 wins we lost the final we played in
2014 11 wins no finals
2015 10 wins no finals
2016 9 wins no finals
2017 5 +? wins (no finals most likely outcome)

It's six years of regression no one is being pedantic just accurate.

As for the could have, should have, Hawthorn should never have lost to us and we were lucky against Sydney so we could have been 3-10.

With more seasons our only true A graders Pendlebury and Reid retire no one seems to make it much past 30 at Collingwood. I see a deficit in top end talent for many years.

We need a coach to maximise the talent we have, hopefully with game plan ahead of the competition otherwise it's going to feel like the 90's again. (I consider 1990 to be the end of 80's)

Fair points made.
I get this point of view.

Whilst I do disagree, as this season I feel we are playing better.

But different perspectives are all welcome.

To me the coach itself is a bit over rated as the magic panacea.

If we can better our forwards for one, ie get an assistant to Moore, Elliot on deck and fit, were already much better.

But your points are well made even if I disagree on some aspects.

 

[ottoman]

Four years really if one is being pedantic.
The first two made finals but let's not quibble that wasn't his side, so making finals doesn't count even a prelim doesn't count.

Like building a business or racing stable if you like, can take a while to get all the pieces together before the business is strong and thriving.

But I get the alternative point of view.

My own view is this year we have actually improved, competitive in games, closer results, some games we should have (could have, would have, didn't win!) won.

I'd think more seasons with the group with further maturity, additions of better talent we may just get there.

I've been wrong before, but doubt I've panicked before though.

No SV not four LP was correct. It has been 6yrs of regression. You can make finals and still be regressing.

 

[Baird]

2011 22 wins (includes winning 2 finals)
2012 17 wins (includes winning 1 final) <- Buckley begins
2013 14 wins we lost the final we played in
2014 11 wins no finals
2015 10 wins no finals
2016 9 wins no finals
2017 5 +? wins (no finals most likely outcome)

It's six years of regression no one is being pedantic just accurate.

As for the could have, should have, Hawthorn should never have lost to us and we were lucky against Sydney so we could have been 3-10.

With more seasons our only true A graders Pendlebury and Reid retire no one seems to make it much past 30 at Collingwood. I see a deficit in top end talent for many years.

We need a coach to maximise the talent we have, hopefully with game plan ahead of the competition otherwise it's going to feel like the 90's again. (I consider 1990 to be the end of 80's)

"B-b-but there are more important things in football than winning! Right guys?!"

 

[Saintly Viewed]

No SV not four LP was correct. It has been 6yrs of regression. You can make finals and still be regressing.

I guess so.
How terrible.

But if it fits the narrative, why not

 

[DoubleDraw7710]

Fair points made.
I get this point of view.

Whilst I do disagree, as this season I feel we are playing better.

But different perspectives are all welcome.

To me the coach itself is a bit over rated as the magic panacea.

If we can better our forwards for one, ie get an assistant to Moore, Elliot on deck and fit, were already much better.

But your points are well made even if I disagree on some aspects.

I agree about the forwards but I would think we also need another tall defender and a fit Ben Reid, a small defender for the Betts/Grey type and pace/skills on the wing/HBF, Varcoe and someone else. I wonder if your feelings would change if we got belted by 60+ points. I feel we have adopted a high disposal backwards sideways playing style to stop blow outs but I see no future in this style of play. I wish I was as optimistic about Collingwood as you.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I agree about the forwards but I would think we also need another tall defender and a fit Ben Reid, a small defender for the Betts/Grey type and pace/skills on the wing/HBF, Varcoe and someone else. I wonder if your feelings would change if we got belted by 60+ points. I feel we have adopted a high disposal backwards sideways playing style to stop blow outs but I see no future in this style of play. I wish I was as optimistic about Collingwood as you.

There are gaps in various places, agree.

Forwards as noted, biggest gap.

Defence? Totally agree another extra type would help, is McLarty the answer? That's the big question, be great if he is. That's why Scharenberg bevoness important, can he be one a Clement type?

If we were constantly pounded, then yes a different conversation.
Multiple huge beatings, kills many things.

 

[No SPIN]

No he is not. Neither am I and neither are you. It's subjective FFS. Until he fails(gets the flick or quits) or succeeds (stays, gets great results , makes finals, grand finals , flags etc) Then none of us are correct.

We are all just putting forward our own opinions.

And in terms of the comment about "those who can't stand bucks" He is definately incorrect regarding some posters like myself. I like Bucks, loved him as a player and love hearing him talk about the game. I'm simply not convinced he is a good coach. As I have said many times if I still can't decide if he is a good coach 6 seasons in then he (In my opinion) is probably the wrong man to take us forward.

Saintly is 100% correct - it's been 4 years not 6 years. Making finals in the first 2 season DID NOT produce protests of bad performance. But now people falsely add in these years as a crutch to add weight to the anti Bucks argument, because 6 years sounds better than 4.

 

[ottoman]

Saintly is 100% correct it's been 4 years not 6 years. Making finals in the first 2 season DID NOT produce protests of bad performance. But now people falsely add in these years as a crutch to add weight to the anti Bucks argument, because 6 years sounds better than 4.

No Saintly is wrong and so are you.
Leviathan Pie pointed out that there had been 6 years of regression, which is correct and undisputable. It's not an opinion it is a fact. He did not say 6 years of failure.

 

[No SPIN]

No Saintly is wrong and so are you.
Leviathan Pie pointed out that there had been 6 years of regression, which is correct and undisputable. It's not an opinion it is a fact. He did not say 6 years of failure.

Sorry - the regression argument is the way people justify that Bucks can't coach. I am simply pointing out that no one complained about Buck' performance in the 2 years we made finals. So by definition 6 is not the relevant number 4 is, if you genuinely wish to link regression as a basis for bagging Bucks as a coach.
You can't NOW choose to bag him for the years we made finals - that's adsurd.

 

[ottoman]

Sorry - the regression argument is the way people justify that Bucks can't coach. I am simply pointing out that no one complained about Buck' performance in the 2 years we made finals. So by definition 6 is not the relevant number 4 is, if you genuinely wish to link regression as a basis for bagging Bucks as a coach.
You can't NOW choose to bag him for the years we made finals - that's adsurd.

Your interpreting it the wrong way.
It is not about bagging him out. It's about pointing out a trend. That trend started the day he started.
If we made finals last year or the year before or if we improved just once during his tenure we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Simple question. Including this year to date how many years have we regressed?
Simple answer. This is the 6th

Stating facts is not bagging someone out No Spin. It's just stating facts

 

[swiftdog]

Your interpreting it the wrong way.
It is not about bagging him out. It's about pointing out a trend. That trend started the day he started.
If we made finals last year or the year before or if we improved just once during his tenure we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Simple question. Including this year to date how many years have we regressed?
Simple answer. This is the 6th

Stating facts is not bagging someone out No Spin. It's just stating facts

Completely factually incorrect. We went from premiers in 2010 to runners-up in 2011. This is a regression. The trend started under Malthouse, not Buckley.

 

[ottoman]

Completely factually incorrect. We went from premiers in 2010 to runners-up in 2011. This is a regression. The trend started under Malthouse, not Buckley.

Actually I was thinking the same thing. But this is a point which is arguable.
We did regress as in not winning the flag but we improved when you look at the H&A season.
But ultimately your right it is actually our 7th season of regression.

 

[No SPIN]

Your interpreting it the wrong way.
It is not about bagging him out. It's about pointing out a trend. That trend started the day he started.
If we made finals last year or the year before or if we improved just once during his tenure we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Simple question. Including this year to date how many years have we regressed?
Simple answer. This is the 6th

Stating facts is not bagging someone out No Spin. It's just stating facts

Regression here is code for Bucks can't coach - you know that.
And people wrongly use 6 and not 4 because it sounds worse.

Sadly for many here, if we make finals this year, Bucks will have a 50% record for making finals. So suddenly his record looks much better.

 

[Toecrusher]

Saintly is 100% correct - it's been 4 years not 6 years. Making finals in the first 2 season DID NOT produce protests of bad performance. But now people falsely add in these years as a crutch to add weight to the anti Bucks argument, because 6 years sounds better than 4.

While I don't mind your point, the way I see it is, bucks took over successful side which declined from that point onward.
I would suspect the worst coach in league history would not drop straight out of the 8 either. I reckon even I could have got them back in the finals.

Even though I believe bucks holds a lot of responsibility for our slide, I will be very annoyed if he is sacked, and doesn't take a heap of others with him. The on field problems start in the boardroom and work their way down.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Completely factually incorrect. We went from premiers in 2010 to runners-up in 2011. This is a regression. The trend started under Malthouse, not Buckley.

Lol
That's very good, love the witty observation.

Never thought of that

 

[Scodog10]

Actually I was thinking the same thing. But this is a point which is arguable.
We did regress as in not winning the flag but we improved when you look at the H&A season.
But ultimately your right it is actually our 7th season of regression.

If I can interject for one moment. This year hasn't seen a regression because we're ahead of 2016 currently, albeit marginally (5-8 88% v 5-8 98%). Realisitcally though the only difference between the two seasons was the blowouts v Sydney and WC. We also need to win our next two to remain on track with 2016.

Obvious maintaining the status quo of 2016 is nowhere near good enough, but it doesn't work in with the 6 years of regression, yet.

 

[westozpie]

2011 22 wins (includes winning 2 finals)
2012 17 wins (includes winning 1 final) <- Buckley begins
2013 14 wins we lost the final we played in
2014 11 wins no finals
2015 10 wins no finals
2016 9 wins no finals
2017 5 +? wins (no finals most likely outcome)

It's six years of regression no one is being pedantic just accurate.

As for the could have, should have, Hawthorn should never have lost to us and we were lucky against Sydney so we could have been 3-10.

With more seasons our only true A graders Pendlebury and Reid retire no one seems to make it much past 30 at Collingwood. I see a deficit in top end talent for many years.

We need a coach to maximise the talent we have, hopefully with game plan ahead of the competition otherwise it's going to feel like the 90's again. (I consider 1990 to be the end of 80's)

Could we not by your logic then include the losses that could have been wins, perhaps add three wins to the w/l

 

[westozpie]

Usually when I reply to you

To Krueger and many others Saintly

 

[Saintly Viewed]

To Krueger and many others Saintly

Lol.

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

2011 22 wins (includes winning 2 finals)
2012 17 wins (includes winning 1 final) <- Buckley begins
2013 14 wins we lost the final we played in
2014 11 wins no finals
2015 10 wins no finals
2016 9 wins no finals
2017 5 +? wins (no finals most likely outcome)

It's six years of regression no one is being pedantic just accurate.

As for the could have, should have, Hawthorn should never have lost to us and we were lucky against Sydney so we could have been 3-10.

With more seasons our only true A graders Pendlebury and Reid retire no one seems to make it much past 30 at Collingwood. I see a deficit in top end talent for many years.

We need a coach to maximise the talent we have, hopefully with game plan ahead of the competition otherwise it's going to feel like the 90's again. (I consider 1990 to be the end of 80's)

Buckley was coach in 2012. MM last game as coach was the 2011 GF.

 

[SuperSub17]

Hawthorn 2013 - 22 wins 3 losses (88%)
Hawthorn 2014 - 20 wins 5 losses (80%)
Hawthorn 2015 - 19 wins 7 losses (73%)
Hawthorn 2016 - 17 wins 7 losses (71%)
Hawthorn 2017 - 5 wins 8 losses (38%)

Clarkson is a horrible coach, four straight years of going backwards.

Am I doing this right?

 

[Scodog10]

Hawthorn 2013 - 22 wins 3 losses (88%)
Hawthorn 2014 - 20 wins 5 losses (80%)
Hawthorn 2015 - 19 wins 7 losses (73%)
Hawthorn 2016 - 17 wins 7 losses (71%)
Hawthorn 2017 - 5 wins 8 losses (38%)

Clarkson is a horrible coach, four straight years of going backwards.

Am I doing this right?

No you aren't. Going premiership to premiership isn't a regression.

Two straight years though is accurate and knowing Hawthorn the heat will come if they're still going backwards in 2021 because they don't accept mediocrity (just ask Peter Schwab).

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Hawthorn 2013 - 22 wins 3 losses (88%)
Hawthorn 2014 - 20 wins 5 losses (80%)
Hawthorn 2015 - 19 wins 7 losses (73%)
Hawthorn 2016 - 17 wins 7 losses (71%)
Hawthorn 2017 - 5 wins 8 losses (38%)

Clarkson is a horrible coach, four straight years of going backwards.

Am I doing this right?

Gave me a laugh. Very witty.

But when winning flags, kind of cancels out.

But after their heydays in the 1980s they almost went down the gurgler - now that was regression.

They did rise again.

Common denominator of winning flags - great list of players