Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III

[Art Vandelay_]

Always do wonder why this thread keeps ticking over in summer. Surely can’t be anything illuminating being discussed for the very first time. Not exactly any football being played with which we can use new evidence as a discussion point.

 

[goyoucatters]

Well you have to include everything as far as I'm concerned. The good, the moderate, and the bad.

Fact - He's a premiership coach. Deservedly so.
Fact - His home and away record is outstanding.
Fact - His finals record is 6-8.
Fact - His recent finals record is not good - 3-8 in the last 6 years (before arteries are burst the full finals record is immediately above it).

Can't wait to be told how they are opinions.

Don't hold your breath. Those are all clearly facts. Which have been stated ad infinitum on here.

It's the extreme opinions disconnected from facts (both the 'genius, can do no wrong' and the 'no idea, can't coach at all' perspectives) that rightly get pilloried.

 

[winty]

Always do wonder why this thread keeps ticking over in summer. Surely can’t be anything illuminating being discussed for the very first time. Not exactly any football being played with which we can use new evidence as a discussion point.

Just waiting for someone to critique his coaching in the upcoming International Rules series....

 

[And_ROOS]

FACT: In the past 3 finals series we have been comprehensively SMASHED in finals in the same manner. Coaching staff hasn't learned from those mistakes. Home and away victories mean literally nothing when you have back to back smackings in Preliminary Finals that is embarrassing for anyone associated with the club.

 

[Landgraft]

Well you have to include everything as far as I'm concerned. The good, the moderate, and the bad.

Fact - He's a premiership coach. Deservedly so.
Fact - His home and away record is outstanding.
Fact - His finals record is 6-8.
Fact - His recent finals record is not good - 3-8 in the last 6 years (before arteries are burst the full finals record is immediately above it).

Can't wait to be told how they are opinions.

I feel that if you want to break up his finals record the logical division is 2011-2014 and 2016-onwards. So 4-5 and 2-3, although percentage would probably help (and further criticise the recent performances).

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Not really. Sydney says he can coach for shit in finals. Our away record proves our tactics work away from skilled. Claiming we won't win another premiership under Scott isn't really going out on a limb, it is just really difficult to win a premiership - 17 teams don't every year. So, this is just your opinion.

You can pick and choose outliers to suit your views - mine are based on more than 1 or 2 games... Its a trend that is real - to deny it is to have your head in the sand. Ranked 1st during regular season down to 10th in finals.. That is not an opinion - it's a fact.

 

[Ricketz]

You can pick and choose outliers to suit your views - mine are based on more than 1 or 2 games... Its a trend that is real - to deny it is to have your head in the sand. Ranked 1st during regular season down to 10th in finals.. That is not an opinion - it's a fact.

No that isn't true, with such a small dataset, you can't say there is a trend. To try to claim there is one shows a profound misunderstanding of statistics. When you base your argument on weak data, only weak data is needed to refute it.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

No that isn't true, with such a small dataset, you can't say there is a trend. To try to claim there is one shows a profound misunderstanding of statistics. When you base your argument on weak data, only weak data is needed to refute it.

The dataset is more than large enough to obtain a trend. Stop denying it.

 

[Ricketz]

The dataset is more than large enough to obtain a trend. Stop denying it.

You have, at best, three finals series to go from. Any prior to 2014 are pretty much irrelevant - it is not the same list of players by a significant margin. So no amount of wishing it to be true will make it true, you don't have the data to trend.

 

[cynical]

if you want to look at our finals data and determine whether there is a trend you should look at the results

-1 or +1 for extremely bad or extremely good losses/wins, 50/50 games with a small win or loss dont count nor do wins as a big favourite

2013 we finished 2nd
1st final vs fremantle we are at home big favourites and lose (-1)
2nd final we are big favourites and beat port
3rd final lose to hawks in a 50/50 game

2014 we finished 3rd
1st final vs hawks 50/50 and lose
2nd final favourites vs north and lose (-1)

2015 no finals

2016 we finish 2nd
1st final 50/50 vs hawks we win
2nd final favourites vs Sydney we lose heavily (-1)

2017
we finish 2nd
1st final 50/50 we get smashed by richmond (-1)
2nd final we thrash sydney (+1)
3rd final we are thrashed by Adelaide (-1)

finishing 2nd/3rd/2nd and 2nd
we have 5 extremely poor losses and 1 good win

fact - our last 3 finals series
2014 out in straight sets
2016 thrashed in a prelim
2017 thrashed in a prelim

 

[The rabbi]

Can't wait to be told how they are opinions.

That's just your opinion.

 

[Cataholic]

Always do wonder why this thread keeps ticking over in summer. Surely can’t be anything illuminating being discussed for the very first time. Not exactly any football being played with which we can use new evidence as a discussion point.

I find it interesting that, despite all the facts, I’ve never seen someone conclude that the facts, stats, data etc run contrary to their interpretation and opinion.

The same facts appear to support two diametrically opposed opinions.

 

[Catman]

as usual only pro Scott opinions matter

there are many valid criticisms of Scott and his tactics that have been mentioned many times, but fall on deaf ears to the believers

fact - Chris Scott has a terrible finals record
fact - home and away records count for nothing, flags are what matter

This would suggest a lot of coaches aren't any good, if it's solely down to the amount of flags won. They are so easy to win after all.

So Ross Lyon can't coach?

Is John Longmire equal to CS, as both only have one flag? I can imagine how CS would be received if we lost our last two GF appearances despite going in as favourites.

 

[Spazz Cat]

This would suggest a lot of coaches aren't any good, if it's solely down to the amount of flags won. They are so easy to win after all.

So Ross Lyon can't coach?

Is John Longmire equal to CS, as both only have one flag? I can imagine how CS would be received if we lost our last two GF appearances despite going in as favourites.

I totally think Longmire deserves more heat than he gets. I believe they have really underachieved since 2012.
They were favourites in 14 and got smacked, didn't even fire a shot.
Things went against them in 16 but they still should've been good enough to win.
This year they looked smug IMO after the Essendon final. Thought they were gonna get us easy.
I am surprised not many are questioning Longmire's coaching.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

Well you have to include everything as far as I'm concerned. The good, the moderate, and the bad.

Fact - He's a premiership coach. Deservedly so.
Fact - His home and away record is outstanding.
Fact - His finals record is 6-8.
Fact - His recent finals record is not good - 3-8 in the last 6 years (before arteries are burst the full finals record is immediately above it).

Can't wait to be told how they are opinions.

Why? Everything you state is a fact. Nothing in my post suggests otherwise. The issue is with the dolts who state he has NFI, cant coach, or who cherry pick information to suit their view.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

He can't prepare the team or coach for shit in finals. Fact. His tactics work fine at Skilled but go to shit away. Fact. We are not going to win another premiership while Scott is head coach. Opinion backed by FACT.

You prove my point.

'Fact. We are not going to win another premiership while Scott is head coach. Opinion backed by FACT'
That's not a fact, that's opinion. You can only have opinions about events that haven't yet occurred. There are no 'facts' in speculation about the future.

'He can't prepare the team or coach for shit in finals. Fact.' That's an opinion, because your statement can be countered with factual evidence. Evidence like Scott coaching a team to a flag (the ultimate final). Or that has won other finals, even against excellent teams. He clearly can prepare a team and coach in finals, because there is evidence that shows he can. That is a fact.

'His tactics work fine at Skilled but go to shit away. Fact.' Same as the above. That he has coached many wins over his career away from home is a FACT that counters your OPNION.

You literally do not know the difference between a fact and opinion.

As I have said before, C.Scott may not be the coach to win us our next flag. I don't know, and no one knows. But his record clearly shows that he can coach. And that he has had success as a coach.

If you and all the other Scott-haters want to be taken seriously (by anyone), then I suggest you do the following. Start recognising the fact of his record and successes. Stop cherrypicking information so that it fits your view. Build your criticism from a less extreme and unrealistic position. You can criticise his strategy and his more recent finals record all you like. But do so in a way that has some bearing on reality. And show a little ****ing humility. Half a dozen High School games aren't comparable to his resume. I know it's hard to believe, but internet access and a keyboard doesn't make you an expert.

 

[Landgraft]

The dataset is more than large enough to obtain a trend. Stop denying it.

Not only is it not big enough but it also contains too many unchecked variables. None of the conclusions here are remotely 'proven'.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

as usual only pro Scott opinions matter

there are many valid criticisms of Scott and his tactics that have been mentioned many times, but fall on deaf ears to the believers

fact - Chris Scott has a terrible finals record
fact - home and away records count for nothing, flags are what matter

Please see my post above, #3066. See especially the last paragraph.

But I have to say, what a bunch of petals you Scott-haters are. You belittle anyone who simply points out Scott's achievements and who doesn't think he is an idiot. You denigrate these moderate positions as examples of 'Scott-lovers'.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

I think people are massively underrating the impact that Selwood's injury had on our finals this year. A fully fit Selwood was just what we needed to turn both the Richmond and the Adelaide games. And combined with Danger's efforts might have got us there or even meant we weren't in a bad position in the first place.

 

[Armo7]

Could find out off Danger. He helped get him sacked.
Didn't spend enough time with younger players apparently.
Meanwhile Scott doesn't even speak to them for 12 months and doesn't show up to exit interviews LOL.

That's just scuttlebutt. If that is real and you are hearing it, then Brian Cook is definitely aware of it. And as we know with the Thomson review, Cook knows how to identify and solve problems.

 

[Armo7]

i agree with that....

the guy has a silver tongue, though - speaks a great game.

and his record of win % speaks for itself...

overall, i like him. i think he is a very good coach.

but that doesnt mean there isnt a better and more 'now' coach out there to be found.

For all these Scott discontent out there, there is a surprising lack of nomination of a replacement coach. A case of don't like what you've got, but not sure what you want in preference either.

 

[Spazz Cat]

That's just scuttlebutt. If that is real and you are hearing it, then Brian Cook is definitely aware of it. And as we know with the Thomson review, Cook knows how to identify and solve problems.

Dunno about scuttlebutt. I recently read an interview with Gillies where that was the case. So can take that as fact.
Fact is he didn't turn up to exit interviews last year. No scuttlebutt there.
Scuttlebutt would be the rumours that Lloyd was hired to communicate to young players because Scott wouldn't even talk to them to tell them why they were dropped, the Lang rumours that Scott did not talk to him for 12 months or that Kent Kingsley shit.
That said, even if all that was true I don't know if that's the norm at most clubs.
Maybe it is so there's no problem anyway.

 

[cynical]

Please see my post above, #3066. See especially the last paragraph.

But I have to say, what a bunch of petals you Scott-haters are. You belittle anyone who simply points out Scott's achievements and who doesn't think he is an idiot. You denigrate these moderate positions as examples of 'Scott-lovers'. Despite your extreme positions, you are given a green light to continue your mob mentality and abuse. Beyond that, some of things I have read about Scott on game day threads beggars belief. So disgusting, yet sadly common on this board.

we are petals? extreme positions?

we are a minority that post actual analysis, but we get shot down because its not what fanbois want to hear, the truth hurts

just because you disagree doesn't make our positions extreme

If you and all the other Scott-haters want to be taken seriously (by anyone), then I suggest you do the following. Start recognising the fact of his record and successes. Stop cherrypicking information so that it fits your view. Build your criticism from a less extreme and unrealistic position. You can criticise his strategy and his more recent finals record all you like. But do so in a way that has some bearing on reality. And show a little ******* humility. Half a dozen High School games aren't comparable to his resume. I know it's hard to believe, but internet access and a keyboard doesn't make you an expert.

Lets look at some more facts

The 2007-2011 team was one of the strongest in history with the number of all australians.
The introduction of the 2 franchise clubs diluted the talent pool in the draft making it harder for clubs to catch up with talent.
The club has recruited a lot of mature age players in the past few years, free agency has helped with this.

Taking those 3 things into account there is no surprise Chris Scott has a good home and away record, especially given the huge home ground advantage we have on a narrow ground.

You can read my post #3060 and see that our recent finals record is shocking.

You are saying our credentials aren't as good so our points are invalid? This is just embarrassing, you dont need to have played the sport at a high level to be able to analyse it. Just because someone has played 200 games of AFL doesnt make them expert strategists.

I have talked before about game theory but those kinds of posts get ignored because people like yourself cant understand it so you just complain about the constant negativity.

Here is another fact for you, when people post analysis that gets ignored they end up just posting their opinions without the analysis.

 

[Nankervis brothers]

its not what fanbois want to hear

Proves my point, really. Any poster who defends Scott on any level is a denigrated as a 'fanbois'.

we are a minority

You certainly are—a loud one with your very own thread.

we[...]post actual analysis

So do those who defend Scott, you just choose to ignore it or denigrate it as 'fanbois' musings.

You are saying our credentials aren't as good so our points are invalid? This is just embarrassing, you dont need to have played the sport at a high level to be able to analyse it

True, I agree. But you can analyse and criticise with some humility. What's embarrassing is pretending you know better than a guy who has spent 24 years playing and coaching at the elite level.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

“Truth”. Hilarious.
It’s an opinion Cynical. Nothing more.