Coach Alastair Clarkson - NMFC Senior Coach - Coaching & Football Discussion II

[FlyHigh18]

Honestly don’t know if we’ll ever be a top 4 team if Clarko is replaced, but I do know that the likes of kerch, wardlaw, and FOS won’t be re-signing with the club if he leaves.

 

[gerry101101]

Eddie the Eagle stuff. People love an underequipped loser.

Hey, why do I feel attacked?

 

[Ichiro #51]

We've changed coaches, assistant coaches, presidents, board members, developmental staff, sports science staff, physios, strength and conditioning staff...

View attachment 2560272

Where’s our Analrapist when we need it?

 

[hilly]

Honestly don’t know if we’ll ever be a top 4 team if Clarko is replaced, but I do know that the likes of kerch, wardlaw, and FOS won’t be re-signing with the club if he leaves.

Who cares. If he's not the right coach those players will get over it. I get the feeling a few around here are happy to keep everyone at the club and results aren't important.

 

[Devil Fish]

Name one area of on-field improvement under Joe Biden.
Old Joe is more worried about posing for photos and telling a few gags.

I am beyond stunned as to how underwhelming he has been at Arden St.

 

[Gasometer]

Clarko has become the Joe Biden of AFL coaching.

I was thrilled when we signed him, but alarm bells have been ringing from very early on.

I don't see one area where we have improved as a team under his reign.

It's been a total disaster.

But we do have stability.

Joe Biden

I’d take Joe any day over the shit show of the past 18 months

 

[Only Forwards]

Who cares. If he's not the right coach those players will get over it. I get the feeling a few around here are happy to keep everyone at the club and results aren't important.

I do wonder what this mythical stability is meant to get us.

It’s not attracting players from elsewhere, all we’ve gotten is Mercs looking for pay days.

It’s not getting us consistency of effort.

It’s not getting us identifiable style or game plan that can stand up to pressure.

It’s certainly not gotten us anything like consequences for under performance.

There’s this repeated backwards and forwards about cowboy or cattle.

It’s both.

The cattle can’t hit a target and wilt when pressure goes up and the f***ing cowboy plays them again the next week like everything is fine.

Nothing changes until we raise the bar on what is acceptable. The loss to West Coast was unacceptable. I’d wager we will see at most three changes from the weekend. One forced and two kids. Probably Dova and Blamires like they’re even remotely the f***ing problem.

 

[Mixed Results]

You can't force stability.

If you have the right people in charge, then you'll naturally build stability over time. If you force it, then you're only creating a culture of unaccountability.

There's no expectations of performance for anyone at our club. Our primary goal as a club wasn't improvement, it was reducing turnover.

It's also a strategy that rings hollow when you look at the board's actions during Sonja's first year in charge.

Hood blew up everything in her pursuit of Clarkson. David Noble and Dan McPherson were the obvious casualties, but reporting also suggests that Ben Amarfio was a casualty of us landing Clarkson.

So her decision to land Clarkson left us with a new CEO, a new GM, a new Coach, and a new batch of assistant coaches. We had gone through so much turnover in the preceding years, but she blew it all up again to land Clarkson.

Now we're being told to accept four years of losing in the name of stability? That's unacceptable.

Clarkson had the excuse of the racism saga, but that excuse has now expired. Two unimpeded summers is enough to install his gameplan. Now it has to be executed over the next two weeks or else he and Hood are both gone.

 

[FlyHigh18]

i think we're over complicating it.
had we kept the pressure and effort up it would have been an easy win.
we had them across every stat except contested ball and pressure. they in turn were able to find space and get more inside 50s for those two extra goals.

its always the same shit, we keep it up until we concede a few and then the boys just give up and switch off. one lazy effort is seen by another and then another and next thing no one's doing anything.

 

[Themanbun]

You can't force stability.

If you have the right people in charge, then you'll naturally build stability over time. If you force it, then you're only creating a culture of unaccountability.

There's no expectations of performance for anyone at our club. Our primary goal as a club wasn't improvement, it was reducing turnover.

It's also a strategy that rings hollow when you look at the board's actions during Sonja's first year in charge.

Hood blew up everything in her pursuit of Clarkson. David Noble and Dan McPherson were the obvious casualties, but reporting also suggests that Ben Amarfio was a casualty of us landing Clarkson.

So her decision to land Clarkson left us with a new CEO, a new GM, a new Coach, and a new batch of assistant coaches. We had gone through so much turnover in the preceding years, but she blew it all up again to land Clarkson.

Now we're being told to accept four years of losing in the name of stability? That's unacceptable.

Clarkson had the excuse of the racism saga, but that excuse has now expired. Two unimpeded summers is enough to install his gameplan. Now it has to be executed over the next two weeks or else he and Hood are both gone.

It's an interesting point. Stability could be associated with success because success creates stability, not the other way around. Maybe.

 

[Only Forwards]

i think we're over complicating it.
had we kept the pressure and effort up it would have been an easy win.
we had them across every stat except contested ball and pressure. they in turn were able to find space and get more inside 50s for those two extra goals.

its always the same shit, we keep it up until we concede a few and then the boys just give up and switch off. one lazy effort is seen by another and then another and next thing no one's doing anything.

So the players don’t do. The coach rarely holds any to account through selection.

We may or may not get some response through internally agreeing to be better.

If we get no response then we cycle through the above again. And if we get a response we celebrate having a response, but the clock is ticking on the next cycle of ineptitude.

We’re on a f***ing hamster wheel.

 

[Makeshift Park]

It's an interesting point. Stability could be associated with success because success creates stability, not the other way around. Maybe.

There’s a few degrees and permutations of “success”.

If success is defined by keeping a young talented playing group together long enough that one could reasonably expect them to execute a competitive gameplan sustainably, then stability would usually be a precondition of that I reckon.

But that type of success can only be your number one priority for a few years at best before everyone gets impatient.

Success beyond that probably benefits from the odd disruptive leadership type. Someone not afraid to take risks, pick fights and make strategic sacrifices.

 

[Mixed Results]

Success beyond that probably benefits from the odd disruptive leadership type. Someone not afraid to take risks, pick fights and make strategic sacrifices.

Brendon Gale is a good recent example. Richmond likely don't win the 2017 premiership without Gale taking ownership and shaking things up.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure that Jen Watt even realizes that we have a men's team. Ben Amarfio, for better or for worse, wanted to see the club win games of footy. I don't think he'd have sat idly and waited patiently for things to turn.

There's benefits to stability, but there's also mountains of evidence that three years is more than enough time to see it pay off with a young list. Alarm bells should have been ringing when we won five games last year.

 

[Themanbun]

There’s a few degrees and permutations of “success”.

If success is defined by keeping a young talented playing group together long enough that one could reasonably expect them to execute a competitive gameplan sustainably, then stability would usually be a precondition of that I reckon.

But that type of success can only be your number one priority for a few years at best before everyone gets impatient.

Success beyond that probably benefits from the odd disruptive leadership type. Someone not afraid to take risks, pick fights and make strategic sacrifices.

Agreed mate. People need to critically think about things and defend their thesis rather than just saying 'change' or 'stability' will bring success.

Side note but I've had a lot to do with football and you'd be surprised at the amount of people who aren't really capable of critical thought to the degree you'd expect who reach very senior positions. A lot of footy is a luck game and the right crop of players can make anyone seem like they know what they're doing.

Not saying that towards anyone in particular but just a bit of a warning that hey, you don't need to buy what successful people are selling you just because of who is selling it, because chances are they like the rest of us have NFI.

 

[King Corey]

Agreed mate. People need to critically think about things and defend their thesis rather than just saying 'change' or 'stability' will bring success.

Side note but I've had a lot to do with football and you'd be surprised at the amount of people who aren't really capable of critical thought to the degree you'd expect who reach very senior positions. A lot of footy is a luck game and the right crop of players can make anyone seem like they know what they're doing.

Not saying that towards anyone in particular but just a bit of a warning that hey, you don't need to buy what successful people are selling you just because of who is selling it, because chances are they like the rest of us have NFI.

You could apply that to any sphere of life tbh.

Plenty of times there's a figurehead moving around between prestigious roles who is providing little more than a talking head to the board.

 

[perplexed]

Agreed mate. People need to critically think about things and defend their thesis rather than just saying 'change' or 'stability' will bring success.

Side note but I've had a lot to do with football and you'd be surprised at the amount of people who aren't really capable of critical thought to the degree you'd expect who reach very senior positions. A lot of footy is a luck game and the right crop of players can make anyone seem like they know what they're doing.

Not saying that towards anyone in particular but just a bit of a warning that hey, you don't need to buy what successful people are selling you just because of who is selling it, because chances are they like the rest of us have NFI.

 

[NMFC49]

Joe Biden

I’d take Joe any day over the shit show of the past 18 months

Sleepy Joe, the president who occasionally got out of bed. C'mon man.

 

[King Corey]

Who cares. If he's not the right coach those players will get over it. I get the feeling a few around here are happy to keep everyone at the club and results aren't important.

I'm trying to think of noteable coaching changeovers at winning clubs in recent history.

Dogs - McCartney comes in Fagan style, the teacher from a successful program. Axed for Beveridge who turns them almost immediately into a competitive unit

Richmond - see out full Frawley then Wallace tenures without fruit before coming good under Hardwick at the 11th hour

Brisbane - axe Leppitsch when player attrition out of control, trial serial bridesmaid Fagan and slowly build to be a constant threat

Melbourne - stutter along before a successful master-protege arrangement with Roos-Goodwin

The nearest equivalents to our current situation are unfortunately Pagan and Malthouse at Carlton whose hirings and axings provided next to no benefit to them.

You could argue Hardwick's long runway to success at Richmond is now our only recent precedent to cling on to. No other successful regime showed as little as us this far into the process.

 

[Gasometer]

Sleepy Joe, the president who occasionally got out of bed. C'mon man.

You saw the tarmac interview in its entirety yesterday?

He may as well been asleep because it made no sense whatsoever

 

[ferball]

i think we're over complicating it.
had we kept the pressure and effort up it would have been an easy win.
we had them across every stat except contested ball and pressure. they in turn were able to find space and get more inside 50s for those two extra goals.

its always the same shit, we keep it up until we concede a few and then the boys just give up and switch off. one lazy effort is seen by another and then another and next thing no one's doing anything.

Except this didn't happen the week before. It was the opposite.

It might have happened in Adelaide with their crowd and the umps paying frees when the crowd says, but it didn't happen at home.

 

[Chip Scab1]

Good post Doc, just our veterans are mostly those cast off from other clubs or journey men that aint much good.

T Pinks turn 28 in July
C Daniel 30 in June
L Parker 34 in August
J Darling 34 in July
G Logue 28 in May
L Mac 31

How many of the above are you concerned about seeing in 2027? My answer is below



View attachment 2560617

Parker for Melb games would be the only one.

 

[ferball]

I'm trying to think of noteable coaching changeovers at winning clubs in recent history.

Dogs - McCartney comes in Fagan style, the teacher from a successful program. Axed for Beveridge who turns them almost immediately into a competitive unit

Richmond - see out full Frawley then Wallace tenures without fruit before coming good under Hardwick at the 11th hour

Brisbane - axe Leppitsch when player attrition out of control, trial serial bridesmaid Fagan and slowly build to be a constant threat

Melbourne - stutter along before a successful master-protege arrangement with Roos-Goodwin

The nearest equivalents to our current situation are unfortunately Pagan and Malthouse at Carlton whose hirings and axings provided next to no benefit to them.

You could argue Hardwick's long runway to success at Richmond is now our only recent precedent to cling on to. No other successful regime showed as little as us this far into the process.

Under the same coach in the middle of a rebuild downturn - we're a tiny bit behind where Adelaide were.

Are you people just ignoring that so you can continue whinging?

 

[King Corey]

Under the same coach in the middle of a rebuild downturn - we're a tiny bit behind where Adelaide were.

Are you people just ignoring that so you can continue whinging?

Could I have that again in English?

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Under the same coach in the middle of a rebuild downturn - we're a tiny bit behind where Adelaide were.

Are you people just ignoring that so you can continue whinging?

It’s not a tiny bit, ferbs.

It’s a clear chasm. We haven’t finished above 16th for six years.

Not comparable.

 

[shintemaster]

i think we're over complicating it.
had we kept the pressure and effort up it would have been an easy win.
we had them across every stat except contested ball and pressure. they in turn were able to find space and get more inside 50s for those two extra goals.

its always the same shit, we keep it up until we concede a few and then the boys just give up and switch off. one lazy effort is seen by another and then another and next thing no one's doing anything.

I agree with this completely - but that is entirely within the football departments control. If they don't have the guts to cull players and have it crystal clear why this is occurring that's on them.