Opinion 2023 Pass mark (Nicks keeps job)

[AFC979810]

As I've said before I think some of Nicks's future depends on Hinkley. There is always one club in town under pressure. If Port have a good year, Nicks will become the media target. I'm not suggesting the Club care about Port but they do care if the media is hounding the club.

Spot on. Pressure builds externally. Sometimes it becomes too much for the club to be able to handle.

 

[AFC979810]

going in and out of finals is what cost Rutten and Ratten, once you make finals the first time it sets the level of expectation for the list.

Not really. Rutten made finals one year and didn't the other. Hardly a yo-yo situation.

Look at Buckley - got given a list and made finals 2 years and then spent 4 years out of them. Goodwin went 9th, 5th (prelim), 17th, 9th in his first four years. Ratten went 11 wins (finals), 10 wins, 11 wins to fired.

Plenty of coaches have hit finals early, dipped out and continued employment. Look at Voss at Brisbane - took em to the finals year 1 with 14 wins and then had 7,4,10 and 8 wins before getting the arse.

There is a definite trend now to give coaches a longer tenure. Probably exacerbated by the well documented decision by Richmond to keep Hardwick after 2016 when (after 3 consecutive finals appearances) they finished 13th.

Its been highlighted by the Saints hanging on to Richardson for longer than they should have, Stuart Dew (although I agree with this one) at Gold Coast, Hinkley at Port, Buckley had 8 years.

 

[AFC979810]

When you go into further detail

The Saints went 12-10 in Richardson's 3rd season and missed the finals on %, Dew is up there coaching a basketcase club and Ted Whitten's initial stint was back in the 1950s

Keeping Nicks for a 5th year, especially if we have a mediocre 2023, will almost be unprecedented.

What doesn't excite me is that all 3 coaches who were retained after 4 shitty seasons with no finals - didn't fair any better in their 5th season.

Its why I am a huge advocate of finals or bust for Nicks.

 

[Redline]

Not really. Rutten made finals one year and didn't the other. Hardly a yo-yo situation.

Look at Buckley - got given a list and made finals 2 years and then spent 4 years out of them. Goodwin went 9th, 5th (prelim), 17th, 9th in his first four years. Ratten went 11 wins (finals), 10 wins, 11 wins to fired.

Plenty of coaches have hit finals early, dipped out and continued employment. Look at Voss at Brisbane - took em to the finals year 1 with 14 wins and then had 7,4,10 and 8 wins before getting the arse.

There is a definite trend now to give coaches a longer tenure. Probably exacerbated by the well documented decision by Richmond to keep Hardwick after 2016 when (after 3 consecutive finals appearances) they finished 13th.

Its been highlighted by the Saints hanging on to Richardson for longer than they should have, Stuart Dew (although I agree with this one) at Gold Coast, Hinkley at Port, Buckley had 8 years.

Definitely a trend for longer coaching contracts. I wonder if clubs protect themselves a bit better enabling them to pay contracts out?

 

[Scorpus]

What doesn't excite me is that all 3 coaches who were retained after 4 shitty seasons with no finals - didn't fair any better in their 5th season.

Its why I am a huge advocate of finals or bust for Nicks.

If the pass mark for Nicks is finals what was the point of retaining him for 2023? Basically just setting him up to fail

 

[Brett Cummings]

What doesn't excite me is that all 3 coaches who were retained after 4 shitty seasons with no finals - didn't fair any better in their 5th season.

Its why I am a huge advocate of finals or bust for Nicks.

Finals with this midfield? You're overrating us so hard it's not funny.

 

[AFC979810]

Definitely a trend for longer coaching contracts. I wonder if clubs protect themselves a bit better enabling them to pay contracts out?

Honestly - I think its just a monkey see monkey do type of thing. The AFL (like most other professional sporting leagues) is full of copy cats.

We are already seeing AFL start to copy the NFL with regards to failed coaches. In NFL circles its almost now a positive to fail miserably as a head coach, go back as an assistant and then have a successful 2nd crack. The names Bellichick, Parcells, Andy Reid, Gruden, Mike Shanahan and a few others.

Voss got a 2nd chance after a disastrous turn at Brisbane. Ratten got a 2nd chance. Brad Scott gets a 2nd chance (although he did make 2 prelims). I am sure it isn't too long before Hirdy gets another chance.

 

[AFC979810]

If the pass mark for Nicks is finals what was the point of retaining him for 2023? Basically just setting him up to fail

These are my thoughts - not the clubs. I wouldn't have brought him back for 2023 and if I did it would be under the acknowledgement that its finals or bust.

I would wager the club has a different view right now. That might just change if we get off to a rough start in 2023.

 

[AFC979810]

Finals with this midfield? You're overrating us so hard it's not funny.

4 wins off the 8 in 2022.
4 wins of the 8 in 2021.

We have the cattle entering 2023.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

4 wins off the 8 in 2022.
4 wins of the 8 in 2021.

We have the cattle entering 2023.

Not so sure as we have too many players under 50 games

We should be challenging finals from 2024.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Not really. Rutten made finals one year and didn't the other. Hardly a yo-yo situation.

Look at Buckley - got given a list and made finals 2 years and then spent 4 years out of them. Goodwin went 9th, 5th (prelim), 17th, 9th in his first four years. Ratten went 11 wins (finals), 10 wins, 11 wins to fired.

Plenty of coaches have hit finals early, dipped out and continued employment. Look at Voss at Brisbane - took em to the finals year 1 with 14 wins and then had 7,4,10 and 8 wins before getting the arse.

There is a definite trend now to give coaches a longer tenure. Probably exacerbated by the well documented decision by Richmond to keep Hardwick after 2016 when (after 3 consecutive finals appearances) they finished 13th.

Its been highlighted by the Saints hanging on to Richardson for longer than they should have, Stuart Dew (although I agree with this one) at Gold Coast, Hinkley at Port, Buckley had 8 years.

yes really. I didn't say it was a yo-yo I said those clubs had changed there expectations because they had made finals recently, and were meant to be on a upward trend. Collingwood coming down, but there more important part was Buckley was a favourite son of the club (as was Voss), Eddie putting Bucks there in the in the first place was controversial, they weren't going to move him unless they had no choice.

I think Goodwin was very close to getting the sack before it came good.

You're contradicting yourself, Nicks is in trouble but coaches are getting longer contracts?
If there is a trend of coaches getting more time, then that will apply to Nicks as well.

 

[AFC979810]

yes really. I didn't say it was a yo-yo I said those clubs had changed there expectations because they had made finals recently, and were meant to be on a upward trend. Collingwood coming down, but there more important part was Buckley was a favourite son of the club (as was Voss), Eddie putting Bucks there in the in the first place was controversial, they weren't going to move him unless they had no choice.

I think Goodwin was very close to getting the sack before it came good.

Yup - Goodwin was on the brink. He made a prelim early and then had two mediocre seasons and they still retained him. He showed success early on (same as Hardwick) that makes it a little easier to stick by a coach with a poorly performing team.

You're contradicting yourself, Nicks is in trouble but coaches are getting longer contracts?

Nicks should be in trouble and IMO we should have moved on this past offseason. But I obviously don't run the club.

Right now he has the full support, but IF we get off to a bad start I believe that the pressure will become too much and he will be moved on.

I think that had he had early success and a trip to the finals he would have a lot more security than he does now.

If there is a trend of coaches getting more time, then that will apply to Nicks as well.

Whilst there is an obvious trend, there are still plenty of coaches that have been given the ass recently - Noble (1 year), Rutten (2 yrs), Rats (3 seasons). In addition to this - the longer times given recently haven't really paid dividends (Richardson, Dew, Hinkley).

 

[crow2crow]

Yup - Goodwin was on the brink. He made a prelim early and then had two mediocre seasons and they still retained him. He showed success early on (same as Hardwick) that makes it a little easier to stick by a coach with a poorly performing team.



Nicks should be in trouble and IMO we should have moved on this past offseason. But I obviously don't run the club.

Right now he has the full support, but IF we get off to a bad start I believe that the pressure will become too much and he will be moved on.

I think that had he had early success and a trip to the finals he would have a lot more security than he does now.



Whilst there is an obvious trend, there are still plenty of coaches that have been given the ass recently - Noble (1 year), Rutten (2 yrs), Rats (3 seasons). In addition to this - the longer times given recently haven't really paid dividends (Richardson, Dew, Hinkley).

why exactly did we go after a rookie coach yet again? do we not like people who know what they are doing?

absolutely great guy speaks well has built the culture and so on... will this translate to premiership - very unlikely

definitely needs 11-12 wins wont be enough for finals but if can't achieve that we need to go get an experienced person abd make something of this list

 

[AFC979810]

why exactly did we go after a rookie coach yet again? do we not like people who know what they are doing?

He was brought in because he is a good guy and players love him. Our culture was so F**cked after the 2017 - 2019 debacle that IMO the #1 reason he was brought in was to restore it. Job done.

I was hoping it would be more of a Paul Roos Melbourne type of deal.

absolutely great guy speaks well has built the culture and so on... will this translate to premiership - very unlikely

Agree. IMO he has done his job really well to date. Great culture established, players having fun - less and less scandals every offseason.

I think we have all seen the limitations of his game day coaching.

definitely needs 11-12 wins wont be enough for finals but if can't achieve that we need to go get an experienced person abd make something of this list

100%.

 

[1970crow]

I would prefer an efficient attacking game than an efficient defensive game

Football is still a simple game. Get to the contest, win the ball and then make a good decision and execute your skill. Run hard and give teammates an option whilst focusing on denying your opponent. It’s not changed since I was playing underage. There’s no 3D chess going on, we had a defensive system and rotated mids through the bench in u15s back in the mid 80s. Thinking there’s more to it than winning contests, decision making and skill execution is only for idiots.

 

[cleanhands]

Football is still a simple game. Get to the contest, win the ball and then make a good decision and execute your skill. Run hard and give teammates an option whilst focusing on denying your opponent. It’s not changed since I was playing underage. There’s no 3D chess going on, we had a defensive system and rotated mids through the bench in u15s back in the mid 80s. Thinking there’s more to it than winning contests, decision making and skill execution is only for idiots.

When you have the ball the opposition don’t

 

[1970crow]

When you have the ball the opposition don’t

And if you’re not part of the ball movement, get into position. Be that an opponent or space. As half backs in 15s we were encouraged to run forward with the play. Not get ahead of the ball in the forward 3rd though. But we had to run back equally as hard to get back with our opponent when we ceased being a viable option. The logic was simple, get to the contest to help your teammate because 2 Beats 1 (nearly) every time and then get back to defend your opponent.

Footy hasn’t changed.

 

[cleanhands]

And if you’re not part of the ball movement, get into position. Be that an opponent or space. As half backs in 15s we were encouraged to run forward with the play. Not get ahead of the ball in the forward 3rd though. But we had to run back equally as hard to get back with our opponent when we ceased being a viable option. The logic was simple, get to the contest to help your teammate because 2 Beats 1 (nearly) every time and then get back to defend your opponent.

Footy hasn’t changed.

Just the terminology to make them sound ahead of the game

 

[Carmo]

It's game style for me, if I keep hearing about this defence first mantra crap all this year, he needs to go. We don't even bloody defend well.

I would prefer an efficient attacking game than an efficient defensive game

Looks like we need another edition of Carmo channels the Crows Coaches to help bigfooty understand our gameplan. Here goes:

Our gameplan is neither defensive nor offensive, at least primarily. Youre looking on the wrong spectrum.

Our gameplan is contested (vs uncontested). This tends to make it less free flowing and possibly lower scoring. If you consider a game we win 60 to 30 to be less offensive than a game with 100 to 70 result, higher scoring, same margin but latter is way less percentage, to be less offensive, then so be it. We don't consider it that way.

So we really don't know where you guys have got this defense first mantra from. It should be contest first.

We also consider our defenders defending to be excellent. They often operate in a system with 6 on 6 in the forward line. Other teams have 7 defenders to the oppos 6 forwards. Given we defend with one less defender, their results are very good. Note that because we have the 6 on 6, we dont have an extra on turnover, so you won't see us rebound out rapidly like you do with other teams.

The things that make our defenders look bad are breakdowns either elsewhere on the ground or that just shouldn't happen, such as stupid turnover kicks in terrible positions under no pressure. Note that because we allow the oppo the extra in our forward line, we have to be extra careful in how we bring it in to not get the fast turnover rebound. For this reason we also bring it in long and high to a contest, we know we have less chance of getting a mark but we also have less chance of them getting a mark in this situation and it frequently results in a ball up contest in our forward line that we will back ourselves to win, since contest is what we're all about.

Perhaps one last thing to note is that our whole setup requires that mids can work very, very hard, since its usually there where we expect to hold up a turnover out of our forward line. You will note the trend in our recruitment and attitude towards mids who can two way run, have enormous tanks and a mentality to chase.

/End Channel.

Hope this helps.

 

[cleanhands]

Looks like we need another edition of Carmo channels the Crows Coaches to help bigfooty understand our gameplan. Here goes:

Our gameplan is neither defensive nor offensive, at least primarily. Youre looking on the wrong spectrum.

Our gameplan is contested (vs uncontested). This tends to make it less free flowing and possibly lower scoring. If you consider a game we win 60 to 30 to be less offensive than a game with 100 to 70 result, higher scoring, same margin but latter is way less percentage, to be less offensive, then so be it. We don't consider it that way.

So we really don't know where you guys have got this defense first mantra from. It should be contest first.

We also consider our defenders defending to be excellent. They often operate in a system with 6 on 6 in the forward line. Other teams have 7 defenders to the oppos 6 forwards. Given we defend with one less defender, their results are very good. Note that because we have the 6 on 6, we dont have an extra on turnover, so you won't see us rebound out rapidly like you do with other teams.

The things that make our defenders look bad are breakdowns either elsewhere on the ground or that just shouldn't happen, such as stupid turnover kicks in terrible positions under no pressure. Note that because we allow the oppo the extra in our forward line, we have to be extra careful in how we bring it in to not get the fast turnover rebound. For this reason we also bring it in long and high to a contest, we know we have less chance of getting a mark but we also have less chance of them getting a mark in this situation and it frequently results in a ball up contest in our forward line that we will back ourselves to win, since contest is what we're all about.

Perhaps one last thing to note is that our whole setup requires that mids can work very, very hard, since its usually there where we expect to hold up a turnover out of our forward line. You will note the trend in our recruitment and attitude towards mids who can two way run, have enormous tanks and a mentality to chase.

/End Channel.

Hope this helps.

not relevant to my post
stop channeling the coaches might help

 

[Mr_Moogle]

You will note the trend in our recruitment and attitude towards mids who can two way run, have enormous tanks and a mentality to chase.

Oh it's been noted. We targeted endurance with McHenry and Jones and that had amazing results.

 

[1970crow]

not relevant to my post
stop channeling the coaches might help

Carmo is our version of Janus. He can see inside of failure and extrapolate success. And it only ever takes a thousand words, or a little more. Pure genius is him.

But I expect better results when he’s hit his mid 20s. The foundation is there.

 

[cleanhands]

Carmo is our version of Janus. He can see inside of failure and extrapolate success. And it only ever takes a thousand words, or a little more. Pure genius is him.

But I expect better results when he’s hit his mid 20s. The foundation is there.

Logged into AI for a summary to post

 

[George Kramer]

not relevant to my post
stop channeling the coaches might help

Can you give me a 2 line summary, I’ve learnt not to read his long posts

 

[Redline]

He was brought in because he is a good guy and players love him. Our culture was so F**cked after the 2017 - 2019 debacle that IMO the #1 reason he was brought in was to restore it. Job done.

I was hoping it would be more of a Paul Roos Melbourne type of deal.



Agree. IMO he has done his job really well to date. Great culture established, players having fun - less and less scandals every offseason.

I

Certainly no pre season camps like we have seen before.

We have had a few off field issues. We had Stengle / B Crouch, we had Tex and racism, we had Barossa training sessions that broke the Covid rules, which looking back wasn't bad but at the time it was.

Losing Doedee is going to hurt Nicksy's player retention record given he was a potential Captain when he took over but that's the Industry.