A Coaching hypothetical

[Crow-mo]

Wasn't this something that was said to be true of Buckley in his earlier years, but not so much in his later years?

dunno, I guess time will tell. that's my point though, there are a lot of variable up in the air for a sure thing.

 

[Macjoe]

Brilliant! One of those times when I think - "Wish I'd said that... ".

Would have mentioned that Malthouse is the only current double-premiership coach, but that wouldn't have changed the assessment.

My thoughts on the various coaches...


Anyone else I should be considering?

Assuming that Parkin can't be considered a recent past coach, I would have thought that Sheedy deserves a mention. Apart from being one of the few 4 times premiership coaches, he was a developer, a finisher and an innovator. Since it seems likely he will have a role in the W Sydney development, I'd be interested in your thoughts on him?

 

[Vader]

Sheedy - The old master has certainly done it all - stay at a club for 20+ years and you're going to have to be developer and finisher. That said, he's finished as a coach - and should have been gone 2 or 3 years before they finally pulled the plug. These days he's a wandering ambassador for the game, much as Barrassi was in his later days. A worthy legend of the game, but these days I'd much rather have Craig as coach of the Crows.

Wallace - A capable tactician, he's not great at developing players or preparing them to play. His biggest flaw though is complete and utter selfishness. Sure, there are times when it's appropriate to put yourself ahead of the team - but there are also times when he needed to put the team ahead of himself. Too often he failed to do so. I would never want someone so self-centred to be head coach of my team.

Laidley - He might have been head coach of North Melbourne for 5 years, but I still have no idea whether or not he's any good. He didn't have a lot to work with in terms of players, facilities and support - yet he made the most of what he had. How would he perform at a club/team with better resources? Your guess is as good as mine. This uncertainty means that he remains ranked below Craig, who is very much a known quantity.

 

[Crow-mo]

Laidley - He might have been head coach of North Melbourne for 5 years, but I still have no idea whether or not he's any good. He didn't have a lot to work with in terms of players, facilities and support - yet he made the most of what he had. How would he perform at a club/team with better resources? Your guess is as good as mine. This uncertainty means that he remains ranked below Craig, who is very much a known quantity.

Laidley is a very tough one, my gut is he is a good coach but there is a little of the Robert Shaw about him - perhaps better tactically.

and I don't mean that as an insult, Shaw was first class at galvanising a team under the "no one believes in us" banner. real in the trenches type, much like Laidley.

but there is a question whether do it all, blood and guts coaches, can actually function in a large, well run organisation. all the delegation, management, PR, time pressures etc. its a different thing to be running an efficient machine, and calling everyone to the trenches.

for some reason the analogy struck between 2 of the recent great full forwards, and why I have always believe Dunstall was better than Lockett. bare with me, esoteric I realise

Lockett was a great one on one guy, who could turn something out of rubbish delivery with his bulk and ability to read the flight, and he was incredibly quick over the first 3 or 4 yards. but it never made much difference to him, whether the midfield was solid gold, or a bunch of hacks. his style, was buckle down deep in the full forward line and battle all comers. not a conducive style to fast winning football. to him a handball was how you gave the ball back to the goal umpire. I never thought he'd do better, or arguably as well in a dominant side - like many suppose. a bit like ablett, he didn't bring players into the game, he was selfish, but he got the results as much as he was capable of. but it was always about him. lets call him Laidley. junkyard dog, but can he strut out front in the dogshow? he was a little picture full forward, who got his. and a helluva lot of it, it must be said.

whereas dunstall was the best mark at full speed, leading out, taking the ball in front of his eyes. he complement his teammates, and timed his leads, made space, and blended in with their attacking style. if he was held he'd bring others in, he tackled, he did the small things. he was the perfect hood ornament to a well oiled machine. he was smart, and he knew how to make that team better.

you swap those around, and I think both teams a little worse off. but If I am a winner, and I have the big, efficient machine I want dunstall 17 times on tuesday. If I am a gut buster struggler, then I want Lockett.

and that's how I kinda see Laidley (Shaw) great in wringing the last pennies and maximum effort out of less, but I wonder if they could be the shiny thing right out front of a big organisation? they are different skills, and abilities. with all the pressure that comes with it, could Laidley actually finish for a big club? not sure.

and yet I think there is a lot of talent there, but how do you use it? make him high performance manager or some such nonsense for the crows and I reckon he'd a do a great job.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I've never really been impressed with Buckley's commentary, and to be honest I've not been unimpressed. I just don't see what all this supposed insight is. he's a little more up-to-date with modern parlance, as you would expect being recently out of the game.

Is conventional wisdom your kryptonite?

Wasn't this something that was said to be true of Buckley in his earlier years, but not so much in his later years?

This is certainly the impression you gain by reading his autobiography. Openly admitted that he behaved poorly in the first half of his career and that team mates had reservations about him in certain areas. Said that he set very high standards for himself in terms of discipline and preparation and performace... and really struggled to understand that team mates would be unable or unwilling to match those same standards.

Had a number of 'revelatory moments' with feedback from team mates and worked hard to improve his behaviour, to the point that Mick Malthouse describes him as "clearly the best captain that I've been fortunate enough to be involved with." To me he just screams Great Coach In Waiting.

It's funny, I'd always thought Buckley would make the better coach over Voss. Voss was too much "one of the boys", I thought. Buckley shows quite an insight into the vagaries of footy in his commentary, Voss not so much. However, CM - you've highlighted a really big importance for coaching - having player respect and affection. Voss was such a leader both on and off the field. Well loved by all his fellow team mates. This is the reason why, I believe, he is doing so well with the Lions. Those boys would walk over hot coals for him.

Saw less of Voss through the media than the others. Had very little idea how he'd go as a coach.

But Voss was brutal on his team mates when he was captain. Would berate them on the ground when they did the wrong thing. Didn't harm his relationship with them though. Respected not because he was simply a good bloke... but because he was a great, courageous player and when he spoke, he was right.