Analysis Beveridge - where to from here?

[dogwatch]

Has Bevo drunk too much of his own bathwater? Or is he taking us on a journey to long term AFL dominance?

Luke Beveridge quickly ascended to the ranks of football divinity when in his first year he rescued a side in crisis and took it back to the finals for the first time in 5 years and then in his second year took this promising but inexperienced side to a totally unanticipated premiership. No side had ever won from seventh before. No side had ever won two interstate finals to get to the GF.

As a godlike figure he had the keys to the Whitten Oval. He could have a contract for as long as he wanted and he was beyond any serious criticism.

Then something happened.

The wheels fell off in 2017 with players out of form, wholesale changes to the roles of the assistant coaches a severe dip in form and the forced ejection of a high profile player at the end of the year. We missed the finals one year after winning the flag.

At the start of 2018 the mood was again upbeat. Libba was back on track, there were some good recruits and some handy players arrived via trade. We started the year with almost a clean sheet on the injury front. 2017 was just going to be a blip on the progress of this new dynasty of Bullgods.

But it wasn’t. Apart from offloading Stringer we found a way to lose the two men who had managed our list and recruiting leading up to the flag. At least one of them, Dalrymple, seems to have left as a result of a disagreement with Beveridge. We desperately missed the leadership of two of the most respected men to play for the club this century: Bob Murphy and Matt Boyd had retired. Bevo himself – the weaver of stories – pondered out loud the difficulty of finding a new narrative for his young side. Then the season began disastrously with thrashings from GWS and West Coast. Serious injuries to star players started piling up. The side never recovered despite a run of wins against lowly opposition in April and May.

Heading towards a difficult game against finals bound Port Adelaide this week, the Dogs have only won one of their last nine games. Our recent form is worse than every other side in the competition except Carlton and possibly St Kilda.

Good reasons can be found for the poor form. We have close to the worst injury list in the AFL and it has been like that for most of the year. This has meant fielding the youngest and least experienced side in almost every round.

However, I wonder whether these contributing issues have taken some attention away from the performance of the coach. While still a fan of his, I have some concerns about Beveridge. He should not be above analysis and if necessary, criticism. Consider these matters which have all been discussed in isolation at different times on this board:

• The seemingly unnecessary switching of all coaching roles after 2016
• The abrupt sacking of Stringer
• The sudden departure of Dalrymple
• The single-minded campaign to develop versatility in nearly all players resulting in players performing below their best in unaccustomed roles
• His headscratching responses to our ruck weakness
• His inability to arrest opposition surges where we concede up to 8 goals a quarter
• His persistence with the high defensive press resulting in easy goals on the turnover seemingly every week
• Puzzling team selections which seem at times to defy exposed form
• Various match day tactical matters

Generally I have been a defender of Beveridge and have mounted arguments in his favour for nearly all of the above. Some of those defences are probably still valid.

However I am getting concerned that Beveridge may be too stubborn for our own good. Admittedly I am a long way from Whitten Oval but I get the sense that it’s his way or the highway ... and that is usually not a healthy thing. Has he eliminated or ground into submission the diversity of opinions and alternative viewpoints that a healthy club needs?

I think he is possibly one of the best team-builders and people managers among all current AFL coaches. Most observers agreed that it was a dominant factor in that glorious finals campaign of 2016. The players seem to love him. However I think he is just average (not the best, not the worst) as far as long-term footballing strategy and match day tactics are concerned. We have often surmised in match day threads - sometimes with good justification - that he has been outcoached.

I’d be interested in others’ viewpoints on this. It raises questions such as:

Is Beveridge playing the long game? Is he so far ahead of the game in terms of tactics and strategy that we just can’t see what he’s building towards?

Will all of this turmoil in 2017-18 be vindicated with a resurgence in 2019? Or is he perhaps a fast-burn coach who ignites a club for a while but soon loses currency and potency, needing to be replaced in another year or two?

Can we shore up his perceived tactical and strategic shortcomings with the recruitment of some strong-minded assistant coaches in the off-season? Or will they just butt heads with Beveridge until they are sidelined or decide to leave?

 

[Yojimbo]

Rome was not built in a day, but it burned down pretty fast.

Overestimated: Interesting word...

 

[Mattdougie]

Unfortunately a lot of the changes since the GF fall squarely into Bev.

- coaching changes
- tactical changes
- Stringer leaving
- staff leaving

I think next year is pivotal for him, he has no brownie points left from 2016 and I am far from convinced he can improve next year.

 

[maddog37]

Didn’t John Kennedy snr say something about sausages.

 

[Bemoreboyddog]

Good thread and some very valid concerns. We need a different senior assistant coach. Someone to challenge Bevo on some of his ideas and thoughts.

Seriously needs to get away from his fascination with flexibility. It’s hurting us. A few swing men is fine but a whole team of them is no good. I can’t understand why Richards and Naughton have been thrown forward already, they’ve played about a dozen games, let them get some familiarity.

Third man up rule getting abolished really hurt him and us. We don’t have the cattle to contest in the ruck (at least until English is ready which is probably 2 years away)

Coaching assistants merry go round. Don’t get me started on that.

Bevo probably has too much of a say in things. Dal’s job was to draft and Bevo wanted to overrule him according to rumours. As Ross Lyon says - let the cobblers cobble.

 

[MrChristo]

• His inability to arrest opposition surges where we concede up to 8 goals a quarter
• His persistence with the high defensive press resulting in easy goals on the turnover seemingly every week

However I am getting concerned that Beveridge may be too stubborn for our own good.

Is Beveridge playing the long game? Is he so far ahead of the game in terms of tactics and strategy that we just can’t see what he’s building towards?

Danger that this could turn into a long and rambling post (only half a beer left so it probably won't! ), but I've recently been thinking on a similar but slightly parallel topic...

It came to me watching the Eagles/Ess game a few weeks back. WC were without Kennedy and Darling, and so their gameplan was ultra-defensive.
Tbh, my memories of exact details are a little sketchy now, but in the 3rd (?) quarter, the Eagles dominated the ball but consistantly and 100% deliberately kicked every forward entry deep into a pocket. (I assume most of us here will know why, to save me from blah-ing on about tactics etc...)
Anyway, they did exactly what they aimed to do by limiting Ess to 1.3 for the term, but (predictably enough) scored a whopping 1.6 themselves.

It was awful to watch. Boring as bat-sh1t. (Bear with me here!) So many teams do this. It's unbearable to watch sometimes. (And as an aside, it's why zones won't work, but that's for another rambling some other time.)

To keep it simple, we don't ever do that. We always look short (esp. early in games when we're still mentally fresh), we look for leads, but given our forward line is generally congested as hell we'll at least kick to the top of the square. [and therefore we open the field/game right up, and therefore we conceed multiple goals quickly.] ...(That, plus turnovers, which goes to the other point I highlighted of the high press. Our skills... But that's probably for another time.)

Now, is that stubborn? Yeah, I guess it is. But as you ask, is it a bigger picture thing?

I may be adding 2+2 to = pi squared, but Bevo's recent comments about the state of the game and it's evolution, I suspect we (I typed 'we' then without even thinking! ) ahem, 'Him' are preparing for a cycle/evolution where scoring becomes king. Not defense.
I really get the impression that it is a deliberate game plan that is focussing on teaching this young group a way to play that will help in the future.

Eggs in one basket stuff? Maybe... (or maybe I'm way off track in the first place!)

 

[TMoney22]

He can start by not playing forwards as extra mids at stoppages. Even with a fully fit midfield he did this. Why? doesn't he think our mids can win there own ball, or are we just too slow and we need extra players to handball out of stoppages. Teams are moving away from this now, why don't we.

We had one of the most dynamic forwards and a #1 pick KPF plus a very decent midfield. Why take away those things via the game plan. Now that dynamic forward is gone and the KPF plays ruck. Doesn't make sense to me

 

[dergert]

Give him time to build his own list and bring in his own people. He has yet to do either in a significant way

 

[Mattdougie]

Give him time to build his own list and bring in his own people. He has yet to do either in a significant way

I truly don’t understand this thinking

He had a list and team that won him a flag, who in their right mind pulls that apart just so you can have “your own” team?

I’m conpletely baffled by this thought process

 

[Dry Rot]

Get Caracella now as an assistant!

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-25/rival-clubs-circle-tigers-flag-mastermind

 

[WallyStringhaus]

I don't really understand the hysteria surrounding the changing up of the assistant coaches. Developing the coaches is every bit as important as developing the players. The majority of people who move into a coaching role would yearn for the opportunity to one day coach their own team. I'd rather us be seen as a club that develops future senior coaches a la Hawthorn rather than a team that hordes long term assistants and pigeon holes them.

Employees in most professions like to see their careers develop and their roles vary or expand. Coaches are no different. You don't learn how to be a Senior Coach by staying put for a decade being a development coach or a stoppage coach. You learn by being all encompassing and by taking on roles beyond your knowledge or comfort zone.

Why, for example, should the backline have been the only area to benefit from Rohan Smith's obvious skillset? It's healthy for these coaches to learn different skills and its healthy for players to hear a fresh voice and set of ideas or a differing way to look at the game.

As for Bevo, I have no issue with how he is coaching. None of us have access to the inner sanctum so it is pure speculation to comment on his relationships with Assistant Coaches and this perception that he is a dictator who quashes those that question his methods. Personally i find it hard to believe when you consider the following;

"What I really love about him is he is strong on his opinions. He doesn't always offer up what the group-think is. He sometimes thinks in an alternative manner and that is good for the group."

This was a quote from Chris Fagan circa 2014 when Bevo had been appointed at St.Kilda prior to us poaching him. Why would a bloke who thinks this way discourage others from doing the same. It makes no sense.

I've got lots more I would like to say but have probably gone on long enough. I'm a firm believer that the onfield stuff will take care of itself pretty quickly. Continuity is such an important factor in this game and we've had zero over the last 18 months in particular. We strike a bit of luck on that front and we'll be back in the thick of it in no time and Bevo can return to his god like status.

 

[SCRAY72]

Has Bevo drunk too much of his own bathwater? Or is he taking us on a journey to long term AFL dominance?

Luke Beveridge quickly ascended to the ranks of football divinity when in his first year he rescued a side in crisis and took it back to the finals for the first time in 5 years and then in his second year took this promising but inexperienced side to a totally unanticipated premiership. No side had ever won from seventh before. No side had ever won two interstate finals to get to the GF.

As a godlike figure he had the keys to the Whitten Oval. He could have a contract for as long as he wanted and he was beyond any serious criticism.

Then something happened.

The wheels fell off in 2017 with players out of form, wholesale changes to the roles of the assistant coaches a severe dip in form and the forced ejection of a high profile player at the end of the year. We missed the finals one year after winning the flag.

At the start of 2018 the mood was again upbeat. Libba was back on track, there were some good recruits and some handy players arrived via trade. We started the year with almost a clean sheet on the injury front. 2017 was just going to be a blip on the progress of this new dynasty of Bullgods.

But it wasn’t. Apart from offloading Stringer we found a way to lose the two men who had managed our list and recruiting leading up to the flag. At least one of them, Dalrymple, seems to have left as a result of a disagreement with Beveridge. We desperately missed the leadership of two of the most respected men to play for the club this century: Bob Murphy and Matt Boyd had retired. Bevo himself – the weaver of stories – pondered out loud the difficulty of finding a new narrative for his young side. Then the season began disastrously with thrashings from GWS and West Coast. Serious injuries to star players started piling up. The side never recovered despite a run of wins against lowly opposition in April and May.

Heading towards a difficult game against finals bound Port Adelaide this week, the Dogs have only won one of their last nine games. Our recent form is worse than every other side in the competition except Carlton and possibly St Kilda.

Good reasons can be found for the poor form. We have close to the worst injury list in the AFL and it has been like that for most of the year. This has meant fielding the youngest and least experienced side in almost every round.

However, I wonder whether these contributing issues have taken some attention away from the performance of the coach. While still a fan of his, I have some concerns about Beveridge. He should not be above analysis and if necessary, criticism. Consider these matters which have all been discussed in isolation at different times on this board:

• The seemingly unnecessary switching of all coaching roles after 2016
• The abrupt sacking of Stringer
• The sudden departure of Dalrymple
• The single-minded campaign to develop versatility in nearly all players resulting in players performing below their best in unaccustomed roles
• His headscratching responses to our ruck weakness
• His inability to arrest opposition surges where we concede up to 8 goals a quarter
• His persistence with the high defensive press resulting in easy goals on the turnover seemingly every week
• Puzzling team selections which seem at times to defy exposed form
• Various match day tactical matters

Generally I have been a defender of Beveridge and have mounted arguments in his favour for nearly all of the above. Some of those defences are probably still valid.

However I am getting concerned that Beveridge may be too stubborn for our own good. Admittedly I am a long way from Whitten Oval but I get the sense that it’s his way or the highway ... and that is usually not a healthy thing. Has he eliminated or ground into submission the diversity of opinions and alternative viewpoints that a healthy club needs?

I think he is possibly one of the best team-builders and people managers among all current AFL coaches. Most observers agreed that it was a dominant factor in that glorious finals campaign of 2016. The players seem to love him. However I think he is just average (not the best, not the worst) as far as long-term footballing strategy and match day tactics are concerned. We have often surmised in match day threads - sometimes with good justification - that he has been outcoached.

I’d be interested in others’ viewpoints on this. It raises questions such as:

Is Beveridge playing the long game? Is he so far ahead of the game in terms of tactics and strategy that we just can’t see what he’s building towards?

Will all of this turmoil in 2017-18 be vindicated with a resurgence in 2019? Or is he perhaps a fast-burn coach who ignites a club for a while but soon loses currency and potency, needing to be replaced in another year or two?

Can we shore up his perceived tactical and strategic shortcomings with the recruitment of some strong-minded assistant coaches in the off-season? Or will they just butt heads with Beveridge until they are sidelined or decide to leave?

Please elaborate.

Just kidding.

 

[Bemoreboyddog]

Get Caracella now as an assistant!

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-07-25/rival-clubs-circle-tigers-flag-mastermind

THIS!

 

[fronkalicious]

Keep Beveridge.

 

[Cadillac]

We need to surround him with good Assistant coaches. And someone who isn’t afraid to challenge him. Hasn’t even crossed my mind the thought of ever replacing him. We will turn this around with a little injury luck.

 

[ScragCity]

Sack him for sure. Any other coach would have 16 wins with this list. 69 injuries is no excuse for our form this year.

 

[Golden_6]

We need to surround him with good Assistant coaches. And someone who isn’t afraid to challenge him. Hasn’t even crossed my mind the thought of ever replacing him. We will turn this around with a little injury luck.

This is the issue. It seems to be that we are getting rid of those who challenge Bevo and are surrounding him with yes men. Where is the line drawn?

 

[dish licker]

I don't really understand the hysteria surrounding the changing up of the assistant coaches. Developing the coaches is every bit as important as developing the players. The majority of people who move into a coaching role would yearn for the opportunity to one day coach their own team. I'd rather us be seen as a club that develops future senior coaches a la Hawthorn rather than a team that hordes long term assistants and pigeon holes them.

Employees in most professions like to see their careers develop and their roles vary or expand. Coaches are no different. You don't learn how to be a Senior Coach by staying put for a decade being a development coach or a stoppage coach. You learn by being all encompassing and by taking on roles beyond your knowledge or comfort zone.

Why, for example, should the backline have been the only area to benefit from Rohan Smith's obvious skillset? It's healthy for these coaches to learn different skills and its healthy for players to hear a fresh voice and set of ideas or a differing way to look at the game.

As for Bevo, I have no issue with how he is coaching. None of us have access to the inner sanctum so it is pure speculation to comment on his relationships with Assistant Coaches and this perception that he is a dictator who quashes those that question his methods. Personally i find it hard to believe when you consider the following;

"What I really love about him is he is strong on his opinions. He doesn't always offer up what the group-think is. He sometimes thinks in an alternative manner and that is good for the group."

This was a quote from Chris Fagan circa 2014 when Bevo had been appointed at St.Kilda prior to us poaching him. Why would a bloke who thinks this way discourage others from doing the same. It makes no sense.

I've got lots more I would like to say but have probably gone on long enough. I'm a firm believer that the onfield stuff will take care of itself pretty quickly. Continuity is such an important factor in this game and we've had zero over the last 18 months in particular. We strike a bit of luck on that front and we'll be back in the thick of it in no time and Bevo can return to his god like status.

 

[dogwatch]

Keep Beveridge.

Sack him for sure. Any other coach would have 16 wins with this list. 69 injuries is no excuse for our form this year.

Not sure if these posts are serious, but sacking Bev was never in the frame. It's more about assessing his strengths and weaknesses. It's about considering whether he has the right people around him and how effectively he can work with them.

I'm not sure anyone has seriously suggested he should go.

Well, that's not quite true. Bevo himself suggested a year or two back that something like 4-5 years was an appropriate shelf-life for a coach. I took that to mean that was the horizon he had set for himself but he might have just been hosing down expectations or giving himself an escape route if he ever wanted to switch clubs.

 

[King Harold]

Not sure if these posts are serious, but sacking Bev was never in the frame. It's more about assessing his strengths and weaknesses. It's about considering whether he has the right people around him and how effectively he can work with them.

I'm not sure anyone has seriously suggested he should go.

Well, that's not quite true. Bevo himself suggested a year or two back that something like 4-5 years was an appropriate shelf-life for a coach. I took that to mean that was the horizon he had set for himself but he might have just been hosing down expectations or giving himself an escape route if he ever wanted to switch clubs.

Yep , no one wants to sack Bev.
But for the first time in his coaching life he is facing some huge challenges.
Seems to have lost that Midas touch .
Is it fair to say he has been as bad as the players these last 2 seasons ?
My hope is he will want to see this re build through.

 

[Unorth]

Question: How much of his seemingly extreme versatility mantra has been because he truly wants to do it, or because of the fact that we have significant depth across the backline?

Richards, Naughton and Cordy have all gone up forward. How are we going to fit Cordy and Naughton down back when we have Morris, Adams and Trengove? With Richards, we've got JJ, Hunter, Crozier, Suckling when healthy, been playing Roarke...Something just has to give. And Cordy's proven to be effective up forward, while obviously it's a waste playing Moz there and Trengove has shown to be much more effective as a defender. Adams has to play in defense because he's pretty much our best intercepter with Wood out. Similarly for Richards, he's more effective up forward than JJ, Crozier or Hunter. But we've been playing all of those guys up forward at some point, so they all get their turn at playing in their long term positions. Remove Morris and Trengove, then you have Adams/Cordy/Naughton, but that might not be a reality for a couple of seasons yet.

 

[go the dogs]

Forever grateful that bevo got us that elusive flag but honestly i think he has to come under pressure next year if we go as bad as this year. Yes we have injuries but look at Collingwood they sit 3rd and have had most injuries this year. Some of his team selections not just baffle me but most of us on here.

For 1 of the rare times this year he picked a team that alot of us want to see under the room of a fast paced Etihad stadium. Boyd and Schache forward Key defenders back and Roughead Rucking. The time he finally does this he chooses to do it on a wet weather day when we don't need as many talls. Not just this but he starts Boyd rucking and Roughy forward.
Also a year where nothing really is left to play for instead of playing young Greene to see what he has to offer he continues to play honey who most likely is done and dusted at seasons send. I just don't understand some of these decisions.

 

[DexterTan]

Yep , no one wants to sack Bev.
But for the first time in his coaching life he is facing some huge challenges.
Seems to have lost that Midas touch .
Is it fair to say he has been as bad as the players these last 2 seasons ?
My hope is he will want to see this re build through.

Or he could quit. Lost the players and all that.

 

[dogwatch]

I don't really understand the hysteria surrounding the changing up of the assistant coaches. Developing the coaches is every bit as important as developing the players. The majority of people who move into a coaching role would yearn for the opportunity to one day coach their own team. I'd rather us be seen as a club that develops future senior coaches a la Hawthorn rather than a team that hordes long term assistants and pigeon holes them.

Employees in most professions like to see their careers develop and their roles vary or expand. Coaches are no different. You don't learn how to be a Senior Coach by staying put for a decade being a development coach or a stoppage coach. You learn by being all encompassing and by taking on roles beyond your knowledge or comfort zone.

Why, for example, should the backline have been the only area to benefit from Rohan Smith's obvious skillset? It's healthy for these coaches to learn different skills and its healthy for players to hear a fresh voice and set of ideas or a differing way to look at the game.

As for Bevo, I have no issue with how he is coaching. None of us have access to the inner sanctum so it is pure speculation to comment on his relationships with Assistant Coaches and this perception that he is a dictator who quashes those that question his methods. Personally i find it hard to believe when you consider the following;

"What I really love about him is he is strong on his opinions. He doesn't always offer up what the group-think is. He sometimes thinks in an alternative manner and that is good for the group."

This was a quote from Chris Fagan circa 2014 when Bevo had been appointed at St.Kilda prior to us poaching him. Why would a bloke who thinks this way discourage others from doing the same. It makes no sense.

I've got lots more I would like to say but have probably gone on long enough. I'm a firm believer that the onfield stuff will take care of itself pretty quickly. Continuity is such an important factor in this game and we've had zero over the last 18 months in particular. We strike a bit of luck on that front and we'll be back in the thick of it in no time and Bevo can return to his god like status.

Thanks. Good input as always, Wally.

I have no problem with changing coaching roles from time to time. As you say developing a range of skills and experience is good for footy coaches as well as for people in business.

So there's no hysteria (as you put it) on my part but I question whether changing ALL those senior roles at once was a good idea. I've hardly ever seen that happen in my 40 years of business experience. It has a strong potential to unsettle the business ... or the footy side in this case. Far better to switch one or two roles a year, especially if there's a convenient departure or two. There's no reason why a rolling rotation can't be foreshadowed as part of each coach's development plan. Say two years in each role. Three years at most.

I fully agree that we don't know what conversations are going on inside the club so we are left to wonder. However it's worth having a conversation about it when we are puzzled by what we see.

The quote from Chris Fagan that Beveridge "is strong on his opinions" and "thinks in an alternative way" suggests that he is an innovative, single-minded person with a strong belief in what he has to offer. Those qualities helped us win a flag. All leaders need it in some measure. However it doesn't necessarily mean he is open and consultative. In fact it could well mean the opposite. Such strength of self-belief can lead to hubris, perhaps shutting out/shutting down other viewpoints or criticism. That can be both a strength and a weakness depending on the circumstances. I've worked with such people. We've seen it in plenty of politicians. Is Bevo one? I'm not sure but I am concerned about it enough to ask the question.

So it would be good to know who, if anyone, is routinely advising him on the bigger issues of strategy and match tactics, and how dynamic those relationships and discussions are.

FWIW I'm still pretty upbeat about the future under Beveridge provided (as you point out) that we can get some continuity in our playing personnel.

 

[Mofra]

However I am getting concerned that Beveridge may be too stubborn for our own good. Admittedly I am a long way from Whitten Oval but I get the sense that it’s his way or the highway ... and that is usually not a healthy thing. Has he eliminated or ground into submission the diversity of opinions and alternative viewpoints that a healthy club needs?

That's not a criticism, but a valid viewpoint.

I think he is stubborn - but I think all the good coaches are in some way. We need everyone pulling in the same direction and if there is open disagreement I don't; think a team could function well in a competitive environment.

With respect to Dalrymple, the disagree was a rookie spot that Bevo got his way on by taking Gowers and thus far this year Bevo has been vindicated, Glowers is one of the few positives to emerge from this year.