Club Mgmt. Board of Directors as led by President Dave Barham

Remove this Banner Ad

 
Last edited:
Bunk Moreland said:
New letter:

www.essendonfc.com.au

Letter to members: Football review

President Paul Brasher pens a letter to Essendon members following the club's post-season football review.
www.essendonfc.com.au www.essendonfc.com.au

I know some have been on the fence with his approach... but it's been a while since we've heard anything as clear as this:

There have been conflicting philosophies in this regard within our coaching program: empowerment/own your career vs. uncompromising demands on standards and accountabilities. It is clear the empowerment approach didn’t work well with this group in this environment. Going forward, everybody, not just the players but everybody in the entire club, will be in no doubt about the standards required and will be held accountable for meeting those standards. This will be a major focus area for the coaches and for the new general manager of football.

Hallelujah

It also, once again, totally reinforces the point that Worsfold was not the right coach post 2017. His re-signing was a major misstep, and the "handover", well... bloody hell.
Click to expand...

Thank god
 

Log in to remove this ad.

TheGreatBarryB said:
Would have thought enpowerment would work better with a more experienced player group not a young one like ours. Ffs
Click to expand...

Yep, If we had a Joel Selwood or Luke Hodge then maybe but we had a young captain and playing list who just went through a huge saga, we needed clear guidelines for them to follow and to see progress.
 
Last edited:
Milanista28 said:
Yep, If we had a Joel Selwood or Luke Hodge then maybe but we had a young captain and playing list who just went through a huge saga, we needed clear guideline for them to follow and see progress.
Click to expand...

Youth aspect isn’t that important. Selwood is essentially the same player he was when came through the door. His leadership and competitive traits were innate. We just haven’t drafted enough willing combatants.
 
Red Black and Blue said:
Youth aspect isn’t that important. Selwood is essentially the same player he was when came through the door. His leadership and competitive traits were innate. We just haven’t drafted enough willing combatants.
Click to expand...

Still my point is we didn't have the right players to go the empowerment route. I also agree with your point, hope this changes from this draft.
 
Lore said:
I hate the stupid Herald Sun and their stupid paywall.

Here's a Jake Niall article from The Age (WHICH YOU CAN OPEN):
www.theage.com.au

Better leadership, game style, less player power: Essendon's review

A frank review of Essendon's football operation has revealed a need for change, consistency in game style and improved leadership.
www.theage.com.au www.theage.com.au

Apparently Brasher called up a couple of journos and gave them the low down, so there's a bit of extra detail in there compared to the summary on the club website.


We didn't have any "minimum standards" & players were getting told different things from different coaches. ^

Minimum standards and accountability is kinda obvious. No one ever gets dropped for failing to meet the standards at the Essendon Football Club. We always select our best 22 based on potential...

As for the different messages from different coaches part; is this a handover thing, a line coaches not saying the same as senior coaches thing, or a changing the line coaches mid-season thing?

Was this a problem in the past? Is this why we had the stupid tweener role with Neil Craig trying to oversee consistent messaging from all line coaches and resulting in all the line coaches being scared to address players without him present?


Rutten needs to have clearer messaging and manage his workload carefully ^

Worsfold had made a sort of veiled comment about this in the past, although he phrased it as a strength of the handover. Rutten would explain what he wanted to Worsfold and Worsfold would help him refine it before he addressed the players so that what he was telling the players wasn't overcomplicated or confusing.


Leadership group gets an overhaul ^ 20-23 year olds should be added to it. I assume he means McGrath.


Also very clear to emphasise that what the group needs and what Rutten brings to it is a good match, just have to put a broom through any player empowerment nonsense and give Rutten the reins and support he needs to get the house in order.
Click to expand...

After watching the video, which was worded so much better than the letter, and reading the journalistic pieces that have come out, I retract most of what I said.

I must say I do like his communication style.
 
Lore said:
:fireemoji::fireemoji::fireemoji:


Also this:
Click to expand...
im watching the Merrett leadership position closely. I think it will provide insight into both his and the clubs future

They talk a strong culture of personal accountability.
Yet the speculation is this is why the players removed Merrett (yet saw fit to install Raz who recused himself).

Had we landed Dunkley, i'd have thought a LG of Heppell (C), Merrett & Dunkley (VC) would have been in step with what we're hearing from the club.
 
As if a lack of onfield leadership is sone sort of drafting issue...What level has the review revealed the leadership problems at Essendon stop at - just below president or below all at board level? Unless the past regime under Tanner's leadership is part of the critisism then the whole review is suspect IMO.

Has the board accepted responsibility in the failures of the club anywhere? Brasher thanked and praised Tanner for his service and contribution. I may have missed his insight into the boards failings (perhaps a mention about senior appointments being made without due process etc).
 
CBombers17 said:
As if a lack of onfield leadership is sone sort of drafting issue...What level has the review revealed the leadership problems at Essendon stop at - just below president or below all at board level? Unless the past regime under Tanner's leadership is part of the critisism then the whole review is suspect IMO.

Has the board accepted responsibility in the failures of the club anywhere? Brasher thanked and praised Tanner for his service and contribution. I may have missed his insight into the boards failings.
Click to expand...

On the draft thing, has it not been a policy for the last 5 years or so that we look to bring in the proverbial choir boys? I feel this has somewhat been reflected in the lack of leadership. You need a few with that bit of campaigner in them to be part of the leading group of players at the club.
 
CBombers17 said:
As if a lack of onfield leadership is sone sort of drafting issue...What level has the review revealed the leadership problems at Essendon stop at - just below president or below all at board level? Unless the past regime under Tanner's leadership is part of the critisism then the whole review is suspect IMO.

Has the board accepted responsibility in the failures of the club anywhere? Brasher thanked and praised Tanner for his service and contribution. I may have missed his insight into the boards failings (perhaps a mention about senior appointments being made without due process etc).
Click to expand...
I find the phrase “accept responsibility” problematic. What does it mean? How does someone demonstrate that? Do they need to apologise and resign? Do they need to make reparations? Do they need to identify issues and rectify them? What actions indicate a lack of accepting responsibility?

Also, slightly off-topic but you may be able to riddle it out for me. What the hell is with the corporate structure at AFLHQ? All of their GMs seem to be EGMs... does that mean basically their GMs are also their board of directors?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The Prosecutor said:
On the draft thing, has it not been a policy for the last 5 years or so that we look to bring in the proverbial choir boys? I feel this has somewhat been reflected in the lack of leadership. You need a few with that bit of campaigner in them to be part of the leading group of players at the club.
Click to expand...
Say drafting 'choirboys' is the problem (personally I don't think it is but that's besides the point) - we started to take those types with Myers apparently. Why are we all these years later doing the same thing?

Who's job is it to check these policies and make sure we are cutting edge? And who appoints those people / promotes them and oversees them. All these problems originate at board level (Xaviers initial appointment and then subsequent heads of football and coaches extensions) and are allowed to continue under board supervision / governance. And then years later here we are - the with the same people who have been around on the board for nearly a decade pointing to a lack of player leadership at the club. It's absurd and it's smokescreening but it does work unfortunately.
 
I can think of only 1 premiership team that was player driven. Geelong 2011. Chris Scott has always admitted he took a back seat and managed an already self driven group of players, who got their act together under Bomber. Brisbanes 3 peat was driven by Lethal and Voss. There is no way those 2 were leaving it up to the playing group to set their standards and drive their own success. Same with Hawthorn who had Clarkson and Hodge. Ross Lyons teams although some would call it boring at times were always extremely disciplined with a defensive mindset as the focus. You wouldn't get a game in those sides if you didnt meet the standards and follow the game plan that the coach set. Richmonds players all sacrifice themselves for the team first. They reward players who chase and tackle and follow the game plan relentlessly. With our playing group, after 4 years of unprecedented stress and mental challenges, it was always going to be a balancing act for Woosh. Trying to get them playing uncompromising football and setting elite standards vs bringing the banned players back and just enjoying the game again. We've clearly gone too far the wrong way and as a result we are a soft, directionless footy team, whos results havent matched the talent on the list. Looks like this has now finally been adressed and the coach is going to put his stamp on the group. I think the younger players have been craving it, some direction from a Ross Lyon/Clarkson/Longmire type coach. Hopefully Rutten can be that type of leader that wont accept any sub par efforts on the field, off the field or on the training track. And if a player cant understand the gameplan or just refuses to do whats expected of them for the betterment of the team, then they dont play, no matter who it is.
 
Bjchan13 said:
I can think of only 1 premiership team that was player driven. Geelong 2011. Chris Scott has always admitted he took a back seat and managed an already self driven group of players, who got their act together under Bomber. Brisbanes 3 peat was driven by Lethal and Voss. There is no way those 2 were leaving it up to the playing group to set their standards and drive their own success. Same with Hawthorn who had Clarkson and Hodge. Ross Lyons teams although some would call it boring at times were always extremely disciplined with a defensive mindset as the focus. You wouldn't get a game in those sides if you didnt meet the standards and follow the game plan that the coach set. Richmonds players all sacrifice themselves for the team first. They reward players who chase and tackle and follow the game plan relentlessly. With our playing group, after 4 years of unprecedented stress and mental challenges, it was always going to be a balancing act for Woosh. Trying to get them playing uncompromising football and setting elite standards vs bringing the banned players back and just enjoying the game again. We've clearly gone too far the wrong way and as a result we are a soft, directionless footy team, whos results havent matched the talent on the list. Looks like this has now finally been adressed and the coach is going to put his stamp on the group. I think the younger players have been craving it, some direction from a Ross Lyon/Clarkson/Longmire type coach. Hopefully Rutten can be that type of leader that wont accept any sub par efforts on the field, off the field or on the training track. And if a player cant understand the gameplan or just refuses to do whats expected of them for the betterment of the team, then they dont play, no matter who it is.
Click to expand...

There certainly has seemed to be inconsistent expectations, where young players have to reach a high bar to get a game and remain in the side, whilst senior players basically get a free ride.

Hopefully one of the things we see under Rutten is clear and consistent expectations of players and standards.
 
Bjchan13 said:
I can think of only 1 premiership team that was player driven. Geelong 2011. Chris Scott has always admitted he took a back seat and managed an already self driven group of players, who got their act together under Bomber. Brisbanes 3 peat was driven by Lethal and Voss. There is no way those 2 were leaving it up to the playing group to set their standards and drive their own success. Same with Hawthorn who had Clarkson and Hodge. Ross Lyons teams although some would call it boring at times were always extremely disciplined with a defensive mindset as the focus. You wouldn't get a game in those sides if you didnt meet the standards and follow the game plan that the coach set. Richmonds players all sacrifice themselves for the team first. They reward players who chase and tackle and follow the game plan relentlessly. With our playing group, after 4 years of unprecedented stress and mental challenges, it was always going to be a balancing act for Woosh. Trying to get them playing uncompromising football and setting elite standards vs bringing the banned players back and just enjoying the game again. We've clearly gone too far the wrong way and as a result we are a soft, directionless footy team, whos results havent matched the talent on the list. Looks like this has now finally been adressed and the coach is going to put his stamp on the group. I think the younger players have been craving it, some direction from a Ross Lyon/Clarkson/Longmire type coach. Hopefully Rutten can be that type of leader that wont accept any sub par efforts on the field, off the field or on the training track. And if a player cant understand the gameplan or just refuses to do whats expected of them for the betterment of the team, then they dont play, no matter who it is.
Click to expand...
Simple first test: Does an unfit Stringer get selected?
 
seer said:
Simple first test: Does an unfit Stringer get selected?
Click to expand...

Depends, is Stringer unfit because of an injury that's limited his ability to train, and are we therefore rushing him back in because we think a semi-recovered and fit Stringer is better than the alternative option?

If so, yes.
 
Lore said:
I find the phrase “accept responsibility” problematic. What does it mean? How does someone demonstrate that? Do they need to apologise and resign? Do they need to make reparations? Do they need to identify issues and rectify them? What actions indicate a lack of accepting responsibility?

Also, slightly off-topic but you may be able to riddle it out for me. What the hell is with the corporate structure at AFLHQ? All of their GMs seem to be EGMs... does that mean basically their GMs are also their board of directors?
Click to expand...
They could point to direct failings in the boards leadership and governance over the last relevant period - say 5 years - and point to the impact that had on the performance of the club and teams output. You should not be able sit at the top and simply point downwards as the problem years later.

An example of where you can blame down is the recent Rio Tinto debacle. Their boards recent review of their Juukan George affair ultimately found fault at CEO level (he's since resigned) and senior management with several removed over the 'incident'. Its probably fair enough that the sackings stopped at that level because it's one incident not years of poor performance. Their board also apologised for falling short of its own standards and internal guidance (set for themselves) and then detailed how they would improve many areas. Cases where there's years of poor performance should mostly mean big changes in board leadership (their can be reasons for poor performance outside of leadership though of course - market changes, pandemics etc).

In our case if there was some acknowledgment of the boards responsibility it would at least show they are aware of their major role in our problems, and are at least prepared to show the leadership required to admit to that - something they are now demanding of everyone else apparently - so the opposite of leadership. Do as I say not as I do.

As for the EGM stuff and the AFL structure I have no idea. It's a really unique scenario all round though. The clubs have a variety of different ownership structures amongst other things. The whole premise of it as a business is odd really - is X a 'CEO' really or just a middle manager in the AFL?

With all the equalization i think great board leadership is even more of an advantage these days. You can't just outspend and out reaource weaker financial clubs any more - yet we seemingly have all the hangover problems from that era and thinking still dragging us down.
 
The Prosecutor said:
On the draft thing, has it not been a policy for the last 5 years or so that we look to bring in the proverbial choir boys? I feel this has somewhat been reflected in the lack of leadership. You need a few with that bit of campaigner in them to be part of the leading group of players at the club.
Click to expand...

This is been an issue for far too long now as the game may have changed with regard to what's acceptable on field but the need for a number of players on the list to be able to play on edge hasn't. & who ticks that box currently? Smith & Ambrose maybe, Draper looks like a goer, but who would opposition players maybe loose a bit of sleep over the thought of having to play on the next day?

The list needs a decent injection of mongrel.
 
Lore said:
Also, slightly off-topic but you may be able to riddle it out for me. What the hell is with the corporate structure at AFLHQ? All of their GMs seem to be EGMs... does that mean basically their GMs are also their board of directors?
Click to expand...
Are they? Quick look on LinkedIn and website and I’m only seeing GM titles.

Where are you seeing EGM?
 
Bjchan13 said:
I can think of only 1 premiership team that was player driven. Geelong 2011. Chris Scott has always admitted he took a back seat and managed an already self driven group of players, who got their act together under Bomber. Brisbanes 3 peat was driven by Lethal and Voss. There is no way those 2 were leaving it up to the playing group to set their standards and drive their own success. Same with Hawthorn who had Clarkson and Hodge. Ross Lyons teams although some would call it boring at times were always extremely disciplined with a defensive mindset as the focus. You wouldn't get a game in those sides if you didnt meet the standards and follow the game plan that the coach set. Richmonds players all sacrifice themselves for the team first. They reward players who chase and tackle and follow the game plan relentlessly. With our playing group, after 4 years of unprecedented stress and mental challenges, it was always going to be a balancing act for Woosh. Trying to get them playing uncompromising football and setting elite standards vs bringing the banned players back and just enjoying the game again. We've clearly gone too far the wrong way and as a result we are a soft, directionless footy team, whos results havent matched the talent on the list. Looks like this has now finally been adressed and the coach is going to put his stamp on the group. I think the younger players have been craving it, some direction from a Ross Lyon/Clarkson/Longmire type coach. Hopefully Rutten can be that type of leader that wont accept any sub par efforts on the field, off the field or on the training track. And if a player cant understand the gameplan or just refuses to do whats expected of them for the betterment of the team, then they dont play, no matter who it is.
Click to expand...
Carlton 1995 Essendon 2000
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

VelvetSledge
  • Locked
  • Sticky
MVP 2024 BigFooty Essendon Board POTY Award
Replies
6
Views
1K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
Jade
Remove the Board of Directors
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
3K
CBombers17
CBombers17
Lore
Mod. Notice Welcome Nuggs Bunny, new Essendon board mod!
Replies
13
Views
1K
Vindicater
Vindicater
Beerfish
  • Poll
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Poster Of The Year - The Scales - Congratulations eDPS!
Replies
14
Views
1K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
Nuggs Bunny
Competitions 2024 Essendon Board My Boy Draft - Round 2 now started
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
182
Views
5K
citizen-erased
citizen-erased
RedmanWasHere
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Mock Draft
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
9K
citizen-erased
citizen-erased
Beerfish
  • Locked
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Poster Of The Year - The Scales - Nomination Thread - Win 1 year free platinum BF experience!
Replies
22
Views
1K
Lore
Lore

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top