Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - Part II [NEW POLL ADDED]

[Turbocat]

maybe there isnt one? maybe they just had a terrible night... sport isnt a magic formula where you assemble 'better' players, and beat all those who players 'arent as good'.

i know this is a few levels below professional sport, but i played high grade competitive futsal in adelaide for 8 years, winning the comp twice. sometimes we turn up against the bottom teams and lose 2-5. sometimes wed turn up as the bottom team and beat a team at the top 5-2. the last grand final i played before leaving adelaide we played the team that finished top, while we had finished second. 4 weeks before we had drawn with them 5-5. we lost 12-2.

sport is fickle, and how do you properly aportion blame? did freo blow the '13 GF because ross ran the wrong drills that week at training? because he got his words in the wrong order at the pre-match address? because the freo players on the whole thought for the whole week before 'we never beat hawthorn - how are we going to do this!' and pretty much lost themselves the game before taking the field? personally, i suspect that was the case - and had they played us that day, who didnt hold the same mental demons over them, the dockers would have been premiers. and if my guess-work turned out to be close to the mark, what could the coach have really done differently? maybe the team psych is to blame.

so trying to find 'reasonable reasons' for the loss is a futile exercise. there may be some, there may not be. there may be unreasonable reasons. there may be reasons beyond scott himself, although logically at least some of the reasons could be traced back to him.

sometimes, teams just s**t the bed when they shouldnt. its happened to us, and its happened against us. on the whole, id wager sydney were just a better team that (this old chestnut) 'matched up well' on us.

collingwood were formidable as f*** in 2011 - no one could get near us... yet this is the H2H record (searched an old post of mine for the stats):

game 1: 65-62; i50 - +20 geelong
game 2: 149-53; i50 - +33 geelong
game 3: 119 - 81; i50 - +6 geelong.

so in the three games - 333 - 196; i50 - +59 geelong; % of 169 in favour of geelong.

so virtually identical 22-3 records, both around 157%, and a 3-0 record in favour of geelong H2H by a fairly massive combined margin. hard to find 'reasonable reasons' for that, other than collingwood didnt/couldnt stand up against geelong.

collingwood of that season, despite being able to smash 16 teams, simply bottled it against geelong.

as fans who care, a poor showing in a PF is pretty tough to swallow. but theyre hard to win, and teams rarely get an easy one. obviously we can say 'scott should have prepared better!' and yeah, i think that too. but its such an easy charge to make from afar and in hindsight (and is also a pretty nebulous concept).

its also possible that all the 'preparation' in the world - and lets even assume it was 'perfect preparation' - and sydney still win that game fairly comfortably.

sometimes, the other team is just better - on the night, or throughout the season.

Nice post. I disagree with the tenet that a professional team with professional management can just shrug the shoulders , just say "whatever dude" , "the vibe was off " , "our biorhythms were off cycle" , "the footy gods were against us" etc.

The reason we have so much off field overview is to take the shroud of mystery off the result. Its his and others job to find the magicians sleight of hand , not to be distracted by the curvy assistant , to look hard and long , to find reasons and correct deficiencies.

 

[romeohwho]

_

Yet , 1 Flag puts a slight "out" for him. Without that first year , he really would have a result poor cv in finals.

I guess what Id like to know is if he can coach and handle players when it counts. That Swans game is a real bugbear , and Im yet to hear any reasonable reason for our performance. Sel in a recent interview on SEN (around 7.00 minute mark) talks about scheduling allowing them to understand what the night meant to them ? What the? This doesn't sound great from coaching perspective imo. So the team didn't understand that the Swans were going to be hard at it, even though only weeks before they had cleaned us up at KP.

https://audioboom.com/posts/5725208-joel-selwood-on-hungry-for-sport-monday-march-20

Hard to know what exactly Selwood was referring to there and it would be interesting to hear it elaborated on-find it hard to believe the club didn't know what was coming! Makes no sense. Did we think they'd be tired and we'd be fresh or something? A prelim, against a team that has our number atm-it's a nobrainer isn't it?

 

[JumpyHolden]

#sackscottbeforeround1

NO WAY!!!!!

Didn't you hear he's got the best winning % of any other coach?

Don't worry no other coach could have possibly won the 2011 flag with the shabby team he inherited and don't worry about his poor finals record, player development or lackluster gameday coaching, he has to be the best coach ever with that winning %, even coaches like Clarkson and Matthews just don't stack up against him, that winning % is proof.

 

[barmy44]

Nice post. I disagree with the tenet that a professional team with professional management can just shrug the shoulders , just say "whatever dude" , "the vibe was off " , "our biorhythms were off cycle" , "the footy gods were against us" etc.

The reason we have so much off field overview is to take the shroud of mystery off the result. Its his and others job to find the magicians sleight of hand , not to be distracted by the curvy assistant , to look hard and long , to find reasons and correct deficiencies.

yes, youre right there... i definitely wasnt intending to say that pro teams should just turn up, let it happen, then say 'ah, cool!' or 'ah, dang!' depending on what happens.

but there will also be times when pro teams, in any sport, thoroughly analyse, thoroughly prepare, and still get beaten. and sometimes it will be against a team on the bottom of the standings. if a teams level of talent and preparation was a sure thing, we'd all be millionaries from sports gambling.

 

[barmy44]

NO WAY!!!!!

Didn't you hear he's got the best winning % of any other coach?

Don't worry no other coach could have possibly won the 2011 flag with the shabby team he inherited and don't worry about his poor finals record, player development or lackluster gameday coaching, he has to be the best coach ever with that winning %, even coaches like Clarkson and Matthews just don't stack up against him, that winning % is proof.

literally (used correctly) no one has said any of those things (edit: GC26 may have (jovial comment disclaimer)).

 

[Art Vandelay_]

NO WAY!!!!!

Didn't you hear he's got the best winning % of any other coach?

Don't worry no other coach could have possibly won the 2011 flag with the shabby team he inherited and don't worry about his poor finals record, player development or lackluster gameday coaching, he has to be the best coach ever with that winning %, even coaches like Clarkson and Matthews just don't stack up against him, that winning % is proof.

Nice contribution as always

 

[JumpyHolden]

Nice contribution as always

Says Bobby's stalker.

 

[barmy44]

Says Bobby's stalker.

haha, Doctor Gero - checkmate there

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Says Bobby's stalker.

Other way around there.

Just not your greatest post, less sarcasm and more content would be nice.

 

[Seeds]

"Prevent". Otherwise known as trying to win flags.

Trying to win them now at the expense of not having a hope of winning them in the future. Given Scott gets marked by what happens now and not the future he suffers a clear moral hazard problem here.

 

[catempire]

Trying to win them now at the expense of not having a hope of winning them in the future. Given Scott gets marked by what happens now and not the future he suffers a clear moral hazard problem here.

There are different views on that. I've put forward the case as to why it's not (necessarily) so in the list management strategy thread.

 

[Turbocat]

yes, youre right there... i definitely wasnt intending to say that pro teams should just turn up, let it happen, then say 'ah, cool!' or 'ah, dang!' depending on what happens.

but there will also be times when pro teams, in any sport, thoroughly analyse, thoroughly prepare, and still get beaten. and sometimes it will be against a team on the bottom of the standings. if a teams level of talent and preparation was a sure thing, we'd all be millionaries from sports gambling.

Yes, one sees it where the process of pushing teams wide or making them shoot the three or play a particular side in cricket etc. And if a player just keeps kicking the low percentage goal then sometimes you just have to say too good today. Basically if the result is more them winning more than you losing.My bet is the Swans played one quarter a bit like that but that we also played a quarter that we were far from happy with.

 

[PhatBoy]

Just getting in nice and early.

Not the best win but a win, and one where, like literally every win since round one, 2011, all the positive aspects were a result of the players and support staff, and all negative aspects were a direct result of the head coach.


And yes I will be doing this after every win this year.

 

[catempire]

Just getting in nice and early.

Not the best win but a win, and one where, like literally every win since round one, 2011, all the positive aspects were a result of the players and support staff, and all negative aspects were a direct result of the head coach.


And yes I will be doing this after every win this year.

inb4 only premierships matter.

 

[dazbroncos]

#goalpostmovingwatch2017hascommenced.

Go Catters

 

[Art Vandelay_]

God our mercenaries were good today.

 

[PhatBoy]

God our mercenaries were good today.

I'd rather we lost and didn't have them tbh

 

[barmy44]

on a more serious note - did anyone figure out what scott was doing at half time, once the ruckus broke apart? was he annoyed? was he excited? was he impressed? seemed to be going for mccarthy... i thought he was unhappy, but the commentators thought otherwise.

 

[evolutionbaby]

Highest winning % in the history of coaches who have coached 100 games begs to differ

That's pretty disappointing of you to apply facts on this thread. You have some nerve.

 

[David the Cat]

on a more serious note - did anyone figure out what scott was doing at half time, once the ruckus broke apart? was he annoyed? was he excited? was he impressed? seemed to be going for mccarthy... i thought he was unhappy, but the commentators thought otherwise.

No...Scott was urging him on from the vision....McCarthy responded well.

 

[Lana]

inb4 only premierships matter.

#2ndIsntGoodEnough

 

[Nankervis brothers]

And I'm gunna post this here, too:

I know I am supposed to be diplomatic with the anti-Scott crowd, but their position is so irrational, so devoid of evidence, that it beggars belief.


They tell us Scott’s premiership year doesn’t count. Let’s do away with that first…..

According to pundits and the media, Geelong in 2011 was a spent force. Yet the team found another gear. Why? It was largely due to Scott’s management of the list he inherited. Scarlett, Ling, and Mooney are on record as saying this. In fact Scarlett has been typically blunt, claiming that we would not have won 11’ had Thompson continued. In 2011 senior players were motivated to prove themselves to a new coach, while younger players felt they had a chance to impress. Beyond that, Scott handled the cross over very well. He could have been ego driven and attempted to ‘make his mark’. But instead he took a diplomatic approach and let the senior players have a real voice in how the club structured on field. He essentially collaborated with Scarlett, Johnson, Ling, et al., rather than arrogantly rewriting the play book in the face of a great team. That is good man-management, pure and simple. It’s probably why players such as Scarlett, Ling, and Enright have returned to work with Scott. The Scott haters also need to remember that a premiership is a premiership. They are hard to win, and can’t be ‘discounted’ as meaningless. Scott is a premiership coach, as much as you may hate it.

Another anti-Scott claim is that we are recruiting for the now at the expense of the future. Much teeth gnashing about our treatment of ageing stars hypocritically accompanies this claim. I say ‘hypocritically’ because letting go of premiership stars was a central part of making sure we don’t fall into the same post-dynasty holes ESS and BRIS fell into, or the post-competitive slumps of COLL and STK. The GFC has moved on stars to ensure we remain competitive in the future. You can’t have your cake and eat too. I would also remind the anti-Scott crowd that Scott has turned over a list in the last six years, while keeping the club a serious competitor. We are a significantly younger side today than we were in 2011.

Another thing the anti-Scott crowd enjoy saying is that they ‘understand that the situation has changed with free agency’. But they don’t really understand that, because they go on to argue for a pre free agency period of list development that is gone. Cook and Scott both said, before the new free-agency situation, that they much prefer the idea of developing players through drafting. However, as drafting is no longer the main game in developing a list, the club would try and become a player in the new landscape. I agree here with the club: equalization and drafting is the best way to go. But as it is no longer the best way to build a list, I am thankful that the club has placed it’s own beliefs aside, and is making itself a player in the new market.

Another much loved anti-Scott claim is that his w/l record is irrelevant, as his finals record is so bad. Let’s look at his final’s record. His finals record stands at 5 wins and 6 losses. That is ‘fair’, not bad. For perspective, Malcolm Blights finals record with Geelong is barely above 50%. One mildly successful finals series this season and Scott betters that. And, of course, the Scott-haters play down his H/A win-loss percentage, which is the so far ahead of anyone’s that it is not even funny. I’ve no idea what to say to the haters here, other than * you, don’t you like winning regularly?!

Then there is game-style. I am an old-school Geelong fan who expects us to play the Geelong way. That means fast, possession heavy, play on football, with lot’s of uncontested show pony s**t. That is how we have done it for decades, and that is how we should keep doing it. I lost interest during the ‘Ayres Years’ because we became far too dour. Scott was a defender, and I can see how he has implemented that mind-set into our team. But it seems to me he his trying to balance that with the free-flowing ‘Geelong way’. As a connoisseur of unaccountable, free-flowing Geelong football, I am okay with the hybrid he is trying to create.

The GFC has made a decision on Scott based on facts listed above. They have made a decision based on wins versus loses and the successful transition of the playing list, rather than the armchair bullshit and pessimistic psycho-babble we have been subjected to in this thread.

 

[dazbroncos]

what... only 5 posts here in the last 12 hours....

What could possibly have triggered such an event? Did the interwebs thingy crash? Was there a global power blackout? Did Vettel beating Lewis explode all the bandwidth? An asteroid has hit the moon causing a solar flare that has terminated technology as we know it?

Nah.. bigger than that...

Geelong won. And won well. Not just by numbers but by structure and gamestyle. Perfect ... no, but well enough.

The perfect antidote to this thread.

GO Catters

 

[Biggy_Boy]

what... only 5 posts here in the last 12 hours....

What could possibly have triggered such an event? Did the interwebs thingy crash? Was there a global power blackout? Did Vettel beating Lewis explode all the bandwidth? An asteroid has hit the moon causing a solar flare that has terminated technology as we know it?

Nah.. bigger than that...

Geelong won. And won well. Not just by numbers but by structure and gamestyle. Perfect ... no, but well enough.

The perfect antidote to this thread.

GO Catters

Geelong beat a side that won 4 games last season. Freo were very hospitable in handing the ball to Geelong and making blunders of their chances, failing to mark the ball and missing shots.

That's not to say Geelong didn't play well, but Geelong won plenty of games last year and it didn't appease people's concerns. A win against Fremantle will hardly answer the doubts people still have.

There are still some real question marks over selection choices and structure. The fact that things worked against Fremantle doesn't completely validate them.

 

[Generalissimo]

I think it's fair to say Chris Scott out coached Ross Lyon yesterday.