Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III

[Vdubs]

Well from that post, "He has runs on the board, and is building a new team." was the only argument, the rest was emotive drivel (no offence!).

The counter-counter hypothetical argument, is that Scott could not have built such a successful team from the ground up. After 2015 which is the closest to what you could say Bomber inherited in 2000 - Geelong were already established as a destination club for free agents, there were premiership heroes remaining to help the handover/develop the next generation and the closest we can get to success is a PF belting. In a weaker, talent diluted competition. Who knows what he would have done if we stacked up on the draft 2014 onwards instead of FA, but that really is as pointless a hypothetical as giving Scott the 2007-2011 team. Can only assess them on what they created and achieved.

If I remove the word "PATHETIC", all will be fine?
I have always disliked the CS thread, but being an addict and a contributor, I am happy to join in his defence.

 

[Vdubs]

Sorry VD, that’s crap.

I’m absolutely a detractor - and I’m not apologising for it - but I will admit every day of the week he can coach.

You know well that you are not included in that group. Detractor you may be, but you are balanced.

 

[Mr Meow]

If I remove the word "PATHETIC", all will be fine?
I have always disliked the CS thread, but being an addict and a contributor, I am happy to join in his defence.

Yes please. I do need to sleep tonight, after all.

I've always been in the camp that he is a good, not a great coach. Good enough to get us almost in contention, but not really, once the Bomber stars left or declined. Every year I hope to be proven wrong, and gain no satisfaction whatsoever from being "vindicated" in my view.

 

[Cronin]

Whatever he said to them at quarter time

Hopefully next week we can play 4 quarters instead of 3 and go from there.

 

[Seeds]

"I'm pretty defence-first in my attitude and we are as a coaching group and we have been as a club for a long time, so I think we'll lean towards the defensive side of it," Scott said.


It breaks my heart what Geelong has become under Scott. F*** Collingwood. Scott doesn’t even try to pretend anymore. He is proud of it. It’s why we will lose Menzel this year and have a forward line next year with defenders like Henry and Taylor up there and nothing but defensive small forwards who can’t win the ball or doing anything with it like Fogarty and parsons and gregson. So sad.

 

[Mr Meow]

"I'm pretty defence-first in my attitude and we are as a coaching group and we have been as a club for a long time, so I think we'll lean towards the defensive side of it," Scott said.


It breaks my heart what Geelong has become under Scott. F*** Collingwood. Scott doesn’t even try to pretend anymore. He is proud of it. It’s why we will lose Menzel this year and have a forward line next year with defenders like Henry and Taylor up there and nothing but defensive small forwards who can’t win the ball or doing anything with it like Fogarty and parsons and gregson. So sad.

Henry's been doing okay as a forward. Wasn't he a forward during his development and VFL time anyway?

Sav, Cocky and McCarthy would be locks for our forward line if available. Injuries have made it a makeshift forward line, as per usual. All sides have a couple of pressure-heavy smalls btw.

He stuffed up excluding Menzel in the QF last year, but he hasn't dropped him before or after if I recall correctly. Just the usual injuries/rest break requirements.

 

[Vdubs]

"I'm pretty defence-first in my attitude and we are as a coaching group and we have been as a club for a long time, so I think we'll lean towards the defensive side of it," Scott said.


It breaks my heart what Geelong has become under Scott. F*** Collingwood. Scott doesn’t even try to pretend anymore. He is proud of it. It’s why we will lose Menzel this year and have a forward line next year with defenders like Henry and Taylor up there and nothing but defensive small forwards who can’t win the ball or doing anything with it like Fogarty and parsons and gregson. So sad.

I feel for your heart because things could be a hell of a lot worse at Catland.
We will lose Menzel, as we did caddy, if he wants more than a fair one year deal. He is one of my very favourite Cats, but he does not deserve more than an annual one year deal. If Saints et al offer him a 3 year deal, bad for us, we will survive.

 

[The rabbi]

 

[Mad_Hatter]

"I'm pretty defence-first in my attitude and we are as a coaching group and we have been as a club for a long time, so I think we'll lean towards the defensive side of it," Scott said.


It breaks my heart what Geelong has become under Scott. F*** Collingwood. Scott doesn’t even try to pretend anymore. He is proud of it. It’s why we will lose Menzel this year and have a forward line next year with defenders like Henry and Taylor up there and nothing but defensive small forwards who can’t win the ball or doing anything with it like Fogarty and parsons and gregson. So sad.

Problem I have with this kind of view is Bomber was also about Defense first.
That is after all where most attacks are generated, and defence doesn’t mean backline, but defensive pressure and accountability.
I’m very happy with that being the priority.

 

[AM]

Sorry VD, that’s crap.

I’m absolutely a detractor - and I’m not apologising for it - but I will admit every day of the week he can coach.

Sorry Partridge but I don't follow things here as closely as I once did. If you say CS can coach then what is it about him that is the root cause of you being a detractor?

 

[Partridge]

Sorry Partridge but I don't follow things here as closely as I once did. If you say CS can coach then what is it about him that is the root cause of you being a detractor?

1. Playing favourites at selection ahead of team balance.
2. Far too much faith in players who consistently underperform when it matters (not just but most critically in finals).
3. Far too much faith in players who have been or are always injured.
4. Lack of accountability and discipline with senior players.

 

[Vdubs]

1. Playing favourites at selection ahead of team balance.
2. Far too much faith in players who consistently underperform when it matters (not just but most critically in finals).
3. Far too much faith in players who have been or are always injured.
4. Lack of accountability and discipline with senior players.

I love the way you make points, always excellent, but they are opinions only, not actually facts.
Each point is contestable. Esp #4.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Contract talks well advanced I see. Well done Cooky.

1. Playing favourites at selection ahead of team balance.
2. Far too much faith in players who consistently underperform when it matters (not just but most critically in finals).
3. Far too much faith in players who have been or are always injured.
4. Lack of accountability and discipline with senior players.

This year, not previous years, but this year, all 4 points can be rebutted by the VFL results.

1 and 2 are closely linked, and those that are possibly the culprits are better than the VFL alternatives.
3 is a list management decision encompassing more than Scott. Dare say 2 of those players are nailed on to leave this year.
4 comes back the VFL rebuttal.

People don't want to listen or acknowledge that but it is unfortunately true.

 

[AM]

1. Playing favourites at selection ahead of team balance.
2. Far too much faith in players who consistently underperform when it matters (not just but most critically in finals).
3. Far too much faith in players who have been or are always injured.
4. Lack of accountability and discipline with senior players.

You and I clearly are on different pages when it comes to the brief of a head coach. Those matters fall within every head coaching brief I've encountered. You can't conveniently partition them.

 

[Claude Balls]

His wording was not ideal, but surely you can appreciate his point, which is totally valid.
2011 is the ONLY year we were clearly, without stress, the team of the finals series.
In 07, we could easily have lost the Prelim.
In 09, a Tomahawk non goal, and we might not have clawed it back in that last quarter.
Of course, history shows that we had a massive win in 07, and deserved it. and we did kick goals in the 09 GF last Q, wich Saints did not do, but the ???? are real.
You can not say that about 11.

The ‘07 prelim was a case of nerves born of a 44 year drought and massive expectations. QF and GF both won by over 100 points. To say we weren’t unequivocally the team of the finals series that year is nonsense.

 

[Vdubs]

The ‘07 prelim was a case of nerves born of a 44 year drought and massive expectations. QF and GF both won by over 100 points. To say we weren’t unequivocally the team of the finals series that year is nonsense.

we were; that stupid AA night should come after the GF, or in this bye week- I reckon that was a distraction when what was it, 12 players selected?

 

[geelong_crazy26]

To say we almost blew it in 2009 is one of the biggest loads of crap I've ever read on this site.
St Kilda won their first 19 games and ended up 2 wins and nearly 30% clear on top.
That team would have cantered to the flag in any of the last 3 Seasons and yet we beat them.

Even in 2007, in front of easily the biggest and noisiest crowd any of them would have played in front of, against a team they had hit strong form and with 44 years of expectations on their shoulders, they still won the match. I have no doubt that the circumstances in the prelim, provided the confidence and belief for the following week

But we did almost blow it in 2009. I’m not taking anything away from the effort or how impressive it was, I am pointing out the fact we almost lost it on the day. The hawkins poster given a goal, St Kilda’s cery Poor kicking early on. They could have easily won.

With the 07 prelim I don’t buy a single piece of any of that nonsense. In fact we were actually a seasoned finals side and collingwood were the inexperienced lesser side. If anyone was going to have nerves it should have been them With the inexperience.

Nobody has more pressure than anyone else in a final, both sides have it equally as pressurizing.

Don’t get me wrong, Thompson was a good developer and overall a good coach but not a great coach in my opinion, the only reason I say not a great coach is because he was quite a poor tactical coach and cost us a couple of premierships we should have won. The team of 2007-11 would have been much better in the hands of Scott.

 

[Landgraft]

GC26 is every bit as responsible for the petty, puerile and hyper-personal quagmire of this thread as those 'negative' trolls that have had their accounts cancelled.

the fact he is 'positive' (except oddly, when it comes to thompson) should not matter.

i have no idea how belittling thompsons efforts, ability and achievements from a decade ago have any relevance to scotts coaching strengths and weaknesses in 2018.

No, comparing GC26 to Blighty is chalk and cheese. There are several posters with abrasive natures, opinions and posting styles but BC was fundamentally toxic. I've said it before, if I ran moderation as a dictator he would have been my only (Geelong) ban. And I would have done it much earlier, too.

As to questioning Thompsons achievements I don't mind it so much. Comparison is one way to evaluate something and with Thompsons coaching often used as a favourable comparison to justify criticism of Scott I think it does bear scrutiny.

If you poke at finals record Bombers is undeniably impressive, especially compared to Scott. But you can still find significant underperformances in September and I think that is worth bearing in mind when we ask why a coach performs better in H&A than finals.

"I'm pretty defence-first in my attitude and we are as a coaching group and we have been as a club for a long time, so I think we'll lean towards the defensive side of it," Scott said.


It breaks my heart what Geelong has become under Scott. F*** Collingwood. Scott doesn’t even try to pretend anymore. He is proud of it. It’s why we will lose Menzel this year and have a forward line next year with defenders like Henry and Taylor up there and nothing but defensive small forwards who can’t win the ball or doing anything with it like Fogarty and parsons and gregson. So sad.

No club is or should be defined by one style of play... and for what it's worth Henry is naturally a forward that played down back for development and team first reasons.

 

[ATSAM]

Remain unconvinced that this win had anything to do with Scott. The 1st qtr was pure Scott and just about every game that we have played this year. But something happened , perhaps the players were reminded of Billys words about being lazy.
On that well done Billy you might have given them the kick up the backside that was needed. I am sure that you will suffer for your words though as our club has a way of punishing those who are critical of 'them'

 

[Mr Meow]

Remain unconvinced that this win had anything to do with Scott. The 1st qtr was pure Scott and just about every game that we have played this year. But something happened , perhaps the players were reminded of Billys words about being lazy.
On that well done Billy you might have given them the kick up the backside that was needed. I am sure that you will suffer for your words though as our club has a way of punishing those who are critical of 'them'

Haha this is such a stretch. I love it.

 

[Partridge]

I love the way you make points, always excellent, but they are opinions only, not actually facts.
Each point is contestable. Esp #4.

Never said they were.

AM asked a question, I answered it. If others don't like it that's not my problem.

 

[Seeds]

But we did almost blow it in 2009. I’m not taking anything away from the effort or how impressive it was, I am pointing out the fact we almost lost it on the day. The hawkins poster given a goal, St Kilda’s cery Poor kicking early on. They could have easily won.

With the 07 prelim I don’t buy a single piece of any of that nonsense. In fact we were actually a seasoned finals side and collingwood were the inexperienced lesser side. If anyone was going to have nerves it should have been them With the inexperience.

Nobody has more pressure than anyone else in a final, both sides have it equally as pressurizing.

Don’t get me wrong, Thompson was a good developer and overall a good coach but not a great coach in my opinion, the only reason I say not a great coach is because he was quite a poor tactical coach and cost us a couple of premierships we should have won. The team of 2007-11 would have been much better in the hands of Scott.

This is so wrong it’s not funny. For one the likes of SJ and Chapman wouldn’t of been at the club as Scott would of sold them off for poor defensive sides of their game. He probably would of had the likes of David Johnson playing as a defensive forward instead. Scott teams are hesitant and chip side ways. Very few young players have developed as they should have under Scott. The likes of Cam Guthrie have gone dramatically backwards from where he was three years earlier. That didn’t happen under Thompson. Thompson got the best ouf of his players. The likes of Ling and Enright weren’t terribly talented but became stars. Under Thompson Thurlow would probably be a great half back flanker like Enright by now.

 

[PhatBoy]

"I'm pretty defence-first in my attitude and we are as a coaching group and we have been as a club for a long time, so I think we'll lean towards the defensive side of it," Scott said.


It breaks my heart what Geelong has become under Scott. F*** Collingwood. Scott doesn’t even try to pretend anymore. He is proud of it. It’s why we will lose Menzel this year and have a forward line next year with defenders like Henry and Taylor up there and nothing but defensive small forwards who can’t win the ball or doing anything with it like Fogarty and parsons and gregson. So sad.

Yeah we've slumped all the way down to fourth for points scored. It's tragic.

 

[ATSAM]

Haha this is such a stretch. I love it.

Such a stretch. Perhaps you don't remember why John Barnes was moved on or why the late Paul Couch was not welcomed or why many of the other 90's players were not welcome. There is a pattern, it has happened before.

 

[barmy44]

This is so wrong it’s not funny. For one the likes of SJ and Chapman wouldn’t of been at the club as Scott would of sold them off for poor defensive sides of their game. He probably would of had the likes of David Johnson playing as a defensive forward instead. Scott teams are hesitant and chip side ways. Very few young players have developed as they should have under Scott. The likes of Cam Guthrie have gone dramatically backwards from where he was three years earlier. That didn’t happen under Thompson. Thompson got the best ouf of his players. The likes of Ling and Enright weren’t terribly talented but became stars. Under Thompson Thurlow would probably be a great half back flanker like Enright by now.

im not sure arguing about which hypothetical 'what if' scenario is the more accurate is going to be all that productive...

scott sides havent always been 'hesitant and chip sideways'. we were a very direct, corridor team, especially in 2013 - 'the geelong highway' was constantly talked about.

much like thompson did the best with what he had 10 years ago, so does scott [edit: not saying no other coach could do better with what thompson had / scott has, but i have no doubt scott is leaving nothing behind in his pursuit of success. he might not be 'good enough', but you could never question his competitiveness and desire to win].

arguing over whose revisionism of a history that never happened wont result in much of any worth.