Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III

[Two Planks]

um you are forgetting the picks we lost for trading in mcintosh, clark, caddy and stanley.

McIntosh - 30ish
Clark - Varcoe
Stanley - Christensen
Caddy - pick 15ish.

Once again hardly selling the farm

 

[cynical]

McIntosh - 30ish
Clark - Varcoe
Stanley - Christensen
Caddy - pick 15ish.

Once again hardly selling the farm

all added up it is

 

[Two Planks]

all added up it is

Yeah because we have been so successful with late 1st round picks like Thurlow, Smedts and Lang.

 

[goyoucatters]

McIntosh - 30ish
Clark - Varcoe
Stanley - Christensen
Caddy - pick 15ish.

Once again hardly selling the farm

McIntosh and Clark ended up being dud deals for us. And both deals were clearly 'reaches' in areas of desperate need for the club at the time. The GFC gambled and they lost. Having said that, they didn't give away really early picks or long-term players in either arrangement. Trav is into his fourth season at the Pies, hasn't notched 50 games, and turns 30 this week. And, apart from a goodish season first up with the Pies, he's returned to much the same (somewhat frustrating) output there as he provided for us over a number of seasons.

Bundy was desperate to get out and the club took the view that Stanley could potentially help in both the ruck and up forward. He hasn't worked out as intended but Bundy has not 'gone to another level' at the Lions either (even in the light of his wretched injury run). Hasn't proved to be a great deal but there are not many players making a huge difference for their teams right now who were taken at P21 or beyond in that 2014 draft. It wasn't actually a stellar group.

And as for Caddy, he has been replaced with Parf. Who I see as a really significant player for us for many seasons to come.

So, it's two 'busts' (for players well after R1 pick range), one 'meh', and a deal in its infancy that could still see us in front.

Must have been a hobby farm, at best.

 

[Partridge]

um you are forgetting the picks we lost for trading in mcintosh, clark, caddy and stanley.

Don't forget the other side of the equation - the number of injury prone players we kept for little reward:

- Menzel (pass)
- Vardy (fail)
- Cowan (massive fail)
- McCarthy (looking more and more like a fail now)

This is all at the same time, and exactly what some feared. Too many speculative trades for little to no reward (see the four names above), and at exactly the same time keeping very injury prone players who also don't provide reward (Menzel the sole exception). It's not a surprise and it isn't something that couldn't be predicted. Because a few on here did.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

I do agree that we could have drafted and developed more good young players instead. Our picks from this year are already having an impact.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

This is Chris's 8th year at the helm having raised the cup in stunning fashion in 2011.
Every Manager has to stay relevant and continually improve to successfully lead , this is a make or break year for Chris and the Coaching Staff IMHO
We don't necessarily have to win the Flag but we need to reach a level to play competitive in Finals for them to get a pass mark I'd have thought.

No more wilting under extreme pressure , no more poorly constructed entries into F50 , no more pathetic sieve like leaky zone defence , no more conceding large blocks of goals without firing a shot , time to construct a game plan to capitalise on our strengths.
So far Chris and the Coaches and the Team have been underwhelming. In particular the game plan , skills and execution have been below par.

Long way to go , but they need to be accountable as they all have the responsibility with Chris having the buck stop squarely with him.
We all need to be objective but we're entitled to expect results and improvement , let's hope they are up to it
Go Catters

 

[you pick one]

This is Chris's 8th year at the helm having raised the cup in stunning fashion in 2011.
Every Manager has to stay relevant and continually improve to successfully lead , this is a make or break year for Chris and the Coaching Staff IMHO
We don't necessarily have to win the Flag but we need to reach a level to play competitive in Finals for them to get a pass mark I'd have thought.

No more wilting under extreme pressure , no more poorly constructed entries into F50 , no more pathetic sieve like leaky zone defence , no more conceding large blocks of goals without firing a shot , time to construct a game plan to capitalise on our strengths.
So far Chris and the Coaches and the Team have been underwhelming. In particular the game plan , skills and execution have been below par.

Long way to go , but they need to be accountable as they all have the responsibility with Chris having the buck stop squarely with him.
We all need to be objective but we're entitled to expect results and improvement , let's hope they are up to it
Go Catters

They are not playing like a team that is committed to his game plan,what ever that may be.

 

[Partridge]

Did you actually even read what I said?
Or are you just shaking uncontrollably in a fit of rage at anyone that dares question Scott in any way?

It's more fun speculating whose alias account it is.

 

[Catters 070911]

This is just a little something I posted over three weeks ago on AFL board, re
Chris Scott. Had a couple of smug cocky posters ridicule it then......
May have more substance regarding Geelongs season rather than the reliance on ifs and buts I keep hearing for success this year.


Chris Scott coaches for Chris Scott

I liken Geelong to a stock market crash. Looks good on the surface but fundamentally a disaster waiting to happen. Both with serious problems and cracks underneath, usually plastered over and propped up too long causing a disaster.
Geelongs future is happening right now at North Melbourne, but will be worse.

Chris, just like his brother , has sold their clubs future away by trading good draft picks, several years running, for ready-made players to prop up their teams
He actually inherited his team from Bomber, and year after year has topped up to stay relevant.
The end result is Geelongs underbelly/depth and lack of quality young players is damning, and I believe the reason for horrible finals record from last few years.
Too much reliance on too few players .
Time has shown this is not how you build a team for a premiership era.
Most Geelong supporters are waiting for the 2011 team to turn up, those teams are gone.
They have been bloody good for a long time but you can't beat the system

Their best players are nearly 30+. Without Dangerfield and Selwood they would not even make finals.

There slide will come and come quick.

Some flaws in your logic.

You say that CS has sold our clubs future away for draft picks.

Do you know why we got in Dangerfield, Smith, S Selwood and Henderson in one year?

People say it is a premiership window, which is one reason, but another is looking at the list back then, we had a few 30 year olds and a lot of under 23 years, but very few players 24-29 at that time. Those four guys fill in that hole.

What it would have meant was that, once the 30 year olds retired, we would have a younger team, and drop down the ladder.

Lack of quality young players? Mitch Duncan, Cameron Guthrie, Tim Kelly, Estava Ratagoulea, Mark Blicavs, Nakia Cockatoo, Zack Guthrie, Fogarty, Mark O'Connor and others have all been introduced under Chris Scott. Now, you may not rate them, but these are players who we have a future with.

You say that we are sacrificing our future, yet I just listed these players, who are all young and talented. I think our age profile in 2009-2010 was older than it is now, and we will still winning. We had better players then, and didn't have to deal with compromised drafts, academy players and the dilution of the father-son rule, which served us well.

If we didn't top up, we would have had a completely young team, and got smashed every week. Then you would sook and blame Chris Scott for that as well. To do this would require more patience from supporters, and many of you want a flag NOW, not five years down the track, which is the average trend of a rebuild to a flag side.

"Without Dangerfield and Selwood we would not have made the finals".

Yet you said earlier that we mortgaged our future by giving away picks, to get in players. That's how we got Dangerfield, you pillock! If we didn't trade for Danger (because Adelaide matched our offer) then we wouldn't have got him, and we wouldn't have made finals according to you.

We are forced to play young players now because of injuries, and yet a lot of people here are bagging the young players. Well, what the hell do you think would happen if we had rebuilt. These same youngsters would be played every week. The difference is that it wouldn't be getting games until our top players return from injury, it would be every week, and then every week, players like Mark O'Connor and Zack Guthrie would be called hacks by many of you, because they make rookie mistakes (that's because they are rookies), and then Chris Scott would be criticised for not having more experienced players.

The finals efforts are questionable, but players should be blamed for this as well. Their lack of tackling, poor disposal and missing easy shots under finals pressure is just as much on them. We need to draft tough players, but, last time I looked, Stephen Wells did the recruiting, so put it on him to draft these types of players in.

You predict doom and gloom, yet people have been doing that on this board for years, and yet we still finish top two most home-and-away seasons. Our finals have to be better, but you have to be in it to win it, and missing one finals series in ten years doesn't exactly reinforce your point.

 

[Catters 070911]

So who do people here think would be a better coach for us, who is out there at the moment,who you think will get to where we are?

PS Alastair Clarkson isn't available.

 

[Catters 070911]

So who do people here think would be a better coach for us, who is out there at the moment,who you think will get to where we are?

Or here's a better question. Who wants our next premiership coach to be Chris Scott (again) and who wants it to be another coach who wins our next flag for us, and if so, who?

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

Did Chris Scott f... your wife or something?

Hahaha nah. He wouldn’t be able to Execute the game plan to pull that off.

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

So who do people here think would be a better coach for us, who is out there at the moment,who you think will get to where we are?

PS Alastair Clarkson isn't available.

Funnily enough your making me dislike him even more with the absolute horrific shit you post. I don’t know what’s worse. Our first half or your posts.

 

[BUSTER29]

It's more fun speculating whose alias account it is.

I think said Poster is clearly not playing with a full deck of cards.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

all added up it is

Hobby farm.

 

[Catters 070911]

Funnily enough your making me dislike him even more with the absolute horrific shit you post. I don’t know what’s worse. Our first half or your posts.

That's not answering the question.

You see, I believe that, to criticize, you have to offer a better alternative, or how else do you know that he might be the best option available?

 

[Catters 070911]

Here's some things to consider:-

-People calling for Chris Scott's sacking. Hey, didn't some of you also call for Bomber's sacking, and, what happened, we backed him in instead and we won flags.

So, are you glad that the GFC didn't listen to your calls of sacking the coach that time?

So, why not back CS in as well? We know that he can coach us to a premiership (yes people, he DID coach us to a flag in 2011, like it or not). Maybe lighting could strike twice.

Here's what I propose. Let's try some of the things that worked last time.

1) A review:- In 2007, Brian Cook did a review of the entire club. Maybe he should do another one, on all aspects of the club. It is good, every ten years, to do this, and see how things are going in every area, and making improvements when necessary.

2) Put good people around him:- In 2007, it was decided to keep Bomber, but get good people around him, so he can focus on his job. We got in Neil Balme, and a good medical team, lead by Dr Chris Bradshaw.

Maybe we should look at Chris Scott's immediate staff, and those around him, and see what is lacking, and then get the best people for those positions into the club, so Chris Scott doesn't have as much to focus on.

3) The players need to be self-driven- Let me tell you a story.

It was the Round 5 game in 2007. I was on the train on the way home with my late brother, who was a North supporter, after the Kangaroos beat an insipid Geelong at Kardinia Park.

After a terrible 2006, I expected more in 2007, but on the train coming home, I was seething, and said that the club needed to turn things around, because I didn't want to see a performance like that again.

I heard that, after that game, Paul Chapman said that enough is enough, and he won't stand performances like that anymore. Harley, Ling and other leaders in the club agreed, and a line in the sand was drawn, as to what was an acceptable performance.

The players drove themselves to do this. Bomber said that he had nothing to do with that, and the players themselves decided to change things. They then played much better, got fitter and started winning games and flags.

So, why can't our current crop do this? Why can't the leaders, after failed finals, say it isn't good enough, and demand more?

The players have to drive it. They did last time. It shouldn't be left to the coach to drive this.

No coach can make a player do something he doesn't want to do. Maybe the standard needs to be to shape up or ship out, and if players go missing in finals, that is on them. They need to motivate themselves.

4) Leading Teams- In 2007, we got Leading Teams in. Players gave each other feedback about how they could improve, and it built a trust and bonded the guys.

Maybe it is time for a Leading Teams session again. Players need to be honest with one another, and put the acid on each other to lift their performance. It worked last time, and made many of the players better players and better people. Maybe it is time to do it again.

5) The coach needs to be told where to improve- Despite what Bomber says about resenting being reviewed by Brian Cook, if he really didn't think he needed to be reviewed, than how come he changed his gameplan from 2006 to 2007.

Bomber changed his tactics. In 2006, we handballed sideways, backwards etc. In 2007, we kicked and handballed forward, always forward, and only sideways when no other option presented itself. This slight change of tactic helped the Cats to win more games.

Now, Chris Scott may should change some tactics. But give him the chance to change things, rather than sacking him.

There are many other avenues to try first before sacking a premiership coach. Some of these worked last time, why couldn't they again?

I am a believer in, if they did it once, they can do it again? That is why I back Scott. He can coach a premiership, so I know that he can do it again, with all things in place. Hey, he's better than Ross Lyon, the most overrated coach in the league, who has had good lists at two clubs and not coached a flag, and he has had more years in the system than Chris Scott.

I also believe that if these changes worked in 2007, they can also work in 2018, and putting more responsibility onto the players for their own performances, building team harmony through Leading Teams, getting a good support staff around Chris Scott, and doing a review of the club, can make us great again.
Other things like getting injury-free seasons, and recruiting also play a part. Scott needs to analyze his own performance too, and have someone he trusts to be honest and correct him when necessary.

If after all this, Chris Scott still doesn't deliver, then his contract is up at the end of next year, I think. After all this, and when his contract comes up (I don't believe in mid-season sackings), then assess whether Chris Scott is the best coach to take us forward, or if someone else is. But let's not just go down the "sack the coach" route so easily. Remember, Richmond supporters wanted Damian Hardwick sacked at the end of 2016. Supporters don't know everything. Just cool your jets.

 

[Stocks_go_Up]

Give him a chance to change things?? You mean 7 years isn't enough?? Should we give him another 7 to figure out how to implement a zone and give the team a game plan that plays on their strengths not weaknesses?

 

[Landgraft]

There's something even weirder than normal about this seasons strategic approach. There's either some kind of grand plan that doesn't seem readily apparent or (my suspicion) there's division in the coaching ranks. We've had such Jekyll and Hyde moments - the weirdness that was naming three rucks for Easter Monday and then playing only one of them, our ruck-averse approach to R3, the two-speed mixture of slow backwards ball movement contrasted with blistering attack and the fact that every game has featured a moment where we start getting torn apart by relatively cheap goals but being unwilling to bolster our stock of big defenders to try and contain it.

To me this speaks to a coaching group that's in two or possibly more minds about things, having to then try and cobble contradictions into a plan. Add some injuries to flavour along with the departure of the entire media team and you have a recipe for almost pure footballing chaos.

Personally I'm very proud of how valiantly our young team has been fighting - and some of the kids are showing enormous promise. But they need to be better supported if this year is going anywhere other than praying Lukuosious slides to our pick.

 

[Seeds]

McIntosh - 30ish
Clark - Varcoe
Stanley - Christensen
Caddy - pick 15ish.

Once again hardly selling the farm

Thats 4 picks between 15 and 30. Where Wells does his best work. And this is on top of all the other ones.

 

[ATSAM]

Here's some things to consider:-

-People calling for Chris Scott's sacking. Hey, didn't some of you also call for Bomber's sacking, and, what happened, we backed him in instead and we won flags.

So, are you glad that the GFC didn't listen to your calls of sacking the coach that time?

So, why not back CS in as well? We know that he can coach us to a premiership (yes people, he DID coach us to a flag in 2011, like it or not). Maybe lighting could strike twice.

Here's what I propose. Let's try some of the things that worked last time.

1) A review:- In 2007, Brian Cook did a review of the entire club. Maybe he should do another one, on all aspects of the club. It is good, every ten years, to do this, and see how things are going in every area, and making improvements when necessary.

2) Put good people around him:- In 2007, it was decided to keep Bomber, but get good people around him, so he can focus on his job. We got in Neil Balme, and a good medical team, lead by Dr Chris Bradshaw.

Maybe we should look at Chris Scott's immediate staff, and those around him, and see what is lacking, and then get the best people for those positions into the club, so Chris Scott doesn't have as much to focus on.

3) The players need to be self-driven- Let me tell you a story.

It was the Round 5 game in 2007. I was on the train on the way home with my late brother, who was a North supporter, after the Kangaroos beat an insipid Geelong at Kardinia Park.

After a terrible 2006, I expected more in 2007, but on the train coming home, I was seething, and said that the club needed to turn things around, because I didn't want to see a performance like that again.

I heard that, after that game, Paul Chapman said that enough is enough, and he won't stand performances like that anymore. Harley, Ling and other leaders in the club agreed, and a line in the sand was drawn, as to what was an acceptable performance.

The players drove themselves to do this. Bomber said that he had nothing to do with that, and the players themselves decided to change things. They then played much better, got fitter and started winning games and flags.

So, why can't our current crop do this? Why can't the leaders, after failed finals, say it isn't good enough, and demand more?

The players have to drive it. They did last time. It shouldn't be left to the coach to drive this.

No coach can make a player do something he doesn't want to do. Maybe the standard needs to be to shape up or ship out, and if players go missing in finals, that is on them. They need to motivate themselves.

4) Leading Teams- In 2007, we got Leading Teams in. Players gave each other feedback about how they could improve, and it built a trust and bonded the guys.

Maybe it is time for a Leading Teams session again. Players need to be honest with one another, and put the acid on each other to lift their performance. It worked last time, and made many of the players better players and better people. Maybe it is time to do it again.

5) The coach needs to be told where to improve- Despite what Bomber says about resenting being reviewed by Brian Cook, if he really didn't think he needed to be reviewed, than how come he changed his gameplan from 2006 to 2007.

Bomber changed his tactics. In 2006, we handballed sideways, backwards etc. In 2007, we kicked and handballed forward, always forward, and only sideways when no other option presented itself. This slight change of tactic helped the Cats to win more games.

Now, Chris Scott may should change some tactics. But give him the chance to change things, rather than sacking him.

There are many other avenues to try first before sacking a premiership coach. Some of these worked last time, why couldn't they again?

I am a believer in, if they did it once, they can do it again? That is why I back Scott. He can coach a premiership, so I know that he can do it again, with all things in place. Hey, he's better than Ross Lyon, the most overrated coach in the league, who has had good lists at two clubs and not coached a flag, and he has had more years in the system than Chris Scott.

I also believe that if these changes worked in 2007, they can also work in 2018, and putting more responsibility onto the players for their own performances, building team harmony through Leading Teams, getting a good support staff around Chris Scott, and doing a review of the club, can make us great again.
Other things like getting injury-free seasons, and recruiting also play a part. Scott needs to analyze his own performance too, and have someone he trusts to be honest and correct him when necessary.

If after all this, Chris Scott still doesn't deliver, then his contract is up at the end of next year, I think. After all this, and when his contract comes up (I don't believe in mid-season sackings), then assess whether Chris Scott is the best coach to take us forward, or if someone else is. But let's not just go down the "sack the coach" route so easily. Remember, Richmond supporters wanted Damian Hardwick sacked at the end of 2016. Supporters don't know everything. Just cool your jets.

Like you analysis and observations. A few different situations now though.
1. Brian Cook is not only the CEO of the GFC but Chair of Barwon Health so not time to do one job let alone two or to undertake a review.
2. That review was a bit of a whitewash and marketing exercise. The only thing that changed was more coaches. Mind you that could be useful now or at least good assistant coaches.
3. There could be n overall problem at the club. Cook too busy elsewhere, the revolving door that is the ,management/admin team and a Board that needs refreshing with some footy experience on it.
4. It was the players who finally understood that they could play at a high level and that they should. Scarlett talks about clicking in 2006 pre-season that if they wanted to win a premiership then they needed to work at it. And work they did.
5. If you want to give Thompson the success then remember that he lost us 2008 and 10.
6. Scott needs to assert himself if he has the footy genius in him and overrule the dopey selection ctee.
7. We need a focus that says each game we choose the best players for that game and treat every game as a mini GF not just for the future Because the future never comes.
8. Yes CS won a premiership but not much since and nothing he is doing or has done for the past few years suggests that he will win another. On that one I hope that I am wrong
7. Scott needs to communicate better with players-there are many, including the club, who have said this is a problem
7.

 

[dazbroncos]

For those wanting to skewer the team for not dropping down the ladder and rebuilding.

Roos last night skewered St Kilda for moving on Vet players, dropping down the ladder and trying to rebuild thru the draft alone. Used Hawks, Swans and GFC as example of how it can be done and using FA to stay competitive. Draft picks, and high draft picks alone wont get it done. Its not the panacea its believed to be.

You need a blend. To attract FA, you need success and sustained success to keep their interest. Swans, Hawks and GFC have done that.
There has been 22 #1 overall picks since 1995. Yielded 1 Brownlow Medal - Adam Cooney. Of all those #1 picks, they have played 212 seasons of footy combined. Of the 212 seasons played, there have only been 15 BnF's won in that time - 6 of them by Nick Reiwoldt.

The strategy of bringing in younger players and drafting is essential to build a list, but dropping down the ladder to garner higher picks is a flawed plan. Roos showed it alone wont work.

Hawks bottomed out on 03/04 but there was no FA then. Now, you must stay competitive to stay attractive to external interests. That does not mean only being top 4 every year will yield results, but the talk of dropping all the way down and coming back has been shown to not work. And its Roos suggesting this. Maybe there is something to what he says.

GO Catters

 

[romeohwho]

Am amazed at how down people on our board are. A half in each of the 3 games has been really impressive- direct and exciting footy with pretty well everyone buying into it. It’s starting to gel. If we can eke out a couple in the next 4 weeks and then we get a few players back we’ll be good to go.

 

[cynical]

For those wanting to skewer the team for not dropping down the ladder and rebuilding.

Roos last night skewered St Kilda for moving on Vet players, dropping down the ladder and trying to rebuild thru the draft alone. Used Hawks, Swans and GFC as example of how it can be done and using FA to stay competitive. Draft picks, and high draft picks alone wont get it done. Its not the panacea its believed to be.

You need a blend. To attract FA, you need success and sustained success to keep their interest. Swans, Hawks and GFC have done that.
There has been 22 #1 overall picks since 1995. Yielded 1 Brownlow Medal - Adam Cooney. Of all those #1 picks, they have played 212 seasons of footy combined. Of the 212 seasons played, there have only been 15 BnF's won in that time - 6 of them by Nick Reiwoldt.

The strategy of bringing in younger players and drafting is essential to build a list, but dropping down the ladder to garner higher picks is a flawed plan. Roos showed it alone wont work.

Hawks bottomed out on 03/04 but there was no FA then. Now, you must stay competitive to stay attractive to external interests. That does not mean only being top 4 every year will yield results, but the talk of dropping all the way down and coming back has been shown to not work. And its Roos suggesting this. Maybe there is something to what he says.

GO Catters

Roos is an idiot.

The Hawks built their core group from early draft picks, the Swans have Cola so they dont count and we won our flags because of youth.

Of course you dont just trade everyone out, tank to the bottom and then enjoy the spoils.

You need an actual concrete long term plan, you need to recruit the right kind of people not just the best available. It's about leadership at the club not just in the playing group.

The Saints have some decent youth but they got impatient like a lot of clubs do and go from youth to topups too quickly. I dont think their talls are good enough and they haven't got elite players.

You need to tick off a lot of boxes before you transition from a rebuild into topping up and aiming for a flag.

As far as recruiting you need quality big men first and then some elite ball winning mids, until you have those sorted its not worth filling gaps. You might as well just keep finishing near the bottom.

The Hawks finished bottom 2 in 2004 their team was in full swing by 2013, that is 9 years.
In 1998 we finished 12th, we won our flag in 2007, 9 years later.

2013 the Saints finished bottom 2 its only 5 years later, they shouldnt have gone after top ups in 2016 and they shouldnt have gone after Carlisle in 2015 (shit character and too old)

Best chance to win a flag is to try to have your list peak in about 9 years. You need to have a really good draft year where you get 3 or more very good players and build from there.

If those players are all 18 then in 9 years they will be 27, after 6-7 years you can probably start getting topups especially if you are lacking in any key areas. Getting top ups before then is a waste because by the time your list peaks they will be too old.

The Hawks showed that once your list is close to peak you should transition into topups because most players peak in the 24-28 age range so its no good getting an 18yo when you are in premiership mode.

There are other variables to go along with it and you want to make sure the kids have quality coaching and leadership so they grow into good players (not a Melbourne situation), the club also needs to be able to keep their young players (unlike Brisbane).

It's not really rocket science its just that I doubt many clubs would have a plan to win the flag in 9 years.