Clarkson V Wallace

[Melbdave81]

Who is doing a better job given they both started at the same time with 2 similar sides?

 

[tazhawk]

Wallet = Media spin bullshit.

Clarkson = Substance.

Give me substance anyday.

Clarkson has Hawthorn streets ahead in terms of development.

Clarkso easily.

 

[jazz]

Bit of a nothing poll. When a team hasn't won a game after 9 rounds, no objective person could claim that the coach is doing ok.

 

[lids2004roar]

Bit of a nothing poll. When a team hasn't won a game after 9 rounds, no objective person could claim that the coach is doing ok.

Exactly.

Might as well rename the poll "Richmond supporters click here, all other 15 clubs click here" and you'd get the same response. I'm not going to vote, but Terry Wallace is a better coach imo.

Recruiting is a different story because coach's don't do it, and the main reason Hawthorn are winning is because of the recruiters more than Clarko.

For example Terry Wallace really wanted to draft Swallow a couple of years ago. Richmond recruiters (like ALL recruiters) said Swallow won't make it because of his short arms or something. So Wallace was overruled. Now he's running around getting 20+ possies, many clearances and kicking winning goals.

Anyway on coaching ability I don't think Clarkson comes close, partly due to experience but mainly because of common sense.

A coach doesn't lose his ability.

 

[andypie]

hard one, i am growing tired of some of wallace's ways, but i think he is still a good coach. i voted for wallace just, mainly because i am still not sure how far clarkson and his style of play can take the hawks.

 

[JoondalupJ]

sorry

 

[Calcium Man]

Who is doing a better job given they both started at the same time with 2 similar sides?

Its one of the biggest myths in football that Hawthorn and Richmond had similar sides when the coaches took the jobs.

Richmond had some very good older experienced players. But very little youth comming thru. Which is why Terry's first 2 years were so much better.

On the other hand Hawthorn fewer older and experienced players but had some good young kids around. Im talking Hodge, Mitchell, williams, Clarke, Bateman and brown. These guys are all reaching their peak which is why they are on the improve.

 

[jazz]

Its one of the biggest myths in football that Hawthorn and Richmond had similar sides when the coaches took the jobs.

Richmond had some very good older experienced players. But very little youth comming thru. Which is why Terry's first 2 years were so much better.

On the other hand Hawthorn fewer older and experienced players but had some good young kids around. Im talking Hodge, Mitchell, williams, Clarke, Bateman and brown. These guys are all reaching their peak which is why they are on the improve.

That then has to be a big negative for Wallace. He stated that he looked at the two lists and thought that Hawks had a stronger list in the short term (next year or two) but saw a better long term future for Richmond.

Got that wrong for sure.

 

[Calcium Man]

That then has to be a big negative for Wallace. He stated that he looked at the two lists and thought that Hawks had a stronger list in the short term (next year or two) but saw a better long term future for Richmond.

Got that wrong for sure.

But thats wallace the spin king.

I reckon he saw that he could make the finals with richmond. And if Richo and browny were going we could have done anything. He turns a team even he didnt believe was a finals team into one and adoring public come rushing in. He lost browny midseason and it hurt.

 

[lids2004roar]

Short term is 4 years, Hawthorn will be better off between 2007-2011+

Long term is from 2011-2017+ where Richmond MIGHT be better off.

I think he deliberately implied something different to spin it his way and make himself look good, but he would have no doubt done extensive analysis and this is pretty much where each club stands.

 

[DynamoUltra]

hard one, i am growing tired of some of wallace's ways, but i think he is still a good coach. i voted for wallace just, mainly because i am still not sure how far clarkson and his style of play can take the hawks.

Probably to the same level, and a little bit higher, as your superstar coach after 9 rounds.

 

[hardcore_hawk]

Short term is 4 years, Hawthorn will be better off between 2007-2011+

Long term is from 2011-2017+ where Richmond MIGHT be better off.

I think he deliberately implied something different to spin it his way and make himself look good, but he would have no doubt done extensive analysis and this is pretty much where each club stands.

hahahahahaha 2017 hahahahahahaha

 

[tigerT]

Short term is 4 years, Hawthorn will be better off between 2007-2011+

Long term is from 2011-2017+ where Richmond MIGHT be better off

oh dear

 

[andypie]

Probably to the same level, and a little bit higher, as your superstar coach after 9 rounds.

sorry, didnt see micks name in the poll.

 

[OneEyedHawk]

Recruiting is a different story because coach's don't do it, and the main reason Hawthorn are winning is because of the recruiters more than Clarko.

He can't win, can he? If we lose, he's a dud. If we win, it's the recruiters not him.

 

[lids2004roar]

oh dear

It's pretty simple and literally every Richmond supporter who has looked at our list has said it at some point mate. Wallace says 2011 but that is the start. We will have a burst in 2008/09 but drop right before around '11.

Richmond will go backwards in 2009-2010 when Joel Bowden, Matthew Richardson, Kane Johnson, Troy Simmonds and Nathan Brown all retire (or on last legs). This is after Wayne Campbell, Stafford, Chaffey, Kellaway and Gaspar all retired in the last 2 years.

Obviously Richmond will be successful when Deledio and Tambling etc are 23yo - 30yo with a consistent stream a young talent behind them.

Richmond current list has heaps of 18-21yos, and several 28+ yos with little in between (unless you count Krakouer, Hyde, Pettifer etc...).


Hawthorn on the other hand are where Richmond will be after Bowden/Richo/Simmonds/Johnson/Brown retire (they only have Crawf to replace currently). They will have a good group of 22-26yos (Hodge/Brown/Mitchell/Boyle etc) PLUS a great dose of young players (Thorp/Buddy/Dowler/Ellis/Roughy/Lewis etc etc etc) who will be coming of age these next couple of years. When our batch of current youngsters come of age they will have NOBODY above them (Bowden/Richo/Simmonds/Johnson/Brown will be gone remember!) where the Hawthorn youngsters will have their Hodge/Brown/Mitchells to lead them.

It's pretty simple really. Richmond may not win a flag for 7 years IMO, we'll have no decent senior players in 3 years except Newman so we'll have to wait until Deledio and co BECOME the senior players, then they can lead the 22-26yo age bracket (when they are about 27-28) to a flag.

Depressing opinion I know, but it's pretty realistic I think. You need good senior/middle aged players, we won't have them untill Deledio become them in 5+ years.

 

[don vito of fitzroy]

Clarkson. He may have better youngsters but at least they are playing with some purpose. Clarko's team aren't blowing leads with 5-10 minutes left.

Wallace is making too many excuses. His team is just plain mediocre. The Tigers have lost matches that they shouldn't have lost in the first place. The Blues lose matches because of a lack of fitness. The Tigers lose matches because of poor decision making and tactics.

 

[A Living God]

Clarkson is also being paid a 1/2? of what wallet is getting paid.
Costs less, delivers more.

 

[lids2004roar]

Clarkson. He may have better youngsters but at least they are playing with some purpose. Clarko's team aren't blowing leads with 5-10 minutes left.

Wallace is making too many excuses. His team is just plain mediocre. The Tigers have lost matches that they shouldn't have lost in the first place. The Blues lose matches because of a lack of fitness. The Tigers lose matches because of poor decision making and tactics.

Wallace is better until Clarkson regularly gets teams into the preliminary finals... or even at least into a single final!!

Clarkson has done nothing yet. At the start of 2005 Wallace got Richmond to win 7-2 and I'll bet you thought he was an awesome coach then Coachs get better with experience so I don't see why he has suddenly turned himself into a crap coach

 

[Melbdave81]

Wallace is better until Clarkson regularly gets teams into the preliminary finals... or even at least into a single final!!

Clarkson has done nothing yet. At the start of 2005 Wallace got Richmond to win 7-2 and I'll bet you thought he was an awesome coach then Coachs get better with experience so I don't see why he has suddenly turned himself into a crap coach

Because at the start of 05 you were 7-2 and now your 0-9. Where is the improvement benny? Clarkson has built a side and now has his side sitting pretty in the 8. Wallace has your side holding everyone else up.

 

[lids2004roar]

Because at the start of 05 you were 7-2 and now your 0-9. Where is the improvement benny? Clarkson has built a side and now has his side sitting pretty in the 8. Wallace has your side holding everyone else up.

We're not holding anyone up!

We let everybody pass us with ease and now we're trailing behind...

 

[don vito of fitzroy]

Wallace is better until Clarkson regularly gets teams into the preliminary finals... or even at least into a single final!!

Clarkson has done nothing yet. At the start of 2005 Wallace got Richmond to win 7-2 and I'll bet you thought he was an awesome coach then Coachs get better with experience so I don't see why he has suddenly turned himself into a crap coach

We aren't even considering Wallace's days at the Dogs. Even if we did, one must remember that his stint started off well and then there was his slow decline. Maybe it Richmond, this decline is quicker than expected.

Whenever a club with a small depth in talent reaches 7-2, they're usually a team on a good run. Clarko's team are having a good run and nobody can yet guarantee if they will maintain their form or slip. Wallace has been very poor this year and there were some matches that Richmond should have won but they blew it in their typical manner.

 

[lids2004roar]

We aren't even considering Wallace's days at the Dogs. Even if we did, one must remember that his stint started off well and then there was his slow decline. Maybe it Richmond, this decline is quicker than expected.

Whenever a club with a small depth in talent reaches 7-2, they're usually a team on a good run. Clarko's team are having a good run and nobody can yet guarantee if they will maintain their form or slip. Wallace has been very poor this year and there were some matches that Richmond should have won but they blew it in their typical manner.

Let's see how we go against your mob this week

Polak is about the only player I'd back to not only compete in the air with Jon Brown, but is one of the few courageous enough to jump in front of him It's going to be a top battle.

 

[don vito of fitzroy]

Let's see how we go against your mob this week

Polak is about the only player I'd back to not only compete in the air with Jon Brown, but is one of the few courageous enough to jump in front of him It's going to be a top battle.

Polak has been a great pick-up for the Tigers. He'll give Brown a tough time.

For the record, the Lions haven't beat Richmond since 2004, in which Jay Schulz played his best game for the Tigers. We only won by about 10 points at that time Schulz was a real threat.