Opinion Coaching Theory

[the mighty T]

I think more broadly you just go for the best bloke for the job. Old, young or whatever. Experienced coaches do have attractive qualities that could be useful however. Experience is important. I am working in an industry that has just been through a massive round of retrenchments. The first to leave were the experienced ones closer to retirement. You do see a distinct difference when you lose all that intellectual property.

Buckley could certainly benefit from more experience around him. I don't think that necessarily requires a wholesale change in the coaching staff. But you would think bringing in someone like Ayres would be a natural target. I wouldn't mind seeing Balme back at the Pies either, even if not in a coaching role.

Precisely what I was thinking. He's had experience at the top and has worked against some of the best coaches. Perhaps theres a stigma associated with those who have failed in their AFL coaching experiences that makes prospective suitors a little wary.

Coaching at a lower level must require a different skill set, both from a game plan sense and on an interpersonal level with the players. I'd certainly have no problem bringing in guys like Gary Ayres, Peter German or even a reinvigorated Matthew Knights. Who says they wouldnt do as good a job as our current blokes?

 

[Markfs]

Not to sure about MM's ability to develop coaches KM.

Watters and Neeld were both sacked very early days, Laidley was also sacked after a reasonable run and NM has underperformed under Brad Scott per most reports, so jury is out on him.

Guy McKenna has a very young list and from all reports he gave Bucks little developmental time.

It's a tough comparison you've made as basketball is a 5 man game and most teams may use only 8 players each game. Phil Jackson was undoubtedly a gun coach but during his time with the Bulls and Lakers he had 40% ( Jordan/Pippen & Bryant/O'Neal ) of his main players as hall of famers, even greatest of all-timers. When you have that much top end talent, you have been set for success with a few tweaks here and there.

I think Rocket may turn out to be a very good appointment for Bucks' development.

I think that if you attribute the appointment of Collingwood assistant coaches by other teams, to the fact that they were coached by Malthouse, you might be ignoring a few things.

I think that other teams were impressed by Collingwood's processes as much as by the coaching as Malthouse. In fact, I would suggest that it was their primary focus. Opposition clubs wanted to know how to put a successful program into place and thought that they could do that by installing a Collingwood assistant.

There were other factors too. Laidley got his gig as much by his own impressive intensity and skills than by anything that he learnt under Malthouse. I think Brad Scott was similar to this.

I'm sure Malthouse would love to think that other clubs were trying to pick his brain by getting his assistants, but I've got a feeling that this wasnt the case.

 

[Markfs]

Gaining knowledge in your own game often grows from knowledge in the games of others.

With the NBA my no.2 sport and as the keen researcher I am, I've been doing some research into the great coaches and how they found success beyond simply the playing personnel they had at their disposal.

The two most interesting and there are two lines of thought are those of the greatest ever in Phil Jackson and then the greatest still active coach in Greg Popovich.
.

I dont watch a lot of NBA but I have a feeling that Jackson is more a motivational coach than a technical one. If thats the case, then he is likely to surround himself with experts who can deal with the structures. He seems to concern himself more with motivating millionaires to actually play for the team than for themselves.

Personally I think the club has fallen in its feet after trying to recruit Malthouse as the mentor. Rodney Eade has given up coaching.... notice that he refused offers in the last year.....and he has a wealth of experience. I dont think we need any more mentors at the club. As for technical experts, it is the young guys who are coming up with the new structures...the old coaches are gone because they failed to cope with the new breed of young coaches. The game is different to NBA which hasnt changed much in the last 20 years.

 

[Green Eggs]

Gaining knowledge in your own game often grows from knowledge in the games of others.

With the NBA my no.2 sport and as the keen researcher I am, I've been doing some research into the great coaches and how they found success beyond simply the playing personnel they had at their disposal.

The two most interesting and there are two lines of thought are those of the greatest ever in Phil Jackson and then the greatest still active coach in Greg Popovich.

Greg Popovich is the Mick Malthouse of NBA coaches. Best known for his intimidating responses to media questions (worth youtubing) but from a pure coaching standpoint he like Malthouse is someone who develops his own coaches as well as any with a number of them then going on to senior coaching jobs.

Phil Jackson on the other hand was a coach who went about it differently and hired assistant coaches with significant coaching experience who he could learn off to in turn improve his coaching. He even learnt his famous offensive scheme "the triangle offense" off assistant Tex Winter and made it into his own trademark.

Now the application to Collingwood's circumstance. We've seen the Popovich/Malthouse method which under previous leadership worked a treat.

Under Nathan though I can't help but lean towards the Phil Jackson route. He's a young coach. As a person having read his book he's someone who is keen to learn and keen to succeed. With those goals in mind logically instead of surrounding himself with young players just out of the game his view towards assistant coaches in my view needs to be to add the most experienced coaches available to him to help him achieve his goals.

With the relatively quick turnover of AFL coaches and how there are so few true veteran coaches it does make if difficult to add genuine coaching experience. Rodney Eade was our veteran coach but now that he's director of football while he's still there and available to help it does leave our coaching team younger than we should be with Nathan as head coach. By AFL standards Scott Burns, Ben Hart, Robert Harvey, Matthew Lappin while all young are not without experience. These guys have been in the coaching ranks for a number of years now and it's not like they retired last year but when I'm talking experience, I'm talking 10+ years of coaching experience. Gary Ayres would be an example of someone with this type of experience. Mark Williams if he could be had from Richmond. These are guys Nathan can learn from and would enhance his coaching education and help him fulfill his coaching potential the most.

My views with most things are that you observe the behaviours of those who are the best in their given field and you integrate those behaviours that fit your personality and situation into your own game. I have no doubt Nathan already does this and going by his recent comments about needing the build up the relational and communication side to his team between players and coaches he's on the right track towards eliminating one of the perceived weaknesses we've seen since he began his tenure as head coach. He's also now got a new kicking coach in which I also really like and I hope as a result the playing group now only improve their set shot goalkicking accuracy but also add further penetration to their kicks and accuracy over distance as Nathan had better than just about anyone. My suggestions may or may not be one of the next things he looks towards in the future as he seems more than content with his current coaching group with seemingly strong relationships with all his assistants but if he can find his Tex Winter who he can learn something new from that will prove gamechanging for him and the team.

Fantastic opinion piece KM, very thought provoking indeed. As few have stated I look at Buckley as more of a leader than a coach, I truly believe he is somebody that can lead any individual to any destination but he just needs the technical experts to design the path.

Buckley to me seems like someone who demonstrates fantastic leadership characteristics every day from the time he wakes up until the time he heads to sleep, and don't get me wrong he does have a wealth of knowledge to share, but in order for him to be a great coach I think he needs to surround himself around people who can design a path and design a destination.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Experienced coaches can also have a really bad quality. Stubbornness.

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

I think we should hire Al Pacino

 

[Knightmare]

Those who say that the experienced senior coaches have egos are right in many cases.

When those can't be had I'd say what about the experienced assistant coaches who have been in the system for close to 10 years and done their apprenticeship? Or even those state league senior coaches who have had success. Those guys having not been AFL senior coaches and likely won't be of the same mentality where they still have their experience but will be more willing to work with the coach than be overbearing in their influence of how they want things done.

 

[jerry springer]

Pops ability to change his team gameplan around his team strengths remains criminally under-rated.

And he is 100% a team man who puts his players, team and organization first. No ego whatsoever.He might be abrupt with the media at times but they love it and respect him. Has to be the most respected coach in the NBA by a long way. nothing like Malthouse

 

[cleomenes]

Most recent successful AFL coaches have been half back flank thugs in their playing days. The really talented players have mostly not done so well. Voss is the most recent example. Matthews seems the exception, but he had the thugs attitude, he just didn't play on the half back line.
They have all been able to motivate their players above all else. The most important thing for a coach is not his game plan, it's his list, followed by his injury list. Some coaches get the best out of particular players (Barassi and Crosswell), but their failures don't tend to be documented: the players disappear.
Collingwood's delivery into the forward line problem is not a coaching failure. We can be assured that none of the coaches tell their players to miss targets. It is a skill problem. Unfortunately, good kicks of the ball are born, not made. This one is a recruiting failure.
The exit strategy from defence is more of a coaching problem, albeit one tied to skill difficulties. I defy any coach to find a way for his defenders to set up attacks if they are not able to deliver the ball accurately.
In short, I mostly agree with those that say that the coaches contribution is over rated.

 

[forwardflanker]

I don't know how many legitimate AFL game plans are out there ATM, but mate, all those plans come a distant second to chemistry, chemistry makes game plans, a great game plan without it is worthless, but an inferior can still succeed with it.

Give me a guy who can gel a group ahead of a master tactician.

It's impossible to create good chemistry without having a gameplan first imo. Chemistry is a function of all 22 players knowing their role in the gameplan and sticking to it. No gameplan = no chemistry.

 

[Knightmare]

Not everyone needs to be a back flanker or a hard nosed guy when it comes to coaches. While few speak about him in the best coaches in the competition discussion Ken Hinkley is while only entering his second season as senior coach an absolutely excellent coach despite being more of a forward/attacking mid.

Pops ability to change his team gameplan around his team strengths remains criminally under-rated.

And he is 100% a team man who puts his players, team and organization first. No ego whatsoever.He might be abrupt with the media at times but they love it and respect him. Has to be the most respected coach in the NBA by a long way. nothing like Malthouse

On Pop I bring him up because I respect him greatly. The Spurs really are a great organisation and really the example of how an organisation should be run and while I'm a Bulls fan I have nothing but respect for everything they do from Pop to Tim Duncan who has helped him greatly with the stability he brings as a no fuss star without an ego but they have helped one another and the Spurs to R.C. Buford as general manager who has done well particularly with finding quality European talent understanding that others don't fully utilise international talent as much as they should.

For the record Pop I feel is the greatest of all the still active coaches and while he still rates behind Phil Jackson they're different coaches and in my view the clear all time standouts in that sport certainly from what I've seen.

AFL coaches not to be disrespectful but I'd say are a class below mostly because the knowledge of the game isn't at that same level and is still being discovered and the resources available to them aren't on the same level so I would agree with you that Pop in the better coach as a largely better version of what Mick is. In saying that though I would still say their traits are similar. Malthouse as you pointed out with Pop similarly changed his game and continued to evolve it and of those coaches coaching in the 90s he's the only one who has kept up with the current trends of the game and even continuing to innovate making his historical impact a great one (Malthouse with the press and Pop going with an offense more geared towards scoring and less post orientated). Malthouse and Pop both come off to the media the same but they also coach very much alike with their players and staff alike both loving them with the disciplined and defined systems they get their players to play but also the relationships they build with them on and off court/field.

As a basketball fan I will be very interested to see whether Pop continues beyond when Tim Duncan retires and if so whether he can continue to have success. Not to undersell Pop's greatness as a coach but I can't help but think the Spurs while the media have time and time continued to get this wrong will remain relevant at the top of the Western Conference with Manu also to retire with Duncan if not before Timmy.

As an AFL fan personally I'd take a motivated Mark Thompson first. To me he's the greatest footballing mind in the game. With Ross Lyon, Paul Roos, Mick Malthouse and Alastair Clarkson are those others I'd have in that conversation as those other coaches you'd want coaching your team and if given free choice with the rest of the coaches really aspiring to get to that standard. John Longmire with continued success may also join that conversation of the modern great coaches but the others I feel still have some way to go.

In Collingwood's situation in hindsight you would have kept Malthouse coaching beyond 2011. The team was in 2011 the most dominant team in the competition and also had a young but experienced list like we haven't seen since the "baby bombers". The style of game was clearly set up for play under Malthouse with the most contested game style we played, the forward press which played into the hands of our excellent intercept marking defenders and all those front half stoppages which our midfield group like no other in the competition has the ability to convert along with the use of the flanks to help give our slow midfield time to push back into the back half when absolutely required. Leon Davis would almost certainly have stayed on under Malthouse because of their relationship and he could even today still be producing going by the sheer dominance he displayed off that back flank in that final season. The list I doubt would have gone through those relationship problems we saw last season with the tension with Heath Shaw, the Dale Thomas and Darren Jolly fallout may well not have happened and I can't help but think that Dale despite his ankle issues just hasn't been playing for Nathan with his play these past two seasons without the heart he's best known for playing with and there has for those two years been a clear unsettling within the playing group with almost all of those who played in a premiership for Malthouse seemingly unsettled by the move. Additionally I can't help but think that under Mick that the veterans who under Nathan have completely declined to irrelevance that they may been able to continue producing for a little longer. We quite possibly could have premiership no.16 by now had he remained with the club.

None of this is to say that Nathan hasn't done some good things in his own right. He's done an excellent job developing our youth with the sheer quantity of young talent coming through and the depth our list has never before had. Additionally some of the role changes we've seen under Nathan have been inspired with Harry to the wing, Macaffer the tagger, Reid forward last season among numerous other positional moves. Just in the situation our list was in at the time he certainly wasn't the right appointment. Doesn't mean now that the list is better fashioned to work under him now with less problem guys and more professionals that he can't experience success. The future is not nearly written yet though and will be interesting to watch with sufficient talent still remaining on our list to succeed. Just for me ideally I'd want Buckley coaching a Gold Coast/GWS where he can develop talent and grow with the list and let a veteran coach of the Thompson/Malthouse/Roos/Lyon/Clarkson quality take Collingwood to another premiership.

 

[Jonno94]

Knightmare The question is would you have rather seen a 16th flag under Malthouse than undergone a rebuild to which Malthouse may have no longer remained at the club after said rebuild. Or would you rather see Nathan take our already rebuilt and young list to MULTIPLE premierships within the next few years.

Obviously we haven't seen the results yet but I know who I would take, the future looks bright at Collingwood lead by Nathan.

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare The question is would you have rather seen a 16th flag under Malthouse than undergone a rebuild to which Malthouse may have no longer remained at the club after said rebuild. Or would you rather see Nathan take our already rebuilt and young list to MULTIPLE premierships within the next few years.

Obviously we haven't seen the results yet but I know who I would take, the future looks bright at Collingwood lead by Nathan.

Success is measured in premierships so I'd without question go the premiership. We've made more grand finals than any other club but the question is always how many premierships and right now that title still belongs to Carlton and Essendon on 16 each so that ledger needs change.

The club would still I feel be clearly of top 8 relevance under Malthouse given the list dynamic. Wellingham and Dawes almost certainly would have been retained. Thomas and Shaw I can't imagine would have left and we may have got more out of some of the veterans so the list from a winning perspective would even now still be stronger.

Malthouse would I expect continue till at least the end of 2015 so even if he decided that's the end it's not beyond imagining that a Mark Thompson wouldn't be open to a big offer, perhaps Paul Roos could be persuaded, perhaps Ross Lyon can be pryed away from Fremantle at that time with Pavlich and Sandilands finished with a mostly veteran list, maybe a Clarkson could possible be had from Hawthorn who would be on the decline with Mitchell and Hodge probably both finished so the transition may well have been Malthouse to another similar quality veteran coach which would have been the optimal transition. We have the money and with the senior coaching post so important why not go for the best and a guy you can say with certainty is one of the clear best in the business.

I don't see any premierships happening under Nathan as coach. It doesn't mean he can't but we're not trending that way and I'm expecting a drop outside of the top 8 happening before a rise to premiership relevance with our top 10, top 15 and best 22 not what it was.

 

[forwardflanker]

Knightmare The question is would you have rather seen a 16th flag under Malthouse than undergone a rebuild to which Malthouse may have no longer remained at the club after said rebuild. Or would you rather see Nathan take our already rebuilt and young list to MULTIPLE premierships within the next few years.

Obviously we haven't seen the results yet but I know who I would take, the future looks bright at Collingwood lead by Nathan.

I doubt we would have seen a 16th premiership under MM. The writing was on the wall after the 2011 prelim that Hawthorn and whilst they've managed to improve even more since we've stagnated. MM would have done no better a job than Buckley with the injuries we had in 2012 and I'd argue that he would have done worse than Buckley last season. I doubt we would have been as aggressive with draft picks and in the trade period with MM in charge and consequently we'd still have Dawes, Wellingham, Shaw, Thomas, Johnson, Tarrant, Davis etc on the list. If they were still there our window would be well and truly shut now. Under Buckley's stewardship instead of having an aged list, we've introduced a ton of young players the last 24 months and have even more from aggressive trading. We also have a new gameplan, something which MM would never accept

 

[BEEG]

The biggest problem we had is people were living in the past that's what changed I feel the club is closer then ever

None of the above though will matter if we are not winning games and showing improvement

 

[Robroy22]

As usual Knight I think you're making some relevant points here, but in the long run we are where we are. Collingwood supporters do "what might have been" just about better than any other group of individuals on the planet and for someone as ancient as myself they have been banging on forever about how we lost GF's in '64, '66, '70, '77(twice), '79, '80, '81, 2002 and 2003 and now 2011. If balls had simply bounced properly, if injuries hadn't occurred, if players hadn't been reported, if accidents hadn't happened, if goal umpires hadn't missed certain goals, if boundary umpires had called diving barrels (sorry Harmsy) out of bounce when he was clearly in the front row of the stands, if field umpires hadn't required guide dogs, if the rules committee hadn't changed the interchange rules, if players hadn't died, if the draw wasn't manipulated so that every other side plays a "grudge match or a Blockbuster" against Collingwood every single week......sigh

I've seen great teams (1970, 2011) come up empty handed and great men that led them cry. I've seen a mighty team of battlers almost steal one (2002) and a team of disbelievers become converted overnight (1977). I've seen great coaches (Phonse Kyne, Bobby Rose, Ron Richards, Tommy Hafey, Lethal Leigh, Mick) and now Bucks. Yes I believe he will be a great coach just as he became a great captain over time.

My footballing heroes never won a premiership despite winning 4 Brownlow's between them. Success must be measured in premierships I suppose but if you do so you dismiss the work, the effort and the undeniable talent of so many people for whom the planets did not align within their playing days. In football as in life itself only a minute % of the participants get to the big show. Coaches, recruiters, physicians, sports scientists, administrators, players, supporters...everyone can make a difference but it all has to happen in just the right way and at the right moment for a premiership to be the reward. A successful business does not always sell the most goods, you cannot expect to win everything all the time.

I don't want to have to criticise our coach, nor our ex coach, nor the president, his predecessor the founding fathers or the cheersquad. The club is in good hands, we're forging a new future and the people in the positions of power know more about the club and it's needs than we will ever know. I've supported every coach we've had in my lifetime (yes even Murray Weideman!) and I'll continue to do so because I believe that's what supporters should do. I also know that lots of supporters (from every club) grow tired and impatient when they perceive that their team is underachieving. But it's just a game lads (and ladies), a beautiful, wonderful game that draws us in and keeps us entranced for a lifetime. Taking it to bits and trying to rebuild it constantly only scratches at it's beauty. The people in the real game know what it is and strive constantly to be their best.

I'm gonna do MY best to support them.


oh and Knight: Kenny Hinkley was a fabulous half back flanker. He played with flair that Tommy Hafey hated but Malcolm Blight adored and encouraged. Both great coaches.

 

[Knightmare]

We also have a new gameplan, something which MM would never accept

Malthouse historically is actually one of the great innovators and is always looking for new ways to improve his gameplan. In the offseasons he'd read and watch different sports and look at what they did and work to integrate those bits into his values and how the team plays. He's the only long serving coach who has kept up with the trends of the game successfully and remained at the top of his field which is a credit to him and his flexibility to his gameplan rather than "being stuck in his ways" which is an incorrect assertion related to Malthouse.

Additionally his gameplan better fits our list than Buckley's. Malthouse had the team played a contested ball game. He forced stoppages in the front 50. He created a gameplan to best protect our back half 1v1 and allow them to be intercepters. He has/had the ideal gameplan for our team and utilised our parts as well as could practically be achieved.

My greatest criticism of Nathan is the gameplan. We're playing entirely away from our strengths. We've got a contested ball unit and yet we play an uncontested gamestyle. Derek Hine does a fantastic job season after season bringing in the best contested ball winners and we're failing to utilised them and we lack the pace and skill to do any damage on the outside and the result has been that the team has taken a step back from contention down to what appears likely middle of the ladder position this season and over coming seasons.

As usual Knight I think you're making some relevant points here, but in the long run we are where we are. Collingwood supporters do "what might have been" just about better than any other group of individuals on the planet and for someone as ancient as myself they have been banging on forever about how we lost GF's in '64, '66, '70, '77(twice), '79, '80, '81, 2002 and 2003 and now 2011. If balls had simply bounced properly, if injuries hadn't occurred, if players hadn't been reported, if accidents hadn't happened, if goal umpires hadn't missed certain goals, if boundary umpires had called diving barrels (sorry Harmsy) out of bounce when he was clearly in the front row of the stands, if field umpires hadn't required guide dogs, if the rules committee hadn't changed the interchange rules, if players hadn't died, if the draw wasn't manipulated so that every other side plays a "grudge match or a Blockbuster" against Collingwood every single week......sigh

I've seen great teams (1970, 2011) come up empty handed and great men that led them cry. I've seen a mighty team of battlers almost steal one (2002) and a team of disbelievers become converted overnight (1977). I've seen great coaches (Phonse Kyne, Bobby Rose, Ron Richards, Tommy Hafey, Lethal Leigh, Mick) and now Bucks. Yes I believe he will be a great coach just as he became a great captain over time.

My footballing heroes never won a premiership despite winning 4 Brownlow's between them. Success must be measured in premierships I suppose but if you do so you dismiss the work, the effort and the undeniable talent of so many people for whom the planets did not align within their playing days. In football as in life itself only a minute % of the participants get to the big show. Coaches, recruiters, physicians, sports scientists, administrators, players, supporters...everyone can make a difference but it all has to happen in just the right way and at the right moment for a premiership to be the reward. A successful business does not always sell the most goods, you cannot expect to win everything all the time.

I don't want to have to criticise our coach, nor our ex coach, nor the president, his predecessor the founding fathers or the cheersquad. The club is in good hands, we're forging a new future and the people in the positions of power know more about the club and it's needs than we will ever know. I've supported every coach we've had in my lifetime (yes even Murray Weideman!) and I'll continue to do so because I believe that's what supporters should do. I also know that lots of supporters (from every club) grow tired and impatient when they perceive that their team is underachieving. But it's just a game lads (and ladies), a beautiful, wonderful game that draws us in and keeps us entranced for a lifetime. Taking it to bits and trying to rebuild it constantly only scratches at it's beauty. The people in the real game know what it is and strive constantly to be their best.

I'm gonna do MY best to support them.


oh and Knight: Kenny Hinkley was a fabulous half back flanker. He played with flair that Tommy Hafey hated but Malcolm Blight adored and encouraged. Both great coaches.

My concern is winning. As a fan naturally I want Collingwood to win and my measuring stick is premierships and what give us a chance to win them.

Tanking I don't believe in - I've seen enough of Carlton/Melbourne these past 15 years get stuck in that cycle and fail to find a way out - with the draft concessions no longer allowing it to even be a viable strategy and seen those clubs who don't rebuild in the traditional sense season after season come back and perform. Instead you have to play to win every year and load up with the best of everything - coaches, recruiters, sports science people among others. If you have the best combination of everything you give yourself the greatest opportunity and those you have will maximise their development and be more likely to get the most out of yourself.

I desperately want Nathan to succeed. He was my favourite footballer throughout my childhood and I strongly believe he is the greatest footballer the game has ever seen because he not only accumulated incredible numbers in an era where it was much more difficult to accumulate so easily than it is today but he also made the vast majority of those touches kicks and long damaging kicks which we just haven't seen in that quality or quantity and we may never see again. It's just a shame he never had the talent around him to achieve the ultimate and win a flag which often how it goes in team sports.

In saying that I follow enough sports. I understand how few coaches make it. I understand how few star sportsmen while he does occasionally happen as we've seen with Leigh Matthews, it's incredibly rare that a star sportsman also makes an even above average coach.

With coaches if you want to win and continue to win you want the proven, experienced coaches who are at the top of the field as you do with any position within any environment. As a club while we have no opportunity to over-pay for recruits outside of the salary cap as Adelaide have and Carlton are thought to have with Judd we do have the ability to spend for the best coaches and given our situation it's plane wrong to have a young coach who clearly at this point in his coaching career not a top 5-6 coach in the competition when you're supposed to be a contender.

As a coach Nathan is learning and improving and he still does have the opportunity to have a coaching career beyond his new contract given his willingness to learn and improve at the coaching caper which is admirable but ideally you'd have Mick Malthouse still coaching to achieve the greatest potential results with the squad we had from 2012 and a Paul Roos or similar highly respected veteran coach when Mick calls it a day as a good fit for our capable contested ball winning squad.

Given our current situation the best that can be done is find ways to give Nathan the greatest possible opportunity to achieve success and with the question still there as to whether he will achieve success given our drop from premiership relevance since 2011.

 

[Pie eyed]

You have brought a smile to my lips.. Your a saint.

Mine too. Great turn of phrase...

 

[THATSGOLD]

We've got eade.

Haha

 

[jerry springer]

Not everyone needs to be a back flanker or a hard nosed guy when it comes to coaches. While few speak about him in the best coaches in the competition discussion Ken Hinkley is while only entering his second season as senior coach an absolutely excellent coach despite being more of a forward/attacking mid.



On Pop I bring him up because I respect him greatly. The Spurs really are a great organisation and really the example of how an organisation should be run and while I'm a Bulls fan I have nothing but respect for everything they do from Pop to Tim Duncan who has helped him greatly with the stability he brings as a no fuss star without an ego but they have helped one another and the Spurs to R.C. Buford as general manager who has done well particularly with finding quality European talent understanding that others don't fully utilise international talent as much as they should.

For the record Pop I feel is the greatest of all the still active coaches and while he still rates behind Phil Jackson they're different coaches and in my view the clear all time standouts in that sport certainly from what I've seen.


As a basketball fan I will be very interested to see whether Pop continues beyond when Tim Duncan retires and if so whether he can continue to have success. Not to undersell Pop's greatness as a coach but I can't help but think the Spurs while the media have time and time continued to get this wrong will remain relevant at the top of the Western Conference with Manu also to retire with Duncan if not before Timmy.

As an AFL fan personally I'd take a motivated Mark Thompson first. To me he's the greatest footballing mind in the game. With Ross Lyon, Paul Roos, Mick Malthouse and Alastair Clarkson are those others I'd have in that conversation as those other coaches you'd want coaching your team and if given free choice with the rest of the coaches really aspiring to get to that standard. John Longmire with continued success may also join that conversation of the modern great coaches but the others I feel still have some way to go.

None of this is to say that Nathan hasn't done some good things in his own right. He's done an excellent job developing our youth with the sheer quantity of young talent coming through and the depth our list has never before had. Additionally some of the role changes we've seen under Nathan have been inspired with Harry to the wing, Macaffer the tagger, Reid forward last season among numerous other positional moves. Just in the situation our list was in at the time he certainly wasn't the right appointment. Doesn't mean now that the list is better fashioned to work under him now with less problem guys and more professionals that he can't experience success. The future is not nearly written yet though and will be interesting to watch with sufficient talent still remaining on our list to succeed. Just for me ideally I'd want Buckley coaching a Gold Coast/GWS where he can develop talent and grow with the list and let a veteran coach of the Thompson/Malthouse/Roos/Lyon/Clarkson quality take Collingwood to another premiership.

some very good points

My thoughts

-Agree with your thoughts on the Spurs. To me they ave been the most professional sports team in the world for the past 15 years.

- Id like to see Pop go around for a year or 2 myself with a younger team after Duncan and manu's retirement. The same reason why i would of loved to see PJ coach NY, or a low market team. I want to see how good these coaches really are.

-I like Clarkson as a coach and a bit disapointed we havent had a red hot go at him. However Im happy to back Bucks as i dont think there is much else out there on the open market now. I really wish Buckley did go to another club to do his apprenticeship, but that ship has sailed.