Opinion Could Chris Scott have won the "Thompson" flags?

[catman 71]

A lot of credit is given to "Bomber" Thompson on these boards, and people like _Me credit him as the SOLE reason for us winning those flags.

But, let's play hypothetical. Let's say Bomber had been sacked at the end of 2006, and got replaced by Chris Scott (I know Scott wasn't coaching then, but pretend so for the sake of the argument), do you think Scott could have coached us to the 2007 and 2009 flag? Could we have won the 2008 or 2010 flag if Scott, instead of Bomber, coached us?

I think we could have won the '07-'09 flags under Scott. He showed in 2011 he could have immediate success, and would have had a cooler head in some situations (he wouldn't have let the Ablett thing derail the season in 2010, for example). The gameplans are similar, so Scott could have just as well as "Bomber" , or maybe better.

Also, Scott makes ballsy decisions like letting stars move on, and keep the team towards the top of the ladder. Bomber would have kept all the old guys, and not have brought on Christensen and others. Hell, Bomber kept playing Mark Blake, Henry Playfair and Charlie Gardiner long after they had shown they weren't up to it. Bomber couldn't make the hard decisions, Scott has shown that he can.

So, do you think Scott could have delivered the way Bomber did?

 

[GeelongFTW]

would've won 08

 

[catempire]

I give Thompson a lot of credit for developing the core group of players into the stars they became during 2007-2009. Without that development, I don't believe we would have won those flags (although there were many other factors - excellent drafting, etc).

As yet, we don't know if Chris Scott has that same ability to develop young players. Time will tell. I suspect, on what we have seen so far, he is tactically superior to Thompson.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

I give Thompson a lot of credit for developing the core group of players into the stars they became during 2007-2009. Without that development, I don't believe we would have won those flags (although there were many other factors - excellent drafting, etc).

As yet, we don't know if Chris Scott has that same ability to develop young players. Time will tell. I suspect, on what we have seen so far, he is tactically superior to Thompson.

He is looking pretty good so far with the rise of Mots, Bundy, Duncan, Blicavs, Caddy etc. That's his work, not Bombers. Sure, they still have a way to go but they are certainly on the right track, along with a pretty solid group of kids nipping at their heels. We'll know a lot more by 2015 but I don't think he could've done anything more in the time-frame he has had to regenerate the list AND keep us up there.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

Re: Thompson's flags - it's just a hypothetical, who knows, might have won 5 on the trot, might have won zero, who knows...I think he could have at least matched it though.

 

[supahoops]

Could Thompson have won the 'Chris Scott' flag?

 

[catempire]

He is looking pretty good so far with the rise of Mots, Bundy, Duncan, Blicavs, Caddy etc. That's his work, not Bombers. Sure, they still have a way to go but they are certainly on the right track, along with a pretty solid group of kids nipping at their heels. We'll know a lot more by 2015 but I don't think he could've done anything more in the time-frame he has had to regenerate the list AND keep us up there.

Yes, looking pretty good but not to Thompson's levels yet.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

Yes, looking pretty good but not to Thompson's levels yet.

But he's a flag and 4(?) years ahead of Bomber! (of course, you can't deny that Bomber played a significant part in '11 - both in development and by leaving!)

 

[Partridge]

He is looking pretty good so far with the rise of Mots, Bundy, Duncan, Blicavs, Caddy etc. That's his work, not Bombers. Sure, they still have a way to go but they are certainly on the right track, along with a pretty solid group of kids nipping at their heels. We'll know a lot more by 2015 but I don't think he could've done anything more in the time-frame he has had to regenerate the list AND keep us up there.

I'd edit it to Motlop, Christensen, and Duncan. They're the 3 who have I think definitively "made it".

Next I'd have (in order), Guthrie and Caddy. Guthrie has just about made it and Caddy is right behind. After that throw in a bunch of kids. All have had good moments, but all need further improvement.

 

[Partridge]

Could Thompson have won the 'Chris Scott' flag?

I would say no. 2010 is the perfect example as to why. He could have easily played Menzel, and Duncan, even Taylor Hunt, but stuck with his favourites. No way would he have dropped Milburn and Mooney on the eve of a finals campaign.

 

[catempire]

But he's a flag and 4(?) years ahead of Bomber! (of course, you can't deny that Bomber played a significant part in '11 - both in development and by leaving!)

If Scott wins another, it will be pretty hard to say he hasn't reached Bomber's heights. All I'm saying is he hasn't yet.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

2011 Scott could have potentially had the team contending in 2008-2010, but my guess is a fair few players could have had their noses out of joint in 2007, with Thompson being viewed as a scapegoat. By the sounds of things, most players absolutely loved Thompson (especially at that stage) and seemed to feel that he'd been unfairly singled out by the 'review'. By the end of 2010, it seemed that more players were receptive to a change and thought that Bomba didn't have much more to give with Geelong.

Too hard to speculate, as far as I'm concerned. Heading in to 2007, Scarlett and maybe Chapman were considered to be our only genuine AA-calibre players. Do Ablett, Bartel, Enright and Johnson make the leap that they did, without Thompson there? Does Ottens become one of the great big-game performers?

 

[jim boy]

I just fail to see how you can compare. When Thompson started in 2000 he had to do a lot more hands on than Chris Scott does now or Thompson did in his later years. One of Thompson's great strengths was his development of junior players. Scott is still responsible for that, but now that we have a well staffed Youth academy, Scott's role is more about managing the coaches rather than hands-on teaching of youth.

 

[Partridge]

I just fail to see how you can compare. When Thompson started in 2000 he had to do a lot more hands on than Chris Scott does now or Thompson did in his later years. One of Thompson's great strengths was his development of junior players. Scott is still responsible for that, but now that we have a well staffed Youth academy, Scott's role is more about managing the coaches rather than hands-on teaching of youth.

Hmm, but that's more about how the coaching roles have evolved too. Thompson started 13 years ago, a hell of a lot has changed since then. The only thing you can judge them on is where they finish. If Scott keeps the team up around the top 4 and brings the next generation through at the same time it would be a very impressive effort.

Scott has brought on and fasttracked Christensen, Duncan and Motlop (all recruited under Thompson). I'll be very surprised if the quartet of Smedts, Guthrie, Horlin-Smith and Caddy don't become established. As only Caddy wasn't recruited by Geelong that would be excellent player development already. Agreed the jury would still be out on everyone else.

 

[TheJimmyCartel]

If Scott wins another, it will be pretty hard to say he hasn't reached Bomber's heights. All I'm saying is he hasn't yet.

Yeah, the argument is valid both ways really. At the same stage of their coaching careers, Scotty is clearly ahead BUT he also had a significant head-start in taking over an supremely talented (yet aging) list with unrivaled culture along with superb administration all in place. We were a bit of a basket case when Bomber took over and understandably took a while to get everything rolling.

They'll probably both go down as two of our greatest ever coaches if Scotty can win at least another one. It's difficult to compare them due to the extremely different circumstances under which they took the reigns.

 

[Partridge]

Yeah, the argument is valid both ways really. At the same stage of their coaching careers, Scotty is clearly ahead BUT he also had a significant head-start in taking over an supremely talented (yet aging) list with unrivaled culture along with superb administration all in place. We were a bit of a basket case when Bomber took over and understandably took a while to get everything rolling.

They'll probably both go down as two of our greatest ever coaches if Scotty can win at least another one. It's difficult to compare them due to the extremely different circumstances under which they took the reigns.

Well said. Yeah I'd say Thompson's difficulties were the actual creation of the right culture and models at the club to get the right development programs in place, and even after that improve the list enough to challenge for a flag - eventually successfully. That is, was, and will remain a magnificent accomplishment.

Scott's is moreso maintenance of those things, and the one problem he has that Thompson did not have is man management - he has to tap veterans with premiership medals around their necks on the shoulder and say you're finished. That's a different but in some ways equally stern test.

 

[ATSAM]

Yes Scott. with the players that we had for 07,08 and 09. would have won all of those flag. They were such a team that the Drovers Dog could have been the Coach.
And Thompson did not bring the kids through that was Hinkley and only Hinkley , he was the one that they talked to and trusted. He was and is the far better Coach than Thompson.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Yeah, I'm sure Scott would've won the '08 flag. I mean, I can't imagine Chris Scott playing guys like Varcoe and injured players during finals.

Chris Scott doesn't make selection blunders like that, especially not during finals.

 

[goodoldcats]

Yeah, I'm sure Scott would've won the '08 flag. I mean, I can't imagine Chris Scott playing guys like Varcoe and injured players during finals.

Chris Scott doesn't make selection blunders like that, especially not during finals.

Chris Scott is an average coach.. Was shown up this year and made massive blunders in the finals

 

[goodoldcats]

what blunders did he make?

If you are referring to rucks, McIntosh and Simpson were finished for year and then Trent West put forth a despicable performance in rd23 which sealed his fate heading into the final series.
Tom Hawkins woke up the day of qualifying final and could not move so Scott was forced to play the next best available option which was Josh Walker who could also pinch hit in the ruck as it was going to be a taxing day for Blicavs and Vardy.

Taylor Hunt couldn't tag anyone because his form had dropped away significantly in the second half of the season and GHS may have been a good option but then we would have had to drop Corey or someone with speed (especially against a team like Fremantle who counter as quickly as they do).

Open the other eye

 

[Partridge]

Yeah, I'm sure Scott would've won the '08 flag. I mean, I can't imagine Chris Scott playing guys like Varcoe and injured players during finals.

Chris Scott doesn't make selection blunders like that, especially not during finals.

That last sentence just invites so much discussion!

 

[Partridge]

what blunders did he make?

If you are referring to rucks, McIntosh and Simpson were finished for year and then Trent West put forth a despicable performance in rd23 which sealed his fate heading into the final series.
Tom Hawkins woke up the day of qualifying final and could not move so Scott was forced to play the next best available option which was Josh Walker who could also pinch hit in the ruck as it was going to be a taxing day for Blicavs and Vardy.

Taylor Hunt couldn't tag anyone because his form had dropped away significantly in the second half of the season and GHS may have been a good option but then we would have had to drop Corey or someone with speed (especially against a team like Fremantle who counter as quickly as they do).

Despicable? No, despicable was what Vardy and Blicavs had waiting for us in the Qualifying Final. Then for good measure they decided to repeat it in the Prelim.

Horlin-Smith would have been at least as effective as Corey in September. He was shot.

Not to mention playing Chapman as a sub. How that cannot be called a blunder is beyond me.

 

[Partridge]

did you even watch the qualifying final or did you simply look at the match statistics?

Watched and suffered through it along with everyone else. You think Corey was still up to it. Great. I don't.

Agree totally that Walker's crappiness is very much in hindsight. We all wanted Hawkins rested after the Brisbane game. But I'm afraid I thought then and still do that they should have planned far better for Corey and as it turned out Kelly. Because they ran out of legs enormously during the finals. Which begs the question why the hell did each play so many games when they didn't need to?

The rotation of players, especially the senior players, is another blunder. Two years in a row the club have preached to us that they'd be playing their best footy in the finals. Two years in a row it's turned out to be bullshit.

Ignoring the goals that Bartel leaked all season and continuing to play him in defence was asking for trouble, and it eventually cost us. Keeping Varcoe in the team because apparently he'll break down in tears if the delicate soul is dropped cost us too.

But the worst was the ruck. Vardy and Blicavs put forward the most insipid ruck display I have ever seen in Geelong colours. Ever. Not playing a fully fit ruckman because he doesn't tackle enough or whatever doesn't excuse the abject slaughter that followed.

 

[catempire]

This thread will be the new record holder for deteriorating into a discussion of West v Vardy v Blicavs.

Well done!

 

[Sttew]

So, do you think Scott could have delivered the way Bomber did?

Probably not, but equally, I doubt Bomber could have achieved what Scott has in the past three years - continued finals appearnaces, including a premiership, while rebuilding