Dan Collins

[whatboutbob]

Far from it. After seeing this sordid profession in action my cynicism about it's true agenda knows no bounds.

Aye, I'm with you John. Having worked closely with the benthic media types for years I'm saddened that more people aren't more skeptical of their pathetic agendas.

 

[3KZ is Football]

3KZ... changing the world, one BigFooty post at a time.

That's funnny BrownDog.

Seriously though, I think John was right when he said, "That's life."

As someone who has been involved for over twenty years as an active teacher unionist, both in the workplace and for a time on state council of my union, it has always been my experience that the number of people you get making noises and complaining about an issue is never equal to the number who stand up when it counts, like you did at the last AGM, to ask the hard questions.

I can understand if you were disappointed by the lack of support. Clearly, judging by the hue and cry on our board over Bowers and the butchering of our jumper, you might have expected better.

That said, there are some supporters, particularly Victorian based, like me who could not attend the AGM, because we have decided to not renew our memberships as a way of communicating our displeasure with the current administration and others who utilised different means to raise the issues you, stitchface and whataboutbob pursued at the AGM.

I know I wasn't the only past or current member to write to Bowers and members of the Lions board and I certainly wasn't the only supporter to utilise SEN talkback in defence of our Club's traditions, having heard Haggis giving it a red hot go over the airwaves. I also think the website had a huge impact on the club and also contributed in a powerful way to the overal debate.

I guess we will all do what we can, when we can and while I agree that it would have been much better to have had scores of angry members at the AGM asking those hard questions, you did your bit and should be congratulated for it.

 

[roostersgal4eva]

Well spoke Judge. Undoubtedly there are problems, but 1 constant of success is that you need all 3 branches of a club to be strong & working in the same direction - admin, coaching & players. That is not happening - it is obvious. Unfortunately I agree that Kelly & Bowers do not appear to have the ability to turn it round.

If you need an example just look at Geelong. Success did not come from Bomber. Success came from Costa , Cook and Thompson.

As to the article that started this whole discussion. With our current performance it is no wonder there is dissent & finger pointing. To invest in short term success as we did in drafting. To be considered genuine top 4 material pre-season & flag contenders. To win the 1st 4 games. Then to lose 9 out of the next 10 & be considered genuine wooden spoon contenders.

There is, undoubtedly, internal friction and dissent. Whilst he may have picked the wrong target, all Hamilton has done is pick up on that. With exposure of the issues mayhap it will force a resolution of the issues instead of the public 'it is all good - don't worry' line we have been getting.

More power to Andrew Hamilton. Something stinks at the Lions & if this publicity is what it needs for change - so be it. With the whole paddlepop, court case with Fitzroy, financial under performance and onfield issues confronting us, if we must implode to bring new direction out of the rubble, bring it on I say. Because we are rapidly going no where right now.

Nail Hammer Head.

Rotten fish always starts from the head. I say its not just geelong or us as an anagalgy as you can say that with postive or negative sence for any club.

On the topic of not renewing membership is a double edge sward IMHO - you show ur displeasure youself at the club but there is a weakend pressence at the AGM to have our say. I live in Adelaide and I cant get up to Brisbane for the AGM so like all interstate fans, im relying on our fellow lions to have a say on what we the fans feel

 

[Stocka]

At the risk of sounding inflammatory Stocka, time to shit or get off the pot.

Unnecessary, and if you are concerned at the risk of sounding inflammatory (which basically tells you that you know it is), then why post the comment?

My impression is, that despite your largely well-thought out posts, that if someone made your above comment to you, that you'd reply back with a fair spray of inflammatory sarcasm indicating your chagrin! I'll attempt to avoid doing so in addressing the rest of your comments below...

This outrage sounds eerily similar to 9 months ago when there was a frenzy of criticism on here about the new logo and jumper. Everyone was claiming to be ropable and demanding blood.

Come AGM time, what did we see? Just myself, stitchface and whataboutbob asking the hard questions... and very little from anyone else.

Forgive me for expecting something similar this year.

You seem to have read something into my comments that wasn't there.

I'm not suggesting that people storm the Bastille about our on-field woes. However, being the forum that this is, people will inevitably sound out their frustrations and concerns. This may come in the form of suggesting that "something should be done" or that various changes be adopted. I don't think anyone here is planning a supporter-lead revolt to oust Voss though, if that's the way you're taking it!

As far as club operations go with regards to on-field issues, I would not expect or want the club to listen to supporters anyway, no matter how well-informed our thought-out their opinions area. I'd hope that the club has people who are experienced, more informed, honest and have a greater degree of expertise when it comes to making decisions and implementing processes to run a successful team.

Over the last two years, I've had some doubts about various on-field decisions that have been made. I guess, being a supporter, I've been willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I don't think I should be derided with comments like your opening sentence, when I suggest that my time of giving the benefit of the doubt is drawing to an end. It is not as if I am on here, every time we have a loss or setback, clammering for the rafters. You know this, as you've probably read many of my posts over the last few years.

For what it's worth, I also had some doubts about various decisions that were made prior to the last two years (pre-Voss). Once again, at the time, I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt. I feel now that my concerns at the time were well-founded and that we are now paying for some poor decisions.

Having these feelings does make me feel like suggesting that something should be done and that changes need to occur. Do I have ideas about how things could have been done, or could be done differently? Yes. Do I regard myself as a greater expert than those who actually run the club? No. This doesn't mean I think they get it right all the time, but at the same time, I not advocating a kangaroo court whereby a bunch of bush lawyers start running the show!

As far as the logo/jumper issue goes, essentially an off-field issue, I believe that the club should indeed listen to the supporters, because the nature of certain off-field operations, particularly when it comes to the club's identity are linked to the investment of supporters, in terms of emotional, time and financial investment.

Not that this was what my initial post was largely about, but it's great that you and a few others from here went to the AGM to express your concerns about the logo/jumper. Mind you, that wasn't the only way for people to express their disappointment with the decision. Many people wrote letters to the club or media, signed up to petitions, or even rang the club. There have also been those who have supported the FFC in its efforts to take the situation to court. There have also been some supporters who have simply voted with their feet and not purchased a membership as a sign of protest. I am sure that many more people would have liked to have attended the AGM to express their opinions, but work (or other) commitments or financial restrictions may have prevented them from attending a Brisbane-based event. There may also be some people who simply don't feel empowered enough to make a public stand, perhaps because they don't feel that they have the powers of articulation or knowledge to come up against what must seem a fairly intimidating group of people who run the club (given that they all appear to be people with corporate or legal experience).

Therefore, noting yourself out as one of the few who made a public stand wins you no votes and comes across as being arrogant. I don't think that this is your intention, but I do think that you should realise the impression that it gives. It reminds me of the tone of comments that certain moderators (from a few years back now) used to make whenever they wanted to gain some sort of superiority (in their own minds) over other posters when discussing certain issues, by the virtue of them thinking that "being there" made them more of an expert or more genuine in their efforts of support or more accurate in their perspective. I notice that there seems to be some tension regarding you not having liked it when Acuguy has referred to his football-playing past as a reference point for the validity of his comments, yet, I think that your comment above comes off quite similarly.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Speaking of reading things that aren't there.

Was not seeking to brag in anyway, nor was I chasing kudos (there is certainly no superiority to be had in "being there" when everyone with a membership card is invited). But you have no idea how deflating it was to see a mountain of internet outrage and seemingly huge grass roots momentum for change reduced to an absolute squeak when push came to shove last year. Others I spoke to there felt equally as disenchanted.

Once again there is a massive outpouring of concern at the direction of the club. People are claiming that the "club they love" is rotting from head to toe. In many ways I have similar concerns, although perhaps not as willing to buy the Hamilton line wholesale.

I'm just wondering how people expect things to change at a membership based club if the members do nothing but complain on an internet forum and utlilize none of the official mechanisms that are available to them as members.

I used your post as a launching pad, and probably unfairly gave the impression that I was targetting you specifically. For that I apologise. But christ people, if things are as bad as you think... bloody stand up.

The difference between 3-4 people asking some hard questions at an AGM and 15-20 would be absolutely massive.

3-4 can be easily dismissed as a lunatic fringe, but when 20-30 percent of those in attendance are publicly admonishing the board, then those in suits may finally gain the precious gift of introspection.

 

[Tassie4ever]

Who blamed the media for our woes. Not me. Better read what I write a bit better mate.

I didn't directly quote you, but having gone over your posts above I'd have to agree with you that maybe you are "just a crazy old conspiracy theorist" as you seem to be pinning an agenda on the CM specifically, or maybe the media more generally. Again- why would this be so? Just because someone is critical doesn't mean they aren't supportive.

To take the Rudd analogy further, wouldn't he have been better off if someone had read him the riot act earlier on before it was too late? One thing I hope I learned from my working life is that the best thing you can do for your boss is to offer him/her full and frank advice, even if this might at times be unpleasant [for him/her and you]. Point being- Voss is still learning.

I listed to a bit of the discussion last night between Andrew Hamilton and NIRS about his articles. AH said that Voss had been on the phone straight after reading the CM on Thursday morning [?] and that they'd had an extended energetic discussion. AH told Voss that if he thought all his sources were disgruntled ex-coaches or players, whatever, he was mistaken, and that he had very firm and direct reason for saying there was a communication breakdown between the coach and some players.

Whether this is all true or not, I'd reckon Voss would be wise to learn from what's been reported.

 

[kimp]

To clarify a few things:

Most if the disinformation that was thrown about during the Aker saga was generated by Hammo. He took an anti-coach line based on what he was told by a (now proven) delusional player.

So forgive me if I don't take seriously what he writes now which is so similar to that episode.

What he said last night just reinforces my opinion of a self-promoter.

 

[Stocka]

I'm just wondering how people expect things to change at a membership based club if the members do nothing but complain on an internet forum and utlilize none of the official mechanisms that are available to them as members.

I used your post as a launching pad, and probably unfairly gave the impression that I was targetting you specifically. For that I apologise. But christ people, if things are as bad as you think... bloody stand up.

The difference between 3-4 people asking some hard questions at an AGM and 15-20 would be absolutely massive.

3-4 can be easily dismissed as a lunatic fringe, but when 20-30 percent of those in attendance are publicly admonishing the board, then those in suits may finally gain the precious gift of introspection.

Perhaps when it comes to off-field issues, such as the logo/jumper change and the performance of the club on a financial scale, or other membership related issues you might have a point. Supporters have a genuine investment in these issues and it would appear to be valid for supporters to speak their minds on how various decisions appear to be directly impacting on their support of the club. However, as I said, don't discount the efforts of those who cannot attend the AGM who seek other avenues to communicate their views.

When it comes to on-field or football department issues, I think it's a much more difficult prospect for your average supporter to canvass at an AGM. Most of us don't have a background with experience or industry-level expertise in the football department workings of a football club. It's harder to canvass an opinion at a meeting such as that with it carrying any validity. Essentially the field of people who have experience and expertise in AFL is fairly small. So, things like recruiting, list-management and contracts, injury-management, team structure, skill development and game plans are almost off the cards. As much as I think our recruiting and list-management over the last decade is now coming to hurt us, I don't think supporter views would be seen as valid, based on them largely being outside views of the club without having the privileged information of those experts who are operating internally and making the decisions.

 

[Hollow Knight]

When it comes to on-field or football department issues, I think it's a much more difficult prospect for your average supporter to canvass at an AGM. Most of us don't have a background with experience or industry-level expertise in the football department workings of a football club. It's harder to canvass an opinion at a meeting such as that with it carrying any validity. Essentially the field of people who have experience and expertise in AFL is fairly small. So, things like recruiting, list-management and contracts, injury-management, team structure, skill development and game plans are almost off the cards. As much as I think our recruiting and list-management over the last decade is now coming to hurt us, I don't think supporter views would be seen as valid, based on them largely being outside views of the club without having the privileged information of those experts who are operating internally and making the decisions.

I agree to a point, but I think there are everyday layman sort of ways you can ask these questions.

eg... "I understand that a high performance manager was hired to increase the performance of our football department across the board. This year we have seen a crisis in injury management, some questionable recruitment practices/contract management, poor on-field results, leaks of dissent to the media, poor on-field body language by players, inability to execute the game plan consistently over four quarters etc etc..

I was wondering if you could give us a feel for what KPI our high performance manager is judged on, and how the decision to recently promote them to COO was reached?".

I reckon that would make them sweat a little.

Then they'd probably just deflect it straight back with a non-answer. Which is why we need numbers probing them.

 

[John]

I didn't directly quote you, but having gone over your posts above I'd have to agree with you that maybe you are "just a crazy old conspiracy theorist" as you seem to be pinning an agenda on the CM specifically, or maybe the media more generally. Again- why would this be so? Just because someone is critical doesn't mean they aren't supportive.

Media generally but the CM is the local mouth piece so that gets my attention. I am certainly not going to bore you with my tale of intrigue other than to say that state wide industrial chaos ensued. This was a long time ago. I did later have the acquaintance of a sub editor at the CM and when I told him the yarn he laughed it of as par for the course and explained how there were "pressures" from above to write in a certain way, make headlines in a certain way, make statements about sources and he was the first to tell me about the of the "Get Whitlam" directive. I was once shown a pic that was published that had in fact deleted an individual that was not the flavour of the month. Anyone with an axe to grind and knows how to use the system can cause mayhem if they have a media link and that link thinks they are onto a winner. I do not trust them as far as I can throw them.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Had a lecturer last year John who writes political editorials for the Courier Mail.

He was disturbingly frank about the way in which opinion is "shaped" from above.

 

[John]

I listed to a bit of the discussion last night between Andrew Hamilton and NIRS about his articles. AH said that Voss had been on the phone straight after reading the CM on Thursday morning [?] and that they'd had an extended energetic discussion. AH told Voss that if he thought all his sources were disgruntled ex-coaches or players, whatever, he was mistaken, and that he had very firm and direct reason for saying there was a communication breakdown between the coach and some players.

Whether this is all true or not, I'd reckon Voss would be wise to learn from what's been reported.

On this point Hamilton would say that though. He is the story teller and has to defend his story. Hey you believe what you want to believe. Your call and there may be some truth in it for all I know but I do not trust the media at all and after the Akermanis debacle Hamilton is a propaganda expert of the highest order IMO. That Eunuch yarn TBD told is the truth. His creditability with me is zero.

On Voss I agree.

 

[whatboutbob]

Tassie, I think you underestimate the power and inclination of the media, and in particular News Ltd, to shape opinions. While it is not always this clear cut, the moment Murdoch publicly supported Rudd before the last election was the moment I knew Labor would win it.

While this is my opinion, I think you'd struggle to find anyone who, having seen the internal machinations of the media, would argue the point.

When News Ltd has a considerable financial stake in ensuring League's continued domination over AFL in the northern states, I would find it bizarrely obtuse to not at least question their editorial motives (and let's face it the entire CM is one big editorial).

 

[whatboutbob]

Kudos to you Stocka btw for a level-headed response to a crudely-put point from a usually eloquent and considered poster.

Having said that, I certainly empathise with TBD's exasperation with the inaction of members in the one forum that has the most potential to have an impact.

After reading so many railing on here, it was certainly galling being made to feel like the lunatic fringe at the AGM for being one of about three people who dared to question the justification for and execution of the introduction of the new logo and financial performance of the club.

While of course there are other avenues for communication, none come close to the potential impact a good grilling at an AGM can have. And while there are plenty of perfectly valid and justifiable reasons why people couldn't attend, the sheer volume of no-shows was deflating. I mean, for god's sake, there was more discussion about banning alcohol being served at match-functions than there was about the new logo or financial performance!

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

Speaking of reading things that aren't there.

Was not seeking to brag in anyway, nor was I chasing kudos (there is certainly no superiority to be had in "being there" when everyone with a membership card is invited). But you have no idea how deflating it was to see a mountain of internet outrage and seemingly huge grass roots momentum for change reduced to an absolute squeak when push came to shove last year. Others I spoke to there felt equally as disenchanted.

Once again there is a massive outpouring of concern at the direction of the club. People are claiming that the "club they love" is rotting from head to toe. In many ways I have similar concerns, although perhaps not as willing to buy the Hamilton line wholesale.

I'm just wondering how people expect things to change at a membership based club if the members do nothing but complain on an internet forum and utlilize none of the official mechanisms that are available to them as members.

I used your post as a launching pad, and probably unfairly gave the impression that I was targetting you specifically. For that I apologise. But christ people, if things are as bad as you think... bloody stand up.

The difference between 3-4 people asking some hard questions at an AGM and 15-20 would be absolutely massive.

3-4 can be easily dismissed as a lunatic fringe, but when 20-30 percent of those in attendance are publicly admonishing the board, then those in suits may finally gain the precious gift of introspection.

I've seen you talk about this a couple of times and think there's one important question to ask. How many of the people on here that were expressing outrage were 2009 members, thus able to attend the AGM? I only moved back to Brissy from NQ during `09, thus, despite my efforts elsewhere, I was unable to so much as set foot near the AGM. I don't doubt there are plenty of others that couldn't attend for the same reason. I also wouldn't doubt that some of the increased 2010 membership is people getting on board to be able to have a say this year.

 

[Hollow Knight]

I've seen you talk about this a couple of times and think there's one important question to ask. How many of the people on here that were expressing outrage were 2009 members, thus able to attend the AGM?

All of them?

I certainly am not disappointed with those who were prevented from attending.

 

[whatboutbob]

I've seen you talk about this a couple of times and think there's one important question to ask. How many of the people on here that were expressing outrage were 2009 members, thus able to attend the AGM? I only moved back to Brissy from NQ during `09, thus, despite my efforts elsewhere, I was unable to so much as set foot near the AGM. I don't doubt there are plenty of others that couldn't attend for the same reason. I also wouldn't doubt that some of the increased 2010 membership is people getting on board to be able to have a say this year.

It was confirmed prior to last year's AGM that new '10 members were able to attend the '09 AGM (and obviously vote). Not having a go at you, but just mentioning it in case anyone's in a similar situation this year.

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

It was confirmed prior to last year's AGM that new '10 members were able to attend the '09 AGM (and obviously vote). Not having a go at you, but just mentioning it in case anyone's in a similar situation this year.

Mother****ers!)(#*^()*!@$^

I called the club on the day of the AGM, told them I was already a signed up 2010 member, and was told I would not be allowed into the AGM because of that.

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

All of them?

I certainly am not disappointed with those who were prevented from attending.

Not all, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were a seriously hefty chunk. I'm not saying it's not disappointing, just not surprising. If you count out anyone under 18, vic members, and those that just aren't members, what kind of numbers would you expect from those that populate this forum?

Like I said, I think all the horseshit that's happened over the last 9 months might have actually lit a fire under a few coits that will see a much more robust 2010 AGM. Bowers was only too happy to tell people that wrote in about the jumpers to buy a membership.

The trick this time around will be the competing issues. The jumper will still be there, but the mop up from a shit season could well relegate that to an issue that is, once again, given little time. We'll see.

 

[whatboutbob]

Ding ding....round 3:

Michael Voss losing player faith

FORMER Brisbane assistant Wayne Brittain has condemned the management skills of Michael Voss as talk grows of an internal crisis at the Brisbane Lions.

At issue is the appointment of former Olympic canoeist Dan Collins as Voss's right-hand man, with the players reportedly at odds with him and his controversial methods.

Anyone hear the interview on SEN?

 

[whatboutbob]

I thought it might be interesting reviewing what was said of and by Collins upon his appointment, as we've not heard much from him since:

Collins appointed as High Performance Manager

The rookie coach said a key component of Collins' brief would be to monitor and critique Voss' own performance.

"He is there to work out whether I'm doing my job, communicating effectively with the players and getting the most out of them, he is there to keep me honest," Voss said.

"It is quite simple. My theory is that we are expecting more from the players. If they get feedback on how they are going then I should too.

"Performance is on every line, players, coaches and staff - we all have to be big enough and bold enough to accept it if there is a better way."

"What I'm here to do is put a system in place so Michael can coach the coaches," Collins said. "So everyone can perform at their maximum capacity.

"Athlete development, data collection, game analysis, opposition analysis, strength and conditioning, every aspect of what we do we can do better."

Collins intends to enforce a rule that every player has a part-time job, business interests or studies, and has warned there will be a complete upheaval in the football operations.

"We all need to be more accountable, the results of the last coupe of years are not what the club would like and it is sure as hell not what fans would like," he said. "If the level of performance we can get out of everyone in the organisation increases, so will the results."

He insists his lack of a football background would not be a disadvantage, and drew a comparison with chief executives, saying they didn't need to be accountants to run businesses.

"I'm not making our kids kick better or get fitter, I am making sure our coaches can teach and achieve that effectively," Collins said. "I'm here to set up a structure and then the experts come in and drive it."

And Grim must've rubbed Duritz' Orb for this snippet:

His job title is "High Performance Manager" which is a role that many businesses use these days. These people can get called different things (eg. organisational psychologists) but basically their job is to improve efficiency within the organisation as a whole and on an individual level. There are many segments of a football club - players, coaches, medicos, admin, accounts, etc and he'll be analysing how functional and cohesive they are. He'll also probably ask each employee for job descriptions, what their strengths and weaknesses are as employees, what their ambitions and goals are, etc and use that information to try and improve output on an individual level. He'll then probably set up monitoring processes to ensure standards are being maintained.

To some it may sound like a bit of a wank but having someone understand how people work on an individual level (eg. job satisfaction) or in a group (eg. social loafing) can help see where the cracks are. These people tend not to be very popular as people don't really like being evaluated and can often bring about lost jobs as the dead wood becomes exposed.

That's my understanding anyway.

 

[BuntonRules]

When Wayne Brittain speaks, I listen. I hope Vossy does too. To not visit Craig, when he was in such dire straights from work related sickness is criminal.

 

[Last of the Roys]

I think the media beat-up angle has well and truly been quashed.

Here is what Wayne Brittain had to say:

Brittain, who coached Carlton from 2001-2, told SEN Radio that Voss had much to learn.
"Dan Collins' structures put Vossy in a position where he's so busy he doesn't get enough time to recover the little things you need to get your people performing well," he said.
Brittain said the failure of Voss or Collins to visit his brother, who had been at the club for 10 years, was no way to look after staff.
"In a footy club you have to genuinely care about the people who are giving for you and then they are prepared to give a bit more," he said.
Brittain said Voss's reputation as a workaholic did not excuse his lack of one-on-one time with the players.
He said none enjoyed working with Collins.
"You are only as good as your ability to communicate with people and that's what your job is, to get the best out of people," he said.

Unfortunately, from the outside looking in Brittain's thoughts seem spot on. The way Voss handled the Bradshaw departure is just another example of that. I personally think Bradshaw could have possibly stayed a Lion if Voss had put the right effort into it after the Carlton deal fell over - but apparently he didn't even talk to him (I realise Sydney had put on the table a better offer - but to not try to mend fences after what had happened was just arrogant b/s).

It sounds like Collins and Voss are two of a kind, which is not a good thing. People aren't robots. Loyalty is a two way street. High performance doesn't come from dictatorship but from everyone in the Club buying-in and pulling in the one direction.

 

[MacMum]

This is not good, not good at all

 

[3KZ is Football]

Sounds like Collins is playing Yoko Ono to Vossie's John Lennon.