News Dean Bailey joins Crows

[Cap]

I can't say that I'm inspired by the decision to sign Bailey. When you look at it as a trade of Craig <--> Bailey, Adelaide clearly come out of this as massive losers.

He's obviously a failed coach, but does he have something significant to offer us in the role of an assistant? I have confidence in the system which appointed him, so I'm going to go with yes - for now.

being a failed head coach really doesn't have a lot to do with his role - he may actually be good at the particular role he has been hired at.

just because a person fails and 1 thing that really doesn't make them failures at everything.

what are you basing your win-loss on? aren't we just swapping 1 failed coach for another?

 

[Sekaj]

I can't say that I'm inspired by the decision to sign Bailey. When you look at it as a trade of Craig <--> Bailey, Adelaide clearly come out of this as massive losers.

He's obviously a failed coach, but does he have something significant to offer us in the role of an assistant? I have confidence in the system which appointed him, so I'm going to go with yes - for now.

I wouldn't say he was a failed coach. He was appointed to put Melbourne "in the best position for draft picks" and he achieved that. So from that point of view he is a success.

I'm just not sure it was that demanding a task for him to achieve and I'm not sure that would be his task at the Crows. I think I could have put Melbourne "in the best position for draft picks" at a much lower cost.

 

[Vader]

I think he was a poor senior coach, even allowing for the fact that his board of directors instructed him to tank for draft picks.

Does that make him a poor assistant coach? No, it does not. Does it make him a good assistant coach? No, it does not. I'm not convinced either way.

My personal opinion is that Craig is/was a much better coach than Bailey and has an lot more to offer Melbourne (courtesy of his sports science background) than Bailey has to offer Adelaide. Yes, they're both failed senior coaches, but Craig is much, much more than that - and I'm not convinced that Bailey is.

 

[srv23]

I think he was a poor senior coach, even allowing for the fact that his board of directors instructed him to tank for draft picks.

Does that make him a poor assistant coach? No, it does not. Does it make him a good assistant coach? No, it does not. I'm not convinced either way.

My personal opinion is that Craig is/was a much better coach than Bailey and has an lot more to offer Melbourne (courtesy of his sports science background) than Bailey has to offer Adelaide. Yes, they're both failed senior coaches, but Craig is much, much more than that - and I'm not convinced that Bailey is.

He showed that he was a good assistant coach at Port during their 02-04 period.

 

[Wood_Duck]

I think he was a poor senior coach, even allowing for the fact that his board of directors instructed him to tank for draft picks.

Does that make him a poor assistant coach? No, it does not. Does it make him a good assistant coach? No, it does not. I'm not convinced either way.

My personal opinion is that Craig is/was a much better coach than Bailey and has an lot more to offer Melbourne (courtesy of his sports science background) than Bailey has to offer Adelaide. Yes, they're both failed senior coaches, but Craig is much, much more than that - and I'm not convinced that Bailey is.

So you know for a fact that whilst Craig has other strings to his bow, Bailey doesnt?

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Apparently, it was designed to put Melbourne, and I quote, "in the best position for draft picks". Is that what we're aiming for here at the Crows?

For the record, I reckon I myself could have coached Melbourne to last without much effort.

Malthouse, Ratten, Worsfold have all done the same.....

Judge Baileys time at Melboune in 2 years..... As Malthouse has said it takes 7 years to build a club.... He has set a fantastic foundation for Mark Neeld... Made many selfless and ultimately terminal decisions....

 

[Allefgib]

Vader I'd argue that with list of comparable talent and experience that bailey has proven to be at least as good a head coach as craig. Some would say better.

 

[Vader]

So you know for a fact that whilst Craig has other strings to his bow, Bailey doesnt?

More strings definitely. I didn't say Bailey doesn't have something to offer.

 

[cmndstab]

Definitely can't agree with that, Allef... but that said, in the specific areas of strategy and predicting future trends, I think Bailey had Craig covered.


In any event, it doesn't matter whether Craig would be a better assistant than Bailey or not - his history with the Crows made it impossible for us to keep him on the books in an assistant role. So we looked for other coaches.

Bailey seems pretty good for the role we've put him in.

 

[cm_perfect]

I think he was a poor senior coach, even allowing for the fact that his board of directors instructed him to tank for draft picks.

Does that make him a poor assistant coach? No, it does not. Does it make him a good assistant coach? No, it does not. I'm not convinced either way.

My personal opinion is that Craig is/was a much better coach than Bailey and has an lot more to offer Melbourne (courtesy of his sports science background) than Bailey has to offer Adelaide. Yes, they're both failed senior coaches, but Craig is much, much more than that - and I'm not convinced that Bailey is.

Agree with this but....I for one would not feel comfortable having Craigy at the AFC with our new coaching panel being put in place. I think that we need a fresh start with fresh ideas.

As it stands, we have to put our faith in Sando to surround himself with the right people and having Craigy around obviously did not sit well with him otherwise he would still be at the AFC.

Craigy has an exceptional background in sports science, unfortunately that has not translated to keeping players on the park or the AFC being in the "elite" in regard to fitness for the last couple of years.

I will be optomistic about our coaching panel and the results they can deliver until proven otherwise.

 

[macca23]

My personal opinion is that Craig is/was a much better coach than Bailey

Uh huh.

And this showed up how when we played Melbourne this year?

 

[Allefgib]

shhhhh macca.. i was trying to not just throw that up there.

Curious to hear from you stabby on why you don't agree.

With similar level of talent/experience - how did craig prove he was a better HEAD coach?

I'd agree he can cover more bases with his skillset but as a head coach he had major deficiences and it was a head coach I made the statement.

Also keen to hear from you Vader on your thoughts on that comment given you feel Craig > Baily as a Head coach. Based on what? (saying the two years of prelim finals doesn't cut it FYI - we had 4 midfielders of a standard greater than anything Bailey had during his time at Melb)

 

[Vader]

Uh huh.

And this showed up how when we played Melbourne this year?

2011 was just plain embarrassing on so many levels.

 

[Vader]

Agree with this but....I for one would not feel comfortable having Craigy at the AFC with our new coaching panel being put in place. I think that we need a fresh start with fresh ideas.

As it stands, we have to put our faith in Sando to surround himself with the right people and having Craigy around obviously did not sit well with him otherwise he would still be at the AFC.

Craig's position at Adelaide was never going to be tenable, particularly after it became clear that his successor wasn't going to be one of his protegees. This has never really been a point of debate.

The only reason there's a Craig vs Bailey discussion is because they effectively swapped clubs after being replaced by their respective clubs.

 

[Mismatched]

Craig will make for a great assistant at Melbourne. He was a good (not great) head coach who will be invaluable to Mark Neeld. My take is that once Sanderson has been in the role for 3~ years, he will call Craigy back to be an assistant. A call which will be answered.

I like the appointment of Bailey. By all reports he was an extremely good assistant at Port at a time when they were a very strong and feared football club. Whilst it's tough to judge his time at Melbourne, I think his experience as a senior coach will be invaluable to Sando.

 

[cm_perfect]

Craig's position at Adelaide was never going to be tenable, particularly after it became clear that his successor wasn't going to be one of his protegees. This has never really been a point of debate.

The only reason there's a Craig vs Bailey discussion is because they effectively swapped clubs after being replaced by their respective clubs.

Fair enough, just wanted to add my 2c, I dont do it often..

The comparison of who would of been better as an assistant at the AFC will always be flawed because of the 1st part of your post.

Comparing them as Head Coaches will only prove that they both under acheived with their respective lists...I call a nil all draw

For me, I am happy with the Bailey appointment and also happy that Craigy will not be influencing the new coaching dept at the AFC, I wish Craigy all the best at the MFC.

 

[cmndstab]

shhhhh macca.. i was trying to not just throw that up there.

Curious to hear from you stabby on why you don't agree.

With similar level of talent/experience - how did craig prove he was a better HEAD coach?

I guess, Craig kept a team that was full of holes and regularly injured, competitive. Bailey did not.

But it's impossible to compare - the two teams have been in vastly different places for pretty much Craig's entire tenure. I probably disagree more with the idea that it's clear cut than anything else.

 

[rayven]

How bout you keep it to yourself then until you can see that a) your thoughts are actually warranted as it relates to his assistant coaching role with the AFC or b) you realise you are a wally for jumping the gun in which case you didn't get embarrassed for opening your mouth too early.

I don't think i jumped any gun..