Dean Bailey's Coaching

[Dez!]

Re: Dean Bailey

Ok Eskimo, in point form, tell me the job of a coach. This should be interesting given that you don't believe that the players performance is part of his job description.

And BTW, Geelong were 30 seconds away from making a GF in Thompson's 3rd season. Bailey taking us into the finals is merely a pipedream.

Look who's back here, aren't you only supposed to come out when we lose?

 

[Mightydees]

Re: Dean Bailey

Ok Eskimo, in point form, tell me the job of a coach. This should be interesting given that you don't believe that the players performance is part of his job description.

And BTW, Geelong were 30 seconds away from making a GF in Thompson's 3rd season. Bailey taking us into the finals is merely a pipedream.

Dee64 you have accidentally put down the club you support as Melbourne

 

[Slander]

I've read through this thread and while some of the concerns are valid I think some posters lack a little bit of perspective.

IMO this gameplan is being viewed through the fog of a few mitigating factors...

We have no key forwards, no stars, we lack power midfielders and lack experience. If we had these attributes; busting zones, creating pressure, winning the damn ball in the right areas and having forward targets would be a piece of cake.

We lost Bruce and McDonald last year. Key experienced players such as Davey and Green seem to have gone backwards this year which isn't helping. Moloney, Jones and Sylvia are currently our grunt midfield group and all are flawed footballers. Grimes, Frawley and Morton have either had interrupted preseasons or look sluggish. Scully and McKenzie haven't been sighted and Liam Jurrah needs to lift his game.

Teams that finished below us last year such as Essendon, West Coast and even Richmond have had less injuries and have better senior players than us. If we go backwards this year I won't be surpised - IMO it has a lot to do with personnel and little to do with the coach.

Ultimately we're four years into a process of perfecting personnel and gameplan which usually takes double that amount of time also having a bit of luck wouldn't go astray. It's still too early to make the call on Bailey, whatever happens he'll leave the list in much better shape that what he inherited.

 

[Chip_]

It is Bailey's fourth year, but for some players it's only their 2nd year. I think individual teaching is necessary before gameplans are introduced. If we're still having this conversation next year, then i'd agree with you 100%. But for mine we're still in a player-developing stage.

Really? I understand if some guys are given specific task/roles in games sometimes to learn a skill or whatever, but learning a game plan & how your role fits into this has to be done from the start. These guys aren't all playing their first seasons ever & will have exposure to game plans (albeit a much simpler plan).

And if half the team are young guys learning their individual roles, what are the other half of our team doing? Maybe you use a simpler game plan if you have lots of younger guys, but you still have a plan.

Ultimately we're four years into a process of perfecting personnel and gameplan which usually takes double that amount of time also having a bit of luck wouldn't go astray. It's still too early to make the call on Bailey, whatever happens he'll leave the list in much better shape that what he inherited.

Terry Wallace will be spewing that you weren't president of Richmond when he applied for the job, he got short changed 3 years.....

 

[d33my]

Really? I understand if some guys are given specific task/roles in games sometimes to learn a skill or whatever, but learning a game plan & how your role fits into this has to be done from the start. These guys aren't all playing their first seasons ever & will have exposure to game plans (albeit a much simpler plan).

Yep bad wording from me. I really meant 'individual coaching before complex game plans'. And I suppose you could read complex to mean premiership winning. Obviously an AFL team is going to have at the very least a simple game plan.

A team is made up of the sum of all it's parts. Lets get them working as well as possible and then start to bring the thing together as a whole.

 

[THE STING2]

We lost Bruce and McDonald last year.

Bruce has been horrible at Hawthorn, he wouldn't make a difference to this side.

McDonald not playing is hurting us big time. Our tackling and pressure I think is our main area of concern, the best teams are great at tackling.

Our No1 tackler is Moloney averaging 5 a game. McDonald would get that in a quarter not to mention McKenzie.

 

[Slander]

Terry Wallace will be spewing that you weren't president of Richmond when he applied for the job, he got short changed 3 years.....

I would've sacked him the moment he started giving crap players like Simmonds and Polak long term deals ahead of fulfilling his rebuild promise
All asinine points aside, Richmond acquired some good young players under Wallace and will be up there in 3-4 years time.

The point of my post was that there are reasons why we are continuing to be shite this year which doesn't IMO have much to do with Bailey's gameplan. Whether he's at the helm or not I would say 2015 is the earliest we'll be challenging for a flag.
Look at recent premiership teams and how long it took them to turn over the list, tweak gameplans and be right up there challenging - it never happens overnight.
Malthouse took over in 2000, despite some gallant performances Collingwood only looked like premiers in 2010.
Thompson took over in 2000, Geelong were on a par with Melbourne's mediocre mid 2000 teams until it finally clicked in 07.
Hawthorn started looking to the draft in 2001 (trading Croad for Hodge) and won a flag in 08.
The Saints could've won the past two flags with a little more luck, the bulk of their team comes from the 2000-2002 drafts.

 

[bing181]

Slander: Good summary. A bit wasted round here though I suspect!

 

[Slander]

Bruce has been horrible at Hawthorn, he wouldn't make a difference to this side.

I tend to agree but we shouldn't underestimate leadership and experience especially when comes to training and setting standards on the track.

McDonald not playing is hurting us big time. Our tackling and pressure I think is our main area of concern, the best teams are great at tackling.

Our No1 tackler is Moloney averaging 5 a game. McDonald would get that in a quarter not to mention McKenzie.

Agreed. I still think the club made the right decision with these two but understand that it means short term pain for long term gain.

 

[dee64]

I would've sacked him the moment he started giving crap players like Simmonds and Polak long term deals ahead of fulfilling his rebuild promise
All asinine points aside, Richmond acquired some good young players under Wallace and will be up there in 3-4 years time.

The point of my post was that there are reasons why we are continuing to be shite this year which doesn't IMO have much to do with Bailey's gameplan. Whether he's at the helm or not I would say 2015 is the earliest we'll be challenging for a flag.
Look at recent premiership teams and how long it took them to turn over the list, tweak gameplans and be right up there challenging - it never happens overnight.
Malthouse took over in 2000, despite some gallant performances Collingwood only looked like premiers in 2010.
Thompson took over in 2000, Geelong were on a par with Melbourne's mediocre mid 2000 teams until it finally clicked in 07.
Hawthorn started looking to the draft in 2001 (trading Croad for Hodge) and won a flag in 08.
The Saints could've won the past two flags with a little more luck, the bulk of their team comes from the 2000-2002 drafts.

I'll give you credit for at least trying to put something factual in support of Bailey, however history doesn't support your argument.

All the sides you've mentioned made the finals within 2-3 years of when you say that their premiership assault began. I can't think of one team in history of football that has taken the premiership path that you're suggesting Melbourne will.

In fact, name a premiership coach that didn't have his team make the finals within 3 years of his tenure commencing?

 

[Syrus]

The above comments by Roos is why. Basically the things you said in the OP (no forward press, lack of forward targets, lack of a plan to beat a press, etc).

So im not the only one thats noticing it?? Oh well they say great minds think alike. Im going to try and find this interview/segment or whatever it was.

Hey Syrus - all fair question marks but I hope you dont mind ive gone devils advocate in my response. Personally Im in the camp that thinks harsh criticism of Bailey is too early and that he's done a reasonably good job to this point given the unique circumstances of his role thus far..

More than welcome to have your say. I welcomed responses to my post and abuse. It may be premature in calling for the coach to be moved on, but i feel that if he doesn't address some of these items i listed we are heading to be worse than last year.

So we agree that 8th on the ladder is a pass mark for Bailey (I think 9th would also be a pass).

Correct. Especially with the draw.

When I asked when Bailey's performance should be assessed I was talking about when a decision should be made about his future with the club and you didn't answer that part but I assume from your other responses that you believe a decision should be made at the end of the year.

Final question for you Syrus - if you believe that a decision should be made on Bailey's tenure at the end of the year and you believe that finishing 8th on the ladder is a pass mark then shouldn't we wait to see how he goes before we tear shreds off the poor bloke?

I believe that if he is not performing during the year and losing winable games, then why wait till the end of the year to move him on.

I highlighted things that I think are flaws/omissions from his "game plan", which very few people have disputed, and now aparently a former premiership coach is saying the same thing. Do you think if he addressed them we would play better or it would make a difference, or am I off the mark?? The game is evolving, he is not, we are still playing the same footy we were 3 years ago.

You have to have someone to kick the ball to. I think I read on another post put Jurrah one out - this is simple but at least would give teammates an option rather than sideways when they get to half forward or the wing!

That was in my OP. But yes, have some sort of option in the forward line to kick to, whether it be Jurrah, Petterd, etc. Bailey's Bald spot is not working.

 

[RandB]

The point of my post was that there are reasons why we are continuing to be shite this year which doesn't IMO have much to do with Bailey's gameplan. Whether he's at the helm or not I would say 2015 is the earliest we'll be challenging for a flag.

That is fine but it isn't a fundamental argument about the gameplan itself. Most supporters would/should understand where we are at on the development curve. At the start of the year I thought 10 wins would be reasonable and if we end up on 10 wins it doesn't change a thing about questioning aspects of our gameplan.

If the thread title was why are we so shit? then I would indulge in pointing out the obvious (as many other posters have done) that our early development and lack of top end leadership plays a part.

But the thread isn't about that. The reality is that what we are trying to do wrt strategy and how developed we are to execute it can be isolated debates although some posters on both sides of the equation have perhaps muddied the issue/s.

 

[Topkent]

ill throw in my 2 cents

i agree with all the criticism of melbournes gameplan and i can honestly say i dont have foxtel and i came to the exact same conclusion that roos and syrus did

we play like a soccer team on the counter attack pure and simple i hate our game plan and i pray that we have a grand plan for it

bailey wonders why we cant put pressure on for 4 quarters .. I CAN FUC**NG tell you why bailey!!
we invite pressure onto us.. we want to teams to attack our defence so we can hit them on the break in a snatch and grab
which all acounts to us inviting the other side to grab the momentum... by playing so deep in defence we can never control a game.. were like a boxer who stays on the ropes ducking and weaving with our hands up waiting to jab at the sign of a mistake... Once the opposition lands a massive blow were unable to mantain that same level of calmness and get hit again and again
we invite teams to control the game and like what happened with both sydney and hawthorn if the oppostions footskills are good then they are able to spot up targets in our 50 at will...
we never seem to lock the ball in our forward half having inside 50 after inside 50 yet seem happy to let the oppostion have 4-5-6 in a row and then hoping we can sneak out the backdoor and get a cheeky goal on the break...

in summary our whole plan relies on us getting turnovers across half back not half forward which seems to be the trend of modern footy..
END RANT

 

[demonfromupnorth]

in summary our whole plan relies on us getting turnovers across half back not half forward which seems to be the trend of modern footy..

Is this you or Paul Roos speaking?

That is someone else’s analysis.

From the sounds of it a few of you would sack him now; i can't for the life of me see the point.

If we come out and win the next couple of games, it will die down, then, as soon as we lose, he’s back under the blow-torch.

 

[Ando727]

Is this you or Paul Roos speaking?

That is someone else’s analysis.

That's a little unfair, isn't it? Paul Roos wasn't the first one to query Bailey's tactics - or even this very conclusion. It has been discussed quite a bit. Roos' comments only add some extra credibility to the argument.

 

[demonfromupnorth]

That's a little unfair, isn't it? Paul Roos wasn't the first one to query Bailey's tactics - or even this very conclusion. It has been discussed quite a bit. Roos' comments only add some extra credibility to the argument.

Im not saying that, what i said was until Roos said what he said on Fox, no-one had mentioned that 'that' was our game style.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Anyone that goes to our games can see that we rarely have any sort of forward structure except for at centre bounces. No wonder Watts looks lost, he's a forward in a non-existent forward line.

 

[Chip_]

That's a little unfair, isn't it? Paul Roos wasn't the first one to query Bailey's tactics - or even this very conclusion. It has been discussed quite a bit. Roos' comments only add some extra credibility to the argument.

Im not saying that, what i said was until Roos said what he said on Fox, no-one had mentioned that 'that' was our game style.

Not harsh at all, what was quoted wasn't just similar a idea, it sounds like the exact line that Roos used to summarised his concept of Melbourne's game plan/style.

 

[Ando727]

Not harsh at all, what was quoted wasn't just similar a idea, it sounds like the exact line that Roos used to summarised his concept of Melbourne's game plan/style.

Ok. I'm not on BF all that much so I haven't really kept track of what terms are being used around here. I can say that in discussion with mates of mine, we have observed that Melbourne has no ability maintain pressure in the forward 50, like Collingwood for example. We seem to resign ourselves to watching it rebound quickly to the other end if we have an unsuccessful forward 50 entry. That, in turn, puts constant pressure on our defence. I didn't hear what Roos said, but those are the terms we have been using.

In any case, even if somebody does use an idea from Roos, that doesn't make it wrong does it? He is a very astute judge of the game and if you are going to be influenced by somebody, he is not a bad place to start. Most people don't have original thoughts on football. It's always an amalgam of the most convincing points of view going around.

I don't support sacking Bailey at this stage. But I'm not confident that he should take us forward beyond this year. I don't think he's tactically astute enough to get us a flag and I'm not prepared to waste our list on that risk. We need a proven coach to take us further. It's ok for successful clubs like the Hawks to take a punt on Clarko, or Geelong on Chris Scott, but Melbourne has such a poor record, we shouldn't be taking any chances. We need a flag to consolidate our efforts to become a stronger (and permanent) club.

Plus, I've had a gutful of supporting an unsuccessful club!

 

[RandB]

Im not saying that, what i said was until Roos said what he said on Fox, no-one had mentioned that 'that' was our game style.

David King made some fundamental observations a month ago about how we set up and that we defend too far back (and as a result attack from too far back). Two other clubs have completely exploited our reliance on transition play as well.

wrt Roos and "rebound" football specifically I agree with you though. In a previous post I said if we have a rebound gameplan then it will come under scrutiny over time. The complete nuts and bolts of what Bailey is trying to get the players to do will reveal itself more as time goes on. So far though we haven't seen anything to contradict such a concept of "rebound" footy (from how we've played) but I agree we don't know for sure yet if it is by design.

There is no doubt though that we rely too much on transition footy atm IMO.

 

[Topkent]

Is this you or Paul Roos speaking?

That is someone else’s analysis.

From the sounds of it a few of you would sack him now; i can't for the life of me see the point.

If we come out and win the next couple of games, it will die down, then, as soon as we lose, he’s back under the blow-torch.

well i can promise you on my familys lives that i havent seen what paul roos said , i dont have foxtel .. i have only read his views about it on here...

as far as im concerned it doesnt take someone like paul roos to work out our gameplan.. anyone with eyes can see what were trying to do
i already told my old man that this was our problem after the sydney and hawthorn games and paul roos has vindicated me ...

whether we should sack him or not remains to be seen.. he probably deserves the rest of the year and the chance to change the plan... cuz as far as im concerned this isnt working

 

[Syrus]

I have just found that interview with Paul Roos, Sheehan and Healy (done after the Hawthorn game) and it's quite interesting. He touches on some of my points in the OP.
http://www.foxsports.com.au/AFL/dis...033969273?subcat=1225864515752&site=FoxSports

Key points from the Interview:

* Hawthorn had 310 uncontested possessions and Melbourne laid 40 tackles the whole game. (6. Pressure)
* 75 inside 50's the whole game. Hawthorn had 42 scoring shots, Melbourne had 17. (2. No forward line plan, 4. Cannot break defensive zone)
* Coming out of the defensive 50, Melbourne only got it past the centre 7 times. (4. Cannot break a defensive zone)
* The game style hasn't changed in 3 years.
* Happy to try and get it out of the defensive 50 with a rebound instead of keeping it in the forward 50. (This reminds me of when Rocky took on Ivan Drago and was happy for him to beat the shit out of him, then he would fight back when he was tired).
* Liam Jurrah should be put in the goalsquare and have it kicked to him, something i suggested. (2. No forward line plan)
* Surprised Melbourne let MacDonald, Bruce and Miller go. (MacDonald was a mistake IMO)
* Need a key CHF/power forward
* Sheehan mentioned moving Watts to defence to get him some football. Roos suggested Wing or HBF. (My reasoning is different though, as i want him to play on a CHF to see what they do first hand and what he needs to do (sorta like Neitz did). (3. Try something different)


It seems that everyone can see the faults in our game plan except the coach. It was just freaky watching them discuss, what i have been thinking for a while. I'm glad im not the only one noticing it or suggesting of alternatives.

 

[bing181]

It seems that everyone can see the faults in our game plan except the coach.

That's because everyone on Bigfooty is an expert, while the coach, his assistants and the entire FD at MFC, in spite of being experienced professionals, know nothing.

 

[Deefolt]

That's because everyone on Bigfooty is an expert, while the coach, his assistants and the entire FD at MFC, in spite of being experienced professionals, know nothing.

I think honestly most of us are venting at something lol, I know I am and the coach is predictably the easiest target haha

 

[Cudi_420]

Re: Dean Bailey

1. Who care?

2. Who care?

and

3. Who cares?

You all expect the world because you're so delusioned from constant losing. Let the man do his job and give him a respectable amount of time to train and improve a group of inexperienced and young players. If he can't do it, then sack him.

In other words, if we don't make the finals this year, definitely hire Malthouse. Don't even think twice.