Gary Ayres

[Crow-mo]

They way I look at it is that he took over 2 Malcolm Blight teams that were absolutely purring and drove them into the ground.

untrue. Blight jumped ship because he thought they had nothing left.

 

[Masten2McKinley]

Apparently was on the blower to the Lions within seconds of Lethal's press conference.

I don't think they returned his call.

hahaha, he must be alright if he can take a side struggling and then take then to a GF

 

[wba1977]

A few of you are being a bit harsh on Ayres.

I think there is a perception out there that he is yesterday's man regarding a head coaching role, I don't think it will happen.

That being said, I thought he would be a perfect fit for Voss and the Lions. Vossy could do with a bit of experience on staff.

 

[Kaladin Stormblessed]

Apparently was on the blower to the Lions within seconds of Lethal's press conference.

I don't think they returned his call.

Pretty poor if true. If someone applies for a job, you at least should get back to them.

 

[Mervyn Beasley]

Apologies for earlier statement re in the GF. Obviously read what i read wrongly.
Whatever the case it's been a good year for the borough.

 

[bedford]

It has been a great year at Port, might not get another gig at AFL level but wrapped to have him at Port.
There is one gig in the AFL though that is North, Laidley is a whinging goose should have shut his mouth before the swans match !

 

[BIGBEZ]

It has been a great year at Port, might not get another gig at AFL level but wrapped to have him at Port.
There is one gig in the AFL though that is North, Laidley is a whinging goose should have shut his mouth before the swans match !

Was he at the port final on the w'end? Would have been sweet to see his sooky face...

 

[Hinkley29]

Gary Ayres is a good coach. you don't coach for 10 years without having something about you.

At Adelaide he was charged with making us a consistent finals team, and he did that. we went close in 2002, and entered 2003 as premiership favourites after the recruitment of Carey. Injuries did not help, but we had a strong campaign. bottom line, he did exactly what was asked of him. 2004 we had the worst injury run in our history, worth noting that Craig couldn't do anything with that depleted team when he took over half way through either.

Geelong supporters always like throw their handbags out of the pram about him, but consider he took them to a grand final in 1995 (and some even thought they were a show against a great Carlton team). Geelong fans keep whinging about how they were robbed in 1997 - which begs the question: which is it? were you robbed of a flag, or was ayres shit the entire time.

He did pretty well at Geelong, and left them - and became our longest serving coach.

he's a real meat and potatoes type coach, discipline, simple accountable football. there are a couple of teams that could use him to right the ship.

not perfect, but a good coach.

I agree and disagree.

I can't speak for his performance at Adelaide, although as an outsider it did appear that they never lived up to expectations whilst he was coach. Maybe the club as whole was rated too highly after 97 & 98 when in reality they were not the #1 team in the comp in either year. As I said, I don't know enough about the Adelaide/Gary Ayres story to comment with any authority.

Geelong and Gary Ayers is a subject I do know a bit about.

He was with Geelong for 5 years of which he had 2 good years (95 & 97). 97 was his best coaching effort as he took a team that was on the decline in 96, and rejuvenated it to the point where it was arguably (with St Kilda) the best performed team of the year. It must be said though that he was thoroughly out-coached in the finals that year, especially in the first final against Nth in the rain. 95 to a large degree was one last hurrah for a good (not great) side.

The other years at Geelong ranged from disappointing (96) to downright abysmal (98 and 99 - clearly the worst Geelong teams I have had the displeasure of following). The biggest problem when you look at his time at Geelong is that he achieved little, and left the list and club in a far worse state than when he arrived.

My other major gripe with Ayres was the way he handled the "non-footy" stuff that is a big part of being a head coach these days. He was aloof and arrogant and treated the fans with disdain at times. He appeared to enjoy playing the "non-Geelong style tough guy" role and IMO badly misread the type of personality that was needed to head up the club. Yes, I understand that many will say this is irrelevant in the performance of a head coach, but the head coach is the club's public figure-head, and the way the coach handles himself goes a long way toward setting the trend for the entire club.

By the end of Ayres' tenure at Geelong, the club was a toxic place. The administrators at the time (and the senior players) have to be apportioned a signifcant amount of blame for this, but the head coach has to take a share as well.

I guess the question is, would I be happy if Gary Ayres was offered the role of head coach at a club I support? No freakin' way.

 

[Crow-mo]

I agree and disagree.

I can't speak for his performance at Adelaide, although as an outsider it did appear that they never lived up to expectations whilst he was coach. Maybe the club as whole was rated too highly after 97 & 98 when in reality they were not the #1 team in the comp in either year. As I said, I don't know enough about the Adelaide/Gary Ayres story to comment with any authority.

fair enough, but he inherited an adelaide team Blight no longer wanted anything to do with.

Geelong and Gary Ayers is a subject I do know a bit about.

He was with Geelong for 5 years of which he had 2 good years (95 & 97). 97 was his best coaching effort as he took a team that was on the decline in 96, and rejuvenated it to the point where it was arguably (with St Kilda) the best performed team of the year. It must be said though that he was thoroughly out-coached in the finals that year, especially in the first final against Nth in the rain. 95 to a large degree was one last hurrah for a good (not great) side.

so you don't think you were screwed in 1997? which is good, because you can't have it both ways.

The other years at Geelong ranged from disappointing (96) to downright abysmal (98 and 99 - clearly the worst Geelong teams I have had the displeasure of following). The biggest problem when you look at his time at Geelong is that he achieved little, and left the list and club in a far worse state than when he arrived.

the problem here is you have assumed (incorrectly) that each year is discrete, and with no relationship to the others. They're the same teams, you seem to suggesting that the barrell was emptied each year, and refreshed from scratch.

I might add he also made the finals in 1996 with dad's army. he also got a helluva lot out of fading team in 1997. 11th & 12th wasn't great, but was to be expected when you inherit a tired and fading list.

He cannot have left the list in a far worse state that he arrived, as it was a on massive decline before he started. he was in the hot seat while it happened.

My other major gripe with Ayres was the way he handled the "non-footy" stuff that is a big part of being a head coach these days. He was aloof and arrogant and treated the fans with disdain at times. He appeared to enjoy playing the "non-Geelong style tough guy" role and IMO badly misread the type of personality that was needed to head up the club. Yes, I understand that many will say this is irrelevant in the performance of a head coach, but the head coach is the club's public figure-head, and the way the coach handles himself goes a long way toward setting the trend for the entire club.

you're right it is irrelevant.

By the end of Ayres' tenure at Geelong, the club was a toxic place. The administrators at the time (and the senior players) have to be apportioned a signifcant amount of blame for this, but the head coach has to take a share as well.

fair. but given the success you had had, it was always going to be a bumpy landing with plenty of egos crushed and the obligatory finger pointing.

I might also point out that the Genius of Malcom Blight is his instincts when to get out, and rightly he left Ayres to steer the sinking ship. did teh same at Adelaide.

Ayres is not perfect, but he is a very very good coach when things need to get back to basics.

 

[Hinkley29]

fair enough, but he inherited an adelaide team Blight no longer wanted anything to do with.

You would know more about that than I would..

so you don't think you were screwed in 1997? which is good, because you can't have it both ways.


The finals system was a joke that year, which didn't help matters (co-incidentally it was a major factor in Adelaide winning the flag from mid-pack, but this is an argument for another thread) but that doesn't absolve Ayres from the fact that he was handed his arse by Pagan in the first week of the finals.

It was our loss in week 1, which Ayres has to take a lot of blame for, which led to us getting screwed by the finals system.

So yes, you can have it both ways.


the problem here is you have assumed (incorrectly) that each year is discrete, and with no relationship to the others. They're the same teams, you seem to suggesting that the barrell was emptied each year, and refreshed from scratch.

I might add he also made the finals in 1996 with dad's army. he also got a helluva lot out of fading team in 1997. 11th & 12th wasn't great, but was to be expected when you inherit a tired and fading list.

Incorrect.

There were 2 distinct teams/eras in Ayres' tenure at Geelong.

The 96 and 95 teams are inextricably linked to the 94 team. 96 was the last roll of the dice with that team, and the 97 team was a very different side to 96. I gave him credit for rejuvenating the side in 97, but he failed dismally to build on that team. 98 & 99 were nothing short of total failures after he built a solid platform in 97.

He cannot have left the list in a far worse state that he arrived, as it was a on massive decline before he started. he was in the hot seat while it happened.

Incorrect.

He inherited a team that made the GF in 94, and with little turnover made the GF again in 95. To say that he inherited a poor list is patently not true. What is patently obvious is that he left the club with a poor list in 99.

The list at the end of 99 was far, far worse than the one he inherited at the end of 94.

I was happy enough to admit that I didn't know enough about the Adelaide Ayres story to comment on it with authority. It appears that your understanding of the Geelong Ayres story is similarly lacking. Perhaps you shouldn't be commenting with an air of authority about it.

you're right it is irrelevant.


We are going to have to agree to disagree here. I contend that it is a big part of a coaches role to portray the club in a positive light. Ayres was a disaster in this part of the role.

fair. but given the success you had had, it was always going to be a bumpy landing with plenty of egos crushed and the obligatory finger pointing.

Success? We had a long history of failing at the final hurdle, a long history of unrealised expectations. I think the egos had been crushed long before Ayres left.

However, the club has never been in a worse state than it was when Ayres left. As I stated, he has to take a portion of the blame for that.

I might also point out that the Genius of Malcom Blight is his instincts when to get out, and rightly he left Ayres to steer the sinking ship. did teh same at Adelaide.

Adelaide may have been a sinking ship, but Geelong in 94 certainly wasn't. When Ayres was given the gig, the footy world saw it as a plum job for a new coach.

Ayres is not perfect, but he is a very very good coach when things need to get back to basics.

Response above in bold.

 

[Crow-mo]

I'm sorry but you haven't added to your argument, just repeated the same things.

West Coast in 2008 is linked to 2005/2006, but it doesn't really have much to do with anything.

 

[Hinkley29]

I'm sorry but you haven't added to your argument, just repeated the same things.

West Coast in 2008 is linked to 2005/2006, but it doesn't really have much to do with anything.

I'm sorry, you have just failed to recognise any opinion which doesn't concur exactly with yours. Unfortunately it appears to be a trend. Don't get involved in a discussion if you don't want to acknowledge any opinion other than your own.

If you can't see that I provided reasoned arguments (and further information) to counter your incorrect assertions about Geelong and Gary Ayres, then you are plainly ignorant. Please read it again, without the blinkers.

Maybe a blog would be more your thing. You could just write your opinion then just sit back and admire your work.

 

[And_ROOS]

I disagree - Ayres cannot coach at AFL level. He is bereft of ideas and alienates himself from too many players. He inherited a top 3 side at Geelong and left the club when the going got tough.

Like so many VFL players, Ayres is good at that level, but will not / should never be considered at the top level again.

Not even that, to use an analogy he basically got a sports car with a full tank of petrol and flogged it to sh*t and left if in a paddock gutted for Cook and Costa to fix...

He didnt look to the future and milked the list for all it was worth then took off.

 

[DBAH0]

Absolute flog of the highest order.

I always said, if Dermie wasn't overruled and Ayers did end up getting the Hawks gig, there probably wouldn't be a Hawthorn today, considering where they were when Schwab was gone and Clarkson took over.

 

[worthy]

History suggests when a team has a stint at the top they will have a fall, the draft is designed for this purpose, so on that, Ayres may be judged a little harsh.

 

[pazza]

Well if Denis Pagan at 60 wants to coach again, then why can't Ayres be considered. He has indeed turned Port Melbourne around. Have to remember that Port is a standalone club these days, so it has to do its own recruiting and not have seconds players from AFL clubs filtering through.

Should win at the TD in a few weeks time, as they will make it.