Lions face decade of pain: Terry Wallace

[POBT]

I am not saying to get rid of Voss for the sake of it, I am asking at what point, if any, do fellow posters think the club and Voss must part ways based on what, if at all?

Gibbo, do you think Voss has no benchmark for season 2011 and irrespective of what happens, his job is secure in order to develop the kids over the next 3 years?

I'd sack him on a repeat of last year's performance. The only possible mitigating factor is the injury toll. If he loses 5 of our best 8 players for extended periods, then he may have some grounds for getting an extra year if he can demonstrate that he's taking the group places by developing the kids. But, all things being equal, a repeat of 2010 cannot, IMO, have any other outcome than a new coach for 2012.

However, the reverse question should also be asked - at what point do you offer Voss an extension on his contract? For me, if in about July we've won about half of our games, then I'd be happy for the club to commit to another 2 years. In other words, if we go into the last 2 months of the year with some chance of finals, then I'd consider that Voss has done a reasonable job with the group.

 

[Gibbo_88]

I am not saying to get rid of Voss for the sake of it, I am asking at what point, if any, do fellow posters think the club and Voss must part ways based on what, if at all?

Gibbo, do you think Voss has no benchmark for season 2011 and irrespective of what happens, his job is secure in order to develop the kids over the next 3 years?

Its hard to say because I have only supported the lions since 2000 and last year was the first time at the half way point of the season that we had no chance of finals. I think he will still be given a bit of leniency this year considering he was understaffed last year and it has been a horrible offseason so he won't be sacked this year. I think if there are not enough signs of improvement from this season to the end of next season then I would hope Voss would leave on his own terms.

It sounds like the club is basically starting from scratch and the benchmarks would be very low compared to what everyone expected us to do after the first 4 rounds in 2010. As nice as it was to have a legend of the club come back and coach, I don't care who coaches us anymore just as long as there is a proper process in finding our next coach after Voss which could be in 1 or 10 years. Bowers, Kelly and Fev are gone and he has the assistant coaches that most other AFL coaches have so at least now it can't be blamed on anyone other than Voss if we can't climb back up the ladder.

 

[PTizzle]

This is pretty much where its at. It's not a hard and fast rule but generally teams can only stay at the pointy end of the ladder for four, maybe five years tops before they come back to the pack due to the equalisation policy. It's no coincidence that the same thing has happened to Port. We spent 2001 - 2005 in the top 5 (pretty much the time frame you guys were in there), paid for it at the draft and have subsequently spent the last 3 years having our holidays in September.

But in four or five years time both Port and Brisbane will be back in the top 8 and current powerhouses like St. Kilda and Collingwood will probably be struggling to make the finals. The only way you can 'miss the wave' like Richmond did is to waste your high draft picks on total duds.

Polec was a great start for you guys (I wish he was at Port.....classy local kid who barracked for us). Draft a couple more stars like him and you'll be well on your way up.

This talk of 10 years in the wilderness is total rubbish.

Great post, very true as well.

I'd sack him on a repeat of last year's performance. The only possible mitigating factor is the injury toll. If he loses 5 of our best 8 players for extended periods, then he may have some grounds for getting an extra year if he can demonstrate that he's taking the group places by developing the kids. But, all things being equal, a repeat of 2010 cannot, IMO, have any other outcome than a new coach for 2012.

However, the reverse question should also be asked - at what point do you offer Voss an extension on his contract? For me, if in about July we've won about half of our games, then I'd be happy for the club to commit to another 2 years. In other words, if we go into the last 2 months of the year with some chance of finals, then I'd consider that Voss has done a reasonable job with the group.

Same for myself. I'd expect us to finish close to where we did last year but nearly last was nearing unacceptable. I'd say 10th-12th would be fine. Any lower than that take a serious look (barring big injury woes). Spoon = sacking I think, or at least a very specific target for 2012 that he has to achieve.

But it's only been two years so I think he needs time to find his feet more. This year might be rough but I think we'll see promising signs.

 

[chopperduck]

For me it can't be based on ladder position, it has to be based of team performance, not scoreboard performance. We are just about at our low point, with another year or 2 we should start to climb back up as our young talent progresses. We have good recruiters in charge, and as long as Voss can demostrate he can develope the kids our recruiters are bringing in then we shouldn't sack him. It doesn't matter who coaches for the next 2-3 years, our ladder position will be in a similar spot, it's just where our playing list is at the moment.

You can still put in a good effort and lose a game of footy, as long as the effort, passion and development is there, the rest doesn't matter. As much as i hate 'tanking', i would hate for us to overperform this year and miss out on better draft picks.

 

[charles202]

I really hate the ladder being the grade on which a decision to fire/retain a coach is made. IMO is way to over simplistic and ignores many factors which are outside the coaches control.

I would like to think that given the recent review that was undertaken that each member of staff (including Voss) was given specific KPI's to measure their performance, and that the ability/failure to meet these objectives is the basis of our future staffing.

At the end of the day coaches need to take care, and be measured, on the things that they can control. Ladder positions can come down to a lot of luck (either way) as well as numerous other uncontrollable external factors.

 

[Dylan12]

IMO I don't see either of Roos or Malthouse entertaining the thought of coaching the Lions next year. There are far more powerful clubs with more upside than us that will be gunning for them (Carlton, West Coast etc).

Same could have been said for Leigh Matthews at the time.

As for Roos/Malthouse and Leigh in 1998, these guys are highly motivated and competitive and love nothing more than a challenge.

 

[POBT]

For me it can't be based on ladder position, it has to be based of team performance, not scoreboard performance.

I disagree. Team performance should lead to scoreboard performance. Sure, there might be the slight chance that a team that is playing well happens to get beaten week after week. But it is far more likely that the team performance will lead to wins. The team exists to put wins on the board and I think it is entirely reasonable to measure our team's performance this year based on wins.

However, that is also based on the fact that I don't subscribe to the theory that we're a poor side likely to finish bottom 4. If I thought our prospects were limited, I'd change the way that I viewed Voss's performance as a coach.

But I think that we have a group of 25-27 who are potentially good enough to play finals and, if nothing else, able to match it with most sides. That should create an expectation of wins.

If my assumption that we're an OK to good side proves to be wrong during the course of the season, then I might re-adjust my expectations of Voss as a coach. But right now - I think it would be inconsistent for me to argue that we're a fringe finals side and, at the same time, not have an expectation on Voss to win games.

Let's face it - he hasn't exactly covered himself in glory as a coach to this point. If he comes close to last this year, he doesn't really have a lot to hang his hat on.

 

[chopperduck]

I can agree with that POBT, and i don't think we are a bottom 4 side either, but i go into this season more carefully after last year. Our depth is waffer thin, so a couple of injuries can easily steal wins away from us. If you were to say ladder position assuming a pretty normal year and not plagued by injuries like last year, i would say 8-12 is about where we sit. We could push a bit higher if some of the young players come on quicker than expected.

I don't expect us to finish bottom 4, and bottom 4 would be a fail, but you still have to consider those outside circumstances as well.

 

[Ironmonger]

I think I'm probably more pessimistic than most about our chances this year, but personally I don't think this year's ladder position should play much of a role at all in this decision.

A lot of our performance this year will depend on players like Brown, Black and Power, who won't be around next time we're challenging for a flag.

We need to be tracking the improvement of the blokes under 23, because how they go is the biggest factor in how quickly we can get back to being a top side. If Polec, Bartlett, Banfield, Redden, Leuenberger and Rockliff have great seasons and we only win four games, we'll be in a much better position going forward than if Brown, Power, Black, Drummond, Staker and Maguire dominate and we win eight.

 

[whatboutbob]

I think I'm probably more pessimistic than most about our chances this year, but personally I don't think this year's ladder position should play much of a role at all in this decision.

A lot of our performance this year will depend on players like Brown, Black and Power, who won't be around next time we're challenging for a flag.

We need to be tracking the improvement of the blokes under 23, because how they go is the biggest factor in how quickly we can get back to being a top side. If Polec, Bartlett, Banfield, Redden, Leuenberger and Rockliff have great seasons and we only win four games, we'll be in a much better position going forward than if Brown, Power, Black, Drummond, Staker and Maguire dominate and we win eight.

 

[maroon and blue]

A pox on the house of T. Wallace. States the bleeding obvious.

 

[Harry Haller]

I think we all agree the lions are a developing side at the mo. The fallout from GC and GWS may be a concession for a coach as there is little to do about players leaving for big bucks and I don't begrudge them that, it is called bussiness acumen from the players and managers. The key component to coaching IMO a developing list is to play the kids and afford opportunity. Acorn must play, they say he needs to improve second efforts IMO playing next to browny will have that effect. With free agency and expansion carrots will be dangled and these kids must be under no illusion that they are valued in their current environment. JB says he is the best set shot on the list, he clearly has great hands, we need a forward. He seems quick on the lead, this all ads up to deep FF to me. Not convinced on Clarke as a FF, IMO he would be a great CHB and is a better user of the ball going forward than running towards it, happy to be proved wrong though. If we are developing then lets do just that and play the kids. That is how I believe a coach of a developing side is ultimately judged.

 

[Harry Haller]

Appologies for the rant. The point of the thread- Terry Wallace is a muppett. Good footballer, little understanding of the modern game evinced by the latter portion of his coaching career and media meanderings.

 

[Grimreepah]

How much pain do Port face?

 

[Skoob]

A marriage made in heaven.
Wish he wait for Buckley's resignation.

 

[3KZ is Football]

How much pain do Port face?

At least 10 years, if Wallace gets the opportunity to string a few of his famous "5 Year Plans" together!

 

[dlanod]

Oh **** me. I read the headline and thought we'd appointed Terry Wallace as CEO, and hence faced a decade of pain. That makes finding out it's just referring to one of his rants almost relieving.

I saw this thread's headline again and thought exactly the same thing, again. STOP BUMPING THIS THREAD. TAKE IT OUT THE BACK AND EUTHANISE IT WITH STEEL-CAPPED BOOTS.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Just two of my favourites:

And Wallace predicted more immediate concerns, claiming one of three unsigned WA stars - Matthew Leuenberger, Daniel Rich and Mitch Clark - had already committed to Greater Western Sydney, while others were likely to follow as the club's 2011 season descended into disaster.​

Losing players like Michael Rischitelli and Jared Brennan to the Gold Coast and Justin Sherman to the Western Bulldogs were just "the tip of the iceberg".​

​

Pretty awesome iceberg...

 

[whatboutbob]

Watching him analyse lists on TAC Future All Stars is just painful. There was one on Melbourne recently where he worked his magic (aka 20/20 hindsight) on their list and included guys like Fyfe. Strangely I never heard him talking up Fyfe before he turned into a star...

 

[jackess]

No idea how this guy gets any respect after what he did to the Tigers. I think he'd be the final nail in Port's coffin.

 

[western royboy]

No idea how this guy gets any respect after what he did to the Tigers. I think he'd be the final nail in Port's coffin.

Having had a miniscule amount to do with him the word that hits you when dealing with him is "Ego".

It sums up everything about him. He makes Costanza look like an amateur whn it comes to subterfuge.

 

[Haso]

He isn't the only person in the AFL world who has an over-inflated sense of self-worth, but he certainly is the funniest when you think about him objectively.

 

[T Factor]

The fact that Malthouse is talking him up means he will surely be coaching someone like Carlton in 2013 and would just love to have Wallace at Port

10 years of pain 2011 yup, 2012 on the up already, he really is a joke.

 

[The Brisbane Beast]

Terry Wallace has a face of pain.

 

[Ceebee]

I think it would be really funny if he coached again ,as long as its not us.