Opinion Managing egos

[xxxWillxxx]

Very valid theory and obviously fergusons results speak for themselves. An alternate example may be the Chicago Bulls and Denis Rodman. The man was clearly a disruptive fruitcake but could seriously play. I do fear we may end up with a majority of competent, solid citizens but few freakish gamebreakers.

We would be ok if footy was 5 on 5 and instead of lachie keefe we had michael jordan

 

[forwardflanker]

He was harsh towards players behind closed doors, but fiercely loyal to them individually in public, and he had no qualms about criticizing the team collectively in public.

He was brutal when it came to list management. Didn't matter if a player was a favorite son - if they didn't pull their weight they were axed or traded.

Sounds a lot like our former coach doesn't it. It's easy to bag MM's gameplan and some of his tactics but the one thing he was great at was being a players manager.

It's also interesting contrast to leading teams that we're using now where the argument could be put that the structure of LT could provide a forum for players to openly question coaching decisions (from my very limited knowledge of LT).

I think in the EPL a manager of a big club has to operate the way Fergi did since individual players have a lot more individual power than in AFL and dressing room mutinies much more common. Mourhinho seems similar as well whereas Mancini appeared less dictatorial and that ended pretty bad for him at Man City. AVB also struggled pretty massively with the massive personalities in the Chealsea dressing room.

I think I like where we're going with leading teams atm though. 18 players on the ground at once is a lot as far as team games go and I like the sound of any program that is going to create a better quality of communication amongst the squad in training and during the match.

Cool op though. I think there is a lot of awesome ways to think about AFL in the context of bigger international sports.

 

[swiftdog]

Top post as always VP!

It would have been a gutsy call to trade any of the 3 in 2012 but a call that should have been made.

As you mentioned players in Dawes and Wellingham were traded for what were terrific outcomes. If your going to overhaul the side then bite the bullet and do so when there is currency.

Didak, Krak and Jol's (to a lesser degree) were never in Buck's team in 2013 let alone beyond, we gave up 2 picks in the early to mid 40's for one pick at 38.

I'm confident that we would have picked up both Ramsay and Currie with the 2 picks in the 40's and Currie would have been far better proposition both short and long term than jolly.

The fact that we received nothing for any of the 3 in Jols, Krak and Didak, all A graders and 2 all Australians is poor list management for mine.

I guess you need to weigh up why those players didn't play for the majority of 2013 and could those circumstances be foreseen at the end of 2012. In retrospect it would have made sense to trade these players when possible seeing as we got next to donuts from them in 2013. However, heading into the season I think most of us thought of Dids and Krak as x-factors heading into the finals and Jolly still as our number 1 ruck. I was overseas for most of this year so am not familiar with the finer points of our season but didn't Didak and Jolly spend the majority of the year injured and Krak just go off the rails? If so, I think the decision to keep them around for one more year was justified (or at the very least, neutral). History is littered with coaches from all clubs making the wrong calls retrospectively on players, this is no different. To call all 3 players A-graders though is a massive stretch, there's a reason we delisted them this year.


As for the comparison to Sir Alex's style of coaching I guess the fundamental principle applies to AFL coaching re: make sure all players are pulling in the same direction, but I feel it would need to be toned down for the AFL. It's somewhat easy for Sir Alex to make the tough decisions like those about Keane and Beckham. Realistically, was there a more desirable club in the world to play soccer at for the time than Manchester United? Arsenal and Chelsea maybe were on par with Man U at the time (although I thought Man U had more of an aura about them), Madrid or Barcelona maybe but Fergie got rid of these players probably just before these 2 clubs started to really dominate the league (Madrid did have a good Champions League record though), Juventus or Milan maybe (again, the time was just before Inter started their huge win streak). My point is if a prospective gun player found himself with a choice of which club he'd like to go to then Man U was probably at the top of most player's lists or at least top 2-3. It's easy to get rid of stars knowing that you are more likely than any other club to sign another star.

Buck's doesn't have the above luxury unfortunately. A total dictatorship couldn't work at Collingwood, or any AFL club, but at the very least he needs to keep players pulling in the same direction. I'm happy with his decisions so far because at the very least I think he's showing conviction in his decisions. We know he has a plan and a way that he wants to run things. Even if he turns out to be wrong, I'd rather this than him half-arsing things, making exceptions for past premiership players and favourite sons etc to try and keep face with everyone for the next few years and ultimately getting no-where.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I think we may have to wait until Bucks writes a book (second one) to find out exactly what happened this off-season. It certainly has been interesting, to say the least.

Seems obvious to me.

As much as I'm sure Bucks loved Dids, he realised that playing Dids would take game time away from a developing kid while Dids wasn't going to realistically have the impact people think. It's not complicated.

Jolly can't jump over a can of coke. Pretty sure my deaf, Greek-only speaking grandmother saw that.

Buckley was most likely sick of Shaws brain fades and less than stellar disposal in a key area of the ground

Thomas in his current state wasn't worth the risk at 700K a season when we didn't know if he'd ever get back to his best

No need for a tinfoil hat dude. Buckley is far more simple and down to earth than you may think.

 

[Hinequarters]

There is no room for sentiment in footy

The final round of 1990 saw Essendon rest many of it's champions to play all 4 Daniher brothers (a record)

It's a nice little record, makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside for them.. except we have a drawn final with West Coast and said rested Essendon Champions are suddenly 3 weeks without any match practice going into their last few games of the year

 

[KJpie]

I guess you need to weigh up why those players didn't play for the majority of 2013 and could those circumstances be foreseen at the end of 2012. In retrospect it would have made sense to trade these players when possible seeing as we got next to donuts from them in 2013. However, heading into the season I think most of us thought of Dids and Krak as x-factors heading into the finals and Jolly still as our number 1 ruck. I was overseas for most of this year so am not familiar with the finer points of our season but didn't Didak and Jolly spend the majority of the year injured and Krak just go off the rails? If so, I think the decision to keep them around for one more year was justified (or at the very least, neutral). History is littered with coaches from all clubs making the wrong calls retrospectively on players, this is no different. To call all 3 players A-graders though is a massive stretch, there's a reason we delisted them this year.


As for the comparison to Sir Alex's style of coaching I guess the fundamental principle applies to AFL coaching re: make sure all players are pulling in the same direction, but I feel it would need to be toned down for the AFL. It's somewhat easy for Sir Alex to make the tough decisions like those about Keane and Beckham. Realistically, was there a more desirable club in the world to play soccer at for the time than Manchester United? Arsenal and Chelsea maybe were on par with Man U at the time (although I thought Man U had more of an aura about them), Madrid or Barcelona maybe but Fergie got rid of these players probably just before these 2 clubs started to really dominate the league (Madrid did have a good Champions League record though), Juventus or Milan maybe (again, the time was just before Inter started their huge win streak). My point is if a prospective gun player found himself with a choice of which club he'd like to go to then Man U was probably at the top of most player's lists or at least top 2-3. It's easy to get rid of stars knowing that you are more likely than any other club to sign another star.

Buck's doesn't have the above luxury unfortunately. A total dictatorship couldn't work at Collingwood, or any AFL club, but at the very least he needs to keep players pulling in the same direction. I'm happy with his decisions so far because at the very least I think he's showing conviction in his decisions. We know he has a plan and a way that he wants to run things. Even if he turns out to be wrong, I'd rather this than him half-arsing things, making exceptions for past premiership players and favourite sons etc to try and keep face with everyone for the next few years and ultimately getting no-where.

Really enjoyed the read thanks Swiftdog.

I was playing the devils advocate as much as anything as well as making a point on the possible trading of the 3 players discussed.

Agree on going to hard to soon and unforeseen circumstances, however Jolly has struggled with his knee for a couple of years now, Krak has encountered fitness, injury and commitment issues and Did's may have been our favourite son but he clearly was never Buck's.

For the reasons above maybe the players held very little currency.

I would have loved to have seen Daisy and Heater see out their respective careers with us yet the club chose to let both go by on-trading Heath and not matching the $$$'s for Daisy. The club was prepared to move on Heath, Daisy, Dawes and Sharrod in less than 12 months and under the circumstances I have no issue with that based on the compo in return.

There is no doubt it would have been a tough call at the time to move on the 3 noted but no tougher than the the decision made on the names above.

In fairness we are all experts in hindsight however I would have moved all 3 on in 2012 if there was appropriate compensation.

 

[Tbone McGraw]

Seems obvious to me.

As much as I'm sure Bucks loved Dids, he realised that playing Dids would take game time away from a developing kid while Dids wasn't going to realistically have the impact people think. It's not complicated.

Jolly can't jump over a can of coke. Pretty sure my deaf, Greek-only speaking grandmother saw that.

Buckley was most likely sick of Shaws brain fades and less than stellar disposal in a key area of the ground

Thomas in his current state wasn't worth the risk at 700K a season when we didn't know if he'd ever get back to his best

No need for a tinfoil hat dude. Buckley is far more simple and down to earth than you may think.

No tin foil hat here. Can't argue with Jolly.

The other points i agree with in part but you can't tell me Shaw and Thomas were not easily best 22 going forward, possibly top 10 at our club. You don't get rid of those players easily especially when Shaw wanted to stay.

To be honest you are guessing as much as the rest of us. That is why we may have to wait for the truth.

I am a bucks fan and support the decisions but there is possibly more to it than you and I know.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

No tin foil hat here. Can't argue with Jolly.

The other points i agree with in part but you can't tell me Shaw and Thomas were not easily best 22 going forward, possibly top 10 at our club. You don't get rid of those players easily especially when Shaw wanted to stay.

To be honest you are guessing as much as the rest of us. That is why we may have to wait for the truth.

I am a bucks fan and support the decisions but there is possibly more to it than you and I know.

When did I say Shaw and Thomas weren't best 22?

Context is king here. If Geelong weren't willing to go over a mill for a FIT Gary Ablett Jr, why in the lord's name would we go to 700K for an INJURED Dale Thomas?

 

[76woodenspooners]

Jolly can't jump over a can of coke. Pretty sure my deaf, Greek-only speaking grandmother saw that.

Does your Grandmother follow Collingwood?

 

[neilk]

No tin foil hat here. Can't argue with Jolly.

The other points i agree with in part but you can't tell me Shaw and Thomas were not easily best 22 going forward, possibly top 10 at our club. You don't get rid of those players easily especially when Shaw wanted to stay.

To be honest you are guessing as much as the rest of us. That is why we may have to wait for the truth.

I am a bucks fan and support the decisions but there is possibly more to it than you and I know.

We didn't get rid of Thomas-he walked out for more money than we were able to offer him, especially given the doubts over his ankle. I am pretty sure there was not another club in the league who would have been willing to match the $700K Carlton are paying Thomas, considering his recent history of ankle issues.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Does your Grandmother follow Collingwood?

Yeah fanatical. It's hilarious.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Yeah fanatical. It's hilarious.

Cool! She sounds like a lovely lady

Hmmm, sure it wouldn't be too difficult to get "Shpeshal's Grandmother" into the lexicon

 

[Old Spice]

Sounds a lot like our former coach doesn't it. It's easy to bag MM's gameplan and some of his tactics but the one thing he was great at was being a players manager.

It's also interesting contrast to leading teams that we're using now where the argument could be put that the structure of LT could provide a forum for players to openly question coaching decisions (from my very limited knowledge of LT).

I think in the EPL a manager of a big club has to operate the way Fergi did since individual players have a lot more individual power than in AFL and dressing room mutinies much more common. Mourhinho seems similar as well whereas Mancini appeared less dictatorial and that ended pretty bad for him at Man City. AVB also struggled pretty massively with the massive personalities in the Chealsea dressing room.

I think I like where we're going with leading teams atm though. 18 players on the ground at once is a lot as far as team games go and I like the sound of any program that is going to create a better quality of communication amongst the squad in training and during the match.

Cool op though. I think there is a lot of awesome ways to think about AFL in the context of bigger international sports.

When a coach is there for over a decade of course he has a group that warm to him because that's all they know, it's mother's milk. They have never had another coach.

But similarly Buckley will develop a bunch of players now who will have the same experience. You already have Adams talking that way because of his experience with him at the AIS. Some players will like individual styles better.

I'd say Buckley's approach works better for Pendlebury as another example.

But at the end of the day you can't have twattish carry-on from players like Thomas pointing to the coaches box or Shaw arguing with Bucks and the captain in full view. It ridicules authority in the organisation.

I think whatever the differences between the EPL and AFL, the principle remains you bowl players who drink their own bathwater out the door.

 

[Old Spice]

We didn't get rid of Thomas-he walked out for more money than we were able to offer him, especially given the doubts over his ankle. I am pretty sure there was not another club in the league who would have been willing to match the $700K Carlton are paying Thomas, considering his recent history of ankle issues.

I reckon the ankles and asking price were fortuitous to some degree. I doubt we would have matched it anyway.

 

[neilk]

I reckon the ankles and asking price were fortuitous to some degree. I doubt we would have matched it anyway.

Agreed!

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Cool! She sounds like a lovely lady

Hmmm, sure it wouldn't be too difficult to get "Shpeshal's Grandmother" into the lexicon

Yaya in Greek. Emphasis on the second A.

 

[jmac70]

I've just finished reading Sir Alex Fergurson's biography. It's a good read for anybody who follows the EPL, those that don't would find it a bit heavy going.

One of my take-aways from the book was a bunch of points he made about the way he managed player egos.

As soon as any player thought they knew more than him and undermined his authority they were shown the door. It didn't matter who they were, how good they were, or what their contract status was, they were gone. Examples of this were David Beckham and Roy Keene.

His point was (summarized) that he couldn't manage players and the team unless he had total authority over them. He was the boss. If a player undermined his authority, or didn't respect his authority, then it wasn't possible to effectively manage him - so the player had to go.

He was harsh towards players behind closed doors, but fiercely loyal to them individually in public, and he had no qualms about criticizing the team collectively in public.

He was brutal when it came to list management. Didn't matter if a player was a favorite son - if they didn't pull their weight they were axed or traded.

I guess analogies at Collingwood would be the delisting of Didak and maybe the trading of Shaw (although we don't know the exact circumstances of that)

It is also worth remembering that the book is one point of view only. Whilst Fergie has the runs on the board we should not assume that he was always right. I am sure that Becks would have a different recollection of what happened at Man U.

I do not think we can draw too many analogies with the Pies. Man U have no salary cap constraints and can effectively draft whoever they want. Makes getting rid of a player very easy. We made the hard call on Shaw based on his age and remaining upside as compared to Adams, a smart decision. Daisy left because another club offered more money and Didaks's body was finished, not a hard call. I see the off-season as a natural reflection of smart trading, free agency and ageing players. I do not think that any sort of revolution has occured and the players drafted in will not have a significant impact on our performance next season. I think that we will make a big free agency play next year.

 

[Old Spice]

It is also worth remembering that the book is one point of view only. Whilst Fergie has the runs on the board we should not assume that he was always right. I am sure that Becks would have a different recollection of what happened at Man U.

I do not think we can draw too many analogies with the Pies. Man U have no salary cap constraints and can effectively draft whoever they want. Makes getting rid of a player very easy. We made the hard call on Shaw based on his age and remaining upside as compared to Adams, a smart decision. Daisy left because another club offered more money and Didaks's body was finished, not a hard call. I see the off-season as a natural reflection of smart trading, free agency and ageing players. I do not think that any sort of revolution has occured and the players drafted in will not have a significant impact on our performance next season. I think that we will make a big free agency play next year.

The book might be one point of view but it is a book about a man lasting 27 years against a less than 2 year average.

That Beckham had a fine career in no way negates the success of Ferguson.

I think you miss the main points which are that Ferguson succeeded in his early career by nutting big names with big egos and attitudes. And that these moves set up a period of success by setting a tone.

 

[jmac70]

The book might be one point of view but it is a book about a man lasting 27 years against a less than 2 year average.

That Beckham had a fine career in no way negates the success of Ferguson.

I think you miss the main points which are that Ferguson succeeded in his early career by nutting big names with big egos and attitudes. And that these moves set up a period of success by setting a tone.

I am a mad Man U fan and revere Ferguson. I was trying to say that there is little point in making comparisons with Collingwood. Man U are able to replace superstars with superstars. We replace proven premierships players with guys that have performed below expectations for years at multiple clubs AND get excited about it for some reason.

 

[Old Spice]

I am a mad Man U fan and revere Ferguson. I was trying to say that there is little point in making comparisons with Collingwood. Man U are able to replace superstars with superstars. We replace proven premierships players with guys that have performed below expectations for years at multiple clubs AND get excited about it for some reason.

You're repeating this nonsense again that Thomas and Shaw are replaced by the likes of White and Karnezis. Again, it's Adams and pick 6 that replace these two players in effect.

The lessons from Ferguson are that you can tip out players who are lionised by fans and much less talented than a Beckham and straighten a gum chewing team right out.

 

[Hinequarters]

I am a mad Man U fan and revere Ferguson. I was trying to say that there is little point in making comparisons with Collingwood. Man U are able to replace superstars with superstars. We replace proven premierships players with guys that have performed below expectations for years at multiple clubs AND get excited about it for some reason.

Adams is a future star, picks 6 and 10 will be knockouts.. and we've cleared some money for a big play at a Free Agent next year..

Shaw's best is behind him at 28 and Daisy's ankle aint worth 700K.. good list management

And **** Fergie, he couldn't do any better under our system

 

[jmac70]

Adams is a future star, picks 6 and 10 will be knockouts.. and we've cleared some money for a big play at a Free Agent next year..

Shaw's best is behind him at 28 and Daisy's ankle aint worth 700K.. good list management

And **** Fergie, he couldn't do any better under our system

I am happy with the trading of Shaw and movement of Daisy for Adams and two top 10 picks. It is good list management and sets us up for the future. I would like to see the club land a top line free agent next year.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I am a mad Man U fan and revere Ferguson.

I'd definately recommend the book to (if you haven't read it already).

It's a surprisingly low-brow read of somebody with such stature - he's a real down-to-earth meat-and-potatoes bloke who just happens to like racehorses and fine wine.

No doubt about which AFL club he'd choose to follow

I was trying to say that there is little point in making comparisons with Collingwood. Man U are able to replace superstars with superstars. We replace proven premierships players with guys that have performed below expectations for years at multiple clubs AND get excited about it for some reason.

Of course the book is all about Manchester United.

It's normal for people to read a sporting biography and consider the parallels in business or in life. Particularly with strategies for man management and risk management.

So it's not a long stretch to consider the parallels with another sporting code.

 

[swiftdog]

Really enjoyed the read thanks Swiftdog.

I was playing the devils advocate as much as anything as well as making a point on the possible trading of the 3 players discussed.

Agree on going to hard to soon and unforeseen circumstances, however Jolly has struggled with his knee for a couple of years now, Krak has encountered fitness, injury and commitment issues and Did's may have been our favourite son but he clearly was never Buck's.

For the reasons above maybe the players held very little currency.

I would have loved to have seen Daisy and Heater see out their respective careers with us yet the club chose to let both go by on-trading Heath and not matching the $$$'s for Daisy. The club was prepared to move on Heath, Daisy, Dawes and Sharrod in less than 12 months and under the circumstances I have no issue with that based on the compo in return.

There is no doubt it would have been a tough call at the time to move on the 3 noted but no tougher than the the decision made on the names above.

In fairness we are all experts in hindsight however I would have moved all 3 on in 2012 if there was appropriate compensation.

Yeah, all good points. I guess the main difference between heading into 2013 vs heading into 2014 that most of us thought that we were still some sort of flag chance in 2013 after a prelim final berth in 2012. As it stands heading into next year, I wouldn't put us as a legitimate flag chance without everything going right (hence the long-term trades/free agent dealings). As you said, in hindsight I would have moved the 3 players on in 2012 also but I think Buck's was still thinking short-term success in 2013, which was likely dependant on Jolly performing as a good number 1 ruck and likely a dangerous performance from either of Dids or Krak. Obviously it didn't happen but I'm not sure there were adequate short-term replacements available for any of the 3 players coming into 2013.

Agree on moving Heath, Daisy, Dawes and Sharrod. I think Heath and Dawes needed a sea-change for both player and club. Dawes is still young but couldn't perform the role that Collingwood needed him to properly and as good a player as Heath has been and still is, it looks like the elimination final was the straw that broke the camel's back re on-field behaviour, he will be missed. The Daisy situation is simple enough in my eyes, he's only worth $700k if he gets back to his best. Obviously there are doubts as to whether that will happen as he hasn't played at his best for a few years now and the whole ankle issue. Can't quite remember the Sharrod situation though, he was homesick from memory? I would have liked to keep him but there's no chance of keeping a homesick player in the current AFL environment, he helped us to a flag so he's probably justified in heading back home.

 

[KJpie]

Thomas and Shaw are replaced by the likes of White and Karnezis. Again, it's Adams and pick 6 that replace these two players in effect.

Respectfully, Shaw and Thomas = Adams and pick 11.