News Meet the manager

[Geelong2k9]

GEELONG chief executive officer Brian Cook has revealed the radical process that Geelong used to recruit its senior coach, Chris Scott.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/107362/default.aspx

Didn't see this put up on the board; what do others think of this model???

I can't think of any other club that has employed this as yet...

 

[AM]

It would be interesting to know the criteria for one or two of those 'measureables'. Personal qualities, outside those defined, for example.

That said the clubs attention to detail and professionalism is to be applauded. A bit in today's Addy relating to this weeks training illustrated that well.

........... the latest group of recruits and rookies had their kicking techniques filmed and analysed under the watchful eye of VFL coach Dale Amos.

 

[InnocentBystandr]

Interesting article, and especially the weighting Geelong gave to the various criteria.

I wonder what weighting Essendon and Brisbane would have given the last criterion (commercial appeal) to their respective coaching appointments.

 

[jim boy]

I'm a bit dubious about the weighting. Sure some things are more important than others, but you could get 80% and still be absolutely clueless when it comes to technique. Weighting only becomes useful if within that weighting, their is a pass mark for every category for which the prospective coach must achieve.

Also interesting last para about Malthouse, was that the journo's opinion or was it something Cook said?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I think it's the right model. Football clubs are such big organisations thesedays that you do need to be able to manage and motivate not just players but a large group of people, and juggle a lot of balls in the air at the same time. Hence management skills and cultural values are really important.

You've still got to be tactically competent, but assuming we had a field of candidates for the job who were all quite tactically important, then the other factors are really critical in making a final decision.

 

[muttonchops]

If Cooky says it's good then that good enough for me.

 

[Partridge]

Interesting article, and especially the weighting Geelong gave to the various criteria.

I wonder what weighting Essendon and Brisbane would have given the last criterion (commercial appeal) to their respective coaching appointments.

Did Brisbane apply any criterion at all to their appointment? Other than being a hairless ape who was good at playing the game I'm not sure what they did.

 

[Slattery_20]

Interesting article, and especially the weighting Geelong gave to the various criteria.

I wonder what weighting Essendon and Brisbane would have given the last criterion (commercial appeal) to their respective coaching appointments.

Hird would be about a bajillion out of 25 for "cultural development" judging by the folks he's brought back into the fold. 0/10 for "coaching history".

Very interesting to see this stuff not only codified, but released.

Looking at it this way (Commercial, leadership, management etc) it'd be pretty easy to justify a Hird over a Choc or a Buckley alongside a Malthouse; when comparing their records would have it clearly the other way.

I'm a bit dubious about the weighting. Sure some things are more important than others, but you could get 80% and still be absolutely clueless when it comes to technique.

I guess that's a (big) nod to the increased importance of the assistants and the group as a whole, compared to the singular coach.