News Rodney Eade confirmed as GC coach (see p10)

[shizzle]

Simon Lloyd rumoured to be in the mix

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

Why not get someone less expensive then?

Besides, I thought that Collingwood would be rolling in money, from their 17 games at the 'G, huge membership, and Eddie is always bragging how successful the club is.

I'm sure that dropping a couple of million will be pocket-money for Collingwood.

The more you spend, the more the AFL tax man comes knocking.

 

[Apex36]

Why not get someone less expensive then?

Besides, I thought that Collingwood would be rolling in money, from their 17 games at the 'G, huge membership, and Eddie is always bragging how successful the club is.

I'm sure that dropping a couple of million will be pocket-money for Collingwood.

Yeah, let's skimp out on our head of football instead of getting the best person available.
It's not about whether we can afford it or not, of course we can. But why would we want to pay extra money when we get taxed on it, and that tax goes directly back to the ****ing minnow clubs who are poaching our staff and players with that very money we provide to prop them up?

Seriously, it's not that hard to understand...

 

[GTOA]

Yeah, let's skimp out on our head of football instead of getting the best person available.
It's not about whether we can afford it or not, of course we can. But why would we want to pay extra money when we get taxed on it, and that tax goes directly back to the ******* minnow clubs who are poaching our staff and players with that very money we provide to prop them up?

Seriously, it's not that hard to understand...

Look, you only created the position to keep Mick Malthouse at the club. Once he left, you had to make it look legit, so you hired Eade.

Hey, you got by without a footy director before 2011, and you can get by again.

I think football director is one of those BS positions which is created in a time where there is too many staff at footy clubs. Premierships are won by the most talented team, not by how many coaches or admin staff you have.

 

[SugarCoat]

Rodney Eade is no longer in that position GTOA
He was the football manager.

 

[Apex36]

Look, you only created the position to keep Mick Malthouse at the club. Once he left, you had to make it look legit, so you hired Eade.

Hey, you got by without a footy director before 2011, and you can get by again.

I think football director is one of those BS positions which is created in a time where there is too many staff at footy clubs. Premierships are won by the most talented team, not by how many coaches or admin staff you have.

Wow. Just stop posting if you don't even know wtf Eade did.

He wasn't the director of coaching anymore, he took over as head of the football department when Geoff Walsh left.

 

[GTOA]

Wow. Just stop posting if you don't even know wtf Eade did.

He wasn't the director of coaching anymore, he took over as head of the football department when Geoff Walsh left.

Why does any footy club need all these positions?

One club has them, so all other clubs get them too. One club has ten assistants, then all other clubs do as well.

Ten years ago, no one needed a footy director or football department head. All you need is a good president, CEO,board, coach, recruiter and development manager. Most of the other positions are BS positions based on some "arms race" that AFL clubs like to have.

 

[Apex36]

Why does any footy club need all these positions?

One club has them, so all other clubs get them too. One club has ten assistants, then all other clubs do as well.

Ten years ago, no one needed a footy director or football department head. All you need is a good president, CEO,board, coach, recruiter and development manager. Most of the other positions are BS positions based on some "arms race" that AFL clubs like to have.

Maybe you should write to your club and ask them to sack Neil Balme then.

Get a clue.

 

[MyManLynch]

Why does any footy club need all these positions?

One club has them, so all other clubs get them too. One club has ten assistants, then all other clubs do as well.

Ten years ago, no one needed a footy director or football department head. All you need is a good president, CEO,board, coach, recruiter and development manager. Most of the other positions are BS positions based on some "arms race" that AFL clubs like to have.

You are right...all we need is some old bloke with a beer pot, wandering around the club selling raffle tickets.
It's easy to run a $70 million business without all the hangers on.
Salary cap...wtf is that (says old man selling raffle tickets), "in my day, the only cap we had was a frenchy".
It's all about maximizing opportunity, ticking every box, gaining an edge, pushing the envelope...or as some clubs say...whatever it takes...
Outsiders call it BS...yet to succeed you must have all your ducks in a row, to be in the game.
Look at Melbourne...say no more...

 

[shizzle]

You are right...all we need is some old bloke with a beer pot, wandering around the club selling raffle tickets.
It's easy to run a $70 million business without all the hangers on.
Salary cap...wtf is that (says old man selling raffle tickets), "in my day, the only cap we had was a frenchy".
It's all about maximizing opportunity, ticking every box, gaining an edge, pushing the envelope...or as some clubs say...whatever it takes...
Outsiders call it BS...yet to succeed you must have all your ducks in a row, to be in the game.
Look at Melbourne...say no more...

 

[Scodog10]

Scodog10
See what I mean?

I agree with that to a degree. The key difference is that I wouldn't put it in those words.

I haven't seen anything from our current coaching group (Hart and Tapping aside) that suggests that any of them are quality. None of the others are getting any improvement out of either their individual lines or the group as a whole.

It is a comment that makes me consider things though. Just throwing this out there, what would people's thoughts be on Buckley in the role?

I know it won't happen it's just that from my POV Buckley isn't a good coach, but his ruthless attitude and the way he communicates with the media suggests he could make a fist of Eade's role with the necessary training.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

To each their own.

I guess I'm not really prepared to pot the negative nellies, the positive pollies or MM acolytes because we all have our views. Opinions are like arseh*le's we all have them, but some are stickier than others. If you have a disregard for those that don't match yours....

I'm quite sure the only instability at Collingwood ATM isn't amongst the playing group. The poor results are the byproduct of our list being fairly average these days and the actual instability. If you've taken the view that I think contrary to that I may not have made myself clear enough. Sugar Coat touched on it a few posts back and yes I had heard talk of an individual no longer with us, but we all have to make up our minds on that sort of stuff.

Where there's smoke there's fire. Isn't that right loki04

I don't have a problem with opinions that don't match mine, I may have an issue with what those opinions are based on. Example, we have no gameplan is akin to saying that someone has no personality. Anyone with half a football brain would be able to see what Buckley and co are trying to do with the movement of the footy but the execution is the problem.
Another example is the boys club stuff. Easy to parrot boys club but I'm not convinced of it by anything I've seen on here. Can you explain it?

 

[shizzle]

I hope whoever they get, isn't made to be a puppet for Blackmores or George Foreman like Eade was.

Get Holly to do it or somebody, just not the Director of Football

 

[Scodog10]

I don't have a problem with opinions that don't match mine, I may have an issue with what those opinions are based on. Example, we have no gameplan is akin to saying that someone has no personality. Anyone with half a football brain would be able to see what Buckley and co are trying to do with the movement of the footy but the execution is the problem.
Another example is the boys club stuff. Easy to parrot boys club but I'm not convinced of it by anything I've seen on here. Can you explain it?

I'm not of the opinion that we have no gameplan I just don't think it's a good one. At times last year we focused on pressure, then it was contested ball and in the last few rounds we wanted to emphasize run and spread (interestingly that was post the Lions systematically tearing us a new one with overlap run).

What we need to do is pick a fundamental area that we will be better than everyone else at and then work on the building blocks around it. Think of it as a mantra "you will not play for this club unless you do this" despite losing Beams I would go with contested footy.

Flood our midfield with contested grunts and then have a few on the outside to finish. In an ideal world Pendles plays as a winger in 2016 and beyond. For instance a core group of insiders such as Greenwood, Adams, JT, PK, Freeman, Crisp and go with say Blakely at 5 we have the potential of a good contested group. You get them feeding the likes of Pendles, Steele, Broomhead, Swan and Seedsman it starts to take shape. Think of it this way in 2011 if you rolled a ball into a pack of 4 players (2 Collingwood v 2 opposition) you knew that 40% of the time Collingwood would win it, 30% we'd break even and 30% would go to the opposition. Well we're now closer to the 30% and people will say that's all about age well tell that to the likes of Wines, Parker, Ellis & Turner just because you're young doesn't mean you can't compete!!

The boys club is pretty simple really they're all yes men. One says this is a good idea then the others all say yeah yeah let's go with that. It was the beauty of Walsh he knew when to pick his fights and would say no if needed. Pert sticking his nose in on football matters is another issue that needs addressing about the boys club.

 

[Anzacday]

Pert sticking his nose in on football matters is another issue that needs addressing about the boys club.

Theory; Pert decided or was asked to "stick his nose" in as they realised it wasn't Rocket's strong suit.
Maybe it will stop when we have someone with the right skill set

 

[Scodog10]

Theory; Pert decided or was asked to "stick his nose" in as they realised it wasn't Rocket's strong suit.
Maybe it will stop when we have someone with the right skill set

Not sure about that. Walsh's departure flies in the face of it.

 

[SugarCoat]

Walsh left specifically because of Pert.
He has been a massive loss.
When Harry went rogue in season 2013, Walsh told the board enough is enough.
He said if you keep him, he will only cause more damage to the group.
Pert came in and said I want to keep Harry.
Walsh then said I'm leaving.

 

[Anzacday]

Ok, I'll take what you say as gospel then

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

I'm not of the opinion that we have no gameplan I just don't think it's a good one. At times last year we focused on pressure, then it was contested ball and in the last few rounds we wanted to emphasize run and spread (interestingly that was post the Lions systematically tearing us a new one with overlap run).

What we need to do is pick a fundamental area that we will be better than everyone else at and then work on the building blocks around it. Think of it as a mantra "you will not play for this club unless you do this" despite losing Beams I would go with contested footy.

Flood our midfield with contested grunts and then have a few on the outside to finish. In an ideal world Pendles plays as a winger in 2016 and beyond. For instance a core group of insiders such as Greenwood, Adams, JT, PK, Freeman, Crisp and go with say Blakely at 5 we have the potential of a good contested group. You get them feeding the likes of Pendles, Steele, Broomhead, Swan and Seedsman it starts to take shape. Think of it this way in 2011 if you rolled a ball into a pack of 4 players (2 Collingwood v 2 opposition) you knew that 40% of the time Collingwood would win it, 30% we'd break even and 30% would go to the opposition. Well we're now closer to the 30% and people will say that's all about age well tell that to the likes of Wines, Parker, Ellis & Turner just because you're young doesn't mean you can't compete!!

The boys club is pretty simple really they're all yes men. One says this is a good idea then the others all say yeah yeah let's go with that. It was the beauty of Walsh he knew when to pick his fights and would say no if needed. Pert sticking his nose in on football matters is another issue that needs addressing about the boys club.

From what I saw this year, there was enough hands on it but the outsiders were all over the shop. Port have us covered when it comes to dishing off to the runners. It all seemed a bit too close in so we were inevitably dishing off to players under just as much pressure. IMO, the second handball in the chain was a big issue. That second runner was either in the wrong spot on non existent. What we got was a rushed disposal and things broke down from there.
Our half forwards were not great and this had an effect on a) the ball movement coming out of our backline b) the bombs to Cloke that were chopped off C) easy opposition ball movement out of the backline. Fix the half forward problem and you a fair way to fixing the current plan.

As for the yes men. You may have inside info but for many its easy to call them yes men when things fall apart on the park. If everyone is perceived to be pulling in the same direction and we have success, it's a united department. If everyone is pulling in the same direction and the team is struggling, we have a bunch of yes men.
I haven't seen enough to suggest Group Think being an issue. I know for a fact that Bucks demands challenges to his ways because it's one of his main beliefs about good management. That's only one element though.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

Walsh left specifically because of Pert.
He has been a massive loss.
When Harry went rogue in season 2013, Walsh told the board enough is enough.
He said if you keep him, he will only cause more damage to the group.
Pert came in and said I want to keep Harry.
Walsh then said I'm leaving.

Heavily summarised to the point of being funny.

 

[SugarCoat]

Heavily summarised to the point of being funny.

You can laugh it off as much as you want.
But it is what happend.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

You can laugh it off as much as you want.
But it is what happend.

None of it was as simple as that and you should know that.

 

[MyManLynch]

Walsh left specifically because of Pert.
He has been a massive loss.
When Harry went rogue in season 2013, Walsh told the board enough is enough.
He said if you keep him, he will only cause more damage to the group.
Pert came in and said I want to keep Harry.
Walsh then said I'm leaving.

Wow...so you must be the fly on the wall.

 

[Krueger]

We have to overpay players now because we aren't an attractive club currently.
It's just the reality of the situation.

Correct and why shouldnt any player put $$$ first when they can be given the boot at any time. Zero loyalty at this club atm. What a great culture this club has embraced.

 

[SugarCoat]

Correct and why shouldnt any player put $$$ first when they can be given the boot at any time. Zero loyalty at this club atm. What a great culture this club has embraced.

That is why I'm worried about Varcoe.
Overpaying the likes of Varcoe & White limits our ability to rebuild correctly.