Mega Thread The 2016 Buckley Coaching Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

PhiloBeddoe

Premium Gold
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Posts
4,847
Likes
5,101
Location
Ma's house.
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
None
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...urne-says-nathan-buckley-20160414-go67kw.html

Is anyone not alarmed reading this?

Here we all are for weeks now talking at how negative and boring our football and style of play has become and then the coach comes out with this?

This reeks of a guy desperate to save his job, rather than for the betterment of the club.

Play some entertaining football for crying out loud. We can then at least hang our hat on something.

If we go ultra defensive and still get pumped by Melbourne, that would just be an absolute train wreck.
"Buckley said he wanted the ball in Collingwood's front half more often, to move the ball better, get it deeper and to get the defensive mechanics in the team's front half functioning better.

"The danger is it'll become a little bit dour, but I'm probably prepared to look like that and pay that price in the early stages, while we re-establish our defensive intent," he said."

What's so alarming about that?
He wants the ball in the front half more often. How's that news? Doesn't each coach want that?
Better defensive mechanics in the front half. We complain about the ball coming out of the forward line too easily yet bemoan better defensive mindset and practice from the forwards and mids?
So it becomes a shit fight because we are relentless in pressuring them? Good.
Regardless of the style of footy, we get pumped and Buckley still has a target on his back. He knows this and I don't believe his main motivation here is to stem his bleeding.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
10,128
Likes
12,770
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
"Buckley said he wanted the ball in Collingwood's front half more often, to move the ball better, get it deeper and to get the defensive mechanics in the team's front half functioning better.

"The danger is it'll become a little bit dour, but I'm probably prepared to look like that and pay that price in the early stages, while we re-establish our defensive intent," he said."

What's so alarming about that?
He wants the ball in the front half more often. How's that news? Doesn't each coach want that?
Better defensive mechanics in the front half. We complain about the ball coming out of the forward line too easily yet bemoan better defensive mindset and practice from the forwards and mids?
So it becomes a shit fight because we are relentless in pressuring them? Good.
Regardless of the style of footy, we get pumped and Buckley still has a target on his back. He knows this and I don't believe his main motivation here is to stem his bleeding.
Exactly. We need it to be a shit fight, because our strength is contested footy. My only concern is that he's focussing on the front half, taken in conjunction with his post game press conference where he talked about the big difference being our inability to lock it in our forward half versus the Saints who effectively locked it in. To me, the biggest issue from that game was that our defence leaked like a sieve and even when he had numbers back, they were able to easily spot up uncontested marks in their forward 50.
 

THATSGOLD

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Posts
16,183
Likes
6,429
Location
the G.. home of the pies!
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
collingwood
Started the day after 2011 GF
True. Buckley was pushing shit up the hill since the time he took over. Certain players didn't want change and now he has got rid of those the team doesn't seem up to standard. For me I've seen enough. He's turned over a list and failed.
 

PieNSauce

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Posts
8,230
Likes
5,293
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
are jealous!
Not sure I follow this caretaker coach thing? What I was saying was if Bucks got offered a job he could of taken it, a 2-3 year deal, during which time Mick would of stayed coaching Collingwood. We could of seen what he could do with the list he had in 2012/2013 and if they fell away again the decision to not to offer him another contract and to bring Buckley back would of been an uncontroversial one. More importantly, the young side that he build that was good enough to win and contest back to back flags might of actually added another cup to your trophy cabinet. And given they only come around about once every 20 years i think Ed was a brave man for messing with a winning formula.

Saying Malthouse wasn't sacked because "technically" Eddie pressured him into agreeing to a demotion that he subsequently walked away from, having proven himself the form coach of the competition in 2011/2012, is also skewing things a fair bit.

The fascinating thing about the whole saga is that in 2009 Eddie didn't think Mick was a good enough coach to take Collingwood to its next flag, yet though that Nathan Buckley was. Then when MM proved him wrong and won one immediately, then followed it up winning the preseason, home and away season, and making the GF the next year. Eddie still though that MM wasn't good enough to take Collingwood to its next flag and that Nathan Buckley was. And here we are 5 years later, was Eddie right? Will Nathan Buckley coach Collingwood to its next flag?

My take away is that in 2009 the President of your club didn't believe his team was good enough to win a flag, and planned to fail over the 201/2011 season. When they didn't fail, which is an absolutely amazing effort by MM, he had no plan to account for that and honoured the deal he had with Buckley. Now its 5 seasons later and we're not talking Premierships or even finals and Eddie is saying he'll sack Buckley without hesitation if thats what he thinks is the right decision for the club. What is it about Eddie's decision making throughout that gives people confidence he's capable of making the right decision about who should coach the Collingwood Football Club going forward?
lol. Your view of the situation is so obviously coloured by perceptions gained by believing so many of the unsubstantiated rumours and media reports since Mick left the club. There is also a very healthy helping of Eddie hate in there as there is with so many who still actually believe that he is a dictatorial president who implements things unilaterally. Quite happy for you to have your opinion but to most of us it's pretty funny.
 

PieNSauce

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Posts
8,230
Likes
5,293
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
are jealous!
Exactly. We need it to be a shit fight, because our strength is contested footy. My only concern is that he's focussing on the front half, taken in conjunction with his post game press conference where he talked about the big difference being our inability to lock it in our forward half versus the Saints who effectively locked it in. To me, the biggest issue from that game was that our defence leaked like a sieve and even when he had numbers back, they were able to easily spot up uncontested marks in their forward 50.
I think what Bucks has maintained since the game against St Kilda is that our backline was seriously under the pump because of the inability or unwillingness of our forwards and mids to apply the pressure needed to keep the ball in the front half. Our backline was under siege all game through repeated opposition entries and I believe he put it down at least to a significant extent to lack of forward or midfield pressure.
 

jmac70

Premium Gold
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Posts
33,047
Likes
34,094
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
North Footscray Devils
"Buckley said he wanted the ball in Collingwood's front half more often, to move the ball better, get it deeper and to get the defensive mechanics in the team's front half functioning better.

"The danger is it'll become a little bit dour, but I'm probably prepared to look like that and pay that price in the early stages, while we re-establish our defensive intent," he said."

What's so alarming about that?
He wants the ball in the front half more often. How's that news? Doesn't each coach want that?
Better defensive mechanics in the front half. We complain about the ball coming out of the forward line too easily yet bemoan better defensive mindset and practice from the forwards and mids?
So it becomes a shit fight because we are relentless in pressuring them? Good.
Regardless of the style of footy, we get pumped and Buckley still has a target on his back. He knows this and I don't believe his main motivation here is to stem his bleeding.
I agree. If we try and outscore Melbourne we will get blown out of the water. Our best footy has always been to apply relentless pressure and to keep the ball in our forward half. If we produce that on Sunday we will win.
 

Shpeshal Ed

I see you on televishaaaaan!
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Posts
23,293
Likes
20,564
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Man. U, Chicago Bulls, Ολυμπιακός
You know, Buckleys comments about Varcoe and Sidebottom I think have proven to me that he really can't coach. At all.

He spoke about how he planned for having Varcoe and Sidebottom so not having them really hurt.

Which is effectively Buckley telling the world he relies on players, not systems. A good system doesn't need specific players to work. Both the Bulldogs and Hawks prove that week after week.
 

jmac70

Premium Gold
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Posts
33,047
Likes
34,094
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
North Footscray Devils
True. Buckley was pushing shit up the hill since the time he took over. Certain players didn't want change and now he has got rid of those the team doesn't seem up to standard. For me I've seen enough. He's turned over a list and failed.
Fair enough. I suggest you watch the Western Bulldogs for the rest of the year and return to the Pies if we change coach.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jmac70

Premium Gold
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Posts
33,047
Likes
34,094
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
North Footscray Devils
You know, Buckleys comments about Varcoe and Sidebottom I think have proven to me that he really can't coach. At all.

He spoke about how he planned for having Varcoe and Sidebottom so not having them really hurt.

Which is effectively Buckley telling the world he relies on players, not systems. A good system doesn't need specific players to work. Both the Bulldogs and Hawks prove that week after week.
To an extent I agree with you but it does also suggest that our system is engineered to cater for certain player strengths. Every team relies on key players to a certain extent and the best sides are able to limit that reliance. Losing Varcoe and Steele was always going to hurt given the inexperience of our team, also add the injuries to players in our back half and it has nor been ideal. Not using that as an excuse though for the god awful way we have played.

The Melbourne game is going to provide a useful picture of Buckley's coaching future. He is really under the pump in this game.
 

Shpeshal Ed

I see you on televishaaaaan!
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Posts
23,293
Likes
20,564
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Man. U, Chicago Bulls, Ολυμπιακός
To an extent I agree with you but it does also suggest that our system is engineered to cater for certain player strengths. Every team relies on key players to a certain extent and the best sides are able to limit that reliance. Losing Varcoe and Steele was always going to hurt given the inexperience of our team, also add the injuries to players in our back half and it has nor been ideal. Not using that as an excuse though for the god awful way we have played.

The Melbourne game is going to provide a useful picture of Buckley's coaching future. He is really under the pump in this game.
I understand losing players will hurt 9 out of 10 sides, but that's no excuse for the remaining players not putting in the effort required at the elite level.

This isn't aimed at you, but generally, missing Varcoe doesn't explain why our defenders were playing 10-15 metres off their man. Or why we continually saw groups of Collingwood players guarding the same patch of empty space.

Missing players have ZERO to do with that, which is why the fact that Buckley even brought it up concerns me GREATLY.
 

CFC2010

Premium Gold
Joined
Aug 22, 2014
Posts
17,206
Likes
29,760
AFL Club
Collingwood
You know, Buckleys comments about Varcoe and Sidebottom I think have proven to me that he really can't coach. At all.

He spoke about how he planned for having Varcoe and Sidebottom so not having them really hurt.

Which is effectively Buckley telling the world he relies on players, not systems. A good system doesn't need specific players to work. Both the Bulldogs and Hawks prove that week after week.
To an extent I agree with you but it does also suggest that our system is engineered to cater for certain player strengths. Every team relies on key players to a certain extent and the best sides are able to limit that reliance. Losing Varcoe and Steele was always going to hurt given the inexperience of our team, also add the injuries to players in our back half and it has nor been ideal. Not using that as an excuse though for the god awful way we have played.

The Melbourne game is going to provide a useful picture of Buckley's coaching future. He is really under the pump in this game.
It sounds like Bucks is going to coach like Roos did at Melbourne in his first couple of years.

Buckle in for the ride because it is going to get ugly over the next two weeks............
 

Unknown Identity

Professional Strawman
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Posts
15,861
Likes
22,415
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys Chicago Bulls
So if you're going to bite, why change the subject?
How i am changing the subject?

The original comment was about sacking Buckley.. your comment was there was not a logical arguement from the doubters.

So my arguement is.. name an area which Buckley has improved our football. This year, Last year.. the year prior..

Wrong thread for this but it's on topic to your comment.
 

Unknown Identity

Professional Strawman
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Posts
15,861
Likes
22,415
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys Chicago Bulls
Just some Friday morning ramblings..

Area's of concern for me.

upload_2016-4-15_9-12-50.png


Our continual decline in Marks but our disposal efficiency remains the same says we're kicking to a lot of contests and players up the ground aren't working hard enough to find space, we are far too stagnant.

We have increased our inside 50 count significantly but our mark's inside 50 have dropped off, mixture of forward line structure, poor decision making and slow ball movement allowing teams to plug holes in our forward 50, more trying to move the ball forward with brute force rather than foot skills and slick ball movement.

Which follows on to running bounces, we don't move the ball fast enough and aren't taking on the game nearly enough, our running bounces have fallen off a cliff.

upload_2016-4-15_9-17-31.png


And lastly and which is why i really like the Mason Cox inclusion (if selected) is our Hit Outs / Clearance correlation.

Yes we have 2 young ruckman but we aren't getting our hand's on the ball first this year which is a huge concern considering our opposition ruckman have been Callum Sinclair, Shaun Hampson and Tom Hickey.

Wait until we come up against Goldstein/Nic Nat/Sandilands.

And if our hit outs don't increase we need to adapt and become better at sharking opposition tap outs.

upload_2016-4-15_9-18-32.png
 

76woodenspooners

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Posts
15,324
Likes
21,686
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Collingwood
Up to a point agree. To put the blame on the board is very easy.
I think this was replying to a different one of my posts?

Anyway, yep, it is easy to blame the board - they are the ones ultimately responsible.

Maybe something to do with the supportersbase too?
Bit of a philosophical debate ... But I think the supporter base are entitled to infallibility status?

The disunity was created by the succession plan where the club went in a unpopular direction that not veryone was ready to follow.
The succession plan was executed in 2009.

Between October 2010 and September 2011 you would not have found a Collingwood member or supporter who wouldn't have been utterly tickle pink to their back teeth ** about our succession plan. It was totally 100% popular.

People can be so fickle :oops:

Club has been doing themselves no favors by raising expectations but not meeting them (partially out of their control) further fuelling the discontent.
This, this and this :thumbsu:

The club have done an appalling job of managing expectations.



** those of us who have back teeth of course
 

76woodenspooners

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Posts
15,324
Likes
21,686
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Collingwood
It all starts from the top though in my opinion.
Totally :thumbsu:

Culture is created at the top.

Ed has been there a tad too long and is starting to lose sight of things.
Yeah, I wonder if he's lost perspective?

I like Ed. I admire him a lot.

I wonder if he could do with a voluntary break from the Presidency for a term or two to ground himself again? Get outside of the bubble. Go watch a game or two from the cheersquad. Get off his Chesterfield sofa in Toorak and go watch an interstate game at the pub with Wozza and Bazza. Hang out on Collingwood social media and become an "internet carper" ;) posting under the pseudonym GoPies666.

If he came back after that he would probably be President for life.

I mean, at what point does all this off field greatness translate to on field greatness?
Maybe our off-field greatness isn't so great?
 
Last edited:

sr36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Posts
10,128
Likes
12,770
Location
Vietnam
AFL Club
Collingwood
I think what Bucks has maintained since the game against St Kilda is that our backline was seriously under the pump because of the inability or unwillingness of our forwards and mids to apply the pressure needed to keep the ball in the front half. Our backline was under siege all game through repeated opposition entries and I believe he put it down at least to a significant extent to lack of forward or midfield pressure.
I agree that Bucks has maintained that. I'm just concerned that he might be putting it all down to a lack of pressure on the ball carrier and ignoring the fact that even when we had numbers back and it was a slow entry by the Saints, all they had to do was switch the play and then they were able to easily spot up loose players in their forward 50. More pressure at the ball, is likely to mean less blokes in defensive 50, which means that it will be even easier to spot up targets, unless we make a very significant change to our defensive structure in defence.
 

PicaBoo

Soldaat van Oranje
Joined
Jul 2, 2015
Posts
7,549
Likes
9,895
Location
Holden Shower Center
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
What other teams?
Bit of a philosophical debate ... But I think the supporter base are entitled to infallibility status?

The club have done an appalling job of managing expectations.
It is a delicate balancing act between having ambitions and grim reality.
An intra club with 5000 fans watching is as good as an indication you can get. And that without Treloar or Howe.
We all have been putting expectations on this season which might well be a gross underestimate of our competitors.
The club was ambitious, so were the supporters and even the players joined in. We are played our part in setting those expectations. And now we all have to play our part to get us back on track.
 

PieNSauce

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Posts
8,230
Likes
5,293
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
are jealous!
How i am changing the subject?

The original comment was about sacking Buckley.. your comment was there was not a logical arguement from the doubters.

So my arguement is.. name an area which Buckley has improved our football. This year, Last year.. the year prior..

Wrong thread for this but it's on topic to your comment.
No, this is the entirety of the post I responded to:
Out: reactive non-supporters who wanna sack a coach after round three. Head on over to Richmond where you all belong.
If you think it's rational to sack a coach after 3 rounds of footy then bully for you. I just happen to believe it's utter lunacy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom