Mega Thread The 2017 'Buckley's Chances' Thread

[Anzacday]

You can't count for your own post because it hadn't been made yet! You were predicting you were going to make it! Then you pressed post reply to make your prediction come true.

Spooky stuff hey?

 

[Luke321]

What has Buckley acheived since he took over?

Preliminary final in 2012 using MM Grand Final list

Elimination Final in 2013 using mostly MM list

2014, 2015, 2016 no finals, middle of the ladder finishes 11th or 12th.

2017 likely to miss finals and finish below 2016 ladder level.

He has not achieved much after the majority of MM list was retired/traded/declined after 2013.

 

[Jafo]

Re Rocket, it was more that I was aligning his time with us, with better perfomances, including by the coach, and with team selection. This was also during a horror period of injuries. But I did concede other factors were probably at play.

Cant see Balme going around a third time with the Pies. What about Maxy - when will the time be right for him to ride in on a white horse? I'd love him back at the club in any capacity, other than senior coach (don't want him chewed up and discarded). He's smart, so probably needs more time away from us, before he can make a real difference on returning.

Wasn't saying bring back Balme but more your opinion of him. Especially given his track record at the Cats and now Tigers.

I also think interesting how many people were taking shots at Maxxy when he was with us and saying he was crap player/Captain etc and now so many, including those people laud his leadership, smarts and captaincy.

 

[HeathySure]

Then read them again, and this time do it properly

lol
classic responses from the defenders,
if i missed 1 please repeat it for me. i will listen

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

What has Buckley acheived since he took over?

Preliminary final in 2012 using MM Grand Final list

Elimination Final in 2013 using mostly MM list

2014, 2015, 2016 no finals, middle of the ladder finishes 11th or 12th.

2017 likely to miss finals and finish below 2016 ladder level.

He has not achieved much after the majority of MM list was retired/traded/declined after 2013.

No he hasnt.

Thats what he'll be judged on

He had two years using the inherited list and then faced the reality that it wasnt good enough.

Are you suggesting he shouldnt have retired/traded those players off?

 

[jackcass]

I've been thinking the same. There is a massive focus on Bucks ATM, but he is just one of many stakeholders with 'skin' in this. The club, the board, the players, the coach, the fans, even the sponsors - are all heavily invested in the success of the club. To look at it brutally, Nathan Buckley and his future is only one consideration, and one decision (albeit a big one) to be made.

Disagree. If Bucks was selecting for his future as the priority then we'd have Scharenberg in the side. We'd be getting a look at Daicos. We'd be finding an opportunity to introduce Kirby. These are the players that show what the future holds, give fans hope moving forward. Think we're just picking the side each week with the best chance of winning.

 

[jackcass]

With all the uncertainty around Bucks its having a detrimental impact on the development of the young players due to moves made at the selection table.

Let's compare the situation our club is in to a club like Melbourne last year. Melbourne had a clear direction and while they only showed small improvements year to year in the Roos years, because there was no uncertainty in terms of who was coaching they were able to select for the future. Roos never selected to save his job. Speak to anyone who watched Casey and they will tell you Dunn was in the dees best 22 but instead they were finding out who could play and who couldn't. That way players like Oscar McDonald and others were getting game time which has held them in good stead this year.

I don't blame Bucks for picking what he thinks is the best 22 to win. He is just doing what most would in his position. But in my opinion it's not what is best for the club.

We have 3rd and 4th year players we have invested heavily in who are constantly in and out of the side and I have no idea if they are going to make it. We need to find out if they can play and they only way to do this is to give these blokes regular game time in the ones. Scharenberg is rotting away in the 2s. He dominates at that level. His game will not develop any more at vfl. I want to know if Aish is up to it. Ramsey has struggled but 1 week in 1 week out does nothing for his confidence. He looks like a cricketer who is hitting them well in the nets but knows he is only 1 bad shot from being dropped. Wills has been injured but surely this we the week to bring him back in.

Guys like Dunn(30) Goldsack(30) Varcoe (29) Greenwood (28) might be in our best 22 but are they getting games at the expense of developing younger players? I personally think they are. Those guys are not part of our future so lets find out who is.

I personally think the end of last year was time to appoint a new coach. I believe a new coach would be giving more opportunities to the likes of Scharenberg and co. Can't change the past but it would be nice to have one of the clubs leaders be bold enough to make a decision for our future.

If we don't make a decision soon then we will see some of these young blokes walk and we won't even know if they are up to it because we have a coach who is trying to coach for his future(as I said not his fault) instead of the clubs future.

Of course all that assumes the club will not be better off longer term winning as many games as possible, and that playing (even more young inexperienced) kids and getting flogged is good for development.

 

[ant22]

Of course all that assumes the club will not be better off longer term winning as many games as possible, and that playing (even more young inexperienced) kids and getting flogged is good for development.

We won't know until we go down that path. We currently seem to be doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. That is insane by definition.

 

[Scribe26]

lol
classic responses from the defenders,
if i missed 1 please repeat it for me. i will listen

Thanks for the opportunity HeathComeBack. Rapt that you would listen.

Please standby while I do my very best to go back through the 7708 posts. I'll get back to you really soon.

 

[HeathySure]

Thanks for the opportunity HeathComeBack. Rapt that you would listen.

Please standby while I do my very best to go back through the 7708 posts. I'll get back to you really soon.

i just want one positive arguement that he has done a good job.
you dont have to go through them all. just give me one
Peter seirkowski asked it the other day, no response, i have asked it many times, i get responses like yours, Not once has anyone given any positive response, not once. Every single time its a half jibe at me asking the question without anyone refuting the argument

 

[jackcass]

We won't know until we go down that path. We currently seem to be doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. That is insane by definition.

Other than the MC picking the side they think has got the best chance to win week to week I don't see that we're doing the same thing over and over. We've trialled 34 or 35 players for the year and for the 1st time in 3 years that isn't primarily injury driven, many players have been tried in multiple positions, and we've tried multiple structures such as 1, 2 or 3 tall forwards.

While I'm not suggesting this is why we lost, last weeks team was on average 12 months younger than the Dawks and 30 games less experienced. We had 9 players with <50 games and another 6 in that 51-100 game bracket. If the last few years have shown us anything, it's that further lowering any of that rarely leads to anything positive.

 

[jackcass]

i just want one positive arguement that he has done a good job.
you dont have to go through them all. just give me one
Peter seirkowski asked it the other day, no response, i have asked it many times, i get responses like yours, Not once has anyone given any positive response, not once. Every single time its a half jibe at me asking the question without anyone refuting the argument

I don't know that I've ever said Bucks has done a "good job". That seems to be the assumption made by those in the "sack Bucks" camp if you hold anything like a dissenting view. While I can't speak for others, I doubt there'd be too many claiming he's done a "good job".

What I've said is that I doubt anyone else would have done any better given factors he's encountered since 2012. I've outlined at length what I think those factors have been. They usually get dismissed as excuses by posters who can't mount a case beyond the "best young blah blah" and "6 years of blah blah" responses, wash, rinse, repeat.

 

[Scribe26]

I can't speak for everyone, but I only find myself defending Buckley because I can't stand the illogical melts and unsubstantiated crap that gets used when we his future is discussed.

"It's been six years of decline!!"

Well, c'mon. He took over a Grand Final side that lost a bunch of key players and in 2012, we still won 10 on the trot and fell a few kicks short of another Grand Final. 2013 we made finals and crashed out - thus began the rebuild.

I'm not sure if you've watched football for long, but rebuilding clubs tend to decline. It's a weird thing - when you play a young list, you tend to do not-so-great most of the time.

"The only success he had was with Malthouse's list!!!"

So, his true crime was in taking the job in the first place? Damned if he does have success with Mick's list, damned even more if he doesn't?

"The players hated him - he kicked cult figures out the door!!"

Would you say that's Nathan's fault? Or the outcome of a messy handover which Malthouse immediately renegged on and eventually made the hand-over as difficult as possible? Do you think things would have been different if Malthouse put an arm around Buckley, embraced him as the new coach, sold the idea to the players and stuck around (like he was contracted to do) after 2011 to oversee the transition? You don't think to revisit history and share some blame to Ed? To Mick? It's all Buckley?

Everything was his fault - all he needs to be rated on is win-loss!!!

Sigh. Yeah, jesus, so much of what went wrong he should (and has) taken responsibility for. But when do we stop pretending injuries didnt play a part in our struggles 2014-16? When do we ignore list management decisions ultimately made outside of his control? When do we ignore that our first two picks in a STACKED draft became injury-riddled busts that killed our development as a side? He's had about 6 football managers work alongside him FFS. Just be semi-reasonable - there are variables and factors outside of win-loss.




FWIW - I think Nathan's charter in 2017 was to create excitement for 2018 and beyond. I've lost my excitement and my trust in key decision makers going forward. I've lost what's left of my sanity trying to work out weekly selection. I'm frustrated in the players Buckley chooses to show his faith in. I don't think you'll find many people saying he's a great coach - I think we're approaching a point where the job could be untenable if the next two months turn really sour.

But Christ, our biggest loss has been by 30 points. In the most even season in AFL bloody history, our % is in the high 90s, despite our ladder position. Even the most pessimistic, depressing person would have to admit that with a bit of luck and some straight-kicking early in the year, we'd be 2-3 wins better off this season.

The projection and improvement we've been waiting for doesn't seem so far off. Fill a few holes in the list, watch some kids continue to develop and who knows, with some injury luck we may even jump a fair way up the ladder in 2018 and beyond.

The constant bleating about Buckley being a sh1t coach is worse than a broken record - I'd LOVE to listen to a broken record over the same Buckley arguments over and over again.

Stop pretending football is judged purely on win-loss. Stop pretending there haven't been outside factors that have contributed to us missing finals.

Or...

Go on with the same old crap. Each to their own.

 

[HeathySure]

I don't know that I've ever said Bucks has done a "good job". That seems to be the assumption made by those in the "sack Bucks" camp if you hold anything like a dissenting view. While I can't speak for others, I doubt there'd be too many claiming he's done a "good job".

What I've said is that I doubt anyone else would have done any better given factors he's encountered since 2012. I've outlined at length what I think those factors have been. They usually get dismissed as excuses by posters who can't mount a case beyond the "best young blah blah" and "6 years of blah blah" responses, wash, rinse, repeat.

Thanks for at least trying to answer the question.
So why then should he keep the job if he has not done a good job?
He has had some things against him., but please remember he was gifted the job back in 2009 because Eddie decided he was the man for the job,and he has turned over the list to what he wants mostly, and he has stated that he has had a hand in what the list looks like.

 

[Scribe26]

i just want one positive arguement that he has done a good job.
you dont have to go through them all. just give me one
Peter seirkowski asked it the other day, no response, i have asked it many times, i get responses like yours, Not once has anyone given any positive response, not once. Every single time its a half jibe at me asking the question without anyone refuting the argument

In 2012, with a senior, experienced list (that apparently hated his guts), he coach 10 wins in a row - the most in Collingwood history.

That positive?

Or was it Mick's list?

 

[HeathySure]

I can't speak for everyone, but I only find myself defending Buckley because I can't stand the illogical melts and unsubstantiated crap that gets used when we his future is discussed.

"It's been six years of decline!!"

Well, c'mon. He took over a Grand Final side that lost a bunch of key players and in 2012, we still won 10 on the trot and fell a few kicks short of another Grand Final. 2013 we made finals and crashed out - thus began the rebuild.

I'm not sure if you've watched football for long, but rebuilding clubs tend to decline. It's a weird thing - when you play a young list, you tend to do not-so-great most of the time.

"The only success he had was with Malthouse's list!!!"

So, his true crime was in taking the job in the first place? Damned if he does have success with Mick's list, damned even more if he doesn't?

"The players hated him - he kicked cult figures out the door!!"

Would you say that's Nathan's fault? Or the outcome of a messy handover which Malthouse immediately renegged on and eventually made the hand-over as difficult as possible? Do you think things would have been different if Malthouse put an arm around Buckley, embraced him as the new coach, sold the idea to the players and stuck around (like he was contracted to do) after 2011 to oversee the transition? You don't think to revisit history and share some blame to Ed? To Mick? It's all Buckley?

Everything was his fault - all he needs to be rated on is win-loss!!!

Sigh. Yeah, jesus, so much of what went wrong he should (and has) taken responsibility for. But when do we stop pretending injuries didnt play a part in our struggles 2014-16? When do we ignore list management decisions ultimately made outside of his control? When do we ignore that our first two picks in a STACKED draft became injury-riddled busts that killed our development as a side? He's had about 6 football managers work alongside him FFS. Just be semi-reasonable - there are variables and factors outside of win-loss.




FWIW - I think Nathan's charter in 2017 was to create excitement for 2018 and beyond. I've lost my excitement and my trust in key decision makers going forward. I've lost what's left of my sanity trying to work out weekly selection. I'm frustrated in the players Buckley chooses to show his faith in. I don't think you'll find many people saying he's a great coach - I think we're approaching a point where the job could be untenable if the next two months turn really sour.

But Christ, our biggest loss has been by 30 points. In the most even season in AFL bloody history, our % is in the high 90s, despite our ladder position. Even the most pessimistic, depressing person would have to admit that with a bit of luck and some straight-kicking early in the year, we'd be 2-3 wins better off this season.

The projection and improvement we've been waiting for doesn't seem so far off. Fill a few holes in the list, watch some kids continue to develop and who knows, with some injury luck we may even jump a fair way up the ladder in 2018 and beyond.

The constant bleating about Buckley being a sh1t coach is worse than a broken record - I'd LOVE to listen to a broken record over the same Buckley arguments over and over again.

Stop pretending football is judged purely on win-loss. Stop pretending there haven't been outside factors that have contributed to us missing finals.

Or...

Go on with the same old crap. Each to their own.

Thanks for at least trying.
Don't you see that those arguments you have given are the same for us who have totally lost our patience in him though, all of those things you have said are arguments defending his inabilities, none are giving me any reasons for us to want to keep him. Thats all i really want,

As for filling holes in our list, isnt that what we tried to do last year? 14 list changes is a lot....

 

[Scribe26]

Thanks for at least trying.
Don't you see that those arguments you have given are the same for us who have totally lost our patience in him though, all of those things you have said are arguments defending his inabilities, none are giving me any reasons for us to want to keep him. Thats all i really want,

As for filling holes in our list, isnt that what we tried to do last year? 14 list changes is a lot....

Thanks for at least trying.
Don't you see that those arguments you have given are the same for us who have totally lost our patience in him though, all of those things you have said are arguments defending his inabilities, none are giving me any reasons for us to want to keep him. Thats all i really want,

As for filling holes in our list, isnt that what we tried to do last year? 14 list changes is a lot....

 

[jackcass]

Thanks for at least trying to answer the question.
So why then should he keep the job if he has not done a good job?
He has had some things against him., but please remember he was gifted the job back in 2009 because Eddie decided he was the man for the job,and he has turned over the list to what he wants mostly, and he has stated that he has had a hand in what the list looks like.

Wash, rinse, repeat....

Go back and read some of the threads from pre 2010 on MM and his coaching, the years he'd had and the lack of silverware.

Turning the list over has consequences in terms of age/experience profiles of the squad.

He may well have had a hand in how the list looks now but just how many footballing gurus would have predicted back in 2012 when he took over that 2x top 10 draft picks would yield 7 senior games in 4 seasons, that Cloke would not continue to be a contributor at at least the same levels... and on and on...

But again, they're just excuses.

 

[PieBeast]

In 2012, with a senior, experienced list (that apparently hated his guts), he coach 10 wins in a row - the most in Collingwood history.

That positive?

Or was it Mick's list?

Buckley is on the record saying he didn't change a thing in 2012 and I believe him.
So no, that's not a positive.

And just to touch on your previous post, we didn't fall few kicks short of a GF, we got obliterated in the prelim.
Taking mitigating circumstances such as a significant injury toll and J Mac's passing into account we probably should have made the GF but we already weren't going anywhere near as good as 2011 and Hawks would have done some nasty things to us.

 

[Buckley is my hero]

I can't speak for everyone, but I only find myself defending Buckley because I can't stand the illogical melts and unsubstantiated crap that gets used when we his future is discussed.

"It's been six years of decline!!"

Well, c'mon. He took over a Grand Final side that lost a bunch of key players and in 2012, we still won 10 on the trot and fell a few kicks short of another Grand Final. 2013 we made finals and crashed out - thus began the rebuild.

I'm not sure if you've watched football for long, but rebuilding clubs tend to decline. It's a weird thing - when you play a young list, you tend to do not-so-great most of the time.

"The only success he had was with Malthouse's list!!!"

So, his true crime was in taking the job in the first place? Damned if he does have success with Mick's list, damned even more if he doesn't?

"The players hated him - he kicked cult figures out the door!!"

Would you say that's Nathan's fault? Or the outcome of a messy handover which Malthouse immediately renegged on and eventually made the hand-over as difficult as possible? Do you think things would have been different if Malthouse put an arm around Buckley, embraced him as the new coach, sold the idea to the players and stuck around (like he was contracted to do) after 2011 to oversee the transition? You don't think to revisit history and share some blame to Ed? To Mick? It's all Buckley?

Everything was his fault - all he needs to be rated on is win-loss!!!

Sigh. Yeah, jesus, so much of what went wrong he should (and has) taken responsibility for. But when do we stop pretending injuries didnt play a part in our struggles 2014-16? When do we ignore list management decisions ultimately made outside of his control? When do we ignore that our first two picks in a STACKED draft became injury-riddled busts that killed our development as a side? He's had about 6 football managers work alongside him FFS. Just be semi-reasonable - there are variables and factors outside of win-loss.




FWIW - I think Nathan's charter in 2017 was to create excitement for 2018 and beyond. I've lost my excitement and my trust in key decision makers going forward. I've lost what's left of my sanity trying to work out weekly selection. I'm frustrated in the players Buckley chooses to show his faith in. I don't think you'll find many people saying he's a great coach - I think we're approaching a point where the job could be untenable if the next two months turn really sour.

But Christ, our biggest loss has been by 30 points. In the most even season in AFL bloody history, our % is in the high 90s, despite our ladder position. Even the most pessimistic, depressing person would have to admit that with a bit of luck and some straight-kicking early in the year, we'd be 2-3 wins better off this season.

The projection and improvement we've been waiting for doesn't seem so far off. Fill a few holes in the list, watch some kids continue to develop and who knows, with some injury luck we may even jump a fair way up the ladder in 2018 and beyond.

The constant bleating about Buckley being a sh1t coach is worse than a broken record - I'd LOVE to listen to a broken record over the same Buckley arguments over and over again.

Stop pretending football is judged purely on win-loss. Stop pretending there haven't been outside factors that have contributed to us missing finals.

Or...

Go on with the same old crap. Each to their own.

I've got news for you. Go down to your local library to the AFL football section and borrow any coaching book on AFL football.

First page of the first chapter states that coaches are judged purely on their win-loss record. That's the way it is and that's the way it has always been. It's a sad fact of life that coaches have to face and all coaches recognise that they will be remembered for their win-loss ratio and that's why football coaching is a terrible job.

 

[jackcass]

Buckley is on the record saying he didn't change a thing in 2012 and I believe him.
So no, that's not a positive.

And just to touch on your previous post, we didn't fall few kicks short of a GF, we got obliterated in the prelim.
Taking mitigating circumstances such as a significant injury toll and J Mac's passing into account we probably should have made the GF but we already weren't going anywhere near as good as 2011 and Hawks would have done some nasty things to us.

So a decision to stay the course as a way to maximise opportunity when he could well have tried to impose his stamp on the team isn't a good decision? Isn't that a demonstration of what good coaches do? They work out the best way with the resources at hand.

 

[Vicky Park]

Disagree. If Bucks was selecting for his future as the priority then we'd have Scharenberg in the side. We'd be getting a look at Daicos. We'd be finding an opportunity to introduce Kirby. These are the players that show what the future holds, give fans hope moving forward. Think we're just picking the side each week with the best chance of winning.

I think you misunderstood my post, although you may still disagree. The point I was trying to make was that the focus on Bucks - meaning outside focus, internal pressure, whatever and wherever its coming from - is making this all about him, whereas Bucks is just one factor in the short-term future of our club. Its an unhealthy focus for us and him, and skews the reaility of where we are at. There are other under-performers at the club, maybe far worse performers than Bucks, and his coaching for the rest of 2017 - be it good, bad or indifferent - for me now is not so central (although I obviously hope its good!). I'm also starting to think we will do a 'Hardwick' and give him another year while sorting out some other, less high profile, issues.

 

[Buckley is my hero]

So a decision to stay the course as a way to maximise opportunity when he could well have tried to impose his stamp on the team isn't a good decision? Isn't that a demonstration of what good coaches do? They work out the best way with the resources at hand.

Not if you end up losing more games than you win. Just to repeat. Coaches are judged purely on their win-loss ratio. In 20 years time no one will remember the injuries, the sniping over the handover and the assassination attempts in the media. They will only remember the win-loss ratio of the coach. Norm Smith used to repeatedly claim that his brother Len was a better coach than he was. Len had a dreadful record as coach of Fitzroy and most people only remember Len Smith as an author of a textbook on football coaching. No one remembers Len Smith as a successful VFL coach despite attempts by his more famous brother to talk him up.

 

[Scribe26]

Not if you end of losing more games than you win. Just to repeat. Coaches are judged purely on their win-loss ratio. In 20 years time no one will remember the injuries, the sniping over the handover and the assassination attempts in the media. They will only remember the win-loss ratio of the coach. Norm Smith used to repeatedly claim that his brother Len was a better coach than he was. Len had a dreadful record as coach of Fitzroy and most people only remember Len Smith as an author of a textbook on football coaching. No one remembers Len Smith as a successful VFL coach despite attempts by his more famous brother to talk him up.

Sigh.

 

[jackcass]

Not if you end up losing more games than you win. Just to repeat. Coaches are judged purely on their win-loss ratio. In 20 years time no one will remember the injuries, the sniping over the handover and the assassination attempts in the media. They will only remember the win-loss ratio of the coach. Norm Smith used to repeatedly claim that his brother Len was a better coach than he was. Len had a dreadful record as coach of Fitzroy and most people only remember Len Smith as an author of a textbook on football coaching. No one remembers Len Smith as a successful VFL coach despite attempts by his more famous brother to talk him up.

We went 18-7 including finals.

And all people remember is silverware. W-L is merely 1 aspect of the trip toward silverware.