Mega Thread The 2017 'Buckley's Chances' Thread

[Gone Critical]

. Why have we waited so long to see what some of our supposedly talented youngsters can do - see if Broomhead, Aish, Daicos, Brown, Scharenberg can play and make clear decisions on them. It showed we needed to go with talent and get games into them rather than persist with mediocre players with the right work ethic but poor disposal skills. Occasional flashes of brilliance in young talent with foot skills will become more frequent with experience and the chemistry of the group is important to ultimately succeed. Do we know who is in our best 22 yet?

While I agree with a lot you say I think Bucks and the MC have mainly selected well this year.

Broomhead and Aish have a good number of seasons in the game now and both have had multiple chances to nail a spot in the 22 permanently. Both have struggled to do so and I believe should only been playing on merit. I wouldn't have given them more than they got this year.

Shaz has been managed very well. Given enough VFL time to build confidence, not rushed. This season was all about games at any level. He hasn't set the world alight at AFL level but has shown some promise. 2018 was always more the season to find out what he is likely to become. Brown and Daicos have both got a taste. They are later draft picks in their 1st season. For them to debut is excellent. Their performance in the VFL didn't stand out to the level where they demanded selection any earlier. Neither have done that much but again 2018 will tell us more about whether they are good enough to be regular AFL players. These players are not stars and don't necessarily benefit from being put in the AFL before they are ready. They all can look forward to 2018 after bending well managed in 2017 for mine.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

No I didn't. I'll be following that just like I did last season. I was merely being a generalist, and not making assumptions about what most Pies fans will be doing. I'm also not naive. I'm aware the vast majority of fans don't give a toss about the AFLW.

If I could be a little cheeky, interesting choice of words.

But agree with the sentiment you raised.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

tne word on the street, is two more years.

That said, caution.

It is human nature for people to like to be in the know, say they know things from people they know, human nature to gossip and spread information. Just human nature.

(There is some great studies in ancient human behaviour how "gossip" is absolutely vital to this human race and is in part a reason for our advancement as a species.
That's and a horse called "Gossips" ran in the 1994 Melbourne Cup.)

 

[Queenie Hearts]

While I agree with a lot you say I think Bucks and the MC have mainly selected well this year.

Broomhead and Aish have a good number of seasons in the game now and both have had multiple chances to nail a spot in the 22 permanently. Both have struggled to do so and I believe should only been playing on merit. I wouldn't have given them more than they got this year.

Shaz has been managed very well. Given enough VFL time to build confidence, not rushed. This season was all about games at any level. He hasn't set the world alight at AFL level but has shown some promise. 2018 was always more the season to find out what he is likely to become. Brown and Daicos have both got a taste. They are later draft picks in their 1st season. For them to debut is excellent. Their performance in the VFL didn't stand out to the level where they demanded selection any earlier. Neither have done that much but again 2018 will tell us more about whether they are good enough to be regular AFL players. These players are not stars and don't necessarily benefit from being put in the AFL before they are ready. They all can look forward to 2018 after bending well managed in 2017 for mine.

I don't agree on some of what you say - I think Scharenberg could have played earlier and Broomhead has had injuries which interrupted development but once he played was more quickly dropped than say Blair or Smith who could stay in on questionable performances. They seemed happy to persist with Langdon (I don't disagree that this was a good decision now). Too many games for Smith. On Aish, he was performing well in VFL and it took a while to come in. At the end of last year, pre-injury he was starting to play well and he could not get back in for some time. He also came in to play a different role than he had been in at VFL level.
I also think once it became obvious finals were out, they could have taken some more risks and played the younger players.

My point is that some players seemed to stay in the team and be given time to develop whereas others were in and out impacting their confidence and development and chemistry of the group.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[GreekLunatic]

I never thought a coaching discussion would divide supporters I hope yesterday isn't false hope if Bucks re signs I want us to be in finals next year I hate seeing sides like Richmond and Essendon in there

 

[76woodenspooners]

I never thought a coaching discussion would divide supporters ...

Oh, you must be new to Collingwood, welcome!

We once had a senior coach by the name of Mick Malthouse.

Some folks were dirty on Mick being sacked - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick would have won us another 3 Premierships.

Other folks were dirty on Mick reneging on his contract - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick underminded his successor and ruined the club.

 

[doodles98]

Oh, you must be new to Collingwood, welcome!

We once had a senior coach by the name of Mick Malthouse.

Some folks were dirty on Mick being sacked - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick would have won us another 3 Premierships.

Other folks were dirty on Mick reneging on his contract - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick underminded his successor and ruined the club.

It's been our very own Hatfields and McCoys playing out in an internet forum.
I guess that makes Ed the sexy pig that started it all.

 

[TKiL]

Oh, you must be new to Collingwood, welcome!

We once had a senior coach by the name of Mick Malthouse.

Some folks were dirty on Mick being sacked - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick would have won us another 3 Premierships.

Other folks were dirty on Mick reneging on his contract - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick underminded his successor and ruined the club.

A good Pie stoush is like no other and may last decades

 

[swoop42]

While it's fair to say just about everything and anything that can be said about our senior coach has been in his dedicated thread of over 500 pages long one thing I believe remains in question.

Should Buckley be prepared to take a not insignificant pay cut if he gets to remain as senior coach?

I do and I'll outline my reasons why.

1. Based on our teams performance during his tenure he can thank himself fortunate if he gets to remain in his job as very few coaches have under the same circumstance in the time of the top 8.
Given that many people in senior management positions would be on performance based contracts out in the real world I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest he take a cut in pay to reflect our side once again missing out on a finals opportunity.
I don't profess to know what the salary of Buckley is but something within the vicinity of $800,000 a year is most likely. I would suggest a pay cut of 25% or $200,000 be appropriate and leave him with a salary akin to the lowest paid senior coaches currently within AFL ranks.

2. It's very likely that for Buckley to remain then many of his current assistants will be removed, that staff in the area of recruitment or high performance might suffer the same fate or a demotion while Pert has already been let go. I don't feel it's appropriate that others will have to carry the burden of another failed season without Buckley at least sharing in the blame and being prepared to suffer some form of consequence like they did.
If for nothing else taking a pay cut would be an excellent act of goodwill from the coach and enamour him to his doubters.

3. Buckley this week in his press conference stated that he loved the club and wanted to see it succeed. He then went on to talk about doing what he needs to do to give us the best opportunity for sustained success. Well Bucks great sentiment now think about what an extra $200,000 can do within our football department and how it could be used towards extra recruiting personnel or specialised skills coaching within the area of development.

4. Adding a high profile director of coaching like Paul Roos or experienced senior assistant appointment like Brett Ratten might just be the tonic to save his career but it will be costly (especially Roos) and reduce the amount of money that can be used on other individuals or programs. Unless we're prepared to go outside the cap having a coach prepared to take $200,000 less will sure help offset the expense of an appointment purely designed to help him keep his job and see him be the best he can be.
Given that players are sometimes asked to play for less in order to add a high profile recruit that hopefully improves the side I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask the same of the coach at this present time.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

It's been our very own Hatfields and McCoys playing out in an internet forum.
I guess that makes Ed the sexy pig that started it all.

 

[PieNSauce]

Sounds like the Deal is that Bucks stays with a Mentor(Most Likely Paul Roos) coming in.

Showing that Bucks is a bad Coach but Ed does not want to sack his mate

http://smallbusinessbc.ca/article/three-famous-billionaire-entrepreneurs-and-their-mentors/
Doh!

Those who reckon that having a mentor is a negative haven't got the vaguest clue what a mentor even is!

 

[Frank Gallagher]

While it's fair to say just about everything and anything that can be said about our senior coach has been in his dedicated thread of over 500 pages long one thing I believe remains in question.

Should Buckley be prepared to take a not insignificant pay cut if he gets to remain as senior coach?

I do and I'll outline my reasons why.

1. Based on our teams performance during his tenure he can thank himself fortunate if he gets to remain in his job as very few coaches have under the same circumstance in the time of the top 8.
Given that many people in senior management positions would be on performance based contracts out in the real world I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest he take a cut in pay to reflect our side once again missing out on a finals opportunity.
I don't profess to know what the salary of Buckley is but something within the vicinity of $800,000 a year is most likely. I would suggest a pay cut of 25% or $200,000 be appropriate and leave him with a salary akin to the lowest paid senior coaches currently within AFL ranks.

2. It's very likely that for Buckley to remain then many of his current assistants will be removed, that staff in the area of recruitment or high performance might suffer the same fate or a demotion while Pert has already been let go. I don't feel it's appropriate that others will have to carry the burden of another failed season without Buckley at least sharing in the blame and being prepared to suffer some form of consequence like they did.
If for nothing else taking a pay cut would be an excellent act of goodwill from the coach and enamour him to his doubters.

3. Buckley this week in his press conference stated that he loved the club and wanted to see it succeed. He then went on to talk about doing what he needs to do to give us the best opportunity for sustained success. Well Bucks great sentiment now think about what an extra $200,000 can do within our football department and how it could be used towards extra recruiting personnel or specialised skills coaching within the area of development.

4. Adding a high profile director of coaching like Paul Roos or experienced senior assistant appointment like Brett Ratten might just be the tonic to save his career but it will be costly (especially Roos) and reduce the amount of money that can be used on other individuals or programs. Unless we're prepared to go outside the cap having a coach prepared to take $200,000 less will sure help offset the expense of an appointment purely designed to help him keep his job and see him be the best he can be.
Given that players are sometimes asked to play for less in order to add a high profile recruit that hopefully improves the side I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask the same of the coach at this present time.

Just sack him.

 

[left at home]

While it's fair to say just about everything and anything that can be said about our senior coach has been in his dedicated thread of over 500 pages long one thing I believe remains in question.

Should Buckley be prepared to take a not insignificant pay cut if he gets to remain as senior coach?

I do and I'll outline my reasons why.

1. Based on our teams performance during his tenure he can thank himself fortunate if he gets to remain in his job as very few coaches have under the same circumstance in the time of the top 8.
Given that many people in senior management positions would be on performance based contracts out in the real world I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest he take a cut in pay to reflect our side once again missing out on a finals opportunity.
I don't profess to know what the salary of Buckley is but something within the vicinity of $800,000 a year is most likely. I would suggest a pay cut of 25% or $200,000 be appropriate and leave him with a salary akin to the lowest paid senior coaches currently within AFL ranks.

2. It's very likely that for Buckley to remain then many of his current assistants will be removed, that staff in the area of recruitment or high performance might suffer the same fate or a demotion while Pert has already been let go. I don't feel it's appropriate that others will have to carry the burden of another failed season without Buckley at least sharing in the blame and being prepared to suffer some form of consequence like they did.
If for nothing else taking a pay cut would be an excellent act of goodwill from the coach and enamour him to his doubters.

3. Buckley this week in his press conference stated that he loved the club and wanted to see it succeed. He then went on to talk about doing what he needs to do to give us the best opportunity for sustained success. Well Bucks great sentiment now think about what an extra $200,000 can do within our football department and how it could be used towards extra recruiting personnel or specialised skills coaching within the area of development.

4. Adding a high profile director of coaching like Paul Roos or experienced senior assistant appointment like Brett Ratten might just be the tonic to save his career but it will be costly (especially Roos) and reduce the amount of money that can be used on other individuals or programs. Unless we're prepared to go outside the cap having a coach prepared to take $200,000 less will sure help offset the expense of an appointment purely designed to help him keep his job and see him be the best he can be.
Given that players are sometimes asked to play for less in order to add a high profile recruit that hopefully improves the side I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask the same of the coach at this present time.

It was said in a post in one of the threads that he is on around 700k or a little less, if so he is not that highly paid.
And Roos would not do anything club wise for under 1.2mill
200 k would not get a line coach, need to double that

 

[Sco80]

Oh, you must be new to Collingwood, welcome!

We once had a senior coach by the name of Mick Malthouse.

Some folks were dirty on Mick being sacked - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick would have won us another 3 Premierships.

Other folks were dirty on Mick reneging on his contract - it went on for years - those folks reckon Mick underminded his successor and ruined the club.

I know this post is in jest but we would of had 10, 11 and possibly 12 even with jmac passing had mick jot god the succession plan on his mind

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Maybe but from my point of view it's an overall club focus thing

The main reason Collingwood is involved with the female competition is to ensure we are there for the ongoing supporters who wish females to play the game.
Until the ladies started to play I never realised how much the female supporters loved it and what it represents.

As a responsible club we can't let that supporter base be neglected.

I see it as a great support to the main game, our boys playing.

 

[BYE BYE JOSH]

While it's fair to say just about everything and anything that can be said about our senior coach has been in his dedicated thread of over 500 pages long one thing I believe remains in question.

Should Buckley be prepared to take a not insignificant pay cut if he gets to remain as senior coach?

I do and I'll outline my reasons why.

1. Based on our teams performance during his tenure he can thank himself fortunate if he gets to remain in his job as very few coaches have under the same circumstance in the time of the top 8.
Given that many people in senior management positions would be on performance based contracts out in the real world I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest he take a cut in pay to reflect our side once again missing out on a finals opportunity.
I don't profess to know what the salary of Buckley is but something within the vicinity of $800,000 a year is most likely. I would suggest a pay cut of 25% or $200,000 be appropriate and leave him with a salary akin to the lowest paid senior coaches currently within AFL ranks.

2. It's very likely that for Buckley to remain then many of his current assistants will be removed, that staff in the area of recruitment or high performance might suffer the same fate or a demotion while Pert has already been let go. I don't feel it's appropriate that others will have to carry the burden of another failed season without Buckley at least sharing in the blame and being prepared to suffer some form of consequence like they did.
If for nothing else taking a pay cut would be an excellent act of goodwill from the coach and enamour him to his doubters.

3. Buckley this week in his press conference stated that he loved the club and wanted to see it succeed. He then went on to talk about doing what he needs to do to give us the best opportunity for sustained success. Well Bucks great sentiment now think about what an extra $200,000 can do within our football department and how it could be used towards extra recruiting personnel or specialised skills coaching within the area of development.

4. Adding a high profile director of coaching like Paul Roos or experienced senior assistant appointment like Brett Ratten might just be the tonic to save his career but it will be costly (especially Roos) and reduce the amount of money that can be used on other individuals or programs. Unless we're prepared to go outside the cap having a coach prepared to take $200,000 less will sure help offset the expense of an appointment purely designed to help him keep his job and see him be the best he can be.
Given that players are sometimes asked to play for less in order to add a high profile recruit that hopefully improves the side I don't believe it's unreasonable to ask the same of the coach at this present time.

 

[Linda_Lovelace]

Almost worth an extension for the lol's on Melbourne.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

While I agree with a lot you say I think Bucks and the MC have mainly selected well this year.

Broomhead and Aish have a good number of seasons in the game now and both have had multiple chances to nail a spot in the 22 permanently. Both have struggled to do so and I believe should only been playing on merit. I wouldn't have given them more than they got this year.

Shaz has been managed very well. Given enough VFL time to build confidence, not rushed. This season was all about games at any level. He hasn't set the world alight at AFL level but has shown some promise. 2018 was always more the season to find out what he is likely to become. Brown and Daicos have both got a taste. They are later draft picks in their 1st season. For them to debut is excellent. Their performance in the VFL didn't stand out to the level where they demanded selection any earlier. Neither have done that much but again 2018 will tell us more about whether they are good enough to be regular AFL players. These players are not stars and don't necessarily benefit from being put in the AFL before they are ready. They all can look forward to 2018 after bending well managed in 2017 for mine.

Throw in Kirby and how he was managed. Not rushed. No Hail Mary during the season.

Gave him a taste at the last round. Just watching the game, he obviously isn't there yet, but have to say his tackling, looks a strong suit!
And he does need a strong decent full pre season.

It's all up with him I reckon.

Just a quick observation of the three, if one were to project who will have the better longer term career, I'd say Kirby has the most upside, then Daicos (but boy he looks smooth) and then Brown.
But up to them.
Be interesting to watch.

 

[BYE BYE JOSH]

well said mate...

We know the Pies have been playing for their coach, and who can blame them? He's one of the better people in footy. If the good bloke factor comes into play, Buckley would be Collingwood coach for life.

In many cases, he's brought these players across to Collingwood on better money than what they were on before, and has them coming daily to a facility much more opulent than the digs they left behind.

So, it stands to reason that they're going to swear their undying loyalty to Buckley.

The intellectual case for retaining Buckley isn't anywhere near as strong. He took over a beaten Grand Finalist at the start of 2012 and since then the Pies have finished fourth, eighth, 11th, 12th, 12th and now 13th. They won nine-and-a-half games this year, half a game better than last year, but before then they had won fewer games each year under Buckley.

At any other club in any other elite sport, there would be no discussion. Buckley would be long gone. But the succession plan that elevated him to the coaching position was conceived and executed by president Eddie McGuire and it would take a rare admission of failure by him if he chooses not to renew Buckley's contract.

 

[Magpie Girl]

I, for one, hope he gets reappointed

 

[Matt_352]

Love Nathan, given everything to the club so much respect for that. Its someones elses turn to have a go.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

I, for one, hope he gets reappointed

Change is needed, we need a fresh start IMO.

 

[Matt_352]

Change is needed, we need a fresh start IMO.

yep roos director of coaching dew or caracella coach

 

[Woods List Clogger]

I am also concerned about the impact all the speculation about Bucks has had on the players. They have been carrying the burden of thinking their performance each week will result in their coach losing his job and many of them are very young - this impacts them personally but also must impact on field performance. I think they need a reset with someone unencumbered by the Ed/Bucks/MM history and to get back to the simplicity of playing the game they dreamt of as little boys at an elite level. If Bucks is reappointed and there is no improvement in win/loss, the media circus will start again next year regardless of the timeframe of any contract because of the history. It is not good for the players and not good for CFC. I was in the rooms post game and the players really needed the win but so did we all to have some optimism and release.

I would love for Bucks to be a great coach and achieve the ultimate success which eluded him as a player. My issue is that the 6 year record provides no evidence to support him staying on.

Many posters who do not want him to continue say he is a terrible coach but if he were so, the decision would be easy. I fear he is mediocre and he is being kept on because he is a nice guy and well liked by the media who see he has integrity under fire which is admirable. We all want him to be successful as a coach as he was such a club champion and his love for Collingwood is clear. Whilst he did some coaching moves that teased us into believing he could be better, I fear he is a serviceable and honest coach but not a creative and talented one who can bring us premierships. Clarkson often tries different things to innovate and get an edge or at least find out about what his list can do. Yesterday we finally saw some different moves but why in the last game after 6 years? Those moves reveal that we may have overemphasised the need for a KPF as Cox and Grundy can work rotating forward/ruck with small defensive forwards at their feet (Fasolo and Cox don't work in the same forward line as neither are defensive enough but Cox with Brown, Daicos, De Goey, Kirby, Steele at his feet can work) and Maynard in the midfield was fabulous. Moore swinging behind the ball was also great. With Howe we do not need Lever, in my view. Those moves lead me to think we need to draft a Daniel Wells type midfielder who could also play off halfback with speed and class. The changes revealed things and changed my mind on players but reinforced my view that Bucks is an ordinary and not a great coach as it all feels too little too late.

One of my main frustrations has been selection decisions under Bucks. How many games were put into a backline that could not dispose of the ball (gone now) or hard working , honest players with not much talent over the last 6 years (Blair, Smith) over more talented individuals? Or we went with 3 talls in the forward line against clubs with fast rebounding defenders who punished us with goals on the rebound. Why have we waited so long to see what some of our supposedly talented youngsters can do - see if Broomhead, Aish, Daicos, Brown, Scharenberg can play and make clear decisions on them. It showed we needed to go with talent and get games into them rather than persist with mediocre players with the right work ethic but poor disposal skills. Occasional flashes of brilliance in young talent with foot skills will become more frequent with experience and the chemistry of the group is important to ultimately succeed. Do we know who is in our best 22 yet?

I heard Bucks once say that on list management he had more say in who left the club whereas the list manager had more say in who came to the club. If that is the case, then I won't hold him accountable for the Mayne debacle but I do for Heater (which lead to Beams going). I believe that was about Bucks' inability to manage people rather than about what was best for CFC. We have never been able to fill that gap and it wasn't necessary.

I will go to the footy every week and support the Pies no matter what the outcome of this review. I will hope like crazy that Bucks will prove me wrong and we will be successful.

If I were a Board member, I would struggle to re-appoint and would want exit terms in the contract to protect the club. I would want assistants in place to mitigate risk of having to exit him early and also to bring in some innovative thinking and player development expertise.

We are Collingwood and we deserve the best for our club. We need a senior coach as good a coach as Nathan Buckley was as a player. Sadly, I think that will be someone else. I hope I am wrong.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Thank you QH for a most articulate and well reasoned post.You have voiced the thoughts and feelings of many Collingwood fans who are concerned with the direction the club has taken over the last six years.

 

[aussiekop79]

The day bucks became coach is the day he accepted responsibility for our teams results.
Maybe one or two bad years could be explained by reduilding, injuries, assistants, malthouse, culture, the media, or any other reasons.
We're now six years into bucks reign and has never had to take any responsibilty for the teams failures. Bucks the player, bucks the great man, bucks the wonderful ambassador of collingwood football club or bucks the three handicap golfer should have no bearing on how he is judged as a coach.