Mega Thread The Western Bulldogs - The Sack Macca saga

Status
Not open for further replies.

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
So his there for the pasta
No he is there to make sure he is not a d...head, but more importantly to get know the history and family of potential recruits.

The process is so refined now that players of suspect character generally drop a fair bit in the draft, some not even picked up at all.

Macca or any coach can't really judge any players on ability compared to other players as the recruiters have that intel.

Macca likes to meet with the players we are likely to draft as part of his philosophy in developing players is to show a genuine interest in their lives, so he meets with the players and their parents. The recruiters have generally weeded out those of suspect character as they know these players are unlikely to develop in our program.

Some coaches like to meet players, there are more who do not meet recruits until after they have been drafted as they see their role in developing their football skills and knowledge and do not see they need to know everything of a players back ground.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

yebiga

Anglo Guilt - suck it up
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
10,468
Likes
10,874
Location
Mens Gallery
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Seems to me, if your right: dickheads have been weeded out, talent has been assessed, needs have been determined ladidada
There is no reason for him to be there other than the Pasta.

I mean can you think of another reason?

Seems Eade just did not like Pasta.
 

ThirdLegUp

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Posts
3,903
Likes
6,253
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
all i picked up from that tv show was the coaches thought the new age 30 people for 30 tasks was stupid, frustrating, and they had no idea what it all meant, impeding them in their jobs. Macca has input, a lot of input in who is recruited, he speaks to all those responsible for recruiting and they know EXACTLY what he wants without having to ask him every second, they go and do their thing. However, macca doesn't go and watch every lower league or junior league game, so he has their advice to go on, so in this situation he only has what is presented to him in regards to many players. Everyone at the club is aware of others opinions and thoughts and it all corrilates into what gets done. It isn't 30 departments who all get together at the end of the year and say, right, this is who we have, 5 midfielders, best in the league... ahh, we have midfielders, best in the league coming out the whazzoo, no kpf or kpd though, oops, sorry, we'll keep that in mind for next year. see you in 12 months!

Also keep in mind, that coaches are not stupid, and it not only benefits them to not belittle anothers position at a club, but also benefits them to down play how influencial they are, since no one is more aware of EVEERYTHING being blamed on the coach, then a coach is..
 

Toastman

All Australian
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Posts
766
Likes
644
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
St. Louis Blues, Salavat Yulaev Ufa
No he is there to make sure he is not a d...head, but more importantly to get know the history and family of potential recruits.

The process is so refined now that players of suspect character generally drop a fair bit in the draft, some not even picked up at all.

Macca or any coach can't really judge any players on ability compared to other players as the recruiters have that intel.

Macca likes to meet with the players we are likely to draft as part of his philosophy in developing players is to show a genuine interest in their lives, so he meets with the players and their parents. The recruiters have generally weeded out those of suspect character as they know these players are unlikely to develop in our program.

Some coaches like to meet players, there are more who do not meet recruits until after they have been drafted as they see their role in developing their football skills and knowledge and do not see they need to know everything of a players back ground.
This is just like any big business, you have a team who provide options on what the company should do, such as marketing strategy or product development, and do the leg work to assess the best direction and then if the decision is going to have a major impact on the business then the CEO signs off.
This is what Macca does and what Eade didn't. You trust your team but at the end of the day the coach is the only one who knows where he wants the team to go and can confirm that the player is likely to fit with his plans.

Macca visits a lot of potentials and provides significant input to the process which seems to be coming out in the performances of our young players. Eade hit auto pilot and it was a mess.

I agree the coach can't do all the leg work, which is why you have the team to advise, but the footy team as a whole is still his responsibility whether he want's it to be or not. Delegating to an underling doesn't absolve him of that responsibility.

Also the "The process is so refined now" line sounds good in theory but the reality is that there are still teams who have to sack players for crap like sexting underage girls so it really isn't refined at all in terms of character. All you have are personal interactions and the hope that the players don't screw you over.
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
Seems to me, if your right: dickheads have been weeded out, talent has been assessed, needs have been determined ladidada
There is no reason for him to be there other than the Pasta.

I mean can you think of another reason?

Seems Eade just did not like Pasta.
Yes this:

Macca likes to meet with the players we are likely to draft as part of his philosophy in developing players is to show a genuine interest in their lives, so he meets with the players and their parents. The recruiters have generally weeded out those of suspect character as they know these players are unlikely to develop in our program.

Choose to believe whatever you want, your choice. Every coach says they have little to do with recruiting, you believe they are wrong, that's fine.

Recruiting is not on the head of coaches, therefore any pro or anti Macca people using recruiting during Maccas tenure as a support of their point of view is a nonsense.

He, and Eade for that matter should be judged on gameplan, individual development, team development and how far they take a list in comparison to other lists. This is what they do and what they should be judged on.

If you don't believe this, do this exercise. Of the last 10 coaches appointed, how many brought in their own recruiting team? How many were appointed by the football director?

Then how many brought in their own coaching and development team?

Why are these pertinent questions. Well surely if the coach has such an input in recruiting they would want their own recruiters would they not.

Yebiga, I mostly agree with your posts as they have great thought and substance including incidentally most of your posts on this thread, its just on this topic dare I use these words on this thread, the facts do not support your premise, or not those I know of anyway.
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
all i picked up from that tv show was the coaches thought the new age 30 people for 30 tasks was stupid, frustrating, and they had no idea what it all meant, impeding them in their jobs. Macca has input, a lot of input in who is recruited, he speaks to all those responsible for recruiting and they know EXACTLY what he wants without having to ask him every second, they go and do their thing. However, macca doesn't go and watch every lower league or junior league game, so he has their advice to go on, so in this situation he only has what is presented to him in regards to many players. Everyone at the club is aware of others opinions and thoughts and it all corrilates into what gets done. It isn't 30 departments who all get together at the end of the year and say, right, this is who we have, 5 midfielders, best in the league... ahh, we have midfielders, best in the league coming out the whazzoo, no kpf or kpd though, oops, sorry, we'll keep that in mind for next year. see you in 12 months!

Also keep in mind, that coaches are not stupid, and it not only benefits them to not belittle anothers position at a club, but also benefits them to down play how influencial they are, since no one is more aware of EVEERYTHING being blamed on the coach, then a coach is..
So who is responsible for the list, the coach or the recruiting team including the list manager?
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
This is just like any big business, you have a team who provide options on what the company should do, such as marketing strategy or product development, and do the leg work to assess the best direction and then if the decision is going to have a major impact on the business then the CEO signs off.
This is what Macca does and what Eade didn't. You trust your team but at the end of the day the coach is the only one who knows where he wants the team to go and can confirm that the player is likely to fit with his plans.

Macca visits a lot of potentials and provides significant input to the process which seems to be coming out in the performances of our young players. Eade hit auto pilot and it was a mess.

I agree the coach can't do all the leg work, which is why you have the team to advise, but the footy team as a whole is still his responsibility whether he want's it to be or not. Delegating to an underling doesn't absolve him of that responsibility.

Also the "The process is so refined now" line sounds good in theory but the reality is that there are still teams who have to sack players for crap like sexting underage girls so it really isn't refined at all in terms of character. All you have are personal interactions and the hope that the players don't screw you over.
So does the list manager and recruitment team report to the coach?
 

Toastman

All Australian
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Posts
766
Likes
644
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
St. Louis Blues, Salavat Yulaev Ufa
So does the list manager and recruitment team report to the coach?
Do you mean in the Org Chart or in reality? In terms of approving sick leave, negotiating pay rates and approving their employment decisions then the football manager handles the administrative tasks but on performance they report to the coach and take direction from the coach as to how to fulfil their duties, what team to make etc.
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
Last year the club made a call on bonty
Are we really of the opinion macca had no input? The year before stringer? Macrae? No in put?

Corporate speak and reality are two different things.
Where have I said no input? I have said it is not the coaches responsibility and he should not be held accountable for it. Do recruiters seek opinions of coaches, of course they will. The recruiting team do not report to the coach, or do you believe they do?

If the recruiting team including list manager do not report to the coach, how the hell are coaches responsible for poor drafting and trading?

If the group putting together the list does not report to the coach, why is the coach responsible for a poor list?

However, if players have not developed as they should have resulting in a poor list, then yes this is the responsibility of the coach as development is part of his role
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
Do you mean in the Org Chart or in reality? In terms of approving sick leave, negotiating pay rates and approving their employment decisions then the football manager handles the administrative tasks but on performance they report to the coach and take direction from the coach as to how to fulfil their duties, what team to make etc.
Do they really? can you provide any examples where a coach has been sacked for poor recruiting and list management and not player or team development?

At Geelong, who is given the credit for list management, Bomber? Chris Scott?

At Hawthorn, was it Clarkson who built the list?

At North is it Brad Scott building the list?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ThirdLegUp

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Posts
3,903
Likes
6,253
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
So who is responsible for the list, the coach or the recruiting team including the list manager?
Both... lachy if you are my recruitment manager i have to trust in your ability to go out and find me the best talent via your gang of henchmen. Throughout the year you and i speak and we will both be on the same page of what is wanted and needed. There is no way i would let you dictate who i train as ultimately it is MY ass on the line. However, i don't have time to run around town and see everything and scruitinise all the youngsters... you don't either, hence the henchmen. But you are going to get the best henchmen you can, because saying, while my assistants failed me, won't mena anything, it will be your ass on the line. ANd same goes for me, when they say, why did you recruit this this and that, nd i say, lachy gave me dud picks...no good enough TLU, lachy is your man, and lachy should be in talks with you throughout the year, if lachy got it wrong, it must have been because you, TLU were not able to communicate your desires. do we need to hire a TLU comprehension officer to mediate between you?

Eades can indeed take some of the blame for bad recruiting. (be it his input, or worse, his lack of input) and Macca can absolutely take some of the credit for our recruiting, expecially whe you consider he reorganised and remoulded the program on his arrival. So if our picks turn to duds... macca will be more to blame then most, since he pretty much saw to its construction in its current criteria form.

edit:also, the both at the top...still means i get the sack, not you lol
 
Last edited:

Guido

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Posts
1,276
Likes
608
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Leros United
Lets agree to disagree on that one. Lake with another brain fade gifting a goal to Sookwoldt at the start of the third was a poor umpring decision? Lake got sucked in... Lake should have known better.

Players bombing long in to the forward 50 hoping that someone was going to take a mark? now who's direction was that? If not Eade's plan, the players were not listening...
St Kilda lost 2 games in 22 up until that point. They had 4 of the top 15 performing players in the league that year, 3 of them superstars at the top of their game - any one of them could be argued to be among the top 5 players in the league at the time.

We also had a good mix at the time, but no neutral supporter would argue that it was better than St Kilda's.

To come within 7 points, and have had the opportunities to bury them (Gia, Aker, Gilbee) and yes, have a couple of bullshit frees go against us (Harbrow clearly touched Reiwoldt's last goal, today the goal would be reversed on review and we would be 2 points down and have 50 seconds with ball in hand - and back then we actually had some form of competent system in place to get the ball out), to construct a gameplan/tactics that got us that close to a clearly superior squad and clearly better performing team that year, I think speaks volumes of Eade's matchday coaching.

If he was coach with the exact same squad at his disposal, on all available evidence I don't think McCartney's tactical acumen would have got us anywhere near as close.
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
Both... lachy if you are my recruitment manager i have to trust in your ability to go out and find me the best talent via your gang of henchmen. Throughout the year you and i speak and we will both be on the same page of what is wanted and needed. There is no way i would let you dictate who i train as ultimately it is MY ass on the line. However, i don't have time to run around town and see everything and scruitinise all the youngsters... you don't either, hence the henchmen. But you are going to get the best henchmen you can, because saying, while my assistants failed me, won't mena anything, it will be your ass on the line. ANd same goes for me, when they say, why did you recruit this this and that, nd i say, lachy gave me dud picks...no good enough TLU, lachy is your man, and lachy should be in talks with you throughout the year, if lachy got it wrong, it must have been because you, TLU were not able to communicate your desires. do we need to hire a TLU comprehension officer to mediate between you?

Eades can indeed take some of the blame for bad recruiting. (be it his input, or worse, his lack of input) and Macca can absolutely take some of the credit for our recruiting, expecially whe you consider he reorganised and remoulded the program on his arrival. So if our picks turn to duds... macca will be more to blame then most, since he pretty much saw to its construction in its current criteria form.

edit:also, the both at the top...still means i get the sack, not you lol
Reality in all AFL clubs though is when it comes to drafting about the only input a coach has is the personal characteristics of a player and those who are a definite no. The responsibility of drafting sits fully with those who are charged with it and this is why they do not report to or are accountable to the coach. It is why coaches can come and go but this is done separately do the recruitment and list management team. Keep in mind players drafted in this years draft are unlikely to hit their peak for 5 years. The chances of the current coach being in place when the current crop come through are minimal at best.

Of course if they are not delivering results the coach can ask for a review and have those in recruiting replaced.

Coaches do have more input in trading as their is more known about the players and in general they are being recruited to fill holes in the current list identified by the coaching group.

The coaches have more control over all direct football staff including fitness, stats and any other position related directly to player development as this is what a coach is responsible for.

So in regards to trades, yes Eade can accept both reasonability and accolades as can Macca, but drafting, no.

BTW a couple of ordinary drafts and I would be joining you on the dole que
 

_Mike_

Super Moderator
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Posts
23,486
Likes
18,294
Location
Victoria
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Tottenham, Montreal Canadiens
Moderator #9,515
To come within 7 points, and have had the opportunities to bury them (Gia, Aker, Gilbee) and yes, have a couple of bullshit frees go against us (Harbrow clearly touched Reiwoldt's last goal, today the goal would be reversed on review and we would be 2 points down and have 50 seconds with ball in hand
Well, unfortunately that was 5 years ago now.. The cameras are with the goal umpires so there's no surety that they would have picked up Harbrow's alleged touch off the boot.

and back then we actually had some form of competent system in place to get the ball out), to construct a gameplan/tactics that got us that close to a clearly superior squad and clearly better performing team that year, I think speaks volumes of Eade's match day coaching.
A subjective viewpoint IMO.. Look at the rematch the following year at Etihad against St.Kilda in 2010... It was a low scoring game, St.Kilda had flooded their backline with only a few forward in the last quarter and scores were close.. What does Eade do? puts Johnson on Milne who went on to kick 2 goals and win the match for them when we were in front.

Eade's match day plan was good in the early days, but by the end of 2009 and onwards most of the good coaches had worked out how to play over it.



If he was coach with the exact same squad at his disposal, on all available evidence I don't think McCartney's tactical acumen would have got us anywhere near as close.
Again, purely subjective, the list Eade had was far mature in age and experience than what we have now.

Disclaimer
- This is not a comparison between McCartney and Eade as I have not done any comparison.. Only pointing out the flaws with Eade and why (IMO) he couldnt get us across the line
 
Last edited:

TedDougChris

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Posts
19,167
Likes
21,616
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Charlton Athletic, Roys FFC
St Kilda lost 2 games in 22 up until that point. They had 4 of the top 15 performing players in the league that year, 3 of them superstars at the top of their game - any one of them could be argued to be among the top 5 players in the league at the time.

We also had a good mix at the time, but no neutral supporter would argue that it was better than St Kilda's.

To come within 7 points, and have had the opportunities to bury them (Gia, Aker, Gilbee) and yes, have a couple of bullshit frees go against us (Harbrow clearly touched Reiwoldt's last goal, today the goal would be reversed on review and we would be 2 points down and have 50 seconds with ball in hand - and back then we actually had some form of competent system in place to get the ball out), to construct a gameplan/tactics that got us that close to a clearly superior squad and clearly better performing team that year, I think speaks volumes of Eade's matchday coaching.

If he was coach with the exact same squad at his disposal, on all available evidence I don't think McCartney's tactical acumen would have got us anywhere near as close.
Saints first goal was from an incorrect umpiring decision as well. But I think we should move on from the Rocket era.....
 

TedDougChris

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Posts
19,167
Likes
21,616
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Charlton Athletic, Roys FFC
I'm also staggered that people are suggesting or inferring that the coach shouldn't be involved in assesing talent - particularly after the Garlett/Gartlett (not sure on spelling here) recruitment at Hawthorn..... They'll get him right, they have the right leaders and processes in place to help him make the most of his talents.... er, nope.....

When we are going through a rebuild, as we are - as many eyes and opinions on our potential draft picks is fine by me... Reduces the chance of a mistake...
 

lachy

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
3,003
Likes
2,518
Location
Western
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
I'm also staggered that people are suggesting or inferring that the coach shouldn't be involved in assesing talent - particularly after the Garlett/Gartlett (not sure on spelling here) recruitment at Hawthorn..... They'll get him right, they have the right leaders and processes in place to help him make the most of his talents.... er, nope.....

When we are going through a rebuild, as we are - as many eyes and opinions on our potential draft picks is fine by me... Reduces the chance of a mistake...
TDC not suggesting the coach should not be involved in assessing talent, more so it is not their accountability so should not be judged either way on who is drafted under their watch
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2010
Posts
2,616
Likes
4,176
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
after watching the AFL doco on the coaches, I wouldn't mind getting Sando in for a senior assistant job. Seems a very genuine bloke. I knw for a fact the majority of players at the Crows loved him. Reasons behind his sacking were stupid. Apparently couldn't communicate his message to the board effectively enough.

That club would have to be the worst run place in the AFL.
 

Guido

Club Legend
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Posts
1,276
Likes
608
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Leros United
Well, unfortunately that was 5 years ago now.. The cameras are with the goal umpires so there's no surety that they would have picked up Harbrow's alleged touch off the boot.
I remember looking at a replay on the Sunday Footy Show the next day clearly showing Harbrow's fingers being flung back against the ball, all the panel agreed, and it was a lot more clear than quite a few decisions that have been reversed this year.
A subjective viewpoint IMO.. Look at the rematch the following year at Etihad against St.Kilda in 2010... It was a low scoring game, St.Kilda had flooded their backline with only a few forward in the last quarter and scores were close.. What does Eade do? puts Johnson on Milne who went on to kick 2 goals and win the match for them when we were in front.

Eade's match day plan was good in the early days, but by the end of 2009 and onwards most coaches had worked out how to play over it.
I don't really care what happened in the re-match the next year, or that you believe some coaches had worked him out. The original post you were saying it was a joke to say that umpiring contributed to costing us the 2009 Prelim, with the insinuation that Eade's tactics cost us the game. The way I see it is if the question is whether it's pretty clear-cut that Eade's tactics that night gave the team an incredible opportunity to win that football game against a superior opponent (and went into the match 21-2), the answer is undoubtedly yes.
Again, purely subjective, the list Eade had was far mature in age and experience than what we have now.
Yes, of course it's subjective. But I did say "with the same list". Put McCartney in charge of that same list on that same night, and I don't see him doing as well.
 

Toastman

All Australian
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Posts
766
Likes
644
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
St. Louis Blues, Salavat Yulaev Ufa
Do they really? can you provide any examples where a coach has been sacked for poor recruiting and list management and not player or team development?

At Geelong, who is given the credit for list management, Bomber? Chris Scott?

At Hawthorn, was it Clarkson who built the list?

At North is it Brad Scott building the list?
Yes, the credit is given to the coach.
During the GF coverage they referred constantly to Clarkson building and turning over the list.
 

TedDougChris

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Posts
19,167
Likes
21,616
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Charlton Athletic, Roys FFC
TDC not suggesting the coach should not be involved in assessing talent, more so it is not their accountability so should not be judged either way on who is drafted under their watch
Agree with that mate - but they should be involved in the process of screening - that way the coach has some idea of their character and whether they need to adjust a few things or use a different lever on a particular player.

Recruiters should recruit and coaches should coach - but if they don't interact and work together it has all the ingredients for a massive ****up... Has to be alignment to go forward.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom