"We want an experienced coach"

[Scotland]

Was listening to an interview Andrew Maher did with someone whose name escapes me that was an NBL coach in the 90s. He was talking about coaches in the US college system, NBL, NBA etc. and was big on coaches having been in charge of their own team. That doesn't seem to be a bit driver in AFL appointments. Clubs tend to focus in who you coached under. A bunch of senior coaches were assistants under long tenured coaches in Clarkson, Malthouse, Worsfold, Roos etc. Having coached a VFL etc. side doesn't seem to be as important as having been a part of a successful program.

 

[Tom_Thumb]

Interesting Judd didn't think he needed any experience to be a Board Member!

 

[blitzer]

One thing that people probably don't like to think about it is their next coach may not be the one that leads them to premiership glory but might just be a steadying hand that gets them on the right track for the next few years. Just getting to the middle of the ladder and instilling a winning culture at Carlton would be a major achievement. For too many years they've relied on this concept that staying at the bottom and assembling an amazing talented list would just lead straight into premierships but honestly I'm not sure they are closer to a flag now than they were 4 years ago.

 

[Gavin Excell]

It's fascinating to see how the philosophy of hiring/retention of coaches has changed in my lifetime of watching footy, from the 'sack 'em if they don't instantly win a flag' mentality of the 80s to now where not only can a coach survive for a decade without ever being a strong chance of ever winning a flag (outside of a gallant finals run here and there) but a previously sacked 'failed' coach can be in the frame for a second chance without even a decent finals campaign under their belt.

which is BS

rewarding mediocrity

if I was a carlton fan the very last thing id want is proven trundlers like Ross Lyon and Brad Scott

Would take an untried option any day over them

 

[Scotland]

Carlton had the most experienced coach in history and went backwards then had an untried Clarkson disciple and haven't improved.

So yeah the problem is Carlton.

 

[Rich01]

Liddle needs to pull Judd back into line.

What is Judds role anyway? On the board and advisor to the Football department but takes no responsibility for their current position.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Liddle needs to pull Judd back into line.

What is Judds role anyway? On the board and advisor to the Football department but takes no responsibility for their current position.

Yes the Paul Roos gig - all care, no I mean no, responsibility

 

[brmi]

Judd as a player, especially at West Coast, was easily one of my favourite players to ever watch. Judd post retirement, an absolute flog and basically unbearable to listen to.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Yes the Paul Roos gig - all care, no I mean no, responsibility

Paul sees easy money.

He’ll jump from the chair before he gets asked to take any responsibility for how the blues are tracking.

 

[Rich01]

Yes the Paul Roos gig - all care, no I mean no, responsibility

I really hope Liddle has the balls to stand up to Jeanne and Bruce and make decisions to benefit the club.

For far too long those in so called positions of power have been puppets.

We know where the president and Judds loyalties lie. Hopefully an outsider can swim against the tide.

 

[master bate]

One thing that people probably don't like to think about it is their next coach may not be the one that leads them to premiership glory but might just be a steadying hand that gets them on the right track for the next few years. Just getting to the middle of the ladder and instilling a winning culture at Carlton would be a major achievement. For too many years they've relied on this concept that staying at the bottom and assembling an amazing talented list would just lead straight into premierships but honestly I'm not sure they are closer to a flag now than they were 4 years ago.

Last time they were bad they traded the farm for Judd hoping to improve, it worked, but they never had the list to get anywhere near a flag.

This time their list was so bad after Malthouse they almost had no choice but to go the full rebuild. Trading out Henderson and Yarran was clever and they sold at the right time on Gibbs too. Not really sure why they did the Tuohy deal but back flankers are pretty easy to replace.

They've made mistakes not bringing in more of the Nic Newman types - capable mature footballers with some experience - but the price they paid for Mitch McGovern and missing out on Shiel and multiple others shows they really were unable to bring in nearly anyone. They desperately needed to trade for some guys with 50-100 games who could play week in week out but every one of those players said no thanks I'm not going there.

Now their kids have matured a bit they should start to attract players and be on their way. The only way it goes completely wrong from here is if Daisy, Ed Curnow, Kreuzer, Murphy and Simpson aren't replaced by some veterans and if a big chunk of the B/C grade kids - Fisher, SPS, Dow, Kennedy, Setterfield, Marchbank, McKay, Cuningham, O'Brien, Stocker - don't improve. Those guys are all 19-22 and call all play a bit with good potential. Put 5 good veterans and 5 potential A graders in Cripps, Docherty, Walsh, Wietering and Curnow around that bunch at any other club and you'd say you've got a bright future.

Not every one of those guys will be a future good player, that's the way the draft and development works. Injury, lack of interest, deficiencies will derail some of them, but if you told me tomorrow Chris Fagan was taking over Carlton and they'd signed a 2 years younger Luke Hodge and added a couple of big bodies like a Mitch Robinson or Lyons type I'd be buying stock in Carlton.

 

[TeeJay Blue]

Last time they were bad they traded the farm for Judd hoping to improve, it worked, but they never had the list to get anywhere near a flag.

The funny thing is Carlton could have had the list to go all the way. But as usual from the blues, the source for most of its problems comes from the short-sighted vision of the board and officials.

Everybody makes it out like the Judd trade itself was the mistake, but fail to see how the club handled it afterward. They were still somewhat arrogant in their approach. They lifted their stars on pedestals and made sure others below fought harder to make a name for themselves. There was little no care in the drafting when the team began reaching the finals. There wasn't much of a development program for the playing group. Newer additions to the list weren't allowed the decent chance to challenge the experienced for regular spots in the AFL line-up. Because of all this, losing who they had under the eye of Malthouse was guaranteed to see the team collapse. The depths they reached however, could be another story of its own.

 

[Tectonic]

…. and should be a dishwashing 'Superstar'.

Rockstar or machine are the preferred adjectives.

Just give me clean plates and don't take forever to do the floor ffs

 

[TeeJay Blue]

I will never back off Carlton having changed much of its approach in recent years, but the board here is still undoubtedly in question regardless of whether or not Judd is speaking the truth.

From where I sit, this administration still looks to be rigid and fairly stubborn in their vision. They never practice what they preach and only ever look for shortcuts or the easy way out. If they say an 'experienced coach', then there are two major problems that are so clearly obvious to discern that they would be refusing to see themselves:

1 - This board obviously has no confidence in itself. Either that, or they don't share much knowledge of their job (which wouldn't surprise me whatsoever as a few are just power-brokers and rich business people of other unrelated projects). They're not willing to create their own history anymore, but rather sit there and honour what has been.

2 - This board has openly stated via both their president and CEO that the plan is still pretty much set in place. Simply looking for somebody with experience is enough to tell me that they're too picky in their search. They are wanting someone with many years and a degree of success under their belt though they are laying down a law for them. An experienced coach is more likely going to come with coaching strategies of their own (especially those they are long comfortable with) compared to somebody fairly newer to such a position. They are having far too much say on the matter, and are not giving their options the freedom to move and meet much of the handed criteria.

Plus there are certain coaches I wouldn't even consider. Ross Lyon is one of them (irrespective of his decision to stay at Freo). Not only has he not tasted ultimate glory, but shares similar tactics to Bolton and has long been the face of unexciting football. Excessive focus on defense, steady movement, etc. It's a plan easily exposed nowadays. He had one of the most potentially exciting forward lines (Walters, Hogan, Matera, Lobb, McCarthy, Taberner, etc.) yet weighs them down with slow, pedantic and sometimes complicated football.

That's exactly one of the few reasons Bolts was shown the door. Considering Ross for the position would be like Carlton moving from purchasing second-hand products to purchasing dollar store products. Bugger all change.

We're to be calling for the board to put some thought into their decisions, but everyone knows that is out of our reach. We can only accept things for what they are right now, and hope things do get better.

 

[branedotorg]

It's worth adding that not all "experienced" coaches are necessarily AFL retreads. Why not consider someone from state leagues?

No no one opens the box marked 'gary ayres'

 

[Benny78]

Malthouse is by far the most experienced available coach

 

[Toump Ass]

Who they really need to replace is the guy who gifted Liam Jones a three year contract extension after the woefully out of form Tom McDonald- who'd managed a monstrous dozen goals from playing EVERY GAME THIS YEAR- managed to kick 6 on him... from just three quarters of football.

 

[100action]

Couldn't agree more.

If the most impressive candidate happens to be experienced, that's fine, but to have a certain outcome as a preference, then you're limiting the field.

In 2004 our president and CEO said the same thing. We had some great older players but otherwise a relatively young squad, we had finished bottom 2 with an inexperienced coach two years running, it apparently HAD to be an experienced head. There was one main candidate that met the criteria - we interviewed him, only him, and offered him the role during the interview. Didn't even bother interviewing anyone else, Eade was apparently the man, and the narrative was that we beat Hawthorn to him.

The guy with massive raps who had been coaching our VFL affiliate Werribee a few years earlier, coached his own team to two consecutive grand finals in the SANFL, was midfield coach of the top of the ladder 2003 team... the up and coming coach we didn't even consider because of the idiotic "must be experienced" mantra - Alastair Clarkson.

Thankfully didn't make the same mistake ten years later, and we won a premiership because of it. A premiership no "experienced" head available at the time would have went close to winning.

I feel in recruiting, coaches with "experience" suffer from selection bias.

Good coaches with experience don't get sacked or moved on. A club only gunning for an 'available' experienced coach therefore is generally picking from a batch of failed experienced coaches: Eade, Malthouse (at Carlton), Wallace etc

Conversely if clubs actively hunted coaches that were contracted and manage to prise them away, then the notion of an experienced coach > inexperienced coach would hold true.

Which club in their right mind would take a Clarkson, Beveridge, Simpson, Hardwick and even god forbid C Scott or Fagan over an inexperienced coach that is on the market right now? (Ratten, Teague, Shaw)

 

[demondavey]

I imagine Carlton supporters would hate the idea, but Brad Scott would be perfect. Give him three years to get them competitive and playing finals, then fu** him off for your premiership coach.
The rub of course is moving on a coach who's taken you from bottom two to top eight.

Like Goodwin

 

[demondavey]

Who they really need to replace is the guy who gifted Liam Jones a three year contract extension after the woefully out of form Tom McDonald- who'd managed a monstrous dozen goals from playing EVERY GAME THIS YEAR- managed to kick 6 on him... from just three quarters of football.

Assume you’re taking the piss?

 

[demondavey]

Carlton playing the safe bet. Whether it works or not is a different story but odds say not. Teague probably best placed I’d reckon but who knows.

 

[sobrave]

Kenneth von stinkley, esq. Is available

 

[tonygeeks]

Why not a 1 yr 'prove it' deal for Teague ? If he keeps them moving in the right direction give him a longer term deal next year. You have to be very careful with the length of coaching contracts these days with the money coming out of the footy spend cap , it kinda works against the coaches really so it's not that smart the way it's set up IMO

 

[Damon_3388]

It's worth adding that not all "experienced" coaches are necessarily AFL retreads. Why not consider someone from state leagues?

7-time SANFL Premiership coach Roy Laird is leaving Central District after 17 years at the end of 2019...

 

[Mr.X]

Teague is an experienced coach, and has had a lengthy apprenticeship.