I have no doubt Bailey is a Good and Hopefully GREAT Coach. Patience Grasshoppers

New coaches always seem to take some weeks for their message to sink in, so I look at the first 6 weeks compared to now in an effort to mark him, and the results are positive for Bailey.

- He has a young, and pretty rough list, with no stars. His core of ball-winners and match-winners are good - very good footballers, but there aren't enough of them. Green, Bruce, Wheatley, White... And at various stages guys like Robbo. But these mature heads are not GREAT players (though Green has been playing the best of his career)...

- In order to mark him you only need to watch a tape of any of the first 6 games, and compare the skills to any of the last 6 games. The 22s are not HUGELY different, but they play like completely different teams. He said he wanted to build a competitive spirit, and that's exactly what's happened.

- He's making good young players into 22 game-a-year AFL players. There are some that are good enough to star in single seasons, like Sylvia, McLean, Morton etc etc... and his work with Warnock and Garland who had both been written off has been absolutely superb.

Everyone knows we were never going to win a lot of games this year, and probably not next... We are rebuilding and SOMEHOW are not the worst side in the AFL. I would rather be following us than Essendon or Freo as they are further from a [censored] than us, and West Coast are playing much worse footy too.

Given our weaknesses, the way he's held the team together and kept them positive, and gotten some good footy out of them... it's a pass mark for me.

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have a fundamental disagreement with the style of footy he wants us to play. I think its a style that has been routinely beaten in finals and is years behind the direction footy is moving.

That said, at achieving what he is trying to achieve I think he's going ok. For guys who arent built for playing that style of footy our guys are adapting to it, and to give Bails his credit, he has made changes to what he initially tried to implement, and that has helped.

Is he a good coach? Too soon to say.

Interesting view on the style of footy he's instilling Hards. Care to expand?

I'll admit to some ignorance on exactly what the style is apart from accountable footy and experimenting with the current list.

What is it about DB's plan that has teams routinely beaten in Finals?

I know old school, what the hell is new school?

He is starting to getting better results now.

It took him 14 weeks to finally get the right leadership group up and going.

Since the Fremantle win with the exception of the Saints game (even though we got pumped by Adelaide I thought we showed some good signs) we have been a lot better.

Some kids are starting to step up like Dunn, Bate, Aussie, Garland, Warnock and CJ.

McLean, Green and Miller are begining to show more leadership.

He still has a long way to go but it's suddenly not looking like all doom and gloom like it did in the first 6 rnds.

He is 10 times better than Daniher.

What did Miller, CJ, Jamar, Warnock etc.. ever do under Daniher? Sweet FA.

Bailey has them all looking like they will make the cut. Yes, even Jamar.

I could throw in Garland and Buckley, but Danners only had half a season with them. If Daniher was still coach I get the feeling they would both be on the footy scrapheap come years end.

Bailey is a master developer. I am excited.

out of interest, could the improvement in CJ, buckley etc be simply a natural progression of their development or does everyone believe that DB is directly responsible?

out of interest, could the improvement in CJ, buckley etc be simply a natural progression of their development or does everyone believe that DB is directly responsible?

Fair question, but IMO, all of these blokes have improved this season and are in career best form

Garland

Dunn

Buckley

CJ

Sylvia

PJ

Warnock

Miller

also Morton, Ozzie, Valenti have all performed after debuting as Bailey products

On top of this, Green, McLean, Bruce, Davey, Whelan, Wheatley and Moloney(pre-injury) are all performing solidly

Bailey's focus and selling point was his supposed ability to nurture and develop players to their potential and it seems to me he is off to a RIPPING start.

Where's Mono?

Fair question, but IMO, all of these blokes have improved this season and are in career best form

GarlandDunn Buckley CJ Sylvia PJ Warnock Miller

also Morton, Ozzie, Valenti have all performed after debuting as Bailey products

On top of this, Green, McLean, Bruce, Davey, Whelan, Wheatley and Moloney(pre-injury) are all performing solidly

Bailey's focus and selling point was his supposed ability to nurture and develop players to their potential and it seems to me he is off to a RIPPING start.

Now finally, we can see that the problem was not CAC, but the danniher regime. Look at these names mentioned above & names such as Jolly, Simmonds, Thompson, & others no longer at the club together with players only now showing what they can get out of themselves, see green, after they've allready played the majority of their careers.

Let's us not Forget, our previous Board appointed Bailley Unanaimously. Hopefully it was there greatest Legacy to the club.

Is he a good coach?

A wide sweeping question without defining criteria for ajudication.

What would we possibly considr as attributes of a good coach ?

An ability to impart knowledge

An ability to impart a strategy

An ability to effect change

An ability to nurture and progress talent

An ability to weed out the ordinary from the exceptional

Coaching I suppose by its generic assertion is to train something to do something in a particular fashion, nominally to advantage.

Has there been change ? Yes

Does there seem to be an easier perceived method in our efforts ? I'd lean towards a yes.

In a results driven environment can we claim anything ?? Probably too early yet to say anything one way or another definitively. Much of what Bailey and staff are attempting to do will be tempered and coloured by everything else thats happening around them. Quite simply the club is changing. Indeed they themselves are part of it.

I'm inclined to think he ( they ) are doing ok. From seeming disarray there appears purpose. There was "something" before yesterdays game. Some may call it a foreboding, an atmosphere or another intangible but there was an air of purpose, thats been missing for a long time.

Part of coaching ( anything ) is the ability to instill belief. Once the constituents cross the line the coach is limited to his impact. Its up to to the players. Its an abstract but they seem better kitted out for this as the weeks go past.

Is he a good coach ? I think YES !! Will he be the Mesiah to deliver us from the wilderness...time will tell

I am really confident in our direction under Bailey. Need to be patient though!

A proper assessment of Bailey will only be known after 2 to 3 years or more if he gets an extension.

So far I have been really impressed with the consistency of his message, his calmness at a time of crisis and his focus on changing the culture.

Given what he has inherited (players, facilities, Board changeover, financial difficulties) he has done an admirable job and I look forward to focus on how he takes the core of this team forward.

I would rather be following us than Essendon or Freo as they are further from a [censored] than us, and West Coast are playing much worse footy too.

out of interest, could the improvement in CJ, buckley etc be simply a natural progression of their development or does everyone believe that DB is directly responsible?

It may be natural development, but I always felt that ND was always a little apprehensive about throwing the young guys in and giving them enough time to develop. I guess understandable when we were often pushing for a finals place and senior guys were more likely to give more immediate results, but probably put us back in the long run. I guess bottoming out takes the pressure off just going with youth. Still, kudos to Bailey for getting something positive out of the kids.

Where's Mono?

Here I am 45.

In my view, the jury is still out on Bailey (and his coaching staff) - will be for a few years I guess.

In my view, he has 2 roles:

1. As Coach - (some factors) -

a. develop strategies to win games

b. train the players to implement those strategies

c. train players so as to develop their skills, to take them forward

d. impart confidence in the players

2. As a Leader - in football dept and club

For most of this year, I would say the coaching team has failed in 1b and 1d, with no evidence of 1a or 1c. I also consider Bailey was failing as a Leader - witness the leadership group at the start of the year (can't comment on his role around the club in general).

But, I think this last week has been a real turning point, and not just because the team won.

1. A new look team

2. Signs of coaching - When we got in front, we flooded the lions forward line. Good coaching. Remember when we got in front of the bullies last year? after a run of goals. We didn't flood; the bullies got a quick goal; the bullies flooded

3. Signs of growing player confidence - witness C Johnson

4. Leadership from staff/Bailey - The player leadership group has been drastically changed (not by a player vote)

I think the signs are really good.

Regarding Bailey's staying calm etc in the media. I am cautious about this, and what it means. Call me a cynic if you like. (Folks might remember the film "Being There" in which a dim-witted gardener's simple mutterings were mistaken for pearls of wisdom and he, the gardener (Peter Sellers) became president.)

Regarding Bailey's staying calm etc in the media. I am cautious about this, and what it means. Call me a cynic if you like. (Folks might remember the film "Being There" in which a dim-witted gardener's simple mutterings were mistaken for pearls of wisdom and he, the gardener (Peter Sellers) became president.)

I think you're off the mark, but I did find the analogy amusing.

I think you're off the mark, but I did find the analogy amusing.

Agree but the analogy is misplaced. I much prefer clear consistent sensible statements from a Coach than the recent trucculent and inept media explosions of Mark Williams and John Worsfold.

Here I am 45.

In my view, the jury is still out on Bailey (and his coaching staff) - will be for a few years I guess....

Spot on Mono with everything you've written.

As for Bailey's calmness in the box, it's easy to be calm when there's no expectations of winning. And IMO, his apparent calmness doesn't prove anything. It's the coach's game strategies and how the players are performing, that really matter.

Personally, I don't believe that Bailey has coached well to date, but as long as he's prepared to learn and adjust, he should be given the chance with at least 2 years in the job.

What is the thoughts on Bailey so far? Is he better than Daniher (both as a coach, and promoting the club)? And does anyone know what his gameplan is?????

I think he maybe a more astute coach than Daniher, but its too early to tell, he hasn't had the same quality players at his disposal at what Daniher had. Promoting the club, well Daniher only really done it for the length of one pre season in 2004. And then the Reverend tag stuck all of the sudden. He didnt really do much after that. Bailey doesn't really have to do that. It will be Connolly and Stynes doing that.

As for Bailey's game plan, whilst he coached very well on Sunday according to some experienced observers against Matthews who will go down as one of the best. He needs players to carry out his game plan, which will still take time. But he's on the right track, much like Alastair Clarkson when he started a few years ago. As Bailey has told his recruitment department, "Give me kids, kids and more kids." Because he needs to mould them into his game plan.

He will start to get my tick of approval once Melbourne can play back to back weeks of decent footy. So far he's failed dismally in this area.

The dogs will be barking if we follow up the Collingwood peformance with a putrid performance against Richmond.

With respect to the Richmond game. It was a 15-20minute period where Richmond played unbelievable footy in the second quarter which went along way to winning the game. Our boys came back and showed grit, the same grit that was displayed against Collingwood.

It was three or four bad pieces of inefficient disposal and not hard enough play by Cale Morton that cost mfc dearly

But, I think this last week has been a real turning point, and not just because the team won.

Sound reasoning. I would look beyond last week to the last five or six weeks. There has been a steady improvement in the intensity and defensive accountability of the side in that period. The defensive pressure and tackling display on Sunday was light years away form our insipid early performances (v Hawthorn, Bullies and Kangas especially). Apart from the St Kilda abberation, the Dee's have shown some improvement in every game since the Freo win, including goalkicking efficiency. Given where the side started from this season, and where they are now (a competetive side week to week) I'm currently very optimistic of the direction Dean Bailey is taking the team.

I think you're off the mark, but I did find the analogy amusing.

I didn't mean to infer that Bailey is a dim-wit; far from it. But I was trying to show that statements can be misjudged/misinterpreted. Especially simple statements.

I didn't mean to infer that Bailey is a dim-wit; far from it. But I was trying to show that statements can be misjudged/misinterpreted. Especially simple statements.

Life's like a box of chocolates Mono