I would like to know what some of you think about the specialization of coaches in the modern day. In the old days it was just coach and assistant coach/es. Nowadays it's all about forward coach and midfield coach etc. Do people think that these specialized positions are all they are cranked up to be? Ultimately it is the coach that decides how a team plays. How much more do the others add, other than helping the coach to teach the players the game plan and perhaps bringing some additional ideas to the table. I don't really know exactly how involved these specialist coaches are, so I don't have much of an opinion on the matter.

But let's assume that these coaches are all specialists in their role. Just like a doctor who specializes, I would want a top ex-midfielder who played at the top level to coach the midfield brigade. Likewise with forward and defensive coaches. There's no point getting a neurosurgeon to do a knee reconstruction is there?

On the other hand, if these positions are just fancy titles and these specialist coaches are really only glorified assistant coaches who help with training and come up with the odd game-day idea, then someone like Williams would be a great choice. Has loads of experience, knows a lot about footy and has coached premiership sides. All he would really have to do would be to take the midfielders away during the parts of training when the players split off into groups, and help them to implement Bailey's midfield ideas.

So in the end, the wisdom of the decision comes down to what Bailey sees as the specific role of each of the specialist assistant coaches.

Hang on...isn't Peter German effectively replacing Chopper Lovell as far as Melbourne is concerned? He isn't going to be a full-time Development Coach for Melb listed players!!

My understanding is that German will have a part-time role as a development coach, as opposed to Lovell who was solely the senior coach of the Zebras.

I would like to know what some of you think about the specialization of coaches in the modern day. In the old days it was just coach and assistant coach/es. Nowadays it's all about forward coach and midfield coach etc. Do people think that these specialized positions are all they are cranked up to be? Ultimately it is the coach that decides how a team plays. How much more do the others add, other than helping the coach to teach the players the game plan and perhaps bringing some additional ideas to the table. I don't really know exactly how involved these specialist coaches are, so I don't have much of an opinion on the matter.

I think its more about spending the one-on-one time with players & working on their deficiencies to move them closer to being a complete player. Working on tiny things like turning your body one way or another, and analyzing the way a player goes about different tasks, breaking it down & improving one small facet which may get a better end result.

No senior coach could possibly do this all by themselves.

These days the game is all about gaining any small advantage you can get, & hopefully in the end it will have a cumulative effect that ends with your club winning the game.

But let's assume that these coaches are all specialists in their role. Just like a doctor who specializes, I would want a top ex-midfielder who played at the top level to coach the midfield brigade. Likewise with forward and defensive coaches. There's no point getting a neurosurgeon to do a knee reconstruction is there?

No, you're talking about getting a neurosurgeon to TEACH you how to do a knee reconstruction.

You definitely want someone who understands the nuances of the game at the top level, but also who can communicate and teach those things to young players. No use having someone who played instinctively and then can't put into words what they think a player should be doing.

Also, just because a player lacks the skills or the athletic abilities to be a true champion of the game, doesn't mean they don't understand that tactics and how to place yourself in the best position on the field & 'play the angles'.

I think its more about spending the one-on-one time with players & working on their deficiencies to move them closer to being a complete player. Working on tiny things like turning your body one way or another, and analyzing the way a player goes about different tasks, breaking it down & improving one small facet which may get a better end result.

No senior coach could possibly do this all by themselves.

These days the game is all about gaining any small advantage you can get, & hopefully in the end it will have a cumulative effect that ends with your club winning the game.

No, you're talking about getting a neurosurgeon to TEACH you how to do a knee reconstruction.

You definitely want someone who understands the nuances of the game at the top level, but also who can communicate and teach those things to young players. No use having someone who played instinctively and then can't put into words what they think a player should be doing.

Also, just because a player lacks the skills or the athletic abilities to be a true champion of the game, doesn't mean they don't understand that tactics and how to place yourself in the best position on the field & 'play the angles'.

That's pretty much what I was thinking. Forgive me if I have misunderstood what you said, but the defensive, midfield and forward coaches are there to do the hands-on work with the players at training that the coach can't possibly do by himself. Obviously there are other things that they bring to the table, and coaches would appreciate their expertise in planning match-day strategies, analyzing opposition sides, game-day ideas etc. But in essence, Williams' primary responsibility would be to work with the midfield unit in helping them to implement DB's gameplan as well as developing their skills. He would not be there to create new midfield styles and structures as that is Bailey's job (though Williams' suggestions should be considered by the head coach). If that is the case, then I don't see why Williams could not be an excellent midfield coach. He doesn't have to be a former champion midfielder or even a great strategist. All he needs to do is use his vast bank of knowledge and presumably excellent teaching and communication skills developed over numerous years of successful involvement in football as a player and coach. I can't see why anyone should consider this a negative move by the MFC. He is much more experienced than the likes of Buckley and Harvey in coaching terms, and has been around longer. He may never have come close to their level on the football field, but Alistair Clarkson was nowhere near as good as Tim Watson or Tony Shaw, and look who turned out to be the premiership coach and who were the one year wonders!!!

the solution is obvious

get the best player ever

he is clearly the best coach ever.

because he could play.

wow

great logic.

a coach has to be a teacher and communicator, as well as have a decent football knowledge, with the ability to motivate (long term) and get an entire club to work together.

a player has to be able to run, kick chase etc.

OF COURSE A GOOD PLAYER IS GOING TO BE A GOOD TEACHER, COMMUNICATOR, MOTIVATOR AND THEREFORE A GOOD COACH. wow

what an obvious conclusion

this is a fine appointment. bailey is making tough decisions to change the entire culture of the club. this is a good thing - but it also means that short term results will be sacrificed to ensure that the culture improves. in the long term the club will be A LOT better off.

mark williams has an excellent coaching CV.

does anyone here know if he even played afl or vfl?

does anyone here remember david parkin or the guy who coached north to two flags in the 90s ( i cant even remember his name) playing football? did they win brownlows? no. does it matter how good you were/are as a player when youre sitting in the coaches box? no [censored] way.