Gary Lyon Coaching Journey Starts

[H_T 3,049]

But anyway back OT I won't comment on the merits of Lyon as a senior coach one day but I must be honest, I'll be pensive throughout his development. Stability will be a very important thing for us at MFC going forward and the last thing we need is a current coach looking over his shoulder for whatever reasons, now or later. Lyon as an assistant coach to DB wouldn't work IMO and for DB to implement the best possible foundation surely he needs long term assurance. I don't have any real reservations against Lyon (depending on what his asperations are) but things may get tricky in the next few years.

Agree on the stability side of things. It's the media beat ups if anything that will create the uncertainty, whenever Lyon is coaching (AIS). What we need is for Lyon to be clear on things and Bailey to concentrate on the job at hand. DB shouldn't have to worry about the things out of his control.

Like parasites such as Robinson sniffing for his next headline.

[Rogue 585]

There is a reason why Bailey scored the job above other more experienced/ well-known candidates, and it wasn't because he looked good in red and blue.

I'm not suggesting that anyone in his position would have gone and drafted 30 year olds to top up our list, but many wouldn't have done the hard thing in trading TJ, wouldn't have list managed for two years to ensure we get ourselves the best possible picks, and definitely wouldn't have played kids ahead of some of our senior players.

I doubt Bennell and Jetta would have got this much game time under some other coaches who have Robbo and Whelan and Wheatley in reserve, and I doubt Morton would have played nearly two full seasons under many other coaches as well.

It's not like playing the kids, culling older fringe players and losing games is something that is a) terribly difficult* or B) hasn't happened before and won't happen again. Anyone who got the gig would have gone down the 'play the kids' road.

As a coach, you don't get much opportunity to turn over the list and set yourself up. DB was given this on the platter, with the Club entirely supportive of us bottoming out.

If he'd put forward a plan that didn't involve what he's done he wouldn't have got the gig. Even if the Coach took a self-interested perspective the pros outweigh the cons - there's no other 'road to success' for DB.

If you want to argue that DB deserves credit for development of players and other things, okay - I'm sure you can mount a more convincing case. However, like I said, I think you're giving DB way too much credit for going down the 'play the kids' road.

*particularly when there are low expectations from the fans and media, you've just taken over the Club and the Board/staff are supportive of the direction

[titan_uranus 25,041]

If we win anywhere between 6-8 games next year, and see some real improvement, he should get a new 2 year contract to continue the good work that he has started.

I agree. But at the same time, if we win less than 6 games next year, we must look at our coaching situation. By that I mean Bailey should go.

That doesn't mean Lyon will be our next coach. It just means we will be changing coach.

You're giving Bailey too much credit for what he's shown so far IMHO. Culling ordinary and/or older players and 'playing the kids' while losing lots of games is the easy part.

Bailey's followed the same general gist that any coach who got the gig would have done. Although you could mount a case for giving credit for the drastic 'experimentation' versus Richmond I don't think DB was alone.

How these players are developed and what our gameplan and structures are like in 2009 is the start of the hard part, and it'll be interesting to see how Bailey goes.

Agree with this. Bailey's credit will (hopefully) come next year when we see Melbourne start to move up the ladder. Until then he doesn't deserve much.

[Rogue 585]

To clarify, I'm certainly not out for DB's blood - I just don't think he deserves a heap of credit for 'playing the kids' since he had no other option.

Could not think of anything more dysfunctional.

I totally agree. This sounds like a nightmare.

NOTE: Mind you, with new draft picks and further turnover to come, there is still some developing to do CB.

Can you give some examples of questionnable game day tactics and set up? (With the exception of the last few weeks)

I'd say every second post of CB's is about forward line structure

I cant imagine why anyone will want to step up to coach the crippled basketcase from beyond Antartica that will become the WS18. Only an assistant who is eternally overlooked will feel it worth a shot

...or a Coach who wants to reclaim his glory days.

There'll be some benefits from the AFL so it's not all bad IMO.

I also think there fact you can set the foundations for an AFL Club might be exciting.

[H_T 3,049]

As a coach, you don't get much opportunity to turn over the list and set yourself up. DB was given this on the platter, with the Club entirely supportive of us bottoming out.

If he'd put forward a plan that didn't involve what he's done he wouldn't have got the gig. Even if the Coach took a self-interested perspective the pros outweigh the cons - there's no other 'road to success' for DB.

If you want to argue that DB deserves credit for development of players and other things, okay - I'm sure you can mount a more convincing case. However, like I said, I think you're giving DB way too much credit for going down the 'play the kids' road.

I know this doesn't come under "play the kids" agrument. This comes under strategic decisions for list management.

But do you think anyone else of those candidates would be of the opinion to trade TJ for pick 14 at that particular time, and actually go through with it?

Edited August 11, 2009 by High Tower

[H_T 3,049]

I'd say every second post of CB's is about forward line structure

Yes I know.

What forward line structure? It's still under construction. We know what we've seen the last two years, it's far from functional. But that also has something to do with the midfield. It's a cattle thing.

Fwiw, the structure will function better with a new look midfield (Scully, Grimes, .....,....) and a maturing quality forward line (Jurrah, Watts, .....).

[Go the Biff 3,440]

To clarify, I'm certainly not out for DB's blood - I just don't think he deserves a heap of credit for 'playing the kids' since he had no other option.

Not necessarily. He could have gone down the Pagan at Carlton path & recycled some established players to bolster his list. That, in my view set Carlton back as much as their salary cap penalties.

Trading TJ for a draft pick was gutsy. It's one thing to have a plan but it takes balls to stick with it.

Agree with those lauding the skills of Matthews. Over time, his tough-guy rep has probably detracted from his footy rep but for those who never saw him, be in no doubt. He was a freak. His ability to hit a leading player lace out on the [censored] is the best I've seen. He could kick bullets over 40 metres that never got more than 4 feet off the ground. Freak

[Hannabal 4]

Not necessarily. He could have gone down the Pagan at Carlton path & recycled some established players to bolster his list. That, in my view set Carlton back as much as their salary cap penalties.

Rogue answered that when he correctly stated that he wouldn't have got the job in the first place if that was the direction he was advocating during the interview process.

[Go the Biff 3,440]

Rogue answered that when he correctly stated that he wouldn't have got the job in the first place if that was the direction he was advocating during the interview process.

Fair enough. That's what I get for skimming through at lunch time !

[FC Melbourne 108]

He may not have done anything of great merit in your eyes, but can you point out one place he has put a foot wrong in 2 years of senior coaching?

I'm afraid I can't fault him, beyond giving too much game time to Robertson, Wheatley and at times Bruce.

Strange days indeed.

2/2 in the spoon stakes = not putting a foot wrong.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Can you give some examples of questionnable game day tactics and set up? (With the exception of the last few weeks)

See most of my posts from the past few years.

EDIT: Rogue beat me to it.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Clint Bizkit

[e25 5]

Strange days indeed.

2/2 in the spoon stakes = not putting a foot wrong.

<_<

He's done the right things in terms of playing kids and developing them.

If that results in losses then so be it.

Regardless of win/loss record he has stuck to his guys and done exactly what he said he would from day one.

Wooden spoons to me are irrelevant - the bottom half of the ladder is the bottom half of the ladder. 2nd or 3rd bottom is no better in my eyes.

And once again: what should he have done differently?

[Allen Jakovich 516]

<_<

He's done the right things in terms of playing kids and developing them.

If that results in losses then so be it.

Regardless of win/loss record he has stuck to his guys and done exactly what he said he would from day one.

Wooden spoons to me are irrelevant - the bottom half of the ladder is the bottom half of the ladder. 2nd or 3rd bottom is no better in my eyes.

And once again: what should he have done differently?

Won some games.

[H_T 3,049]

Yes I know.

What forward line structure? It's still under construction. We know what we've seen the last two years, it's far from functional. But that also has something to do with the midfield. It's a cattle thing.

Fwiw, the structure will function better with a new look midfield (Scully, Grimes, .....,....) and a maturing quality forward line (Jurrah, Watts, .....).

See most of my posts from the past few years.

EDIT: Rogue beat me to it.

I've seen them. In all due respect, Bailey hasn't had much to work with in terms of structure. A team that turns over the ball as much as Melbourne does, it's anything but functional. A midfield that is sub-standard and beaten regularly, a backline that's been put under immense pressure because of the turnovers & midfield as well as the likes of forwards that are either out of form and below par in Miller, Roberston, Newton or too young and still learning the caper (Watts, Jurrah, Maric, Petterd, etc).

It's still very much development mode, hence the experimentation for the last two years, and positional experimentation of late, with over 40 players used. The forward structure is very much work in progress still. I don't see how you can be critical of Bailey in this regard.

[e25 5]

Won some games.

Subjective.

[Roost It 1,434]

If Lyon wants to coach the club, which I think he and others still think is a possibility, he needs to get up to speed. Hence he's off to coach the best youngsters in the country, pretty good training you would think, espcially for a young team like Melbourne. He knows Bailey deserves more time and thus he signs with 9 for two more years to promote stability. If coaching Melbourne in a year or two is the grand plan I forsee 2 problems. One is that Bailey begins winning games and makes the eight, or nearly makes it, next year. Can't really sack him now can we? Second problem is that if Melbourne keep getting flogged during the first half of next year and find themselves at 1 and 12, not exactly what everyone is hoping for. What happens now? Do we rush Lyon in to the top spot? Would there be other, more qualified people putting their hands in the air? Todd Viney perhaps, I mean his son will be with us soon.

To me it looks as though Lyon is setting himself for the top job at Melbourne, he has the backing of the President and the CEO and most supporters would welcome him with open arms. The hard work of turning over the list will have been done and the club should be on the verge of a successful period. Is it fair on Bailey? What's fair in this sport? Is it the best thing for the club? Only if we win a premeirship. If this happens the club better be right on the money, something it hasn't been for over 40 years. Romance or Reality, It would seem both will be used to promote this move.

[Rogue 585]

I know this doesn't come under "play the kids" agrument. This comes under strategic decisions for list management.

But do you think anyone else of those candidates would be of the opinion to trade TJ for pick 14 at that particular time, and actually go through with it?

I don't know what the other candidates presented, but I would have thought that anyone on board with the 'building around kids' angle would actively look to offload older 'talent' for early picks.

Maybe it's just hindsight but TJ seems the perfect candidate for that. On one hand he's very skilled so he's marketable and others clubs would feel there was something to work with. On the other hand he's not a leader, someone you'd feel the Club would miss as much as others if he wasn't there.

I've seen them.

How could you not have?

In all due respect, Bailey hasn't had much to work with in terms of structure. A team that turns over the ball as much as Melbourne does, it's anything but functional. A midfield that is sub-standard and beaten regularly, a backline that's been put under immense pressure because of the turnovers & midfield as well as the likes of forwards that are either out of form and below par in Miller, Roberston, Newton or too young and still learning the caper (Watts, Jurrah, Maric, Petterd, etc).

I think your first sentence should read 'cattle', not 'structure'. You can still have a decent structure without a great list or even great forwards.

I think CB would and has persuasively argued that you don't need a Franklin and Fevola to play some of your 18 as forwards. Plenty of times we've be outmanned in the forward line or have no one there, leading to the handballing, chipping sideways - and inevitable turnovers - that annoy so many fans.

It's still very much development mode, hence the experimentation for the last two years, and positional experimentation of late, with over 40 players used. The forward structure is very much work in progress still. I don't see how you can be critical of Bailey in this regard.

CB's been banging on about the forward structure for longer than just this season. You'd certainly hope the forward line structure was a work in progress because for far too often the forward line is devoid of structure (literally).

[FC Melbourne 108]

<_<

He's done the right things in terms of playing kids and developing them.

If that results in losses then so be it.

Regardless of win/loss record he has stuck to his guys and done exactly what he said he would from day one.

Wooden spoons to me are irrelevant - the bottom half of the ladder is the bottom half of the ladder. 2nd or 3rd bottom is no better in my eyes.

And once again: what should he have done differently?

Wasn't a crack at you or Bailey, more the system we find ourselves trying to exploit.

[grazman 7,451]

Lyon's appointment, if indeed it actually happens... is it contingency planning perhaps? The first two years are a wipeout for Bails, because it takes that long to prune back the dead wood. As Jaded pointed out finishing with 8 wins while it looks better in terms of win/loss is actually a worse case scenario in terms of rebuilding. Bails needs at least two more years to show what his real wares - if nothing much happens there's at least a fall back option.

Edited August 11, 2009 by grazman

[Doggo 32]

Admittedly they were before my time, but by all reports Malthouse, Sheedy and Matthews were never blessed with anything resembling the skills of a Buckley or even a Lyon, but achieved varying degrees of success by being tough, uncompromising players who would sooner kill you than give up the contested ball.

Before my time also, but from what i've read and heard from older friends and footy supporters, Matthews, despite being a downright thug, was a highly skilled, absolute champion of the game. (edit- already pointed out by H and others, didn't see it before i posted).

That said, you make some good points.

Although i, like many others, love the romantic notion of a former captain and 'heart and soul' player of the club, coming back and leading us to the flag they never got in their playing careers. Sentimental to the extreme degree i know, but I'd love nothing more than Lyon, or preferably Todd Viney

(who's done his apprentiship) coming back and leading us to the great heights we haven't seen at our club for 50 years.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Doggo

[rpfc 28,729]

No, losing now seems to be the courageous and unselfish thing to do, but no one was saying that at the start of the season. The point is, nothing has changed and I don't want to give coach credit for now losing when it's been happening for the past two seasons.

Easy to say that but Bailey could have gone hell for leather and beaten Sydney, Richmond, NM, and Freo to finish on 7 wins and shore up the 'improvement' on 2008 by more than doubling his wins tally.

But he knew those wins would have been useless outside of that fact, detrimental even, and he 'prepared' the side very well against Sydney, Rich, and NM.

I, personally, would give him a 2011 extension right now to give him more time, but I understand that people want improvement early next year. But if we get 'backended' draw like 2009, Bailey will be under artificial pressure at the midway point of the season.

[LITTLE STINGA 1]

GARRY LYON YOU GENIUS.

Choose the worst coach possible who was never gonna win us any games so we can get some gun draft picks and once we start looking like we may improve take over as coach.

BRILLIANT

[Skipper3 7]

GARRY LYON YOU GENIUS.

Choose the worst coach possible who was never gonna win us any games so we can get some gun draft picks and once we start looking like we may improve take over as coach.

BRILLIANT

You seem to fail to realize that Garry was only one person on the coaching sub-comittee - he was not the only person who chose DB! Others chose DB too, otherwise he would not have got the job.

Btw - how do you know that DB is "the worst coach possible"??? How do you know another coach who was on the final list would have done any better to this stage??

[pantaloons 2,019]

I find the unwavering support of Dean Bailey on this forum quite interesting and out of proportion to the views of the numbers of Melbourne supporters I know who don't use this site. I'm happy to give him next year to see if he's worth persisting with, but I don't think some discussion on whether he is actually any chop is unhealthy. Provided it doesn't turn into a witch hunt and Bailey's given a chance that is.

Thus far, what has Bailey shown? There are positives and negatives. He's shown a willingness to shelve or trade ageing stars and focus on building from scratch. He hasn't played favourites, usually selecting players on merit. Similarly, he's tried to enforce a culture where off-field shenanigans are completely unacceptable. That's not saying Neale enjoyed such behaviour, but it's been more apparent under Bailey. Maybe its just that Carroll's out the door now. He's also tried to adopt a gameplan more up to date with the direction football is heading. This took a long time to start to bear any fruit though.

On the flip side, Bailey has won 6 out of 41 games. That's a damning statistic, even if he's tried to lose a few towards the end of this season for future gain. Some will point to a very ordinary list, and I don't want to turn this into a debate on how good or bad the list was when he inherited it, but in many ways Bailey chose to rebuild and dump players like TJ who could have helped the side immediately (obviously the TJ trade was a cracker, no denying that). He's opted for short-term pain. It's unlikely that any coach in Australia could have netted less wins in this time than Bailey though. The team could probably have managed 6 wins in the last two seasons with a magic 8-ball as coach to be honest. How much the players have learned and developed in this time is crucial. There are signs of improvement in many on the list.

I'm fine with the direction we're heading, on the sole proviso that next year we start to see serious signs of improvement in our play and in the wins column. If we're still in the bottom two or three next year, that is completely unacceptable and a change is unavoidable. I can't sit here and laud what I've seen the last two years as a masterpiece. It would be beyond a celebration of mediocrity, rather a celebration of the completely inept. I don't want to be a supporter who calls for the coach's head every couple of years, but at the same time gleefully lap up the excrement currently being dished up. There comes a point where you have to stop making excuses and produce results. The Kangas side that made the preliminary final a couple of years ago was woeful, but yet they found themselves on the second-last day of the season. Essendon were tipped by some to win the wooden spoon this year, but until their late season stumble have been very promising. I don't disagree with Bailey's decision to nuke the list and start afresh, but we must start seeing results next year for him to get the chance to continue. I'm not asking for finals, just a realistic improvement in the wins column and the quality of the team's play.

My gut feeling is that we will start to see some very positive signs next season, and that Bailey's focus on teaching and development will start to pay off, with around 8 wins and a 10-12 finish.

Edited August 11, 2009 by pantaloons

[old55 23,687]

Rogue answered that when he correctly stated that he wouldn't have got the job in the first place if that was the direction he was advocating during the interview process.

Didn't seem to hurt Matthew Knights.

How many here would prefer to be the Bombers right now (ignoring their extra $ resources for a moment)?

Not me.