How is that relevant? Who would have done better in those 2 years?

So, basically, we should subject our coach to trial-by-media purely because there is a slim chance we could finish bottom on the back of ONE nab cup result.

Genius.

Who knows, fact remains is football clubs need to win games, wooden spoon after wooden spoon after wooden spoon is not acceptable.

Why sign him up? what has he proven? To sign him up just to avoid media pressure is a cop out, as if the football journos and greater football world arent going to know that we are in massive trouble if we serve up another year of crap just cos we have our underperforming coach still signed for another 2 years.

You seem to think Genuis is signing up someone who may not be up to it simply to avoid a few articles that would be well founded if we cant get some wins on the board and show that this club has a future

Mikes point is well made, there isnt another club out there circling and waiting to pounce on Dean Bailey

Edited February 22, 201015 yr by red&blue&true

WHAT VESTED INTERESTS..?

Also, he didn't care to mention any of the ramifications of NOT signing Bailey to an extension, that being a season of trial by media until Bailey loses his job in Round 11 a la Terry Wallace, as a result of not having won at least 50% of his first 10 games.

As he should not be expected too.

Also ignoring the added pressure this would apply to the playing group, making the task of winning games needlessly more difficult.

Think people... THINK.

Do you think a contract is going to stop the press from speculating about his demise? If we are only keeping him on as a show of faith then that is the wrong reason we need a coach who is capable of moulding this side in to a winning unit or the club will probably fold.

We have been given the opportunity of picking up some very talented kids and we must get some runs on the board, not just wins but competitive performances because this is not just about winning, it's about showing what we are capable of doing. If the game on Sunday was an example of that then we are in trouble.

I'm not anti Bailey I want him to be good, I like him, but I also want the club to have a coach that can turn this current crop in to winners and the jury's out at the moment. St Kilda wasted years with Thomas, let's hope we don't do the same.

Shehans job is to write about footy...hadly an agenda per se. what vested interest does he have to suggest there is unrequired haste ? Does he benefit from this as opposed to not writing this piece ? He will have ample fodder as source for articles without needing to invent things by suspending his previous thinkings. I suggesthe has simply voiced what many of us are thinking and that sunday was not what we were expecting and that this might result in a few people taking a breath. How does he benefit from this especially? he doesnt...a vested interest my foot. Hes just doing what he does..write about footy and the capitulation by Melbourne on Sunday was not what a lot of the footballworld, let alone us was quite expecting.

I'm not anti Bailey I want him to be good, I like him, but I also want the club to have a coach that can turn this current crop in to winners and the jury's out at the moment. St Kilda wasted years with Thomas, let's hope we don't do the same.

nutshell

Who knows, fact remains is football clubs need to win games, wooden spoon after wooden spoon after wooden spoon is not acceptable.

Why sign him up? what has he proven? To sign him up just to avoid media pressure is a cop out, as if the football journos and greater football world arent going to know that we are in massive trouble if we serve up another year of crap just cos we have our underperforming coach still signed for another 2 years.

You seem to think Genuis is signing up someone who may not be up to it simply to avoid a few articles that would be well founded if we cant get some wins on the board and show that this club has a future

But it's CAUSE AND EFFECT!!

Don't you take the time to wonder WHY we have been finishing bottom?

Have you not analysed our list and seen the clear reasons for this and the indicators which must improve for us to achieve success?

The thing is: this isn't rocket science.

Bailey has proven little. That includes proving he is a dud as a coach.

He has proven to be good at all things off-field, has developed some players very nicely that many had given up on and he is highly rated by those in the know.

Isn't that enough for you? Aren't you willing to admit your opinion is uneducated in comparison?

Why subject him to trial-by-media needlessly?

Your last line makes no sense at all.

What about evaluating where we are at present as a list? Not so much, where we were.

put it back into context...and its self evident...sigh

Ive been very much in the camp of give him another year and let him have the two to show his wares. But its hard to argue with Mike here. I really expected more of the team, diluted and gren as it was , than what transpired as a feeble excuse for a game on Sunday. Im now second guessing my own thinking. Am I simply wanting him to have the advantage of an effective 2 year stint as some sort of honourable offer ? Is it actually warranted ? Is he really a good game day coach or more an educator ?

Too easy to suggestits all a Subiaco thing and nothing to do with any of a dozenother factors. You'll need to widen your scope a bit.

Your quite avid at introducing word into mouths. I suggested thatthe haste to sisn aspect might need to be revisited as is the whole theme of Shehans article.. Not to not sign him ..but maybe to watch and see a bit longer. That might be more prudent.

My evaluation of him takes into context of where we were and what we wanted to achieve.. We got all the picks..now we need to face the front and win..its a different cause. Th evaluation hasnt changed at all.. he now has a different goal surely. cant you see that ?

My point was that if a NAB cup game has changed the way someone feels about the coach, they should re-think the way they evaluate a coach. Can't see where I put anything in your mouth.

WHAT VESTED INTERESTS..?

The fact that if Mike Sheahan writes a column saying the Dees are correct in their stance on Bailey, it ends up being 3 lines long and no one wants to read it.

The fact that if MFC don't extend Bailey's contract it gives Sheahan something else to write about and speculate on and create salacious rumours about for the length of the season.

Only having Mark Harvey coming out of contract give him little ammo to fill space with.

Irrational hysteria drives the sale of newspapers.

It's in Mike's best interests to keep this alive.

Also, he didn't care to mention any of the ramifications of NOT signing Bailey to an extension, that being a season of trial-by-media until Bailey loses his job in Round 11 a la Terry Wallace, as a result of not having won at least 50% of his first 10 games.

As he should not be expected to.

Also ignoring the added pressure this would apply to the playing group, making the task of winning games needlessly more difficult.

Think people... THINK.

Thats ludicrous!

your saying thats its in Sheahans interest for Bailey to fail so they can continue to sell the Hun???

Maybe the fact that we have a winning percentage of only 16% is because the last 2 years we have been cleaning out the dead wood from our list, to build one, that will see our window be open for some time.

We cannot judge Bailey on the past 2 years as a game day coach. That starts this year.

sheehan is spot on. although refreshing to see the dees board etc backing their coach, the results speak for themselves. ok he took over a team that, lets be honest were a shambles, and he now has some new blood to work with, so ok give him this year. my only concern is that he says all the right things in the press, a real spin doctor, loves a challenge with the media, but sheedy he isn't, he should first and foremost be letting us fans know that there is improvement, sunday was not a good advert for that so called improvement. we can blame the players yes but the responsibility rests with DB, simple. he should be on borrowed time, put the pressure on him to prove he is a good coach and man manager, give him 2 years and it'll be all too comfortable for him. we have a real tough start to the season so it'll be hard to judge, later in the season will tell. or if we lose to richmond, who are gash, they should fold the club if we lose to those clowns!

come on the red and blue

I understand it was only a NAB cup game, and we are hardly ever successful at that ground. My beef is that with the way our team was set up, it just seems we were never actually going to have a chance at winning. Who's fault is that? That is the coaches fault my friend. Never having any players in our F50 seems to me like a sure fire way to lose a game of footy.

The loss is not the problem, it's the way it happened. The players looked lost, there seemed to be little passion, some players did not seem fit enough and the skills were shocking. Many people say it's the first game for the year, but it was the first game for Freo and they seemed to be able to hit targets and run out the game.

The argument that we must resign him to avoid negative articles by Mike Sheehan is the worst that I have heard.

until we know if he can develop a winning style of play, teach the players, and coach a match, I see no reason to make a decision on his future. To extend his contract before the season would make as much sense to me as sacking him before the season.

Do you think a contract is going to stop the press from speculating about his demise?

Somewhat, yes. I think having a contract in place will lessen the speculation and alleviate the pressure to be placed on the team if we don't extend it.

If we are only keeping him on as a show of faith then that is the wrong reason we need a coach who is capable of moulding this side in to a winning unit or the club will probably fold.

If we are only changing our mind and NOT extending his contract on the back of ONE poor NAB Cup result, then the club WILL fold. That is the type of knee-jerk reaction which will lead to MFC's demise.

I trust the board has taken into account many indicators in making this decision and I trust their judgement.

We have been given the opportunity of picking up some very talented kids and we must get some runs on the board, not just wins but competitive performances because this is not just about winning, it's about showing what we are capable of doing. If the game on Sunday was an example of that then we are in trouble.

Have you stopped to consider that they are STILL kids..? Have you pondered that maybe they need time to grow and develop into players..?

Maybe we are expecting far too much far too soon, by nature of our impatience after finishing bottom the past 2 years?

(When I say TIME, I am talking about YEARS, not merely WEEKS)

I'm not anti Bailey I want him to be good, I like him, but I also want the club to have a coach that can turn this current crop in to winners and the jury's out at the moment. St Kilda wasted years with Thomas, let's hope we don't do the same.

So Bailey has had 2 years where he has had very little chance to display any of his ability to us supporters outside the inner sanctum.

Now he is finally reaching the beginning of a period where, although the players are still very young and are still learning and growing, he can show some of his talent as a coach.

As witnessed by Mike Sheahan's article, the media care little for solid reasoning or delving into the facts of the matter - if significant wins don't come soon they will happily begin a media campaign to have him sacked.

It'll be a feeding frenzy with no regard for what reasonable expectations should be put on Bailey at this stage.

There is no option to not extend Bailey and have him comfortably see out the year, unless he miraculously reels off more wins than should be reasonably expected.

Although I have some faith in him, I do not have that much.

It is a choice between extending now and letting him do his job, OR not extending and having the media circus surround the team for the rest of the season, consequently having a detrimental effect on the team and its development.

(By NOW I mean in the 1st third of the season.)

The loss is not the problem, it's the way it happened. The players looked lost, there seemed to be little passion, some players did not seem fit enough and the skills were shocking. Many people say it's the first game for the year, but it was the first game for Freo and they seemed to be able to hit targets and run out the game.

The argument that we must resign him to avoid negative articles by Mike Sheehan is the worst that I have heard.

until we know if he can develop a winning style of play, teach the players, and coach a match, I see no reason to make a decision on his future. To extend his contract before the season would make as much sense to me as sacking him before the season.

Spot on.

Thats ludicrous!

your saying thats its in Sheahans interest for Bailey to fail so they can continue to sell the Hun???

Are you SERIOUS?!???

You must see that the football media don't REPORT the news, they CREATE the news.

Surely you recognise that..?

The argument that we must resign him to avoid negative articles by Mike Sheehan is the worst that I have heard.

Who made that argument..?

My evaluation of him takes into context of where we were and what we wanted to achieve.. We got all the picks..now we need to face the front and win..its a different cause. The evaluation hasnt changed at all.. he now has a different goal surely. cant you see that ?

put it back into context...and its self evident...sigh

I'll re-phrase.

So your evaluation of Bailey two minutes after the draft picks come in...."it's a different cause" ...is it ? After a NAB Cup game... ?

Again. How about evaluating where we are at present as a list, and not in the context of where we were. Understand now ?

All I can say is Thank Heavens none of you make any decisions that affect our club.

Bailey for PM!

I don't think anyone is suggesting that we sack Bailey (now or midseason) only that we should wait to see the results of THIS season before any decision is made.

Who made that argument..?

You

"The fact that if MFC don't extend Bailey's contract it gives Sheahan something else to write about and speculate on and create salacious rumours about for the length of the season."

edit: reread and you were talking about Mike Sheahans motives, not why we should re-sign him.

Edited February 22, 201015 yr by Thomo

You

"The fact that if MFC don't extend Bailey's contract it gives Sheahan something else to write about and speculate on and create salacious rumours about for the length of the season."

Well done. Quoted completely out of context.

I was saying that is Mike Sheahan's extra incentive for Bailey to not get extended.

It had nothing to do with reasoning why we should extend his contract.

Try again Thomo.

Edit: exactly.

Edited February 22, 201015 yr by Keyser Söze

Well done. Quoted completely out of context.

I was saying that is Mike Sheahan's extra incentive for Bailey to not get extended.

It had nothing to do with reasoning why we should extend his contract.

Try again Thomo.

Edit: exactly.

See above, corrected before you replied. Agreed, taken out of context.

See above, corrected before you replied. Agreed, taken out of context.

Not often someone on a forum admits they made a mistake.

Well played.

Although you were partly right - some of my reasoning for re-signing Bailey now, is to avoid a media maelstrom and all that comes with it (including unflattering articles by that parasite Mike Sheahan).

Edited February 22, 201015 yr by Keyser Söze

Not often someone on a forum admits they made a mistake.

Well played.

It's not often I'm wrong.

The rest of my original post was 100% correct. Extending his contract now would make as much sense as sacking him. Wait until we have more information either way.

It's not often I'm wrong.

The rest of my original post was 100% correct. Extending his contract now would make as much sense as sacking him. Wait until we have more information either way.

But how long does that take?

I think by the end of this season we will only start to get an idea.

If we don't extend it before the end of the season it is a show of no faith.

I certainly don't think by mid-season we will have any real indication either way.

Taking that into account, why not avoid all the negativity that comes with waiting?

Also, if the powers that be at the club are satisfied that Bailey has proven his ability to them and deserves another year, then so am I.

I'm not foolish enough to believe that I know better.

Somewhat, yes. I think having a contract in place will lessen the speculation and alleviate the pressure to be placed on the team if we don't extend it.

If we are only changing our mind and NOT extending his contract on the back of ONE poor NAB Cup result, then the club WILL fold. That is the type of knee-jerk reaction which will lead to MFC's demise.

I trust the board has taken into account many indicators in making this decision and I trust their judgement.

Have you stopped to consider that they are STILL kids..? Have you pondered that maybe they need time to grow and develop into players..?

Maybe we are expecting far too much far too soon, by nature of our impatience after finishing bottom the past 2 years?

(When I say TIME, I am talking about YEARS, not merely WEEKS)

So Bailey has had 2 years where he has had very little chance to display any of his ability to us supporters outside the inner sanctum.

Now he is finally reaching the beginning of a period where, although the players are still very young and are still learning and growing, he can show some of his talent as a coach.

As witnessed by Mike Sheahan's article, the media care little for solid reasoning or delving into the facts of the matter - if significant wins don't come soon they will happily begin a media campaign to have him sacked.

It'll be a feeding frenzy with no regard for what reasonable expectations should be put on Bailey at this stage.

There is no option to not extend Bailey and have him comfortably see out the year, unless he miraculously reels off more wins than should be reasonably expected.

Although I have some faith in him, I do not have that much.

It is a choice between extending now and letting him do his job, OR not extending and having the media circus surround the team for the rest of the season, consequently having a detrimental effect on the team and its development.

(By NOW I mean in the 1st third of the season.)

It wasn’t that we lost one NAB cup match it was the way we lost it. The excuse that they are still kids doesn’t hold any water; it was some of the more senior players that let us down. If you look at the clubs I mentioned they also have kids that seem capable of performing at a much higher standard. I actually suggested on another board, some time ago that they hold off on any extension of his contract until he has shown that he is a capable coach, in fact that’s not what we want we want an exceptional coach. I have yet to see the Melbourne players show that they are desperate and that they will run themselves in to the ground for the club and the coach. Was it Simon Buckley that said they train a lot harder at Collingwood than we ever did?

I have seen clubs extend Coaching Contracts in the past for no apparent reason and it usually backfires, remember Tony Shaw at Collingwood? They finished up asking him to resign when thing got worse after his contract extension.

If we reappoint Bailey and there is no discernable improvement by the last few rounds what then? Can we afford to go in to 2011 and even worse 2012 with a lame duck coach?