Cool coach

[norwood_demon 196]

I have always been very impressed with Dean Bailey's coolness in the coaches' box. This coolness was epitomised in Monday's game when he gave an interview and discussed strategy ("going around the zone") live on the telecast during Q2. The TV cameras have been trained on him for two years and the most emotion that I have witnessed is a "wipe of the forehead" and the recording of an error in his notebook. I, on the other hand, have to be forcibly restrained from putting a chair through the TV when umpires pay "holding the ball" when the Melbourne player is the only one making the play. Or when Cam Bruce handballs randomly into the air for the third time in a quarter to avoid being tackled "in possession".

IMHO, Dean Bailey and the football department have not made a recruiting or strategic mistake in 2 years (playing Watts last QB was their closest to an error). They have made some fantastic recruiting & player development calls. Some Bailey agnostics on this site will question our forward line structure, Bailey's game-day coaching, and his ability to emotionally "rev players up". My point in this thread is that Bailey's coolness on match day is a very good omen for the real pressure situations in the future. His cool professionalism is the sign of a supportive teacher and someone who can at least be in the right frame-of-mind to make the correct decision when scores are level in Q4 in the 2013 GF that will see that long-awaited Demon victory.

In short, I'm a big fan of our "cool coach".

[Harrisonrules 273]

I'd like to agree but I don't see any evidence either for or against. Very few would agree that the forward line functions well. There are many options that for some reason they will not try. There have been a lot of cool persona coaches who have been no good. What makes us think that Dean develops players better than any other coach? Ratten is going well at Carlton. Clarkson brought his team on very quickly. Hardwick isn't doing well enough at Richmond. Their progress has been far better than ours was in Deans first two years. I've watched for over fifty years. I think Dean reduced our team to a rabble as soon as he came and we are just seeing some semblance of improvement and we are 13th. They were the closest to the worst I had ever seen of a Melbourne team. There may be something I can't see. But I want evidence that there is more to Dean before I will be convinced. The ledger is still very much in the balance as far as I can see.

[Red Sox 2]

I see where your coming from on this but would agree that there is still a lot that Bailey has to prove, I think coaches can get away with a bit using the 'rebuilding mantra' that is so prevalent.

Hardwick at Richmond IMO has at least put his stamp on that group quite quickly where I don't think Bailey was as quick to do so, having said that the majority would have seen Hardwick play and understand that what he asks of his players he did out on the field, that is not quite so obvious with Bails.

I think next year will tell the tale for Bails...the forward line is the final piece of the puzzle as far as I am concerned. With players such as Sylvia, Jurrah, Petterd, Wonna, Bennell, Tapscott, Hughes, Maric, Fitzpatrick, Stef Martin all missing for various reasons this year at different times added to others such as Watts, Bate, Jetta, Dunn, Miller and Green there are an abundance of options.

Barring injury I would expect to see this all come together somewhat next year and for us to be seriously knocking on the door of the Top 8. If we are still struggling to kick decent scores then he will be under scrutiny.

Lets see...

[Guest The Boss]

It's easy to be under no pressure when you are coaching a team that will not be contending for a finals spot, he is just fine tuning the team for years to come.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I'd like to agree but I don't see any evidence either for or against. Very few would agree that the forward line functions well. There are many options that for some reason they will not try. There have been a lot of cool persona coaches who have been no good. What makes us think that Dean develops players better than any other coach? Ratten is going well at Carlton. Clarkson brought his team on very quickly. Hardwick isn't doing well enough at Richmond. Their progress has been far better than ours was in Deans first two years. I've watched for over fifty years. I think Dean reduced our team to a rabble as soon as he came and we are just seeing some semblance of improvement and we are 13th. They were the closest to the worst I had ever seen of a Melbourne team. There may be something I can't see. But I want evidence that there is more to Dean before I will be convinced. The ledger is still very much in the balance as far as I can see.

Thats what makes him good 'Hr', he won't bend from the development plan, come 'HELL' or 'High Water'.

He'll play players when he knows their ready, & when it suits the development of the team. Long Term veiw.

[dee-luded 2,959]

I see where your coming from on this but would agree that there is still a lot that Bailey has to prove, I think coaches can get away with a bit using the 'rebuilding mantra' that is so prevalent.

Hardwick at Richmond IMO has at least put his stamp on that group quite quickly where I don't think Bailey was as quick to do so, having said that the majority would have seen Hardwick play and understand that what he asks of his players he did out on the field, that is not quite so obvious with Bails.

I think next year will tell the tale for Bails...the forward line is the final piece of the puzzle as far as I am concerned. With players such as Sylvia, Jurrah, Petterd, Wonna, Bennell, Tapscott, Hughes, Maric, Fitzpatrick, Stef Martin all missing for various reasons this year at different times added to others such as Watts, Bate, Jetta, Dunn, Miller and Green there are an abundance of options.

Barring injury I would expect to see this all come together somewhat next year and for us to be seriously knocking on the door of the Top 8. If we are still struggling to kick decent scores then he will be under scrutiny.

Lets see...

Very different scenario, we're rebuilding far deeper from 3 Yrs ago, than the Tiges are this year.

I've told friends all year that the Tiges are not as bad as some in the Media have been suggesting. And now we can see it. But they will progress up the ladder far slower over the next few years, IMO, than us. Unless they pick up some new guns in a hurry.

IMO, our rebuild is from the foundations up, & we are still to fit certain parts into place. Each time we change over an experienced for a beginner, we go back a bit.

[Felix 92]

just watched the replay, DB had a couple of moments where he was not cool. It was just before one of the quarters ended and the pies just marked and kicked a goal. He was far from being cool in the box. He has emotions, which is good to see & he holds himself above the rest come media time.

[Harrisonrules 273]

Thats what makes him good 'Hr', he won't bend from the development plan, come 'HELL' or 'High Water'.

He'll play players when he knows their ready, & when it suits the development of the team. Long Term veiw.

D-L I just don't see how this is different from what anyone else is doing. IMO Developmental coach is just code for I'm new at this caper. I know I can analyse skills and work on guys with this in mind. Clarkson does the same but he's not going to undersell himself, he's happy to embrace the title of plain and simple coach, with all its portfolios including development. The great coaches are more likely to employ someone as development coach if they are not able to spend enough time on it themselves. It's an issue of self confidence, self belief, personal identity and Bailey is not yet embracing the whole role.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

What makes us think that Dean develops players better than any other coach? Ratten is going well at Carlton. Clarkson brought his team on very quickly. Hardwick isn't doing well enough at Richmond. Their progress has been far better than ours was in Deans first two years. I've watched for over fifty years. I think Dean reduced our team to a rabble as soon as he came and we are just seeing some semblance of improvement and we are 13th. They were the closest to the worst I had ever seen of a Melbourne team. There may be something I can't see. But I want evidence that there is more to Dean before I will be convinced. The ledger is still very much in the balance as far as I can see.

I would have thought there is substantial evidence to suggest Dean has got the improvement from experienced players like Junior, Beamer and Jamar through to younger players Garland and Frawley.

Ratten took over a team that was gifted Judd and had stitched up 3 first round draft picks. However the jury is still out on Ratten. MFC are two years behind Carlton in the development stakes and IMO are better positioned to improve. MFC dodged two bullets in trading McLean and not paying out big money for Warnock. This will hurt Carlton. Clarkson took over a similar crud list to Bailey but had the benefit of more generous drafting rules in good years, a couple of fortunate trades and the legacy of good access to picks in 1999 to 2001. There was a reason

And Bailey reduced the side to a rabble??? MFC were already there in 2007. The backbone of side for the past 10 years, Neitz, Yze, White, Robbo, Whelan were finished and the need to rebuild our list from scratch was blatantly obvious. Bailey has done this and done it professionally.

If you cant see the evidence now you wont be able to see any in the future.

[Rocknroll 1,002]

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

D-L I just don't see how this is different from what anyone else is doing. IMO Developmental coach is just code for I'm new at this caper. I know I can analyse skills and work on guys with this in mind. Clarkson does the same but he's not going to undersell himself, he's happy to embrace the title of plain and simple coach, with all its portfolios including development. The great coaches are more likely to employ someone as development coach if they are not able to spend enough time on it themselves. It's an issue of self confidence, self belief, personal identity and Bailey is not yet embracing the whole role.

Clarkson is now in his sixth year and his list should be out of the developmental phase. MFC appointed Bailey with a view to complete recasting the train wreck of a list that was inherited. Given the talented young list, the development process is critical and MFC have already appointed Kelly O'Donnell to fill that role. And given O'Donnells role do you think his pedigree reflects he is new at the caper? .

I am not sure how you can draw a judgement of self belief, self confidence and personal identity about Bailey. Do you know him? His press conferences are straight bat standard answer sessions with consistent key messages that are oft forgotten by supporters. I not sure you can glean any clear messages from that particularly when you seemed to have missed more obvious signs about the state of the Club's playing list.

[Weedster 174]

I see where your coming from on this but would agree that there is still a lot that Bailey has to prove, I think coaches can get away with a bit using the 'rebuilding mantra' that is so prevalent.

Hardwick at Richmond IMO has at least put his stamp on that group quite quickly where I don't think Bailey was as quick to do so, having said that the majority would have seen Hardwick play and understand that what he asks of his players he did out on the field, that is not quite so obvious with Bails.

I think next year will tell the tale for Bails...the forward line is the final piece of the puzzle as far as I am concerned. With players such as Sylvia, Jurrah, Petterd, Wonna, Bennell, Tapscott, Hughes, Maric, Fitzpatrick, Stef Martin all missing for various reasons this year at different times added to others such as Watts, Bate, Jetta, Dunn, Miller and Green there are an abundance of options.

Barring injury I would expect to see this all come together somewhat next year and for us to be seriously knocking on the door of the Top 8. If we are still struggling to kick decent scores then he will be under scrutiny.

Lets see...

Very true - well stated

[Harrisonrules 273]

And Bailey reduced the side to a rabble??? MFC were already there in 2007. The backbone of side for the past 10 years, Neitz, Yze, White, Robbo, Whelan were finished and the need to rebuild our list from scratch was blatantly obvious. Bailey has done this and done it professionally

The disastrous merry go round hand ball fiasco dominated Baileys first two years plus game one. That was the game plan. It stopped then and at least Bailey now talks of his model being to kick it and through the corridor. Either our players were so dumb they got it so wrong for so long after each playing 10 years of natural instinctive football. Good footballers were turned into a rabble and we were told week in week out it was their skill and the lack of intensity. There was something more fundamentally wrong that no one was able to pin point. Your can not rule out poor coaching communication, poor game plan or lack of strategic planning and implementation unless other evidence becomes apparent. Again I say our players may have been dumb and without skill. IMO it was the most bizzare start to a coaching career I can remember. I remain open minded but continue with serious questions

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The disastrous merry go round hand ball fiasco dominated Baileys first two years plus game one. That was the game plan. It stopped then and at least Bailey now talks of his model being to kick it and through the corridor. Either our players were so dumb they got it so wrong for so long after each playing 10 years of natural instinctive football. Good footballers were turned into a rabble and we were told week in week out it was their skill and the lack of intensity. There was something more fundamentally wrong that no one was able to pin point. Your can not rule out poor coaching communication, poor game plan or lack of strategic planning and implementation unless other evidence becomes apparent. Again I say our players may have been dumb and without skill. IMO it was the most bizzare start to a coaching career I can remember. I remain open minded but continue with serious questions

Wrong wrong wrong.

The game plan is the same. It did not change in Round 2.

There has been enough discussion (some of it worthy and some of it crud) that clearly outlines what has happened. Do a search of the site for "Game plan" and track posters like Axis of Bob and rpfc.

You may be open minded but you clearly dont have the facts.

[Bleasey as that 99]

I. This coolness was epitomised in Monday's game when he gave an interview and discussed strategy ("going around the zone") live on the telecast during Q2.

Did anyone elsa hate him doing "interviews" mid way through the game?

I know myself and my dad did....

[Grandson of a gun 276]

Agree with the original thoughts re Bailey.

People who are critical of his first two years need to remember that we had an old list, and some very average players. He had to cull it all and start again. And whether you believe it or not, he and the match committee crafted this list while "managing" win loss ratios to ensure the best long term future for MFC, i.e securing priority picks. I applaud his fortitude in that regard.

Have a look at the backline he built.

Have a look at the midfield he is building.

He has taken the right steps so far.

Quite rightly all that remains now is development of the forward line (hopefully with much fewer injuries).

People are so quick to jump down his throat but i believe so far that he is better than blokes like Ratten (ask any CFC supporter), Voss (without Brown and Black his team would be a shambles) and Knights (he is a man who has serious gameplan issues) and he is equal with blokes like Hardwick and Clarkson.

[Harrisonrules 273]

You may be open minded but you clearly dont have the facts.

I am open minded, All I ask is give me facts, not vague opinions. We're not after a good finals team, it is only the best that will get there. Bailey will have some strengths, and weaknesses. If the club doesn't moniter them then we will only end up being a good finals team. This forum is surely our opportunity to keep asking the hard questions.

[Harrisonrules 273]

People are so quick to jump down his throat but i believe so far that he is better than blokes like Ratten (ask any CFC supporter), Voss (without Brown and Black his team would be a shambles) and Knights (he is a man who has serious gameplan issues) and he is equal with blokes like Hardwick and Clarkson.

Your opinion might be right but what can you say to substantiate it. Players are scrutinised mercilessly by 'us' what is so sacred about the coaching panel being scrutinised. Looking for concrete signs of performance is hardly jumping down someones throat. This is our opportunity to keep the discussion going to ensure excellence, otherwise why have a forum.

[Guest DeesPower]

Very different scenario, we're rebuilding far deeper from 3 Yrs ago, than the Tiges are this year.

I've told friends all year that the Tiges are not as bad as some in the Media have been suggesting. And now we can see it. But they will progress up the ladder far slower over the next few years, IMO, than us. Unless they pick up some new guns in a hurry.

IMO, our rebuild is from the foundations up, & we are still to fit certain parts into place. Each time we change over an experienced for a beginner, we go back a bit.

The Tigers may get into the 8 in the next 3 years but they are not building a foundation capable of winning a premiership. They started too late and are now ambushed by GC and GWS.

We, on the other hand, have the foundations for a long term multi premiership dynasty. It will be extremely difficult for other established clubs to do likewise in the next five years because of the arrival of the new clubs. IMO our competition in four or five years time will be from these new clubs who will have built from a group of brilliant youngsters, but their challenge will be to construct a winning club culture from no history. As someone who has lead corporate start-ups I can tell you how difficult the building of a successful corporate culture is from nothing. Our club shrewdly in my opinion see our tradition as a strength and an advantage over these "jonny come latelies".

Our challenge though with the advent of free agency will be to keep our brilliant group together, but the club is very much aware of this and moves such as state of the art facilities, getting a buy-in to the building of a dynasty, and fixing the financial position are all positive moves in this direction. The overwhelming protection from being raped by other clubs though is to build success and we are better placed than anyone over the next 6 or so years to do this.

Go Dees!

Edited June 18, 2010 by DeesPower

[Grandson of a gun 276]

Your opinion might be right but what can you say to substantiate it. Players are scrutinised mercilessly by 'us' what is so sacred about the coaching panel being scrutinised. Looking for concrete signs of performance is hardly jumping down someones throat. This is our opportunity to keep the discussion going to ensure excellence, otherwise why have a forum.

Agree. But what more do you want of him at this stage?

Concrete signs of performance:

He recognised the poor state of the list and cleaned it up;

He had the intestinal fortitude to see the big picture and "manage" the team to ensure the best draft picks in his first two years;

He built a backline that is in the top 4 or 5 in the comp;

He has / is developing a midfield that will be scarily good;

He is now developing the forward line (albeit hampered by injuries to Jurrah, Petterd, Sylvia and Bate at times).

The game plan is positive and exciting, defence based but with quick direct ball movement through the guts- what we all want.

I'm sure we will continue along this path after the break.

Given this, surely he has done enough at this stage to win your confidence that he is on the right path.