THE HOUSE THAT DEAN BUILT

[Harrisonrules 273]

THE HOUSE THAT ‘DEAN’ BUILT

Essendon finally squeezed 53 games out of Dean before they realised there was no more improvement. It certainly wasn’t 200 games but then I wish I had just got on the Dees list let alone play one game. So I congratulate Dean on his efforts, he’ll look back with some pride.

Dean has some 67 games as Melbourne coach. Yes I believe we have squeezed out of him pretty well all there is. Week in week out we blast players for their inept performance. This week the weakest excuse was injuries. Unfortunately that is only part of the story, the buck most always stop somewhere. And that is Deans desk.

A 70 point turn around yesterday against one of the lowest teams in the league, after a quarter of dominance is absolutely absurd. It says there is something drastically wrong, not on the strength of yesterday’s game alone but because flawed patterns appeared once again.

This is the house that Dean built.

Into his fourth year no one else carries as much responsibility as Dean does.

He was given free reign to build a complete list as he chose, from tanking to cutting, this is his list. Very few coaches ever get such a choice.

He cut hard at the top end following a formula that said premiership teams must have players with certain numbers of games in them irrespective of readiness. This philosophy meant that not only did players not quite good enough to get cut but the experienced competent players also went before they were real liabilities. It meant we cut deep into leadership. It overlooked the value and need of a group of leaders to teach the younger brigade. The result is that we are so vulnerable at times that we are inept.

We understand his strength and excitement at time of appointment was his platform that he was a development coach. I still fail to see in what way he develops players any better than any other coach.

We criticise lapses in tackling, hardness etc, but the task of the coach to get into the minds of players so that they perform consistently close to their optimum separates the average coaches from the elite. What an elusive quality, but 67 games has shown us that Dean does not have it.

What is at least as important and I really think more important is the way the game has changed to be a systems game. Team performance is more important than ever. I’ve never heard anybody – from supporters to media – speak of Dean as having any significant skill in coping at this level. It’s not simply developing a game plan, it’s about one’s ability to constantly read the ever evolving and changing plans of the opposition and counter attack. Sorry Dean, it’s just not there.

As I began, this is the team Dean built. He’s done a job but the total picture says there is nothing more in the tank. We might squeeze up to 80 games out of him. That will depend on the clubs administration, I doubt they will. I doubt there would be more than a hand full at the club, admin or supporters who would be prepared to entrust this young group to even two more years of Dean. It’s too much of a risk. He made choices that really required 7 plus years to see if it would work. He has not made the progress that justifies it. And the club cannot afford the time.

53 games as a player, 70 odd games as coach. Well done Dean I envy the career you were able to squeeze out of yourself.

[ICU2 Jerry Jerry 257]

Just got sledge hammer out there mate!

Edited May 15, 2011 by Rogue
No need to quote massive slabs of text - just enough to indicate what you're replying to is fine

[demons27 1]

Elaborate and good call. Time to send him packing and employ a coach with a proven track record including Premierships eg Malthouse/Roos :-)

Edited May 15, 2011 by Rogue
No need to quote massive slabs of text - just enough to indicate what you're replying to is fine

[rpfc 28,846]

He made choices that really required 7 plus years to see if it would work. He has not made the progress that justifies it. And the club cannot afford the time.

These sentences are incongruous. Takes '7 plus years' to see whether he is the right coach but he is, according to your summation, not the right coach?

?

And more of 2011 needs to happen before anyone can judge progress, or lack thereof.

53 games as a player, 70 odd games as coach. Well done Dean I envy the career you were able to squeeze out of yourself.

How patronising of you.

Things are not looking good with some terrible performances but I want to see more before I make judgements on the coach and the FD.

[Guest 36DD]

THE HOUSE THAT ‘DEAN’ BUILT

Essendon finally squeezed 53 games out of Dean before they realised there was no more improvement. It certainly wasn’t 200 games but then I wish I had just got on the Dees list let alone play one game. So I congratulate Dean on his efforts, he’ll look back with some pride.

Dean has some 67 games as Melbourne coach. Yes I believe we have squeezed out of him pretty well all there is. Week in week out we blast players for their inept performance. This week the weakest excuse was injuries. Unfortunately that is only part of the story, the buck most always stop somewhere. And that is Deans desk.

A 70 point turn around yesterday against one of the lowest teams in the league, after a quarter of dominance is absolutely absurd. It says there is something drastically wrong, not on the strength of yesterday’s game alone but because flawed patterns appeared once again.

This is the house that Dean built.

Into his fourth year no one else carries as much responsibility as Dean does.

He was given free reign to build a complete list as he chose, from tanking to cutting, this is his list. Very few coaches ever get such a choice.

He cut hard at the top end following a formula that said premiership teams must have players with certain numbers of games in them irrespective of readiness. This philosophy meant that not only did players not quite good enough to get cut but the experienced competent players also went before they were real liabilities. It meant we cut deep into leadership. It overlooked the value and need of a group of leaders to teach the younger brigade. The result is that we are so vulnerable at times that we are inept.

We understand his strength and excitement at time of appointment was his platform that he was a development coach. I still fail to see in what way he develops players any better than any other coach.

We criticise lapses in tackling, hardness etc, but the task of the coach to get into the minds of players so that they perform consistently close to their optimum separates the average coaches from the elite. What an elusive quality, but 67 games has shown us that Dean does not have it.

What is at least as important and I really think more important is the way the game has changed to be a systems game. Team performance is more important than ever. I’ve never heard anybody – from supporters to media – speak of Dean as having any significant skill in coping at this level. It’s not simply developing a game plan, it’s about one’s ability to constantly read the ever evolving and changing plans of the opposition and counter attack. Sorry Dean, it’s just not there.

As I began, this is the team Dean built. He’s done a job but the total picture says there is nothing more in the tank. We might squeeze up to 80 games out of him. That will depend on the clubs administration, I doubt they will. I doubt there would be more than a hand full at the club, admin or supporters who would be prepared to entrust this young group to even two more years of Dean. It’s too much of a risk. He made choices that really required 7 plus years to see if it would work. He has not made the progress that justifies it. And the club cannot afford the time.

53 games as a player, 70 odd games as coach. Well done Dean I envy the career you were able to squeeze out of yourself.

What was your thoughts on last week? Surely the coach cant have that much of an influence that we win by 96 points against the crows, were up by 30 pts against North to get rolled by 41 points. Did Dean coach well in the first quarter and not in the remaining three? Gee for a man perched in a box on the sidelines he has an incredible influence on the game.

Players simply didn't bring it. I could tell at about the 20 minute mark of the first even though we were up by 31pts. North started winning contested footy and lifted their pressure. No one from Melbourne rose to the challenge, plain and simply. Players mentally weak and not prepared to work hard.

[Guest watts04]

players r mentaly weak and dont have the right attitude cause of the coach

betchya if malthouse or roos were the coach we wouldnt have the same issue

time for bailey to go

[Guest 36DD]

players r mentaly weak and dont have the right attitude cause of the coach

betchya if malthouse or roos were the coach we wouldnt have the same issue

time for bailey to go

why didn't you pipe up last week?

Mate, Bailey obviously prepared the team with the right attitude for North, they came out of the blocks, were up by 31 pts, were challenged, then didn't offer a yelp.

You are entitled to blame Bailey, thats fine, but I feel that the majority of the blame lays solely at the players feet, they are not prepared to work hard for each other or the coach. The media have us worked out, North had us worked out to.

Swallow said on the footy show that if you let Melbourne play on and give them time and space they run all over you, once they tightened the screws, applied pressure, won contested footy it was curtains. Brereton said we have too many players including our captain who offer one effort and then sit on their heels. Darcy said on the coverage that whilst understanding that we were playing with 2 men down, there were no players who were prepared to gut run to spread and provide an option when we have the ball, or to run back and take their position in the zone when we dont have the ball.

players were mentally weak under Daniher, one year up, one year down, even got done by 100 points two weeks running in 2000, then went on a winning streak to make the Granny.

That culture still lingers.

[Dockett 32 1,239]

That's harsh.

I very much liked what I saw last week and this week it seems everyone wants to sack him.

I'm sure a mid term review will be coming up and the club will analyse the total football dept closely.

I would expect they will require an improvement in the second half or the story will write itself.

Personally I don't understand why we 9 players on our list 180 or under. I like running payers but I like them Judd or Griffin size.

[Harrisonrules 273]

These sentences are incongruous. Takes '7 plus years' to see whether he is the right coach but he is, according to your summation, not the right coach?

?

And more of 2011 needs to happen before anyone can judge progress, or lack thereof.

How patronising of you.

Things are not looking good with some terrible performances but I want to see more before I make judgements on the coach and the FD.

Obviously I am not as proficient with English as you. We will all make our decision (as if it is of any significance) at different times. I hope you get the full season to make your call. You've got to make it by seasons end. I've made mine.

[Harrisonrules 273]

why didn't you pipe up last week?

Mate, Bailey obviously prepared the team with the right attitude for North, they came out of the blocks, were up by 31 pts, were challenged, then didn't offer a yelp.

You are entitled to blame Bailey, thats fine, but I feel that the majority of the blame lays solely at the players feet, they are not prepared to work hard for each other or the coach. The media have us worked out, North had us worked out to.

Swallow said on the footy show that if you let Melbourne play on and give them time and space they run all over you, once they tightened the screws, applied pressure, won contested footy it was curtains. Brereton said we have too many players including our captain who offer one effort and then sit on their heels. Darcy said on the coverage that whilst understanding that we were playing with 2 men down, there were no players who were prepared to gut run to spread and provide an option when we have the ball, or to run back and take their position in the zone when we dont have the ball.

players were mentally weak under Daniher, one year up, one year down, even got done by 100 points two weeks running in 2000, then went on a winning streak to make the Granny.

That culture still lingers.

So what do you suggest. You've got 13 games to make your choice. How are you going to change the club culture over the next few years.

[Harrisonrules 273]

That's harsh.

I very much liked what I saw last week and this week it seems everyone wants to sack him.

I'm sure a mid term review will be coming up and the club will analyse the total football dept closely.

I would expect they will require an improvement in the second half or the story will write itself.

Personally I don't understand why we 9 players on our list 180 or under. I like running payers but I like them Judd or Griffin size.

Who is responsibile for choosing those players?

[Harrisonrules 273]

What was your thoughts on last week? Surely the coach cant have that much of an influence that we win by 96 points against the crows, were up by 30 pts against North to get rolled by 41 points. Did Dean coach well in the first quarter and not in the remaining three? Gee for a man perched in a box on the sidelines he has an incredible influence on the game.

Players simply didn't bring it. I could tell at about the 20 minute mark of the first even though we were up by 31pts. North started winning contested footy and lifted their pressure. No one from Melbourne rose to the challenge, plain and simply. Players mentally weak and not prepared to work hard.

Jimmy made the comment on radio that pre Crows game, the press had motivated us for ten days before the Crows game. I don't want to take away from what Dean did that week, but there were so many sources of motivation who really knows what brought that enormous potential out of our team. It's there. The club has to make a choice by years end on who is to oversee it.

[BAMF 4,421]

What was your thoughts on last week? Surely the coach cant have that much of an influence that we win by 96 points against the crows, were up by 30 pts against North to get rolled by 41 points. Did Dean coach well in the first quarter and not in the remaining three? Gee for a man perched in a box on the sidelines he has an incredible influence on the game.

Players simply didn't bring it. I could tell at about the 20 minute mark of the first even though we were up by 31pts. North started winning contested footy and lifted their pressure. No one from Melbourne rose to the challenge, plain and simply. Players mentally weak and not prepared to work hard.

Exactly. It's strange how no one on here was saying how good a coach Bailey was last week.

After all. The West Coast game was all his fault. But the Adelaide game was only because of the media scrutiny?

Josh Mohoney is a [censored] coach because he was an average player. But Scott West and Todd Viney are the best because they were awesome players.

Starts getting old after awhile.

[Guest 36DD]

So what do you suggest. You've got 13 games to make your choice. How are you going to change the club culture over the next few years.

Weed out the deadwood....remainder of the season will determine who gets shown the door...those who stand up we hang onto...i'll get the ball rolling

Bate and/or Dunn

Whilst I am relatively happy with Bailey thus far he will also have to prove he does not fall into the "deadwood" category.

8 wins for me this season was my pass mark, I never bought into this finals, too early in our development.

[Guest 36DD]

Jimmy made the comment on radio that pre Crows game, the press had motivated us for ten days before the Crows game. I don't want to take away from what Dean did that week, but there were so many sources of motivation who really knows what brought that enormous potential out of our team. It's there. The club has to make a choice by years end on who is to oversee it.

if we have players that only get motivated after getting a serve from the media then we have the wrong players. no personal pride, no pride in the jumper.

[Swampfox 190]

THE HOUSE THAT ‘DEAN’ BUILT

Essendon finally squeezed 53 games out of Dean before they realised there was no more improvement. It certainly wasn’t 200 games but then I wish I had just got on the Dees list let alone play one game. So I congratulate Dean on his efforts, he’ll look back with some pride.

Dean has some 67 games as Melbourne coach. Yes I believe we have squeezed out of him pretty well all there is. Week in week out we blast players for their inept performance. This week the weakest excuse was injuries. Unfortunately that is only part of the story, the buck most always stop somewhere. And that is Deans desk.

A 70 point turn around yesterday against one of the lowest teams in the league, after a quarter of dominance is absolutely absurd. It says there is something drastically wrong, not on the strength of yesterday’s game alone but because flawed patterns appeared once again.

This is the house that Dean built.

Into his fourth year no one else carries as much responsibility as Dean does.

He was given free reign to build a complete list as he chose, from tanking to cutting, this is his list. Very few coaches ever get such a choice.

He cut hard at the top end following a formula that said premiership teams must have players with certain numbers of games in them irrespective of readiness. This philosophy meant that not only did players not quite good enough to get cut but the experienced competent players also went before they were real liabilities. It meant we cut deep into leadership. It overlooked the value and need of a group of leaders to teach the younger brigade. The result is that we are so vulnerable at times that we are inept.

We understand his strength and excitement at time of appointment was his platform that he was a development coach. I still fail to see in what way he develops players any better than any other coach.

We criticise lapses in tackling, hardness etc, but the task of the coach to get into the minds of players so that they perform consistently close to their optimum separates the average coaches from the elite. What an elusive quality, but 67 games has shown us that Dean does not have it.

What is at least as important and I really think more important is the way the game has changed to be a systems game. Team performance is more important than ever. I’ve never heard anybody – from supporters to media – speak of Dean as having any significant skill in coping at this level. It’s not simply developing a game plan, it’s about one’s ability to constantly read the ever evolving and changing plans of the opposition and counter attack. Sorry Dean, it’s just not there.

As I began, this is the team Dean built. He’s done a job but the total picture says there is nothing more in the tank. We might squeeze up to 80 games out of him. That will depend on the clubs administration, I doubt they will. I doubt there would be more than a hand full at the club, admin or supporters who would be prepared to entrust this young group to even two more years of Dean. It’s too much of a risk. He made choices that really required 7 plus years to see if it would work. He has not made the progress that justifies it. And the club cannot afford the time.

53 games as a player, 70 odd games as coach. Well done Dean I envy the career you were able to squeeze out of yourself.

For the record lack of leg speed is why he didn't play more games not his footy smarts

Did you know the best administrator in football played only 4 games for the Demons

So much for your relevance theory

Edited May 15, 2011 by Swampfox

[Guest 36DD]

Weed out the deadwood....remainder of the season will determine who gets shown the door...those who stand up we hang onto...i'll get the ball rolling

Bate and/or Dunn

Whilst I am relatively happy with Bailey thus far he will also have to prove he does not fall into the "deadwood" category.

8 wins for me this season was my pass mark, I never bought into this finals, too early in our development.

On that note, watch the replay and tell me what you think of Dunn's game. Here were some of the highlights for me, reported for a stupid and weak attack on Pratt whilst on the ground, not only did he give away a free kick he will be rubbed out for 2..3..4 weeks, not something you want from a senior player. Then there was a pathetic 50m penalty which resulted in a shot on goal. Third highlight for me was blazing away into the forward 50 where there were three North players there to rebound. Those were the things that stood out for me, oh and I reckon he would have struggled to break double figures in disposals. Now what hope has Bailey got when one of his senior experienced players plays a game like that. I'll go far as to suggest that Lynden was more focused on what he had planned for his bday on saturday night than playing tough, honest football. Everyone has a bad day from time to time, however, Dunn has offered nothing all season.

[titan_uranus 25,059]

Then there was a pathetic 50m penalty which resulted in a shot on goal.

Oh lord, I forgot about that. That was awful. Truly, truly awful.

Dunn has played about 10 decent games of AFL. Unfortunately most of those were in the second half of last year, where he lulled everyone into thinking he could play.

He can't. And shouldn't, again, ever.

[Akum 2,660]

My problem with Bailey after a game like yesterday is that I can't see how he makes any impact whatsoever on the outcome, especially in a game where we're put under pressure. His effect on team performance seems to be completely passive - if the players can't lift themselves on the field, we're stuffed. I want to see a single game in which he does have an impact before we extend his contract. By contrast, the impact that Hardwick has had, that Brad Scott has had, that Hird/Thompson have had, is all too clear for everyone to see. I could add, in past years, the impact of Lyon, of Eade, of Clarkson. Blame the players all you like; Bailey, so far, is no-impact. I would love for him to show us all that he has an impact on the team's performance. It's up to him. If he's up to it, he'll do it. If not, he won't; he'll just get better ecuses, with the help of a number of D'landers.

Another point that we need to face squarely: how much of our team improvement comes down to the improvement of a single individual: Mark Jamar. How would we look if Russian hadn't gone from "doughnut" to AA in one season? Well, Dean has a golden opportunity to show us that he is such a good coach that he can overcome the loss of our central player. Or he won't. It's up to him, plain & simple. I'm getting sick of it being left up to the players to justify him as coach.

I hope he can do it; if we can go forward without having to replace him as coach, it would be much better for us. He's got the rest of the season to do it. But without a big improvement in team performance - if this is as good as we can do this year whenever we're put under pressure - he'll be relying purely on sympathy to keep his job into 2012.

[Demonic Ascent 0]

Weed out the deadwood....remainder of the season will determine who gets shown the door...those who stand up we hang onto...i'll get the ball rolling

Bate and/or Dunn

Whilst I am relatively happy with Bailey thus far he will also have to prove he does not fall into the "deadwood" category.

8 wins for me this season was my pass mark, I never bought into this finals, too early in our development.

What rubbish. So you're happy to only win 8 games out of 22? I can understand being realistic but I can also understand developing a culture and club who goes out expecting to win each and every game and if not win at least make a fist of it and let the opposition know they have to work for a win against us. I didn't think we could realistically win the flag at the start of the year but there is no reason why we couldn't make finals in a comp where half the sides get in and considering the easy draw we have been dealt.

It's not the losing that is the problem, it is the inconsistency of effort and structure of our team. Even in games we have won the issues have been apparent (no forward system or structure going inside 50, just kick and hope, no second efforts, shepherds and helping out team mates etc). Against North we had no one to kick to when running forward yet at the other end North had loose players streaming into their own 50 on multiple occasions. This is the coaches job, to ensure consistency in the players effort and performance, and to try and get a win from what he has at his disposal or at least make the opposition earn it.

Someone also mentioned that it was apparent that at the 20 minute mark fo the first quarter North applied the pressure and our players stopped running and dropped their heads. Well what did Bailey do to rectify this? What did he say at 1/4, 1/2 & 3/4 time? What moves did he pull to try and stem the bleeding? What strutures did he put in place to try and grind out a win considering we had some key players out and 2 injuries on the bench? Face it Bailey has shown nothing in over 3 seasons to prove that he is tactically gifted or proactive enough to alter the outcome of a macth on game day. Similar to Daniher he goes in with his set plans and if they come off we look a million dollars but if it breaks down in any way or the opposition coach puts moves in place to counter our structure we fall to bits and nothing is done to counter-attack.

As for Mahoney, West & Royal don't get me started on them. Wellman seemed to be quite good last year however he left to return to Windy Hill and we replaced him with Choco Royal, someone who not only has been in the system forever (and therefore unlikely to bring a fresh persepctive) but who was also booted from his last job and has no creedentials to say he should be a specialist defensive coach. We need a cleanout from Bailey down and bring in someone who is uncompromising, makes no excuses and has a proven track record. Malthouse is the obvious one but I'm not 100% sold on him. He has got what it takes to get his players up most weeks but really it took him 10 years to get a flag at the Pies and only then once they had given him his marching orders (albeit with 2 years notice). I think Roos would be a better option if he would come. He is still young and is a tactical thinker of the game who can squeeze the most out of players (as seen by the second hand players he was able to turn into best 22 regulars at the Swans).

Edited May 15, 2011 by Demonic Ascent

[Guest 36DD]

Another point that we need to face squarely: how much of our team improvement comes down to the improvement of a single individual: Mark Jamar. How would we look if Russian hadn't gone from "doughnut" to AA in one season? Well, Dean has a golden opportunity to show us that he is such a good coach that he can overcome the loss of our central player. Or he won't. It's up to him, plain & simple. I'm getting sick of it being left up to the players to justify him as coach.

I know when I was playing footy I never once thought of playing to justify my coach. I played because I wanted to test myself and win a match of footy with my mates. I never bought into all the ranting and raving of a coach before the game, I just wanted to test myself and beat my opponent which would hopefully lead to a win. If the players need external sources including the coach to motivate themselves the we are well and truly farked.

[Disco Demons 92]

Dean will be gone after round 13. We play Freo at the MCG. If we lose that game and current performances continue he will be gone.

[Guest 36DD]

What rubbish. So you're happy to only win 8 games out of 22? I can understand being realistic but I can also understand developing a culture and club who goes out expecting to win each and every game and if not win at least make a fist of it and let the opposition know they have to work for a win against us. I didn't think we could realistically win the flag at the start of the year but there is no reason why we couldn't make finals in a comp where half the sides get in and considering the easy draw we have been dealt.

It's not the losing that is the problem, it is the inconsistency of effort and structure of our team. Even in games we have won the issues have been apparent (no forward system or structure going inside 50, just kick and hope, no second efforts, shepherds and helping out team mates etc). Against North we had no one to kick to when running forward yet at the other end North had loose players streaming into their own 50 on multiple occasions. This is the coaches job, to ensure consistency in the players effort and performance, and to try and get a win from what he has at his disposal or at least make the opposition earn it.

Someone also mentioned that it was apparent that at the 20 minute mark fo the first quarter North applied the pressure and our players stopped running and dropped their heads. Well what did Bailey do to rectify this? What did he say at 1/4, 1/2 & 3/4 time?

Mate, where did I say I was happy with 8 wins? I would like us to win every game, but yes I was being realistic given we lost about 600 games of experience when Miller, Junior and Bruce departed.

Yes, Bailey does have a structure in place, players are unprepared to work hard to maintain that structure. You show such little understanding when you said we had no structure in the forward line. The reason why there were no options was because no one was prepared to "gut run" and offer an option. Listen to what Luke Darcy says about our effort to run and provide options in the broadcast. These sort of things must come from within.

Bailey can play chess with the players, but if the players are unprepared to work hard, dig in and play tough footy we are screwed.

Things get pretty bad when your best afield, Chip Frawley says post match that "we gave in". That is quite damning.

Btw, when was the last time you saw a Melbourne player vomiting on the ground or sidelines from having run their guts out???

[BAMF 4,421]

As for Mahoney, West & Royal don't get me started on them. Wellman seemed to be quite good last year however he left to return to Windy Hill and we replaced him with Choco Royal, someone who not only has been in the system forever (and therefore unlikely to bring a fresh persepctive) but who was also booted from his last job and has no creedentials to say he should be a specialist defensive coach.

How do you know how well our assistant coaches perform?

[Demonic Ascent 0]

Mate, where did I say I was happy with 8 wins? I would like us to win every game, but yes I was being realistic given we lost about 600 games of experience when Miller, Junior and Bruce departed.

Yes, Bailey does have a structure in place, players are unprepared to work hard to maintain that structure. You show such little understanding when you said we had no structure in the forward line. The reason why there were no options was because no one was prepared to "gut run" and offer an option. Listen to what Luke Darcy says about our effort to run and provide options in the broadcast. These sort of things must come from within.

Bailey can play chess with the players, but if the players are unprepared to work hard, dig in and play tough footy we are screwed.

Things get pretty bad when your best afield, Chip Frawley says post match that "we gave in". That is quite damning.

Btw, when was the last time you saw a Melbourne player vomiting on the ground or sidelines from having run their guts out???

So Bailey's the best coach since Norm Smith it's just that the players are too lazy to carry out his infallible plans? Come on. I'll admit there are certain players who should be ashamed of some of the performances they put in but at the end of the day 1) it is the coaches job to ensure the players get the best out of themselves and 2) its easier to replace the coach than to replace 38 players.