Malthouse won't be cheap/Gary Lyon on Bailey article

[Guest Thomo]

The article says that if Melbourne want Malthouse they will have to spend big money on not only him, but also assistant coaches and potentially a breach of contract case by Collingwood.

I think Melbourne is almost no chance of getting Malthouse, not because of his salary, but he has come from two of the richest clubs in the league who had an almost open chequebook for football club spending. When he has had the resources of Collingwood for things like training trips to the US and the best in sports science that money can buy, I doubt he will want to come to Melbourne with little resources compared to Carlton, Hawthorne and GWS who may also be after his services.

More interesting in the article is Lyons opinion on Bailey. I'm only going on the quotes in the article, so I'm not sure if it is taken in context, but it sounds like Lyon has put the heat on Bailey.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/mick-malthouse-wont-be-cheap-if-melbourne-dump-dean-bailey/story-fn8libnl-1226064771894

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

A fair call I think. It's obvious that Malthouse would want to bring some personnel with him, but he may be tempted if he rates our young players.

[biggestred 4,360]

micky m has only ever coached at west coast and the pies - two of the most well resourced clubs in the afl.

3 1/2 years ago when we appointed bailey we had no money, horrible facilities and presumably no money to attract coaching talent as assistants - hence we only have 3 compared to the pies 6. have we come very far since 2006? absolutely, but most of this has been off field. all 3 of our assistants at the time were straight out of playing with little experience - and thus came on the cheap.

getting mick malthouse would be a very expensive operation, as not only would we have to fork out for him but also a number of assistants, who wouldnt come cheap. in addition there is the question mark over mick... can he coach a team that doesnt have all the advantages and still be successful? or not? interesting times ahead

[Demon Disciple 11,086]

micky m has only ever coached at west coast and the pies - two of the most well resourced clubs in the afl.

3 1/2 years ago when we appointed bailey we had no money, horrible facilities and presumably no money to attract coaching talent as assistants - hence we only have 3 compared to the pies 6. have we come very far since 2006? absolutely, but most of this has been off field. all 3 of our assistants at the time were straight out of playing with little experience - and thus came on the cheap.

getting mick malthouse would be a very expensive operation, as not only would we have to fork out for him but also a number of assistants, who wouldnt come cheap. in addition there is the question mark over mick... can he coach a team that doesnt have all the advantages and still be successful? or not? interesting times ahead

Ummmm, no Benno. He was the coach of the Bulldogs before heading west.

[biggestred 4,360]

okay i should rephrase.

he hasnt won a flag at a club without blah blah blah

[biggestred 4,360]

also, i was 9 in 1992 lol but yes, i stand corrected

[Dee Fan 3,247]

One of the biggest problems Melbourne has had for many years now is its inconsistency and is inability to win games that it should. We never go in to a game assured of a win whoever we play and however bad they're playing; we have a habit of playing sides and footballers back in to form. This is one thing that Collingwood never do; let games slip when they are supposed to win, if they are, they generally do.

It's so frustrating when we play a side that hasn't won for 6 to 7 weeks in a row and are playing poorly and then drop the match because we didn't turn up to play. It really shits me when we go to adelaide and play against a sub standard Crows or Port and walk away from the ground after another 70 point flogging.

Malthouse coached clubs don't seem to do that, if they are against a substandard team they don't "not turn up to play" and all the players know that if they don't perform they are not going to get a game. We have been unable to attract a high profile mature recruit to the club but I reckon if we had a coach of the calibre of Malthouse that would change.

[45HG 1,539]

Over 27 years Mick Malthouse has coached 648 games for 372 wins, 6 draws and 3 premierships at a winning percentage of 57.4 and a losin percentage of only 41.66%.

In the past 22 finals series' (including this one) only 4 have not featured a team coached by MM. In the past 22 years he has coached 3 premiers and reached 6 grand finals.

I think any question marks over his coaching are miniscule.

[old dee 22,963]

If we cannot afford the best and have to choose a middle cost coach for cost reasons

Then IMO we are doomed to continue the mediocrity we have achieved for most of the last 45 years.

God help us if it is cost that determines who the coach is in 2012 and beyond.

I know all coachs start somewhere but can we afford a coach that takes 2 years to find his feet?

Edited May 30, 2011 by old dee

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

I agree its a risk to go probably back into debt again to find a top coach and god help us if that doesn't work, but at the same time can we afford not to... as continuing like this will have us back in debt in no time anyway.

[Dreamin' Demon 10]

I agree its a risk to go probably back into debt again to find a top coach and god help us if that doesn't work, but at the same time can we afford not to... as continuing like this will have us back in debt in no time anyway.

I doubt we will get Malthouse, not because of the money, but the contract holding him to Collin%$^%. If he made himself available to us, then we should pay him & his coaching staff what he wants.

It will be hefty yes, but the inflow of sponsors & members from this announcement alone will be significant.

[praha 10,329]

There is absolutely no excuse for not offering a position to a proven successful coach if he was available. Any amount of money that he would demand would be completely and utterly justified considering what he brings to the table. It's moronic to think the club might not go after him because of the price. Anything he is worth is completely in the reach of this club financially. I wouldn't expect anything less.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

If Paul Roos is in the market, I would rather go for him.

Mick M, by the end of the year, may well have lifted the holy grail for the 4th time. He is now in his 60's. And, as already pointed out, even if we could afford Mick and his entourage, will he still have the hunger? Perhaps, as he is a total professional after all.

Paul Roos became coach as a result of "people" power. Remember, Terry Wallace was all but in the chair, having already told the the Bullies he would be moving on. While there was undoubted skill and talent at the Swans when they won their flag, they beat an Eagles team, which, pound for pound, had a lot more class within its ranks. Paul Roos gave real kudos to the axiom, "a champion team, will always beat a team of champions". While the dollar is undoubtedly a motivator for anyone, Paul Roos would attract a calibre of assistants that we need, because they would be likely to believe that working under Roos, would add to their own credentials for any future senior position in the offing.

If he is in the market, I say we go for him, with all guns blazing.

Edited May 30, 2011 by iv'a worn smith

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

a winning percentage of 57.4 and a losin percentage of only 41.66%.

that's not exactly brilliant, that means he would be about 8th on the ladder in his overall career... and as has been mentioned, he's had the luxury of the richest footy departments at his disposal... if he came here with our 'dimmeys' style setup his name would go right alongside Daniher and Bailey with you lot

[Sir Why You Little 34,752]

Debt demolition was set up so we could clear debt and attract the best people....Be it Roos, Malthouse. or whoever.

We must go for the BEST, not just who is available.

Spend $$$ to make $$$

[DemonWA 3,520]

if we want sudden on field change we need to make it off field too. The bombers culled their FD and packed it full of proven coaching talent. If we want dramatic changes we'll need to do the same.

I really like Chirs Connoly, but in my opinion he seems like a bloke that shouldnt be able to look his boss in the eye when he recieves his pay check! I could well be out of line there, but please someone tell me what he does? He's great for spreading to good word about the club and the history and the young players who will deliver for us, but what value does he actually give the coaching department? Hate to say it, but same goes for Viney... Seems like alot of ex-palyers / mates of Jimmy get jos at the club because they're good blokes, not becasue they are good at what they do neccesarily?

Edited May 30, 2011 by DemonWA

[dee-luded 2,958]

The article says that if Melbourne want Malthouse they will have to spend big money on not only him, but also assistant coaches and potentially a breach of contract case by Collingwood.

I think Melbourne is almost no chance of getting Malthouse, not because of his salary, but he has come from two of the richest clubs in the league who had an almost open chequebook for football club spending. When he has had the resources of Collingwood for things like training trips to the US and the best in sports science that money can buy, I doubt he will want to come to Melbourne with little resources compared to Carlton, Hawthorne and GWS who may also be after his services.

More interesting in the article is Lyons opinion on Bailey. I'm only going on the quotes in the article, so I'm not sure if it is taken in context, but it sounds like Lyon has put the heat on Bailey.

http://www.heraldsun...l-1226064771894

I don't think it's any coincidence that Mrs Pratt has become a director or similar @ Carlton in recent times.

They want a strong Pratt's involvement.

[Guest hangon007]

There is absolutely no excuse for not offering a position to a proven successful coach if he was available. Any amount of money that he would demand would be completely and utterly justified considering what he brings to the table. It's moronic to think the club might not go after him because of the price. Anything he is worth is completely in the reach of this club financially. I wouldn't expect anything less.

Is this you offering to pay his salary then ... beautiful its all sorted then. I will call Swabby you call Mick. B)

[Guest Artie Bucco]

if we want sudden on field change we need to make it off field too. The bombers culled their FD and packed it full of proven coaching talent. If we want dramatic changes we'll need to do the same.

I really like Chirs Connoly, but in my opinion he seems like a bloke that shouldnt be able to look his boss in the eye when he recieves his pay check! I could well be out of line there, but please someone tell me what he does? He's great for spreading to good word about the club and the history and the young players who will deliver for us, but what value does he actually give the coaching department? Hate to say it, but same goes for Viney... Seems like alot of ex-palyers / mates of Jimmy get jos at the club because they're good blokes, not becasue they are good at what they do neccesarily?

WOW.

Would you say the same about Neil Balme? Because he has the same role as Connolly.

What exactly does he do? Ross Monaghan has the same job at Richmond after doing it for us, same with Fagan at Hawthorn.

It's a valid role at an AFL club.

Todd Viney's role has been described in detail on the club website, but his main role is in development rather than as a line coach.

I'm not sure what you're expecting these blokes to do publicly, to convince you they are worthy of their pay packet.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

I doubt we will get Malthouse, not because of the money, but the contract holding him to Collin%$^%. If he made himself available to us, then we should pay him & his coaching staff what he wants.

It will be hefty yes, but the inflow of sponsors & members from this announcement alone will be significant.

Eddie MGoo has already stated that if Mick wants to go, the Caringbush will not stand in his way.

[Guest Artie Bucco]

Eddie MGoo has already stated that if Mick wants to go, the Caringbush will not stand in his way.

They won't stand in his way, but their lawyers will be chasing us.

[DemonWA 3,520]

WOW.

Would you say the same about Neil Balme? Because he has the same role as Connolly.

What exactly does he do? Ross Monaghan has the same job at Richmond after doing it for us, same with Fagan at Hawthorn.

It's a valid role at an AFL club.

Todd Viney's role has been described in detail on the club website, but his main role is in development rather than as a line coach.

I'm not sure what you're expecting these blokes to do publicly, to convince you they are worthy of their pay packet.

Yep, i'd say that about probably 50% of the footy department at every club. Jobs for the sake of having more jobs

[Guest Artie Bucco]

Yep, i'd say that about probably 50% of the footy department at every club. Jobs for the sake of having more jobs

I can't believe you could possibly take this view, when clubs the that spend the most on their football departments are the ones that perform.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

They won't stand in his way, but their lawyers will be chasing us.

Why, if he is released from his contract?

Edited May 31, 2011 by iv'a worn smith

[daisycutter 28,661]

They won't stand in his way, but their lawyers will be chasing us.

Not necessarily. MM has a big out. His staying there is dependent on Collingwood finding him a "meaningful" job. MM has said this a number of times. If that is a clause for his contract extension I think it would be sufficiently broad to frustrate Collingwood lawyers.

But what would I know about lawyers!