On 28/07/2011 at 01:43, Range Rover said:

But would a coach with some serious 'fear factor' and authority (ie. Malthouse/Clarkson) put up with that rubbish for more than a minute?

One wonders ...

Yes I think so. But are they available or willing? Earlier in the season I started a thread to consider Clarkson when it was unfashionable. I like his attitude and he is still in his prime. I admire the way he's developed Hawthorn. Last week it was like watching a genuine AFL side playing against a VFL side. Their disciplined passing and slick close in ball handling game with very few turnovers was sublime but painful to watch. They got a lot of new kids in the team but play like real professionals.

  On 28/07/2011 at 01:43, Range Rover said:

But would a coach with some serious 'fear factor' and authority (ie. Malthouse/Clarkson) put up with that rubbish for more than a minute?

One wonders ...

Am I alone in believing it s got all too cosy cosy down at Demonland ?

I am sure that Bailey is every bit as good a 'development' man , a mentor type to the young etc but Im stil lnot seeing that he has the Ire required to get some moving a bit faster than they currently do.

Again and again I wonder which applies. Does Bailey indeed have gameday nous but the players are failing to heed his directions ( thats a problem )

or does he NOT have the plan(s) to win games on days when all is thrust his way ? ( again, a problem )

Are players failing to understand exactly whats required of them (...thats another problem )

Are players being taught/instructed the wrong skills/gam ( guess what...yep... problem )

Whatever the problem, or combination there of... we're not really gettting very far, if anywhere !!

  On 28/07/2011 at 01:59, america de cali said:

Yes I think so. But are they available or willing? Earlier in the season I started a thread to consider Clarkson when it was unfashionable. I like his attitude and he is still in his prime. I admire the way he's developed Hawthorn. Last week it was like watching a genuine AFL side playing against a VFL side. Their disciplined passing game with very few turnovers was sublime but painful to watch. They got a lot of new kids in the team but play like real professionals.

lol

Unfashionable?

Kick that thread up. He's a premiership winning coach.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:01, rpfc said:

lol

Unfashionable?

Kick that thread up. He's a premiership winning coach.

Just to refresh your mind. Read this

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:00, belzebub59 said:

Am I alone in believing it s got all too cosy cosy down at Demonland ?

I am sure that Bailey is every bit as good a 'development' man , a mentor type to the young etc but Im stil lnot seeing that he has the Ire required to get some moving a bit faster than they currently do.

Again and again I wonder which applies. Does Bailey indeed have gameday nous but the players are failing to heed his directions ( thats a problem )

or does he NOT have the plan(s) to win games on days when all is thrust his way ? ( again, a problem )

Are players failing to understand exactly whats required of them (...thats another problem )

Are players being taught/instructed the wrong skills/gam ( guess what...yep... problem )

Whatever the problem, or combination there of... we're not really gettting very far, if anywhere !!

The words 'mentor' and 'development' are all a bit too nice and snuggly for my liking.

I'd like someone down there who would rip a bloke a to shreds for bringing up a non-issue like the James McDonald departure.

I mean seriously brought in and told to pull their head and consider themselves grateful for every game they get. Or f%!k off!

And how many players have we really had come on this year? I mean take their game to a seriously good new level?

Stefan Martin, Jack Watts, Trenners? That's about it.

Not good enough.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:05, america de cali said:

Just to refresh your mind. Read this

lol

I read that 29 post thread...

Five posters can make something unfashionable?

Just as many people agreed with the notion of Clarkson.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:13, Range Rover said:

And how many players have we really had come this year? I mean take their game to a seriously good new level?

Stefan Martin, Jack Watts, Trenners? That's about it.

Not good enough.

Well, to be fair, Bailey was the coach when a whole heap of players 'came on' in recent years...

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:13, rpfc said:

lol

I read that 29 post thread...

Five posters can make something unfashionable?

Just as many people agreed with the notion of Clarkson.

Unfashionable it was because no one was talking about him at the time when I started the thread. Everyone had Malthouse or Roos on their lips.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:17, america de cali said:

Unfashionable it was because no one was talking about him at the time when I started the thread. Everyone had Malthouse or Roos on their lips.

Because they definitely weren't coaching an AFL team in 2012...

A Premiership coach in charge of one of the top 4 favourites could hardly be desribed as 'unfashionable.'

If you would like me to classify it, I would say that Clarkson was 'unthought of' because most people didn't think it possible that Clarkson would be available in 2012. I am still not convinced he or the Hawks aren't playing some games trying to get the best contract for each other.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:24, rpfc said:

Because they definitely weren't coaching an AFL team in 2012...

A Premiership coach in charge of one of the top 4 favourites could hardly be desribed as 'unfashionable.'

If you would like me to classify it, I would say that Clarkson was 'unthought of' because most people didn't think it possible that Clarkson would be available in 2012. I am still not convinced he or the Hawks aren't playing some games trying to get the best contract for each other.

At the time Clarkson was allegedly refusing an extension on his contract. As far as I am concerned that made him a fair target and an opportunity worth investigating. Now there are media reports he may be a good fit for the Crows. I hate to think they might have a better chance of snaring him if he doesn't coach Hawthorn next season.

I don't think he should be signed under any circumstances if one of Roos, Matthews, Blight, Malthouse are available.

But why would the club sign proven coaches when they have one coach that can't beat a top 8 side for the life of him?

Oh, because it's Melbourne...

  On 27/07/2011 at 23:56, Weedster said:

Has there ever been a coach in league history who has been more sheltered from scrutiny of performance than DB ? There would appear to be no benchmarks at all - still no wins anywhere but the MCG except Darwin ( and that's against PA - the worst performed team in the league by a mile ) not even competitive against any of the top 4, easy losses to NM and Footcray who we should be on level footing with at a minium - and people are suggesting a 2 year extension - enough is enough

I do agree that, if there are benchmarks, the club hasn't seen fit to inform its members.

We have no idea (except for Jimmy's 10 wins comment earlier in the year) what key areas the club needs fulfilled in order to consider that Bailey is doing his job effectively. I think that's disappointing. Given that we had a full need and mandate to bottom out, it also makes is very hard to judge Dean.

I certainly think it has to be a concern that we have not demonstrated an ability to pinch many games against good sides or really be competitive against good sides (Collingwood excepted - but I do not Malthouse's patronising comments about it being our GF), and also our form this year against the ordinary sides (St Kilda at that time, NM, Bulldogs, etc....) and the sheer non-competitiveness of some of our losses (WC, Hawks for example) make it difficult to say that Bailey is doing a great job.

It doesn't help his cause that we do not have stellar assistant coaches, we massively underinvest in our football department spend and that there are some undermining activities in the background, mind you!

For me I think Bailey will get a two year contract, if the club does this the club needs to ensure we put better assistant coaches around him. For Me Bailey keeps his job but Royal, Williams and Mahoney don't.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:29, Cudi_420 said:

I don't think he should be signed under any circumstances if one of Roos, Matthews, Blight, Malthouse are available.

Malcolm Blight ... no you cant be serious. Yesterdays man ... anyone for Cowboys & Indians?

The game has pasted him by. Best to stay where he is and out of the coaching box.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:30, Choko said:

I do agree that, if there are benchmarks, the club hasn't seen fit to inform its members.

We have no idea (except for Jimmy's 10 wins comment earlier in the year) what key areas the club needs fulfilled in order to consider that Bailey is doing his job effectively. I think that's disappointing. Given that we had a full need and mandate to bottom out, it also makes is very hard to judge Dean.

No club should reveal the metrics they use (although you can infer from what Schwab talks about in a few of his WW chats/seminars) because then they can become hard and fast rules that paint the club into a corner.

They will have their measurements, and I am sure the club is sounding out all the coaches mentioned.

We require an established coach and not another untried coach (the reasons for that surround my issue with our 'senior' players, that I won't get into here) so that leaves Malthouse, Roos, Clarkson, Craig, and Eade amongst the possibles at this stage.

  On 27/07/2011 at 14:59, dee-luded said:

Do you think Malthouse hasn't been wanting to Coach next Year???

Yip ... Collingwood. The rest is media driven.

Mick wife sounds like a very smart lady ... Mick should consider listening to her.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:30, Choko said:

I do agree that, if there are benchmarks, the club hasn't seen fit to inform its members.

We have no idea (except for Jimmy's 10 wins comment earlier in the year) what key areas the club needs fulfilled in order to consider that Bailey is doing his job effectively. I think that's disappointing. Given that we had a full need and mandate to bottom out, it also makes is very hard to judge Dean.

I don't think we need to know what criteria the club thinks Bailey has to meet to kep his job, if that's what you're saying. I'd say they'd have made up their minds regarding Bailey. Some of the things you'd look for we can pretty well guess at. The overall on-field performance in 2011 has been very poor. We've had the easiest draw the MFC has had in my time following the club, and look set to win an extra two games which, given we have new, woeful side in the comp who we play twice, cancels out any improvement if you're looking at the win/loss column. More so than the wins and losses has been the manner in which we've lost. Last year we were flogged once - by 56 points to Hawthorn in Round 1. This year, all but one of our 8 losses have been by at least 41 points. I wouldn't be looking at injuries as an excuse either. Hawthorn have won games this year with their entire spine missing. We've fared pretty well on the injury front - you only need to look back to 2007 to see us really cruelled by injury. While Watts and Martin have improved significantly, others have stagnated or are a bit mired in mediocre play, or worse, have completely regressed like Cale Morton. I'd argue that we haven't beaten a genuinely decent side under Bailey in four years.

For the record, I don't dislike Bailey as a human being. I do feel it's time for a change on several levels though, and am hoping that the club is well and truly into the ears of Malthouse, Roos and Clarkson, regardless of what these coaches are saying publicly.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:42, hangon007 said:

Malcolm Blight ... no you cant be serious. Yesterdays man ... anyone for Cowboys & Indians?

The game has pasted him by. Best to stay where he is and out of the coaching box.

I'm not so sure the Gold Coast Football Club board member would be interested anyway. Nor would anyone contemplate him as an option now, having been out of the coalface for so long.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:51, pantaloons said:

I don't think we need to know what criteria the club thinks Bailey has to meet to kep his job, if that's what you're saying. I'd say they'd have made up their minds regarding Bailey. Some of the things you'd look for we can pretty well guess at. The overall on-field performance in 2011 has been very poor. We've had the easiest draw the MFC has had in my time following the club, and look set to win an extra two games which, given we have new, woeful side in the comp who we play twice, cancels out any improvement if you're looking at the win/loss column. More so than the wins and losses has been the manner in which we've lost. Last year we were flogged once - by 56 points to Hawthorn in Round 1. This year, all but one of our 8 losses have been by at least 41 points. I wouldn't be looking at injuries as an excuse either. Hawthorn have won games this year with their entire spine missing. We've fared pretty well on the injury front - you only need to look back to 2007 to see us really cruelled by injury. While Watts and Martin have improved significantly, others have stagnated or are a bit mired in mediocre play, or worse, have completely regressed like Cale Morton. I'd argue that we haven't beaten a genuinely decent side under Bailey in four years.

For the record, I don't dislike Bailey as a human being. I do feel it's time for a change on several levels though, and am hoping that the club is well and truly into the ears of Malthouse, Roos and Clarkson, regardless of what these coaches are saying publicly.

I agree with everything you're saying, but I do think most successful clubs will ensure that their clubs understand what is required from the coach to maintain the support of the Board. Look at Carlton this year as an example. At the very least, I don't think the club has particularly had the guts to state when they think we should be playing finals/winning premierships, other than the aspirational statement to be the most dominant side of this decade.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:55, High Tower said:

I'm not so sure the Gold Coast Football Club board member would be interested anyway. Nor would anyone contemplate him as an option now, having been out of the coalface for so long.

But come on, it would be funny. And quite a ride!

Whether I've just softened or become sold on Bailey, I don't know, but I maintain that we should give him a go. Especially as the coaches situation changes with the bulk of premiership coaches removing themselves from contention it becomes harder to justify replacing Bailey.

That said, I still like a clear-cut one year extension with a goal of 12 wins and/or finals and an option of a 2year extension based on that.

  On 28/07/2011 at 02:00, belzebub59 said:

Am I alone in believing it s got all too cosy cosy down at Demonland ?

I am sure that Bailey is every bit as good a 'development' man , a mentor type to the young etc but Im stil lnot seeing that he has the Ire required to get some moving a bit faster than they currently do.

Again and again I wonder which applies. Does Bailey indeed have gameday nous but the players are failing to heed his directions ( thats a problem )

or does he NOT have the plan(s) to win games on days when all is thrust his way ? ( again, a problem )

Are players failing to understand exactly whats required of them (...thats another problem )

Are players being taught/instructed the wrong skills/gam ( guess what...yep... problem )

Whatever the problem, or combination there of... we're not really gettting very far, if anywhere !!

No you are not I wonder about the same thing.

As well I think we are greatly over estimating the ability of a number of our players.

It may well be that we simply do not have the cattle.

I am tired of being told how young a large number of the players are.

We simply struggle to match any team higher than the bottom eight.

I have little idea if DB is a good coach or not.

Why?

Because I struggle to seperate our ability and his game plan/ability

I do think we should be giving the better sides more competition than we are.

Hawthorn was a ten goal loss

Geelong we will struggle to keep it under that.

Carlton will be a ten goal loss

West Coast will be another ten goal loss.

If those happen I suggest we have lost ground since last year.

We have not pushed one of the better sides since Sydney in round 1.

With our draw this year we should be doing better.

What does all that mean?

IMO We do not have as good a list as we thought.

Who constructed this list?

DB

Unless we win one of the next three games

or push a couple of these teams to close results it is time to move BD on IMO

  On 28/07/2011 at 03:34, old dee said:

No you are not I wonder about the same thing.

As well I think we are greatly over estimating the ability of a number of our players.

It may well be that we simply do not have the cattle.

I am tired of being told how young a large number of the players are.

We simply struggle to match any team higher than the bottom eight.

I have little idea if DB is a good coach or not.

Why?

Because I struggle to seperate our ability and his game plan/ability

I do think we should be giving the better sides more competition than we are.

Hawthorn was a ten goal loss

Geelong we will struggle to keep it under that.

Carlton will be a ten goal loss

West Coast will be another ten goal loss.

If those happen I suggest we have lost ground since last year.

We have not pushed one of the better sides since Sydney in round 1.

With our draw this year we should be doing better.

What does all that mean?

IMO We do not have as good a list as we thought.

Who constructed this list?

DB

Unless we win one of the next three games

or push a couple of these teams to close results it is time to move BD on IMO

You and I are of like mind Old Dee - really, no matter what criteria are applied, we have gone backwards this year. DB has had 4 years to re-shape this team with very little critical scrutiny applied. His results speak volumes - a continued pattern of unacceptable losses against good teams, an inability to play well anywhere except the MCG, no ability to guts it out when pressure is applied, a continued pattern of losses against other Vic teams ( 9 consecutives losses to NM !) Fair dinkum, enough ..

  On 28/07/2011 at 04:40, Weedster said:

You and I are of like mind Old Dee - really, no matter what criteria are applied, we have gone backwards this year. DB has had 4 years to re-shape this team with very little critical scrutiny applied. His results speak volumes - a continued pattern of unacceptable losses against good teams, an inability to play well anywhere except the MCG, no ability to guts it out when pressure is applied, a continued pattern of losses against other Vic teams ( 9 consecutives losses to NM !) Fair dinkum, enough ..

I think you fail to recognise the additions to the regular 22, and the deletions from the regular 22.

Evans, Howe, Nicholson, Gawn, Tapscott, Blease have all debuted and played mutliple games.

Other youngsters such as Strauss, Watts, Gysberts, Jurrah, Maric, McKenzie, Trengove and Scully have got multipl games into them.

This is not a normal AFL side.

Our supporters often overlook how young our players are and how many of them there are, expecting them to outperform seasoned opposition.

It is simply not reasonable.

And keep in mind even if we do get those 10 wins in the manner some pundits suggest they would be as follows:

Brisbane x1

Gold Coast x 2

Adelaide x 1

Essendon x 1

Fremantle x 1

Richmond x 2

Port Ade x 2

So we would have accounted for only 7 teams out of 16 .

of those We have a basket case...and its neighbouring cousin. We have the Newbies and a team reknown for inconsitent and often dreadful performances in Melb.

Now comparisons are fraught with pitfalls but even in 2010 we managed to beat ( teh above sans GC ) and well only other team was Sydney. .. And we toed to toed with the Maggies !!

So you might even say weve gone backwards ???

All in all a sublime performance ne c'est pas ??