On 18/08/2011 at 23:07, High Tower said:

And James Hird repeatedly said last year he wasn't going to coach Essendon. Now look.

Honestly, if you find it unbelievable, good for you.

If the offer to Clarkson is true, it's a good move at precisely the right moment before anything is penned with the Hawks. Surely it must be worth some consideration, former club, 5 year lucrative offer, Lyon, Viney , Connolly - all acquaintances. But it would be hard to let go with what he has helped build and the superstars available on the Hawthorn list as well as Jeff on the way out.

It would be a great coup in netting a visionary coach who has his finger on the cusp when it comes to tactical game plans. Although it must be said, he has benefited from the quality players and good recruiting at his disposal.

HT you're missing my point in a typically pig-headed "Demonlander' fashion. I am saying it is unbelievable that people are writing Clarkson off immediately whilst continuing to entertain, reasonably in my view, the idea that Malthouse might coach us.

  On 18/08/2011 at 23:17, Pates said:

Perhaps this is the real reason behind the 100% Demon campaign. I'm already donating, if we get Clarkson I'll double it.

Would you triple it if they read your name out on TV?

  On 18/08/2011 at 23:44, Demon17 said:

The cash comes from the Board's resolve, quite correctly, not to pay Scully an outrageous salary which would destabilse the team.

How cash can be obtained by not spending an amount you were never going to spend is beyond me...

We can pay for a good coach like Clarkson or Malthouse because of the fact that we have grown revenue streams and asked fans to chip in.

  On 18/08/2011 at 23:44, Demon17 said:

If Clarkson is a true professional and Melbourne throws the kitchen sink at him, he will take it. Issues about lists quality etc. over a 5 year deal - which is a lifetime offer for someone of his age - will not/should not count in his decison. Pickering will be telling him the same. This issue is a professional one, not that emotional - thats the angle for us fans to take.

Whatever happens this move says to me the Board/G. Lyon and Co. are seriously on this case for next year.

I'm excited that there's a firm hand on the tiller.

Agree on everything here. But just one point. The issue would be a professional one and what comes with that is a reasonably good relationship (minus Jeff Kennett) with Hawthorn. You cannot discount the manner in which Clarkson has helped create at the Hawks and the relationships formed there. Clearly the Hawks remain a power of the competition and the star players there, their superior midfield, superior FD, would be difficult to let go of, with a 3 year offer apparently on the table to sign.

It is great to hear MFC in the marketplace going at the best with everything they've got.

I don't believe Clarkson will leave Hawthorn, and more importantly i don't think Hawthorn will let Clarkson go- they will ensure that their offer is close to if not matching ours for money.

I applaud the club for having a red hot crack (hopefully that will filter through to the playing group!)

I like Clarkson but it's fine line isn't it. If Cam Mooney could kick a football straight, the concensus on this site would be that Clarkson is a failure.

I'm worried if this offer is real. Surely there's a process that the club needs to go through before it can make decisions such as these. Hopefully the club doesn't 'over-romanticise' the idea of a premiership coach or worse still sign a certain coach simply to appease the supporter base.

  On 18/08/2011 at 23:50, the fork said:

HT you're missing my point in a typically pig-headed "Demonlander' fashion. I am saying it is unbelievable that people are writing Clarkson off immediately whilst continuing to entertain, reasonably in my view, the idea that Malthouse might coach us.

Ok. You identify the poster(s) who have written off Clarkson by replying to their posts and/or highlighting instances of such comment. And I'll refrain from questionning your post in an "apparent"(IYO) pig headed demonlander fashion.

Vague generalisations of such nature of posts regarding comments on Clarkson & Malthouse I believe are distasteful, unless you can hold them to to account by replying to these examples you speak of.

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:15, High Tower said:

Ok. You identify the poster(s) who have written off Clarkson by replying to their posts and/or highlighting instances of such comment. And I'll refrain from questionning your post in an "apparent"(IYO) pig headed demonlander fashion.

Vague generalisations of such nature of posts regarding comments on Clarkson & Malthouse I believe are distasteful, unless you can hold them to to account by replying to these examples you speak of.

It's not about you and me HT. I have not the time or energy to provide specific examples but I am sure you can empathise with the thrust of my arguement without too much effort.

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:14, WAClark said:

I like Clarkson but it's fine line isn't it. If Cam Mooney could kick a football straight, the concensus on this site would be that Clarkson is a failure.

I'm worried if this offer is real. Surely there's a process that the club needs to go through before it can make decisions such as these. Hopefully the club doesn't 'over-romanticise' the idea of a premiership coach or worse still sign a certain coach simply to appease the supporter base.

I am ok with the club abandoning a 'formal process' if they get a proven coach who has won a flag.

Sometomes getting consultants in to tell you something means they tell you something you already know or they give you glossy BS.

I find it hilarious that we are trying to play the "Come back home" card. Do people actually know Clarkson's playing career record? Yeah sure, he played for Melbourne, 41 games over 2 seasons in fact, but he was at the Kangaroos for about 9 seasons and played just under 100 games. I would think he considers himself as an ex-North player more than an ex-Demon.

As Demon17 said, this would be a professional decision, not an emotional one. Would be a massive get by the Club to lure him away from their list. I know if I were coaching Hawthorn it would want to be a frigging good offer to pull me away, especially to join Melbourne (even if they gave me a couple of cheap seasons at the end of my playing career).

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:23, the fork said:

It's not about you and me HT. I have not the time or energy to provide specific examples but I am sure you can empathise with the thrust of my arguement without too much effort.

Ok, fine. I just thought you might want to support your argument for clarity. It would add some much needed weight to what you find 'unbelievable'.

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:23, rpfc said:

I am ok with the club abandoning a 'formal process' if they get a proven coach who has won a flag.

Sometomes getting consultants in to tell you something means they tell you something you already know or they give you glossy BS.

Consultants are hired to provide a fancy justification to a decision you have already made but not announced (except to the consultant)

Its more democratic that way

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:33, daisycutter said:

Consultants are hired to provide a fancy justification to a decision you have already made but not announced (except to the consultant)

Its more democratic that way

We are far too cynical, DC...

From the outside looking in (pretending that you're not in this situation is very amusing) I would find it odd if:

(1) Hawthorn didn't offer Clarkson a new contract;

(2) Clarkson didn't sign a new contract with Hawthorn; and/or

(3) Clarkson signed for Melbourne, given I think (1) and (2) are very likely.

By the way, why do people say that coaches like Eade and Sheedy were "sacked" by their clubs?

You have a three-year contract. Those three years are up. Club does not offer a new contract. Who got sacked?

Understand having a crack but 0 chance. The guy loves Hawthorn, is deeply committed to the playing group and is in the middle of a serious premiership window. His $ value is going up at Hawthorn this year, he is more than happy to wait for a better contract than he would have got at the start of the year.

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:33, daisycutter said:

Consultants are hired to provide a fancy justification to a decision you have already made but not announced (except to the consultant)

Its more democratic that way

Exactly right. Most decisions in businesses, even big decisions, are essentially made on "gut feel", "experience" and "instinct". Getting the official research or expert consultant in is a way for a business to have a formal justification or research to back up the decision they were going to make anyway. Depending on the type of business and it's stakeholders it can be a necessity.

Clarkson > Eade > Malthouse

Malthouse is the flavour of the month BUT it took him a very long time and A LOT more resources than we can throw at our football department. He has every luxury an AFL coach would want - money, facilities, top assistant coaches and a stand alone VFL side. It still took him a long time to win one, perhaps two flags. He's also a [censored].

Eade has a good record, without the ultimate success. I believe he could do more with our list and football department resources than Malthouse could. 7 years without a flag is probably long enough to lose the confidence of the players, but we have a good list ready to learn and perform for a new coach.

Clarkson's record at Hawthorn speaks for itself. Our potential talent could possibly be better than Hawthorns (we probably have more Top 20 picks on our list) and our football department spend would only be slightly behind. Has a history with our club and current powerbrokers. Go get him.

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:51, The Jacks said:

Most decisions in businesses, even big decisions, are essentially made on "gut feel", "experience" and "instinct".

Not in successful businesses. The use and role of consultants is not necessarily ceremonial notwithstanding corporate governance requirements

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:14, WAClark said:

I like Clarkson but it's fine line isn't it. If Cam Mooney could kick a football straight, the concensus on this site would be that Clarkson is a failure.

I'm worried if this offer is real. Surely there's a process that the club needs to go through before it can make decisions such as these. Hopefully the club doesn't 'over-romanticise' the idea of a premiership coach or worse still sign a certain coach simply to appease the supporter base.

The process metric might be "currect premiership coach" - that means there's 3 candidates Malthouse, Clarkson and Worsfold.

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:14, WAClark said:

I like Clarkson but it's fine line isn't it. If Cam Mooney could kick a football straight, the concensus on this site would be that Clarkson is a failure.

I'm worried if this offer is real. Surely there's a process that the club needs to go through before it can make decisions such as these. Hopefully the club doesn't 'over-romanticise' the idea of a premiership coach or worse still sign a certain coach simply to appease the supporter base.

I disagree. Regardless of his success he is the EXACT type of coach we need. A no nonsense hard-arse to weed the SOFT and LAZY culture out of playing group. He has also proven he can adapt game plans and innovate new ones to counteract the current successful gampelans. I don't think he will leave the Hawks but good on the MFC for having a crack at him because he would be my first choice as coach if we had the pick of the lot with Roos and Malthouse 2nd & 3rd.

If there is any truth to that article I love it!!

Like others have said it's not really even about the likelihood of snaring Clarkson, but more about the fact that the MFC has the balls to try and rip a bloody good coach from another team in their prime with a compelling contract. Isn't that what we want this club to be seen to be doing????

If this is true then I don't have much doubt (i'd be 98% sure in fact ) that the MFC would be putting something similar in front of Malthouse's management, and others like Roos perhaps as well. Heck Worsfold might have also been sounded out!!

We can afford to be bold at the moment, lets try and achieve the impossible, because if it fails then we have other candidates that will very likely to accept a senior coaching (Eade, Williams, Laidley .... and all the other assistants out there)

  On 19/08/2011 at 00:51, The Jacks said:

Exactly right. Most decisions in businesses, even big decisions, are essentially made on "gut feel", "experience" and "instinct". Getting the official research or expert consultant in is a way for a business to have a formal justification or research to back up the decision they were going to make anyway. Depending on the type of business and it's stakeholders it can be a necessity.

Never read such a load of hooey in all my life.

Recipe for failure - if a business needs research and consultants to justify predetermined decisions then there is fundamental flaws in the business and its management. ( and a huge waste of money)

Management may have a "gut feel" or "instinct" but you would hope that a business would go to the expense of procuring what you call "official research" or "expert consultants" to get an unbiased and untainted view. Management should have no preconceptions that view will either solidify what you instinctively know or give you information and "expert" thoughts that may show that your instincts are just plain wrong.

(Don't send me your resume ! )

Edited August 19, 201113 yr by nutbean

  On 19/08/2011 at 01:15, nutbean said:

Never read such a load of hooey in all my life.

...

(Don't send me your resume ! )

some interesting business strategy on the board this week

- lie to key stakeholders

- make key decisions on "gut feel"

  On 19/08/2011 at 01:15, nutbean said:

Never read such a load of hooey in all my life.

Recipe for failure - if a business needs research and consultants to justify predetermined decisions then there is fundamental flaws in the business and its management. ( and a huge waste of money)

Management may have a "gut feel" or "instinct" but you would hope that a business would go to the expense of procuring what you call "official research" or "expert consultants" to get an unbiased and untainted view. With no preconceptions that view will either solidify what you instinctively know or give you information and "expert" thoughts that may show that your instincts are just plain wrong.

(Don't send me your resume ! )

that may be the theory old bean but is often not the practice

i won't bother sending my resume, you couldn't afford me

I think what "the Jacks" is getting at, is that best practice is great in theory, but in the real world a lot of businesses are managed a lot less professionally.

Not sure I'd be optimistic about the long term viability of one that followed his business plan, though.