Neil Craig

[deanox 9,791]

RE Craig and payout

We all knew Craig was gone weeks ago. Roos said it. Craig knew it. Then why want it announced until yesterday, the same time he was announced to join Essendon? We didn't sack him, then he go find another job like usually happens.

I suggest it was a mutual redundancy:

"I don't want to work under Roos"

"That's fine Neil, There isn't really a spot for you."

"Ok, let's chat again once I've checked what else is out there."

I imagine he'll get a payout but would be surprised if it was the full amount. We may have even said:

"we can afford to pay you $x if you move on to another position elsewhere. If you don't move somewhere else we will have to retain you here as we can't afford to pay your full salary for no work, and your new position will be ..."

[nutbean 8,838]

RE captains

Neeld created the process although I imagine there was input from other choosing staff. I seen to recall him saying that they had identified the qualities that a leader should have and then all players and footy dept staff ranked the players.

Yes, Neeld could have rigged the system to get what he wanted but that seems ridiculous. Grimes had constantly been awarded the clubs leadership award under multiple coaches and is widely recognised for his leadership qualities, particularly during his injuries.

If the process selected Grimes as a captain and identified Trengove as his equal, the system probably isn't flawed is it?

Also, this system doesn't seem to be much different than the leading teams system Roos is bringing in.

agreed,

A little more on leading teams .

The system that leading teams would employ would be group discussion about the captain and you would find the candidates will talk about why they should be captain and non candidates would talk about who should be captain - then the hard part comes - Roos would talk in front of the entire group as to why it his belief that Jones would be a better captain than say Trengove. A little further discomfort - the whole group may be asked " who would you respond to better as captain " and names would be heard and then players would have to explain why. You have to be very open to criticism and be able to handle it under the leading teams process and fragile ego's dont cope all that well.

As an aside - the hardest part I found was that we had Justin Peckitt ( ex Saint) as the leading teams facilitator for our company and I found it hard to get over the fact that a very average footballer was trying to add value to our very good company - but cudo's to him - he was excellent.

edit - basically the main difference is that leading teams make you explain your decisions in terms of honest feedback - whereas the Neeld system you voted and thats it

Edited October 11, 2013 by nutbean

[jnrmac 19,940]

How can he take the payout, if he has a contract with another club, then its a mutually agreed decision?

I'm not sure he has taken a payout. Hence his departure wasn't announced until he was placed elsewhere. I think it is actually mutually agreed as he didn't want to be around Roos - and hence give Roos clean air so to speak - but I stand to be corrected.

I always liked Craig but I still have lingering doubts about him. He was overseeing Neeld and Neeld failed. Doesn't that mean he failed as well??

And there was a smell about peptides from his relationship with cycling - there are stories around from 1997/98 Adelaide days under Blight. They had an extraordinary amount of energy those two years....

[deanox 9,791]

agreed,

A little more on leading teams .

The system that leading teams would employ would be group discussion about the captain and you would find the candidates will talk about why they should be captain and non candidates would talk about who should be captain - then the hard part comes - Roos would talk in front of the entire group as to why it his belief that Jones would be a better captain than say Trengove. A little further discomfort - the whole group may be asked " who would you respond to better as captain " and names would be heard and then players would have to explain why. You have to be very open to criticism and be able to handle it under the leading teams process and fragile ego's dont cope all that well.

As an aside - the hardest part I found was that we had Justin Peckitt ( ex Saint) as the leading teams facilitator for our company and I found it hard to get over the fact that a very average footballer was trying to add value to our very good company - but cudo's to him - he was excellent.

edit - basically the main difference is that leading teams make you explain your decisions in terms of honest feedback - whereas the Neeld system you voted and thats it

Cheers. That's really interesting.

I can see some amazing benefits to that however the challenges are immense. Working at an engineering firm for example, the personality tours vary from extreme introverts to extroverts. Making sure that everyone had the chance to be heard, the opportunity to think about what they'd like to say would be critical. If not handled well, it could very quickly be dominated by the loudest in the room. This may not be obvious at the time either; the discussion may appear orderly but that doesn't mean everyone is happy with their opportunity to speak up, even if they say they are.

Also, I imagine the start of this process would be extremely confronting. People you've worked with for years and you suddenly tell them your true opinion that you may never have mentioned before? I imagine there is a lot of hurt and lost trust at the start. It would feel like a gang up at times. Once the system runs for a while and you regain that trust I can see amazing benefits, but to only run a few sessions could be more harmful than good.

[Biffen 12,937]

I'm not sure he has taken a payout. Hence his departure wasn't announced until he was placed elsewhere. I think it is actually mutually agreed as he didn't want to be around Roos - and hence give Roos clean air so to speak - but I stand to be corrected.

I always liked Craig but I still have lingering doubts about him. He was overseeing Neeld and Neeld failed. Doesn't that mean he failed as well??

And there was a smell about peptides from his relationship with cycling - there are stories around from 1997/98 Adelaide days under Blight. They had an extraordinary amount of energy those two years....

Must be why he got on his bike to the Bombers.

Funny how the guy who bought the weapon into AFL is Mr Clean.