2 hours ago, rpfc said:

The garbage in this thread doesn't sit well with me. Chris Connolly made some mistakes but had the best interests of your club at heart, and got strung up on trumped up charges just the same as your club did.

Now it comes up again and we regurgitate and eat our own again.

Sometimes I wish we had a stubborn, arrogant, pigheaded culture like the Bombers.

We are not big enough to maintain all these grudges.

Unfortunately Chris just runs off at the mouth.

Anyone who has heard his segment with KB would understand that he is putting things out there and trying to be relevant. To me he comes off us an uninformed buffoon who doesn't do his homework.

He might not have said what is in the headline but he opened himself and the club up with his comments...

 

33 minutes ago, TGR said:

 

 

We had a losing culture anyway.  

 

Still no reason to celebrate it so openly. 

Anyone can lose, it's easy

 

We were lined up like ducks. 

Not Cuddles fault. Look elsewhere

1 hour ago, rjay said:

Unfortunately Chris just runs off at the mouth.

Anyone who has heard his segment with KB would understand that he is putting things out there and trying to be relevant. To me he comes off us an uninformed buffoon who doesn't do his homework.

He might not have said what is in the headline but he opened himself and the club up with his comments...

 

Hearing him this morning was really average, why he feels like he should make light of/tell of the ways you tank is beyond me. 

5 hours ago, praha said:

I think the headline is misleading. If it's based on his comments on SEN, he said that planning for the future was smart but that the current draft system made it difficult for club's *not* to tank in some way if there was a potential superstar up for grabs. He calls for a lottery draft to eliminate tanking. 

I think the headline is more a reflection of the discussion happening on the live podcast. He never actually says that tanking is smart 

EDIT: Here's a link to an article about his actual comments. The headline the OP mentions links to a live blog discussing today's headlines.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/the-easy-solution-to-kill-tanking-speculation-chris-connolly-says-the-afl-should-use-a-lottery-draft-system/news-story/40f9a97189f65ae81af960839b3a4820

Did he mention that the Zulus will get you?

Tanking has happened at least 30-40 times by up to a dozen different clubs ... for a while there the issue was completely out of control ('03, '04 & '05)

But here's the deal - so what!  Most teams who tank are garbage teams anyway.  I've never understood the angst. 

After 13 rounds in '09 we had a record of 1 & 12 and for the most part of that season we were virtually unwatchable.  Yet some here (and often elsewhere) carry on as if we were somehow finals aspirants that year. 

The godawful football we displayed in that year was on a par with 2012/13 (ditto for '97, '03 & '08 when we also received draft concessions)

AFL clubs started tanking in the early to mid 90's ... coinciding with the early years of drafting of course.  It's an age-old issue for sports the world over that use drafting as a means of recruiting.

And it is never going to go away.

 

 

Edited July 28, 20178 yr by Macca

21 minutes ago, Macca said:

Tanking has happened at least 30-40 times by up to a dozen different clubs ... for a while there the issue was completely out of control ('03, '04 & '05)

For the record, we ourselves almost certainly tanked in '97, '03, '08 as well as '09. 

But here's the deal - so what!  Most teams who tank are garbage teams anyway.  I've never understood the angst. 

After 13 rounds in '09 we had a record of 1 & 12 and for the most part of that season we were virtually unwatchable.  Yet some here (and often elsewhere) carry on as if we were somehow finals aspirants that year.  The godawful football we displayed in those aforementioned years was on a par with 2012/13. 

AFL clubs started tanking in the early to mid 90's ... coinciding with the early years of drafting of course.  It's an age-old issue for sports the world over that use drafting as a means of recruiting.

And it is never going to go away.

 

 

Yes we all know that. But the MFC openly celebrated being garbage. We should have been dead quiet

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes we all know that. But the MFC openly celebrated being garbage. We should have been dead quiet

Speak for yourself Wyl - you should never assume that everyone 'knows all that'

Mine was an opinion anyway - not a statement of fact.

If you want to continually beat yourself up about what many would describe as a complete witch-hunt,  you go right ahead.  You'll get support here though - misery loves company.

I saw the whole thing as a media beat-up from a bunch of clueless journo's (led by Carro) with nothing better to write about.  It still goes on now - the subject matter just changes.

A 6 month investigation and the only quotable reference was some innocent off-the-cuff remark about 'Zulu's' and some absolute BS about some sort of 'Vault' ... and the CEO was apparently on one occasion 'Ashen-faced' over a result.  That was it, that was the evidence.

By the way, who do you think is behind the tanking?  Do you honestly believe that the Coach,  CEO,  Pres,  Footy ops manager and all the rest of them aren't all involved?  The Coach is the main man and if you believe otherwise you really are naïve.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 28, 20178 yr by Macca

20 minutes ago, Macca said:

Speak for yourself Wyl - you should never assume that everyone 'knows all that'

Mine was an opinion anyway - not a statement of fact.

If you want to continually beat yourself up about what many would describe as a complete witch-hunt,  you go right ahead.  You'll get support here though - misery loves company.

I saw the whole thing as a media beat-up from a bunch of clueless journo's (led by Carro) with nothing better to write about.  It still goes on now - the subject matter just changes.

A 6 month investigation and the only quotable reference was some innocent off-the-cuff remark about 'Zulu's' and some absolute BS about some sort of 'Vault'

By the way, who do you think is being the tanking?  Do you honestly believe that the Coach,  CEO,  Pres,  Footy ops manager and all the rest of them aren't all involved?  The Coach is the main man and if you believe otherwise you really are naïve.

 

 

 

 

The club was involved.

I am certain Bailey was coaching under instruction, it was easy to see. 

Cuddles was self appointed PR Man, (What was his real Job at Melbourne? Nobody could tell me) who told everyone that we were recruiting $cully & Trengove. 

I went to a function months before when Chris told the whole room what was going to happen, he thought it was great...

 

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

The club was involved.

I am certain Bailey was coaching under instruction, it was easy to see.

I saw Dean Bailey as one of the main instigators with the tanking based purely on his role as head coach.  Without the coach being totally involved in the tanking, it's hard to see the tanking being successful.  And like it or not, we did manage to tank successfully for those priority picks (just like so many other clubs did on numerous occasions)

But I had or have no attachment to the bloke like you obviously do.  I never play faourites and I never have anyone in the gun. 

Also, I don't have a problem with tanking when the ruling bodies continually turn a blind-eye.  We never had any tanking before drafting.

Anyway, apparently, ... "There's no such thing as tanking"
 

21 minutes ago, Macca said:

I saw Dean Bailey as one of the main instigators with the tanking based purely on his role as head coach.  Without the coach being totally involved in the tanking, it's hard to see the tanking being successful.  And like it or not, we did manage to tank successfully for those priority picks (just like so many other clubs did on numerous occasions)

But I had or have no attachment to the bloke like you obviously do.  I never play faourites and I never have anyone in the gun. 

Also, I don't have a problem with tanking when the ruling bodies continually turn a blind-eye.  We never had any tanking before drafting.

Anyway, apparently, ... "There's no such thing as tanking"
 

I don't think Bails was given a choice. He was employed to do the job. 

I believe that was the main breakdown between the "Team" and the "CEO" of the day. 

The only thing i do believe is that the whole saga contributed toward the premature death of Dean Bailey and for that reason i wish Cuddles would keep his mouth shut

 

Edited July 28, 20178 yr by Sir Why You Little

Tanking doesn't happen anymore now that they have taken away the priority pick away so it really is a dumb move to tank. There is very little difference between picks 1,2 and 3 usually anyway. All tanking will do is create losing culture.

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

I don't think Bails was given a choice. He was employed to do the job. 

I believe that was the main breakdown between the "Team" and the "CEO" of the day. 

The only thing i do believe is that the whole saga contribed toward the premature death of Dean Bailey and for that reason i wish Cuddles would keep his mouth shut

 

You can believe what you want to believe - but your bias towards Dean Bailey influences your opinion.  I judged Bailey on how the team played under him and his list management.  We were terrible on all fronts.

With regards to the tanking I reckon they were all in on it - except the players.  But again, who cares anyway?  All the clubs were doing it and it still goes on now. 

You don't see Hawk fans uttering a word about their tanking years ('04 & '05) for one simple reasons - the benefits of their tanking resulted in premierships.

We on the other hand kept drawing the short straw with our top-end draft picks so the tanking ended up rearing its ugly head. 

It's all connected for those who can see things clearly.

1 minute ago, WERRIDEE said:

Tanking doesn't happen anymore now that they have taken away the priority pick away so it really is a dumb move to tank. There is very little difference between picks 1,2 and 3 usually anyway. All tanking will do is create losing culture.

A lower pick gives a club greater bargaining power though - e.g. pick 1 can be converted for a better reward than pick 3 (in theory)

7 minutes ago, Macca said:

You can believe what you want to believe - but your bias towards Dean Bailey influences your opinion.  I judged Bailey on how the team played under him and his list management.  We were terrible on all fronts.

With regards to the tanking I reckon they were all in on it - except the players.  But again, who cares anyway?  All the clubs were doing it and it still goes on now. 

You don't see Hawk fans uttering a word about their tanking years ('04 & '05) for one simple reasons - the benefits of their tanking resulted in premierships.

We on the other hand kept drawing the short straw with our top-end draft picks so the tanking ended up rearing its ugly head. 

It's all connected for those who can see things clearly.

 

I actually blame Schwab's Red and Blueprint which targetted the wrong players regardless of what draft picks we managed to lie down for. His strategy was just wrong. 

I have no bias towards Dean Bailey except that he was a great bloke, who was treated very badly and i felt ashamed during his final press conference as the Demon Coach

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I have no bias towards Dean Bailey except that he was a great bloke, who was treated very badly and i felt ashamed during his final press conference as the Demon Coach

I agree with you on that to a degree ... but if we judged Dean on how the team performed and the state of the list,  he wasn't successful by any means. 

The final press conference was poor form by the club but we also left Neeld out to dry for his final few weeks as well.  Of course, Neeld was universally disliked in the end so I suppose no one seemed to notice.  The Daniher exit was rather messy too.

It's any wonder Roos organised his own exit plan before he even started coaching us!

 

Just now, Macca said:

I agree with you on that to a degree ... but if we judged Dean on how the team performed and the state of the list,  he wasn't successful by any means. 

The final press conference was poor form by the club but we also left Neeld out to dry for his final few weeks as well.  Of course, Neeld was universally disliked in the end so I suppose no one seemed to notice.  The Daniher exit was rather messy too.

It's any wonder Roos organised his own exit plan before he even started coaching us!

 

Dean didn't pick the players. He was told to coach a certain way,  he said as much during that last presser. The players were chosen under the guidelines of the Red and Blueprint. 

The Whiteboard Videos told the story, it all came from CS. 

I think Dean was a very similar coach to Goodwin, he just didn't have the support or the player development to show it

9 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Dean didn't pick the players. He was told to coach a certain way,  he said as much during that last presser. The players were chosen under the guidelines of the Red and Blueprint. 

The Whiteboard Videos told the story, it all came from CS. 

I think Dean was a very similar coach to Goodwin, he just didn't have the support or the player development to show it

Wow. Bails was a terrific bloke but on all available evidence that's an incredibly long bow to draw.

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Dean didn't pick the players. He was told to coach a certain way,  he said as much during that last presser. The players were chosen under the guidelines of the Red and Blueprint. 

The Whiteboard Videos told the story, it all came from CS. 

I think Dean was a very similar coach to Goodwin, he just didn't have the support or the player development to show it

I don't agree ... I reckon you've convinced yourself that he was some sort yes-man who didn't make his own decisions.

In the end, he would have always known that the buck stopped with himself so if he did kowtow to others, that's on him anyway.  As a coach, you have to own all the decisions as if you made them all yourself.

I reckon he was much more of his own man though and was just simply not up to the task.  Most coaches end up that way though - the emphasis on premierships is so profound that we end up with an enormous number of failed coaches. 

Personally, I have a high regard for Bobby Rose,  Neale Daniher,  Rodney Eade,  Ross Lyon,  John Northey and a number of other coaches who have never attained the ultimate success - but in the eyes of many, they failed.  It's never been one size fits all in my eyes.

18 minutes ago, Members' Wing said:

Wow. Bails was a terrific bloke but on all available evidence that's an incredibly long bow to draw.

Yes it is, but Bails coached with the handbrake applied

He wanted his team to play the same Kamikaze style as Goodwin has implemented, he just wasn't able to show it, which is why everything imploded during 2011

he was a very smart man Dean Bailey, sadly ahead of his time

Edited July 28, 20178 yr by Sir Why You Little

7 minutes ago, Macca said:

I don't agree ... I reckon you've convinced yourself that he was some sort yes-man who didn't make his own decisions.

In the end, he would have always known that the buck stopped with himself so if he did kowtow to others, that's on him anyway.  As a coach, you have to own all the decisions as if you made them all yourself.

I reckon he was much more of his own man though and was just simply not up to the task.  Most coaches end up that way though - the emphasis on premierships is so profound that we end up with an enormous number of failed coaches. 

Personally, I have a high regard for Bobby Rose,  Neale Daniher,  Rodney Eade,  Ross Lyon,  John Northey and a number of other coaches who have never attained the ultimate success - but in the eyes of many, they failed.  It's never been one size fits all in my eyes.

Dean had far more limitations put on him than all those coaches you mention. 

He was told to Tank.... "Take it or leave it"...that says it all

Cuddles thought it was funny, more than once i heard him laughing openly at club functions. To think back on it now is just horrendous. 

8 hours ago, rpfc said:

The garbage in this thread doesn't sit well with me. Chris Connolly made some mistakes but had the best interests of your club at heart, and got strung up on trumped up charges just the same as your club did.

Now it comes up again and we regurgitate and eat our own again.

Sometimes I wish we had a stubborn, arrogant, pigheaded culture like the Bombers.

We are not big enough to maintain all these grudges.

Agreed. The majority of us on here were all for tanking.

There were very few who opposed it.

9 hours ago, Chris said:

Just read this headline in the Hun. Can't Chris just learn to shut up. F off Chris to the hole you came from.

I find this OP somewhat disconcerting in a Smegal/Fight Club sense. 

2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes it is, but Bails coached with the handbrake applied

He wanted his team to play the same Kamikaze style as Goodwin has implemented, he just wasn't able to show it, which is why everything imploded during 2011

he was a very smart man Dean Bailey, sadly ahead of his time

No question the environments Goodwin and Bailey walked into couldn't have been more different 

11 hours ago, TGR said:

The carrot was there.  This was always a Demetriou AFL system problem, not an MFC intent issue....IMO. 

Hit the nail on the head.

6 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Dean didn't pick the players. He was told to coach a certain way,  he said as much during that last presser. The players were chosen under the guidelines of the Red and Blueprint. 

The Whiteboard Videos told the story, it all came from CS. 

I think Dean was a very similar coach to Goodwin, he just didn't have the support or the player development to show it

If you really believe that then you have your head up a place where the sun don't shine.