Any thoughts on whether Gary Pert leaving Collingwood was good for them, and him becoming CEO of Melbourne has beeen bad for us?

5 minutes ago, _H_ said:

Any thoughts on whether Gary Pert leaving Collingwood was good for them, and him becoming CEO of Melbourne has beeen bad for us?

Early evidence says ‘yes’ and ‘yes’.

We simply are not getting any line of sight.  Who knows what he actually does, has achieved, or what his plans are.  The on-field performance is the result of the football department.  How he responds will be interesting.  Perhaps he may even make himself seen and heard?

Wasn’t Gary Pert CEO of Collingwood when they won their last Premiership? Or let’s forgot that because it doesn’t fit the narrative? The situation we’re in doesn’t come down to one persons fault, there’s plenty of factors that have got us to where we currently are.

I can’t for the life of me imagine how he would have any impact whatsoever on our onfield performance.

With that said, Collingwood played finals 7 of his 11 years at the helm, winning 1 premiership and coming runner-up once.  If he does have an impact, sounds like a pretty good one.

 

10 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Wasn’t Gary Pert CEO of Collingwood when they won their last Premiership? Or let’s forgot that because it doesn’t fit the narrative? The situation we’re in doesn’t come down to one persons fault, there’s plenty of factors that have got us to where we currently are.

You’re only as good as your last CEO job. Left Collingwood under a cloud and since his arrival at MFC has presided over an unmitigated disaster in a few short months. Like everyone else at the club, he’s accountable.

Can't assess his performance for at least another 18 months.

Can we merge with the sack everyone megathread? I'm looking forward to tallying up the 2019 scapegoats and it will be much easier if they're all under the one roof.

We seem to be obsessed with the blame game as if one single person is is responsible for all of our woes! 

So far, we have identified Taylor, Misson, Chaplin, Jones, Pert, Hogan, May, etc.

I thought Melbourne supporters were smarter than that.

Not being able to train because of surgeries, to me, is the biggest factor in our poor form. One that most informed Demonland posters were worried about in February/March.

Edited April 30, 20196 yr by dee-tox

The biggest issue I have with Pert is not with Pert himself, it's the unfortunate timing of the changeover.

I think we needed to have a club review of the Prelim performance that being the new man in the job it wasn't appropriate for him to call.

It’s just a coincidence that we’re playing 2013 Melbourne football as soon as Jackson left the joint...right?

I have no idea about the ability of Pert right now the problems have IMO been caused by people further down the chain. Who were the people who decided to get rid of Hogan and replace him with a guy who is grossly overpaid with low enthusiasm and a guy with health problems? 

Who are the people who seemingly ignored the effect 666 would have on our game plan?

These are the ones who have arranged our demise not Pert at this point. 

Having said that it is obvious that Peter Jackson did not want Pert as his replacement and if he did not want him then you have to wonder.

 

4 hours ago, dee-tox said:

We seem to be obsessed with the blame game as if one single person is is responsible for all of our woes! 

So far, we have identified Taylor, Misson, Chaplin, Jones, Pert, Hogan, May, etc.

I thought Melbourne supporters were smarter than that.

Not being able to train because of surgeries, to me, is the biggest factor in our poor form. One that most informed Demonland posters were worried about in February/March.

dee tox we are trying our best to be non-sensible panicky nuf nufs here and qualify this thread to be merged with the "sack everyone mega thread" and you come along and give us something sensible!

Some ppl i tell ya

A 3AW interview before the Tigers game, that has escaped Demonland's attention. Pert Interview

Questions/discussion (Paraphrased response in itallics)

1. Players fitness on return from preseason holidays?  Pert talks about the 14 surgeries and less training sessions for the group.  He watches training and sat in player meetings and there is no complacency.  Club expected fitness to build in early stages of the season.
2. Role of CEO in challenging a coaching group about systems or who is there to challenge the coaching staff on what they are doing?   Its not the CEO role but he sits in a lot of the meetings and talks to Mahoney and Goodwin on what we are doing to turn things around.  What you want to know you have the best people, can see an energy and commitment to turn things around.
3. Work rate is pretty good but the system is crap!  Its the system and the execution.  Poor execution and skills will make the system fail.
4. Role of Brendan McCartney philosophies and relationship with players and coaches?   Pert sits in football department meetings.  Challenges occur among the coaches which is healthy but their are no issues.
5. Given all the meetings he goes to, is he in the football department!  As CEO he is getting a feel for the personalities and dynamic of the group.  He is very impressed with Mahoney, Goodwin etal

I thought Pert came across really well.  Was assured and represented us well.  He side stepped some questions which is to be expected.  I'm not convinced that all is well.

I have said on DL for over a year that our Football and Coaching staff are too inexperienced in their roles.  I've lamented that we do not have a Neil Balme type person to oversee football and coaching and to challenge, mentor and support those staffs.   Pert's responses to 2 and 5 suggest he is filling that role atm.  It is quite appropriate that he does because someone needs to hold them accountable and as he says, to assess the people and the dynamics (which he is happy with). 

Pert apparently had a penchant at Coll for being too involved in football matters/decisions.  Its hard to tell whether his deep involvement in football related meetings is that penchant at work, a new CEO getting the lay of the land or real concern about how we are performing.  Probably all 3.  I'm pleased Pert is going to meetings etc:  something needs to change off-field and he will make that happen. 

On staffing, imv while it is important to know a new appointee will fit into a team far too many appointments have been made based on relationships and not on a proven track record.  A successful team needs a balance of experience, past success and fresh blood.  Nearly all our coaches are 'rookies' in their current role or come from friendships forged at Bulldogs, Ess or Port and from what I can see most have little experience let alone successful experience in their jobs.

Will Pert be happy in 6 months time?  I would be shocked if we don't have personnel changes at years end. 

Edited April 30, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

13 minutes ago, old dee said:

I have no idea about the ability of Pert right now the problems have IMO been caused by people further down the chain. Who were the people who decided to get rid of Hogan and replace him with a guy who is grossly overpaid with low enthusiasm and a guy with health problems? 

Who are the people who seemingly ignored the effect 666 would have on our game plan?

These are the ones who have arranged our demise not Pert at this point. 

Having said that it is obvious that Peter Jackson did not want Pert as his replacement and if he did not want him then you have to wonder.

 

Had to move Hogan on OldDee. The lad had/has severe off field issues the likes of which have only been alluded to in the media. Plus he consistently went missing in big games for the Dees. Plus he wanted to return home. Still only averaging 1 goal a game at Freo this year. 

It's true though that we are structurally hamstrung without a genuine gorilla forward of quality to straighten up the side. Need to get one as priority no.1 in the off season.

Your other points are more than valid, especially re Jackson and Pert. Jackson not wanting Pert is very telling.

Can't put my finger on it but there is something about Pert's manner and energy that I don't think is resonating well at the MFC. Smart man, highly professional and all that but there's a key ingredient missing. Just one of those people who's hard to warm to.

24 minutes ago, old dee said:

I have no idea about the ability of Pert right now the problems have IMO been caused by people further down the chain. Who were the people who decided to get rid of Hogan and replace him with a guy who is grossly overpaid with low enthusiasm and a guy with health problems? 

Who are the people who seemingly ignored the effect 666 would have on our game plan?

These are the ones who have arranged our demise not Pert at this point. 

Having said that it is obvious that Peter Jackson did not want Pert as his replacement and if he did not want him then you have to wonder.

 

Where is this obvious?? I would have thought it was Jackson who gave the final tick of approval of Pert when he signed off?

4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Where is this obvious?? I would have thought it was Jackson who gave the final tick of approval of Pert when he signed off?

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/gary-pert-s-resurrection-a-contentious-call-at-melbourne-20180629-p4zojn.html

"The old Melbourne guard - a vocal and gregarious group of former committeemen, coterie and old Melburnians (the school not the club) - were loud in their condemnation that Bartlett had recruited a Collingwood discard. Admittedly many of this group have had their time at board level with underwhelming results but many still give generously to the club. Ditto the Demons' most influential past players and ditto a long list of other club CEOs who have great respect for the achievements of the outgoing Peter Jackson and were dismayed that Jackson had been totally shut out of the search for his successor."

Edited April 30, 20196 yr by Matsuo Basho

7 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Had to move Hogan on OldDee. The lad had/has severe off field issues the likes of which have only been alluded to in the media. Plus he consistently went missing in big games for the Dees. Plus he wanted to return home. Still only averaging 1 goal a game at Freo this year. 

It's true though that we are structurally hamstrung without a genuine gorilla forward of quality to straighten up the side. Need to get one as priority no.1 in the off season.

Your other points are more than valid, especially re Jackson and Pert. Jackson not wanting Pert is very telling.

I'm not sure Jackson did not want Pert.  It was more that he wanted an internal person (whom he had groomed) and wanted to be involved in the process. 

The hue and cry was mostly about the process, or apparent lack thereof, not about Pert himself or Jackson's opinion of him.

Edited April 30, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Why the rush to reappoint Goodwin, he had a year to run on his contract?

3 hours ago, rjay said:

The biggest issue I have with Pert is not with Pert himself, it's the unfortunate timing of the changeover.

I think we needed to have a club review of the Prelim performance that being the new man in the job it wasn't appropriate for him to call.

I would say it wasn't the timing, more so that we don't have a Neil Balme type to call Mahoney/Goodwin to account. 

Mahoney (GM Football) should have ensured a though review happened, not just the prelim but the whole season.  Maybe he was caught up with the euphoria of a making a prelim.  Maybe, having presided over all the appointments in the football/coaching department, game plan and list management decisions he isn't objective enough to review. 

While over at Geelong their GM Football went over their final loss with a fine tooth comb with coaches etc and look at the results.  They don't take losing well.  Explains why they have missed the 8 once in about a dozen years.

So I don't think it was PJ's or Pert's job to review the prelim.   What did Mahoney do?  He has a lot of accountability in where we are now.

Edited April 30, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

5 minutes ago, old dee said:

Why the rush to reappoint Goodwin, he had a year to run on his contract?

Hard to pot that decision OldDee. Coming off more linear improvement and finals wins, Adelaide looming as a club that might poach him et. Reappointment as a vote of confidence was fair enough heading into 2019. But three years was the poor decision. Two was more than enough.

Unless you're in the club you'd have no idea how he's performing or interacting with other admin staff.

But you'd have to be a gene short of a moron to think our on-field performances have anything to do with Pert.  On a scale of 1-100 his influence is 0.

9 hours ago, Matsuo Basho said:

You’re only as good as your last CEO job.

The good old cliches

28 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Can't put my finger on it but there is something about Pert's manner and energy that I don't think is resonating well at the MFC. Smart man, highly professional and all that but there's a key ingredient missing. Just one of those people who's hard to warm to.

You know him personally do you?

22 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Where is this obvious?? I would have thought it was Jackson who gave the final tick of approval of Pert when he signed off?

 

20 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/gary-pert-s-resurrection-a-contentious-call-at-melbourne-20180629-p4zojn.html

"The old Melbourne guard - a vocal and gregarious group of former committeemen, coterie and old Melburnians (the school not the club) - were loud in their condemnation that Bartlett had recruited a Collingwood discard. Admittedly many of this group have had their time at board level with underwhelming results but many still give generously to the club. Ditto the Demons' most influential past players and ditto a long list of other club CEOs who have great respect for the achievements of the outgoing Peter Jackson and were dismayed that Jackson had been totally shut out of the search for his successor."

Matuo, this is a partial quote of Caroline Wilson's opinion. It says that past players and other club CEO's were dismayed that "Jackson had been totally shut out of the search for his successor."      

Nothing is obvious, @old dee is joining dots and jumping to conclusions. Jackson may not have been happy about not being involved in the search for a replacement, but I have seen nothing to suggest that he thought it a bad appointment, it is not obvious to me.