Mid-season Coaching Revamp

[Matsuo Basho 1,053]

5 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

No surprise that you would believe it.

Closing one’s eyes, covering one’s ears and yelling “na na na na na” unfortunately does not make problems go away. As a child I remember learning this.

[chook fowler 19,752]

5 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Closing one’s eyes, covering one’s ears and yelling “na na na na na” unfortunately does not make problems go away. As a child I remember learning this.

works for me

[The Chazz 4,077]

1 hour ago, Matsuo Basho said:

Not a hands on role no but Jackson had earmarked and groomed Mahoney for the CEO position prior to the Pert appointment. We know that this event caused a bit of an earthquake at the club at the time. The shockwaves of something like that can be felt months after the fact, especially as the new big dog on the block looks to assert control. Pee on a few fire hydrants if you will. 

Just trying to work all this out.  Mahoney being groomed for the CEO role, didn't get it.  Pert got it.  Mahoney then becomes the new GM of Football, a role where he is the boss of the entire football department.  Within months of him overseeing this role, there is a mid-season review of the FD operations, leading to a number of changes.

The non-football department side has seen record memberships and movement toward setting up a new home/training base.  2 big ticket items to make us a financially sustainable club off the field.

With all the above in mind, are we now appreciative that Mahoney isn't running the entire club?

[DeeSpencer 26,567]

4 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I wrote somewhere that players seem confused on when/how to defend and when/how to attack and mused whether there were mixed messages from coaches eg Macca an old school, 'defensive first' coach and Jennings' all out ballistic style of attack game. 

One thing the first 12 rounds have shown is that defence and 'slow to play on' is a dominant feature of the top 4-6 sides.  'Fast to play on' and attacking football is a dominant feature of lower sides...

With Macca no longer a defensive coach I wonder if we will see an even more attacking game style to try and regain 'the way we play'. 

Will keenly watch how we play, and keep an eye on the bench to see if Macca is sitting there on Saturday.

Edit:  Article on mfc webste says Macca will be in an overall mentoring position of the AFL and VFL assistant coaches.  So not development as per The Age article.  Lends more intrigue into Macca's match day role and involvement with players.

I'm pretty sure from watching training that McCartney is a play it on quickly Geelong under Thompson style coach.

Lever and May should mean more intercept marks and with a fitter midfield group that could mean more kick mark style. The desperation to move the ball quickly stems from having a forward line without goal kicking power and a midfield with running power. A controlled build up needs more run in to space and forwards who can beat a man.

[Matsuo Basho 1,053]

17 minutes ago, The Chazz said:

Just trying to work all this out.  Mahoney being groomed for the CEO role, didn't get it.  Pert got it.  Mahoney then becomes the new GM of Football, a role where he is the boss of the entire football department.  Within months of him overseeing this role, there is a mid-season review of the FD operations, leading to a number of changes.

The non-football department side has seen record memberships and movement toward setting up a new home/training base.  2 big ticket items to make us a financially sustainable club off the field.

With all the above in mind, are we now appreciative that Mahoney isn't running the entire club?

I’m not sure what you’re getting at with that question. I’ve never suggested it.

Mahoney is the GM of Football of a club that was touted a top four fancy but is now sitting at the foot end of the ladder and is swinging changes among its coaching staff. If there’s heat being placed on those blokes then it’s logical to conclude there’s incendiary heat on his position, too. It’s a results based business. There’s nothing surprising about what I’m saying. All AFL club footy department employees would know what they’re getting into in this industry. Guaranteed long term security of tenure simply does not exist.

[Earl Hood 6,153]

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

The biggest line I have taken out of this is the players feedback around this issue. Changes have been made based on feedback from staff and players.

And the big one to come out of that was McCartney now won't be involved with match day commitments on a full time basis but instead will be at Casey working on development on players and coaches. 

Am I the only who sees this as players not wanting much of McCartney come game day?

Apparently Rawlings is highly respected amongst the playing hence why now he has been given a full time role on match day.

 

All this is very interesting to me. As I reported on the Monday training thread I had a chat to McCartney, the background is he put his jacket on the fence near me and my wife and quipped he was going to get these guys fired up as he walked out to run a series of drills where he ran them pretty hard and it looked like a good session to me. He then came over to pick up his jacket and his first words were these guys just don’t understand it yet, their young but they have to train harder and stop taking shortcuts, you play how you train, great sides set high standards they have to understand that. 

My take on his comments at the time were that the playing group (and by inference the leading players) is not setting the bar high enough at training, thinking after last year, that it is all just going to happen. 

Given that Macca looks like he has been sidelined, I am thinking his opinion is at odds with the other coaches and it seems the players as he was clearly a bit pizzed off, now I know why. 

 

[The Chazz 4,077]

Just now, Matsuo Basho said:

I’m not sure what you’re getting at with that question. I’ve never suggested it.

Mahoney is the GM of Football of a club that was touted a top four fancy but is now sitting at the foot end of the ladder and is swinging changes among its coaching staff. If there’s heat being placed on those blokes then it’s logical to conclude there’s incendiary heat on his position, too. It’s a results based business. There’s nothing surprising about what I’m saying. All AFL club footy department employees would know what they’re getting into in this industry. Guaranteed long term security of tenure simply does not exist.

You've been carrying on for months about how the board went against Jackson's recommendation on who should replace him, and further to that, have been carrying on about Pert's appointment.

My point is that Pert hasn't appeared to put a foot wrong to date (albeit in less than 12 months), yet Mahoney's responsibility, which he would've been involved in the development of the football department model, has already seen a review and a number of changes made.

In many ways, I see Mahoney's involvement in this mid-season review absolute amateur hour.  So maybe, just maybe the board got the CEO appointment right.  But I don't expect you to agree as it doesn't support your agenda.

[DeeSpencer 26,567]

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

I guess I see it differently. We are desperate for outside players and finishers, so I'm not one to bag a player who is actually doing those things for us. Everyone talks up the 'hardness' of Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw, but they are our 3 worst users going inside 50, and Viney is rated as worst in the league, for some reason though 'hardness' is rated higher than skill by the average footy fan. I get that it's something about the game that we all love, but clearly our balance is tipped far too much to one side.

It does require an ability to read the game to be that last 'link in the chain', and for a team with a weakness for ground balls inside 50 his ability to crumb and create scoring opportunities is vital, and I think the message it sends to Bedford, Spargo etc is they need to provide more than just 'hardness'.

Incidentally, Garlett leads our team for average tackles inside 50, so I'm not sure I buy this narrative some supporters have about him being 'soft' and not chasing or working hard enough.

We can't complain about a lack of scoring, forward pressure and marks inside 50 and then drop the player who leads us in every one of those categories.

 

Multiple times in each game he:
- Clearly runs under kicks to avoid body contact from behind, spilling or clean missing marks
- Takes flying shots on goal to avoid contact
- Approaches defenders from behind to lay run down tackles rather than having to attack them from front or side on which requires more force and courage and is more likely to create a turnover
- Passes off goal scoring opportunities including the 30m shot against the Pies that was inexcusable

All these things are clear to see. If you can't see them then I don't know what you're watching.

Yes, he has far more forward craft than any of the alternatives but he's no longer a competitor. He plays like a guy who doesn't want to be there. Now that we've got Hunt, Hannan and Lockhart all available we have 3 guys who can do the job and are actually willing to put their bodies on the line. 

[Lord Nev 13,512]

3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Multiple times in each game he:
- Clearly runs under kicks to avoid body contact from behind, spilling or clean missing marks

Yet he is our leading player for average marks inside 50.

- Takes flying shots on goal to avoid contact

Yet he is our leading average goal kicker.

- Approaches defenders from behind to lay run down tackles rather than having to attack them from front or side on which requires more force and courage and is more likely to create a turnover

Yet he is our leading player for tackles inside 50.

- Passes off goal scoring opportunities including the 30m shot against the Pies that was inexcusable

Yet (again) he is our leading average goal kicker.

All these things are clear to see. If you can't see them then I don't know what you're watching.

Replies to your comments above.

You can have 22 'courageous' Vineys every week if you want. We'd end up with 0 marks inside 50, but at least we'd be 'tough' hey? Personally I think a mix of skill and hardness is needed.

 

[dazzledavey36 56,000]

14 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

All this is very interesting to me. As I reported on the Monday training thread I had a chat to McCartney, the background is he put his jacket on the fence near me and my wife and quipped he was going to get these guys fired up as he walked out to run a series of drills where he ran them pretty hard and it looked like a good session to me. He then came over to pick up his jacket and his first words were these guys just don’t understand it yet, their young but they have to train harder and stop taking shortcuts, you play how you train, great sides set high standards they have to understand that. 

My take on his comments at the time were that the playing group (and by inference the leading players) is not setting the bar high enough at training, thinking after last year, that it is all just going to happen. 

Given that Macca looks like he has been sidelined, I am thinking his opinion is at odds with the other coaches and it seems the players as he was clearly a bit pizzed off, now I know why. 

 

What an interesting take.

McCartney would see the frustration first hand as he would see our list similar to Geelong back in that golden period between 07 to 2011. 

Knows exactly how hard we need to work before we reach Mt Everest.

[Matsuo Basho 1,053]

4 minutes ago, The Chazz said:

You've been carrying on for months about how the board went against Jackson's recommendation on who should replace him, and further to that, have been carrying on about Pert's appointment.

My point is that Pert hasn't appeared to put a foot wrong to date (albeit in less than 12 months), yet Mahoney's responsibility, which he would've been involved in the development of the football department model, has already seen a review and a number of changes made.

In many ways, I see Mahoney's involvement in this mid-season review absolute amateur hour.  So maybe, just maybe the board got the CEO appointment right.  But I don't expect you to agree as it doesn't support your agenda.

It’s too early to make a definitive call on Pert. I don’t have an agenda other than try to understand why the on field fortunes of the club have plummeted so drastically under his watch. He may ultimately prove to be a great CEO and I hope he does, but it’s an ignominious start to get off to as far as the visible scoreboard goes. I actually share some of your concerns regarding the “amateur hour” goings on we are seeing within the FD and hope Pert shows strong leadership in doing what needs to be done to rectify it. I’m on the MFC’s side, not Pert’s or Mahoney’s as individuals. Club > Employee.

[binman 44,744]

5 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Replies to your comments above.

You can have 22 'courageous' Vineys every week if you want. We'd end up with 0 marks inside 50, but at least we'd be 'tough' hey? Personally I think a mix of skill and hardness is needed.

 

Why are you focusing on toughness.?

Jeffy doesn't need to be a tough player like a  viney. He'll never be that sort of plsyer. And that's fine.

But Jeffy is playing as if he is afraid of getting hurt and is shirking contests. Even that peanut darcy (I think) pointed that out against the crows when  jeffy, late in the match elected to skirt a pack rather than go to the ball.

But as you say he is kicking goals and if goody continues to pick him I'll respect his call. 

[The Chazz 4,077]

19 minutes ago, Matsuo Basho said:

It’s too early to make a definitive call on Pert. I don’t have an agenda other than try to understand why the on field fortunes of the club have plummeted so drastically under his watch. He may ultimately prove to be a great CEO and I hope he does, but it’s an ignominious start to get off to as far as the visible scoreboard goes. I actually share some of your concerns regarding the “amateur hour” goings on we are seeing within the FD and hope Pert shows strong leadership in doing what needs to be done to rectify it. I’m on the MFC’s side, not Pert’s or Mahoney’s as individuals. Club > Employee.

Jackson didn't dabble too much in football department issues.  He put the staff in place that he felt would do that required job.

Pert hopefully won't dabble too much in football department issues.  He put the staff in place that he felt would do that required job.

At the moment, the staff member that oversees the football department isn't performing.  I'm sure the directive from Pert would be "fix it, Josh".  He (JM) has now tried, so if this doesn't work, then I'd imagine Pert would have to step in.

Let's also not forget that JM isn't one of Pert's appointments.

Let's hope it doesn't get to that point.

 

[DeeSpencer 26,567]

21 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Replies to your comments above.

You can have 22 'courageous' Vineys every week if you want. We'd end up with 0 marks inside 50, but at least we'd be 'tough' hey? Personally I think a mix of skill and hardness is needed.

 

Viney's are irrelevant. I'm not suggesting replacing Jeff with an inside midfielder.

Hunt - 14 goals/12 games. 2.2 tackles
Hannan  (last year): 22 goals/15 games 2.2 tackles
Lockhart 6 goals/7 games 2.4 tackles

They are guys who have some combinations of pace and forward craft. They also have more flexibility to rotate through the midfield or high half forward line so Baker, Oliver, Petracca etc can all spell deep forward.

When he kicked 40 goals a season and had electrifying pace Garlett was a great player, but he's lost a yard and lost the hunger for the ball. 

[Pennant St Dee 13,416]

2 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Am I the usual troll you're referring to? 

Really you ask, it ain't you. I like your input, don't always agree with it but it is balanced.

Think along the lines of multiple user names 

[Matsuo Basho 1,053]

5 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Really you ask, it ain't you. I like your input, don't always agree with it but it is balanced.

Think along the lines of multiple user names 

ProDee aka Hanabal?

[beelzebub 23,390]

6 minutes ago, The Chazz said:

Jackson didn't dabble too much in football department issues.  He put the staff in place that he felt would do that required job.

Pert hopefully won't dabble too much in football department issues.  He put the staff in place that he felt would do that required job.

At the moment, the staff member that oversees the football department isn't performing.  I'm sure the directive from Pert would be "fix it, Josh".  He (JM) has now tried, so if this doesn't work, then I'd imagine Pert would have to step in.

Let's also not forget that JM isn't one of Pert's appointments.

Let's hope it doesn't get to that point.

 

well done...

actually going to a member of the causality of this fiasco

Peter Jackson did many great and mercurial things for this club and we are mostly the better for them all. That said Football as such wasnt his forte...Administration WAS. Initially PJ simply left Football to Roos. But with his departure and shall we say some interesting turns of events within the FD it basically became infested with a new-boys club accountable to only themselves.

Mahoney can take a bow for much of this mess. Jackson was WRONG to think he JM could run this club...he cant run the FD successfully. I for one will not be sorry if he's a casualty in this.

Even if this was not Pert''s initiative it's only happened because hes there. 

[old dee 24,040]

6 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

well done...

actually going to a member of the causality of this fiasco

Peter Jackson did many great and mercurial things for this club and we are mostly the better for them all. That said Football as such wasnt his forte...Administration WAS. Initially PJ simply left Football to Roos. But with his departure and shall we say some interesting turns of events within the FD it basically became infested with a new-boys club accountable to only themselves.

Mahoney can take a bow for much of this mess. Jackson was WRONG to think he JM could run this club...he cant run the FD successfully. I for one will not be sorry if he's a casualty in this.

Even if this was not Pert''s initiative it's only happened because hes there. 

I suspect you are correct bb.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

16 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Viney's are irrelevant. I'm not suggesting replacing Jeff with an inside midfielder.

Hunt - 14 goals/12 games. 2.2 tackles
Hannan  (last year): 22 goals/15 games 2.2 tackles
Lockhart 6 goals/7 games 2.4 tackles

They are guys who have some combinations of pace and forward craft. They also have more flexibility to rotate through the midfield or high half forward line so Baker, Oliver, Petracca etc can all spell deep forward.

When he kicked 40 goals a season and had electrifying pace Garlett was a great player, but he's lost a yard and lost the hunger for the ball. 

Yeah look I'm not saying Garlett is in great form or he has no faults in his game, all I'm saying is given his strengths and our wekanesses as a team currently I would not be dropping him at this stage.

I've loved Hunt up forward, it's been a bit inconsistent but it seems to have helped him find a bit of form and a bit of happiness in his footy which will benefit the team in the end.

Not sure how Hannan's stats from last year are relevant? I rate him, and he's important to our mid/forward mix, but to my eyes he was brought back in way too early (and without VFL time) and has struggled so far in his games back.

Lockhart I like a lot, I see him as the most likely direct replacement for Jeff as we move forward.

Where we differ I guess is that I just think as of right now we can't afford to drop him. That may change, but right now I wouldn't be dropping the one player who leads our tackles inside 50, marks inside 50 and goals.

The Viney comparison was just to highlight that we need both skill and hardness, and that I find it strange we're picking out one player when every single other player on our list has weaknesses in their game.

Anyways, maybe the mods could merge all the Garlett posts in a new or existing thread? I didn't mean to get so far off the topic.

 

[Matsuo Basho 1,053]

13 minutes ago, old dee said:

I suspect you are correct bb.

#metoo

[bing181 9,437]

19 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Interesting that Misson has seemingly also been demoted (reading between the lines a bit).

Fairly standard practice. Makes it easier for the new person coming in and minimises disruption by ensuring a certain amount of continuity.

[Lord Nev 13,512]

5 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Fairly standard practice. Makes it easier for the new person coming in and minimises disruption by ensuring a certain amount of continuity.

'Fairly standard practice' to change someone's role halfway through the last year of their contract when no replacement is employed as yet? Wouldn't have thought so, unless Burgess has already agreed to terms and will start soon. If not, it's a movement of Misson's role and restructure of the department that was not planned until things were reviewed recently.

 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Lord Nev

[Deemania since 56 6,775]

17 hours ago, A F said:

Why would they signpost this?

Deflection. (Of who knows what.)

[bing181 9,437]

3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

'Fairly standard practice' to change someone's role halfway through the last year of their contract when no replacement is employed as yet? Wouldn't have thought so, unless Burgess has already agreed to terms and will start soon. If not, it's a movement of Misson's role and restructure of the department that was not planned until things were reviewed recently.

Nothing to do with halfway through the last year. The most important part of Misson's year is the off-season. He'll be gone in August. It's now June.

As for the rest ... yes, standard practice, e.g.:

" ...  it’s best for the outgoing ED to disengage from the organization for several months, if not a full year, even in cases where the board desires his or her continued involvement."

https://murdocktrust.org/prepare-executive-transition/

[Lord Travis 10,805]

Not sure why people are potting Garlett in this thread about our coaching restructure. 

Garlett facts:

- leading club for average goals per game. Will likely win our goal kicking on current form. He’s also the leading goal kicker at the club over the past decade.

- leading marks inside 50. Despite being undersized and double teamed, he always works to make an option.

- leading tackles inside 50. Defensively he works hardest out of all our forwards to put on pressure and lay tackles.

He’s not perfect, but if we’re potting Jeffy, then no other forward on our list is worthy of a game. He currently has the biggest impact out of all our forwards. 

 

As for the coaching restructure, its hard to know what to make of it. Rawlings back to MFC can only be good for the club IMO. He’s a proven coach and has had success with us in a variety of roles. Seems the rumblings about Macca have some merit with his change of role. Will we see immediate improvement after the shake up?