6 minutes ago, demonstone said:

Over and over and over and over again.  Ad infinitum.  Ad nauseam.

Your Native American tribal name would be "Five Horses".   Nag, nag, nag, nag, nag.

That’s not even funny mate. Lift your game please

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I am talking coaches. The Game Style was very similar 

Skills did not improve either sadly, would love to know why

So was i SW!

5 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

So was i SW!

Bailey came to us as a forward, that move wasn’t rocket science. 

Nathan Jones on a wing is far more concerning

5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Bailey came to us as a forward, that move wasn’t rocket science. 

Nathan Jones on a wing is far more concerning

Given the year the FD had i beg to differ!

And what's wrong with putting your slowest into areas where you need speed SW?

Surely you appreciated the double with Lewis on the other wing on occasions?

We're a fussy lot at D'land.  Expecting to win...well i never!

Edited August 29, 20196 yr by Rusty Nails

3 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Given the year the FD had i beg to differ!

And what's wrong with putting your slowest into areas where you need speed SW?

Surely you appreciated the double with Lewis on the other wing on occasions?

We're a fussy lot at D'land.  Expecting to win...well i never!

Haha i thought you were serious until the last sentence!!

4 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes i ask the same question. 

If you think we improved post the bye round i pity you

Yeah I started asking a footy related question than remembered who I was responding to 

40 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Haha i thought you were serious until the last sentence!!

After this many years of punishment i try hard to see the lighter side where possible SW.  Reckon i would have been committed a few decades ago if i hadn't.

4 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

After this many years of punishment i try hard to see the lighter side where possible SW.  Reckon i would have been committed a few decades ago if i hadn't.

Not wrong mate. We have seen it all, and it hasn’t stopped yet

2 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Yeah I started asking a footy related question than remembered who I was responding to 

Pathetic really

5 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Pathetic really

but true

Has the club finished its review yet??

Waiting too long for the results could hamper our drafting strategy. Or isn't drafting strategy a part of the review?

Rohan Connolly summed us up beautifully in 2013 after Neeld was sacked. I can’t quote him exactly, but he stated that there was a soft underbelly at the club that ensured the club would fall to pieces at the first sign of trouble. 

I am in furious agreement with him on this front. I interpret his take on the club as one where a few injuries, some consecutive losses or an unexpected loss, some amplified negative media coverage, some type of administrative scandal or (in this case) a horrible season causes the whole club ecosystem to collectively throw it’s hands in the air and demand instant gratification for it’s problems. We are a relic of the past in many ways (i.e. our inability to fully embrace the professional era), but we are modern in the sense of reflecting current societal trends in that we cannot abide any form of discomfort and melt down at the first sight of adversity. If you don’t believe me, look at the 2011 season.

As this pertains to the review, I believe that it needs to be solutions based, and not a huge round of navel gazing and finger pointing. The question should not be ‘How do we start again?’ but ‘How do we regain and improve on what we were building from 2014 onwards?’

One thing I am concerned about is that there has been a reshuffle of assistants but what recommendations have been made about Goody’s job? I don’t suggest for a minute he should be sacked, but I remember that Geelong’s 2006 review specifically stated that Bomber Thompson be removed from list management, be made to embrace a different game plan and have Neil Balme as his head of football. This was to allow him to focus on his actual strength of one to one coaching. 

Where has anything like this been indicated in our review? It’s almost been the reverse of what clubs did in the past; have the coach carry the can while everyone else avoided scrutiny. Maybe those assistants did need to be moved on, but for mine it seems a bit too much of a bandaid solution and a fop to those baying for blood.

10 minutes ago, Hillary Bray said:

Rohan Connolly summed us up beautifully in 2013 after Neeld was sacked. I can’t quote him exactly, but he stated that there was a soft underbelly at the club that ensured the club would fall to pieces at the first sign of trouble. 

I am in furious agreement with him on this front. I interpret his take on the club as one where a few injuries, some consecutive losses or an unexpected loss, some amplified negative media coverage, some type of administrative scandal or (in this case) a horrible season causes the whole club ecosystem to collectively throw it’s hands in the air and demand instant gratification for it’s problems. We are a relic of the past in many ways (i.e. our inability to fully embrace the professional era), but we are modern in the sense of reflecting current societal trends in that we cannot abide any form of discomfort and melt down at the first sight of adversity. If you don’t believe me, look at the 2011 season.

As this pertains to the review, I believe that it needs to be solutions based, and not a huge round of navel gazing and finger pointing. The question should not be ‘How do we start again?’ but ‘How do we regain and improve on what we were building from 2014 onwards?’

One thing I am concerned about is that there has been a reshuffle of assistants but what recommendations have been made about Goody’s job? I don’t suggest for a minute he should be sacked, but I remember that Geelong’s 2006 review specifically stated that Bomber Thompson be removed from list management, be made to embrace a different game plan and have Neil Balme as his head of football. This was to allow him to focus on his actual strength of one to one coaching. 

Where has anything like this been indicated in our review? It’s almost been the reverse of what clubs did in the past; have the coach carry the can while everyone else avoided scrutiny. Maybe those assistants did need to be moved on, but for mine it seems a bit too much of a bandaid solution and a fop to those baying for blood.

Yes Hillary Agree completely

I guess we will never know what or how the review was done.

I suppose all we can do is wait to see what the on field results are and then we might get some idea of what the review achieved. Soft underbelly mentioned above is a real and present problem.

11 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

but true

Talking about yourself is just sad

1 hour ago, Hillary Bray said:

One thing I am concerned about is that there has been a reshuffle of assistants but what recommendations have been made about Goody’s job? I don’t suggest for a minute he should be sacked, but I remember that Geelong’s 2006 review specifically stated that Bomber Thompson be removed from list management, be made to embrace a different game plan and have Neil Balme as his head of football. This was to allow him to focus on his actual strength of one to one coaching. 

Where has anything like this been indicated in our review? It’s almost been the reverse of what clubs did in the past; have the coach carry the can while everyone else avoided scrutiny. Maybe those assistants did need to be moved on, but for mine it seems a bit too much of a bandaid solution and a fop to those baying for blood.

Overall agree with your observations.

Re the above extract, all the outcomes are yet to be announced.  No inside info, just going on:

- The club flagged there will be lots of changes to our medical/fitness staff.  Guessing this involves Burgess who officially doesn't start for a while but is probably working with the club on changes.

- That Richardson's role has not been disclosed suggests more changes in coaching/football department.

From early last year I've advocated for a Neil Balme experienced type person to manage all areas of the football department.  Notwithstanding some things he does well, I've had serious reservations about Mahoney as the GM Football because our current problems have happened on his watch with his signing off on decisions made in the various football departments over the last 3-4 years.

I'm looking forward to all the changes happening as then we can make a more informed assessment.

Edited August 29, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Look at 3 of the top teams in the comp at the moment. Richmond, West Coast and Brisbane all set up with 3 talls (Bold = 2nd ruckman

Bris: McInearny, McStay, Hipwood

Rich: Reiwoldt, Lynch, Chol

WC: Darling, Kennedy, Allen

 

I think next season McDonald, Weideman and Petty should make up our forward line unless we recruit another tall 

The Crows getting Dunstall in to do an external review is a great idea. I forgot that it was Dunstall who did the overhaul at Hawthorn and he appointed Clarko.

The Dees could do no harm bringing him in to do something for us if things don’t improve next year.

Not sure if anyone else watched Open Mike last night, but they had Ray McLean on who founded leading teams.

Interestingly, Geelong went through a big shake up at the end of 2006 facilitated by leading teams which led to their stellar 2007 season. 

Some of their work with Sydney, Hawthorn and Geelong speaks volumes considering they’ve been the 3 most successful clubs over the last 15 years.

I know Roosy had them doing work for us as late as 2016 (his final year as coach) but I can’t see if there’s been any more involvement since Goody took over.

15 minutes ago, At the break of Gawn said:

Not sure if anyone else watched Open Mike last night, but they had Ray McLean on who founded leading teams.

Interestingly, Geelong went through a big shake up at the end of 2006 facilitated by leading teams which led to their stellar 2007 season. 

Some of their work with Sydney, Hawthorn and Geelong speaks volumes considering they’ve been the 3 most successful clubs over the last 15 years.

I know Roosy had them doing work for us as late as 2016 (his final year as coach) but I can’t see if there’s been any more involvement since Goody took over.

From memory, a lot of teams have used Leading Teams in the past. Some have worked, such as Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney, but while they were a contributing factor, they weren't the defining factor. While, for others, it has clearly not worked. Leading Teams has a success rate of about 50%, so I wouldn't think bringing them back would be much help.

I don't blame Ray for pumping up his business' tyres during an interview, but to say that what they did was one of the reasons that Geelong went on to win in 2007 is a bit of an exaggeration.

Edited September 3, 20196 yr by AshleyH30

i think we should appoint Guru Bob from the Temple.

On 8/27/2019 at 3:33 PM, don't make me angry said:

This is pointless post, forget about the camp has nothing to do with anything anymore, and what do u think should happen force everyone to go on this pointless camp which is for soldiers, it a easy thing to point to without actually 

Maybe... but I look at what successful teams do...take Melbourne Storm and this camp. We are a mentally fragile team, anything we can do address this, we must do, even if its managing the optics of looking weak by  ot going to this camp.

On 8/28/2019 at 2:51 PM, beelzebub said:

A full review simply is that. The result  is you then have a better image of everything.  It may be Goody goes...it might be stays and others go...or a number of permutations. 

Those who are open to this..a full review make no preconditions  for it. 

A review is just that...a review.

I think we need a review to determine what sort of review we need. Bring in Gary Lyon to lead it. History shows he's the go to man

On 9/4/2019 at 9:42 AM, chook fowler said:

i think we should appoint Guru Bob from the Temple.

 

18 hours ago, CYB said:

Maybe... but I look at what successful teams do...take Melbourne Storm and this camp. We are a mentally fragile team, anything we can do address this, we must do, even if its managing the optics of looking weak by  ot going to this camp.

Your humour is possibly a meaningful response.

A review which focuses on the obvious disconnections mentioned by the coach countless times are the most significant.

Theplayers and coaches were all progressing then in WA at prelim all fell apart.

Maybe they all got a bit serious and forgot about the freedom that lightheartedness gives.

I reckon the problems are in the head and need to be addressed as much as physical conditioning and game plans.

Identifying players emotional traits can identify their responses to circumstance. Combining the right balance of motion and physical and communicating that structure is an important part of the coach/es connecting.

Roos said regarding the Crows review.....if you need an external people doing a review of your club, you have the wrong people in charge & they should resign! Thats why the CEO, President & board are there for!

On 9/4/2019 at 9:34 AM, AshleyH30 said:

From memory, a lot of teams have used Leading Teams in the past. Some have worked, such as Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney, but while they were a contributing factor, they weren't the defining factor. While, for others, it has clearly not worked. Leading Teams has a success rate of about 50%, so I wouldn't think bringing them back would be much help.

I don't blame Ray for pumping up his business' tyres during an interview, but to say that what they did was one of the reasons that Geelong went on to win in 2007 is a bit of an exaggeration.

I am also lead to believe that Mick Malthouse was anti leading teams during his Collingwood days. I am sure it works for others and some it doesn't.