Football Program Review

[Dr. Gonzo 24,443]

1 hour ago, layzie said:

A good point.

John Longmire, that is all I got.

 

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

Sumich

Roughead

[58er 6,811]

15 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

And if that happens Pert will have got away with a slight of hand trick and we the supporters will be the losers. I have never rated him. Hope I am wrong but he seems like one of the 70s footballers who went into Sales and ended up running this or that company with no formal training.

You vastly underrate his feats at Collingwood Re membership and finance .There is no way Pert  would have survived over a decade at Pies if he was not efficient snd performing at a good level.

It is only a perception that you have and his record foes to belie those thoughts.

[Half forward flank 1,022]

7 hours ago, 58er said:

You vastly underrate his feats at Collingwood Re membership and finance .There is no way Pert  would have survived over a decade at Pies if he was not efficient snd performing at a good level.

It is only a perception that you have and his record foes to belie those thoughts.

All a bit of smoke and mirrirs 58. Collingwood membership increased by 2000 between 2012 and 2016. Huge latent support and home game attendances from before Pert took over. As for finances, well they have a financial officer and other qualified people for task. 

Pert did however, oversee the disastorous succession plan that saw Malthouse replaced with Buckley. And Eddie, well, he is a dynamo and would drive most initiatives such is his power at the Club.

[deanox 10,045]

13 minutes ago, Half forward flank said:

All a bit of smoke and mirrirs 58. Collingwood membership increased by 2000 between 2012 and 2016. Huge latent support and home game attendances from before Pert took over. As for finances, well they have a financial officer and other qualified people for task. 

Pert did however, oversee the disastorous succession plan that saw Malthouse replaced with Buckley. And Eddie, well, he is a dynamo and would drive most initiatives such is his power at the Club.

So yiu are daying that it is the part time, volunteer chairman and the subordinate financial officers who are responsible for the success of Collingwood, not the full time CEO who's job it was?

[SFebes 4,884]

Underwhelmed, seems like more spin from Pert. 2021 is a big big year for this footy club.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

 

On 11/3/2020 at 9:14 AM, spirit of norm smith said:

 

3. Greg Stafford as forward line coach. Really. That’s a bizarre choice given he was just a ruckman.  And as goalkicking coach, he was working alongside Fritsch this year! .  That needs further thought. 
 

Hunt 10.2

ANB 7.0

Spargo 8.1

Tmac 7.1

Hannann 7.3

Weed 19.8

Melk 15.8

Fritz 22.24

 Fritch wasn't his only forward he worked with.

 

15 hours ago, Rogue said:

I can't see why people are ruling out Stafford as forwards coach just because he wasn't a forward. Coaching is about teaching, not about whether you are or were great at a particular thing yourself - and it's not like he has no elite footy background, if that's important to you; 204 games and 141 goals.

Given he's been at the Club in ruck and goal-kicking roles for quite a while, we should have a very good idea of what he's like as a coach.

SNAP

[jnrmac 20,276]

1 hour ago, Half forward flank said:

All a bit of smoke and mirrirs 58. Collingwood membership increased by 2000 between 2012 and 2016. Huge latent support and home game attendances from before Pert took over. As for finances, well they have a financial officer and other qualified people for task. 

Pert did however, oversee the disastorous succession plan that saw Malthouse replaced with Buckley. And Eddie, well, he is a dynamo and would drive most initiatives such is his power at the Club.

Pert also lost a massive amount of money after their last flag. They developed their own Side By Side brand and spent up big on Mechandise they couldn't sell. From memory it was a $2m+ loss in 2011-2012

 

[Half forward flank 1,022]

2 hours ago, deanox said:

So yiu are daying that it is the part time, volunteer chairman and the subordinate financial officers who are responsible for the success of Collingwood, not the full time CEO who's job it was?

They are your words. If you want to call a Financial officer with responsibility for fairly large finance and due dilligence  a subordinate and Eddie a volunteer, that is up to you. I am not understanding  why Dees supporters are wanting to pump up Perts tyres. let his performance at MFC be of prime concern. So far, he has not delivered on team success, a stable coaching group or a home ground. Happy to congratulate him when he achieves those goals.

[Lucifers Hero 40,515]

16 hours ago, rpfc said:

The split in football and list management is odd to me.

If it was admin and footy split I can understand it better but list management and trading and management of the cap goes hand in hand with what the FD are thinking.

I know they will talk to each other but where the buck stops is important and has endless implications.

Isnt the end of the world, just don’t think it will last.

Agree with your concerns.

I'm guessing the split is to pad out the GM Admin role. 

If 'List Management' is the administration (ie contracts, systems, research, parity etc) of the sal cap but the decisions rests with Football it will work.  But if Admin is doing the drafting, trading, recruiting etc and who gets what contract/conditions it would be a concern especially if they have a different view to the Football department.

Also concerned if football analytics is in the GM Admin remit.

The split just sets up potential for 'demarcation' issues with football priorities and if decision makers are not on the same page.

It was interesting that Pert said Mahoney will be located at the MCG so he will be physically distant from the Football department.

Should Mahoney leave, I would hope all the AFL football functions go back to GM Football.  It would then be a lesser role needing a different incumbent.

Edited November 4, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[deanox 10,045]

4 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

They are your words. If you want to call a Financial officer with responsibility for fairly large finance and due dilligence  a subordinate and Eddie a volunteer, that is up to you. I am not understanding  why Dees supporters are wanting to pump up Perts tyres. let his performance at MFC be of prime concern. So far, he has not delivered on team success, a stable coaching group or a home ground. Happy to congratulate him when he achieves those goals.

My words, yes. They are correct though.

Eddie is a part time volunteer. He isn't paid at Collingwood. In fact during his tenure he holds/held similar Director roles  at lots of other organisations:

-The President of the Melbourne Stars;

-Chairman of the Michael Long Learning and Leadership Foundation;

-13 years on the board of the Victorian Major Events Corporation;

-8 years on the board of Athletics Australia;

-This year became a board member for Visit Victoria.

In addition he has maintained roles as tv show and radio show host, newspaper columnist, footy commentator etc.

He cannot possibly put in more than a couple of hours per day at CFC and still do those things, so he is absolutely part time. Meanwhile Pert was full time at CFC for a decade.  Before that he was the CEO of AusStero Network (fox, mmm, etc.) and then CEO of Nine (replacing Eddie).

Also, as CEO for 10 years, he is the guy responsible for the appointment and management of those finance administrators. 

I'm not a Pert fan, I'm indifferent. So if your arguement is that Pert was a yes man, not making real decisions, not involved in strategy, planning etc. and just doing what Eddie told him after their morning meeting catchup, or that he was incompotent and performed only because he had a gun CFO at his side, I'd like to hear it and understand your basis for saying so.

But if you just want to discount any success he may have had as due to someone else, without backing it up, you will get called out.

 

Edited November 4, 2020 by deanox

[deanox 10,045]

4 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Agree with your concerns.

I'm guessing the split is to pad out the GM Admin role. 

If 'List Management' is the administration (ie contracts, systems, research, parity etc) of the sal cap but the decisions rests with Football it will work.  But if Admin is doing the drafting, trading, recruiting etc and who gets what contract/conditions it would be a concern especially if they have a different view to the Football department.

Also concerned if football analytics is in the GM Admin remit.

The split just sets up potential for 'demarcation' issues with football priorities and if decision makers are not on the same page.

It was interesting that Pert said Mahoney will be located at the MCG so he will be physically distant from the Football department.

Should Mahoney leave, I would hope all the AFL football functions go back to GM Football.  It would then be a lesser role needing a different incumbent.

When I read it, I assumed he was maintaining responsibility for business related decisions, vs football performance related decisions whixh go to Richo.

Directly from the email Richo is overseeing the performance-based elements of the program including coaching, high performance, medical, performance psychology and skill development. But Josh is responsible for the financial management of our soft cap, which means reaponsible for managing the cost of the staff Richo is managing.

I interperet that Richo's team will identify performance needs (recruiting and trading targets) and Josh will then try to deliver those. Similar to how they said they wanted Oliver and Kosi, and he then did the business deals to get the picks to get them. 

I'm thinking of it almost like a "Program Delivery Manager" (responsible for delivery of core business) and a "Operations Manager" (responsible for managing the business overheads and expenses) working side by side.

 

I also thought this has been under discussed:

Josh will be a key part of the government led working party for the new home base development within the MCG sports precinct. 

 

1) We also just brought in Dave Rennick as a Director with sepcific experience in this sector. Makes sense to have a director and a staffer in this space.

2) "Government led" is an intriguing and promising phrase.

[58er 6,811]

5 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Pert also lost a massive amount of money after their last flag. They developed their own Side By Side brand and spent up big on Mechandise they couldn't sell. From memory it was a $2m+ loss in 2011-2012

 

From memory HF flank and jnrmac Pies dropped back each year when Bucks took over so a status quo is not surprising in membership.

 

While a CEO has Some responsibility for team performance the Head of FD is responsible to him it is too easy to blame  Pert for the whole Situation Pert if I recall was at Cwood in 2010 and 2011 when Pies won flag and were runners up.

(Perty would be a hero If he could do this within the next 3 years).

The side by side campaign would surely be a marketing decision approved by Board or Pert. And submitted by the Marketing Manager,  As his Role.

It's has been a constant from many D/L Anders that if they didn't want Pert or agree with his appointment to blame every thing on Pert. The reality Perty isn't in the Coaching box when Simon refuses To move players or makes multiple Team changes akin to deck chairs on the Titanic. 
The more  realistic Situation is that nearly all sections of the Club are performing OK  with Financial surprisingly us being stable and not needing AFL support.

Membership, football Dept and on field Performance definitely need 20/25% Lift fir us to be a serious contender for the flag.

That is the challenge for 2021 And beyond with the changes and recruiting currently being undertaken as the first crucial steps.
 

 

 

[Half forward flank 1,022]

1 hour ago, deanox said:

My words, yes. They are correct though.

Eddie is a part time volunteer. He isn't paid at Collingwood. In fact during his tenure he holds/held similar Director roles  at lots of other organisations:

-The President of the Melbourne Stars;

-Chairman of the Michael Long Learning and Leadership Foundation;

-13 years on the board of the Victorian Major Events Corporation;

-8 years on the board of Athletics Australia;

-This year became a board member for Visit Victoria.

In addition he has maintained roles as tv show and radio show host, newspaper columnist, footy commentator etc.

He cannot possibly put in more than a couple of hours per day at CFC and still do those things, so he is absolutely part time. Meanwhile Pert was full time at CFC for a decade.  Before that he was the CEO of AusStero Network (fox, mmm, etc.) and then CEO of Nine (replacing Eddie).

Also, as CEO for 10 years, he is the guy responsible for the appointment and management of those finance administrators. 

I'm not a Pert fan, I'm indifferent. So if your arguement is that Pert was a yes man, not making real decisions, not involved in strategy, planning etc. and just doing what Eddie told him after their morning meeting catchup, or that he was incompotent and performed only because he had a gun CFO at his side, I'd like to hear it and understand your basis for saying so.

But if you just want to discount any success he may have had as due to someone else, without backing it up, you will get called out.

 

He lasted 5 minutes at Channel Nine and you would need to show me evidence that he held the CEO role there. Over rated role at Austereo, mainly sales. Yes, CEO job includes appointing good people. When I read the posts here there is a lot of debate about whether Goodwin, Richardson and Mahoney are good appointments. Time will tell.

[deanox 10,045]

23 minutes ago, Half forward flank said:

He lasted 5 minutes at Channel Nine and you would need to show me evidence that he held the CEO role there. Over rated role at Austereo, mainly sales. Yes, CEO job includes appointing good people. When I read the posts here there is a lot of debate about whether Goodwin, Richardson and Mahoney are good appointments. Time will tell.

Apologies, at C9 he was Managing Director not CEO. For all intents and purposes, that is the same role though, with additional responsibilities.

Here is an article talking about how announced he was leaving C9 to take on the CEO role at Colingwood.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/magpies-set-to-appoint-pert-as-ceo-20070510-gdq3pf.html

So Eddie left as CEO of C9 on 30 June 2006. They decided to change their management structure and have an MD instead, and they appointed Pert to the role. 9 months later, Eddie poached him to Collingwood.

So either Eddie things he was a great operator, or Eddie thought he was a push over yes man to do his bidding.

I'd really like to engage with you keep makings comments that you either cant back up or are deliberately disingenuous.

 

The closest to a point you might have made is that you don't think Goodwin, Richardson or Mahoney are good appointments, and that that may reflect on Pert. Is that your angle?

Because I agree his role will live or die by those type of appointments. But you seem to be writing them off before they pass or fail, which shows your bias.

[Half forward flank 1,022]

17 minutes ago, deanox said:

Apologies, at C9 he was Managing Director not CEO. For all intents and purposes, that is the same role though, with additional responsibilities.

Here is an article talking about how announced he was leaving C9 to take on the CEO role at Colingwood.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/magpies-set-to-appoint-pert-as-ceo-20070510-gdq3pf.html

So Eddie left as CEO of C9 on 30 June 2006. They decided to change their management structure and have an MD instead, and they appointed Pert to the role. 9 months later, Eddie poached him to Collingwood.

So either Eddie things he was a great operator, or Eddie thought he was a push over yes man to do his bidding.

I'd really like to engage with you keep makings comments that you either cant back up or are deliberately disingenuous.

 

The closest to a point you might have made is that you don't think Goodwin, Richardson or Mahoney are good appointments, and that that may reflect on Pert. Is that your angle?

Because I agree his role will live or die by those type of appointments. But you seem to be writing them off before they pass or fail, which shows your bias.

Pert was a Melbourne based employee for the very short time, less than a year, he was an employee at Channel 9. By that time channel Nine was a National Broadcaster which was run out of Sydney. He was already a Board member at that time at Collingwood.He left collingwood as or in part a result of a true external review. Oversaw the disastorous Buckley Malthouse succession plan. As we both seem to agree, time will tell. I am not suggesting he be replaced, just that the Footy industry has a way of pumping people up until it all ends in tears.

[deanox 10,045]

30 minutes ago, Half forward flank said:

Pert was a Melbourne based employee for the very short time, less than a year, he was an employee at Channel 9. By that time channel Nine was a National Broadcaster which was run out of Sydney. He was already a Board member at that time at Collingwood.He left collingwood as or in part a result of a true external review. Oversaw the disastorous Buckley Malthouse succession plan. As we both seem to agree, time will tell. I am not suggesting he be replaced, just that the Footy industry has a way of pumping people up until it all ends in tears.

Thanks for the extra info RE your thoughts.

The only thing I'd say is that the transition from Malthouse to Buckley seems to be regraded as an Eddie brainchild. I'm not sure we can say that it is Pert fault that transition didn't work, while also saying that Eddiec is the reason the club was successful. 

[Half forward flank 1,022]

12 minutes ago, deanox said:

Thanks for the extra info RE your thoughts.

The only thing I'd say is that the transition from Malthouse to Buckley seems to be regraded as an Eddie brainchild. I'm not sure we can say that it is Pert fault that transition didn't work, while also saying that Eddiec is the reason the club was successful. 

Lets just hope things work for us this year.

[Cards13 9,117]

Keep trying to poke holes in his CV, I’ll let him oversee/govern the Dees and make judgements (with virtually no information we get on how he’s doing against his key metrics). He’s doing very well sponsorship wise to date. 

[Half forward flank 1,022]

Really?  Annual report has sponsorship and hospitality down 10 per cent 2018-2019. 

[Diamond_Jim 12,687]

14 hours ago, Half forward flank said:

Really?  Annual report has sponsorship and hospitality down 10 per cent 2018-2019. 

Not surprised as many sponsorship contracts have kickers if you make finals... (more exposure).

If anything surprised that in 2019 it was not down further by comparison to 2018.

Sponsorship dollars are directly related to TV exposure...

Hard to blame Pert for that.

Let's remember that MFC is a medium size business at best in a highly controlled industry where the opportunity to grow your market is restrained to say the least. 

[Demon17 5,227]

On 11/3/2020 at 6:22 PM, Rogue said:

I can't see why people are ruling out Stafford as forwards coach just because he wasn't a forward. Coaching is about teaching, not about whether you are or were great at a particular thing yourself - and it's not like he has no elite footy background, if that's important to you; 204 games and 141 goals.

Given he's been at the Club in ruck and goal-kicking roles for quite a while, we should have a very good idea of what he's like as a coach.

Exactly.  And bear in mind Stafford did play as a forward for a few early years and his accuracy record histrorically in those years was up with Dunstall and the very best.

He knows how to kick, but can he instruct smaller players who likely have varying actions?

 

[jnrmac 20,276]

20 hours ago, 58er said:

The side by side campaign would surely be a marketing decision approved by Board or Pert. And submitted by the Marketing Manager,  As his Role.

 

 

These things are championed by the CEO. This was all down to Pert. I know. He sought and received board approval but it was his cause.

I don't rate him at all and was shocked we: a) chased him and, b) went outside our guidelines/process to get him.

Edited November 5, 2020 by jnrmac

[Half forward flank 1,022]

4 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Not surprised as many sponsorship contracts have kickers if you make finals... (more exposure).

If anything surprised that in 2019 it was not down further by comparison to 2018.

Sponsorship dollars are directly related to TV exposure...

Hard to blame Pert for that.

Let's remember that MFC is a medium size business at best in a highly controlled industry where the opportunity to grow your market is restrained to say the least. 

The converstaion so far, Deanox congratulates pert for his sponsorship work, I point out it went backwards, to which you say it is not perts fault.  

[Diamond_Jim 12,687]

1 hour ago, Half forward flank said:

The converstaion so far, Deanox congratulates pert for his sponsorship work, I point out it went backwards, to which you say it is not perts fault.  

The getting of sponsorship is his job... a drop of 10% is easily attributed to on field performance...not his job.

The re-signing of sponsors in 2020 given our 2019 performance and the virus was a decent performance.

MFC has many problems IMO but Pert is not at the top for now.

[Half forward flank 1,022]

27 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The getting of sponsorship is his job... a drop of 10% is easily attributed to on field performance...not his job.

The re-signing of sponsors in 2020 given our 2019 performance and the virus was a decent performance.

MFC has many problems IMO but Pert is not at the top for now.

Fair enough, what do you see as the problems we face .