Goody was class on 360.

Served us well, won us a flag.

But god there are some worry worts on here.

We needed a change, it was plain to see. Time to welcome Buckley with a beefed up assistant brigade.

5 minutes ago, Howard_Grimes said:

We needed a change, it was plain to see. Time to welcome Buckley with a beefed up assistant brigade.

You might have mentioned this elsewhere - apologies if this comes across as a lazy question: what do you like about Buckley?

3 hours ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

You might have mentioned this elsewhere - apologies if this comes across as a lazy question: what do you like about Buckley?

He's available - and interested, for a start.

11 hours ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

"We need a new voice" is a weak, flawed and laughable concept, but the weather... that's a rich discursive vein?

Except I didn't just refer to weather did I. Cherry picking. But heh, if that's the hill you want to die on, be my guest:

"Daniher said the environment at the Lions and the lifestyle away from football was a perfect combination. "It's been a beautiful change," he said.

"It's 30 degrees and blue sky and sunny outside, it's an enjoyable place to be. A great city and a great place to play football."

Why do folks seem to assume a new coach = a successful coach, or even just a better coach? Genuine question. Like every other supporter I really hope our new coach is successful, but I know it’s not a given.

9 minutes ago, Ghostwriter said:

Why do folks seem to assume a new coach = a successful coach, or even just a better coach? Genuine question. Like every other supporter I really hope our new coach is successful, but I know it’s not a given.

Goodwin had to go, the performance over a sustained period was evidence of that.

The success or otherwise of our next coach is irrelevant to whether that decision was right or not.

6 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Goodwin had to go, the performance over a sustained period was evidence of that.

The success or otherwise of our next coach is irrelevant to whether that decision was right or not.

I completely disagree with both statements, particularly the second.

If the next coach does not bring success, and I would argue immediate success, then the decision to sack Goodwin, one of only four coaches that have won a flag in the club's 173 year history who has a proven ability to take this team from near bottom back to the top (near bottom in 2019 after making a preliminary in 2018) and completely retooling the game plan (ironically super attacking to ultra defence) and had not 'list the players' will be an epic fail.

Just one reason why is that we have to pay him a million dollars on top of what i imagine will be a similar amount to the new coach severely hampering our ability to surround a new coach with the very best assistants and high performance team.

If we don't make finals next year then the opportunity cost for sacking Goodwin, in addition to pouring a million dollars down the drain, includes the lost chance to say do another succession plan with for example Chaplin or Bruce (which I think would have been at least worth considering, particularly given that exact model brought the club its first flag in 57 years just 4 years ago).

The board should be judged on its decisions. It decided just two years ago to extend Goodwin’s contract.

Sacking him with a year on his contract can only be seen as an admission that was a mistake.

If the coach they now appoint does not bring success, and I would argue immediate success by at the least making finals next season, then they will have made another mistake.

Edited Friday at 21:162 days by binman

4 minutes ago, binman said:

I completely disagree with both statements, particularly the second.

If the next coach does not bring success, and I would argue immediate success, then the decision to sack Goodwin, one of only four coaches that have won a flag in the club's 173 year history who has a proven ability to take this team from near bottom back to the top (near bottom in 2019 after making a preliminary in 2018) and completely retooling the game plan (ironically super attacking to ultra defence) and had not 'list the players' will be an epic fail.

Just one reason why is that we have to pay him a million dollars on top of what i imagine will be a similar amount to the new coach severely hampering our ability to surround a new coach with the very best assistants and high performance team.

If we don't make finals next year then the opportunity cost for sacking Goodwin, in addition to pouring a million dollars down the drain, the lost chance to say do another succession plan with for example Chaplin or Bruce (which I think would have been at least worth considering, particularly given that exact model brought the club its first flag in 57 years just 4 years ago).

The board should be judged on its decisions. It decided just two years ago to extend Goodwin’s contract. Sacking him with a year on his contract can only be seen as an admission that was a mistake.

If the coach they now appoint does not bring success, and I would argue immediate success by at the least making finals, then they will have made another mistake.

They also might sell next year as a necessary step back and If so they may clear out some players too. This also might feel ugly for us in terms of what we get in return.

But I agree with your summary. Goody should have been given his final year. The more I sit with all of it the angrier I feel.

7 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

They also might sell next year as a necessary step back and If so they may clear out some players too. This also might feel ugly for us in terms of what we get in return.

But I agree with your summary. Goody should have been given his final year. The more I sit with all of it the angrier I feel.

I think they should have let Goody see out his contract, but that doesn't mean I think the board nesssarily made a mistake.

My point really is that we simply don't have enough information to make an assessment on whether it's a mistake or not.

Which is exactly why the success or otherwise of a new coach IS of great significance.

If say we go with Buckley and don't make finals, or at the very least drastically improve our win loss record (which would see us pushing for finals all season) then the evidence will strongly suggest the decision was wrong.

We were beaten twice by St Kilda this year, both horrifying defeats for different reasons

North Melb pumped us by 10 goals. North Melbourne for Christs sake

The Essendon defeat was hideous

Goody was by no means entirely to blame but it was clear to me he was not able to get a tune out of this group of players

Maybe another coach can so that's why i am in favour of the change.

its neither here nor there anyways, cos we'll never know if he could have turned things around

I just hope the club pick the right coach to take us forward. And the idea of Buckley doesn't fill me with confidence.

7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Goodwin had to go, the performance over a sustained period was evidence of that.

The success or otherwise of our next coach is irrelevant to whether that decision was right or not.

Right now, the club would struggle to hire Bozo the Clown as the new coach. Off the field the place is a rabble, a fiasco, a [censored].

8 hours ago, Ghostwriter said:

Why do folks seem to assume a new coach = a successful coach, or even just a better coach? Genuine question. Like every other supporter I really hope our new coach is successful, but I know it’s not a given.

No it's not. It's a fair comment. Nothing in life is a given. There is NO magic button nor elixir.

35 minutes ago, binman said:

I think they should have let Goody see out his contract, but that doesn't mean I think the board nesssarily made a mistake.

My point really is that we simply don't have enough information to make an assessment on whether it's a mistake or not.

Which is exactly why the success or otherwise of a new coach IS of great significance.

If say we go with Buckley and don't make finals, or at the very least drastically improve our win loss record (which would see us pushing for finals all season) then the evidence will strongly suggest the decision was wrong.

I’m usually on the same page as you with most things but this I’m not so sure.

If you believe Goodwin should have been given his 5th year, since the flag, to carry out his reinvention of our gameplan, how is a first year coach missing finals a failure?

Goodwin should be judged more harshly because despite his feeling that we are closing the gap, we were still going backwards in the only metric that counts, wins.

Our fitness and skills, which are two of your favourite topics of disappointment, are not immediately changing next year without serious list moves, for which we have no currency.

Whoever the new coach may be, they are inheriting a bit of a mess

Edited Friday at 22:212 days by BW511

8 hours ago, Ghostwriter said:

Why do folks seem to assume a new coach = a successful coach, or even just a better coach? Genuine question. Like every other supporter I really hope our new coach is successful, but I know it’s not a given.

I think most of us know that changing Coaches is not a guarantee for success.

But when you look at last night, with the Saints struggling to beat the Bombers VFL side and think back to us losing to them with a 45 point lead at 3/4 time, not kicking a goal in the last quarter, an AFL record loss, combined with the last two seasons, it was an obvious and necessary decision.

Also the off field situation where we were losing members had to be considered.

Will we do better next year, hopefully?

Edited Friday at 22:272 days by Redleg

4 minutes ago, BW511 said:

I’m usually on the same page as you with most things but this I’m not so sure.

If you believe Goodwin should have been given his 5th year, since the flag, to carry out his reinvention of our gameplan, how is a first year coach missing finals a failure?

Goodwin should be judged more harshly because despite his feeling that we are closing the gap, we were still going backwards in the only metric that counts, wins.

Our fitness and skills, which are two of your favourite topics of disappointment, are not immediately changing next year without serious list moves, for which we have no currency.

Whoever the new coach may be, they are inheriting a bit of a mess

A bit of a mess? Under Green's watch the club made a meal of the chief executive appt, made a meal of the Goodwin sacking and Green is now making a complete botch of the handover. Plus he can hardly string two coherent words together. The press conference with Goodwin was embarrassing. He made Goodwin look articulate.

9 hours ago, bing181 said:

Except I didn't just refer to weather did I. Cherry picking. But heh, if that's the hill you want to die on, be my guest:

"Daniher said the environment at the Lions and the lifestyle away from football was a perfect combination. "It's been a beautiful change," he said.

"It's 30 degrees and blue sky and sunny outside, it's an enjoyable place to be. A great city and a great place to play football."

No one wanted to be at the lions 10 years ago. They had many players including captains walk out on them. They turned themselves around when they brought in Swann, Noble and Fagan.

1 hour ago, binman said:

I completely disagree with both statements, particularly the second.

If the next coach does not bring success, and I would argue immediate success, then the decision to sack Goodwin, one of only four coaches that have won a flag in the club's 173 year history who has a proven ability to take this team from near bottom back to the top (near bottom in 2019 after making a preliminary in 2018) and completely retooling the game plan (ironically super attacking to ultra defence) and had not 'list the players' will be an epic fail.

Just one reason why is that we have to pay him a million dollars on top of what i imagine will be a similar amount to the new coach severely hampering our ability to surround a new coach with the very best assistants and high performance team.

If we don't make finals next year then the opportunity cost for sacking Goodwin, in addition to pouring a million dollars down the drain, includes the lost chance to say do another succession plan with for example Chaplin or Bruce (which I think would have been at least worth considering, particularly given that exact model brought the club its first flag in 57 years just 4 years ago).

The board should be judged on its decisions. It decided just two years ago to extend Goodwin’s contract.

Sacking him with a year on his contract can only be seen as an admission that was a mistake.

If the coach they now appoint does not bring success, and I would argue immediate success by at the least making finals next season, then they will have made another mistake.

Each decision must be judged on its own merits. You can't agree with sacking Goodwin now but then change your mind in 12-24 months time because the new guy isn't panning out.

As it stands, the decision to sack Goodwin was the correct one. The team has been going backwards for years. He's only won finals in 2 of his 9 years as coach. We lost games to teams we should in no way be losing to on a consistent basis. It was clear that no matter how much "love" the players had for him they were either not responding or unable to implement what he was asking them to do. He played favourites and was too stubborn with positional changes etc The last 2 years he's been coaching to save himself instead of coaching for the future.

The time was right regardless of how upset people (including players) might feel about the decision. The performance of the next coach is irrelevant to whether the decision was correct now. It could be the decision to part ways was correct but the decision on who to appoint was wrong, who knows. I also don't buy the financial argument, we have bled members/attendees and it would have continued next season with Goodwin costing us far more than what we are losing by paying him out.

Edited Friday at 22:382 days by Dr. Gonzo

1 hour ago, binman said:

The board should be judged on its decisions. It decided just two years ago to extend Goodwin’s contract.

Sacking him with a year on his contract can only be seen as an admission that was a mistake.

Regardless of Goodwin's results since the contract renewal or results by his successor there is no way the renewal was a mistake.

It was renewed in August '23 after Premiership, 2nd and 4th results. It would expire in '24. There is no way a sane Board would allow that coach to enter 2024 without an ongoing contract. There was no basis to not renew it.

Also, in his 2022 contract he left money on the table to not blow the covid soft cap or have to reduce FD staff. The latest contract gave that money back to him, hence the $1m payout.

That contract was thoroughly deserved and people who lament the $1m payout could reflect on the circumstances.

Given the results at August '23 it could have been tempting to renew for 3 or more years. That the Board renewed it in two year chunks is very responsible.

Edited Friday at 22:462 days by Lucifers Hero

That's where we differ doc.

I see the logic in sacking Goody, will back in whoever they choose, but imo there simply is not enough evidence to assess whether it was a mistake or not.

We will only know the answer to that question in the fullness of time.

4 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Regardless of Goodwin's results since the contract renewal or results by his successor there is no way the renewal was a mistake.

It was renewed in August '23 after Premiership, 2nd and 4th results. It would expire in '24. There is no way a sane Board would allow that coach to enter 2024 without an ongoing contract. There was no basis to not renew it.

Also, in his 2022 contract he left money on the table to not blow the covid soft cap or have to reduce FD staff. The latest contract gave that money back to him, hence the $1m payout.

That contract was thoroughly deserved and people who lament the $1m payout could reflect on the circumstances.

That the Board renewed it in two year chunks is very responsible.

Good points, well made.

3 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Regardless of Goodwin's results since the contract renewal or results by his successor there is no way the renewal was a mistake.

It was renewed in August '23 after Premiership, 2nd and 4th results. It would expire in '24. There is no way a sane Board would allow that coach to enter 2024 without an ongoing contract. There was no basis to not renew it.

Also, in his 2022 contract he left money on the table to not blow the covid soft cap or have to reduce FD staff. The latest contract gave that money back to him, hence the $1m payout.

That contract was thoroughly deserved and people who lament the $1m payout could reflect on the circumstances.

That the Board renewed it in two year chunks is very responsible.

Coaches don't really get poached. They renewed him because he and the club were going through a smear campaign.

53 minutes ago, binman said:

I think they should have let Goody see out his contract, but that doesn't mean I think the board nesssarily made a mistake.

My point really is that we simply don't have enough information to make an assessment on whether it's a mistake or not.

Which is exactly why the success or otherwise of a new coach IS of great significance.

If say we go with Buckley and don't make finals, or at the very least drastically improve our win loss record (which would see us pushing for finals all season) then the evidence will strongly suggest the decision was wrong.

So a hypothetical. If we continued with our win loss trajectory for 2026, what position would the club be in?

I suspect the Board said 'we cant afford that with the current list we have. And we cant sit here and do nothing and lose sponsors, supporters and probably players. As well we won't attract all of he above if it continues'

The Board has access to way more info than we have. They know exactly what parameters were put on Simon, exactly what he had committed to delivering, exactly what the commercial issues were including terrible fixtures and TV coverage and falling membership. They would have received lots of feedback from players, supporters etc.

You have to give them some credit. Doing nothing was not an option.

You have argued that our game style was evolving but it was still a disaster. Basic problems like 666 infringements, 50m penalties, last 2 minute drills, losing close games, fwd connection, selection integrity, poor kicking were getting worse not better

It seems to me that Simon had his own vision of what he wanted to play like and relentlessly focused on that. Hence the disaster in the last qtr of the St Kilda game where he appeared incapable of making any changes.

I can see why he wasn't not necessarily focused on the immediate W/L for the good of the long term but he had been there 9 years and this was a premiership list.

A coach has to balance the short term with long term when managing the game plan and players. Not easy.

But to me Simon seemed to sacrifice the short term W/L on the alter of being stubborn about his decisions like Petty playing fwd. Our by having Viney tracc and Oliver in the centre despite stating he wld run other players through there like rivers, Langdon, Bowey etc.

We lost a lot of games in the last few years because he refused to change things until it was too late Like petty being moved in the last 2 minutes of the Brisbane finals game

The club has moved on. Great i say

Get behind them. Go Dees

Here lies the rub.

Perhaps they put pen to paper just a tad too quick. ( back in 23 )

The bee in many a bonnet was not waiting to see how those 23 finals panned out.

Had we... we might have perhaps tempered our enthusiasm.

He was already contracted for 24.

Edited Friday at 22:572 days by beelzebub

7 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Here lies the rub.

Perhaps they put pen to paper just a tad too quick. ( back in 23 )

The bee in many a bonnet was not waiting to see how those 23 finals panned out.

Had we... we might have perhaps tempered our enthusiasm.

He was already contracted for 24.

Not sure straight sets exit is enough to not renew a contract just two years after a premiership but we may need to agree to disagree on that point.

But OK, let's say the Board delayed renewal into 2024.

Goodwin had introduced the 'transition' game plan with which we had reasonable results: at round 11 we were 7/4 sitting 4th with a healthy 116.9% heading for finals. Couldn't ask for more than that.

To not have renewed his contract by this point would have been very irresponsible.

No one could have predicted the downward spiral in the second half of the year.

Just now, Lucifers Hero said:

Not sure straight sets exit is enough to not renew a contract just two years after a premiership but we may need to agree to disagree on that point.

But OK, let's say the Board delayed renewal into 2024.

Goodwin had introduced the 'transition' game plan with which we had reasonable results: at round 11 we were 7/4 sitting 4th with a healthy 116.9% heading for finals. Couldn't ask for more than that.

To not have renewed his contract by this point would have been very irresponsible.

No one could have predicted the downward spiral in the second half of the year.

Ahh.. but you might have hedged bets with a simple YEAR'S extension. That would have made 2 years ( 24 and 25 ) More than generous and acceptable imo.

But we didn't.. like a giddy kid in a lolly shop...

MFC ..knee-[censored] capital.