In my opinion - If you step back from the noisethe Buckley discussion isn’t really about whether he ends up at Melbourne or Tasmania—it’s about what those choices represent in the AFL landscape, and what gets revealed when people like Caroline Wilson start publicly nudging him one way or another.

Caroline has always played the role of provocateur and guardian of the game’s bigger picture, and when she makes a point of pushing Buckley towards Tasmania, you have to see the agenda sitting behind it.

Tasmania is the AFL’s most fragile project—it’s a political, cultural, and financial gamble. To land someone with Bucley’s name and stature gives it instant credibility, the kind of legitimacy that no PR campaign could buy. She’s talking about Buckley the symbol. For her,its about protecting the long-term integrity of the AFL’s national expansion. Thats her agenda...

But here’s the cost. Relationships in footy matter more than people like to admit. Publicly steering Buckley isn’t neutral. It risks friction with Melbourne, who have their own needs and narrative. I'd wager it risks friction with Buckley himself, who has always been fiercely independent (well looks to be) and unlikely to appreciate being typecast into someone else’s storyline, so the question is, is he his own person, or does he toe the industry line that he has been part of for 3 decades.

For Buckley, the two choices couldn’t be more different. At Melbourne, he gets immediacy: a list that’s capable(??), a culture in need of repair, and the chance to walk straight back into finals. At Tasmania, he gets a blank canvas, patience, and the prospect of becoming something bigger than a coach—more like a founding father. Melbourne is safer, Tasmania is riskier, but only one offers the kind of immortality that comes from shaping a club and a state from scratch...but then I cant recall GWS or GC initial coaches of the top of my head...let alone in another 10-20years.

The fact (hey @Gator , we love facts!) Wilson is advocating so openly tells you this isn’t just about Buckley, it’s about how the AFL wants to look in ten years. For mine, the conversation is really just a reflection of the industies own anxieties... nothing is ever afait acompli (assuming Buckley has historically said he is open to the Tassie gig...which kind of feels like this is why its all so pointed).

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by Engorged Onion

Daisy Thomas talking sense though. Buckley is a realist. If he goes to Tasmania he's not winning a flag. Small town club, playing in front of 15-20k for home games and not much better than that away, and at least 5 years before they'd be genuinely competitive. Melbourne - the MCG most weeks, big games like ANZAC eve and King's Birthday, already competitive and with great young talent. At 53 the clock is ticking for that elusive premiership. It's not a difficult choice.

4 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

In my opinion - If you step back from the noisethe Buckley discussion isn’t really about whether he ends up at Melbourne or Tasmania—it’s about what those choices represent in the AFL landscape, and what gets revealed when people like Caroline Wilson start publicly nudging him one way or another.

Caroline has always played the role of provocateur and guardian of the game’s bigger picture, and when she makes a point of pushing Buckley towards Tasmania, you have to see the agenda sitting behind it.

Tasmania is the AFL’s most fragile project—it’s a political, cultural, and financial gamble. To land someone with Bucley’s name and stature gives it instant credibility, the kind of legitimacy that no PR campaign could buy. She’s talking about Buckley the symbol. For her,its about protecting the long-term integrity of the AFL’s national expansion. Thats her agenda...

But here’s the cost. Relationships in footy matter more than people like to admit. Publicly steering Buckley isn’t neutral. It risks friction with Melbourne, who have their own needs and narrative. I'd wager it risks friction with Buckley himself, who has always been fiercely independent and unlikely to appreciate being typecast into someone else’s storyline, so the question is, is he his own person, or does he toe the industry line that he has been part of for 3 decades.

For Buckley, the two choices couldn’t be more different. At Melbourne, he gets immediacy: a list that’s capable(??), a culture in need of repair, and the chance to walk straight back into finals. At Tasmania, he gets a blank canvas, patience, and the prospect of becoming something bigger than a coach—more like a founding father. Melbourne is safer, Tasmania is riskier, but only one offers the kind of immortality that comes from shaping a club and a state from scratch...but then I cant recall GWS or GC initial coaches of the top of my head...let alone in another 10-20years.

It’s worth noticing the way the industry mouthpieces swirls around these decisions. The fact Wilson is advocating so openly tells you this isn’t just about Buckley, it’s about how the AFL wants to look in ten years. For mine, the conversation is really just a reflection of the industies own anxieties... nothing is ever afait acompli (assuming Buckley has historically said he is open to the Tassie gig...which kind of feels like this is why its all so pointed).

Loving your posts tonight Onion 👏

1 minute ago, demoncat said:

Loving your posts tonight Onion 👏

a few of these in me... 🍺

stream of consciousness and then constant rewording/reworking...

5 minutes ago, Swooper1987 said:

Daisy Thomas talking sense though. Buckley is a realist. If he goes to Tasmania he's not winning a flag. Small town club, playing in front of 15-20k for home games and not much better than that away, and at least 5 years before they'd be genuinely competitive. Melbourne - the MCG most weeks, big games like ANZAC eve and King's Birthday, already competitive and with great young talent. At 53 the clock is ticking for that elusive premiership. It's not a difficult choice.

Thought his argument was a bit messy. He said in a sense the Tassie job would be easier because the players would all be self-driven professionals. Not sure how he knows that or what he's basing that on. They will mostly be 18 year olds who will need a lot of guidance.

Just watched the Caro clip. She is 100% speaking directly for Brendan Gale. She has black amd yellow blood running through her veins from growing up at punt road. Has a long ongoing working relationship with the ex Tiger player and ceo in Gale.

There doesn't appear any other agenda than her going into bat to get Brendan his man and stop him from going to Melbourne, regardless of what it actually means for Bucks - waiting another year to start, will be 5 years minimum to tast some success, needs to move state and anything else I can't think of.

Isn't the Tassie team dependent on a stadium that is still in doubt?

I bet Tasmania was genuinely appealing to Bucks and he was heading in that direction, that was until we came and stole his attention (like that classic meme with the guy checking out the girl walking by)

Buckley can scratch every itch he would in Tasmania, without leaving home, leaving his family behind and not to mention, isolating himself from all the other opportunities Melbourne (the city) presents.

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by BW511

4 minutes ago, BW511 said:

I bet Tasmania was genuinely appealing to Bucks and he was heading in that direction, that was until we came and stole his attention (like that classic meme with the guy checking out the girl walking by)

Buckley can scratch every itch he would in Tasmania, without leaving home, leaving his family behind and not to mention, isolating himself from all the other opportunities Melbourne (the city) presents.

Geez we're sensitive bunch on here lol.

Caro drops a story that people would rather not hear and she gets called all things under the sun.

Personally I found nothing wrong with what she said at all. I absolutely have no doubt that there would be some close to Bucks who would have advised him not to take the Melbourne job.. so what?

You will get those opinions from friends and close colleagues with any big decision that has resulted in a club that has been a mess on and off field for the best part of 2 years.

If its not Buckley, then its Brendan Lade for me.

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Geez we're sensitive bunch on here lol.

Caro drops a story that people would rather not hear and she gets called all things under the sun.

Personally I found nothing wrong with what she said at all. I absolutely have no doubt that there would be some close to Bucks who would have advised him not to take the Melbourne job.. so what?

You will get those opinions from friends and close colleagues with any big decision that has resulted in a club that has been a mess on and off field for the best part of 2 years.

If its not Buckley, then its Brendan Lade for me.

While I tend to agree about MFC supporters being too sensitive about negative reporting, I think most people’s issue is that Caro is dressing up her personal agenda as “reporting”

It’s been clear since Bucks emerged as the favourite for the job that she’s been against it, likely because of her connections to Brendon Gale and AFL HQ

Which is fair enough, but let’s not pretend that it’s anything but that

That’s my read on it anyway 🤷

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Geez we're sensitive bunch on here lol.

Caro drops a story that people would rather not hear and she gets called all things under the sun.

Personally I found nothing wrong with what she said at all. I absolutely have no doubt that there would be some close to Bucks who would have advised him not to take the Melbourne job.. so what?

You will get those opinions from friends and close colleagues with any big decision that has resulted in a club that has been a mess on and off field for the best part of 2 years.

If its not Buckley, then its Brendan Lade for me.

She already shown her hand. Wrote a whole article urging him not to join us. Personally think it's unbecoming of a journalist to try and confect an outcome the way she is.

36 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Tasmania is the AFL’s most fragile project—it’s a political, cultural, and financial gamble. To land someone with Bucley’s name and stature gives it instant credibility, the kind of legitimacy that no PR campaign could buy.

Agreed - but by next year there could be other candidates that bring that. The Demon's gig has come too soon for the likes of Longmire or Hinkley or others, but there's a bit of water to go under the bridge before Tassie have to lock in a coach. Heck, even our Simon could throw his hat in the ring, premiership player, All-Australian, premiership coach yadda yadda.

12 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Geez we're sensitive bunch on here lol.

Caro drops a story that people would rather not hear and she gets called all things under the sun.

Personally I found nothing wrong with what she said at all. I absolutely have no doubt that there would be some close to Bucks who would have advised him not to take the Melbourne job.. so what?

You will get those opinions from friends and close colleagues with any big decision that has resulted in a club that has been a mess on and off field for the best part of 2 years.

If its not Buckley, then its Brendan Lade for me.

I don’t think it’s really about being “sensitive” at all—it’s about recognising the weight that comes when Caro goes public with a view like this. She doesn’t just toss opinions into the ether; she actively reframes the conversation. If she keeps pressing the idea that Buckley belongs in Tasmania, that narrative takes on a sense of inevitability, almost like it’s the noble, legacy-defining path. And that does ripple outward—to boards, sponsors, and AFL decision-makers who are always conscious of how things will be perceived.

But when it comes down to Buckley himself. He’s been around the fire long enough to know the noise never stops, and he’s appears to not be the type to be steered by someone else’s headlines...

Caro can shape the theatre around the choice, but she doesn’t make the choice for him....

As for those close to Buckley advising him to tread carefully with Melbourne—of course that’s happening. I've made two massive decisions in my life this year and sought council... the future is still unclear. That’s the nature of any high-stakes decision. Friends and colleagues will caution against walking into a club that’s looked fractured for two years..

If not him then I think you’re right—someone like Brendan Lade makes sense. A steadying hand, exposure to different systems, no media storm before he even signs the contract. Sometimes the best choice is the one who arrives without a narrative already written for them...

I dont care who we get really, as I dont have the optics on the best candidate thats a fit for where we are at, and the culture within - clearly change was required from an FD perspective, and as inevitable - the playing list too...

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by Engorged Onion

Just now, bing181 said:

Agreed - but by next year there could be other candidates that bring that. The Demon's gig has come too soon for the likes of Longmire or Hinkley or others, but there's a bit of water to go under the bridge before Tassie have to lock in a coach. Heck, even our Simon could throw his hat in the ring, premiership player, All-Australian, premiership coach yadda yadda.

Reckon Tassie needs someone who can be both a coach and a promoter like Sheedy used to be. Actually think Hinkley is the sort of person who could do that if he's allowed to be himself.

13 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

Personally think it's unbecoming of a journalist to try and confect an outcome the way she is.

This is basically AFL journalism 2025. They pretty much all do it.

3 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

This is basically AFL journalism 2025. They pretty much all do it.

It's rarely this blatant.

17 minutes ago, demoncat said:

While I tend to agree about MFC supporters being too sensitive about negative reporting, I think most people’s issue is that Caro is dressing up her personal agenda as “reporting”

It’s been clear since Bucks emerged as the favourite for the job that she’s been against it, likely because of her connections to Brendon Gale and AFL HQ

Which is fair enough, but let’s not pretend that it’s anything but that

That’s my read on it anyway 🤷

16 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

She already shown her hand. Wrote a whole article urging him not to join us. Personally think it's unbecoming of a journalist to try and confect an outcome the way she is.

She can say all she wants, but i can 100% guarantee you that Buckley would not given even give two thoughts or even blink at what Caro has been saying about him lately.

He's clearly part of the coaching process and has agreed to do so. So that to me clearly says that Buckley has a real interest in the Melbourne job.

26 minutes ago, Swooper1987 said:

Daisy Thomas talking sense though. Buckley is a realist. If he goes to Tasmania he's not winning a flag. Small town club, playing in front of 15-20k for home games and not much better than that away, and at least 5 years before they'd be genuinely competitive. Melbourne - the MCG most weeks, big games like ANZAC eve and King's Birthday, already competitive and with great young talent. At 53 the clock is ticking for that elusive premiership. It's not a difficult choice.

This x 1000.

Sure, if he had his choice of clubs Buckley might not choose the dees. But he doesn't.

And there is unlikely to be a better option in the near term - obviously the pies are out, the hawks and the crows are on the rise, the lions have Daly in the wings, Scott doesn't look like he is going anywhere at the cats.

The blues and perhaps the dogs and freo might have a vacancy next year, but none are anymore attractive than the dees - and besides next year he might have to compete for any vacancy with Longmire, Simpson and perhaps even goody.

And I just can't see Buckley wanting to coach a team in full rebuild mode, let alone one that is two full seasons from playing its first game and realistically won't win a flag for at least 7 or 8 seasons after they enter the competition (meaning, no flag until at least 2035, a decade from now).

Misuse of stats has been discussed a bit recently on here. I think on On The Couch last night someone said 20 of the last 21 premiership coaches were coaching their first team. That proves first-timers can succeed but how many more are there compared to the 'second hand' ones? There are a lot of coaches that after 3 or 4 years every club has decided could never win a flag and he's moved on. Then very occasionally premiership coaches are tried at a new club. Only eleven are in this category this century. Honestly that's a pretty small sample especially given I could easily give four a mulligan: Sheedy with a brand new GWS club, Blight whose heart was never in it in his few months at St Kilda, Bomber Thompson forced to coach and Essendon team with a dozen plus suspended players alongside Hird and our Roosy probably doing as much as he could in three years with our completely rock bottom team.

I'm quite happy to see exact stats for the first-timers, second-timers and "flag-elsewhere" coaches. All I know is all are viable. And while statistically Buckey is probably our best option just if another candidate genuinely wows the board I'm very happy to believe he's the right choice.

Caro has always hated us and is never consistent with content on other clubs

Zero respect for her

If he is truly on the fence I’m thankful Caro is surfacing that now.

It’d be a distaster if he turns it down late in the process and all of the decent assistants have pulled out because they assumed it was a one-horse race.

If he isn’t on the fence and he/Melbourne are all in then we don’t need to worry about what Caro says.

1 minute ago, KozzyCan said:

It's rarely this blatant.

12 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

It's rarely this blatant.

When you take a step back and really look at how the AFL operates, it’s clear it isn’t just about one journalist pushing a line or one club trying to protect itself. The whole thing functions as an ecosystem where media, governance, and legal frameworks overlap in ways that are often invisible to supporters. An AFL media accreditation is a licence to access players, coaches, and inner circles. With that comes subtle but very real pressure: play the game and the doors stay open, push too hard against the grain and access dries up. That dynamic alone explains why certain stories get told loudly while others barely see daylight.

Then there’s the legal and governance layer, which is just as tightly interwoven. It’s not unusual to see the same lawyers or compliance people advising the AFL in one capacity and then appearing for clubs or players in another. Think back to the Essendon supplements saga or the Dees under Bailey with tanking...—AFL-appointed lawyers were simultaneously protecting the league’s broader integrity while working directly with the clubs under scrutiny.

At board level, individuals often sit across multiple bodies: the AFL Commission, state leagues, even the AFLPA. None of this is hidden, but it does blur the lines of independence. The real purpose isn’t to create transparency—it’s to manage risk!

So when Caro comes out with something that feels like an agenda, such as now... it’s worth remembering she isn’t operating in isolation. She’s moving within that ecosystem, one where narratives are constantly shaped, softened, or amplified depending on whose interests are being served. Understanding this doesn’t mean dismissing her or anyone else, but it does show why these stories land the way they do. They’re not just journalistic takes; they’re part of a system designed to protect itself. If we understand that, then our responses can change...

The AFL is no longer sport in its purest sense; it’s an entertainment product built on sport. That doesn’t make what happens on the field any less real, but it does explain why the stories, the governance, and the decisions around the game so often feel stage-managed. If we can see it for what it is, we don’t have to be annoyed when agendas surface—we can simply recognise the system at work. For me that awareness probably makes following the game easier, not harder, probably a bit detached and cynical really..

TL/DR

1. The AFL is an ecosystem. Media, governance, and legal structures are interconnected, shaping the way stories are told and decisions are made.

2. Access matters. Journalists rely on accreditation to stay close to players and coaches. That reliance naturally affects which stories get airtime and which fade away.

3. Legal crossover is common. The same advisers often work for the AFL, clubs, and players. It doesn’t mean corruption — it means risk is carefully managed, sometimes at the cost of independence.

4. Narratives are carefully managed. Headlines don’t appear in isolation; they’re part of a bigger pattern where certain interests are protected and others minimised.

5. It’s not the 1980s anymore. Back then, following footy felt more innocent and unfiltered — local clubs, raw stories, fewer layers of spin. Today the game has grown into a full entertainment product, and with that growth has come more orchestration and stage-management.

6. (thanks CHATGPT)

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by Engorged Onion

2 minutes ago, The Jackson FIX said:

If he is truly on the fence I’m thankful Caro is surfacing that now.

It’d be a distaster if he turns it down late in the process and all of the decent assistants have pulled out because they assumed it was a one-horse race.

If he isn’t on the fence and he/Melbourne are all in then we don’t need to worry about what Caro says.

That just sounds like poor communication given the potential wins both for club and coach. I guess if the 5th and 6th preference asked an honest question and board admitted their unlikelihood that'd be fine. But I hope the board tell - stress that - to the likely contenders it's not just Buckley (and the actual 2nd in line doesn't pull out thinking he was 6th). This is an arena you hope neither side makes silly mistakes in.

41 minutes ago, demoncat said:

While I tend to agree about MFC supporters being too sensitive about negative reporting, I think most people’s issue is that Caro is dressing up her personal agenda as “reporting”

It’s been clear since Bucks emerged as the favourite for the job that she’s been against it, likely because of her connections to Brendon Gale and AFL HQ

Which is fair enough, but let’s not pretend that it’s anything but that

That’s my read on it anyway 🤷

You really think that “just because she is working against our club for Gale and AFL HQ” - we are a bit sensitive, I am not sensitive I am getting a bit outraged that someone in a position of power is so blatantly working against my club. But don’t worry Kero is working for the big picture and she can get away with undermining our club and hey what some of our supporters think that we are such a [censored] club this is what we actually deserve. Media manipulation at its worse.