Engorged Onion

I must have miscommunicated @Dr. Gonzo . To be frank, my career has been built around working in and around elite sport, the AFL industry being one of them, for 2 decades. When you become a career coach, the career physio, psych, ex phys etc etc etc - you are passionate about the people you work and care for wherever you are at any given point in time. I know, because I have been one of them and give a great big [censored] about athletes, coaches and other staff ,due to humans doing their best in tough environments constantly under scrutiny. However, whilst that is true, simultaneously, fans are wedded more myopically due to the tribalism. That's a great thing, but as fans its from the outside looking in, where there is a projection of what 'we as fans feel' must be the experience of the players or FD, or administrators... is factual incorrect. It's why people in the industry go from job to job within the industry - because those emotional ties are less (to the clubs, not the relationships they have built). So yes plenty of tribalism for the fans... less so for those who work in the industry. It's why Jack Watts laughing was a problem too :) the optics was he didn't care as much as the average fan, because he had a great opportunity to live someones dream, and great genetics to get that opportunity and thus he should have cared more. That juxtaposition and dissonance really upset the 'tribal fan'.

Agreed @DeeSpencer - of course when you're within the next club - you use 'we' 'us' and learn about the club invest in the relationships and the cultural ways of being, rather than remaining aloof...

Would the pettyness change if you saw the contract start date? 😘 Practically, he's merely finishing one project and moving onto another project... like going from Barwon Water to Melbourne Water and unlike supporters it's not evocative for him in the same way. Can you imagine working in the industry and going through 4,5,6 different clubs, you'd be inoculated to the emotional meaning of the colours, the words, and the hysterical us vs them that most of us as young supporters are thrust in to.

@WiseDeeMan Again, great point. I do question what else is he going to learn in 14 days what he hasn’t learned already however. Kind of like this espionage

Good thought provoking post @Dannyz - my perspective is I think it’s a pretty outdated view to suggest that the minute you’re appointed coach of Melbourne, every other club suddenly becomes your sworn rival and therefore you should sever ties immediately. Yes, of course Geelong is a competitor on the field, but “rival” doesn’t mean “enemy.” Modern coaching isn’t tribal in that sense. It’s relational, professional, and grounded in integrity. Coaches regularly move between clubs, finish out contracts, and maintain friendships across the competition without compromising their new role. To assume that King can’t act with professionalism while helping Geelong through finals is to mistake rivalry for bad faith, and that’s a fallacy.The suggestion that he’s somehow disloyal for honouring his commitments underestimates both him and the systems in place. Transitions take time, and part of being a professional—whether in sport or any workplace—is seeing through the work you’ve started, showing respect for colleagues, and leaving an organisation the right way. I'd say far from being a weakness, that’s actually the very quality Melbourne have hired him for: integrity under pressure. The bigger picture here is that the game has evolved beyond the old “us versus them” lens. Rivalries matter, yes, but the best modern coaches know that composure, relationships, and respect are just as important. King staying the course with Geelong isn’t a betrayal of Melbourne—it’s a demonstration of the kind of leader he’ll be once he starts work. This is contemporary leadership, from all of the MFC FD, and Steven himself and the GFC.

When I see you two posting

After reading some of these posts this morning I reflected it was R U OK Day the other week had me thinking about why we’re all here on Demonland. We all use it in different ways, some with more intensity and frequency. Some just want the footy chat, trades, tactics. Others are here for the banter, the [censored]-taking??, the theatre of it all. But for some, this is actually a way of feeling connected. When life feels isolating... and it can, even when you’re surrounded by people - a forum like this becomes a place to check in, to vent, to be seen. And in a way, that’s what “leaks” are too — little bits of information, emotion, or frustration that spill out into public. Some people get furious about them, others lap them up, but the common thread is that they remind us how human this all is. So....if you see someone really getting amped up about how they feel treated, it’s because that feeling is true for them. Think Adam Goodes — the lesson there wasn’t about what was said or even the intention behind it. It was about how the receiver felt. And once that’s clear, the sender has a choice: double down, or step back and consider the impact. Of course online, the sharp edges get sharper. Without tone or body language, a comment lands heavier, particularly when the individual 'feels' things intensely. At a cafe or pub, in the real world - you’d probably just roll your eyes, ignore it, or move onto the next conversation. Here, we bite back, and suddenly it’s a pile-on. So maybe there’s value in pausing. If a post winds you up for whatever reason (and only you know why), you don’t have to buy into it. Scroll past, disengage, move on, block the person (i've blocked plenty, and I am sure plenty have blocked me). And consider that, if someone’s clearly struggling out loud, maybe that’s their way of stating, I am NOT OK... we have a choice to respectfully acknowledge that. Doesn’t mean we stop arguing about the game. That’s the heartbeat of this place. But we do get to choose how we argue. We can go hard without cutting someone down. Anyway, that’s my little sermon from the mount — take it as thoughtful, or condescending, or both. I just reckon it’s worth remembering: the posts and the debates they’re all part of people trying to connect - and ultimately not feel alone.

never in doubt 🙃

Timeframe wise, the poll was started prior to the appointment. I’m pretty critical of lack/limited flexible thinking and also operating in a contemporary world. Essentially, in reading posts about the candidates, there was a clear dichotomy of beliefs of how an incumbent coach in finals could ALSO be appointed and still operate to an acceptable level etc etc. So I wanted to stimulate healthy debate. I was intrigued your ‘drive by’ at the beginning. Good on you for reflecting on your judgements… it appears I’m ahead of the curve even if it’s not clear for some. 😘

Pretty sure we have the most recent 2 losses of - ‘first to 100 points, never looses’ over the last few years… stand to be corrected though.

Sometime I cheat and I can’t be bothered typing with my fat sausage fingers on my phone - so I voice upload my thoughts and here we are…

The “hard-[censored] coach = results” view is stuck in the 1950s. Performance is driven by connection, precision, and trust—not intimidation. To suggest losing comes down to a coach being “too soft” is reductionist at best. The evidence is clear: consistent outcomes come from psychological safety and clarity, not dogma. I look forward to the usual suspects crapping on in due course…

Maybe ‘we’ don’t leak after all…

Taking the pi$$??

and... 😙

What’s the rationale @Ted Lasso ? IP? Optics of conflict of interest? ‘Mind elsewhere’?

I am genuinely interested here in people’s opinions. I get a sense some think if you’re interested in another role, there is no possible way you’re committed to your current employer.

did this require its own thread?

Step one: preliminary meetings with Buckley in early 2025. Step two: politely turf Goodwin. Step three: instead of fighting off Carlton or Essendon, we actually get ahead of the AFL itself to line up Buckley. And then—because the AFL can’t help but meddle—they’re forced to offer up Caulfield as a home base, or other collateral or incentives, plus “mysteriously” help us land a fantastic coach (who, spoiler alert, isn’t even Buckley). That’s not just doing a Steven Bradbury. That’s Steven Bradbury winning the Olympic gold, then being handed a lifetime supply of ice skates, and a Netflix doco deal by the IOC. Maybe, just maybe… we actually know what we’re doing after all. 😆 here (for those that are too young ,or forgot...)

The whole “no one wants the Melbourne job” take is lazy. This isn’t rejection, it’s culture. MFC are smart enough to manage optics so that coaches bow out with respect rather than get publicly stamped as “not good enough.” That protects individuals, protects the brand, and is exactly how you handle a high-profile role in 2025. Further, It’s not just Buckley’s gig, and we’re definitely not a rabble. What you’re look long at is a club that’s stabilised, understands perception, and is running things like a professional organisation should. That’s what good culture looks like — and a few other clubs could take notes.

had to google that...

Oh, look, a negotiable fixture, rather than one based on fairness and equity. 😅 Looking forward to the Buckley appointment then.. the commercial reality is that Buckley (not MFC) versus his old club, is the best narrative to sell that opening match.

So kicking off the ground and out is fine?

On a Demonland forum, that’d typically be seen as disgraceful…

BT froths over Daicos like he’s watching Swan Lake because it’s not really about Nick — it’s anima projection as you said. He’s just spraying his own unmet need for beauty and creativity all over the commentary box. Daicos is the canvas, BT’s mid/late life psyche is the paint. And I’m not even joking.