Dr. Gonzo

So every time we go long down the line around the boundary, that's shaking things up? Every time we go with the same merry go round of ins/outs? Every time we have the same players with 80%+ CBAs? Every time we go with the same forward setup be that personnel or structure? It's a myth Goodwin tried to drastically overhaul our setups/structures and ball movement. Yeah he may have tinkered but it was too little, too late. Nevermind I forgot to add the lack of development of our younger players, none of whom have really come on since the flag year despite debuting with some core strengths to build around.

Because the club went backwards every year since 2021, has only won finals in two seasons since 2006, had/has massive cultural issues widely reported on, refused to make positional changes, structural changes or changes to our ball movement such that watching us play was/is like banging your head against the wall, because we had lost members in their droves etc

Which one? The dial-a-quote based in Hawaii?

The Bulldogs game wasn't a high standard, yes it was more free flowing but the Bulldogs are poor at defending. Our disposal in that game was god awful as well (especially the first half).

Thanks for that @BoBo seems to back up what my eyes tell me. We still hack away at it way too much, still bomb long to contests (or no-one), still go long around the boundary to contests etc @At the break of Gawn says Chaplin and Goodwin say it's improved so it must be so but watching the game and looking at the stats it's clearly not the case. Our forward setups are a shambles and so is our ball movement. We may have improved the speed of our ball movement but that doesn't tell us anything about it's effectiveness or efficiency.

Having watched every minute of every game (bar the Cats game), nah we haven't.

The club has issues. Goodwin underperformed. These things can both be true. If you're talking about distinct periods I agree. If you're talking about sustained periods of underperformance/decline, that's on coaching not getting the best out of their players. You could argue we didn't have the players to win a flag the last two seasons and I would agree. But I would argue we had the players to at least challenge for finals and we have been way off even that.

We do not.

The argument was they needed percentage to finish top 4 which is incorrect. If the Hawks beat the Lions they finish top 4 and get the double chance. Lose and they don't. Percentage is irrelevant to that. Had Collingwood won on Saturday night Geelong may have been in 1st and Adelaide 2nd. So this talk about home final is grasping at best. Hawks destiny is in their own hands now as it relates to the double chance, and all this grasping at straws to try and justify why our performance in the last 4 minutes was commendable is laughable. We were pathetic on the weekend, that's the end of the story.

Also because he takes a heap of contested marks and gets his fair share of free kicks, both of which count towards this stat.

It's only a big deal if Smith has an issue with it. If not then I agree, nothing to see here but we don't know Smith's view. Edit although @rpfc is correct, Smith must be part of the coach selection process as he will be the long term leader.

Exactly. Percentage is irrelevant to their top 4 aspirations as well. If they beat Brisbane they are top 4, if they lose they're not. So not sure where this "they needed percentage" argument is coming from.

Of course percentage is important but fair to say the heat was well and truly out of the game. Anyone watching the game could see we never threatened and it all came down to our absolute garbage disposal, setup and forward 50 entries. I'm not sure what the point of this "we matched them after quarter time" argument is; we were putrid, they weren't much better but had more polish and so put the score on the board when it mattered. With 4 minutes left in the game we were down by 9 goals.

Except theirs mattered whereas we were already down by 50 points.

It's useless trying to massage stats to make yourself feel better about where the team is at but whatever floats your boat I guess.

Most of those reasons come back to coaching.

We kicked 3 goals in the last 4 minutes. Take that out and your stats don't look so good.

I thought starting Melksham as sub was an inspired choice.

Coming back from concussion.

They didn't even stop to do a proper review. What a shambles of a competition.

Now it explains our forward setups 😂

https://www.archivebuttons.com/articles?article=https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/awkward-scenes-in-simon-goodwin-s-kitchen-and-a-power-play-in-the-boardroom-20250815-p5mn6a.html

What is the reason for Watson being chosen? Where did that even come from? Just having worked/played in dysfunctional environments and being out of the game for a long time isn't enough to qualify someone otherwise we'd have people bashing down the door to join. It's a strange call and even stranger knowing it came at the behest of Guerra, our new CEO who hasn't started yet, who has no footy experience and has links to Essendon being touted as a potential board member in recent years.

Essendon were perennial contenders under Sheedy. When they did have a down year, like 1992, they bounced back quickly. Not sure what relevance this has to Goodwin.

Lewis also understands our playing group and club culture.