binman

Yep. And what is the one constant in that entire period?

I reckon that's simple not the case, and its a falsity that drives myth that replacing the coach will address sustained poor performance. I mean there is so little evidence changing coaches results in sustained success that its bizarre the myth, not to mention practice (though AFL clubs are not changing coaches as often now) continues. Just look at the blues and roos for recent examples. How many coaches did both clubs cycle thru in the 5 years before landing on their current saviours Voss and Clarkson, neither of whom have been able to achieve anything remotely resembling sustained success. I wold argue the number one factor in not achieving sustained success is a poorly performing executive. Number two is players. Number three is the high performance team and culture (the latter being influenced by the coach). Number four is the coach. If they don't sort the governance of the club the next coach could be a combination of Norm Smith, Clarkson, Hardwick, Phil Jackson and Sir Alex Ferguson and we'd still have sustained lack of success. Which is this quote from the Caro article posted above is spot on: Whether or not you agree with the decision to sack Simon Goodwin, it cannot be disputed that he coached in often challenging and occasionally untenable conditions. Board discord has punctuated the past six seasons, including 2021 when Goodwin coached the club to its first flag in almost six decades. Surely the next coach will be spared that distraction.

As I have said I see the logic of the board's decision - and God knows I've read enough posts on Demonland over the last two seasons with all the reasons why people think goody was not the right guy and should be moved on. I disagree with many of those arguments but again I get the logic for making a change and will fully back and support whoever they decide will be the new coach. Like Goody, I respect the board's right to make that call and sincerely hope that it proves to be the right decision. Another hypothetical. We appoint Buckley - and by the by I really hope we do as I think he us an excellent candidate. Buck says in his first presser that he has taken the job because he thinks we can win a flag in the near future, expects to be competitive from the get go and believe we can make finals in 2026. Bur instead his message doesn't land, his game plan doesn't work and we win fewer games and finish 2026 near the bottom of the ladder. Is sacking Goody still the right call?

Good points, well made.

Good points, well made.

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.

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 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.

3 or 4 in 5 years is one person few and an another's bugger all

Exactly. And I don't really understand the knock on selecting who Chaplin and the selection panel think will give us the best chance of beating the hawks. I for one have suffered thru enough losses to the Hawks and the very last thing I want to see is a bunch of b graders been given a run for [censored] and giggles and to 'see what they've got to offer'. If they haven't forced their way into the team by now thru sustained excellence we know the answer to that question. And besides I also don't get the knock on the idea of ensuring Casey have the very best chance of beating Box Hill Hawks. Casey going deep in the VFL finals, hopefully even winning a flag would, for all sorts of reasons, be a real fillup for the club, particularly if we alsi have a good start to the AFLW season.

When was the last time a player went to the PSD because a deal couldn't be done?

Blimey, I'm convinced. MFC you have your coach!

Love it. Only two problems. Any coach, or prompter who thinks Schache is part of the solution can't be allowed anywhere near the club. There is only one Lever.

Bloody goody and his love for sharp. Wait a minute......

Me too. To protect against some lazy wannabee coach entering a prompt into chatgpt like: Give me a snazzy PowerPoint that includes a five year plan and minimum of two flags

I think you'll find that's Kenterfield (the er is silent)

Can't we all just get along? We have a wonderful opportunity for a full Demonland reset. The Goody is NOT the right guy crew must be thrilled. The Goody IS the right guy crew (of which I'm a card carrying member) have moved on - the king is dead, long live the king! Let's all rally around our interim President, acting CEO and yet to appointed head coach (*cough bucks cough*).

Yep, that's a fair call. If anything Bowser's field kicking has improved this year, particularly in terms of the depth of his kicks - for a little fella he can really woof the ball and unlike say Rivers can do so whilst still being accurate. Would you believe......

Judd is really important player for us i reckon. He has only recently been getting somewhere near his best this season but that is because his injuries completely derailed his season (ditto for Kolt to a lesser extent, Lindsay whose PCL meant he had a sub optimal preseason - the impact of interrupted preseasons cant be underestimated, partic for young players). By far our biggest need is elite kicks and when on Judd is arguably our best field kick. Totally agree that Judd likey wants to play half back rather than being the main small/medium lock down defender. And like you i suspect the only reason he hasn't is the injury to AMW who was primed for the key role of small/medium lock down defender. Judd's best position IMO is not a mid it is an attacking half back flanker that has the green light to run off his nominal opponent, be aggressive and push forward (would love him to be takin a high number of inside 50 kicks) and take on high risk kicks on transition that open up opposition's zones defences. That role has become one of the most critical in footy given how important ball movement is atm. A player that comes to mind that plays that role super well (and a player i would love to come to the dees) is Kitty Coleman.

Sooo, not blindsided...... Sorry, luci couldn't help myself (binman do better)

It doesn't to me. Since his sacking Goody has not behaved or spoken like someone who was blindsided. Hell, it's sounds like he's already lined up a new job. Anywhoo its a moot point, not to mention semantics. I just hope they announce the new coach soon so we can have a proper crack at the trade period.

Goody DIDN'T say he was blindsided, a point I just made.

If you seriously think the board had not already made a decision on Goody's future way before that board meeting then, in all due respect, I think you are being very naive.

Personally I think they should have honoured goodys contract and kept him as coach for next year. I think that because i agree with his and Paul roos assessment that we can be a genuine contender next season, in large part because I think goody has done a really good job implementing the new method and that work will bear fruit (I thought it was revealing he mentioned on 360 that he was confident of doing so because he had done so before in 2019 when he retooled our game plan, ironically from a high octane, fast ball movement method to ultra defence). But leaving that aside you are 100% correct jnr to point out the win loss record as being the core reason for his sacking. It's an immutable law of footy, all elite sports really, that lack of successwill eventually force a responses and the easiest of such responses is sacking the coach. It's the law of the jungle. It's why goody was surprised bur not completely blindsided. And it's also why Clarkson, whom many argue is the best coach of the modem era, will surely come under massive pressure early next season if the Roos rack up early season losses again. I'd add that if reports of us sounding out Beveridge and Roos way back in April are true that would suggest at least some on the board had marked Goody's cards and he was on borrowed time all season. Which may well be the lack of 'alignment and stability' Goody said on 360 he had not experienced this year. Which by the by is a perfect example of why focusing on the coach as the cause of a lack of success condem clubs like us, the bombers and the blues to being unsuccessful. Unless we sort our executive it won't matter a jot who coaches us.

Of course he presented to the Board, I'm not disputing that. It was a scheduled presentation and just like any such presentation by a coach to a board, particularly one 3 games pur from the end of our season, he of course gave his view as to where we are at and where we are heading. I mean what is else is a coach going to talk to a board about? The point us he wasn't pitching anything. As goody said on 360: 'I had a standard board meeting the week before, and didn’t have an inkling at that point' about being sacked.' If tha board had a different view about the purpose of that presentation, ie he had to 'pitch' for his job thenobviously didn't tell goody and they they are even more hopeless than I thought. And if the board genuinely think we need 'some kind of step or two backwards before it pushed forward' then they have zero chance of landing Buckley, or any other experiencedcoach fir tbat matter, as there'sno chance he's interested in a rebuild. And if that was the case, and as I said I call [censored] on it, then they have wasted everyone's time if they have, as has been suggested, had conversations with Buckley.