deelusions from afar

I find the views people have on coaches / assistant coaches fascinating. Mark Williams has clearly had an enormous impact on the MFC. I've heard about some of his kooky ideas and I'm sure his experience, passion and out of the box thinking played a big role in the '21 flag. But he has also been responsible for development and goal kicking which clearly has not been where it needed to be the last few years. Is this his fault? I have no idea - it could be. But equally it might have had more to do with the culture / environment, the fitness levels, the club psychologists etc etc We don't really know who is responsible for what and even if we did, it normally takes the whole football department wokring in sync to see the fruits on the individuals labour. So I find it amusing that posters will say that we won the flag because of Yze and Williams but the disappointments afterwards were all Goody's fault. Surely they all share in the successes and failures. I'm not saying some coaches aren't better than others... but many on here seem to want to reduce people to saviours or sinners when people are often both. A big name / profile doesn't necessarily mean they will be good at the role. So if Whitford is highly regarded internally and in the industry, then that's good enough for me.

Is there a chance we would rookie him or is he done at Melbourne. He seemed to have something.

I know you know the players better than most on here and so can probably set me straight - but my understanding was that although the media were first to say it publicly (who else can?) this was part of the messy leaks last year and so it was said by someone at the club (as a way of fighting back against all the negative things coming out from Trac / his management about the club). I'm sure he hates the term. But that doesn't necessarily mean its wrong or unfair. What has disappointed me (and I think many dees supporters) is that he hasn't said anything to show he genuinely loves the club. Obviously a lot happened last year that I suspect most of us on Demonland can only piece together from what's reported publicly and so it's probably understandable he doesn't want to come out saying how much he loves the club. I'm not talking about the BnF speech so much - he has a big profile and so has limitless opportunities. But the problem is, by not speaking when he has a bigger platform than all (except maybe Gawn) at the club, it looks like he is protecting his brand so that he can move elsewhere if the right deal comes up. So even if he hates the term, he's not doing much to prove it wrong (when he could)?

The main thing I'd be wanting to get from BM coming in (and maybe a new assistant as well) is some improved forward craft / structure (not saying this isn't something they've been trying to fix for a while). How are our young key forwards meant to develop when there are so few (any?) natural forwards at the club. I rate Melksham and Fritsch but because of their size and skillset have to play differently to key forwards and are often trying to get out the back rather than come at the ball carrier. I don't think this works for your main focal point to play like that. Kentfield, Jefferson and JVR all have shown potential... but its only potential. Someone like BM could be a huge help in helping us structure up on field. Not sure the extent of King's connections and other priorities / contractual limitations etc but would love to see him try and bring in someone like Tom Hawkins to help coach the forwardline. Though I despised him as a player, he did seem to get better with time (suggests someone who relies on their brain rather than athleticism) and is well known for creating goals (through assists) rather than just kicking them himself. I think it's probably been as long as the days of Neitz / Robertson (other than some brief stints from Brown, Hogan, Clarke etc) that we've had a true key forward leader in the forward line.

Wonder if this makes it easier to land someone like Flanders if the saints have had to pay more than they were hoping for Windhager

I just see this as Buckley managing the situation in case he misses out. He works at SEN and Fox - so he has plenty of footy media people that can speak on his behalf. Now the narrative can be "buckley didn't want the job" rather than "buckley wasn't melbourne's preferred candidate".

It makes the next few months very interesting - assistant coach appointments, other appointments, approach to trade and drafting. Will we adopt the Geelong style of play (however you define it) or does he have his own. Are we rebuilding or can he tweak the right things to get us back up the ladder?

That happened? I was going to say, why didn't i hear about it... but if you don't have a media department ...

But did Petracca meet with any other clubs? Obviously his management were doing things in the background. Merrett is not quite on the same coin as Trac is he? Also has less to run on his contract.

Are there other players this could apply to that aren't in the team eg Clayton Oliver or Max Gawn?

I'm intriuged by how this works. How can Buckley or any of the other assistants vying for the Melbourne job put together a team until they've got the job. And why would the best coaches be available? I would think that someone like Chaplin would surely want to have a chat with our new coach and if he doesn't like the direction / approach etc then he's got the Tigers up his sleeve.

For Jefferson and .... ?

Buckley would be great for these reasons. But I'm not convinced he can coach for the modern game. At the end of the day it is about winning. Would the media have cared much about what Hardwick or Clarkson had to say prior to them winning flags? Would someone like McCrae and Kingsley quickly command respect of the media without their onfield success? I think we would get a bounce with Buckley - but if we have similar seasons to the last two then the shine will wear of pretty quickly (as it would with any of the other assistants admittedly). So I hope this is not a factor unless it is neck and neck on their ability to coach us to another premiership.

Yes thought that was interesting. Simpson comes across as a decent person (I'm still not sure he's a great coach). But my take on this was I think he was thinking "that could have been me and I'm a premiership coach". Of course he wouldn't want to have to go through all of that again. Back in the day I remember Sheedy getting narky at us as we told him anyone applying had to go through the process. There are a lot of egos in footy and particularly when it comes to senior coaches. But of course we want to go through a process. We might think Buckley is the front runner (or that could just be media talk) - but even so, as if we wouldn't want to know what other options there are. And it is also an excellent opportunity to steal some IP from some of the most successful teams going around. I have no idea what the questions would be like but surely they would ask questions that get to "what are some of the strategies / frameworks / habits that have been a point of difference at another football club you have spent time at that you would look to implement at Melbourne?" Regardless of who you appoint, you have 5 ideas from people who have seen success just from that question.

Yes I felt like we loaded up to try and get Harley and then West Coast said they weren't interested anyway. Someone else will remember exactly what we gave up to get the Kolt pick. The justification was that there was a cliff around that pick we wanted to be in front of. Obviously with hindsight that's never the case with Darcy Wilson, Logan Morris, Shaun Mannagh, Joel Freijah all coming after - but we probably could have had two of these players. On McAdam, is there a version of the universe where we gets back to senior AFL next year and has an impact? I remember the signs being really positive before his last injury.