Is Alan Richardson Actually Up to Snuff?

[rodgerfox]

The President said that the side is a top 4 side, if anyone can recall that from early in the season then the pass mark would be about 15/16 wins. But forget that, the side should have been aiming for a top 8 finish or about 12 wins. None of that has happened.

So you think that a professional sporting club would set their head coach a KPI of '12 wins'? Seriously?

I'd be utterly staggered if in 2018, that's how clubs operate.

[samoht]

I posted this in the wrong thread..... I’m reposting here.

The "performance" of a coach (Wins vs Losses) is determined by circumstances (injuries, suspensions, how successful recruiting/trading has gone etc..) and how relatively strong/weak the list is at a given point in time - and we've currently had injuries plus our list is below average right now - and our recruiting has been poor (we haven't recruited enough midfield runners or enough skilled players or the right types of players). So the performance of the coach is a variable and reflective of all this - it’s got to be!


I think AR is doing the best he can with what he has - and at this juncture.

By the same token, let's not forget that RL is both a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach all wrapped in one due to changing circumstances - and all the above. The Richmond, Bulldog and Collingwood coaches have also gone through this up and down cycle.

We can't have one set of weights and measures for one coach and not the other.
So, given all this, we know that when the circumstances change for the better - AR will be a "better" coach - he'll start getting “pleasing” results (more wins).

Therefore, patience is the order of the day.

It's easy to blame one person - the coach - but then we'd be overlooking/discounting the shortcomings of our list and the circumstances that have led us to where we're at - and forget/forgive the poor recruiting, etc...

[Saints43]

The thing that has struck me about Richo during this season is he seems to have kept cool in a crisis. He's looked focused, proactive and determined on game day with him coming down to the bench when things haven't been going well.

If you are not panicking you don't realise the severity of the situation.

[Saints43]

The players we've drafted over five years are all no good.
The support staff around him are all no good.
Richo must be one unlucky bloke.

[parkeysainter]

I don't think Richo is getting the arse...unless we get thumped every week after the bye. His assistants (most of the them) are apparantly toast though.

[samoht]

The players we've drafted over five years are all no good.
The support staff around him are all no good.
Richo must be one unlucky bloke.

We’ve drafted inside midfielder after inside midfielder when we needed outside run.
We’ve drafted 4 average ruckmen and a half-dozen average smalls plus 10 half back flankers.
Roberton, Acres, Paddy, Bruce, etc... are/were unavailable and/or injured.

Where’s the luck?

At least we did not start the year at 0- 10.

[Teflon]

At this level of sport, you need to go on results, and Richo has a terrible record in his tenure as coach. Most of the indicators are very poor, and I don't know how the club can justify keeping him if they want to go forward.

What are his KPIs?

What are most coaches KPIs
Give u a clue.....w/l %....

[Teflon]

At this level of sport, you need to go on results, and Richo has a terrible record in his tenure as coach. Most of the indicators are very poor, and I don't know how the club can justify keeping him if they want to go forward.

What are his KPIs?

What do you reckon??

I have no idea.

But I would 100% guarantee that very few clubs in world sport would set a coaches KPIs as wins and losses.

Errr......no wins v loss directly impacts members
Clubs know it
So yeah w v l are absolutely a core KPI
Silly to suggest otherwise...

[Teflon]

I posted this in the wrong thread..... I’m reposting here.

The "performance" of a coach (Wins vs Losses) is determined by circumstances (injuries, suspensions, how successful recruiting/trading has gone etc..) and how relatively strong/weak the list is at a given point in time - and we've currently had injuries plus our list is below average right now - and our recruiting has been poor (we haven't recruited enough midfield runners or enough skilled players or the right types of players). So the performance of the coach is a variable and reflective of all this - it’s got to be!


I think AR is doing the best he can with what he has - and at this juncture.

By the same token, let's not forget that RL is both a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach all wrapped in one due to changing circumstances - and all the above. The Richmond, Bulldog and Collingwood coaches have also gone through this up and down cycle.

We can't have one set of weights and measures for one coach and not the other.
So, given all this, we know that when the circumstances change for the better - AR will be a "better" coach - he'll start getting “pleasing” results (more wins).

Therefore, patience is the order of the day.

It's easy to blame one person - the coach - but then we'd be overlooking/discounting the shortcomings of our list and the circumstances that have led us to where we're at - and forget/forgive the poor recruiting, etc...

Sorry but this excuses so much

Why can’t players follow instruction not to bomb to forward 50? That’s the coach
Why are players skill levels going backwards ? Goal kicking deplorable
How can a team not turn up for 3 qtr and decide to play in last ? Coach surely owns the responsibility to have his side mentally turn up??
Why are players constantly handballing backwards or to static players? Coach game plan
Why are we attempting to 0lay possessive football with a list who s8mply doesn’t have the skills to pull that off?? Coach

There’s plenty onfield rubbish to tell us the coaches message is either not getting through or it’s rubbish

[st.byron]

I posted this in the wrong thread..... I’m reposting here.

The "performance" of a coach (Wins vs Losses) is determined by circumstances (injuries, suspensions, how successful recruiting/trading has gone etc..) and how relatively strong/weak the list is at a given point in time - and we've currently had injuries plus our list is below average right now - and our recruiting has been poor (we haven't recruited enough midfield runners or enough skilled players or the right types of players). So the performance of the coach is a variable and reflective of all this - it’s got to be!


I think AR is doing the best he can with what he has - and at this juncture.

By the same token, let's not forget that RL is both a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach all wrapped in one due to changing circumstances - and all the above. The Richmond, Bulldog and Collingwood coaches have also gone through this up and down cycle.

We can't have one set of weights and measures for one coach and not the other.
So, given all this, we know that when the circumstances change for the better - AR will be a "better" coach - he'll start getting “pleasing” results (more wins).

Therefore, patience is the order of the day.

It's easy to blame one person - the coach - but then we'd be overlooking/discounting the shortcomings of our list and the circumstances that have led us to where we're at - and forget/forgive the poor recruiting, etc...

I also think this excuses Richardson’s failure by deflecting the accountability elsewhere. “Doing the best he can with what he has”....... and “ patience is the order of the day”......... it reads to me like lame excuses. No offence intended Samoht. Where the f*** is the accountability? Where is the responsibility? If it was a first or second year coach then I’d feel more amenable, but he’s in his fifth year and the most damning thing is the number of players going backwards.

[st.byron]

I posted this in the wrong thread..... I’m reposting here.

The "performance" of a coach (Wins vs Losses) is determined by circumstances (injuries, suspensions, how successful recruiting/trading has gone etc..) and how relatively strong/weak the list is at a given point in time - and we've currently had injuries plus our list is below average right now - and our recruiting has been poor (we haven't recruited enough midfield runners or enough skilled players or the right types of players). So the performance of the coach is a variable and reflective of all this - it’s got to be!


I think AR is doing the best he can with what he has - and at this juncture.

By the same token, let's not forget that RL is both a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach all wrapped in one due to changing circumstances - and all the above. The Richmond, Bulldog and Collingwood coaches have also gone through this up and down cycle.

We can't have one set of weights and measures for one coach and not the other.
So, given all this, we know that when the circumstances change for the better - AR will be a "better" coach - he'll start getting “pleasing” results (more wins).

Therefore, patience is the order of the day.

It's easy to blame one person - the coach - but then we'd be overlooking/discounting the shortcomings of our list and the circumstances that have led us to where we're at - and forget/forgive the poor recruiting, etc...

I also think this excuses Richardson’s failure by deflecting the accountability elsewhere. “Doing the best he can with what he has”....... and “ patience is the order of the day”......... it reads to me like lame excuses. No offence intended Samoht. Where the f*** is the accountability? Where is the responsibility? If it was a first or second year coach then I’d feel more amenable, but he’s in his fifth year and the most damning thing is the number of players going backwards.

[ROLS-LEE]

At this level of sport, you need to go on results, and Richo has a terrible record in his tenure as coach. Most of the indicators are very poor, and I don't know how the club can justify keeping him if they want to go forward.

What are his KPIs?

What do you reckon??

I have no idea.

But I would 100% guarantee that very few clubs in world sport would set a coaches KPIs as wins and losses.

Errr......no wins v loss directly impacts members
Clubs know it
So yeah w v l are absolutely a core KPI
Silly to suggest otherwise...

Agreed and the kpi for w / l % would be a scaling number depending on where the club and board think were the club is at.
If the Prez thinks where top 4 or 8 then he is definitely in trouble.

[bigcarl]

Of course it’s a KPI.

It’s how you measure where the club is at.

[rodgerfox]

Of course it’s a KPI.

It’s how you measure where the club is at.

It's not at all.

Winning is a target. A goal. It is NOT a KPI.

KPIs are markers or indicators that are predefined to ensure progress toward that goal.

What are the things that if achieved, will result in the team winning?


Milne said on radio last week that Lyon set KPIs on tackling. If you didn't lay a certain amount of tackles you got dropped. Full stop.
Winning was never the goal as such - meeting certain KPIs was. And if the team did that, they'd generally win.

That's what all coaches do.


There are far too many uncontrollable factors in footy that result in winning to simply have win/loss as your measurable. It's an incredibly outdated model.

That's why coaches don't lose their job after their first season. It's why coaches do long stints without flags.

[samoht]

West Coast Eagles and Adelaide crows have gone from world beaters to ordinary performers after just a few injuries.
Adelaide is probably also "bombing the ball in" at the moment - you need good linkage players like Tom Lynch - who's been injured - to run the ball in and provide silver service into the forward line.
Billings is supposed to be that for us - but he's been playing average football this year.

We've had our share of injuries this year - then there's Roberton - and we no longer have Riewoldt, Montagna and Dempster.
These are reasons - not excuses.

Why should these be reasons for other teams (not to be performing up to snuff) but excuses for us?

Also, by laying all the blame on the coach - we are forgiving/forgetting the poor recruiting - which is the crux of our problem - which has resulted in too many inside midfielders, too many half back flankers, too many average ruckmen and too many smalls - and allows for more of the same in the future.

[spert]

Of course it’s a KPI.

It’s how you measure where the club is at.

It's not at all.

Winning is a target. A goal. It is NOT a KPI.

KPIs are markers or indicators that are predefined to ensure progress toward that goal.

What are the things that if achieved, will result in the team winning?


Milne said on radio last week that Lyon set KPIs on tackling. If you didn't lay a certain amount of tackles you got dropped. Full stop.
Winning was never the goal as such - meeting certain KPIs was. And if the team did that, they'd generally win.

That's what all coaches do.


There are far too many uncontrollable factors in footy that result in winning to simply have win/loss as your measurable. It's an incredibly outdated model.

That's why coaches don't lose their job after their first season. It's why coaches do long stints without flags.

Don't want to make a big argument about it, but KPIs are Key Performance Indicators, and can be any thing from a number of small performance target indicators to a single very big specific indicator, and many executives removed from positions of responsibility will attest to that.

[Cairnsman]

Is there evidence to suggest in this defence centric and two way running focussed era of footy that a fully fit properly functioning forward line is the key to flag success. Meaning it is the area of the game that has the least amount of development and attention over recent seasons by most clubs to the point most clubs are vulnerable as soon as they lose one or two key forwards. Whereas most clubs have developed thier lists to include several back up defence/mid versatile type players. I submit Eagles as exhibit A.

I make the point becuse our problems in the forward line have arguably worked agsinst us the most this year and I cant help but think that once we get Josh, Paddy and Members all firing together we will see some dramatic improvement.

[ROLS-LEE]

Of course it’s a KPI.

It’s how you measure where the club is at.

It's not at all.

Winning is a target. A goal. It is NOT a KPI.

KPIs are markers or indicators that are predefined to ensure progress toward that goal.

What are the things that if achieved, will result in the team winning?


Milne said on radio last week that Lyon set KPIs on tackling. If you didn't lay a certain amount of tackles you got dropped. Full stop.
Winning was never the goal as such - meeting certain KPIs was. And if the team did that, they'd generally win.

That's what all coaches do.


There are far too many uncontrollable factors in footy that result in winning to simply have win/loss as your measurable. It's an incredibly outdated model.

That's why coaches don't lose their job after their first season. It's why coaches do long stints without flags.

That would be a KPI on the playing group.
The clubs vision would be to 'be the best club in the AFL' or along those lines.
The mission would be to winning gfs and be finals etc
The strategic planning in where KPI's are set is to meet the clubs mission and vision statement.
At the lower end the coach would give players KPI's in certain measurable statistics so the coach can achieve their KPIs

The coach would also have KPIs set which would be W L % etc
The board would have theirs etc.

[rodgerfox]

Speaking from many years experience designing and implementing KPIs at various organisations - the number 1 rule is that KPIs should never be set for factors that are beyond your control.

That defeats the whole purpose of a KPI.

KPIs are about behaviours that lead to a goal.
So as I said, for an organisation with heavy corporate influence, I'd fall over if they set a KPI for the coach specific to win/loss.

Depending how corporate they are, win/loss could potentially be set as an SLA.

[bigcarl]

Let’s just call it the bottom line.

[WellardSaint]

The thing that has struck me about Richo during this season is he seems to have kept cool in a crisis. He's looked focused, proactive and determined on game day with him coming down to the bench when things haven't been going well.

If you are not panicking you don't realise the severity of the situation.

just like Nero played the fiddle while Rome burned.

Yeah, if you pretend there isn't really a problem, or downplay it, it's known as being in denial

[WellardSaint]

Speaking from many years experience designing and implementing KPIs at various organisations - the number 1 rule is that KPIs should never be set for factors that are beyond your control.

That defeats the whole purpose of a KPI.

KPIs are about behaviours that lead to a goal.
So as I said, for an organisation with heavy corporate influence, I'd fall over if they set a KPI for the coach specific to win/loss.

Depending how corporate they are, win/loss could potentially be set as an SLA.

SLA- Service Level Agreement.
Different from KPI, as KPIs are measurements and targets, while an SLA is more outcome based.
E.g. Optus might have a SLA of 99.95% broadcast continuity, and if they drop under that during the World Cup, they might have to let SBS get the feed as well, or give customers one day free of charge.

SLA - IIRC, is all about the outcome and the level of service promised to an end user.

[saintspremiers]

Whatever way you want to spin it, if we don’t make finals this year coach gets sacked.

That should be a known entity from the start of this season. No excuses.

IF the assistants are rubbish for so long now, if Richo was worth his salt he would’ve jumped up and down and asked for replacements by now.

But either he has and no one listened, or he is so incompetent that he didn’t know they were a big problem.

I’m backing the latter, given he has been at the club for 5 years.

Sorry, there are WAY too many red flags for Richo to survive. I’ve lived long enough to know when it’s deadman walking.

Thank god we have fresh eyes in Lethlean who will cut through the inertia.

[samoht]

The big criticism I have of Richardson is why did it take injuries before we saw Rice (who's been playing good football for over 2 years and was just wallowing in the VFL), Phillips, Austin etc..
Other things are harder to identify and quantify.
This isn't.
Also, why was Phillips dropped - when he was playing good football and looked comfortable at AFL level - and why was Dunstan dropped earlier in the year when he was in career best form?

Some things aren't making any sense.

[Teflon]

Speaking from many years experience designing and implementing KPIs at various organisations - the number 1 rule is that KPIs should never be set for factors that are beyond your control.

That defeats the whole purpose of a KPI.

KPIs are about behaviours that lead to a goal.
So as I said, for an organisation with heavy corporate influence, I'd fall over if they set a KPI for the coach specific to win/loss.

Depending how corporate they are, win/loss could potentially be set as an SLA.

you wouldnt last long in business
that thinking is so 80's it aint funny
SLA's are not KPI's how odd - most know this
anyway, enough corporate gobbeldy gook
coaches die by W V L and so will Alan eventually cause members dont necessarily see nor care about 'tackling is going well kpi' if you are 2-10...