Why False Optimism Is Demented And Dangerous

[groupie1]

Interesting debate.
I would add that where you finish on the ladder is a fact, but what the cause is, is not.
I.e. Tigers 13 to 1st, Pies 13 to first. I remember Collingwood going from last to a multiple grand finals and a prelim three consecutive years late 70's.
Clearly the Tigers list , recruiting and coach was not Abysmal. Add a two players and they become the benchmark. (BTW not saying we are the Tigers or Pies!)

Not sure how far back you are going but Collingwood have not had a very poor season (4 wins or less) since 1999.
Tigers was 2007. They won a flag in 2017.
Doggies 2003. They won a flag in 2016.

So not quite sure about the dramatic upswings you refer to, unless they were back in the VFL days?

Collingwood had a dramatic upswing from 1976 to 1977.

?????

"...Collingwood going from last to a multiple grand finals and a prelim three consecutive years late 70's."

Not sure why all the question marks, but i'll assume you dont know what i mean.
I just offered it as another example of where a team's ladder position one year was not a true reflection of their list, SO here is an example:

Collingwood finished LAST in 1976 (then recruited Hafey)
They played in TWO grand finals in 1977 (finishing 1st at end of home & away season)
They made the prelim final in 1978
They played in the 1979 grand final
They played in the 1980 grand final
They played in the 1981 Grand final

Next year they sacked the coach!

Question marks were this, bro:

"Not sure how far back you are going but Collingwood have not had a very poor season (4 wins or less) since 1999."

Ok, so you dont like my example from 1977. Too far back, No problem., I'll stick to one current example.

2016 A large number of negative Tigers fans wanted to sack the coach the CEO and president because they finished 13th - next year they won it.
All i am saying is that going back one year, 30 years, 50 years and across any sport, its not a fact that a teams list is abysmal based only on their last years ladder position. Lots of contributing factors.

Nah... sorry.... i was responding to the guy who asked 'not far how back you wanna go...." after you'd already said how far back you'd gone

[Crossy66]

Interesting debate.
I would add that where you finish on the ladder is a fact, but what the cause is, is not.
I.e. Tigers 13 to 1st, Pies 13 to first. I remember Collingwood going from last to a multiple grand finals and a prelim three consecutive years late 70's.
Clearly the Tigers list , recruiting and coach was not Abysmal. Add a two players and they become the benchmark. (BTW not saying we are the Tigers or Pies!)

Not sure how far back you are going but Collingwood have not had a very poor season (4 wins or less) since 1999.
Tigers was 2007. They won a flag in 2017.
Doggies 2003. They won a flag in 2016.

So not quite sure about the dramatic upswings you refer to, unless they were back in the VFL days?

Collingwood had a dramatic upswing from 1976 to 1977.

?????

"...Collingwood going from last to a multiple grand finals and a prelim three consecutive years late 70's."

Not sure why all the question marks, but i'll assume you dont know what i mean.
I just offered it as another example of where a team's ladder position one year was not a true reflection of their list, SO here is an example:

Collingwood finished LAST in 1976 (then recruited Hafey)
They played in TWO grand finals in 1977 (finishing 1st at end of home & away season)
They made the prelim final in 1978
They played in the 1979 grand final
They played in the 1980 grand final
They played in the 1981 Grand final

Next year they sacked the coach!

Question marks were this, bro:

"Not sure how far back you are going but Collingwood have not had a very poor season (4 wins or less) since 1999."

Ok, so you dont like my example from 1977. Too far back, No problem., I'll stick to one current example.

2016 A large number of negative Tigers fans wanted to sack the coach the CEO and president because they finished 13th - next year they won it.
All i am saying is that going back one year, 30 years, 50 years and across any sport, its not a fact that a teams list is abysmal based only on their last years ladder position. Lots of contributing factors.

Nah... sorry.... i was responding to the guy who asked 'not far how back you wanna go...." after you'd already said how far back you'd gone

These long winded posts are hard to keep up with lol

[gwiltyascharged]

So you can have one off year.
Let's look at 5 years then.
33% over the last 5 years.
As others have pointed out we had an easy draw and a dream run with injury in 2016.
2016 was the odd one out. Not 2018.

The club can rebound but I'll guarantee it won't be with Richo.
Happy to put my money where my mouth is too.
I'll bet $1,000 Richo never coaches a top 4 side in the AFL.
Teddy?.

[stonecold]

So you can have one off year.
Let's look at 5 years then.
33% over the last 5 years.
As others have pointed out we had an easy draw and a dream run with injury in 2016.
2016 was the odd one out. Not 2018.

The club can rebound but I'll guarantee it won't be with Richo.
Happy to put my money where my mouth is too.
I'll bet $1,000 Richo never coaches a top 4 side in the AFL.

You need to be careful with that statement, we could win first up and be top 4 after rnd 1!!!!!

[chico2001]

So you can have one off year.
Let's look at 5 years then.
33% over the last 5 years.
As others have pointed out we had an easy draw and a dream run with injury in 2016.
2016 was the odd one out. Not 2018.

The club can rebound but I'll guarantee it won't be with Richo.
Happy to put my money where my mouth is too.
I'll bet $1,000 Richo never coaches a top 4 side in the AFL.

You need to be careful with that statement, we could win first up and be top 4 after rnd 1!!!!!

Most certainly, I would be leaving my money in my wallet till about round 11...

[gwiltyascharged]

You all know exactly what I mean.
Top 4 finish. I.e. making a prelim.
Any takers?
Teddy boy?
Stoney?

[Gordo']

The earth round? Another of your false realities - it is an oblate spheroid.

too flowering true mate!!! and this is flowering why fluid dynamics, gravitational force, flow speed, viscous and surface tension, all flowering well combine to give us the 'law of urination'. ffs!!! what does this flowering mean??? it means, all smaller mammals like those flowering soft*&@# phil collins drummer fanbouy wannabes, empty their soft*&@# bladders over nearly constant duration of average 21 seconds (standard deviation 13 seconds). ffs!!! thank god (i.e.; your lead guitarist ) for that!!! https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.3737

[gwiltyascharged]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

[Crossy66]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

I wouldn't put any of those 3 in a conversation with Hafey or Malthouse. Atleast not yet

[st.byron]

The earth round? Another of your false realities - it is an oblate spheroid.

too flowering true mate!!! and this is flowering why fluid dynamics, gravitational force, flow speed, viscous and surface tension, all flowering well combine to give us the 'law of urination'. ffs!!! what does this flowering mean??? it means, all smaller mammals like those flowering soft*&@# phil collins drummer fanbouy wannabes, empty their soft*&@# bladders over nearly constant duration of average 21 seconds (standard deviation 13 seconds). ffs!!! thank god (i.e.; your lead guitarist ) for that!!! https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.3737

Post of the year. Easily.

[gwiltyascharged]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

I wouldn't put any of those 3 in a conversation with Hafey or Malthouse. Atleast not yet

Hang on.
You are the bloke who compared Richo to Hafey and Malthouse.
Your argument is because Malthouse and Hafey had dramatic improvement at Collingwood in the distant pass we should all feel a sense of optimism about our chances.
That is comparing Richo to them. Whether you like it or not.
If your reasons for feeling optimistic are based on what Malthouse and Hafey did way back when then you have jumped the shark.

[Crossy66]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

I wouldn't put any of those 3 in a conversation with Hafey or Malthouse. Atleast not yet

Hang on.
You are the bloke who compared Richo to Hafey and Malthouse.
Your argument is because Malthouse and Hafey had dramatic improvement at Collingwood in the distant pass we should all feel a sense of optimism about our chances.
That is comparing Richo to them. Whether you like it or not.
If your reasons for feeling optimistic are based on what Malthouse and Hafey did way back when then you have jumped the shark.

Not quite, seems you missed my point and maybe i didnt explain it well. Also i never mentioned Malthouse, that was someone else.
The point i made was in reference to the list. not the coach, the club, recruiters, or anything else. I was responding to a poster that suggested finishing 13 was proof or a fact that our llist was abysmal. I just gave a few of the many examples where the list wasnt the problem. In the case of collingwood, they finished last, changed the coach (Hafey) then played in a grand final the next year with much the same list. So was it the list or the coach? They ended up playing five grand finals and a prelim in a row. If you follow my point that the list is ok, yet they finished 13, then that may be a reflection on the coach.

I only mentioned the Collingwood example because it's one i remember well and best illustrated my point. I also used Richmond 2017 as an example. Same list essentially, yet they go from 13 to 1st. Listen to Gale and co., the biggest change was the attitude or approach of the coach Hardwick and the leadership of cotchin and the mentoring role of Balme.
So if anything, i am actually doing the opposite of what you are saying.

[WellardSaint]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

Buckley and Hardwick appear to be flexible, and look at ways of improving.
They seem to welcome constructive criticism and willing to accept changes.
Like Buckley letting Harves run pre-season training.

Hardwick accepting Balme, and listening to new assistants like Caracella.

Richo is just so convinced of his own brilliance, and so stubbornly set in his ways,
he's never going to absorb input of others.
He's blind to the obvious.

That's why he's a very poor coach.
I want to see how he reacts to Lade and Ratten, but I reckon he'll just think he's the top dog.
No improvement in 2019.

[gwiltyascharged]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

I wouldn't put any of those 3 in a conversation with Hafey or Malthouse. Atleast not yet

Hang on.
You are the bloke who compared Richo to Hafey and Malthouse.
Your argument is because Malthouse and Hafey had dramatic improvement at Collingwood in the distant pass we should all feel a sense of optimism about our chances.
That is comparing Richo to them. Whether you like it or not.
If your reasons for feeling optimistic are based on what Malthouse and Hafey did way back when then you have jumped the shark.

Not quite, seems you missed my point and maybe i didnt explain it well. Also i never mentioned Malthouse, that was someone else.
The point i made was in reference to the list. not the coach, the club, recruiters, or anything else. I was responding to a poster that suggested finishing 13 was proof or a fact that our llist was abysmal. I just gave a few of the many examples where the list wasnt the problem. In the case of collingwood, they finished last, changed the coach (Hafey) then played in a grand final the next year with much the same list. So was it the list or the coach? They ended up playing five grand finals and a prelim in a row. If you follow my point that the list is ok, yet they finished 13, then that may be a reflection on the coach.

I only mentioned the Collingwood example because it's one i remember well and best illustrated my point. I also used Richmond 2017 as an example. Same list essentially, yet they go from 13 to 1st. Listen to Gale and co., the biggest change was the attitude or approach of the coach Hardwick and the leadership of cotchin and the mentoring role of Balme.
So if anything, i am actually doing the opposite of what you are saying.

So you mentioned Collingwood late 70s in this thread why???? For what reason if not a comparison?
What point are you making then?
You still can't explain yourself at all.
You make a point and then deny making it.
The thread is about false optimism. You mention Collingood late 70s. Then backtrack from it.
Richmond won 15 games in 2015.
Seriously explain what you are saying.
Are you saying optimism is justified or not?????
Be clear.

[Crossy66]

Comparing Richo to Buckley or Hardwick is an optimistic long stretch but tolerable.

Comparing Richo to legends like Hafey and Malthouse means we have really jumped the shark.

I wouldn't put any of those 3 in a conversation with Hafey or Malthouse. Atleast not yet

Hang on.
You are the bloke who compared Richo to Hafey and Malthouse.
Your argument is because Malthouse and Hafey had dramatic improvement at Collingwood in the distant pass we should all feel a sense of optimism about our chances.
That is comparing Richo to them. Whether you like it or not.
If your reasons for feeling optimistic are based on what Malthouse and Hafey did way back when then you have jumped the shark.

Not quite, seems you missed my point and maybe i didnt explain it well. Also i never mentioned Malthouse, that was someone else.
The point i made was in reference to the list. not the coach, the club, recruiters, or anything else. I was responding to a poster that suggested finishing 13 was proof or a fact that our llist was abysmal. I just gave a few of the many examples where the list wasnt the problem. In the case of collingwood, they finished last, changed the coach (Hafey) then played in a grand final the next year with much the same list. So was it the list or the coach? They ended up playing five grand finals and a prelim in a row. If you follow my point that the list is ok, yet they finished 13, then that may be a reflection on the coach.

I only mentioned the Collingwood example because it's one i remember well and best illustrated my point. I also used Richmond 2017 as an example. Same list essentially, yet they go from 13 to 1st. Listen to Gale and co., the biggest change was the attitude or approach of the coach Hardwick and the leadership of cotchin and the mentoring role of Balme.
So if anything, i am actually doing the opposite of what you are saying.

So you mentioned Collingwood late 70s in this thread why???? For what reason if not a comparison?
What point are you making then?
You still can't explain yourself at all.
You make a point and then deny making it.
The thread is about false optimism. You mention Collingood late 70s. Then backtrack from it.
Richmond won 15 games in 2015.
Seriously explain what you are saying.
Are you saying optimism is justified or not?????
Be clear.

So if you go back and read my first post here's the statement i made" I would add that where you finish on the ladder is a fact, but what the cause is, is not."
That was responding to a poster saying that because we finished 13th, thats proof our list is abysmal. So that's my point.

So the examples i gave i only referred to the list , never the coach

So here's a question for you. If a team finishes say 13th, 14th 15th etc. , Is it solely due to the list? So there are no other factors?

[Scollop]

Not sure if its a Freudian slip or if you are just quoting others regarding finishing 13th. Maybe if we were competitive enough to finish 13th we wouldn't have had all all these negative and pessimistic threads.
I was so upbeat about this year but I quickly changed after witnessing the debacle of our marquee Good Friday match live and then the Geelong game on the telly.

Yorkeys and St Byron have summed up best how I feel about Richo and his assessment (or should I say his various assessments) and I think his biggest problem is his inability to make the right judgments on individual players and their potential and in turn on the potential of the sum parts of the team

[Crossy66]

Not sure if its a Freudian slip or if you are just quoting others regarding finishing 13th. Maybe if we were competitive enough to finish 13th we wouldn't have had all all these negative and pessimistic threads.
I was so upbeat about this year but I quickly changed after witnessing the debacle of our marquee Good Friday match live and then the Geelong game on the telly.

Yorkeys and St Byron have summed up best how I feel about Richo and his assessment (or should I say his various assessments) and I think his biggest problem is his inability to make the right judgments on individual players and their potential and in turn on the potential of the sum parts of the team

Bit of a slip, i was caught up with the tiger s - pies story.
I think everyone had high hopes for the year, hence the massive disappointment.
All the changes made by the club guarantee there will be improvement, but how much and will it be enough i don't know. I think they have given richo everything he needs, so wont be any excuses if we have a bad start.