2019 Coaching. It's a lose-lose.

[David-Lee]

Supporters can carry on as much as they like about Alan Richardson remaining as coach for 2019, but that's all in vain.

Fact is that the club have backed him to be Senior Coach, and have identified the need for him to be given far more support for the team to achieve success in 2019 and beyond.

Therefore the clean out of assistant coaches, and bringing in some real experience, especially Brett Ratten and Brendon Lade (as well as Billy Slater) all of whom come from clubs with strong cultures of success.

Gubby Allen is going to give the club some real clout in the area of list management and player retention - a fantastic appointment as every club where he has worked in senior roles has had considerable on-field success while he was involved.

Opinions of supporters of Richo are utterly meaningless compared to how the players rate him, as noted in an article on the AFL website today:

"Acres, 23, has – as you'd expect – backed coach Alan Richardson and his new team to take the Saints a step forward in 2019.

"We've brought in, I think, four or five new coaches now and we'll bring in a few draftees in a few weeks," he said.

"We all trust Richo, we all know he knows what he's doing and I think this year he's got a great support group with all the new coaches.

"We've got to hold up our end of the bargain as well and perform each week."

If it's good enough for players to trust Richo, then so should supporters. Save your breath....relax, and do what most supporters do at the end of a bad season - bury our disappointment and look forward to next year!!

I think Richo sucks and he's gone after 2019. He is sh!t coach and the club is trapped by a contract....hes so bad at coaching theyre trying to prop him up to save sponsors, memberships and our future.

Who cares what players back him ( rarely do players bag the head coach so it means zero), he had great players when he started and he did nothing. He climbed a bit off the bottom and then sunk. We would have dumped him but his payout was too large and the AFL would have skinned us especially since we are going to them hat in hand for more quids from game revenue etc.

But he will coach out 2019, we cant escape his contract until round 16 without the escaping the payout clause and then there's no reason to dump him at the end. Having better assistants ( except King who was excellent- so we dumped him) will yield us 6-8 wins but it won't save Richo.

[rodgerfox]

Having better assistants ( except King who was excellent- so we dumped him) will yield us 6-8 wins but it won't save Richo.

Is 'King' referring to Kingsley?

If so, why do you think he was excellent? I'm curious.

[Yorkeys]

To properly consider the lose/lose coaching outcomes probability on the 2019 spin you possibly need to recognise that for some time at the table our results/outcomes have been lose/lose/lose/ lost again/oh no/ yes it can get worse/will you take an IOU...... Just bad luck? Not on Richo's part he is the luckiest coach going in terms of employment. Fell into a job with no real head hunting, gets an extension based on a below par effort and parleys that into an appalling record, but we stake him the chips so why not double down Al. Those precious 4 wins this year could have footnotes mentioning that if the Melbourne game had gone on a few minutes more we would have blown a big lead and if there was not extreme skill and unlikely luck at the end of the Suns game that would have been a loss as well. Richo really only fair dinkum coached 2 wins without luck in 2018. 2 from 22. And on he goes, fal da re fal da ra. But as all punters know it cannot go on, he is a fraud and I think his luck will run out before Easter. I hope we can retrieve something from the season after that. People that argue he is a good coach, are there any? must think Clarkson and Simpson are gods.

[saynta]

Having better assistants ( except King who was excellent- so we dumped him) will yield us 6-8 wins but it won't save Richo.

Is 'King' referring to Kingsley?

If so, why do you think he was excellent? I'm curious.

Don't you know. All our coaches were excellent. That's why we won a massive 4 games this year.

[Flagless]

First up, cards on the table. Richardson has completely lost me. How he is still in the role is just astounding really. Pathetic, matey performance management. Fish rots at the head. Runs are just not on the board.

We would have to win 18+ games next year to have me thinking otherwise.

I hate sacking coaches. It just reeks of failure and bad management. Never, ever a good look.

So riddle me these hypotheticals.

• We win five games or less. We sack a coach. Probably before the half way point of the year. Season will be dusted... we lose. Wont be able to attract any players come season end. We lose.

• We win five to ten. Good god.... They might actually consider giving him another year. We lose.

• We win Ten to thirteen games and make the finals, going out first week. Extension imminent. We lose.

• We win Thirteen to sixteen games. Win a final. Ratten influence. Extension granted. Christ maybe even two years.

• Sixteen wins or more, win two finals and make a prelim. f*** sake two years. Ratten influence.

• We win the flag and he coaches for ten years.... more. We win.

Honestly, give him the arse now. Do it. Just damn well pull the band aid off and start fresh. Give it to Ratten.

I just do not trust that Richardson is the guy that is going to get us back at the pointy end. How can you? Blind faith? We cant afford blind faith.

If he says "park that fifteen minutes" once in 2019 my TV will be in trouble.

Just a question to all those wanting Richardson sacked- how many have ever coached a season of senior footy ?

Are you going to vote in the upcoming state or federal elections? Question for you.
Have you ever been Prime Minister or Premier?
By the logic in the above post, you’re not qualified to have or express an opinion if you haven’t held those offices.

I never said anything about not having an opinion, but if you haven't coached you don' t know what you are talking about. I've never heard so many experts on coaching that have never picked up a clip board, because if they had they wouldn't espouse so much rubbish

So......I’m allowed to have an opinion...but it’s invalid because I’ve never been a senior AFL coach. That would render pretty much every commentator, ex player, armchair observer, everyone who hasn’t coached at senior AFL level unqualified to comment. Pretty narrow cohort that one.

And in Richardson’s case, all you need to know are the following facts :
5 years
33%
Zero finals
Then there is the less quantifiable matter of player development. We’re not shining are we?

That inane comment pretty much sums up how much you know about coaching.
Coaching is about maximising potential,. It's different to teaching, it's about getting players to learn, its about making them aware but also self aware. When Reiwoldt , Montagna and co were there they got to 9th, with the list at his disposal that was about as good as they were capable. With them gone and the talent, experience, leadership vacuum that was created, coupled with injuries to key players at crucial times, its doubtful a Clarkson/Sheedy/Norm Smith clone would have done much better. There are 17 other clubs in the comp, the fact is they have recruited better and they have more top line talent- The saints didn't have one player make All Australian this year- doesn't that tell you something- we lack class.
Very simplistic to say there has been no development- players develop at different rates, I' d argue that we seen significant development in Jack Steel, Battle, Gresham, Marshall, Long (despite his injuries) and even Lonie who despite being dropped several times, the coach showed faith in him and he returned that faith with some solid efforts towards the end of the year.
Coaching is a very tough gig, those on the outside are completely unaware of all the issues at play, whether it be players personal problems, mental health issues, confidence, anxiety etc. The best laid plans can come undone very quickly and the coach doesn' t always have total control. People on these pages who simply state "he can' t coach" are immature in the extreme and really have no idea what coaching is

Imagine how it would be to not start your response with a personal put down. That would be awesome.

Re the rest of your post, thanks for the debate. Agree with you that we lost a lot of on field leadership, but I don’t buy the argument that it excuses Richardson for our dismal year. I’m interpreting your argument along the same lines as those of Samoht and others who lay pretty much zero accountability at Richardson’s door. It’s all about our players not having enough talent, rather than Richardson being a rubbish coach. If that’s your view, you’re entitled to it, but I disagree.
I personally think that view gives Richardson a way too easy out. “It’s the fault of everyone else around him, but he did the best anyone could have expected in the circumstances.” It’s certainly the view the club has been advocating and we saw in the second half of last year a clear laying of blame at the players’ feet without any accountability whatsoever from Richardson or other senior management. That really stunk in my view.

Yes, development from Steele, Battle, Gresham, Marshall. Some signs there for the future. What of Acres, Dunstan, Billings, Membrey, White, McCartin, Sinclair?

But beyond looking at individual’s development, the way the team played spoke volumes about their level of belief and cohesiveness as a team. Those elements I hold Richardson directly accountable for - and we were absolute rubbish.

You could be right that all the other elements you’ve named are the real key factors in our rubbish year. The club has certainly shifted the deck chairs around Richardson in the off season in coaching staff so we shall see how 2019 unfolds.

Personally, I have zero faith in Richardson. Watching his pressers and members’ messages gives the impression he is about as inspiring as a wet sock. His match day performances seem to me to be one dimensional and unable to respond in real time when we were going down the gurgler. His “if you just park those 10 minutes....” excuses only exacerbated the image of him being clueless, unaccountable and out of his depth.

I should also add my impression of him is strongly influenced by what I’ve been told by a friend who worked with the playing group and Richardson from 2014 - 2016. The reports he gave me about Richardson’s M.O are borne out in our dismal performances this year and by Richardson’s demeanour and media presentation.

So I’m firmly in the camp he should be sacked as soon as possible and that we will go nowhere significant whilst he remains head coach.

So by your reckoning Justin Langer should be sacked as coach of the Australian cricket team, after all they are performing terribly, having a winning percentage under his watch of about 20%. their style of game is boring and the team clearly lacks confidence.- He must be a poor coach. Oh wait- he did coach the Scorchers to 3 Big Bash titles

[st.byron]

First up, cards on the table. Richardson has completely lost me. How he is still in the role is just astounding really. Pathetic, matey performance management. Fish rots at the head. Runs are just not on the board.

We would have to win 18+ games next year to have me thinking otherwise.

I hate sacking coaches. It just reeks of failure and bad management. Never, ever a good look.

So riddle me these hypotheticals.

• We win five games or less. We sack a coach. Probably before the half way point of the year. Season will be dusted... we lose. Wont be able to attract any players come season end. We lose.

• We win five to ten. Good god.... They might actually consider giving him another year. We lose.

• We win Ten to thirteen games and make the finals, going out first week. Extension imminent. We lose.

• We win Thirteen to sixteen games. Win a final. Ratten influence. Extension granted. Christ maybe even two years.

• Sixteen wins or more, win two finals and make a prelim. f*** sake two years. Ratten influence.

• We win the flag and he coaches for ten years.... more. We win.

Honestly, give him the arse now. Do it. Just damn well pull the band aid off and start fresh. Give it to Ratten.

I just do not trust that Richardson is the guy that is going to get us back at the pointy end. How can you? Blind faith? We cant afford blind faith.

If he says "park that fifteen minutes" once in 2019 my TV will be in trouble.

Just a question to all those wanting Richardson sacked- how many have ever coached a season of senior footy ?

Are you going to vote in the upcoming state or federal elections? Question for you.
Have you ever been Prime Minister or Premier?
By the logic in the above post, you’re not qualified to have or express an opinion if you haven’t held those offices.

I never said anything about not having an opinion, but if you haven't coached you don' t know what you are talking about. I've never heard so many experts on coaching that have never picked up a clip board, because if they had they wouldn't espouse so much rubbish

So......I’m allowed to have an opinion...but it’s invalid because I’ve never been a senior AFL coach. That would render pretty much every commentator, ex player, armchair observer, everyone who hasn’t coached at senior AFL level unqualified to comment. Pretty narrow cohort that one.

And in Richardson’s case, all you need to know are the following facts :
5 years
33%
Zero finals
Then there is the less quantifiable matter of player development. We’re not shining are we?

That inane comment pretty much sums up how much you know about coaching.
Coaching is about maximising potential,. It's different to teaching, it's about getting players to learn, its about making them aware but also self aware. When Reiwoldt , Montagna and co were there they got to 9th, with the list at his disposal that was about as good as they were capable. With them gone and the talent, experience, leadership vacuum that was created, coupled with injuries to key players at crucial times, its doubtful a Clarkson/Sheedy/Norm Smith clone would have done much better. There are 17 other clubs in the comp, the fact is they have recruited better and they have more top line talent- The saints didn't have one player make All Australian this year- doesn't that tell you something- we lack class.
Very simplistic to say there has been no development- players develop at different rates, I' d argue that we seen significant development in Jack Steel, Battle, Gresham, Marshall, Long (despite his injuries) and even Lonie who despite being dropped several times, the coach showed faith in him and he returned that faith with some solid efforts towards the end of the year.
Coaching is a very tough gig, those on the outside are completely unaware of all the issues at play, whether it be players personal problems, mental health issues, confidence, anxiety etc. The best laid plans can come undone very quickly and the coach doesn' t always have total control. People on these pages who simply state "he can' t coach" are immature in the extreme and really have no idea what coaching is

Imagine how it would be to not start your response with a personal put down. That would be awesome.

Re the rest of your post, thanks for the debate. Agree with you that we lost a lot of on field leadership, but I don’t buy the argument that it excuses Richardson for our dismal year. I’m interpreting your argument along the same lines as those of Samoht and others who lay pretty much zero accountability at Richardson’s door. It’s all about our players not having enough talent, rather than Richardson being a rubbish coach. If that’s your view, you’re entitled to it, but I disagree.
I personally think that view gives Richardson a way too easy out. “It’s the fault of everyone else around him, but he did the best anyone could have expected in the circumstances.” It’s certainly the view the club has been advocating and we saw in the second half of last year a clear laying of blame at the players’ feet without any accountability whatsoever from Richardson or other senior management. That really stunk in my view.

Yes, development from Steele, Battle, Gresham, Marshall. Some signs there for the future. What of Acres, Dunstan, Billings, Membrey, White, McCartin, Sinclair?

But beyond looking at individual’s development, the way the team played spoke volumes about their level of belief and cohesiveness as a team. Those elements I hold Richardson directly accountable for - and we were absolute rubbish.

You could be right that all the other elements you’ve named are the real key factors in our rubbish year. The club has certainly shifted the deck chairs around Richardson in the off season in coaching staff so we shall see how 2019 unfolds.

Personally, I have zero faith in Richardson. Watching his pressers and members’ messages gives the impression he is about as inspiring as a wet sock. His match day performances seem to me to be one dimensional and unable to respond in real time when we were going down the gurgler. His “if you just park those 10 minutes....” excuses only exacerbated the image of him being clueless, unaccountable and out of his depth.

I should also add my impression of him is strongly influenced by what I’ve been told by a friend who worked with the playing group and Richardson from 2014 - 2016. The reports he gave me about Richardson’s M.O are borne out in our dismal performances this year and by Richardson’s demeanour and media presentation.

So I’m firmly in the camp he should be sacked as soon as possible and that we will go nowhere significant whilst he remains head coach.

So by your reckoning Justin Langer should be sacked as coach of the Australian cricket team, after all they are performing terribly, having a winning percentage under his watch of about 20%. their style of game is boring and the team clearly lacks confidence.- He must be a poor coach. Oh wait- he did coach the Scorchers to 3 Big Bash titles

If Australia are still absolute rubbish in May 2023, then yep for sure, give Langer the boot. Because that’s how long Richardson has had with the Saints. Five years. Langer was appointed to the role in May this year in crap circumstances with a divided and gutted team and management. So six months on, in the light of the Ethics Centre Report, it would be ridiculous to hold Langer accountable for the rabble that is Australian cricket. They are right at the start of a root and branch rebuild.

Richardson on the other hand, is totally accountable after five years at the helm and is only still there by grace of a bone headed contract extension that is too expensive to pay out.

[ListManager]

First up, cards on the table. Richardson has completely lost me. How he is still in the role is just astounding really. Pathetic, matey performance management. Fish rots at the head. Runs are just not on the board.

We would have to win 18+ games next year to have me thinking otherwise.

I hate sacking coaches. It just reeks of failure and bad management. Never, ever a good look.

So riddle me these hypotheticals.

• We win five games or less. We sack a coach. Probably before the half way point of the year. Season will be dusted... we lose. Wont be able to attract any players come season end. We lose.

• We win five to ten. Good god.... They might actually consider giving him another year. We lose.

• We win Ten to thirteen games and make the finals, going out first week. Extension imminent. We lose.

• We win Thirteen to sixteen games. Win a final. Ratten influence. Extension granted. Christ maybe even two years.

• Sixteen wins or more, win two finals and make a prelim. f*** sake two years. Ratten influence.

• We win the flag and he coaches for ten years.... more. We win.

Honestly, give him the arse now. Do it. Just damn well pull the band aid off and start fresh. Give it to Ratten.

I just do not trust that Richardson is the guy that is going to get us back at the pointy end. How can you? Blind faith? We cant afford blind faith.

If he says "park that fifteen minutes" once in 2019 my TV will be in trouble.

Pathetic post. If I was a Moderator I would delete it straight away. Incoherent dribble

What in the actual F? Your an idiot. He has a right to his opinion, and just happens to be bang on correct.

Let me remind you "iwantmeseats". The abbreviation for "you are" is you're.

[desertsaint]

First up, cards on the table. Richardson has completely lost me. How he is still in the role is just astounding really. Pathetic, matey performance management. Fish rots at the head. Runs are just not on the board.

We would have to win 18+ games next year to have me thinking otherwise.

I hate sacking coaches. It just reeks of failure and bad management. Never, ever a good look.

So riddle me these hypotheticals.

• We win five games or less. We sack a coach. Probably before the half way point of the year. Season will be dusted... we lose. Wont be able to attract any players come season end. We lose.

• We win five to ten. Good god.... They might actually consider giving him another year. We lose.

• We win Ten to thirteen games and make the finals, going out first week. Extension imminent. We lose.

• We win Thirteen to sixteen games. Win a final. Ratten influence. Extension granted. Christ maybe even two years.

• Sixteen wins or more, win two finals and make a prelim. f*** sake two years. Ratten influence.

• We win the flag and he coaches for ten years.... more. We win.

Honestly, give him the arse now. Do it. Just damn well pull the band aid off and start fresh. Give it to Ratten.

I just do not trust that Richardson is the guy that is going to get us back at the pointy end. How can you? Blind faith? We cant afford blind faith.

If he says "park that fifteen minutes" once in 2019 my TV will be in trouble.

i don't really get this. if by some miracle we make finals richo won't get an extension, but will see out his contract, and would deserve it. even more so if we win a final.
finish top four and make a prelim and what club would change the formula?
why would this be a lose situation?
i think richo is in his last year unless we make finals or come very close. and then he certainly won't get an extension. will be gone after 2020 unless we make finals.

[samoht]

We don't have to rack our brains with worst-case what ifs and hypotheticals.
Lyon has already gone down that beaten path, recently! And I mean "beaten".
Freo "won" 4 games - that's not even 4 and 1/2 games - in RL's 5th year at Freo in 2016. Freo then won 8 games in both 2017 and 2018 and happily retained their coach's services at $1 million per annum.
Is that a lose-lose, or what? - and they haven't even batted an eyelid.

Lyon has already blazed and stunk up that trail - If we are going to start tearing coaches to shreds and holding them totally accountable when things go pear shaped.

Richo may or may not end up plumbing similar depths - but even if he does, he won't be the first coach - or the last, I bet.
Injuries, poor/good recruiting, the overall talent and skill of the list - there are a lot of factors at play - it's not only the coach's doing when you look at the w/l ratios. Of course the coach is also accountable - to a reasonable extent - when things go wrong. But other factors weigh in more - considerably more, in my opinion.
That’s why you have Malthouse the premiership coach and Malthouse the bottom of the ladder coach at different stages of his career. Malthouse and plenty of other premiershio coaches have experienced both the extreme ups and downs. That’s because there are bigger factors/determinants at play that outweigh (and overwhelm) coaching ability alone - whatever that amounts to.

[st.byron]

We don't have to rack our brains with worst-case what ifs and hypotheticals.
Lyon has already gone down that beaten path, recently! And I mean "beaten".
Freo "won" 4 games - that's not even 4 and 1/2 games - in RL's 5th year at Freo in 2016. Freo then won 8 games in both 2017 and 2018 and happily retained their coach's services at $1 million per annum.
Is that a lose-lose, or what? - and they haven't even batted an eyelid.

Lyon has already blazed and stunk up that trail - If we are going to start tearing coaches to shreds and holding them totally accountable when things go pear shaped.

Richo may or may not end up plumbing similar depths - but even if he does, he won't be the first coach - or the last, I bet.
Injuries, poor/good recruiting, the overall talent and skill of the list - there are a lot of factors at play - it's not only the coach's doing when you look at the w/l ratios. Of course the coach is also accountable - to a reasonable extent - when things go wrong. But other factors weigh in more - considerably more, in my opinion.
That’s why you have Malthouse the premiership coach and Malthouse the bottom of the ladder coach at different stages of his career. Malthouse and plenty of other premiershio coaches have experienced both the extreme ups and downs. That’s because there are bigger factors/determinants at play that outweigh (and overwhelm) coaching ability alone - whatever that amounts to.

I accept there could be mitigating factors with Richardson’s accountability, but on the other hand, there are some people who are just not good coaches. Tim Watson come on down. Scott Watters come on down. In spite of all their experience as players, even as assistants - they just don’t translate into effective senior coaches. My money’s on that horse with Richardson.
And re Freo and Lyon - they are crazy. If I was a Freo member I’d be livid Lyon is still there.

[samoht]

We don't have to rack our brains with worst-case what ifs and hypotheticals.
Lyon has already gone down that beaten path, recently! And I mean "beaten".
Freo "won" 4 games - that's not even 4 and 1/2 games - in RL's 5th year at Freo in 2016. Freo then won 8 games in both 2017 and 2018 and happily retained their coach's services at $1 million per annum.
Is that a lose-lose, or what? - and they haven't even batted an eyelid.

Lyon has already blazed and stunk up that trail - If we are going to start tearing coaches to shreds and holding them totally accountable when things go pear shaped.

Richo may or may not end up plumbing similar depths - but even if he does, he won't be the first coach - or the last, I bet.
Injuries, poor/good recruiting, the overall talent and skill of the list - there are a lot of factors at play - it's not only the coach's doing when you look at the w/l ratios. Of course the coach is also accountable - to a reasonable extent - when things go wrong. But other factors weigh in more - considerably more, in my opinion.
That’s why you have Malthouse the premiership coach and Malthouse the bottom of the ladder coach at different stages of his career. Malthouse and plenty of other premiershio coaches have experienced both the extreme ups and downs. That’s because there are bigger factors/determinants at play that outweigh (and overwhelm) coaching ability alone - whatever that amounts to.

I accept there could be mitigating factors with Richardson’s accountability, but on the other hand, there are some people who are just not good coaches. Tim Watson come on down. Scott Watters come on down. In spite of all their experience as players, even as assistants - they just don’t translate into effective senior coaches. My money’s on that horse with Richardson.
And re Freo and Lyon - they are crazy. If I was a Freo member I’d be livid Lyon is still there.

What I'm getting at is even if Richo happens to be a poor coach relative to other coaches, and I'm not sure how we can determine that exactly, but let's assume that this is the case - a poor coach will not negatively impact to the extent that poor recruiting and/or injuries would/do. We are talking about AFL coach and assistants vs AFL coach and assistants.
Re: Lyon - we're referring to the 19-0 coach with us. Same guy and coach, different list and circumstances at Freo. Same with Malthouse - the multiple premiership coach at West Coast and Collingwood and the bottom of the ladder coach at Carlton and Collingwood. The same guy and "great coach", but different circumstances - where his great coaching amounts/amounted to nothing -it makes/made no difference - because it's the talent of the list and how healthy it is that counts for much, much more.
So recruiting and injuries far outweigh the coach (as a determinant of a team's success) and the influence and difference their coaching makes. This is what I'm getting at.
IMHO, our attention should therefore be much more focussed on getting our recruiting right first and foremost. A coach makes a 5% difference if you get all else right first, otherwise they are powerless - as Lyon, Malthouse, et al have demonstrated. We should be concentrating on getting the 95% (what counts as 95%) right. And our recruiting has been poor relative to the teams that have managed to sustain their success.
Am I the only one who sees/senses this?
If we are going to be livid about anything, we should be livid over our recruiting first and foremost - because this is what is really holding us back (and has been holding us back and sending us down the slippery slope over the last 10-12 years). A little luck with injury would not go astray, also.
The fly in the ointment - for those arguing that Richo is such a poor coach and is toxic - is that Steele, Membrey, Roberton and now Austin have vastly improved since crossing to us from their former clubs. They are playing their best football at St Kilda.
Why are we expending so much energy barking up the insignificant dwarf-coach tree when we should be roaring and bellowing up the giant recruitment sequioa tree - the one that counts. We've been barking up the wrong tree, IMHO - one that's not worth barking up at, let alone peed on in some cases.

[Dave McNamara]

(Lots of good stuff left out for brievity reasons.)

... I should also add my impression of him is strongly influenced by what I’ve been told by a friend who worked with the playing group and Richardson from 2014 - 2016. The reports he gave me about Richardson’s M.O are borne out in our dismal performances this year and by Richardson’s demeanour and media presentation.

So I’m firmly in the camp he should be sacked as soon as possible and that we will go nowhere significant whilst he remains head coach.

So by your reckoning Justin Langer should be sacked as coach of the Australian cricket team, after all they are performing terribly, having a winning percentage under his watch of about 20%. their style of game is boring and the team clearly lacks confidence.- He must be a poor coach.

Hi Flagless, by my reckoning, Justin Langer won't (and should not) still be the senior coach if he has that sort of record... after five years in the job.

[Dave McNamara]

... as for the topic of lightning rods... I'm more seeing a master class being given in the art of fishing.

[Cairnsman]

Apologies in advance St Byron but I have to call you you out again for the absolute BS you are again spreading with these idiotic and ridiculous impressions you get in your mind that are proven false claims and which you have previously been embarrased over when called out on them. You've been given ample opportunity to prove you weren't just making stuff up but now you are persisting with this other BS about some secret ITK of yours that has given you more impressions. What is wrong with you man, St Byron is this how you get your kicks? If you are going to harass and attack someones character at least have the balls to do it to a man that can fight back.

[AccidentallyTim]

I don't normally post but this one got me fired up.

Thompson was a dud, cats kept him
Clarkson was a dud, hawks kept him
Buckley was a dud, pies kept him
Hardwick was a dud, tigers kept him
Simpson was a dud, Eagles kept him

All bar Buckley now have a flag on their CV.

No one has a crystal ball but all the clubs I've mentioned took an unpopular decision and backed themselves in and were rewarded with better onfield results.

I love the passion other Saints supporters show but there comes a time where you need to get over our own ego or superior knowledge and get behind the decision that's been made in order for the club to prosper.

It's done and dusted, move on and get your membership to support the club and the players.

If he bombs out, he bombs out.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[rodgerfox]

The fly in the ointment - for those arguing that Richo is such a poor coach and is toxic - is that Steele, Membrey, Roberton and now Austin have vastly improved since crossing to us from their former clubs. They are playing their best football at St Kilda.

Have they though?

Austin? Really? He only got a game cause no one else could walk. And he hardly set the world on fire.

Membrey was 19 when he left Sydney, he's now 24. Very few players get worse as they transition from a teenager to a grown man.

Ditto Jack Steele.

Attributing that improvement to coaching is a very long bow.


There's a case for Roberton, but the others is a huge stretch.

[asiu]

... as for the topic of lightning rods... I'm more seeing a master class being given in the art of fishing.

yes David

a Master Class indeed

how observant you are

[st.byron]

... as for the topic of lightning rods... I'm more seeing a master class being given in the art of fishing.

Fishing rods....lightning rods...doesn’t matter whether you’re calling it down or dredging it up, the intent is the same. To cause trouble.

[samoht]

The fly in the ointment - for those arguing that Richo is such a poor coach and is toxic - is that Steele, Membrey, Roberton and now Austin have vastly improved since crossing to us from their former clubs. They are playing their best football at St Kilda.

Have they though?

Austin? Really? He only got a game cause no one else could walk. And he hardly set the world on fire.

Membrey was 19 when he left Sydney, he's now 24. Very few players get worse as they transition from a teenager to a grown man.

Ditto Jack Steele.

Attributing that improvement to coaching is a very long bow.


There's a case for Roberton, but the others is a huge stretch.

All these players have thrived, nevertheless, since crossing to us (and Austin came to us as a "grown man" - he's averaging 20 possessions per game with us vs only 7 at Port Adelaide). So the environment may not be as toxic as some think. I'm not saying Richo is good or bad (and i'm sure there are areas that he needs to improve in and I've also posted as much), just that the coach (in general) isn't the area that we need to get right most of all.
A coach - Malthouse, Lyon, whoever it may be, is not the panacea. They are just the 5% - the cherry on top.

The point is, relatively poor recruiting over the years, our scattergun recruiting approach - means we're behind the 8 ball, as we've ended up with multiples of D grade ruckmen, multiples of C grade inside midfielders with average skills , multiples of half back flankers, etc ... i.e., we've ended up with an unbalanced list that's overweight in a lot of areas with average players and list cloggers, and underweight in other important areas - a "great coach" isn't going to come along and magically overcome this.
Other teams have recruited in a planned way and built balanced lists by targeting quality players, based on their team's needs, and have thus sustained their success. That's how they've done it.
We need targeted and smart/planned recruiting ABOVE ALL ELSE - this counts for 95% of a team's success - if we're looking for sustained success, and if we want to become one of the successful teams.
Most of us in this forum are livid about the perceived flaws in the coach, but are blind to our relatively poor (scattergun) recruiting and forgiving of it. The area we really need to get right, that will make the most difference (the 95%),we just shrug our shoulders at.
All I'm hearing is that it's all the coach's fault!!

As Accidentally Tim posted above ...

"I don't normally post but this one got me fired up. ................... (it's got me fired up too, Accidentally Tim))

Thompson was a dud, cats kept him
Clarkson was a dud, hawks kept him
Buckley was a dud, pies kept him
Hardwick was a dud, tigers kept him
Simpson was a dud, Eagles kept him

All bar Buckley now have a flag on their CV."

[rodgerfox]

All these players have thrived, nevertheless, since crossing to us (and Austin came to us as a "grown man" - he's averaging 20 possessions per game with us vs only 7 at Port Adelaide). So the environment may not be as toxic as some think. I'm not saying Richo is good or bad (and i'm sure there are areas that he needs to improve in and I've also posted as much), just that the coach (in general) isn't the area that we need to get right most of all.
A coach - Malthouse, Lyon, whoever it may be, is not the panacea. They are just the 5% - the cherry on top.

Totally disagree.

Completely, and utterly disagree.

[samoht]

All these players have thrived, nevertheless, since crossing to us (and Austin came to us as a "grown man" - he's averaging 20 possessions per game with us vs only 7 at Port Adelaide). So the environment may not be as toxic as some think. I'm not saying Richo is good or bad (and i'm sure there are areas that he needs to improve in and I've also posted as much), just that the coach (in general) isn't the area that we need to get right most of all.
A coach - Malthouse, Lyon, whoever it may be, is not the panacea. They are just the 5% - the cherry on top.

Totally disagree.

Completely, and utterly disagree.

Good.
I agree with me, anyway.
I think Lethlean (or was it Gallagher?) noted in one of the podcasts that we are overweight in certain areas and underweight in others, and that we need more quality inside 50's - and that we will be "targeting" a midfielder (preferably an outside midfielder) with elite kicking skills.
So, they are saying the right things, at least - and they seem to understand what's important and what we really need to get right.

[Yorkeys]

If it is arguable that four players out of say 50 over 5 years have improved then a lot haven't, yes? Can't see that the hypothesis that AR improves players has any validity. And if he is the 5% cherry top we paid a lot for the almost 1 win he can claim that represents 5% of our 2018 wins. Value for money you say?

[rodgerfox]

All these players have thrived, nevertheless, since crossing to us (and Austin came to us as a "grown man" - he's averaging 20 possessions per game with us vs only 7 at Port Adelaide). So the environment may not be as toxic as some think. I'm not saying Richo is good or bad (and i'm sure there are areas that he needs to improve in and I've also posted as much), just that the coach (in general) isn't the area that we need to get right most of all.
A coach - Malthouse, Lyon, whoever it may be, is not the panacea. They are just the 5% - the cherry on top.

Totally disagree.

Completely, and utterly disagree.

Good.
I agree with me, anyway.
I think Lethlean (or was it Gallagher?) noted in one of the podcasts that we are overweight in certain areas and underweight in others, and that we need more quality inside 50's - and that we will be targeting a midfielder (preferably an outside midfielder) with elite kicking skills.
So, they are saying the right thing, at least.

So who has a perfectly balance list? Name one club.



And why do you think that the AFL put a cap on football dept. spending? It's because coaching improves footballers. It improves football teams. Drastically.

To say that anyone has 'thrived' under Richo is a stretch. Some have improved, but much of that improvement would logically be put down to physical maturity.

Given Austin's job at Port wasn't as a running back or possession gatherer, him getting the ball more with us isn't neccessarily a sign of improvement. His 1%ers have dropped by 50% since he came to us - so he's clearly playing a different role.

If we brought in a 196cm defender to become a running back - then we have big problems! If anything, him getting the ball 20 times a week shows a serious flaw in our coaching. Geary's disposals were up 25% this year too - seeing the problem here?


We traded out good players for draft picks, in compromised drafts. I've sifted through those drafts and although we didn't get any good players from the whole experiment - we didn't really miss anyone of note. The drafts were compromised. The talent simply wasn't there.


People will be amazed at the improvement that will come, and how much better individual players will appear, with some decent coaching around them.

[samoht]

If it is arguable that four players out of say 50 over 5 years have improved then a lot haven't, yes? Can't see that the hypothesis that AR improves players has any validity. And if he is the 5% cherry top we paid a lot for the almost 1 win he can claim that represents 5% of our 2018 wins. Value for money you say?

It's no use arguing the point. We are at cross purposes.
The way I see it, if we want sustained success, we need to start recruiting to our team's needs and with a balanced and quality list in mind. We clearly haven't recruited as well as other teams who have sustained their success.
A coach will always be the cherry on top (and will make the final 5% difference).

[rodgerfox]

As Accidentally Tim posted above ...

"I don't normally post but this one got me fired up. ................... (it's got me fired up too, Accidentally Tim))

Thompson was a dud, cats kept him
Clarkson was a dud, hawks kept him
Buckley was a dud, pies kept him
Hardwick was a dud, tigers kept him
Simpson was a dud, Eagles kept him

All bar Buckley now have a flag on their CV."

That's not entirely true though.

Was Clarkson a dud?
He went 5 wins, 9 wins, 14 wins in his first 3 years. Won a final in his 3rd season.

Was Thompson a dud?
They'd been top 4 under his watch, and won a final.

Was Hardwick a dud?
They'd played finals for 3 straight years under him.

Seriously, was Simpson a dud?
? Played in a GF in his second season and only missed the finals once.

I'll give you Buckley.


It's rewriting history chronically to try to put Richardson in the same category as any of these guys, except maybe Buckley. But considering Luke Beveridge, Adam Simpson, Ross Lyon, Chris Scott and John Longmire all had teams in GFs within their first 2-3 years of coaching - why choose to follow the 'Buckley model' over the 'Beveridge model'?