Saints chasing big names

[Yorkeys]

Ted, on a quiet day at the RSEA Stadium marketing hub, decides to relieve his boredom by taking the piss and rattle our fragile cages - again. "Trust me, I'm an intern". Gubby Allan big fish magnet? well so far so good, how does he take his coffee Teddy boy. If we didn't have such big problems the attempted satire might be school boy funny but this nonsense just highlights our meagre prospects of external salvation and an ignorance of how the salary cap system works. How about a real story, e.g. how we are going to develop and are developing our existing talent and attract a class act coach. The senior coaching appointment will be the real story after the proverbial 9 month gestation period, however there may be a surrogate appointed earlier. I fear both Gubby and AR are past their operational roles use by dates, but hopefully Gubby can usefully mentor James G. I guess Gubby takes his coffee black and white, yes ted-et al?

[Jacks Back]

Aiden Bonar ?

Yes, I have one, as I am so excited by what ted talks about.

[Gordo']

oh ffs!!! everyone should just flowering well lay off urban teddy parker!!! ffs!!! the man is a flowering legend amongst musos'!!! no one plays the flowering cow bells like flowering urban teddy parker! and over the christmas break teddy had a flowering traumatic experience. so show him some flowering respect and sympathy, ffs!!!



ffs, no certainly whispers from you there mate.

but teddy is a flowering trooper, and he did eventually get his digs back. https://www.buzzfeed.com/krishrach/this ... -see-today

[Scollop]

The burley we've been using to try and land a big fish has not worked so far.
We don't look like being contenders anytime soon so perhaps the marketing spiel needs to change
The message to ooc players might be that the Saints are a team who has to rebuild and they are looking for young stars who want to be part of a new leadership group. Hopefully that may attract a big name or two.

You really don't rate DH do you.

Right now I don't, but back when he was in AA form he was one of my favourite opposition players. I really admired his work ethic and his guts and determination. I used to get my son to watch his games (to try and emulate his running patterns and his commitment at every contest) because I thought he was one of the hardest working midfielders going around from about 2010 up to probably 2017.

I really do hope he can recapture that form, and that burst outside speed he used to have but from what I witnessed this year I think it's highly unlikely.

I also think we need to rebuild and we are 4 years away from challenging for a top 4 position and at least 2 years away from making finals. I think he was the wrong choice as a player for where the team sits right now. If it's all about on field leadership and training standards, then what the hell was going on under the current head coach and the previous footy leadership in the last 5 years. A lot more people needed the sack if we were dead set looking for a defacto captain coach

[saintsRrising]

Two words...Gubby Allan. Keep an eye on it.

That is seven

[saintsRrising]

More will come to light during the season but its confirmed the Saints will be going all out for a couple of massive fish.

Yes the StKilda Fishing Boat is out...but so far this is as big as they have landed.

[WellardSaint]

We could have Elon Musk come in onto our board with Richard Forking Branson as Director of Coaching,
it still wouldn't get any big fish anywhere near the place.

We ain't a destination club, we're a desperation club.
If any player manager mentions 'Saints' to a journo, it will ONLY be a red herring to drive up
his price.

Seriously, get rid of The Librarian and get a real coach.
He studied in the US this pre-season at some uni, while Ratten n Lade ran the place.
That's the club telling Numpty to go and study, you balding dumb bookworm,
and let the REAL coaches work on the lads.
You've done enough damage, we'll try to clean up your mess.

[Cairnsman]

The burley we've been using to try and land a big fish has not worked so far.
We don't look like being contenders anytime soon so perhaps the marketing spiel needs to change
The message to ooc players might be that the Saints are a team who has to rebuild and they are looking for young stars who want to be part of a new leadership group. Hopefully that may attract a big name or two.

You really don't rate DH do you.

Right now I don't, but back when he was in AA form he was one of my favourite opposition players. I really admired his work ethic and his guts and determination. I used to get my son to watch his games (to try and emulate his running patterns and his commitment at every contest) because I thought he was one of the hardest working midfielders going around from about 2010 up to probably 2017.

I really do hope he can recapture that form, and that burst outside speed he used to have but from what I witnessed this year I think it's highly unlikely.

I also think we need to rebuild and we are 4 years away from challenging for a top 4 position and at least 2 years away from making finals. I think he was the wrong choice as a player for where the team sits right now. If it's all about on field leadership and training standards, then what the hell was going on under the current head coach and the previous footy leadership in the last 5 years. A lot more people needed the sack if we were dead set looking for a defacto captain coach

You are very much confusing two issues. Coaching performance and player leadership. They are linked but not in the way you believe. The leadership gap the club is trying to bridge is related to those short periods in a game when the opposition takes the game away from us. Many times in 2018 it was the last 5 minutes of a quarter.

You are throwing the baby out with the bath water with the sack everyone mentality. Not all is as bad as it seems. Stop jumping at shadows and learn to relax.

[satchmo]

Aiden Bonar ?

Moist.

[Scollop]

The burley we've been using to try and land a big fish has not worked so far.
We don't look like being contenders anytime soon so perhaps the marketing spiel needs to change
The message to ooc players might be that the Saints are a team who has to rebuild and they are looking for young stars who want to be part of a new leadership group. Hopefully that may attract a big name or two.

You really don't rate DH do you.

Right now I don't, but back when he was in AA form he was one of my favourite opposition players. I really admired his work ethic and his guts and determination. I used to get my son to watch his games (to try and emulate his running patterns and his commitment at every contest) because I thought he was one of the hardest working midfielders going around from about 2010 up to probably 2017.

I really do hope he can recapture that form, and that burst outside speed he used to have but from what I witnessed this year I think it's highly unlikely.

I also think we need to rebuild and we are 4 years away from challenging for a top 4 position and at least 2 years away from making finals. I think he was the wrong choice as a player for where the team sits right now. If it's all about on field leadership and training standards, then what the hell was going on under the current head coach and the previous footy leadership in the last 5 years. A lot more people needed the sack if we were dead set looking for a defacto captain coach

You are very much confusing two issues. Coaching performance and player leadership. They are linked but not in the way you believe. The leadership gap the club is trying to bridge is related to those short periods in a game when the opposition takes the game away from us. Many times in 2018 it was the last 5 minutes of a quarter.

You are throwing the baby out with the bath water with the sack everyone mentality. Not all is as bad as it seems. Stop jumping at shadows and learn to relax.

So you're blaming the players for the season we just had, yeah?

Show me which games in 2018 where we lost games because of these 5 minute periods at end of quarters you speak of

I'm betting you're not going to. I'm betting we lost games mainly because of poor starts; terrible middle periods in quarters; some lapses in the last 5 minutes of a handful of quarters where the game was already lost; and overall horrendous fundamental basics of football which falls back on coaching.

The strategies and gameplan of our head coach where so bad that the players had to speak up and make changes. Most people agree that training standards, skills, player development and team selection needs improving and all of these are directly related to Richo aren't they? Or...should Richo be given more time to show us he can improve on his 33% win loss ratio?

On DH; his value as a leader has not been questioned by any one. The problem I have is that I reckon the optimists are confusing the player he was to the player we recruited. The main reason I have doubts about his worth is that I have a bad feeling that he'll continue to have setbacks and injuries in the next few years. His value as player is diminished if he can't get his body right so that he can perform each week and for enough games each year.

[Cairnsman]

The burley we've been using to try and land a big fish has not worked so far.
We don't look like being contenders anytime soon so perhaps the marketing spiel needs to change
The message to ooc players might be that the Saints are a team who has to rebuild and they are looking for young stars who want to be part of a new leadership group. Hopefully that may attract a big name or two.

You really don't rate DH do you.

Right now I don't, but back when he was in AA form he was one of my favourite opposition players. I really admired his work ethic and his guts and determination. I used to get my son to watch his games (to try and emulate his running patterns and his commitment at every contest) because I thought he was one of the hardest working midfielders going around from about 2010 up to probably 2017.

I really do hope he can recapture that form, and that burst outside speed he used to have but from what I witnessed this year I think it's highly unlikely.

I also think we need to rebuild and we are 4 years away from challenging for a top 4 position and at least 2 years away from making finals. I think he was the wrong choice as a player for where the team sits right now. If it's all about on field leadership and training standards, then what the hell was going on under the current head coach and the previous footy leadership in the last 5 years. A lot more people needed the sack if we were dead set looking for a defacto captain coach

You are very much confusing two issues. Coaching performance and player leadership. They are linked but not in the way you believe. The leadership gap the club is trying to bridge is related to those short periods in a game when the opposition takes the game away from us. Many times in 2018 it was the last 5 minutes of a quarter.

You are throwing the baby out with the bath water with the sack everyone mentality. Not all is as bad as it seems. Stop jumping at shadows and learn to relax.

So you're blaming the players for the season we just had, yeah?

Show me which games in 2018 where we lost games because of these 5 minute periods at end of quarters you speak of

I'm betting you're not going to. I'm betting we lost games mainly because of poor starts; terrible middle periods in quarters; some lapses in the last 5 minutes of a handful of quarters where the game was already lost; and overall horrendous fundamental basics of football which falls back on coaching.

The strategies and gameplan of our head coach where so bad that the players had to speak up and make changes. Most people agree that training standards, skills, player development and team selection needs improving and all of these are directly related to Richo aren't they? Or...should Richo be given more time to show us he can improve on his 33% win loss ratio?

What is with the angry obsession in having to BLAME?

Geez I hope you go easy on your son and his footy.

I'm sitting on a dunny in a remote office at the moment so I can't access my footy spreadsheets to give you stats but one game I can think of off the top of my scon is the Bulldogs game where we were in control and they went bang in the last 4 to 5 mins of the 2nd. It was a pattern that was noticable to those who aren't blinded with anger and irrational and emotive thoughts processes.

[samoht]

Is changing the coach the real answer ? ... here's a study conducted across different codes, granted - soccer, college football, NBA. etc...that gives an emphatic NO to this question.
Studies across the different codes give consistent results - that show a coaching change has either no impact or a negative impact. it's never positive.


"We find that for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach".

"So these authors find that if you are a bad team, changing your coach didn’t make a difference. And if you are “not bad,” a new coach makes it worse".

We've changed coaches over the years, when things weren't going well for us - has it ever improved us at any stage?

Full article ...
http://freakonomics.com/2012/12/21/is-c ... he-answer/

[Scollop]

The burley we've been using to try and land a big fish has not worked so far.
We don't look like being contenders anytime soon so perhaps the marketing spiel needs to change
The message to ooc players might be that the Saints are a team who has to rebuild and they are looking for young stars who want to be part of a new leadership group. Hopefully that may attract a big name or two.

You really don't rate DH do you.

Right now I don't, but back when he was in AA form he was one of my favourite opposition players. I really admired his work ethic and his guts and determination. I used to get my son to watch his games (to try and emulate his running patterns and his commitment at every contest) because I thought he was one of the hardest working midfielders going around from about 2010 up to probably 2017.

I really do hope he can recapture that form, and that burst outside speed he used to have but from what I witnessed this year I think it's highly unlikely.

I also think we need to rebuild and we are 4 years away from challenging for a top 4 position and at least 2 years away from making finals. I think he was the wrong choice as a player for where the team sits right now. If it's all about on field leadership and training standards, then what the hell was going on under the current head coach and the previous footy leadership in the last 5 years. A lot more people needed the sack if we were dead set looking for a defacto captain coach

You are very much confusing two issues. Coaching performance and player leadership. They are linked but not in the way you believe. The leadership gap the club is trying to bridge is related to those short periods in a game when the opposition takes the game away from us. Many times in 2018 it was the last 5 minutes of a quarter.

You are throwing the baby out with the bath water with the sack everyone mentality. Not all is as bad as it seems. Stop jumping at shadows and learn to relax.

So you're blaming the players for the season we just had, yeah?

Show me which games in 2018 where we lost games because of these 5 minute periods at end of quarters you speak of

I'm betting you're not going to. I'm betting we lost games mainly because of poor starts; terrible middle periods in quarters; some lapses in the last 5 minutes of a handful of quarters where the game was already lost; and overall horrendous fundamental basics of football which falls back on coaching.

The strategies and gameplan of our head coach where so bad that the players had to speak up and make changes. Most people agree that training standards, skills, player development and team selection needs improving and all of these are directly related to Richo aren't they? Or...should Richo be given more time to show us he can improve on his 33% win loss ratio?

What is with the angry obsession in having to BLAME?

Geez I hope you go easy on your son and his footy.

I'm sitting on a dunny in a remote office at the moment so I can't access my footy spreadsheets to give you stats but one game I can think of off the top of my scon is the Bulldogs game where we were in control and they went bang in the last 4 to 5 mins of the 2nd. It was a pattern that was noticable to those who aren't blinded with anger and irrational and emotive thoughts processes.

Games aren't finished at the end of the second quarter.
I remember the game and we were close enough at half time for the game to still be up for grabs.

Not sure why you think that it is ok for a team to capitulate in the second half just because the other team got some momentum and we surrendered the lead. The weakness and lack of fight shows some serious leadership issues. If the coach isn't the most important football department leader, I'd like to know who is?

[Scollop]

Cairmsman

The 'go easy' approach doesn't appeal to me.

Probably more suited to Richo

[samoht]

I've posted a study - in my earlier post above, that showed what impact a coaching change has (if any) to a team's performance.
Can someone cite instances where we've changed coaches and where we've improved as a team - and for a fair, balanced and objective assessment - also instances where our performances went backwards, and do the tally.

We need to look at this impassionately and objectively.

How many times did we improve as a team over the new coach's tenure (looking at the whole tenure of the new coach vs that of the coach they've replaced- w/l of new coach vs w/l of replaced coach) vs How many times we went backwards as a team (over the new coach's whole tenure vs that of the coach they've replaced - W/L of new coach vs W/L of replaced coach ) or where the coaching change made little or no impact - and then we can resume the discussion, but in a more rounded and valid way.

[Scollop]

Is changing the coach the real answer ? ... here's a study conducted across different codes, granted - soccer, college football, NBA. etc...that gives an emphatic NO to this question.
Studies across the different codes give consistent results - that show a coaching change has either no impact or a negative impact. it's never positive.


"We find that for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach".

"So these authors find that if you are a bad team, changing your coach didn’t make a difference. And if you are “not bad,” a new coach makes it worse".

We've changed coaches over the years, when things weren't going well for us - has it ever improved us at any stage?

Full article ...
http://freakonomics.com/2012/12/21/is-c ... he-answer/

According to Richo and Finnis during early 2018 (and right up until May/June this year in the CEO's case) both had rated this list as worthy of playing finals and possibly being contenders for a top 4 spot.

Does that make us a 'good team'? If yes, then we fall outside the scope of the 'bad' and the 'not bad' teams and therefore... if we make some assumptions based on this study, there is an argument for replacing the coach

[samoht]

Is changing the coach the real answer ? ... here's a study conducted across different codes, granted - soccer, college football, NBA. etc...that gives an emphatic NO to this question.
Studies across the different codes give consistent results - that show a coaching change has either no impact or a negative impact. it's never positive.


"We find that for particularly poorly performing teams, coach replacements have little effect on team performance as measured against comparable teams that did not replace their coach. However, for teams with middling records—that is, teams where entry conditions for a new coach appear to be more favorable—replacing the head coach appears to result in worse performance over subsequent years than comparable teams who retained their coach".

"So these authors find that if you are a bad team, changing your coach didn’t make a difference. And if you are “not bad,” a new coach makes it worse".

We've changed coaches over the years, when things weren't going well for us - has it ever improved us at any stage?

Full article ...
http://freakonomics.com/2012/12/21/is-c ... he-answer/

According to Richo and Finnis during early 2018 (and right up until May/June this year in the CEO's case) both had rated this list as worthy of playing finals and possibly being contenders for a top 4 spot.

Does that make us a 'good team'? If yes, then we fall outside the scope of the 'bad' and the 'not bad' teams and therefore... if we make some assumptions based on this study, there is an argument for replacing the coach

Why not? -- we had better than 50% W/L seasons in 2016 and 2017 (even with Riewoldt on one leg).Getting a top 4 finish was not out of the question.
Freo finished top of the ladder and runners up in the GF in 2015 - people were expecting them to win the GF in 2016 - yet they only had 4 wins in 2016 after a 0-10 start!!!.
Over 2018 we were devastated by injuries - we turned over 34 players - and we had a hard draw.

And when we are over all our injuries, and if our speculative recruiting somehow pays off (we fluke it) -and if we manage to get more outside run happening, and with the easier draw this year - I could even see a top 4 spot happening in 2019.
What type of turn around would that be from 2018?
Even a GF win, if we replace our F grade ruckmen with an A grade one... there are a few ifs there, mind you. We'd need a charmed run.

But ... I repeat again - to take the ifs and buts away and settle the argument. Talk is cheap.
I've posted a study - in my earlier post above, that showed what impact a coaching change has (if any) to a team's performance. It consistently showed a neutral or negative impact across a number of different codes/sports.
Never a positive one.
Can someone cite instances where we've changed coaches and where we've improved as a team - and for a fair, balanced and objective assessment - also instances where we went backwards (or where a coaching change had very little impact), and do the tally.

We need to look at this impassionately and objectively. Let's settle the argument, by conducting our own study.

We've changed coaches like it's nobody's business over the years...
How many times did we improve as a team over the new coach's tenure (looking at the whole tenure of the new coach vs that of the coach they've replaced- w/l of new coach vs w/l of replaced coach) vs How many times we went backwards as a team (over the new coach's whole tenure vs that of the coach they've replaced - W/L of new coach vs W/L of replaced coach ) or where the coaching change made little or no impact? - and then we can resume the discussion, but in a more rounded and valid way.

[dragit]

[samoht]

I thought so.
You'd rather hold onto beliefs that might not be valid rather than seek the truth that might set you free - and open your mind.

[Scollop]

So you reckon we should have kept Watters?

Ok. Don't answer that. Answer this; if we replaced Watters with Williams and we gave Williams the five year contract that he demanded, do you think Williams would have got us back into finals?

Obviously it's all hypothetical, but based on the evidence of his coaching record and all the circumstances surrounding Port Adelaide FC and the consistent top 4 finishes Choco was able to achieve, I reckon he would have at least got us into finals and therefore we could have been a destination club rather than a consistent bottom 4 team.

These are the specific circumstances that our club faced in 2013 when the club decided to change the coach. If you are going to make a change, at least get a guy who wants the damn job and wants to strive for the ultimate

[samoht]

So you reckon we should have kept Watters?

Ok. Don't answer that. Answer this; if we replaced Watters with Williams and we gave Williams the five year contract that he demanded, do you think Williams would have got us back into finals?

Obviously it's all hypothetical, but based on the evidence of his coaching record and all the circumstances surrounding Port Adelaide FC and the consistent top 4 finishes Choco was able to achieve, I reckon he would have at least got us into finals and therefore we could have been a destination club rather than a consistent bottom 4 team.

Forget the hypotheticals and ifs - do the study. Convince me that way.
Until then, I will give our coach (or whoever happens to be our coach at any point in time) the benefit of the doubt.
My gut feeling is a coaching change will not make a difference (it'll be consistent with the study I posted above, conducted on a number of other codes/team sports ).

We need to recruit smarter - that's where we can and need to improve. I don't need to refer to a study to convince me of that.

[Scollop]

Yeah sure. Get all the coaches at their peak and when they were all hungry for success like Pagan, Sheedy, Hafey, Barassi, Blight, Clarkson, Lethal Leigh Matthews perhaps throw in Mark Williams...plus just for a laugh add Alan Richardson to the mix. Put them all in a room and they're all equals aren't they

[samoht]

Yeah sure. Get all the coaches at their peak and when they were all hungry for success like Pagan, Sheedy, Hafey, Barassi, Blight, Clarkson, and add Alan Richardson to the mix. Put them all in a room and they're all equals aren't they

That's a matter of opinion - they each coached different lists. They are impossible to compare, for this reason.
You can drive a Ferrari or a beaten up bomb ...and it doesn't make you lesser of a driver, if you happen to drive a bomb.

But show me a study which shows that replacing coaches will consistently improve a team's performance (and it has in our case over the years)- and I'm open to change my mind.

[Scollop]

Some people just can't drive. They have no drive. They could be given a ferrari and they'd still consistently finish in the last 25%. Ask yourself this; how would you go with the right training and apprenticeship if you you were the driver?

If the answer is that you wouldn't be suited to driving and that you'd be more suited to the role of engineer or support staff, then maybe that's where the analogy is similar to how I see Richo. Maybe initially Richo thought he'd give senior coaching a crack but he decided after failing in a few interviews that he wasn't suited. Didn't we offer him the job after he told us he wasn't interseted?

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

2018 all over again...every thread turns into an Alan thread from the usual suspects.