The BIGGEST issue with our coach.

[st.byron]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

I didn’t say that .. but sacking coaches seems to be our go to.

Samoht, you have said many times that coaches are generic and don’t really make any difference and that everything depends on the quality of recruiting.

[The_Dud]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

I didn’t say that .. but sacking coaches seems to be our go to.
And they can’t always be at fault.

Of the last 13 times we’ve replaced our coach, hoping to improve our w/l ... we actually went backwards 9 times.
So it didn’t work out for us on most occasions ... and there must be something else at play- recruiting?

Like when we replaced Watters with Richo we went backwards?

When we sack coaches with a record equal to or worse than Cho’s we improve more than 50% of the time.

Not like we’re sacking a gun...

[freely]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

The other thing is, so much at this level is between the ears. North and Carlton haven't had a chance to change gameplans but they've started winning. Why? Because their respective coaches have given them permission/given them the feeling that they're off the leash. On reflection, that may also why we won our first few games unexpectedly - the new coaching regime momentarily engendered a quasi change-of-coach honeymoon period.

[BarryGrogan]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

I didn’t say that .. but sacking coaches seems to be our go to.
And they can’t always be at fault.

Of the last 13 times we’ve replaced our coach, hoping to improve our w/l ... we actually went backwards 9 times.
So it didn’t work out for us on most occasions ... and there must be something else at play- recruiting?

Like when we replaced Watters with Richo we went backwards?

When we sack coaches with a record equal to or worse than Cho’s we improve more than 50% of the time.

Not like we’re sacking a gun...

More importantly, it's not like sacking him would be a knee jerk reaction as the spam bot is suggesting.

[twirlyhair]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

The other thing is, so much at this level is between the ears. North and Carlton haven't had a chance to change gameplans but they've started winning. Why? Because their respective coaches have given them permission/given them the feeling that they're off the leash. On reflection, that may also why we won our first few games unexpectedly - the new coaching regime momentarily engendered a quasi change-of-coach honeymoon period.

Losing our best midfielder hasn't helped. Not sure how well Blues would have gone without Cripps.

[BarryGrogan]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

The other thing is, so much at this level is between the ears. North and Carlton haven't had a chance to change gameplans but they've started winning. Why? Because their respective coaches have given them permission/given them the feeling that they're off the leash. On reflection, that may also why we won our first few games unexpectedly - the new coaching regime momentarily engendered a quasi change-of-coach honeymoon period.

Losing our best midfielder hasn't helped. Not sure how well Blues would have gone without Cripps.

Had him last year.

[samoht]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

I didn’t say that .. but sacking coaches seems to be our go to.

Samoht, you have said many times that coaches are generic and don’t really make any difference and that everything depends on the quality of recruiting.

Pretty much.
Recruiting makes the real difference, IMHO.

If you think about it, if you keep replacing coaches with better and better coaches (isn’t that the aim each time you replace a coach), you should have the pinnacle of coaches after only the 3rd replacement.
We’re continually blaming them while accepting our glaringly obvious poor recruiting.

[twirlyhair]

If you reckon coaching doesn't make a difference, then you haven't played footy. Over the years I've seen many clubs in various comps change coach and started winning more games with the same list. Sure any A grade player is desirable, but it's a team sport, not an individual sport- and top teams win finals, not a couple of stars who may or may not have a good day.

The other thing is, so much at this level is between the ears. North and Carlton haven't had a chance to change gameplans but they've started winning. Why? Because their respective coaches have given them permission/given them the feeling that they're off the leash. On reflection, that may also why we won our first few games unexpectedly - the new coaching regime momentarily engendered a quasi change-of-coach honeymoon period.

Losing our best midfielder hasn't helped. Not sure how well Blues would have gone without Cripps.

Had him last year.

Entirely new season with new coaching team and game strategy. Our key midfielder was key to this.

[samoht]

redundant post .... I reposted further down

[saintadamski]

I notice there’s been some posts on Lyon and comparisons made with him.

Lyon was a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach, depending on the strength of the list.
Freo’s recruiting has turned their fortunes around recently with the addition of ... Hill, Hogan, Matera etc..

It really is all about recruiting .. the sooner we realise this the better.

This is the area we need to get right .. and once we do, everything else will start falling into place - we won’t keep sacking our coaches one after the other, as if it’s always their fault.
It can’t always be their fault .. and it isn’t.

Our biggest issue is we always think the coach is the issue!

Replace Richo if we must .. but we need to get our recruiting right, above all.

Completely agree Samoht

This constant garbage about 'game style' and 'everything is the coaches fault' frustrates me no end.

Every team in the AFL has a similar 'game style'. It's a fricking rolling zone that covers space up and down the field - EVERY TEAM DOES THIS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!...the true difference between teams is personnel - ball use, pace, marking, and contested ball.

Lyon inherited amazing lists at both the Saints and Freo...couldn't win a GF, and then like clockwork took both teams to the bottom of the ladder.

Chris Scott takes over the best list in the AFL by far and immediately wins a flag - If coaching defined everything, he would have won the GF 5 years in a row right? wrong....the best players retired.

We need to start recruiting A grade talent - fierce powerful footballers.

I do believe a coach is important for fine tuning, and identifying player's strengths etc, but Clarko couldn't win games with our current list - as there are too many C graders in it....Longer, Newnes, Joyce, Phillips....the list goes on.

And as for the fool that called you full of sh#%... Can't really say what I think or I'll be banned....

[older saint]

I notice there’s been some posts on Lyon and comparisons made with him.

Lyon was a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach, depending on the strength of the list.
Freo’s recruiting has turned their fortunes around recently with the addition of ... Hill, Hogan, Matera etc..

It really is all about recruiting .. the sooner we realise this the better.

This is the area we need to get right .. and once we do, everything else will start falling into place - we won’t keep sacking our coaches one after the other, as if it’s always their fault.
It can’t always be their fault .. and it isn’t.

Our biggest issue is we always think the coach is the issue!

Replace Richo if we must .. but we need to get our recruiting right, above all.

Completely agree Samoht

This constant garbage about 'game style' and 'everything is the coaches fault' frustrates me no end.

Every team in the AFL has a similar 'game style'. It's a fricking rolling zone that covers space up and down the field - EVERY TEAM DOES THIS, WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!...the true difference between teams is personnel - ball use, pace, marking, and contested ball.

Lyon inherited amazing lists at both the Saints and Freo...couldn't win a GF, and then like clockwork took both teams to the bottom of the ladder.

Chris Scott takes over the best list in the AFL by far and immediately wins a flag - If coaching defined everything, he would have won the GF 5 years in a row right? wrong....the best players retired.

We need to start recruiting A grade talent - fierce powerful footballers.

I do believe a coach is important for fine tuning, and identifying player's strengths etc, but Clarko couldn't win games with our current list - as there are too many C graders in it....Longer, Newnes, Joyce, Phillips....the list goes on.

And as for the fool that called you full of sh#%... Can't really say what I think or I'll be banned....

the one thing is that Clarkson wouldn't keep picking C grade players which wont be in our next finals campaign

Recruiting and Development, Melbourne aside is probably as poor as any other AFL team in the last 5 years

[samoht]

Excuse me?

How can you banned for being personal with a spambot?

I can count over 50 posts wurh the exact same rubbish from the same poster.

It's straight up spam.

Even when I've seen that bot be corrected in blatant lies, the bot continues with the spam.

"We don't try to recruit gun midfielders".

Lie.

When pulled up on that lie, the bot twists it that trying isnt good enough.

Now the bot is saying that Hawthorn being 'into' Coniglio is good enough. Samoht must be a spambot. There's no other explanation for blatant lies and nonsense that has been repeated adnauseum in thread after thread after thread.

It derails them constantly, and is nothing more than spam.

When asked to cease with the spam, the bot stated tbst it wouldn't until people get it.

That is the definition of spam.


So please, if you think someone telling a robot account that it's full of s*** ruins forums, after that bot has spammed the forum with over 50 posts of the exact same thing - you're mad.

Re: spam -
Well, I can count at least 1000 posts and 100 threads with exactly the “same rubbish” (your words, not mine) from the same posters posting the same things over and over .. so multiply my posts by 20 to get an idea of how I view things from my end.

And BarryGrogan...
I’m sorry but ....”trying” to recruit is not good enough! I am not even sure if we are seriously trying to recruit an ace midfielder, given our track record.
Everything is result driven .. I’m sure you measure a coach’s performance based on w/l, not on trying to win.. so how many A graders have we actually landed since and including the Lyon years.. not ”tried to land”, as you conveniently want it?
Why aren’t our recruiters under the same scrutiny?
Are you happy with their performance? Would the Hawks have been happy with our recruiters’ performance?

[skeptic]

Ross Lyon is pbly the best example of how reasonable coaching/development can make the difference between average players and good ones.

Dawson
Blake
Raph Clarke
Clint Jones

Plus guys on the way out like
Gardiner
Milne
Ray

And other limited players like Kosi

Not exactly the most talented list. Elevated their games and careers under a coach that played to their strengths and reduced exposure to their limitations

Are we suggesting that Acres isn’t as talented as Clint Jones or Farren?

IMO has a higher ceiling then both those guys

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Alan doesn't have any issues tbh.

[Ghost Like]

Alan doesn't have any issues tbh.

Thanks Ted, good to know. So the coach is perfect. So why have we not made the finals in his tenure. What is the aspects that are stopping us from playing finals.

Samoht raises some excellent points in relation to recruiting.

Skeptic nailed it in relation to development.

I think we all agree it is a combination of all three, it is a fulfilling cycle: recruiting / development / coaching.

TBH I don't believe St Kilda has a pass mark in any of those categories over the period of Richo's reign. If he's had no input into recruiting and development then he's a fool because whether people agree or not, the buck stops with him. If you can't square the win loss ledger then you must show hope consistently, whether that's visible development or building a team to play a sustainable, winning brand of football.

If you build it they will come. Richo is ignoring the voices and failing to offer hope in my opinion.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

I think Richo can coach. Yep, he isn't perfect but can coach.

He just hasn't really had the cattle at his disposal through either bad luck or injury plus taking over a very bottom side list at the start. The fact we haven't had the ability to attract a couple of A grade guns hasn't helped either. Same as being based at Seaford and losing a lot of expierenced players.

But anyway, I never played under him and he might be gone at the end of the year so it won't matter anymore.

[skeptic]

Another person blaming bad luck for our circumstances

Incredible.

The more questionable decisions we make, the more unlucky we get

[BarryGrogan]

Samoht raises some excellent points in relation to recruiting.

Which points are excellent?

It's complete drivel.


"Great players make you a better team"? No s***!!

Players leave their club for the following reasons:

Success
Big games and big crowds
For a coach
Money
To go home

Under Richo, we've never played in a final and he only wins 3 out of 10 games he coaches - so forget the first one.

We're behind at least 8 clubs for the 2nd option.

I won't even bother with the 3rd one.

We have no advantage with money since the 15% increase in the salary cap.

Forget about the last one too.


The suggestion by the spambot that our recruiters have been drunk at the wheel is simply wrong. Recruiting players is not an even playing field.

Ask North.

I've seen the spambot asked to list the draft blunders that we have apparently made. He can't (or won't), because it's negligible.
Someone listed our drafting once, and it's hardly been a blunder.

There's a reason I said the spambot is full of s***.


Do we have the best list? No.
Do we have the worst list? No.

Is Richo getting the best out of our list? Not even close.


But our recruiting is a totally different discussion. I don't know why we get spammed with it constantly, when it's largely irrelevant to the topic of 'Is Cho the best person to coach the current team?'

Whether our list is awesome, s***, or somewhere in between isn't the topic that is being debated.

Should our current list be a flag contender right now? I don't think so, and I havent heard anyone suggest this.

But should it be a perrenial bottom 4 team, with no playwrs developed into AA's, Rising Star nominations and only 1 or 2 genuinely solid performances in a 5 year period? No way. But that's what is happening.


Would changing coach result in a sudden top 2 ladder position? No.

But would it result in improved cohesion between mids and forwards? Would players be played in positions that remotely suit them?
Would it stop 5 years of 'bombing it in'?

Would we see at least one of our plethora of first round picks start playing like they enjoy the game?

Would we see this team kick more than 70 points?

Yes. And if it didn't, we wouldn't be any worse off as what we do know for a fact - none of the above will hapoen under Richo.

<1 day ban for commenting negatively on another poster >

[st.byron]

Nub of the issue as Barry has suggested : “Is Richo getting the best out of our list? Not even close”.

The biggest issue with our coach is lack of genuine leadership. Closely followed by the fact that he’s still our coach. Actually that trumps every other issue. Needs to be removed asap. Going nowhere whilst he remains coach.

[Yorkeys]

Coaching, recruitment, development seem fully integrated elements of success or failure (?). I don't get the impression that each of those aspects is typically carried out in bureaucratic silos separate from each other. Its a three legged piece that falls if any one leg doesn't match the others.

Perhaps under Alan the separation model is in place, though I doubt it; I thought the big money coaches got was for actually getting those three in sync to result in wins. The actual running, kicking, spread, tackling and formations package ain't worth half a mill plus each year on its own; there seem to be plenty of capable technicians in the industry.

It's to have those practical operational aspects manifest the result of the higher level work that warrants the big dough. And its not all science, a coach needs to be able to spot talent, potential within that talent and develop it as part of all the myriad of moving parts that make up a successful team. And also to be able to deploy the assets at his/her disposal in the heat of game day to counter the tactics of other highly paid coaches. Maybe Alan is a good technician but he doesn't seem to be a good manager.

Remember when picking Paddy was run by him very early in his tenure; his response was to the effect of well I'll leave that to the recruiting team, their judgement will do me. I worried at the time because I hoped he would explain why it was a good choice despite obvious risks, plus he seemed to be taking a don't blame me if it goes pear shaped position. But because he could not articulate how he saw Paddy fitting into the team I wondered about his assessment of the list. We know Mr Elshaugh thought Paddy would replace Roo (even though a different sort of player) but what was the vision from the new man: well a big lad that can catch can't be a bad thing, if you park his known health issue. For instance how about explaining why #1 wouldn't be used on a mid fielder and how would the condition be managed without diluting playing output. I am not second guessing Paddy's selection - hindsight would make that churlish - but the basis of the pick seemed worryingly simplistic. Like the way we have played for a while now.

[samoht]

Samoht raises some excellent points in relation to recruiting.

Which points are excellent?

It's complete drivel.


"Great players make you a better team"? No s***!!

Players leave their club for the following reasons:

Success
Big games and big crowds
For a coach
Money
To go home

Under Richo, we've never played in a final and he only wins 3 out of 10 games he coaches - so forget the first one.

We're behind at least 8 clubs for the 2nd option.

I won't even bother with the 3rd one.

We have no advantage with money since the 15% increase in the salary cap.

Forget about the last one too.


The suggestion by the spambot that our recruiters have been drunk at the wheel is simply wrong. Recruiting players is not an even playing field.

Ask North.

I've seen the spambot asked to list the draft blunders that we have apparently made. He can't (or won't), because it's negligible.
Someone listed our drafting once, and it's hardly been a blunder.

There's a reason I said the spambot is full of s***.


Do we have the best list? No.
Do we have the worst list? No.

Is Richo getting the best out of our list? Not even close.


But our recruiting is a totally different discussion. I don't know why we get spammed with it constantly, when it's largely irrelevant to the topic of 'Is Cho the best person to coach the current team?'

Whether our list is awesome, s***, or somewhere in between isn't the topic that is being debated.

Should our current list be a flag contender right now? I don't think so, and I havent heard anyone suggest this.

But should it be a perrenial bottom 4 team, with no playwrs developed into AA's, Rising Star nominations and only 1 or 2 genuinely solid performances in a 5 year period? No way. But that's what is happening.


Would changing coach result in a sudden top 2 ladder position? No.

But would it result in improved cohesion between mids and forwards? Would players be played in positions that remotely suit them?
Would it stop 5 years of 'bombing it in'?

Would we see at least one of our plethora of first round picks start playing like they enjoy the game?

Would we see this team kick more than 70 points?

Yes. And if it didn't, we wouldn't be any worse off as what we do know for a fact - none of the above will hapoen under Richo.

You can continue to disrespect yourself, and continue to call me anything under the sun. This is your choice - and the moderators can continue to allow it - that's their choice.

I can equally call the 50 or so anti coach threads and the 1,000's of anti coach posts being regurgitated by the same posters as spam and the posters themselves as spambots - but I'm not going to disrespect the posters/fellow sainters.
Can you imagine it from my end? - I've been putting up with 1,000's of posts, of the same tenor - "the coach is to blame for everything"..
And I don't start threads - something that "spambots" by definition would do.

Again ..
We all know it's a result driven industry.
Just as you'd judge the coach on w/l, not on "trying to win", and just as you're being brutal and demanding with our present coach .. I ask you -
1. how many A grade big fish have we landed since and including the Lyon years?
This covers 3 coaches - Lyon, Watters and Richo.
I'm not just referring to Richo.
So how many A grade big fish have our recruiters landed over those 12 or so years?

Now contrast this with Hawthorn (or Geelong or Collingwood, etc..) and their recruiters over this same period.

My apologies for having a different view on things - and for not having a thick enough skin to put up with 1,000s of regurgitated posts of the anti coach variety, and for firing back 50 of my own.

and 2.
How is it that other successful clubs select coaches that have 10 year or 20 year stints while 12 of our coaches since Alan Jeans have been sacked/replaced and one jumped ship?
How do we continually get it wrong, coach after coach?
Why haven't we been able to produce a coach like that (since Alan Jeans)- if the coach is the be all and end all.
It tells me our record for sacking coaches and finding a successful replacement really sucks - and that we should be looking at what else might be going wrong - but it might be telling you something else.

Anyway, you seem to have all the answers - I will stop my drivel, as you so rightly put it.
Take your time answering - i will be hanging off every word.

[Teflon]

Samoht raises some excellent points in relation to recruiting.

Which points are excellent?

It's complete drivel.


"Great players make you a better team"? No s***!!

Players leave their club for the following reasons:

Success
Big games and big crowds
For a coach
Money
To go home

Under Richo, we've never played in a final and he only wins 3 out of 10 games he coaches - so forget the first one.

We're behind at least 8 clubs for the 2nd option.

I won't even bother with the 3rd one.

We have no advantage with money since the 15% increase in the salary cap.

Forget about the last one too.


The suggestion by the spambot that our recruiters have been drunk at the wheel is simply wrong. Recruiting players is not an even playing field.

Ask North.

I've seen the spambot asked to list the draft blunders that we have apparently made. He can't (or won't), because it's negligible.
Someone listed our drafting once, and it's hardly been a blunder.

There's a reason I said the spambot is full of s***.


Do we have the best list? No.
Do we have the worst list? No.

Is Richo getting the best out of our list? Not even close.


But our recruiting is a totally different discussion. I don't know why we get spammed with it constantly, when it's largely irrelevant to the topic of 'Is Cho the best person to coach the current team?'

Whether our list is awesome, s***, or somewhere in between isn't the topic that is being debated.

Should our current list be a flag contender right now? I don't think so, and I havent heard anyone suggest this.

But should it be a perrenial bottom 4 team, with no playwrs developed into AA's, Rising Star nominations and only 1 or 2 genuinely solid performances in a 5 year period? No way. But that's what is happening.


Would changing coach result in a sudden top 2 ladder position? No.

But would it result in improved cohesion between mids and forwards? Would players be played in positions that remotely suit them?
Would it stop 5 years of 'bombing it in'?

Would we see at least one of our plethora of first round picks start playing like they enjoy the game?

Would we see this team kick more than 70 points?

Yes. And if it didn't, we wouldn't be any worse off as what we do know for a fact - none of the above will hapoen under Richo.

<1 day ban for commenting negatively on another poster >

This is an excellent post - shame on the baiting but a good post.

The issue of tying recruitment into a defence of Allan’s coaching is to ignore the fact the coach does have some things in his control that CAN be improved over 6 years.........yea a bloody long time.

System - we’ve all seen the constant “can’t move the ball into fwd 50 with any system” it’s been going on for years.....is that because we recruited badly? Don’t have the cattle?.......yet we’ve equally seen patches and games where it happens......so what’s the failing?? For mine a good coach implements a system consistently even if they don’t have the best list in the league players know the system, and you see that in the game style. Ours goes from manic pressure to turn overs too often and has done so for far to long. Somethings isn’t getting through here out of the coach for mine.

Selection mystery box - we’ve all seen it.....scratched our heads......it’s almost weekly...

Player development - why do our supposed bright youngsters fail to go on ?....who honestly has confidence right now we have a crop of talented young kids who are coming through, who will absolutely make it and become really good A grade players? Guys like Acres still look borderline after years .........only Gresham and Billing’s (this year) look to be there.....we are in deep Shyte here......the cupboard ain’t full.......and that’s the worst things cause we keep hanging around mid table .....in no mans land ......not attractive to a FA but not really going forward or good enough to challenge the big boys.....Coach certainly after 6 years has a big influence here.....yes one can argue “oh it’s cause we’ve recruited poorly” but surely after 6 years we’d see either that corrected or a few more developed??

Club needs to move on. Decisively and in full confidence we gave this guy enough time to demonstrate he had the tools......he doesn’t.

[twirlyhair]

Samoht raises some excellent points in relation to recruiting.

Which points are excellent?

It's complete drivel.


"Great players make you a better team"? No s***!!

Players leave their club for the following reasons:

Success
Big games and big crowds
For a coach
Money
To go home

Under Richo, we've never played in a final and he only wins 3 out of 10 games he coaches - so forget the first one.

We're behind at least 8 clubs for the 2nd option.

I won't even bother with the 3rd one.

We have no advantage with money since the 15% increase in the salary cap.

Forget about the last one too.


The suggestion by the spambot that our recruiters have been drunk at the wheel is simply wrong. Recruiting players is not an even playing field.

Ask North.

I've seen the spambot asked to list the draft blunders that we have apparently made. He can't (or won't), because it's negligible.
Someone listed our drafting once, and it's hardly been a blunder.

There's a reason I said the spambot is full of s***.


Do we have the best list? No.
Do we have the worst list? No.

Is Richo getting the best out of our list? Not even close.


But our recruiting is a totally different discussion. I don't know why we get spammed with it constantly, when it's largely irrelevant to the topic of 'Is Cho the best person to coach the current team?'

Whether our list is awesome, s***, or somewhere in between isn't the topic that is being debated.

Should our current list be a flag contender right now? I don't think so, and I havent heard anyone suggest this.

But should it be a perrenial bottom 4 team, with no playwrs developed into AA's, Rising Star nominations and only 1 or 2 genuinely solid performances in a 5 year period? No way. But that's what is happening.


Would changing coach result in a sudden top 2 ladder position? No.

But would it result in improved cohesion between mids and forwards? Would players be played in positions that remotely suit them?
Would it stop 5 years of 'bombing it in'?

Would we see at least one of our plethora of first round picks start playing like they enjoy the game?

Would we see this team kick more than 70 points?

Yes. And if it didn't, we wouldn't be any worse off as what we do know for a fact - none of the above will hapoen under Richo.

You can continue to disrespect yourself, and continue to call me anything under the sun. This is your choice - and the moderators can continue to allow it - that's their choice.

I can equally call the 50 or so anti coach threads and the 1,000's of anti coach posts being regurgitated by the same posters as spam and the posters themselves as spambots - but I'm not going to disrespect the posters/fellow sainters.
Can you imagine it from my end? - I've been putting up with 1,000's of posts, of the same tenor - "the coach is to blame for everything"..
And I don't start threads - something that "spambots" by definition would do.

Again ..
We all know it's a result driven industry.
Just as you'd judge the coach on w/l, not on "trying to win", and just as you're being brutal and demanding with our present coach .. I ask you -
1. how many A grade big fish have we landed since and including the Lyon years?
This covers 3 coaches - Lyon, Watters and Richo.
I'm not just referring to Richo.
So how many A grade big fish have our recruiters landed over those 12 or so years?

Now contrast this with Hawthorn (or Geelong or Collingwood, etc..) and their recruiters over this same period.

My apologies for having a different view on things - and for not having a thick enough skin to put up with 1,000s of regurgitated posts of the anti coach variety, and for firing back 50 of my own.

and 2.
How is it that other successful clubs select coaches that have 10 year or 20 year stints while 12 of our coaches since Alan Jeans have been sacked/replaced and one jumped ship?
How do we continually get it wrong, coach after coach?
Why haven't we been able to produce a coach like that (since Alan Jeans)- if the coach is the be all and end all.
It tells me our record for sacking coaches and finding a successful replacement really sucks - and that we should be looking at what else might be going wrong - but it might be telling you something else.

Anyway, you seem to have all the answers - I will stop my drivel, as you so rightly put it.
Take your time answering - i will be hanging off every word.

Excellent post.

[bigred]

It points to our administration. They hire and fire the coaches and to be honest, our boards, over the journey are just filled with spuds looking to further their own careers or agendas.

Our biggest issue with the coach is the way he has been performance managed. They were far to eager to extend on the back of 2017 and this has proven to be a very poor decision. 2017 was really an average, middling season and there is no way known that a TWO year extension should have been given.

Stability is one thing, but when you find yourself twelve months down the track and the performance has dropped off that far then alarm bells should be ringing. Be it list management, player development, injury management, match day and media performance the buck inevitably stops with the senior coach.

The current board, after inheriting this basket case of a football club, need to show themselves to be ruthless when it comes to results. We exist to win football matches. If they cannot demand performance then we may as well fold or just go and play in the Southern league.

Make a decision and refuse to apologise for it. None of this political correctness velvet sledgehammer. Make a call on the coach and stand by it. The Club President should front all and sundry with the message that we can no longer stand for on field failure. The viability of the club is totally dependent on how the selected team perform each week. Any financial plan to move forward is complete and utter folly if they think we can keep middling along like this.

Most, if not all of us have to perform to particular expectations in our professional careers. Chances are if you were running at 35% of your targets after what, six years you would be staring down the barrel. How many would even last six years at that level?

No matter which way we look at this, there is absolutely no way that we can keep the current coach beyond this season. They threw considerable resources at him over the off season and yet our on field is only marginally improved.

TLDR... Richo's biggest problem is how he has been performance managed.

[HighettMan]

Ross Lyon is pbly the best example of how reasonable coaching/development can make the difference between average players and good ones.

Dawson
Blake
Raph Clarke
Clint Jones

Plus guys on the way out like
Gardiner
Milne
Ray

And other limited players like Kosi

Not exactly the most talented list. Elevated their games and careers under a coach that played to their strengths and reduced exposure to their limitations

Are we suggesting that Acres isn’t as talented as Clint Jones or Farren?

IMO has a higher ceiling then both those guys

This is a complete load of typically distorted bias and misguided BS.

Select the same players for the game this week and tell me how much Ross would extract from them.

The exposure was reduced becuase they were surrounded by a healthy crop of A graders and a couple of once-in-a-generation players.