2 and 4

[takeaway]

Yes, scollop. That's what I was getting at (with my chess analogy). I'm not supportive of Richo, I'm just contending that you can't really get a handle on a coach's capabilities from their wins/losses.
The important thing (to me) is to recruit and draft our way to a strong list - I think smart, targeted and planned recruiting is the key.

Proof that it's never an even playing field - is that you can have a 19-0 coach and a 0-10 coach being one and the same coach (Ross Lyon).
Norm Smith may have won 6 premierships when in charge of a very strong Melbourne list, in the 1950's, but he had a 33% win loss ratio from 1965 to 1972.

Year Team Games Coached Wins Losses Draws Win %
1965 Melbourne Demons 17 10 7 0 58.8%
1966 Melbourne Demons 19 3 16 0 15.8%
1967 Melbourne Demons 18 8 10 0 44.4%
1969 South Melbourne Swans 20 7 13 0 35.0%
1970 South Melbourne Swans 23 14 9 0 60.9%
1971 South Melbourne Swans 22 3 19 0 13.6%
1972 South Melbourne Swans 22 2 20 0 9.1%

What happened in 1966, 1971 and 1972? This is Norm Smith, acknowledged as the doyen of coaches. His win/loss ratio is up and down like a yoyo, year by year.
I think the appropriate thing to do is to wait and see, with the new coaches on board, and above all we need to nail our recruiting from now on.
Build it (draft and recruit our way to a strong list) and they (the wins) will come.

Agree with a number of your points but I think you are undervaluing our recruiting over the last 5 years or so. Not the best, but OK in my view, especially recently. The coach, and playing list, game plan, etc are of course very important aspects, but a number of studies conducted around the world on the most successful sports teams in modern history (not AFL teams but still applicable) have illustrated the most important aspect (the queen) in that success - on field leadership, ie captain and senior players. Note that in your example Melb 1965-67, Barassi had just left for Carlton, Swans had Skilton, great player but not a leader like Barassi. Recent AFL success stories virtually all had strong on field leadership - Brisbane - Voss & Co, Hawks Hodge & Co, Cats Harley & Co, even Cotchin's improvement in output/leadership was a major factor in the Tiger's flag. Saints had Roo, Joey, etc in the late 2000's.

I have said before that with only Steven/Geary left from the 2006-10 recruiting periods, that is our major issue, dearth of senior leadership. Hannebury will help, and that is why he was recruited. Geary does his best, but needs help, and probably needs a captain above him. We imo have quite a few players who have now had enough senior games under their belt to have improved impact, and that would be helped further by having more Hodge types keeping them in line. So as you say it is not all on the coach, although I agree Richo is on his last year (or part thereof) if the team does not improve in 2019. It is of great value to any coach however to have a few senior leaders such as Hodge, Mitchell, Roughhead on the field.

[skeptic]

Let's try again, if Richo is still coach at the start of the 2020 season, what do you think it will be he got right in 2019.

A hint: try and think about what things Richo might do well in 2019, what are his strengths, what does he do well? positive attributes, it's a mindset.

He stopped playing injured players

He selected/retained players that were playing well and dropped players that weren’t playing well rather than basing selection on less transparent criteria

He finds a way to play two proper rucks in the top 22 rather than rotating guys like Paddy, Bruce, Steele, Acres through there

He stops picking teams that are too heavily loaded with a similar type of midfielder... most notably slower contested ball winning mids

He finds a way to develop psychological strength in his team’s so that we have less 1/4 to 1/2 fade outs or start games completely rattled unable to hit basic targets or frequently miss easy EASY set shots at goal.

The players need to demonstrate a better understanding on the structure e.g. zone defence, a tall guy on the line for a set shot, kicking to actual targets up forward rather than bombing it in to no one.
Add to that that players and the team need to be more aware of each other’s strenghts/weakness and play to them. For example, Membrey is a player that does better when he leads back to the ball and tries to catch it at the highest point due to his leap (taking advantage of his opponents difficulty matching suit) as opposed to playing as a contested marking or lead up forward

He needs to play more youth and let them take the game on when more seasoned players are not playing well

He absolutely needs to train out of the players the notion of immediately playing on when they have absolutely no idea what’s directly in front of them

He needs to train out of them the frequent tendency to pass short to contests when under pressure

He needs to find a better balance in the game plan (or the player’s ability to execute it) between moving the ball fast/directly and passing it around and around and around pointlessly allowing the opposition to structure up.
Obviously it’s a balance because we don’t want them to be wreckless going forward but too often we disadvantage the forwards by being to cautious and slow.


If I saw inmprovement in those areas... which you have told me to stop posting about in the past, I would be considerably more satisfied with the coach regardless of the win loss though I imagine our performance would be better


In terms of what he does well, strengths etcI guess I’m not so sure.
He seems to have at least developed a culture where players love the club and want to stay
They seemingly work hard and don’t foul up off-field
He’s created a culture where players are open to constructive criticism and feedback and want to get better
Our relationship with Sandy seems to be the most settled it’s ever been so I have to imagine he’s played a part in that
He seems very much inclined to give ppl responsibility and back them in to perform and stick with them if things dont work out right away... at least some players
And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

That’s the best I’ve got

[Cairnsman]

Let's try again, if Richo is still coach at the start of the 2020 season, what do you think it will be he got right in 2019.

A hint: try and think about what things Richo might do well in 2019, what are his strengths, what does he do well? positive attributes, it's a mindset.

He stopped playing injured players

He selected/retained players that were playing well and dropped players that weren’t playing well rather than basing selection on less transparent criteria

He finds a way to play two proper rucks in the top 22 rather than rotating guys like Paddy, Bruce, Steele, Acres through there

He stops picking teams that are too heavily loaded with a similar type of midfielder... most notably slower contested ball winning mids

He finds a way to develop psychological strength in his team’s so that we have less 1/4 to 1/2 fade outs or start games completely rattled unable to hit basic targets or frequently miss easy EASY set shots at goal.

The players need to demonstrate a better understanding on the structure e.g. zone defence, a tall guy on the line for a set shot, kicking to actual targets up forward rather than bombing it in to no one.
Add to that that players and the team need to be more aware of each other’s strenghts/weakness and play to them. For example, Membrey is a player that does better when he leads back to the ball and tries to catch it at the highest point due to his leap (taking advantage of his opponents difficulty matching suit) as opposed to playing as a contested marking or lead up forward

He needs to play more youth and let them take the game on when more seasoned players are not playing well

He absolutely needs to train out of the players the notion of immediately playing on when they have absolutely no idea what’s directly in front of them

He needs to train out of them the frequent tendency to pass short to contests when under pressure

He needs to find a better balance in the game plan (or the player’s ability to execute it) between moving the ball fast/directly and passing it around and around and around pointlessly allowing the opposition to structure up.
Obviously it’s a balance because we don’t want them to be wreckless going forward but too often we disadvantage the forwards by being to cautious and slow.


If I saw inmprovement in those areas... which you have told me to stop posting about in the past, I would be considerably more satisfied with the coach regardless of the win loss though I imagine our performance would be better


In terms of what he does well, strengths etcI guess I’m not so sure.
He seems to have at least developed a culture where players love the club and want to stay
They seemingly work hard and don’t foul up off-field
He’s created a culture where players are open to constructive criticism and feedback and want to get better
Our relationship with Sandy seems to be the most settled it’s ever been so I have to imagine he’s played a part in that
He seems very much inclined to give ppl responsibility and back them in to perform and stick with them if things dont work out right away... at least some players
And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

That’s the best I’ve got

Happy New Years Skeptic, may it bring health and happiness.

Hey great post, but just need to clarify something, I don't think I have ever asked you (or any other poster) to stop posting. I absolutely have challenged, or tested if you like, where challenging or testing seemed appropriate. Even though the challenging and testing may appear vigorous and even persistent at times I mostly try to be respectful when doing so as well as keeping the challenging and testing proportionate and commensurate.

I'm a big advocate of forums being self moderating and I think you should be prepared for your ideas, opinions, statements and claims to be challenged if you if you post on a forum, it's what a healthy forum is all about.

So don't go changing Skeptic, you have been a magnificent contributor to this board over a very long time.

Can't wait for round 6

[samoht]

Agree with a number of your points but I think you are undervaluing our recruiting over the last 5 years or so. Not the best, but OK in my view, especially recently. The coach, and playing list, game plan, etc are of course very important aspects, but a number of studies conducted around the world on the most successful sports teams in modern history (not AFL teams but still applicable) have illustrated the most important aspect (the queen) in that success - on field leadership, ie captain and senior players. Note that in your example Melb 1965-67, Barassi had just left for Carlton, Swans had Skilton, great player but not a leader like Barassi. Recent AFL success stories virtually all had strong on field leadership - Brisbane - Voss & Co, Hawks Hodge & Co, Cats Harley & Co, even Cotchin's improvement in output/leadership was a major factor in the Tiger's flag. Saints had Roo, Joey, etc in the late 2000's.

I have said before that with only Steven/Geary left from the 2006-10 recruiting periods, that is our major issue, dearth of senior leadership. Hannebury will help, and that is why he was recruited. Geary does his best, but needs help, and probably needs a captain above him. We imo have quite a few players who have now had enough senior games under their belt to have improved impact, and that would be helped further by having more Hodge types keeping them in line. So as you say it is not all on the coach, although I agree Richo is on his last year (or part thereof) if the team does not improve in 2019. It is of great value to any coach however to have a few senior leaders such as Hodge, Mitchell, Roughhead on the field.

Apart from Steven and Geary, we also have Armo, Roberton, Steele, Membrey, etc.. all leading by example. We have plenty of leaders.
Hannebery needs to lead by getting back to his 30 possessions per game average - he needs to lead by example too. That's the type of leadership we need, the best type of leadership - the "follow me and do as I do, not only as I say" type of leadership. We don't need him to be a surrogate coach or captain - we need him to be an inspiring player, racking up possessions.

I keep coming back to this (and at the risk of sounding like an old record, for the umpteenth time) ...
What we lack are elite-skilled A grade players - and we need to start drafting as well as recruiting according to our needs.
We need to land some proven A grade players - that's what other teams are doing, they are not just relying on the draft. We are too speculative, looking for bargain players who "might come good" if they overcome injuries or if they can step up to AFL level (and even if one or two of our mature-age recruits do step up, chances are they will never be A grade) , etc.. - taking the iffy, hit and miss approach.
We are overweight in a few areas and underweight in others - our recruiters need to get their act together, start targeting proven, healthy A grade players and recruiting and drafting to a plan and addressing needs to build us a strong and balanced list. They can and need to do a lot, lot better.

[skeptic]

Let's try again, if Richo is still coach at the start of the 2020 season, what do you think it will be he got right in 2019.

A hint: try and think about what things Richo might do well in 2019, what are his strengths, what does he do well? positive attributes, it's a mindset.

He stopped playing injured players

He selected/retained players that were playing well and dropped players that weren’t playing well rather than basing selection on less transparent criteria

He finds a way to play two proper rucks in the top 22 rather than rotating guys like Paddy, Bruce, Steele, Acres through there

He stops picking teams that are too heavily loaded with a similar type of midfielder... most notably slower contested ball winning mids

He finds a way to develop psychological strength in his team’s so that we have less 1/4 to 1/2 fade outs or start games completely rattled unable to hit basic targets or frequently miss easy EASY set shots at goal.

The players need to demonstrate a better understanding on the structure e.g. zone defence, a tall guy on the line for a set shot, kicking to actual targets up forward rather than bombing it in to no one.
Add to that that players and the team need to be more aware of each other’s strenghts/weakness and play to them. For example, Membrey is a player that does better when he leads back to the ball and tries to catch it at the highest point due to his leap (taking advantage of his opponents difficulty matching suit) as opposed to playing as a contested marking or lead up forward

He needs to play more youth and let them take the game on when more seasoned players are not playing well

He absolutely needs to train out of the players the notion of immediately playing on when they have absolutely no idea what’s directly in front of them

He needs to train out of them the frequent tendency to pass short to contests when under pressure

He needs to find a better balance in the game plan (or the player’s ability to execute it) between moving the ball fast/directly and passing it around and around and around pointlessly allowing the opposition to structure up.
Obviously it’s a balance because we don’t want them to be wreckless going forward but too often we disadvantage the forwards by being to cautious and slow.


If I saw inmprovement in those areas... which you have told me to stop posting about in the past, I would be considerably more satisfied with the coach regardless of the win loss though I imagine our performance would be better


In terms of what he does well, strengths etcI guess I’m not so sure.
He seems to have at least developed a culture where players love the club and want to stay
They seemingly work hard and don’t foul up off-field
He’s created a culture where players are open to constructive criticism and feedback and want to get better
Our relationship with Sandy seems to be the most settled it’s ever been so I have to imagine he’s played a part in that
He seems very much inclined to give ppl responsibility and back them in to perform and stick with them if things dont work out right away... at least some players
And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

That’s the best I’ve got

Happy New Years Skeptic, may it bring health and happiness.

Hey great post, but just need to clarify something, I don't think I have ever asked you (or any other poster) to stop posting. I absolutely have challenged, or tested if you like, where challenging or testing seemed appropriate. Even though the challenging and testing may appear vigorous and even persistent at times I mostly try to be respectful when doing so as well as keeping the challenging and testing proportionate and commensurate.

I'm a big advocate of forums being self moderating and I think you should be prepared for your ideas, opinions, statements and claims to be challenged if you if you post on a forum, it's what a healthy forum is all about.

So don't go changing Skeptic, you have been a magnificent contributor to this board over a very long time.

Can't wait for round 6

Thanks Cairnsman and fair enough. You didn’t ask me to stop, just pointed out that I was repeating myself a bit at the time and though I didn’t like it at the time, you were spot on.

It is actually good to be challenged and you have certainly caused me to reflect and rethink my positions which is great.

I do tend to react a bit fast and emotionally at times which can often result in a more hyperbolic tone than intended so apologies if I come across ruder than intended at time but certainly no hard feelings or issues on my end.

Happy New Years to yourself.

And speaking on amends and not reading through things properly... quick apology to Samoht for dissing your chess analogy that I misread. Totally made sense in hindsight

[takeaway]

Agree with a number of your points but I think you are undervaluing our recruiting over the last 5 years or so. Not the best, but OK in my view, especially recently. The coach, and playing list, game plan, etc are of course very important aspects, but a number of studies conducted around the world on the most successful sports teams in modern history (not AFL teams but still applicable) have illustrated the most important aspect (the queen) in that success - on field leadership, ie captain and senior players. Note that in your example Melb 1965-67, Barassi had just left for Carlton, Swans had Skilton, great player but not a leader like Barassi. Recent AFL success stories virtually all had strong on field leadership - Brisbane - Voss & Co, Hawks Hodge & Co, Cats Harley & Co, even Cotchin's improvement in output/leadership was a major factor in the Tiger's flag. Saints had Roo, Joey, etc in the late 2000's.

I have said before that with only Steven/Geary left from the 2006-10 recruiting periods, that is our major issue, dearth of senior leadership. Hannebury will help, and that is why he was recruited. Geary does his best, but needs help, and probably needs a captain above him. We imo have quite a few players who have now had enough senior games under their belt to have improved impact, and that would be helped further by having more Hodge types keeping them in line. So as you say it is not all on the coach, although I agree Richo is on his last year (or part thereof) if the team does not improve in 2019. It is of great value to any coach however to have a few senior leaders such as Hodge, Mitchell, Roughhead on the field.

Apart from Steven and Geary, we also have Armo, Roberton, Steele, Membrey, etc.. all leading by example. We have plenty of leaders.
Hannebery needs to lead by getting back to his 30 possessions per game average - he needs to lead by example too. That's the type of leadership we need, the best type of leadership - the "follow me and do as I do, not only as I say" type of leadership. We don't need him to be a surrogate coach or captain - we need him to be an inspiring player, racking up possessions.

I keep coming back to this (and at the risk of sounding like an old record, for the umpteenth time) ...
What we lack are elite-skilled A grade players - and we need to start drafting as well as recruiting according to our needs.
We need to land some proven A grade players - that's what other teams are doing, they are not just relying on the draft. We are too speculative, looking for bargain players who "might come good" if they overcome injuries or if they can step up to AFL level (and even if one or two of our mature-age recruits do step up, chances are they will never be A grade) , etc.. - taking the iffy, hit and miss approach.
We are overweight in a few areas and underweight in others - our recruiters need to get their act together, start targeting proven, healthy A grade players and recruiting and drafting to a plan and addressing needs to build us a strong and balanced list. They can and need to do a lot, lot better.

We don't have plenty of leaders - Armo is cooked, and is in and out of the side, Roberton missed last year but hopefully may fill some needs this year (is he a leader?), Steele is still young and not yet a senior leader, and Membrey adds leadership value but not sure how much. In addition to Hannebury, who will add greatly to the side even if he doesn't get back to his best, a Selwood, or even a non A grade player with leadership qualities like a Tom Harley, would improve our side markedly.

I am sure the club HAS been targeting proven, healthy A graders (ie Kelly, Shiel), and it is fine to say the recruiters need to "improve" by getting in A graders, but you can't get them in if they won't come, and the bigger clubs have an advantage in that regard.
I can understand the recruiting approach taken in the last few years, getting in mature agers who are attainable, ie Carlisle, Membrey, Roberton, Steele, etc - excellent pickups, and also drafting young players based on best considered available. Not many failures in the mature risk category in recent years - Freeman, who else? Plenty of clubs take risks in bringing in injury prone or otherwise risky projects. It is a tough business and very difficult to get who you really want. We brought in some mature agers this year to fill a perceived need, speed, all at low picks, so one success from the four of them would be a win.

With a reasonable list profile, many players now around the 50 games or more, bit of a lift in on field leadership, hopefully we can win a few more games next year and improve our chances of getting those A graders in.

[samoht]

Armitage, averaging 20 possessions per game in 2018 is not a leader (because he's cooked), while Hannebery averaging 18 possessions per game is a leader and is going to offer much more?
Is that what Hannebery thinks - that we lack leaders and he's going to make a difference that way? I think someone needs to set him straight, if that's the case.

I think we have all the leaders we need - and we need Hannebery to get back to his best.

We can attract the healthy A graders - we just need to sell ourselves better and not sell ourselves short.
We now have great facilities, etc.. we are now back at Moorabbin, we have a vision and a plan, etc... blah, blah .. dollar, dollar.

The pacy, mature-age recruits will need to prove themsleves capable at AFL level first - they are not proven players, and certainly not A grade.

[SaintPav]

Richo is on borrowed time; whether it’s round 6 or after round 22 whatever, unless he pulls one out of his arse and we win 15 games, this WILL BE his final year.

[takeaway]

Armitage, averaging 20 possessions per game in 2018 is not a leader (because he's cooked), while Hannebery averaging 18 possessions per game is a leader and is going to offer much more?
Is that what Hannebery thinks - that we lack leaders and he's going to make a difference that way?

I think we have all the leaders we need - and we need Hannebery to get back to his best.

We can attract the healthy A graders - we just need to sell ourselves better and not sell ourselves short.
We now have great facilities, etc..

The pacy, mature-age recruits will need to prove themsleves capable at AFL level first - they are not proven players, and certainly not A grade.

Armitage is 30, Hannebury 27. If Armo was near his prime yes, but he has not been really fit for a couple of years, virtually no games in 2017, and at the most has 2 years left (probably one). Hannebury was playing injured 2018, but should have 4-5 years left. Hannebury has better career stats, 3 times AA and not out of his prime years. I love Armo, but I doubt whether he will get back to his best, let alone play most games. I hope I'm wrong.

I would hope Hannebury would think he can fill some of the leadership void, probably been told that by the club anyway - seems to be taking on that role a bit at training.

Agree re the mature recruits, but what else can you expect at picks 47 plus?

Anyway, agree to disagree.

[takeaway]

Richo is on borrowed time; whether it’s round 6 or after round 22 whatever, unless he pulls one out of his arse and we win 15 games, this WILL BE his final year.

He must be gone then, little chance of winning 15 games. Will probably be safe if we challenge for finals imo. Any less than 8-9 wins, in trouble.

[samoht]

Armitage is 30, Hannebury 27. If Armo was near his prime yes, but he has not been really fit for a couple of years, virtually no games in 2017, and at the most has 2 years left (probably one). Hannebury was playing injured 2018, but should have 4-5 years left. Hannebury has better career stats, 3 times AA and not out of his prime years. I love Armo, but I doubt whether he will get back to his best, let alone play most games. I hope I'm wrong.

I would hope Hannebury would think he can fill some of the leadership void, probably been told that by the club anyway - seems to be taking on that role a bit at training.

Agree re the mature recruits, but what else can you expect at picks 47 plus?

Anyway, agree to disagree.

The void that Hannebery really needs to fill is that between his current lowly 18 possessions per game and the 30 possessions per game he was averaging at his best.
That would be all the leadership and inspiration that we need from him.

Even post Armo -- Ross, Steele, Geary, Steven,Membrey, Roberton, even Webster .. they are all leaders in their own right.
Leaders need to be respected - and you earn that respect on the field - by being a consistently strong player.

[Scollop]

I predict we will regularly have our pants pulled down again in 2019.

Richo should have been sacked after round 6 this year

[takeaway]

Armitage is 30, Hannebury 27. If Armo was near his prime yes, but he has not been really fit for a couple of years, virtually no games in 2017, and at the most has 2 years left (probably one). Hannebury was playing injured 2018, but should have 4-5 years left. Hannebury has better career stats, 3 times AA and not out of his prime years. I love Armo, but I doubt whether he will get back to his best, let alone play most games. I hope I'm wrong.

I would hope Hannebury would think he can fill some of the leadership void, probably been told that by the club anyway - seems to be taking on that role a bit at training.

Agree re the mature recruits, but what else can you expect at picks 47 plus?

Anyway, agree to disagree.

The void that Hannebery really needs to fill is that between his current lowly 18 possessions per game and the 30 possessions per game he was averaging at his best.
That would be all the leadership and inspiration that we need from him.

Even post Armo -- Ross, Steele, Geary, Steven,Membrey, Roberton, even Webster .. they are all leaders in their own right.
Leaders need to be respected - and you earn that respect on the field - by being a consistently strong player.

Can't resist.

It would be great if Hannebury gets back to his best, but even if he doesn't his main value will be felt - experience and leadership - and others will get the extra possessions. You can't expect Luke Hodge to be a leader for Brisbane by returning to his stellar years - he has previously earnt the right to be respected, listened to and be a leader right away - as has Hannebury. Not that Hannebury is the be all and end all, but I am sure even in his first game for the Saints, Dan Mc Kenzie, Steele and the like will be listening to and obeying his requests without a murmur. Aside from that, Hannebury is young enough to get back to his best anyway.

We have all those respected and proven leaders? That is good recruiting.

[samoht]

Armitage is 30, Hannebury 27. If Armo was near his prime yes, but he has not been really fit for a couple of years, virtually no games in 2017, and at the most has 2 years left (probably one). Hannebury was playing injured 2018, but should have 4-5 years left. Hannebury has better career stats, 3 times AA and not out of his prime years. I love Armo, but I doubt whether he will get back to his best, let alone play most games. I hope I'm wrong.

I would hope Hannebury would think he can fill some of the leadership void, probably been told that by the club anyway - seems to be taking on that role a bit at training.

Agree re the mature recruits, but what else can you expect at picks 47 plus?

Anyway, agree to disagree.

The void that Hannebery really needs to fill is that between his current lowly 18 possessions per game and the 30 possessions per game he was averaging at his best.
That would be all the leadership and inspiration that we need from him.

Even post Armo -- Ross, Steele, Geary, Steven,Membrey, Roberton, even Webster .. they are all leaders in their own right.
Leaders need to be respected - and you earn that respect on the field - by being a consistently strong player.

Can't resist.

It would be great if Hannebury gets back to his best, but even if he doesn't his main value will be felt - experience and leadership - and others will get the extra possessions. You can't expect Luke Hodge to be a leader for Brisbane by returning to his stellar years - he has previously earnt the right to be respected, listened to and be a leader right away - as has Hannebury. Not that Hannebury is the be all and end all, but I am sure even in his first game for the Saints, Dan Mc Kenzie, Steele and the like will be listening to and obeying his requests without a murmur. Aside from that, Hannebury is young enough to get back to his best anyway.

We have all those respected and proven leaders? That is good recruiting.

(Can't resist, either).
Good, but not great recruiting (as far as leadership types go) - yes, we do have quite a few proven leaders, i.e., players who lead by example - but you can't have too many C grade chiefs/leaders and not enough A grade Indians.
For example, Geary is C grade, but still a respected leader, as he's getting the most out of himself, consistently averaging his 20 defensive possessions per game and he's been a loyal, one club player - Hannebery is not a special case, he needs to do that too - get back to his very, very best (to justify his salary for starters and start earning his respect on-field - his new team mates don't owe him any).
I'm sorry, but, 18 midfield possessions per game would not be good enough (or inspirational enough) - he can't just rest on his laurels. He needs to lead by example, and play inspirational AA grade football and do that consisently to be considered among our proven leaders.
We do have proven leaders (players who lead by example), but we only have one elite player - and we haven't got the balance right (unless recruiting 5 C grade ruckmen, 10 half back flankers, 4 -6 full forwards and not enough proven elite skilled outside runners/accumulators is good for team balance ). Our recruiting has been very poor overall, and very iffy.
I expect to see a passing parade of coaches until we finally get our recruiting sorted out (and AR might very well become our 3rd or is it 4th? coaching casualty in 8 years, next year - and chances are we will get pantsed, as scollop predicts).

Happy New Year to everyone - we might see things differently, but we all want the same thing, at the end.

[Cairnsman]

And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

This is probably the biggest leaver Alan can pull in 2019.

Players are always being asked to develop and learn from mistakes, the same opportunity should be given to head coaches and thankfully the admin are giving Alan an opportunity to grow with the club.

Hardwick and Buckley seemed to re-invent themselves when given the opportunity and the results spoke for themselves.

[samoht]

And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

This is probably the biggest leaver Alan can pull in 2019.

Players are always being asked to develop and learn from mistakes, the same opportunity should be given to head coaches and thankfully the admin are giving Alan an opportunity to grow with the club.

Hardwick and Buckley seemed to re-invent themselves when given the opportunity and the results spoke for themselves.

I think Hardwick and Buckley "re-invented themselves" on the back of some good recruiting. There needs to be a confluence of growth from all areas - coaching, recruiting, players (as well as the admin planning, overseeing and fostering/driving this growth)... for it to all come together.

[dragit]

thankfully the admin are giving Alan an opportunity to grow with the club.

Hardwick and Buckley seemed to re-invent themselves when given the opportunity and the results spoke for themselves.

You've got to be kidding, the admin made a huge bungle by extending Richo prematurely… why would they sack him in round 6 next year if they thought he was the man to take us forward?

His record of developing young players in the last 5 years is worse than his Win/Loss record.

You guys are absolutely dreaming likening Richo to Buckley or Hardwick… he's closer to Mark Neeld if we are looking for a reference point.

Richo has claimed that we were in the frame to contend for a flag for the last 2 seasons, the guy clearly has absolutely no idea where he or we are at.

[skeptic]

And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

This is probably the biggest leaver Alan can pull in 2019.

Players are always being asked to develop and learn from mistakes, the same opportunity should be given to head coaches and thankfully the admin are giving Alan an opportunity to grow with the club.

Hardwick and Buckley seemed to re-invent themselves when given the opportunity and the results spoke for themselves.

I think Hardwick and Buckley "re-invented themselves" on the back of some good recruiting. There needs to be a confluence of growth from all areas - coaching, recruiting, players (as well as the admin planning, overseeing and fostering/driving this growth)... for it to all come together.

I hear this point but IMO, the things that I listed earlier in the thread regarding areas of improvement (which in my opinion is why we struggled this season) are not talent issues. They’re coaching ones.

It won’t matter if King is the next Buddy, if he’s at the 50m mark and we kick the ball to a 3 on 1 in the goal square and Gresh in the 1... our recruiting doesn’t matter.

If we recruit 3 talented mids but they play at Sandy because we prefer to play an injured Armitage etc etc it doesn’t matter who we get.

I agree yes talent is an issue but how we play and develop them is an equally big one

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

We will be 6-0 so this 2-4 Sack Richo talk won't come to fruition.

[Cairnsman]

And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

This is probably the biggest leaver Alan can pull in 2019.

Players are always being asked to develop and learn from mistakes, the same opportunity should be given to head coaches and thankfully the admin are giving Alan an opportunity to grow with the club.

Hardwick and Buckley seemed to re-invent themselves when given the opportunity and the results spoke for themselves.

I think Hardwick and Buckley "re-invented themselves" on the back of some good recruiting. There needs to be a confluence of growth from all areas - coaching, recruiting, players (as well as the admin planning, overseeing and fostering/driving this growth)... for it to all come together.

I hear this point but IMO, the things that I listed earlier in the thread regarding areas of improvement (which in my opinion is why we struggled this season) are not talent issues. They’re coaching ones.

It won’t matter if King is the next Buddy, if he’s at the 50m mark and we kick the ball to a 3 on 1 in the goal square and Gresh in the 1... our recruiting doesn’t matter.

If we recruit 3 talented mids but they play at Sandy because we prefer to play an injured Armitage etc etc it doesn’t matter who we get.

I agree yes talent is an issue but how we play and develop them is an equally big one

How do you know Alan deliberately played Armo injured and what other players did Alan deliberately play injured other than Armo? and can I ask how do you know Alan did so deliberately over other viable options?

[degruch]

The Mystic says we lose to the Suns and then win the next 3.

If we lose to the Sun's I don't hold out a lot of hope for the rest of the season but no matter who gets the reins it's going to be a tough gig . I suppose you have wait & see

First gig of the year, all bets are off, so I would be disappointed but not surprised if we didn't get over the Suns First 22. As for 2-4, there have been so many changes to the coaching staff I highly doubt the club will turn around and point the finger at one individual, that would be a massive mistake and send a shocking message. Without rose tinted glasses I can easily see 3-3 (and loving that Melbourne is one of them), I'd be surprised if we did better than that, but 2-4 is hardly cause to send the Cho packing.

[DJ Higgins]

People forget that all teams are now different with different coaching staff and players. Some clubs have more impacting changes than others of course. Most fans think their team will get better as well. I can see the us improving on last year as it's a low bar but winning 3 from 6, I'm expecting 1, 2 at a stretch

[skeptic]

And perhaps he’s willing to learn and adapt from his mistakes

This is probably the biggest leaver Alan can pull in 2019.

Players are always being asked to develop and learn from mistakes, the same opportunity should be given to head coaches and thankfully the admin are giving Alan an opportunity to grow with the club.

Hardwick and Buckley seemed to re-invent themselves when given the opportunity and the results spoke for themselves.

I think Hardwick and Buckley "re-invented themselves" on the back of some good recruiting. There needs to be a confluence of growth from all areas - coaching, recruiting, players (as well as the admin planning, overseeing and fostering/driving this growth)... for it to all come together.

I hear this point but IMO, the things that I listed earlier in the thread regarding areas of improvement (which in my opinion is why we struggled this season) are not talent issues. They’re coaching ones.

It won’t matter if King is the next Buddy, if he’s at the 50m mark and we kick the ball to a 3 on 1 in the goal square and Gresh in the 1... our recruiting doesn’t matter.

If we recruit 3 talented mids but they play at Sandy because we prefer to play an injured Armitage etc etc it doesn’t matter who we get.

I agree yes talent is an issue but how we play and develop them is an equally big one

How do you know Alan deliberately played Armo injured and what other players did Alan deliberately play injured other than Armo? and can I ask how do you know Alan did so deliberately over other viable options?

We're talking future. That's an example of something if it happened it would bother me.

The notion of the critique came from the revelation that Weller played the majority of 2017 with an ankle injury that was hampering his performance and many of us were miffed at his continual selection at the time.

It was also reported last year that Longer got injured in rd1 and was selected to play through vs Nth in rd2 to only aggravate the injury further and miss the second half + weeks when we had 3 fully fit ruckmen playing in the reserves

[samoht]

RL was 0-10 and the knives/swords still remained fully sheathed - and he's now into his eighth year, securely ensconced at double AR's salary.
We probably have AR and BR working for less than that (RL's salary), combined.

It's a case of be careful what you ask for, unless it's for an improvement in our (hitherto, iffy, speculative and scattergun) recruiting, which we definitely do need (stop it, just stop it!).

[kosifantutti]

RL was 0-10

??????
Edit:
Just realised you were talking about his time at Freo.