Mega Thread The Buckley/Malthouse Succession Plan Mega Thread

[Cousin of Daicos]

Ironic, considering I've never seen you be so balanced in your appraisal when talking about Malthouse. Aren't results ALL that matter Ed? Malthouse took Collingwood from a wooden spoon to a Grand Final in 3 years but I never see you ever give credit for that regardless of the circumstances Malthouse was in for those first few years because he didn't get the job done. No premiership, no credit, right? Or do results suddenly not matter in Wallaces case, he's a joke, I don't want him anywhere near the club.

Context is king mate.

I've always had a go at Malthouse because most coaches DREAM of the conditions Malthouse has had at Collingwood.

Terry Wallace's situation is stuff of nightmares.

If Mick Malthouse was coaching Richmond during that particular period, I doubt it would have been much better at all.

Yeh, Nathan Brown was a good example of a dud imo. Certainly not as savvy as trading a top 20 pick for Jordan McMahon.

Really? Taht's your rationale? So NO other coach in history has ever dudded up trades? Including Mick? Mick has never ever stuffed up at the trade or draft table?

Steve Johnson? No? Steve McKee? No? I mean come on, at least try and take the blinkers off.

Like I said, Terry was doing everything on his own.

 

[PieBeast]

I just listened to the same interview (I assume as there are no others on the matter on SEN site.) and fail to see how you drew this conclusion...in any way.
He spoke exclusively about Neeld's strengths and had nothing to say regarding his own situation?

Good old case of selective hearing my friend. Prior to saying Neeld should not let anyone interfere with his coaching and have everything under his control Mick said-

"Now this might sound as slightly pointed and it is...."

I'm of the opinion this will be the exact reason he will give for leaving us next year, as in Bucks needs full autonomy to properly establish himself as a senior coach.
I could be wrong but thats my read of the situation.

 

[Pie eyed]

Good old case of selective hearing my friend. Prior to saying Neeld should not let anyone interfere with his coaching and have everything under his control Mick said-

"Now this might sound as slightly pointed and it is...."

I'm of the opinion this will be the exact reason he will give for leaving us next year, as in Bucks needs full autonomy to properly establish himself as a senior coach.
I could be wrong but thats my read of the situation.

I think I know who is being selective in their mishearing that's for sure.
The statement made perfect sense in context with the conversation about Neeld taking the reigns as a senior coach and makes absolutely no sense in MM situation next season.
Bucks already has full autonomy for next season, in fact it is the reason for all the BS in the media.

 

[Zahki]

Context is king mate.

I've always had a go at Malthouse because most coaches DREAM of the conditions Malthouse has had at Collingwood.

Uh, yeah, the conditions that Malthouse had a hand in creating. You realise he was the impetus behind the move from Victoria Park because he was appalled at the facilities there after being at West Coast right? There are no excuses Ed, Malthouse took a Collingwood side at their lowest ebb and lifted them into a Grand Final. Wallace achieved NOTHING in his entire time at Richmond.

 

[smiddaz123]

Really? Taht's your rationale? So NO other coach in history has ever dudded up trades? Including Mick? Mick has never ever stuffed up at the trade or draft table?

Steve Johnson? No? Steve McKee? No? I mean come on, at least try and take the blinkers off.
.

What the hell is the matter with you? Why are you shitting on about Malthouse to me? And take my blinkers off? Do I have some bias against Wallace or some rubbish?

It's pretty ridiculous logic from you anyway. You say criticise Richmond for trading poorly before Wallace came, and then when someone points out a poor trade from Wallace your stance it 'ah well, every coach does it'.

Good one.

 

[Pie eyed]

Ed is not an idiot.
Wallace would be lucky to be considered for a radio interview now days.

 

[PieBeast]

I think I know who is being selective in their mishearing that's for sure.
The statement made perfect sense in context with the conversation about Neeld taking the reigns as a senior coach and makes absolutely no sense in MM situation next season.
Bucks already has full autonomy for next season, in fact it is the reason for all the BS in the media.

Absolutely???

Then I guess its absolutely pointless to continue this conversation.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Uh, yeah, the conditions that Malthouse had a hand in creating. You realise he was the impetus behind the move from Victoria Park because he was appalled at the facilities there after being at West Coast right? There are no excuses Ed, Malthouse took a Collingwood side at their lowest ebb and lifted them into a Grand Final. Wallace achieved NOTHING in his entire time at Richmond.

Neither Wallace NOR Malthouse had won a flag in the 4 or 5 years Wallace was at Richmond.

Malthouse had 'a hand in it' because Collingwood could afford it.

Richmond couldn't. Again, you're completely ignoring context. Terry Wallace has never been given a chance at a wealthy club. Mick has had a chance at 2.

Coincidentally, Mick and Terry achieved the exact same results as first time coaches of the Bulldogs.

Coincidence much?

What the hell is the matter with you? Why are you shitting on about Malthouse to me? And take my blinkers off? Do I have some bias against Wallace or some rubbish?

It's pretty ridiculous logic from you anyway. You say criticise Richmond for trading poorly before Wallace came, and then when someone points out a poor trade from Wallace your stance it 'ah well, every coach does it'.

Good one.

I said Richmond had traded away all their top draft picks for years before Terry got there. I don't believe Terry did that in his time there.

The longer part of my post wasn't in response to you anyway. Onl yht huh? was because I had no idea what your post meant.

 

[Pie eyed]

Absolutely???

Then I guess its absolutely pointless to continue this conversation.

Glad you see it my way.
We won't have to send you off to that camp in Siberia for re-education.

 

[smiddaz123]

I said Richmond had traded away all their top draft picks for years before Terry got there. I don't believe Terry did that in his time there.

So Terry Wallace's genius plan was to keep pick 1 and draft the best young player in the country? Well shit, sign him up

You threw off my point about Jordan McMahon because apparently 'every coach does this'. Yet you're happy to condemn the previous Richmond coaches for some poor trades

The longer part of my post wasn't in response to you anyway.

Yeh, spare me. You directly told me to take my blinkers off in regards for Malthouse. I haven't mentioned the bloke once in this entire thread. I have no idea what you think you're arguing about.

Terry Wallace

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

So Terry Wallace's genius plan was to keep pick 1 and draft the best young player in the country? Well shit, sign him up

You threw off my point about Jordan McMahon because apparently 'every coach does this'. Yet you're happy to condemn the previous Richmond coaches for some poor trades


Yeh, spare me. You directly told me to take my blinkers off in regards for Malthouse. I haven't mentioned the bloke once in this entire thread. I have no idea what you think you're arguing about.

Terry Wallace

But why would you specifically point out that one trade/pick, when again, EVERY coach/club has done it?

I mentioned Mick as an example to back up the point I just mentioned.

If you can't see how different Richmond back then were from Collingwood, or even Richmond now, then you have issues. Terry Wallace had a lot of shit to deal with in his time at Richmond and I think he was very harshly judged.

I hear him speak and I feel he is a very astute judge of the game and how a club should be run, and a lot of that experience would come from the horror time he had at Richmond.

I think, if given the chance, assuming mick doesn't stay (which is where this all came from), then I think terry would do a good job at our club. Again, all this was on the pretense that mick goes, which is how it came up. Im not saying I'd prefer terry to mick as doc, but if mick goes, I think terry would be good for the role.

 

[topic97]

Life after Malthouse - Pies fans thoughts?

Now ill say straight off the bat this is in no way whatsoever a trolling thread.

I was thinking last night after reading a few things about Thompsons leaving Geelong and how he thinks we have done well without him etc etc and was wondering how the similar situation will affect the Pies next season.

Sure, its been a succession plan from day dot, but in essence its a head coach leaving and a new coach and what appears to be new coaching panel fronting an awesome list - similar to what happened to the Cats.

So what is all the Pies fans thoughts on how you will fare next season after possibly 2 flags in a row?
Are you expecting a drop off and are wishing that Mick could hang around, or are you looking forward to the change and think it could further invigorate the players like Chris Scott has for us?

I am just interested to see what you guys think knowing where the coaching situation is headed, because I know Cats supporters were all doom and gloom when we lost our head coach not knowing what was around the corner.

 

[jonbe54]

Re: Life after Malthouse - Pies fans thoughts?

Now ill say straight off the bat this is in no way whatsoever a trolling thread.

I was thinking last night after reading a few things about Thompsons leaving Geelong and how he thinks we have done well without him etc etc and was wondering how the similar situation will affect the Pies next season.

Sure, its been a succession plan from day dot, but in essence its a head coach leaving and a new coach and what appears to be new coaching panel fronting an awesome list - similar to what happened to the Cats.

So what is all the Pies fans thoughts on how you will fare next season after possibly 2 flags in a row?
Are you expecting a drop off and are wishing that Mick could hang around, or are you looking forward to the change and think it could further invigorate the players like Chris Scott has for us?

I am just interested to see what you guys think knowing where the coaching situation is headed, because I know Cats supporters were all doom and gloom when we lost our head coach not knowing what was around the corner.

I'm inclined towards the re-invigoration theory that partly explains Geelong's resurgence this year.

Lets face it players are as human as the rest of us - well mostly lol - Mick will have been at the helm for over a decade and lets face it over time the message can get diluted - too familiar.

A significant change with Bucks I feel will be the modification of the boundary hugging game plan which Mick clearly instigated to cover weaknesses in the squad some time ago. I believe that those weaknesses have been addressed and that we no longer need to hug the boundary all the time anymore and my belief and hope is that Bucks agrees with this.

Finally there is the Sheedy lesson to learn from, he waited too long to leave and both his reputation and the bombers chances suffered for it and only now are they starting to rebuild.

Back to back premierships or not I believe THIS is the time to embrace renewal, while the club is still riding high and is in a position of strength to cover any teething probs that may manifest with a change over, rather than the normal hang on until we fall down the ladder again.

The ultimate 'affirmative action' plan which stands a chance of turning a few years of dominance into a long term power play

 

[Ed D]

Re: Life after Malthouse - Pies fans thoughts?

I don't think there will be much, if any drop off next season considering the playing list is young. We'll have a few retirements/delistings but we have the depth to fill the spots, especially when guys like Nathan Brown will be fine to play.

As for the coaching panel, we've lost one assistant, Malthouse will step aside (and hopefully still be there), and perhaps we'll lose another assistant. If 3 staff leave it's not the end of the world, especially when you look at how many are already employed at the club:

2011 football staff:
Geoff Walsh Director of Football
Michael Malthouse Senior Coach
Tracey O’Connor Executive Assistant
Nathan Buckley Assistant Coach
Scott Watters Assistant Coach
Matthew Lappin Assistant Coach
Max Hudghton Defensive Coach
Tarkyn Lockyer VFL Coach/Development
Christian Stagliano VFL Manager/Player Development Manager
Craig McRae Development Manager
Anthony Rocca Development assistant
Shane Joules Opposition Analyst
David Stiff High Performance Manager/Player Psychology
Derek Hine National Recruiting Manager
Jason Taylor National Recruiting Assistant
Dominic Milesi National Recruiting Assistant
Andrew Lockyer WA Recruiting Manager
Michael Armfield SA Recruiting Manager
David Buttifant Director of Sports Science
Michael Dugina Strength and Conditioning Coach
Luke Vella VFL Conditioning
Lachlan Fooks Rehabilitation Physiotherapist
Kevin White Sports Science
Con Hrysomallis Conditioning
Rohan Bownds Head Trainer
Wayne Connor Property Manager
Marcus Wagner Football Technology Manager
Jason Kelly Football Technology Assistant
Tony Nicol VFL Property Manager
Blake McLean Exercise Scientist/ PhD Candidate

 

[vjknight]

Re: Life after Malthouse - Pies fans thoughts?

I'm inclined towards the re-invigoration theory that partly explains Geelong's resurgence this year.

A significant change with Bucks I feel will be the modification of the boundary hugging game plan which Mick clearly instigated to cover weaknesses in the squad some time ago. I believe that those weaknesses have been addressed and that we no longer need to hug the boundary all the time anymore and my belief and hope is that Bucks agrees with this.

The ultimate 'affirmative action' plan which stands a chance of turning a few years of dominance into a long term power play

i think one thing to explain the cats resugence is, despite the aging list, 2 byes during the year and their deserved finals week 2 holiday has been vital. without it IMO they have been tiring by finals week 1.

while i agree the boundary hugging was a tool to help overcome some weaknesses, it is now used because of our dominance. it allows either a constant forward movement of the ball, or if not possible, a likely stoppage thru a boundary throw in, and the subsequent contested win. see any eagles finals game from their dominant early 90's - it mirrors it.

back to the the OP - no hesitation is proceeding with the current succession plan. the quality of the new man is not questioned (by us anyway) and with our current list, a drovers dog could...........

 

[jonbe54]

Re: Life after Malthouse - Pies fans thoughts?

i think one thing to explain the cats resugence is, despite the aging list, 2 byes during the year and their deserved finals week 2 holiday has been vital. without it IMO they have been tiring by finals week 1.

while i agree the boundary hugging was a tool to help overcome some weaknesses, it is now used because of our dominance. it allows either a constant forward movement of the ball, or if not possible, a likely stoppage thru a boundary throw in, and the subsequent contested win. see any eagles finals game from their dominant early 90's - it mirrors it.

back to the the OP - no hesitation is proceeding with the current succession plan. the quality of the new man is not questioned (by us anyway) and with our current list, a drovers dog could...........

Don't get me wrong vj I'm not advocating dropping a superior tactic just advocating not slavishly following it if opportunities present themselves. We have the troops now to use it on occasions if the corridor becomes available and a quick coast to coast movement is obviously available.

This also has the effect of making the inboard opposition players accountable by forcing them to take into account a fast inboard break by the Pies and opens up the flanks

 

[Bird Man]

Micks emotion

Just after that game you can see Mick shed a tear for your club shows how passionate he is about footy and his team and how you guys can just dump him at years end escapes me seriously ... I'm not having a dig just curious as to what you guys thought at seeing this form your coach

I didn't see a thread on this here so I thought I would post it up

 

[nick_savo]

Re: Micks emotion

Its a done deal and it wont change, obvistly we would like Mick to stay on

 

[jonbe54]

Re: Micks emotion

Just after that game you can see Mick shed a tear for your club shows how passionate he is about footy and his team and how you guys can just dump him at years end escapes me seriously ... I'm not having a dig just curious as to what you guys thought at seeing this form your coach

I didn't see a thread on this here so I thought I would post it up

Yes you are having a dig

P1ss off

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Re: Micks emotion

We're not "dumping" him, this has been planned for the past 2 years.

 

[Between The Lines]

Re: Mick Malthouse Asks: What's My Job?

We can't help but ask questions.

Are we stupid for letting Malthouse, arguably the best coach currently in the league, go for an untried Bucks - and only because Bucks is a legend at the club?

It just doesn't seem logical.

I'm torn.

I so agree, Mick offers leadership that can only come from his unique, inspiring wisdom and experience. Bucks will have the football plan and techniques covered, but will he have the ability to lead, inspire, motivate, correct, believe in, trust, develop the young, developing egos of our future stars. MM commands respect from these boys that is based on who he is, not because he is coach.

Surely, Bucks should be the one to push for the dumping of this agreement. if we win the 2011 Premiership, Bucks should be the one to push for MM staying, if MM wants to. Surely, if MM wants to remain, Bucks and Eddie should remember its all about what's good for this pioneering club. I'm sure Eddie knows this, and if we think BUCKS is bigger than the club, then we are in trouble already. If MM wants to retire and be with his family, then the club moves on, but if MM wants to keep coaching, surely we do too.

 

[coldpieswarmbeer]

Re: Mick Malthouse Asks: What's My Job?

first time i've ever thought this, but after watching his reaction... i don't want him to leave as coach

however, emotions aside - i've always been a believer of the re-invigoration theory mentioned earlier.

however - and i haven't read this thread in its entirety so apologies if it has been asked & answered - but what do we do next year if come round 15, we're 2-13 for example. very low chance of it happen... but if so.. what do we do?

What I am really interested in, is do you think in any way it will be possible to slot mick back in if bucks falls flat??

 

[Ed D]

Re: Mick Malthouse Asks: What's My Job?

what do we do next year if come round 15, we're 2-13 for example. very low chance of it happen... but if so.. what do we do?

What I am really interested in, is do you think in any way it will be possible to slot mick back in if bucks falls flat??

Very very very unlikely but it's always a possibility if he's still at the club and willing to be senior coach.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Re: Mick Malthouse Asks: What's My Job?

first time i've ever thought this, but after watching his reaction... i don't want him to leave as coach

however, emotions aside - i've always been a believer of the re-invigoration theory mentioned earlier.

however - and i haven't read this thread in its entirety so apologies if it has been asked & answered - but what do we do next year if come round 15, we're 2-13 for example. very low chance of it happen... but if so.. what do we do?

What I am really interested in, is do you think in any way it will be possible to slot mick back in if bucks falls flat??

Just as easy to say "what do we do next year if we come round 15, we're 13-2 for example"

If you are prepared to consider one scenario, you also have to consider an even more likely scenario.

The talent in the team will not be leaving, therefore it would need to be massive injuries for your 2-13 proposition to occur.
Malthouse or no Malthouse would change that.

 

[PieBeast]

Good old case of selective hearing my friend. Prior to saying Neeld should not let anyone interfere with his coaching and have everything under his control Mick said-

"Now this might sound as slightly pointed and it is...."

I'm of the opinion this will be the exact reason he will give for leaving us next year, as in Bucks needs full autonomy to properly establish himself as a senior coach.
I could be wrong but thats my read of the situation.

Glad you see it my way.
We won't have to send you off to that camp in Siberia for re-education.

Maybe our board should pitch in and send you on that education trip mate