Why does everyone want past eagles to be on the board or have positions at the club. Get outside people in my view. That is what brings new ideas and new systems to the club.
Coach Adam Simpson Megathread est. 2017 - Staying for 2024, Lyon’s Cryin’
- Thread starter Carbine Chaos
- Start date
-
- Tags
- autopsy
- Tagged users None
- Status
Why does everyone want past eagles to be on the board or have positions at the club. Get outside people in my view. That is what brings new ideas and new systems to the club.
Dom sheed pocket
Club Legend
- Aug 15, 2023
- 1,514
- 3,392
- AFL Club
- West Coast
You want a diverse board with a range of different skills, backgrounds and expertise, not all opinions and views are equal when considering different issues that a board needs to make decisions on.
On financial issues, you might lean heavily and give weight to the views of people on the board who have business/finance expertise.
On matters relating to the footy department and footy operations, you would think the board places weight on the views of people who have football and operational experience.
The fact that didn’t happen, and the board instead made a different decision to those with the most experience in the day to day running of a footy club is at minimum, very interesting.
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
“Football people” in this case refers to Nisbett, who had a vested interest, and Jones, who as far as I’m aware hasn’t had any involvement in the football activity of any club other than as a player.
And it’s all based on the word of “The Snitch” in any event.
Good point and one I considered also, of not recycling past leaders - But I saw a recent vid interview with Woosha on the subject of him being on the board, and he expressed an interest if asked and suggested he certainly had the necessary business and football qualifications. So while not wanting to keep recycling the same people at the risk of stagnating, he actually does seem a good fit for the job, or a job on the board.
But I'm sure past eagles are capable of bringing new ideas and systems to the club; they've since had broader experiences away from the club. It's not mutually exclusive. And I'm sure there's an argument that supports positive qualities in having ex-eagles returning to the club.
- Aug 14, 2019
- 1,263
- 2,312
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I would rather that they were more astute and clear headed than what they are. I would rather they familiarised themselves with the old maxim that you are what your record says you are. If you win two games in a season then you clearly have problems to solve. If they recognised how bad things actually are then they might have had a review a year ago (or two years ago) and started looking for the causes of how we got into the predicament we are in (which departments are underperforming and why, what bad decisions did we make and why did we make them, what skills do we lack, is our internal culture too matey and comfortable and not competitive and adversarial enough, is power and authority too centralised in a single figure, i.e. Nisbett), thought through the courses of action to move forward and started implementing.
I would rather than they were more humble and aware enough of their own fallibility to at least think twice and think carefully about what you are doing when every other person in the industry is laughing at you. It doesn't mean you are wrong and should immediately reverse course just because a majority of outside observers disagree with you. Don't completely substitute other peoples judgement for your own. But you should at least think twice. And if it is a unanimous chorus and not just a majority, and if it is seasoned experienced people within the industry and not just random public opinion that is very strongly disagreeing with you you should definately think twice. It is pretty unlikely in those circumstances that you are anywhere near 100% right. If they were to walk you through their rationale as for why they thought they were right and everybody else was wrong 12 months ago do you think it would make one skerrick of sense or be even marginally coherent and logical?
Why does it matter how "well connected" they are? What does that mean and why does it matter to the smooth and high level day to functioning of a football club to have people on the Board with a fat rolodex? How does that translate into better decisions and outcomes for the club? It obviously doesn't.
It is very well known that Langer and Simpson are best mates and their families even go on holiday together.
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
Sigh … source?
What you need a source for? It's not a court of law here.
It is well known they are mates.
From AFL website just last week
The former Test star is close friends with Simpson but it remains to be seen whether Langer can convince the rest of the board to stick with the current coach.
"It's a challenge for JL because he's on the board," Simpson replied when asked what words of advice Langer has had for him.
"He's going to make decisions based on what's best for the club, not for me. So that's separate.
"But in terms of what he's been through and how he's handled it, and what he's experienced (during his own coaching career), that's invaluable.
"He is and always will be a good friend of mine. I respect his leadership and what he's done for the club, and for me personally."
Not much a long bow to draw that the families may of gone away together at some point is it?
Well John Worsfold is a football person that has spent time at West Coast, Essendon, Adelaide and Carlton.
he is well educated a good person and a club legend. Would have far more credibility and passion for West Coast than any external candidates.
Yes, it is.
Yes he is a football person and he has been a football person at those clubs. No problem if you want to be on the board and sit in the background but surely you don't want him involved with football now? I think his time has passed.
How so?
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
Just seems like a strange claim to make, that it’s well known that the families go on holidays together.
I didn’t know it and I apparently have no job and no life so I live on here.
But it just doesn't matter, they are mates and apparantly good mates. So who cares really.
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
It’s a really annoying trend for people to claim something is well known or common knowledge, then get their hackles up when questioned about whether it’s well known or common knowledge or even the case at all.
If I was a cynical man, I’d say that they’re just saying stuff that suits them and adding “it’s common knowledge that…” in order to give that stuff an undeserved air of legitimacy. Good thing I’m not that.
If I was a cynical man, I’d say that they’re just saying stuff that suits them and adding “it’s common knowledge that…” in order to give that stuff an undeserved air of legitimacy. Good thing I’m not that.
Keys
Looking for a cloud to yell at
- Moderator
- #13,943
Simpson and Langer are friends that’s common knowledge
Just how deep their friendship goes I’m not sure, nor do I give a ****
I certainly don’t care if they went on family holidays together
Argue about something more important
Like were there donuts or lamingtons at the board meeting
Just how deep their friendship goes I’m not sure, nor do I give a ****
I certainly don’t care if they went on family holidays together
Argue about something more important
Like were there donuts or lamingtons at the board meeting
As am I and the exact same. I just don't think it needs to be questioned though because none of us know it is or isn't true. What proof do you have it isn't true?
It's just not important. The fact that they are good mates was what he was really stating.
Because "we're good friends" doesn't equal living in each others' pockets, going on family holidays and being BFFs for life.
I've had plenty of good friends at my workplaces before, doesn't mean we're joined at the hip.
Bender_
X
I'd go on several family holidays with close friends if I was Simmo too. BBQs and dog races for dayzzzzzz.
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
There was a fully catered strategic lunch, or so I understand.
I posit that Langer and Simpson are both Kang and Kodos in disguise posing as humans in an alien attempt to take over the club, what proof do you have that that isnt true?
see here
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
Is this because you saw them exchanging long protein strings?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
