+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Princes Park (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: Robert Heatley Stand (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-14.html)
+--- Thread: Football Department Review (/thread-5260.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Re: Football Department Review - DJC - 08-26-2021
So, the review found that Judd was correct and we won’t appoint a coach on training wheels again ?
I think that the criticism of the gameplan and tactics are justified but surely Lloyd should have been providing feedback to Teague. There’s no mention of support and development of the coach, something that Mark Maclure and others have identified as a key failure. We’ll just appointed an experienced hack and let him get on with the job.
I can’t believe that list management gets a tick. I guess we’ll see more highly paid halfback flankers next season.
Player development didn’t get a mention either ?
Re: Football Department Review - cookie2 - 08-26-2021
(08-26-2021, 02:20 AM)DJC link Wrote:So, the review found that Judd was correct and we won’t appoint a coach on training wheels again ?
I think that the criticism of the gameplan and tactics are justified but surely Lloyd should have been providing feedback to Teague. There’s no mention of support and development of the coach, something that Mark Maclure and others have identified as a key failure. We’ll just appointed an experienced hack and let him get on with the job.
I can’t believe that list management gets a tick. I guess we’ll see more highly paid halfback flankers next season.
Player development didn’t get a mention either ?
This is all most concerning.
Re: Football Department Review - LP - 08-26-2021
(08-26-2021, 02:15 AM)madbluboy date Wrote:Half the players didn't rate him.Was that the half that wouldn't chase?
Who is their leader?
Re: Football Department Review - kruddler - 08-26-2021
Let me critique Sayers letter to point out some BS inaccuracies....
Quote:The review has found that while the coaching group had the expertise required, it had been unable to have an effective impact on a playing group that is required to deliver results at the elite level.So the coaches had the expertise (read: We did not appoint the wrong people previously)
...but they couldn't impact the group (read: Some players were pissed off with hard truths about not defending!)
Quote:While the easier option would have been to wait a further 12 months in the hope these deficiencies would change...Personally i think the easy option was to sack him rather than back him.
Quote:There is a high level of expertise in the high-performance area, however opportunity exists to clearly define roles and responsibilities.Thats what happens when you sack someone at the start of the review, people are forced to cover for the bloke that was just sacked and there is no clear roles and responsibilities because they are scrambing to cover your f***ups.
Quote:We were pleased that the final report delivered by the external panel outlined a number of areas our football department had been performing strongly, relating to areas of football strategy, list management, systems and operations, with quality people committed to what they’re doing.Football strategy - but players didn't understand the game plan, yeah? Which is it??
Systems and operations - but there was not well defined roles, you just told us that.
Quote:Whilst management and staff were found to be capable and committed to the success of Carlton Football Club, and demonstrating a positive mindset, there is a requirement for stronger leadership, more experienced coaching, and improvements in player development.Hang on, the coaches had the expertise, but not we need more experienced coaches? Oh, because a few players were pissed off??
Name them, shame them and f*** them off.....and start with Cripps.
Quote:Our AFL and AFLW playing groups are now well placed to pursue on-field success in the coming seasons, supported by our incredibly strong off-field position that is underpinned by new facilities and sustainable revenue streams.Firstly, AFLW.....mass exodus there and nothing that occured from this review changes that. So BS on that.
Secondly, why is our AFL playing group now well placed to purseue on-field success?
We...
1. Don't have a senior coach yet (or did you leave something off your email Luke!)
2. Are down at least 3 assistants on top of not having a senior coach - Barker, Amos and Stanton.
So again, how are we well placed???
and finally...
Nobody has addressed the Lloyd to Collingwood rumours or list building and development (or lack of?) not the medling of our CEO in that area.
Cut through all that crap and you'll find that....
1. We wanted to sack the coach and a few assistants and this was a grandstand way to do that.
2. Everything else is fine and dandy...apart from a few changes at board level which we choose who comes on.
3. Supposedly, no issues with CEO's and list management at the club. I expect everyone to re-sign then. If any of Dow, Stocker, Silvagni.....etc want out, then BS. I expect Lloyd+Liddle to be replaced within the next 12 months.
Re: Football Department Review - blueday - 08-26-2021
Read between the lines, the coaching group did not have a clear game plan or the ability to communicate and lock in the plan. This would be fatal for any coach, this is not the board forming an opinion, this is the external review findings. Accept it, a decision has been made. Judge the new board on the decisions they make from this point forward.
Re: Football Department Review - cookie2 - 08-26-2021
(08-26-2021, 02:48 AM)blueday link Wrote:Read between the lines, the coaching group did not have a clear game plan or the ability to communicate and lock in the plan. This would be fatal for any coach, this is not the board forming an opinion, this is the external review findings. Accept it, a decision has been made. Judge the new board on the decisions they make from this point forward.
Don’t worry BD, plenty of us will be watching very closely how we go from now on and judging accordingly. The bs will clear and true reality will become apparent soon enough.
Re: Football Department Review - ElwoodBlues1 - 08-26-2021
(08-26-2021, 02:20 AM)DJC link Wrote:So, the review found that Judd was correct and we won’t appoint a coach on training wheels again ?
I think that the criticism of the gameplan and tactics are justified but surely Lloyd should have been providing feedback to Teague. There’s no mention of support and development of the coach, something that Mark Maclure and others have identified as a key failure. We’ll just appointed an experienced hack and let him get on with the job.
I can’t believe that list management gets a tick. I guess we’ll see more highly paid halfback flankers next season.
Player development didn’t get a mention either ?
(08-26-2021, 02:10 AM)madbluboy link Wrote:The Herald Sun can reveal that Teague was heavily wounded by feedback provided to the club’s external reviewers during their exhausting investigation into Carlton’s football department.Players might be asking for Teague back when they get a dose of Ross Lyon methodology, the bar is going to be raised a lot higher in terms of what he expects, injuries etc wont be an excuse for lack of effort etc etc.
It is understood that Teague received support from less than 50 per cent of the players and support staff interviewed by Matthew Pavlich, Geoff Walsh and Graham Lowe.
Teague drove into the club this morning to tell the playing group he had been sacked after two and a half years in the job. He had one more year to run on his contract.
The external panel was given unfettered access to the Blues and left few stones unturned in their search for answers, although Pavlich’s research was conducted via Zoom because he was unable to fly in from Western Australia
The suggested pass mark for coach support was considered to be closer to 80 per cent.
Sources said Teague was stunned when he was informed on Monday when the findings were finally tabled to him.
Teague passionately shot down reports that he had lost relationships with some of his players on Saturday night after his final game in charge.
“It hurt when people said I’d lost relationships with the players,” Teague said.
“That one probably dug a little bit deep because it’s not true.
Re: Football Department Review - Baggers - 08-26-2021
New Board Members, new senior coach, new assistants...
The Terrier to narrow his focus to his area of responsibility.
I wouldn't get too comfy if I was Lloyd or Liddle.
Re: Football Department Review - LP - 08-26-2021
(08-26-2021, 03:02 AM)Baggers date Wrote:The Terrier to narrow his focus to his area of responsibility.I suspect he'll go, he came to us to get away from that!
(08-26-2021, 03:02 AM)Baggers date Wrote:I wouldn't get too comfy if I was Lloyd or Liddle.Lloyd I can't comment on, Liddle must be the author of the report based on it's content.
I reckon Sayers must have been too busy pissing it up with the Fox family and Dan down Portsea and Sorrento to author that rubbish, then he's rolled in with the hangover and said can't be fecked just tell me where to sign!
Re: Football Department Review - kruddler - 08-26-2021
(08-26-2021, 02:48 AM)blueday link Wrote:Read between the lines, the coaching group did not have a clear game plan or the ability to communicate and lock in the plan. This would be fatal for any coach, this is not the board forming an opinion, this is the external review findings. Accept it, a decision has been made. Judge the new board on the decisions they make from this point forward.Did the coach not have a clear game plan?
OR
Did he was he not able to lock in a plan?
I'm going to try a few things which may or may not work, bare with me.
IMO a simplistic view of our gameplan is to back our defenders in to beat their opponents in one on one contests, move the ball quickly through the middle to our leading KP forwards. Be strong at the contested ball through the guts and basically play with attacking flare to keep the ball going forward and locking it in deep forward when we get it there.
OK, so we've seen that basically work against top teams...albeit just falling short because we are not as talented as the top teams yet.
Now, at the start of the year, we couldn't win the contested ball because we were playing a guy with a broken back in the middle....and who couldn't chase. Our defenders did remarkably well despite this. So less defensive pressure in the middle = more pressure on defenders.
That aside, we started turning things around in the middle and winning contested possessions...then our rucks broke down.
So less defensive pressure in the middle = more pressure on defenders.
We then were unable to lock the ball up forward as well as we used to because we had no real targets there as our KPPs were sitting in the injury room. Their defenders were able to sit in the dangerous spots and not have to worry about defending a player. This allowed for quick slingshots out of our forwardline.
So less defensive pressure in the middle = more pressure on defenders.
Ultimately, our defenders broke down due to sheer weight of numbers. Without checking, i reckon our defenders had more 1 on 1 contests than any other side.
Further to the above, due to injuries (and also lack of VFL....over 2 years!) to teach players new roles....and the actual gameplan(!)...players were asked to play in multiple new roles that were foreign to them. Hands up who thought Silvagni would be our #1 ruck at times this year? Kennedy, Silvagni, Martin as our FF? Kemp as our CHB?
The whole thing is one large clusterf***. I'm not doubting the issues around the game plan, but there are many valid reasons why this is the case.
Example questions...
1. Do you understand the game plan?
2. Are you 100% clear on what your role is on game day?
*no follow up question*
IMO, first answer is yes. Second answer could be 'no'. Rather than leaving it at that as "Why?" and you might find its because throughout my 2 years under teague i never thought i'd need to understand how to play FF/ruck/chb/whatever.