Culture

[Lods]

Short memory.

Remember Rattens Objectives?

That was about turning this club around and making Carlton more 'Carlton'. We had a poor culture and we went some way to changing that, but never quite got there.

Culture extends past the coaching and playing group. Its not just about wins, its about respect. Our club has not had it in a long time, quite the opposite.

We're often told we need to stop living in the past...that the premiership glory of bygone years is something we need to put behind us and start embracing the future game and it's challenges.

But you wonder whether we've gone too far in that respect.

What normally happens in a football team is there is a gradual transition within the playing group.
Senior players retire or move on at different times...but usually only one or two at a time so as they leave new leaders step in and there is a continuity, because these guys have been mentored by the departing ones.
A young player coming into the Hawks at the moment would have a great feel for success because it recent...but as he grows into the side the memory of that success will stay with him and he can pass it on to the next generation.

We lost a bit of a connect with past success when Pagan took over.
We lost our way.
Older players were forced out...a foreign legion of recruits came on board (sound familiar).
The links with the past were lost.
It's a danger with turning over a list so thoroughly... so quickly.

So where to from here.
Rather than distancing ourselves from the past we should embrace it.
"We are Carlton"... and that's the message we should be instilling in the young group.
We need to make it mean something to be part of the Carlton side....because if this season is any indication to some players it doesn't mean very much other than a pay cheque
Get some of the ex-players involved, visiting and talking about their experiences as part of a successful Carlton side. I'm sure that happens to some extent already but build on it.
Get rid of any player with half-hearted commitment, even if it costs us at the trade table in the short term.
Holding on to these blokes on principle is counter productive.

Challenge the remaining players with task of restoring some real meaning to slogans like "I am Carlton", "We are Carlton"

[PassIt2Carrots]

We lost a bit of a connect with past success when Pagan took over.
We lost our way.
Older players were forced out...a foreign legion of recruits came on board (sound familiar).
The links with the past were lost.
It's a danger with turning over a list so thoroughly... so quickly.

In other words, don't gut the list and replace it with plodders.

[ElwoodBlues1]

I'm struggling with that idea EB. I can only think that you and I are using different definitions of "culture".

Cookie...I guess my best example is West Coast....they were successful winning  premierships but had ten players according to Dean Cox who were
on the gear, some involved in other activities etc...Chad Fletcher nearly died on an overseas trip from reasons more than just a bad hotdog........while they were successful it wasnt a problem to management and the coach who turned a blind eye,but when  they went down hill all their dirty laundry got exposed and we suddenly had a drug culture problem...

Collingwoods ratpack stuffed up way more than players like Robbo, Fev, Garlett etc but Malthouse wasnt going to lose players like Swan, Shaw, Tarrant etc and stuff up his chances of a flag....ie 2010
Robbo got the flick for lying under Mick but Heath Shaw and Didak did the same and got a club suspension only......

North Melbourne under Pagan and Carey had a woeful player culture and I know that via a ex Nth player from that era but the King being so good and North being so successful covered
those issues....execs like Ron Joseph earned their money back then..

So while you do get clubs who excel in creating good culture and success there are also those who have success but its down to sheer talent masking poor culture....just my opinion...

[madbluboy]

Collingwoods ratpack stuffed up way more than players like Robbo, Fev, Garlett etc but Malthouse wasnt going to lose players like Swan, Shaw, Tarrant etc and stuff up his chances of a flag....ie 2010
Robbo got the flick for lying under Mick but Heath Shaw and Didak did the same and got a club suspension only......

Robbo was sacked by people higher than Mick, not sure how many times this needs to be pointed out?

[Gointocarlton]

Robbo was sacked by people higher than Mick, not sure how many times this needs to be pointed out?

Over and over and over and over again MBB. Its quite tiresome and naive to think Mick negotiated any contracts and alone sacked/recruited players. You can only try.

[LP]

Over and over and over and over again MBB. Its quite tiresome and naive to think Mick negotiated any contracts and alone sacked/recruited players. You can only try.

Coaches have two stamps they can use on the papers of players, one states Approved and the other Reject!

You really think clubs force players on coaches that the coaches don't want? :o

[kruddler]

Coaches have two stamps they can use on the papers of players, one states Approved and the other Reject!

You really think clubs force players on coaches that the coaches don't want? :o

Mick was quoted throughout the year as saying SOS is in charge of the list and he will coach whoever is put in front of him.

What is the point of a list manager if this is not the case?
Why don't all coaches turn up on draft day?
They are consulted and can make recommendations, but will coach whoever they have too.

[LP]

Mick was quoted throughout the year as saying SOS is in charge of the list and he will coach whoever is put in front of him.

What is the point of a list manager if this is not the case?
Why don't all coaches turn up on draft day?
They are consulted and can make recommendations, but will coach whoever they have too.

List managers primarily assess the options, they don't make the decisions in isolation, they are briefed by the coach about the type of player required to suit the game plan.

MM said a lot of stuff, and often he said the opposite the next week! I don't pick and chose when to believe the stuff he said, I look for actions that back up words, and as far as I am concerned I saw very few actions backing up his rhetoric!

People and players see through that, and it destroys culture!

[kruddler]

List managers primarily assess the options, they don't make the decisions in isolation, they are briefed by the coach about the type of player required to suit the game plan.

MM said a lot of stuff, and often he said the opposite the next week! I don't pick and chose when to believe the stuff he said, I look for actions that back up words, and as far as I am concerned I saw very few actions backing up his rhetoric!

People and players see through that, and it destroys culture!

Dismissing a direct quote from the coach that doesn't suit your argument. Not surprising.

Neglecting to comment on the fact that some coaches don't even turn up on draft day, thus proving the same point.

Point is, coach is far from solely responsible for who stays and who goes and who is drafted and who is not.

[Gointocarlton]

Mick was quoted throughout the year as saying SOS is in charge of the list and he will coach whoever is put in front of him.

What is the point of a list manager if this is not the case?
Why don't all coaches turn up on draft day?
They are consulted and can make recommendations, but will coach whoever they have too.

MM also stated on many occasions he excluded himself from player contract negotiations.