Football Department Review

[PaulP]

we won't get anywhere until we start maximising peoples potential rather than expecting them to improve us. 

Yes, I agree. Too many seem to expect the coach to come in and rescue the club, but that's not possible IMO. Modern football clubs have different departments - the football department is but one, and the senior coach isn't even the top man in there. He has a director of football above him, then the rest of the executive, then the board. When you add in external moneymen who also demand input and influence, I'm not really sure the coach actually has that much clout.

[dodge]

Since 1965 Carlton has had 19 coaches (includes two stints by Jeza and Parkin).  That is under three years a coach.

Barassi was appointed coach in 1965.  He lasted 7 years (to 1971).  Parkin in his second stint went from 91-00 - 10years.  That's 17 years for two coaches.    Take these off and we get 17 coaches in 39 years.  Less than 2.5 years per coach!  (Does include '78 where there were three coaches).  Got this from Blueseum.  A curiosity is it lists both Nicolls and McKenzie as coaches from 72-75.  40 coaches since 1902 - three years per coach.

I don't really know the history of the 60s and 70s, but the Carlton way that I grew up with was to buy success - particularly in the 80s and 90s.  There was the odd developed player, but not many.  We know how this ended in 2002.

Have we actually learnt anything from the draft era - that we actually have to work hard and invest in the coaches and development of players?  It is a whole of club approach needed, not an appoint one person who will fix it all.

(While I was typing - a couple of posts have covered some of this)

[PaulP]

Since 1965 Carlton has had 19 coaches (includes two stints by Jeza and Parkin).  That is under three years a coach.

Barassi was appointed coach in 1965.  He lasted 7 years (to 1971).  Parkin in his second stint went from 91-00 - 10years.  That's 17 years for two coaches.    Take these off and we get 17 coaches in 39 years.  Less than 2.5 years per coach!  (Does include '78 where there were three coaches).  Got this from Blueseum.  A curiosity is it lists both Nicolls and McKenzie as coaches from 72-75.  40 coaches since 1902 - three years per coach.

I don't really know the history of the 60s and 70s, but the Carlton way that I grew up with was to buy success - particularly in the 80s and 90s.  There was the odd developed player, but not many.  We know how this ended in 2002.

Have we actually learnt anything from the draft era - that we actually have to work hard and invest in the coaches and development of players?  It is a whole of club approach needed, not an appoint one person who will fix it all.

(While I was typing - a couple of posts have covered some of this)

I think there have been genuine attempts to embrace modernity, but up till now, they have been embraced half heartedly, incompetently, or killed off before they had time to bear fruit. The Bolton / SOS rebuild is the most conspicuous example, but folks inside and outside the club got the jack of that before it was finished, assuming it was even undertaken correctly to begin with. There's a good reason why Malthouse refused to be part of a rebuild. He knew it would take forever, and he knew that you had to give supporters some sort of hope, rather than a ground zero wasteland and years at the bottom. Hence the famous "coach and club are no longer in alignment". And yet again, he was right.

[northernblue]

I'm pretty sure I read Teague saying he did not want or need a mentor or additional support / development when he got the gig.

I'd be curious to know, whether in light of those comments above, Maclure thinks Teague should or should not keep his job.

I guess there’s two things there, a young coach who isn’t sure enough of himself to say “I’d like a little help here please”
Possibly a club saying “You’re a big boy David, you don’t need help do you ?”
Maybe the club should have been saying “You’ve got a big job ahead mate, who would you like out of MrX, MrY or MrZ to work with you?”

[PaulP]

I guess there’s two things there, a young coach who isn’t sure enough of himself to say “I’d like a little help here please”
Possibly a club saying “You’re a big boy David, you don’t need help do you ?”
Maybe the club should have been saying “You’ve got a big job ahead mate, who would you like out of MrX, MrY or MrZ to work with you?”

Yes, I tend to agree. Especially when covid hit, it became even more important (I understand clubs had to reduce spending). If he did approach the club for help, and they told him they have no money, then sacking him becomes even more problematic IMO.

[LP]

Yes, I tend to agree. Especially when covid hit, it became even more important (I understand clubs had to reduce spending). If he did approach the club for help, and they told him they have no money, then sacking him becomes even more problematic IMO.

We are run by a board and executive that have a profit first emphasis, that means commercial decisions over football decisions, it explains so much.

When COVID hit, profits were down and costs were cut, the assistants got the kybosh, the exact wrong thing to do from a football perspective!

Nthmond have done one thing better than any other club, they left the football to the football staff, and the commercial to the commercial staff, and the two never overlap. Not even their Gale interferes in the football and he is far more qualified than most, I wonder if that compartmentalising ethos is why Liddle ended up with us, because he seems to micro-manage!

[kruddler]

I'm pretty sure I read Teague saying he did not want or need a mentor or additional support / development when he got the gig.

I'd be curious to know, whether in light of those comments above, Maclure thinks Teague should or should not keep his job.

Remember 2020? Remember Covid?? Remember how many people lost their jobs because of it? You want teague to say, actually, give me more help (and as a result someone else loses their job).

Another reason why Teague needs the benefit of the doubt.

[laj]

https://www.theage.com.au/link/follow-20170101-p58iv9

[Micky0]

https://www.theage.com.au/link/follow-20170101-p58iv9

Yep thanks new Prez - great first act as incoming Prez, call a review mid season and make it known by chatting to all the players then have the results and not even have the decency to speak to the players and coaches.  What a joke.

[Lods]

Well the review is in.
Decisions are probably well advanced (some may have even been made prior to the whole thing starting )

It's just a waiting game now and next week looks set to be an interesting one.