Oppo Camp Non-Essendon Football Thread XVI

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.


There you go TheGrizz, must’ve read your post
Where you draw the line on what a salary dump is, and what is a regular trade, would be debatable, as often a traded player can take revised lower terms at a new club, or have a large portion of his contract paid by his club to play elsewhere.

Potentially, a demarcation line would be based on whether the recipient club gives up a worse pick than the one they are receiving for taking on a big contract.
 
Has to be more to the story than just s**t results, the timing makes no sense
Well they sacked Scott Watters on the 1st of November, according to wiki

I'm pretty sure Ross Lyon is the only person to coach St.kikda more than 5 years...
 
Timmy Watson leaving Ch7 sports desk to take over Saints!


But seriously, could see them with Bucks.
 
My guess is that, perhaps unusually for them, they are working to a plan.

Walsh knows what he is doing and is ruthless. It’s an unpleasant thing but these are the sorts of decisions that sometimes have to be made. Clearly the review was quite scathing of Ratten.
 
Well they sacked Scott Watters on the 1st of November, according to wiki

I'm pretty sure Ross Lyon is the only person to coach St.kikda more than 5 years...
Richardson coached for 6 seasons and is, incredibly, their longest serving coach after Jeans.

Truly the madhouse of the AFL. We've got nothing on them.
 
My guess is that, perhaps unusually for them, they are working to a plan.

Walsh knows what he is doing and is ruthless. It’s an unpleasant thing but these are the sorts of decisions that sometimes have to be made. Clearly the review was quite scathing of Ratten.


It's just another example of how boards confuse inertia with stability: "if we hold on to our coach we'll be Geelong!" As though there is nothing else.

St Kilda is a mature team and has weapons but barely gave a yelp when it came to making finals. 2 failures in a row.

What conceivable reason was there to re-appoint Ratten when they did?

The review didn't really need to be more than looking at the age of the team and the results of the last 2 years.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Watch Ross the Boss suck up all the media attention again without committing!

I'd love it if they reached out to him about the job, and then told him he'd have to go through a process.

_Ross.jpg
 
Except you know, Richmond did the opposite of this when they reviewed their program.

You can’t really use Richmond as a model though, yes they kept Hardwick and a core of players post that review but Hardwick then had to toss essentially everything about himself, completely break his existing game plan and it somehow miraculously worked.

You don’t plan for that.
 
You can’t really use Richmond as a model though, yes they kept Hardwick and a core of players post that review but Hardwick then had to toss essentially everything about himself, completely break his existing game plan and it somehow miraculously worked.

You don’t plan for that.

It identified that the head coach could / would change with different support around them.

The whole point of a detailed review is to be better than a superficial review that turfs the head coach but changes nothing else if other areas are failing.
 
It identified that the head coach could / would change with different support around them.

The whole point of a detailed review is to be better than a superficial review that turfs the head coach but changes nothing else if other areas are failing.

That review can’t have possibly identified ‘yes this is the right man but all of his values, tactics, philosophies and beliefs are completely wrong and need to be put in the bin’

Clubs looking to emulate this are chasing a ghost that was kissed on the proverbial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top