A different view - Craig and the Club

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Everyone recruits talented young players. Have we had more elite draft selections than other teams?

We have had mediocre picks and mildly better than mediocre results. Doesn't that put us ahead of the curve?

Your argument, Carl, reminds me of parents who always imagine their kids to be above average. Not everyone can be above average - that's the point of "average".

You don't rate Rendell?

Or, as you've said above, believe he is just average at what he does, no better or worse than his equivalent at any other club?

Like everyone, we have some good young kids. So what? Our development is probably above par compared to the rest of the comp, but being slightly above par with slightly below par cattle gets us nowhere.

Geez... the amount of players who have either stagnated, gone backwards or not developed at all:
Armstrong, Cook, Knights, Mackay, Maric, Moran, Petrenko, Reilly, Sellar, van Berlo, Vince...

 

[Crow-mo]

You don't rate Rendell?

Or, as you've said above, believe he is just average at what he does, no better or worse than his equivalent at any other club?

I think as time goes on and starts to take an ugly look at 2007, combined with the bingeing on talls, I am not sure Rendell is any better than the norm. He's certainly no worse, but I'd question how much better than average he's been so far. some big hits, some not so much.

that said I don't think Rendell is a problem, he just might not be the messiah after all.

Geez... the amount of players who have either stagnated, gone backwards or not developed at all:
Armstrong, Cook, Knights, Mackay, Maric, Moran, Petrenko, Reilly, Sellar, van Berlo, Vince...

agree with this, I don't think our development is great.

 

[Slippery Pete]

. Sheedys 1987 to 1992 are very similar to craigs time as coach.

Except that he already had two premierships to his name.

Honestly, what pathetic analysis.

If NC had two flags to his name, we wouldnt be having this discussion.

 

[Cap]

what's your argument here?

After 2006, we were all making excuses for the wheels falling off in the last 1/3 of the season and talking about how 2007 was going to be the year.

last year was, erm, somewhat different.

the biggest similarities was that 2010, like 2007 was meant to be a year of contending - even Craig said so; and like those 2 years we're dealing with the realisation we're further back that we thought.

well I thought I answered that one...

I was kidding.

On a time line basis our next flag is sometime in the future - meaning we are now closer to it than we were in 05/06...

in terms of a teams ability to perform on a consistent basis yes, we are further away from a GF than we were in 05/06 - that is clear.

 

[Slippery Pete]

The implied corollary of said notion that winning 13 games and losing a final is a worse coaching result than winning 10 games and not having the chance to lose a final is even more ridiculous..

No matter what happens throughout the course of the year - the path to the premiership is always the same. Win your last three games. It doesnt matter if you win 13 minor round games or 20. Win your last three games.

The AFL season is like an egg and spoon race. You can get all the way to the prelim final without the egg moving a centimetre, and then - splat.

History has shown us that it matters little where along the line the egg was dropped. All that's remembered is that it was dropped. Ask St Kilda. Ask the Western Bulldogs......

Fair? Not at all. I hate it. But that's footy. Many other sports are much more forgiving. Some, like the EPL, dont even have playoffs. Some have playoff rounds that are best of 3, best of 5, best of 7... Not football.

History will tell us Craig's winning percentage becomes meritorious in the annals of footy literature when, and only when, a premiership accompanies it. And as a club, we simply cannot accept anything less than this judgement.

 

[Lawrst]

Except that he already had two premierships to his name.

Honestly, what pathetic analysis.

If NC had two flags to his name, we wouldnt be having this discussion.

Yes you would...

 

[cmndstab]

No matter what happens throughout the course of the year - the path to the premiership is always the same. Win your last three games. It doesnt matter if you win 13 minor round games or 20. Win your last three games.

The AFL season is like an egg and spoon race. You can get all the way to the prelim final without the egg moving a centimetre, and then - splat.

History has shown us that it matters little where along the line the egg was dropped. All that's remembered is that it was dropped. Ask St Kilda.

Fair? Not at all. I hate it. But that's footy. Many other sports are much more forgiving. Some, like the EPL, dont even have playoffs. Some have playoff rounds that are best of 3, best of 5, best of 7... Not football.

History will tell us Craig's winning percentage becomes meritorious in the annals of footy literature when, and only when, a premiership accompanies it. And as a club, we simply cannot accept anything less than this judgement.

I'll give you a situation where winning your last three games of the year means bugger all - when you come into round 20 (or round 22 this year) more than three wins out of the finals.

Yes, winning 12 games or 20 games in the minor round makes no difference to your premiership record if you can't get the job done in September, but it does demonstrate a huge difference in ability to produce a side that can win matches.

The thing is, in your mind, you're comparing the coach who has 12 minor round wins, and then goes on to win a premiership, with the coach who has 20 minor round wins and then doesn't win a premiership. Of course, the former coach is more successful, there is no question about that. The actual comparison is the coach who wins 12 games without winning a premiership, and the coach who wins 20 without winning a premiership. Neither have succeeded, certainly, but one has outperformed the other by a significant margin.

 

[Slippery Pete]

. The actual comparison is the coach who wins 12 games without winning a premiership, and the coach who wins 20 without winning a premiership. Neither have succeeded, certainly, but one has outperformed the other by a significant margin.

Practically, of course.

Historically? Not so much. Both end up sacked.

Tell me, when judging the history of the Western Bulldogs and St Kilda, is anything other than their appalling tally of premierships ever mentioned?

You have a point Stabbo, but your point becomes almost non existent as a historical marker.

 

[cmndstab]

Yes you would...

Have to agree with this. I'd hate to think that a couple of premierships a decade ago at a different club in a different circumstance and a different era of football would have much weight in determining a coach's current merit.

If the current issues people are having with Craig could be placated by a premiership from years back, they're not really strong issues in my opinion.

 

[icrow32]

Not quite the cattle, they're more like calves at this stage.

Get another 50 games into them and then field a full team and you're on the right track.

St Kilda is an interesting one. Thomas definitely had a squad capable of winning a flag, but not sure that the cattle is there now. Also, their problem was/is their very average culture which is not conducive to a flag.

Oh no, 3 more years of excuses!!

So mid 2014 is when we expect to have any type of success? So NC gets 10 years to show what he can do? We are turning into Richmond quicker than many people think.

These type of posts by NC apologists are getting worse by the week.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Have to agree with this. I'd hate to think that a couple of premierships a decade ago at a different club in a different circumstance and a different era of football would have much weight in determining a coach's current merit.

If the current issues people are having with Craig could be placated by a premiership from years back, they're not really strong issues in my opinion.

This was in reference to a poster citing Sheedy's record from 87-92 as simialr to Craig's, ignoring the fact that Sheedy won flags in 84 and 85. Which would be about the equivalent of Craig going back to back in 05 and 06.

And if that had happened, I can guarantee you I wouldn't be here. I'd be posting on Bay 13 giving endless amounts of crap to Port fans about our four premiership flags.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Have to agree with this. I'd hate to think that a couple of premierships a decade ago at a different club in a different circumstance and a different era of football would have much weight in determining a coach's current merit.

If the current issues people are having with Craig could be placated by a premiership from years back, they're not really strong issues in my opinion.

The fault lies on both sides of the fence here. Why do the Craig worshippers constantly drag out comparisons with other coaches to justify the current shithouse state of our team. The "he has a better win loss ratio than Mathouse" is no more relevant than a premiership 10 years ago.

The pointlessness of compairing NC to past coaches to justify either side of the arguement is rather ridiculous.

The fact is that there are current AFL coaches that have coached their teams to premierships. Any sort of claims that NC has shared success over these coaches is is unadulterated crap.

 

[Slippery Pete]

The fault lies on both sides of the fence here. Why do the Craig worshippers constantly drag out comparisons with other coaches to justify the current shithouse state of our team. The "he has a better win loss ratio than Mathouse" is no more relevant than a premiership 10 years ago.

The pointlessness of compairing NC to past coaches to justify either side of the arguement is rather ridiculous.

The fact is that there are current AFL coaches that have coached their teams to premierships. Any sort of claims that NC has shared success over these coaches is is unadulterated crap.

Have you talked Roy Laird into taking the next step yet?

 

[Lawrst]

The club is in a shambles!!! on facebook the pics of the Fasta Pasta Nest Clinic shows Hendo taking tackling and Tippett showing the kids to kick... These 2 really the best for this?

 

[cmndstab]

The fault lies on both sides of the fence here. Why do the Craig worshippers constantly drag out comparisons with other coaches to justify the current shithouse state of our team. The "he has a better win loss ratio than Mathouse" is no more relevant than a premiership 10 years ago.

The pointlessness of compairing NC to past coaches to justify either side of the arguement is rather ridiculous.

The fact is that there are current AFL coaches that have coached their teams to premierships. Any sort of claims that NC has shared success over these coaches is is unadulterated crap.

I agree, and I've been viewing Craig's past minor round successes as less and less relevant as time has gone on. I also agree that winning a premiership is an immediate tick in the "success" column, and that a premiership coach is always going to be viewed as more successful than a coach that has not won one.

My only dispute is with people that seem intent of lumping Craig as "equal bottom" with every other coach that has never won a premiership, as though there is no way to distinguish between them, as though there is no merit whatsoever in any effort that does not lead to a flag during that coach's tenure.

 

[Slippery Pete]

I agree, and I've been viewing Craig's past minor round successes as less and less relevant as time has gone on. I also agree that winning a premiership is an immediate tick in the "success" column, and that a premiership coach is always going to be viewed as more successful than a coach that has not won one.

My only dispute is with people that seem intent of lumping Craig as "equal bottom" with every other coach that has never won a premiership, as though there is no way to distinguish between them, as though there is no merit whatsoever in any effort that does not lead to a flag during that coach's tenure.

I agree with you, and I wish it wasn't so. But history is not kind to coaches who don't tick the premiership box. It's somewhat unique to our game though. We do place a tonne of emphasis on such a disproportionate part of the season. Other sports post seasons are nowhere near as hit and miss as ours.

If Neil had his time again, I reckon he would have prepared us better for the 2005 finals series. He spent that whole year saying we were "still improving" and a "long way off." All of a sudden, we were the minor premiers. It came so quickly that I dont think the playing group knew what to do with themselves. This is the danger of not basing everything you do around preparing for September. At that stage, we were just happy to be competing. We shouldnt have been.

You're the voice of reason though Stabbo, I'll give you that. .

 

[cmndstab]

I agree with you, and I wish it wasn't so. But history is not kind to coaches who don't tick the premiership box. It's somewhat unique to our game though. We do place a tonne of emphasis on such a disproportionate part of the season. Other sports post seasons are nowhere near as hit and miss as ours.

I wonder if this is because many other sports have a "best of x matches" concept? I do kind of like the one match concept, but it's probably a less accurate reflection of talent than the model in baseball, for example.

If Neil had his time again, I reckon he would have prepared us better for the 2005 finals series. He spent that whole year saying we were "still improving" and a "long way off." All of a sudden, we were the minor premiers. It came so quickly that I dont think the playing group knew what to do with themselves. This is the danger of not basing everything you do around preparing for September. At that stage, we were just happy to be competing. We shouldnt have been.

I often wonder how Neil would go if he was transported back to 05 knowing what he does now. I wonder, would the team even be as successful as it was then? Perhaps coaching with fresh eyes allowed him to do things he wouldn't do these days? On the other hand, he might have been able to harden us up a little for the finals.

There's no doubt you're correct - when a whole year's worth of football lives or dies on three/four matches in September, you need to be mentally focused on it. The league is too close to miss out on that mental edge.

 

[anthc]

Adelaide misses a hell of a lot of easier goals then any given team a lot of the time, Tippet at times gets so close to the man on the mark he pulls his kick and it goes 30 metres from 50 out.
Most of carlton's missed shots were replayed during intermissions, 5 behinds were rushed. Several were from outside 50, shots were taken on the boundary snapped at goal from quick pickups and players blazed away when they had more time to work with.
Whether you think there is pressure and whether the player feels pressure are very different things.
What you consider easy shots you specify there were a lot of easy goals missed? Sounds like they are bad kicks at goal then doesn't it if you apply the same negativity, not that they should of been this or that or what they could of been this in mystical carlton is perfection land.

There is nothing hard to understand about the fact that a clanger can happen in any part of a passage of play, from which consequences are not as blatant as on the scorecard.
I make the effort to understand what you are saying and I'll tell you it's irrational if it is. I'm not about to get on the bandwagon of some sad panda parallel dimension line of thought, that then doesn't take into account the butterfly effect. What happens when kicking a behind and what happens when one kicks a goal bring about a very different state of play.

If your opponent continually scores points and you can't make it past mid field from your kick in.
Are those misses even hurting the side making them or are they eventually turning into goals with more and more points extra?
Is perhaps impacting your forward line not getting possession and getting a feel for the game?
Is the dragging of the players away from your goal further down field hurting your scoring potential?
Is there noone at the fall of the ball when you do get the ball to the few players up forward?
Is noone moving forward as they don't expect it to go there?
Do you handpass backwards out of habit formed throughout the game of having nothing up field?

If you can say if carlton kicked straight, you can just as well say if adelaide were harder at the contest and won more possession this or that would of happened, it's meaningless. The result is, the result is the result.

ill say it again CARLTON MISSED ALOT OF GETTABLE GOALS, they did this because they sliced through are zone with ease.

I understand your point that if Carlton had of kicked a goal a butterfly would have farted in Denver and the play could have changed blah, blah, blah. But at the end of the day they could of kicked 5 or 6 more and the game would have been over by half time!

And as you stated we normally miss the easy ones, so i guess we were extra lucky we kicked straight. Yet we still lost.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Can you please elaborate on the bolded part. I don't understand the comment as I believe we are a young and promising side, but nothing more and nothing less.

2 weeks ago we got beaten by a team that on Saturday was beaten by GCS. If Port Adelaide are currently the laughing stock of the competition, where does that leave us?

People can carry on about potential all they like, but on current form, we aint good. Sure the Carlton game was an improvement, but the previous 2 weeks were 2 of the most embarassing in the clubs history.

Next week, next year, next whenever may be a completely different story.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Have you talked Roy Laird into taking the next step yet?

....and leave the doggies looking for a new coach, no way.

 

[Crow-mo]

Oh no, 3 more years of excuses!!

So mid 2014 is when we expect to have any type of success? So NC gets 10 years to show what he can do? We are turning into Richmond quicker than many people think.

These type of posts by NC apologists are getting worse by the week.

I remember when he needed to 2010/11 to really show progress.

after 2009 it was "we're finally ready" and now people talk about needing until 2014 - that's 5 years after 2009.

5 year plans... they always work out so well.

 

[Vader]

If Neil had his time again, I reckon he would have prepared us better for the 2005 finals series. He spent that whole year saying we were "still improving" and a "long way off." All of a sudden, we were the minor premiers. It came so quickly that I dont think the playing group knew what to do with themselves. This is the danger of not basing everything you do around preparing for September. At that stage, we were just happy to be competing. We shouldnt have been.

I often wonder what might have happened if Roo hadn't got himself rubbed out for the first final, against St Kilda - and what might have happened if Ben Hudson hadn't done his ACL 2 weeks before the finals began. Put this pair back into our team and we could very well have a 3rd flag - and all this hoohaa about Neil Craig goes away. I also wonder what might have happened if Biglands hadn't done his ACL half-way through the preliminary final, if McLeod hadn't been underdone due to a post-surgery infection on a bursa, if Roo hadn't contracted parvovirus, if Hentschel & Hart hadn't had their careers ended on the same Black Saturday. None of this is attributable to Craig - it's all just bad luck at the wrong time of the year.

You can blame the 2007 fiasco (Massie on Franklin) on Craig, if you like. I blame 2008 (vs Collingwood) on the players who turned up wearing netball skirts instead of their footy shorts. As for 2009.. any game decided by less than a goal is down to pure luck.

However, we were never really in the hunt for a flag in any of those years. All a win would have done in those circumstances would have been to prolong the agony. There were only 2 years, under Craig's reign, where we had a genuine shot at a flag - 2005 & 2006.

For all the talk about him not being a "premiership coach", the biggest factor in our failure to win the 2005 & 2006 flag was bad luck, injuries and illness. We did NOT fail to win those flags because of Craig's coaching.

Are you really going to tell me that Craig is a failure as a coach purely because his team suffered from bad luck at the wrong time of the year?

 

[Cap]

Even Roo in that Crows secrets books states that his suspension is the main cause

slightly arrogant I guess but 100% true.

that being said, we should never have lost that match regardless of Roo being out - again not a coaching issue more a personel issue.

 

[Drakescoffeecake]

The Adelaide Board isn't really a great place to have a sensible discussion about Craig and his future because the usual suspects will just shoot you down in an instant.

I thought our response v Carlton was brilliant (bar the 1st quarter) and considering the week prior and what Craig had to work with I think it was a bloody good effort. We really did try our hearts out. I was near the Crows race and I notcied Dougy was almost in tears as he was looking at the fans cheering us off. Thought that was a great sign.

But I do think many have been harsh on Craig considering our injury toll and the calibre of talent we lost last year. I agree there are areas that he needs to work on and by no means do I think he's the perfect coach, but what I do love is his ability to accept criticism and accept responsibility. I also think he is (slowly) connecting more with the players and supporters.

Unfortunately though some people will never be happy with him unless we finish 22-0 at the end of the H&A season.

 

[Slippery Pete]

I often wonder what might have happened if Roo hadn't got himself rubbed out for the first final, against St Kilda - and what might have happened if Ben Hudson hadn't done his ACL 2 weeks before the finals began. Put this pair back into our team and we could very well have a 3rd flag - and all this hoohaa about Neil Craig goes away. I also wonder what might have happened if Biglands hadn't done his ACL half-way through the preliminary final, if McLeod hadn't been underdone due to a post-surgery infection on a bursa, if Roo hadn't contracted parvovirus, if Hentschel & Hart hadn't had their careers ended on the same Black Saturday. None of this is attributable to Craig - it's all just bad luck at the wrong time of the year.

You can blame the 2007 fiasco (Massie on Franklin) on Craig, if you like. I blame 2008 (vs Collingwood) on the players who turned up wearing netball skirts instead of their footy shorts. As for 2009.. any game decided by less than a goal is down to pure luck.

However, we were never really in the hunt for a flag in any of those years. All a win would have done in those circumstances would have been to prolong the agony. There were only 2 years, under Craig's reign, where we had a genuine shot at a flag - 2005 & 2006.

For all the talk about him not being a "premiership coach", the biggest factor in our failure to win the 2005 & 2006 flag was bad luck, injuries and illness. We did NOT fail to win those flags because of Craig's coaching.

Are you really going to tell me that Craig is a failure as a coach purely because his team suffered from bad luck at the wrong time of the year?

Where have you been, Sheldon? I've actually missed this....