Balme

Remove this Banner Ad

Mr_Moogle said:
Mate it's obvious what you're doing and it's not surprising who your supporting cast is.

As for this "good stuff", it hasn't materialised into anything tangible on the field. Until it does, listing his accomplishments just looks kind of pitiful.
Click to expand...
Yeah it is obvious what I’m doing, putting down moronic posting, it’s what I always do. It just happens to be a bunch of lefties who were against his appointment from the beginning still harping on about it and pretending it’s not political bias. It’s laughable really.

Just look at the ridiculous benchmark you’ve applied, “it hasn’t materialised into anything tangible”.

Ok found a new home but has to be built, given it hasnt materialised into anything tangible on field then that’s clearly not an accomplishment, is that what you’re really saying?

Moving Roo on seamlessly soon, that move hasn’t helped us make finals yet, no accomplishment.

Stopped all the non-football bullshit, no finals yet, no accomplishment.

Burgess comes on board, no finals yet, no accomplishment.

If we get Balme tomorrow, we haven’t made finals yet, no accomplishment.

Olsen took over after we hit rock bottom, literally finished bottom for the first time in our history and we’ve had to rebuild our list and football department. He’s been in charge for 4 years, I repeat 4 years.

Fine call for his head for re-signing Nicks, but to discount all the other stuff, well all that’s doing is showing ridiculous lefty bias.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

George Kramer said:
If we dont make the finals next year and we don’t sack Nicks most certainly. If we do and they make positive changes then less likely.
Click to expand...
I think there have been too many board members who have proceeded over years of mediocrity & poor decisions.

Surely some of these in addition to Roo need to be moved on for a refresh?
 
George Kramer said:
I agree, does that mean a total clean out? Unlikely. Roo, Ellis are going/gone and whoever has been there longest.
Click to expand...
Not a total clean out, but imo half the board should go given the Nicks' reappointment last year & we have been mediocre for way too long.
 
Kane McGoodwin said:
Not a total clean out, but imo half the board should go given the Nicks' reappointment last year & we have been mediocre for way too long.
Click to expand...
No objection there and if that includes Olsen, no issue. At least when he gets the arse or quits some here should admit he’s left some legacy with Thebby and changing the board tenure so we could get rid of Roo.
 
George Kramer said:
Dude this has zero to do with Olsen and if you think that you’re one paranoid fella.

Look at what we done with the list.
Look how Nicks seemed to unify the club and mend relationships.
At the end of 2021 we had won 7 games after 3 the previous year, we were moving up, they thought the rebuild was going well and most on here did too.

I don’t think a club in the competition wouldn’t have re-signed Nicks under those circumstances. Know of any in a similar position that have sacked their coach?
Click to expand...

Did Wayne guess your password?
 
George Kramer said:
No objection there and if that includes Olsen, no issue. At least when he gets the arse or quits some here should admit he’s left some legacy with Thebby and changing the board tenure so we could get rid of Roo.
Click to expand...
The limited board tenure is definitely a positive.
 
George Kramer said:
For starters its 4 years he’s been in charge, I won’t list his achievements, I already have and you lefties, yeah you lefties can’t bring yourself to acknowledge them because you’re lefties and he was a previous Liberal Premier. Did I mention lefties?

Now I’m critical of the re-signing of Nicks last year, I’ve gone to town on that. I’m even pretty sure I’ve posted before anyone involved should go. But if you want him gone because of that fine, sack him, but to not even acknowledge the good stuff is just lefty bias.

In terms of the initial re-signing, you’re being massively paranoid if you think I’m defending that because I want to defend Olsen. I’ve explained it and explained it again. If you don’t believe me that just makes you more paranoid. His initial re-signing was not some shock, what would have been a shock was if we sacked him. Ask any impartial what they think.
Click to expand...

The meer fact that you continue to use politics as a shield is actually you projecting your own political bias, not the other way around.

I'm actually shocked how you cannot see this.

Trying to dismiss any legitimate criticism as political bias is essentially the same as Wayne's intangible nonsense that he continually trots out in defense of Nicks.

Come on George, you're better than this.
 
relapse said:
The meer fact that you continue to use politics as a shield is actually you projecting your own political bias, not the other way around.

I'm actually shocked how you cannot see this.

Trying to dismiss any legitimate criticism as political bias is essentially the same as Wayne's intangible nonsense that he continually trots out in defense of Nicks.

Come on George, you're better than this.
Click to expand...
Ok ABAB I can play that game as well.

Look at it from my perspective, the arguments you lot have put make it bloody obvious it’s politically motivated. Why is it that I’m having this argument only with posters with left leanings? You’re really trying to say it’s all just a coincidence especially when you look at when he was first announced and the commentary. Compare that to what I posted when he was first announced, I even said not my preference. Why would I do that if I’m backing him in if my support is politically motivated?

Speaking of being better perhaps look at yourself because you’ve totally misrepresented what I’ve been posting.

I have not dismissed and legitimate criticisms, how many times do I have to state the last Nicks extension was diabolical? Where have I dismissed this criticism?

I’ll repeat it again for the 20th time, perhaps you’ll get it this time:

The first Nicks extension was reasonable. I’ve given my reasons. You gave examples that weren’t relevant of clubs sacking their coaches, they weren’t in the same position. That’s on you not me.

Thebby is an achievement. Your posting on this has been nuts and paranoid given the lack of a viable alternative.

Board change leading to Roo going, likely to be replaced by Balme.

Returned focus to football and beefed up football department.

Olsen took over the club when we finished bottom and started a full rebuild.

To dismiss his achievements like Moogle tried to do because they haven’t led to on field success is surely a ludicrous position you disagree with right? Or do you agree?

So in summary, the posters I’m arguing with are all from the left, I repeat all from the left, should I repeat it again, all from the left. You’ve all discounted or dismissed his achievements. You’re all blaming him for lack of on field success in his 4 years without acknowledging where we were as a club when he took over. Your opinions are all as one, Olsen sucks.

I on the other hand despite you misrepresenting my position are critical of him for the last Nicks re-signing, can understand the first one, have listed achievements.

Based on that who has provided the more balanced argument? A group of posters from a political leaning who never wanted him and who have shown zero balance or me who didn’t want him, has at least been critical and explained why his achievements are significant.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

George Kramer said:
No objection there and if that includes Olsen, no issue. At least when he gets the arse or quits some here should admit he’s left some legacy with Thebby and changing the board tenure so we could get rid of Roo.
Click to expand...

Olsen is no different to any other AFC Chairman in that they have all left a legacy to some degree.

My prediction is that Olsen won't end up wearing out his welcome and suspect that he'll only be in the seat for another season or two before stepping down of his own volition.

No doubt he'll be remembered for helping establish Thebarton, but I don't think people will be looking back at his time at the club and thinking that it was some sort of watershed moment in the club's history.
 
Last edited:
relapse said:
Olsen is no different to any other AFC Chairman in that they have all left a legacy to some degree.

My prediction is that Olsen won't end up wearing out his welcome and suspect that he'll only bo be in the seat for another season or two before stepping down of his own volition.

No doubt he'll be remembered for helping establish Thebarton, but I don't think people will be looking back at his time at the club and thinking that it was some sort of watershed moment in the club's history.
Click to expand...
Agreed that he will go in a few years.

No one is saying it’s a watershed moment in our history, why post that?

Unlike other chairmans he’s been in the job for a short time and took over the club when it was on its knees and yet you guys are holding him accountable for our on field performance without any consideration for the mess he took over and for what he’s achieved in only 4 years.
 
When Chapman stepped down, they had a hard time trying to find a competent replacement as Chair who wanted the job. It was a poisoned chalice at that point. I would like to think its a more attractive proposition now, and for the Olsen has done a good job.

But its not going to be easy finding someone who can take on that Chair role if Olsen were to leave.
 
El Doederino said:
When Chapman stepped down, they had a hard time trying to find a competent replacement as Chair who wanted the job. It was a poisoned chalice at that point. I would like to think its a more attractive proposition now, and for the Olsen has done a good job.

But its not going to be easy finding someone who can take on that Chair role if Olsen were to leave.
Click to expand...


He isn't a spring chicken and you're right.
 
Mr_Moogle said:
This idea that the first extension was a given is complete bullshit. He absolutely deserved to be sacked at that point in time and it was unprecedented for Adelaide not to do so. No other coach in our history was given that sort of leeway.
Click to expand...

strongly disagree. No other AFC coach has been there for a start of a rebuild.
You need to afford rebuilding coaches more time than a coach competing for finals.

I think you're right that the board may have been insecure about the perception that we are not a patient club when it comes to head coaches.
However, whether we think it's justified or not, that is a real perception that victorians had (or had).

We couldn't really afford to sack Nicks that early, even if internally we had doubts on how far he could take the group.

If you want the best candidates applying for the head coach role coming out of a rebuild, then the club needs to show signs of re-gaining stability and being prepared to give the new hire a fair opportunity to produce results. Ad this was not the clubs reputation back in 2021 or even 2022.

I think we did reach that point by 2024, and Nicks had a lot more red flags against this coaching technique to justify moving him on.
 
relapse said:
I don't think that's true, the standard tenure for coaches that come in during a rebuild phase historically is about 2-3 years.

Here are some examples from various clubs

Brendan McCartney 3 years - Bulldogs
David Noble 2 years - North
David Teague 3 years - Carlton
Ben Rutten 2 years - Essendon
Mark Neeld 2 years - Melbourne
Matthew Primus 2 years - Port

It wouldn't have been a dog act, it would have been consistent with how other clubs have moved coaches on.

For me I would have sacked him after the Hawthorn loss in 2022.
Click to expand...

unfair comparison, most of those coaches were actively taking the team performance and/or culture backwards.

Under nicks we took forward steps in years 2, 3 and 4.
 
George Kramer said:
Agreed that he will go in a few years.

No one is saying it’s a watershed moment in our history, why post that?

Unlike other chairmans he’s been in the job for a short time and took over the club when it was on its knees and yet you guys are holding him accountable for our on field performance without any consideration for the mess he took over and for what he’s achieved in only 4 years.
Click to expand...

I'm not holding him to account for the mess and putting the blame on him.

I am saying that during his tenure he's presided over 2 poorly timed contract extensions for Matthew Nicks.

Back in 2022 the club should have waited until midway through the season before making a call on him rather than jumping the gun and giving him an extra two years before a ball was even bounced in 2022.

We once again made the same mistake in 2024 by giving him another poorly timed extension when the club had the ability to wait until later in the season to make a call.

I think both were bad calls

Do I hold John Olsen personally responsible for making those calls? No, but at the end of the day he is the Chairman of the Board who has made those decisions so he does bear some responsibly due to his position.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Balme

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top