Club Mgmt. Board of Directors as led by President Dave Barham

Remove this Banner Ad

 
Last edited:
Vander18 said:
Whether it’s a bank or a footy club, your CEO should understand core business.

Somebody has to sign off on whatever Scott and Mahoney propose. Better if they understand footy I’d have thought.
Click to expand...
I get what you are saying, I don't know where I sit, but out of interest...

Can you come up with a scenario whereby Scott and Mahoney have a proposal that a CEO's football knowledge would help them overrule the request?

I can't, because you should be hiring the experts in those roles and trusting them to do their business, while implementing robust processes that ensure there is appropriate peer review and board oversight to ensure no repeat of things like the saga.

It doesn't take football knowledge to fund the right areas, you have plenty of people both above and below who have that knowledge.

It doesn't take football knowledge to implement the appropriate health and well being plans for the players and coaches etc.

In fact as long as he acknowledges he has no knowledge and doesn't interfere (like Campbell), then that can work very well.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Vander18 said:
Whether it’s a bank or a footy club, your CEO should understand core business.

Somebody has to sign off on whatever Scott and Mahoney propose. Better if they understand footy I’d have thought.
Click to expand...
We're talking about the CEO of a professional football club though, not the shift manager in a fish and chip shop.

This is sort of a mirror image of the argument against former players being on the board of directors.
 
andleanback said:
Its just fact whether you like it or not. Having a ceo that truely understands the football industry and a professional football club environment as a whole is a huge advantage. Brad Scott would’ve been a better option as ceo than this bloke.
Click to expand...
It's a small selection of not-quite facts that you've chosen to show a correlation that does not indicate a causation.

I'm not going to waste my time deconstructing or arguing against something that isn't based on logic in the first place. It'd be like playing chess with a pigeon... or Kevin Sheedy.
 
Mr Mojo Risin said:
I get what you are saying, I don't know where I sit, but out of interest...

Can you come up with a scenario whereby Scott and Mahoney have a proposal that a CEO's football knowledge would help them overrule the request?

I can't, because you should be hiring the experts in those roles and trusting them to do their business, while implementing robust processes that ensure there is appropriate peer review and board oversight to ensure no repeat of things like the saga.

It doesn't take football knowledge to fund the right areas, you have plenty of people both above and below who have that knowledge.

It doesn't take football knowledge to implement the appropriate health and well being plans for the players and coaches etc.

In fact as long as he acknowledges he has no knowledge and doesn't interfere (like Campbell), then that can work very well.
Click to expand...
The club SHOULD have a sophisticated list and salary cap management plan. The plan comes out of the footy department. The CEO should be able to review and endorse these crucial plans.

It’s not about game day. It’s about the high level strategy and planning component.
 
Vander18 said:
It won’t be….until it is.

As an aside, would you assume Scott reports to Mahoney?
Click to expand...
He does but his AFL experience will be used .
From all reports Scott is running the football department ( coaching / development) and reporting to Mahoney.
 
Lore said:
We're talking about the CEO of a professional football club though, not the shift manager in a fish and chip shop.

This is sort of a mirror image of the argument against former players being on the board of directors.
Click to expand...
It’s a mirror image of good freaking governance if you ask me.
 
Vander18 said:
The club SHOULD have a sophisticated list and salary cap management plan. The plan comes out of the footy department. The CEO should be able to review and endorse these crucial plans.

It’s not about game day. It’s about the high level strategy and planning component.
Click to expand...
For sure, but it doesn’t require a football background to be able understand that and approve it or not.

You want your GM of football, list manager, head of strength and conditioning and senior coach to create all that and the CEO to ensure all the processes, funding and management are in place to encourage thought and creativity while minimising risk.
 
Lore said:
It's a small selection of not-quite facts that you've chosen to show a correlation that does not indicate a causation.

I'm not going to waste my time deconstructing or arguing against something that isn't based on logic in the first place. It'd be like playing chess with a pigeon... or Kevin Sheedy.
Click to expand...
Please indulge me because at the moment you’re actually saying a whole lot of nothing.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ant555 said:
He does but his AFL experience will be used .
From all reports Scott is running the football department ( coaching / development) and reporting to Mahoney.
Click to expand...
I actually think we should be honest and just seperate footy and non-footy ops. Mahoney runs one and Thorburn the other. Both reporting to the Board.

The CEO role is a fraud if it doesn’t encapsulate footy.
 
Vander18 said:
The club SHOULD have a sophisticated list and salary cap management plan. The plan comes out of the footy department. The CEO should be able to review and endorse these crucial plans.

It’s not about game day. It’s about the high level strategy and planning component.
Click to expand...
How do you know what he knows and who he has worked with ?
He has to stay on board with the board so I doubt he gets out of his lane given the president says the focus will be on footy.
The more I hear the more I realise Scott gives them more than just a coach .
 
Vander18 said:
The club SHOULD have a sophisticated list and salary cap management plan. The plan comes out of the footy department. The CEO should be able to review and endorse these crucial plans.

It’s not about game day. It’s about the high level strategy and planning component.
Click to expand...
It's a good point, but I don't think the CEO actually goes into that sort of detail most of the time. As long as it's broadly consistent with the overall strategic direction of the club it should be up to the footy department.


In the past there has been a cap on how much capital can be spent on any one player acquisition, such as Dylan Shiel, without the board ratifying it, and big trades that fundamentally change the overall organisational strategic direction, like contracted Joe Daniher, would also have greater oversight and potentially be vetoed. That stuff we know to be true about Essendon specifically.

But the question of delisting Tom Cutler or getting D'Ambrosio in the draft is left to people who know what they're doing, which is probably why we have two GMs in the footy department.


The caveat to that is the article about Brad Scott the other day that was talking about him presenting three list management philosophies to North Melbourne's Board of Directors, one being top up and go again, one being a full scale rebuild and strategically trading out established players to beef up their draft hand, and the third option was a sort of middle way.

It's not Essendon specifically but it does show that long-term strategies can go to that level of the organisation if necessary in order to decide on the direction that the footy department will take. But then you get back to the idea of whether you need to have experienced football people on the board of directors, which a lot of people say no to.
 
Vander18 said:
I actually think we should be honest and just seperate footy and non-footy ops. Mahoney runs one and Thorburn the other. Both reporting to the Board.

The CEO role is a fraud if it doesn’t encapsulate footy.
Click to expand...
That would just end in another dumpster fire. The key is the whole club is aligned on the 1 path. The ceo is in charge of that.
 
andleanback said:
That would just end in another dumpster fire. The key is the whole club is aligned on the 1 path. The ceo is in charge of that.
Click to expand...
Sure, we agree. But that needs a CEO who knows footy. I think we agree that’s the optimal model.

If you appoint a CEO who doesn’t know footy (which we have) then at least be honest about it and acknowledge that he isn’t responsible for footy outcomes and that he isn’t really a CEO. In this structure, Mahoney (supported by Scott) makes the decisions around core business.
 
Not sure the CEO really has to have come from a footy background. You could liken it to a CEO of a bank not being an expert in every domain across the business. Typically they hire people who do know each division and the CEO then sets the direction that binds them together and he/she oversees performance and enables them via resourcing, as well as managing external forces.

Thorburn doesn’t need to have come from football if he has very capable direct reports. This gig won’t have the spread, depth, complexity etc that the nab role did. It’s chalk and cheese. He’d have to make a blunder of Asaga proportions to **** it up.
 
Lore said:
It's a small selection of not-quite facts that you've chosen to show a correlation that does not indicate a causation.

I'm not going to waste my time deconstructing or arguing against something that isn't based on logic in the first place. It'd be like playing chess with a pigeon... or Kevin Sheedy.
Click to expand...
Geelong and Syndey are the benchmark clubs - it has to be of interest that both seem to favour footy CEO’s.

I also think it’s interesting that both Andrew Ireland and Tom Harley joined Sydney as GM Footy before transitioning to the CEO role. I think it shows the value they put on a footy background.

Let’s see what happens with Richmond….Has Gale set them up for one window or for sustained success?
 
Lore said:
Are you sure it's the same one?

There's a City on a Hill church based in New Zealand which is Evangelical, the one Thorburn is involved with is Anglican, and then there's another similarly named one in the USA as well (City on the Hill).
Click to expand...

I’m not sure and I’m almost scared to look.

A bible basher banker on the back of a bygone Paul Brasher?
 
Vander18 said:
Geelong and Syndey are the benchmark clubs - it has to be of interest that both seem to favour footy CEO’s.

I also think it’s interesting that both Andrew Ireland and Tom Harley joined Sydney as GM Footy before transitioning to the CEO role. I think it shows the value they put on a footy background.

Let’s see what happens with Richmond….Has Gale set them up for one window or for sustained success?
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t be surprised if Livingstone gets promoted to ceo once gale leaves. Charlie gardiner at Sydney is another ceo in waiting and would almost be a lock whenever Harley moves on/ is poached (wouldn’t be surprised if the afl have a crack at him at some point).
 
rumply said:
No idea as to the accuracy of any of this

Click to expand...

I’ll give you a hot tip, the specifics of what he’s claiming Guy Mason said is about as accurate as Tom browns reporting (not very). Nothing to worry about.

If you look at people like Brad Stevens for example, who coached the Boston Celtics. Highly religious, didn’t stop him from running a mostly successful team.
 
andleanback said:
Wouldn’t be surprised if Livingstone gets promoted to ceo once gale leaves. Charlie gardiner at Sydney is another ceo in waiting and would almost be a lock whenever Harley moves on/ is poached (wouldn’t be surprised if the afl have a crack at him at some point).
Click to expand...
Based on Ireland and Harley you’d assume Charlie Gardiner is the succession plan at Sydney. Ex-player, lawyer….fits the bill.
 
frodos gardener said:
Not sure the CEO really has to have come from a footy background. You could liken it to a CEO of a bank not being an expert in every domain across the business. Typically they hire people who do know each division and the CEO then sets the direction that binds them together and he/she oversees performance and enables them via resourcing, as well as managing external forces.

Thorburn doesn’t need to have come from football if he has very capable direct reports. This gig won’t have the spread, depth, complexity etc that the nab role did. It’s chalk and cheese. He’d have to make a blunder of Asaga proportions to * it up.
Click to expand...
Do you believe Thorburn is accountable for on-field performance? Not week to week, but over a period of say 3 years or more.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Club Mgmt. Board of Directors as led by President Dave Barham

Similar threads

VelvetSledge
  • Locked
  • Sticky
MVP 2024 BigFooty Essendon Board POTY Award - ZACH MERRETT wins again!
Replies
24
Views
3K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
Lore
Mod. Notice Welcome Nuggs Bunny, new Essendon board mod!
Replies
13
Views
1K
Vindicater
Vindicater
Beerfish
  • Poll
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Poster Of The Year - The Scales - Congratulations eDPS!
Replies
14
Views
1K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
Nuggs Bunny
Competitions 2024 Essendon Board My Boy Draft - Round 2 now started
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
182
Views
6K
citizen-erased
citizen-erased
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sport The Essendon Board’s Paris 2024 Olympics Thread
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sporno 4 Pyros
RedmanWasHere
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Mock Draft
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
10K
citizen-erased
citizen-erased
Beerfish
  • Locked
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Poster Of The Year - The Scales - Nomination Thread - Win 1 year free platinum BF experience!
Replies
22
Views
1K
Lore
Lore

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top