Toast Eat One Buckley Haters

[FuManchu]

Just start off saying howdy Fu, long time no see, good to see you around.

But on tenure, Mick got a reasonable shake of it and the only way was up for him when he took over. Bucks took over at the top end so he was always going to have a harsh measure.

I'm confident if Bucks is given 12 years, he'll shake one or two down.

I was going to say that Buckley had the misfortune of taking over at the top of a cycle. That's very rare, usually coaches take over as the team is either at the bottom of a cycle or into an obvious decline. I still say that any coach gets 3 years minimum to make his mark on the club. Buckley's mark might be something completely different to just performance, it may have to be a cultural change, but as yet, all we are seeing is the inevitable decline, which is understandable because we have been in finals for 8 years. The more disturbing aspect is the resistance to cultural change, where certain elements are resisting change because they were tolerated due to their on field excellence. This might be buckley's biggest challenge.

Buckley might also be facing a challenge of his own personality too. Just as when he took over as captain, perhaps the players find him not as engaging as they were used to with The father like figure of a Malthouse. Time will tell. It's a pity that he didnt have a more engaging person in the background helping him. Eade was a great game day coach but apparently not one to establish strong personal relationships with players. The players need some lovin' because that's what they were used to. Who's giving them that at the club now?

 

[Beary17]

I was going to say that Buckley had the misfortune of taking over at the top of a cycle. That's very rare, usually coaches take over as the team is either at the bottom of a cycle or into an obvious decline. I still say that any coach gets 3 years minimum to make his mark on the club. Buckley's mark might be something completely different to just performance, it may have to be a cultural change, but as yet, all we are seeing is the inevitable decline, which is understandable because we have been in finals for 8 years. The more disturbing aspect is the resistance to cultural change, where certain elements are resisting change because they were tolerated due to their on field excellence. This might be buckley's biggest challenge.

Buckley might also be facing a challenge of his own personality too. Just as when he took over as captain, perhaps the players find him not as engaging as they were used to with The father like figure of a Malthouse. Time will tell. It's a pity that he didnt have a more engaging person in the background helping him. Eade was a great game day coach but apparently not one to establish strong personal relationships with players. The players need some lovin' because that's what they were used to. Who's giving them that at the club now?

Excellent post, far too sensible for this thread!

 

[noideaatall]

I was going to say that Buckley had the misfortune of taking over at the top of a cycle. That's very rare, usually coaches take over as the team is either at the bottom of a cycle or into an obvious decline. I still say that any coach gets 3 years minimum to make his mark on the club. Buckley's mark might be something completely different to just performance, it may have to be a cultural change, but as yet, all we are seeing is the inevitable decline, which is understandable because we have been in finals for 8 years. The more disturbing aspect is the resistance to cultural change, where certain elements are resisting change because they were tolerated due to their on field excellence. This might be buckley's biggest challenge.
...

Top post.

The question will always remain: did Bucks cause the decline? Makes me wonder if the succession plan did not disturb the natural order of things, that letting MM ride out the decline would have made for a much better coaching transition and given Bucks licence from the start to institute change. If we were now sacking MM and appointing Bucks perhaps there would be far less resistance.

 

[ksardog]

I wouldn't mistake 20 pimply teenagers and some grumpy old men on the internet for the membership.

im a member, and i dont like whats been happening these past 2 years.

 

[Krueger]

The question will always remain: did Bucks cause the decline? Makes me wonder if the succession plan did not disturb the natural order of things, that letting MM ride out the decline would have made for a much better coaching transition and given Bucks licence from the start to institute change. If we were now sacking MM and appointing Bucks perhaps there would be far less resistance.

Ofcourse he has!! What else could explain our rapid decline. He has presided over the systematic dismantling of the juggernaut formerley known as Collingwood. When I look back at where we were and where we currently should be it makes my blood boil.

Who in their right mind makes changes when you are at the top? The only way you can go is down if things dont go according to plan and in our case it has been an unmitigated disaster. The player sackings are disgusting to say the least. Doing it so soon clearly lays the blame on them as if the current incompetant coaches had nothing to do with our decline.

 

[the distributer]

The succession plan was a disaster, Mick was supposed to train Bucks, he was supposed to ensure he was ready, but Mick resented Buckley and the succession plan.

The way it's turned out Bucks was not ready to coach, he's still struggling now IMO, using hindsight Bucks should have went elsewhere for 2010-2011 and done a real apprenticeship, IMO Mick should have seen out our window, the change over should have been around now.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I wouldn't mistake 20 pimply teenagers and some grumpy old men on the internet for the membership.

Hey, you are going a bit far now! I am not all that grumpy, am I?

 

[RuFiO]

Hey, you are going a bit far now! I am not all that grumpy, am I?

I'm sorry, but you are.
Your constant name changes shows it.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I'm sorry, but you are.
Your constant name changes shows it.

Does the same apply to your avatar that seems to change on a daily basis?

 

[RuFiO]

Does the same apply to your avatar that seems to change on a daily basis?

No. I
I
I've had the same avatar all along.

 

[DThomas]

The number of morons against buckley is growing by the day

Fixed your post.

 

[DThomas]

Ofcourse he has!! What else could explain our rapid decline. He has presided over the systematic dismantling of the juggernaut formerley known as Collingwood. When I look back at where we were and where we currently should be it makes my blood boil.

Who in their right mind makes changes when you are at the top? The only way you can go is down if things dont go according to plan and in our case it has been an unmitigated disaster. The player sackings are disgusting to say the least. Doing it so soon clearly lays the blame on them as if the current incompetant coaches had nothing to do with our decline.

Hey, Krueger, did you hear the great news?!
http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/af...form-collingwood/story-fniv64s8-1226715466633

Nathan Buckley is poised to win a contract extension to help transform Collingwood

THE one certainty amid so many unanswered questions is that Nathan Buckley will be given the chance to transform Collingwood in his own uncompromising image.

Buckley will almost certainly be handed a contract extension over the summer that will solidify his position of power.

Aaaaand once again!

 

[noideaatall]

Ofcourse he has!! What else could explain our rapid decline. He has presided over the systematic dismantling of the juggernaut formerley known as Collingwood. When I look back at where we were and where we currently should be it makes my blood boil.

Who in their right mind makes changes when you are at the top? The only way you can go is down if things dont go according to plan and in our case it has been an unmitigated disaster. The player sackings are disgusting to say the least. Doing it so soon clearly lays the blame on them as if the current incompetant coaches had nothing to do with our decline.

What else could explain our rapid decline? There are other slightly more complex explanations, posted by many heaps of times. We see that differently, I wouldn't call it cut and dried.

Who in their right mind makes changes when you are at the top? Its a good question. I'd argue changes are relevant if you are not actually at the top but sliding down the other side. Further, given the rate of change in the game and that drafting rules means weaker clubs are set to develop quicker/better than top teams, changing whilst you are at the top may be essential to maintain dominance or relevance.

The changes from Buckley through the last couple of years have matched the last category for mine. Now we are no longer at the top, we have declined, so further change - the clean out is essential.

 

[TheFreshBanana]

How many times have we heard that the hunger disappears when you win a premiership?

And from what Pendlebury said, the lack of hunger is apparent. I think that's where the source of the problem is and Buckley is fixing it.

 

[Krueger]

Hey, Krueger, did you hear the great news?!
http://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/af...form-collingwood/story-fniv64s8-1226715466633

Never seen anyone so happy about another disastrous administrative decision by the club. Its no longer the Collingwood Football Club, its the Buckley Football Club ala James Hird at Essendon.

BTW you should think of a new use name and avatar as Daisy probably leaving too. Great news aswell is it??

 

[Yidaki]

The succession plan was a disaster, Mick was supposed to train Bucks, he was supposed to ensure he was ready, but Mick resented Buckley and the succession plan.

The way it's turned out Bucks was not ready to coach, he's still struggling now IMO, using hindsight Bucks should have went elsewhere for 2010-2011 and done a real apprenticeship, IMO Mick should have seen out our window, the change over should have been around now.

Totally agree with this.

 

[Wayne Arnold]

The succession plan was a disaster, Mick was supposed to train Bucks, he was supposed to ensure he was ready, but Mick resented Buckley and the succession plan.

The way it's turned out Bucks was not ready to coach, he's still struggling now IMO, using hindsight Bucks should have went elsewhere for 2010-2011 and done a real apprenticeship, IMO Mick should have seen out our window, the change over should have been around now.

And how would have this worked at the time, as Malthouse did not have the full support of the board to continue coaching after 2009 but Eddie implemented a plan to keep him on for another two years as senior coach and then an additional three years. If there was no succession plan then Malthouse would have been sacked in 2009.

 

[RuFiO]

Never seen anyone so happy about another disastrous administrative decision by the club. Its no longer the Collingwood Football Club, its the Buckley Football Club ala James Hird at Essendon.

BTW you should think of a new use name and avatar as Daisy probably leaving too. Great news aswell is it??

You should feel honoured that someone's made a thread totally dedicated to you.
I'm envious and a little bit jealous of you.

 

[Magpie Girl]

Clarkson is out of contract. Throw the sink at him

they wanted to throw him out with the sink not so long ago

 

[DThomas]

I like this one even more: Malthouse - one final win (so far) in 2013. Buckley - None.

Face it, you're a loser, just like the Coach you worship.

They get a win over a team that hasn't played finals in 12 years and suddenly that makes them a better team than us? And then when they face an actual decent team they can't do shit! Sydney had a ton of injuries and the Scum had the umps on their side and they couldn't do anything except sit there and get flogged by a superior team. Real genius Mick Shithouse is, isn't he?

Just a friendly reminder:
Bucks - 2
Mick - 0

I won't stoop to your level, but face it, the Coach you worship is a loser.

 

[Krueger]

They get a win over a team that hasn't played finals in 12 years and suddenly that makes them a better team than us? And then when they face an actual decent team they can't do shit! Sydney had a ton of injuries and the Scum had the umps on their side and they couldn't do anything except sit there and get flogged by a superior team. Real genius Mick Shithouse is, isn't he?

Just a friendly reminder:
Bucks - 2
Mick - 0

I won't stoop to your level, but face it, the Coach you worship is a loser.

Better team or not they won one final. Eddie McGuires face after the loss to Port Adeliade told the whole story. He was disgusted but his hands were tied since he was responsible for the change.

Malthouse was spot on about the culture issue at Pieland. Buckley has no man mangement skills and is not respected by the playing group simple as that. Easiest solution is sack everyone and bring in puppets. Nevermind winning games in the meantime Bucks, its all about creating a team that you can be proud of. Bringing in obedient plodders is far more important than man managing great players.

BTW posting images in every post makes you very cool - BRO! Kids.............

 

[DThomas]

Better team or not they won one final. Eddie McGuires face after the loss to Port Adeliade told the whole story. He was disgusted but his hands were tied since he was responsible for the change.

Malthouse was spot on about the culture issue at Pieland. Buckley has no man mangement skills and is not respected by the playing group simple as that. Easiest solution is sack everyone and bring in puppets. Nevermind winning games in the meantime Bucks, its all about creating a team that you can be proud of. Bringing in obedient plodders is far more important than man managing great players.

BTW posting images in every post makes you very cool - BRO! Kids.............

Wow, you're noticeably subdued! Could it be all that egg on your face affecting your posting?

Speaking of pictures...

"Ah, shit! What the f*ck have done letting an old has-been coaching us? Is Bucks still available?"

Bucks - 2
Mick - Big, fat, juicy 0

 

[THATSGOLD]

The succession plan was a disaster, Mick was supposed to train Bucks, he was supposed to ensure he was ready, but Mick resented Buckley and the succession plan.

The way it's turned out Bucks was not ready to coach, he's still struggling now IMO, using hindsight Bucks should have went elsewhere for 2010-2011 and done a real apprenticeship, IMO Mick should have seen out our window, the change over should have been around now.

Spot on.

 

[THATSGOLD]

The number of 'haters' for buckley is growing by the day

No that's the players. Jolly Krakouer Daisy Shaw Wellingham Dawes and Didak are the Buckley haters.

 

[Magpie Girl]

Malthouse had the opportunity to really 'stick it up them' at Collingwood over the Buckley succession plan by winning that second premiership in 2011 instead of sabotaging the season.

However he chose to be petty and petulant