Coaching Staff Former Coach Ben "Truck" Rutten - Sacked for real this time - 21/8

[CBombers17]

Given that we consistently see players not executing it, I would argue that they don't understand it by now.

Understanding it in a training session is one thing. Understanding it in the midst of a game, under physical duress, opponent pressure, in different scenarios and making other decisions, is what makes it complex to execute on game-day.

Time and again we've seen that teams take a number of seasons to bed down these game-plans until the players can execute the game-plan under a number of different scenarios, under physical duress, week-in and week-out.

We literally have different coaches for how we setup with the ball in attack versus defence, that tells you immediately that there's some layers of complexity to how the team operates.

It's not astrophysics, sure, but then these guys aren't astrophysicists either.

It's not just bedding down a gameplan. It's changing the personnel who can and will implement it - some clubs are better at this than others

And also changing the minds of those who are choosing not to currently - and some coaches are better at this part than others (I was given a specific example of how this was done successfully with a senior player of one of the clubs coached)

A failure to execute a plan does not necessarily equate to a failure to understand the plan. That's what I have been told by 2 experienced coaches and is also my personal experience.

What the club has to do is turn the following around. The problem can be looked at like this -
Without getting into semantics about individual players abilities just assume my following assessments are correct.

Break the list down into 4 player Categories:

Category A - young players- learning the plan and MAY not understand it yet Tex Wanganeen, and Cox (but they quite likely already understand it after 5 minutes just like Hobbs and Martin ).

Category B - experienced players - understand the plan and their role and are not performing it consistently because of either motivation or physical capacity - Merrett, Shiel and Parish.

Category C - understand the plan but cannot perform it consistently because they physically aren't up to it (age or conditioning) - Heppell, Caldwell, Smith.

Category D - understand the plan and can implement the plan - Snelling, Langford, Laverde, Hobbs, Martin.

Effectively we need far more players out of A, B and C into D.

It is up to Rutten and Co to educate A. It is up to Rutten and co to get into into hearts and minds of B and its up to the club to upgrade all of C - and also trade any of B that need it.

This is what can take time. If you either have a lot of players to change and/or the coach can't influence the ones who just won't. Sometimes you get a coachable group or a leader like Cotchin who was desperate to change and it can turn quickly. Sometimes you get our group ...

Ive been informed that some coaches are much better at working with A and B than others (and also who worked with Dimma and cotchin - Ben Crowe mindset coach) and that all bar a very small minority won't understand the coaches strategy - Maybe none on the list.

So correct it's not astrophysics it's just football and believe it or not the footballer's actually do get it.

 

[84859300]

I would argue that most understand it, but:

• Young players (and less fit senior players) cannot execute it both ways for extended periods. Often it involves high intensity repeat sprints back then forward
• Some senior players understand it but haven't broken bad habits of ball watching (or unnessarily running to contests like a moth to flame) when they should be running to position elsewhere
• Some senior players fully understand it but because of the two categories above often have to cover for others too often, tiring them out and becoming another weak link

Then there is the few who for whatever reason don't get it.

This doesn't include what I suspect are also a few who while not lazy in normal person terms, do not have the mental fortitude to gut run beyond what they think they can despite having the fitness.

Our young players, senior players and coaching staff ALL came back the earliest of all clubs, all so we could learn a defensive game plan.

Haven't seen any improvement in our defensive side at all. In fact, I haven't seen any trying and failing. Non existant.

It took for the media to call us out after consecutive poor efforts from senior players being plastered in newspapers and on every footy show.

No one can say we have 22 players suit up, that 1 can't run to the plan - but here we are.

 

[ant555]

It's not just bedding down a gameplan. It's changing the personnel who can and will implement it - some clubs are better at this than others

And also changing the minds of those who are choosing not to currently - and some coaches are better at this part than others (I was given a specific example of how this was done successfully with a senior player of one of the clubs coached)

A failure to execute a plan does not necessarily equate to a failure to understand the plan. That's what I have been told by 2 experienced coaches and is also my personal experience.

What the club has to do is turn the following around. The problem can be looked at like this -
Without getting into semantics about individual players abilities just assume my following assessments are correct.

Break the list down into 4 player Categories:

Category A - young players- learning the plan and MAY not understand it yet Tex Wanganeen, and Cox (but they quite likely already understand it after 5 minutes just like Hobbs and Martin ).

Category B - experienced players - understand the plan and their role and are not performing it consistently because of either motivation or physical capacity - Merrett, Shiel and Parish.

Category B - understand the plan but cannot perform it consistently because they physically aren't up to it (age or conditioning) - Heppell, Caldwell, Smith.

Category D - understand the plan and can implement the plan - Snelling, Langford, Laverde, Hobbs, Martin.

Effectively we need far more players out of A, B and C into D.

It is up to Rutten and Co to educate A. It is up to Rutten and co to get into into hearts and minds of B and its up to the club to upgrade all of C - and also trade any of B that need it.

This is what can take time. If you either have a lot of players to change and/or the coach can't influence the ones who just won't. Sometimes you get a coachable group or a leader like Cotchin who was desperate to change and it can turn quickly. Sometimes you get our group ...

Ive been informed that some coaches are much better at working with A and B than others (and who worked with Dimma and cotchin - Ben Crowe mindset coach) and that all bar a very small minority won't understand the coaches strategy - Maybe none on the list.

So correct it's not astrophysics it's just football and believe it or not the footballer's actually do get it.

Can not argue with any of this. Pretty much sums up a lot that I learnt doing level 2 coaching.

 

[jmoo wan]

. Langford could be a really good player but he’s not even close at the moment.

yeah he’s been shit all year.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Our young players, senior players and coaching staff ALL came back the earliest of all clubs, all so we could learn a defensive game plan.

Haven't seen any improvement in our defensive side at all. In fact, I haven't seen any trying and failing. Non existant.

It took for the media to call us out after consecutive poor efforts from senior players being plastered in newspapers and on every footy show.

No one can say we have 22 players suit up, that 1 can't run to the plan - but here we are.

Many times this year at the ground I've seen periods where we are implementing the defensive side of things on the whole, but it's for not long enough and/or a few players who don't that creates a weak link then chain reaction of covering/catching up. Some of the games where we have done it better for longer a lot of our younger players are too gassed to run hard forward to create options and overlap. People then start bitching about our lack of attack.

Our list and injuries play a large part in exacerbating these issues.

All in all from my observations it's not as if no one understands anything or doesn't try to implement, but it doesn't take much being off at this level for it to be easy to score against.

Now of course you can throw it all out and go on effort and emotion when under media scrutiny, but that doesn't last long or fix things for us in the long term.

The main reasons I have harped on and on about Shiel, Parish and Merrett this year is they have been in most the year, should be fit enough to perform the game plan, are meant to be leaders and have been some of the worst offenders of not adhering to it. Our lack of forward line pressure has made it harder for them in the midfield but that's more an issue of availability of senior small forwards who provide pressure. These three just simply need to be better.

As others have said there is a difference in understanding the theory and implementing it during games, but I've seen enough evidence to suggest a large amount know it and for various reasons we currently lack the tools to implement it consistently for extended periods.

What does please me is that in general it's our younger players who do it more often (until they physically can't).

 

[Lore]

Can not argue with any of this. Pretty much sums up a lot that I learnt doing level 2 coaching.

If that’s all in the level 2 course, then surely a team of level 4 coaches at Essendon would be well aware of it?

 

[CBombers17]

Can not argue with any of this. Pretty much sums up a lot that I learnt doing level 2 coaching.

The points you have previously about senior leadership were also made by these guys. In particular it's difficult if senior players don't buyin to the plan - which is why the culture change at one particular club with a selfish culture started with a senior player (mojo risins points about only needing a couple to not put in at this level and everything falls apart were also made in these discussions).

Anyone who has been around and played in lower leagues will know this of course. Problem at the highest level it gets far more difficult to change senior players as they are often on big contracts and can tie up a lot of club investment/be hard to move on etc

This may be less of an issue as more role players and some senior players return from injury but it still looks like there's a spot for more senior midfield leadership as many are suggesting on here (maybe a veteran). Do you see a place for that?

All said we have a heap of talent and a solid side doesn't look too far away tbh. As long as the club doesn't shit the bed in the meantime (scapegoats or scandals or both)...

 

[ant555]

If that’s all in the level 2 course, then surely a team of level 4 coaches at Essendon would be well aware of it?

They would be but the culture is hard to change. One of the biggest issues Worsfold had was the club insisting that Daniher and Fantaisia be in the leadership group. Joe never really played to any game plan as such. How he played was described to be as Joeball. Raz was never a leader and was never going to be a long term player as it turned out.

Being aware is one thing. being able to actually do something with it is a whole new ball game. If Truck fails it will be because he can not sell the message. It will be his failure in that regard. He has to be able to get the players on board. That is his job. The issue is even his his game plan is slightly flawed the message about being able to play hard edge blue collar footy is not. Carlton have found that out. Bolton tried to teach defense first but they could not grasp it or score. Teague let them play more attacking footy but they ran too far in front of the footy and did not defend. They still struggle to defend at times but they have a blue collar midfield with a dash of class now and their captain is back to his best. They also have a coach in Voss who still has a bit of aura about him. We do not have the list they have right now so it is not totally apples and apples but their under achievement has some similarities to us.

I thought Truck would be okay with Blake by his side as an experienced operator who has seen success at pretty much every where he has been and a good team of assistants to help out but maybe we are not at the young coach stage. Maybe our culture rules out any cut through from a young coach and we need an experienced coach to take on the role. He could still get it done but there is going to be some pain doing it.

Collingwood and Hawthorn have been a bit better with young coaches but both clubs have had a defensive style set up as far as game plan and coach for a number of years under their previous coaches and both clubs had finals exposure. I think that different culture allows more of a buy in.

 

[ant555]

Many times this year at the ground I've seen periods where we are implementing the defensive side of things on the whole, but it's for not long enough and/or a few players who don't that creates a weak link then chain reaction of covering/catching up. Some of the games where we have done it better for longer a lot of our younger players are too gassed to run hard forward to create options and overlap. People then start bitching about our lack of attack.

Our list and injuries play a large part in exacerbating these issues.

All in all from my observations it's not as if no one understands anything or doesn't try to implement, but it doesn't take much being off at this level for it to be easy to score against.

Now of course you can throw it all out and go on effort and emotion when under media scrutiny, but that doesn't last long or fix things for us in the long term.

The main reasons I have harped on and on about Shiel, Parish and Merrett this year is they have been in most the year, should be fit enough to perform the game plan, are meant to be leaders and have been some of the worst offenders of not adhering to it. Our lack of forward line pressure has made it harder for them in the midfield but that's more an issue of availability of senior small forwards who provide pressure. These three just simply need to be better.

As others have said there is a difference in understanding the theory and implementing it during games, but I've seen enough evidence to suggest a large amount know it and for various reasons we currently lack the tools to implement it consistently for extended periods.

What does please me is that in general it's our younger players who do it more often (until they physically can't).

Good post. Although we have had a couple of really piss poor games there have been games where the team defense has stood up for periods of the game but poor turnovers or a couple of positional mistakes have leaked goals right when we did not want them. The total lack of pressure forwards has killed us big time. We can not stop the footy from rebounding out of the forward half. As you say the midfield has not always been great either. Shiel has run up the white flag. Parish chases the footy and that is all he does and Merrett has been a bit 50/50 but it is not a natural thing for him although you can see he is improved at times.
Throw all that together with young rucks who do not have a marking impact , very average leadership depth and a captain who is a great bloke but the game is slipping away from him and has never been the type to maybe give away a free kick by bumping a bloke over to make a point and a bunch of senior players who are not really hard edge players and we get what we have.

 

[CBombers17]

They would be but the culture is hard to change. One of the biggest issues Worsfold had was the club insisting that Daniher and Fantaisia be in the leadership group. Joe never really played to any game plan as such. How he played was described to be as Joeball. Raz was never a leader and was never going to be a long term player as it turned out.

Being aware is one thing. being able to actually do something with it is a whole new ball game. If Truck fails it will be because he can not sell the message. It will be his failure in that regard. He has to be able to get the players on board. That is his job. The issue is even his his game plan is slightly flawed the message about being able to play hard edge blue collar footy is not. Carlton have found that out. Bolton tried to teach defense first but they could not grasp it or score. Teague let them play more attacking footy but they ran too far in front of the footy and did not defend. They still struggle to defend at times but they have a blue collar midfield with a dash of class now and their captain is back to his best. They also have a coach in Voss who still has a bit of aura about him. We do not have the list they have right now so it is not totally apples and apples but their under achievement has some similarities to us.

I thought Truck would be okay with Blake by his side as an experienced operator who has seen success at pretty much every where he has been and a good team of assistants to help out but maybe we are not at the young coach stage. Maybe our culture rules out any cut through from a young coach and we need an experienced coach to take on the role. He could still get it done but there is going to be some pain doing it.

Collingwood and Hawthorn have been a bit better with young coaches but both clubs have had a defensive style set up as far as game plan and coach for a number of years under their previous coaches and both clubs had finals exposure. I think that different culture allows more of a buy in.

This all aligns with what I was told. It was added that just because a coach has come through a successful system it does not mean they have the capacity to get into the hearts and minds of the players (the body mind and heart stuff I mentioned).

You can be successful coaching certain groups with mostly a mechanics focus (body - where to go and what to do etc) - but others you need to dig much deeper into the psyche of the players to get the required buy in (mind and heart). It's horses for courses and all groups are at different stages of their development have different levels of player leadership.

Some coaches have experienced this in their journey and others haven't. Hinkely, Dimma and Buckey were all mentioned as having had this background or understanding. Personally I found the mind and heart stuff very interesting and applicable to life in general.

 

[CBombers17]

They would be but the culture is hard to change. One of the biggest issues Worsfold had was the club insisting that Daniher and Fantaisia be in the leadership group. Joe never really played to any game plan as such. How he played was described to be as Joeball. Raz was never a leader and was never going to be a long term player as it turned out.

This part should also be illuminating for anyone who can't understand how the clubs senior management crap can hinder on-field development. From memory it was said that Worsfold didn't want them in the leadership group but it was a decision from above. This type of stuff is very detrimental to playing group culture changes.

All areas at the club need to be pretty much aligned to get results on the field - especially when ifs senior players that are the problem. This is why it's worth pondering the real motivation and cost of this recent dumbed down plan.

 

[faible]

Langford and Snelling are OK players. Let’s not say they are vital players. I feel we are over evaluating our list. Langford could be a really good player but he’s not even close at the moment.

They're not stars, but they're quite important structurally at this point.

Being good in the broader AFL sense and being important to us structurally aren't necessarily the same things.

 

[faible]

just assume my following assessments are correct

I think it's safe to never assume anyone's assessments on BigFooty are correct

 

[faible]

I thought Truck would be okay with Blake by his side as an experienced operator who has seen success at pretty much every where he has been and a good team of assistants to help out but maybe we are not at the young coach stage. Maybe our culture rules out any cut through from a young coach and we need an experienced coach to take on the role. He could still get it done but there is going to be some pain doing it.

This is where we might benefit from chasing some mature guys who can command respect from the playing group that will get on-board.

I'm a big fan of going hard for Brayshaw as a guy who's young enough to be a good player, has demonstrated they're willing to change roles for the benefit of the side, and I'm fairly sure he's been in the leadership group at some point.

Otherwise looking for a Hodge to Brisbane type pick-up that can play a year and direct traffic and reinforce the coaches message.

 

[CBombers17]

I think it's safe to never assume anyone's assessments on BigFooty are correct

I can understand why.

 

[ant555]

I can give a personal experience as far as nature of players go.
Coaching under 18 you always have half your list turning over year by year due to top age going out and bottom age coming up which has it challenges.
My role when coaching was senior development coach working with the under 21 players , under 18 development coach and a role with the under 16 group at the junior club getting to know the top age who where coming into the under 18 level and getting them to train with the under 18 group on some Wednesday nights ( our under 18 group trained Monday , Wednesday and Thursday ) I also did Tuesday night training with the under 16 group. This is what I did for 12 years along with the little part time recruiting role.
We had a very good 12 year period making finals in 10 of the years but the two years we missed I could see coming because the group of kids coming through the under 16 level where not as switched on or as physical as previous ones so you would lose the players at the top end who drove the game plan and have to go back to a more basic game plan.
We went from winning a flag to 6th to elimination final to losing the GF in a four year period due to the middle group not having the same edge we had when we won the flag and it was not just about ability but the nature of the kids and their willing to play a bit more physical footy (not bashing the opposition but being willing to block or shepherd and take body contact).
Obviously it is different to AFL level but mindset is mindset and for every person who is willing to step out of their comfort zone there are 2 who will not.

 

[Call Me Cake]

Lol @ people saying exclusions made us the team we are now. Every team has injuries.

Literally the entire purpose of the gameplan brought in was the result of having an even spread where every player can play multiple roles.

If this isn't the case then the only thing that can be deduced is that the gameplan itself is stifling the players and not providing them with Plan B, Plan C and Plan D for when said omissions occur.

That's no one's fault but the coach's.

 

[faible]

Every team has injuries.

How's West Coast going with all their senior players being out?

Whoops. Not quite the slam dunk you thought.

 

[Call Me Cake]

By comparison to the period up to round 10 last year, between Hooker (27), Tippa (24) and Jones (10) we are missing 61 goals to round 10 this year.

Accounting for Wrights uptick and maybe Martin, we are still 40-odd goals short of where we were last year. That's 4 odd goals a game (we would have at least a couple of extra wins with 4 more goals per game).

We are severely down on cattle this year forward of centre.

What a simplistic way of looking at it.

The fact of the matter is we played much better last year, win, lose or draw. We beat the teams we should have beaten and were competitive against teams that were higher on the ladder, and we had plenty of close ones.

This year the stats show a different tale - not just in "goals", but literally all across the ground. Especially in defense. All contributing to a situation where we are not beating the teams lower on the ladder and we are no where near competitive against teams higher on the ladder. The games we lose are literally from the 30 to 50 goal margins, that's not 4 goals, that's 6 to 8.

One would think a past defensive player and coach, who loses firepower, would understand the need to concede less as a result to even the ledger, but even that has alluded us. And he's supposedly championing a gameplan designed to work based on roles, not personas.

Last year we walked away from losses with a sense of optimism - this year we walk away with a headline every week.

Enough of the apologist mantra.

 

[Call Me Cake]

Otherwise looking for a Hodge to Brisbane type pick-up that can play a year and direct traffic and reinforce the coaches message.

Owen 1: gameplans are so intricate, they can't just be picked up that easy. We need 5 years to know it!

Owen 2: ayo, we can like, bring in some old guy, and he'll be able to literally parlay it all after 1 off-season, ayyyyy

 

[faible]

Owen 1: gameplans are so intricate, they can't just be picked up that easy. We need 5 years to know it!

Owen 2: ayo, we can like, bring in some old guy, and he'll be able to literally parlay it all after 1 off-season, ayyyyy

I mean if you ignore everything I wrote, the reality of football experience, of picking the right player, and simply make things up. Then yep.

 

[faible]

Writes this:

What a simplistic way of looking at it.

Proceeds to produce incredibly simplistic analysis:

The fact of the matter is we played much better last year, win, lose or draw. We beat the teams we should have beaten and were competitive against teams that were higher on the ladder, and we had plenty of close ones.

This year the stats show a different tale - not just in "goals", but literally all across the ground. Especially in defense. All contributing to a situation where we are not beating the teams lower on the ladder and we are no where near competitive against teams higher on the ladder. The games we lose are literally from the 30 to 50 goal margins, that's not 4 goals, that's 6 to 8.

One would think a past defensive player and coach, who loses firepower, would understand the need to concede less as a result to even the ledger, but even that has alluded us. And he's supposedly championing a gameplan designed to work based on roles, not personas.

Your schtick is tired.

 

[Beerfish]

Lol @ people saying exclusions made us the team we are now. Every team has injuries.

Once again, literally nobody is saying this is the only reason. It's one contributing factor. And yet here you are again coming in off a long run up about something nobody has said.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Once again, literally nobody is saying this is the only reason. It's one contributing factor. And yet here you are again coming in off a long run up about something nobody has said.

For god's sake Beery can you stop saying the only reason we're playing poorly is injuries?! It's blatantly wrong!

 

[JayDon]

Most of our desired forward line is injured or retired.
Maybe it's just this for a developing team?
If they were playing surely we would be better.
Yes there are deficiencies across the field. Expected in a growing team?
Maybe they aren't doing too badly with say 3 preferred forwards playing regularly.