Rumour Future of the club (Bevo, board, assistant coaches, football department)

[Freshwater]

Who would you bring in to replace Vandermeer?

Sanders, Bendendo, Baker, Daniel, Clarke whoever is most in form.

 

[lachy]

I blame McNeil for the whole VDM debacle this year. He’s wins the last small forward spot over the pre season and practice matches and then has possibly his worst game for the club round one against Melbourne and has never been seen again.

We desperately need one of the VFL smalls to step the heck up and take his place.

Or like a lot of clubs rotate quality mids forward if the small forwards are not at the level

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Freshwater]

Ok you don’t like Vandermeer. But he has attributes that the coaches like. Not a sack-the-coach offence.

How does anyone think a player that does nothing, can’t even compete above his head, is worth staying in the team? Is there some esoteric thing he does that us mere mortals can’t comprehend? There are blokes getting the job done in the twos, week in week out, reward them. I want to see Bevo succeed and not get sacked. But if he can’t see through his own blind spots, the inevitable will happen.

 

[dogwatch]

It's incredible how any success is because of the players and their talent and any failure is because of the coach and their inability to coach. But it's never the other way round. Funny about that

I think you are only seeing one side of it 3NP. A bit like how we only remember the umpiring howlers that go against us, not so much the dubious ones that go our way.

I've seen plenty of posts that say "our list is way overrated", "can't blame Bevo if the players are crap" or "there are good plans but the players won't execute". Why even Treloar mentioned that last point in an interview a few days ago.

I also saw HEAPS of praise directed at Bevo for our two illustrious finals campaigns in 2016 and 2021 (and also 2015 for that matter). For a while he walked on water. He was the Bullgod-in-Chief. Even in more recent years when he has pulled some good moves there is acknowledgement of it.

There's some Yin and Yang in the arguments about list performance vs coaching performance. One side will say this list should be making top 4 on a regular basis and therefore it's the coach's fault, the other saying the list has rarely been better than mid-table quality and the coach has excelled just to get them into finals, let alone a couple of GFs.

What makes it an eternal and insoluble argument is that while the list and the coach remain unchanged it's impossible to put up definitive proof that the real problem is with one or the other.

The truth, as is so often the case, can be found somewhere in the middle. They are mutually dependent. And they fluctuate accordingly. The coach can only be as good as the players' collective talent allows him to be. Players can't reach their optimum performance unless the collective coaching is also close to optimum.

It may come as a surprise to you but IMO most people around here are receptive to that sort of nuance. Of course there will always be a few who aren't. I wonder whether you might be obsessing with the few who aren't?


Regardless, there will come a time at all clubs when change is clearly required, even if there isn't always agreement on what that change should be. The longer the perception of under-performance the louder the calls will be for change.

What we DO know is that replacing an entire list (or the larger part of it) is a huge, complex and protracted task likely to take several years. But replacing a coach can be done in one swift coup. Instant renewal. Now that's a very appealing option.

Is it any wonder then, that after (debatably) years of under-performance and at times head-scratching decisions & tactics, and twiddling many other dials on the console, people start thinking a change of coach might now be the answer ... and a swift answer at that?

 

[cecil]

Sanders, Bendendo, Baker, Daniel, Clarke whoever is most in form.

Of those only Clarke plays the same position and Vandermeer clearly outperformed him in the seniors.

Our small forward stocks are dire which is why Vandermeer gets games.

 

[Proffessor]

Just frustrating that no club is as confused at selection than us. There never seems to be selection integrity. We are on top in the twos and struggling in the ones. Rotate crew through there. They go on about pre-season form? Round 1 or 2 maybe, but real games AFL and VFL show who’s in form and who’s not. Sometimes they think they need to play these types or those types. To a degree, you need a certain amount of structure, but mostly should reward form and play blokes when they’re hot. VDM is cold as ice at the moment, I’d even drop JUH for a week or two is quite out of form and throw Lobb in for him who is in form. That’s the sort of flexible thinking I reckon we need.

The one thing that people miss a bit here, is that there is at least some method to the Bevo madness.

I’ve said many times that I think he focuses too much on giving young blokes opportunities, and often at the expense of important immediate results. But there are definitely still benefits that flow from his dedication to rewarding young players for good VFL and preseason form.

His adherence to such promotion principles have helped maintain a positive development culture and improved playing list depth. Many clubs fall off a cliff after a few successful years because the younger players didn’t get enough chances at senior level. Our problem is we haven’t maximised our use of senior talent and arguably under rewarded players for past performances. It is difficult to get the balance right.

The extra challenge is you need to be mindful of not messing with player confidence too much because it is a fragile thing.

 

[lachy]

The one thing that people miss a bit here, is that there is at least some method to the Bevo madness.

I’ve said many times that I think he focuses too much on giving young blokes opportunities, and often at the expense of important immediate results. But there are definitely still benefits that flow from his dedication to rewarding young players for good VFL and preseason form.

His adherence to such promotion principles have helped maintain a positive development culture and improved playing list depth. Many clubs fall off a cliff after a few successful years because the younger players didn’t get enough chances at senior level. Our problem is we haven’t maximised our use of senior talent and arguably under rewarded players for past performances. It is difficult to get the balance right.

The extra challenge is you need to be mindful of not messing with player confidence too much because it is a fragile thing.

I would more argue he his inconsistent with young players. Some get games without earning that and keep getting games still without earning it, whilst a similar amount earn the opportunity without getting that run of games.

I would also argue he keeps experienced players in too long when they have prolonged drops in form.

However, his biggest issue is giving to many opportunities to players from other clubs who are under performing.

None of these issues however are sacking offences

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[hutchy31]

I think you are only seeing one side of it 3NP. A bit like how we only remember the umpiring howlers that go against us, not so much the dubious ones that go our way.

I've seen plenty of posts that say "our list is way overrated", "can't blame Bevo if the players are crap" or "there are good plans but the players won't execute". Why even Treloar mentioned that last point in an interview a few days ago.

I also saw HEAPS of praise directed at Bevo for our two illustrious finals campaigns in 2016 and 2021 (and also 2015 for that matter). For a while he walked on water. He was the Bullgod-in-Chief. Even in more recent years when he has pulled some good moves there is acknowledgement of it.

There's some Yin and Yang in the arguments about list performance vs coaching performance. One side will say this list should be making top 4 on a regular basis and therefore it's the coach's fault, the other saying the list has rarely been better than mid-table quality and the coach has excelled just to get them into finals, let alone a couple of GFs.

What makes it an eternal and insoluble argument is that while the list and the coach remain unchanged it's impossible to put up definitive proof that the real problem is with one or the other.

The truth, as is so often the case, can be found somewhere in the middle. They are mutually dependent. And they fluctuate accordingly. The coach can only be as good as the players' collective talent allows him to be. Players can't reach their optimum performance unless the collective coaching is also close to optimum.

It may come as a surprise to you but IMO most people around here are receptive to that sort of nuance. Of course there will always be a few who aren't. I wonder whether you might be obsessing with the few who aren't?


Regardless, there will come a time at all clubs when change is clearly required, even if there isn't always agreement on what that change should be. The longer the perception of under-performance the louder the calls will be for change.

What we DO know is that replacing an entire list (or the larger part of it) is a huge, complex and protracted task likely to take several years. But replacing a coach can be done in one swift coup. Instant renewal. Now that's a very appealing option.

Is it any wonder then, that after (debatably) years of under-performance and at times head-scratching decisions & tactics, and twiddling many other dials on the console, people start thinking a change of coach might now be the answer ... and a swift answer at that?

Would like this post a couple of times if I could. Maybe Bevo is over performing every year with our list, he definitely did so in 2015-2016 and 2021 was excellent for 90% of the year. Maybe we fell off a cliff after the flag and he actually did enormously well to have us back in the bottom half of the eight for a few years after missing for a couple.

The issue I have is that since the 2021 GF there are issues that appear to still be problematic - forward movement/chemistry, team defense, tackling and match committee/selection to name a few. Now maybe he’s coaching out of his skin but the list is now full of holes and he can’t plug them all, but I do wonder what a different coach with an alternative view on modern team defense and standards for team selection would do.

You can’t replace a list, but you can replace a coach like you say. I’m not sure if it’s apocryphal, but it’s been mentioned around here a few times that Bevo himself has stated he believes a head coach has a shelf life at a club - 10 years? I don’t recall the quote myself, but I definitely agree with the sentiment if he did say it and he’s in year 9 now.

Bottom line is that if a club appears to be underperforming for a decent chunk of time then the coach will be changed. I’d argue that the last 50-odd games of his tenure qualify as underperforming and he might be running out of ideas with the group. Maybe I’m wrong and we’ll massively regret it, but I’d like there to be a new broom soon.

As an aside on the list, it was interesting to see the VFL team perform very well today against a decent opponent. Unbeaten and top of the ladder is pretty impressive. I wonder if the continual rotation of players on the border between AFL/VFL (so maybe our 18th-32nd players on the list) means that we now have a deeper list than most in terms of AFL exposure, but because it’s been spread across those players our bottom six at AFL level are still comparatively poor because there’s no consistency. I’m not sure if that makes sense - apologies if not - but it felt unusual to see so many VFL players with fairly extensive recent AFL experience, and it showed. Lobb, Sanders (young but had a few games this year at the top level), Daniel, Khamis, Scott, Baker, Poulter, Jones, Gardner, McNeil - all been around the AFL team in recent history. It might not mean anything but it stuck out for me. I’m not a big VFL watcher but I don’t often see a side with maybe half the team who’ve had a recent run at AFL level.

 

[dogwatch]

... I’m not sure if it’s apocryphal, but it’s been mentioned around here a few times that Bevo himself has stated he believes a head coach has a shelf life at a club - 10 years? I don’t recall the quote myself, but I definitely agree with the sentiment if he did say it and he’s in year 9 now.

...

It's only a historical footnote and therefore might be irrelevant, but I do recall the quote. It was very early in his tenure, probably in the first 6 months, i.e. late 2014 or early 2015.

FWIW I'm pretty sure he said the typical coach's shelf-life was 5 years but I could be wrong by a year or so. Anyway we are well past that date now.

Pretty certain it was nothing like 10 years.

 

[Fossie 32]

It's only a historical footnote and therefore might be irrelevant, but I do recall the quote. It was very early in his tenure, probably in the first 6 months, i.e. late 2014 or early 2015.

FWIW I'm pretty sure he said the typical coach's shelf-life was 5 years but I could be wrong by a year or so. Anyway we are well past that date now.

Pretty certain it was nothing like 10 years.

I remember that too - thought it was 7 years but can’t recall

 

[Next Waiting]

I regret to inform you all that I did the ladder predictor yesterday and we finish 9th, 2 wins adrift of 8th. In a bizarre twist however, we finish with the 5th highest percentage and 4 wins clear of 10th place. If it's any consolation, both Carlton and Essendon go out in the first week.

In much less of a consolation, Sydney, Melbourne and Geelong all make the prelims.

In better news, Port go out in the semi finals and Zac Butters, who wants to return to Victoria, nominates the Bulldogs as long as Bevo remains the coach. Bevo is duly extended for another 2 years and knighted in a lavish ceremony on the corner of Droop St and the Princes Highway after Albo reintroduces the peerage system. The King Charles spaniel replaces the bulldog as our mascot and our club song is renewed to the tune of God Save the King.

Freijah, Buss, Sanders and VDM have all cemented their places in the best 22 by season's end and Harvard introduce a new course, Bevo 101: Excellence in player management and media relations.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

If the Dogs finish 9th Bevo has worked a miracle.

 

[Proffessor]

I would more argue he his inconsistent with young players. Some get games without earning that and keep getting games still without earning it, whilst a similar amount earn the opportunity without getting that run of games.

I would also argue he keeps experienced players in too long when they have prolonged drops in form.

However, his biggest issue is giving to many opportunities to players from other clubs who are under performing.

None of these issues however are sacking offences

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

You could probably group the young drafted and traded in players together as just new players, and yes the traded in variety seem to get a level of priority, but so do early draftees.

I agree that he does tend to persist too long when new players struggle, sometimes to the detriment of both the player and the team. However it is obvious that this show of faith is intended to help instil confidence not just in the individual player being extended that faith, but the other players awaiting their turn, that they can expect similar treatment.

As I have said before, there is at least some method behind the madness.

Where I think he typically goes wrong, is that he doesn’t extend enough faith to proven performers, and is too quick to drop them to provide opportunities to the chosen new players who often aren’t ready. This can undermine the confidence of the whole playing group and erode psychological safety.

But we need also to recognise it’s a difficult balancing act looking after a playing group where only a fraction can be selected in the senior team.

 

[Norm De Guerre]

I would more argue he his inconsistent with young players. Some get games without earning that and keep getting games still without earning it, whilst a similar amount earn the opportunity without getting that run of games.

I'd argue that by their very nature its the young players who are inconsistent.

How do we measure earned though? A game at the top level where they are small cogs in a bigger machine. A game at the lower level where elite juniors more often than not they are playing against glorified suburban footballers (see Sanders yesterday). Training. Or do we put our faith in a coaching panel that monitors their every move both inside and outside of the club?

The notion that any coach picks favourites has always seemed counterintuitive and detrimental to their own survival to me.

I would also argue he keeps experienced players in too long when they have prolonged drops in form.

This is true from a purely dispassionate point of view. However it's not so easy from a coaching point of view. Especially a coach who has as close a personal relationship with his senior squad as Beveridge clearly does. A squad that for the most part is responsible for his successes and failures. One only needs to see what Weightman and Treloar had to say in support of him over the past week or so to understand this.

I think the handing of Macrae, Dale and Daniels form slumps has for the most part found the right balance. Macrae though not back to his elite elite level of years past has found a niche as a solid role player. Dale is obviously back to his best and Daniel is a victim of team balance as much as it is of his own form.

At the other end of the spectrum we have the likes of Keath and Gardner. Both of whom are coverage for our otherwise thin KPD stocks. But them remaining on the list has allowed for the slowish development of Busslinger.

However, his biggest issue is giving to many opportunities to players from other clubs who are under performing.

These guys are usually mature, cheap role fillers designed to take the strain off 18 year old recruits finding their way in the system. I don't think that anybody is under the illusion that the vast majority of them will be on the list for an extended period of time. Im as prone to it as the next bigfooty coach, but in my view we scapegoat these guys way too much for the overall failings of the team.

None of these issues however are sacking offences

It's a win loss business. That is the metric that will decide Beveridges fate.

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[lachy]

In the media, on our fan Facebook pages and in these forums too much of the emphasis is on Bev, his role within the club and his control over all things football within the club.

Someone posts he is a megalomaniac that has and wants total control, this becomes a fact amd most of the discussion revolves around that.

It really is a whole lot more.

We were under resourced from the covid cut backs and making a Grand Final after that was really an amazing achievement on top of the gruelling travel and isolation.

However, Bev was not the top paid coach in the competition yet is blamed for taking up too much of the soft cap. How did Geelong for example manage or Richmond.

The message from Bains to appease our support base that we were aiming for top 4 created a misalignment with where we actually were at the time.

We finally put the resources back into the football department, still not enough but an improvement and upgraded our strength and conditioning.

Many of our better players are still developing and are 1 to 2 years away from being the players they could be but the expectation from the media and our supporters on social media including here seem to think they should already be at the level. Examples are Naughts is showing signs now he is taking the leap but Jamarra and certainly Darcy are still developing so inconsistency will occur now, patience is required but Bains words creates unreasonable expectations.

Our midfield did lack pace. B Smith was a key but was injured so we are only now starting to see the evolution of the midfield. It is not there yet but signs are positive with Sanders going back and working on his issues to come back stronger, Garcia improving and Ed adding another dimension. Keep Bailey and all of a sudden our midfield is on the way up.

All areas of the ground are being redeveloped whilst not throwing away everything and rebuilding. However it will take a bit of time.

Bev and his new off field team are highly likely to see out this year. If there is continued development that is clear and focused till the end of the season, we may miss the finals but there is a better than average chance the current coaching group with a couple of additions and tweaks will have the group next season.

It is not the end of the world if that happens as young players with abilities take some time to improve their role, and get the consistency needed to become the leaders we require to genuinely challenge.

I am optimistic with where this group is headed, and though yes some of the losses have frustrated me massively it is from those losses strong groups learn from and grow and build.

All I want to see is the club being cohesive in all aspects including messaging and see us continue to improve accross the ground. We may even make finals this year but it is not the only measure when we understand where our group actually is.

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

In the media, on our fan Facebook pages and in these forums too much of the emphasis is on Bev, his role within the club and his control over all things football within the club.

Someone posts he is a megalomaniac that has and wants total control, this becomes a fact amd most of the discussion revolves around that.

It really is a whole lot more.

We were under resourced from the covid cut backs and making a Grand Final after that was really an amazing achievement on top of the gruelling travel and isolation.

However, Bev was not the top paid coach in the competition yet is blamed for taking up too much of the soft cap. How did Geelong for example manage or Richmond.

The message from Bains to appease our support base that we were aiming for top 4 created a misalignment with where we actually were at the time.

We finally put the resources back into the football department, still not enough but an improvement and upgraded our strength and conditioning.

Many of our better players are still developing and are 1 to 2 years away from being the players they could be but the expectation from the media and our supporters on social media including here seem to think they should already be at the level. Examples are Naughts is showing signs now he is taking the leap but Jamarra and certainly Darcy are still developing so inconsistency will occur now, patience is required but Bains words creates unreasonable expectations.

Our midfield did lack pace. B Smith was a key but was injured so we are only now starting to see the evolution of the midfield. It is not there yet but signs are positive with Sanders going back and working on his issues to come back stronger, Garcia improving and Ed adding another dimension. Keep Bailey and all of a sudden our midfield is on the way up.

All areas of the ground are being redeveloped whilst not throwing away everything and rebuilding. However it will take a bit of time.

Bev and his new off field team are highly likely to see out this year. If there is continued development that is clear and focused till the end of the season, we may miss the finals but there is a better than average chance the current coaching group with a couple of additions and tweaks will have the group next season.

It is not the end of the world if that happens as young players with abilities take some time to improve their role, and get the consistency needed to become the leaders we require to genuinely challenge.

I am optimistic with where this group is headed, and though yes some of the losses have frustrated me massively it is from those losses strong groups learn from and grow and build.

All I want to see is the club being cohesive in all aspects including messaging and see us continue to improve accross the ground. We may even make finals this year but it is not the only measure when we understand where our group actually is.

On SM-S926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

I totally agree with you Lachy, and I would add, don’t believe everything that the media states. Think we all recognise by now that there is some in the media with an agenda against Bevo, and by default want to harm our club. If fans and members bag out our club all the time, it has a flow on effect, turning off new members and maybe even players we are attempting to trade for.

By all means vent on here, but it really disappoints me when I see our supporters bagging out the coach and club on the MB, Facebook, draft threads etc. I don’t see supporters from other clubs doing this as much as our supporters do, is it an inferiority complex?

 

[dogwatch]

There are a few signs that the minor off-season shake-up in coaching is yielding some results. Not necessarily results in the W/L ratio yet but in terms of how we play. The ball movement has changed. We are trying to put some more pace into the middle. We are rewarding players like VDM who can slow the rebound out of our f50. Why I've even heard that the forwards are now trying not to compete against each other for the mark!

These changes are slow and erratic. We get it right for a lot of the time one week but we lose the plot and revert to some bad habits the next week when the pressure is turned up. Overall it looks like we are trying to develop a different style of play.

These are small but encouraging signs.

 

[ScragCity]

It's only a historical footnote and therefore might be irrelevant, but I do recall the quote. It was very early in his tenure, probably in the first 6 months, i.e. late 2014 or early 2015.

FWIW I'm pretty sure he said the typical coach's shelf-life was 5 years but I could be wrong by a year or so. Anyway we are well past that date now.

Pretty certain it was nothing like 10 years.

I'm also pretty sure that it was 5 years. Probably a silly thing to say in hindsight as there's plenty of evidence to the contrary. Two of the best teams in the comp have had the same head coach for 15 or so years. I don't see Bevo lasting that long given that he won't have a top four finish in 10 seasons.

 

[Next Waiting]

I'm also pretty sure that it was 5 years. Probably a silly thing to say in hindsight as there's plenty of evidence to the contrary. Two of the best teams in the comp have had the same head coach for 15 or so years.

His view on the matter may have evolved.

 

[Contador]

I'm pretty sure the 5 year thing was about jobs in general and was in response to questions about Bevo having had several different careers at that point (footballer, finance guy etc.). Was basically just saying he likes to try new things sometimes. This was picked up on when we started winning because everyone was terrified he would get bored and just up and leave after 5 years.

It wasn't about the life span of a footy coach.

 

[dogwatch]

I'm pretty sure the 5 year thing was about jobs in general and was in response to questions about Bevo having had several different careers at that point (footballer, finance guy etc.). Was basically just saying he likes to try new things sometimes. This was picked up on when we started winning because everyone was terrified he would get bored and just up and leave after 5 years.

It wasn't about the life span of a footy coach.

That's not my recollection at all. I remember it as a general statement about the shelf-life of a coach. I could be wrong of course. It's been known to happen.

But as I say it's all history and largely irrelevant now.

A free "like" for anyone who can ind the original quote and settle the argument!

 

[Dazb86]

Sounds like a rebuild.

 

[lachy]

Sounds like a rebuild.

Given that other than Dunkley we have not lost a solitary top 10 player only some have got older, how is that a rebuild?

 

[seaweed]

As a new Dogs fan (fell out of love with the game almost ten years ago and have a mate who is a Dogs fan. Went to the game v Hawks and the Dogs just felt like coming home to me, so here we are ) it will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

It used to be that when you had the public backing of the president, we would all laugh and say that was your death knell.

I haven’t been following at all to know the ins and outs of it but Bevo’s role does seem tenuous at best right now, and I feel like anything is possible (in terms of a potential standing down or sacking) going forward

 

[Planet Dogs]

I think there are two scenarios for how this plays out:


1. We continue with our current erratic form and miss the finals again (unfortunately this is the most likely scenario). In this scenario, the options regarding our footy department are:
a. Replace Bevo with the best available external coach (my preferred option under this scenario)
b. Keep Bevo but hire a new head of footy to ensure the footy department is a top quartile outfit in terms of accountability, structure, expertise, etc (an acceptable outcome).
c. The status quo (unacceptable).

2. Against the odds we turn things around and make finals, a la Carlton last year (by far my preferred scenario!). In this scenario, I believe it is unlikely Bevo will go. Therefore it will be either the status quo (most likely) or a new head of footy (my dream outcome).

Conclusion: it is simplistic to frame this as either an anti-Bevo or pro-Bevo argument. It is rather what realistically gives the club the best chance for success over the next 5 years (BTW I am excited about the next 5 years provided the club goes about things the right way).