NBates
Brownlow Medallist
Well, from reports on radio I don't think Bevo is going anywhere. I'd be very surprised.
Rumour Future of the club (Bevo, board, assistant coaches, football department)
- Thread starter BulldogMuscle
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Planet Dogs
Team Captain
- Aug 12, 2022
- 308
- 752
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
I'm not buying to story that our list is the issue. If you look at our hypothetical best 23 it looks OK to me. People keep saying our bottom 6 are not up to AFL standards:
Arguably Our bottom six would be: Scott (a fringe player but OK); Poulter (a newby that looks OK); JOD (a newby that looks OK); Cleary (a newby that looks OK); Keith (get's too much hate on this forum); Darcy (a newby that looks OK).
Do people really think the above group of players are rubbish? I've seen a lot worse in my 30 years following the dogs.
Arguably Our bottom six would be: Scott (a fringe player but OK); Poulter (a newby that looks OK); JOD (a newby that looks OK); Cleary (a newby that looks OK); Keith (get's too much hate on this forum); Darcy (a newby that looks OK).
Do people really think the above group of players are rubbish? I've seen a lot worse in my 30 years following the dogs.
BulldogMuscle
Honk For The Dogs
- Thread starter
- #1,980
IF Bevo goes it's gonna happen very quickly, club will hold the same line of ''support of the board'' until the severance is done, this is industry standard practice these days.
All I know is either Ameet, Grant or Bevo have to go, the boys club needs breaking up.
All I know is either Ameet, Grant or Bevo have to go, the boys club needs breaking up.
bresker
Brownlow Medallist
Veteran
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2023
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2023
10k Posts
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2022
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2022
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2021
Western Bulldogs - Ed Richards Player Sponsor 2021
- Sep 21, 2005
- 11,976
- 19,590
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Wet Sham, BANGOR FC, Down
I trust Front’s mail on this one & he suggests it’s just a matter of sorting out the financial settlement. It would be great to move him on ASAP, I agree.
I won’t be surprised if he resigns but then he’s Bev.
I hope he’s gone by the end of the week.
In soccer if a manager is stated to “have the full support of the board” that means he’s finished .
- Jan 19, 2014
- 7,945
- 13,114
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
I thought Bevo's "you reap what you sow" was an interesting line. Who or what did he have in mind there. I'm thinking he wasn't thinking about himself.
Perhaps a player or two that didn't crack in when they needed to, a player or few that didn't convert when they needed to, an administration that didn't fund when it needed to or destabilised when it didn't need to.
Perhaps a player or two that didn't crack in when they needed to, a player or few that didn't convert when they needed to, an administration that didn't fund when it needed to or destabilised when it didn't need to.
dogwatch
Premium Platinum
The list vs coach arguments continue. They are nothing new and happen at most clubs.
The binary nature of the argument is annoying though. It's never just one OR the other. It's always going to be some combination of the two. The questions are more about which is the greater contributor to our woes and which will give us the biggest and fastest improvement? Also which is easier to address?
LIST
Clearly our list has some shortcomings, like every club's list does. As a general statement (there are always individual players who are exceptions) our most obvious shortcomings are in pace, kicking skills, endurance (maybe) and perhaps some mental attributes that have contributed to our inconsistency within games. Call it resilience and toughness if you like. It tends to improve a bit with age and experience, around the 50-100 game mark. However we do have some very talented players in our top 10.
There's also a lot of discussion about whether we really have a "top 4 list" and whether our "bottom six" is good enough. Depth to at least 25 players is important but I think the assessment of a bottom six can be deceptive. That's because when a side lifts (like Collingwood in 2022 for example) the bottom six get swept up in the improvement and suddenly don't look too bad if everyone is playing with purpose, cohesion and self-confidence. That said, there's always going to be opportunities to turn over those lower performers who have been around a while and will never be better than fringe or "break glass" types. No need to give examples!
COACH
The criticisms of the coach (or coaches) fall into two categories - the visible and the inferred.
The visible is the easiest to attribute - team selection, player opportunity, game strategy and tactical moves. Whether you agree with it or not the evidence is there for everybody to see and it's a fair stretch to blame the players for any shortcomings in this area. My own view is we are quite deficient in these areas compared to most clubs. There have certainly been some successes along the way but overall I've been very disappointed the last couple of years.
The inferred are those things we can't see but make assumptions about. Coach motivation vs confused messaging. Strong bonds with players / losing the players. Conditioning program. What gets practised at training and what gets ignored (shots at goal perhaps?)
For example: showing forwards how to work cohesively by blocking, creating space, where to lead, how to stay out of each others way, when to fly for the mark and when to crumb, how to position yourself for crumbing, how to deal with hard tags or a dominant interceptor, how to lock the ball in the forward 50, how to deal with different kickout strategies after a behind, how far to push up when the ball is at the other end, etc etc. And so on for every line and every role including rucks.
Most of the time we're just guessing with these things but collectively you can get a sense of whether a team is well-oiled and purposeful, strongly motivated, well schooled etc. My gut feeling is we have significant deficiencies in this area but I simply can't prove it. Nor can people who argue the opposite. The only way you know is if you're an insider and embedded with the side over the course of a full season. So we often only hear about these deficiencies or strengths much, much later. Like when a retired star player writes his obligatory book.
THE WAY FORWARD
Overall I think our list needs to be improved - partly by changing some of the cattle and partly by working on fixable skills and physical deficiencies. Fortunately the cattle-changing opportunities come every off-season. It's then up to the list managers to get it right.
The biggest and fastest improvement will come with a huge change in our coaching, which is what we've been promised or at least has been strongly hinted. Both the "Bevo Out" and "Bevo Up" approaches may work (the "Bevo Up" option has assistants running most of the game strategy, drills and match tactics). However the Bevo Out option is obviously going to be the cleanest and clearest way to achieve it. The Bevo Up option will raise some questions, could take a while to settle in and will rely on a lot of assumptions about new relationships, authority and staying within roles.
If the coaching has a big overhaul it then brings with it the opportunity to improve the list in the other area I mentioned - those things that can be imparted with better tactical coaching and training.
The problem is that it's always easier to tinker with the list, especially during the trade and draft season. So it's convenient to put more of the blame on the list. I don't think tinkering with our list is going to give us any quantum improvement.
Coaching overhauls by contrast are hard and often traumatic. They involve political will, personalities, power groups, contracts and financial considerations which go well beyond simply deciding which coach or coaching strategy would be more effective.
I'm in favour of "ripping the band-aid off" as Fronk put it. I hope we have the guts to do it.
The binary nature of the argument is annoying though. It's never just one OR the other. It's always going to be some combination of the two. The questions are more about which is the greater contributor to our woes and which will give us the biggest and fastest improvement? Also which is easier to address?
LIST
Clearly our list has some shortcomings, like every club's list does. As a general statement (there are always individual players who are exceptions) our most obvious shortcomings are in pace, kicking skills, endurance (maybe) and perhaps some mental attributes that have contributed to our inconsistency within games. Call it resilience and toughness if you like. It tends to improve a bit with age and experience, around the 50-100 game mark. However we do have some very talented players in our top 10.
There's also a lot of discussion about whether we really have a "top 4 list" and whether our "bottom six" is good enough. Depth to at least 25 players is important but I think the assessment of a bottom six can be deceptive. That's because when a side lifts (like Collingwood in 2022 for example) the bottom six get swept up in the improvement and suddenly don't look too bad if everyone is playing with purpose, cohesion and self-confidence. That said, there's always going to be opportunities to turn over those lower performers who have been around a while and will never be better than fringe or "break glass" types. No need to give examples!
COACH
The criticisms of the coach (or coaches) fall into two categories - the visible and the inferred.
The visible is the easiest to attribute - team selection, player opportunity, game strategy and tactical moves. Whether you agree with it or not the evidence is there for everybody to see and it's a fair stretch to blame the players for any shortcomings in this area. My own view is we are quite deficient in these areas compared to most clubs. There have certainly been some successes along the way but overall I've been very disappointed the last couple of years.
The inferred are those things we can't see but make assumptions about. Coach motivation vs confused messaging. Strong bonds with players / losing the players. Conditioning program. What gets practised at training and what gets ignored (shots at goal perhaps?)
For example: showing forwards how to work cohesively by blocking, creating space, where to lead, how to stay out of each others way, when to fly for the mark and when to crumb, how to position yourself for crumbing, how to deal with hard tags or a dominant interceptor, how to lock the ball in the forward 50, how to deal with different kickout strategies after a behind, how far to push up when the ball is at the other end, etc etc. And so on for every line and every role including rucks.
Most of the time we're just guessing with these things but collectively you can get a sense of whether a team is well-oiled and purposeful, strongly motivated, well schooled etc. My gut feeling is we have significant deficiencies in this area but I simply can't prove it. Nor can people who argue the opposite. The only way you know is if you're an insider and embedded with the side over the course of a full season. So we often only hear about these deficiencies or strengths much, much later. Like when a retired star player writes his obligatory book.
THE WAY FORWARD
Overall I think our list needs to be improved - partly by changing some of the cattle and partly by working on fixable skills and physical deficiencies. Fortunately the cattle-changing opportunities come every off-season. It's then up to the list managers to get it right.
The biggest and fastest improvement will come with a huge change in our coaching, which is what we've been promised or at least has been strongly hinted. Both the "Bevo Out" and "Bevo Up" approaches may work (the "Bevo Up" option has assistants running most of the game strategy, drills and match tactics). However the Bevo Out option is obviously going to be the cleanest and clearest way to achieve it. The Bevo Up option will raise some questions, could take a while to settle in and will rely on a lot of assumptions about new relationships, authority and staying within roles.
If the coaching has a big overhaul it then brings with it the opportunity to improve the list in the other area I mentioned - those things that can be imparted with better tactical coaching and training.
The problem is that it's always easier to tinker with the list, especially during the trade and draft season. So it's convenient to put more of the blame on the list. I don't think tinkering with our list is going to give us any quantum improvement.
Coaching overhauls by contrast are hard and often traumatic. They involve political will, personalities, power groups, contracts and financial considerations which go well beyond simply deciding which coach or coaching strategy would be more effective.
I'm in favour of "ripping the band-aid off" as Fronk put it. I hope we have the guts to do it.
[/QUOTE]
Chris Grant is responsible for this..... now he is responsible for fixing his own mess. Bit like trying to get a golden retriever to clean his own mess off the lawn.
We got Sphanger first, melbourne were left with scraps.
- Aug 15, 2014
- 11,521
- 24,288
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
The issue with Grant is that he’s likely got a close working relationship with the majority of the board due to him being a Bulldogs person with a rich history.
It’s like Darcy publicly backing in Bevo. He was the one that pushed for Bevo to be originally hired. A lot of the people we’re talking about are close friends and they seem to want to work in inner circles. It needs to be broken up. There’s no logic behind Grant’s role needing to be someone with a history at the club.
It’s like Darcy publicly backing in Bevo. He was the one that pushed for Bevo to be originally hired. A lot of the people we’re talking about are close friends and they seem to want to work in inner circles. It needs to be broken up. There’s no logic behind Grant’s role needing to be someone with a history at the club.
Are you Bevo's Mum?
All he had to do was put someone behind the ball in the 3rd quarter v GWS and we win that game. In the 2nd quarter, whenever the ball was deep in GWS' forward line, Kingsley put Connor Idum 30m off behind our deepest forward. If we were able to get out over the back with the wind, they had a sweeper to shut it down. Why wouldn't we do that when we're six goals in front? Kill that quarter and the game's over.
Why let Newcombe run free and pick up 40? 30 of them were uncontested, it's not like he was winning it in close. Shut down Newcombe and we win that game, too.
These are really simple things that any local coach would know to do. If Beveridge does the basic things in these two instances we have a home final. I'm not even mentioning West Coast, Gold Coast and Sydney games.
A competent coach gets us top four.
They used to say Ricky Ponting's main tactic when Australia was in trouble was to throw the ball to Warne and say, "Shane, get this guy out for me, would ya?"
The Beveridge equivalent is "Bont, win this game for me, would ya?"
Last edited:
- Jan 19, 2014
- 7,945
- 13,114
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Darcy is in a unique position with his board role discussing Bevo, and in his home life, possibly discussing Bevo with his son. I wonder if they agree on limits as to what they discuss. If they don't, I imagine he has a pretty good insight into how the players really feel about Bevo which may inform his resolute backing.
There are obviously differing views on this board (to say the least) on where the issues with the club lie. But even if we accept that there are major issues with the list, the footy department/administration, the playing group taking more responsibility for their performance etc. then there are instances like those you have highlighted above that point to major issues with in-game coaching. I think you could add Kelly in the first half of the WC game and a few other instances of letting an opposition player run free, but tbf Bevo's not alone there as a lot of coaches reject tagging/run with players. The GWS example you've mentioned was, however, a glaring example of incredibly poor in-game coaching.
Collingwood won a bunch of close games last year, and have done something similar this year. Is that luck and they'll regress to the mean next year, or are they seeing the benefits of a focus on this in training? I'd have to believe that every AFL club does last two minute drills whether in front or behind, but maybe they don't do them well enough or frequently enough.
Our planning looks poor at the end of games, and our execution is poor as well. Bevo can point the finger at the players for the latter, but he's in control of the former. It's obviously a matter of opinion, but my view aligns closely with yours that we were possibly an AFL-standard coaching approach away from at least 5th place this year, if not 3rd/4th.
Werewolf
Meme Thief
Veteran
10k Posts
Western Bulldogs Board Tipping Champion
Western Bulldogs - Josh Prudden Player Sponsor 2016
Western Bulldogs - Zaine Cordy Player Sponsor 2016
Western Bulldogs - Bailey Dale Player Sponsor 2016
Western Bulldogs - Mitch Honeychurch Player Sponsor 2016
SuperCoach Club Board Championship League Member
But what if he actually does have the full support of the board?
- Jan 19, 2014
- 7,945
- 13,114
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
I put it to y'all that we were one player away from making the top 4 this year. We were Zak Butters away from being that side. With Butters, we win, at the very least, half of the games we lost by a goal or less, but probably all of them. We set up differently at stoppages, we have a quick burst and clearance player that kicks off both feet, defends, makes good decisions and doesn't bottle it when things get tough. We were that close.
We are probably a Zac Butters (or similar) and 1 wing away from being a serious flag threat. It's both close and the Grand Canyon. A Butters clone and class winger will help our cause next season no end, and to a degree, this year's experience to illustrate to a young forward line that defence matters too (Cody and others up there making 11 tackles on a regular basis will make a difference).
We are probably a Zac Butters (or similar) and 1 wing away from being a serious flag threat. It's both close and the Grand Canyon. A Butters clone and class winger will help our cause next season no end, and to a degree, this year's experience to illustrate to a young forward line that defence matters too (Cody and others up there making 11 tackles on a regular basis will make a difference).
Last edited:
If you're a coach emanating negativity like that it would infect the playing group.
Or possibly playing a Bailey Smith/Macrea/Daniel/Treloar on the wing instead of Poulter?
- Sep 14, 2015
- 5,521
- 16,608
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
I don't think that's far off.
For all of the problems we have, our biggest losing margin all year after Round 2 was 22 points.
We definitely need change, but we are a long way from being in a 'blow everything up and start again' position.
VitalDread
The Unofficial Face of Bigfooty Bulldogs-NGA & VFL
Veteran
10k Posts
Western Bulldogs - Mitch Honeychurch Player Sponsor 2017
Western Bulldogs - Josh Prudden Player Sponsor 2017
Palm Dee Or
Western Bulldogs - Cordy, Honeychurch, Prudden, Dale Player Sponsor 2015
Western Bulldogs - Honeychurch/Austin/Prudden Player Sponsor 2014
Western Bulldogs - Christian Howard/Mark Austin 2012 Player Sponsor
If JOD and Buss both have great pre-seasons, our back 6 will be the strongest in a long time
Having those two young players with an in-form Liam Jones
We all know Bevo prefers third defender coverage instead of a brute defender
Having those two young players with an in-form Liam Jones
We all know Bevo prefers third defender coverage instead of a brute defender
Our wing situation is deplorable. Bailey Williams is at best average. Has gone backwards at an alarming rate since the 21 GF - then again so have a few others.
Baker can look good because he runs fast and tries hard…so does VDM. He tends to be a massive momentum killer due to his lack of skills. It’s hilarious that the same week we announced a two year deal, he was dropped and basically out of favour since.
Poulter is a mixed bag with ball in hand, has some upside with his height, god awful defensively and probably would be nowhere near a game in most or all other sides.
I think it was sheer arrogance to think we could gift Hunter to a top 4 side and replace him with castoffs and a struggling Bailey Williams.
So that’s a huge hole in the list. But generally outside of that I think the list is a lot better than 9th. It’s not a strong era - there’s no Hawthorns or Richmond’s. We lack a small defender since Duryea is cooked. Cleary, JoD and Buss all hopefully feature next year and improve our backline. Our mids lack defensively, but our coaching/setups in that regard are deplorable. Take away Caleb’s mid minutes, insert West and we get a lot stronger in that area too.
2016 for example was a really strong year. We were basically a top 4 side in quality but there was just too much competition. I don’t see that now. We were shit all year and somehow nearly fell into 5th.
With Bont two seasons away from free agency I think any talks of list blowups are premature. We just need a couple of smart recruits and a new vision for what we have, much like Bevo enacted in 2015 himself.
Baker can look good because he runs fast and tries hard…so does VDM. He tends to be a massive momentum killer due to his lack of skills. It’s hilarious that the same week we announced a two year deal, he was dropped and basically out of favour since.
Poulter is a mixed bag with ball in hand, has some upside with his height, god awful defensively and probably would be nowhere near a game in most or all other sides.
I think it was sheer arrogance to think we could gift Hunter to a top 4 side and replace him with castoffs and a struggling Bailey Williams.
So that’s a huge hole in the list. But generally outside of that I think the list is a lot better than 9th. It’s not a strong era - there’s no Hawthorns or Richmond’s. We lack a small defender since Duryea is cooked. Cleary, JoD and Buss all hopefully feature next year and improve our backline. Our mids lack defensively, but our coaching/setups in that regard are deplorable. Take away Caleb’s mid minutes, insert West and we get a lot stronger in that area too.
2016 for example was a really strong year. We were basically a top 4 side in quality but there was just too much competition. I don’t see that now. We were shit all year and somehow nearly fell into 5th.
With Bont two seasons away from free agency I think any talks of list blowups are premature. We just need a couple of smart recruits and a new vision for what we have, much like Bevo enacted in 2015 himself.
- Sep 22, 2008
- 25,524
- 34,636
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Banned
- #2,000
Does anyone really believe ‘taking away power’ from your head coach is the recipe for success? Like honestly, it’s going to be a better environment by sacking the people Bev wanted to keep, ie Bubba, and replacing them with strong willed assistants who are going to gracefully take over all of the tactical side on game day and the game plan (so you know, a huge part of the job)
What sort of fairytale bullshit is this? On what earth will that be conductive to a better, successful environment?
Personally I want a coaching panel which is all on the same page striving for the same goal, I want a new coach to come in and design his coaching panel around people HE wants and trusts and no this doesn’t mean hiring yes men, but it also doesn’t mean putting in people the coach doesn’t necessarily agree with to basically undermine his input?
Yes you need a strong football director above them that enforces people stay in their lane and lines don’t get blurred - which is obviously where we’ve failed in the past. But it’s definitely not the fix a few here believe to now strip back power from the head coach and play chess with the pawns around him ffs, that leads to an even more toxic environment than we already have
What sort of fairytale bullshit is this? On what earth will that be conductive to a better, successful environment?
Personally I want a coaching panel which is all on the same page striving for the same goal, I want a new coach to come in and design his coaching panel around people HE wants and trusts and no this doesn’t mean hiring yes men, but it also doesn’t mean putting in people the coach doesn’t necessarily agree with to basically undermine his input?
Yes you need a strong football director above them that enforces people stay in their lane and lines don’t get blurred - which is obviously where we’ve failed in the past. But it’s definitely not the fix a few here believe to now strip back power from the head coach and play chess with the pawns around him ffs, that leads to an even more toxic environment than we already have
Similar threads
