Is Buckley A Good Coach?

[jathanas]

The senior coach is an important club figure and a legitimate topic of discussion. It's fair to do so and everyone has a right to express their view.

The mod team observed that the thread was dominated by a few protagonists and their points were repeated i.e. 8 years of regression vs marked improvement in 17,18 etc Pretty much everyone with a strong opinion has already expressed it here.

What further degraded discussion was the simplistic "sack FIGJAM" or "he's a legend" type posts.

This thread will remain open. If your view has slightly shifted or you have new thoughts please share. In an effort to encourage quality discussion repetitive statements and circular arguments will from now on be deleted as will silly posts suggesting that we sack a coach on match-day.

FYI Gone Critical Anzacday Maggie5

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

I reckon we have an opportunity to allow our young players and old to start showcasing what they've got talent wise, if we get rid of Bucks at the bye. Let whoever takes over for the rest of the year allow the players to go play their natural game. I bet you even the Brown brothers will improve

It would be interesting to see who does take over, if Bucks walked away now. I would let Skipworth coach the rest of the season, as Harvey and Sanderson, l would also let know they more than likely will not be renewed.

 

[Roverjg]

Ben Johnson saying in The Age that he believes Paul Licuria his good mate and board member is supportive of a change of coach

That is not what was reported. It was Johnson's view that changes neede to be made to the Football department, not Licuria's

What was reported was
“I have so much confidence in him [Licuria] to do the right thing and make the right call on the coach. He is a committed Collingwood person who has given his heart and soul to the club and I question how much those initiating a coup could do better than someone as experienced in football as Licuria,” Johnson said.

 

[jackcass]

This is beyond a joke, this is exactly why we don’t kick goals.

Think it was Brown in middle of the ground, totally free, where do you reckon he kicked it? Sideways 20m to Grundy who was surrounded by 3 Geelong players.

View attachment 1140100

Happens all too often. Nothing to do with coaching, it's an individual players choice.

 

[Maggie5]

This is beyond a joke, this is exactly why we don’t kick goals.

Think it was Brown in middle of the ground, totally free, where do you reckon he kicked it? Sideways 20m to Grundy who was surrounded by 3 Geelong players.

View attachment 1140100

Simillar to what Sidebottom did. In 2nd? qtr, had two options one similar to where Brown was and another on the wing, held on to the ball so long that the centre option closed then kicked to the one on the wing where the option further down also closed. No way that is game plan.

 

[Matt_352]

Absolute gross negligence by the club if they renew. COLLINGWOOD FC NEEDS A NEW HEAD COACH.

 

[BringouttheGimp]

Dunno what game people are watching..

You're running out of the back half.. or say through the guts.. your team mates are pre-empting you launching the pill to a one on one in our forward 50.. so they're gemi-ing it up the pitch.. to get involved in the action.. then you've got smaller/medium types anticipating a launch of the pill into our forward 50 to add to the play. Great way to play the game.. players are always on their toes.. even if you distribute the pill to someone under immense pressure.. they'll be someone there to support you on the overlap.. so in effect.. you're catching your opponents off guard.. even though they've got a hold of ya.. and I'm just starting here.. can go on and on about the benefits of moving the pill this way..

Under Buckley.. players with or without the pill.. their brains are wired to look sideways and backwards.. rather than looking forward.. looking for an option that's free.. but doesn't necessarily get you anywhere.. it's as risk averse footy as you can get. Holding on to the pill.. stagnant.. boring.. horrible.. flat footed rubbish football.

 

[makethat2]

Happens all too often. Nothing to do with coaching, it's an individual players choice.

So all 22 players faults?

 

[BringouttheGimp]

Unless you've got sick moves like Rick Astley.. then why on earth would you play this stagnant repugnant flat footed style of football?

It's astounding re.

 

[Carringbush2010]

If l was GW and Co. I would be making the call on Bucks future now. I would advise Bucks either way, as to whether or not he will be extended. If not, then give him the option to move on now or stay until seasons end. If he is renewed then this will release the pressure valve, give the club some clear air, and direction for the future. Also if Bucks isn't renewed but decides to stay until the end of the season or is renewed now, he needs to coach the boys with a more positive gameplan with an eye on the future of the club.

That may already be happening, we don't know.

As for Bucks needing to coach a more positive game, it's clear from his comments he wants to stay the course. The question is what is that course, he has alluded to the positive game that is played for a qtr here or there is the aim, the next question is why is that not being sustained. Can it be or can it not be, if it cannot then the game does not suit the cattle and is therefore flawed. Hence that ideal game not being sustained.

If GW 'orders' Bucks to play with a view to future rather purely attempt to win games in futility, as it seems he is doing, then he may comply or he may walk. Hope it's the former.

Some will argue he wants to negate the opposition, that's how it seems, as the majority of the last two and half season points to that style.

I'd argue with what his got at his disposal, we don't have tank to play that ideal game for the whole 4 qtrs, therefore he tries to get leads and then negate the opposition. That's not so unrealistic - considering what he's got to work

I'd also argue that he's trying to win games, but this negative style of football is hampering the developing youngsters and I'd also argue that our current list is not a bottom 4 side. The list imbalance is a contributing factor however it still does not reflect a bottom 4 team, my view is anywhere between 13-7th.

Therefore I'd agree with you he needs to develop player and game, not eye towards trying to negate the opposition every week in an attempt to win.

 

[DaVe86]

On the one hand, we've been within striking distance in most games this year, including against top 5 sides like Doggies, Geelong and Port Adelaide.

On the other hand, we haven't given ourselves an opportunity to win those games because we don't set up in a way that is going to kick a big enough score. It's merely limiting the damage.

I think buckley is a good strategiser, but I don't think he is a great match-day coach. I'm sure he wants to find the right balance between attack and defence. He grew up under MM who was a notoriously conservative coach in terms of always using the boundary so you weren't caught out on turnover. So he has probably inherited that game-plan. But our players seem to be too stifled and they are not looking up for better options. It's ok to go conservative if there isn't anything else on. But on the weekend there were countless opportunities to be attacking but they player didn't even look up!

My concern is that we stifle player development. Guys like Poulter and Bianco aren't going to learn under this system. Better to open the game up a bit and try to snatch a few victories, even if that comes at the cost of a belting or two.

 

[kickitolachie]

I haven't watched the second (better?) half of the Geelong game yet, but from the first half, I just cannot understand the hatred for the coach that is now so fashionable. The sad fact is that our forward players are just not good enough to get the good goal shots, or to make anything of the difficult ones that win games. The rest of the team is getting the ball there, albeit rarely with incisiveness, but the forwards can't do what they need to. They don't get separation, and they don't win contests often enough. This is not coaching, it is personnel. Most of the commentary pretends that we have plenty of star players that should be doing better. We don't.

The actual play in the Geelong game was fine, but its effectiveness was poor because the forwards failed. We don't have a lot of better ones, if you exclude the two good ones out injured, and so we can't expect much better. I have been pleasantly surprised by the way the team has kept its collective head up through this difficult time, and that is a credit to the players and the coach. They keep having a go, despite the dire circumstances of the season and of particular games.

 

[Roverjg]

On the one hand, we've been within striking distance in most games this year, including against top 5 sides like Doggies, Geelong and Port Adelaide.

On the other hand, we haven't given ourselves an opportunity to win those games because we don't set up in a way that is going to kick a big enough score. It's merely limiting the damage.

I think buckley is a good strategiser, but I don't think he is a great match-day coach. I'm sure he wants to find the right balance between attack and defence. He grew up under MM who was a notoriously conservative coach in terms of always using the boundary so you weren't caught out on turnover. So he has probably inherited that game-plan. But our players seem to be too stifled and they are not looking up for better options. It's ok to go conservative if there isn't anything else on. But on the weekend there were countless opportunities to be attacking but they player didn't even look up!

My concern is that we stifle player development. Guys like Poulter and Bianco aren't going to learn under this system. Better to open the game up a bit and try to snatch a few victories, even if that comes at the cost of a belting or two.

Good to see you back on the Board

 

[jackcass]

So all 22 players faults?

Players make those calls every game. It's hardly likely the coaches change it within quarters or quarter to quarter. Some players really good at pulling the trigger, others not so much so. It's more a confidence and cohesion thing to me and that is definitely a coaching issue. It's their job to instill that in the player group, but it'll generally be one of the 1st things that suffer when you start playing so many <50 game players.

But don't let that stop anyone calling our current ball movement issues a coaching directive.

 

[manicpie]

NO, NO, NO, NO and NO

 

[Stripes B and W]

Players make those calls every game. It's hardly likely the coaches change it within quarters or quarter to quarter. Some players really good at pulling the trigger, others not so much so. It's more a confidence and cohesion thing to me and that is definitely a coaching issue. It's their job to instill that in the player group, but it'll generally be one of the 1st things that suffer when you start playing so many <50 game players.

But don't let that stop anyone calling our current ball movement issues a coaching directive.

Probably another way of saying it; if the instruction in fact is to not hit up open or favourable corridor targets forward of the ball then yes, we do need an urgent change of coach!

 

[HFF]

Even Ben Johnson one of our very own knows we need change.

The only ones who don’t want change are the ones in the media pumping Nathan up trolling us and the fan boys on here who don’t understand it’s Collingwood FC not Nathan Buckley FC

 

[jackcass]

Probably another way of saying it; if the instruction in fact is to not hit up open or favourable corridor targets forward of the ball then yes, we do need an urgent change of coach!

Yet for periods of games we do look to go forward with urgency (ie: Q1 against Port). Very much player dependent I reckon. Players like Pendles, Crisp, Quaynor and Noble are always looking to attack. Players like Sidey are notorious for stopping and propping. Moore likewise afflicted since his return to defence.

The instance shown earlier in the thread of Daicos demonstrates another player who's disposal efficiency has plummeted this year, especially his kicking efficiency (below 50% until recent games against Port and the Cats, now @ 56%), so you can understand why he'd look for something more cautious, and that again demonstrates a lack of confidence. There may even have been an element of it being Brown down the line as opposed to WHE or JDG or Checkers. Would he have had more confidence to pull the trigger if recipient was any one of those?

 

[HFF]

Tom Browne running with Wright wanting to re-sign Nathan
Licuria wanting to go with change

I knew Wright wouldn’t have the balls to do what was required

 

[jackcass]

Tom Browne running with Wright wanting to re-sign Nathan
Licuria wanting to go with change

I knew Wright wouldn’t have the balls to do what was required

According to?

 

[Matt_352]

Tom Browne running with Wright wanting to re-sign Nathan
Licuria wanting to go with change

I knew Wright wouldn’t have the balls to do what was required

dont take a backwards step Lica!!

 

[NMBB]

Tom Browne running with Wright wanting to re-sign Nathan
Licuria wanting to go with change

I knew Wright wouldn’t have the balls to do what was required

Board trumps football dept in this instance.

 

[loki04]

Yes and Clarkson is apparently the leading candidate. Go figure.

Probably has something to do with winning 4 flags and being known for having both excellent attacking and defensive systems. Rommel's box etc.

 

[No SPIN]

Tom Browne running with Wright wanting to re-sign Nathan
Licuria wanting to go with change

I knew Wright wouldn’t have the balls to do what was required

Where were your howls of protest, when GW was appointed.

 

[loki04]

Where were your howls of protest he was the wrong man, when he was appointed.

My issue is Buckley prior to going into coaching and in the media spoke in much more attacking philosophy when commenting on games.

He then got burnt on the rebound and out the back a bit after his first few seasons then almost went purely defensive in mindset rigidly so.

 

[No SPIN]

My issue is Buckley prior to going into coaching and in the media spoke in much more attacking philosophy when commenting on games.

He then got burnt on the rebound and out the back a bit after his first few seasons then almost went purely defensive in mindset rigidly so.

sorry mate - I corrected the language because the post was ambiguous.
I was talking about GW.