News Leppitsch's contract extended until 2017

[Happy_Neale]

There lies the truly difficult question! Taking the feeling of this thread as a very small sample of fan feeling, you would suggest externally at least it's roughly 70-30 or 80-20 in favour of a short-extension.

Internally is the big one for me. Whilst being in favour of the short extension myself, my one area of concern was the player relationship issues. I am more than prepared to accept that injuries, list turnover (a necessary evil) and lack of resources have hindered his first 2 years, as these are largely beyond his control. Yes he instigated the list turnover but I don't believe he had any choice given the state of our list prior to his tenure.

The area that is within his control which clearly encountered issues was his relationship with the players. This is the area I would want immediate improvement in. External stories suggest things have much improved in that department, but time will tell.

Fan feeling means nothing. Fans wanted Mark Thompson sacked back in '06...they do not always know what is best for the club and I am happy to admit that as a fan myself.

I would argue on field is much more concerning. Injuries have been significant but there is no excuse for our lack of development in the past two seasons. We have regressed on nearly every major stat line imaginable. We have pumped games into the kids, sacrificing wins along the way. We have played with a game plan that, IMO, does not suit our list profile one iota, not to mention the positional changes he has made which I am 50/50 on (Mcstay good, Mayes not so much, Redden played out of position, Rich as a backman etc...)

Another perspective is to look at our losses from last year. Not just the fact that we lost games but the manner in which we did it. These are the margins from our losses last year:

12, 82, 79, 53, 64, 58, 22, 30, 72, 13, 36, 21, 24, 72, 56, 14, 87, 72. That's 7 losses over 10 goals (!) and 12 over 5 goals (plus one 30 point loss) for an average losing margin of 48 points or thereabouts. Over a quarter of the season we lost by more than 10 goals. How much is the coach responsible for that? Matter of opinion but many have been moved on for performances like that and last season was not a one off.

I can't be bothered comparing but surely that is GWS/GC levels of mauling for most of those, and some weren't even against great opposition (64 point loss against the Suns, 82 against the Tigers at home, 58 against the Bombers).

I'm aware this is all very simple and does not take into account other factors such as injuries and squad development but what coach gets an extension after these losses? Basically, we should be doing better in my opinion. The talent is there.

 

[WA Lion]

Fan feeling means nothing. Fans wanted Mark Thompson sacked back in '06...they do not always know what is best for the club and I am happy to admit that as a fan myself.

I would argue on field is much more concerning. Injuries have been significant but there is no excuse for our lack of development in the past two seasons. We have regressed on nearly every major stat line imaginable. We have pumped games into the kids, sacrificing wins along the way. We have played with a game plan that, IMO, does not suit our list profile one iota, not to mention the positional changes he has made which I am 50/50 on (Mcstay good, Mayes not so much, Redden played out of position, Rich as a backman etc...)

Another perspective is to look at our losses from last year. Not just the fact that we lost games but the manner in which we did it. These are the margins from our losses last year:

12, 82, 79, 53, 64, 58, 22, 30, 72, 13, 36, 21, 24, 72, 56, 14, 87, 72. That's 7 losses over 10 goals (!) and 12 over 5 goals (plus one 30 point loss). Over a quarter of the season we lost by more than 10 goals. How much is the coach responsible for that? Matter of opinion but many have been moved on for performances like that and last season was not a one off.

I can't be bothered comparing but surely that is GWS/GC levels of mauling for most of those, and some weren't even against great opposition (64 point loss against the Suns, 82 against the Tigers at home, 58 against the Bombers).

I'm aware this is all very simple and does not take into account other factors such as injuries and squad development but what coach gets an extension after these losses? Basically, we should be doing better in my opinion. The talent is there.

I think that last sentence is the key one for me. The talent is there but hasn't been on the pitch. With this off-season's additions and a clear run with injury, I would see no excuse for not moving forwards, even if we do have the youngest squad in the league now. Whether Leppa is deserving of even a short extension is clearly a matter of opinion, but I happy am trust Swann and Mathews to have our best interests at heart.

 

[Milux]

As much as i agree with an extension. 1 year just doesnt seem enough. If they still feel he is the man for the job why not 2 years.

 

[Hollow Knight]

As much as i agree with an extension. 1 year just doesnt seem enough. If they still feel he is the man for the job why not 2 years.

If they think he is the man for the job why not 5 or 10?

I guess there is an element of uncertainty. He may or may not be the man but they have probably determined that he needs more than 1 year to answer the question.

 

[Milux]

If they think he is the man for the job why not 5 or 10?

I guess there is an element of uncertainty. He may or may not be the man but they have probably determined that he needs more than 1 year to answer the question.

Fare points in regards for the 5 or 10. I just feel if they are aiming for stability 1 just doesnt feel enough. Im all for giving him the time. Just not sure what the message is they are trying to get accross.

 

[Lace Out]

As much as i agree with an extension. 1 year just doesnt seem enough. If they still feel he is the man for the job why not 2 years.

If things go **** up you need to consider payouts unfortunately these days

 

[ZoBlitz]

A one year extension is about all you can give in the circumstances. Short enough to provide some sense of stability but not long enough to create payout issues if the club does want to move him on. Personally I would have waited until the end of the season because I don't think this extension will stop the media speculation anyway if we do hit rock bottom.

 

[Elixuh]

I don't know the answer to this but if you tick off things from a club point of view then how much thought do you give to the 1yr extension as a bit of a stress absorber for the HC? Or is that simply part of the job.

 

[Pacman82]

we're digging our way out fellas, who's up for it..

 

[Skoob]

As noted in the first post I think it is a bloody stupid decision.

Leppa has shown zero ability to coach to date. He has cut savagely into the list creating an excuse for himself and then implemented a training program which resulted in injury after injury. Despite that there has been talent at his disposal and the players have consistently performed below their talent level as a team. There is no structure going forward or defending and every stat backs this up. There were stacks of knives in Voss' back at the end but we have gone backwards at a rate of knots under Leppa.

So management in their wisdom give him an extra year. Based on what criteria exactly? Hopium is obviously being pumped into the board room of late. If things are a disaster this year and we decide to part ways we are going to have to fork out another half mill or so that we can ill afford to spend. This is the kind of decision a loss making entity should not be making. Surely it would be prudent to wait and see how we go. If it was based on past performance he would not be in a job.

I honestly hope I am wrong but I really just do not see how such a decision could be made.

Interesting comments. 5 very promising talents walked out the door, 5 minutes before he got here and I can't think of who the superstars are that he has let go since (without good return).
I'm not sure that he should be held to account for the fitness staff that were contracted, nor that the swag of impact injuries were a result of any training programme he implemented. It seems that lingering soft tissue injuries have been reduced over the last couple of years (though I don't have evidence of that).
It was made clear from the start that there would be a big turnover to build a team we need to go forward. Considering the acquisitions of the last few years, I'd have to say I am happy with the direction taken. That said, even though there will be more changes needed, this year introduces some real strength of depth in areas of need, but those will take some time to develop and implement.
Though our talent (potential) looks nice on paper, I wouldn't expect a whole lot out of the youngest recruits in Keys, Hipwood or Schache. Having built an exciting list on paper won't translate into a strong team on field (this year), and I think the line of thought is that with enough pieces in place, one year is not enough to really see where it's going, but 2 should be sufficient.
I think the points made by some about the media frenzy are missing something. I don't think it is as much about trying to avoid bad press for the club (because that will come regardless, contracts don't matter) but rather aimed at taking that pressure off Leppa, somewhat. They don't want him worrying about his job all season, with pressure mounting every time the press make a story out of a loss, but rather just focus on the week to week stuff. There is always pressure on every coach to get it right, but it is one less big distraction.
I think it is an acknowledgement that we like your ideas of where we're headed and how you plan on getting us there although don't expect leaps & bounds this year, but also a message that he should be able prepare this group to show those leaps & bounds next year.

Why not longer? We should all be able to acknowledge that at some point the excuses run out, and that we are yet to see all the boxes ticked.
Why at all? Answered above, I think. I don't think we would have seen much different from any other coach given the list and circumstances of the last few years.

 

[chopperduck]

Results to date means he couldnt get any more of an extension. It is only a year which isnt much, but it gets the media off his and the clubs back so we can have a crack this year, especially with a hard start. Realistically, he still only has this year, if we dont perform then i think they will use next year to take some time and find a replacement, either way that decision will be made end of this season.

 

[POBT]

As I said last time this was discussed, I simply don't know if Leppa is a good coach or not. I can't agree with comments such as him showing "zero coaching ability" but, equally, it is not clear (yet) that he is up for the job. As a general comment, it makes me uncomfortable to extend a contract for someone who really hasn't performed yet, irrespective of the reasons why he hasn't performed.

I've never agreed with the arguments around media pressure. That to me is part of the job and we should be strong enough as a club to not let artificial external pressures affect out decision making. Furthermore, if we have an abysmal start to the year, the pressure on Leppa won't decrease and the pressure on the club, having extended the coach's contract, will increase.

I think stability is important and this decision at least takes out of players' minds that the coach could be sacked any week. It still might happen, of course, but it is less likely now.

I also think last year is really hard to analyse. I'm happy to ignore in field results because I do buy into the injury excuse. The biggest indictment on Leppa from last year was that he presided over a divided group. Too many people were too dissatisfied. That is a poor reflection of the coach. If that feeling remains, then the decision to extend the coach's contract may actually disenfranchise people further.

My preference was always to give Leppa at least half the year to show us what he can do, particularly in terms of development - both of individual players and a shared team ethic. I don't think it is fair to judge him on the back of 2015 but nor do I think we can necessarily ignore what happened, particularly off field. Giving him 12 rounds or more to show some signs seems a prudent approach to me.

Having said that, I am not overly perturbed by this decision. Provided he doesn't cause a mass exodus, the effect is really just adding an extra year's salary to the risk. If we go 0-18, he'll get the sack anyway.

One thing about this decision is that I think it will get support from fans because of Leppa's status as a favourite son. I'm not so sure the support would be quite as widespread if we were talking about an outsider. I don't see that as a bad thing, by the way because it helps unify supporters. But there would be some (certainly not all) supporters who would have a different perspective on an "outsider" coach with this on field record and persistent rumours of player dissatisfaction.

 

[HowYouDoin]

It's one thing to promote stability, but to do so at the cost of retaining an unproven coach is just overdoing it. I know we're not exactly in a great position as a club, but to retain a coach purely on the notion of stability rather than his on and of-field performance's is absolutely pissening. I would be hard pressed to find anyone here that actually believes Leppa has earned this slight extension based on his coaching skills, because the fact of the matter is he did not. And vust lies the problem here.

 

[LongLion]

Interesting comments. 5 very promising talents walked out the door, 5 minutes before he got here and I can't think of who the superstars are that he has let go since (without good return).
I'm not sure that he should be held to account for the fitness staff that were contracted, nor that the swag of impact injuries were a result of any training programme he implemented. It seems that lingering soft tissue injuries have been reduced over the last couple of years (though I don't have evidence of that).
It was made clear from the start that there would be a big turnover to build a team we need to go forward. Considering the acquisitions of the last few years, I'd have to say I am happy with the direction taken. That said, even though there will be more changes needed, this year introduces some real strength of depth in areas of need, but those will take some time to develop and implement.
Though our talent (potential) looks nice on paper, I wouldn't expect a whole lot out of the youngest recruits in Keys, Hipwood or Schache. Having built an exciting list on paper won't translate into a strong team on field (this year), and I think the line of thought is that with enough pieces in place, one year is not enough to really see where it's going, but 2 should be sufficient.
I think the points made by some about the media frenzy are missing something. I don't think it is as much about trying to avoid bad press for the club (because that will come regardless, contracts don't matter) but rather aimed at taking that pressure off Leppa, somewhat. They don't want him worrying about his job all season, with pressure mounting every time the press make a story out of a loss, but rather just focus on the week to week stuff. There is always pressure on every coach to get it right, but it is one less big distraction.
I think it is an acknowledgement that we like your ideas of where we're headed and how you plan on getting us there although don't expect leaps & bounds this year, but also a message that he should be able prepare this group to show those leaps & bounds next year.

Why not longer? We should all be able to acknowledge that at some point the excuses run out, and that we are yet to see all the boxes ticked.
Why at all? Answered above, I think. I don't think we would have seen much different from any other coach given the list and circumstances of the last few years.

Huge list turnover (for good reason) 2 years gives enough time and stablity for Leppa to work with "his" team and see if he is up for the long haul. 1 year extension is a good call.

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

A one year extension is probably a message that he won't be sacked in the first half of the season but as POBT says, if we are 10 or 12 zip, all bets are off.

 

[knaf]

I can understand the difference in opinion. No one will know if it is the right decision or not until the middle of next year.

I am in the middle of a renovation at the moment. Home is a mess. I am not completely happy with builder, a couple of disagreement. He has reasons why certain things aren't at the quality I expected. But I am not a builder so it is hard to judge.

Maybe my process in selecting a builder was wrong, maybe I wasn't clear enough about what I wanted, maybe I
should sack the builder and get another one? No I think that would be a mistake particularly additional cost and disruption and I still might not have my high expectations met.

Why am I crapping on about this? I think the same logic applies to footy supporters. See the rebuild through.
I support the extension of Leppa's contract.

 

[Kevvo]

Overall, I like the extension.

I can understand the argument that he hasn't proved himself yet. I'm a little bit more positive than that about it, but no doubt the wins and losses make for grim reading. On the other hand, I don't think anyone is in a position to firmly conclude that he's not a capable coach. I agree that the onus has to be on the coach to show results, but if we're committed to a proper rebuild from scratch then I think it was almost inevitable that we'd have to bear with underachieving for a while. That coupled with some bad injury luck means that our results, to me at least, are unsurprising and (to date) not alarming as much as frustrating.

On the relief of media pressure, I think that reasoning is probably targeted at the players more than anyone else. More experienced players should be professional enough to ride out media pressure on the coach, but it's hard to expect kids in their first few years to respond well to that sort of scrutiny. That applies especially to kids whose families and friends will largely judge the club through southern media coverage. We're a particularly young side, and at this point in our development I think we're far more vulnerable to that sort of pressure than (for example) a side like Richmond who might be more likely to wait on the extension. Maybe a one year extension isn't enough to totally derail the baying for blood, but if it helps incrementally then I think it's probably worth the risk.

 

[jackess]

Not the vote of confidence from the board that I was expecting but perhaps Leppa is backing himself for the team to win a few more so he can get a decent offer on his next contract.

 

[Wounded Lion]

Fan feeling means nothing. Fans wanted Mark Thompson sacked back in '06...they do not always know what is best for the club and I am happy to admit that as a fan myself.

I would argue on field is much more concerning. Injuries have been significant but there is no excuse for our lack of development in the past two seasons. We have regressed on nearly every major stat line imaginable. We have pumped games into the kids, sacrificing wins along the way. We have played with a game plan that, IMO, does not suit our list profile one iota, not to mention the positional changes he has made which I am 50/50 on (Mcstay good, Mayes not so much, Redden played out of position, Rich as a backman etc...)

Another perspective is to look at our losses from last year. Not just the fact that we lost games but the manner in which we did it. These are the margins from our losses last year:

12, 82, 79, 53, 64, 58, 22, 30, 72, 13, 36, 21, 24, 72, 56, 14, 87, 72. That's 7 losses over 10 goals (!) and 12 over 5 goals (plus one 30 point loss) for an average losing margin of 48 points or thereabouts. Over a quarter of the season we lost by more than 10 goals. How much is the coach responsible for that? Matter of opinion but many have been moved on for performances like that and last season was not a one off.

I can't be bothered comparing but surely that is GWS/GC levels of mauling for most of those, and some weren't even against great opposition (64 point loss against the Suns, 82 against the Tigers at home, 58 against the Bombers).

I'm aware this is all very simple and does not take into account other factors such as injuries and squad development but what coach gets an extension after these losses? Basically, we should be doing better in my opinion. The talent is there.

Given the recent severe turnover of our list and our current age profile, our list is very comparable to the early days of GC & GWS.

 

[chopperduck]

IIRC it was mentioned on a podcast or something recently that whilst we went from 7 wins down to 4, we actually improved in most stats as a team, only by a small margin, but statistically we performed better in 15 with 4 wins than 14 with 7 wins, so there is an arguement there that there has been some peogression as a squad. Perhaps the injuries last year masked some of that improvement, we will never know.

I still believe that if we can get a half decent run with injuries we can easily push back up around 8 or so wins. The improvement from the younger guys like Freeman, Squiz, Diz, McStay, Harro, Paps will probably decide how far we push.

We lacked key parts in our structure for long periods last year, and had only 3 games where our 3 best mids played together. Theris a lot of room for improvement on field, simply from having guys on the park, before we even talk about further development

 

[Wounded Lion]

After the GH5, if you were to tell me that 12/16 senior list draftees from 2012-2014 would extend contracts, I would've thought you were high.

Leppa has stabilized our young talent, we have only had one kid walk out the door and he was pretty damn close to signing on with us. He didn't put his hand up mid season and say "I'm outta here" AKA Patty Karnezis.

Well done Leppa, our situation could have been much worse if we didn't get a coach who could create a welcoming environment for our younger players.

 

[M Malice]

IIRC it was mentioned on a podcast or something recently that whilst we went from 7 wins down to 4, we actually improved in most stats as a team, only by a small margin, but statistically we performed better in 15 with 4 wins than 14 with 7 wins, so there is an arguement there that there has been some peogression as a squad. Perhaps the injuries last year masked some of that improvement, we will never know.

I still believe that if we can get a half decent run with injuries we can easily push back up around 8 or so wins. The improvement from the younger guys like Freeman, Squiz, Diz, McStay, Harro, Paps will probably decide how far we push.

We lacked key parts in our structure for long periods last year, and had only 3 games where our 3 best mids played together. Theris a lot of room for improvement on field, simply from having guys on the park, before we even talk about further development

agree. our list age profile is a bit deceiving i feel. the bulk of our mids are right in the peak of their careers age profile wise. allen christensen 24, ryan bastinac 24, mitch robinson 26, dayne beams 25, daniel rich 25, pearce hanley 27, dayne zorko 26 and tom rockliff 25 years of age are certainly not wet behind the ears AFL footballers.
we can not afford to lose the little experienced talent we do have at either end of the ground, hopefully daniel merrett, josh walker and stefan martin can stay healthy and 1 or 2 of justin clarke (entering 4th year), michael close/jonathan freeman (entering 3rd year) can play a role for us. if josh schache is as good as rocky pumps him up to be maybe he has a jesse hogan or jeremy cameron type first year, not to put any pressure on him though

 

[Jman78]

I dont understand the Leppa hate at times. We had a cactus list and a stack of issues he inherited. He came in cleaned out and is moving forward but the fan base doesn't want too. He made hard decisions and I can guarantee that not all 1st and 2nd year coaches would have made those decisions. For me 1 year is too short. Matthews and Swann back him so surely we as a fan base can trust they are doing the right thing for the club.

 

[POBT]

I dont understand the Leppa hate at times. We had a cactus list and a stack of issues he inherited. He came in cleaned out and is moving forward but the fan base doesn't want too. He made hard decisions and I can guarantee that not all 1st and 2nd year coaches would have made those decisions. For me 1 year is too short. Matthews and Swann back him so surely we as a fan base can trust they are doing the right thing for the club.

It isn't "Leppa hate" to doubt his ability to coach at a senior level. Until he has the results, there will always be doubt.

While I have faith in Swann as an administrator (and to a lesser extent, Matthews), they are dealing with almost as many unknowns as we are. They obviously will have better knowledge about how Leppa is relating to the players and the rest of the football dept, about his plans for the team's development. But they are still faced with unknowns about whether another coach is better qualified to do the job, whether he can actually improve the side, whether the players will buy his message.

They are all risks associated with an inexperienced coach in charge of a developing team. The decision makers will have looked at all the risks and then decided on this course of action. It doesn't mean that it is the right course of action and others may have made a different decision faced with exactly the same situation.

I reckon we need to differentiate between support and blind faith. Calling on people to ignore their own doubts and just "trust" doesn't strike me as a particularly advanced way of thinking.

I support Leppa and hope he has every opportunity to succeed.

 

[WA Lion]

It isn't "Leppa hate" to doubt his ability to coach at a senior level. Until he has the results, there will always be doubt.

While I have faith in Swann as an administrator (and to a lesser extent, Matthews), they are dealing with almost as many unknowns as we are. They obviously will have better knowledge about how Leppa is relating to the players and the rest of the football dept, about his plans for the team's development. But they are still faced with unknowns about whether another coach is better qualified to do the job, whether he can actually improve the side, whether the players will buy his message.

They are all risks associated with an inexperienced coach in charge of a developing team. The decision makers will have looked at all the risks and then decided on this course of action. It doesn't mean that it is the right course of action and others may have made a different decision faced with exactly the same situation.

I reckon we need to differentiate between support and blind faith. Calling on people to ignore their own doubts and just "trust" doesn't strike me as a particularly advanced way of thinking.

I support Leppa and hope he has every opportunity to succeed.

I think the issue is though that fans are so passionate about their club, that it is sometimes difficult to differentiate between these 2, and one persons faith is another persons support depending on perspective and personal perspective. A very emotive issue