Matthew Kngihts - credit for Essendons rennaisance

[Macca18]

Essendon in 2011 (and 2010)
Round 1. Defeated Western Bulldogs 113-58 (Round 10. Defeated Western Bulldogs 99-90)
Round 2. Defeated by Sydney 93-98 (Round 11. Defeated by Sydney 80-89)
Round 3. Defeated St Kilda 136-84 (Round 8. Defeated St Kilda 93-81)
Round 4. Drew with Carlton 79-79 (Round 3. Defeated Carlton 95-75)

Record from first matches against these teams in 2011 (and 2010)
2-1-1 132.0% (3-0-1 109.6%)

Not overwhelming evidence of a renaissance yet.

I love the very selective use of statistics here.

Why are you comparing our victories this year to our first games against those opponents last year?

Why not compare our Round 1 victory (113-58) to our Round 22 defeat (78-107) last year to the Bulldogs?

Or how about our Round 4 draw this year (79-79) to our Round 19 defeat (73-149) last year to Carlton?

Or how about defeating St Kilda (108-75) by 33 points in Round 18 last year and defeating them (136-84) by 52 points in Round 3 this year?

Maybe not a renaissance yet, but definitely significant improvement as much as people like to twist statistics to discredit it.

 

[Slattery_20]

Essendon in 2011 (and 2010)
Round 1. Defeated Western Bulldogs 113-58 (Round 10. Defeated Western Bulldogs 99-90)
Round 2. Defeated by Sydney 93-98 (Round 11. Defeated by Sydney 80-89)
Round 3. Defeated St Kilda 136-84 (Round 8. Defeated St Kilda 93-81)
Round 4. Drew with Carlton 79-79 (Round 3. Defeated Carlton 95-75)

Record from first matches against these teams in 2011 (and 2010)
2-1-1 132.0% (3-0-1 109.6%)

Not overwhelming evidence of a renaissance yet.

Rd 1 2010 5 goal loss.
Rd 2 2010 7 goal loss.
Rd 3 2010 4 goal win.
Rd 4 2010 4 goal loss.
Rd 5 2010 10 goal loss.

Cherry-picking 4 good/decent results over half a year, vs every second week - at least - being a belting.

You're right - it's not overwhelming evidence , but the whole Knights issue was not what we were capable of on our good days, it was what we were capable of when things weren't going our way -
runs of 6 or 8 goals against, 10 goal defeats, and flat-out disinterest.

We haven't seen the runs.
We haven't seen a big defeat.
We have seen a renewed intent.
All 3 may make a re-appearance (feel free to bump) but they are 3 turnarounds for us.

No doubt we'll get done by the Pies this week, but I think it'll be interesting to see how, and by how much.

 

[SJ]

I love the very selective use of statistics here.

Why are you comparing our victories this year to our first games against those opponents last year?

Why not compare our Round 1 victory (113-58) to our Round 22 defeat (78-107) last year to the Bulldogs?

Or how about our Round 4 draw this year (79-79) to our Round 19 defeat (73-149) last year to Carlton?

Or how about defeating St Kilda (108-75) by 33 points in Round 18 last year and defeating them (136-84) by 52 points in Round 3 this year?

Maybe not a renaissance yet, but definitely significant improvement as much as people like to twist statistics to discredit it.

Because comparing the first games against the teams from 2010 against the first games against the teams in 2011 is the more accurate measure.

By two-thirds of the way through last year Essendon's season was over. Clearly there is a lack of motivation once this hits.

Just comparing like with like.

 

[pazza]

I maintain to this day and will for quite sometime that Knights was never given enough support at the club to make his time as a coach easier.

Take the football department for example. We spent such little funds on it over the tenure of Knights that he did pretty good job with what he had at his disposal.

The argument about the inexperience of his assistant coaches is a flat out lie.

Hickmott had been involved at TAC level for a number of seasons at Gippsland before being bought over.

Prescott had time as an assistant at Fremantle along with coaching Clontarf College in Perth.

O'Donnell had stints as an assistant to Matthews and Sheedy.

Grant last year had coached Frankston before taking Bendigo to the finals.

Only Camporeale had inexperience.

Knights deserves credit in the fact that he took the hard decisions on players from the outset and has given much of the current 22 regular game time. Giving these kids the experience in the last 3 years has prepared the list better than it otherwise would have been.

I dare say had Knights not done that, Hird's job would have been even tougher.

 

[OB1]

I maintain to this day and will for quite sometime that Knights was never given enough support at the club to make his time as a coach easier.

Take the football department for example. We spent such little funds on it over the tenure of Knights that he did pretty good job with what he had at his disposal.

The argument about the inexperience of his assistant coaches is a flat out lie.

Hickmott had been involved at TAC level for a number of seasons at Gippsland before being bought over.

Prescott had time as an assistant at Fremantle along with coaching Clontarf College in Perth.

O'Donnell had stints as an assistant to Matthews and Sheedy.

Grant last year had coached Frankston before taking Bendigo to the finals.

Only Camporeale had inexperience.

Knights deserves credit in the fact that he took the hard decisions on players from the outset and has given much of the current 22 regular game time. Giving these kids the experience in the last 3 years has prepared the list better than it otherwise would have been.

I dare say had Knights not done that, Hird's job would have been even tougher.

Knights had a lot more money in the football department than what Sheedy was afforded. When you take into account that money includes the coaching salaries it highlights the reality that Knights was given very good support from the club. Jackson was the man responsible for it all & he gave Knights every chance to succeed, even extending his contract when all logic pointed to it being a premature gesture.

As for his assistants, you are making a fool of yourself trying to defend them. Campo at least had some success behind him even if he was a squib but the others (apart from O'Donnel who was already at the club) were failure ridden. Sorry Paz but VFL, TAC, Clontarf or upper woop woop thirds is not the AFL. Prescott may have had something to offer but as the coaches right hand man it reaked of Richmond mates looking out for each other. Nothing in Prescotts past indicated he was worthy. As for Hickmont, he failed completely at Bendigo so rather than sack him he gets promoted to a senior role. FFS that is the absolute height of mediocrity. Richardson at least was introduced later with some justification but from all reports his advice was unheeded.

When you break down the Knights tenure its pretty obvious it was a failure. Yes our recruiting department chose some talented kids during that time but Knights is no more responsible for that then he is for chosing Myers over Rioli. What Knights was responsible for was the gameplan & team morale both of which were in dissaray. His list management (again we have a list manager) wasn't the big broom some suggest. Richmond for example cut more players in Hardwick's first year than what Essendon did in 2 years under Knights. We dratfed 1 player more than premiers Geelong. Hard decissions to retire Peveril & Johnson???? Both were at the end but IMHO deserved to be treated fairly, same with Lloyd. These are the areas he failed his man management. How can you win the respect of the players by treating club great poorly - thats the Richmond ethos, not Essendon's.

 

[Dave]

Commentators keep saying 'can a new coaching panel bring that much of a turnaround'

I'm personally looking forward to someone asking the hard question 'can a list of 22 players not try for much of a season in order to get their coach removed'

Tim Watson says hi.