Opinion Matthew Nicks: Adelaide's Coach (Part 2) - Full Support of the Board

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The main issue is we don't have a strong 'footy' person inside the hierarchy at Adelaide. (No, im not counting that turncoat clown Ricciuto)

Kelly, Silvers, Olsen.... Literally outside of AFC supporters, no one else would even know who these blokes are.

We don't have a Neil Balme, Ross Lyon, Tom Harley, Graham Wright, Brendon Gale, Simon Lloyd etc etc type in our setup. Strong football operators who don't take any sh*t and strive for professional success.

Its actually sad the quality of personnel we now have running the club.

Yep.

Have said before that the board almost had to defer to Roo on football matters, because he's the only one with football industry knowledge.

I'm pleased Silvers is here now though because he has been inside a successful club.

 

[FullyBigKPro]

Yep.

Have said before that the board almost had to defer to Roo on football matters, because he's the only one with football industry knowledge.

I'm pleased Silvers is here now though because he has been inside a successful club.

Thats a fair point on Silvers, but would love him to be a bit more visible and come out and be more vocal on things.

Like last year for example after the umpiring debacles costing us games, he was very wishy washy and just put out a statement online etc. Cant rock the VFL boat.

I know its a pipe dream, but would love to have ruthless high quality football people in our set up running the club...

 

[GreyCrow]

He's also the Chairman of a board which has just hastily re-signed a dud coach when they had the option to wait until later in the season. If the six month payout rule doesn't apply to us then with the soft cap rules we've effectively screwed ourselves over for the next two years because we have to wear the full cost of Nicks' contract if we sack him.

Ultimately if you sit in the big chair you're the one who takes the responsibility for poor decisions by the Board.

This would be my ultimate criticism of both Olsen and Chapman

Chapman was a fan. He loved the club and ( by reports) was there most days. And thats fine but I think by being a fan he relegated his opinions to what Roo said. I dont think Chappie could be critical and question our football activities because he had involved himself so deeply

ie rubber stamp Chappie

Olsen has had (one hopes) more experience and the ability to take a step back and look at the bigger picture

And here is where I agree that we dont fully know the internal happenings enough to fully comment

BUT there was an opportunity for Olsen to step in and say '' why the rush?'' - even if you thought at the time Nicks was doing ok a smart Chairman is asking the deeper questions as to why do we need to now

And if NOISE was the only criteria then thats a failure of Olsen. As Premier he would have absorbed more noise than this

Again it seems he has taken strong advice from the only member of the Board involved intimately

 

[1970crow]

This would be my ultimate criticism of both Olsen and Chapman

Chapman was a fan. He loved the club and ( by reports) was there most days. And thats fine but I think by being a fan he relegated his opinions to what Roo said. I dont think Chappie could be critical and question our football activities because he had involved himself so deeply

ie rubber stamp Chappie

Olsen has had (one hopes) more experience and the ability to take a step back and look at the bigger picture

And here is where I agree that we dont fully know the internal happenings enough to fully comment

BUT there was an opportunity for Olsen to step in and say '' why the rush?'' - even if you thought at the time Nicks was doing ok a smart Chairman is asking the deeper questions as to why do we need to now

And if NOISE was the only criteria then thats a failure of Olsen. As Premier he would have absorbed more noise than this

Again it seems he has taken strong advice from the only member of the Board involved intimately

Olsen may have voted no and been outvoted.

 

[Brett Cummings]

Remember when nicks made and injured lynch sub? When he eventually came on the ground the commentators said he couldn't run. Should have been given his marching orders then. That's kindergarten shit.

 

[relapse]

You’ve been paranoid about Olsen and the good job he did at the SANFL since day 1, it’s irrational and you’ve still yet failed to provide one alternative to Thebby, but we’ve covered that paranoia to death.

Hundred percent go hard on Olsen for Nicks but you’re being very selective if you think Silvers did not have a major say in his re-signing.

You keep referring to he just looks after the business side. Well given that and we were travelling well financially under Fagan, do you think he did a good job and we were harsh for force him out?

I do think we were harsh with Fagan

If you go back through my posts I never really bagged Fagan, I liked that Fagan was trying to seperate us and get us far away as possible financially from the SANFL and had no problems with the job he did.

The criticism of Fagan internally was that he wasn't football minded and they wanted to go down the path of having someone there that was more football oriented. That was the club's decision, I didn't necessarily agree but accepted the club's decision.

You keep trying to deliberately misrepresent my position too. My concern has always been that Olsen has a huge conflict of interest with his ties to the SANFL and his comments have given me concerns that he has a foot in each camp.

On Day 1.... DAY 1, Olsen literally talked about re-aligning the club and the SANFL closer together.

People tried to dismiss it a faux pas, but even after that he's mentioned about looking for win/win solutions with the SANFL.

Throw in the 9 million dollar gift to the SANFL and yes I do have big concerns.

At the end of the day you don't have to agree with my opinion, but I've never pivoted from wanting someone running this club who's trying to achieve the best outcomes and maximise the returns to our club, not someone with one eye on the club and the other being on looking for opportunities to help the SANFL.

 

[George Kramer]

I do think we were harsh with Fagan

If you go back through my posts I never really bagged Fagan, I liked that Fagan was trying to seperate us and get us far away as possible financially from the SANFL and had no problems with the job he did.

The criticism of Fagan internally was that he wasn't football minded and they wanted to go down the path of having someone there that was more football oriented. That was the club's decision, I didn't necessarily agree but accepted the club's decision.

You keep trying to deliberately misrepresent my position too. My concern has always been that Olsen has a huge conflict of interest with his ties to the SANFL and his comments have given me concerns that he has a foot in each camp.

On Day 1.... DAY 1, Olsen literally talked about re-aligning the club and the SANFL closer together.

People tried to dismiss it a faux pas, but even after that he's mentioned about looking for win/win solutions with the SANFL.

Throw in the 9 million dollar gift to the SANFL and yes I do have big concerns.

At the end of the day you don't have to agree with my opinion, but I've never pivoted from wanting someone running this club who's trying to achieve the best outcomes and maximise the returns to our club, not someone with one eye on the club and the other being on looking for opportunities to help the SANFL.

And that’s the thing, your last sentence highlights your paranoia, nothing he’s done suggested he has an eye on helping the SANFL.

You’re pissed because whilst at the SANFL he did deals that helped them and not us, ie he did his job.

 

[Cap]

I feel like we are a picking our favourite administrator not to blame.

it was a board call, noone is more or less to blame.

 

[relapse]

And that’s the thing, your last sentence highlights your paranoia, nothing he’s done suggested he has an eye on helping the SANFL.

You’re pissed because whilst at the SANFL he did deals that helped them and not us, ie he did his job.

FMD he's literally said it

You're always complaining about others refusing to concede.

Just like I predicted a golden parachute for the SANFL with Thebarton the next will be if we leave the SANFL comp.

I will literally piss myself laughing at the mental gymnastics trying to justify if we end up having to pay more than Port.

We all know it's coming so buckle up!!!!

 

[George Kramer]

FMD he's literally said it

You're always complain about others refusing to concede.

Just like I predicted a golden parachute for the SANFL with Thebarton the next will be if we leave the SANFL comp.

I will literally piss myself laughing at the mental gymnastics trying to justify if we end up having to pay more than Port.

We all know it's coming so buckle up!!!!

No he did not say that

You predicted we will have to pay the SANFL to leave the ground they have a lease at, well strike me pink. Given they hold all the cards, no shit they’d be heavily compensated, why else would they do it?

If the SANFL make us pay more to leave, how will that be our fault? Blame the SANFL. If we want to break a contract, we either pay it or we don’t and stay. Do you want us to stay?

 

[1970crow]

FMD he's literally said it

You're always complain about others refusing to concede.

Just like I predicted a golden parachute for the SANFL with Thebarton the next will be if we leave the SANFL comp.

I will literally piss myself laughing at the mental gymnastics trying to justify if we end up having to pay more than Port.

We all know it's coming so buckle up!!!!

I think you had unrealistic expectations re Thebarton. We'd failed at aquatic centre and Brompton and opportunities were few and far between. We'd never win a bid for a site that can be developed soloely as residential dwellings. SANFL had a strong bargaining position because we needed to get into their lease and they had no reason to leave. By the time we've completed the project, that $9m won't be all that meaningful.

I also don't know what's wrong with saying that aligning with SANFL if there's win:win opportunities available. Makes sense to me and only sheer bloody mindedness would see someone disagree. Re leaving the SANFL, surely the contract would determine that. Is it even a term thing, thought I'd heard it was year to year.

 

[George Kramer]

I think you had unrealistic expectations re Thebarton. We'd failed at aquatic centre and Brompton and opportunities were few and far between. We'd never win a bid for a site that can be developed soloely as residential dwellings. SANFL had a strong bargaining position because we needed to get into their lease and they had no reason to leave. By the time we've completed the project, that $9m won't be all that meaningful.

I also don't know what's wrong with saying that aligning with SANFL if there's win:win opportunities available. Makes sense to me and only sheer bloody mindedness would see someone disagree. Re leaving the SANFL, surely the contract would determine that. Is it even a term thing, thought I'd heard it was year to year.

But when Olsen was working for the SANFL he screwed us. Of course he’d still try and screw us and help the SANFL even though he works for us now

 

[1970crow]

But when Olsen was working for the SANFL he screwed us. Of course he’d still try and screw us and help the SANFL even though he works for us now

Yeh, was weird belief back then, no less weird now. Had that been an ex non-liberal premier that had been chair of SANFL, they'd be singing from the rooftops.

 

[Gtowncrow]

So after 4 rounds, the crows team is 15th on the ladder.

But the ladder of coaches performance would have Matthew Nicks

Matthew Nicks

Age

49

Ht

187cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.6

3star

K

9.4

4star

HB

4.2

3star

M

4.1

4star

T

1.7

4star

G

0.7

4star

No current season stats available

D

6.6

2star

K

4.4

2star

HB

2.2

2star

M

2.2

3star

T

1.4

4star

G

0.4

3star

locked into the spoon right now.

He won't be sacked due to financial and board room egg face reasons. But we can apply pressure to get him to resign.

 

[Shuestar13]

So after 4 rounds, the crows team is 15th on the ladder.

But the ladder of coaches performance would have Matthew Nicks locked into the spoon right now.

He won't be sacked due to financial and board room egg face reasons. But we can apply pressure to get him to resign.

Look at the “company” you are in. Two of the rabbles for the past ~3 seasons and a heavily rebuilding Hawthorn.

Completely unacceptable and without a huge turnaround (as in a sustained winning streak and major change in gamestyle, method and ‘process’) - he needs to go.

 

[maxlilly]

I think you had unrealistic expectations re Thebarton. We'd failed at aquatic centre and Brompton and opportunities were few and far between. We'd never win a bid for a site that can be developed soloely as residential dwellings. SANFL had a strong bargaining position because we needed to get into their lease and they had no reason to leave. By the time we've completed the project, that $9m won't be all that meaningful.

I also don't know what's wrong with saying that aligning with SANFL if there's win:win opportunities available. Makes sense to me and only sheer bloody mindedness would see someone disagree. Re leaving the SANFL, surely the contract would determine that. Is it even a term thing, thought I'd heard it was year to year.

With the amount of time, effort and money we have spent looking for another training ground, in hindsight, it would have just been easier just to stay at West Lakes
Who would have ever thought it would be this hard to find another oval

 

[relapse]

Yeh, was weird belief back then, no less weird now. Had that been an ex non-liberal premier that had been chair of SANFL, they'd be singing from the rooftops.

What is weird is running defence for someone in the footy industry due to politics.

Even to point of deflecting criticism about Nick's getting extended, "maybe he got outvoted" well maybe Chapman got outvoted for half the crap that we blamed him for.

At the end of the day you know how it works, if you sit in the Chair you're ultimately responsible for the decisions and outcomes both good and bad.

Also singing to rooftops about what exactly? Re-signing Nicks? Yeah right anyone who thinks people should be singing to the rooftops about that are kidding themselves.

I've said it umpteen times I'll happily admit and want to be proven wrong, but first there actually has to something praise worthy to be achieved. There's literally nothing at the moment that anyone can even hang their hat on.

 

[MsTopG]

So after 4 rounds, the crows team is 15th on the ladder.

But the ladder of coaches performance would have Matthew Nicks locked into the spoon right now.

He won't be sacked due to financial and board room egg face reasons. But we can apply pressure to get him to resign.

If people don't turn up he will be sacked.

 

[MsTopG]

With the amount of time, effort and money we have spent looking for another training ground, in hindsight, it would have just been easier just to stay at West Lakes
Who would have ever thought it would be this hard to find another oval

We should be in the parklands along greenhill road. Most of the grass is dead. If you tell me we wouldn't improve the space thats total bullshit. Typical adelaide run by complaining whinging councillors.

 

[1970crow]

We should be in the parklands along greenhill road. Most of the grass is dead. If you tell me we wouldn't improve the space thats total bullshit. Typical adelaide run by complaining whinging councillors.

There's lots of places in the parklands where we would improve the space. But we couldn't even take their crumbling cash drain and fix it for them.

 

[cleanhands]

 

[relapse]

But when Olsen was working for the SANFL he screwed us. Of course he’d still try and screw us and help the SANFL even though he works for us now

Once again with the hyperbole

At this point it's becoming pretty clear that you're not even attempting to acknowledge and/or address anything I say in good faith.

Let me put it this way, imagine Eddie McGuire being rolled out as the new CEO of the AFL.

Would it just be ignorant paranoia to have concerns that Eddie's past ties may potentially cause a conflict of interest in that role especially in terms of his future dealings with Collingwood? I'm essentially saying the very same thing and highlighted some red flags that I've seen so far.

 

[George Kramer]

Once again with the hyperbole

At this point it's becoming pretty clear that you're not even attempting to acknowledge and/or address anything I say in good faith.

Let me put it this way, imagine Eddie McGuire being rolled out as the new CEO of the AFL.

Would it just be ignorant paranoia to have concerns that Eddie's past ties may potentially cause a conflict of interest in that role especially in terms of his future dealings with Collingwood? I'm essentially saying the very same thing and highlighted some red flags that I've seen so far.

Did you or did you not raise the deal he did for the SANFL which hurt the Crows as a concern?

Irrelevant example. Collingwood are a team in the same competition he is now presiding over. Eddie is also a mad passionate Collingwood man. He would also not make decisions that hurt his new employer to benefit Collingwood. If he started making decisions that favoured Collingwood there would be legitimate concerns, until that time it would just be paranoia.

The SANFL are not in the same competition.

You’ve also raised a number of times the cost of the SANFL leaving Thebby as a concern. They have no incentive to leave unless we make it worth their while as we are effectively kicking them out and without a viable alternative, we have no choice but to pay it. That’s not on Olsen, that’s the reality of our shit situation.

 

[1970crow]

Remember the good old days when it was just fear and not fact.

 

[Punchy Bassett]

I'd love for someone who has more time than me to make a video clip showing say the first 60 seconds after each point we scored versus Melbourne. I'm willing to be nearly 95% of the time Melbourne get the ball to at least the centre wing without us laying a finger on it.