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

Is Matthew Nicks the right coach for Adelaide?

  • Firmly yes (I love what I'm seeing)

  • Leaning yes

  • Can't decide either way

  • Leaning no (but don't sack him yet)

  • Firmly no (he should be sacked)


Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.



Well this is on the coaches too, I get why Smithers would feel that way but dropping him earlier in the season when he was in his worst form would’ve been better for all parties

Or don't put your hand up to play when you have a crook back and can hardly walk
These guys think they can just get out there each week and not worry about their performance
 
Nicksy really needs to evaluate what he thinks a leader is, the 3rd one to be dropped this year.
It’s not him though is it.

It’s (stupidly) elected by the players. Sure the coaches sign off on it, but it’s player driven. That’s the problem with it.

If I were coach, I’d say this is our captain, the vice captain is the bloke I want to be captain if he doesn’t get up. Then one to three (absolute max) deputy vice captains. At least one young player would be in this group.

A 3-5 man group. Decided by the coaches. The end.
 
It’s not him though is it.

It’s (stupidly) elected by the players. Sure the coaches sign off on it, but it’s player driven. That’s the problem with it.

If I were coach, I’d say this is our captain, the vice captain is the bloke I want to be captain if he doesn’t get up. Then one to three (absolute max) deputy vice captains. At least one young player would be in this group.

A 3-5 man group. Decided by the coaches. The end.
Not by those clowns.
 
It’s not him though is it.

It’s (stupidly) elected by the players. Sure the coaches sign off on it, but it’s player driven. That’s the problem with it.

If I were coach, I’d say this is our captain, the vice captain is the bloke I want to be captain if he doesn’t get up. Then one to three (absolute max) deputy vice captains. At least one young player would be in this group.

A 3-5 man group. Decided by the coaches. The end.
Ultimately it’s still the coach. If the players selected curtin as a joke I’m sure nicks would have put a stop to it pretty quickly.
And if you’ve been dropped on form in the past year or two you should be excluded from being able to hold a leadership position.
You can’t have players who don’t put their position out of the question of being dropped.
 
Well so much for Nicks fixing our culture.

He didn't fix shit.

All that happened was the expectations were taken away.

It's easy to pretend to care about others when your own spot is under no pressure.

This year, with the expectations reinstated has been a fun montage of finger pointing, excuses, arrogance and denial.

Bring on another review.
 
It’s not him though is it.

It’s (stupidly) elected by the players. Sure the coaches sign off on it, but it’s player driven. That’s the problem with it.

If I were coach, I’d say this is our captain, the vice captain is the bloke I want to be captain if he doesn’t get up. Then one to three (absolute max) deputy vice captains. At least one young player would be in this group.

A 3-5 man group. Decided by the coaches. The end.
Haha yeah, I fully agree.

Kerry Packer said to Ian Chappell that he was the captain of the Australian side for World Series Cricket, to which he replied, wasn't Greg was the current Test captain of the Australian Side?

Packer said he's bankrolling the whole bloody thing, so Chappelli was the Captain, no question.

Football coaches should go in with the same mentality - it may not exactly be all their money, but their job is on the line because of this. Phil Walsh knew this when he, ahem, strongly suggested to Tex that he should be captain when they were chatting over a number of other candidates for the role. I don't think many would argue with the result. ;)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

But like you say, have 3-4 man leadership group.
Who do you think made the decision to have an 8 man leadership group ?
The coaches. But we seem to bounce around between 4-8 man groups for years, across different coaches. Every year there’s a few changes. Not much continuity
 


Well this is on the coaches too, I get why Smithers would feel that way but dropping him earlier in the season when he was in his worst form would’ve been better for all parties

you want to do job where you earn more money than most of us will ever dream off, then make additional $$ from sponsors you unfortunately have to take the good with the bad. The bad is that fans are going to be critical of your every move. Dont forget about the times when the fans have backed and supported you.
 
Watched it, they did discuss it, but it was a bit weak.

No real analysis, just nebulous comments.

Others have highlighted our disastrous drafting (On the Couch), or Nicks's terrible record against decent sides - specifics are always helpful.
The drafting analysis is also superficial, very straw level and not actually a deep dive at all. Just going through first round picks and ignoring any other drafting/trades done over that time isn't telling me a thing. I've had an attempt in another thread to actually do a deeper dive on recruiting.
 
It’s not him though is it.

It’s (stupidly) elected by the players. Sure the coaches sign off on it, but it’s player driven. That’s the problem with it.

If I were coach, I’d say this is our captain, the vice captain is the bloke I want to be captain if he doesn’t get up. Then one to three (absolute max) deputy vice captains. At least one young player would be in this group.

A 3-5 man group. Decided by the coaches. The end.

It’s player elected though. It’s not who the coach wants.

As you said above, if the coach wanted to he could select the leadership group.

Because Nicks doesn't know what he is doing he is happy to sign off on the elected players.

A proper coach would either select the leaders or ensure the ones he wanted were 'elected' by the playing group.
 
Well so much for Nicks fixing our culture.

He didn't fix shit.

All that happened was the expectations were taken away.

He did. It was toxic as all hell at the end of 2019. He changed it around and did what we needed.

His job was done at the end of 2022. 2023 was when we needed someone who knew what they were doing as a football coach not a team builder.
 
He did. It was toxic as all hell at the end of 2019. He changed it around and did what we needed.

His job was done at the end of 2022. 2023 was when we needed someone who knew what they were doing as a football coach not a team builder.
Hasn’t fixed the entitlement culture though.
 
It’s not him though is it.

It’s (stupidly) elected by the players. Sure the coaches sign off on it, but it’s player driven. That’s the problem with it.

If I were coach, I’d say this is our captain, the vice captain is the bloke I want to be captain if he doesn’t get up. Then one to three (absolute max) deputy vice captains. At least one young player would be in this group.

A 3-5 man group. Decided by the coaches. The end.

Even five’s too many.

Captain. Vice. Deputy. That’s it.

Leadership titles should be very exclusive, not something you just hand out like a Spenze insult.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top