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

[relapse]

Capt hindsight observation ….. no-one was putting Hardwick on any pedestal for simply making finals

Supporters still wanted him gone in 2016

What a bizarre comparison

Hardwick
4th season 15 wins 7 losses (finals)
5th season 12 wins 10 losses (finals)
6th season 15 wins 7 losses (finals)
7th season 8 wins 14 losses

Hardwick's reprieve in 2016 was earned because of the credits that he had in the bank from the previous 3 years, he was also open with the club about his personal struggles through 2016. The important thing is that in the three seasons leading into that season he had a regular season record of 42 wins 24 losses (65%).

Your belief that Nicks deserves a reprieve for this year is based on nothing. He has absolute zero credits in the bank, if anything I believe he was very lucky to survive 2022. The 2023 season was enough to keep the wolves at bay, but this was supposed to be his year to deliver and he hasn't, it's been a train wreck.

Trying to use Hardwick as a basis of comparison is completely baseless and foolish.

 

[feenix67]

There is a type of person that just gets off on being contrarian. They see a group of people all mostly saying the same thing and think that taking the opposite position somehow puts them above other people. Like they have some kind of unique insight.

Oracle syndrome

 

[baldandbroke]

Because this in my wheelhouse of what i was paid to do ….. problems are never simple, nor is there rarely a simple solution

The Coach is one part of the puzzle …. he’s not the puzzle though
There are exceptions of course …. but labelling Nicks as the root cause is folly …. he’s done exactly what was expected in a rebuild …. but explore all the factors behind the 5th year stumble

That isn’t going to happen though, is it

5th year stumble?

Check out Mr Nicks’ record at the start of the year - before we extended him.

 

[kirky]

Capt hindsight observation ….. no-one was putting Hardwick on any pedestal for simply making finals

Supporters still wanted him gone in 2016

Yes the supporters/members want Nicks gone because he hasn’t delivered anything in 5 years and shouldn’t have support of the Admin.

Now the difference is yes Richmond supporters/members wanted Hardwick gone but you know what happened in 2016, Richmond had upheaval and the board was under the pump via a challenge but survived and changes were implemented. The board could remain strong given Hardwick could provide evidence via various finals campaigns.

We as AFC members don’t have that ability to overthrow the board or get the changes we want - plain and simple.

 

[1990crow]

5th year stumble?

Check out Mr Nicks’ record at the start of the year - before we extended him.

I'm convinced Wayne actually works for the club. There's no other explanation.

 

[GreyCrow]

The other issue with being a contrarian is you have nowhere to go

Its why he goes missing for ages at a time

 

[Mr_Moogle]

The other issue with being a contrarian is you have nowhere to go

Its why he goes missing for ages at a time

"George Kramer mentioned you in a comment" is his cue to go hide in the bushes.

 

[kirky]

I'm convinced Wayne actually works for the club. There's no other explanation.

Think we have all come to that conclusion and if was to have any credibility he would just say he does and be done with it (doesn’t have to tell us his role but just be open and transparent - yes that catch phrase). At least then, he would have some respect but at the moment he gets zero respect from me.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Oracle syndrome

There’s only one oracle around here. And it’s kirky

 

[relapse]

5th year stumble?

Check out Mr Nicks’ record at the start of the year - before we extended him.

LOL

A stumble?

Nicks hasn't even learnt how to walk yet, he's barely even been able to crawl let alone be in a position to stumble.

 

[kirky]

There’s only one oracle around here. And it’s kirky

Yeh, The Matrix is one of my favourite movies.

The sequels were probably the worst.

 

[kirky]

5th year stumble?

Check out Mr Nicks’ record at the start of the year - before we extended him.

Yeh, that one needs to be explained.

Waiting in anticipation when they decide to announce the renewal of a few player contracts due this year.

 

[Slippery Pete]

What a bizarre comparison

The reviews of those two clubs were held under an almost universally-agreed premise that they’d built premiership lists, but had missing ingredients off the field.

Pretty telling that the AFC is telling you the complete opposite. The list is buggered, but off field everyone’s doing a great job.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Yeh, The Matrix is one of my favourite movies.

The sequels were probably the worst.

I just thought that post might get me free wine

 

[woofsson]

Few would know (and maybe care) that since 2014 under the terms of the Crows’ re-struck constitution, the AFL appoints seven of the nine Adelaide directors and has sole voting rights of all matters at annual general meetings other than the election of the two remaining board members.


So, if the AFC Directors are appointed by the AFL, the AFL presumably provides them with a job description that includes on and off field performance objectives for the Club that they are tasked with achieving, in short the job they are given to do.
(Now this is where it gets tricky.)
It would only be fair and reasonable to share those objectives with the members, and the KPIs that demonstrate progress (or lack thereof) towards them.
In a public company shareholders get to assess the performance of each director and vote to retain or dismiss them accordingly.
As the only shareholder of the AFC, this presumably is the role of the AFL.
But are they doing it?
We have no idea.
As AFC members and supporters we should be pressuring the AFL to disclose:

• the objectives they have set for the AFC Board and Directors
• the evaluation of the performance (KPIs) of the Board and Directors in achieving those goals
• the trigger points at which the AFL will regard the performance of the Board and Directors as unsatisfactory
• what actions reaching the above trigger points will precipitate

We should collectively hassle the AFL for this information.

They are the dog that's wagging the tail.

Simples.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Coaches inherit a list

But 5 years is more than enough time to put your stamp on it

What we're seeing is increasingly Nicks and what he's built, rather that whatever he was lumped with after 2019.

We're seeing that he's backed in the wrong seniors and invested in the wrong youngsters, meaning he keeps having to start over and we'll perennially be a young team. He's wasted players in the wrong roles. Ultimately hasn't built anything of value and we are going backwards.

Incorrect …. you play the wrong players until the next Draft’s players are ready

I agree, Ned, Hamill, Berry, Gollant & co are not up to GF AFL standard …. however you need to see 3-4 years mostly, and a number of games, to see if they stagnate or develop

By then you’re feeding in players like Nankervis, and others, to ease the fore mentioned players out

Given our rebuild started in 2019 …. 3-4 years should be expiring 2023 and beyond …. if our injuries hadn’t hit home, you wouldn’t have Ned and Berry still playing, and the young ones a stronger support framework around them

Unfortunately that’s where rebuilds can get derailed …. McAsey a big hurt ….I agree, our list currently isn’t deep enough, nor enough experience in that depth range

 

[Slippery Pete]

As AFC members and supporters we should be pressuring the AFL to disclose:

• the objectives they have set for the AFC Board and Directors
• the evaluation of the performance (KPIs) of the Board and Directors in achieving those goals
• the trigger points at which the AFL will regard the performance of the Board and Directors as unsatisfactory
• what actions reaching the above trigger points will precipitate

We should collectively hassle the AFL for this information.

They are the dog that's wagging the tail.

Simples.

Terrible idea. This only legitimizes the current illegitimate board structure.

Members should be lobbying — relentlessly — for a member-owned club with a fully-elected board.

They should not take no for an answer.

It really is that simple, and anyone telling you it isn’t is running an agenda.

 

[AFC3000]

I don't mind criticism of Nicks, move him on or not. I think even if he was hired because he wasn't someone who was going to shake things up, he's had the chance to become that. Always unlikely to see out a rebuild, certainly not two...

My only problem is we make so much noise about removing one person, gives those higher up (I don't think we're set up in a way that places the coach above all, and don't think we'll hire one that takes on that role) or horizontal to him like Reid their scapegoat and it calms the supporters for a while but no real change is made.

We do another, no other changes this time, let the new senior coach have a year to identify what he needs, then give him another Nathan Van Berlo

Nathan Van Berlo

Age

38

Ht

184cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

D/M

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.2

5star

K

9.7

4star

HB

8.5

5star

M

4.3

4star

T

3.3

5star

MG

250.5

4star

No current season stats available

D

6.4

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

1.4

2star

M

1.8

2star

T

0.6

3star

...

I'd feel much more comfortable if it was the next head of football, CEO, board members etc that had a look and decided we needed a new coach and who to hire, because this group or a version of them haven't really shown they are capable.

 

[woofsson]

Terrible idea. This only legitimizes the current illegitimate board structure.

Members should be lobbying — relentlessly — for a member-owned club with a fully-elected board.

They should not take no for an answer.

It really is that simple, and anyone telling you it isn’t is running an agenda.

I agree, but we are not, and in the meantime we can still try and make the current situation better.

If someone wants to start a boycott of matches or membership or something that might ruffle a few feathers at the AFL, get some media exposure and move us towards a member-owned club, count me in.

 

[1970crow]

We won't get it because we are treated with disdain and the club knows they have people waiting to become members.

Is there still a waiting list for memberships?

 

[Pugsley]

Is there still a waiting list for memberships?

You have to wonder.

 

[George Kramer]

I’ve said B4 …. judge a coach based on the list quality at his disposal

Is he maximising the talent on the list …. a young list experiencing injuries, hasn’t the depth, nor the fitness levels & mental strength to run out 4 qtrs of AFL footy

NORTH demonstrated that yesterday … and they have minimal injuries to key players

But, you’ll see, what you want to see …. what your biases determine

No what you said at the start of the year was all Nicks was to prove was that he was a finals coach, he then went rogue bonkers changing the game plan and we went 0-4, season over.

So be pathetic like the club and use injury excuses all you like, but your words are there for all to see.

Just like “self motivate” “shape” “5 day break” “look at Collingwood not coping with injuries” currently sitting 3rd

 

[hugecannon]

We also don't have Jack Riewoldt, Dustin Martin, Tom Lynch, Alex Rance, Trent Cotchin, Dion Prestia, Bacha Houli, Josh Caddy, Shane Edwards etc

And 17+ games at the MCG each year including the grand final and hometown umpires with a VFL feel good narrative to get them that elusive premiership

 

[feenix67]

Incorrect …. you play the wrong players until the next Draft’s players are ready

I agree, Ned, Hamill, Berry, Gollant & co are not up to GF AFL standard …. however you need to see 3-4 years mostly, and a number of games, to see if they stagnate or develop

By then you’re feeding in players like Nankervis, and others, to ease the fore mentioned players out

Given our rebuild started in 2019 …. 3-4 years should be expiring 2023 and beyond …. if our injuries hadn’t hit home, you wouldn’t have Ned and Berry still playing, and the young ones a stronger support framework around them

Unfortunately that’s where rebuilds can get derailed …. McAsey a big hurt ….I agree, our list currently isn’t deep enough, nor enough experience in that depth range

Mate, the only time we've debuted players is because of injuries. Yet another swing and miss.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Boards and good companies have 5 year out the door plans. If the CEO doesnt make meaningful strides they are shown the door within 5 years

Sorry, you have no idea how boards work ….. what’s your expertise in this area