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

[AFC979810]

I think it’s fine to pin it on a line coach if something is wrong with that particular part of the game plan, when it’s all shitzen and the overall game plan isn’t working or not cohesive then the head coach comes under fire

Is is the cattle? Is it the overall gameplan of the head coach that is restricting what that group is doing?

How much do the line coaches get to decide who is selected for their particular area of the ground?

 

[Scorpus]

I think it’s fine to pin it on a line coach if something is wrong with that particular part of the game plan, when it’s all shitzen and the overall game plan isn’t working or not cohesive then the head coach comes under fire

VB might not have the ultimate say in selection but he's part of the panel.

And if he isn't responsible for things like the skills of our midfield - some players can't take the ball cleanly, can't execute basic skills like handballs, or have poor game sense - then what is he responsible for?

Just seems like a way to absolve him of anything. I absolutely blame issues like positioning and skills on the line coach

 

[Scorpus]

Is is the cattle? Is it the overall gameplan of the head coach that is restricting what that group is doing?

How much do the line coaches get to decide who is selected for their particular area of the ground?

If Nicks is responsible for things like skills and positioning there's no point having line coaches

 

[GreyCrow]

Its Nicks final selection.

He has to live by the sword and die by the sword. The fish rots from the head.

There are so many variables - its pretty much impossible to discuss performance of line coaches.

I got told it was Burgess by a very close sauce

 

[AFC979810]

Why wouldn't the culture of they club the played at influence their opinions?

So you are honestly saying Van Berlo is conservative with the midfield group because he played under rigid Craig?

Wouldn't his coaching be more influenced by playing under Craig in 2005/2006 when our midfield was Roo, McLeod, Goodwin and Edwards and we made consecutive prelims with one of the strongest midfields in the AFL?

 

[FR0GGY]

Is is the cattle? Is it the overall gameplan of the head coach that is restricting what that group is doing?

How much do the line coaches get to decide who is selected for their particular area of the ground?

Partly, yes.
They should you would think

 

[AFC979810]

VB might not have the ultimate say in selection but he's part of the panel.

So what? Its like saying our member elected board members have a real say in the running of the club when the 7 VFL appointed board members have the majority.

We don't know what goes on between these line coaches and Nicks. Do you know how much control Nicks gives VB?

And if he isn't responsible for things like the skills of our midfield - some players can't take the ball cleanly, can't execute basic skills like handballs, or have poor game sense - then what is he responsible for?

He is responsible for what Nicks assigns him to be responsible for. We don't know what that is, therefore it's impossible to speculate how well these guys are doing.

Sounds to me like blaming VB for midfielders who can't take the ball cleanly, can't execute basic skills like hand balling and have poor game sense is a bit tough.

Just seems like a way to absolve him of anything. I absolutely blame issues like positioning and skills on the line coach

No. I am not saying he is doing a great job, nor am I saying he is devoid of responsibility. We just don't know how Nicks is managing and how much control he has over the group, structure, selections etc.

Having a crack at assistant coaches is low hanging fruit.

 

[AFC979810]

Partly, yes.
They should you would think

You would think.. Thats fair. But we don't know and nobody knows except those win the inner circle.

Therefore - we can't know whether an assistant coach is doing a good job or a bad job - all we can go on is how the head coach is tracking.

 

[Scorpus]

So you are honestly saying Van Berlo is conservative with the midfield group because he played under rigid Craig?

Wouldn't his coaching be more influenced by playing under Craig in 2005/2006 when our midfield was Roo, McLeod, Goodwin and Edwards and we made consecutive prelims with one of the strongest midfields in the AFL?

Yes he would have been influenced by 2005 and 2006, because those years have influenced the entire clubs' thinking since. From selection to the general philosophy of how a club should operate. Only under Nicks have things looked to change briefly but we appear to be reverting back to type.

He has played or coached at the Crows under our culture for 16 of the 20 years since he was drafted in 2004. What has happened at our club would be highly influential

 

[Scorpus]

So what? Its like saying our member elected board members have a real say in the running of the club when the 7 VFL appointed board members have the majority.

We don't know what goes on between these line coaches and Nicks. Do you know how much control Nicks gives VB?



He is responsible for what Nicks assigns him to be responsible for. We don't know what that is, therefore it's impossible to speculate how well these guys are doing.

Sounds to me like blaming VB for midfielders who can't take the ball cleanly, can't execute basic skills like hand balling and have poor game sense is a bit tough.




No. I am not saying he is doing a great job, nor am I saying he is devoid of responsibility. We just don't know how Nicks is managing and how much control he has over the group, structure, selections etc.

Having a crack at assistant coaches is low hanging fruit.

Why is blaming VB for poor skills tough? What is the role of a coach if not to improve our players?

Being unable to infer that the midfield line coach has some responsibility over the quality of our midfield is ridiculous.

 

[AFC979810]

Yes he would have been influenced by 2005 and 2006, because those years have influenced the entire clubs' thinking since. From selection to the general philosophy of how a club should operate. Only under Nicks have things looked to change briefly but we appear to be reverting back to type.

You see what you want to see.

Whilst the ultimate lack of success (a flag) has alluded us -the club has not had singular thinking since 2005.

He has played or coached at the Crows under our culture for 16 of the 20 years since he was drafted in 2004. What has happened at our club would be highly influential

Like Clarkson playing for shitty clubs influenced his coaching? Like James Hird and Tim Wallace culture helped them become great coaches?

 

[AFC979810]

Why is blaming VB for poor skills tough? What is the role of a coach if not to improve our players?

Being unable to infer that the midfield line coach has some responsibility over the quality of our midfield is ridiculous.

So how much responsibility does he have? How much control does he have? How much say does he have in selection & gameplan.

Common sense would dictate you would need to have some level of knowledge of these answers to be critical of someone?

 

[GreyCrow]

and nobody knows except those win the inner circle.

Lol the 4 walls circle jerk that gets trotted out to shut the socials up

(hint its a false narrative)

Therefore - we can't know whether an assistant coach is doing a good job or a bad job - all we can go on is how the head coach is tracking.

This is as preposterous as the 1st line

Of course you can infer. Yes the head coach will live and die by it but performance matters

 

[FR0GGY]

You would think.. Thats fair. But we don't know and nobody knows except those win the inner circle.

Therefore - we can't know whether an assistant coach is doing a good job or a bad job - all we can go on is how the head coach is tracking.

But we don’t know if he’s responsible for it , so we can’t criticize him either.

 

[AFC979810]

Lol the 4 walls circle jerk that gets trotted out to shut the socials up

(hint its a false narrative)

Well no. Thats a silly statement. I am neither positive nor negative on our assistant coaches.

The head coach selects his assistant coaches to perform the roles he wants them to. We have no understanding of what their KPI's are nor how they are performing against said KPI's. We have no idea how these assistant coaches are being managed.

This is as preposterous as the 1st line

Of course you can infer. Yes the head coach will live and die by it but performance matters

So how much control do these line coaches have? If you are going to be critical of them surely you must have a basic understanding of what they are being asked to do and how they are performing.

 

[GreyCrow]

So how much responsibility does he have?

He sets the midfield structures and instructs the players on their roles and responsibilities - in accordance with the senior coaches philosophies. Just as we blamed Clarke for the 369 Ruck set up we blame VB for Pedlar and Dawson and Laird being the midfield starting rotation

How much control does he have? How much say does he have in selection & gameplan.

This is where it gets more difficult but feedback about how VB thinks a player is going is important. ie '' yeah Joe is struggling at the moment to understand what I want so maybe needs a run in the 2s''

Common sense would dictate you would need to have some level of knowledge of these answers to be critical of someone?

Common sense would dictate any well versed student of football would have enough intelligence to be critical of someone

All I need to do is to remind you of the CrowCast podcast of a few years ago when feenix67 talked about centre square set ups and lo and behold the following saw the implementation of some of those criticisms - one which was how stagnant and static our set up at CBAs was

 

[GreyCrow]

So how much control do these line coaches have? If you are going to be critical of them surely you must have a basic understanding of what they are being asked to do and how they are performing.

I have a basic understanding of football - as do most on here

Some choose to cheer

 

[AFC979810]

But we don’t know if he’s responsible for it , so we can’t criticize him either.

Silly.

Head coach is the boss. We can absolutely criticize him for things we can see and things we know he is responsible for. We can be critical of his selections, his gameplan, his in game moves, his win loss record etc.

Same way we can be critical / positive of the head fitness trainers based on soft tissue injuries.

Same way we can be (slightly less in truth) critical of our recruiting team based on draftees.

 

[Scorpus]

You see what you want to see.

Whilst the ultimate lack of success (a flag) has alluded us -the club has not had singular thinking since 2005.



Like Clarkson playing for shitty clubs influenced his coaching? Like James Hird and Tim Wallace culture helped them become great coaches?

Clarkson played under premiership winning coach Denis Pagan not some shitty club. Essendon cheated the salary cap during Hird's years and I think that would have been very influential on his decision to continue that culture and cheat with drugs

So how much responsibility does he have? How much control does he have? How much say does he have in selection & gameplan.

Common sense would dictate you would need to have some level of knowledge of these answers to be critical of someone?

I can easily assume he has above zero level of responsibility. I think it's common sense to say the midfield coach has responsibility over low level aspects of the midfield like skills

 

[GreyCrow]

Silly.

Yes it is

We have seen an immediate example of how a line coach makes a difference

Last year our forward line was like a machine with plenty of grease and lubrication - now we have a rusty ole junker

We kept the Head Coach - so it cant be him

Hmm wait up we changed line coaches - imagine that

 

[AFC979810]

He sets the midfield structures and instructs the players on their roles and responsibilities - in accordance with the senior coaches philosophies. Just as we blamed Clarke for the 369 Ruck set up we blame VB for Pedlar and Dawson and Laird being the midfield starting rotation

So VB selects our midfield group each week? He gets final say over who is selected, how many center bounces they attend, and what the balance is? How much control does VB have vs Nicks? Is it Nicks that is wanting to play Crouch/Laird/Berry in the same group r is it VB? If it is Nicks picking this team - you can't really blame VB can you?

This is where it gets more difficult but feedback about how VB thinks a player is going is important. ie '' yeah Joe is struggling at the moment to understand what I want so maybe needs a run in the 2s''

Huh? And what if Nicks doesn't listen?

Common sense would dictate any well versed student of football would have enough intelligence to be critical of someone

Yeah - a player or a head coach. Not an assistant coach when we have no knowledge of the management style and power dynamic.

All I need to do is to remind you of the CrowCast podcast of a few years ago when feenix67 talked about centre square set ups and lo and behold the following saw the implementation of some of those criticisms - one which was how stagnant and static our set up at CBAs was

Incomplete thought.

 

[cleanhands]

Yes it is

We have seen an immediate example of how a line coach makes a difference

Last year our forward line was like a machine with plenty of grease and lubrication - now we have a rusty ole junker

We kept the Head Coach - so it cant be him

Hmm wait up we changed line coaches - imagine that

Sounds reasonable

 

[Scorpus]

Silly.

Head coach is the boss. We can absolutely criticize him for things we can see and things we know he is responsible for. We can be critical of his selections, his gameplan, his in game moves, his win loss record etc.

Same way we can be critical / positive of the head fitness trainers based on soft tissue injuries.

Same way we can be (slightly less in truth) critical of our recruiting team based on draftees.

Hang on a moment, just last week weren't you saying it was Burgess decision to make Soligo the sub, and that Nicks wasn't ultimately responsible for it?

Now you are saying we actually can criticize the coach for selections because he's ultimately responsible for it.

So which is it, or is it maybe not as clear as you're making it out to be?

 

[AFC979810]

Yes it is

We have seen an immediate example of how a line coach makes a difference

Last year our forward line was like a machine with plenty of grease and lubrication - now we have a rusty ole junker

We kept the Head Coach - so it cant be him

Hmm wait up we changed line coaches - imagine that

Think it through.

2022 - Our forward line ranked 12th in the AFL averaging 11.3 goals per game under Rahilly.

2023 - Our forward line ranked 1st in the AFL averaging 13.9 goals per game under Rahilly. We replaced Rowe with Rankine and Walker kicked 29 more goals than 2022. That explains the difference.

And lets just pump the breaks a little on panicking on the forward line missing Rahilly.

Round 1 - 2023 - we kicked 90 points in a game that 206 points were scored.
Round 1 - 2024 - we kicked 54 points in brutal weather without tex in a game that 114 points were scored.

Round 2 - 2023 - we kicked 76 points in a home loss to Richmond.
Round 2 - 2024 - we kicked 77 points in a home loss to Geelong.

 

[AFC979810]

Hang on a moment, just last week weren't you saying it was Burgess decision to make Soligo the sub, and that Nicks wasn't ultimately responsible for it?

Nope. I said it was Nick's decision, but that Burgess would have a heavy impact.

Dr's and Fitness guru's are very different than line coaches IMO. Same with club Psychs.

Now you are saying we actually can criticize the coach for selections because he's ultimately responsible for it.

Head coach - Mathew Nicks is 100% responsible. He is 100% responsible for how our club does.

So which is it, or is it maybe not as clear as you're making it out to be?

Its not clear when you try and say that I said things I didnt say.