Opinion Matthew Nicks: Adelaide's Coach (Part 3) - The Biggest Loser

[George Kramer]

Absolutely. However, making a preliminary final, it's really hard to then turn around and sack him if he doesn't win or get into the big one. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I think it's hilarious from a Port view point, but I reckon it'd be bloody hard to sack a bloke given he just made the prelim.

Nicks could only dream of a prelim

 

[jenny61_99]

Nicks could only dream of a prelim

As could we all!

 

[AFC979810]

If you have someone talented enough to fix Matthew Nicks, you need to reward that person with the senior position before they get poached by another club.

Thats a very simplistic take that sounds smart to idiots, but is actually a very dumb comment.

But what someone he is talented enough to fix the tactical issues of Nicks - but then sucks at all the other roles a head coach has to undertake?

For mine - Nicks is very well liked, fine with the media, the players love him, the players play for him. Whats lacking is the tactical side of things. A coach can be a well renowned tactician but lacks in other areas and its just as disastrous (Bolton, Leppitsch, etc).

 

[GreyCrow]

For mine - Nicks is very well liked, fine with the media, the players love him, the players play for him. Whats lacking is the tactical side of things. A coach can be a well renowned tactician but lacks in other areas and its just as disastrous (Bolton, Leppitsch, etc).

I agree the backroom guy may not be a good front role person but the point is still well made

On your list of things Nicks is good at I would prioritise coaching and tactics over all the others

He is not fine with the media unless you count boring them or just talking talking as being good.

Players play for him? Just another cliche with no quantifiable measure. Given our record have they been playing for him or not?

I reckon the senior players would absolutely love him. He doesnt make accountability a plank of his coaching where I would. His core values lack the hard edge required

 

[George Kramer]

Thats a very simplistic take that sounds smart to idiots, but is actually a very dumb comment.

But what someone he is talented enough to fix the tactical issues of Nicks - but then sucks at all the other roles a head coach has to undertake?

For mine - Nicks is very well liked, fine with the media, the players love him, the players play for him. Whats lacking is the tactical side of things. A coach can be a well renowned tactician but lacks in other areas and its just as disastrous (Bolton, Leppitsch, etc).

So you mean he’d be a good assistant

 

[Cromulant]

So you mean he’d be a good assistant

He'd probably make a better GM of Footy than our current guy, not that it's a very high bar

 

[GreyCrow]

So you mean he’d be a good assistant

Thats how I see him

Have the tactical day coach and leave the rest to the good guy

 

[Multiballz]

Thats a very simplistic take that sounds smart to idiots, but is actually a very dumb comment.

But what someone he is talented enough to fix the tactical issues of Nicks - but then sucks at all the other roles a head coach has to undertake?

For mine - Nicks is very well liked, fine with the media, the players love him, the players play for him. Whats lacking is the tactical side of things. A coach can be a well renowned tactician but lacks in other areas and its just as disastrous (Bolton, Leppitsch, etc).

The players played for him when they wanted to play for him. Give me a break.

So you think he gets the best out of his team and its all down to a poor gameplan? Rubbish. Hes poor in all areas. Even media.

 

[AFC979810]

The players played for him when they wanted to play for him. Give me a break.

We have had 3 losses by 40+ in the past 2 years. The players play for him.

So you think he gets the best out of his team and its all down to a poor gameplan? Rubbish. Hes poor in all areas. Even media.

Well he doesn't get the best out of them because his gameplan and tactical ability is shit. But the players love him - he is very likable. He is perfect in the media - think about the lack of pressure he has endured during his pitiful reign as head coach.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

He'd probably make a better GM of Footy than our current guy, not that it's a very high bar

I have said a few times the smart move would have been to sack our Football Manager & replace him with Nicks, then bring in a senior coach who can actually coach well.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Thats how I see him

Have the tactical day coach and leave the rest to the good guy

But our new football director is also managing the assistants, arranging training as well as setting strategies.

Sounds like the senior coach, except in name.

 

[AFC979810]

I agree the backroom guy may not be a good front role person but the point is still well made

On your list of things Nicks is good at I would prioritise coaching and tactics over all the others

I never said I didnt prioritize coaching and tactics. I have been extremely critical of Nicks and still think he is a shit tactical head coach.

I have wanted him fired since early 2022.

He is not fine with the media unless you count boring them or just talking talking as being good.

Disagree. He is brilliant with the media. Look at his record and how it correlates to the external pressure.

Players play for him? Just another cliche with no quantifiable measure. Given our record have they been playing for him or not?

No - they absolutely play for him. In the world of sport its very easy to see when a club / team gives up on a coach. The losses are huge. Players give up.

This has not happened with Matty Nicks.

I reckon the senior players would absolutely love him. He doesnt make accountability a plank of his coaching where I would. His core values lack the hard edge required

Disagree. He does make hard decisions. Dropping Rachele is an example. Its a completely stupid decision, but its not an easy one to make.

Nicks has the hard edge. He just doesn't have the brain to make the right call.

 

[AFC979810]

The players played for him when they wanted to play for him. Give me a break.

When did they not want to play for him? Any examples?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The players played for him when they wanted to play for him. Give me a break.

So you think he gets the best out of his team and its all down to a poor gameplan? Rubbish. Hes poor in all areas. Even media.

Can't really claim the players play for him when have the worst win loss record for a Crows coach.

 

[AFC979810]

So you mean he’d be a good assistant

Yes. He would be and has been.

He is an absolute disaster as a head coach for the tactical issues we have all discussed ad nauseam. What I am saying is that he does do a bunch of things well as a head coach. If we Murray Davis can fix the tactical issues - we are in a very good spot.

 

[GreyCrow]

Disagree. He does make hard decisions. Dropping Rachele is an example. Its a completely stupid decision, but its not an easy one to make.

Dropping Rachele wasnt a hard decision - it was a shit decision compounded by the fact Laird had a worse game

He dropped him for ''stirring '' and not form

 

[AFC979810]

Can't really claim the players play for him when have the worst win loss record for a Crows coach.

You can, if you follow sport at all.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

You can, if you follow sport at all.

Well in 2025 I'm hoping the players don't play for Nicks... but play for Davis!

 

[AFC979810]

Dropping Rachele wasnt a hard decision - it was a shit decision compounded by the fact Laird had a worse game

It was both a shit decision and a brutally tough decisions. One that he got lambasted for across both media and fans.

He dropped him for ''stirring '' and not form

And thats exactly what made it a hard decision.

 

[GreyCrow]

You can, if you follow sport at all.

Come on Graeme you cant keep using this '' oh how would you know you never played the game''

The weakest comeback when somebody has a better argument

Try harder

 

[GreyCrow]

It was both a shit decision and a brutally tough decisions. One that he got lambasted for across both media and fans.



And thats exactly what made it a hard decision.

No he sheepled

The hard decision would have been to give everyone the middle finger ( as alluded to in the Non Crows thread)

Would it have been hard or easy to drop Stengle?

 

[George Kramer]

Yes. He would be and has been.

He is an absolute disaster as a head coach for the tactical issues we have all discussed ad nauseam. What I am saying is that he does do a bunch of things well as a head coach. If we Murray Davis can fix the tactical issues - we are in a very good spot.

So effectively we have Ken Hinkley MKII and that’s a very good spot?

Nicks has shown many examples of poor judgement and arrogance, do you think he will listen to Davis if he has a different opinion?

 

[119others]

So effectively we have Ken Hinkley MKII and that’s a very good spot?

Nicks has shown many examples of poor judgement and arrogance, do you think he will listen to Davis if he has a different opinion?

Sweet, Soldo, Visentini and Dodson is a little OTT IMO. They have holes all over the ground

 

[AFC979810]

Come on Graeme you cant keep using this '' oh how would you know you never played the game''

Thats not the argument - ya nuffy.

The weakest comeback when somebody has a better argument

Try harder

I stated my argument previously. Here it is again.

Nicks has coached 5 seasons. If you watch sport - its very clear when a coach has lost the playing group. The losses mount and get bigger. The margins blow out.

Over the past 2 seasons we have only had 3 losses of 40+ points. During the same time period Brisbane (lost a GF by 3 points, won a GF by a million) have also had 3 40+ losses.

The players play for Nicks.

 

[George Kramer]

Sweet, Soldo, Visentini and Dodson is a little OTT IMO. They have holes all over the ground

If they consider Dodson quality and better than all of them, they will pick him.