Coach Men's Senior Coach: Brad Scott

[ant555]

I’m not saying to sack him.

I’m saying I want to see more from him than the dialogue about effort. I have question marks over his ability to implement a modern style of play that will stack up against the best. The way we concede goals and the level of confusion when defending transition is really concerning for me.

So you have confidence in the current list’s ability to perform a modern game plan?
I think it is personal as much as game plan. Both need refinement.

 

[FlyingV]

So you have confidence in the current list’s ability to perform a modern game plan?
I think it is personal as much as game plan. Both need refinement.

No I agree with you on that. I don’t think we have the personnel to sustain it. I think Martin, Durham, Duursma help. In fact it makes me reflect on 3 years ago how far off it were then and the improvements made. I think Rosa gets it.

My point of view is that he should have built the foundation of effort and professionalism required by year 3. That should be established and now we work on embedding a contemporary style of play.

 

[Old Campaigner]

No I agree with you on that. I don’t think we have the personnel to sustain it. I think Martin, Durham, Duursma help. In fact it makes me reflect on 3 years ago how far off it were then and the improvements made. I think Rosa gets it.

My point of view is that he should have built the foundation of effort and professionalism required by year 3. That should be established and now we work on embedding a contemporary style of play.

What are you basing that on? We’ve had a merry go round of coaches over the last decade and they’ve all identified the same problem but been unable to fix it. Now you’re saying after two years that Scott has had long enough to achieve something no other coach could manage?

We have a trash list but you’re still judging the coach by his ability to implement a modern game plan? A modern game plan that is based on defensive efforts, something the players have steadfastly refused to accept for over a decade?

 

[Mercurial89]

Do not agree at all and I did not say good football. My view is we did play better football for a good part.

Apologies I read "played pretty well" as a synonym for good.

 

[ant555]

No I agree with you on that. I don’t think we have the personnel to sustain it. I think Martin, Durham, Duursma help. In fact it makes me reflect on 3 years ago how far off it were then and the improvements made. I think Rosa gets it.

My point of view is that he should have built the foundation of effort and professionalism required by year 3. That should be established and now we work on embedding a contemporary style of play.

I think effort and a professional base has been established. It is now they sort the players and they will expand the game plan. The fact that they say we need to be better covers all areas.

 

[FlyingV]

What are you basing that on? We’ve had a merry go round of coaches over the last decade and they’ve all identified the same problem but been unable to fix it. Now you’re saying after two years that Scott has had long enough to achieve something no other coach could manage?

We have a trash list but you’re still judging the coach by his ability to implement a modern game plan? A modern game plan that is based on defensive efforts, something the players have steadfastly refused to accept for over a decade?

I think I’ve made it pretty clear in my posts that I believe two years is long enough to ensure players are aware of what effort and standards are required to be an AFL footballer.

 

[FlyingV]

I think effort and a professional base has been established. It is now they sort the players and they will expand the game plan. The fact that they say we need to be better covers all areas.

I agree.

 

[Squeaky]

yeah some fair points there, maybe its Scott copping the brunt of my displeasure but its a Club wide issue over the last two years.

The one thing I can definitely point at Scott is the change in approach in 2nd half of year to more short term planning based on our ladder position at the mid point of the season.

I know it comes to personal belief of what is the best approach as Both you and Lore say "we were a chance to make finals so thats why the did X and Y" and thats a perfectly valid view, but for me a personally (and I believe a couple of other supporters) we were happy to hear him talk about patience/8 year plans etc at start of year and we were happy to see him give younger guys more responsibility pre bye so its disappointing he fell back on tried and failed strategies/positioning etc in back half of year just because he saw a finals berth as a possibility.
I hate Sam Mitchell as much as any Essendon supporter does but I cant help but look back at the last two years of us all laughing at them languishing at the bottom whilst he tried to instil his style. But he didnt blink, Scott blinked.

This bit is spot on.
The guys in charge cannot afford to get carried away like that.
If there is a plan it had to be adhered to - maybe there just wasn't a plan.

And the other thing that makes me worried is his selection policy. Perkins should have been dropped much earlier than he was. Roberts could have played earlier. Hayes?
And don't play 2 Rucks and 200cm Wingers in the rain!
Pretty ****ing basic.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

What has become pretty clear over the last few months is rebuilding the list couldn’t happen with Dodoro there, and so is only starting now.

So many wasted years, what a mess.

Yep it's very clear now.
The reason I'm jaded and a bit skeptical about the excuses made for Scott and Vozzo is the reasons offered by posters for the slow pace in the rebuild are starting to feel a bit like the excuses made for dodoro still being at the club.

"Nah he isn't in charge of drafting, now RFK is so all good he really shines at trade time"

"Now he is doing contract negotiations so not really involved in list build"

Now it's "we couldn't make progress whilst Adrian was at the club"

Maybe dodoro wasn't the problem after all, he was just a symptom of the big club malaise that has engulfed the club for 20 years.
I was sure scott/vozzo were change agents to finally pull us into the modern game but now I'm 50/50 whether this is the case or whether it's just same shit new faces.

 

[BrunoV]

yeah some fair points there, maybe its Scott copping the brunt of my displeasure but its a Club wide issue over the last two years.

The one thing I can definitely point at Scott is the change in approach in 2nd half of year to more short term planning based on our ladder position at the mid point of the season.

I know it comes to personal belief of what is the best approach as Both you and Lore say "we were a chance to make finals so thats why the did X and Y" and thats a perfectly valid view, but for me a personally (and I believe a couple of other supporters) we were happy to hear him talk about patience/8 year plans etc at start of year and we were happy to see him give younger guys more responsibility pre bye so its disappointing he fell back on tried and failed strategies/positioning etc in back half of year just because he saw a finals berth as a possibility.
I hate Sam Mitchell as much as any Essendon supporter does but I cant help but look back at the last two years of us all laughing at them languishing at the bottom whilst he tried to instil his style. But he didnt blink, Scott blinked.

I'd also add that the key difference with Mitchell is that he had a clear idea of how he wanted a team to play and prioritised selection for that purpose. Scott has done the opposite, which is the same thing that every other Essendon coach has done, which is why we have not advanced during his Scott's 2 years in charge, he's let the pieces determine the style. I don't think he has blinked so much as he has responded to being stuck between a style of play tailored for a deeply flawed team and squad and the realisation that it won't work.

It's the reason I've said all along that he has squandered the opportunity he had and why history says he will likely be a failure. As at least 1 premiership coach learned the hard way, you can't be the same voice asking the players to do things differently when you've been selling them on the need to do things in a certain way. You can build from the ground up and evolve, that is a different thing.

 

[Zach Package]

What has become pretty clear over the last few months is rebuilding the list couldn’t happen with Dodoro there, and so is only starting now.

So many wasted years, what a mess

I don’t even think we were in any position to really ‘go for it’ either with the benefit of hindsight, even the right established players doesn’t compensate for a top down organisational shemozzle.

Must unravel the shemozzle first

 

[P Money]

same shit new faeces.

FIFY

 

[Keystone agony]

Would like to give him a 5th year now if he hasnt got one, assume he signed for 4 years

The next 2 years likely will be tough and not many survive 4 consecutive years of missed finals

 

[BrunoV]

Would like to give him a 5th year now if he hasnt got one, assume he signed for 4 years

The next 2 years likely will be tough and not many survive 4 consecutive years of missed finals

Why will the next 2 years be tougher than the last?

Perkins, Hobbs, Tsatas, Cox, Hayes, Draper, Bryan, Durham, Caldwell, El Hawli (because he is mature) and maybe Reid (body allowing) all enter their prime years.

Add that to the established quality of Merrett, Ridley, Redman, Duursma, Gresham, Wright, Guelfi, Langford, Martin, McGrath, McKay, Parish.

That doesn't include Caddy, Kako and Roberts given that they are still very young which makes it 26 players without what will be mature roles players in the form of Laverde, Jones, Menzie, Setterfield and Shiel. That's 31 players to use to win games next season.

I don't believe in this team. But Brad Scott and Essendon do otherwise they would try to change it. I don't see a valid argument for his survival short of winning a final next season. You can't blame past operators for things you had the opportunity to change but didn't. Brad Scott has adopted this team as his own and now he needs to make it work.

If we go backwards 3 years into the build what does that say about his judgement? Why would you have any faith in someone whose judgement is so flawed?

 

[Keystone agony]

Why will the next 2 years be tougher than the last?

Perkins, Hobbs, Tsatas, Cox, Hayes, Draper, Bryan, Durham, Caldwell, El Hawli (because he is mature) and maybe Reid (body allowing) all enter their prime years.

Add that to the established quality of Merrett, Ridley, Redman, Duursma, Gresham, Wright, Guelfi, Langford, Martin, McGrath, McKay, Parish.

That doesn't include Caddy, Kako and Roberts given that they are still very young which makes it 26 players without what will be mature roles players in the form of Laverde, Jones, Menzie, Setterfield and Shiel. That's 31 players to use to win games next season.

I don't believe in this team. But Brad Scott and Essendon do otherwise they would try to change it. I don't see a valid argument for his survival short of winning a final next season. You can't blame past operators for things you had the opportunity to change but didn't. Brad Scott has adopted this team as his own and now he needs to make it work.

If we go backwards 3 years into the build what does that say about his judgement? Why would you have any faith in someone whose judgement is so flawed?

Stringer, Hind, Kelly, Heppell ect is a pretty decent void

We will be super young. Prime years is 25-27 for non talls not 21 with a handful of games or 24 with zero games

Our actions would suggest were taking a back step next year, as we dont believe the list is good enough

Not necessarily comparing the next 2 years to the last 2, but we were top 5 for most of those years

The build has just began, the last one has failed. 2025 - Year 1

So you rate the list but the coach is no good?

 

[dank420_]

The build has just began, the last one has failed. 2025 - Year 1

This is going to absolutely trigger the shit out of Bruno.

 

[ant555]

I'd also add that the key difference with Mitchell is that he had a clear idea of how he wanted a team to play and prioritised selection for that purpose. Scott has done the opposite, which is the same thing that every other Essendon coach has done, which is why we have not advanced during his Scott's 2 years in charge, he's let the pieces determine the style. I don't think he has blinked so much as he has responded to being stuck between a style of play tailored for a deeply flawed team and squad and the realisation that it won't work.

It's the reason I've said all along that he has squandered the opportunity he had and why history says he will likely be a failure. As at least 1 premiership coach learned the hard way, you can't be the same voice asking the players to do things differently when you've been selling them on the need to do things in a certain way. You can build from the ground up and evolve, that is a different thing.

Agree with regards to the Hawks and Mitchell. They had a plan. The moved Clarkson out when he wanted to move away from the plan and create his own and stuck to it. They nailed the game style they wanted and recruited that way.

I think our problem is not just Scott doing what Scott does. It was twisting someone's arm to coach us who clearly was not thinking about coaching and had no real plan when we talked him into it. Throw in a second choice CEO and you get what happened in 2023. The lack of a clear plan lead to them believing the Essendon cool aid as far as list goes and not in a position to have a clear plan.

You have not really rated Scott and it looks to be well founded. I have been more wait and see . What I do know is the level of the football program has changed. I have mentioned before that the training I have seen is a level above anything we have done before as far as method and drills and it being a place to be serious on the track and no ****ing around.

I rate recruiting the players they did last year a it more than you. McKay was a need and despite his woes with ball in hand he was decent. Duursma was a plus . Gresham was one that played his role okay but you can argue his real worth. Goldstein worked in the role he was recruited for. As far as the young blokes go Caddy and Roberts where a plus. Lual is only a slim chance. Overall despite the couple of misses they did target areas that needed upgrades. KPF. Half back. Small forward. Did not work 100% but they where looking at certain spots.

I think we have not gone far in 2 years because the coach never came to us with a real plan. It has been a bit of make it up as you go. Secondly there is simply too much baggage from previous years. Third it took time for the CEO to work out that he should not be listening to Essendon people about the list.

We never gave ourselves a chance to build like Mitchell because we never actually had a cold hard look at the list and worked out it was not as good as they thought. We kept listening to guys like Lloyd and other Essendon people who was saying the list was okay but under performing. We worked out our succession plan but the Truck was never as well loved as Mitchell at the Hawks and he was not really given the same level of support. Throw in the constant war between Dodoro and two football mangers who where trying to get him out and we are what we are.

 

[Keystone agony]

Mitchell and hawthorn are also the outlier, not the norm. Always said Mitchell is a level of coach beyond everyone else. He didnt want to coach us and we certainly didnt want him to coach us, so not much point comparing him to scott unless you wanted Sam as coach 3-4 years ago

Tell me how the saints, blues, dogs, north are going. Theyre in the same market as us

 

[P Money]

Why will the next 2 years be tougher than the last?

Perkins, Hobbs, Tsatas, Cox, Hayes, Draper, Bryan, Durham, Caldwell, El Hawli (because he is mature) and maybe Reid (body allowing) all enter their prime years.

Add that to the established quality of Merrett, Ridley, Redman, Duursma, Gresham, Wright, Guelfi, Langford, Martin, McGrath, McKay, Parish.

That doesn't include Caddy, Kako and Roberts given that they are still very young which makes it 26 players without what will be mature roles players in the form of Laverde, Jones, Menzie, Setterfield and Shiel. That's 31 players to use to win games next season.

I don't believe in this team. But Brad Scott and Essendon do otherwise they would try to change it. I don't see a valid argument for his survival short of winning a final next season. You can't blame past operators for things you had the opportunity to change but didn't. Brad Scott has adopted this team as his own and now he needs to make it work.

If we go backwards 3 years into the build what does that say about his judgement? Why would you have any faith in someone whose judgement is so flawed?

He's just started his second off-season, hasn't even had a second draft period in charge (if you acknowledge that he came in so late in 2022 that he really couldn't have much influence). I don't think he's had a huge opportunity to mould the list/team into what he wants.

There's a lot of reasons we may go backwards next year, and one of them could be the short term pain that's required to reshape the list. Progress isn't linear, and it's possible for young players to be developing and improving (i.e. Martin, Caldwell, Durham et al) while at the same time the team sliding somewhat as we offload experienced players and blood young players in their stead. That doesn't mean the rebuild is 'going backwards' if that makes sense.

I also don't think the coaches sticking with a younger crop that hasn't blossomed yet (Cox, Reid, Perkins, Hobbs, Tsatas, Davey x2, Hayes, Bryan, Jones) means that they're somehow culpable for not changing the list. No club would be giving up on these players yet - it will take a few seasons yet to make a call on whether they are going to make it or not.

If we can see progress across different elements - development of young players, lifting of standards and professionalism, moving on some dead wood that isn't going to help our next push (or isn't contributing value on & off the field), deeper embedding of a game plan year on year, and an uplift in the professionalism of the organisation itself, then I for one can cop some short term pain. From the outside, I think (/hope) I can see those things happening.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

Agree with regards to the Hawks and Mitchell. They had a plan. The moved Clarkson out when he wanted to move away from the plan and create his own and stuck to it. They nailed the game style they wanted and recruited that way.

I think our problem is not just Scott doing what Scott does. It was twisting someone's arm to coach us who clearly was not thinking about coaching and had no real plan when we talked him into it. Throw in a second choice CEO and you get what happened in 2023. The lack of a clear plan lead to them believing the Essendon cool aid as far as list goes and not in a position to have a clear plan.

You have not really rated Scott and it looks to be well founded. I have been more wait and see . What I do know is the level of the football program has changed. I have mentioned before that the training I have seen is a level above anything we have done before as far as method and drills and it being a place to be serious on the track and no ****ing around.

I rate recruiting the players they did last year a it more than you. McKay was a need and despite his woes with ball in hand he was decent. Duursma was a plus . Gresham was one that played his role okay but you can argue his real worth. Goldstein worked in the role he was recruited for. As far as the young blokes go Caddy and Roberts where a plus. Lual is only a slim chance. Overall despite the couple of misses they did target areas that needed upgrades. KPF. Half back. Small forward. Did not work 100% but they where looking at certain spots.

I think we have not gone far in 2 years because the coach never came to us with a real plan. It has been a bit of make it up as you go. Secondly there is simply too much baggage from previous years. Third it took time for the CEO to work out that he should not be listening to Essendon people about the list.

We never gave ourselves a chance to build like Mitchell because we never actually had a cold hard look at the list and worked out it was not as good as they thought. We kept listening to guys like Lloyd and other Essendon people who was saying the list was okay but under performing. We worked out our succession plan but the Truck was never as well loved as Mitchell at the Hawks and he was not really given the same level of support. Throw in the constant war between Dodoro and two football mangers who where trying to get him out and we are what we are.

The last paragraph is key for me. Still hearing people even now claim that the list is only x or y factors away from contending and it makes me want to pull my hair out. (One saving grace is I saw Robbo stating in the Sun that we need to go backwards to go forwards so at least that's one prominent voice that has accepted where the list is ....for now).

I really expected Scott to be an agent for change already in this regard but maybe I just need to focus on stuff happening BoH.
There are small greenshoots I see, like the trading of picks to get caddy and the pick swap with the Dees, these are the sort of things our previous regime would never entertain.
But the frustration is how much the last 2 years have been a transition from old to new regime. Alot of moves with list management that contradict other moves and what the coach has said publicly, that basically means new regime has one arm tied behind its back.

 

[Corleone]

What has become pretty clear over the last few months is rebuilding the list couldn’t happen with Dodoro there, and so is only starting now.

So many wasted years, what a mess.

I couldn't agree more.

I know that next year will be Brads third, but in my mind there is no coach in the league who could operate effectively with the Sheedy/Dodoro faction white-anting every single attempt to bring the club up to standard.

Finally we/Brad have some clear air. Let's see what happens from here

 

[Old Campaigner]

I don’t even think we were in any position to really ‘go for it’ either with the benefit of hindsight, even the right established players doesn’t compensate for a top down organisational shemozzle.

Must unravel the shemozzle first

This is why I don't rate most criticism of Scott thus far and don't have much patience for it. The head coach is just one role in an organisation clearly riddled with mismanaged roles and positions that extends from the board to the playing group. I very strongly suspect that the majority of the things people here complain about are stemming from the difficulty in unraveling the shemozzle (as you put it) rather than flaws with the individual. I tend to include in that the issues with the attitude, culture and values of the playing group that needs to be untangled as well.

That isn't to say he's perfect, the selection of an overly tall side for a game in the rain in an example where he ****ed up (and owned up to it). He's only human and will make mistakes along the way just like any other coach from time to time; but I think it's important to separate genuine errors he's made from unavoidable shit that comes from trying to turn around decades of inertia and organisational rot.

 

[Old Campaigner]

I really expected Scott to be an agent for change already in this regard but maybe I just need to focus on stuff happening BoH.
There are small greenshoots I see, like the trading of picks to get caddy and the pick swap with the Dees, these are the sort of things our previous regime would never entertain.
But the frustration is how much the last 2 years have been a transition from old to new regime. Alot of moves with list management that contradict other moves and what the coach has said publicly, that basically means new regime has one arm tied behind its back.

This is what I wish more people would accept, most of the necessary change will only take place behind the scenes and aside from some newsworthy personnel changes unless you have a mate ITK you won't hear about it. We likely won't know it's taken place until a few years from now if/when the effects become obvious on field.

I'm not surprised it's taken two years to transition and we may well still be in transition in the coming year. Entrenched cultures die hard, it will take however long it's going to take.

Even if the current regime isn't taking us in the exact right direction at least they're breaking the back of Old Essendon so hopefully any future changes become a lot easier to enact.

 

[Keystone agony]

The last paragraph is key for me. Still hearing people even now claim that the list is only x or y factors away from contending and it makes me want to pull my hair out. (One saving grace is I saw Robbo stating in the Sun that we need to go backwards to go forwards so at least that's one prominent voice that has accepted where the list is ....for now).

I really expected Scott to be an agent for change already in this regard but maybe I just need to focus on stuff happening BoH.
There are small greenshoots I see, like the trading of picks to get caddy and the pick swap with the Dees, these are the sort of things our previous regime would never entertain.
But the frustration is how much the last 2 years have been a transition from old to new regime. Alot of moves with list management that contradict other moves and what the coach has said publicly, that basically means new regime has one arm tied behind its back.

Which moves contradict?

Also the old regime was the trade of pick for caddy and the new regime was the trade that just went down. Both arent the new regime

 

[Keystone agony]

What has become pretty clear over the last few months is rebuilding the list couldn’t happen with Dodoro there, and so is only starting now.

So many wasted years, what a mess.

He was literally apart of rebuilding the list 3-4 years ago