Opinion Mick Malthouse

[GoBlues!]

Kernahan/Pratts/Mathieson and a bunch of other second rate nobodies infesting a Board - which no one of any substance would want to part of - with an ex Collingwood CEO peddling old boy crapola ....in a21st century corporatised and institutionalised world - Carlton continued to embrace and suck up to corporate criminals and scum like Edelstein - and still does.

Fossils living in the past ( a past which they as a Board had NOTHING to do with ex Kernahan who was a willing puppet providing a semeblence of credibility to these backroom boofs) wanting to hire mercenaries to do a quick fix job - so that they can get credit for being smart.

So many player selection and development fails it beggars belief. Thinking that #1 picks is something to be proud of - and advertising guaranteed success on the back of these #1's while shoving them down people's throats in old boy nuff nuff marketing campaigns year after year after year.

A crap culture is built overtime - it doesn't happen overnight.

Fortunately, fixing this shyte isn't as hard as people might think. The fix will be on when we see Pratt and Mathieson mules OFF the Board - along with their cronies and third rate nobodies - unless and until this happens we are not at ground zero.

JaB, this image must've warmed the cockles of your heart.

 

[JustaBattler]

JaB, this image must've warmed the cockles of your heart.

I've been trying to get a copy of this absolutely disgusting screen grab - thanks mate. Makes me sad to see our Club going backwards.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

Ratten would be looking stone-faced at this. He wouldn't be laughing, he loves the club too much. But he would be wondering what the hell these knobs have done to the club he loves more than any of them...

Hate to tell you mate, but Ratten and his recruiting and trading decisions are a big reason why the club is in the position it now finds itself in.

5 years, 1 finals win with a list much stronger then Mick inherited (Judd at is prime, Healthy Kruezer etc)

FACT, not hyperbole, FACT - We now currently have a list only capable of winning 7-8 games a season (maximum) and that number will reduce to 5-6 next year, when we delist/trade away more experienced players and bring in more kids ..

Is it Mick's fault that Ratten overruled Hughes and chose Lucas over Talia ? Or wasting a prized first rounder on Bootsma ?

We are lay down certs to win a spoon in the 2-3 years no matter who is coaching us, any rational fan knows we won't be playing finals again before the decade is out, its all well and good to get rid of Mick, but unless we get rid of coach killing players like Gibbs, Curnow, Casboult, nothing will change, the coaching change will only be a cosmetic touch-up to what is probably the most inept run club in the league of the past decade.

To sum up, a player cull is far more necessary than a coaching change.

 

[NavyBlueMan25]

This is my first post (having only found this board on Friday) and so please be gentle as it is also my first internet forum venture.

I have followed the Blues since I was 7 in 1967. I have been through pain and pleasure but much more pain of late. I have read the last 40 pages of this thread today and it astounds me how some people can still defend Malthouse. Is Mick responsible for all the issues at our club? No way. But in terms of his performance as senior coach there is no way but to conclude that he has failed miserably.

To start with when appointed Mick said we were close to a flag and brought in Thomas as an outside mid on good money - the thing you do when you think you are close. In hindsight this is a terrible call but it shows at the time what Mick's thoughts were - i.e. he could take this list to a flag. So out of the gate the bloke promised something he now cannot deliver on.

Now compare Carlton at the end of 2012 with the other clubs.

Adelaide: 2012 lost a prelim. In 2013 went backwards and only now seem like coming back into finals contention. But arguably started with a much better list - so not fair to compare.

Brisbane: 2012 finished 13th. Worse than us now despite some good recruits and reasonable picks. Clear Mick can say he has performed better than the Lions.

Collingwood: finished 4th in 2012 but then traded a heap of players under Buckley meaning most of their 2010 flag side was gone. Have since recruited a number of younger players and are miles ahead. Buckley vs Mick - FIGJAM wins hands down no contest.

Essendon: finished 11th one behind us in 2012 and despite being scandal ridden, look much closer to it than us.

Fremantle: were on the way up then and far ahead now. Not fair to compare.

Geelong: finished 6th in 2012 and have remained there abouts. Look to be dipping this year but by no means at our level. Helped by having core of senior guns. Not fair to compare.

GWS/Suns: not fair to compare because of picks etc. Suns down atm but will finish the year well.

Hawks: not fair to compare

Melbourne: this is the big one for me. Were 16th in 2012 having been crap for ages. Playing good footy and showing real class. Roos has massively beaten Mick in the performance stakes here.

North Melbourne: 8th in 2012 and probably fair to say most of us saw ourselves around North if not better in 2012. Have gone past us massively. Mick has been destroyed.

Richmond:were behind us in 2012 but now ahead, though I don't think can go far with their list. Still ahead of us but - Hardwick has out coached Mick.

StKilda: finished 9th in 2012 and were on the way down. We beat them but I find it hard to argue we are ahead of them when you compare their youth with ours. Could arguably say Mick has done better - I wouldn't agree but it is arguable.

Sydney: not fair to compare

Dogs: were on the way down in 2012 and have reloaded and destroyed us. Lost senior guns last year and still way ahead of us. No contest

Port: were pathetic in 2012 and we saw ourselves miles ahead. New coach has made them very good - destroyed Mick.

West Coast: 4th in 2012 so ahead of us and still ahead despite major injuries. Still not a loss for Mick atm.

So on what I believe is an analysis that gives Mick the benefit of the doubt, you could only argue Mick has put us in a better position than one other coach definitely, that is the Lions. Perhaps could argue the Saints as well. How can you judge a person's role if you don't compare them to their peers? On that basis Mick is an abject failure.

Now for those blaming Ratts/Hughes - they were also not very good at their job. But other coaches - e.g. Port's coach faced arguably bigger problems and still turned it out around. The issue isn't Ratts or Mick - it isn't a choice. Neither was right for the role. Now we also must consider the number of players Mick has turned over the list with. If he had embraced the draft and a youth policy then you could understand our results and deal with it. But instead we have guys like Tutt, Jones etc who are simply plodders like the ones he discarded.

Does the whole club need to take a look at itself from top to bottom? - absolutely.

Is Mick the sole reason for where we are - nope.

But Mick, despite allowing for other factors, has not performed as senior coach and therefore must go. The only question is when?

 

[AceAndy]

This is my first post (having only found this board on Friday) and so please be gentle as it is also my first internet forum venture.

I have followed the Blues since I was 7 in 1967. I have been through pain and pleasure but much more pain of late. I have read the last 40 pages of this thread today and it astounds me how some people can still defend Malthouse. Is Mick responsible for all the issues at our club? No way. But in terms of his performance as senior coach there is no way but to conclude that he has failed miserably.

To start with when appointed Mick said we were close to a flag and brought in Thomas as an outside mid on good money - the thing you do when you think you are close. In hindsight this is a terrible call but it shows at the time what Mick's thoughts were - i.e. he could take this list to a flag. So out of the gate the bloke promised something he now cannot deliver on.

Now compare Carlton at the end of 2012 with the other clubs.

Adelaide: 2012 lost a prelim. In 2013 went backwards and only now seem like coming back into finals contention. But arguably started with a much better list - so not fair to compare.

Brisbane: 2012 finished 13th. Worse than us now despite some good recruits and reasonable picks. Clear Mick can say he has performed better than the Lions.

Collingwood: finished 4th in 2012 but then traded a heap of players under Buckley meaning most of their 2010 flag side was gone. Have since recruited a number of younger players and are miles ahead. Buckley vs Mick - FIGJAM wins hands down no contest.

Essendon: finished 11th one behind us in 2012 and despite being scandal ridden, look much closer to it than us.

Fremantle: were on the way up then and far ahead now. Not fair to compare.

Geelong: finished 6th in 2012 and have remained there abouts. Look to be dipping this year but by no means at our level. Helped by having core of senior guns. Not fair to compare.

GWS/Suns: not fair to compare because of picks etc. Suns down atm but will finish the year well.

Hawks: not fair to compare

Melbourne: this is the big one for me. Were 16th in 2012 having been crap for ages. Playing good footy and showing real class. Roos has massively beaten Mick in the performance stakes here.

North Melbourne: 8th in 2012 and probably fair to say most of us saw ourselves around North if not better in 2012. Have gone past us massively. Mick has been destroyed.

Richmond:were behind us in 2012 but now ahead, though I don't think can go far with their list. Still ahead of us but - Hardwick has out coached Mick.

StKilda: finished 9th in 2012 and were on the way down. We beat them but I find it hard to argue we are ahead of them when you compare their youth with ours. Could arguably say Mick has done better - I wouldn't agree but it is arguable.

Sydney: not fair to compare

Dogs: were on the way down in 2012 and have reloaded and destroyed us. Lost senior guns last year and still way ahead of us. No contest

Port: were pathetic in 2012 and we saw ourselves miles ahead. New coach has made them very good - destroyed Mick.

West Coast: 4th in 2012 so ahead of us and still ahead despite major injuries. Still not a loss for Mick atm.

So on what I believe is an analysis that gives Mick the benefit of the doubt, you could only argue Mick has put us in a better position than one other coach definitely, that is the Lions. Perhaps could argue the Saints as well. How can you judge a person's role if you don't compare them to their peers? On that basis Mick is an abject failure.

Now for those blaming Ratts/Hughes - they were also not very good at their job. But other coaches - e.g. Port's coach faced arguably bigger problems and still turned it out around. The issue isn't Ratts or Mick - it isn't a choice. Neither was right for the role. Now we also must consider the number of players Mick has turned over the list with. If he had embraced the draft and a youth policy then you could understand our results and deal with it. But instead we have guys like Tutt, Jones etc who are simply plodders like the ones he discarded.

Does the whole club need to take a look at itself from top to bottom? - absolutely.

Is Mick the sole reason for where we are - nope.

But Mick, despite allowing for other factors, has not performed as senior coach and therefore must go. The only question is when?

Cracking first post NavyBlueMan25

Great to see someone who can recall the golden years on BF

 

[BlueBelle]

Wont surprise if there is some kind of announcement this week.

I think he'll last the year.

When is the administration going to take some responsibility for this? First Pagan, then Ratts, now Mick. Ugh. I give up

 

[OldSaintsBro]

Kernahan/Pratts/Mathieson and a bunch of other second rate nobodies infesting a Board - which no one of any substance would want to part of - with an ex Collingwood CEO peddling old boy crapola ....in a21st century corporatised and institutionalised world - Carlton continued to embrace and suck up to corporate criminals and scum like Edelstein - and still does.

Fossils living in the past ( a past which they as a Board had NOTHING to do with ex Kernahan who was a willing puppet providing a semeblence of credibility to these backroom boofs) wanting to hire mercenaries to do a quick fix job - so that they can get credit for being smart.

So many player selection and development fails it beggars belief. Thinking that #1 picks is something to be proud of - and advertising guaranteed success on the back of these #1's while shoving them down people's throats in old boy nuff nuff marketing campaigns year after year after year.

A crap culture is built overtime - it doesn't happen overnight.

Fortunately, fixing this shyte isn't as hard as people might think. The fix will be on when we see Pratt and Mathieson mules OFF the Board - along with their cronies and third rate nobodies - unless and until this happens we are not at ground zero.

Good post and I agree.

There are a few foundation principles relating to football teams and success.

I posted one of them in a thread you started JAB. That is:
A coach is only as good as his players, but
a team is only as good as their coach.

That pithy comment is underpinned by this one:
Give me a good Club, and
I'll give you a good team.

So, I think your post is astute JAB. No good trying to fix the team without first fixing the Club.

 

[Windhover]

Hate to tell you mate, but Ratten and his recruiting and trading decisions are a big reason why the club is in the position it now finds itself in.

5 years, 1 finals win with a list much stronger then Mick inherited (Judd at is prime, Healthy Kruezer etc)

FACT, not hyperbole, FACT - We now currently have a list only capable of winning 7-8 games a season (maximum) and that number will reduce to 5-6 next year, when we delist/trade away more experienced players and bring in more kids ..

Is it Mick's fault that Ratten overruled Hughes and chose Lucas over Talia ? Or wasting a prized first rounder on Bootsma ?

We are lay down certs to win a spoon in the 2-3 years no matter who is coaching us, any rational fan knows we won't be playing finals again before the decade is out, its all well and good to get rid of Mick, but unless we get rid of coach killing players like Gibbs, Curnow, Casboult, nothing will change, the coaching change will only be a cosmetic touch-up to what is probably the most inept run club in the league of the past decade.

To sum up, a player cull is far more necessary than a coaching change.

You are pathological, not logical.

It wasn't mm fault we picked Bootsma. It WAS mm fault Bootsma was given a further 2 year contract towards the end of 2013. MM must have loved his game on Jack Riewoldt.

Since the arrival of St Mick we have now had a huge turnover of players. Continuing to blame Ratten/Hughes for the recruitment of duds who will take us nowhere, you know, like Daisy, Wood, Tutt, Jones,Boekhurst and on and on is just a small part of your delusions.

You now say we are "lay down certs" to win the spoon in 2 to 3 years. I do not necessarily disagree. That would be after 5 or 6 years of MM's loving guidance were he to remain. Do you think losing is a good thing or what?

 

[DaVillaBlues]

You are pathological, not logical.

It wasn't mm fault we picked Bootsma. It WAS mm fault Bootsma was given a further 2 year contract towards the end of 2013. MM must have loved his game on Jack Riewoldt.

Since the arrival of St Mick we have now had a huge turnover of players. Continuing to blame Ratten/Hughes for the recruitment of duds who will take us nowhere, you know, like Daisy, Wood, Tutt, Jones,Boekhurst and on and on is just a small part of your delusions.

You now say we are "lay down certs" to win the spoon in 2 to 3 years. I do not necessarily disagree. That would be after 5 or 6 years of MM's loving guidance were he to remain. Do you think losing is a good thing or what?

You missed my point, we will win a spoon in the next few years, no matter who is coaching us, can't deny Mick's bought in a couple of clunkers in Tutt and Jones, but they were cheapies. Ratten traded pick 11 for Brock McLean (for example)

Look maybe I was a bit unfair on Ratts, I apologise, but this club has been poorly administrated for 20 years, and it now looks like it was a mistake to hire Malthouse (but that isn't Mick's fault)

Even if Clarkson, Hinkley or Beveridge coach us in the next 5 years, I can only speculate with a degree of brutal realism that results in terms of win/losses would only be marginal, no way can we expect a Port or Doggies type resurrection until we nail our next 3/4 national drafts.

This is only Mick's third year in charge coaching, not his 5th or 6th.

And its rather short-sighted you to call a 2 game first year player in Boekhorst a dud (who did some nice things against St Kilda)

Take away your blinkered and illogical hatred of Mick away, and you'll realise that replacing Mick isn't going to make much difference unless prudent list management decisions are made, and we make pragmatic choices as to who is running the club at board level.

You're unfairly targeting Mick as a scapegoat, when in reality, the stink at this club reeks from boardroom level and meddling powerbrokers.

 

[chunkylover53]

Hate to tell you mate, but Ratten and his recruiting and trading decisions are a big reason why the club is in the position it now finds itself in.

5 years, 1 finals win with a list much stronger then Mick inherited (Judd at is prime, Healthy Kruezer etc)

How can you possibly believe this?

Ratten rarely had a fit Kreuzer - Rattens had a primed Judd and Carrazzo, that's it really.

I've said it before and it keeps falling on deaf ears. Have you seen the best 22 we fielded in our final against WCE? Robinson, Davies, Joseph, O'Hailpin, Thorton, Armfield, Ellard, Laidler.

Malthouse inherited a bottom 8 list and exposed every ounce of weakness it had due to his game plan, and taken it backwards.

Whilst I agree the Ratten era's list management was awful, there is no way Mick has had to deal with a shitter list than Ratts.

 

[chunkylover53]

Sure, Mick has a good track record and the man deserves the utmost respect. But what has he done AT CARLTON to deserve more years?

No ones really improved under him, he has taken us backwards every year, and we play a crap brand of footy.

Bought Docherty and Jaksch to the club which is a big tick. But lost a few guys who could come in handy as well.

I am also filthy he got Thomas in at the result of losing our compensation pick for Betts. Dumb, dumb move.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

How can you possibly believe this?

Ratten rarely had a fit Kreuzer - Rattens had a primed Judd and Carrazzo, that's it really.

I've said it before and it keeps falling on deaf ears. Have you seen the best 22 we fielded in our final against WCE? Robinson, Davies, Joseph, O'Hailpin, Thorton, Armfield, Ellard, Laidler.

Malthouse inherited a bottom 8 list and exposed every ounce of weakness it had due to his game plan, and taken it backwards.

Whilst I agree the Ratten era's list management was awful, there is no way Mick has had to deal with a shitter list than Ratts.

Well it is shitter, if you consider the fact Micj made a conscious decision to jettisoning experienced players like Robinson, Waite and McLean, and Betts wanted to return home to SA and Jeppy wanted a fresh start at a new club.

We actually have started the rebuilding process under Mick already, what i will say, is that the decision to recruit Dale Thomas is questionable, although I am not sure if it is fair to be too critical considering his unlucky run with injuries.

 

[The Flying Doormat]

Injury.

 

[chelseacarlton]

You are pathological, not logical.

It wasn't mm fault we picked Bootsma. It WAS mm fault Bootsma was given a further 2 year contract towards the end of 2013. MM must have loved his game on Jack Riewoldt.

Since the arrival of St Mick we have now had a huge turnover of players. Continuing to blame Ratten/Hughes for the recruitment of duds who will take us nowhere, you know, like Daisy, Wood, Tutt, Jones,Boekhurst and on and on is just a small part of your delusions.

You now say we are "lay down certs" to win the spoon in 2 to 3 years. I do not necessarily disagree. That would be after 5 or 6 years of MM's loving guidance were he to remain. Do you think losing is a good thing or what?

Ahh Wood has been great apart from Friday night in which he was far from our worst!
He's been one of our only shining lights!

 

[chunkylover53]

Well it is shitter, if you consider the fact Micj made a conscious decision to jettisoning experienced players like Robinson, Waite and McLean, and Betts wanted to return home to SA and Jeppy wanted a fresh start at a new club.

We actually have started the rebuilding process under Mick already, what i will say, is that the decision to recruit Dale Thomas is questionable, although I am not sure if it is fair to be too critical considering his unlucky run with injuries.

Mick inherited those players and they walked under his watch. We could have kept those guys (except for maybe Betts). He probably now has a worse list because these guys have left. He inherited basically the same list Ratten took to the finals in 2011, and took it backwards.

Please, recruiting Thomas at the expense of a top 10 pick was a joke of a decision then and it's a joke of a decision now. It was clear as day we lacked young talent coming through, yet he chose to bring in an injury prone 27yo on quite big money. Even if he stars for the next 2 years whilst we finish 15th and 17th it's still a bust, we needed kids then and we still do now.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

Mick inherited those players and they walked under his watch. We could have kept those guys (except for maybe Betts). He probably now has a worse list because these guys have left. He inherited basically the same list Ratten took to the finals in 2011, and took it backwards.

Please, recruiting Thomas at the expense of a top 10 pick was a joke of a decision then and it's a joke of a decision now. It was clear as day we lacked young talent coming through, yet he chose to bring in an injury prone 27yo on quite big money. Even if he stars for the next 2 years whilst we finish 15th and 17th it's still a bust, we needed kids then and we still do now.

To be fair to Mick, he was desperate to keep Jeffy, but he wanted a fresh start at another club, I don't think we can blame Mick for that.

 

[chunkylover53]

To be fair to Mick, he was desperate to keep Jeffy, but he wanted a fresh start at another club, I don't think we can blame Mick for that.

You sure?

Heard he was having a shit personal life and the club was happy to see the back of him, especially after the brawl incident.

 

[Gavstar]

This is my first post (having only found this board on Friday) and so please be gentle as it is also my first internet forum venture.

I have followed the Blues since I was 7 in 1967. I have been through pain and pleasure but much more pain of late. I have read the last 40 pages of this thread today and it astounds me how some people can still defend Malthouse. Is Mick responsible for all the issues at our club? No way. But in terms of his performance as senior coach there is no way but to conclude that he has failed miserably.

To start with when appointed Mick said we were close to a flag and brought in Thomas as an outside mid on good money - the thing you do when you think you are close. In hindsight this is a terrible call but it shows at the time what Mick's thoughts were - i.e. he could take this list to a flag. So out of the gate the bloke promised something he now cannot deliver on.

Now compare Carlton at the end of 2012 with the other clubs.

Adelaide: 2012 lost a prelim. In 2013 went backwards and only now seem like coming back into finals contention. But arguably started with a much better list - so not fair to compare.

Brisbane: 2012 finished 13th. Worse than us now despite some good recruits and reasonable picks. Clear Mick can say he has performed better than the Lions.

Collingwood: finished 4th in 2012 but then traded a heap of players under Buckley meaning most of their 2010 flag side was gone. Have since recruited a number of younger players and are miles ahead. Buckley vs Mick - FIGJAM wins hands down no contest.

Essendon: finished 11th one behind us in 2012 and despite being scandal ridden, look much closer to it than us.

Fremantle: were on the way up then and far ahead now. Not fair to compare.

Geelong: finished 6th in 2012 and have remained there abouts. Look to be dipping this year but by no means at our level. Helped by having core of senior guns. Not fair to compare.

GWS/Suns: not fair to compare because of picks etc. Suns down atm but will finish the year well.

Hawks: not fair to compare

Melbourne: this is the big one for me. Were 16th in 2012 having been crap for ages. Playing good footy and showing real class. Roos has massively beaten Mick in the performance stakes here.

North Melbourne: 8th in 2012 and probably fair to say most of us saw ourselves around North if not better in 2012. Have gone past us massively. Mick has been destroyed.

Richmond:were behind us in 2012 but now ahead, though I don't think can go far with their list. Still ahead of us but - Hardwick has out coached Mick.

StKilda: finished 9th in 2012 and were on the way down. We beat them but I find it hard to argue we are ahead of them when you compare their youth with ours. Could arguably say Mick has done better - I wouldn't agree but it is arguable.

Sydney: not fair to compare

Dogs: were on the way down in 2012 and have reloaded and destroyed us. Lost senior guns last year and still way ahead of us. No contest

Port: were pathetic in 2012 and we saw ourselves miles ahead. New coach has made them very good - destroyed Mick.

West Coast: 4th in 2012 so ahead of us and still ahead despite major injuries. Still not a loss for Mick atm.

So on what I believe is an analysis that gives Mick the benefit of the doubt, you could only argue Mick has put us in a better position than one other coach definitely, that is the Lions. Perhaps could argue the Saints as well. How can you judge a person's role if you don't compare them to their peers? On that basis Mick is an abject failure.

Now for those blaming Ratts/Hughes - they were also not very good at their job. But other coaches - e.g. Port's coach faced arguably bigger problems and still turned it out around. The issue isn't Ratts or Mick - it isn't a choice. Neither was right for the role. Now we also must consider the number of players Mick has turned over the list with. If he had embraced the draft and a youth policy then you could understand our results and deal with it. But instead we have guys like Tutt, Jones etc who are simply plodders like the ones he discarded.

Does the whole club need to take a look at itself from top to bottom? - absolutely.

Is Mick the sole reason for where we are - nope.

But Mick, despite allowing for other factors, has not performed as senior coach and therefore must go. The only question is when?

Key issue for me is is there a better coach candidate to rebuild to challenge for a flag and unless Roos, Bomber or Clarkson is available the answer is no. Mick has done this for Footscray, West Coast and Collingwood (x2).

He is the best candidate available unless he has lost the players.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

You sure?

Heard he was having a shit personal life and the club was happy to see the back of him, especially after the brawl incident.

Well I read a newspaper article where Mick invited Jeffy over to his house for dinner, trying to convince him to stay.

Fairly sure it was someone higher up at the club (at board level) who wanted Jeffy gone...

 

[NavyBlueMan25]

Key issue for me is is there a better coach candidate to rebuild to challenge for a flag and unless Roos, Bomber or Clarkson is available the answer is no. Mick has done this for Footscray, West Coast and Collingwood (x2).

He is the best candidate available unless he has lost the players.

Really? In three years he has taken a bad situation and made it worse. There comes a point in life - like it or not - where you aren't as effective as you were at your peak. For some people this happens at 35, others at 50, some at 60 and others at 70+. Results suggest Mick is past his peak.

Roos inherited a much worse situation at Melbourne - has gone past us.

Alan Richardson has laid a solid foundation at St Kilda in a similar timeframe to Mick.

Look at what Hinkley did at Port and the bloke at the Dogs?

Honestly you hire on performance and Mick's performance over three years is almost the worst in the league as my earlier post shows.

 

[Gone Critical]

Key issue for me is is there a better coach candidate to rebuild to challenge for a flag and unless Roos, Bomber or Clarkson is available the answer is no. Mick has done this for Footscray, West Coast and Collingwood (x2).

He is the best candidate available unless he has lost the players.

Sorry to intrude but this issue is of interest to many. MM was a great coach. Like most great coaches of the modern era he seems to have gone to the well once to often and is past it. The difference for mine between Mick at Collingwood and Carlton is Brad Scott, Guy McKenna, Scott Waters, Mark Neeld, Nathan Buckley v Rob Wiley, Dean Laidley, John Barker, Brad Green, David Buttifant etc.

Micks final years at Collingwood were littered by dynamic young cutting edge assistants. Guys who may not have made great senior coaches were at least recognised as excellent assistants who were modern in outlook and complimented Mick. His team at Carlton smacks of Dads army and a desire to prove his ideas are timeless. Getting Buttifant when Collingwood had deemed that his ideas had become outdated smacked further of this.

Sorry but we need your team to be better for the strength of the competition. As hard as it is for me to say that. You administration has been stuck in yesterday for too long and I reckon Mick and the "old" team he has bought with him just perpetuates that.

Simply he needs to go. It's not the whole answer of course but it is the start.

 

[passmark]

Sorry to intrude but this issue is of interest to many. MM was a great coach. Like most great coaches of the modern era he seems to have gone to the well once to often and is past it. The difference for mine between Mick at Collingwood and Carlton is Brad Scott, Guy McKenna, Scott Waters, Mark Neeld, Nathan Buckley v Rob Wiley, Dean Laidley, John Barker, Brad Green, David Buttifant etc.

Micks final years at Collingwood were littered by dynamic young cutting edge assistants. Guys who may not have made great senior coaches were at least recognised as excellent assistants who were modern in outlook and complimented Mick. His team at Carlton smacks of Dads army and a desire to prove his ideas are timeless. Getting Buttifant when Collingwood had deemed that his ideas had become outdated smacked further of this.

Sorry but we need your team to be better for the strength of the competition. As hard as it is for me to say that. You administration has been stuck in yesterday for too long and I reckon Mick and the "old" team he has bought with him just perpetuates that.

Simply he needs to go. It's not the whole answer of course but it is the start.

Mod trolls disguising themselves as concerned supporters.

 

[MrsEddieBetts]

Gone Critical is not a troll.

 

[passmark]

Gone Critical is not a troll.

Course not.

 

[El Topo]

Sorry to intrude but this issue is of interest to many. MM was a great coach. Like most great coaches of the modern era he seems to have gone to the well once to often and is past it. The difference for mine between Mick at Collingwood and Carlton is Brad Scott, Guy McKenna, Scott Waters, Mark Neeld, Nathan Buckley v Rob Wiley, Dean Laidley, John Barker, Brad Green, David Buttifant etc.

Micks final years at Collingwood were littered by dynamic young cutting edge assistants. Guys who may not have made great senior coaches were at least recognised as excellent assistants who were modern in outlook and complimented Mick. His team at Carlton smacks of Dads army and a desire to prove his ideas are timeless. Getting Buttifant when Collingwood had deemed that his ideas had become outdated smacked further of this.

This is an excellent point. The focus on senior coaches tends to obscure the fact that Mick is just one member of a team. It's no coincidence that Ratten's side looked it's best when he had Gavin Brown, Alan Richardson and Skinny Lappin as assistants. I'm undecided as to whether mick should get another contract, but the one certainty is that the proven failures "assisting" him MUST go.