Opinion Mick Malthouse

What is the next move on Mick?

  • Sack him immediately; replacement coach to see out the year.

    Votes: 192 48.9%

  • Let him coach out the year then show him the door.

    Votes: 70 17.8%

  • Sign him now to give coaches and players some direction.

    Votes: 81 20.6%

  • Not sure yet... still too angry to think clearly.

    Votes: 50 12.7%
  • Total voters
    393
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
But we know that, Magster. We know the mistakes we made. Laying them out time and time again doesn't change anything. Doesn't mean we won't make mistakes again. Drafting is a lottery. I keep saying even Hawthorn took Mitch Clark over Joel Selwood and Xavier Ellis over Pendlebury.
 
thylacine60 said:
But we know that, Magster. We know the mistakes we made. Laying them out time and time again doesn't change anything. Doesn't mean we won't make mistakes again. Drafting is a lottery. I keep saying even Hawthorn took Mitch Clark over Joel Selwood and Xavier Ellis over Pendlebury.
Click to expand...

All club's make mistakes Thy. For each club tht has been relatively successful at the draft/trade/"not illegal therapy" table there ae clubs that have it badly wrong.

The point is that you keep playing the numbers game untill you hit the right players. You need the stucture of your list right though befor you keep cycling new young bodies through the place. Otherwise you end up with a vey poor age/positional profile, (like we had).

The problem is not the sucture of the list anymore, but the quality. The only way to improve it is the draft, some judicious trades; luck and time.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

thylacine60 said:
I don't dispute that. It's just the endless chronicling of our dud drafting that seems unnecessary. Perhaps younger poster need to see it though.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree, I also think hindsigt dafting exercises are a waste of energy. But much can be learnt by examining our rivals.
I think we have embraced how poor we have been, and the consequences. Hopefully more resources/science around our drafting improves our chance of turning 2008's pick 40 (Robinson) into 2008's pick 44 (Sloane) in the future
 
thylacine60 said:
But we know that, Magster. We know the mistakes we made. Laying them out time and time again doesn't change anything. Doesn't mean we won't make mistakes again. Drafting is a lottery. I keep saying even Hawthorn took Mitch Clark over Joel Selwood and Xavier Ellis over Pendlebury.
Click to expand...
Mitch Thorpe?
 
I think even Mick has come to that realisation and is simply happy coaching out the rest of the year. I dont really see any massive advantage in flicking him now, especially as it will only be one of the assistants who will take over and theoretically will be delivering the same message. In saying that I dont really see any huge advantage in keeping him around for the rest of the year either.
 
Magruder said:
Don't disagree, I also think hindsigt dafting exercises are a waste of energy. But much can be learnt by examining our rivals.
I think we have embraced how poor we have been, and the consequences. Hopefully more resources/science around our drafting improves our chance of turning 2008's pick 40 (Robinson) into 2008's pick 44 (Sloane) in the future
Click to expand...

No more giving away top draft picks for clunkers either (case in point, pick 11 for Brock McLean)

Mind you the process isn't just about the drafting, but also the development/nuturing of young draftees.

For instance, Mick's patience and steady as she goes development of Cripps has been sublime, whereas the jury's out on Nick Graham (although its debatable now if Nicky G is cut out at AFL level, certainly hasn't really seized the day in the admittedly few chances he has gotten in the seniors)

This is a big problem/issue we have regarding Mick, he is coaching for his future and needs wins, can he afford to play a player like Graham, who so far has lacked composure/maturity at AFL level ..

This is why the board is at fault here, if Mick had already been given a new contract, the likes of Graham, Holman and Watto would get games, no doubt in my mind.

In Mick's position, I'd probably do the same, its easy to pot Mick for not playing the likes of NG and Watson, but he is fighting for his employment future, he hasn't got the luxury of fielding a side of mainly kids, not at this point in time.
 
DaVillaBlues said:
No more giving away top draft picks for clunkers either (case in point, pick 11 for Brock McLean)

Mind you the process isn't just about the drafting, but also the development/nuturing of young draftees.

For instance, Mick's patience and steady as she goes development of Cripps has been sublime, whereas the jury's out on Nick Graham (although its debatable now if Nicky G is cut out at AFL level, certainly hasn't really seized the day in the admittedly few chances he has gotten in the seniors)

This is a big problem/issue we have regarding Mick, he is coaching for his future and needs wins, can he afford to play a player like Graham, who so far has lacked composure/maturity at AFL level ..

This is why the board is at fault here, if Mick had already been given a new contract, the likes of Graham, Holman and Watto would get games, no doubt in my mind.

In Mick's position, I'd probably do the same, its easy to pot Mick for not playing the likes of NG and Watson, but he is fighting for his employment future, he hasn't got the luxury of fielding a side of mainly kids, not at this point in time.
Click to expand...



Agree - unless they have Ross Lyon in their pocket (as the Rumours suggest) then I can't see why you wouldn't give Mick another two years.

Everyone who thinks we should get an untried coach thinks we are getting the next Clarkson - we could also be getting the next Neeld !!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

DaVillaBlues said:
In Mick's position, I'd probably do the same, its easy to pot Mick for not playing the likes of NG and Watson, but he is fighting for his employment future, he hasn't got the luxury of fielding a side of mainly kids, not at this point in time.
Click to expand...

Well we have been playing a reasonable number of kids in the past 2 rounds, in any case.

But if mick is coaching the side 'to win' and we're still getting belted, why keep rewarding senior players who barely touch the footy? Davey Ellard, trooper that he is, ain't going to win you a game up forward. And I've given up my thoughts in the round 6 thread about Gibbs and Walker simply collecting a paycheck.
 
Azul said:
Well we have been playing a reasonable number of kids in the past 2 rounds, in any case.

But if mick is coaching the side 'to win' and we're still getting belted, why keep rewarding senior players who barely touch the footy? Davey Ellard, trooper that he is, ain't going to win you a game up forward. And I've given up my thoughts in the round 6 thread about Gibbs and Walker simply collecting a paycheck.
Click to expand...

Not bad points you make, but the harsh reality is our depth is either wafer thin, or the kids in the Northern Blues aren't ready for a regular starting 22 spot.

Love Ellard, can't question his heart, but your right, he should only be an emergency/depth player these days ? Question is, can one of the kids knocking on the door like Graham, step up to the plate, and prove they are starting 22 material. I hope so.
 
ItsAllAboutMe said:
I think even Mick has come to that realisation and is simply happy coaching out the rest of the year. I dont really see any massive advantage in flicking him now, especially as it will only be one of the assistants who will take over and theoretically will be delivering the same message. In saying that I dont really see any huge advantage in keeping him around for the rest of the year either.
Click to expand...

This depends. If Carlton are close to having his replacement locked in, I'd be brooming Mick from now and allow the assistant to blood kids, which then gives the excuse for staying down the ladder to nab those delicious top picks. Club looks like it's taking action by getting rid of Mick all while not technically doing anything to improve the ladder situation and ruin your draft prospects.

If they don't have a replacement in mind, then odds are Mick will stay until year's end.
 
Is the quality of the assistant coaches that we are able to secure effected by Mick's massive salary?? I would imagine like any business there would be a 'budget allocated for coaches' and if Mick is taking up such a large chunk of that there wouldnt be much left for the assistants... IMO we would be better off getting a fresh coach on half the wage of Mick and then loading up with the best assistants in the business.
 
Malthouse Inc will be at Carlton MiCkarlton for the rest of the year -unless and until he decides to do resign for 'family' reasons. Malthouse Inc is smart enough to have set this honourable discharge scenario up for himself. Of course he is such a good salesman to the nuffs on our Board that he may in fact convince these 'geniuses' that a 61 year old has the energy to oversee a 5 year rebuild and lead the side to success...and why not give t a go - on $1M + p.a it beats any other gig he is likely to get.

Don't forget Malthouse was Carlton's second choice for coach - when the nuff nuffs ditched Ratten for this con artist. Roos was too honest with the Board and walked away shaking his head.
 
Shpeshal Ed said:
This depends. If Carlton are close to having his replacement locked in, I'd be brooming Mick from now and allow the assistant to blood kids, which then gives the excuse for staying down the ladder to nab those delicious top picks. Club looks like it's taking action by getting rid of Mick all while not technically doing anything to improve the ladder situation and ruin your draft prospects.

If they don't have a replacement in mind, then odds are Mick will stay until year's end.
Click to expand...

I hope they dont have one in mind, I want them to go through the full process to make sure they have the right coach and they will not be able to do that until the season finishes. I actually wouldnt mind them announcing that Mick wont be coaching in 2016, or letting him announce his retirement from coaching and then seeing out the year and that way we can start the process of looking for a new coach and be ready to move swiftly, as i suspect Richmond will also be looking for a new coach.
 
Hmm I wonder if the situation around Mick& his uncertain future at the club could be affecting the players?.Other points maybe to not well as we could be suspecting the consistency of certain players across the board at our club, the quality still of our list& our depth& well are the players really wanting to play for Mick right now also?.

In my opinion clearly looking at our list i'm sure like you guys serious major changes are needed it's going to take time, for me at the end of the day& it's just me personally I see it as if Mick is on board& want's to coach still for the Blues, the board is on board& the players especially the one's who are going to be a part of our future at the moment are truly on board for Mick then I'd say stick with him:).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top