News Mick Won't Be At Collingwood in 2012 - Mike Sheahan Reports

[jonbe54]

You didnt need to. If the situation today didnt involve Nathan Buckley we wouldnt be having this conversation. A champion player doesnt always make a champion coach. The risk is immense and unnecessary. I mean WTF do we gain out of this apart from keeping Nathan from going to an opposition club?

Sorry that doesn't wash - I never declared any espousal for Buckley - you are just jumping to conclusions and putting words in my mouth.

You don't seem to understand this isn't an either/or situation here. We are talking about the respect and confidence players/ officials and employees have in the club. Not to mention our reputation in the larger world - especially with our corporate partners. Reputation is built on dealing clearly and consistently with all parties. It's not a good look to go back on a contract just because it suits you - it sends a BAAAD message to those dependent on or interested in being connected with the club that our word can't be trusted if it conflicts with our interests.

Double dealing in the way you and some others suggests undermines confidence in the club from within and I will have no part in it.

Play hard, deal fairly with all and sleep well or night.

Or take the path of least resistance. . .

 

[Scodog10]

The Wallace comment was based on how situations can change not on how long a bloke is signed before he takes over. In that case Sydney changed their mind after a verbal agreement with Wallace and went for Roos instead which produced a premiership. A classic case of doing what is BEST not agreed to and not for the sake of 1 mans ambitions.

I know full well what your point was! You really didn't need to provide an explanation just because I didn't agree with it

 

[JohnHowat31]

Just remember all this discontent began in Arizona 2010 - noone believed me then but they sure should now. It became untenable then, and whilst there is some mutual respect between Buckley and Malthouse, both recognise working together as planned 3 years ago won't work. Both guys are extremely confident in their own opinions - which they have to be (no surprises here). Is it the right or wrong decision?? Only time will tell. But rest assured the relationship can only be described as 'professional' since they returned from training camp last year. As an aside, I don't barrack for the Pies - but admire how they play footy. I only wish my team were having these issues as to who should coach them to flags!!

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Just remember all this discontent began in Arizona 2010 - noone believed me then but they sure should now. It became untenable then, and whilst there is some mutual respect between Buckley and Malthouse, both recognise working together as planned 3 years ago won't work. Both guys are extremely confident in their own opinions - which they have to be (no surprises here). Is it the right or wrong decision?? Only time will tell. But rest assured the relationship can only be described as 'professional' since they returned from training camp last year. As an aside, I don't barrack for the Pies - but admire how they play footy. I only wish my team were having these issues as to who should coach them to flags!!

I think many people work with other people they don't like, "professional relationships" as you put it occur in every workplace, it is not new nor is restricted to Collingwood.

In essence it doesn't matter, the only thing that does is that Nathan Buckley will be coaching Collingwood next year. While the stories and protestations of the media sell lots of newspapers, in reality they are just a side show.

 

[KissmeRobbo]

This should be the dream deal for Malthouse

He is given the opportunity to win 2 flags after 10 years without one (the club gets big loyalty points for that)

His family gets what they want regarding his health issues and their wish that he pull back a bit

He progresses to a position that represents a reverence for and places a premium on age, experience and years of wisdom.. and is richly rewarded financially for that wealth of knowledge and support

He is the prototype for that position, he's tailor made for it.. and it for him

 

[Jesus Baulks]

Just remember all this discontent began in Arizona 2010 - noone believed me then but they sure should now. It became untenable then, and whilst there is some mutual respect between Buckley and Malthouse, both recognise working together as planned 3 years ago won't work. Both guys are extremely confident in their own opinions - which they have to be (no surprises here). Is it the right or wrong decision?? Only time will tell. But rest assured the relationship can only be described as 'professional' since they returned from training camp last year. As an aside, I don't barrack for the Pies - but admire how they play footy. I only wish my team were having these issues as to who should coach them to flags!!

I don't think you know what untenable means. It's clearly been tenable for the last 2 years as evidenced by the fact they are both still employed and working for the club. They've worked together during that whole period, won a premiership together and managed to only lose 2 games out of the last 40 odd.

Remind me again how it hasn't worked?

 

[Ed D]

I don't think you know what untenable means. It's clearly been tenable for the last 2 years as evidenced by the fact they are both still employed and working for the club. They've worked together during that whole period, won a premiership together and managed to only lose 2 games out of the last 40 odd.

Remind me again how it hasn't worked?

Not to mention Buckley captained under Malthouse without a problem for 9 or so years. The whole "Buckley and Malthouse can't work together" myth is all put together by the media.

 

[golazo]

This should be the dream deal for Malthouse

He is given the opportunity to win 2 flags after 10 years without one (the club gets big loyalty points for that)

His family gets what they want regarding his health issues and their wish that he pull back a bit

He progresses to a position that represents a reverence for and places a premium on age, experience and years of wisdom.. and is richly rewarded financially for that wealth of knowledge and support

He is the prototype for that position, he's tailor made for it.. and it for him

Exactly. Am I right in saying that he'll be getting paid the same amount that he gets now? For half of the workload and I'd say at least 60% less stress, it's a dream deal.

Where can I sign up?

Edit: Also, it took him 10 years to win a premiership with us. If opposition supporters think he's some kind of super coach who can win them a premiership straight away, they'd better think again. We're the best resourced club, with the highest quality assistant coaches, fitness coaches,scouting department and suit men. Malthouse helps piecing it all together.

 

[soreplums]

He won't be at another AFL club either

 

[Krueger]

Edit: Also, it took him 10 years to win a premiership with us. If opposition supporters think he's some kind of super coach who can win them a premiership straight away, they'd better think again. We're the best resourced club, with the highest quality assistant coaches, fitness coaches,scouting department and suit men. Malthouse helps piecing it all together.

That may be the case now but 10 years ago we were a basket case and in 3 years we played off in a grand final against 1 of the greatest teams of all time who had salary cap concessions and were the AFL's love child.

Its like a pack of sheep in here. What was right 3 years ago may not be right today. People carry on about the deal is done, however if that deal now looks a bad and may not be the best thing for the club stuff the deal.

The players know who is the best bloke for the job. What Sam Newman said on TFS was 100% correct. The players want Mick to stay aswell.

 

[Shade]

That may be the case now but 10 years ago we were a basket case and in 3 years we played off in a grand final against 1 of the greatest teams of all time who had salary cap concessions and were the AFL's love child.

Its like a pack of sheep in here. What was right 3 years ago may not be right today. People carry on about the deal is done, however if that deal now looks a bad and may not be the best thing for the club stuff the deal.

The players know who is the best bloke for the job. What Sam Newman said on TFS was 100% correct. The players want Mick to stay aswell.

well it wont happen bucks is more than ready he will do a great job

 

[jonbe54]

That may be the case now but 10 years ago we were a basket case and in 3 years we played off in a grand final against 1 of the greatest teams of all time who had salary cap concessions and were the AFL's love child.

Its like a pack of sheep in here. What was right 3 years ago may not be right today. People carry on about the deal is done, however if that deal now looks a bad and may not be the best thing for the club stuff the deal.

The players know who is the best bloke for the job. What Sam Newman said on TFS was 100% correct. The players want Mick to stay aswell.

You are paying attention to SAM NEWMAN???? The guy wouldn't know if he was being boned!! Seriously if you look up 'out to lunch' in the urban dictionary his picture is the explanation.

 

[E Shed]

I don't think you know what untenable means. It's clearly been tenable for the last 2 years as evidenced by the fact they are both still employed and working for the club. They've worked together during that whole period, won a premiership together and managed to only lose 2 games out of the last 40 odd.

Remind me again how it hasn't worked?

It works fine when Mick is in charge. It may not work so well when he's not top dog. I think that's the point.

 

[JohnHowat31]

It works fine when Mick is in charge. It may not work so well when he's not top dog. I think that's the point.

E Shed, thank goodness for common sense. You are spot on - that is the point!!
Jesus Baulks clearly missed the main point - they have worked well in the past, but as of Arizona 2010 this changed, thus making the working relationship, as decided upon 3 years ago and come 2012, untenable.

 

[samcam]

sry havent read all the pages and I am overseas so maybe a little out of touch....but...Malthouse has always had a wonderful defensive game plan and over the years we have always been competitive and he has got a lot out of good average players.. the change in Collingwood into a bloody good team has been the offensive set up who is responsible for this, was it Malthouse, was it Buckley as offensive coach, not sure but there was a significant change in the way we played when Buckley was forward coach

Additionally as opposition coach, we have had our best year yet, how can you quantify Buckley role in this success......

For Mick to go to another club how long would it take to get their players and the squad he wants, then playing in a "his" style.......also he does not have the recruiting prowess, hine, and player support and facilities that we do at Collingwood, I guess it would take 3 -4 years and we know by then the afl sponsered gold coats should have their window wide open....

Mick, take the Director of Football role, bucks continue to grow.....

 

[Ed D]

E Shed, thank goodness for common sense. You are spot on - that is the point!!
Jesus Baulks clearly missed the main point - they have worked well in the past, but as of Arizona 2010 this changed, thus making the working relationship, as decided upon 3 years ago and come 2012, untenable.

And you know this how? Or just going off media reports? I assume you're just speculating.

 

[pennym]

We don't need this sh###t right now...I say ignore it till the second week in October...we have bigger fish to fry..let the scum just try and derail us...don't get sucked in.....get behind our boys 110%....keep it all positive and let's bring home another flag...just one last thing...F##K of sheahan

 

[Baltimore Jack]

It works fine when Mick is in charge. It may not work so well when he's not top dog. I think that's the point.

It works in every other industry, why can't it work in football?

 

[TheFreshBanana]

Personally, I think everyone is trying to destablise us.

How fitting is that this "private" issue (according to Mike) has hit the papers on the eve of finals?

I fully expect MM to be at Collingwood in 2012.

However, as others have pointed we are Collingwood, not Mick Malthouse.

This.

I have full faith in Eddie and the club, and completely trust their word.

The same goes with Mick. He is not the same as Bomber Thompson nor Hird. I don't believe he would be lying up til now.

Had respect for Sheahan, and there's a possibility he may be right. But for now, I am in full support of the club and Mick.

Sheahan's rep is on the line here, if Mick doesn't leave let's all e-mail shit to him

 

[tigs2010]

Thread title should read Mike Sheahan guesses just so its accurate.

 

[WakeUpPies]

Say we win the premiership this year, would any one of you care if Mick is coaching somewhere else next year?

 

[Zahki]

Say we win the premiership this year, would any one of you care if Mick is coaching somewhere else next year?

Yes. Don't want to see any other club get Malthouse, it burns them up that he's with us and they can't get their mitts on him, thats why they're all trying to pry him loose through the media. If he goes into the media, fair enough, but Malthouse is far too good a brain to lose to another club.

 

[Jesus Baulks]

E Shed, thank goodness for common sense. You are spot on - that is the point!!
Jesus Baulks clearly missed the main point - they have worked well in the past, but as of Arizona 2010 this changed, thus making the working relationship, as decided upon 3 years ago and come 2012, untenable.

Is 2010 not the past

 

[Jesus Baulks]

It works fine when Mick is in charge. It may not work so well when he's not top dog. I think that's the point.

If that was the point, he didn't make it very well. No where in his post did he indicate that.

Instead he just said "both recognise working together as planned 3 years ago won't work".

...then we won the premiership in 2010 with both of them working together. Whoops.

 

[mattys123]

Say we win the premiership this year, would any one of you care if Mick is coaching somewhere else next year?

Yes, and No.

If we have won back to back flags, part of me would be quite happy for Mick to do whatever he wants, and for Bucks to take over and continue our success.

But it would depend on which club he was at.

If he went to a lower club, with no immediate premiership chance like Melbourne or Adelaide, then I wouldn't really care, because they won't be threatening us over the next 2-3 years when we are in our so called premiership window.

But it's an irrelevant question, Mick will either be the DOC at Collingwood next year, or he will be involved with no club at all, that much has become clear over the past few days.

Malthouse will not coach at senior level next year, at any club, no matter what happens.