Roast Sack Koch - Chairman of The Redeem Team

[PowerLil]

To summarise this really simply:

1. He understands business.
2. He doesn't understand football.

His biggest failure is not delegating a right hand man to handle the big decisions that impact on-field performance.

In addition, the Board takes recommendations from a guy who has a massive conflict of interest and is in a gambling syndicate with whom he repeatedly has endorsed..you can't make this sh*t up. Tin pot organisation.

 

[Chewy316]

To summarise this really simply:

1. He understands business.
2. He doesn't understand football.

His biggest failure is not delegating a right hand man to handle the big decisions that impact on-field performance.

Well the person he's delegated that responsibility to is CD.

The issue with that though is CD uses Ken somewhat as a shield to hide his own shortcomings. He knows they're a package deal so to get rid of one you get rid of both. Hence, CD consistently recommends keeping Ken whenever they're at a crossroad.

There needs to be a better process when it comes to footy department decision making - no doubt about that.

I'm personally hoping with Warren being on the Board and the Footy Committee that serious questions will finally be asked and not just glossed over when the time comes at the (most likely) conclusion of this season.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Well the person he's delegated that responsibility to is CD.

The issue with that though is CD uses Ken somewhat as a shield to hide his own shortcomings. He knows they're a package deal so to get rid of one you get rid of both. Hence, CD consistently recommends keeping Ken whenever they're at a crossroad.

There needs to be a better process when it comes to footy department decision making - no doubt about that.

I'm personally hoping with Warren being on the Board and the Footy Committee that serious questions will finally be asked and not just glossed over when the time comes at the (most likely) conclusion of this season.

Yes but he needs a board member I mean.

Also CD has clear conflicts of interest which would have been nipped in the butt early at any competent organisation.

 

[dirty2]

I'd smash the campaigner

Yep if I ran into David or Hinkley I reckon I would get my self into trouble.....

And at this stage .. it could be worth it.

 

[Steve Dore]

Well the person he's delegated that responsibility to is CD.

....

Koch also has Cassisi providing recommendations on the senior coach.

 

[Jojay]

Koch also has Cassisi providing recommendations on the senior coach.

Says it all really.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Well the person he's delegated that responsibility to is CD.

The issue with that though is CD uses Ken somewhat as a shield to hide his own shortcomings. He knows they're a package deal so to get rid of one you get rid of both. Hence, CD consistently recommends keeping Ken whenever they're at a crossroad.

There needs to be a better process when it comes to footy department decision making - no doubt about that.

I'm personally hoping with Warren being on the Board and the Footy Committee that serious questions will finally be asked and not just glossed over when the time comes at the (most likely) conclusion of this season.

Ultimately Koch is the problem. The buck stops with him.

He had enabled CD and by virtue KH and everyone else.

However IF Koch managed to replace CD with a hard edged footy person (a Balme type) and continued to operate in the same way (I.e. give them the reign to do their job) then it would actually work well.

Balme is past it now but imagine a Tredrea/Luke Hodge/Justin Langer (he'll even Mark Wiliams) type in CD's role. The whole culture would change.

Put a Josh Carr under one of these types and see his competitive edge come out.

Ultimately as has been said it comes down to accountability.

Koch needs to either make CD accountable for his mismanagement (remove him) or make himself accountable and fall on his own sword.


On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Harlott]

Let’s paint a clear picture here. If these guys were really good at their current roles and as a collective group, we wouldn’t be where we are currently which when you compare to what other clubs have achieved in the meantime, is at best middle of the road.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Cucksissi is hilarious. Such a small peen he has to respond to anyone bring critical.

 

[philreich]

To summarise this really simply:

1. He understands business.
2. He doesn't understand football.

His biggest failure is not delegating a right hand man to handle the big decisions that impact on-field performance.

This was blatantly obvious from the very beginning of his tenure, when he insisted that Port should become everyone's friend. I still fume whenever I think of that traitorous moment when he had his arm around Rob Chapman - moments before the siren signalled a Port Showdown loss. Such a thing would appall a true Port person.

The longer Koch has undeservedly remained in his position, the more vanilla our club has become - to the point that we're now unrecognisable from the real Port Adelaide from yesteryear. The only way we can ever hope to get our club back is to find a way to get rid of David Koch!!!!!

 

[1954]

This was blatantly obvious from the very beginning of his tenure, when he insisted that Port should become everyone's friend. I still fume whenever I think of that traitorous moment when he had his arm around Rob Chapman - moments before the siren signalled a Port Showdown loss. Such a thing would appall a true Port person.

The longer Koch has undeservedly remained in his position, the more vanilla our club has become - to the point that we're now unrecognisable from the real Port Adelaide from yesteryear. The only way we can ever hope to get our club back is to find a way to get rid of David Koch!!!!!

Agreed, koch wanting Port to be every ones 2nd club was the biggest load of crap in the history of loads of crap.

Those words, along with his `little old blue collar club from Alberton' shtick were absolute proof if it was ever required the bloke doesn't have a genuine PAFC bone in his body!

 

[Shaucob_Burjan]

Can we boot Holly Random and add David King to the board

 

[Doctor Feel]

David Kochwomble

 

[Sewer de Lance]

I've only spoken to David a handful of times, but colleagues who deal with him on an ongoing basis - particularly with regards to his work at the Club, say he's definitely not an idiot. But rather, his arrogance extends further than his nose and he can get misguided. I'll add though that it's probably difficult to find a Chairman at an AFL Club whose arrogance doesn't extend further than Pinocchio's nose.

If one were to exclude the on-field performance and strictly look at what has happened off-field under David's leadership, a lot has been done right. They maximised the return to Adelaide Oval, have brought in (currently) half a dozen 1M+ PA sponsors, have significantly upgraded the facilities at Alberton, and the future developments have them on track to not only be recession-proof, but have the potential to establish the Club as a true financial powerhouse of the competition.

David's biggest issue however has been hanging onto Hinkley. Depending on how one looks at it, either 7 years (end of 2017) or 2 years (end of 2022) too long. I know for a fact that the Board are not united on Hinkley. At the same time, I know that the Board merely ratify the Footy Committee's recommendation regarding Hinkley etc. I suspect this was the process because of a lack of footy smarts on the Board (outside of Snowdon, zilch). Now that Warren is on the Board, that process may look a bit different. Even if it isn't, Warren is also on the Footy Committee which has previously decided Ken's future.

If the Club got rid of Ken and won a flag shortly thereafter, I think a lot of people would look at David in a different light. Currently though, rightly or wrongly he's the representation of stability to the point of potential staleness filtering through the entire Club from the top down.

I think you’ve written a very fair & balanced assessment of David’s time at the club. He’s done so much right off field, but the on field results have been unacceptable.

At the end of the day we are a football club first, not a business. If it wasn’t for Michael Jordan, Air Jordan’s would just be an ordinary shoe.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

I've only spoken to David a handful of times, but colleagues who deal with him on an ongoing basis - particularly with regards to his work at the Club, say he's definitely not an idiot. But rather, his arrogance extends further than his nose and he can get misguided. I'll add though that it's probably difficult to find a Chairman at an AFL Club whose arrogance doesn't extend further than Pinocchio's nose.

If one were to exclude the on-field performance and strictly look at what has happened off-field under David's leadership, a lot has been done right. They maximised the return to Adelaide Oval, have brought in (currently) half a dozen 1M+ PA sponsors, have significantly upgraded the facilities at Alberton, and the future developments have them on track to not only be recession-proof, but have the potential to establish the Club as a true financial powerhouse of the competition.

David's biggest issue however has been hanging onto Hinkley. Depending on how one looks at it, either 7 years (end of 2017) or 2 years (end of 2022) too long. I know for a fact that the Board are not united on Hinkley. At the same time, I know that the Board merely ratify the Footy Committee's recommendation regarding Hinkley etc. I suspect this was the process because of a lack of footy smarts on the Board (outside of Snowdon, zilch). Now that Warren is on the Board, that process may look a bit different. Even if it isn't, Warren is also on the Footy Committee which has previously decided Ken's future.

If the Club got rid of Ken and won a flag shortly thereafter, I think a lot of people would look at David in a different light. Currently though, rightly or wrongly he's the representation of stability to the point of potential staleness filtering through the entire Club from the top down.

Like a few have said, I appreciate the balanced view of David.

My understanding of our financials is basically. We had a bad deal at AAMI Stadium because of the SANFL deal. Then we move to Adelaide Oval and our deal is good and now we are profitable. Can you shed some light on that because David seems to take a lot of credit for that turn around.

Do you know when we won't have any debt, the approximate time?
Would this have any bearing on Koch's time here?

 

[Peninsula Boy]

He is his own brand of being dumb. He has an IQ but is selfishly impervious to any possibility that someone else sitting at a table with him might know more about a particular subject than he does.

Take China for example. He was always shy to reveal how little he knew about it. He would never ask about it … not even when I was invited by his daughter to a lunch her father was hosting during a visit her parents made to Hong Kong at the end of 2015, maybe 2016. All he wanted to tell his guests about (there were three of us, all members of the PAFC China Advisory Group) was how wonderful were the local restaurants he’d been to; his guests already knew them well. He didn’t want to talk about the club, about football, and he grew more and more visibly annoyed when I refused to take any notice of his mood and kept asking pointed questions.

He was shocked to learn that Brendan Ah Chee and Jake Neade had Chinese blood. I’d suggested to him they be appointed multi-cultural club ambassadors. His daughter told him: “Denis does a lot of research, you know, Dad,” and that only made things worse.

The atmosphere became so challenging at one moment that I thought of sneaking out to the desk at the entrance and quietly picking up the David’s chit. Why didn’t I do that? I could’ve held that over him ever since. But, I guess, I was the polite one out of the two of us.

BTW he doesn’t like being called ‘David’. He prefers ‘Kochie’. He thinks it makes him sound like one of the boys … one of the faux acts he thrives on. Another, as you know, is announcing to a room full of strangers in a foreign country his dubious qualifications as a “professional bullshitter”.

I have always called him David. I once did it holding the mike in the HK Football Club and his wince was magic to my eyes. “Why are we all here?” I asked rhetorically. “We’re all here because David is in town and he wants everyone to know it.”

Cheers Lockhart Road.

It sounds like he would rather go down with his own bad decision making rather than delegate to others.

And that's the way the Port Adelaide Footy Club has been under him.

That last bit reminds me of a joke.

How do you know a pilot is at this RAAF party? They tell you.

 

[JohnHinckleyJr]

I think you’ve written a very fair & balanced assessment of David’s time at the club. He’s done so much right off field, but the on field results have been unacceptable.

At the end of the day we are a football club first, not a business. If it wasn’t for Michael Jordan, Air Jordan’s would just be an ordinary shoe.

AIR HINKLEYS IS THE MONEY

 

[Chewy316]

Like a few have said, I appreciate the balanced view of David.

My understanding of our financials is basically. We had a bad deal at AAMI Stadium because of the SANFL deal. Then we move to Adelaide Oval and our deal is good and now we are profitable. Can you shed some light on that because David seems to take a lot of credit for that turn around.

Do you know when we won't have any debt, the approximate time?
Would this have any bearing on Koch's time here?

I'm going to tag and defer to RussellEbertHandball on this because he will be able to explain the complexities far greater than I can.

 

[Cheesey Mac]

Do you know when we won't have any debt, the approximate time?
Would this have any bearing on Koch's time here?

At the AGM in February they said we currently only have a bank debt worth about $3.5m.

We no longer owe any money to the AFL or SANFL. On this basis there should be no reason why we can't have more than 2 token member appointed positions on our Board, we should have at least half the Board appointed by member vote if not have a fully member appointed Board. The current Board has no accountability to the members and the fish very much rots from the head.

 

[Kenny_Powers]

At the AGM in February they said we currently only have a bank debt worth about $3.5m.

We no longer owe any money to the AFL or SANFL. On this basis there should be no reason why we can't have more than 2 token member appointed positions on our Board, we should have at least half the Board appointed by member vote if not have a fully member appointed Board. The current Board has no accountability to the members and the fish very much rots from the head.

Very much agree with this, what if anything is stopping us from moving towards an at least 50/50 member voted board? Has it got to do with the license?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[El_Scorcho]

Very much agree with this, what if anything is stopping us from moving towards an at least 50/50 member voted board? Has it got to do with the license?

Koch doesn't want to give up his power, effectively. Cheesey Mac asked the question at the AGM and was told the club weren't really aware of anything around it, despite the fact that we know they've been asked before.

The board don't like criticism or accountability, they'll absolutely hate having to perform to keep their jobs.

 

[Cheesey Mac]

Very much agree with this, what if anything is stopping us from moving towards an at least 50/50 member voted board? Has it got to do with the license?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

I would defer to more knowledgeable minds than me, REH and the like, but as I understand it the club's constitution is stopping us.

I am happy to be corrected on the below.

From what I've understood we would need to somehow get an extraordinary general meeting called to get the constitution amended, on some level this is the AFL (or Koch) agreeing to cede power, which feels unlikely without public pressure. As to who actually gets to vote on the proposal should it get that far - this I don't know - the way it's written it sort of feels like a very unrepresentative 'Electoral College' situation where the Board are the members voting on the proposal and the actual members are only customers (which is a touch ironic given the jibe we've aimed at Adelaide for years is that they're only treated as customers, even though they've got a set date for getting control of their Board back and we don't).

Adelaide having a date set for control of their Board could well be a blessing in disguise if we are able to leverage that into public pressure to return Board seats to our members.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I would defer to more knowledgeable minds than me, REH and the like, but as I understand it the club's constitution is stopping us.

I am happy to be corrected on the below.

From what I've understood we would need to somehow get an extraordinary general meeting called to get the constitution amended, on some level this is the AFL (or Koch) agreeing to cede power, which feels unlikely without public pressure. As to who actually gets to vote on the proposal should it get that far - this I don't know - the way it's written it sort of feels like a very unrepresentative 'Electoral College' situation where the Board are the members voting on the proposal and the actual members are only customers (which is a touch ironic given the jibe we've aimed at Adelaide for years is that they're only treated as customers, even though they've got a set date for getting control of their Board back and we don't).

Adelaide having a date set for control of their Board could well be a blessing in disguise if we are able to leverage that into public pressure to return Board seats to our members.

2028 is a massive season for us. We need Adelaide to put public pressure on us, because at that point they'll be a "real" club and we'll be the AFL controlled franchise. We absolutely must use that opportunity to get control of the club back or we'll probably never get it back.

 

[Papa G]

If Adelaide get, we will too.

 

[El_Scorcho]

If Adelaide get, we will too.

It's already locked in to their constitution that they'll get it.

It won't automatically happen for us, we have to make it happen, and that means we're relying on the group of feckless losers in charge to do something for the members instead of for themselves.