Mega Thread The 2017 'Buckley's Chances' Thread

[ottoman]

Warning. This post is not an excuse post, I think Bucks needs to go but need to call a spade a spade.

No Pendles
No Wells
No Varcoe
No JDG
No Grundy
No Greenwood
No Faz
No Goldsack

All things considered it wasn't a bad effort against a team sitting 3rd on the ladder.

 

[MagpieJo]

How far back do you go?

I'm getting old shorter memory! Well I landed in oz in1970 when I was seven, Peter McKenna came to my school, and changed the colour of my blood! and when footy became a passion by 1978 we were making a few grand finals then, if not winning them! A hiatus from attending meant I missed a few years, and 1990 is still the best day I ever lived! Me and my sister attended together and went to vic park afterwards! Then it went a bit lean for even finals! People seem to forget that MM got us to 4 grand finals, and two of them were rigged against us from the get go.

I said Grand Finals, not Premierships!

 

[TKiL]

Anyone else fear the fix is on with these reviews?
I should say review because only Walsh will be looking at the football department and I hardly feel he's an independent voice when forming a view on Buckley and his coaching.

Murphy wouldn't be qualified to do it either given his background isn't in football administration but couldn't we have appointed someone from outside the club who does like Dunstall for example?

I'm concerned that just like the AFL appointed tribunal ultimately found Essendon not guilty the best way to produce the ace up your sleeve, to achieve the outcome you desire, is to stack the deck from the start.

Obviously Walsh, being an employee is not independent. This doesn't necessarily preclude him from producing a useful report. I wouldn't want Dunstall poking around our club - he's got footy smarts but keep him out of it.

Re Murphy - don't need a background in football admin to review a football dept. In some ways it's better if you don't - "fresh eyes" etc- need a forensic analyst who can join the dots and write a report in plain English. I googled Murphy's background - despite his connection with Cwood I'd be confident he will produce a useful report on what he's reviewing - depends somewhat on the Emperor's terms of reference. Then depends on whether the Club is prepared to act on any unpalatable findings Murphy may come up with.

It's an indictment on the Club that they have commissioned THREE reviews - shouldn't need a review into governance if the Board follows protocols and applies due diligence.

 

[MagpieJo]

Why do we need a review? It's footy not brain surgery, we stink, the game plan stinks, we have good players who can't last a match, we have only a few players taller than my doggie door, we need a new football department. I'll send in the bill

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Why do we need a review? It's footy not brain surgery, we stink, the game plan stinks, we have good players who can't last a match, we have only a few players taller than my doggie door, we need a new football department. I'll send in the bill

We don't have tall players?
Not sure if your police work there?

(Fargo)

 

[MagpieJo]

We don't have tall players?
Not sure if your police work there?

(Fargo)

I said only a few.
Cox, Grundy, Moore (but he weight 60kg so doesn't count) Keefe (vfl doesn't count) white (ditto) Reid - see Moore

 

[Matt_352]

Had it with people defending Bucks. There is ZERO justification in re-signing Nathan. The game plan is Shit and virtually inconsistent. There is no structure at all. He is stubborn and will not listen to anyone.

 

[TKiL]

Had it with people defending Bucks. There is ZERO justification in re-signing Nathan. The game plan is Shit and virtually inconsistent. There is no structure at all. He is stubborn and will not listen to anyone.

Agree - I've just had it with the Pies consistently under performing. We're the "biggest" club (YAWN f***ing YAWN) - where is the dynasty? Dynasty = flags. Not TALK, SPIN, GABBLE. Just FLAGS, FLAGS, FLAGS. End of story. Have a nice day.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Anyone else fear the fix is on with these reviews?

For me, not yet. Let's see what the results are.

I should say review because only Walsh will be looking at the football department and I hardly feel he's an independent voice when forming a view on Buckley and his coaching.

Something that gives me a little optimism is a quote from 'Side by Side - A season with Collingwood' by Paul Ryan in 2009. I can't put my hand on the exact quote now, but it was of Walshy saying something along the lines that Malthouse is the best person for the job and has put the club in the best position to win a Premiership.

Murphy wouldn't be qualified to do it either given his background isn't in football administration but couldn't we have appointed someone from outside the club who does like Dunstall for example?

Murphy through his position at PAN group and charities would seem to be eminently qualified.

I don't think it matters that he doesn't have specific football administration experience. Think of it like an accountancy firm being able to do annual audits of large companies - the auditor might not know the intracies of how to kick a footy or making Tim Tams or how to cut people's hair - but the principles of business are much the same. Specifically in Collingwood's case it's a not-for-profit business which is a distinctly different kind of business, and it would seem that Peter Murphy has some experience with that.

Peter will be looking into things like 'Where does the money come from?' and 'what value do the various people bring?' (Collingwood employs over 200 people) and 'how do we increase fan involvement?'

I'm concerned that just like the AFL appointed tribunal ultimately found Essendon not guilty the best way to produce the ace up your sleeve, to achieve the outcome you desire, is to stack the deck from the start.

You're clearly not the only one who feels this way.

If these reviews were being conducted by new club leadership, would you be having similar concerns?

Probably not? Maybe there's a story behind that

 

[76woodenspooners]

It's an indictment on the Club that they have commissioned THREE reviews - shouldn't need a review into governance if the Board follows protocols and applies due diligence.

Pretty sure the Chris Thomas review is about board composition (rather than board governance)

Maybe people are stepping down and Ed has run out of people in his Rolodex to replace them with?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Had it with people defending Bucks. There is ZERO justification in re-signing Nathan. The game plan is and virtually inconsistent. There is no structure at all. He is stubborn and will not listen to anyone.

That's ok, he'll get over it too.

But you do know he'll be there another two years minimum?

 

[76woodenspooners]

That's ok, he'll get over it too.

But you do know he'll be there another two years minimum?

We're assuming that Buckley wants to continue to coach Collingwood?

 

[Countrypie]

We're assuming that Buckley wants to continue to coach Collingwood?

Got a funny feeling he's over it. I reckon the Prince delivered the coup de gras

 

[Matt_352]

That's ok, he'll get over it too.

But you do know he'll be there another two years minimum?

If he is im done with Ed. Done.

 

[Countrypie]

If he is im done with Ed. Done.

You're developing a rhythm. I like that

 

[jscan]

The Emperor will admit no wrong doing and maintains the desire to collect a six figure sallary, no doubt.

 

[Roverjg]

Had it with people defending Bucks. There is ZERO justification in re-signing Nathan. The game plan is Shit and virtually inconsistent. There is no structure at all. He is stubborn and will not listen to anyone.

Matt; I agree that we need a change of coach but I feel your comments are a case of the pot calling the kettle black. You basically say you refuse to listen to anybody defending Bucks as there is in your opinion no justification to keeping him. Yet you call him stubborn and that he will not listen to anyone?

 

[Run n Spread]

Anyone else fear the fix is on with these reviews?

I should say review because only Walsh will be looking at the football department and I hardly feel he's an independent voice when forming a view on Buckley and his coaching.

Murphy wouldn't be qualified to do it either given his background isn't in football administration but couldn't we have appointed someone from outside the club who does like Dunstall for example?

I'm concerned that just like the AFL appointed tribunal ultimately found Essendon not guilty the best way to produce the ace up your sleeve, to achieve the outcome you desire, is to stack the deck from the start.

Of course its fixed. Whenever you want something covered up an Internal Review/Independent Inquiry is called for.

Fine. If you are willing to accept the results/have no idea what you are doing and are lost. Given all that happens is a bunch of recommendations are made which are cherry picked off and processes reviewed (which everyone knows what they are) the whole thing is a stalling tactic as we wait for the Great Man to make his mind up on Bucks.

 

[Carringbush2010]

They would be too old now

Hahaha you know that's not what I meant, you quick witted ............. you ! lol

 

[Run n Spread]

Why do we need a review? It's footy not brain surgery, we stink, the game plan stinks, we have good players who can't last a match, we have only a few players taller than my doggie door, we need a new football department. I'll send in the bill

Because the Season was over after the Hawks Game (rd 15). Club then needed to stall rather than making a harsh call/starting planning for 2018. Now all year I've been cautiously optimistic on Bucks (Personally would rip the band aid off but wouldn't be apocalyptic if he got another deal) but the time to sort this out was then.

Instead everyone is waiting on this review like its the New Bible when really it will explain nothing we don't know all ready.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

We're assuming that Buckley wants to continue to coach Collingwood?

He would you'd think, see it through

 

[Saintly Viewed]

If he is im done with Ed. Done.

Ed shmed
I've long not worried about Ed.

His biggest accomplishment in my view, which he doesn't get enough credit for, is keeping the whole club in one united front there hasn't been all those troubling factions causing havoc

 

[Carringbush2010]

Bet I have paid out more $$$ to be a member than you have.

Probably yes as I'm a member from WA, so what? sounds like you couldn't care less - so if you do don't put up rubbish posts like you're previous one. Looked like you were on your high horse so I just kicked you off

 

[Carringbush2010]

My concern is whether Buck's has the ability to change

Agreed and sadly this is blocking Nathan from being a good coach, game knowledge? Tick, people skills? Ba bow!

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Hahaha you know that's not what I meant, you quick witted ............. you ! lol

That's a bingo!