Was Matthew Knights a scapegoat?

Remove this Banner Ad

A certain amount of natural attrition occurred, and perhaps Knights could've cut back harder, but Sheedy had debuted Gumbleton, Hocking, Reimers, Jetta, Davey, Neagle, Houli & Hislop in 2007. Knights retained all of those and followed with Pears, Hooker, Bellchambers, Myers, Daniher, Atkinson, Williams & Magin the following year. 16 newcomers over two seasons is a new broom; Terry Wallace, who was supposedly rebuilding, introduced just 6 new players in that time. I think Knights made bigger calls than Hird has done to date. Perhaps Hird lacked faith in Essendon's recruiters in the face of a compromised draft?

Knights 1 - Bolton (28), Bradley (21), Camporeale (32), Cole (24), Heffernan (28), Hird (34), M.Johnson (29), McKinnon (20)

Knights 2 - Chartres (23), Dick (19), Hislop (20), Johns (24), J.Johnson (30), Lee (22), Michael (31), Peverill (29), Ramanauskas (27)

Knights 3 - Carroll (19), German (19), Klemke (19), Lloyd (31), Lovett (26), Lucas (31), Magin (20), McPhee (27), Nash (24), Skipworth (27)

Hird 1 - Atkinson (25), Bock (20), Houli (22), Laycock (26), Marigliani (24), Still (19), Williams (22)

Playing very well for the Tigers off the half-back line.
 
Could not agree more with this. The way Sheedy left the club was disgraceful.. so many old players lack of youth and there was very little to work with. Sheedy never looked to the future he was only concerned about on field results and current team performance. Knights was left with crap and naturally essendon supporters would not blame their great legend Sheedy.

I dont reckon Sheedy is as good as what everyone thought particularly in the latter stages of his reign. Okay he won 4 premierships but considering the list that he had in the late 90s and early 2000s, to only get one premiership from that i thought was a massive underachievment.

Yep, but in many ways Sheeds was a victim of his own unwavering optimism. He always believed we were close to a flag and continued to collect experienced "top-up" players to try and a plug a hole or two. Problem was he had so much power at the club there was no-one to tell him it wasn't working. Had he culled the list over 05-07 and begun the re-building process he could still very well be coaching us today.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

They have a young list so they should improve each year, add to that a new super expensive coaching team and they should improve by at least 15 percent.

So far no improvement, looks a woeful waste of money.

This time last year after 11 games we had scored 1005 pts for and 1065 pts against for a percentage of 94.3.

This year after 11 games we have scored 1124 pts for and 944 pts against for a percentage of 119.
 
Playing very well for the Tigers off the half-back line.

Not having watched him closely before and therefore not expecting much, have been pleasantly surprised by his skill level. :thumbsu:

Without favorable trades it is hard to turf out any more players than what Hird has done, especially in a compromised draft. Rather than Hird lacking faith in the recruiters, perhaps the recruiters lacked faith in the draft pool? We may just be better off with a Lovett-Murray than a 6th/7th round pick?

Maybe. Maybe Hird wanted to show faith in some older players who were reportedly unhappy under Knights.

Pretty sure Essendon turned down an offer of pick 40-something for Houli since they didn't plan on using it?
 
Knights 1 - Bolton (28), Bradley (21), Camporeale (32), Cole (24), Heffernan (28), Hird (34), M.Johnson (29), McKinnon (20)

Knights 2 - Chartres (23), Dick (19), Hislop (20), Johns (24), J.Johnson (30), Lee (22), Michael (31), Peverill (29), Ramanauskas (27)

Knights 3 - Carroll (19), German (19), Klemke (19), Lloyd (31), Lovett (26), Lucas (31), Magin (20), McPhee (27), Nash (24), Skipworth (27)

Hird 1 - Atkinson (25), Bock (20), Houli (22), Laycock (26), Marigliani (24), Still (19), Williams (22)

27 players in 3 years, plus 7 the next and how many more to go? Just highlights what he had when he took over. Essendon had serious personnel issues during Knights stint, too many players just not up to the standard. You can argue that his gameplan was not going to be successful but when you have so many players making basic errors time and time again there isn't a lot you can do. It will take Hird a couple of years to turn them into a genuine contender, their early season form probably took us by surprise but it important to remember that they have had flashes of brilliance the last couple seasons.
 
Ofcourse he was.

But what I don't get is where is the scrutiny for the board which appointed and sacked Knights and then appointed Hird with no prior coaching experience whatsoever? Very, very amateur.

Hird (like Michael Voss) was a phenomenal player. Why does that automatically mean he'll be a great coach? I honestly thought after Voss at Brisbane that nobody would make the mistake of appointing a coach with zero experience. I was wrong and Bomber fans, you should seriously be questioning your board. Hird may or may not be the messiah you hope for but if he is, its not because of his playing career. And it won't be anytime soon either.
 
It was spoken of quite a lot after Hird took over, he retained as many as possible to really see first hand where the list was at. Probably a bit of a backhand to Knights/previous coaching line up. His opinion may have been they weren't being properly developed and what they had shown wasn't indicative of their talent.

Since Hird and co have taken over we have seen big improvement from Bellchambers, Hooker, Jetta, Myers, Hocking, Hardingham, Crameri, Howlett, Zaharakis, Lonergan, and Dempsey (for the small time before his knee). We didn't see anywhere near that much under Knights over his whole three years.
 
This time last year after 11 games we had scored 1005 pts for and 1065 pts against for a percentage of 94.3.

This year after 11 games we have scored 1124 pts for and 944 pts against for a percentage of 119.

That's what is referred to as the Gold Coast factor :)
 
LOL. Imagine the the threads that would be up on BF about Matthew Knights if he was still coaching.

He would be universally decried as a dud. And there would be endless posts calling for him to get the sack.

Knights was hard done by - like many ex-coaches. But spare us the crocodile tears. Most of the people expressing sympathy for him are concern trolls.
 
Since Hird and co have taken over we have seen big improvement from Bellchambers, Hooker, Jetta, Myers, Hocking, Hardingham, Crameri, Howlett, Zaharakis, Lonergan, and Dempsey (for the small time before his knee). We didn't see anywhere near that much under Knights over his whole three years.

I'll concede the ones who appeared to have stagnated under Knights, but not Zaharakis or the sub-15-gamers who'd shown a bit already in their handful of matches.

While most questioned the viability of the midfield, I don't think anyone who looked seriously at Essendon's list doubted that it contained some young talent, and I certainly don't think they've gone backwards under Hird. But question marks remain over the older players, from Monfries (24) up. With the initial flush of patriotic fervour subsiding, it'll be interesting to see whether Hird can actually integrate those blokes into a serious unit, or whether he needs to scale back the list and turn to draftees to take the club forward.
 
Knights had to provide some value for the money he was about to get for not coaching. The Essendon Board's job isn't about ensuring that a coach that they are about to sack is treated fairly, their concern is about what is best for the club. When the sums were added up, Knights only saving grace would have been if there was no replacement available and even then the members attitudes were being expressed such that the board would have probably gone into this season without a coach rather than keep Knights if Hird didn't put his hand up.

As to karma catching up with Hird, what has he done wrong? (in a moral sense, not in a coaching sense). The club he played at was imploding and going backwards (not necessarily Knights' fault but he didn't alleviate the situation). Important people at the club were probably telling him that they would walk out on the club if Knights remained, he chose to do what he could and his role is to be a knight in shining armour figurehead type role, the assistant coaches can coach but Hird is to be the face of the club. Members are happy, therefore sponsors are happy, therefore the board is happier. The worst case scenario is that the Hird aura gives the club two or three seasons of grace before dissent in the ranks starts entering the public arena again. Hird needs to have tangible results before then to kill it before it starts ie he needs his coaching role to support the aura rather than still be relying on the aura from his playing days.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

We are half way through a season and Essendon are 8th, possibly a couple of ladder positions north of where they should be. They are an 8th to 12th team.

Did anyone expect any diffrerent from a very average and uninspiring team? Hird is a gamble in that they can't play the Hird card again but the jury is still out. I think he'll fall on his rearend because he is not a coach in truth and Essendon will be in turmoil next year but that is only my view. We'll see.
 
This is the reason why I reserve judgement on teams until about 10 weeks into the season...

There are so many variables such as fitness levels,draw and injuries with some teams able to prepare their players and get their fitness levels and injury recovery from end of season surgery up to peak performance earlier than teams that play deep into finals.

I think this is one reason why invariably we always see 1-2 teams who struggled the year before push good sides at the start of the season...
Of course,it's not the only reason.....Natural development of younger players has a lot to do with it as well.

Have the Bombers improved?
Yes,I think they have...They had to after the insipid second half to the season in 2010....Whether that was down to the coach losing the players,game plan or just not enough developed talent on the list.....They had to come out for the start of this season on fire.
They had to win their fans back as well.....
The appointment of Hird and the way they played to first 6-8 weeks of the season has done that.
As long as coaches and fans keep seeing improvement ,even incremental improvement at this stage, I think they would/should be happy.

The club knows better than anyone, be it fans ,media and so on what their expectations for the club were at the start of the season.
If you look at their list,most people would not have had them playing finals this year.

As I stated earlier I think it's about continuous improvement and development however incremental at this stage for the bombers.
 
No bigger ego than essendons CEO, he just wanted the big name for memberships etc.

The process re hird was pathetic and so far has been a massive failure.

Are essendon better than 2009 when they made the finals?
 
It seems that may be one of the worst decisions Matty Knights era was to appoint Scott Camporeale... Seeing a lot of similarities at ADelaide right now.

I expect a pretty big clean out at the end of this year and I'll be judging Hirdy after 3 years, not 11 games.
 
It seems that may be one of the worst decisions Matty Knights era was to appoint Scott Camporeale... Seeing a lot of similarities at ADelaide right now.

I expect a pretty big clean out at the end of this year and I'll be judging Hirdy after 3 years, not 11 games.

Its better that way. A lot of Essendon supporters I remember were judging Knights harshly before he coached his first game.
 
Obvious troll is obvious.

"Scapegoat" (noun) = a person or group made to bear the blame for others.

Knights wasn't a scapegoat. He earned the right to be asked to leave forthwith all by and for himself. He should be very grateful he was so well rewarded financially.

I'm not sure how Hird (who has been left to pick up the wreckage of Knights' mishandling of the list) couldn't be seen as a superior choice for Essendon.

Incidentally, for those saying Knights had a bad run with injuries: I'm really curious about that. Didn't Essendon have a far better run with injury last year than they have already had this season? Gumbleton, Pears, Watson, Hocking, Fletcher, Stanton, Winderlich, Dempsey etc (who are all keys for the Bombers) would all have played for longer periods last year than to the same stage this year, wouldn't they?
 
To an extent you could argue yes, bombers list just isnt that good.

But i don't think its that bad either. Matthew Knights had his chance, he failed so he was sacked and paid out. Not the first or the last time that's happened in AFL footy. The media has overblown the hype about Essendon from the very start of the year. James knows better than anyone that this list needs a lot of work and thats what this year would be about. He'll get the time to do his job but if he fails too then just like anyone else he will be sacked.
 
Have Essendon improved or just copied a game plan to be like everyone else?
Wasn't the criticism of Knights game plan not player development?
Game plan is just a carbon copy of last years Pies blue print, how's player development going under Hird/Bomber?

Ryder - stagnant
Stanton - backwards
Bellchambers - forwards, but now dropped?
 
Not a scape goat .
Some of the players played as though were being coached by him yesterday.
Some lacked the guts to be at the ball first, they didnt run in a straight line to the ball to get there first, they lacked the passion .

Hird and co had better re-educate them on the finer points on getting to the ball first and the rules of the game.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Was Matthew Knights a scapegoat?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top