So by that logic, Craig's job in 05/06 was much easier when he had Roo, Goody, McLeod, Edwards, Hart, Bassett etc to work with. Now he has a young inexperienced list to work with, coaching is much more difficult and he's struggling with it big time. You can't laud Craig's efforts in 05/06 but dismiss the efforts of guys like Scott/Lyon for having the luxury of taking over a squad of experienced players.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
What does Neil Craig have to do to keep his job?
- Thread starter alex_is_on_fire
- Start date
- Tagged users None
So by that logic, Craig's job in 05/06 was much easier when he had Roo, Goody, McLeod, Edwards, Hart, Bassett etc to work with. Now he has a young inexperienced list to work with, coaching is much more difficult and he's struggling with it big time. You can't laud Craig's efforts in 05/06 but dismiss the efforts of guys like Scott/Lyon for having the luxury of taking over a squad of experienced players.
I think that's the point he's making. You are dismissing Chris Scotts coaching effort/current record/philosophies because of the talent/experience he has at his disposal whilst at the same time stating Craig has had good results in 05/06 with a squad of experienced players with some of the most talented players that have ever played for the club.
That's not my intention at all and I'm sorry if you've misinterpreted me.
In 05/06 Craig found coaching to be a relatively easy gig, just like Scott is now. Fast forward 6 years and Craig is struggling with a young, inexperienced and inconsistent list and his philosophies are being sorely tested. Scott has not had this "pleasure" just yet.
So the implication here is that the best list Craig has ever had is the one he inherited from Ayers.
The current list has greater potential, but that potential is to date unrealised (due to the age/experience of the talented youngsters). Other than that, the answer is clearly yes.
Partly! Though you've highlighted an obvious inconsistency in the comparison
My point was regardless of whether Scott's group is fantastic (which they are) or young/inexperienced, his actual coaching philosophies as highlighted by a quote earlier in the thread are imo excellent and adaptable to both types of groups (with different levels of success initially of course, no one's denying that).
In stark contrast, Craig's philosophy/game plan appears shocking for young players, is outdated, and even with a good list couldn't withstand finals pressure time and again.
My comparison was regarding coaching philosophy and tactical approach, regardless of the list (which in Craig's case is a massive flaw as his plan can only be reasonably good with an experienced list full of A graders). Not a development coach or a coach that can get his team over the final hurdles...sounds like a recipe for disaster.
Yes, no doubt his philosophies and game style will be tested but basically they are simply better.
We've seen that his philosophy works well with Geelong's current team. We have no idea how it will work when he has a less talented/experienced group of players.
Craig's philosophy worked quite well when he had a mature & hardened list to work with, noting that our list in 05/06 (it's peak under Craig) was nowhere near as good as Geelong's list from 07-11. Craig's philosoply has fallen apart completely with a younger/less experienced list, in environment where his tactics are no longer "cutting edge".
I don't think this is necessarily true. I still think that overall, in terms of genuine talent, this current list still is more talented than the one that Craig took over with the major difference being that the side that Craig inherited was a)full of hardened, big bodied experienced players and b) more importantly had a handful of the greatest players to ever play for this club still playing high quality football.
The problem is that as these players have left and as the game has changed and progressed over the subsequent years, Craig's coaching and footballing philosophies have been found to be significantly flawed in current day AFL footy and Craig has shown a complete unwillingness to change his philosophies in the wake of changes in the way modern football is played and a very young and inexperienced list. Successful long term AFL coaches have to show an ability to be flexible and move with the times as gameplans and football fads change and as the players they have at their disposal changes. Pagan would never have created "Pagan's Paddock" if his centre half forward was Ian Perrie instead of Wayne Carey.
Craig doesn't seem to take into account the skill sets and natural talents of the players on his list and devise a gameplan based around his philosophies combined with the specific players he has to work with. The players must fit into the gameplan not vice versa. The gameplan will work whether we play Collingwood or Gold Coast, whether it's Round 1, a Showdown or an Elimination Final and if it fails, well the players aren't executing it well enough so instead of making some match day changes, we will strive to implement our gameplan better.
If he has any future at this club after 2011 ( which I highly doubt) he needs to show some geunine flexibility in his gameplan and in his match day coaching, He needs to show an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of our current list and implement a gameplan around this. He needs to start selecting the guys with genuine talent and allowing that talent to develop at AFL level which includes having the guts to play players in high pressure areas where they will end up playing for the rest of their careers eg Danger and Sloane in the guts when the game is on the line.
Yes it has - the concern is that Craig does not seem to realise/accept this and therefore does not show any willingness to change his philosophies in light of the younger list, when it appears clear to most football observers that it is clearly not working. That is a major flaw in his coaching ethos and should be a major factor in determining whether or not he has a future post 2011.
Beautifully put srv23.
This idea that the list now has more talent than the one Craig had in 2005 is crap. With hindsight it may be true but in 2005 Messen, Mcgregor, Gibson, Krueger, Hentschell, Jericho, Reilly, Bock, Rutten etc also gave us all hope they would become A grade players aswell to compliment the genuine A graders we already had in the Roo, Goody , Mcleod, Edwards etc...
From this talented list we now have who is a certainty to be 300 game A grade player? Someone you would bet your house on? No one!
The 2005 list had more talent than this one....
From this talented list we now have who is a certainty to be 300 game A grade player? Someone you would bet your house on? No one!
The 2005 list had more talent than this one....
- Jul 19, 2010
- 26,472
- 70,239
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Jul 19, 2010
- 26,472
- 70,239
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Oh, I forgot to answer the OP.
- Jul 19, 2010
- 26,472
- 70,239
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Not too sure, but I can see who Tippett got his "stand still with arms raised" forward line tactics from.
Beautifully put srv23.
Agreed. Enjoy your opinions much more when someone else gives them to you Vader.
The team NC inherited was a Dad's Army. The team now might be better referred to as Craigie's Creche, or Kraig's Kindergarten.
- Jul 19, 2010
- 26,472
- 70,239
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
And Clarke, Bassett, Torney, Biglands, Burton & Welsh (who were all aged 27+ in 2006). Then there's a really big bunch of B-graders who were aged 25/26 at that time - Shirley, Massie, Doughty, Bode, Perrie & Hudson (slightly better than B-grade).
That's 11 players aged 27+ and 17 players aged 25+. Today we have 6 players aged 27+ and 11 players aged 25+.
- Jul 19, 2010
- 26,472
- 70,239
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
The issue is these blokes are still relatively inexperienced for their age.
What on earth are you going on about?
Wood Duck asked whether I thought that the current list was the best that Neil Craig has had to work with, noting the disparity in achievement between the 2005/06 teams and the 2010/11 outfit.
The observation was made that the current team has more talent, in terms of raw potential, but they are limited by a lack of experience and maturity.
In contrast, the higher performing 05/06 outfit had some elite talent (sadly lacking today) but it also had an awful lot of B-grade players without much (if any) potential for improvement. The biggest strength of that team, compared to today's unit, was the maturity & experience of the players.
Do you actually have anything constructive to add to this thread, or are you just going to bring it down with your usual gutter level rubbish?
Similar threads
