Coach Who should be our next coach?

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
15/8 Board toppled (reportedly will pursue Clarkson)
19/8 Alastair Clarkson to join North
21/8 Ben Rutten sacked
22/8 Coach selection sub-committee to be established to find a replacement
26/8 Committee members announced: Josh Mahoney (GM-Footy, chair), Dorothy Hisgrove (Board member), Andrew Thorburn, Simone McKinnis, Robert Walls, Jordan Lewis
7/9 James Hird, Dean Solomon, Brendon Lade, Adem Yze interviewed at EY
13/9 Daniel Giansiracusa reportedly interviewed
17/9 Don Pyke “not pursuing that at this stage”
21/9 Brad Scott contacted by the club but won’t make a decision on whether to pursue the role until after the Grand Final
21/9 Adem Yze has second interview and tours the training facilities at Tullamarine
22/9 Blake Caracella will put his hat in the ring
27/9 Brendon Lade appointed as assistant coach at the Western Bulldogs, out of the running for Essendon job
28/9 Brad Scott to be interviewed on Thursday
29/9
 
Last edited:
It's entirely reasonable to suppose that some players who have been at the club for a long time want a senior coach who is not going compromised and overwhelmed by the club's inherent factionalism, more than for any specific football reason.

I suspect they have seen that undesirable effect more than once and indeed may have heard about it from previous sets of senior players stretching back for quite some time.

But maybe what they and we really want is, well, a good CEO first and foremost.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I can see the players wanted a more tough-love kind of coach for sure. That makes sense.

I can also see 3 more years of 8th-15th placed finishes, and the players wanting a gentler, more relationship-building coach so we change again heading into the 2026 season.

But after two years of that, and no improved results, we have to wonder if “new” new coach is the right one for the job. Perhaps a drill-sergeant might be better.

Rinse and repeat.
 
Lore said:
I don’t think a specific condition holds you back — it’s how you cope with it.

Some people cope better than others, have different triggers, etc. you might have anxiety but it may revolve entirely around your kids or worries about getting sick, those kinds of things aren’t usually an issue in a workplace.

If you’re going for a coaching gig in a big Melbourne club and media scrutiny is a trigger that causes you to underperform or not turn up at work, then that’s going to be a problem.

I also don’t know much about bipolar specifically, but I used to know someone who has it, was a very successful person at work but when he was at home he didn’t take his medication consistently and was really difficult for his partner at the time to live with. It really just depends.

But a psych eval isn’t going to look just for a diagnosis to rule you out of a job. Probably 80% of people could be diagnosed with something. It just comes down to whether that set of traits works well in the environment you’re talking about.

Here’s an interesting article I was reading a while ago:
www.smithsonianmag.com

The Neuroscientist Who Discovered He Was a Psychopath

While studying brain scans to search for patterns that correlated with psychopathic behavior, James Fallon found that his own brain fit the profile
www.smithsonianmag.com www.smithsonianmag.com
Click to expand...
In the best of all circumstances a proper evaluation shouldn’t rule you out of a job.

But ‘the best of circumstances’ never really exists. It’s just an idea. And yes, if a prospective employer finds out any candidate has acute bipolar they are out. No room for determining whether the environment would fit them or not. Recruitment just isn’t that nuanced, and major mental illness still isn’t well enough understood for anyone to take a risk.

I say this from experience. I have acute manic depressive disorder. Or Bipolar 1 - but I prefer the other term. But I can say with a fair bit of confidence that it does rule you out of a job every single time.
 
BrunoV said:
How can you seriously compare the players wanting Teague and Lyon.

It's not the first time this group has asked for a firm hand. It was the feedback following the Worsfold's tenure.
Click to expand...
Carlton players wanted Teague. Essendon players reportedly want Lyon. Sounds comparable enough for me.

PS. I’ve stated a few times I want Lyon.
 
tandino said:
Probably a bit small-minded but not sure I really care what the players want TBH.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of about 10 years ago when Jack Watts was bemoaning the lack of leadership at the MFC and one pundit (Roos, perhaps) pointedly said that perhaps the leadership could come from those saying there isn't any.
 
Tracey Holmes has written a series of tweets this week that re-examines the saga and Hird’s role in it. She remains very sympathetic to him.

The timing is interesting, for obvious reasons.
 
madrigal said:
And I remember that David King said that Lyon is not a dictator, he sets standards and lets the leaders drive the standards. So if he is correct Lyon might be too much a Worsfold type where the players drive standards rather than what the players want a dictator to drive the standards.
Click to expand...


The merit of the position is one thing.

There are a number of reasons not to dismiss Edmund's reporting.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I don’t like the Carlton went through a process and opted not to go with Lyon. Hoping our desperation doesn’t just default to Lyon or Hird
 
Vander18 said:
Tracey Holmes has written a series of tweets this week that re-examines the saga and Hird’s role in it. She remains very sympathetic to him.

The timing is interesting, for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
Yeah I saw that interesting timing indeed. This is what I managed to get off twitter if anyone is interested...

 
FlyingV said:
I don’t like the Carlton went through a process and opted not to go with Lyon. Hoping our desperation doesn’t just default to Lyon or Hird
Click to expand...

Reportedly, Lyon was pissed that they'd headhunted him, then suddenly did an about-face and wanted him to go through a process, so he said no.

Meanwhile, his comments the other night were a bit more to the effect of wanting some clarity about how the process at Essendon would work, or such was how I interpreted his comments.
 
Ok here’s a question that I myself don’t quite even know the answer to. Let’s say Hird does end up as coach again. Whether he goes through the process and is the best candidate or he is the “best candidate” and it’s just performative…how do you handle it going forward?

This is more for the people who not on board with him coming back - obviously the people who want him back would be thrilled. I’ve seen some people say they’ll switch teams, which, I don’t believe they would. But what happens. Do you just say **** it and go all in with an us vs them mentality? Do you disconnect from footy a bit?
 
Natalie Wood.

She's never been beaten.
 
TheGreatBarryB said:
Nothing stopping the players from working harder or extra work, don’t need a coach to tell them that. I think it’s bs from Edmund
Click to expand...
He has a decent rep and has alluded to journalists that go early with unsubstantiated claims as damaging the profession. I think it is reasonable to assume what he reports is accurate - your point around the players working harder is bang on however. Its reflective of the softly softly approach since the saga....quickest way to make someone accountable is to drop them. See Dylan Shiel....oh wait
 
Footyology podcast from today has RoCo and Shawry talking about this in the news bit at the start.
  • Goes through the coaching selection panel: Walls, Lewis, McKinnis, Hisgrove, Thorburn, Mahoney
  • Robert Walls doesn't hate Essendon, it's all theatre. Grew up an Essendon supporter, lot of respect for Essendon, wouldn't have been appointed if he legit hated the club. Been through a lot of these processes before, knows what makes clubs tick, and gives a very different perspective to the others. Shawry doesn't think he'd be domineering, he'd sit back and provide some degree of insight/wisdom when asked about trickier aspects of things.
  • Jordan Lewis getting criticised about the Hawks-Dons rivalry. RoCo says we should be looking at what worked for Hawthorn ("or you should get your head read'). ~~
  • Shawry emphasising that the panel have pride in their professionalism, they have their reputations on the line with this.
  • RoCo likes the business influence of Thorburn, the HR influence of Hisgrove, and Mahoney as the one who has insight into the club's inner workings and recent things as well.
    <McKinnis seems to be invisible>
~ I agree with this to some extent, it's good to know what has worked for other clubs, the broad strokes of leadership, professionalism, cohesion. But it's also important to be looking forward about what will work well in the future, at this club. Hawthorn have been there and done what they did. Geelong have been there and done what they did. Richmond have been there and done what they did. Becoming like them in any material sense will take us 5-10 years and by that time someone better will be doing something else for us to try and copy. Need to have a bit more vision than that.
  • In terms of candidates RoCo reckons no one really knows anything. It's all speculation and it's the same speculation being rehashed and dressed up slightly differently each time, particularly the Lyon and Hird stuff that keeps being regurgitated for further consumption. Usually you can tell when there are leaks and people are getting actual info because names just crop up out of nowhere, but that isn't the case here. ~
  • RoCo leaning towards Ross Lyon, reckons he'd be able to whip an entire club into shape. Some people presume that because he pulled out of the Carlton he doesn't want to go through a process, it's more specifically that process he didn't want to go through after they stooged him a bit. Refers to Nick Riewoldt as a sort of Ross Lyon expert via the St Kilda connection, recounts some comments from Roo that he thinks it's "more unlikely than likely", but every time Roo hears Lyon talk he "still hears a coach".
  • Shawry favouring an experienced assistant emerging coach with an experienced mentor – so his example was Solomon x Williams. He reckons player development programs are a deficiency at Essendon and Choco Williams would be a good one to push that through.
  • Whole thing is related to lack of due process at the club over the past several months in particular. Extending Campbell, chasing Clarkson, the quality of the internal review. ~~
~ I take it from that that these two don't know anything either. Which actually bodes well for this being a real process and not a bullshit performative thing.
~~ I will note that this habit of not respecting processes at the club goes back a lot further than a few months!

Starts around 5 minutes, goes for about 10:
 
Does anyone else just crave a coach who calls it as he sees it and actually speaks in something other than monotone without fear of a reprimand? My biggest frustration with the last few years is the serious lack of heightened emotion (one way or the other) in the pressers! We have had two cardboard cutouts for the past 7 years
 
owen87 said:
I assume you mean the Dylan Shiel who noticeably improved his defensive work-rate after being made sub, right?
Click to expand...
Is it odd that the only guy Rutten dropped was one of his two apparent coaches pets? Couldn't drop Snelling since a) Snelling is a tackle monster and b) Snelling was at the time already out with injury.

Are the players a protected species or something, is this what they mean by more discipline? More willingness to drop players? Or was he unwilling to drop players because we had no one left to bring in 🤔
 
Lore said:
Is it odd that the only guy Rutten dropped was one of his two apparent coaches pets? Couldn't drop Snelling since a) Snelling is a tackle monster and b) Snelling was at the time already out with injury.

Are the players a protected species or something, is this what they mean by more discipline? More willingness to drop players? Or was he unwilling to drop players because we had no one left to bring in 🤔
Click to expand...
I do get the vibe that there is a certain level of entitlement within our playing group borne from the saga as well as supporter group pumping up their tires despite the group having not achieved anything of significants for a while.
Only have to cast our eyes back to the stuff floating around re senior players being upset about Bellchambers not getting a farewell game. He isn't a champion of the game, you don't get charity game just for being a good bloke.

Having come across from GWS I dont think Shiel has this attitude and its possible the coaching group knew that he would respond in a positive way to his axing (as he did) whereas some of the other mids could be more likely to throw a tantrum and either them or their influential supporters could poison the playing group.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

div12ressie
Roast Who should be our next coach? [melty]
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
207
Views
8K
yodellinhank
yodellinhank
TheUnicorn
  • Poll
Opinion Who Should Lead Next?
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
FlyingV
FlyingV
eth-dog
Coach Men's Coaches 2025 - Coaching Structure Announced
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Zach Package
Zach Package
Blind Turn
Opinion Elite Potential on our List
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
250
Views
12K
EnolaGay
EnolaGay
eth-dog
  • Locked
Coach Men's Coaches 2024
10 11 12 13 14
Replies
325
Views
20K
Donflicted
D
TheUnicorn
  • Poll
Hot Topic Who are you taking?
Replies
15
Views
994
Nuggs Bunny
Nuggs Bunny
Old Campaigner
Recruiting AFL Draft Watch 2024 - Check out our haul
124 125 126 127 128
Replies
3K
Views
151K
jdstorm
J

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top