Skip to main content
Topic: Football Department Review (Read 74536 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1110
A lot of assumptions in there too Baggers 😄
It’s quite likely that the internals are in melt down as we speak, it’s just that they had the good fortune to lock the doors and windows when they went inside !

I have no doubt that the internals are 'hot'... I'm just glad it's all behind closed doors. I don't think it's good fortune to 'shut shop', I think it's good planning.

Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1111
I have no issue with major change, but it has to be the right change. I'd be very curious to know if the review is telling the club to sack Teague, or telling them get Clarko if he's available. If it's the former, you'd have to legitimately ask why we paid three blokes good money to tell us something we're already good at, and which we were probably going to do anyway. "You've sacked 5 blokes so far this century, if hasn't worked out, but you should sack one more. You'll eventually find the right one. Good things take time. That'll be 100k thanks."


And that will only really be known... cliche warning... in the fullness of time. Yep, there will no doubt be an avalanche of opinion and speculation as to the effectiveness of the changes. But again, we'll only know whether the changes are right, wrong, good, bad, once they've been implemented and tested in the real world.

Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1112
I have no doubt that the internals are 'hot'... I'm just glad it's all behind closed doors. I don't think it's good fortune to 'shut shop', I think it's good planning.



You have more faith than I…
Let’s go BIG !

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1113
I think this is the problem...
The club want to work at their own pace.
Good on them for that.
But what it does is leave an 'information void.'
Media and supporters will fill that with their own assumptions.

We're shooting at shadows that may not even be there.
I don't think we have a united playing group but I really have nothing concrete to support that theory.
Does Cripps not like Teague, does Teague not like Cripps.
Do Cripps and Weitering not hang together at playlunch.

We're suffering a bit of media damage at the moment but  the focus will come off a bit once the finals start.
Get the major announcements out of the way in the next few days and we'll have some good distractions to occupy everyone once the weekend games begin.

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1114
You have more faith than I…

Understand. We've been well conditioned over the past two decades to lack trust... even to expect the worst. But, I am cautiously buoyed that at least the process (a seemingly structured one, adhered to) this time looks very different. Don't worry, my fingers are crossed. There is a conservative faction on the Board which seems to fear bold change, favouring populist change.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1115
And that will only really be known... cliche warning... in the fullness of time. Yep, there will no doubt be an avalanche of opinion and speculation as to the effectiveness of the changes. But again, we'll only know whether the changes are right, wrong, good, bad, once they've been implemented and tested in the real world.

This, IMO, is true, but it's also a big part of the problem. There are no guarantees in anything, but these appointments have to be a lot better than guesswork. Other clubs live in the same random, morally indifferent universe as us, and they seem to be getting these decisions right more often than not. Part of the professional aspect of decision making is to make good decisions that don't turn into problems later, and I'm not convinced we're there yet.

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1116
I think this is the problem...
The club want to work at their own pace.
Good on them for that.
But what it does is leave an 'information void.'
Media and supporters will fill that with their own assumptions.

We're shooting at shadows that may not even be there.
I don't think we have a united playing group but I really have nothing concrete to support that theory.
Does Cripps not like Teague, does Teague not like Cripps.
Do Cripps and Weitering not hang together at playlunch.

We're suffering a bit of media damage at the moment but  the focus will come off a bit once the finals start.
Get the major announcements out of the way in the next few days and we'll have some good distractions to occupy everyone once the weekend games begin.

Well said.

The media condemnations and criticisms thus far I interpret as, "I don't understand, I don't know, I haven't got a decision to comment on... and I've cracked the sh1ts about that." I say, stiff. Focus on the finals.

Fractures in the playing group don't bother me so much as they can be very quickly remedied once a clear direction has been sold to them.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1117
This, IMO, is true, but it's also a big part of the problem. There are no guarantees in anything, but these appointments have to be a lot better than guesswork. Other clubs live in the same random, morally indifferent universe as us, and they seem to be getting these decisions right more often than not. Part of the professional aspect of decision making is to make good decisions that don't turn into problems later, and I'm not convinced we're there yet.


Yep, living with a lack of faith in the midst of major change asks of us trust, and that ship sailed long ago. We can only hope that the ensuing changes gradually rebuild trust. Sayers will no doubt have his work cut out for him selling these changes to some clearly, populist/risk averse inclined, Board members... who will hopefully, FO very soon.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1118
And that will only really be known... cliche warning... in the fullness of time. Yep, there will no doubt be an avalanche of opinion and speculation as to the effectiveness of the changes. But again, we'll only know whether the changes are right, wrong, good, bad, once they've been implemented and tested in the real world.

'Success has many fathers, while failure is an orphan'

When things work out, the architects are seen as geniuses - cue Brendan Gale and Peggy O'Neal.

And those who do not oversee success are branded as incompetent and unable to make appropriate decisions - cue Leigh Matthews last night.

But in this stupid game, there is so much luck involved - injuries, the draw, Covid-like interruptions - so it's a bit like trying to complete a jigsaw when you only have a vague idea of what the picture is.  I think it's fair to say we have had the wrong end of the luck stick for 2 or 3 years, even though I know some of you will say you make your own luck.

So how do you know if it's the right change?  Simple, when combined with a fair dose of luck, 2-3 years later you win a flag.
This is now the longest premiership drought in the history of the Carlton Football Club - more evidence of climate change?

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1119
It also begs the question Baggers, if you have such a mindset for change, how could you have possibly sat on that board for 9 years !?
I would have been able to muster no more than 6 months at best personally !
Let’s go BIG !

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1120
It also begs the question Baggers, if you have such a mindset for change, how could you have possibly sat on that board for 9 years !?
I would have been able to muster no more than 6 months at best personally !

You're right to assume I am not a change averse kind of human.

However, there are always imperative considerations first. 1) Is the proposed change necessary, ie, does it address a failure? 2) Is the person, company, review or Board competent to institute the change or changes and see them through to implementation and beyond? All change needs tweaking. 3) Will the ramifications from the change be thoroughly thought through with all possible scenarios (legal, HR etc.) comprehensively addressed and considered. 4) Does said change have buy-in/commitment from the 'top?' 5) Will the delivery of the change be respectful of all involved. 6) Will the rationale for the change be explained thoroughly to those impacted. 7) Will there be appropriate publicity to 'sell' the change to all appropriate stake-holders and beyond? 8) Will there be a detailed assessment of the change, say, 6 months later?

I made these up on the hop and may have missed an important step or two. Just couldn't be bothered going back over my 'old' Chairman / CEO notes... and those when I was later a consultant. Ah, them thar the days!
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1121
Ah, the world of mixed messages... or should I say, mixed assumptions.

The media is having a field day with this, with opinions flying about all over the place. Opinions based on rumour and speculation.

Very impressed that the club is sticking with its process/agenda/timing and not jumping about trying to respond to the media's agenda/pressure & sensational needs.

Personally more than happy to wait until things actually happen rather than speculate, 2nd guess and jump at shadows.

Major change takes time and though unfortunate, even sad, there will be casualties and they won't be happy.

This!!

So many people going on about how incompetent the Board is, as they keep changing their minds.  They dont keep changing thier minds - the media's b*llcrap keeps changing.  

Ross Lyon appoints himself coach in the media (CFC says nothing).  Media decides Lyon not suitable for a few reasons (CFC says nothing).  CFC gets skewered for changing its mind and hanging Ross out to dry.    Media has no idea what is going on behind closed doors, but that hasnt stopped everyone assuming every thing they say is correct, and potting the Board because of it.

I actually think they have done a good job of a) sticking to the plan and b) not leaking

 

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1122
It's not about the media, it is absolutely about the Board. Look around and tell me which of the other 17 clubs behave this way. Which of the other 17 clubs have a track record as bad as ours ? Which of the other 17 clubs treat their senior coach like this ?

It's a disgrace, and it has nothing to do with the media.

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1123
This!!

So many people going on about how incompetent the Board is, as they keep changing their minds.  They dont keep changing thier minds - the media's b*llcrap keeps changing.  

Ross Lyon appoints himself coach in the media (CFC says nothing).  Media decides Lyon not suitable for a few reasons (CFC says nothing).  CFC gets skewered for changing its mind and hanging Ross out to dry.    Media has no idea what is going on behind closed doors, but that hasnt stopped everyone assuming every thing they say is correct, and potting the Board because of it.

I actually think they have done a good job of a) sticking to the plan and b) not leaking

The clubs silence is deafening and speaks volumes for its ineptness.
Whilst silence can be a good thing, it must be in context and in the current context that strategy is wrong… as we are witnessing.
Let’s go BIG !

Re: Football Department Review

Reply #1124
This!!

So many people going on about how incompetent the Board is, as they keep changing their minds.  They dont keep changing thier minds - the media's b*llcrap keeps changing.  

Ross Lyon appoints himself coach in the media (CFC says nothing).  Media decides Lyon not suitable for a few reasons (CFC says nothing).  CFC gets skewered for changing its mind and hanging Ross out to dry.    Media has no idea what is going on behind closed doors, but that hasnt stopped everyone assuming every thing they say is correct, and potting the Board because of it.

I actually think they have done a good job of a) sticking to the plan and b) not leaking
All of that is fair enough, but you are ignoring a few things that are getting on peoples nerves.

1. This board started a review mid-season which no doubt had an effect on the way the football department ran.
2. This board sacked Barker 2 days after the review was announced (clearly not finished yet) because he said he was not going to be around next year.
3. This board sacked Bolton and appointed Teague.
4. This board sacked Malthouse and appointed Bolton.
5. This board sacked Ratten and appointed Malthouse.