Damien Hardwick [Merged]

[jb03]

You lost me at the idea of even playing Hampy let alone playing him in a GF.

Yeah lost me there too. was a very promising post from Spook up to then.

 

[Carter]

i did the sentiment though.

the hampster is a decent tap ruck if nothing else.

NM killed us with clean first use in the EF third quarter.

 

[Sintiger]

Quote from Spook "At the very least, he's to be commended for taking a long-term view" (Hardwick)

It was our Football dept. who made this decision not Hardwick.

One only has to look at the footage of the 2014 draft when Hardwick looked as if he was sucking a lemon when informed that Menadue was a three year project player. This showed that Hardwick was more interested in the short term than the long term.
When a coach is under the pump this is understandable.

I think people see what they want to see. When menadue was discussed and dimma was told he would take 3 years my recollection is that he didn't make any objection at all and I certainly don't recall him pulling a face. Nor do I recall any faces being pulled this year when Rioli or markov's names were entered into the system.
But to think that this was the first time menadue had been discussed with the coach would be naive I reckon as well.

 

[Rancey18]

I think people see what they want to see. When menadue was discussed and dimma was told he would take 3 years my recollection is that he didn't make any objection at all and I certainly don't recall him pulling a face. Nor do I recall any faces being pulled this year when Rioli or markov's names were entered into the system.
But to think that this was the first time menadue had been discussed with the coach would be naive I reckon as well.

My recollection of it was that he smiled and nodded when that was said to him. Ah well.

 

[millar time]

You may think quoting this list of players proves your point but it doesn't.

Schulz had been a B grade forwrd who Hinkley turned into key forward.

Cassisi was turfed by Hinkley. Surprised you didn't include Thomas on your list.

Broadbent. Really. A foot soldier who once again Hinkley utilised to his potential.

Carlisle v Rance. Carlisle Not fit to lick his boots.

Cornes had virtually retired and again resussitated by Hinkley.

Ebert Hartlett solid B grade mids - Had done 2/5ths of SFA before Hinkley got there.

Jonas ' Really?

Trengove -Solid.

Lobbe - again only a foot soldier.

Pittard - Played 14 games in 3 years before Hickley got there and was treading water. Pittard flourished (and he still has a few issues) because of Hinkley's game plan and belief.

Wingard, Boak, Gray and Westhoff - top players.

There is absolutely no doubt Hinkley outperformed Hardwick in their first three years coming from similar bases. I still believe Hinkely has a mid table list and we have a top 4 list.

Imagine the boosters around here if Hardwick had WON finals year 1 of the rebuild and was a kick of the GF in year 2. They'd probably also prefer 12 wins in year 3 rather than 10.

If you are seriously suggesting Hardwick did better than Hinkley in his first three years you're probably a lost cause and probably someone who believes Griffiths is actually a valuable player.

Nice comeback. Spook actually had Griffiths BOG in the elimination final until he was subbed so one must exercise caution when analysing his posting.

Signing Hardwick to any further term without allowing for the season to unfold smacks of panic. It's not like we're scared of him being poached are we?

 

[AngryAnt]

I think people see what they want to see. When menadue was discussed and dimma was told he would take 3 years my recollection is that he didn't make any objection at all and I certainly don't recall him pulling a face. Nor do I recall any faces being pulled this year when Rioli or markov's names were entered into the system.
But to think that this was the first time menadue had been discussed with the coach would be naive I reckon as well.

Facts don't come into play when PRE mythology kicks in.

 

[Tigertough1974]

Nice comeback. Spook actually had Griffiths BOG in the elimination final until he was subbed so one must exercise caution when analysing his posting.

Signing Hardwick to any further term without allowing for the season to unfold smacks of panic. It's not like we're scared of him being poached are we?

Wow your very perceptive for a new 12 post poster.....

 

[Rancey18]

Wow your very perceptive for a new 12 post poster.....

And only registered 2 weeks ago :hihi

 

[TigerMasochist]

Pretty good posting from the Spook Man I would've thought.

My only quibble is the notion that we haven't underachieved.

Missing the top four in 2013 and 2015 when we were well in place to do so, along with the well documented finals losses, puts us firmly in the underachieving category.

Yeah we have some positional weaknesses but every club except Hawthorn does.

The argument that we are about where we should be because of our deficiencies doesn't wash at all.

We have a battalion of skilled, attacking mids who can go one on one in the goal square or kick from long range.

We have an AA key back in the peak of his career.

We have an AA key forward in the peak of his career.

We have a clutch of highly skilled forwards who aren't given chances (or too late).

No. We should be playing to our strengths. That equals a top four berth in my book.

Look at Fremantle. They have a number of holes but play to their strengths.

Sydney. West Coast. The list goes on.

All teams have holes. It's a matter of maxmising the skill sets you do have.

Hardwick has been wrong for this list for three years now.

Thinking you may well have things the wrong way around Carts n are way overrating our list.
Geelong, Sydney n Hawthorn have had massively talented lists over the previous decade or so, n their constant finals n Grand final appearances over this period proves the fact of how well rounded n complete their lists have been. Freo's list has been pretty damn good n extremely well coached to help cover it's pure elite deficiencies. They've managed a solid run of finals over the years without taking the prize.
For us to achieve finals victories rather than simply appearances, we're going to need a bit more than an AA forward n AA defender plus a bunch of decent mids that constantly fail to step up the additional rung required when finals come around.
Three years in a row we've made finals, three years in a row we've proven that we can match nearly any team bar the Dees, Cats n Kangas during the season. Three years in a row the mids have failed to step up an extra notch during our finals n take control of the game when it's been there to win.
That's not the coach, that's the players. We're a decent fairly balanced team, we're not yet a bloody good team and until our much vaunted n over celebrated midfield learns to ramp up another level when finals come around, we'll remain a fairly decent team only.

 

[Leysy Days]

Thats a copout TM.

Why didn't he change up the mix in the middle if we were getting beaten so badly?

 

[Leysy Days]

You may think quoting this list of players proves your point but it doesn't.

Schulz had been a B grade forwrd who Hinkley turned into key forward.

Cassisi was turfed by Hinkley. Surprised you didn't include Thomas on your list.

Broadbent. Really. A foot soldier who once again Hinkley utilised to his potential.

Carlisle v Rance. Carlisle Not fit to lick his boots.

Cornes had virtually retired and again resussitated by Hinkley.

Ebert Hartlett solid B grade mids - Had done 2/5ths of SFA before Hinkley got there.

Jonas ' Really?

Trengove -Solid.

Lobbe - again only a foot soldier.

Pittard - Played 14 games in 3 years before Hickley got there and was treading water. Pittard flourished (and he still has a few issues) because of Hinkley's game plan and belief.

Wingard, Boak, Gray and Westhoff - top players.

There is absolutely no doubt Hinkley outperformed Hardwick in their first three years coming from similar bases. I still believe Hinkely has a mid table list and we have a top 4 list.

Imagine the boosters around here if Hardwick had WON finals year 1 of the rebuild and was a kick of the GF in year 2. They'd probably also prefer 12 wins in year 3 rather than 10.

If you are seriously suggesting Hardwick did better than Hinkley in his first three years you're probably a lost cause and probably someone who believes Griffiths is actually a valuable player.

Great retort, has Spook ducking for cover around some of the Port player he threw up.

Carter also raises a great point, we have possibly the best key back and forward in the country. And will do so for maybe 3 more years absolute tops.

That is unlikely to be the case for another couple of decades. With the other sprinkling of elite talent around the ground you'd think some other coaches would have melded a team to go deeper in the season than we have.

Are we wasting our window??

 

[millar time]

Wow your very perceptive for a new 12 post poster.....

One can't read old pages? Hindsight is a beautiful thing, interesting reading some old threads, I'm sure some would like them banished to the archives ;D

 

[Tigertough1974]

One can't read old pages? Hindsight is a beautiful thing, interesting reading some old threads, I'm sure some would like them banished to the archives ;D

Absolutely, although highly unusual for new posters to join, read historical information and then attack long serving members in their first 12 posts....

Good for you if thats how you roll, lets see if some of the longer serving people can work out your writing style anyhow!

 

[spook]

Yep that must be why Hawks have won three in a row - their great ruck strength.

Where did I say that? Hawthorn is able to break even in the ruck, that's all you need. You just can't be slaughtered, which is what we have been in our finals.

You may think quoting this list of players proves your point but it doesn't.

Schulz had been a B grade forwrd who Hinkley turned into key forward.

Cassisi was turfed by Hinkley. Surprised you didn't include Thomas on your list.

Broadbent. Really. A foot soldier who once again Hinkley utilised to his potential.

Carlisle v Rance. Carlisle Not fit to lick his boots.

Cornes had virtually retired and again resussitated by Hinkley.

Ebert Hartlett solid B grade mids - Had done 2/5ths of SFA before Hinkley got there.

Jonas ' Really?

Trengove -Solid.

Lobbe - again only a foot soldier.

Pittard - Played 14 games in 3 years before Hickley got there and was treading water. Pittard flourished (and he still has a few issues) because of Hinkley's game plan and belief.

Wingard, Boak, Gray and Westhoff - top players.

There is absolutely no doubt Hinkley outperformed Hardwick in their first three years coming from similar bases. I still believe Hinkely has a mid table list and we have a top 4 list.

Imagine the boosters around here if Hardwick had WON finals year 1 of the rebuild and was a kick of the GF in year 2. They'd probably also prefer 12 wins in year 3 rather than 10.

If you are seriously suggesting Hardwick did better than Hinkley in his first three years you're probably a lost cause and probably someone who believes Griffiths is actually a valuable player.

Schulz was always a good player waiting to happen. Played some very good footy for us in 08/09.

Cassisi played 25 games in two years under Hinkley. Worthy foot-soldier.

Broadbent has played 70 games in three years under Hinkley.

Who suggested Carlile was better than Rance. He's a solid player, as is Trengove.

Ebert and Hartlett are good players. Had done 2/5ths of FA before Hinkley got there? What had Riewoldt done before Hardwick got there?

Trengove. Good key defender. Jonas has been a decent player. Lobbe - we almost gave pick 12 for him. Better than any of our rucks.

"Pittard - Played 14 games in 3 years before Hickley got there and was treading water" (they were his first three years. Was pick 16.). "Pittard flourished (and he still has a few issues) because of Hinkley's game plan and belief." (agree.)

If you are seriously suggesting Hardwick did better than Hinkley in his first three years you're probably a lost cause and probably someone who believes Griffiths is actually a valuable player.

Lamby, it's disappointing you play the man. I didn't argue either way who did better in his first three years. It's irrelevant.

And Griffiths is a valuable player. Your little man syndrome just won't let you see it.

As I outlined, I have my criticisms of Hardwick. But he's better than anyone we've had at least since Swooper.

Nice comeback. Spook actually had Griffiths BOG in the elimination final until he was subbed so one must exercise caution when analysing his posting.

Horseshit, noob.

You lost me at the idea of even playing Hampy let alone playing him in a GF.

Our ruck stocks are diabolical.

 

[TigerMasochist]

Thats a copout TM.

Why didn't he change up the mix in the middle if we were getting beaten so badly?

Cotchin, Edwards, Grigg, Deledio, KMac, Maric, even Martin ranked somewhere between getting flogged to bloody ordinary virtually all game. Miles was the only one who stood tall smack bang in the middle of a *smile* storm.
As the ginger dragon was oft heard to enquire " please explain " what changes a coach can make when his entire midfield n the core of his elite squad is having it's collective pants pulled down?

Then add to that a couple of underdone players like Concs n Griff struggling as well n the actual fact is our overall game plan n systems held up reasonably well to remain in the contest for as long as we did instead of getting obliterated.
This last comment refers to coaching by the way, there are some things the coach can massively influence overall, not much he can do in the heat of the match, that onus is on the players n onfield leaders.

 

[toby64]

Cotchin, Edwards, Grigg, Deledio, KMac, Maric, even Martin ranked somewhere between getting flogged to bloody ordinary virtually all game. Miles was the only one who stood tall smack bang in the middle of a sh!t storm.
As the ginger dragon was oft heard to enquire " please explain " what changes a coach can make when his entire midfield n the core of his elite squad is having it's collective pants pulled down?

Then add to that a couple of underdone players like Concs n Griff struggling as well n the actual fact is our overall game plan n systems held up reasonably well to remain in the contest for as long as we did instead of getting obliterated.
This last comment refers to coaching by the way, there are some things the coach can massively influence overall, not much he can do in the heat of the match, that onus is on the players n onfield leaders.

Well said TM.

Players have got off way too lightly with some around here.

 

[yandb]

I think people see what they want to see. When menadue was discussed and dimma was told he would take 3 years my recollection is that he didn't make any objection at all and I certainly don't recall him pulling a face. Nor do I recall any faces being pulled this year when Rioli or markov's names were entered into the system.
But to think that this was the first time menadue had been discussed with the coach would be naive I reckon as well.

I actually recorded the program on Fox so I can confirm it did occur despite your recollection. But to confirm part of your recollection he did not voice any dissent but pulled a sour face.

 

[Leysy Days]

Cotchin, Edwards, Grigg, Deledio, KMac, Maric, even Martin ranked somewhere between getting flogged to bloody ordinary virtually all game. Miles was the only one who stood tall smack bang in the middle of a sh!t storm.
As the ginger dragon was oft heard to enquire " please explain " what changes a coach can make when his entire midfield n the core of his elite squad is having it's collective pants pulled down?

Then add to that a couple of underdone players like Concs n Griff struggling as well n the actual fact is our overall game plan n systems held up reasonably well to remain in the contest for as long as we did instead of getting obliterated.
This last comment refers to coaching by the way, there are some things the coach can massively influence overall, not much he can do in the heat of the match, that onus is on the players n onfield leaders.

Still doesn't answer the question of why we didn't change the mixup if those guys were getting beat so badly as you suggest.

What would Clarkson have done in that situation? He would have thrown things around to get some momentum out of the middle.

 

[Carter]

He sure would have LD.

Our set game plan is both a blessing and a curse. the players know their roles inside out but there is zero flexibility.

Doesn't make us very strong tactically when the *smile* hits the fan.

Hardwick has done well to set us up but I'd like to see what a Knights or a Tudor could do with this list.

We are a very skilled side if allowed to move it quickly by hand. The Geelong blueprint.

 

[fastin bulbous]

Blair - 'ah dimma that speed you wanted and really need - you gotta wait 3 years'
Dimma -