Is Wallace Right? | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Is Wallace Right?

Thank heavens Poster Diggler restored the spiritual integrity of this thread.

There was far too much logical thinking and reasoned discussion - backed up by evidence fer cryin out loud. I was going to report the thread to the moderator.

Whether or not Wallace is right or wrong, the list is still awful. That hole in the most important age group is our biggest problem. Can't be fixed in anything less than 5 years.
 
75 Richo
78 Bowden, Johnno Brown Simmo
79 Tivvers
80-
81- Tuck
82 Pettifer Coughlan Hyde newman
83 mcMahon
84 Polak Moore King
85 Schulz, Foley Howat
86 jackson Raines tambling Meyer Pattison Polo Thursfield
87 Deledio Hughes Morton McQuane Casserley Graeme White Peterson
88 Reiwoldt Oakleys Edwards Connors Collins

Yes Smildon, there just isn't enough quality on our list between age group (DOB) 80 and 85.
It will take time

But I still think Wallace knows what he is doing because of the numbers of bottom age players at the club since he arrived (the 86 +age group)
 
i believe the biggest problem is structure. thats something wallace and miller have had control over. 6 of our 10 kpp ruckmen thats right just 10 all up and 6 are 22 or under. imo the ratio should be 10 talls aged 22 23 plus as a minimum . then you have 6 minimum in the development group.

the other problem has been the failure to turn over long term hacks. we now have over a third of the list in the so called critical age bracket with another seven on the cusp. the trouble is 8 of the 15 are duds and should be delisted. i think in time a few more will be classified as genuine duds as well.
 
evo said:
Paralysis by analysis.

Theres no big secret to it.Win your fair share of footy and make sure you dispose of it properly to a team mate.

We need people who can put their head over the ball and kick straight.Its that bleeding simple.
spot on evo. this quote by alan jeans has been used many times it goes like this. theres 3 parts to a game of footy. we have the ball. the opposition have the ball. and the ball is contested. wallaces recruiting reflects just the we have the ball part and ignores the rest. well rounded footballers are what is required. a team with an even spread of height size speed smarts and hardness is whats required.

astute tiger you are right when you say wallace inherited a train wreck.
the trouble being the list still resembles a wreck when it comes to structure and depth. i think he has improved skills marginally in the run and carry players or the we have the ball part of jeans quote. but we have gone backwards in the other areas.

to exasperate this problem is the fact wallace must think he is close hence just 3 nd picks for the second time in 3 yrs.

in reality to cover the holes in the list we are this draft and 2 others away from finals. even then we will just be making up numbers.
 
mb64 said:
Tango said:
wallace is a good coach, he is just not a good builder of lists
We need a good builder of lists.
you said it mate. atm the so called builder of our list is miller its his job and resposibility. yet we hear all the time him deffering to wallace. we might as well give wallace millers jobs as well as the coaching gig.
 
Is he right?

Is giving up pick 19 for a skinny back pocket right?

Is not willing to do trade for a bloke who after 49 games is less than a 50/50 chance of making it right?

Is not doing the above and jeopardising the chance to rebuild the list through the draft process right?

IMO he is wrong. Time will tell.
 
Must admit was very excited when Wallet signed on, loved him at the dogs, they were a tough team who played for each other.

But honestly the blokes view of how football will be played or should be played is completely out of whack and will never, repeat never be successful
 
Streak said:
I have thought for some time that the Dogs you are talking about here were Terry Wheelers team, and the Dogs that Eade has now are TWs team.

You nailed it, Streak. Why isn't that obvious? And BTW whose list did Roos inherit? Was this a close call? Simple, sack everyone who got it wrong.

Terry Wallace inherited a fine list at Footscray. And on game day he did it more than justice. He's a fine game day coach. The battles between him and Eade in the day, Footscray v Sydney were a pleasure to watch. More moves than at any time in history.

But Wallet steadily eroded the strength of the side with his predeliction for the under-nourished.

When he traded for Nathan Eagleton he went all out. The blokes he traded from Footscray were Montgomery who went All Australian the next year(?) and Stephen Powell, who was a change mid for the Saints in their best year of the past fifteen or more. Melbourne gave up premiership #3 back - Matthew Bishop in the deal. But Footscray didn't need talls- still don't.

What did Footscray get from this? Some would say ten years from a fine running flanker. I would say a ten year sentence to a pea-hearted down hill skier. And at what cost?

To be sure I don't care what he gave up. What kills me and damns Wallace is the type he targeted. A flanker. And when was that ten years ago? Has he learned nothing?

When Terry Wallace was appointed as Richmond coach, I regarded it as a disaster. I never doubted his game day coaching. But the models he preferred were worse than Neesham's. It was his list management that was terrifying. It would take years after we got rid of him to right his list bungling. And five years to get rid of him. If you were sixty when we appointed him you'd be dead before we eradicated is legacy.

The spoon is not the problem in itself. If anything it may exacerbate the long term problem. One of the easiest assignments in the comp is to get a spooner off the bottom with some pretty outside players.

That's where the problem lies. Terry can save himself and finally deliver on his *smile* sixteen goals a game promise in the next two years (but never in elite company). Then buy another two years to further destroy the list.

He has to go before his term is out. And so does the bloke who appointed him. Before irreparable damage is done.

That's why we should go after Nathan Buckley. Job opportunity.

(Oh, and Michael Voss would do well at Collywood - nuffer.)
 
Dyer'ere said:
Streak said:
I have thought for some time that the Dogs you are talking about here were Terry Wheelers team, and the Dogs that Eade has now are TWs team.

You nailed it, Streak. Why isn't that obvious? And BTW whose list did Roos inherit? Was this a close call? Simple, sack everyone who got it wrong.

Terry Wallace inherited a fine list at Footscray. And on game day he did it more than justice. He's a fine game day coach. The battles between him and Eade in the day, Footscray v Sydney were a pleasure to watch. More moves than at any time in history.

But Wallet steadily eroded the strength of the side with his predeliction for the under-nourished.

When he traded for Nathan Eagleton he went all out. The blokes he traded from Footscray were Montgomery who went All Australian the next year(?) and Stephen Powell, who was a change mid for the Saints in their best year of the past fifteen or more. Melbourne gave up premiership #3 back - Matthew Bishop in the deal. But Footscray didn't need talls- still don't.

What did Footscray get from this? Some would say ten years from a fine running flanker. I would say a ten year sentence to a pea-hearted down hill skier. And at what cost?

To be sure I don't care what he gave up. What kills me and damns Wallace is the type he targeted. A flanker. And when was that ten years ago? Has he learned nothing?

When Terry Wallace was appointed as Richmond coach, I regarded it as a disaster. I never doubted his game day coaching. But the models he preferred were worse than Neesham's. It was his list management that was terrifying. It would take years after we got rid of him to right his list bungling. And five years to get rid of him. If you were sixty when we appointed him you'd be dead before we eradicated is legacy.

The spoon is not the problem in itself. If anything it may exacerbate the long term problem. One of the easiest assignments in the comp is to get a spooner off the bottom with some pretty outside players.

That's where the problem lies. Terry can save himself and finally deliver on his *smile* sixteen goals a game promise in the next two years (but never in elite company). Then buy another two years to further destroy the list.

He has to go before his term is out. And so does the bloke who appointed him. Before irreparable damage is done.

That's why we should go after Nathan Buckley. Job opportunity.

(Oh, and Michael Voss would do well at Collywood - nuffer.)

Amen. Here endeth the sermon
 
Dyer'ere said:
What kills me and damns Wallace is the type he targeted. A flanker. And when was that ten years ago? Has he learned nothing?

When Terry Wallace was appointed as Richmond coach, I regarded it as a disaster. I never doubted his game day coaching. But the models he preferred were worse than Neesham's. It was his list management that was terrifying. It would take years after we got rid of him to right his list bungling. And five years to get rid of him. If you were sixty when we appointed him you'd be dead before we eradicated is legacy.

The spoon is not the problem in itself. If anything it may exacerbate the long term problem. One of the easiest assignments in the comp is to get a spooner off the bottom with some pretty outside players.

That's where the problem lies. Terry can save himself and finally deliver on his *smile* sixteen goals a game promise in the next two years (but never in elite company). Then buy another two years to further destroy the list.

He has to go before his term is out. And so does the bloke who appointed him. Before irreparable damage is done.

That's why we should go after Nathan Buckley. Job opportunity.

Yep despressing as it it, Wallace will be lucky to get us to the finals in his five appointed years let alone take us to premiership heights.

I agree with the premise that as soon as a season begins and a team doesn't believe it can make finals in the appointed coaches 4th year then they should be looking for a replacement.

Any nuffer can take a side to wooden spoons.

The heat is on Wallace massively.
 
Spot on big Jack

The other problem I have with TW is that his only exposure is to little low budget clubs.
 
Michael said:
Spot on big Jack

The other problem I have with TW is that his only exposure is to little low budget clubs.

That's why I'd love to see Buckley at Richmond. Assisting for a year or so.
 
Dyer'ere said:
[
To be sure I don't care what he gave up. What kills me and damns Wallace is the type he targeted. A flanker. And when was that ten years ago? Has he learned nothing?

................. If you were sixty when we appointed him you'd be dead before we eradicated is legacy." quote)



Geeeezzzz Jack - I was 65 when Wallace was appointed. You haven't made me feel good
 
Yeah but you'll see his successor's successor's successor off no worries, Cutter.