wallace and Miller will they bring us success? Yes or no?

[gustiger12]

In 2004, we had a crap list, a crap ethic, just about everything was crap.
Most of you should remember how bad things were.

We've come a long way since then.
The finances are much better, the list is much better, and the boys have progressed from being a bottom to a middling team.
There is no doubt in my mind that Wright, Miller & Wallace have been directly responsible for this improvement.
We need these men to continue their efforts to sustain & improve the results thus far.

My guess is that Wallace is definitely good enough to make us a competitive & regular finals player.
He did that in the 90s with Footscray.
The other side of the coin says that he is still yet to show that he can produce a premiership team.
I'll reserve my decision on that until we get up to that window.

Phantom excellent Post.

It just amazes me that some people (not all I might add) scream about being prepared to take some short term pain for long term gain and as soon as it starts to happen they are screaming for the coaches ahead again. Are yes that same of mentality of "sack the coach"

As you correctly state Phantom some people have short memories and seem to have forgotten just how bad things were in the dim dark old days.

It would matter whether it was Eade, Pagain, Blight or Sheedy. The fact is our list was woeful. Remember the punchline we are just one small forward a way from a Premiership mentality so off we go and recruit a Paul Hudson, a Trent Nichols (2nd time round) and a few others.

We are one round into a new season and the rumblings are starting.

Does anyone really think that these people come here without any intention of really improving this clubs performance?

I want sustained success not just another repeat of 1995. Problem is that many have been hanging on the coat tails of that season, a season where we probably over performed and gave some, some false sense of hope.

I am with Phantom on this one, lets wait for the window of opportunity to arrive. 18-20 year olds wont win us a premiership, but they might as 24-28 year olds.

its a sad fact that we have been forced to start from so far back, but we all know the reality. Now we just have to accept it.

As someone else said if they can't bring us success then who can. But we need another Richmond era not just a finals appearance to make that valid.

 

[Tigers of Old]

I did have to laugh at the poster who suggested Wallace won't have his contract extended. That is rubbish, if he wants to stay at the end of the current deal, he will remain at the helm.

Why is that?
Surely Terry and the coaching staff should be evaluated at the end of every season. 3 more years time is an eternity in football.
There is no guarantees about anything and nor should there be.

As has been pointed out ad nauseum even by Wallace himself, anyone could have lifted us off the bottom to ninth, that's the easy part.
The hard part is making us a genuine contender and as it stands right now we are miles away from that yet with Wallace in charge.
Who knows what the future holds?

Despite his 5 year contract, Wallace still has plenty to prove that we are on the right track to ultimate success, if things aren't turning around by mid '08 expect the blowtorch to be well and truly applied. He's got time yet but he won't have forever to show that his blueprint for success is working.

 

[meltiger]

I did have to laugh at the poster who suggested Wallace won't have his contract extended. That is rubbish, if he wants to stay at the end of the current deal, he will remain at the helm.

Why is that?

On the assumption that the club is moving forward, regardless of whether a flag has been delivered ... Wallace will remain coach. I believe we have moved forward since Frawley's days and I believe we will continue to do so, maybe just not as quickly as some would like though.


Sorry TOO, I should have mentioned that's what I meant, my bad.

 

[Rosy]

I read somewhere this morning where Greg said it's not the coaches duty to select the players to draft. The recruiting people are there for that job. Out of interest how long has Greg been involved with our recruiting? Terry has been involved for 3 years now.

The story seems to be changing to me. First we heard Terry had a 5 year contract because that's how long he'd need to turn things around but now the time frame has been extended. I'm happy to just take it as it comes. Time frames are no certainties and don't come with guarantees, and we all know to expect the unexpected with our beloved club.

I wouldn't have a clue if we'll have success or not, especially when other club's are all planning the same things. I'll still enjoy barracking for the Tiges, wooden spoons or premierships.

One thing that interests me is how well Terry is treated by the supporters. If it was Danny coaching the chip around, ring-a-rosy style play or 100 point floggings he'd be hung, drawn and quartered. Maybe we've learned a bit of patience after all.

Good luck to everyone at the club when it comes to bringing us an era of sustained success.

P.S. Way too early to be talking contract extensions.

 

[meltiger]

I read somewhere this morning where Greg said it's not the coaches duty to select the players to draft. The recruiting people are there for that job. Out of interest how long has Greg been involved with our recruiting? Terry has been involved for 3 years now.

The story seems to be changing to me. First we heard Terry had a 5 year contract because that's how long he'd need to turn things around but now the time frame has been extended. I'm happy to just take it as it comes. Time frames are no certainties and don't come with guarantees, and we all know to expect the unexpected with our beloved club.

Rosy, maybe Phanto or one of the other more knowledgable people can comment, but i always assumed the recruiting man recruits based on the type of team that coach wants, it's then up to the coach to not only implement the game plan he wants but also take the se 18yo prospects to AFL standard footballers.

We've seen time after time after time at Richmond, recruiting is only the first step.

 

[dcstar]

...........
Despite his 5 year contract, Wallace still has plenty to prove that we are on the right track to ultimate success, if things aren't turning around by mid '08 expect the blowtorch to be well and truly applied. He's got time yet but he won't have forever to show that his blueprint for success is working.

If "things aren't turning around" it won't be the fault - or responsibility - of one individual at the club.

The club - as a whole - is responsible for finding all the resources required, if Wallace needs something that he doesn't have (or can't personally provide), it is up to the club - working with Wallace - to obtain it.

The same applies to Miller and any other individual lined up by Richmond supporters for the chop if things aren't as some would like them to be.

The days of replacing individuals for the sake of it should be gone - unless any individual doesn't realise that they are just a part of a bigger entity that is working towards the common goal.

 

[meltiger]

^^ What if the club is clearly going backwards though David? You would expect at the end of TW's 5 year reign that the club moves forward, if we are going backwards however, should we look at a change?


I wouldn't consider that change for the sake of change?

 

[Rosy]

We've seen time after time after time at Richmond, recruiting is only the first step.

Yeah of course that's the case mel. I think the comment I was referring to was in the article Terry wrote about the dogs recently. I read it from a link on PRE this morning but it appears the article has since been removed.

 

[Tigers of Old]

...........
Despite his 5 year contract, Wallace still has plenty to prove that we are on the right track to ultimate success, if things aren't turning around by mid '08 expect the blowtorch to be well and truly applied. He's got time yet but he won't have forever to show that his blueprint for success is working.

If "things aren't turning around" it won't be the fault - or responsibility - of one individual at the club.

The club - as a whole - is responsible for finding all the resources required, if Wallace needs something that he doesn't have (or can't personally provide), it is up to the club - working with Wallace - to obtain it.

The same applies to Miller and any other individual lined up by Richmond supporters for the chop if things aren't as some would like them to be.

The days of replacing individuals for the sake of it should be gone - unless any individual doesn't realise that they are just a part of a bigger entity that is working towards the common goal.

Sorry David that's just pap.
The coach will remain largely responsible for the performances of the team.
What you are suggesting just reeks of passing the buck.
Over time Terry Wallace will ultimately live or die by our team's performances and to suggest otherwise is pure fantasy.

 

[Disco08]

Yeah of course that's the case mel. I think the comment I was referring to was in the article Terry wrote about the dogs recently. I read it from a link on PRE this morning but it appears the article has since been removed.

The article is still there and the link is here rosy.

 

[dcstar]

^^ What if the club is clearly going backwards though David? You would expect at the end of TW's 5 year reign that the club moves forward, if we are going backwards however, should we look at a change?

I wouldn't consider that change for the sake of change?

There could be a multitude of reasons for any results (good or bad), the point is that any individual is highly unlikely to be solely responsible for it, so the "solution" of replacing that individual is just as unlikely to help.

That sort of policy hasn't worked that well for us in the past, why should it be any different again?

There may need to be many changes made for us to achieve the success we are all after, but as Phantom said it should be an evolutionary process and it may or may not involve certain people - just targeting particular ones hasn't proven to work that well for us.

 

[Rosy]

Thanks Disco. I clicked on the link you posted earlier and got 2 "old content removed" kind of messages.

I am always amazed when I hear experts from the media speak about coaches losing their jobs because they have not selected the right players for their club. Likewise, I have a laugh when some coaches want to take over the whole recruiting process.

The coach's role is to work with the recruiting department to ensure that everyone has an understanding of the type of players the club is trying to develop for its future.

But it is like any other form of business. If you have a manager in place who you trust, you must allow them to do their job.

Recruiters have an intimate knowledge of players, so you must allow them to make their selection. Their job lives and dies on their ability to make the right selections.

I believe the draft is the recruiting department's responsibility, while trading is the responsibility of the senior coach and the match committee.

That is what I was referring to.

 

[Rosy]

Thanks Disco. I clicked on the link you posted earlier and got 2 "old content removed" kind of messages. Weird.

I am always amazed when I hear experts from the media speak about coaches losing their jobs because they have not selected the right players for their club. Likewise, I have a laugh when some coaches want to take over the whole recruiting process.

The coach's role is to work with the recruiting department to ensure that everyone has an understanding of the type of players the club is trying to develop for its future.

But it is like any other form of business. If you have a manager in place who you trust, you must allow them to do their job.

Recruiters have an intimate knowledge of players, so you must allow them to make their selection. Their job lives and dies on their ability to make the right selections.

I believe the draft is the recruiting department's responsibility, while trading is the responsibility of the senior coach and the match committee.

That is what I was referring to.

 

[Growl]

I think a coach should 'pull' a player if he is not playing within the team structure.

Good in theory, bit hard when 15 of them aren't playing to plan though lol

Yeah, admit you would have to have a pretty long bench for that many of the team but I bet if one or two were dragged the others would soon get the message - and there's always the threat of playing for Coburg. (worked for one player)

What I was trying to get across was that a coach has to have some course of action if players are not doing what they're told.

Terry said they didn't play according to what he laid out for the day - so what's the solution?

 

[FightingFury]

If it is to be, then it will take every part of a decade of Millers tenure at Richmond IMO.

He would also need to raise the bar considerably from his output thus far as well.

Thats a long timeframe in that industry, with a still considerable risk involved.
I pray it gets the result we crave.

 

[Tigerbob]

Our drafting of Ruckman has been shocking.

We have Simmonds, Knobel as ruckman on our list.

Pattison as a Forward - part time ruckman.

Angus Graham on the rookie list.

Clearly not enough, clearly not good enough.

The one thing about the RFC and their recruiting policy is they dont beleive in structure. When I talk about structure I mean the key positions on the ground need to be filled by Key players if we are to be successful. Ruckman, Key Defenders, Key Forwards, Genuine Midfielders. Thats what structure is. Not trying to draft in kids that have played on the flanks their whole junior career and then we try and convert them into midfielders, or Key position players.

The strategies in place dont allow us to draft for structure, therefor we are going to struggle.

My rule as to what is needed;

200+cm Ruckman
195+cm Key Position Players
Geniune Midfielders with the bigger bodys.

Until these philosophys are carried out, I cannot be confident of the future.

Yeah its good we are drafting kids with good skills and pace, but how many do we carry on our list that dont contribute to our structure?

Who's at fault here, Miller or Wallace......or both?

 

[Disco08]

West Coast have only Cox and Seaby, Hansen part time and Spaanderman developing.

 

[Punxsutawney Phil]

I hope they will- they are definitely better than the rubbish we had under the Frawley regime.

Unfortunately, Terry has suffered from past recruiting blunders, and also from his relative success in year one of his tenure when he led us to 10 wins. If we had have finished near the bottom like Hawthorn and got a few more early draft picks that year, we would probably have more to look forward to in the near term.

To have had so many coaches, so many players, so many administrators etc over the past 25 years and for the side to constantly be amongst the also rans indicated there is something horribly wrong at the club. Its more than just coincidence that we are the least successful club (in terms of finals) over the past 25 years. I reckon TW is just starting to realise that now, and would be kicking himself for leaving the Doggies.

TW needs to get the best out of the young kids we have drafted in the past 3 years to take us to success, otherwise in 3 years time we will be rebuilding yet again. I am a patient man, but this football club has really tested me in recent times.

 

[French Tiger]

What frustrates me is that a side like Brisbane was up for many years & now half their side has retired or moved to another club.Now in their period of dominance they would have had bugger all early draft picks.Yet it looks like they have just as much chance of moving back up the ladder as we do.We made the 8 once compared to their 3 flags & another grand final appearance in their reign at the top & to look at both lists now they look no worse off than us.