Nathan Buckley 2016 Report Card - Round 2 v Richmond

[AnthonyC]

Some posts in this thread (and the Sack Buckley thread) prove that some people have no idea of what a coach does, tries to do, and has any control over, in any sport.

[Skids]

Yep.

[RudeBoy]

I don't understand the question.

Are we rating the coach or the team? If the team plays well does the coach get the credit, or only if we play badly?

FWIW, I thought the team played average but Bucks made some master moves which helped win the game.

[CarringbushCigar]

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

[AnthonyC]

[The Boy Who Cried Wolf]

[AnthonyC]

^ True, agree with your last point in essence.

Many here, including myself, talked about the additions to the list this season and that clearly it was positive. I'm not here defending Bucks, I don't know that he's the best person for the job. I don't know how to judge him specifically, win/loss?, ladder position at end of season?, etc.

I'm just not prepared to throw him, or any coach, under a bus after one week of this season.

[Cuthbert Collingwood]

How the f*** are we meant to rate Buckley on a week to week basis? We have zero insight as to what is going on in the box, the week before, all the meetings etc. This thread is a bloody travesty and you should take it down. The sort of twisted logic behind your pathetic thread is like what American FOX news, Donald Trump and a shipload of Tony Abbott advisers would get together and come up with. Boo hiss

[CarringbushCigar]

[Pies4shaw]

I am very concerned about the way the team has played (as distinct from either of the results) in rounds 1 and 2 and will, of course, become increasingly restless if the game style doesn't pick up over a few rounds.

At the same time, I am mindful that, every season, big calls are made too early, especially in the media (presumably, because they need to sell their product).

So, eg, I recall that there were calls for Thompson to be sacked in 2007 when, after 6 rounds, Geelong were 2 wins and 4 losses. As we know, they only lost 1 more game that season (by 5 points, to Port Adelaide) and won the GF by a record margin.

Again, West Coast were 1 and 2 after 3 rounds last year and made the Grand Final. Last year, Freo won the first 9 but fell away; Sydney were 1 and 3 after 4 rounds in 2013 and made the Grand Final - they won the first 3 last year and were being touted as likely to avenge their loss to Hawthorn but, in fact, were never really a serious challenger in 2015.

Last year, Hawthorn were 4 and 4 after 8 rounds and their mantle was said to be slipping (and, as it happens, that Collingwood might take their spot in the top 4). They also started the season 2 and 3 in 2012. They made the GF and were, of course, expected to win (although they choked in the big one against the Swans).

As for us, well, we were 5 and 1 last year and 5 and 2 in 2014 and we know how well that ended. We were 11 and 2 in 2013 but fell away from there. In fact, if there is a trend to discern in our recent seasons, it is that we raced out of the blocks in the last 3 years in a row to absolutely no useful effect.

We were 3 and 5 at the start of 2009 but made the prelim. We were 2 and 2 at the start of 2007 and made the prelim. 2003 particularly stands out in my mind. We won the first 3, lost the next 3 (including getting absolutely pumped on Anzac Day) and after 12 rounds were 6 and 6. At half-time in that 12th-round game against Hawthorn, I sat with my AFL Record drawing lines through the names of 25 players on the list that I was certain could not play in a Collingwood premiership. Nevertheless, Collingwood made the GF (and were favourites with many).

Sometimes, of course, an early trend is telling. Thus, in 2004 and 2005, we started the season 1 and 7 - and that proved to be a true indication of where we were at. The truer indication was that the team looked slow all over the field in early 2004 and simply could not stop mediocre teams from taking the ball end to end from their kick outs - repeatedly, week after week.

Thus, in short, I do not know what to make of rounds 1 and 2, 2016 for Collingwood (or, frankly, any other team). One might reasonably predict that Sydney is going to finish top 4 and may be the heir apparent, that Freo is on the road to oblivion, even that Essendon might be more competitive than people expected. But two games is too small a sample size - and the business end of the season is so far away that I don't think it is actually possible to discern any important trends from results or performances as the teams do little more than shake off their pre-season cobwebs.

Some people will make big calls abut who is going to win the flag and who is hopeless and, in the way of things, some of those people will be proved "correct" (it's like people dreaming about plane crashes - if enough people do it, there will someone who wakes up, finds there was a plane crash and thinks they had a premonition of disaster).

I don't like how the team is playing and didn't really enjoy the Richmond game at all (until the last 3 minutes) because I can't see our team kicking enough goals to win anything much this year. I think it is very reasonable to raise such questions, provided none of us think we can actually know the answers to any of them, yet.

[Piesnchess]

A WIN IS A WIN, he did well, we now move on.

[ANNODAM]

I voted for #2 only because of the win.
Anything above 2 is being too generous, I think...

[AnthonyC]

[CarringbushCigar]

And what about you clowns who gave Bucks 5 out of 5 last week ?
It shows that a band of Nick's Buckley supporters have absolutely zero credibility, and will embarrass themselves in order to offer every last drop of hope. Clutching at straws much ?

Tania gave him 4 stars, and Jett only 1 star.

Its these sort of polls that show the bulk of the Nick's community is reasonable and fair.

It is the fanatical Buckley defenders that are quite the 'rare breed'.