Moderator: bbmods
Okay, I'll ask the reverse question. Who has been on the list that had potential that wasn't realised? This should not include those with chronic injuries and the salary dump players.Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Well the evidence from the previous crop is in, and we have very few players on the list who have been developed under Buckley, very few indeed
Why shouldn’t include the dump players? Stevo is the most obvious examplePyreneesPie wrote:Okay, I'll ask the reverse question. Who has been on the list that had potential that wasn't realised? This should not include those with chronic injuries and the salary dump players.Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Well the evidence from the previous crop is in, and we have very few players on the list who have been developed under Buckley, very few indeed
If you can provide some examples of young players that were not permitted to reach their full potential, please give them.
Because of the word "current". Most high quality players take years to show their true worth. Swanny took about four!!! This is just a given. So add a couple of years to now and there's your answer.Magpietothemax wrote:Exactly. How can it possibly be suggested that we have to wait 2 years to see whether our current crop of young players is being coached properly??Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Well the evidence from the previous crop is in, and we have very few players on the list who have been developed under Buckley, very few indeed
Because we were discussing the current crop of young players and whether they could be developed under the present regime. It's a different topic.think positive wrote:Why shouldn’t include the dump players? Stevo is the most obvious examplePyreneesPie wrote:Okay, I'll ask the reverse question. Who has been on the list that had potential that wasn't realised? This should not include those with chronic injuries and the salary dump players.Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Well the evidence from the previous crop is in, and we have very few players on the list who have been developed under Buckley, very few indeed
If you can provide some examples of young players that were not permitted to reach their full potential, please give them.
Agree with what you say about Buck's general inability to make quick adjustments during today's game. Valid critique IMHO.Magpietothemax wrote:While commentating tonight, Jonathan Brown observed in the last quarter that Collingwood had allowed the Swans an extra man in defence for just over 2 quarters and finally in the last quarter had decided to even up the numbers so that at least there would be one to one contests everywhere in our F50. Why did it take so long for Bux to decide this?
There are just so many examples in this game, and over the years, where Bux has failed to respond to adjustments made by other coaches.
Definitely we don't have the players now to sustain AFL pressure for an entire game. We have a hollowed out list with many young, developing players, and alot of older players whose powers are now clearly in decline, and not enough in between.
But you cannot separate Bux from responsibility for the list crisis we are currently in. It is impossible to believe that Bux does not influence the recruiters in regard to what kinds of players he wants for the team.
FFS, I did say at present!!!!!think positive wrote:He’s the captain of course he is, let’s see what he says next yearPyreneesPie wrote:Well perhaps ask Pendles about this? He's currently defending the coaching. His tune may change, but that's what it is at present.Haff wrote:Don’t want to start a new thread but I came to a realisation today. Buckley has, amongst many other things, cost Pendles a brownlow. How many times has Pendles been in the perfect position, takes a mark and then.... holds up the ball or kicks sideways? Why? He’s coached that way and there is no structure up the field because our game plan is so deficient it’s like Buckley hates scoring. You never saw Ablett do that, sure he got lots of possessions out the back but he was just so damaging like all the best players. If Pendles had a competent coach for the last 10 years, He would be in the absolute upper echelon of players. Now? Sure he’s always in the conversation in the best players in the game but not mentioned with the top midfields of all time. Putting that squarely on the square jaw of Buckley. Our kids have no chance.
+10 - letting Buckley and his crew "develop" them will destroy their initiative and individuality and lead to minimal skill development. One reason I want him and his useless mates gone is to give our promising kids a chance to learn the right way.shawthing wrote:That's what keeps me up at night. The best thing for these kids' development is getting Buckley and his cronies as far away from them as possible. And as soon as possible.Jezza wrote:Clarkson's done plenty to earn respect and patience from the Hawthorn supporter base. That's why silence from the Hawks fans to have moved him on are deafening.Piesnchess wrote:Good players, a good healthy list, make good Coaches, being that way for over 150 yrs. Clarko is finding that out now. I doubt if he could do any better with us at present, our kids need to mature and we really need a KPP or two. Takes time, it is what it is. Keep playing kids, and get a few guys back, theres not much more we can do, until the draft really. We wont win the flag this season, but neither will 16 other teams, thats the reality.
It's easy to "play the kids", but are they being taught and coached properly?
Absolutely wrong. Ned Guy was list manager not recruiter and only around two or three years. Derek Hine is chief recruiter. Get your facts rightLazza wrote:In reality the main person responsible for player recruitment was Ned Guy. Like you said, Ned too had years to replenish the list. He failed miserably.The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote:Exactly right and all under whose watch? I mean how many decades do you give a guy to rebuild a premiership winning list RB?RudeBoy wrote:OK, I get it, most here blame Bucks. That's fair enough. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I simply think we don't have enough good players.
That is why, if we are serious about getting out of this black hole, we need to remove Bux as soon as humanly possible, before season's end if it can be done. The difficulty is that Bux is not the sole problem, but the assistant coaches are useless as well. At least though, with the removal of the main coach, even if the assistant coaches have to stay until the end of the year (i just dont know if it is possible to get two interim assistant coaches!!) the toxicity of the relations that Bux clearly engenders, the inability to respond on game day to other coaches' changes, the stultifying insistence on discredited and suffocating defensive structures, will be gone, and our team will at last be able to breathe more freely.Gerry Cooper wrote:+10 - letting Buckley and his crew "develop" them will destroy their initiative and individuality and lead to minimal skill development. One reason I want him and his useless mates gone is to give our promising kids a chance to learn the right way.shawthing wrote:That's what keeps me up at night. The best thing for these kids' development is getting Buckley and his cronies as far away from them as possible. And as soon as possible.Jezza wrote: Clarkson's done plenty to earn respect and patience from the Hawthorn supporter base. That's why silence from the Hawks fans to have moved him on are deafening.
It's easy to "play the kids", but are they being taught and coached properly?
Here's a question I have been contemplating the last few days. Under Buckley's regime how many players have really developed beyond the skill set they came to the club with? I might be wrong but I can't think of too many.
Spot onMagpietothemax wrote:That is why, if we are serious about getting out of this black hole, we need to remove Bux as soon as humanly possible, before season's end if it can be done. The difficulty is that Bux is not the sole problem, but the assistant coaches are useless as well. At least though, with the removal of the main coach, even if the assistant coaches have to stay (i just dont know if it is possible to get two interim assistant coaches!!) the toxicity of the relations that Bux clearly engenders, the inability to respond on game day to other coaches' changes, the stultifying insistence on discredited and suffocating defensive structures, will be gone, and our team will at last be able to breathe more freely.Gerry Cooper wrote:+10 - letting Buckley and his crew "develop" them will destroy their initiative and individuality and lead to minimal skill development. One reason I want him and his useless mates gone is to give our promising kids a chance to learn the right way.shawthing wrote:
That's what keeps me up at night. The best thing for these kids' development is getting Buckley and his cronies as far away from them as possible. And as soon as possible.
Here's a question I have been contemplating the last few days. Under Buckley's regime how many players have really developed beyond the skill set they came to the club with? I might be wrong but I can't think of too many.
