In the first of a series of posts, I looked at Premiership coaches since 1960 and identified that gritty players who'd worked hard to get the best from their limited talent were disproportionately represented in the ranks of Premiership coaches.
I think there's one major reason that this should be so, but there is a prerequisite assumption involved.
The prerequisite is to assume that the performance level of the bottom 20% of a list determines the success of the team. Let me expand on this a little. Few would disagree that the ‘stars’ in a team are those who can be relied upon to produce close to their best most weeks. These may be the top 5–10% of the list. Then you've got the nucleus of the team — up to 70% of the list — who’ll do their assigned jobs most weeks without threatening to take the game by the throat, except in unusual circumstances. Then there’s the 20% who are the journeymen, the guys fighting to cement a place in the team, the guys who aren’t going to win BOGs, B&Fs or Brownlows. I think it’s the performance levels of these guys that defines Premiership teams.
OK, with the prerequisite assumption bedded down, how does this factor into coaching prowess? It seems to me that the list of the most successful Premiership coaches of the past 48 years is a list of blokes who made their playing reputations, such as they were, on guts and determination rather than natural talent. Who better to help the bottom 20% of a list understand what they need to do to cement a place in the team and potentially write themselves into history as Premiership players?
Of course, expounding on coaching credentials in this way is pretty meaningless without applying the ideas. So, of the current crop of coaches, who best fits the bill? These are subjective analyses, necessarily, but opinions make the blogosphere go ’round! Remember, Premierships are the only measure of success in this discussion and these assessments are relative.
Adelaide: Neil Craig
No record at AFL level, which could be seen as both a plus and a minus. I don’t see a flag from this coach.
Brisbane: Michael Voss
Not hugely talented in the Hird/Buckley mould, but not a gritty journeyman either. Ferocious determination on the field, but with the physical goods to make it happen. Especially without experience, I don’t see a happy ending here.
Carlton: Brett Ratten
A fair possibility if he can get the cattle.
Collingwood: Mick Malthouse
Classic example of the theory early in his career. The burden of being at Collingwood and fading memories of playing days suggest no more flags for Mick.
Essendon: Matthew Knights
Classic example of who NOT to choose under this theory. Talented footballer who didn’t have to work hard to earn his spot. No flag here.
Fremantle: Mark Harvey
Undoubted courage as a player, but also a precocious talent. Flag unlikely.
Geelong: Mark Thompson
Certainly an example of this theory in action. Hard to see him not adding to the trophy cabinet.
Hawthorn: Alistair Clarkson
A bit part player at a few clubs, but kept bobbing up. 2008 flag was no accident. More to come.
Melbourne: Dean Bailey
Never a standout at Essendon as a player. Administrative issues, affecting playing stocks, could reduce his potential. Unlikely, but a possibility.
North Melbourne: Dean Laidley
Laidley’s nickname — Junkyard Dog — says it all. Administrative issues have wrought havoc. A Premiership coach in waiting.
Port Adelaide: Mark Williams
Certainly gritty as a player and no-one would accuse him of being gifted. Club culture and expectation are a millstone that reduce his potential to add to the trophies.
Richmond: Terry Wallace
Should be the essence of this theory. Disappointing thus far.
St Kilda: Ross Lyon
Highly-talented player. No flag, especially in the St Kilda culture.
Sydney: Paul Roos
Roos is the exception to prove the rule. Hugely talented as a player. His mentoring of Sydney into successive Grand Finals speaks volumes for his capabilities.
West Coast Eagles: John Worsfold
I’d rank him on the cusp of fitting the theory.
Western Bulldogs: Rodney Eade
Ticks all the boxes, but there seems to be a timeframe before his message wears thin.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Coaching credentials, Part 2
2 comments:
Labels:
Coaches
In the first of a series of posts, I looked at Premiership coaches since 1960 and identified that gritty players who'd worked hard to get the best from their limited talent were disproportionately represented in the ranks of Premiership coaches.
I think there's one major reason that this should be so, but there is a prerequisite assumption involved.
The prerequisite is to assume that the performance level of the bottom 20% of a list determines the success of the team. Let me expand on this a little. Few would disagree that the ‘stars’ in a team are those who can be relied upon to produce close to their best most weeks. These may be the top 5–10% of the list. Then you've got the nucleus of the team — up to 70% of the list — who’ll do their assigned jobs most weeks without threatening to take the game by the throat, except in unusual circumstances. Then there’s the 20% who are the journeymen, the guys fighting to cement a place in the team, the guys who aren’t going to win BOGs, B&Fs or Brownlows. I think it’s the performance levels of these guys that defines Premiership teams.
OK, with the prerequisite assumption bedded down, how does this factor into coaching prowess? It seems to me that the list of the most successful Premiership coaches of the past 48 years is a list of blokes who made their playing reputations, such as they were, on guts and determination rather than natural talent. Who better to help the bottom 20% of a list understand what they need to do to cement a place in the team and potentially write themselves into history as Premiership players?
Of course, expounding on coaching credentials in this way is pretty meaningless without applying the ideas. So, of the current crop of coaches, who best fits the bill? These are subjective analyses, necessarily, but opinions make the blogosphere go ’round! Remember, Premierships are the only measure of success in this discussion and these assessments are relative.
Adelaide: Neil Craig
No record at AFL level, which could be seen as both a plus and a minus. I don’t see a flag from this coach.
Brisbane: Michael Voss
Not hugely talented in the Hird/Buckley mould, but not a gritty journeyman either. Ferocious determination on the field, but with the physical goods to make it happen. Especially without experience, I don’t see a happy ending here.
Carlton: Brett Ratten
A fair possibility if he can get the cattle.
Collingwood: Mick Malthouse
Classic example of the theory early in his career. The burden of being at Collingwood and fading memories of playing days suggest no more flags for Mick.
Essendon: Matthew Knights
Classic example of who NOT to choose under this theory. Talented footballer who didn’t have to work hard to earn his spot. No flag here.
Fremantle: Mark Harvey
Undoubted courage as a player, but also a precocious talent. Flag unlikely.
Geelong: Mark Thompson
Certainly an example of this theory in action. Hard to see him not adding to the trophy cabinet.
Hawthorn: Alistair Clarkson
A bit part player at a few clubs, but kept bobbing up. 2008 flag was no accident. More to come.
Melbourne: Dean Bailey
Never a standout at Essendon as a player. Administrative issues, affecting playing stocks, could reduce his potential. Unlikely, but a possibility.
North Melbourne: Dean Laidley
Laidley’s nickname — Junkyard Dog — says it all. Administrative issues have wrought havoc. A Premiership coach in waiting.
Port Adelaide: Mark Williams
Certainly gritty as a player and no-one would accuse him of being gifted. Club culture and expectation are a millstone that reduce his potential to add to the trophies.
Richmond: Terry Wallace
Should be the essence of this theory. Disappointing thus far.
St Kilda: Ross Lyon
Highly-talented player. No flag, especially in the St Kilda culture.
Sydney: Paul Roos
Roos is the exception to prove the rule. Hugely talented as a player. His mentoring of Sydney into successive Grand Finals speaks volumes for his capabilities.
West Coast Eagles: John Worsfold
I’d rank him on the cusp of fitting the theory.
Western Bulldogs: Rodney Eade
Ticks all the boxes, but there seems to be a timeframe before his message wears thin.
Read More
I think there's one major reason that this should be so, but there is a prerequisite assumption involved.
The prerequisite is to assume that the performance level of the bottom 20% of a list determines the success of the team. Let me expand on this a little. Few would disagree that the ‘stars’ in a team are those who can be relied upon to produce close to their best most weeks. These may be the top 5–10% of the list. Then you've got the nucleus of the team — up to 70% of the list — who’ll do their assigned jobs most weeks without threatening to take the game by the throat, except in unusual circumstances. Then there’s the 20% who are the journeymen, the guys fighting to cement a place in the team, the guys who aren’t going to win BOGs, B&Fs or Brownlows. I think it’s the performance levels of these guys that defines Premiership teams.
OK, with the prerequisite assumption bedded down, how does this factor into coaching prowess? It seems to me that the list of the most successful Premiership coaches of the past 48 years is a list of blokes who made their playing reputations, such as they were, on guts and determination rather than natural talent. Who better to help the bottom 20% of a list understand what they need to do to cement a place in the team and potentially write themselves into history as Premiership players?
Of course, expounding on coaching credentials in this way is pretty meaningless without applying the ideas. So, of the current crop of coaches, who best fits the bill? These are subjective analyses, necessarily, but opinions make the blogosphere go ’round! Remember, Premierships are the only measure of success in this discussion and these assessments are relative.
Adelaide: Neil Craig
No record at AFL level, which could be seen as both a plus and a minus. I don’t see a flag from this coach.
Brisbane: Michael Voss
Not hugely talented in the Hird/Buckley mould, but not a gritty journeyman either. Ferocious determination on the field, but with the physical goods to make it happen. Especially without experience, I don’t see a happy ending here.
Carlton: Brett Ratten
A fair possibility if he can get the cattle.
Collingwood: Mick Malthouse
Classic example of the theory early in his career. The burden of being at Collingwood and fading memories of playing days suggest no more flags for Mick.
Essendon: Matthew Knights
Classic example of who NOT to choose under this theory. Talented footballer who didn’t have to work hard to earn his spot. No flag here.
Fremantle: Mark Harvey
Undoubted courage as a player, but also a precocious talent. Flag unlikely.
Geelong: Mark Thompson
Certainly an example of this theory in action. Hard to see him not adding to the trophy cabinet.
Hawthorn: Alistair Clarkson
A bit part player at a few clubs, but kept bobbing up. 2008 flag was no accident. More to come.
Melbourne: Dean Bailey
Never a standout at Essendon as a player. Administrative issues, affecting playing stocks, could reduce his potential. Unlikely, but a possibility.
North Melbourne: Dean Laidley
Laidley’s nickname — Junkyard Dog — says it all. Administrative issues have wrought havoc. A Premiership coach in waiting.
Port Adelaide: Mark Williams
Certainly gritty as a player and no-one would accuse him of being gifted. Club culture and expectation are a millstone that reduce his potential to add to the trophies.
Richmond: Terry Wallace
Should be the essence of this theory. Disappointing thus far.
St Kilda: Ross Lyon
Highly-talented player. No flag, especially in the St Kilda culture.
Sydney: Paul Roos
Roos is the exception to prove the rule. Hugely talented as a player. His mentoring of Sydney into successive Grand Finals speaks volumes for his capabilities.
West Coast Eagles: John Worsfold
I’d rank him on the cusp of fitting the theory.
Western Bulldogs: Rodney Eade
Ticks all the boxes, but there seems to be a timeframe before his message wears thin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
