Assistant Coaches Moving forward

[GVGjr]

Is it just me or is it a bit unnerving reading about who's leaving, who's being targeted by other clubs, with no news coming from the kennel?

With Drain leaving it gives a great reason for the Club to look at Sheedy. Perhaps the dogs should look at Chris Grant, even in a part time role, of course he would need to be interested, but it gives him an opportunity to back up what he said when he retired.

Sheedy would not be the right man for us and Chris Grant needs at least a season away from us. My understanding is that Chris is not looking to a career in coaching now that his playing days are over.

[Go_Dogs]

Sheedy would not be the right man for us and Chris Grant needs at least a season away from us. My understanding is that Chris is not looking to a career in coaching now that his playing days are over.

Why would you be against Sheedy GVGjr? If he was prepared to take a reduced role and follow instruction from Rocket as well as being able to offer his own honest appraisal, I think he could do a reasonable job.

[GVGjr]

Why would you be against Sheedy GVGjr? If he was prepared to take a reduced role and follow instruction from Rocket as well as being able to offer his own honest appraisal, I think he could do a reasonable job.

He just doesn't strike me as an administrator and his best days are long gone as a coach. Good for getting us a few headlines but they might not be for the right reasons and Akermanis can do that for us anyway

[Crizza]

He just doesn't strike me as an administrator and his best days are long gone as a coach. Good for getting us a few headlines but they might not be for the right reasons and Akermanis can do that for us anyway

Imagine that Sheedy and Aker at the Kennel. We would be in the paper everyday! Not such a bad idea, could attract more members, sponsorship?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Imagine that Sheedy and Aker at the Kennel. We would be in the paper everyday! Not such a bad idea, could attract more members, sponsorship?

Probably, but the club has done a fair bit of off-field work in the last few seasons as far as Memebrships and Sponserships are concerned. Sure - more would be nice, but IMO the only way this club is going to get more is by actually winning games of football and winning in finals. Until ten, kiss whatever else goodbye.

At first I was for Sheedy, but I can see why he wouldn't be attractive as an assistant. He's very much an ego driven coach. Not sure he could play second fiddle. He'd be fantastic for exposure, but for a club like ours trying to actually turn around our efforts ON the field, we'd probably be better off going for somebody else. If we were an on-field successful club, the idea of introducing Kevin Sheedy would perhaps make more sense as it would further boost our club off-field.

For now, we need to focus on getting things right on the track. Rose etc. have done a fantastic job to date in terms of membership & sponsership, the only way forward would be to prove it ON field.

That's my take on it, anyway.

[FrediKanoute]

Why would you be against Sheedy GVGjr? If he was prepared to take a reduced role and follow instruction from Rocket as well as being able to offer his own honest appraisal, I think he could do a reasonable job.

Put simply the bolded bit is your answer. Sheed's is a fiddler. He gets too involved and I doubt very much whether he could sit back in an advisory role. To give an example, Fulham FC in the premier legaue tried something similar with Jean Tigana and franco Baresi. Baresi was brought in as an "expert" to give advice - Tigana's response was to shut him out entirely because in effect it was saying the club had no confidence in him.

Its pretty much what we would be saying to eade if we went down this path. If we had an inexperienced coach then maybe you could justify it, but not with a coach who has 10 or so years experience.

If you are going to go down that path then you need to install a Director of Football and make Eade and Clayton report into him. The DoF is the link between the Board and the playing group and he is responsible for setting the strategy etc. Its a matter of finding someone who does this well. Two that stand out are Balme and Shaw (robert), but you may look at guys like Giechen or Schwab....guys who are good communicators..not necessarily great coaches!

[Sockeye Salmon]

Put simply the bolded bit is your answer. Sheed's is a fiddler. He gets too involved and I doubt very much whether he could sit back in an advisory role. To give an example, Fulham FC in the premier legaue tried something similar with Jean Tigana and franco Baresi. Baresi was brought in as an "expert" to give advice - Tigana's response was to shut him out entirely because in effect it was saying the club had no confidence in him.

Its pretty much what we would be saying to eade if we went down this path. If we had an inexperienced coach then maybe you could justify it, but not with a coach who has 10 or so years experience.

If you are going to go down that path then you need to install a Director of Football and make Eade and Clayton report into him. The DoF is the link between the Board and the playing group and he is responsible for setting the strategy etc. Its a matter of finding someone who does this well. Two that stand out are Balme and Shaw (robert), but you may look at guys like Giechen or Schwab....guys who are good communicators..not necessarily great coaches!

Please not Giechen or Schwab - they've ****ed up every job they've ever had!

[FrediKanoute]

Please not Giechen or Schwab - they've ****ed up every job they've ever had!

I'd disagree with that. Both have done a pretty good job as "umpires coach". Given its a role which requires more communiction and analysis than technical coaching, to me they would be good candidates for an oversight role. Both failed as coaches, but then so too did Balme and Robert Shaw was just good with limited cattle. Its horses for courses and what you're looking for in that role is ideally someone capable of taking a detached view of the world and communicating between admin and playing group. Even someone like Rhode would be good in that type of role because of their ability to see and deal with the big picture.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I'd disagree with that. Both have done a pretty good job as "umpires coach". Given its a role which requires more communiction and analysis than technical coaching, to me they would be good candidates for an oversight role. Both failed as coaches, but then so too did Balme and Robert Shaw was just good with limited cattle. Its horses for courses and what you're looking for in that role is ideally someone capable of taking a detached view of the world and communicating between admin and playing group. Even someone like Rhode would be good in that type of role because of their ability to see and deal with the big picture.

We'll have to agree to disagree, Fredi, I think both Gieschen and Schwab have been terrible with the umpires.

[aker39]

Gieschen as Director of Umpiring is the biggest waste of money. He does nothing to improve the standard of umpiring.

He is there simply to take the pressure of Vlad & Anderson. They have a "football" person there to address the football clubs concerns.

As for Peter Schwab, is has had a very cushy career path. Director of umpiring, Match Revie Panel chairman and now head of AFL Victoria.

[Dry Rot]

Anyone know the assistant coach set-up at other clubs?

We seem have former defenders and midfielders as forward coaches, which seems odd to me.

[Bulldog Revolution]

We'll have to agree to disagree, Fredi, I think both Gieschen and Schwab have been terrible with the umpires.

I also remain unconvinced that either have done great things with the umpires

Geischen completely had the stuffing knocked out of him when he was sacked at Richmond - before that he seemed to be an innovative coach but hes basically never coached since. Seemed to lack the charisma required for head coaching.

[Raw Toast]

Hadn't seen this link posted so thought I'd put it up here, apologies if I missed it somewhere.

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/De...2&newsId=52668

Campbell as our forward's coach does sound a bit strange - at least Wellman spent most of his time playing on forwards. Though I guess senior coaches are expected to have a fair idea of the requirements of forwards, defenders, midfielders and rucks and most have only played one position.

Hopefully we get a decent defensive coach and do get get an extra development coach as well.

Robert Shaw might be ok as a football operations guy. What does the position involve? At least he was at Essendon when they were successful IIRC, and would be used to dealing with a coach who may not get on with every member of the exec