Wallace vs Bevo: Play to WIN vs Play to "Play Good Footy"

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Stubbornness... or loyalty?
We're also slow to move on players from our list who are marginal at best (e.g. Prudden, who is a fantastic individual and great for our VFL side but was way too slow to play the roles we asked him to)

In truth it's a bit of both, or loyalty when you're winning/successful and stubbornness when you're losing/treading water.

Given our path since 2016 I think we can say the element of stubbornness is more prominent.

Ultimately Bevo will live and die by his own sword, which anyone can respect - even if we don't agree with it - but it's a risky approach when you're not a top 4 side consistently winning/challenging.

I know people keep saying this, but how do we know? Who has confirmed this?

The proof is in the pudding in that we've had fewer changes than any other side in the competition over Bevo's tenure as senior coach. The most significant change has been removing Monty as senior assistant, where IIRC there were a few 'splashes' of a falling out. We know Monty was quite a demanding character, and he made his own mistakes at times (comments on Lake spring to mind) but it's clear he had differing views to Bevo.

Probably the other significant change was losing Dalrymple when he was still under contract after he'd proven himself to be - arguably - the best recruiter in the land over their spat v taking Gowers. I know Simon isn't a coach but it's further evidence that Bevo doesn't like to be challenged, and two prominent figures within the club who DID challenge him soon found themselves out the door.

[comrade]

I know people keep saying this, but how do we know? Who has confirmed this?

Base it off results, the lack of change in the coaching box, the strict adherence to one type of game plan and the refusal to make changes/adjust on game day when things aren't going well.

Are this the outcome you'd expect of a coaching team that has different ideas and a leader willing to execute on them?

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

In truth it's a bit of both, or loyalty when you're winning/successful and stubbornness when you're losing/treading water.

Given our path since 2016 I think we can say the element of stubbornness is more prominent.

Ultimately Bevo will live and die by his own sword, which anyone can respect - even if we don't agree with it - but it's a risky approach when you're not a top 4 side consistently winning/challenging.



The proof is in the pudding in that we've had fewer changes than any other side in the competition over Bevo's tenure as senior coach. The most significant change has been removing Monty as senior assistant, where IIRC there were a few 'splashes' of a falling out. We know Monty was quite a demanding character, and he made his own mistakes at times (comments on Lake spring to mind) but it's clear he had differing views to Bevo.

Probably the other significant change was losing Dalrymple when he was still under contract after he'd proven himself to be - arguably - the best recruiter in the land over their spat v taking Gowers. I know Simon isn't a coach but it's further evidence that Bevo doesn't like to be challenged, and two prominent figures within the club who DID challenge him soon found themselves out the door.

That doesn't fit with Bevo's profile at my work, where he was prior to coaching.
He was well known to challenge both up and down the chain of command, and to lead teams who would challenge his views.
He was known as being extremely loyal to his staff, even when they'd made mistakes, but once you'd lost his trust, there was no going back.

[GVGjr]

Base it off results, the lack of change in the coaching box, the strict adherence to one type of game plan and the refusal to make changes/adjust on game day when things aren't going well.

Are this the outcome you'd expect of a coaching team that has different ideas and a leader willing to execute on them?

I'm sure there are other factors with the stability of coaches we have had with Bevo but if our results were better no one could challenge if it was working or not. There will be more switched on footy people than myself who can advise if we are cutting edge with our game day tactics or not but what I think a lot of us have noticed is that the development of players and particularly our skill level isn't where it needs to be. That has to fall on our coaches and development approach
I still recall Bevo was saying when he first arrived that players need to improve their skills and particularly with the opposite foot and I don't think it's anywhere near a strength of our playing group

[comrade]

I'm sure there are other factors with the stability of coaches we have had with Bevo but if our results were better no one could challenge if it was working or not.

Of course, but the results haven't been acceptable since 2016 and there has to be reasons for that.

[bornadog]

the strict adherence to one type of game plan and the refusal to make changes/adjust on game day when things aren't going well.

I think Bevo changes it up during a match. The most recent being Richmond when he made moves and we matched them in the second half with equal scores. There are lots of things that are tweaked during a match.

[bornadog]

That doesn't fit with Bevo's profile at my work, where he was prior to coaching.
He was well known to challenge both up and down the chain of command, and to lead teams who would challenge his views.
He was known as being extremely loyal to his staff, even when they'd made mistakes, but once you'd lost his trust, there was no going back.

To me his coaching at the Bulldogs is exactly like this.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I think Bevo changes it up during a match. The most recent being Richmond when he made moves and we matched them in the second half with equal scores. There are lots of things that are tweaked during a match.

I don't think we can go of the scoreboard in 2nd halfs when you're already 7 goals down. Particulary this season when teams will basically pull the pin with a comfortable lead in order to aid recovery for the short turnarounds between matches. Aside from the classic Bont to the forwardline switch with Gowers I didn't see too much difference in our 2nd half against the tigers.

[bornadog]

I don't think we can go of the scoreboard in 2nd halfs when you're already 7 goals down. Particulary this season when teams will basically pull the pin with a comfortable lead in order to aid recovery for the short turnarounds between matches. Aside from the classic Bont to the forwardline switch with Gowers I didn't see too much difference in our 2nd half against the tigers.

What I saw was we stopped leaking goals and started to win out of the centre. Trengove was rubbish in the ruck and was better on Lynch when he went to FB.

[azabob]

To me his coaching at the Bulldogs is exactly like this.

Like you said earlier we can't confirm if his views are challenged or not.

[comrade]

What I saw was we stopped leaking goals and started to win out of the centre. Trengove was rubbish in the ruck and was better on Lynch when he went to FB.

Let's give Bevo the benefit of the doubt and say he did make some changes that helped us stop the rot.

Why wouldn't he have tried it earlier and not after we were ambushed to the point of being 7 goals down?

[bulldogsthru&thru]

What I saw was we stopped leaking goals and started to win out of the centre. Trengove was rubbish in the ruck and was better on Lynch when he went to FB.

Maybe we did or maybe Richmond let the foot off the gas. I guess we don't really know and it could have been a bit of both. Trengove at FB is exactly where he should have been all night. Why he did ruck work for a large portion of the night is beyond me. We've played 1 ruck all year then Bevo brings in Trengove to presumably matchup on the tiger talls and instead employs him more in the ruck. It's just bizarre.

[bornadog]

Like you said earlier we can't confirm if his views are challenged or not.

Exactly, we can't speculate, but we can guess.

[bornadog]

Let's give Bevo the benefit of the doubt and say he did make some changes that helped us stop the rot.

Why wouldn't he have tried it earlier and not after we were ambushed to the point of being 7 goals down?

How would I know. Maybe he backed his players in at quarter time. If Libba had of kicked the goal early in the 2nd quarter, the difference would have been 12 points, and who knows what would happen. At that point you don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Half time I presume he worked on some tweaks and it paid off to some extent.

Trengove at FB is exactly where he should have been all night. Why he did ruck work for a large portion of the night is beyond me. We've played 1 ruck all year then Bevo brings in Trengove to presumably matchup on the tiger talls and instead employs him more in the ruck. It's just bizarre.

Everyone has been calling for help for English, so an experienced ruck was brought in. It didn't work, so Bevo changed it back to English in the ruck.

Easy to pot the Coach, but in my opinion, and I have said it for awhile, is we don't have the cattle on the ground. We are missing at least one more A grade mid with pace, and some forwards than can kick at least 25 to 30 goals per year.

Put in Hunter, Naughton on Monday, and we would have won that game.

[comrade]

How would I know.

Exactly. So we're left with basing our speculation on the results, which have been unacceptable since 2016.