true_blue24 wrote:
what's 3LO?
My grandfather used to have this thing made out of bakelite...
| TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| 774 ABC: Graham Smorgon interviewed pre-match http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11823 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | camel [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 774 ABC: Graham Smorgon interviewed pre-match |
Will be interesting to hear what Smorgo has to say about Denis' feelings about the coaching panel review, among other things… …coming up between 1-2pm. |
|
| Author: | true_blue3 [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
what's 3LO? |
|
| Author: | GWS [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
true_blue24 wrote: what's 3LO?
My grandfather used to have this thing made out of bakelite...
|
|
| Author: | true_blue3 [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: true_blue24 wrote: what's 3LO? My grandfather used to have this thing made out of bakelite...  i meant what frequency is it?
|
|
| Author: | GWS [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
true_blue24 wrote: GWS wrote: true_blue24 wrote: what's 3LO? My grandfather used to have this thing made out of bakelite... i meant what frequency is it?774 
|
|
| Author: | jim [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: 3LO: Graham Smorgon will be on pre-match |
camelboy wrote: Will be interesting to hear what Smorgo has to say about Denis' feelings about the coaching panel review, among other things… There'll probably be some spin from Smorgon, like anythng that goes onto the media. The bottom line, I believe at least, is that they are trying to make Pagan's position as untenable and uncomfortable as possible, given his payout, by trying to make him walk. Doing this by getting at his assistants. Using a boxing analogy, it's a case of not hitting with the knockout blow directly to thead, but pounding away at the body until everything gives way and collapses. That's the way I'm seeing it anyway. Could be right, then again, could be wrong.
…coming up between 1-2pm. |
|
| Author: | true_blue3 [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: true_blue24 wrote: GWS wrote: true_blue24 wrote: what's 3LO? My grandfather used to have this thing made out of bakelite... i meant what frequency is it?774 isnt that abc? (i better shutup, im startin to talk shit) |
|
| Author: | GWS [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yep - used to be called 3LO now 774ABC. Camel's fault.
|
|
| Author: | tommi [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Where's my remote..........? kindest regards tommi |
|
| Author: | camel [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here's some brief notes just taken from Smorgon's interview with 3LO… GS: Club will undertake a review, some of the change will be substantial. (Won't rule anything in or out in regards to change.) 3LO: Will the club review the senior coach? GS: Will review whole coaching department. Denis understands this as he and GS have regular communication. 3LO: How would GS deal with removing assistant coaches against DP's wishes? Wouldn't answer. 3LO: Have DP and Sticks had a falling out? GS: No evidience of this to his mind. GS: Board understands it will be another couple of years before getting right on and off the field. Take on 8 new recruits this draft/trade and another 8 next draft/trade. Unacceptable that we have won so few games. Can only change it by sticking with the youth policy. Kernahan pushing youth very hard. 3LO: Value in bringing back someone like Ratts? GS: Does he have the necessary skills and desire? 3LO: How much of this review has been brought upon by the AFL? GS: The club was going to do this regardless of whether the AFL wanted them to or not. GS: Fitzy advisor to the board, not a member of the board. If he wasn't an AFL commissioner he would have been chased as a board member. GS: Spoke with AD about sharing services with our membership department. (Didn't go into detail about what that might entail.) GS: Membership/attendance/coterie all down due to poor on field performance. Lack of income, major sponsorship levels are okay, but match day returns and membership are down and hurting the club. 3LO: Would he guarantee Denis would see out 2007-08? GS: We won't rule anything in or out. Denis has a 2 year contract. Rejects claims that AFL has control of the club, but can understand the viewpoint. But he claims the CFC board is in control and has taken the steps required, with eyes open, because the club needs to. 1.5M is only a one-off loan. Looking forward to announcement distribution of media rights funds to clubs. Thinks this will help enormously. 3LO: Does Kouta have final say on if he plays again next year? GS: Club will have input, not entirely his decision. If he retires CFC will send off Kouta with testimonial in best way possible. The only other point of note was that Smorgon is yet to meet Jim Watts! |
|
| Author: | JackWorrall [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not a particularly profound interview, although he wouldn't categorically state that Pagan's job was secure next year. He welcomed the AFL supplying Jim Watts as a consultant, but has never met the bloke. That part surprised me, as I'd prefer we had some dealings with any consultant coming in prior to commitment. There will be a complete review of the football department, but no specifics. Would like to give Koutoufides a decent send-off in round 21, if he decides to retire. The club would also hold a testimonial function, which is a good idea, because our captain is short of a quid. Refuted the suggestion the AFL had too much control of our club, saying the appointment of Fitzpatrick as a board advisor for a couple of months was gratis, and he has a wealth of business success. |
|
| Author: | camel [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: Yep - used to be called 3LO now 774ABC.
Camel's fault. Haha, sorry about the confusion. 
|
|
| Author: | jim [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Interesting interview. Seems the entire review, especially the coaching review, is AFL generated. Our finances are apparently down to memebrship and match days finances associated with a lack fo success. It's not as if our costs are high. Makes me wonder if the the $1.5 million was to pay out Pagan and his staff, with the asociated flow-on effects financially coming with an increase in membership and match days revenue from here on. In other words increases there outweighing the cost of paying out the coaching staff. Sounded a little like it. Smorgon DID NOT guarantee Pagan's position at all when asked about next year so that tells me alot. I think he's in trouble. I have my own agendas (hoping all this is right.......please), so I'm trying not to put too much of my own spin on it. Interesting to hear other's thoughts on it. |
|
| Author: | GWS [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The $1.5 million was because we literally didn't have enough cash to pay people. Nothing to do with Pagan. Sorry Jim.
|
|
| Author: | jim [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: The $1.5 million was because we literally didn't have enough cash to pay people. The coaching review IS AFL generated, which is what was said. After talking specifically where we're losing money, membership and match day, together with no guarantee of Pagan's, position, effectively meaning he's in trouble, I don't see it any other way. If they can't pay him out they would guarantee his job for next year. The fact they haven't meaning they're thinking about it deeply.
Nothing to do with Pagan. Sorry Jim. Maybe I'm talking out of hope |
|
| Author: | GWS [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
jim wrote: GWS wrote: The $1.5 million was because we literally didn't have enough cash to pay people. The coaching review IS AFL generated, which is what was said. After talking specifically where we're losing money, membership and match day, together with no guarantee of Pagan's, position, effectively meaning he's in trouble, I don't see it any other way. If they can't pay him out they would guarantee his job for next year. The fact they haven't meaning they're thinking about it deeply. Nothing to do with Pagan. Sorry Jim. Maybe I'm talking out of hope He can't guarantee it because if he does then the next question invites the same expectation. All you can do in that scenario is say everything's up for grabs and leave it at that. If you try to cherry pick which things are negotiable and which are set in stone you're in deep shit. Smorgon's no great media performer but I'm glad he's at least shown he knows that much. As for the AFL instigating the review: camel wrote: 3LO: How much of this review has been brought upon by the AFL?
GS: The club was going to do this regardless of whether the AFL wanted them to or not. Besides - what club coming last doesn't have a wide ranging review of all positions? We did the same last year and Denis convinced the board to give Trout and Libba another go. The AFL didn't instigate that review either. |
|
| Author: | nightcrawler [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: The $1.5 million was because we literally didn't have enough cash to pay people.
Nothing to do with Pagan. Sorry Jim. Doesn't mean he's not right about Pagan. When does this special distribution money come through and how much will it be? Maybe he can be paid out of that? Then you have the big new season launch parading all the new draft picks and the new coach, and then send out the membership packs (along with NBH's direct debit form) and whamo 35k members again? Just speculation ... |
|
| Author: | nightcrawler [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GWS wrote: As for the AFL instigating the review:
camel wrote: 3LO: How much of this review has been brought upon by the AFL? GS: The club was going to do this regardless of whether the AFL wanted them to or not. That only means the AFL did want them to do it, but they would have done it anyway. It doesn't mean the AFL is unconcerned with the coaching situation at Carlton. |
|
| Author: | amazonstud [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 6:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Maybe just maybe the coaching review by the AFL is because they don't think our playing stocks are that bad and we were not seriously affected by the draft penalties. |
|
| Author: | ryan2000 [ Sat Aug 05, 2006 10:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
amazonstud wrote: Maybe just maybe the coaching review by the AFL is because they don't think our playing stocks are that bad and we were not seriously affected by the draft penalties.
I aggree with that too. We picked up Fisher & Simpson the year that we got our draft picks taken away from us. You gotta be happy with that. We have a fair share of people who are the most elite athelets, but so does every team. Not saying that our list is great! Or doesn't need some intake of talented kids in the coming years. But it's not as bad as we make it out to be. |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|