Patience is required people. So many posters at the start of the season stated all they wanted to see this year is the 10 goal losses to stop and continued development of our youngsters. Well we're seeing that and now people are getting frustrated that we're not winning.

Yes, its disappointing to lose to shit teams. Yes its frustrating to watch us play. But the youngsters are coming along. If we had as much commitment from our senior group, we would have won a few more.

As long as I see continued improvement from the Walkers, Murphys, Waites, Fishers, Russells, Carrazzos etc etc I'm prepared to be a little more patient with Pagan. In addition to this, we have several more young players to be blooded and they will be blooded shortly.

We were never going to make the 8 this year, we were always going to struggle to win alot of games - we just don't have the talent. But we're slowly accumulating that talent and it is being developed nicely. That's enough for me at this stage.

I agree that jim that "we could have done better than 1-4"; that's a good sign isn't it? The flip side to that is that we "couldn't do better" . Last year when we were using the "we could've done better" phrase was when we referring to 10 goal plus thrashings.

As for the facts preacher:

"Fact number one is that Pagan doesn't communicate well with the younger players". Says who? If true OK that's a good point to bring up.

"the younger blokes who are not in the senior squad can go on for weeks without speaking to DP" Says who? If true that's a good point to bring up.

" the perception amongst the players is that IT"S NOT RIGHT." Perception is reality. Whose perception is it? Are the kids saying this? If that's true then that's a good point to bring up.

"the assistants from Libba, Elsaugh down to the club doctor take their orders from DP". Does this imply that DP is not asking them to get the skills up to scratch? Says who?

If all of the above is true and responsible for our demise (I don't see one coming) then yeah let's have a good look at the coach. But lets do it at the end of the year. In the meantime you should take out your frustrations on umpires, Richo, McPharlin, Roos, Croad, Demetriou and not prey on our own whilst we are showing improvement. That's too much like Jack Elliot's style; preying on his own.

You see from where I sit, I have seen a committed approach by all the players in the first 5 weeks and cannot see any signs that they are not committed, alienated and neglected, and appreciate this effort indeed.

As for 1-8 and what we do. All I can suggest is to look for the reasons. If it's skills and experience that continue to be the problem, then well and good that we can put a finger on it. I would then be suggesting that our expectation of the kids has been bit unrealistic for 2006, and they are still too young to show their true potential. Then we focus on getting that right.

Before I take my eyes off the issues for improvement within the playing group and go looking for scapegoats and crucify a coach , I prefer to identify the shortfalls of our players, because regardless of who is coach, we will still have to focus on our young players' weaknesses. Face it, they are young, inexperienced, and developing. From what I've seen so far in 2006, the endeavour is very good, commitment very good and skill level below average.

Ever seen a shopping trolley in motion? Yeah well all the knockers seem to have a lot of similarities with shopping trolleys in terms of their inconsistency.

The boys get off to 3 slow starts. (Knockers say Sack the coach)
The boys win a game (Knockers say Pagan has seen the light and changed for the better)
The boys lose to Richmond (Knockers say sack the coach)

At least the shopping trolley is consistent.

Can you honestly say that there has been no improvement in 2006, and that even with a bit of luck we still wouldn't have won all our games?

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

dont think koutas comments on brittain were anything that would require him to be hauled over the coals?

You don't think Kouta's comments were an intentional public slap in the face to Denis?

I don't think Kouta's the brightest spark going around but he's not that stupid that he didn't know how those comments would be perceived by many people.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

from memory -all kouta said was that he was close to britts/mitchell and that they put in a lot of work into him to build him into the player that he became - and as such they were his best coaches

in which case there is nothing wrong with that - or have I forgotten something?

Agree with what you say here Preacher, but with one concession. I thought they attacked the ball hard and had blokes RUNNING BY FOR HANDPASSES in the first quarter.

The first quarter was good quality footy from The Blues.

Bondi you make post good arguements. And its good to read posts with some form of logic.

My concern with your post is just this little bit :

" I prefer to identify the shortfalls of our players, because regardless of who is coach, we will still have to focus on our young players' weaknesses. Face it, they are young, inexperienced, and developing. From what I've seen so far in 2006, the endeavour is very good, commitment very good and skill level below average. "

Its very well put , but this is what i believe our coaching staff have been missing. Focussing on weaknesses means we are not confident. We should be coaching to strengths ( especially againgst quality opposition like Richmond . Our coaching staff IMO believe our weaknesses far outweigh our strengths and hence we play the way we do. How else can we accept the move of Lance down back when we were in front and the stubborness of not trying anything or anyone else.

We could of had the best backman in the business on Richo last night and Richo could have still dominated. Pagan needed to make changes to our structure to stem the flow to Richo, rather than at Richo. He basically conceeded that we could not stop the flow of ball movement, so he tried to stop one player. He failed on both accounts.

The remainder of the game was then played as per Pagans stubborness. He then stuck with this change. Surely our coaching dept have more than Plan A and Plan B , what about Plan C D E.... Pagan stops at Plan B and that is my worry at the present time.

Yes we are young and yes we have improved but do we attribute this improvement to Pagan or to time and healthy nutrition.

I'd also like to ask a question to anyone out there.....

Who of our experienced senior players has improved under Pagan ??

_________________
I know a little secret. And i'm not sharing.

You sack him 12 weeks in if things dont improve (and they wont)
A new coack needs to know who to keep and who to delist.

you cant just work that out without feeling them out yourself

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Why would Pagan haul Kouta over his comments about Britts? Kouta is quite within his rights to mention the influences in his footy career given the occasion. Says a fair bit about Pagan's mindset if true.



Very true and a point many supporters have only recently started to grasp. Losing the playing group is the chief reason coaches move on.



Not a fact actually but your opinion. Why do you think he was a poor captain? Didn't really have much of a run at it given injuries and circumstances. Carlton should look for their next coach in a manner befitting a professional modern club - not thru a one-man show by a president intent on saving his own arse or the appointment of someone just because he was a good CHB once upon a time.

I just want the last word

I WANNA BE COACH
Pay me 600k a year to coach a team to virtually bottom the last 3 years.

Theres no point keeping a coach if the players arent playing for a coach. Theres no real balls out there but fev a couple weeks ago. No hard shepparding, no depseration etc.

Im not saying get rid of pagan now but if we dont have a win in the next few matches then the club has to make a change. No point holding on to a coach due to financial reasons. I already heard of members not renewing next year. A club with no members is called a merger with another club

Personally lm just sick of the gameplan, it doesnt work and obviously last night showed that PAGAN does not want to take any risks to win the game and just save the game from a big loss.
Couple more games like this and l wont go again!!

If there's one thing i have noticed it's that players, especially young players, love being coached by someone who has done it all. Lets face it, they love impressing the coach, and who better than someone from the team of the century. SOS has repect.

I would give sos a go, if we couldn't get him i would LOVE Peter Dean.

Mitchell is ok, but as an AFL coach i could see his temprement causing a rift between him and the players.

SOS has the quality that you can't deny.

Mitchell is the dad that screams and yells at you and tells you everything you did wrong in detail, and leaves you mad and resentfull...

SOS is the dad that looks you in the eye and tells you how dissapointed he is, and makes you cry and bleeding for a chance to wrong the right ...

_________________
Circumstance has no value. It is how one relates to a situation that has value. All true meaning resides in the personal relationship to a phenomenon, what it means to you.

Is Pagan like the Step Father or Father In law then ??

_________________
I know a little secret. And i'm not sharing.

Thanks TC.

I'm trying to focus on identifying gaps and defeciencies with each player and expect that the coaches to be sure to know and comprehend the player's strengths. Each and every player's strengths and weaknesses.

So rather than blaming the loss of Pagan, I would rather use my limited available time to focus on what weakness a player has over the first 10 rounds (that's where TC fits in) and

1. plan to fix player deficiency
2. identify who is responsible to satisfy these requirements
3. measure the effectiveness of the current methodology
4. get the best person affordable to do the job
5. get the player fixed in readiness for 2007

then at the end of the season I would refer back to TC, and the year that was, and rate the coaches performance then. But hey, if it ends up being a crap job done by Libba etc and not the coach, I'm going to sacrifice Libba and not the coach. There are certain things Pagan would have to delegate, such as one on one work developing and correcting a players deficiencies, running around the park. He's 58.

ATM I'm more concerned with the basic skill errors I'm seeing every week, since intra club games, by hand and foot, and importantly at goal with the young guys (as well as Lappin's clanger spree), than thinking about Pagan's performance.

But your concerns on Pagan are a reflection of what you have seen so far, so its quite plausible that there are limitations in preparation (and maybe ability) with the coaching dept.

Your concern is that there doesn't seem to be depth and breadth in playing strategies from the coach and that he is ultimately responsible. I would take it a step further in a collective manner and include all the coaching contributors, the MC included, as stakeholders of player development and their performance, as well as the game plan(s). If it turns out as you say, where Pagan continues to show limitations in adaptability and not coaching to our strengths then he should be held accountable and dealt with (within our financial limitations).

Even if there are obvious signs of this after 10 rounds, it should be a discussion point taken very seriously,(especially if we start to lose by last year's margins), but after 5 rounds its certainly a case of glass half full to me.

Go the Baby Blues

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Mistake after mistake?

Name me a 'mistake' and I'll produce you a far more legitimate reason than Pagan is incompetent. Granted it will be a theoretical one, but at least it's not devoid of looking at the 'big picture'.

Pagan is playing a game plan that actually puts us in with a chance to snatch wins in our games, that's evident for everyone to see.

Would you prefer we dulled down the flood and loose defenders and zoning so that our defenders get carved up when they lose a second on the lead on their man for not paying attention to what he's doing?

Would you prefer players manned up when the opposition chips around the back half rather than playing the percentages to cover for a startling amount of passangers we have in our team*?

* - I know Sydney exploited this late in our game against them, but I'm talking about everything other than the last five minutes of the game.

Would you prefer our players played accountable football so that some of our players who are not accountable AND do not win plenty of their own ball and provide options are exposed for their lack of accountability?

Mate we would all love to see Carlton to play with a lot less flooding, a forward structure that doesn't crumble simply to provide numbers in the back half and a whole host of other droppings, delistings and positional changes but you're all deluded when you say Pagan isn't coaching to win.

He's addressing the faults of our team:

Overall lack of accountability
Poor defensive structure and overall lack of defensive play
General inability to kick long and accurate

The way preacher describes Pagan communicating to his senior players, it would seem he isn't mad at them. Nor should he be. This isn't about them, it isn't about what they're doing, it's about addressing the team as a whole.

Here's a quick run down of last night's 22:
Bannister - Solid defender/defensive midfielder, form warranted selection and would be on the fringe of a few other AFL sides in his current form, but only just. In his previous form would not have warranted a spot on any senior list.

Benitck - Future ball winner and reasonable defensive midfielder. At age 20, without a full season of AFL footy under his belt is part of our best centre clearance team. Carries a lot of responsibility and overall shoulders it very well. Would be in and out of better teams so that he developed correctly and would be pushing for consistent senior selection at the end of this year. May have been rested last week or well managed in a better side if rumours of a niggle are to be believed.

Betts - Sensational forward pocket cum tiny midfielder. Skill level and poise belies his young age at 19. Carries a lot of responsibility and overall shoulders it very well. Would spend virtually the whole game in the forward line in other teams that can fit him into the forward line, and there's a few. Would be looking to maybe push into the midfield in bursts next year in other sides. Would have been rested late last year or managed better when suffering general soreness in a better side.

Carrazzo - Extremely solid ball magnet, defender, defensive midfielder and link player. Developing every game but still lacks polish in disposal. Would play the whole game in the back line or hard tagging in other teams. Would play the whole season in another team baring injury or a form drop.

Adrian Deluca - Ruckmand/forward, not Forward/Ruckman. Would be developing as a ruckman in the reserves in any other team except the Bulldogs and Melbourne. Does his job in the side in marking forward of the wing and passing off to our runners, who are not 202 cms and thus are more likely to be spoiled.

Fevola - Top-level key forward. Would play in any team in the league and would not have had to shoulder the responsibility he has had since he was 22 until he was 23 going on 24, if that. Wouldn't compete with any more than 2 defenders at a time in most sides.

Fisher - Extremely solid and promising tall forward flanker. Would play a fairly similar role to what he does now by the end of this year in most other teams but would probably on play with the responsibility of the fourth tall/medium forward. Would exploit this match up in a ridiculous fashion. May not have come straight back into the team after his hamstring injury in a better side due to prior knee problems.

French - Evergreen, extremely solid ruckman. Would have an able assistant in the form of a developing or competing first ruck in most teams. Would get a bit more bench time in other teams but still get a bit of time up forward or dropping back.

Houlihan - Would not have to cover so much of the field in other sides, and would be a starter in almost every side in the competition - make no mistake. Would not have had so much responsibility until this year, ala Fevola. Would not have his dodgy knee tested so much with the ball going back and forth and as a result would actually lay and break more tackles in a game. Would understand the concept of the interchange bench in any other team.

Koutoufides - Top shelf tall utility who has a very bad knee. Would play a far more relaxed role in most sides of the competition and would be looking at retirement come the end of the year depending on his body. Would be the 2nd or 3rd plan for clearances in the midfield rather than THE plan. Would see a lot more of the bench so that he would be fresh for the latter half of the season and right for every game. Would have been rested last week without a second thought in a better side.

Lappin - Top shelf utility. Would play in any side in the competition, no questions asked. Would get a lot more help from his team mates too. Would understand the concept of the interchange bench in any other team.

McLaren - Allegedly solid ruck utility. Would be 3rd or 4th ruck at most clubs, maybe come in for a team like Richmond to matchup on the resting ruckman.

Murphy - Future superstar of the competition, playing midfield or HFF. Would be played every game this year unless form dropped away completely or injury took its toll. Would be an imposing proposition in a better midfield because he would virtually be at the bottom rung, resulting in more possessions and space due to less attention.

Russell - Pretty solid and promising defender/defensive midfielder for his age and improving every game. Would probably be getting a gurnsey in a few other sides but would prefer him to still be developing his game in the ressies. Would have gotten a decent crack in the pre-season in a team that didn't need to develop a ridiculously defensive game plan.

Saddington - Pretty solid defender/tall utility. Would be still gaining match fitness in the ressies for other teams and would be on the cusp of selection within a fortnight.

Heath Scotland - Extremely solid ball magnet and link man. Would shoulder less responsibility in other sides and probably see a bit more of the bench. Would be on the cusp of top-level midfields as the plug in and play bloke for them from the ressies.

Simpson - Extremely solid and promising attacking midfielder or wing. Would shoulder significantly less responsibility in better sides but as a result may not be quite so vigorous with the defensive side to his game. Would be a regular selection towards the second half of this season in better sides.

Nick Stevens - Close to top-shelf balanced midfielder who would still be top shelf were it not for the amount of times he has played under a genuine injury cloud. Would have more mates in a better midfield and not have to shoulder so much attention, responsibilty and time on the ground as he does in this team. Would have more impressive stats and more freedom to run forward of the play in a better side.

Thornton - Extremely solid tall defender. Would currently be rested in a better side and would not have been rushed back so hastily when returning from his knee injury last year. Would certainly not have shouldered so much responsiblity in the last four years.

Waite - Future star of the competition (not superstar) and extremely solid tall utility. Would have spent a bit more time in the ressies in year 2 and would not have shouldered so much responsibility last year in a better side. Would have probably secured an extra weeks rest, a lot of time on the bench for most of the game against Freo after the quad niggle or both in a better side. May even be considered as a midfielder/forward role in a better side that can make use of his strong body in contested situations without exposing him as somewhere in between a key forward and a midfielder. Would likely walk into any side in the competition.

Walker - Future star of the competition (possibly superstar) and near-top shelf tall/middle utility. Would not have copped as much attention in a better side but conversely may not have developed such a good all round game. Would have spent a bit more time in and out of the side in year two in a better team. Would probably walk into almost any side in the competition.

Whitnall - Top-shelf KPP/Tall utility. Would probably play forward in most teams in the competition. Would be rested and rotated off the bench better in a lot of teams, especially when he was suffering niggles last year and through out his career. Would not have been rushed back so readily and conversely may have been pushed harder to better himself in a more competitive playing list.

So there's my wrap. You can blame the players as much as the coach, but the way I see it we are still paying for the previous managers of the list, whoever's fault that may be. Why? Because we still have very little to fall back on. Any player to come in would be due to injury or it would be a first or second year player being rushed in or putting their hand up, and we know they can't be expected to deliver for us week in, week out.

Long enough for you Jarusa?

If Pagan has really lost the players, then yes things need to be addressed but if I was going to address one thing first it would be the intent and discipline of some our players, present both sides of the argument to players and discuss it with them as to why they are playing the way they are. If someone deserves a bath, give them a bath. If they question why another player isn't get the same treatment, explain why.

Transparency would work wonders in a circumstance like you're suggesting.

mjonc I'm glad you said "elaborate" and not "explain".

Only joking jimmae. A great read. First time I have agreed with everything written in elaborative format.

You didn't elaborate on how you think each player played last night.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I didn't want to.



We played about as bad as we could last night, work rate was fantastic, everything else was atrocious. In the first and early in the second I was thinking to myself how can anyone play as bad as Richmond when they were chipping right into our hands and handballing into us as though they didn't see us there.

I had to ask how bad could one team play, didn't I...

My mates were in the rooms after the Fremantle game in
perth. A friend of mine is good mates with Kouta. Kouta said and I'm not kidding "I can't wait for the season to end to get my money and get out of this place" (referring to carlton)



The information I heard from Melbourne is that he was poor as an assistant coach and was told to move on. Agree with Preacher he wasn't the greatest of captains

I havent seen last nights game yet but just thought I'd highlight a few of your points

deluca - umm.. no - I'd back almost any of our other players to lead up and mark the ball ahead of deluca - regardless of height!

fevola - the comments about shouldering responsibility - if he is a top liner he should be shouldering responsibility - regardless of whether you are 18,21 or 28 - topliners must take responsibility and to suggest otherwise is a copout

russell - umm... no he wouldnt be getting a game in a few other sides in the competition. From all respected reports, Russell was nowhere near selection. He didnt have any form of note prior to his selection and a realistic assessment of his time at the bullants last season would suggest that he was not ready yet.

saddington - so why is he in the team?

most of our midfielders - you have listed everyone of them as 'should not have to shoulder the responsibility' - wtf? so who should be responsible?


Along those lines, someone who deserves a game should get a game. So why is it that a certain player has been told he will never be selected regardless of form (training and match). Why do players that shouldnt be in the team are getting a game (saddington, deluca, russell) whilst other players that are perhaps more deserving arent getting a game (livingston).

Look if all this talk about sacking every coach in our football department is going to continue, let's have a meaningful debate as to who needs to go and who are the choices for replacements or new roles.

I'll start.

Head Coach: Denis Pagan - all things considered, he's the man.

Assistant coaches: Terry Daniher, Barry Mitchell, Stephen Silvagni, can't think of another with maybe Tony Libratore staying on board. Maybe Shaun Rehn?

Forward coaches: Terry Daniher, Stephen Kernahan

Midfield coach options: Greg Williams (part-time), Brett Ratten (part-time), Craig Bradley (part-time)

Defensive coach options: Stephen Silvagni, Peter Dean

Skills coach options: Stephen Kernahan (marking and leading), Brett Ratten (disposal and tackling/contested ball work), Diesel (same as Ratten), Bradley (disposal and goal kicking), Silvagni (just about everything), Terry Daniher (disposal and goal kicking).

Fitness and conditioning coach: Unsure, if only Craig Bradley was qualified... Terry Mulkerns (sp?) is a very solid choice though. If we could afford a world class coach in this department the results would be amazing.

Other roles: Pretty satisfied with that.

Let the antics begin!

So you want this to be the second last thread about the coach and replacing him?

_________________
And so while others miserably pledge themselves to the pursuit of ambition and brief power, I will be stretched out in the shade, singing.