Leppitsch sacked, Brad Scott should be next

Why aren't you calling for the sackings of Chris Scott & Jeremy Cameron? Hardly? They lost Preliminary Finals this year, Brad Scott achieved that task in 2014 & 2015. There were two sides in 2016 that were leading the way until injuries slammed the teams. They were North Melbourne and Western Bulldogs. In round 6 North Melbourne defeated Western Bulldogs both sides were looking like they would take part in FInals action. The disgusting chant from so called North Supporters after North Melbourne lost its first game was sack Scott and get rid of old players. This had been there in 2014 & 2015. Saying North beat nobody in the first 9 games was laughable. Injuries were serious and even as players were introduced and showed how good the team was going to be they were struck down too. Western Bulldogs proved how a champion team beats a team of champions any day. Also having rotten luck midseason with injury they had the intestinal fortitude to be able to present with nearly their whole squad for the finals. Finishing 7th & 8th Western Bulldogs were in a different mental framework to embrace the task but a simple mishandling of players at North Melbourne marching into an office changed the dynamic to prepare for a final series. Brad Scott's only mistake in this was by trying to be fair on the players who demanded their future be solved before they left the office.

I'd take Brad Scott's record over Nathan Buckley's. The pies drop further and further down the ladder the longer he is in charge, hugely disappointing considering he inherited a side that had just won the grand final and the resources at Collingwood's disposal.

The "Sack Scott" brigade totally ignore the positives at North in the 2014 & 2015 Finals (you know the spot Western Bulldogs are in now!) Those FB whingers became the 'zip' brigade until we lost our first game. Then for the rest of the season they didn't shut up with calling out the 'older' players to be sacked. Scott was forced by the players managers to do the right thing announcing the players who were going to be delisted. In the interest of the circumstances there was only one Melbourne game left to send them off! How many ways do these people want it? I don't accept your evaluation of 2016 there were three issues injuries to key players, the totally pathetic overreaction of the $80,000 fine which was of AFLs own making and some poor games that could have changed the outcome.

Absolutely agree with the call to sack Brad Scott. Dismal second half of the season and an inability to manage the team really showed up with the flogging from Adelaide Crows. Not good enough mate you have had a crack time to move out.

'Trim Victoria to 6 teams in the AFL comp' - disagree. Get rid of the Suns and Giants. Too many teams is allowing the overall standard to slip. Example - Brandon Ellis of the Tigers - complete rubbish

Scott's job in the past few years has been "win now". There was always a limited window for that. If they hadn't been so competitive in 2015 I think the rebuild would have started after that season, but they have pushed a year too long it seems. Forgiveable. I think they always knew this year was only "on" with terrific injury luck, and of course we haven't had that. Ironically, it isn't the oldest players who've been injured (apart from Waite). It wasn't Scott's job (and supporters would and should have been critical) if he sacrificed wins the past few years to play "kids" who hadn't earned it ahead of players more likely to help us win then. Dumont and Wood are really the only guys who probably deserved to play more than they have (badly timed injuries haven't helped, of course). Daw always underwhelms. I would have delisted Mullet last year and come close to delisting McKenzie (and having to play them this year for so many games has not persaded me that was wrong, neither is up to it).

Only one coach wins the Grand Final each year, and it doesn't mean the other 17 are all bad coaches. It's not all on the coach. I tend to wonder why chief recruiters are so rarely under the public blowtorch, actually. This article blatantly overstates some things in order to hatchet Brad Scott, such as pretending Robbie Tarrant was going to be a success under any coach, saying he inherited Todd Goldstein to avoid admitting Goldstein developed into a beast under Scott, and so on. There's fair questions over Scott but this isn't a fair article. The question is simple- given the state of North's list when he inherited it, could Scott have done much better? Obviously North needs a rebuild now but he's hardly responsible for their players getting older, the question is whether Scott is a good coach for the next time try at a premiership or whether he's not and they should give someone else a go. I tend to think he's not perfect but has done pretty well to get two prelims out of this lot (one of them genuinely uncompetitive and probably would have been even if the backline wasn't destroyed by injuries, the other competitive despite the awful pro-Eagles umpiring). He clearly gets the team prepared for finals footy very well. So that's a tick in his favour, he can prepare a team for finals footy, and he probably got as much out of this squad as anyone could have done. The question is then on list management. We don't know how much of that is Scott and how much of that is North management saying "do your best to win now". The top-up strategy has mostly been free agents (not costing draft picks) and got them to two prelims, so even if that's Scott it made sense. You can't throw away even a 5-10% chance of making a Grand Final, which is what I'd estimate North had (basically, what's the chance of having no major injuries and maybe your best opponents having a key injury or two?). North's list is the result of basically never bottoming out (two top 5 picks, Wells and Cunnington, in 15 years). They haven't found the superstars that are the foundation of success for the most successful clubs in the modern era but they haven't had much of a shot at the very best talent either. Don't think that's on Scott. With young players it's always hard to tell the difference between bad recruitment and bad development, but Scott doesn't seem to have more strikeouts than anyone else. The success in developing Ben Jacobs after he failed at Port Adelaide is probably a good sign for Scott being good at development. Basically, I think Scott has demonstrated real coaching ability (more than most coaches) but hasn't had the cattle to quite go all the way, and North is probably better off giving Scott a go with the rebuild than trying some new assistant who might be the next Damien Hardwick or Leppitsch or Matty Primus and make a pig's breakfast of the rebuild and never take it anywhere, unless they encounter someone they are absolutely convinced will do a brilliant job. Al Clarkson isn't walking through that door.

Nothing like getting ahead of yourself. Gotta win the first one before you can even think about a second or beyond.

I've said all along that Swans are building a dynasty similar to Hawks and look a good chance at back-to-back flags. As much as it may upset the Melbourne fans, we could see Swans and GWS setting up camp in the top 4 for the next decade and sharing 5 or 6 premierships in that time. It's what the AFL really needs...strong support in Sydney.

One year wouldn't be enough, but he has had two already and will be entering his third at the start of next year.

If longmire wins the flag this year its the youngest and least experienced list profile to win a grand final ever and we are in for a dynasty. The complaining about the swans is only just starting!

How many real members though, we all know how each and every club pads that stat with 3 game memberships etc etc. There is realistically 40 000 die hards between the two clubs that would be lost. But losing 40 000 from melbourne isnt a big deal to the afl, the city itself will see their kids become invested in another club in time, and the better national competition would add 40 000 over the next 10 years all over the country.

True. I never wrote of Jacobs I always rated him. A ball magnet in the VFL, now he blankets ball magnets. The only question is did we need another hard ball get mid in Jacobs and then draft Dumont on top of that? Jacobs got a go at half back before tagging because he was never going to be in our mid. Great that it's worked out though and he's a great tagger

Preliminaries aren't the goal of AFL. It is good to reach there but it's not why players are recruited. The very reason they have dumped our experienced players is to regenerate for a GF push. Brayshaw and Scotts words not ours. If the goal was to push for another preliminary then they may have kept these veterans or at least 2. Brad Scott has continually said throughout his tenure that the future of North is his utmost concern. Well we haven't introduced enough players to the seniors and only debuted 3 in two years. This is in direct contrast to Sydney and Hawthorn, arguably two of the best yard sticks in the business. Scott chose a different direction and it didn't work. I wouldn't say he was totally wrong it was worth a go. However, it's not wrong to say he has had his turn at success and maybe it's time for new blood, new ideas and a new direction. He is totally unproven at developing players having gone the experienced player route. Not sure why he should be at North in 4-5yrs for another GF tilt.. your argument that Scott has had success is not totally wrong. But suggesting the premise of the article is false is not right. During that success players like Daw, Mason Wood, Mullet and Dumont etc all rotted in the VFL. It is an unknown where any of those players would be at if we went the younger route or if our success was more sustained. That's where I would say your argument fall short. NO club measures sustained success as a two year period. Clubs and most supporters want sustained success at the top for 4-5yrs for the best chance of a flag. This sustained success includes prolonged periods of top four finishes. The industry standard for success. Period.

Great article and absolutely spot on. Rest assured your article echoed the EXACT thoughts of a 36yr member. The only thing I slightly disagreed with is that Atley is a 'jobber'. Different coach and he might not be running around in circles down back doubting himself. In the first half of the year he was one of our few improvers before it all went to pot. Never tried across the mid or up forward for something different. Same with McKenzie (I'm not a fan but..) supposedly the best kick at the club but did he try him up the field across the wing delivering inside 50? No. Scott just bemoaned our ineffectiveness going inside 50. Had McKenzie kicking 15 metre kicks from fullback to the pocket. Scott has a lot of support but lost mine because of what you say 1. Talked tough after bad losses but did nothing (Well he finally did by belittling the least deserving and subbing him before the 400th. 2. Rewarded mediocrity by not turning over players enough as you pointed out compared to top clubs. 3. Never 'invented' or tried to create something. 4. Prelim finals are great but the real stuff is decided in the home and away with a top four finish. We have had 7 mediocre years and that's a lot of mediocrity. We set our aim for 12 wins at the start, and well, we reached our goal I'm really bitter about Harvey and Scott doesn't have my respect or support and that's just how I feel. I would feel much better if North cleared out a few other oldies and gave a new coach a crack. Then I would support the Harvey decision as a club. If Scott goes out recruiting Nathan Brown or Mayne then the rebuild and given youth a crack is just BS

I think we all need to wait and see how 2017 pans out before concluding whether Scott has reached his use by date for North. If the club tumbles down the ladder and there are no signs of improvement in the young brigade(ie Dumont, Wagner, Clarke) and continued reliance on the usual suspects(Goldstein, Brown, Waite, Tarrant) then it may be time to part ways with the coach. However, Scott has earnt the chance to guide North in the wake of the exit of the 4 veterans and it will be interesting to see what impact he will have in shaping North's future. Without doubt, it will be his most challenging year as coach since he first took over post Laidley.

Seriously? The whole premise of your argument is that North hasn't achieved anything in the last 5 years. I'd say getting to 2 Prelims is pretty good for a struggling Melbourne club, wiht limited finances. IF you judged every club by your astronomical standards - that is 2 x prelims is unacceptable - then every coach in the league would be sacked. The club clearly made a decision to top up and go for a flag rather than recruit and build. Anyone can see that, except you. So again your argument around youth and drafts is irrelevant in that context. Don't forget there are only a handful of clubs in the last 5 years that are actually in contention - Hawks, Swans, Cats, Eagles & Freo - and to make it into the last 4 for 2 years running under any circumstance is I believe considered a success. I don't entirely disagree with the notion that Scott should go - his handling of the Harvey et al exit was terrible - but the basis of your argument is wrong.

As a North fan who thinks we need to go in a different direction, this is a very lazy and cliched/click-baity piece and really undersells his finals record in an era of 18 teams. As for player development - again, lazy. Tarrant was a mid first rounder, has had four shoulder reconstructions and was nearly delisted, so to put his turnaround down to "early draft pick, would have succeeded at any club" is severely underselling how good the current coaching staff has been for him. Especially when you laud other coaches for similar player turnarounds like McGovern. Goldstein might have been at the club before Scott arrived, but only made his debut the year before as a project ruckman with a basketball background. He has developed into the player he is under Scott. Sam Wright was a flaky forward and the current coaches turned him into an excellent rebounding defender. ben jacobs has gone from inconsistent half back to one of the best taggers in the game. Drew Petrie has enjoyed his five most productive seasons since Scott took over, including an All-Australian selection. Again, I am of the opinion the club needs a change, but this article is a bit all over the shop.

With Leppa sacked, if I was a club looking for good assistant coaches, I would employ him. He has experience as a senior coach so knows what is expected. I think he would be valuable as an assistant. I would be interested to hear the roarers views on this. Would he be good for your club as an assistant?

True and persevered with Sammy Wright and Ben Jacobs when others were righting them off as footballers. I'll give him credit for that