I think a lot of the criticism from exiting players was a more generally of the whole of management structure.
Interestingly, today there was an interview with Brian Cook, CEO Geelong who made the following comment as being a secret of his success, “develop a culture before (premiership) cups … you can’t sustain anything without culture”.

Agreed, you would have to love another McKenna at the Pies!! But, I also have a lot of time for Saad.
I think Buckley is really showing a lot of love for speed in the selection of John Noble in the mid year draft. Great figures for endurance and speed!

Even from the Power Rangers set?

If you were going to play Cox and Reid together, then Freo on the G would be a good time to try it.

As Forrest Gump said as he did his picks….. “Essendon is like a box a chocolate, you never know what your going to get”. But, this week it could be a Carlton win. The Bombers are beginning to look like soft centres.

I think it is time we reconsidered the Tim Lane article about how Collingwood and Carlton were at the same level but headed in different directions!

To some extent, I will take some vindication about how the bombers are going. I was entirely under-whelmed by their fantastic list as described by some commentators last year and coming into this season. I agree they were great to watch at times, but so were Melbourne last year.
I felt the Bomber’s list was neither wide nor deep. With a full team, it was vulnerable to exploitation by opponents skilful enough to channel attacks through designated areas. With injuries or when players tire late in the game, those channels of attack just become wider.

Anybody who has played in a first division NCAA team is not unco! Gangly perhaps, unco? Never!

If he was not respected by other clubs, they would not be putting so much effort into him. A lot of what Cox does goes unnoticed or seen as missed marks, but with him in the team, watch how many of those missed marks fall into the laps of Collingwood’s runners. The only effective strategy teams have come up with against Cox is to block him well away from the fall of the ball, while this is potentially a free, it rarely gets paid and is worth the risk for until it has been paid a couple of times and the umpires are obviously looking for it.
If you watch Cox in replay, it becomes clear how many of the times he fails to mark are simply being palmed to runners. Since Cox’ injury, goals from off hands to runners have dropped significantly. I don’t have any figures, but I would guess that his tap ons were worth two goals a match.

Buckley has frequently speculated about Reid and Cox playing together. To make it work required Mihocek to play as a small forward rather than a marking forward. Its not such a big stretch considering how many of his goals come from broken play.

If you can not measure it, you can not manage it!
Nobody is worse off from looking at the stats. But, the issue is how you collect and interpret what you need. Consider the way stats were used in the movie Moneyball. I often think that teams in many sports would benefit from a person who comes from a strategy and stats background not so much to design your own play(s), but to interpret what other teams are doing and counter.

One of the factors in the Swans v Pies game was how poorly the Pies handled the dewy surface and slippery ball. Despite saying after the game they knew it would be a factor I think poor balling handling and in ability to move the ball on meant Collingwood squandered plenty of opportunities when they could have opened an early lead up.
There was a time when Sydney had heaps of night games at home, I wonder how much the tight confines of the SCG and dewy surfaces contributed to their win ratio and if they are playing less in the evenings is it one of those marginal factors hurting them now?

When I really started being able to see what Roughhead was doing it reminded me of Prestiagiacomo and Ted Potter (if you are old enough to have seen him). I think having the option of a negating defender adds additional complexity to a backline and he has been a great addition. That it took me so long is, I suppose, why I am writing here typing and not talent spotting and list building. B-)

No, if my kids played and were good enough for the draft, I would be delighted. Every parent would have preferred options and a couple of places they would prefer not. As a life long Collingwood supporter, in the Black and White would be fantastic, but I would be proud regardless.
Putting aside the Lever business, for me there are a heap of other things coming out of Adelaide that are indications of a poor culture. I wonder about some of the underlying beliefs and framing in both Adelaide clubs. I have never understood why Graham Cornes refused to go to the Port rooms even when he had two sons playing for them. Strange to me, but apparently not in Adelaide.
A good culture requires balance and effectively a statement of what your stand for. But a side for being completely with us or against us what is it that Adelaide stands for? They have accepted bullying as part of their culture. They have prevented exiting players addressing the group: ostracism. And, the obfuscated about their mistakes with the team camp. Sounds like a poor leadership culture.

Looking at the images of Cox moving at training he has always looked as tough it was close to a return, however the reports are that he is having trouble moving laterally. Seems to be a fairly normal problem with syndesmosis injuries they seem hard to predict.
I have not been a huge fan of Roughhead during the season so far, but have changed my mind and think he may be one of the big factors in what I see as a major improvement in being able to cover for injuries and give flexibility in matchup. He seems to be one of those defenders that you think [… insert name here … ] had a bad day, until you look at the isolation shots and see it was not a bad day as much as beaten on the day.

Ryan, thank you very interesting comments.
I thought that I had been seeing something along the same lines. Also, I think that the Pies are using the same or similar numbers of handballs to get out of packs to outside runners as last year, but opting for faster movement into the forward line using kick to open runners. This years forward line looks better able to find or create the mismatch. I suspect this is due to giving the forward line more option to set itself up as opposition coaches will find it had to respond in the absence of runners during play.
If the fast entry is not on, then you see the Pies switch to tempo football and use the full width and length of grounds, and this has also contributed to the change in their kick / handball ratio. To me this looks a bit like soccer teams getting up on the scoreboard and then being prepared to pass the ball around until defences advance and open up opportunities. Hawthorn have done this to great effect a couple of times this year.

It was more than just that. The Club stopped the amount of other work such as sponsor days etc that he was expected to do. Their instruction was for him to do less and coach more.

For mine, he never seems to have a viable plan B. As my comments here probably show I am a lover of strategy and while I do watch them, the Crows never delight me. So much of what they do to score seems like chaos rather than any attempt to play to strengths or create strategic advantages. I always finish feeling unfulfilled.

Perhaps I am now looking for more than is really there. But, taken along with all the Crows’ other man management and culture problems the issues with Gibbs look like there may be more to it. I just do not know, but it looks wrong and wreaks of scapegoating.

I’m blushing in my cold damp skin.

I am unsure of who organised it but as soon as the club knows players are leaving, (not just Lever), my understanding is that the club has instructed players not to contact them, answer calls or SMSs. How mind bogglingly childish and how stupid must this make the leadership group look in the eyes of players who have been playing with and against each other in competition(s) since they were 14 years old?

If what you say is correct, then Lever should have been in the twos. But, I doubt he would really need any pumping unless he was being recruited by part-timers.
In terms of locker room talk, I can remember Daisey Thomas being touted as the best player in the comp while Didac bagged him in the rooms as not even the best in the team.
And even if Lever is entirely to blame, it doesn’t excuse all of Adelaide’s other stuff ups.
Despite all of this, and either way, failure to take the appropriate action is a failure of management.

Hi RT,
I was watching what Buckley was trying to achieve to beat the Tigers, but part of it was having the skills and players, and the other a period without injuries. I am also sure that Hardwick could see it just based on his pre & post match comments in the 2017 & 18 season.
The thing about strategy is that it is about bringing overwhelming force against an opponent’s point of weakness. Adversaries are always looking to find a loose brick in an opponents wall. It will not take Hardwick two years, he is too good for that. Also, as players change and age etc, strategies become vulnerable. I look forward to pre-game anxiety against Richmond for years to come. Particularly since, over the last decade, Richmond have distinguished themselves as excellent citizens of the AFL.

My kids are not old enough to play yet, but as it happens are likely to go to other sports. That said, I do believe that all clubs have a high responsibility to young men and their through them, to their parents. Once you are in the draft you go where you are sent, but Adelaide would worry me just based on what I think I have seen.
In terms of the whole lever thing, it was badly managed by the club and its leaders from the very start. It is a fact of life that players move, allowing yourself to be manoeuvred into a position that allows your club to be painted in a bad light shows foolishness on the part of club administrators and leaders.
When a player needs to go do it with some grace, other players are watching and interpreting what they see. Consider the way Collingwood managed Beams move to Brisbane. Because a good relationship had been maintained eventually Beams returned to the Pies. How many of the players who left Adelaide would either want to return or be welcomed back?

I agree the camp and how the follow up was addressed were problems. But, the real problem for Adelaide is that it was not just the camp, there were other things as well. The way Lever was treated was absolutely an indicator of workplace bullying. If it happened in any other work place it would have been investigated.

I agree with your observation. Turn-over is a key indicator of cultural problems. Like with a lot of other issues, Adelaide found a way to turn a blind eye to it.