Wouldn't call Nathan a failed coach. As true coaches never stop learning. But, Nathan returned to Collingwood as Head Coach way too early, was still too inexperienced. And the way he inherited the Head Coach role from Mick, was not the correct way to do things. Impatience on Nathans part, made him a great football player but not YET a great Coach. Good but not great. Very few get to those heights.
The way the football Dept handle the last trade period, was a disgrace. We can make the argument of the situation of "hub life" as the cause, and wanting early draft choices, but how Nathan and others on the coaching panel treated the players involved, was not good or acceptable for the culture of the Club and its most important assets. "THE MEMBERS" what happened to "side by side"
How can a Club expect to attract named players off contract or experienced coaches with this sort of attitude. Can understand tough decisions need to be made from time to time, but this trade debacle was just poor planning and now you have this mess. Giving players away and paying other clubs to take players. Again just poor planning for the future....how many paid professional in the footy department and this basic error is allowed to happen.
Moving forward as a footy club and as a business you cannot have the Football Dept making these bad decisions followed by bad decisions. Well documented off field discontent has not helped, but has played no part in the poor choice of match tactics, players roles and development "ARM CHAIR EXPERT TALKING" ha ha..
So many issues that need to be address on and off the footy field to keep corporate dollars rolling in. Very difficult job and I wish all board members future success. Very difficult (3) years approaching for the footy club to maneuver back in the right direction.
Although I have been active in suggesting Nathan should walk, I also wish Nathan all the best and every success in his next coaching role.
Second half of this years fixtures will be interesting to see which players get what role and how they get themselves out of the massive list issues they have....cough cough degeoy as a starting point.
The way the football Dept handle the last trade period, was a disgrace. We can make the argument of the situation of "hub life" as the cause, and wanting early draft choices, but how Nathan and others on the coaching panel treated the players involved, was not good or acceptable for the culture of the Club and its most important assets. "THE MEMBERS" what happened to "side by side"
How can a Club expect to attract named players off contract or experienced coaches with this sort of attitude. Can understand tough decisions need to be made from time to time, but this trade debacle was just poor planning and now you have this mess. Giving players away and paying other clubs to take players. Again just poor planning for the future....how many paid professional in the footy department and this basic error is allowed to happen.
Moving forward as a footy club and as a business you cannot have the Football Dept making these bad decisions followed by bad decisions. Well documented off field discontent has not helped, but has played no part in the poor choice of match tactics, players roles and development "ARM CHAIR EXPERT TALKING" ha ha..
So many issues that need to be address on and off the footy field to keep corporate dollars rolling in. Very difficult job and I wish all board members future success. Very difficult (3) years approaching for the footy club to maneuver back in the right direction.
Although I have been active in suggesting Nathan should walk, I also wish Nathan all the best and every success in his next coaching role.
Second half of this years fixtures will be interesting to see which players get what role and how they get themselves out of the massive list issues they have....cough cough degeoy as a starting point.
