Soft Saints?

[rodgerfox]

Intriguing insight by Riewoldt last night.

He was asked whether there would have been strong feedback and honesty sessions at the Saints after the s*** they've been serving up.

"Not strong enough" was his response.

Went on to say that basically they are nowhere near hard enough in their feedback. It frustrated him during his last couple of years.

So there it is. Pretty much your answer regarding 'development' and also mediocrity on-field. They're not pushing themselves, and they're not being pushed and challenged.

The question is ... is it Richo that is too soft? Or are the players too soft to cop blunt, honest feedback? Or both?

[bigred]

Did he really say that?

[Cairnsman]

Thier general look I have to agree appears soft, the first quarter against the Swans is your damming evidence. Bruse free I think they call it.

[rodgerfox]

When asked how brutal the review of last weekend’s heavy loss to Sydney would have been, Riewoldt gave an honest view of what would have happened internally.

“It wouldn’t be very brutal at all in my opinion,” he told Fox Footy.

“I’ve got a different view on what brutal looks like compared to the current group and that was probably something that really frustrated me over my last few years at the club.”

[bigred]

Excellent.

[rodgerfox]

Successful footy teams find that perfect timing of having strong leaders who accept being challenged, and coaches that challenge them.

A coach that challenges players, when the players don't want it - will fail.

Players that want to be challenged but aren't by their coach will face careers of mediocrity.

A team with neither is f***ed.


The question is, what do we have?

[thejiggingsaint]

Successful footy teams find that perfect timing of having strong leaders who accept being challenged, and coaches that challenge them.

A coach that challenges players, when the players don't want it - will fail.

Players that want to be challenged but aren't by their coach will face careers of mediocrity.

A team with neither is f***ed.


The question is, what do we have?

The answer to THAT question is provided each week on the paddock, Colleague.

[Yorkeys]

An intriguing thing for me in a masochistic aside is how long can this soft rubbish continue. So in the absence of anything other than observed behaviour and Nick's observations its a generally poor culture controlled by mutually dependent people that lack the capacity for needed change and/or there is internal political bastardry at play. Nobody seems to be accountable for the side being currently the worse performing club, which is a rare achievement given how bad a few other clubs are. Whatever AR's role and responsibilities are and those of the various coaches and directors (incl. Board), going four months without a win is apparently not reason to conclude that pretty much the same players and officials in the same positions going through the same motions is going to produce the same results. That assumes the club would like to win some games. Once a franchise loses for say six months can the AFL send in administrators (no not Matt and Simon, real change agents)? As much as the other clubs would enjoy the Saints ineptitude for a while wouldn't it get boring to the point of overall brand damage that needs to fixed. Is the organisational structure so convoluted that no one can demand improvement, the ongoing allusion to review(s) makes review sound like a euphemism for don't do anything just yet. Its a fascinating case study in organisational failure don't you think. So Soft Saints for how long? Players would be taking the lead from the environment set by the managers and coaches but are probably starting to wonder how long their cosy no harsh words gig is going to last because they must see it is well beyond a joke.

[elizabethr]

Who cares what he thinks?

[Enrico_Misso]

What sort of honest brutal feedback does Richo give to Mav Weller?

[mordiboyz]

First of all congratulations to BackfromUSA with getting this board back on track. The new software is great.

I detested posting on that other website forum.... a weird mix of propaganda, bullies, negativity and over the top advertising.

Is this a false dawn or is change finally coming to our Saints?

[MC Gusto]

To y74 brought this to the table a while back

Essentially the players like Richo....and I think some are confusing that like with the players ‘playing’ for Richo

Tony essentially said there is too much ‘mr nice guy’ and not enough c-unt

This is a big problem. I think under our ‘modern business management’ regime we’ve lost the concept of the importance of authority and in some instances a bit of mongrel and fear. We have to tread on eggshells around our precious generation Z players. It’s bulls***!!
Let me tell you the people at the top of most orgs eg the big CEOs are still feared today and that is a big part of how they got to where they are

[Con Gorozidis]

What sort of honest brutal feedback does Richo give to Mav Weller?

'Looking buff bro'.
Followed by a gentle but meaningful tap on the bottocks.

[Con Gorozidis]

To y74 brought this to the table a while back

Essentially the players like Richo....and I think some are confusing that like with the players ‘playing’ for Richo

Tony essentially said there is too much ‘mr nice guy’ and not enough c-unt

This is a big problem. I think under our ‘modern business management’ regime we’ve lost the concept of the importance of authority and in some instances a bit of mongrel and fear. We have to tread on eggshells around our precious generation Z players. It’s bulls***!!
Let me tell you the people at the top of most orgs eg the big CEOs are still feared today and that is a big part of how they got to where they are

Spot on.
The players like Richo..
They probably like the tea lady as well.

Same kind of 'like'.

[rodgerfox]

Successful footy teams find that perfect timing of having strong leaders who accept being challenged, and coaches that challenge them.

A coach that challenges players, when the players don't want it - will fail.

Players that want to be challenged but aren't by their coach will face careers of mediocrity.

A team with neither is f***ed.


The question is, what do we have?

The answer to THAT question is provided each week on the paddock, Colleague.

No it's not.

The sympton is - but the cause remains unknown. To us, anyway.

Is it a weak coach? Is it mentally fragile players? It it both?

[rodgerfox]

Let me tell you the people at the top of most orgs eg the big CEOs are still feared today and that is a big part of how they got to where they are

Not really. I'd replace feared with respected.

The rule with fear approach started dying out when Gen Y arrived on the scene.


And that takes me back to the original post - is it a coaching issue in that the players are not being pushed? And that doesn't mean abused - that s*** doesn't work anymore, it means blunt, honest and respectful feedback with the right intention.

Or are the player not prepared to be challenged by the Coach? Are they too precious? Or is it both?

[WellardSaint]

Who cares what he thinks?

Reiwoldt pushed himself harder than any other player in the league, for years.

He set the tone, the standard, and demanded others
try to reach some level of excellence.
A true champion.

Remember Maddie's Match last year?

I reckon he pushed all the right buttons in that one.
He gets MY vote.

[chico2001]

Agree Wellard.....could not think of anyone better to add comment regarding the saints woes........

[portosaint]

Who cares what he thinks?

What a childish reaction

[satchmo]

Pat the tail, kick the dog.

[st.byron]

Successful footy teams find that perfect timing of having strong leaders who accept being challenged, and coaches that challenge them.

A coach that challenges players, when the players don't want it - will fail.

Players that want to be challenged but aren't by their coach will face careers of mediocrity.

A team with neither is f***ed.


The question is, what do we have?

The answer to THAT question is provided each week on the paddock, Colleague.

No it's not.

The sympton is - but the cause remains unknown. To us, anyway.

Is it a weak coach? Is it mentally fragile players? It it both?

I don’t understand the debate about where responsibility lies. It is clearly, fairly and squarely at the door of Richardson. He is the senior coach, the leader of the club with regards to their on-field performance and responsible for the culture of the team. From our on-field performances and from feedback I have from people who worked with him at the Saints, he doesn’t have integrity to stand firm in the fire of tough decisions. The players can see that and whether they like him as a person or not, they know he’s not a warrior leader, a leader to trust when it gets tough. We will go nowhere whilst he remains at the helm, unless he finds it within himself to grow a pair.

[saynta]

Did he really say that?

Yep. I heard him.

[Con Gorozidis]

Do people really need Nick to point this out for them to acknowledge it. It is plain obvious.
Do some peole even watch our games?
Do they watch the good sides play for comparison?
Chalk and cheese.

[saynta]

Nic would be spewing watching the s*** being dished up each week.

[Milne]

Do people really need Nick to point this out for them to acknowledge it. It is plain obvious.
Do some peole even watch our games?
Do they watch the good sides play for comparison?
Chalk and cheese.

It hold more weight coming from someone who not only played under the current regime, but absolutely bled for the red white and black.