CEO - Xavier "Drive Purposeful Innovation" Campbell


#824

Some blitzers were smashing X when the team was losing last year, but all when quiet when the team started winning.

It’s not his fault players drop marks, miss easy shots at goal or lack intensity at the footy.


#825

He has to take responsibility for extending tge contract of the head coach for no reason.


#826

He’s not responsible for the day to day of the footy department but he is responsible for the longer term strategic stuff.

  • Are Woosha, Dodorro and Richardson the right people for the job and are they being managed effectively.

  • What’s up with our fitness program

  • list strategy. We effectively gave up 3 first round picks for Smith and Sheil, that’s a big investment. I hope it was the right decision.


#827

In the context of where we were at, I don’t think the club or Xavier had any choice. We signed Worsfold at a time when the club required an experienced and steady head - and then the majority of his team/best players got suspended. Worsfold may have signed with the remote chance that could happen, but I doubt it was ever considered to actually happen. He deserved an opportunity to prove himself as a coach because IMO that was taken away in his first year.

What is happening now - is a different story. I think Xavier and certainly Richardson would move on Worsfold because he’s had a 2 year run with no success (at the moment).


#828

He didn’t need to be extended last year


#829

Was he extended last year? I didn’t think he was contractually extended.


#830

Fair enough on most of those points… he has handled some of the clubs issues, post-saga, exceptionally well.

However, a purge can often be more beneficial in the long-run… keeping Worsfold and some players for the sake of stability may have also helped to maintain the mediocrity. If the footy dept’s main kpi was ‘just keep the existing group together and bring in some new players’, it’s a continuation of the low standards we’ve had for 16 years. The supporters want to see improvement, and finals… and that’s not really too much to ask for. The saga was a result of poor recruitment and management of key personnel, poor systems of accountability etc. Not being able to recruit and build a football department in the four years since, that can get its team playing finals, is an extenuation of this poor recruitment and management of footy personnel that the executive have displayed over the last 2 decades


#831

He was, it’s the Essington way


#832

The questions he should be asking is how the ■■■■ does Zaharakis, Bellchambers, Myers, Brown, McKernan, Bag ect still get games.

Why does Parish not attend any center bounces and play half forward while Langford opposite?

Clarke plays a game last year and plays deep forward the whole game, you know the guy who dominates the VFL clearances.

Hard decisions need to be made on these players, someone needs to just ■■■■■■■ make them.


#833

Langford attends hardly any centre bounces either so not sure why that keeps coming up.

He played a predominantly outside role and mixing with forward.

He also had the least time on ground of any of our players.


#834

Announced March 28, 2018.
Five days after we beat Adelaide in round one.
We lost six of the next seven games.

I don’t think it’s too out there to say that was premature.


#835

Yep - how can a club make such a naive decision


#836

Exactly.


#837

Killer_Mike it’s not about 1 game, it’s about giving the kids a chance to develop in the position which is most natural to them.

The coaching group just don’t give players the best opportunity to develop in the position they excel at I see it as making it harder for the young players to have good AFL careers.

Langford a forward
Parish a mid
Clarke played 1 game as a forward, the player who dominates VFL clearances.

They played Bags ahead of Laverde in round 1 like WTF.


#838

It came out of absolutely nowhere too.


#839

I’m pretty sure he played in the middle, he just couldn’t get near it. May have even been following an opponent around in the midfield


#840

None of that is the responsibility of the CEO.


#841

The_Bomb if you actually watched the players then you might see that they aren’t playing in the roles that you think they are.

Both Langford and Parish are getting about 5 minutes a game in the middle and that is whats holding them back.

Its irrelevant what you think their natural position it has more to do about where they can help the side.

And your point about Bags and Laverde highlights your bias. Laverde has done nothing with his opportunities whilst Bags has been a great servant of the club.


#842

As soon as he apologised for his tweet, I lost all respect for him.

How the hell can you be the top man at a club and be so spineless


#843

I’ll be honest, I’m not a fan of the bloke.
That’s a gut feel. I’ve met him I think maybe twice.
But that means bugger-all.

Fact is, though, that his blood-rush to the head is going to cost the club…probably a million dollars.
Let’s just say that much. No need to exaggerate or make it seem worse than it is.
That’s enough.
There was no reason for him to do it.
It’s not like then or now if Worsfold were let go then any One of seventeen clubs would be thinking, ‘■■■, exactly the assistant coach we need!’

I’d think costing your organisation a million bucks would be reason enough to take a step back.
No need to sack the guy, he’s still young.
shrugs And apparently the AFL like him.
But, come on.
You can’t do that and keep your job.