Bombertalk

Ive been hearing some people say there are an overwhelming number of essendon supporters who wanted sheeds to stay and other saying the majority wanted him gone. I think it's time to come clean and say who did and who didn't want him gone and the reasons.

To start the ball rolling, I think the decision was correct.

Ahem...you forgot your reason

Personally, I would have been happy for him to stay as he has a proven record of developing teams and I have been relatively happy with our progress this year.

Now that the decision to replace him has been made, I accept that it has happened and I look forward to finding out who the new coach will be.

I wanted him to stay on a 2 year contract.

I wanted him gone, but not just him, the rest of the coaching staff as well needs to change. The tactics employed are not entirely Sheedys fault, we do have three assistant coaches.

We needed the change, not because Sheeds is old, but we continualy get out-coached. We dont pick the right team for the right ground and we dont have enough runners (midfielders not Barnes-like figures) in the team when we play at the 'G.

Rossoneri wrote:I wanted him gone, but not just him, the rest of the coaching staff as well needs to change. The tactics employed are not entirely Sheedys fault, we do have three assistant coaches.

We needed the change, not because Sheeds is old, but we continualy get out-coached. We dont pick the right team for the right ground and we dont have enough runners (midfielders not Barnes-like figures) in the team when we play at the 'G.

What Rosso said, except I'd keep GO'D

Was happy for Sheeds to stay another 1-2 years with a transistion plan for the future. However, I totally understand the board's decision, and was satisfied that it was done with dignity. l totally accept the board's decision, the manner in which they handled it and the reasons of which it was made.

What is a disgrace though, is any group wanting to oust Peter Jackson.

I've waxed and wained re Sheeds for the last 5 years. Now that the decision has been made, I reckon it has been the correct one. My reasoning is that although Sheeds is the master at getting a team to play a competitive match when he sets his sights on it e.g. against Geelong, the teams "default" performances are pretty poor. Game plans, selections etc, really do leave one wondering - on too many occasions. It was handled as well as can be expected, in the circumstances, the other coach ' terminations" plus the Voss hysteria probably buggered the preferrd timing, but all in all we get the fairwell "tour" it should not have derailed finals action - hell players should work bloody hard to gety September action, no matter who the coach is, and since the announcement, Sheeds coaching has been different to what we can expect, so all in all, lets hope a new broom turns up some gems.

should have been NO different !!!!

i think this is the right decision, i've just never had any other coach of Essendon so i dont know what to expect thats all

there were some things that he did/does that really piss me off but also when he is on he is REALLY ON!!

what i love about him is his ability to promote the game and give only good things back to the sport

i would have also liked for him on a 1 year deal while a replacement coaches under him and steps up in 2009... BUT then again would the new coach learn all the things that piss me of about sheedy in the first place???

so ill stick with my first answer of right decision now lets move on and be the best we can be

Rossoneri wrote: We needed the change, not because Sheeds is old, but we continualy get out-coached. We dont pick the right team for the right ground and we dont have enough runners (midfielders not Barnes-like figures) in the team when we play at the 'G.

Agree 100%.

I could have gone either way on the decision. I can see the merits for a change, but I think that Sheeds has also done a pretty good job this year.

Firmly on the fence but agree with your reasoning Rosso.

The decision was 100% correct.
Just as champion footballers need to be told the game has passed them and they must give it away the same goes for coaches.

The correct decision.

Sheedy has been great for the club but it was very clear to all and sundry that the place was becoming a little one dimensional

Larger than life characters like Sheedy, Hird, Lloyd continue to dominate the club's persona and with all of them approaching the end of their time, this was the right thing to do.

New coach, new attitude, new approach.

We have the nucleus of a reaonable side and as such a new coach can do exactly what Sheedy did in 81. Build upon the nucleus to go to a flag three years later.

It's a bit like the Stokhlom Syndrome.

Let's move one - perhaps it was something (with hind sight) we should have done 3 years ago.

We're a professional football club FFS! Not a benevolent society.

Wanted him gone, but not from the club, just as our seniour coach.

I wanted him to stay for three years but with one year contracts.

Jazz_84 wrote:i think this is the right decision, i've just never had any other coach of Essendon so i dont know what to expect thats all

Describes a lot of us.

I wouldn't have objected to (in order of preference):

BenDoolan wrote:happy for Sheeds to stay another 1-2 years with a transistion plan for the future.

Essendon4eva wrote:I wanted him to stay for three years but with one year contracts.

dom_105 wrote:I wanted him to stay on a 2 year contract.

I wanted a transition plan.

Would have been happy if they had have sacked him start of 2005 because it was obvious that we were going backwards. But now we're going forwards.

andrewb wrote:I wanted a transition plan.

Would have been happy if they had have sacked him start of 2005 because it was obvious that we were going backwards. But now we're going forwards.

I here ya, but we made the 2nd week of finals in 2004. Given the outcry we've had over Sheeds being flicked at the end of this year on the back of 2 consecutive bottom 4 finishes and a likely 10-11th this year, imagine the outcry if he got the arse after we'd made the second week of finals!

Not just Windy Hill, but all of Essendon and neighbouring suburbs would be burnt down, we'd have 42,593 EGMs, a Royal Commission, parliamentary enquiry, appeal to the Hague, some supporters would want our Board tried for treason, there'd be a petition to the Pope, and people would only just be getting warmed up.

jimmyc1985 wrote:

andrewb wrote:I wanted a transition plan.

Would have been happy if they had have sacked him start of 2005 because it was obvious that we were going backwards. But now we're going forwards.

I here ya, but we made the 2nd week of finals in 2004. Given the outcry we've had over Sheeds being flicked at the end of this year on the back of 2 consecutive bottom 4 finishes and a likely 10-11th this year, imagine the outcry if he got the arse after we'd made the second week of finals!

Not just Windy Hill, but all of Essendon and neighbouring suburbs would be burnt down, we'd have 42,593 EGMs, a Royal Commission, parliamentary enquiry, appeal to the Hague, some supporters would want our Board tried for treason, there'd be a petition to the Pope, and people would only just be getting warmed up.

And only missed out on a Prelim spot by 10 points. At that stage, Sheeds wasn't going anywhere.

I like Sheeds, and have been a supporter since 1981, however, after 2001 he has made 1 crucial repetitive error IMHO.

He tried to get another shot, via getting older experienced players...Allan, Murphy, Campo, MM, Zantuck etc...when he should've gone younger.
Younger via the draft, younger via trades...whichever.

He has shown loyalty to his players, especially those he asks to do jobs oop for him, eg Henneman and Bolton, and this trait is fine. Unfortunately it hasn't been a positive for the team.

It's time.