Eade legacy at Swans now finished.

[Bas]

There was an article in the Sun Herald yesterday about Brett Kirk and Eade.

Brett said that in June 2002 after playing in Melbourne that both he and Frosty were told by Eade that their careers were finished. They would not play in first grade again.

A week later , Eade quits the Swans and Roos brings Brett back into the fold. The rest is history.

I think for too long, the Swans have had held an honour to Eade for getting them into a GF in his first year. Yet he couldn't do it again or get anywhere close to doing it in the next 7 years.

I think there were other players too who were not happy with Eade, especially his rantings and ravings.

Now Roos has taken the Swans to a Premiership with his coaching and player empowering skills I think Eades place and contribution in Swans history will be corrected.

[Damien]

So what? he got a player wrong? shoot him.

He made a contribution to the club, that should be remembered.

Roos was the first coach to win in 72 years - doesn't mean the many other coaches we have had since 1933 mean nothing in terms of what they were able to do.

Barrassi and then Eade were able to instill a winning culture into the club, very very important in the scheme of things.

[cressakel]

Originally posted by Bas
There was an article in the Sun Herald yesterday about Brett Kirk and Eade.

Brett said that in June 2002 after playing in Melbourne that both he and Frosty were told by Eade that their careers were finished. They would not play in first grade again.

A week later , Eade quits the Swans and Roos brings Brett back into the fold. The rest is history.

I think for too long, the Swans have had held an honour to Eade for getting them into a GF in his first year. Yet he couldn't do it again or get anywhere close to doing it in the next 7 years.

I think there were other players too who were not happy with Eade, especially his rantings and ravings.

Now Roos has taken the Swans to a Premiership with his coaching and player empowering skills I think Eades place and contribution in Swans history will be corrected.

Couldn't stand "Floodney" when he was coaching us post 1996 and still can't now.....

Second behind Gary Buckenara in the Swans history post 1982 as the worst coach

Eade was the only coach to constantly take good players (read. Maxfield, Kelly, Cresswell, Lewis, Roos, Schwass etc. etc.) off the ground for mistakes but constantly kept duds like Bomford, O'Connor and Filandia on the ground after mistakes for God knows what reason.....

[BayesysLeftBoot]

While I was one of the people hoping for him to leave in his last season, I think he is an excellent coach and should be congratulated for what he did for us. He probably lost the players to a certain extent in his last couple of seasons and we just needed a change, simple as that.

[Plugger46]

Eade was a second-rate coach. Had Barassi stayed on, we would have won a flag. How we didn't win a flag with Lockett, Kelly, Creswell, Schwass, Roos, O'Loughlin etc, is beyond me.

Kirk was our best player in the elimination final against Hawthorn in 2001. Why didn't Eade realise that he was a good footballer then?

[hammo]

Harsh assessment. Considering where the club had come from in the early 90's, Eade's achievements as coach were commendable. He turned us from a bottom of the ladder side to a regular finals team.

Many of our premiership team were brought to the club by Eade.

In saying that, I firmly believe Roos is a better coach and Eade moved on at the right time.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by hammo
Harsh assessment. Considering where the club had come from in the early 90's, Eade's achievements as coach were commendable. He turned us from a bottom of the ladder side to a regular finals team.

Many of our premiership team were brought to the club by Eade.

I have always believed he was a hack coach, and still believe it. He did nothing for the club that any other coach would not have, and did much less for us than either Barassi or Roos.

Lets remember that the team that got us into the 96 GF and then at least three of the next finals campaigns included a miriad of Team of the Century players, two Brownlow medalists, a Coleman medalist, and a Hall of Famer (with at least two more to be inducted eventually IMO). And with that team, arguably one of the most talented we've ever assembled, he managed to get us squat.

Why? Because he is hopeless at reaching out and developing seccond and third tier players. He can create a side with a good first 6 or 7 players, but cannot reach out or connect with the younger ones coming through.

Compare that with Roos, who can put a side with 16 solid players every week onto the park, and ensure that the weakest 6 players every game are better than the weakest 6 of the opposition.

Put all of that "game day strategist" crap to one side, and you'll find Eade is in the bottom 6 of coaches in the league today. I would struggle to put him at anywhere but in the last three in fact.

[Mike_B]

I reckon that Eade definitely struggled to connect with the players in his latter years with the Swans and it seems he has taken those learnings with him to the Dogs. It will be interesting to see how he goes in coming years them - has he really changed or will he end up heading down the same road as he did with the Swans.

[NMWBloods]

I suppose people think Hafey was crap too...

For similar reasons some think Blight was crap because of his experience at St Kilda.

Both of those coaches achieved success elsewhere. Perhaps club culture was an issue at the time too.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I suppose people think Hafey was crap too...

He failed in one crucial arena... he forgot that finals was where it counted. Particularly in 87 where he had the team peak at round 18, with three consecutive 30+ goal games in a row. We beat Melbourne by 6 goals at the G in round 12, but yet in the Semi we lost to the same team, same venue, by almost double that.

Being the searing cynicist that you are NMW, I would have thought you would have less support for this form of 'mediocrity'? For mine, its not so much the record of each coach that annoys me, its also the style. Both Eade and Hafey were what I call 'screamers' and that's all fine if you get results. IMO if you have to treat players like crap to get results, you deserve to get it back double when you fail as a coach.

[mocaholic]

It's spoken about that Barass was great, but he was more a figurehead for Drum below him who I believe did a lot of the matchday / strategy stuff. Barass to my mind was to inspire and motivate - which is something he certainly did well. I still have a little bit of time for Drum as he certainly assembled a good crew at Freo (to his own expense) and the fact that somebody else can't get the best out of them isn't necessarily Drum's fault.

Eade early on was good, innovative, keen and eager (running on to the ground Waverley 1996 shows his passion), but after seven years his message was tired and his methods were self-defensive. Sure he made an error with Kirk, but I didn't think he was too bad.

My mate at the Dogs though does say he can get a little 'unhappy' with the players...

Hafey however could've cost us flag with his overtraining of the 86/87 teams...the team was like a well-oiled machine in August 87 but lost back-to-back against Hawks and Melb because they couldn't run out the game.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by mocaholic
Hafey however could've cost us flag with his overtraining of the 86/87 teams...the team was like a well-oiled machine in August 87 but lost back-to-back against Hawks and Melb because they couldn't run out the game.

Woosha 2005? After the loss to the Swans the Eagles got quite wobbly.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
He failed in one crucial arena... he forgot that finals was where it counted. Particularly in 87 where he had the team peak at round 18, with three consecutive 30+ goal games in a row. We beat Melbourne by 6 goals at the G in round 12, but yet in the Semi we lost to the same team, same venue, by almost double that.

Being the searing cynicist that you are NMW, I would have thought you would have less support for this form of 'mediocrity'? For mine, its not so much the record of each coach that annoys me, its also the style. Both Eade and Hafey were what I call 'screamers' and that's all fine if you get results. IMO if you have to treat players like crap to get results, you deserve to get it back double when you fail as a coach.
I was very disappointed with the way Eade finished up at the Swans. I think he lost the players in his last few years. However, he did a great job before then and I think he's a very good coach. He'll be even better in his next time around now at the 'Dogs.

[swan_song]

For me, Rodney was a great coach to the point that either he couldn't impart anything more to the players, or they were not listening to him...I don't profess to know which. I only know that at the time that that point was reached, he had to be replaced. Thankfully, the board made the correct decision in appointing Roosie and his three-year plan has come to fruiition....or was it a five-year plan? :D

I was talking to a fellow swannie at the parade on friday about this...what is it with THIS goup of players that delivered a premiership, when we had star-studded teams in 86-87 and 96 to a lesser degree that couldn't...it came down to Roosie's coaching methods in the end we thought.

[Bas]

I think it was a belief in the players themselves. The formation of "The Bloods" was significant.

I'm sure they can take it up a level next year.

[Legs Akimbo]

At a tactical level, Eade was clearly ahead of his time and that got us quite a few games. His mistake was not to be even handed with players, but rather to play favourites (i.e. Filandia the love child). I think that eventually lost him the players' confidence and belief. Notable that some of the players still have a lot of time for him (i.e. MOL).

I think Roos picked up a lot of Eade's tactical nous, to our benefit this year. But Roos is clearly 'the great motivator' in the style of coaches like John Northey and Stan Alves. I think history shows you need that to be really succesful. Roos is the almost the complete package, whereas Eade was flawed.

Whether or not Eade has learnt from his mistakes will be known soon enough.

[Vivien]

I rate Eade as a very good coach. Sure, I didn't always agree with his methods but as others have said, his achievement was to bring a winning culture to the club.

Having said that, I think Roos is a better coach for this particular group of players. He clearly has great interpersonal skills (which perhaps Rodney lacked) - the ability to grasp the sort of mentoring that individual players require. And he has been most successful in extracting a great deal from his second and third tier players. However, there will come a time when Roos will no longer be the right man for the club, just as Eade was when he left. Different coaches are suited to different player groups. I think Eade is much better suited to the high-pressure environment of a Melbourne club, and so I believe he will do well at the Dogs.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by swan_song
I was talking to a fellow swannie at the parade on friday about this...what is it with THIS goup of players that delivered a premiership, when we had star-studded teams in 86-87 and 96 to a lesser degree that couldn't...it came down to Roosie's coaching methods in the end we thought.
I'm still of the belief that a significant part of it was due to timing as well. This year was the most open the competition has been and the best opportunity we have had in years. All the cards fell right and we (finally) took advantage of them.

[swansrule100]

compared to the past before him eade was quite successful. I think he did a very good job and i wish him all the best at the doggies!

[Cher]

Originally posted by Bas

I think for too long, the Swans have had held an honour to Eade for getting them into a GF in his first year. Yet he couldn't do it again or get anywhere close to doing it in the next 7 years.


It was Ron Barassi who go us to that 96 Grand Final !!

[punter257]

Originally posted by Damien
So what? he got a player wrong? shoot him.

He made a contribution to the club, that should be remembered.

Roos was the first coach to win in 72 years - doesn't mean the many other coaches we have had since 1933 mean nothing in terms of what they were able to do.

Barrassi and then Eade were able to instill a winning culture into the club, very very important in the scheme of things.

what they said

[sharpie]

All coaches eventually lose the ability to reach players. The great ones just last a bit longer. He was a good coach for us, but his message got tired. By 2002, we needed a change and he needed a change. Simple as that IMO.

[SimonH]

What most people have said, i.e. a fundamentally talented coach who did good things at the club, whose time was up come 2002.

In particular, the 'no premiership with good players in 1996 therefore hopeless coach' theory is quite ridiculous. NMWB is quite right to say, in effect, 'We weren't facing a 1996 North Melbourne in this grand final'. Someone with more time on their hands than me could write a list of 10 teams that had more superstar players in them than our 1996 team, but never won a premiership (nor, in many cases, even made a grand final).

You have to be in it to win it (as we now know all too beautifully) and so the Eade/Roos achievement of making the finals 8 times in 10 years, a level of sustained performance that hasn't been seen around the club since the 1930s, is not one to be sneezed at.

[swan_song]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I'm still of the belief that a significant part of it was due to timing as well. This year was the most open the competition has been and the best opportunity we have had in years. All the cards fell right and we (finally) took advantage of them.
I too think this is relevant, but I also think that had we got over Brisbane in the preliminary final of 2003, Collingwood were ripe for beating in the GF. So, to me, 2003 was also a year when the cards ALMOST fell in the right place...save for Roosie telling the team at three-quarter time that Cressa was retiring. And that shocking news would put 20lbs of lead into any one's legs! It's nice to speculate though on how Roosie would have done with say the 87 team, if there were a parallel universe, of course.

[Bas]

Originally posted by sharpie
All coaches eventually lose the ability to reach players.


In Sheedy's case, they just get rid of the players.

[ROK Lobster]

Bit hard on Rodney. I think he made some mistakes but I think he will make the Dogs a dangerous team over the next 2-3 years.

[taurus]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I was very disappointed with the way Eade finished up at the Swans. I think he lost the players in his last few years. However, he did a great job before then and I think he's a very good coach. He'll be even better in his next time around now at the 'Dogs.

Agree. I think Eade has learned lot during his time-off and will make Bulldogs very competitive side.