Opinion Senior coach options

[aussierulesrules]

Lenny in the succession plan under Choco?

 

[Defacto]

1 hour in and the responses are coming in. richmond speak extremely highly of williams. port adelaide speaks highly of him but with constraints. gws are not very fond of him.

starting with port adelaide, they think he is someone that will give us 110% and pour his heart and soul into the job. however he does come with a buyer beware warning that to be honest i think is there for every coach bar a rare few. this post sums it up beautifully:

Choco is a coach that likes responsibility. He'll want to lead your coaching department, recruiting department, admin department, marketing department and probably demand a certain brand of toilet paper for the offices as well (Quilton I believe). When this happened at Port, things started to break down, he made some horrible assumptions in regards to where football was headed and demanded recruiting decisions accordingly.

Choco works best when he has a strong football manager, CEO and president to keep him in line and reiterate what his job needs to be, which is coaching and developing young players.

so they key with choco is that we need to be extremely clear in his job description and put the right people around him. we need a strong CEO, a strong football dept manager. which to be honest we would have needed with any other coach we are chasing now. i suspect the "job parameter" issues we found in watters we will also encounter in williams unless we have those strong people around him. i think he would get more buy in and respect from the senior players though, given he has been there and done that. he would also come with more experience.

if we let choco go off and do what choco wants to do and run everything, we will end up with an unmitigated disaster. how we do this, given we are going through large organisation change, i dont know. its a pretty big challenge given how head strong choco is. but i guess thats for those earning a wage and running the club to work out.

i think richmond speak highly of him because he has this structure around him, so he works very well. he has a strong head coach, strong football dept manager, strong CEO etc. he also has set responsibilities and constrained influence IMO i.e. he isnt a decision maker

GWS think he butted heads with people and he lost some of the young talent. a couple of posters mentioned some of the key younger players did not re-sign/extended their contracts until he moved on. they also mentioned his wife did not like sydney.

personally i'd take an experience worker like alan richardson before mark williams, as i think he is someone that is not as head strong and can help you sort out the structure in your football dept. but i dont think we could get him to move. the way he is going at port and the reduction in the coaching pool from the last 2-3 years, he'd be a shoe in for the next senior gig at a more stable club. especially when on average 2 coaches depart a year.

 

[Mowman]

Lenny in the succession plan under Choco?

If chocco gets the gig he isn't giving it up

 

[Defacto]

If chocco gets the gig he isn't giving it up

this is also the other issue GWS mentioned. chocos ego is not suited to a succession plan arangement

 

[Fred]

They could do something really radical and appoint either Riewoldt or Hayes as playing coach. That would save the Watters payout for a start. One of the assistants could do coach box duties.

 

[Jack Stevens]

Pelchen and Choco, for as far I can see, worked well together at Port. Their roles there were probably different to what they are/will be at St Kilda, but I still think there's respect between the two of them. This makes me think that, no matter how authoritative Choco may be, he'll still be able to work better with Pelchen than Watters was.

 

[Q TRAIN]

Lenny in the succession plan under Choco?

The collingwood succession plan went about as smoothly as a car with square wheels.
Dont know why people suddenly think its a good idea.
The Paul Roos one hasnt even proved to be a good idea yet.

 

[Periphery]

1 hour in and the responses are coming in. richmond speak extremely highly of williams. port adelaide speaks highly of him but with constraints. gws are not very fond of him.

starting with port adelaide, they think he is someone that will give us 110% and pour his heart and soul into the job. however he does come with a buyer beware warning that to be honest i think is there for every coach bar a rare few. this post sums it up beautifully:


so they key with choco is that we need to be extremely clear in his job description and put the right people around him. we need a strong CEO, a strong football dept manager. which to be honest we would have needed with any other coach we are chasing now. i suspect the "job parameter" issues we found in watters we will also encounter in williams unless we have those strong people around him. i think he would get more buy in and respect from the senior players though, given he has been there and done that. he would also come with more experience.

if we let choco go off and do what choco wants to do and run everything, we will end up with an unmitigated disaster. how we do this, given we are going through large organisation change, i dont know. its a pretty big challenge given how head strong choco is. but i guess thats for those earning a wage and running the club to work out.

i think richmond speak highly of him because he has this structure around him, so he works very well. he has a strong head coach, strong football dept manager, strong CEO etc. he also has set responsibilities and constrained influence IMO i.e. he isnt a decision maker

GWS think he butted heads with people and he lost some of the young talent. a couple of posters mentioned some of the key younger players did not re-sign/extended their contracts until he moved on. they also mentioned his wife did not like sydney.

personally i'd take an experience worker like alan richardson before mark williams, as i think he is someone that is not as head strong and can help you sort out the structure in your football dept. but i dont think we could get him to move. the way he is going at port and the reduction in the coaching pool from the last 2-3 years, he'd be a shoe in for the next senior gig at a more stable club. especially when on average 2 coaches depart a year.

I'm not sure that Choco getting off the leash will be an issue since Pelchen has firmly cemented his position of power in the club.

I think all the talk of "structure" the other day was basically referring to Pelchen being boss and everyone below him reports to him and does what he says while Pelchen reports to the board. If the board backs Pelchen in this role then any coach that comes in will have a very hard time if they want to go beyond their set duties. I'm going to assume that whoever comes in will be made fully aware that that is the way it will be and that there is no getting around it.

Hopefully Choco having worked with Pelchen in the past will help them make that work.

 

[Mowman]

Pelchen and Choco, for as far I can see, worked well together at Port. Their roles there were probably different to what they are/will be at St Kilda, but I still think there's respect between the two of them. This makes me think that, no matter how authoritative Choco may be, he'll still be able to work better with Pelchen than Watters was.

Maybe Pelchen never wanted Watters to be able to work with.

 

[Defacto]

Pelchen and Choco, for as far I can see, worked well together at Port. Their roles there were probably different to what they are/will be at St Kilda, but I still think there's respect between the two of them. This makes me think that, no matter how authoritative Choco may be, he'll still be able to work better with Pelchen than Watters was.

i agree, however i think theres one key difference between now and then. back when choco was coach, pelchen was only the head of the victorian recruitment. basically if anything, pelchen answered to choco. if choco is appointed our new coach, he will now be reporting to pelchen.

can you imagine moving to a new job where your boss will be the bloke you used to supervise 8 years ago?

 

[Defacto]

I'm not sure that Choco getting off the leash will be an issue since Pelchen has firmly cemented his position of power in the club.

I think all the talk of "structure" the other day was basically referring to Pelchen being boss and everyone below him reports to him and does what he says while Pelchen reports to the board. If the board backs Pelchen in this role then any coach that comes in will have a very hard time if they want to go beyond their set duties. I'm going to assume that whoever comes in will be made fully aware that that is the way it will be and that there is no getting around it.

Hopefully Choco having worked with Pelchen in the past will help them make that work.

this is my hope, i hope somehow we can put something into his contract that means if he goes outside his duties and his employment is terminated, we do not have to pay him out like we did with watters.

is this possible?

 

[Mowman]

i agree, however i think theres one key difference between now and then. back when choco was coach, pelchen was only the head of the victorian recruitment. basically if anything, pelchen answered to choco. if choco is appointed our new coach, he will now be reporting to pelchen.

can you imagine moving to a new job where your boss will be the bloke you used to supervise 8 years ago?

Seen it happen at my golf course this year not pretty lol

 

[Defacto]

The collingwood succession plan went about as smoothly as a car with square wheels.
Dont know why people suddenly think its a good idea.
The Paul Roos one hasnt even proved to be a good idea yet.

i think passing up the best available coach for the nostalgic approach of appointing a past players is the real issue these days

 

[Q TRAIN]

this is my hope, i hope somehow we can put something into his contract that means if he goes outside his duties and his employment is terminated, we do not have to pay him out like we did with watters.

is this possible?

Couldnt see any Senior coach with any cred agreeing to that.
Its a bit like a pre nup. " i love you now honey. But sign this cos ive got a feeling we are gonna hate each other one day".
Its a risk but if we hire him we have to back him in.

 

[Sheeza69]

What odds is Choco with the betting agencies? We can make some money on this if we're right.

$2.50

 

[Defacto]

Couldnt see any Senior coach with any cred agreeing to that.
Its a bit like a pre nup. " i love you now honey. But sign this cos ive got a feeling we are gonna hate each other one day".
Its a risk but if we hire him we have to back him in.

good point, do we go with shorter contract length then? 2 years?

 

[Q TRAIN]

good point, do we go with shorter contract length then? 2 years?

Yeah prob not a bad idea.
If it all running smoothly after the first 14 months give him an extension.

 

[aussierulesrules]

The collingwood succession plan went about as smoothly as a car with square wheels.
Dont know why people suddenly think its a good idea.
The Paul Roos one hasnt even proved to be a good idea yet.

Yeah, I wasn't really being srs. I do hope that Lenny sticks around though.

 

[Mowman]

Yeah prob not a bad idea.
If it all running smoothly after the first 14 months give him an extension.

We don't have a whole lot of confidence in our Board pick the right coach do we

 

[Q TRAIN]

Yeah, I wasn't really being srs. I do hope that Lenny sticks around though.

Didnt really mean JUST your post anyway. But all of a sudden everybody seems to be talking about succession plans dont they.
Your spot on about Lenny, any club would be lucky to have him.

 

[Mowman]

Any good coach will want 3 years min.

 

[Q TRAIN]

We don't have a whole lot of confidence in our Board pick the right coach do we

We picked Sheldon and made finals for the 1st time in 17yrs.
Nearly won a flag with Alves.
Nearly made a few Grand Finals with Thommo.
Shouldve won 2 under Lyon.
At times our board is very good at picking coaches.
Its the SACKING of coaches we seem to have problems with

 

[Defacto]

Didnt really mean JUST your post anyway. But all of a sudden everybody seems to be talking about succession plans dont they.
Your spot on about Lenny, any club would be lucky to have him.

Lenny would work well as a specialist coach with the mids, similar to max and hamil. he'd get to stay around the club, work on some coaching to see if he likes it

 

[Bojangles17]

The collingwood succession plan went about as smoothly as a car with square wheels.
Dont know why people suddenly think its a good idea.
The Paul Roos one hasnt even proved to be a good idea yet.

I agree , I see this idea going the same way as cherry flav coke. It worked once with longmire and failed everywhere else, Parkin/Britain, malthouse/Buckley and Roos can't get anyone warm on the crackpot idea

 

[Defacto]

We picked Sheldon and made finals for the 1st time in 17yrs.
Nearly won a flag with Alves.
Nearly made a few Grand Finals with Thommo.
Shouldve won 2 under Lyon.
At times our board is very good at picking coaches.
Its the SACKING of coaches we seem to have problems with

to be fair the first real challenge for the majority of this board was the appointment of watters. it turned over slightly since then, if they get this one wrong there will be another ticket found from somewhere. maybe possible AFL intervention ala melbourne