So what do we all think about the possibility of a coaching succession plan and who would you want to lead this once great club into the future

Succession plan??? We don't yet have a coach to have a successor!

Vey true. But you know what i mean

I like it as long as its not in a set time frame like the malthouse/buckley plan was. In Sydney it was always known Longmire was to take over, but it was never set in stone when. Much better like that. The collingwood succession plan was a disaster.

I find them strange and can backfire like the collingwood one has. The Sydney one was ok as for a long time there was no set time when Roos was leaving, it was just known Longmire would take over.

That said, if it was Roos and he was here to set the standard and get the clubs culture right whilst setting up say a Simpson to take over in three years I'm for that.

If its Williams or Eade then I think they deserve to be the coach and no succession plan.

How about we get one coaching appointment right, until we can do that there is no point trying to predict a follow up coach.

Vey true. But you know what i mean

Ok... ideally, I would love to see Roos come in as coach and bring along Brett Kirk as his understudy/successor.

How about we get a good experienced coach, get him to get some bright assistant coaches and build them up to be seen as future head coaches, and then pick one of them at some point in the future should they be seen as the best options?

Or we could just name some bloke to take over after 3 years or something stupid like that. Whatever.

So what do we all think about the possibility of a coaching succession plan and who would you want to lead this once great club into the future

Yes we do... succession, Craig to Roos/Matthews... 2013-2014,,,,,,Or, 2014-2015

I think Bomba is spoken for...

Edited August 1, 201312 yr by dee-luded

I'm not big on the idea, but that's just my personal opinion,

I think sometimes it can work, it's clearly worked really well up in Sydney, but i think Collingwood has gone miles backwards from the team that played in two grand finals under mick Malthouse.

It's as much of a gamble as appointing any untried coach so for mine my preference would just be to lock up the best coach going around for 4-5 years and by the time that term is up we SHOULD be looking at being a serious team in the finals.

Craig to someone would be a good start to succession.

baby steps ( as we're good at tripping over ourselves )

Perhaps a bit premature talking of succession. But worth discussing as having the right assistants in the job may influence someone like Roos that the top job is worthwhile. Was it by design or just dumb luck that the Swans ended up with Roos, Longmire and Lyon all at the same time? And how much of the credit goes to Roos for their ongoing success. Lyon's game seems to be an extension of Roos. Whilst Longmire's style is somewhat different. if Roos does come to us it would be a long shot that he would have such capable assistants as he had at the Swans.

Hiring the head coach is perhaps the easy part, Getting the right assistants may be a lot harder. I think Roos understands this and will not seriously entertain a return to the top job without the right people in place.

It is obvious Collingwood, Brisbane, Bombers are paying a price for promoting inexperienced golden boys based on their past reputations to the top job. Buckley is having difficulties living up to the promised hype. If Hird was already an experienced coach he would likely have not bought into the doping plan. These guys were hired on the presumption that success was a sure thing.

How bout a succession plan for the coaches, players, board, FD.....

FMD what a dumb idea, at the moment lets just focuss on getting a quality coach and players.

For what it's worth, I don't blame Collingwood's on-field demise on the succession plan. I think that's just a result of the closing of their window. I'll go one step further - I think Collingwood is in a much better position now because Malthouse has moved on. Buckley is already regenerating that list. If they'd not moved Malthouse on when they did, he'd still be in denial and Collingwood's future prospects would be more dire.

The concept of a succession plan is a good one, but not generally adopted by football clubs or political parties.

Yeah, I don't like the idea. I understand that could well be the plan with Roos on a two to three year contract, followed by a handover. Roos stayed at Sydney for essentially a decade and then handed over. There's no way our club can be turned around in two years and handed over to an assistant. If that is truly the plan with Roos, I'd be leaning towards Williams or waiting to see if we can snare Clarkson.

We shouldn't be aiming for a succession plan for at least 5 years.

But what we do need is some young and talented assistant coaches.

The best clubs have very good assistants and they are also always turning them over with smart operators, often bringing in freshly retired players to development coaching then bringing them up the ladder.

If we get Roos I expect he'll know that AFL coaching is best done as a team and also with an expiry date to avoid burnout and I'd expect within 3 if not 2 years he'd have 1-2 assistants who could end up part of his succession plan without a distinct policy and he'd slowly give them more reign as he did with Longmire.

Perhaps a bit premature talking of succession. But worth discussing as having the right assistants in the job may influence someone like Roos that the top job is worthwhile. Was it by design or just dumb luck that the Swans ended up with Roos, Longmire and Lyon all at the same time? And how much of the credit goes to Roos for their ongoing success. Lyon's game seems to be an extension of Roos. Whilst Longmire's style is somewhat different. if Roos does come to us it would be a long shot that he would have such capable assistants as he had at the Swans.

Hiring the head coach is perhaps the easy part, Getting the right assistants may be a lot harder. I think Roos understands this and will not seriously entertain a return to the top job without the right people in place.

It is obvious Collingwood, Brisbane, Bombers are paying a price for promoting inexperienced golden boys based on their past reputations to the top job. Buckley is having difficulties living up to the promised hype. If Hird was already an experienced coach he would likely have not bought into the doping plan. These guys were hired on the presumption that success was a sure thing.

Agree on your point of Roos. What I try to analyse is the assistants. The rumour mill example of Eade/Simpson often leads me to closely analyse the assistants.

Ie. looking at bloodlines and/or form if you like.

Sydney did well with Roos/Lyon/Longmire. But there's also the playing list and experience of that list to take into account.

I've looked at Leigh Tudor recently. He was with the Cats for sometime under Thompson and helped with development/list before he joined Lyon at the Saints.

He's now at Sydney with Longmire.

Strong form line there, and highly regarded. I'd be disappointed if our club did not come into contact with him whether it be 2IC to an experienced candidate or a candidate in his own right.

I'd be disappointed if our club did not come into contact with him whether it be 2IC to an experienced candidate or a candidate in his own right.

I think the club needs a candidate who has already had some success at senior level; given how bad we've been under the last two reigns, you need that to sell hope and weather criticism as we begin the slow ascent up the ladder. I'd say this is why PJ has asserted we need an experienced candidate.

A succession plan could work if we had something that resembled a quality football team. We cannot guarantee that our new coach won't be in the firing line by round 10 2014.

I really don't know what to say in this thread at this point ib time.

There been alot of changes at the MFC this year, but noone know if they will work yet so IMO planning for the future is a luxury we can,t afford yet.

My feeling is that it is journos trying to pump up the tyres of Scott Burns and Adam Simpson on behalf of people they know. The club has been clear they want someone with experience and the Hutchys of the world know this. They now realize that for them to get the job, they need another angle and this 'succession plan' rot is just that. Let's get the head bloke in first. If it's Leigh Matthews (just using him as an example, I know he is challenging for the Brisbane board) or Neil Craig, then age would be a consideration and they should think about what will happen in 3-5 years time. But get the head bloke over the line first then start thinking about his assistants and where they fit in in the grand scheme of things.

So what do we all think about the possibility of a coaching succession plan and who would you want to lead this once great club into the future

my feelings are similar to everyone elses

seeing as we have this Essendon bloke within the club,i say go for broke

appoint mark Harvey with his underling to be the son of james hird

wait 7 years and hand over the job to the,son of a chemically enhanced phsyco and we will be pepped to the max

jobs done

recruit Mark WIlliams as coach and then sign Oscar judd as an assistant when he reaches playing age sign him as a playing coach.

I think the club needs a candidate who has already had some success at senior level; given how bad we've been under the last two reigns, you need that to sell hope and weather criticism as we begin the slow ascent up the ladder. I'd say this is why PJ has asserted we need an experienced candidate.

I've previously suggested Roos, Eade as experienced choices as coach long ago.

Still I'd be disappointed if he wasn't spoken to at the very least, as a 2IC candidate (to an experiened coach like above) or perhaps even a candidate in his own right. He has great credentials in the development of players in the three clubs he has worked.

If the club is thorough and prudent in casting the net as they intend, he will be spoken to.

It sounds great in theory, the reality is I dont think it would work the way intented.

1: The new coach is going to need at least 2 years to 'un-neeld' this rabble. Another couple of years to get the players required.

2; If we had anyone decent in the wings, other clubs would be onto it, and snipe him.

3: Who is going to hang around for the duration,waiting their chance at the big time.

4: The head coach will want to select his own people to assist. Its his call. If not he may not be all that thrilled with someone he doesnt want to work with.

5: The standby coach more than likely is tarnished with the out-going coaches flawed habits.

(If he is following on from a coach that got us consistently into finals , then he can build on those expereiences.this COULD work) But thats not going to happen anytime soon.

6: Most times a fresh voice with new ideas is the better way to go.

My track record at picking coaches is woeful (well depends... going by our results maybe not)

I thought Greg Hutchinson was a shoe in after his caretaker effort. Then Mark Williams *Sandy 3 flags" was a good chance.

I have better results picking players than coaches.

I would prefer someone like a Neil Craig to dissect the current coach, when that coach is moved on, Craig or whoever is in the chair. has a say on the next in line, then the coaches commitee narrow down the candidates. I cant see anyone in the wings bideing their time working out.

Now someone cuttting their teeth at Casey, getting results and experience could work in our favour. But thanks to our great player management, Casey have had a new coach every year, not one has hung around,after being shafted.

Anyone know when nominations for the Casey job for 2014 will be made known??? Or is it possible they may have a 2 year coach this time round?? *shakes head*

Having a 2nd string Chairman is something I have pushed my barrow on for yonks. Someone able to slip right in, without missing a beat. We require a strong and stable board, and then when a change is required for whatever reason, its a smooth transaction.

Back to the coaches, stack them with the best available. When they finally show signs of success, then move in a successor.

Give me a coach NOW that can give me results, let the rest take care of itself for the moment.