Potted it on Classified tonight.

Article tomorrow?

Craig thought it was pretty thin...

Caro doesn't love footy, she loves footy politics.

What has become paper thin is this stage "controversy" her and Hutchy try to drum up every week now. The Footy Show has more credibility than them now.

Caro doesn't love footy, she loves footy politics.

What has become paper thin is this stage "controversy" her and Hutchy try to drum up every week now. The Footy Show has more credibility than them now.

I wish those two would shut up and give Lloyd a go - he actually makes sense.

Caro's thought. Don't appoint anyone so you hope Roos stays for longer and then you might luck in to a Clarkson or Lyon down the track.

MFC point - hire Roos for 2-3 years, have him appoint a capable assistant who's almost ready to be a senior coach himself, have him work with the senior coach and then take over, thus guaranteeing the head coach position at MFC is set up for the next 5 years.

Caro seems to just skip over the fact that Roos signed on with the succession plan as part of his thinking. She also forgot to make any mention as to how this handover from Roos to well regarded senior coach works and made no mention of the whole idea behind the succession plan which is it's some genius coach who gets results but steady planning and working to a plan.

How or why The Age have agreed to give her opinion pieces is beyond me. Reporters should report. If I want an opinion I'd take it from a well regarded footy administrator like Brian Cook or a footy director like Dunstall.

Edited March 17, 201411 yr by the master

I agree with her. Don't worry about the succession plan, sign Roosy up for the next 5!!!

Exactly right Stuie. It's manufactured codswallop, their 'rivalry'. You'll notice Caro doesn't have major fights with anyone actually in football. All her 'enemies' are media people. Hutchy, Brayshaw... people for whom being embroiled in a shitfight is just as beneficial as it is for Caro.

why does anyone even watch/read these idiots honestly the thought would never occur to me

When Matthew lloyd starts to sound smart you have to doubt the intelligence of those surrounding him

Ha, Lloyd agreed with her!

What a joke. Paul Roos is yet to coach the MFC for a senior match and this tripe goes to air.

Caro's thought. Don't appoint anyone so you hope Roos stays for longer and then you might luck in to a Clarkson or Lyon down the track.

MFC point - hire Roos for 2-3 years, have him appoint a capable assistant who's almost ready to be a senior coach himself, have him work with the senior coach and then take over, thus guaranteeing the head coach position at MFC is set up for the next 5 years.

Caro seems to just skip over the fact that Roos signed on with the succession plan as part of his thinking. She also forgot to make any mention as to how this handover from Roos to well regarded senior coach works and made no mention of the whole idea behind the succession plan which is it's some genius coach who gets results but steady planning and working to a plan.

How or why The Age have agreed to give her opinion pieces is beyond me. Reporters should report. If I want an opinion I'd take it from a well regarded footy administrator like Brian Cook or a footy director like Dunstall.

I sat next to Carro at a recent function mastermind, she has a lot of time for the club and our pathetic plight, don't be too quick to discount what she says, maybe she's trying to put the heat on Roos to commit as he hasn't as yet

I sat next to Carro at a recent function mastermind, she has a lot of time for the club and our pathetic plight, don't be too quick to discount what she says, maybe she's trying to put the heat on Roos to commit as he hasn't as yet

That's a nice thought. But it's not really her job is it?

Roos has committed to giving his all for 2-3, I sincerely hope it's 3 and to have a the next man in place, trained up and ready to deliver. That's his end of the bargain and what we lauded PJ for signing him to. If we trust Roos to coach we kind of have to trust him to pull off his plan as well.

What I would like to see is hopefully the correct successor in place at the end of the year and then Roos come out and say he's in for 2016 to give the next coach 2 years under Roos.

Don't watch their show anymore, it just got tired. Not one person on that panel has a clue about football.

This chick knows jack shite about football. Do not listen to her.

I thought she was gunning for Danny Frawley these days since Schwab's demise

Caro's thought. Don't appoint anyone so you hope Roos stays for longer and then you might luck in to a Clarkson or Lyon down the track.

That wasn't her only point. She was also critical of the club's seeming haste to sign the assistant to the senior role early in the tenure, rather than later.

As she said, what if we discover after 1 or 2 years that our fantastic assistant coach - say a Mark Neeld type - looks like he'll be a dud senior coach - but we've locked it in for 2 years already or whatever.

Unfortunately, as she also pointed out, the succession thing was a key requirement in getting Roos over the line. Unless the man himself decides to stay on, we're stuck with a less-than-perfect scenario in my opinion.

That wasn't her only point. She was also critical of the club's seeming haste to sign the assistant to the senior role early in the tenure, rather than later.

As she said, what if we discover after 1 or 2 years that our fantastic assistant coach - say a Mark Neeld type - looks like he'll be a dud senior coach - but we've locked it in for 2 years already or whatever.

Unfortunately, as she also pointed out, the succession thing was a key requirement in getting Roos over the line. Unless the man himself decides to stay on, we're stuck with a less-than-perfect scenario in my opinion.

Mentioning Mark Neeld shows me she doesn't understand it.

It's about bringing in the number 2 to get to know the plan and work with Roos then carry on that plan with some minimal tweaks as needed.

Neeld was a failure when we appointed him in charge of everything based off some power point presentations and then he let the club go off on the direction he chose. Sure they will have to make sure they pick the right person for the job and there is some risk involved but mainly it's about keeping stability for the players. It's less than perfect but it was what we required to get Roos.

The idea of hiring the assistant earlier is fundamental to it. Hiring Roos was all about him setting the club up with a culture, getting us competitive on the field, getting all aspects of the footy department up to scratch and then setting up a young coach with a side on the rise and looking at sustainable success. For the assistant 1 year is too brief which is why I hope Roos commits to the third year so we have a guy getting 2 years under him but it's the seamlessness of the transition thats most important. It's not going to be Malthouse to Buckley. It's really not that different than Demetriou handing over the CEO of the AFL to Gil McLachlan.

As I said before I see no point trying to force Roos in to something his initial instincts told him he didn't want. If we get what he originally signed up for which is a turned around club in 2-3 all set to have the reigns handed over to an assistant who has the trust of the playing group and has desires to continue Roos' work then it will be a great result.

Wow -- must be a dud of a plan because Caro says so :-(((

it's the seamlessness of the transition thats most important. It's not going to be Malthouse to Buckley. It's really not that different than Demetriou handing over the CEO of the AFL to Gil McLachlan.

Collingwood planned a seamless transition too, and it looked like it would be up until it went sour.

Of course having the assistant work for two years under Roos would be better than one, but the rigidity of the timing of it all makes me nervous (while recognising that's what we're stuck with).

If we can't find the perfect candidate by the end of the year, will we wait for the right man or will we go for next best?

I hope this succession plan is a decade long.

It is going to take more than 2-3 years to turn this ship around.

If Roos is serious about this, then he'll need to stay for at least 3.

I think we are still at rock bottom.

GWS and GC have hindered the quality of drafts, but the upside is that we'll get players cheaper.

Cameron will command a lot of coin and there will be bidding war for Patton come years end.

Players will be easy to entice back home.
We should be aiming for Kelly when he is available.

Collingwood planned a seamless transition too, and it looked like it would be up until it went sour.

That's true but you have to look at who you're dealing with and in the Collingwood case it backfired because Malthouse won a flag, had the confidence of the playing group and decided he didn't really want to move on. The result proved toxic and Buckley was unable to rein in the renegade players and let some of them go to other clubs. They still appear to have a divided list and one commentator described the way they played in one quarter against Freo as being as bad if not worse than Melbourne last year. Luckily for Buckley he has a better list than we had and he therefore has better chances to rebound but they're in for a couple of rocky years.

By contrast, Roos is working at fixing past problems and there's nobody who wants to revert to the disasters of almost a decade past. Moreover, he's overseen a seamless transition at Sydney that, unlike the one at Collingwood, was forced and really not to the liking of either the mentor or the coach in waiting of the time.

This thread is a ridiculous overreaction to a simple 1 minute comment piece from Wilson that MFC shouldn't rush the succession plan and they for the moment should enjoy Roos. Hardly controversial and I would have thought common sense.

You would not have thought so gauging much of melodrama here.

This thread is a ridiculous overreaction to a simple 1 minute comment piece from Wilson that MFC shouldn't rush the succession plan and they for the moment should enjoy Roos. Hardly controversial and I would have thought common sense.

You would not have thought so gauging much of melodrama here.

Me too RR

I agree with her.

This thread is funny. Caro isn't a fan of the succession plan, but says we need to celebrate Roos. If you have listened to Peter Jackson speak, there would be no Roos without a succession plan. Basically, it was a choice for the MFC between Roos and succession, or no Roos.

We are a club on our knees... I personally think we had to sell the China to get Roos for commercial and in fact survival reasons, but also to sell hope. I therefore think that the succession plan is just the way it is - no point liking it or not. The way I see it, Roos wouldn't leave us worse than he found us, and if the succession falls apart, then Roos stays on or it's a new coach without succession. Either way, we win by having Roos for 2 - 3 years.