She's just expressing an opinion. Who cares whether you agree with her or not.

Why are so many offended by opinions with which they disagree ? Say you don't agree and articulate why (like The Master). She doesn't need to be personally denigrated for having a view.

So many precious peanuts around here.

Succession plans are a wonderful thing - unless of course they don't work.

It is a far cry from being a well credentialled assistant to being a senior coach as Neeld, Watters and others have found out.

You would hope that the coach and board would monitor the progress of the successor and make a well reasoned and dispassionate decision close to handover on whether after two years of an apprenticeship he is the right person to hand the reins over to or alternatively the club needs to abandon the succession plan.

I have seen this path followed in business - succession plan in place - the successor and the business decide down the track that the successor is not the right move for the business. The decision to be made is obvious - however sometimes paths are followed to the bitter end even when it is known that the path isn't right direction. I am not convinced that Nathan Buckley was not a mistake that Collingwood felt they just had to move forward with.

They aren't going to rush the succession plan, PJ isn't stupid, they will wait til they have the right guy, until that happens Roosy will stay on.

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.

I think the AFL had to sell China to get Roos....

If Roos was to leave MFC in 2-3 years time without a worthy and capable successor then he and Jackdon have failed an important KPI.

The succession pkan is very important. However we dont at this time have to rush an appointment of a successor.

Seriously who cares what Caro thinks????

I think the AFL had to sell China to get Roos....

If Roos was to leave MFC in 2-3 years time without a worthy and capable successor then he and Jackdon have failed an important KPI.

The succession pkan is very important. However we dont at this time have to rush an appointment of a successor.

But the earlier we get the person in place means the earlier we have a long term vision for the players as to the senior coach for 5 years. Isn't that what Frawley wants in order to stay?

If we don't get someone this October/Sept we will run in to a situation where it is Roos coaching for the next 12-24 months and who knows after that.

I wouldn't talk about it much for the next few months and let Roos settle in to coaching. He may then change his mind and figure he's good for 4 or 5 years and then we can just hire plain assistant coaches and see if someone emerges. If that's Caro's point then fine. But mainly Roos seems pretty set in his ways and I wouldn't be forcing him to change his mind and break the deal that was agreed to when he came on board.

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 think Caro is widely misunderstood, particularly on here. She is an investigative journalist, and an extremely good one. It so happens her field of work is AFL football. When she ventures out and works in other areas (such as the Olympics), she struggles. She does not have a broad sporting knowledge, as for instance, Bruce Macinvaney does. But she is the best in the business in the AFL, closely followed only by Patrick Smith, and is so far ahead of tossers like Mark Robinson and Brian Taylor it is not even funny.

But in the AFL, she forensically applies investigative journalist techniques: relentless networking, building trust with those who matter, uncovering snippets of information which she then checks out thoroughly with her network of contacts, double checks and triple checks stories, then uncovers them without fear or favour. She is unpopular because she mostly does not curry favours ( with the possible exception of Richmond although even there she has been responsible for breaking some big stories about them over the years, often ones they would have preferred to keep private), and really does not mind who she offends as long as what she says supports her story of the day.

This means that on occasions she has gone after the MFC, but let's face it, the incompetence surrounding our club in the last five years has called for investigation and criticism more than any Organisation in the AFL. She would have been derelict in her duties if she had not investigated it, and exposed it for what it was. I would suggest without the media spotlight on Melbourne's plight, the AFL would not have moved so quickly to fix it. My one contention with her relationship with Melbourne is her slant on the so called "tanking scandal" was not as nuanced as it should have been. Carlton and Collingwood were at least as guilty as Melbourne at tanking, but this seems to be lost in the discussion.

Caroline Wilson cops a lot of stick from dumb "kick-it-long" MFC supporters. Yes she has had a go at this club over the past 10 years; but guess what, if the club responded to serious doubts over its admin and decision-making, rather than looking for cozy pats-on-the-back we wouldn't be in dire straits. Most of us just accepted the dribble coming out of the club over the past decade. Fact.

Wilson is the closest thing to a footy journo (probably Whately) without mates, without conflict and with a cupboard full of ethics. Another case-in-point was that she had the names of the Essendon gang of injectees months ago; but this wasn't public until the gutter journalism of Mark Robinson wanted a lazy scoop. Then he had the gall to pretend to be respectful of Mitch Clark and his current saga on 360.

Most of the short-term me-thinking Australian public deserve the Murdoch Press. Most of the dumb SEN blokey football public deserve your Mark Robinson's over your Wilson's.

As for the success-plan? She is spot on. The "rush" to get in the 'anointed one' last summer was "old-Melbourne". Roos has signed for 2-3 years. Lets just sit back for once, and canvass our options.

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.

It should be more like Sheedy to Cameron IMHO, but don't be surprised if PR stays on longer in another capacity eg Director of Football with the coach reporting to him, or even CEO. I know some on here laugh at this, but I think Roos is more personally ambitious than many give him credit for. Watch to see if they send him to the Harvard Executive 6 week winter(northern hemisphere) school for potential CEOs in the next two years - that would give us a clue, perhaps leaving the heir apparent in charge of pre-season training.

Succession plans are a tried and true formula in business. The only places they don't seem to be used are professional sport, with some exceptions, and politics, with even fewer exceptions.

Can anyone recall whether John Longmire was considered to be Paul Roos' successor at Sydney before Roos announced he was to leave? If so, we'd be following the same strategy as Sydney. I'd be happy with such a strategy.

I am not sure what the beef is about succession plans.

Its clearly the last footy buzz phrase

They're not new. They are not unusual. Everyone has them in varying forms.

In fact, for eons any competent club with at least one eye on the future has a consdered plan about what to do with key persons (Chairman, CEO, Coach abd Captain).

But the earlier we get the person in place means the earlier we have a long term vision for the players as to the senior coach for 5 years. Isn't that what Frawley wants in order to stay?

If we don't get someone this October/Sept we will run in to a situation where it is Roos coaching for the next 12-24 months and who knows after that.

I wouldn't talk about it much for the next few months and let Roos settle in to coaching. He may then change his mind and figure he's good for 4 or 5 years and then we can just hire plain assistant coaches and see if someone emerges. If that's Caro's point then fine. But mainly Roos seems pretty set in his ways and I wouldn't be forcing him to change his mind and break the deal that was agreed to when he came on board.

You want to get the best person available not the first person. I am sure Frawley and others will prefer that

Regardless, if you took the time to actually listen to Wilson rather than the cheap ill informed swipe then you would have realised that youare pushing the same point.

Wilson is the closest thing to a footy journo (probably Whately) without mates, without conflict and with a cupboard full of ethics. Another case-in-point was that she had the names of the Essendon gang of injectees months ago; but this wasn't public until the gutter journalism of Mark Robinson wanted a lazy scoop. Then he had the gall to pretend to be respectful of Mitch Clark and his current saga on 360.

My only beef with Wilson's reporting is she takes about 10% fact and then pads it out with 90% of assumption, innuendo's and opinion but masquerades the whole 100% as fact. I read her and enjoy what she writes but I bear in mind her modus operandi.

Succession plans are a tried and true formula in business. The only places they don't seem to be used are professional sport, with some exceptions, and politics, with even fewer exceptions.

Can anyone recall whether John Longmire was considered to be Paul Roos' successor at Sydney before Roos announced he was to leave? If so, we'd be following the same strategy as Sydney. I'd be happy with such a strategy.

When Roos was whistling on the boundary, and horse was up in the coaches box with a headset on barking instructions....I think the writing was on the wall.

My only beef with Wilson's reporting is she takes about 10% fact and then pads it out with 90% of assumption, innuendo's and opinion but masquerades the whole 100% as fact. I read her and enjoy what she writes but I bear in mind her modus operandi.

And truly how would the average football supporter know what the facts truly are on an issue. They dont.

And if it was true that the average football supporter could actually discern those %s (they cant) then they either acceot her opinion or not.

Glad you enjoy what she writes. I reckon she is the most compelling AFL journalist and her disclosures have so often being correct. She is so far ahead of the clowns on Footy classified its not funny..

This wont stop the village hanging squads continuing to abuse her (some of it mysognistic and all of it a reflection of the abusers inadequacies).

Despite her protests has anyone given thought to Rawlings being the one in an ideal position or out of left field Brad Miller. Brad has leadership written all over him. carl has missed the point IMO, as this exercise is about continuity of what we hope is a successful game plan based on defence. In order to do this appoint a successor from within not throw out assistant coaches and start again as we see every time a new coach comes on board. Lyon, Clarkson would want their own confidants. Look at Mick when he went to Carlton all the assistants went. I trust Roos and Jackson!!

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.

I used to read you with interest Master but I'd rather read Caro's pieces now. If you don't like what she writes don't read it. Unlike you I'm interested in opinions of the well connected and well informed.

For heavens sakes, football is an opinion business.

Caro's a mole.

Caro's a mole.

the

I thought she made a reasonable point and had it been made in general dialogue it probably would have been received much better by some.

The whole 'Caro's Arrow' thing is pretty silly tbh if she is struggling to come up with material for it though.

Thought it was interesting yesterday that Roosy now mentions both Jade AND Brad as the two standout young coaches at the club, the two who have impressed him most over preseason. Miller's got a lot more coaching experience under his belt than Simon Black, and as the team's runner he has to understand Roos' game plan intricately.

I wouldn't be surprised if Jade becomes senior coach and Brad his assistant.

A journo is a journo.

Those that knash teeth are as lost as those that laud.

She is trying to sell a show/papers/herself.

WGAF?

I think the Sheedy-Cameron succession plan will give us the best idea of whether it will work or not.

Unlike the Malthouse-Buckley or the Roos-Longmire plans who were promoted from within the existing club environment, Cameron was recruited, after Williams spat the dummy and left, to be the assistant who would take over from Sheedy.

Cameron was already considered a coach in waiting for a few years prior and may well have got one of the jobs that were up for grabs last year anyway without going through another assistant year.

We are not really in a much different situation to GWS we just need to find the right person as that will really determine if succession really works or not.

My biggest worry is that the Roos' assistants will leave as well after he leaves unless the next coach is someone picked out of Roos' own group. For me this needs to be Brett Kirk as our next coach.

He is already connected to Roos coaching group from his playing days and is currently doing his apprenticeship under a Roos' protégé in Ross Lyon.

Daniel Giansiracusa could be another perfect candidate if he retires from playing this year. If you watch footage of him coaching from the bench with the doggies and footage of Roos coaching from on the ground in an intra club and they are so similar in the way they interact with players and give direction its almost creepy.

I think I have stayed off course a bit from what I was originally saying but Kirk or Giansiracusa would have to be seriously looked at for the Roos successor.

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

Yep me too, agree with her 100%.