Keep a look out for Brendon Bolton the Hawks assistant who will be filling in for Clarko.

I know the Hawks have had a couple of their highly rated assistants leave lately (Cameron to GWS, Simpson to West Coast) but I think this guy is a senior coach in waiting as well.

Though I wouldn't mind if Mark Thompson was considering our club as a destination.... But him being a two time premiership coach, kind of nullifies the need for there to be a successor... The whole point of a successor coach, is so Roos can train and shape he/she into a Paul Roos clone... Maybe we could have two coaches? Who knows if that would work...

As far a successor... Id like to see more than one brought in... Why not Ling and Kirk?

Keep a look out for Brendon Bolton the Hawks assistant who will be filling in for Clarko.

I know the Hawks have had a couple of their highly rated assistants leave lately (Cameron to GWS, Simpson to West Coast) but I think this guy is a senior coach in waiting as well.

Not for me, if he hasn't played at senior AFL level and is a rookie coach he has 2 marks against him. We can't afford to take that chance, and filling in for a senior coach really tells you nothing about his ability to coach. Allan Joyce filled in for Jeansy won a flag but was a bust as a senior coach in his own right.

ratten and voss were both on the cusp of finals when sacked

ratten working at hawks could add the attack after roos' defence

Edited May 27, 201411 yr by rolly

ratten and voss were both on the cusp of finals when sacked

ratten working at hawks could add the attack after roos' defence

Ratten can't even get the interim gig with the Hawks and a lot of the players couldn't get away from Brisbane quick enough. So neither of these are the right coach for us.

Not for me, if he hasn't played at senior AFL level and is a rookie coach he has 2 marks against him. We can't afford to take that chance, and filling in for a senior coach really tells you nothing about his ability to coach. Allan Joyce filled in for Jeansy won a flag but was a bust as a senior coach in his own right.

I think not having played at senior AFL level is irrelevant.

I think not having played at senior AFL level is irrelevant.

of course it is, don't underestimate the extra development of 10 years of playing under various AFL coaches, i mean you look at Brett Kirk for example, he has an in depth understanding over a long period of time of how Ross Lyon, Paul Roos, Rodney Eade and John Longmire coach, and that's before he even becomes an assistant.

that's a huge leg up on someone who hasn't played AFL.

I think not having played at senior AFL level is irrelevant.

No, I don't. I would have said this a few years back but now I think it's extremely relevant and having some success as a player at AFL level is also now more relevant than ever. Unless you have walked the walk it is very difficult to have others believe you know the way.

I love Macca at the Doggies and think he is a great football person but I think this is the thing that will always hold him back. As far a we are concerned we just can't afford to take the chance.

I think our choice looks to be Ling or Kirk, both premiership captains and both people persons (which I think is even more important).

of course it is, don't underestimate the extra development of 10 years of playing under various AFL coaches, i mean you look at Brett Kirk for example, he has an in depth understanding over a long period of time of how Ross Lyon, Paul Roos, Rodney Eade and John Longmire coach, and that's before he even becomes an assistant.

that's a huge leg up on someone who hasn't played AFL.

No, I don't. I would have said this a few years back but now I think it's extremely relevant and having some success as a player at AFL level is also now more relevant than ever. Unless you have walked the walk it is very difficult to have others believe you know the way.

I love Macca at the Doggies and think he is a great football person but I think this is the thing that will always hold him back. As far a we are concerned we just can't afford to take the chance.

I think our choice looks to be Ling or Kirk, both premiership captains and both people persons (which I think is even more important).

I agree that playing for 10 years under different coaches will teach a player. That clearly gives ex-players an advantage. But it doesn't automatically make them a better coach than someone who has never played. Under that logic, Peta Searle (apologies if I have the name wrong) should never have been an Assistant Coach in the VFL.

Coaching is a combination of people management, list management, gameplan design, teaching, media management and a myriad of other things. Having been a player will help with gameplan design. What else?

You are absolutely right but that leg up probably makes it nearly impossible for someone who hasn't played afl based on where we are at

I agree that playing for 10 years under different coaches will teach a player. That clearly gives ex-players an advantage. But it doesn't automatically make them a better coach than someone who has never played. Under that logic, Peta Searle (apologies if I have the name wrong) should never have been an Assistant Coach in the VFL.

Coaching is a combination of people management, list management, gameplan design, teaching, media management and a myriad of other things. Having been a player will help with gameplan design. What else?

It doesn't mean that everyone that's played AFL is going to be a better coach than someone that hasn't but like for like the applicant with AFL experience wins...and as for the example of Peta Searle, well she is an assistant coach and as we know the 2 jobs are light years apart.

...now if I had Peta Searle teaching me how to tag or Cameron Ling, who would I listen to? Everyone brings their own strengths and weaknesses to a role, and I'm sure Peta adds to the group coaching mix at Port.

It would be a bold move for us to appoint someone who hasn't played the game at the highest level and it's not going to happen.

Not for me, if he hasn't played at senior AFL level and is a rookie coach he has 2 marks against him. We can't afford to take that chance, and filling in for a senior coach really tells you nothing about his ability to coach. Allan Joyce filled in for Jeansy won a flag but was a bust as a senior coach in his own right.

Completely irrelevant. Has played plenty of senior footy in Tassie, sure it's not the big league but he's a footy person. The 2 biggest sports in the world - European soccer and NFL both hire coaches who had very little playing experience. Why is AFL so special?

Not sure what you mean rookie coach? There's a chance we go with Voss or Ratten but senior coaching experience is not necessarily a requirement when the guy will be coming in and doing 2 years under Roos anyway. Bolton will have coached his own sides in Tassie and at Box Hill and will then have coached the Hawks for at least 1 week but realistically I think it will be at least a month.

That Hawthorn chose him over Brett Ratten says a lot about the guy.

It doesn't mean that everyone that's played AFL is going to be a better coach than someone that hasn't but like for like the applicant with AFL experience wins...and as for the example of Peta Searle, well she is an assistant coach and as we know the 2 jobs are light years apart.

...now if I had Peta Searle teaching me how to tag or Cameron Ling, who would I listen to? Everyone brings their own strengths and weaknesses to a role, and I'm sure Peta adds to the group coaching mix at Port.

It would be a bold move for us to appoint someone who hasn't played the game at the highest level and it's not going to happen.

So you'd rather appoint a good player who's never coached before (Ling) but you'd have trouble with a good coach who played plenty but it wasn't at the very highest level. That makes no sense.

The standing that he's held within the game affords Roos a lot of instant respect with the playing group, but the reason why he is a good coach is because he understands man management, tactics and gets out on the training track and coaches.

So you'd rather appoint a good player who's never coached before (Ling) but you'd have trouble with a good coach who played plenty but it wasn't at the very highest level. That makes no sense.

The standing that he's held within the game affords Roos a lot of instant respect with the playing group, but the reason why he is a good coach is because he understands man management, tactics and gets out on the training track and coaches.

Ling would have played the role of an on field assistant for a good part of his career, in fact bomber confirmed that, he has also played a leadership role under two different premiership coaches, just because he hasn't officially been an assistant coach doesn't mean for a second he hasn't taken on those responsibility's to an extent as a player, this is the advantage of a past player over someone who didn't play AFL.

To summarise my position, if I had to choose as my senior coach between someone with coaching experience but no AFL playing experience versus someone with AFL playing experience but no coaching experience, I'd go with the one with coaching experience every time. He or she is the one with the more relevant skill set and experience for the job.

Thompson and Roos obviously get along well, but I still believe that Thompson will be required to coach Essendon next year.

I'd prefer either Kirk or Bassett, if contractual issues can be ironed out.

Mathew Nicks, currently Port Adelaide defensive coach?

Here's an idea....

-Lingy signs on as successor.
-Does 2 years under Roos.
-Roosy then becomes Director Of Coaching.
-Bomber becomes head coach for 2 years.
-Then Ling takes over.

That way he learns under 2 premiership coaches before taking over and we have a great senior coach the whole time.

Here's an idea....

-Lingy signs on as successor.

-Does 2 years under Roos.

-Roosy then becomes Director Of Coaching.

-Bomber becomes head coach for 2 years.

-Then Ling takes over.

That way he learns under 2 premiership coaches before taking over and we have a great senior coach the whole time.

No way too much coaching change. Just keep it simple, do the succession and back him in whoever it is.

No way too much coaching change. Just keep it simple, do the succession and back him in whoever it is.

It's not that much change if they're all teaching the same game plan that is headed up the whole time by the same guy (Roos).

I like it stuie, roos establishes elite defensive tactics, bomber comes in when we have a handle on that and coaches offensive plan and ling then takes over a complete team ready to compete with the top sides

Edited May 28, 201411 yr by Sassy

No, I don't. I would have said this a few years back but now I think it's extremely relevant and having some success as a player at AFL level is also now more relevant than ever. Unless you have walked the walk it is very difficult to have others believe you know the way.

I love Macca at the Doggies and think he is a great football person but I think this is the thing that will always hold him back. As far a we are concerned we just can't afford to take the chance.

I think our choice looks to be Ling or Kirk, both premiership captains and both people persons (which I think is even more important).

An interesting point you raise, you know Vince Lombardi never played professional ball for the NFL and is generally considered one of the best coaches ever. While I think you would probably be right 3/5 times, the on balance difference means I'd like to keep my eyes open, likewise I believe a coach could be the best person for the job and female.

That said if Kirk got the nod, I'd trust the decision and live with it despite the hippy mantra (I used to have long hair once upon a time), 200 games on the trot shows a mental discipline that few others can claim, as awesome as Ling is (and I'd be happy if he coached) I still rate Kirk as a better player (and somehow a bit like Jim Stynes if that is not sacrilege to say?).

So whats the point in having Bomber Stuie? Just remember Bomber has always been about attacking where Roos is about defensive. Having 3 changes in senior coach in a spacs of 4 years is overloading the players especially with both with different side of game plans.

So whats the point in having Bomber Stuie? Just remember Bomber has always been about attacking where Roos is about defensive. Having 3 changes in senior coach in a spacs of 4 years is overloading the players especially with both with different side of game plans.

Exactly why I am just about certain the successor will be Brett Kirk, but I don't think you'd knock back a bloke with Bomba's credentials if he was open to coming to the Dee's

you dont sign someone with no coaching experience as the successor

The suggestions of signing Ling to be the next coach are laughable

He might be an absolute dud