nutbean

I hereby declare I am a [censored]...having made that clear. Unless you are a perennial long term underperformer ( Sylvia, Jamar) I would like to see what Roos and co can do with the newer underperformers - if Tapscott and Blease have no value at all then what is the cost of seeing if they can improve significantly for a year. The only disclaimer is if Roos has met them and sensed attitude problems that wont get fixed ( think Gysberts) Edit - I want to see next year as a clean slate - for example - Jack Watts - you have been in a horrible system for 5 years and played all over the shop. We are starting new this year with a new coach and structure. I will judge you on 2014 onwards.

Number two must first and foremost be for someone accomplished in the centre square - i think it is that simple.

I like Walker and we need everyone ! but it is not specifically our greatest need...

succession plans work (we have them at my company) as long as the successor is assessed all the way along the journey and continues to develop into the successor you want. We have cut successors before that havent "progressed". It must be made clear to the heir apparent that the succession plan comes with annual reviews leading up to the hand over. Whilst there is an expectation of a handover both parties need to understand that things dont always work out as planned and there is the option for either party to terminate. Edit -there is always the possibility that if you think the successor aint ready he may walk - i think Collingwood/Bucks and Malthouse were confronted with that .

The difference is simply whether or not a club wants to enforce the contract - this idea of a "gentlemans agreeement" is simply that - a non binding notion of allowing an assistant to move on to greener pastures. We let Wellman move on from an assistant role to an assistant role whilst under contract. Bottom line is that there is a contract in place and it can be enforced. The coaches association needs to shut the hell up.

"I won't be coaching next year" - Paul Roos - also fairly definitive

If he does go on the trade table, since we offered him a 3 year deal for what would be good money it would be a monty that we would have to fund part of his contract if he moved. Over the years this has been the case when we traded out overpaid footballer ( Trapper and Woey) I think it would be interesting to see Roos reaction when he sees what we pay our players - Unfortunately we have to pay a minimum of 92% of the cap and Roos would also know what Sydney paid their players. Roos would look down the list at what we pay and say " you pay him how much ????????? are you kidding me ??????"

I need to ask - if you dont know who he was , then how do you know he wont be missed ? I think the timing is significant - I would be culling a recruiter after the PSD but at worst after the ND. His timing is worrying ?

Its only a missed opportunity if we were actually in the hunt in the first place.

And further to this - I am thinking that Watts is probably getting more with us than offered at Carlton

With Schwab - the fish certainly rots at the head - but in my experience - when the head gets rotten, it just doesnt stop there - the whole fish gets rotten

yeah it is a bad idea. Both those players are good but neither address our problem for a need for midfielders than can play in the guts

you never know when statements like that are going to bite you on the bum.....

neither will help our midfield woes

OD - As CEO CS was responsible for lots of stuff and rightfully got his whack. I just am bemused when he gets blamed for everything - there was so much rotten at the club and as one of the most powerful he deserves the most but organisation was inept to the core and no one is exempt and unfortunately that includes Jimmy ( although he had rather larger battles going on).

The lure of being the highest paid player in the history of the game was secondary to the challenge....

Ahh the delusional card ! Whilst you may be able to sell the vision of going to the dogs who finished off nicely last season, we are a much harder sell. But we are already hearing that the likes of Taylor Adams doesnt want to come to us - the only way you would go to club without financial inducement is the likes of Brian Lake and Riv - the lure of a premiership at the end of the career. I would suspect that even some mid aged footballers go to a top club for less money because of the lure of a premiership. The idea of a footballer coming to us without a rather large financial inducement for the challenge of the rebuild just doesnt cut it.

Sorry Titan, I am much more sceptical than you. I will give a million plus reasons per season why Ablett went to GC and in excess fo 600,000 reasons why Dawes came to us. The idea of a challenge whilst romantic is nothing more than noise.

There is the distinction - Garry Lyon didnt coach us badly - but he did put the rubber stamp on two coaches who turned out that way....

It wasn't reported anywhere that he couldnt get a loan from a bank - you know this how ?

I would use the word "convenient" - everything that has gone wrong over the past 3 years was CS and MN's fault according to many. The youth policy was something that CS pushed ? What him and him alone ? Spare me..... It may be that CS was too opinionated when it came to matters football ( PJ let all and sundry know even before we had a coach that we will recruit midfielders - not that that was rocket science but again - a CEO commenting on football matters). Ultimately Cameron was not successful but laying all the ills of the world at his feet is way too convenient.

Be still my beating heart.... Would be lovely.. hard to see it happening and I also dont think they would need to offer a "Smith" sweetener for Kennedy. Averaged 27 touches last season in a down year and is still Sydneys best midfielder.

I saw what you did there...don't think that I didn't.....

Name me one player that has gone to a club that is by any measure way off the pace for a challenge ? Players will come to us 1/ Because they are not getting a good go at their current club 2/ Because they are in their twilight and either wont be getting a go at another club or have tasted the ultimate glory so going somewhere for a premiership crack is not as important 3/ For truckloads of money. The challenge of playing for us would have zero appeal. Edit - i noted you said "that had already won a premiership" - the likes of Hannebery would come for the biggggg $$$$$$$

And the facts are that 8 weeks ago Paul Roos wasnt interested in coaching next year - yup - that was a fact too ! Whilst all the indicators are pointing to him going nowhere by all the noises made, if Eagles turned around and said they wanted our pick two and he was available and we offered him twice as much as he on now? The fact is you keep pushing for anything and everything you want ( as we did with Roos) and rule out nothing. As we have found out with our coach, no doesnt necessarily mean no. Keep dangling the "no 2 bait" and if we get one we want on the hook, let the other nibblers know who also may want that the pick that it is going going and now is the time to put up or shut up. Then no will mean no.