The 'definition of insanity' thing, mentioned in the other thread, was true. It also applies to us replacing Mooks just for the sake of it, and expecting things to be better.
He should only go if there's a significantly better replacement, a proven NRL coach.
Yep, therein lies the problem.
Cameron George's comments can't be brushed off. If the CEO is getting itchy & grumpy at the results, surely the owners are too - but they must realise that the same old Warriors solution (get a new coach that sounds decent, but is completely unproven at NRL level) ain't gonna cut it.
So how can they (a) headhunt a coach with a decent track record, and (b) get Kearney to leave or slide back to assistant (his natural level in the NRL, as he's well and truly shown he can't be in charge)?
I can't answer (b), but for (a) they'd have to sell the the gig as "a real do-up job" (as they say in the Real Estate industry) & a true test for someone's coaching ability. "Can YOU get this club to deliver on it's potential?"