This is a perfectly fair response, and I don't disagree. Although would say that "this isn't a well coached team" is hard to divorce from "this is a very hard team to coach". Your Sharks example didn't win the premiership missing half their spine for the year, and got the benefit of paying above the salary cap for the roster...Well for one I've personally not said the words "sack the coach" once. Not tonight, not ever since AOB got here. Every point I'm making is something I believe to be a fair criticism, based on what I see week after week. Does it all get fixed if we get rid of AOB and bring in somebody else? Probably not. That's not for me to decide. But I've watched and played enough football to know that what I'm seeing is definitely not a well coached football team. Across the board we've got a team that I believe a serious coach would back himself to get to the finals. You can't tell me we shouldn't be beating the Tigers twice in a season, rather than losing to them twice in a season.
As for your actual question, that's hard to answer. Many of us have cited the Smith example, but in terms of a relatively new coach none particularly stand out I suppose. But in certain periods or seasons I do think some teams stand out as playing high above their perceived threshold. When the Sharks won the comp I don't think their team was THAT amazing. The Raiders two seasons ago could have won the comp, and I don't even like or rate Ricky at all but that was a team where the way they played is what them awesome, not necessarily the 1-17. Very few coaches are consistently successful, but plenty are able to improve the team they have at different times. I've seen no evidence yet that we're building towards anything.
I said we're average. And if the whole comp is garbage, that only suggests that it's even harder to find a coach that can build you into one of the very few decent teams.Saying you're below average in a garbage comp isn't a ringing endorsement.