What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

No big deal about coaches on the move

K-Man

Bench
Messages
3,115
No big deal about coaches on the move

Written by: Kalon Huett
Jul 22, 2009 12:02am

The perennial pandemonium over coaching positions is nothing more than making a mountain out of a molehill; it's a storm in a teacup; an overreaction bigger than Phil Gould's ego. Coaches breaking contracts and clubs sacking coaches are always hot topics. And yes it's true that the NRL usually has more coaches moving around the country than Greyhound this time of year. But what's the big deal? $2.4million over four years I hear you say. Fair point. But what’s the big deal apart from that?

I for one am tired of caring. It's a bit like Home and Away – the characters might change over the years but it's the same old regurgitated stories. Seen it once, seen it a hundred times. Unlike the popular soapie, however, it's the newer, younger and sexier stars that are struggling to establish themselves in the NRL big time.

First there was Nathan Brown, who was barely old enough to drink when he took over the Dragons. Now there’s Brad ‘Freddie’ Fittler, who clearly still loves a drink. Ivan Cleary might be next. Or David Furner - did I say sexier? Younger anyway. It’s a coaching merry-go-round and the ride never ends. We can’t seem to move forward - it must be how Michael Hancock always felt as he crabbed across field.

In the latest installment Brian Smith asked the Knights for an early release from the final year of his contract to join the Roosters in 2010. Why? Because they were offering him the security of a four-year deal. The Knights couldn't match the offer and agreed to the request. Then a huge conflict erupted in Newcastle when... oh wait, no that's about all that happened actually. Now let’s prepare ourselves to be bashed over the head with this story for the next few seasons.

So Smith is off to less greener pastures, which is just the way he likes it. The Knights can search for their new long-term coach, which is just what they wanted to do. The Roosters got their man, which is just about fair enough considering what the fickle Wayne Bennett did to them. And Fittler can get drunk without having to fine himself ten grand, which is just as far as I’m concerned.

Incidentally feeling 'secure' at the Roosters because they offered you a contract is akin to feeling secure at the airport because they make everybody put their toiletries in a little see-through bag. Blind Freddie could see the ever-present danger. Unless, of course, he was too blind to even find his own room.

Businessman Smith will now attempt to clean up loyal Brad’s mess after the latter managed to take a squad full of representative players and whip them into something softer than a Bondi cafe sorbet. Unfortunately these beach boys tend to prefer strawberry daiquiris to strawberry ice cream, and big nights to big hits. No doubt Fittler will have the last laugh, however, when Smith either walks out on the Roosters or is sacked within four years. Bookmakers will let you write your own ticket on neither of those events taking place. And so the tedious cycle will continue. Even Home and Away might come up with something new.

One way to put an end to all the controversy would be to implement an NRL coach’s draft. The premiership-winning coach would swap clubs in the off-season with the coach that won the wooden spoon, and so on and so forth down the table. This would happen every year and ensure coaching excellence and success was shared evenly throughout the competition. Much the same way as the salary cap has helped spread the player talent around all sixteen clubs. It’s an NRL wet dream.

Who would get lucky and pick up Bennett? Who would be reduced to tears at the sight of Jason Taylor turning up for training? The possibilities are endless. (Well, not really, but there certainly are a lot of them.) Let the spoils and toils be shared around. The coach swap would be like an episode of Wife Swap that lasts a whole year. That would be real drama. That would be a big deal.

LeagueUnlimited.


I hope nobody minds me putting this up - it's on the LeagueUnlimited homepage and just happens to be written by yours truly, which I thought might be of interest to some of you.

There was an article last week as well about Tommy Raudonikis, and it looks like this will become a weekly column if you want to check it out. I will, of course, be attempting to avoid any overt Knights bias!

Cheers guys.
 

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
We kept Hagan too long and some people wanted us to keep Smith too long.

3 or 4 years tops is how long a coach should stay.
 

Pika

Bench
Messages
3,641
I think for Smith and Hagan that is the truth roop.

I do think some Coaches can stay long term and build a dynasty at a single Club though.
 

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
I think for Smith and Hagan that is the truth roop.

I do think some Coaches can stay long term and build a dynasty at a single Club though.
Some have done it - Harry Bath, Wayne Bennett, Craig Bellamy - but it isn't the norm - and all of them have done it at clubs that have been very strong i'd say.
 

Hanscholo

Bench
Messages
4,818
We kept Hagan too long and some people wanted us to keep Smith too long.

3 or 4 years tops is how long a coach should stay.

A coach should stay until either the game passes them by, or they lose the dressing room to a certain point where you need to choose either the players or the coach to stay. I dont buy the 3-4 years argument, you have to be pragmatic, we tried to be and we got out played, fair enough.
 
Top