So your argument boils down to two things:
1) You,re assumption that BC is the most important coach for us and was at previous clubs and we’re going to have an extremely difficult job in replacing him, which will make us a worse side
2) That there’s a good chance we’ll stuff it up
Mine boils down to:
1) BC is a good to elite coach, but not unique in the whole AFL industry and his replacement could be beneficial, or at least not detrimental, to the club ability to coach our players effectively
2) That there’s a small chance we’ll stuff it up, because we’re well managed and a destination club
Happy to call it a difference of opinion...but much happier with my view of the world!
People move on in all industries and there’s nothing you can do about it. It’s not the end of the world though if the organisation is run extremely well.
Definitely happy to have acknowledge and accept the difference of opinion. Your paraphrasing of my position is not accurate though, in fact is is wildly inaccurate, so I will explain further.
1) Your assumption that BC is the most important coach for us and was at previous clubs and we’re going to have an extremely difficult job in replacing him, which will make us a worse side
I do not assume that Caracella is the most important coach for us. He may or may not be, I have no reliable way to judge that. I would doubt that you do either, and that is my point. All indicators I can see suggest he is a very good coach, possibly one of the best or THE best going around including head coaches:
- he is probably about to be made the highest paid assistant in the competition, which says the assistant coach market rates him numero uno in that market place,
- has been constantly headhunted by people who have worked with him, from Collingwood to Geelong, from Geelong to Richmond and now Richmond to Messendon, presumably being offered greater financial compensation and responsibility with each progressive move,
- he has transformed Richmond's ball movement successfully, unarguably. It is very difficult to conclude from the evidence he is not the main figure behind this transformation.
I do not know how difficult he will be to replace and happily acknowledge we could stumble upon someone even better, though I would not be betting on it happening. My observation is that is a lot less likely than appointing someone who is not as good based on orthodox deductive reasoning....
1 Caracella is and has been very successful, and appears to now be rated within the market as being the cutting edge of coaches, certainly assistants
2 his replacement will by definition be someone the market rates as inferior to Caracella
3 we would expect the market to be correct more often than not given it is being guided by people with first hand knowledge
4 therefore there is a greater chance that even the optimal appointment is inferior to Caracella than there is that they will be equal or superior.
5 you add in the very real possibility of a sub-optimal appointment from even a perfectly sound appointment process...
6 you add in the real possibility, however slight, of errors being made in the appointment process...
This is how I reasoned my way to my position. How did you reason your way to yours?
Your misrepresentation of my position in your second point reads:
2) That there’s a good chance we’ll stuff it up
In my previous posts I have not only not said that, I have given clear detail and explanation to frame my comments. I have, like you, strong confidence in Richmond's decision making processes. I base this on a strong and steady stream of value adding decisions over the last 10 seasons or so. Even the very best decision makers when faced with a list of probably inferior choices is less likely to come up with a superior one than not. Is that not a sound statement?
I won't go into your paraphrasing of your own position other than to make the observation that it is funny you are describing us as a destination club over an example of us being a point of departure club.
There is a marketplace out there. It appears to me a strong resource has been poached by someone within the market place who values him more highly than we do. We may eventually be shown to have grossly undervalued this resource, hopefully not.
Last edited: