Opinion Bomber Thompson vs Chris Scott

[Gydafud]

Who has the stronger legacy at Geelong now?

Both are 2x premiership coaches but some argue Scott rode the coattails of Bomber to get his first.

Did Bomber forever tarnish his legacy at Geelong with what happened after he left? Despite the one to break the drought?

Who would you build the statue of?

 

[PhatBoy]

Who has the stronger legacy at Geelong now?

Both are 2x premiership coaches but some argue Scott rode the coattails of Bomber to get his first.

Did Bomber forever tarnish his legacy at Geelong with what happened after he left? Despite the one to break the drought?

Who would you build the statue of?

Bomber I will be forever grateful to, he thrilled us with some of the most ruthless, ice cold and clinically destructive football ever played. He gave us a hard edge and he backed the players in to get the job done and they delivered.

What detracts from his legacy aside from the obvious double act of leaving abruptly to join Essendon and the way his private life unravelled, is this:

Thompson had a fairly straightforward path in front of him as to how to succeed. He had some good draft hands to pick from initially and was given some truly exceptional talent on a platter and you could mount the argument that it shouldn’t have taken as long as it did for us to be genuinely contending.

100 per cent we more than made up for it but we underwhelmed in a number of years.

Regardless of your critiques of Scott, there are few if any years where you could look at our on-hand resources, compare them to the competition, then look at our year end results and go ‘gee they underwhelmed.’

Sure, once the season was reaching its pointy end we set ourselves up time and again to go all the way only to fall short but at the start of MOST of those seasons people didn’t give us a real chance anyway.

Now having not only built his own side but to have had to do it without any help at all from the draft and no new father sons etc, to me at least he’s gone past Thompson

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Thompson had a fairly straightforward path in front of him as to how to succeed. He had some good draft hands to pick from initially and was given some truly exceptional talent on a platter and you could mount the argument that it shouldn’t have taken as long as it did for us to be genuinely contending.

There are too many examples of clubs failing to achieve any success doing this despite it being a clear path for it to hold weight as a criticism of Bomber. Two coach a side to 3 grand finals and 2 flags, which would then win a third immediately after his departure, is a tremendous achievement after starting with a bunch of kids, especially given those kids were not the absolute cream of the crop talents. Other sides have gone through the same, but often with better draft hands, and come out with nothing.

It didn't really take us that long to genuinely contend either. We were playing prelims with a pretty young side.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

Bomber built a team from kids through the draft and F/S selections.

Scotty built his team mostly through the trade period, with some good draft selections here and there. But he didn't rely on the draft as the main source of players.

That's pretty much what made them different.

Scotty rebuilt the team while still keeping it in the top 8. No coach that I know of has ever done that successfully. The Saints & Hawthorn tried, but both fell off the cliff eventually. I think Richmond wants to emulate the Cats too these days.

 

[Phipppppa]

Bomber had less to work with at the start of his run as coach.

Will forever be grateful for him, but neither get a statue, maybe a gate at best.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Different times, different challenges, different people.

 

[Gee Class Loco]

Different eras.
Different times.
One gifted 3 of the all time great father sons.
Scarlett Hawkins Ablett
Without those 3 gifts forget about it.
Also. Helps when u get access to a few top 10 picks as well.
Corey Mackie Bartel Selwood
The other had to use other means due to the lack of access of youngsters via the draft due to expansion clubs and such.
So any attempt to compare the pair is a fruitless exercise IMO.
For me.
Loved them both.
We were winning. And we won the ultimate prize on 4 occasions.
That to me bought many smiles, joy and contentment.
We are lucky to be part of the GFC Mob.
GiddyUp Boys... I'm still walking on the clouds.

 

[Warhorse]

Bomber better at developing young players, Scott the better game day coach.

 

[FredLeDeux]

The question is one for Wells to answer; which does he think was better, the list he built for "Thompson", or the list he built for "Scott"?

 

[Hinkley29]

Different eras.
Different times.
One gifted 3 of the all time great father sons.
Scarlett Hawkins Ablett
Without those 3 gifts forget about it.
Also. Helps when u get access to a few top 10 picks as well.
Corey Mackie Bartel Selwood
The other had to use other means due to the lack of access of youngsters via the draft due to expansion clubs and such.
So any attempt to compare the pair is a fruitless exercise IMO.
For me.
Loved them both.
We were winning. A we won the ultimate prize on 4 occasions.
That to me bought many smiles, joy and contentment.
We are lucky to be part of the GFC Mob.
GiddyUp Boys... I'm still walking on the clouds.

Hawkins was a far bigger contributor to Scott’s 2 flags than he was to Bomba’s 2 flags.

i would argue that bomba was gifted 2 great father sons, scott was gifted 1.

neither scott nor bomba’s achievements were better or worse, just different. Bomba had to convince a club it could be great, scott had to win a flag without bottoming out whilst changing basically the whole team. They are both amazing achievements.

 

[kickazz]

Bomber better at developing young players, Scott the better game day coach.

Yeah, they were both what we needed at the time.

 

[dangerwood]

Bomber will always get a huge amount of credit from me because he turned us from a team that expected failure to a team expected success. Our recruiting and everything else was great but it doesn't work without the coach.

I think turning a negative losing team into a powerhouse deserves the most credit. Scott has done an unbelievable job maintaining success, over the past 10 years I don't think our team has been that great, yet we've never dropped.

 

[Turbocat]

How long does CS still to go. ... The story is still being written. ... but CS has the chance to put it beyond doubt if he can refresh the side with more emphasis on drafted youth.

 

[dazbroncos]

Cant we just be happy with 2 Premiership coaches at the club with 2 Flags each in a 15 year period?

Sure they did it differently at different times but the rules were different for each of them too.

Happy the both did it their way.

Go Catters

 

[jim boy]

Bit weird to make a statue for a current coach, so Bomber it is!

But in other aspects, I'd probably go with Bomber, he joined the club when we were a rabble. He went through a lot of s**t to build us up into being a power club. This was real transformation. I'm not saying that Scott has had it easy, or that his achievements are any less worthy or that he is a worse coach, but he hasn't had to 'save' the club.

FWIW I'd only build a statue if there was any money left over from the money spent on the Costa statue.

 

[jim boy]

Cant we just be happy with 2 Premiership coaches at the club with 2 Flags each in a 15 year period?

Nope - success drives the want and need for more success - I want more and I would hope the club wants more

 

[catempire]

No need to compare. Both Geelong legends.

 

[Mr Meow]

Cant we just be happy with 2 Premiership coaches at the club with 2 Flags each in a 15 year period?

Sure they did it differently at different times but the rules were different for each of them too.

Happy the both did it their way.

Go Catters

While I do agree there's no need to elevate one beyond the other (point scoring etc), I do think the actual replies have showed it's merely praise and appreciation for both - while talking a bit about the unique challenges they faced. Which kind of brings us to much more unity than in previous years - it's funny how a flag will do that.

 

[Vdubs]

Bomber better at developing young players, Scott the better game day coach.

is that fair though?
Blicavs, Holmes, Close, Atkins, both Guthries, Parfitt, De Koning, Simpson, Henry, Miers, Kolo, Bews, have all developed perfectly under Scott, when we needed to have youngsters.
Worth recalling we did not have access to any of the top-line youngsters over the tenure of CS.

 

[dazbroncos]

Nope - success drives the want and need for more success - I want more and I would hope the club wants more

No need to compare. Both Geelong legends.

My point exactly .. just better said with those wordy things

Go Catters

 

[dazbroncos]

Nope - success drives the want and need for more success - I want more and I would hope the club wants more

Missed my poorly explained point..
I’m all for more success… just don’t need the who was better or worse comparisons and digging thru it all…

But yes I’m all for going for it again and not resting on laurels

Go Catters

 

[Gee Class Loco]

Bomber better at developing young players, Scott the better game day coach.

Don't leave out Macca... he was credited by most of these boys.
He was an old fashioned teacher... hard taskmaster... probably a bit prehistoric these days.
But a big part of our development of our boys transition to men i believe.
Either way we hit the jackpot on both these men.

 

[Sky]

Same coach 11 years apart at the same club is harder. Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

47

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

easily. Next Sheedy

 

[Mad_Hatter]

is that fair though?
Holmes, Close, Atkins, both Guthries, Parfitt, De Koning, Simpson, Henry, have all developed perfectly under Scott, when we needed to have youngsters.
Worth recalling we did not have access to any of the top-line youngsters over the tenure of CS.

Yeah it is fair, but he wasn't saying the margin was huge or Scott is terrible at developing players. But I also give the edge to the bomber era when it comes to developing unknown youth into genuine superstars.

Same as how bomber wasn't a terrible preparation or gameday coach, but Scott is clearly the better of the 2.

Together they would have created a team that could win 10 straight flags.

 

[Mr Meow]

is that fair though?
Holmes, Close, Atkins, both Guthries, Parfitt, De Koning, Simpson, Henry, have all developed perfectly under Scott, when we needed to have youngsters.
Worth recalling we did not have access to any of the top-line youngsters over the tenure of CS.

Oddly, Wells does better with picks below 20 for the most part. That's why we did well to give up first round picks for ready made champions Danger and Cameron, then let Wells mine the rest of the draft for gold.

From our '07-'11 squad Corey, Bartel and Mackie were all around pick 8. Ling, Johnson and Chapman ridiculous value in 20s-30s. Harley for 37 before trading onto us, Taylor a bit higher at 17. Enright at 47 and Milburn at 48! Mooney as steak knives.

Even Ablett and Scarlett weren't ranked top 10 (mid range expectations I think, maybe 2nd roundish), so while we got them cheap in hindsight via FS, pick 40 at the time wasn't crazy. For Hawkins it definitely was, but Scott got really all of his good years.

The list of our '22 team and where they were drafted would surely stack up as excellent value too. But that original team Bomber built and developed weren't just a stack of top 5 or even 20 draft picks. Geelong had never bottomed out properly like what was seen prior to other dynasty sides.

But Scott has been a master too, simply with a different set of tools at his disposal.