Good to see you're open minded.
I would have preferred that Scott saw out his current contract before the club made a decision on his future. I have concerns over what I have witnessed in the past few years in terms of the team's performance under pressure (especially in finals), their togetherness as a team and the game plans that are being implemented.
In terms of the clubs management, I do have some issues with what has gone on in the last few years, and compare some of the decisions to what I witnessed in pre-2000 Geelong (I was first a club member in 1979). If you have read the book Comeback: The Fall and Rise of Geelong (James Button), it will inform you of some of the issues that the club had; the board was a nepotistic 'boys club', run by wealthy individuals from old money Geelong who saw a position on the board as adding to their prestige rather than being interested in furthering the interests of the team and the club.
The appointment of an outsider in Frank Costa as president and, in turn, Brian Cook as CEO, turned the club around, but only after a long process of investigating all areas of the club, getting rid of syncophants and hangers on and changing the way things were run. I fear that, in Colin Carter (who was also a director from 1987-1993), we have regressed in terms of the way the club is managed. A warning sign in terms of the nepotism that used to occur was the recent resignation of Gareth Andrews as Vice-President. Rather than holding an election for a new board member, his nephew Justin Andrews was handed a spot on the board. Regardless of whether Justin is an appropriate choice, the 'jobs for the boys' mentality is never a good look. To my mind, Cook has become too comfortable and is no longer leading the pack in terms of administration innovation; he's become 'one of the boys' along with his man Chris Scott.
Despite all of the changes Cook, in 2006 we were still a rabble (after a few good years, mind yoiu), even though our list was essentially the same as the all conquering 2007 team. Important changes were made to the coaching and administration structure, with the crucial appointment of Neil Balme occurring in 2007 (who is now at Richmond...). The turnaround in 2007 was dramatic, but showed one important factor in football; most of the lists in the league have similar levels of talent, with the last 5% being between the ears (close team bonding, confidence) and in developing a unique game style that suits the players on the list. Geelong played the game 'the way it should be played' with a list of natural footballers who played for each other and had bonded as a group (Leading Teams and player-led meetings being the driving force for this).
I would like nothing more than to believe after 8 years at the helm that Chris Scott and his Neil Balme substitute Simon Lloyd, along with the administration of the club, are capable of delivering a similar turn around in game style and team togetherness. But unfortunately I don't see it. What I saw in the games against Richmond and Hawthorn was a Geelong team that was poorly set up and organised with respect to their opposition. A team that did not respond to the tactics of the opposition (e.g. guarding the corridor for kick-ins and allowing Rich/Haw to chip around the boundary line and escape defensive 50 time and time again). A 'team' with players that pointed fingers and argued when structures broke down. A 'team' that let a 34-year old almost carry them to the line against Hawthorn, yet when he kicked 3 of the first 4 goals, almost none of his teammates went to him to slap him on the back. These things speak to me of a dysfunctional team that lacks leadership and cohesion, is not playing with a game style that is innovative or suits the available list. Chris Scott is a leader at the club (though not the only one), so for me, a significant proportion of this falls on his shoulders.
Personally, I do have issues with how Chris Scott deals with the media. I would prefer he gave up his slot on AFL 360, as I don't enjoy what I see as his self-promotion in this role. Sensibly, Nathan Buckley gave up the role recently; coincidence? I also do not like the way Chris aggressively attacks reporters that question his tactics during press conferences. I have never once seen him admit that he may have got it wrong, which lowers my respect for him.
On this forum, I would think that people should be open minded enough to realise that disagreeing with a decision to extend the contract of a coach and 100% supporting your team are actually simultaneously possible. I wish for nothing more than for 5 wins in a row and a flag in 2018, I just don't currently see it as at all likely.
Maybe people should realise that it is OK to hold differing opinions and to respect those of others, particularly when they are articulated an reasoned. Some people (on both sides of the argument) need to take a chill pill and realise that we all support the same team. Some mods should also pull their heads in and not take pot shots at those that disagree with them.
Peace, and long may the respectful discussion continue (although I don't think it will if we don't win this week...)
Its a lock as the best post I have read for a while 
