He transformed a team that yes had good players
Good players? Do you realise that we were fielding probably the most balanced Geelong side that you or I will ever live to see? Hunt, Scarlett, Lonergan, Enright, Taylor, Wojcinski, Mackie? Selwood, Corey, Kelly, Stokes, Ling, Ottens? Hawkins, Varcoe, Podsiadly, Chapman, Bartel? That is not "good". We were fielding legends of our club. They were a class above the rest in their hay day and they will be a class above in hindsight. People continuously underestimate the list we had.
He transformed a misfiring team with a stale style of play into the premiers within 12 months.
And why is it that these changes were only truly effective in the 2011 season? Because, simply, he walked into a ready-made champion side. The Collingwood loss was never going to be the bookend to our dynasty and you only had to take a look at our list and their retaliations to finals losses in the past to know this. 2011 was conveniently timed, as more players started to retire and lose form in the following seasons.
That following season he re-introduced Mackie who had fallen out of form and favour
Mackie had registered 22 games for the year, only being dropped for the last 2 games (finals evidently). No one is to say that had Bomber continued coaching or had another coach come in and held the reins, they would not have "reintroduced" Mackie, who had played 24 out of 25 games in 2007,
21 out of 25 games in 2008, 24 out of 25 games in 2009, and 22 out of 25 games in 2010. Especially seeing as he was only 25 at the start of 2011.
made hard calls on Mooney and Milburn
Mooney was extremely unlucky with injury throughout the year and only played 8 games. Hawkins was showing signs after being dropped to the VFL, and this is ultimately what put a line through Mooney's comeback. It was not a hard call, it was a justified call and I say this with both a gleam in my eye (Tommy in the 2011 finals series) and an ache in my heart (Moons being my eternal favourite). Milburn was rough, however he was definitely on the wrong side of 30 being our oldest player at the time in an already ageing squad (as media sources and opposition/club supporters had made a constant point of referencing); replacing him was inevitable at any rate, Scott just happened to be handed that responsibility.
Hawkins played every game in 2009 except round 1; he also played 18 games in 2010, (from rounds 1-10 and every game from round 18 to the preliminary final vs Collingwood). Any games he didn't play, he was sidelined and recovering from a serious foot injury. Again, reintroducing him was practically a given and not merely a smart tactical move on Scott's behalf. In fact, the only reason Scott had the duty of reintroducing Hawkins was because he had been dropped that many times throughout the 2011 season that he couldn't string more than 4 games together up until Round 17 vs Brisbane when his career took on a new path. I don't think any Cats supporter will hold any regrets in that regard, however "reintroducing" Hawkins shouldn't be used in a context both maledictory towards Thompson and eulogistic towards Scott.
Again Scott did more than merely coach a team that could win the 2011 flag on autopilot, to suggest so imo is insulting to the body of work and decisions that the players and staff put into winning in 2011.
Alternatively, to suggest that a coach who invested in excess of 10 years into a club....a club he walked into with no prodigious culture to speak of, a club whose own players claimed were surrounded by lazy and egotistical influences, a club who sprouted from troubled rising stars, a club whose players were renowned for taking significant pay cuts just to play together, a club whose representative majority resisted almost all external offers from opposition clubs, a club who were known to face adversity outside its four walls even from its own supporters and stuck it to all of them not once but twice (07, 09)...had not only
A. led his group into an oblivion that only Chris "The Messiah" Scott could lead them out of and
B. was thus comparable to Scott, a first year coach
is nothing short of insulting, not only to Bomber but to the club personnel and players who lived and bled the club, for some like Bomber in excess of 10 years. They would have held the belief they could win the 2011 flag, with or without Scott and you know why? It's certainly not because the new coach on the block decided to play a promising young forward ahead of an injured 32 year old. These beliefs, values and culture were instilled into our club long before Chris's arrival, and that is something that Bomber, suffice to say, was a huge part of, like it or not.