The anti-Scott crew get a great run on here because we have to respect a 'diversity of opinions'. I guess that is fine on the surface, but unfortunately, in our post-truth age, we mistake opinions for facts.
The fact is the 2011 flag counts. The fact is his H/A record counts. The fact is he has only missed the finals once while transitioning a list. The fact is the finals wins against Haw (2016) and Syd (2017) count. The fact is he among the most statistically successful coaches in V/AFL history. The fact is we still finished the 2017 h/a season second after the disaster of rd.17 when no one gave us a chance. The fact is he successfully changed the game plan after rd 8, when we had been found out, and in doing so saved the season.
These are facts. They aren't just opinions.
I don't state these facts because I am a 'Scott-lover'. On the contrary, I have my criticisms of Scott. I state these facts because I respect reality. It is clear he can coach - his record and longevity suggest he is a very good coach. Whether he is the coach to take us to our next flag remains to be seen. If he fails to do that in the next two years, then he will move on, and I've no doubt the separation will be mutual and professional.
I would confidently bet that the heroes who like to claim that Scott has 'NFI' are people whose highest level of football achievement is a few High School games. I say that with total conviction. Because I don't believe anyone who has played the game at a decent level would devalue his achievements in the way the keyboard warriors do.
i think the 'he has NFI' and the flip side of those arguments are largely just internet hyperbole driven by ego and personality clash.
most people who genuinely support geelong or footy generally would acknowledge chris did a great job in 2011. one way to look at it is even
if that job was cimply 'staying out of the way' as the players 'coached themselves' (highly unlikely), at least he did what needed to be done and put ego aside. but he did have that team playing some of the best football of this particular era. he did a great job, imo.
however, it
was 7 seasons ago now.
manchester city had mancini win them their first title in 44 years recently. then they wanted to make a splash in europe. so they dumped him, and got in pellegrini. he got them a second title, but nothing in europe. then guardiola got pursued. and he finally has them humming. a massive threat in european competition. they dumped title winners quite quickly, because they were ruthlessly pursuing the best. they know seem to have it.
do we already? maybe. could we do better with a new coach? yes. could we do worse? of course.
but winning a flag doesnt and never has guaranteed life tenure. especially one 7 seasons back. successful coaches can go stale, lose their edge, or simply have their ideas out-paced.
i love chris scott - as a person, and as a coach. but he has flaws. can they be surmounted? yeah, he could win another. are there better options that could be pursued? probably. but its a crapshoot.
he has had a long career at geelong, far longer than AFL/VFL average for a coach. no matter how good a coach is - and i think he is a very good one - their message can go stale. i dont think parting ways and seeking a fresh approach would be that radical a proposition at this stage.
when the argument becomes more about the personalities involved, though - thats when we hit the hyperbolic 'straw men' at opposite extremes.