Hardwick and Clarkson - AFL Legends?

[Cdog71]

A coach can only be considered really good if they win flags at different clubs.

Until then, it's too hard to validate whether it was their coaching or the playing list that was the reason for their success.

I mean, who knows what Hardwick's resume would look like if he didn't have Dustin Martin? Likely similar to a Ratten or a Bolton.

I agree, having a core group Reiwoldt,Cotchin,Rance, Edwards(*pick 26 but I rate him) and Martin all first Rnd’s playing for 10 years together.
It’s a big part of the success.

Clarkson has won flags in different leagues I know it’s not the highest level but it’s the next highest level.
I think that’s pretty impressive and the SANFL, VFL it’s not about marketablity or media preformance to help memberships.

I think Clarkson is the more accomplished of the two, maybe it’s still not enough for legend status but no other coach has done it.

Even if Hardwick wins one at GC I reckon Clarkson is the closer of the two

 

[PhatBoy]

No. You're being an ass.

I already said Ablett should've been charged with manslaughter.

‘He killed her.’

 

[Back One Out]

‘He killed her.’

Yeah. He did.

I didn't say he murdered her.

It was manslaughter. i.e. the act of killing another human being without malice.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I agree, having a core group Reiwoldt,Cotchin,Rance, Edwards(*pick 26 but I rate him) and Martin all first Rnd’s playing for 10 years together.
It’s a big part of the success.

Clarkson has won flags in different leagues I know it’s not the highest level but it’s the next highest level.
I think that’s pretty impressive and the SANFL, VFL it’s not about marketablity or media preformance to help memberships.

I think Clarkson is the more accomplished of the two, maybe it’s still not enough for legend status but no other coach has done it.

Even if Hardwick wins one at GC I reckon Clarkson is the closer of the two

Neither are in the Malthouse or Matthews ball park until they can win a flag with a different club.

 

[Cdog71]

Neither are in the Malthouse or Matthews ball park until they can win a flag with a different club.

I don’t agree with Malthouse
That West Coast team should’ve won more and that Collingwood team should have won more.
If he was as good as you say they wouldn’t have pushed him for Buckley and stuffed up their chances.

 

[PhatBoy]

Yeah. He did.

I didn't say he murdered her.

It was manslaughter. i.e. the act of killing another human being without malice.

Ok.

 

[BF Tiger]

yes he’s on the same scale as people who deliberately murder people.

Aren't we all on that scale, just at different points?

 

[PhatBoy]

Aren't we all on that scale, just at different points?

Well that’s true when you put it that way

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Yes, it was a risk but honestly not too fussed about the lengths of their contracts, they'll have 5 years left after this year and will be 27 and 28 at the start of next season. Cotch and Jack just finished up, Dusty is in the final year of his $1.1m a year contract + Lynch contract ends next year where he's going to be on $1.5m. Our books are getting cleared and the salary cap is going up, we can do some front ending for both Hopper and Taranto over the next couple years so their contracts will be more reasonable the last few.

Hardwick should stick around at the detriment of the team? You think he's part of some trades so that means he can't leave the club? Heads up buddy, clubs make trades every year, the people involved aren't obliged to stick around until the end of their contracts lmao.

If him coaching a team would make that team worse than a rookie coach, well what does that say about his HOF credentials?

I think it's actually the opposite of your opinion, it would've been gutless to stick around when you know you're not the right man for the job anyone just because of pride. It takes guts to admit you are not up this anymore.

I agree, I do look at it from an almost opposite perspective. It looks like he lost the hunger about two days after Richmond's 2023 finals chances were effectively done. Do you think his hunger would have still been gone, if Sam Durham hadn't goaled on the siren in the Dreamtime game last year? Because I seriously doubt it.

Your opinion would only make sense if him leaving put the club in a worse place and he bailed purely for his own good. Do you think Richmond would be in a better spot if Hardwick was still coaching?

As above. If you think he'd make the side worse than they were with McQualter in charge, or worse than Yze's modest start, it's not exactly a ringing endorsement of him. And then the hunger came back a few months later when he had a chance to inherit an immensely talented list and potentially one of the greatest draft crops of all-time. How convenient.

Hahahah. Collingwood were an utter rabble? Sure....for their expectations since they were almost always near the top of the ladder. They were the worst team for literally one season. It's like saying McRae took over "a joke, an utter table". Nah mate, you've got to be really s**t for a significant period of time to be an actual rabble. And you have to proper s**t, like "how will this team ever be good again" s**t, not just the bottom of the ladder.

1997: 10-12 91%
1998: 7-15 90%
1999: 4-18 84%.

Oh the horror! Finishing bottom once? North last 4 SEASONS are worse than Collingwood's worst year. And finishing with a percentage of 84% on the bottom of the ladder? How is that a rabble? You have to go back 43 years ago to find a team with a higher percentage while finishing bottom. You've got West Coast and North finishing in the 50% range and you think a team finishing bottom once with 84% is an utter rabble?

Show me a wooden spoon side and I'll show you a rabble. Were they as bad as Fitzroy in the 90s, or the recent North Melbourne squads? Probably not. But that was the second wooden spoon in Collingwood's history and their worst ever W/L record. Find me a Collingwood supporter who wouldn't describe that team as a rabble. And of course, that's on the back of nine consecutive years without a finals win, seven out of nine where they missed September action completely. That's rock bottom for Collingwood over the past 50-60 years, I don't think it really matters that they won a flag a decade earlier and still had a couple of players who'd played in the 1990 premiership on the list in 2000: I believe it was only Gavin Brown and Gavin Crossisca, who played fewer than 20 games combined under Malthouse at Collingwood.

I'm not arguing he didn't improve teams, so I'm not sure why you're just throwing these stats out there. The point is if they are in WORST positions than the teams Hardwick taken over. So what arguments do you have for that. Why were West Coast and Collingwood in a worse position than Richmond and Gold Coast at the times each coach joined?

They were similar positions - Collingwood with an extended period of mediocre-to-poor seasons, without so much as a finals win to show for the decade following their premiership breakthrough in 1990. Malthouse took them to a grand final in three years.

West Coast: access to a wealth of excellent players, nothing to show for it in three years, besides an elimination final loss. Finished 11th out of 14 the year before Malthouse took over. Interstate clubs had never had anything remotely resembling success in the VFL/AFL, there were no guarantees that it would ever work. That all happened post-Malthouse.

He doesn't have the longevity? ....he hasn't finished yet. Yes, a guy that's still coaching doesn't have the longevity as guys that have finished their careers. He may coach a couple seasons and finish up or he could coach for another 20 years, who knows. What we do know is his win percentage is 55.6% and Malthouse's was 56.5%. So if he can coach for the same amount of time, he's on track to match the wins and has already matched the number of flags.

Malthouse's was pushing 60% when he finished at Collingwood. Hardwick's been going at <50% since the 2020 premiership. Coaches don't tend to finish up when their career winning percentage is at its peak.

Hes Richmonds longest serving coach, he had 170 wins at Richmond v Hayes 173

Sounds like a fantastic case to be a Richmond legend. I'd heartily endorse it.

TLDR: see Bedi's post above. Parkin's case is better in every way. No-one's calling for Parkin to be elevated to Legend status. In all likelihood, no-one ever will.

 

[MadMaxx]

Consider that five teams ever have won three flags in a row:

Brisbane : Coach Leigh Matthews (Legend) - 4 Flags total
Collingwood : Coach Jock McHale (Legend) - 8 Flags total
Melbourne : Coach Norm Smith (Legend) - 6 Flags total
Hawthorn : Coach Al Clarkson - 4 Flags total
Carlton : Coach Jack Worral - 5 Flags total

Now the 1906-8 Carlton Triple wasnt exactly normal, with odd rules and countbacks on how the premers was decided. Worral went on to win another 2 coaching the Dons. It was the first few years that teams went from Caprain Coaches to full time head coaches too.
Smith and McHale won thiers in the VFL 12 teams comp. One of McHales flags in 1919 was even in a 9 team comp.
Matthews and Clarkson in the Fully Fledged AFL era 16/18 teams


I think that Clarko should definately be considered. A flag with another team should ice it.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Consider that five teams ever have won three flags in a row:

Brisbane : Coach Leigh Matthews (Legend) - 4 Flags total
Collingwood : Coach Jock McHale (Legend) - 8 Flags total
Melbourne : Coach Norm Smith (Legend) - 6 Flags total
Hawthorn : Coach Al Clarkson - 4 Flags total
Carlton : Coach Jack Worral - 5 Flags total

Now the 1906-8 Carlton Triple wasnt exactly normal, with odd rules and countbacks on how the premers was decided. Worral went on to win another 2 coaching the Dons. It was the first few years that teams went from Caprain Coaches to full time head coaches too.
Smith and McHale won thiers in the VFL 12 teams comp. One of McHales flags in 1919 was even in a 9 team comp.
Matthews and Clarkson in the Fully Fledged AFL era 16/18 teams


I think that Clarko should definately be considered. A flag with another team should ice it.

The problem with that is twofold. Firstly, Matthews was already a HOF Legend before his threepeat with Brisbane. We'll never know if that would have tipped him over to Legend status had he not already had a Legend worthy career as a player. Secondly, Smith and McHale had HOF worthy playing careers, something that Clarkson can't claim. And if you eliminate Matthews - since it's impossible to know if he'd be named a Legend primarily on the strength of his coaching career, Clarkson still has quite a way to go to catch McHale and Smith on the total premierships tally.

 

[Hawker55]

That was my first thought about Clarkson too. More likely to get cancelled for things he's previously done rather than recognised as an AFL legend.

Dimma isn't exactly squeaky either clean having dumped his wife for a staffer, and then dumped the Tigers entirely for that gold coast money.

Personally I'd prefer to see the legends status recognise players rather than magnet movers.

If you applied that standard to some of the people in there now it'd be interesting. Leigh Matthews king hit a bloke on the field of play and nearly caused a riot. Ted Whitten has more skeletons than people realise - just for two.

I find people comparing Clarko and Hardwick to Ablett Snr pretty distasteful as well - Ablett's off field indiscretion caused a death. That's a far cry from punching a wall/being a dickhead/cheating on your wife.

(I've left off the Hawks racism stuff only because at this point I don't think it's been proven one way or another. But even then it's different to a death)

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I don’t agree with Malthouse
That West Coast team should’ve won more and that Collingwood team should have won more.
If he was as good as you say they wouldn’t have pushed him for Buckley and stuffed up their chances.

It's not about how good he was.

It's about what he achieved.

 

[Osho]

One DH, one BS artist, with a bunch of premierships.

Dimma started a football revolution that is still on its way, with 4 stars and 20 good players. His achievement is remarkable. He just is a bit of a hypocrit and not that trustworthy.

Clarko is only tolerated bc of his 4 flags. A master coach, who is the anti role model. No obvious redeeming qualities apart from success.

 

[The Goon]

As others have said, both need more flags at their new club to be in the conversation, and I think they both need it to be multiple flags.

Clarkson has a reputation as a s**t bloke which rightly or wrongly counts against, but with his SNAFL and VFL flags I think he's closer. I reckon he needs 1-2 flags to really be in contention.

Hardwick wasn't anywhere near a hall-of-famer as a player so I don't think that really counts for him even though he won two flags (no one has Kamdyn McIntosh

33

Kamdyn Mcintosh

Age

30

Ht

191cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.8

4star

K

9.9

4star

HB

4.9

4star

M

3.7

4star

T

2.6

4star

CL

0.8

3star

D

13.8

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

5.4

3star

M

2.8

3star

T

2.2

3star

CL

1.0

3star

D

18.6

5star

K

12.6

5star

HB

6.0

4star

M

5.8

5star

T

2.4

4star

CL

1.4

4star

lined up for the hall of fame despite his three flags). Plus he's taken over a team that is absolutely brimming with talent. I'd say 2-3 flags at GC would get him in the conversation.

 

[BomberManU]

Reading this thread reminds me just how good Lethal was. I 'loved to hate him', back in the 80's, now I just love him. His contribution to football has been unbelievable. (Apart from the Bruns incident, obviously)
For me, Clarkson definitely not. Too much baggage. Hardwick, maybe, but probably not - though I wouldn't mind if he was. Was a very, very good player, but an excellent coach.

 

[TiggerMan22]

If him coaching a team would make that team worse than a rookie coach, well what does that say about his HOF credentials?

Hearing the same voice for over a decade loses its impact regardless of how good the coach is. Pretty poor attempt at argument there, mate. Fresh voice almost always brings in an initial surge for the team, that has nothing to do if the new coach is better/worse than the old coach.

I agree, I do look at it from an almost opposite perspective. It looks like he lost the hunger about two days after Richmond's 2023 finals chances were effectively done. Do you think his hunger would have still been gone, if Sam Durham hadn't goaled on the siren in the Dreamtime game last year? Because I seriously doubt it.

Yes. The hunger was lost before the Essendon game, that game was just the nail in the coffin that made up his mind.

As above. If you think he'd make the side worse than they were with McQualter in charge, or worse than Yze's modest start, it's not exactly a ringing endorsement of him. And then the hunger came back a few months later when he had a chance to inherit an immensely talented list and potentially one of the greatest draft crops of all-time. How convenient.

The fact that you legitimately think that's a comparison of who's a better coach is worrying and even more so worrying that you think he's lying about burnt out? It's like some people don't see coaches as people or being a head coach as a job. What's your point here? That he was lying about burnout or that he shouldn't take a job because they have a good list?

I dunno about you but if I was burnt out after working for the same company for 13 years, quitting and taking 6 months travelling overseas and then taking a new job in a different state sure af would get me over the burnout. Hell even just changing company without the holiday or moving to a new state would do that.

Show me a wooden spoon side and I'll show you a rabble. Were they as bad as Fitzroy in the 90s, or the recent North Melbourne squads? Probably not. But that was the second wooden spoon in Collingwood's history and their worst ever W/L record. Find me a Collingwood supporter who wouldn't describe that team as a rabble. And of course, that's on the back of nine consecutive years without a finals win, seven out of nine where they missed September action completely. That's rock bottom for Collingwood over the past 50-60 years, I don't think it really matters that they won a flag a decade earlier and still had a couple of players who'd played in the 1990 premiership on the list in 2000: I believe it was only Gavin Brown and Gavin Crossisca, who played fewer than 20 games combined under Malthouse at Collingwood.

Just being the worst team in the comp doesn't make you a rabble, that makes you the worst team in the comp. Of they were just probably not as bad as these teams? You're not sure about that? It's just a maybe? If you can't make a definite statement on that, then what's the point of even typing something out?

....so exactly what I said? That they were a 'rabble' by Collingwood's expectations, not by any actual metric? So they weren't that bad. I don't really give a s**t what Collingwood supporters described their team as, it doesn't mean anything.

Of course them winning a flag a decade earlier matters, are you still not getting the point here? I asked if anyone took on a harder job than Hardwick, not if they just took on a bad team.
Collingwood had a bad team at the time when he took over, one of the worst teams Collingwood had for a long time. He had to turn a bad team around back to the regular occurrence of being at the top and making grand finals.
Richmond didn't just have a an awful team, the club itself was broken. The entire culture of the club needed to be fixed after 3 decades of failing to do so.

The question isn't if that Collingwood team was s**t, it's if you think the team and club was in a worse position than Richmond was in 2009. Simple yes or no.

They were similar positions - Collingwood with an extended period of mediocre-to-poor seasons, without so much as a finals win to show for the decade following their premiership breakthrough in 1990. Malthouse took them to a grand final in three years.

West Coast: access to a wealth of excellent players, nothing to show for it in three years, besides an elimination final loss. Finished 11th out of 14 the year before Malthouse took over. Interstate clubs had never had anything remotely resembling success in the VFL/AFL, there were no guarantees that it would ever work. That all happened post-Malthouse.

Just to clarify, you think Collingwood 1999 and Richmond 2009 were in similar positions?

West Coast had "nothing to show for it nothing to show for it in three years, besides an elimination final loss". Wow 3 whole years after joining the league! What a massive draught. Not sure how they survived only making the finals once in the first 3 seasons after joining the league. And oh my god! They finished 11th out of 14 teams in the year! That's almost bottom of the ladder! For one season they were almost bottom, yikes!!!

Of course 3 years with 1 finals appearance and 1 bottom 4 finish IS AS BAD AS as 13 years of 0 finals appearances and 9 bottom 4 finishes, right? Is that actually your argument here?

Malthouse's was pushing 60% when he finished at Collingwood. Hardwick's been going at <50% since the 2020 premiership. Coaches don't tend to finish up when their career winning percentage is at its peak.

You just keep topping yourself for poor arguments. So you cherry pick the peak of Malthouses winning percentage and compare it to Hardwick's percentage from when he won the last flag up until now? Huh? Please let me know why you think that makes any sense.
For any logical argument you would think you would compare winning percentages up until the same point in their career, right?

And once again I gotta remind you that Hardwick's career isn't over lol.

Team records

Sounds like a fantastic case to be a Richmond legend. I'd heartily endorse it.

TLDR: see Bedi's post above. Parkin's case is better in every way. No-one's calling for Parkin to be elevated to Legend status. In all likelihood, no-one ever will.

Team records are obviously highly regarded when viewing a persons impact league wide obviously.

Once again, I really don't know how many times I gotta say it, Hardwick has not retired. No one is calling for him to be elevated to legend status right now. Yet you continuously compare his current career to those who have finished for some unknown reason. This is a hypothetical IF he wins a flag or flags at gold coast, where that puts him. Not to mention

 

[TiggerMan22]

As others have said, both need more flags at their new club to be in the conversation, and I think they both need it to be multiple flags.

Clarkson has a reputation as a s**t bloke which rightly or wrongly counts against, but with his SNAFL and VFL flags I think he's closer. I reckon he needs 1-2 flags to really be in contention.

Hardwick wasn't anywhere near a hall-of-famer as a player so I don't think that really counts for him even though he won two flags (no one has Kamdyn McIntosh lined up for the hall of fame despite his three flags). Plus he's taken over a team that is absolutely brimming with talent. I'd say 2-3 flags at GC would get him in the conversation.

It doesn't count for a whole lot as just viewed as a player he's not anywhere near that level, but it's still worth something. He was also more than just the 22nd guy picked in the team and just played a role. He did make AA in 2000, so he stood out in a team that lost 1 game for an entire season. Not quite the Mcintosh comparison you made.

He was AA in 2000 where Essendon won a flag and have the best single AFL season.
He then goes to Port and is part of them winning their first and only flag (so far) in the AFL.
He then joins Hawks as assistant Coach as they win their first flag in 17 years.
He then joins Richmond and breaks a 37 year flag draught and wins 3 flags.

If he can add joining Gold Coast and taking them to their first flag after 13 years of failure, then it's quite impressive to look at as a whole really.

Also Gold Coast have been brimming with talent for how many years now? Yet they still haven't finished higher than 12th.

 

[HairyO]

What about his 2 playing flags mate at 2 different clubs.

Legend status is for a particular thing not an overall thing?

I know there were reasons why people have been excluded and it was to do with needing to be a legend at your best thing, not the sum of all parts.

Matthews would get it for both given he coached 4 flags with a 3-peat and is the GOAT player, but many coaches have won 3 flags spread out across their career.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Once again, I really don't know how many times I gotta say it, Hardwick has not retired. No one is calling for him to be elevated to legend status right now.

It's literally the OP.

Everyone - not just me - has said he isn't remotely close. Matthew Nicks could be an AFL Legend as a coach one day for all we know.

Other points:

Yes, I think Hardwick bailed as soon as he realised he'd royally screwed up Richmond's chances for the next five years or so and that finals - let alone flags - were not on the horizon. So he bailed and took on a list with a very high potential for success.

The win percentage was just an indicator that coaches typically finish their careers with one or more catastrophic seasons. So it's certainly no given that Hardwick maintains his existing win percentage, more likely that it drops (just as Malthouse's did) by the time he's finished.

Yes I think Collingwood in 1999 were in a similar hopeless state to Richmond in 2009. Wooden spoon, five consecutive years without playing a final, nine years without a finals win. They'd become irrelevant.

 

[MadMaxx]

The problem with that is twofold. Firstly, Matthews was already a HOF Legend before his threepeat with Brisbane. We'll never know if that would have tipped him over to Legend status had he not already had a Legend worthy career as a player. Secondly, Smith and McHale had HOF worthy playing careers, something that Clarkson can't claim. And if you eliminate Matthews - since it's impossible to know if he'd be named a Legend primarily on the strength of his coaching career, Clarkson still has quite a way to go to catch McHale and Smith on the total premierships tally.

Understand the argument. However relying on "Premierships won" as the only metric is also problematic. In an 18 team national competition, the opportunity is close to half as frequent as it was in the 60's or 20's/

Here is another thought? lets look at the legacy impact of the system that was run by how many successful senior coaches had thier start and tutelage under clarkson.

I borrowed this from elsewhere on the net:

Thats 4 premiership coaches that got a start, or at least learned a stack from working as a Clarko Assistant. The list also doesnt include Stewie Dew, who Clarkson mentored as a player, as well as a number for "career" assitants.

His method of building a club and culture was the blueprint for a lot of the success stories in the last few years, even though many in the media (and on bigfooty) prefer to take pot shots at him for his temper.

I havent done the homework, but I doubt Smith or McHale would have as tidy legacy when it came to knowledge transfer that benefited the league and other clubs. I understand that assitants were not as much of a thing back then. Lethal had a few proteges as well, but it was generally his players that became coaches (Scotts, Voss, Leppa) rather than the coaching staff.

To paint Clarko, his system and methodology as having a negligible impact is just not correct. For the last 11 years, 10 of the flags were either won by Clarkson, or one of his former assitants (Goodwin being the sole exception)

 

[Cleansweep17]

Legend status is for a particular thing not an overall thing?

I know there were reasons why people have been excluded and it was to do with needing to be a legend at your best thing, not the sum of all parts.

Matthews would get it for both given he coached 4 flags with a 3-peat and is the GOAT player, but many coaches have won 3 flags spread out across their career.

Who knows what the AFL does but looking at who they select for HOF/Legend status most of the time they prioritise achievements especially flags, you have to be an truely exceptional player/coach to get in without having multiple. I only know Lockett is a Legend with no flag, is there anybody else?

Also are there many players/coaches with 5 flags overall that aren’t a Legend? I haven’t looked into it. If there is i would guess it is very few.

 

[MadMaxx]

Also are there many players/coaches with 5 flags overall that aren’t a Legend? I haven’t looked into it. If there is i would guess it is very few.

More than you would think. Here is the list of players with 5 Flags. Legends in bold

Michael Tuck 7
Albert Collier 6
Harry Collier 6
Ron Barassi 6
Frank Adams 6
Gordon Coventry 5
Robert DiPierdomenico 5
Chris Mew 5
Gary Ayres 5
Dermott Brereton 5
Charlie Hammond 5
Don Williams 5
Brian Dixon 5
John Beckwith 5
Laurie Mithen 5
Bob Johnson 5
Kevin Bartlett 5
Ian Ridley 5
Harold Rumney 5
Charlie Dibbs 5
Francis Bourke 5

If Tucky can play in 11 Gf's, win 7 (captain for 4) and not be a legend of the Game, then I dont think the selectors put much weight on team success as an entry criteria. And Lockett gets in with Zero Flags

 

[Cleansweep17]

More than you would think. Here is the list of players with 5 Flags. Legends in bold

Michael Tuck 7
Albert Collier 6
Harry Collier 6
Ron Barassi 6
Frank Adams 6
Gordon Coventry 5
Robert DiPierdomenico 5
Chris Mew 5
Gary Ayres 5
Dermott Brereton 5
Charlie Hammond 5
Don Williams 5
Brian Dixon 5
John Beckwith 5
Laurie Mithen 5
Bob Johnson 5
Kevin Bartlett 5
Ian Ridley 5
Harold Rumney 5
Charlie Dibbs 5
Francis Bourke 5

If Tucky can play in 11 Gf's, win 7 (captain for 4) and not be a legend of the Game, then I dont think the selectors put much weight on team success as an entry criteria. And Lockett gets in with Zero Flags

Hmm fair enough. But it’s a little harder to win flags nowadays. I don’t think we’ll see a 5x premiership player again.

It would be a little weird not having any legends from the 21st century. Hence why I think they start just picking the best ones which would be Clarko and Hardwick.

 

[BF Tiger]

It's literally the OP.

Everyone - not just me - has said he isn't remotely close. Matthew Nicks could be an AFL Legend as a coach one day for all we know.

Other points:

Yes, I think Hardwick bailed as soon as he realised he'd royally screwed up Richmond's chances for the next five years or so and that finals - let alone flags - were not on the horizon. So he bailed and took on a list with a very high potential for success.

The win percentage was just an indicator that coaches typically finish their careers with one or more catastrophic seasons. So it's certainly no given that Hardwick maintains his existing win percentage, more likely that it drops (just as Malthouse's did) by the time he's finished.

Yes I think Collingwood in 1999 were in a similar hopeless state to Richmond in 2009. Wooden spoon, five consecutive years without playing a final, nine years without a finals win. They'd become irrelevant.

So Hardwick took on a team primed for success but it's highly unlikely he'll maintain his winning percentage. FMD. You're all over the shop.