I remember when we wanted Mark Williams to be a ten year coach, then we ended up losing everything and handing the empty plate to Primus.
At least we got a premiership out of the deal, which was obviously what mattered most, but instead of rebuilding post premiership we tried to use up everything we had and lost all of it as a result, bar a few players.
Did Koch never consider this when plotting his plan?
I think it’s a tough balance. Not many coaches are going to be successful within 4-5 years, so you don’t want to sack everyone who doesn’t win a premiership in that time. On the other hand you don’t want a 10 year coach that hasn’t achieved anything either.
The coach has to have a clear plan of how to get there from the start though, but that’s not something supporters are usually privy to I think.
Unless coaching and strategy is a lot simpler than it looks, and coaches actually do divulge their entire strategy in press conferences. Which is possible I suppose.
That has nothing to do with your original assertion about the head coach's influence on the fitness program and my subsequent question.
You are saying that Hinkley may want a game plan based on speed and outside run but has no control over the fitness program that is just as likely to deliver a squad of bulked up players who couldn't run out of sight on a dark night.
Besides, fitness program is not skills training so stop moving the goal posts.