Koch or Ken

[finbarr]

Hinkley. Deal with Koch later.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

It is obviously Koch.

Hinkley is a nice guy with a loser mentality and an average coach.
Koch allows it. That is far worse.

Koch should be blamed as much as Hinkley for our stability in mediocrity.

There is only one place where you can hurt Koch and that is his image.
Destroy his image and paint him as a loser he is that has changed this club from a proud, efficient, practical club to the loser mentality that has plagued us and he will leave.
And the rest of the daisy chain will fall.

The List Management guys and our Port Adelaide roots are keeping us going.

 

[JUSTWORK]

Hinkley.

If not for Koch (And Richo. We can’t underplay his role in Hinkley still being here) then Hinkley would have been moved on by now. Not necessarily sacked, but certainly not reappointed.

That said, Hinkley is a far bigger obstacle in relation to us winning on a flag next year.

With a gun coach, they others wouldn’t be as nearly as big a problem as they are currently.

 

[Power Raid]

This is like a Trump v Hillary or Abbott v Latham type election

 

[Eddie Woloschek]

The Hayseed has to go, as he is a day-to-day, week-to-week irritant, poison and cancer. (Koch would be too if I watched Channel 7). Then, of course, we'd have a farcical process to find the new coach, and someone like Gerard Neesham would be 'not the last man standing, but the best man standing'. Still, I'm at the stage where I could make an argument for almost anyone in order to flick the hick. Scotty Watters, David Noble, picket number 27 at Alberton Oval . . .

 

[yepits2020]

I dislike this thread and is incredibly disrespectful. We should not underestimate the importance of having some one of Koch’s calibre supporting us on the Board and in the media. People should be aware that the Board makes decisions as a collective, not by Koch. Hinkley is frustrating, but he is our coach - while I struggle seeing it, I still hope he can deliver us a premiership.

 

[bomberclifford]

David Cuck

 

[Rendaw]

Koch. It all starts at the top

 

[EskimoPAFC]

I'm so disappointed that you didn't add Boak to this poll - would have been epic trolling

 

[Cheesey Mac]

Short term view - sack Hinkley. Bringing in a new coach would bring enthusiasm back to the supporter base and if we brought in a coach with literally any tactical nous it would be an immediate upgrade on donuts. Stop losing games in the same tactically inept way, get the new coach bounce, make the grand final and listen to the happy clapper holdouts give Ken credit for it.

Long term view - sack Koch. The man is a cancer on the club, Ken is just the symptom. If we turfed Koch and got in a chairman who was actually a Port person then we wouldn't have to endure this "little old battler club" schtick, and a Port person in that chair would be a lot less tolerant of finishing 10th in perpetuity and move on a coach whose ceiling is demonstrably not high enough to win any silverware.

 

[Alberton Proud]

¿Por qué no los dos?​

 

[Duck Farmer]

Hinkley: symptom
Koch: root cause

 

[240volt]

Koch is behind just about all that is wrong with the club.
Our club’s success over the years was built on strong and decisive management.
Now it’s some drongo from a morning tv show and a bunch of misfits.

 

[1954]

As others have already said, Koch is the cancer and kern is the symptom, ideally they both have to go but the kokmeister needs to get the rissole first, because as sure as god made little green apples if we make the 8 next year his trigger finger will be flexing uncontrollably, and the result could be yet another kern extension.

 

[snozulu]

They're both attached at the hip so they can both go.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Our longest serving president without a flag or our longest serving coach without a flag.

Koch by a mile.

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Spadge]

Kock 100%

Our new president would fire Ken into the sun fairly quickly after that anyway

 

[Alyx]

I voted for both, and there is nothing you can do about it.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Pretty simple scenario. If you had the power to, but it could be only 1, who would you fire into the sun, Hinlkley or Koch?

Hinkley.

The board has handed over most of the power to the executive team. Hinkley is the one that keeps people out of the football department - Darren Cahill, Warren Tredrea, Jay Schulz etc. Ben Perkins has offered to help the club with goal kicking - Hinkley said no.

Hinkley is insular and a snake oil used car salesman who knows how to play the media. He is too scared to allow world class sports professionals into the club who would impinge on his patch. It would mean he has to work differently - work smarter - something Ken doesn't believe in.

He is a good coach, but not a great coach. His use by date is up but like some packaged goods, you still consume them a bit after the use by date.

How much cliched BS has he said at pressers since the 2017 EF loss? He has media mates who grovel to him to protect him. Koch doesn't get paid for his work as Chairman, yes he gets reimbursed expenses, but Hinkley was on $1mil a year contract before Covid cuts.

And he has held the club to ransom, first in 2017, and then with the covid cuts, he said he would do them but wants to go onto full wages again, so we are stuck with a soft cap issue if we sacked him this year.

From what I have been able to glean over the last 5 years, its was KT, not Koch who drove the extension in 2017, ie 2 more years on top of 2018 original end date, with such a low bar that if he makes finals 1 year in 3, he gets 2021 automatically.

Thinking about KT's U/23 comments the last couple of weeks, that made me start that thread yesterday, and the fact he announced he was stepping down about 6 weeks after the 2019 Big Footy Focus Group, where us attendees made it very clear what we thought of Ken, I reckon KT pulled the pin because he didn't want to deal with the issue of sacking Ken if we didn't make finals in 2020. Yes he was probably burnt out, but he didn't really want to deal with this, as the original plan was to find a successor in March or April, take him/her to the China game and finish up before 30 June. Covid changed all that.

If I'm right about KT then the last 2 year contract Ken got was driven more by Richo and CD than the board. It would have been a big decision to say to a new CEO, 4 months into the job, we don't back your decision to give him 2 years, its only 1 year.

The Koch - Hinkley public lovefest is a facade. They are professional enough to present a front to us all. This sort of s**t happens all the time.

Boards are like a government cabinets, there is robust debate, a position is formed and everybody has to back the majority vote in public forums whether they like the decision or not.

Look at Peter Garrett, do you reckon he believed all of the stuff the government did on the environment when he was minister for the environment? He had to back the majority decision. He wanted the power of his portfolio so he had to play the game, not be an outsider protesting. Plenty of people when they get outside of politics reveal the truth that they didn't vote for certain decisions, but cabinet solidarity meant they had to back it fully in public.

I reckon our board has 3 factions - the old guard Koch, Cardone, Osborn and Restas, been there since October 2012, the middle guard Ranson and Cahill and the new guard who have come onto the board the last 20 months or so, who I reckon have had enough of the BS, but can't force change alone - Nagle, Zeitz, Snowdon and Columbus.

Once the old guard goes its a WNBG as the Coodabeens used to say - Whole New Ball Game.

Where they all stand on different issues would make for interesting observations sitting in Big Bob's chair in the corner at a board meeting.

Looking at the successful well run clubs for the last decade, its clear than CEO+Footy Ops Manager+Coach run the club, not the board. Boards tend to step in when there is a crisis ie St Kilda today giving their coach the arse.

The so called review of our 2022 season, will tell us who really has the power at the club, if it is ever fully disclosed.

 

[Steve Dore]

I also voted both thanks to a flaw in the poll's logic.



As some others have already posted, I'd sack Koch. He is Hinkley's enabler. Get in a club chairperson who understands football and what is required to make a football club successful and Hinkley will be gone.

 

[gbear]

I voted for both, and there is nothing you can do about it.

I did too, they are both as toxic as each other.

 

[Peninsula Boy]

If Koch was sacked and replaced by someone with half a brain, his first order of business would be to check over the whole club and give Hinkley the boot. Both would be gone.
If Hinkley is sacked, Koch and the board might pick another average coach to replack him. The board and Koch are littered with bad decisions regarding coaching. Perhaps another coach who is a good bloke who has a loser mentality for another 10 years. Yay!!!

 

[PowerLil]

I dislike this thread and is incredibly disrespectful. We should not underestimate the importance of having some one of Koch’s calibre supporting us on the Board and in the media. People should be aware that the Board makes decisions as a collective, not by Koch. Hinkley is frustrating, but he is our coach - while I struggle seeing it, I still hope he can deliver us a premiership.

Carn. What on earth have Koch and Hinkley done to deserve so much respect? Sack them. Disrespectful was Hinkley appointing co-captains and Koch ratifying it.

 

[Igavemyloveachicken]

Their reign should end together like Thelma and Louise.

 

[Papa G]

If start with a challenge to the board involving Timmy G, George Fiachi and Warren Tredrea (plus whoever they need to put around them for the business know how).

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Tim Ginever has been incredibly disappointing on 5aa I must say. Not quite Rucci/Kornes level of propaganda but very much tows the company line.