Sydney and Port Adelaide being AFL controlled is why their coaches escape media scrutiny

[Taper]

Out of the five clubs under AFL control the most interesting cases are those of Sydney and Port.
Crows are AFL controlled but will become member controlled from 2028 onwards.
GC and GWS are AFL controlled which is self explanatory given they're new franchises, but they both have KPIs required to be met before becoming member controlled.

Sydney and Port are interesting cases because not only are they set to remain AFL controlled indefinitely, they were both different clubs in the past being SMFC and Port Magpies respectively.
Both clubs seem to always be too good to bottom out while not being good enough to become a force. This has been the case for both clubs ever since being under AFL control and there is no doubt this is by design.

Longmire and Hinkley always seem to escape media scrutiny despite both being in their 11th season as coach of their club without any silverware to show. It's not a coincidence the two coaches who happen to coach AFL controlled clubs Sydney and Port escape media scrutiny, because the media is controlled by the AFL and the AFL want to do whatever it takes to maintain stability at these clubs.

Prior to Longmire and Hinkley, no one had coached for 11 consecutive seasons at one club without any silverware to show and before anyone points out Longmire coaching Sydney to a premiership in 2012, I'm specifically referring to 2013-2023 and I'm aware of Hinkley coaching Bell Park to a premiership in 2003 as well. The point is Longmire and Hinkley have both been coaching for 11 consecutive seasons without winning any silverware in that time yet receive very little media scrutiny.
Compare this to the heat Chris Scott

Chris Scott

Age

47

Ht

182cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.6

4star

K

11.2

4star

HB

5.4

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.4

3star

No current season stats available

D

13.2

4star

K

10.2

4star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

was under after coaching us for 10 consecutive seasons without winning any silverware, it's chalk and cheese.

Longmire and Hinkley are contracted until 2025 and both will remain safe as long as their sides make finals, because there is a clause stating if the side make finals in the year the contract expires, the contract must be renewed. This is why David Koch specifically stated many times they'd wait until August to discuss Hinkley's contract as that's when it's clear as to whether or not teams will be playing in finals.

I know many people amongst neutrals along with supporters of Sydney and Port often wonder why Longmire and Hinkley escape media scrutiny and the answer to this is simple, it all comes down to Sydney and Port being AFL controlled.

 

[Papa G]

Don't lump Longmire in with Hinkley. Horse has won a Premiership and been in a further 2 Grand Finals.

Hinkley is zero in both. Chalk and Cheese. Hinkley is a Loser.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Longmire: Flag in 2nd season. 2 further GF losses.
Scott: Flag in first season. Flag last season. Another GF loss.

What a difference that game last September makes to both coaches. Sydney win last year and the cats still experience their fall in 2023 and Horse is the great coach and this thread is about Scott and Hinkley.

Don't lump Longmire in with Hinkley. Horse has won a Premiership and been in a further 2 Grand Finals.

Hinkley is zero in both. Chalk and Cheese. Hinkley is a Loser.

Weird how things turn out. Successful coach in the Geelong league.
Successful assistant coach at the cats.

Just can't quite get there at Alberton. So close a few times now.

 

[MF]

Longmire escapes scrutiny because he's a pretty good coach.

 

[Underarm]

Port have been one of the most winningest clubs in the last decade. Sydney have missed finals 5 times in 100 years.

 

[Interstater]

Longmire and Hinkley are contracted until 2025 and both will remain safe as long as their sides make finals, because there is a clause stating if the side make finals in the year the contract expires, the contract must be renewed. This is why David Koch specifically stated many times they'd wait until August to discuss Hinkley's contract as that's when it's clear as to whether or not teams will be playing in finals.

I would like evidence of this before I let it spiral me into full blown depression.
How would you possibly know this?

 

[Caj]

Don't know how Longmire escapes scrutiny, he's a very ordinary coach who has underachieved on a major level with the teams he has had at his disposal

If only North had been successful in poaching him a few years ago, we're stuck with him now

 

[Taper]

I would like evidence of this before I let it spiral me into full blown depression.
How would you possibly know this?

Geoffa32

Don't know how Longmire escapes scrutiny, he's a very ordinary coach who has underachieved on a major level with the teams he has had at his disposal

If only North had been successful in poaching him a few years ago, we're stuck with him now

Port fans say the same about Hinkley.
Longmire loses grand finals while Hinkley loses preliminary finals but at the end of the day, they've both been head coach at their club for 11 seasons with no silverware.

Ask yourself this. How many other clubs would retain the same coach for 11 years with no silverware? It doesn't happen because supporters expect silverware, look at Nathan Buckley and Brad Scott who were both turfed in their 10th season as coach.
The difference is Collingwood and North Melbourne are member controlled.

 

[melanChronic]

This is spot on, but more to the point the problem is that Port fans are beholden to their (mostly) AFL appointed board-- including our longstanding chairman Koch. He is responsible for the panicked premature resigning of Hinkley at each stage over the last few years, and now has come out saying he wants to make Hinkley a 20 year coach!

Just unheard of bullshit that comes from some slavish commitment to stability over success. Something you wouldn't even contemplate if you were accountable to members rather than to the AFL.

If we get rolled in straight sets right after Koch again shot his load too early on Hinkley then he should fall on his sword, but he will not have any worries as long as Port continues to stay out of the AFL House problem basket.

 

[Wolfgang West]

Don't lump Longmire in with Hinkley. Horse has won a Premiership and been in a further 2 Grand Finals.

Hinkley is zero in both. Chalk and Cheese. Hinkley is a Loser.

3 Actually.

 

[Papa G]

3 Actually.

s**t I forgot 2016..... when the AFL went full WWE. But yes further confirms that Hinkley and Longmire shouldn't be in the same conversation.

 

[ClintEastwood]

Port have been one of the most winningest clubs in the last decade.

That would be great, if not for the existence of a little old thing called the finals series.

 

[Golumless]

They dodge scrutiny because both sides have tended to be finalists in the last decade. The AFL media only cares about shitshows, not the clubs who are performing well but aren't winning it all.

Scott didn't really cop too much heat in the last decade either.

 

[ibd77]

Just can't quite get there at Alberton. So close a few times now.

Close is when you lose a GF by a kick or two. We have never been close. 2014 and 2020 was our best chance but failed.
We accepted our 2014 loss as a part of a new era for the club. 2020 was a choke with some of the advantages we had that season. 2021 was another club lowlight that should have sent Ken packing.

 

[ibd77]

Out of the five clubs under AFL control the most interesting cases are those of Sydney and Port.
Crows are AFL controlled but will become member controlled from 2028 onwards.
GC and GWS are AFL controlled which is self explanatory given they're new franchises, but they both have KPIs required to be met before becoming member controlled.

Sydney and Port are interesting cases because not only are they set to remain AFL controlled indefinitely, they were both different clubs in the past being SMFC and Port Magpies respectively.
Both clubs seem to always be too good to bottom out while not being good enough to become a force. This has been the case for both clubs ever since being under AFL control and there is no doubt this is by design.

Longmire and Hinkley always seem to escape media scrutiny despite both being in their 11th season as coach of their club without any silverware to show. It's not a coincidence the two coaches who happen to coach AFL controlled clubs Sydney and Port escape media scrutiny, because the media is controlled by the AFL and the AFL want to do whatever it takes to maintain stability at these clubs.

Prior to Longmire and Hinkley, no one had coached for 11 consecutive seasons at one club without any silverware to show and before anyone points out Longmire coaching Sydney to a premiership in 2012, I'm specifically referring to 2013-2023 and I'm aware of Hinkley coaching Bell Park to a premiership in 2003 as well. The point is Longmire and Hinkley have both been coaching for 11 consecutive seasons without winning any silverware in that time yet receive very little media scrutiny.
Compare this to the heat Chris Scott was under after coaching us for 10 consecutive seasons without winning any silverware, it's chalk and cheese.

Longmire and Hinkley are contracted until 2025 and both will remain safe as long as their sides make finals, because there is a clause stating if the side make finals in the year the contract expires, the contract must be renewed. This is why David Koch specifically stated many times they'd wait until August to discuss Hinkley's contract as that's when it's clear as to whether or not teams will be playing in finals.

I know many people amongst neutrals along with supporters of Sydney and Port often wonder why Longmire and Hinkley escape media scrutiny and the answer to this is simple, it all comes down to Sydney and Port being AFL controlled.

Absolutely agree about the part of membership control but from the aspect of members placing pressure on the board, chairman and CEO with the ability to vote them out if they are underperforming.

Our club serves the AFL and their agendas. The AFL wants stability over success for the PAFC so we can provide a loyal customer base to consume their product. To do that, the AFL insists Hinkley stays in his position as he has the right demeanour to deal with the media. By serving the media, protects him and the club from negative publicity.

The problem with stability over success is that there is no drive or hunger for the club to prevail when it matters most. This seems to run from admin, coaching and players.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Absolutely agree about the part of membership control but from the aspect of members placing pressure on the board, chairman and CEO with the ability to vote them out if they are underperforming.

Our club serves the AFL and their agendas. The AFL wants stability over success for the PAFC so we can provide a loyal customer base to consume their product. To do that, the AFL insists Hinkley stays in his position as he has the right demeanour to deal with the media. By serving the media, protects him and the club from negative publicity.

The problem with stability over success is that there is no drive or hunger for the club to prevail when it matters most. This seems to run from admin, coaching and players.

Great summation. 100%

I think we are the same, AFL has the veto over who we appoint on our board and ultimately our coaches etc.

Stand to be corrected but I think this is the case until 2028 with us?

Both SA clubs beholden to the AFL which in a traditional (and one of only 3) Aussie rules football states is ridiculous.

 

[ibd77]

Great summation. 100%

I think we are the same, AFL has the veto over who we appoint on our board and ultimately our coaches etc.

Stand to be corrected but I think this is the case until 2028 with us?

Both SA clubs beholden to the AFL which in a traditional (and one of only 3) Aussie rules football states is ridiculous.

I could never understand why the Crows never went member control once the SANFL gave up your sublicence.

I think your board was too scared to give up their entitled boys club positions to the passionate members.

 

[Rabish Binney]

I could never understand why the Crows never went member control once the SANFL gave up your sublicence.

I think your board was too scared to give up their entitled boys club positions to the passionate members.

Sadly, I think your spot on.

It is absolutely ludicrous the position both clubs are in as so far as control
of their own destiny.

We are a traditional Aussies rules footy state FFS.

 

[KenGaveUsWhatHeDeserved]

Great comments.

We exist for TV licensing

Maynard getting off tonight, Cripps last year being clear reminders this is a boy's club VFL with some interstate teams

Port and Crows against column in free kicks says it all

 

[KenGaveUsWhatHeDeserved]

Sadly, I think your spot on.

It is absolutely ludicrous the position both clubs are in as so far as control
of their own destiny.

We are a traditional Aussies rules footy state FFS.

Come to Victoria and see how utterly, utterly irrelevant SA is (and the other states for that matter)

 

[maskmcgee]

Longmire and Hinkley always seem to escape media scrutiny despite both being in their 11th season as coach of their club without any silverware to show.

Sydney won the McClelland Trophy in 2014 and 2016 and Port won it in 2020.

 

[ibd77]

Sydney won the McClelland Trophy in 2014 and 2016 and Port won it in 2020.

That's not silverware, that's a cheese platter board. Who is McClelland anyway?

 

[PeterSalt]

I could never understand why the Crows never went member control once the SANFL gave up your sublicence.

I think your board was too scared to give up their entitled boys club positions to the passionate members.

Because the funding for Adelaide to buy the AFL license ($11.3M) off of the SANFL came in the form of a loan from the AFL.

The club won't automatically become member controlled in 2028, there are certain conditions that were put in place by the AFL that have to be met.

 

[PerthBoy86]

There could easily have been a Sydney dynasty. They were 2 points away from going back to back in 2006, and had say 2014 and 2016 gone differently, they'd have 3 in 5 years. Not sure the AFL could prevent that. Pro Bulldogs umpiring conspiracy?

 

[Footy Smarts]

It might have more to do with Sydney making finals 12/14 years with Longmire as coach including winning a flag and Port finishing top 4 in 3 of the last 4 seasons.