Blue Sombrero wrote:
Barker as the temp is the front runner and his results will mean much more than a slick powerpoint presentation and list evaluation.
If he can turn it around this year and has them playing to their skills and with passion, he will get the gig and should.
OK, he came from inside the club two weeks ago but his pedigree is pretty good. He's done his apprenticeship under some pretty big names, not the least of which is Clarkson.
BTW, just wondering how we might have gone with Yarran and Garlett playing last week. Yarran we will have next game but Garlett is playing like a sixteen year old without a worry in the world.
Eddie left. Garlett we kicked out for whatever reason. Loitering with Mitch, maybe. Mistake. Kids go to clubs with issues. Some work it out, some don't. Nobody wanted to touch Franklin or Lewis Jetta and now they're both at Sydney. We could have had Jetta AFAIR. I remember wanting us to get him. Mind you, I wanted the other Garlett as well. Some you get wrong.
Anyway, I reckon Barker will get the gig if he can maintain the rate of improvement. He knows that.
Ross Lyon? Genius? Nah. Good at finishing 2nd. His game plan is like MMs with a bit of extra run through the middle. He's lucky to have Fyfe and Sandi in the same team. He didn't have much say in Sandi and Fyfe was pick what? Fluke?
Barker should NOT get the job, based on what he's shown so far.
He needs to show more.
Famousblueraincoat made a good point in the Adelaide post game thread - this is the same situation as Ratts all over again.
Ratts came in and gave the team some fresh air, buoyed the players' spirits and convinced them to actually suck it up and put in a bit of effort before their Mad Monday celebrations, have a few honourable losses, and everybody thought what a nice guy Ratts was, let's give him the job, etc.
Barker should be held to the same standards as Mick was!!!
(maybe with a slight pro rata handicap for his lower salary)
Simply convincing the team to 'try' and lose by gradually reducing margins is not sufficient!
Nobody was banging down Mick's door to re-sign him last year when we were mediocre, so why should Barker get the job based on a couple of average losses?
The players need to take the heat for switching on and off - and they will. More will go at the end of the year. Just putting in a few token efforts because the mean, stubborn coach got sacked is not sufficient. Barker needs to motivate them to start winning!
Barker has been a low profile assistant, in a mediocre team environment, for the past 4 and half years (maybe it's harsh to describe the whole of Ratts' time as mediocre, but we didn't make a GF). That is a definite strike against him, whether its his fault or not.
There's plenty of successful head coaches who are successful because they had a stellar team of assistants around them. Barker has worked under great coaches - fine. That's a plus.
But he needs to prove he can get the team winning.
Unless he can do that, there is absolutely no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt, or a head start, or favourable consideration, or whatever.
I'd rather take a chance on an assistant who has won premierships in a motivated, consistent team... than gift the job to a mediocre caretaker coach.
If Barker wants to the job he needs to do more to convince me.
There are still 12 rounds to play.
No excuses - 5 or 6 more wins MINIMUM.
No tanking in return for a job. Just win, Barks
Login
Register
FAQ
What a great post. My sentiments exactly.
