The_Cranium wrote:
camel wrote:
The_Cranium wrote:
camel wrote:
How about: Thank @#$%&! we don't have to watch that defensive and boring shite that Lyon coaches?
I dunno... a coach that gets his clubs to grand finals I'd rarely boring
Equally, when did "3 time losing grand final coach" become a must-have attribute?
Yeah, he was a bounce of the ball away from being premiership coach. My point is he gets the best out of a group and having a team challenging for finals and grand finals isn't what I'd call boring.
AFL is a business of winning games of football not being entertaining losers. I know what is rather
Yeah, of course, coming from where we are, I get it, just the act of getting to a GF is very attractive, and a long way off.
But you said it yourself: "AFL is a business of winning games of football not being entertaining losers."
So what's the attraction of a dude that's coached three grand finals and lost three grand finals? How many times do we need to see he's good at getting to the one game that really counts but keeps failing?
And then how do you define entertaining losers?
For example, would that be Geelong? They've made the finals pretty much every year under Chris Scott and have one flag from 10-years ago to show for it. Nothing to sneeze at sure, and way better than our past 10 years obviously, but where's does your line about winning games of football stop? At 8th place? 4th place? Or losing 3 grand finals?
Surely we want to *win* grand finals, otherwise isn't that just being an entertaining loser?