Michael Voss said today he's looking for ''What's right for Michael Voss'' and if he were to coach it would be with a club with ''Resources''.
If he isn't commited, and as keen as mustard to coach our club right now then we should go on with what we've got . And in Ratts what we've got is the man we need.
What this club needs right now is a coach that is desperate to succeed, someone who has a deep love of this footy club, someone with a great football brain.
I cannot remember the last time I was happy after a Carlton loss, but today I was proud of the boys and reminded what a great club we support.
Vossy, I've got news for you, this is not about "what's right for Michal Voss'' it's about WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CARLTON FOOTBALL CLUB.
Forget the glitz and glamour , I think Ratts is the man .

On 3aw Caro mentioned this about our Ratt's.

A senior Carlton person conveyed to the playing group (either as a group or individually) that if they won 4 of the remaining games then Ratt's would be installed as coach from next year.

Tony Shaw then went on to say "what happens if they win 3?"

Caro's reply was that she had it on good authority "that is what I have been told"...

Anyway right, wrong or indifferent thought I would bring it to your attention.....

Agreed. Voss just doesn't have the fire in the belly. He doesn't want the job or else we would have heard it already. Why do we want a wavering coach? It staggers me.

To my way of thinking picking up Voss as senior coach right now would be a total disaster.

Essendon* cheated, simple as that

Voss doesn't need a mentor. Either he gets in and does the job, or he takes on a assistant role and learns what's involved. There is no middle ground.

Voss may be wavering or maybe its a good story to tell the rabid media to get them off his back a little?

If you're being questioned about a job and you state you may not be interested in any, then you dampen some of the speculation somewhat.

We could appoint one of three types:

1. An experienced senior coach, like a Denis Pagan. Less perceived risk, but also no guarantee of success. Could do 'a Matthews, or could do 'a Pagan'.

2. An experienced assistant coach. Again, less perceived risk, but the majority of people in this bracket fail. For every Roos, there are ten Frawley's. Remember Robert Shaw? One of the best assistant coaches of the last 20 years... failed when he tried the senior gig. Very different jobs.

3. Someone with no coaching experience, but who has the personal attributes to succeed, like a Voss or a Buckley. To be honest, I really don't see this as such a huge risk, given the fact that most senior coaches leave the job as failures anyway. It's not like we'd be choosing between a Voss and a guaranteed success.

Where we're at right now: young list, a club trying to reinvent itself, a club desperate to position itself as newly relevant in the marketplace, a club that doesn't expect to play finals in the next couple of years, a club that needs to value player development over and above immediate onfield results... all these things point to a Voss with an experience backup person as a bold, but wise, choice.

Of course, it could fail. But we could appoint Roos and he could fail. Just like Pagan did. Or we could appoint McKenna and he could fail. Most do.

Honestly, what's the worst that can happen? We appoint Voss for 3 years, and orientate our entire focus towards player development (Voss, don't forget, is spending 2007 working with the AIS development program) and instilling the right onfield ethics in our playing group (ie, leadership, doing the right thing by the team, etc)

Based on the evidence at hand, these are areas in which Voss should be very good. So, after say 2 seasons, maybe we discover that Voss isn't a tactical genius. Worst case? We've significantly developed our list, but we need to augment our coaching panel with tacticians. Sheedy didn't make those moves in the 93 granny... his assistants did that.

Of all the clubs looking for a coach, Carlton is actually the club with the least to lose. I know we're all shitting ourselves about the immediate future, but really - the pressure is on the recruiters and the broader coaching setup. Recruiting and player development is our focus, not win/loss ratios.

We can afford to try Voss. At the worst, he'll bring with him an attitude that our young list can assimilate. He'll reinvigorate the image of the club, making it far more desirable to younger fans. He can make some mistakes and learn along the way, because we're not in the position where a loss or two is going to rob us of our 17th flag.

I really hope we do it.

One last thing: we didn't 'follow the process' when appointing Greg Swann either. And I don't hear anyone complaining about him.

On 3aw Caro mentioned this about our Ratt's.

A senior Carlton person conveyed to the playing group (either as a group or individually) that if they won 4 of the remaining games then Ratt's would be installed as coach from next year.

I just dont understand the fascination with Voss.

What are his strengths to be a senior coach?
All I'm hearing is "he is a great leader".
Is that it?
Kernahan was apparently the greatest leader our club has seen. Would that make him a good coach? Collingwood rate Shaw as one of their greatest leaders...not a good result there.

I hear Voss talk and all I hear is media trained rhetoric. His commentary is abysmal and offers no insight whatsoever. He states the obvious and doesnt do that very effectively.
I listen to Nathan Buckley talk about tactics and game structures and he makes Voss look like a school kid.
I understand that communication is'nt everything but being able to effectively explain tactics and set ups to players would be a priority would'nt it?

I read yesterday that Voss openly admits that he doesnt know if he wants to coach.
Surely a coach that needs to be talked into the role isnt fully commited. As for him throwing people off the scent, Voss has put himself out there as a potential coach at every opportunity!

Robert walls wrote a couple of months ago that Voss and Buckley could become coaches without an apprenticeship. Even he is stepping away from that comment after working with Voss on channel 10.

I also read that Voss was assistant coach at the AIS. If you listen to Alan McConnell speak, his role at the AIS is to make the facilities available and relevant to the players in the program. He doesnt work on any tactics or set ups etc as he rightly believes the players have more than enough coaches filling their heads at their local/state/club levels.

I just hope that we have a comprehensive set of criteria that everyone has to be judged by. Unfortunately I have a feeling that the club is too busy being starstruck to make an informed decision.

I just dont understand the fascination with Voss.

What are his strengths to be a senior coach?
All I'm hearing is "he is a great leader".
Is that it?
Kernahan was apparently the greatest leader our club has seen. Would that make him a good coach? Collingwood rate Shaw as one of their greatest leaders...not a good result there.

I hear Voss talk and all I hear is media trained rhetoric. His commentary is abysmal and offers no insight whatsoever. He states the obvious and doesnt do that very effectively.
I listen to Nathan Buckley talk about tactics and game structures and he makes Voss look like a school kid.
I understand that communication is'nt everything but being able to effectively explain tactics and set ups to players would be a priority would'nt it?

I read yesterday that Voss openly admits that he doesnt know if he wants to coach.
Surely a coach that needs to be talked into the role isnt fully commited. As for him throwing people off the scent, Voss has put himself out there as a potential coach at every opportunity!

Robert walls wrote a couple of months ago that Voss and Buckley could become coaches without an apprenticeship. Even he is stepping away from that comment after working with Voss on channel 10.

I also read that Voss was assistant coach at the AIS. If you listen to Alan McConnell speak, his role at the AIS is to make the facilities available and relevant to the players in the program. He doesnt work on any tactics or set ups etc as he rightly believes the players have more than enough coaches filling their heads at their local/state/club levels.

I just hope that we have a comprehensive set of criteria that everyone has to be judged by. Unfortunately I have a feeling that the club is too busy being starstruck to make an informed decision.

:lol:

Sorry. I'm happy to be talked into it but I have'nt seen anything of substance to sway me.

All I've seen is "experienced guys could stuff it up too" or "he's a great leader".
Is that it? Have I missed something?

Don't know if this has been posted elsewhere yet.
Marc Murphy endorsing Ratten as coach for next year.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/ ... 62,00.html

He is now the 3rd player to declare in the media that he wanted Ratten to coach next year... others being Fev and Whitnall.

Does anyone else think we may have a silmilar scenario to the whole Roos/Sydney thing.