If that is true - it means Ciraldo sees strength in our position in the future. And if that's the case, why are we sacking the current coach?
We have waited over an extended period to create a platform from which to launch greatness, got rid of 15 years of baggage, and the bloke close to the centre of it gets punted?
What it means is some people in the media are prepared to take a punt and "call it" on Madge, without specific knowledge, because there are no repercussions if the media get it wrong.
As to why replace Madge - that one is easier to explain. Even if you subscribe to the idea that Madge is heavily responsible for a brighter future at the club, the reality is he has had 4 years of bad results to get there. He cannot afford another 6-month period of 3 wins 9 losses.
If we were to assume that a new coach would also be subject to a rough introduction period, they would at least be granted some grace by media and fans. So in this example, Madge might well be out on his arse with another 3W 9L half-season, whereas a new coach would be forgiven (at least for a period) for what they've inherited.
Personally I have a hunch this is the same situation as last year - Tigers are canvassing possible replacements, but won't axe Madge unless they find someone they want to take on. That is why the media is getting a sniff of possible replacement candidates, without knowing the specifics, because Tigers might well be asking around.
But unlike Bulldogs, we won't be stupid enough to sack the current coach without an appropriate replacement lined up. Paws likes to debate that "lack of replacement is not an argument for retaining incumbent" (paraphrased), but I strongly strongly disagree. "Better the devil you know" as they say.