Sydney Morning Herald - Wests Tigers seek new general manager

[Spartan117]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

God it's tempting… Is there a salary listed?

 

[gallagher]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

Sheens?

 

[Sabre]

Sheens is with Salford isn't he?

Geoff Toovey, Matt Elliott or Ivan Cleary?

 

[Spartan117]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

Sheens?

Im thinking that this add is a mere formality and that the candidate is already chosen.

I suspect this because in the corporate world (Especially of late) one is required to be Seen as opening up to all potential candidates. Im guilty of this myself.

 

[Tigermama]

So….we have two protagonists.

A Coach
Football GM

Coach says he wants players a, b and c and I can get results. Football GM says you can have players x, y and z because a,b and c will be better long term.

Coach says I can't deliver results. GM says it is the only way he can get the club to develop.

You think there won't be the odd colourful discussion?

IMHO the coach is responsible for player personnel and performance. It's pretty much been that way for over 100 years and I am worried we will be a laughing stock in the years to cone.

Thing is about the last 100 years, though, is rugby league was NOT a big business for most of that time.

You are talking about a transformation from club staff of 10 to now multiples of 10\. Teams used to include part-time workers and tradies, who have become elite-level full-time professional athletes. Rosters of even $3-4M total 10 years ago are now pushing $8M, media revenues gone from 10s to 100s of millions per season, rise of internet and social media, broadcasting technologies, fan engagement.

In my opinion, you can give a head coach full reins if they are a proven long-term performer. Likes of Bennett, Hasler, Bellamy… even Sheens, could fully manage a club with years or decades of proven performance.

Does WT have the money to afford such a head coach? No. We are currently stuck with the more speculative options - emerging rookies, modestly experienced support coaches, fallen former heads looking for another gig. We have people who are absolutely not assured of seeing out their contract, and you want to give them 100% club control to achieve results.

Well maybe that works, maybe the coach gets it right and the whole organisation flourishes. Or maybe the totally mess up and the club plummets backwards, you go back to square 1 with the nuffy coaches and modest roster.

Do we really put all our eggs in one basket? It's quite neat and nice to say "he's the head coach, given him full control... and if he fails it's 100% his own fault". Makes that person easy to cut loose. But that person is going to be absorbed with short-term success, to ensure their own continuing employment. Sure they have longer-term aspirations, but the plans for Years 5 and 6 matter for naught if the knives are out within your first 6 months.

Also look at our own history: we have done quite poorly with 4 x less experienced coaches. Pearce, Lamb, Potter and Taylor did not achieve much success in their 1-3 year tenures. The only time we got anywhere was with an extremely experienced operator who was given a long term to build the club up. And for all Sheens' detractions, he is still comfortably the best operator we've ever had, managing to balance all the financial and political woes that have befallen us before and since.

It might have been nice, for example, to have a GM in 2000 to put some moderation into the early buying spree / money wasting. Or to get involved when Sheens decided to cull a chunk of the side in 2012.

In many ways it raises the question, why does a coach have to have 100% control? Is it just ego? Why can he not get performance out of a roster put together and cooperatively managed with someone else? Most big businesses operate this way, they carve up the work (and stress burden) to be shared amongst talented peers. The CEO of a company sets broader strategy, usually financially-based, and leaves the details to specialists. Similarly, the operations lead does not always have to take on the burden of staff management, which of itself is already a huge time investment (career development, performance mgmt, leave clashes, morale etc.). It also means that one single person cannot overextend or easily mismanage, because there checks and balances from other departments.

Footy has become big business, and most head coaches cannot oversee everything. That is why NFL clubs go with this approach, because they are far far bigger business than we are.

This is actually how my own management-level job operates. I am responsible for getting performance out of structures set by someone else, with a team hired by someone else. There are negatives with this approach because I do not have complete authority, but I also don't bear the stress of project success by myself. My business is just too big to have one person to be responsible for every component of a project, and the bigger it gets, the more and more we split up the work amongst a peer group of managers, each with their own area of expertise, strengths, unique ideas.

Sometimes it sucks, yes, but rugby league SHOULD be moving away from old-school models of operations.

Great post Jirskyr. Well thought out and i agree. The way clubs are run nowdays has changed and if WT are to have any chance of being successful, need to grow and try new things.

 

[balmain boy]

Hagan, Elliot, Anderson??

Toovey and Cleary want to coach so they're ruled out.

 

[supercoach]

Hagan, Elliot, Anderson??

Toovey and Cleary want to coach so they're ruled out.

If their are no coaching jobs up for grabs, they may drop their coaching aspirations and opt for a career change and of course I doubt Pascoe would knock back the best applicant on the grounds they may have or in the future want to coach. If you looking for the best person you never narrow the field by excluding people from the interview process

 

[balmain boy]

Hagan, Elliot, Anderson??

Toovey and Cleary want to coach so they're ruled out.

If their are no coaching jobs up for grabs, they may drop their coaching aspirations and opt for a career change and of course I doubt Pascoe would knock back the best applicant on the grounds they may have or in the future want to coach. If you looking for the best person you never narrow the field by excluding people from the interview process

The club has already stated no-one with future aspirations of coaching will be considered. They don't want someone walking out on the post because another gig comes up. Even if Cleary or Toovey don't have NRL coaching offers at the start of the season, they'll have offers by the start of next season.

We don't want to chop and change a role like this. It's made to be much more of a permanent long time position than a head coaching role. Which is why it's better suited to those who won't be tempted (or linked to) coaching gigs every few months. I'd doubt Toovey and Clearly have the business nous for a position like this too. There's a lot of financial obligations they'd be controlling - not what a regular head coach would be used to handling.

 

[supercoach]

Hagan, Elliot, Anderson??

Toovey and Cleary want to coach so they're ruled out.

If their are no coaching jobs up for grabs, they may drop their coaching aspirations and opt for a career change and of course I doubt Pascoe would knock back the best applicant on the grounds they may have or in the future want to coach. If you looking for the best person you never narrow the field by excluding people from the interview process

The club has already stated no-one with future aspirations of coaching will be considered. They don't want someone walking out on the post because another gig comes up. Even if Cleary or Toovey don't have NRL coaching offers at the start of the season, they'll have offers by the start of next season.

We don't want to chop and change a role like this. It's made to be much more of a permanent long time position than a head coaching role. Which is why it's better suited to those who won't be tempted (or linked to) coaching gigs every few months. I'd doubt Toovey and Clearly have the business nous for a position like this too. There's a lot of financial obligations they'd be controlling - not what a regular head coach would be used to handling.

I know what the club is saying and I know why, but if Cleary was your best applicant for example you would be mad to exclude him from the process.

As for not wanting to chop and change a role like this, your talking Weststigers,every six month they have a new vision and its out with the old and in with the new, and create and chop a few roles in the football club.
In principle what Pascoe is saying is right,you want to keep the two roles completely seperate and you do not want either trying interfering with each other's job,but all Iam saying you have to have a very open mind and get the best person.

 

[ricksen]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

Sheens?

Im thinking that this add is a mere formality and that the candidate is already chosen.

I suspect this because in the corporate world (Especially of late) one is required to be Seen as opening up to all potential candidates. Im guilty of this myself.

Agreed - and matches what I've heard on the grapevine that the candidate is more or less already chosen. Unsure who it is though.

 

[supercoach]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

Sheens?

Isn't Sheens one of the main reason we are in the mess we are today,four year deals,backloaded contracts and dud recruiting are things that come to mind when I think of Sheens,but yes he did deliver us a title many years ago!!

 

[gallagher]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

Sheens?

Isn't Sheens one of the main reason we are in the mess we are today,four year deals,backloaded contracts and dud recruiting are things that come to mind when I think of Sheens,but yes he did deliver us a title many years ago!!

He wouldn't be my choice. I was just guessing as to who spartan was thinking of.

 

[king_sirro]

Geo is right I reckon, Mark O'Neill.

Not sure of his credentials but it's a good move having a guy that loves the Tigers. If his credentials match his loyalty to us then it works out perfectly.

 

[Snake]

The closing date along with the Underlined section narrows the pool a bit… anyone thinking what im thinking???

Sheens?

Isn't Sheens one of the main reason we are in the mess we are today,four year deals,backloaded contracts and dud recruiting are things that come to mind when I think of Sheens,but yes he did deliver us a title many years ago!!

He wouldn't be my choice. I was just guessing as to who spartan was thinking of.

Forget Sheens he is in a nursing home somewhere….I have no problem with this concept the only issue I have is that this club is a gunna club it has been Gunna do this gunna do that year after year the only thing they do is stuff up ..Every time a new CEO arrives it is another gunna.
I am over it when it happens great but at the moment the Weststigers are the Badgerys creek airport of the NRL it is gunna happen well we know about that don,t we.
Is Pascoe just another gunna in that conga line of gunna CEOS the Tigers have employed.

 

[Sabre]

Anybody else think that the job description sounds like a ridiculous amount of work and range of responsibilities for 1 person? I guess whoever gets the gig will have some assistant(s) but still seems like a lot.

 

[Tigermama]

Anybody else think that the job description sounds like a ridiculous amount of work and range of responsibilities for 1 person? I guess whoever gets the gig will have some assistant(s) but still seems like a lot.

Lol, I was thinking exactly the same thing, when I read it Sambre.
Hell of a lot for one person. 😱pen_mouth:
Salary must be real good too, for that amount of responsibility.

 

[supercoach]

Geo is right I reckon, Mark O'Neill.

Not sure of his credentials but it's a good move having a guy that loves the Tigers. If his credentials match his loyalty to us then it works out perfectly.

When you look what they want, no mortal could apply, but Buckets Oneill would come close. What could hold him back is the fact he comes from the balmain side of the venture. Now before I start a riot I am not trying to start of another faction war. I just think they might try to be politically correct and try and find a independent person. I am not saying it is right but it could stop bush fires down the track

 

[Tigerdon]

Anybody else think that the job description sounds like a ridiculous amount of work and range of responsibilities for 1 person? I guess whoever gets the gig will have some assistant(s) but still seems like a lot.

Lol, I was thinking exactly the same thing, when I read it Sambre.
Hell of a lot for one person. 😱pen_mouth:
Salary must be real good too, for that amount of responsibility.

I thought the opposite. I thought it would be a piss of cake. All the have to do is read footy forums , work out who we should buy. Then walk into Pascoe's office and demand we buy player X. :smiley:
Maybe turn up at training and Tuesday's and Thursdays and attend a few white board session so you're in the loop. Then say to the board "we have one of the best junior nurseries in the comp" let buy some experience to place around them and we'll be a top four team in 2018\. That should keep you in a top job for at least two years, maybe more if you sweet talk the media and get the coach sacked (like Gould did) .

 

[gallagher]

Anybody else think that the job description sounds like a ridiculous amount of work and range of responsibilities for 1 person? I guess whoever gets the gig will have some assistant(s) but still seems like a lot.

It doesn't seem to leave much for Pascoe to do.