Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread VI: End of the MOC [Revenge of the STH]

BoardsMember · 26-07-2015 4:41pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The only way you appoint someone full time and give them full backing is with a 2-3 year deal. I don't like the idea of an "interim" coach at any level as a huge amount of what they do extends into long-term planning, and an interim coach is only incentivised to disregard those things. If Leo is going to be head coach then we need to be behind him 100%, it's the only intelligent way to proceed.

Hard to argue with that. Then again, it's hard to imagine that this was the master plan when they parted ways with MOC.

bilston · 26-07-2015 6:11pm

3 years is some backing.

total former · 26-07-2015 7:21pm

bilston wrote: »

3 years is some backing.

Matt O'Connor had a three year deal.

Teferi · 26-07-2015 7:44pm

total former wrote: »

Matt O'Connor had a three year deal.

Matt O'Connor also had some success in his coaching roles too in fairness.

awec · 26-07-2015 7:56pm

Three years for a totally unproven coach would be mental.

Crimsonforce · 26-07-2015 8:00pm

awec wrote: »

Three years for a totally unproven coach would be mental.

Where else in a European top 10 club have they appointed someone with no coaching experience. One year under the previous head coach would count for nothing in my opinion.
they should keep him where he is and wait till after world cup when someone with experience can come on board , join in Jan to learn how club is run like pat lam and take over in June

irishbucsfan · 26-07-2015 8:00pm

awec wrote: »

Three years for a totally unproven coach would be mental.

Why?

Interested Observer · 26-07-2015 8:01pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Why?

I would have thought it's clearly enough because three years is a long time and we've no idea if Cullen is up to the job or not. It's a sentiment I share.

matthew8 · 26-07-2015 8:02pm

Not a fan in the slightest of the appointment but the head guys at Leinster have an excellent track record recently hiring coaches so I'll be optimistic.

awec · 26-07-2015 8:10pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Why?

He has absolutely zero experience managing a team at any level and his coaching experience comprises of one single season which happened to be one season where Leinster were awful by their own standards.

People can use MOC as a scapegoat and try and hang everything that happened last year on him, but I refuse to believe that the other coaches had no input into tactics and decisions and IMO Cullen has shown nothing to indicate he's a man who's first head coaching gig should be a three year stint at one of the top sides in Europe.

I've said it loads of times but Leinster should have told Cullen to go away and come back in 3 or 4 years for a senior coaching role.

vienne86 · 26-07-2015 8:13pm

I just don't like the idea of a guy who was a player a year ago becoming HEAD coach now. And I just find it hard to see how he deserves the job, apart from holding the fort until we can get someone with some experience.

irishbucsfan · 26-07-2015 8:25pm

awec wrote: »

He has absolutely zero experience managing a team at any level and his coaching experience comprises of one single season which happened to be one season where Leinster were awful by their own standards.

People can use MOC as a scapegoat and try and hang everything that happened last year on him, but I refuse to believe that the other coaches had no input into tactics and decisions and IMO Cullen has shown nothing to indicate he's a man who's first head coaching gig should be a three year stint at one of the top sides in Europe.

I've said it loads of times but Leinster should have told Cullen to go away and come back in 3 or 4 years for a senior coaching role.

I think those are all good reasons not to go with Cullen as a head coach at all. I think there's a decent argument against him as a candidate for sure.

However he is the head coach now, it's pretty clear there isn't much interest from anyone in the Leinster role and given the manner they parted ways with the predecessor and the "famously impatient supporters" (

) I think it's fairly obvious why people would be wary of the job. Because of that I'm operating under the assumption that Cullen is the best candidate we had available to us.

If he is the best candidate available then we should back him fully and give him the reins. If the management don't fully support him from day one (a shortened deal would be spub as them being wary of him) then the chances of him succeeding are lessened even further. If he doesn't work out then it's not impossible to part ways with him, but until that point the management should do everything in their power to help him succeed.

The really important thing is who comes in to run the backs. It seems Dempsey will move back down to the academy so hopefully they bring in someone with a lot of experience for the backs job, that would help a lot.

EDIT: Or bring in Cossy! Ian Costello would be a great call, he has head coaching experience and he's one of the best backs coaches in the country.

sydthebeat · 26-07-2015 8:29pm

Three year contract after just one bad year as assistant coach?

With NO coaching experience outside of the club?

We, as fans, deserve a hell of a lot better appointment than that.

Hopefully that article is bs.

awec · 26-07-2015 8:29pm

Even if he's the best, or only candidate, three years is nuts.

sydthebeat · 26-07-2015 8:34pm

If he does get the contact and this year is a write off... we're just kicking the can down the road and costing the club more money.

sydthebeat · 26-07-2015 8:36pm

If he does get the contact and this year is a write off... we're just kicking the can down the road and costing the club more money.

Interested Observer · 26-07-2015 8:37pm

POSITIVITY TRAIN CHOO CHOO

Leo Cullen is the next Guy Noves, I feel it in my waters.

Zzippy · 26-07-2015 8:39pm

Rugby banter page on fb had the news earlier and asked for opinions from Leinster fans. One guy: "As a Munster fan I'm delighted". Says it all really. Think Leinster are really taking a big gamble on Cullen. Is it a sign of changing times? Are Leinster simply not able to attract high calibre coaches with pedigree anymore? Or just bad timing? I can't imagine Cullen was the preferred option when MOC was being let go. Certainly don't think he would have got a head coach role anywhere else, even in ProD2 or the Championship...

irishbucsfan · 26-07-2015 8:41pm

awec wrote: »

Even if he's the best, or only candidate, three years is nuts.

sydthebeat wrote: »

If he does get the contact and this year is a write off... we're just kicking the can down the road and costing the club more money.

So the alternative is that they give him one year. The media all jump on it as them being unable to find someone and falling back on Cullen. Cullen suddenly has a mountain of public opinion to climb. All of that can be easily avoided by Leinster just giving him the same length of contract they gave MOC. It's the correct decision regardless of who they went with, the particulars of the deal could easily give either party easy outs in case it doesn't work out.

RobbieRuns · 26-07-2015 8:47pm

It also goes to show the lack of true class coaches out there in the market.

Tox56 · 26-07-2015 8:48pm

awec wrote: »

Even if he's the best, or only candidate, three years is nuts.

The 3 years is the problem here, one season or half a season while they search for a coach would be fine

Rigor Mortis · 26-07-2015 8:53pm

I wouldn't be getting too hung up on the three years. I would imagine that the contract has some performance clauses, particularly for year two that will allow Leinster to get out of the contract at minimum cost if the targets are not met.

Tox56 · 26-07-2015 8:55pm

Zzippy wrote: »

Rugby banter page on fb had the news earlier and asked for opinions from Leinster fans. One guy: "As a Munster fan I'm delighted". Says it all really. Think Leinster are really taking a big gamble on Cullen. Is it a sign of changing times? Are Leinster simply not able to attract high calibre coaches with pedigree anymore? Or just bad timing? I can't imagine Cullen was the preferred option when MOC was being let go. Certainly don't think he would have got a head coach role anywhere else, even in ProD2 or the Championship...

Do Leinster usually attract high calibre coaches with pedigree? Schmidt and Cheika werent what they are now they got the job. Matt O'Connor had reasonable pedigree but he wasnt exactly a Deans or McKenzie

salmocab · 26-07-2015 8:58pm

In an ideal world Cullen will be a roaring success and be Leinsters coach for the next ten years whilst delivering leagues and european cups, he seems like a top bloke and I'm sure he loves Leinster. However it seems that giving a long contract to a completely unproven coach would be ludicrous and I suspect its BS, maybe they are going to offer him the forwards role with someone lined up as head coach being kept under wraps. I think that Leo is smart enough to know he hasn't earned the head coach position yet and would be happy to stay in a lesser position.

molloyjh · 26-07-2015 10:03pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

So the alternative is that they give him one year. The media all jump on it as them being unable to find someone and falling back on Cullen. Cullen suddenly has a mountain of public opinion to climb. All of that can be easily avoided by Leinster just giving him the same length of contract they gave MOC. It's the correct decision regardless of who they went with, the particulars of the deal could easily give either party easy outs in case it doesn't work out.

Ah come off it IBF. Public opinion isn't swayed by contract length. Just look at the general reaction to the rumour.

Giving him the gig on an interim basis and using the time to (a) see if he's up to it and (b) look out for additional candidates is the only sensible option. I can't see how that can even be argued (famous last words!). If he proves himself over the season then he should be kept on and he should be made well aware of that from the outset. However if he ends up being a disaster (he's had just 1 season as a forwards coach and absolutely no other experience and we weren't great in the forwards for that year so the initial signs are not good) do we stick with him for the full 3 years or drop him early like MOC and become a club known for dumping coaches early?

All of that can be easily avoided by giving him a year and taking it from there.

awec · 26-07-2015 10:08pm

Also the media and fans are not stupid. Leinster can try and make a statement by giving him three years and pretending they have full confidence, but everyone will know that really he is unproven and the reality is he'll still be under pressure to prove that he's up to it within the first 12 months whether he's on a 1 year deal or a 3 year deal.

Why risk having to pay him off for 2 years? Completely unnecessary!

thomond2006 · 26-07-2015 10:11pm

I actually can't believe this. I am stunned.

irishbucsfan · 26-07-2015 10:14pm

molloyjh wrote: »

Ah come off it IBF. Public opinion isn't swayed by contract length. Just look at the general reaction to the rumour.

Yes, look at it. Clearly it matters a lot to people.

molloyjh wrote: »

Giving him the gig on an interim basis and using the time to (a) see if he's up to it and (b) look out for additional candidates is the only sensible option. I can't see how that can even be argued (famous last words!). If he proves himself over the season then he should be kept on and he should be made well aware of that from the outset. However if he ends up being a disaster (he's had just 1 season as a forwards coach and absolutely no other experience and we weren't great in the forwards for that year so the initial signs are not good) do we stick with him for the full 3 years or drop him early like MOC and become a club known for dumping coaches early?

All of that can be easily avoided by giving him a year and taking it from there.

If he doesn't work out you part ways with him exactly as you would have to do for ANY other coach in the exact same situation, there's no point there.

Giving him a proper contact is the only fair and sensible way to make him the permanent head coach. Even if there are mutual break clauses.

The worst part about this is that people are going to be finding ways to completely undermine him from day one. I don't know why people think that way these days. It may take 18 months for him to settle down, but I think he's going to mature into a great head coach, and I'm happy it sounds like the management are prepared to make a real investment in him.

Interested Observer · 26-07-2015 10:18pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

The worst part about this is that people are going to be finding ways to completely undermine him from day one. I don't know why people think that way these days. It may take 18 months for him to settle down, but I think he's going to mature into a great head coach, and I'm happy it sounds like the management are prepared to make a real investment in him.

It is very important that people don't freak out if the RWC period isn't a resounding success. From Cullen's point of view it really couldn't be a worse situation to be cutting your teeth as a head coach.

awec · 26-07-2015 10:18pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Yes, look at it. Clearly it matters a lot to people.

If he doesn't work out you part ways with him exactly as you would have to do for ANY other coach in the exact same situation, there's no point there.

Giving him a proper contact is the only fair and sensible way to make him the permanent head coach. Even if there are mutual break clauses.

The worst part about this is that people are going to be finding ways to completely undermine him from day one. I don't know why people think that way these days. It may take 18 months for him to settle down, but I think he's going to mature into a great head coach, and I'm happy it sounds like the management are prepared to make a real investment in him.

I think that's nonsense. Nobody is undermining anything, just asking genuine and very valid questions.

As for having to give him a proper contract, I don't think that's really true either. A 1 year deal with a view to extending depending on how he goes would be much more realistic and fair to all involved.

Him being on a 1 year deal or a 3 year deal will make no difference to how he is treated by the media or the fans in terms of pressure. He's going to have to prove himself quickly no matter how long his deal is, so it seems stupid to give him a long one to try and pretend that it's an "investment" or a measure of how much faith the branch have.

Leinster Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread VI: End of the MOC [Revenge of the STH]

Comments