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

Interested Observer

I've seen basically zero evidence things were becoming toxic, all I've read/heard is how nice a guy he was and how popular he was with the squad.

RichieRich89

.ak wrote: »

Then what two evils did you refer to? Because the conversation has always been the subject for the past few pages is whether or not letting MOC go without Leinster having a new coach lined up (ie they knew they'd have to use Leo if they couldn't find anyone) was a good idea or not.



So, Leo Cullen is a better coach than Matt o'connor?

You said that it was a fact that MOC was a better coach than Cullen. As someone else pointed out, going by your criteria MOC was a better coach in April 2011 than Joe was. Experience and quality are related, but they aren't the same thing. And anyway, to get a better overall picture you'd have to compare the entire MOC, Cullen, Caputo ticket to the Cullen, Dempsey, McQuilkin, Fogarty ticket. With the probability that next season could be a barren year for us either way, I'd at least be willing to give the new guys a chance as they'd be more likely to give young players a shot and put us in a better position in the future. Plus, the actual coaches' development will likely be accelerated, which is a positive for Leinster Rugby

stephen_n

Tox56 wrote: »

In fairness his first season has been almost universally panned, hes not really getting a free pass

Well I mean free pass in the context of being a better option than MOC, which is what the original suggestion was. If we took Leinster and the last two years out of the equation, we'd be looking at going from a head coach with 15 years experience and plenty of silverware, to one with only 1 years experience and a disasterous season. If it wasn't Leo, no one would be suggesting we are better off, so that's the home bias as I'd see it.

stephen_n

molloyjh wrote: »

I'm very confused. Why exactly are we talking about a potential situation that isn't the plan? I mean if we're concerned that we won't find a replacement why not just give MOC a contract for life? Surely the risk re finding a coach will always exist when the position becomes vacant?

The discussion about Leo becoming a longer term head coach is pointless. Leinster set out to remove and replace MOC without having an alternative in place. At the time their options were simply:

1. Retain MOC in a role where he had the team playing like drains and where the "environment" was (seemingly) becoming a toxic one.

2. Remove him and look at options that were available at the time and ones that would become available post RWC and post SH season.

It was always a risk but then at this stage so was retaining MOC. As I said earlier if we were going to write off a season it may as well be this one. Plus there may be a greater chance of getting a SH coach around October time given the end of their season and the immediate availability of the post.

Leo has never been a part of Leinsters plan. Sure he might end up having to take the job but surely had MOC seen out his contract that was still a risk. Just one that was 9-10 months further down the line. Leinster chose to bite the bullet now. Possibly with the input of MOC himself. For me it was the right decision. And while it makes sense to argue the merits or demerits of the decision I'm not sure it makes much sense to argue the decision against a hypothetical that was never part of the plan. It might happen but so might a lot of things. Hell it may even happen that Leo turns out to be an excellent head coach.

Because the when is a big problem, ideally having your head coach in place for the preseason and not jumping horses mid stream is the way to go. Even if we get a coach in October, there's no guarantee they will be good enough to turn things around, we are now panic buying. It's like the old analogy, "it's easier to get a job, when you're in a job", we now have a coaching group, with pretty much no experience, who are going to guide the team in one direction, knowing that sometime in November a coach will come in and probably replace them all. How is that possibly better than MOC seeing out his last year and having a full season to plan his replacement?

.ak

RichieRich89 wrote: »

You said that it was a fact that MOC was a better coach than Cullen. As someone else pointed out, going by your criteria MOC was a better coach in April 2011 than Joe was. Experience and quality are related, but they aren't the same thing. And anyway, to get a better overall picture you'd have to compare the entire MOC, Cullen, Caputo ticket to the Cullen, Dempsey, McQuilkin, Fogarty ticket. With the probability that next season could be a barren year for us either way, I'd at least be willing to give the new guys a chance as they'd be more likely to give young players a shot and put us in a better position in the future. Plus, the actual coaches' development will likely be accelerated, which is a positive for Leinster Rugby

It's not comparable. Are you comparing Leo Cullen to Schmidt?

And you haven't answered my question - is Leo Cullen a better coach than Matt O'Connor?

.ak

molloyjh wrote: »

I'm very confused. Why exactly are we talking about a potential situation that isn't the plan? I mean if we're concerned that we won't find a replacement why not just give MOC a contract for life? Surely the risk re finding a coach will always exist when the position becomes vacant?

The discussion about Leo becoming a longer term head coach is pointless. Leinster set out to remove and replace MOC without having an alternative in place. At the time their options were simply:

1. Retain MOC in a role where he had the team playing like drains and where the "environment" was (seemingly) becoming a toxic one.

2. Remove him and look at options that were available at the time and ones that would become available post RWC and post SH season.

It was always a risk but then at this stage so was retaining MOC. As I said earlier if we were going to write off a season it may as well be this one. Plus there may be a greater chance of getting a SH coach around October time given the end of their season and the immediate availability of the post.

Leo has never been a part of Leinsters plan. Sure he might end up having to take the job but surely had MOC seen out his contract that was still a risk. Just one that was 9-10 months further down the line. Leinster chose to bite the bullet now. Possibly with the input of MOC himself. For me it was the right decision. And while it makes sense to argue the merits or demerits of the decision I'm not sure it makes much sense to argue the decision against a hypothetical that was never part of the plan. It might happen but so might a lot of things. Hell it may even happen that Leo turns out to be an excellent head coach.

If Leo was never part of Leinster's plan then it's even worse management from Leinster. They surely knew who'd be taking over on an interim basis if they sacked MOC and more importantly who'd still be there as HC if they can't source someone.

I said it at the time and until we hire someone I stick with it - sacking the coach at this stage during a RWC year is extremely risky, and I really wouldn't be surprised if we don't get a coach sorted for this season (that's why we're talking about this, because it's a very real possibility due to the lateness in the day)

It's reminding me a lot of the Ulster situation tbh.

molloyjh

Interested Observer wrote: »

I've seen basically zero evidence things were becoming toxic, all I've read/heard is how nice a guy he was and how popular he was with the squad.

I think you're misunderstanding my point. I wasn't saying anything about MOC as an individual there. It certainly seems to me though that there was a divide forming in the squad between the younger lads and the first team lads. That's where the issue was.

stephen_n wrote: »

Because the when is a big problem, ideally having your head coach in place for the preseason and not jumping horses mid stream is the way to go. Even if we get a coach in October, there's no guarantee they will be good enough to turn things around, we are now panic buying. It's like the old analogy, "it's easier to get a job, when you're in a job", we now have a coaching group, with pretty much no experience, who are going to guide the team in one direction, knowing that sometime in November a coach will come in and probably replace them all. How is that possibly better than MOC seeing out his last year and having a full season to plan his replacement?

I don't think we're panic buying at all. And I don't think MOC leaving was all Leinsters doing. I genuinely believe he had a part to play in that as well.

If we went out to the market for a coach with MOC seeing out the remainder of his contract then we'd basically be telling the candidates that there would be a job available from June/July onwards. I would imagine we'd be looking to attract a decent coach from either another European club or a SH club. We won't be looking at international coaches. By having a role available that they can take up immediately we would therefore have a stronger chance of recruiting a SH coach at the end of their season and therefore the end of their current contract.

Say for example Tony Brown finishes his contract at the end of the current season with the Highlanders. He gets approached and is interested but is told that the position won't be vacant until June/July 2016. He also has offers from SH clubs for vacant positions that need to be filled in December/January. Those 6 months would make a real difference to how seriously he considers the Leinster post.

Are we running a risk that we end up with Leo for the season? Yes we probably are. But are we also giving ourselves more scope to get the coach we want? Yes. Is it ideal? No. But then neither was holding on to MOC as a lame duck coach for a season given the way things were going.

molloyjh

.ak wrote: »

If Leo was never part of Leinster's plan then it's even worse management from Leinster. They surely knew who'd be taking over on an interim basis if they sacked MOC and more importantly who'd still be there as HC if they can't source someone.

I said it at the time and until we hire someone I stick with it - sacking the coach at this stage during a RWC year is extremely risky, and I really wouldn't be surprised if we don't get a coach sorted for this season (that's why we're talking about this, because it's a very real possibility due to the lateness in the day)

It's reminding me a lot of the Ulster situation tbh.

You're assuming MOC was sacked. As I said I genuinely believe it was a mutual agreement.

irishbucsfan

.ak wrote: »

If Leo was never part of Leinster's plan then it's even worse management from Leinster. They surely knew who'd be taking over on an interim basis if they sacked MOC and more importantly who'd still be there as HC if they can't source someone.

I said it at the time and until we hire someone I stick with it - sacking the coach at this stage during a RWC year is extremely risky, and I really wouldn't be surprised if we don't get a coach sorted for this season (that's why we're talking about this, because it's a very real possibility due to the lateness in the day)

It's reminding me a lot of the Ulster situation tbh.

If MOC went to the board and offered his resignation it's a different story though. If he also happened to have told them that he probably wasn't going to renew after this season and was considering going back to Oz they might have all agreed that it'd be better to conduct the search now than before/during this upcoming season with all the disruption and hesitancy.

They were never choosing between Cullen and MOC obviously, there's only one choice to make there.

.ak

irishbucsfan wrote: »

If MOC went to the board and offered his resignation it's a different story though. If he also happened to have told them that he probably wasn't going to renew after this season and was considering going back to Oz they might have all agreed that it'd be better to conduct the search now than before/during this upcoming season with all the disruption and hesitancy.

They were never choosing between Cullen and MOC obviously, there's only one choice to make there.

Yeah if MOC went to the board then obviously LR would be put into an awkward position, which is why Buer made the point that there's probably a large amount of 'mutuality' to the situation.

However, if it turns out there wasn't, and we end up being stuck without a new HC, then I would say it was a large mistake.

Time will tell.

Interested Observer

.ak wrote: »

Yeah if MOC went to the board then obviously LR would be put into an awkward position, which is why Buer made the point that there's probably a large amount of 'mutuality' to the situation.

However, if it turns out there wasn't, and we end up being stuck without a new HC, then I would say it was a large mistake.

Time will tell.

How much worse do you think this season can be without a new head coach? Missing out on Europe altogether?

.ak

Interested Observer wrote: »

How much worse do you think this season can be without a new head coach? Missing out on Europe altogether?

Honestly? It could be an absolute disaster in the longer term. We're already on a slippery slope and we need a new direction and new coach asap. We need a strong coaching setup to stop that happening.

total former

Interested Observer wrote: »

How much worse do you think this season can be without a new head coach? Missing out on Europe altogether?

We could miss out on Europe, we could fail to make the semis of the Champions Cup - yes, this season can be significantly worse.

errlloyd

Is there a way to search these threads to see if MOC alone has got 10,000 posts yet. Which has been the most ridiculously repetitive and overly drawn out boards fight.

MOC v no MOC
Heineken Cup v ERCC

irishbucsfan

total former wrote: »

We could miss out on Europe, we could fail to make the semis of the Champions Cup - yes, this season can be significantly worse.

We could lose players who suddenly become disillusioned following the departure of a popular head coach with no replacement...

Interested Observer

total former wrote: »

We could miss out on Europe, we could fail to make the semis of the Champions Cup - yes, this season can be significantly worse.

Leinster will probably not get out of the group this season imo, that's what happens when you're third seed.

Rigor Mortis

Interested Observer wrote: »

Leinster will probably not get out of the group this season imo, that's what happens when you're third seed.

You could be right, but it may be hard to work out what impact the difference in the seeding mechanic might have. Personally i would prefer to get Stade than Toulon. I would prefer to get Sarries than Northampton or Bath.

total former

Interested Observer wrote: »

Leinster will probably not get out of the group this season imo, that's what happens when you're third seed.

But we've a better shot at getting out of our group if we have a head coach in place. No?

Interested Observer

total former wrote: »

But we've a better shot at getting out of our group if we have a head coach in place. No?

Yeah certainly.

molloyjh

.ak wrote: »

Yeah if MOC went to the board then obviously LR would be put into an awkward position, which is why Buer made the point that there's probably a large amount of 'mutuality' to the situation.

However, if it turns out there wasn't, and we end up being stuck without a new HC, then I would say it was a large mistake.

Time will tell.

But will it? We'll probably never know for sure just how mutual the decision was so we'll probably never be able to tell. Everything we've heard officially so far has said it was a mutual decision and that's probably as good as we're ever going to get. Personally I think it was mutual purely because it makes the most amount of sense.

.ak

molloyjh wrote: »

But will it? We'll probably never know for sure just how mutual the decision was so we'll probably never be able to tell. Everything we've heard officially so far has said it was a mutual decision and that's probably as good as we're ever going to get. Personally I think it was mutual purely because it makes the most amount of sense.

Well if we end up with Leo for a year it'll tell us a lot.

Interested Observer

Interested Observer wrote: »

Leinster will probably not get out of the group this season imo, that's what happens when you're third seed.

I said the same thing last year.

Toulon. ****

scott1974

Deleted User wrote: »

Toulon. ****

Ouch.... that's gonna hurt..

Interested Observer

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I said the same thing last year.

The pool last year was as easy as it gets.

Note because Leinster couldn't beat Treviso and Dragons we end up with Toulon.

ArmchairQB

Has to be wasps with our luck so far!

bunnyarmstrong

Well ****.

ArmchairQB

Group of Death, inexperienced coaching team, no recognized Head Coach, shouldn't be a problem so:eek:
Munster get the rub of the green

stephen_n

errlloyd wrote: »

Is there a way to search these threads to see if MOC alone has got 10,000 posts yet. Which has been the most ridiculously repetitive and overly drawn out boards fight.

MOC v no MOC
Heineken Cup v ERCC

Clearly you missed the Kidney saga :pac:

AdamD

Should make for some great matches at least. Still fancy us over Wasps and Bath.