The sad events of the past week regarding Port Adelaide’s Matthew Primus have reinforced just how cut throat this business of AFL footy is now. Before the match on the weekend, Primus was seemingly guaranteed another contract.
Fast forward two hours, and his tenure is in tatters.
Surprisngly he is the first coach to be ousted this year. It seems every week there is new scrutiny, new questions directed at men who try their absolute hardest to get their footy club to win matches.
High expectations from supporters and CEOs don’t help either. Brett Ratten’s head was on the chopping block after the Blues soared and crumbled out of flag contention.
We all thought he was gone. Hell, even Mick Malthouse was being groomed as his successor.
But it’s fair to say the buck doesn’t just stop with coaches. Sometimes, rotten luck can play a huge part in the life of a coach.
With the advent of two new teams in the competition, the talent pool is getting shallower and shallower.
Clubs are being forced to scour lower leagues in order build their lists.
Seeing how thinly the talent has been stretched, I bet the AFL are hoping more code-hoppers follow new boys Karmichael Hunt and Israel Folau across.
Everyone says results drive clubs. And to a certain extent that’s true. But when clubs change coaches at the drop of a hat, like Richmond have done, it destabilises the time a coach needs to build a list and to build a game plan.
Remember, Mark “Bomber” Thompson took until his seventh year to make a grand final.
Recent successes like Paul Roos and Leigh Matthews have heightened our expectations on what coaches can produce, and it’s sad to see critics and ‘experts’ saying that clubs need to change their plans yearly.
If coaches stay on the track they believe is best, and have support around them, then let them coach.
Players must also take blame for poor results. Unfortunately, it seems coaches will always be the scapegoat in the cut and thrust of modern AFL football.
ChrisCantatore
Roar Rookie
Other than appeasing the members and support base after what was probably the most surprising and embarrassing defeat in Port Adelaide history there was no reason to make this information public before the end of the season IF the reports are true and his fate was decided weeks ago. Primus had a 2 year contract with the option of a third year if the club agreed to it- they should have let him coach out the season and then exercised their legal right not to pick up that option. It seems to be the knee jerk reaction of clubs to sack the coach to appease the members and supporters- it shows the administration understands there is an issue and this is what they are going to do about it. I'm not suggesting the Primus is a good coach or the right man for the job- but consistently changing coaches isn't the way either. Pick your man and leave him in the seat for 5 years- that's enough time to see improvement. The exception to this is Fremantle- they made the decision to sack Mark Harvey because they thought that Ross Lyon was a better coach.
checkside
Guest
Funny things happen the game after the coach of a team is sacked. However the Hawks will absolutely smash them. Who is going to take this job in 2013? Where do you start?
Walt
Guest
I know Port Adelaide isnt the most popular or most glamorous team in the league but I am more surprised that some commentators have little to no idea about what is happening at the club. Matthew Primus' sacking was NOT a knee-jerk reaction to the GWS loss. It was the last straw. Primus' sacking was a surprise to nobody at Alberton. About half the supporter base were calling for it by about Round 18 last year. The AFL came out at the time and said it would be a big no-no to sack another coach so early in his contract. There was not one Port supporter Saturday evening who could give you one single reason as to why Matthew Primus should be retained for 2014. Primus never lost the players. He never had them in the first place.The group never developed a game plan and it seemed Primus had no idea how to implement one. Primus is NOT a scapegoat. He simply didnt know how to do his job.
Matt F
Roar Guru
Pretty much. It's hard and expensive to sack 20 players who aren't good enough, especially as early termination of their contracts get counted to the salary cap. It's far easier to sack one coach (and maybe some/all of the assistants.)
Happy Hooker
Guest
Its cheaper and easier to sack one coach and find a replacement than to sack half a footy team and find players that can play.