Jobs For the Boys or Building an Ethos

This week we have seen Leicester Tigers boss Richard Cockerill come out and hinted that he is keen to get ex-Tiger Julian White involved in the coaching set up. Tigers are a club who have always looked to get their ex players involved coaching to build an ethos. Kicking coach Paul Burke, director of rugby Richard Cockerill and first team assistant coach Ben Herring are all ex-Tigers also and current club captain Geordan Murphy has been promised that there will be a backroom position available when he hangs up his boots.

Leicester are just one of many teams who opt for such a system and it has its merits and flaws. Scarlets have long had a coaching team where every single coach and backroom staff member either played for Llanelli RFC or the Llanelli Scarlets. Stade Toulouse are the same - their coaching team of Guy Noves, JB Ellisalde, Yannick Bru have all come through as players and emerged as coaches. Munster were long advocates of it with Anthony Foley, Jim Williams, Shaun Payne and Jason Holland having found work in the Munster backroom after hanging up the boots.

Are you in favour of this bootroom attitude or should the clubs be looking for the best coaches regardless of their background.

I'm kind of on the fence about it. Some lads seem to do very well, like Axel and Jim Williams while others fail like Dutchy and Mick Galwey (what did he actually do when he was on the coaching staff) I would probably prefer to look outside first and then see if there are previous players who could do it.

Ben Herring took a head coach job (second in command to a DOR) in Japan over a year ago. He was replaced by retired second row Blaze though their jobs don't overlap as Herring was the specialist breakdown coach whilst Blaze was brought in to fine tune the lineout.

Tigers head coach O'Connor is not an ex-Tiger which I think is important as he brings in that something different. Tigers have always tended to have a strong ethos in terms of players and staff but often bring in a 'twist' either a flair player (Howard, Mauger, Gibson) or a coach with a different view (Meyer, O'Connor) to add something different and evolve the way they play. I think the mix is just about right, a defence coach would be good.

The Julian White thing has been down played in the short term as he is always busy with his farm and Cockers complained it was difficult enough to get him there once a week.

Geordan Murphy seems likely to be coaching the academy backs once he hangs up his boots judging from a recent interview.

I wouldn't put it past Harry Ellis to return at some point either as he is coaching at South Leicester (with some former Tigers) and is studying Sports Science at Loughborough whilst getting his coaching badges.

Well look at this way. When Liverpool went all international in their leadership and players, they went down on a downward spiral the depths of which have yet to be plumbed.

Tigers traditionally have only ever achieved anything with a Tigers culture. We've tried overseas coaches and have dipped alarmingly.

There's certainly a balance to be struck between old boys and new input, and I think it also depends on the club in question.

Some club have a defined ethos and very much pride themselves on it (Wasps, Leicester and more recently Sarries). They want some continuity so that certain values can be passed down and instilled in the new generation.

Other clubs, such as Bath, Gloucester and London Irish, seem to be in a permanent state of revolution, and it makes less sense I think to bring former players on board (or grant them any particular favouritism), as there are now few remnants of any particular era or ethos of relevant success (unlike in the early 90s).

Certainly from a Scots perspective we've seen a couple of questionnable promotions from the old boys ranks, Gregor Townsend in particular, who has landed a job considerably above his reputation and merit on any prior achievements. Similarly Alan Tait walked into a defence role for Scotland without any prior experience. Not a fan.

Liverpool started going south with Souness (an ex player) in charge, so not sure it's the best analogy to use Portnoy.

It's a balancing act for me. If you have a good ethos, which is seeing you win, you would be mad to not try to maintain that. What the best teams do though is know when the time is right to bring an outside influence in. The game is moving forwards at a rate of knots and you have to be prepared to move forward and adapt with the times as well.

FES I think it's important that the old boys start small and work their way up. Cockers went away and was forwards coach at Montferrand before returning to be forwards coach, then head coach and now DOR. He himself says that each new head coach (Howard, Loffreda, Meyer) he worked under taught him something new and now he learns more each season.

I would be very wary of Tigers bringing in another non-Tiger to the top job, it was a disaster with Loffreda and Meyer had yet to win over everybody (though that is pretty much impossible at Tigers). Non-Tigers assistant coaches are a good idea mind it's better if they come from another successful culture then experience Tigers before taking up coaching ala Ben Herring.

I agree with Ozzy3213. It's about balance - you could argue all life is like that.

You want a good mix of ex club men and people from outside the club who can bring something new to the table.

Positives
Entrenched club ethos
Ex-players often command loyalty and respect
Less 'bedding-in' time

Negatives
Staleness/complacency can creep in and new ideas can be difficult to implement
Players (especially younger ones) can feel intimidated by working with 'legends' of the club
Resentment of 'jobs for the boys' culture

Ideally you want a mix that enables continuity and growth.

The Crusaders have tended to use ex-players - Wayne Smith, Robbie Deans and Todd Blackadder as head coaches, with the likes of Mark Hammett, Daryl Gibson, Dave Hewett, Rob Penney, Steve Hansen all involved at various times after playing for Canterbury.

In addition former players like Scott Robertson, Reuben Thorne, Tabai Matson and Leon MacDonald have been involved with "feeder" INL cup sides Canterbury and Tasman.

Thus far the set up has worked pretty well.

formerly known as Sam wrote:FES I think it's important that the old boys start small and work their way up. Cockers went away and was forwards coach at Montferrand before returning to be forwards coach, then head coach and now DOR. He himself says that each new head coach (Howard, Loffreda, Meyer) he worked under taught him something new and now he learns more each season.

Agreed. Being an old boy and familiar with club ethos and culture may be sufficient to grant you access to the bottom rung of the ladder, but thereafter promotions have to be on merit.

The most awful example of old boy network in recent times must be the extremely dumb appointment of Martin Johnson to "manage" England. Personally I think he'd have been a wonderful forwards coach had he started at Welford Road and served his time, uncompromising yet intelligent characters usually do well in that area (I'm think of Jim Telfer here as an example), but he was horribly under qualified for the task in hand.

Neil Back was another who tried to run before he could walk. The Leeds job came too soon in my opinion. Hopefully as a forwards coach at Edinburgh he's in the right place at the right level now.

I was interested that when it came down to the local lad Anthony Foley (who went from player and captain to academy coach to defence coach to forwards coach at Munster) and the new man Rob Penney - Munster decided to take the new face and keep the local guy in the backroom as he wasnt ready.

Hoping it will be the right move.

Neil Back was another who tried to run before he could walk. The Leeds job came too soon in my opinion. Hopefully as a forwards coach at Edinburgh he's in the right place at the right level now.

FES not strictly true. Backie had worked as the Tigers defence coach for quite a while and was teamed up with the head of the Tigers academy team when he went to Leeds. There was some initial success but when the lack of funds started taking their toll there was no togetherness it turned all a bit cut throat with pointing of the fingers. Back had actually tried to get the Tigers job first when Cockers went for it but missed out and left in a huff to join Leeds instead.

Re. Johnno I don't think he was really wanting to come back into the game so soon but with the England team on it's knees in terms of morale and organisation I think he felt that he couldn't say no. To be fair he did a lot of good things and it was only the disasterous RWC where he failed. I think he may have always been to big a name to work as a forwards coach he would have had to be completely out of sight with the academy or in the top job as the media would have always been looking to him before the DOR.

To be fair to Johnson he won a Grandslam.

As a player, as a manager he won the 6N not the grandslam. Those Irish buggers ruined that for us.

Oh yea.

I just fell into the trap that I am seeing more and more and more these days.

To a growing numbre of people (apparently including myself now 6 Nations = Grandslam)

I'd look for the coach who I believe is the best man for the job, regardless of where he's from. Obviously when interviewing him you'd want to know he has an understanding of the teams ethos and history. But any intelligient coach will have made it his business to do just that. But you're really looking for the best technical coaches.

And it depends on the standing of the team. A complete revolution in how things are done could be very good for a badly under-performing team. But not necessarily for a team that are doing a lot of things well and winning games. Continuity or a small evolution might be better in that case.

The danger of giving jobs to the boys is that you're hiring inferior coaches based on no coaching merit, but because of what they did as players.

If done right, it can work. Dan Baugh as fitness coach at the blues and now with Wales is a great example of players being kept on but fitting in a role which works.

I think it's a factor that is hugely exaggerated in importance because lazy or poor journalists who know little about the actual knowledge, style or expertise of a coach or coaching set-up can Google it in five minutes and attribute success or failure to it.

Sometimes a homegrown coach is best, sometimes an outsider is. You could say the same about fair-haired/dark-haired/red-haired coaches.

Name two good red-haired coaches!

Mark Jones as "skills" coach says it all really

formerly known as Sam wrote:

Neil Back was another who tried to run before he could walk. The Leeds job came too soon in my opinion. Hopefully as a forwards coach at Edinburgh he's in the right place at the right level now.

FES not strictly true. Backie had worked as the Tigers defence coach for quite a while and was teamed up with the head of the Tigers academy team when he went to Leeds. There was some initial success but when the lack of funds started taking their toll there was no togetherness it turned all a bit cut throat with pointing of the fingers. Back had actually tried to get the Tigers job first when Cockers went for it but missed out and left in a huff to join Leeds instead.

I disagree. He retired at the end of the 2005 season and was head coach at Leeds three years later. That is FAR too short a time period to progress to being a head coach in my view. There are always exceptions, people who just hit the ground running, but I personally back experience every time, and in 99% of cases three years of coaching just isn't going to cut it.

I think one of the main weakness in recruiting an "old boy" is that if they are not doing well in the job and have be removed it becomes much harder because of the attachment and more so if the player was popualr with the fans; Martin Johnson was clearly out of his depth as England manager and would have had the world calling for his head after the RWC if he'd been anyone else, however based on his record as a player and the great affection and respect in which he's (rightly) held his management is subject to a revisionist history which goes along the line of:
"He only took the job becasue no else would", "he couldn't let the country down", "the team wanted him", "he was weakend by machinations at the RFU", "he was let down by the players in his squad", etc.
Some or all of these may well contain a grain of truth but I doubt if they'll be said about Staurt Lancaster when he gets sacked.

Irish Londoner wrote:I think one of the main weakness in recruiting an "old boy" is that if they are not doing well in the job and have be removed it becomes much harder because of the attachment and more so if the player was popualr with the fans; Martin Johnson was clearly out of his depth as England manager and would have had the world calling for his head after the RWC if he'd been anyone else, however based on his record as a player and the great affection and respect in which he's (rightly) held his management is subject to a revisionist history which goes along the line of:
"He only took the job becasue no else would", "he couldn't let the country down", "the team wanted him", "he was weakend by machinations at the RFU", "he was let down by the players in his squad", etc.
Some or all of these may well contain a grain of truth but I doubt if they'll be said about Staurt Lancaster when he gets sacked.

Martin Johnson took England to their first win in Australia since 2003, first back to back win against Australia since 2003, first 6 nations Championship since 2003. If it wasn't for the World Cup discipline issues what would have been the issue? He had the backs playing better together than Lancaster's done. He played Wilkinson more than he should have but every coach since CW has done that. Johnson did little different to what Lancaster's done. The difference is Johnson can into a rotten set-up that has had some clearing out since the World Cup.

He left after getting beat by the team that 'almost' beat New Zealand in the final and the one that knocked Wales out.

Well put Hammer, I seem to remember a lot of commiserations on behalf of Ashton when he lost the England job despite making a real hash of it and having the senior players nearly take over whilst at the RWC.

FES, he worked with the academy forwards and A team forwards winning the A League and took the Leeds job with the long standing Tigers Rugby Development Officer Andy Key. Two of their three years at Leeds were successfull it was only the third season where they had no budget and lost a few key players to other teams that it all went wrong. Now there are question marks over Back's temprement and man management skills but I don't think he was ever out of his depth. Maybe no suited to being a head coach and definitely not suited to being a head coach without the guidance of a DOR but he was no abject failure.

Weren't the Leeds management told that their funding would increase in their second year if they managed to stay up? Then when the year rolled around the extra funding never appeared.

Oh and regarding the Johnson WC discipline thing, even that was blown way out of proportion. He was let down by players he trusted

formerly known as Sam wrote:FES, he worked with the academy forwards and A team forwards winning the A League and took the Leeds job with the long standing Tigers Rugby Development Officer Andy Key. Two of their three years at Leeds were successfull it was only the third season where they had no budget and lost a few key players to other teams that it all went wrong. Now there are question marks over Back's temprement and man management skills but I don't think he was ever out of his depth. Maybe no suited to being a head coach and definitely not suited to being a head coach without the guidance of a DOR but he was no abject failure.

I'm not suggesting he was a failure, in the same way that I didn't intend on suggesting that Martin Johnson's tenure was a complete failure with England. Clearly both had successes. What I'm saying is that the top jobs came too soon for them. Being ready for the top job, and "not being out of your depth", are two very different things. Of course both would cope with the job, both being extremely tough and experienced players and both of whom were extremely well coached by a number of the best coaches to have graced the game. However, being head coach requires experience of coaching, and Back, with only three years behind him, did not have the experience and nous to be making tough selection decisions, big man management calls and build a successful side.

Do I think he'll be better at Edinburgh and approve of his appointment? Yes, most definitely.

Do I think after three or four years at Edinburgh working with Mike Bradley and coaching the forwards he'll be better prepared to move into a top position than he was after only three years coaching the kids and reserves at Leicester? Absolutely.

The best coaches continue to develop and learn.

Well I certainly would hope he hadn't peaked already. You never know, after three years at Edinburgh he might be ready to return to Tigers. I doubt that though as he refused to work under Cockers previously and there is little chance of Cockerill leaving unless the RFU change their position massively (very unlikely) or the Clermont job becomes available (he is still popular over there and I'd imagine the remuneration offered would be considerably bigger than that offered by Tigers).

Judging from the reports of his time at Rugby Lions he was a) very sweary on the touchline, b) beloved by the players (mainly because he paid some wages out of his own pocket) and c) took the league by storm, winning it with ease.

HammerofThunor wrote:Weren't the Leeds management told that their funding would increase in their second year if they managed to stay up? Then when the year rolled around the extra funding never appeared.

Oh and regarding the Johnson WC discipline thing, even that was blown way out of proportion. He was let down by players he trusted

I can only but agree. I doubt that MJ's team would be much different from SL's is now. But I have reservations as to whether the coaching staff would be including Andy Farrell.

formerly known as Sam wrote:Well I certainly would hope he hadn't peaked already. You never know, after three years at Edinburgh he might be ready to return to Tigers. I doubt that though as he refused to work under Cockers previously and there is little chance of Cockerill leaving unless the RFU change their position massively (very unlikely) or the Clermont job becomes available (he is still popular over there and I'd imagine the remuneration offered would be considerably bigger than that offered by Tigers).

Judging from the reports of his time at Rugby Lions he was a) very sweary on the touchline, b) beloved by the players (mainly because he paid some wages out of his own pocket) and c) took the league by storm, winning it with ease.

Well Edinburgh is definitely a good fit then. The SRU finances are the stuff of nightmares so we may well end up needing Uncle Back to pay some of our players!

Being very sweary on the touchline really isn't a big deal in Scotland!