Terry's Next Contract

[1980]

So if we dont make the finals in 2009, how many posters on here believe Wallace should be given a contract extension?

Lets see who are the brave ones!

If we don't make the finals in 2009 I don't think he should be given an extension.  Doesn't change my opinion on whether he should be allowed to coach until then however.

The only way Wallace wont be coach in season 2009 is if he packs it in himself.

But he wont get a renewal. Because he doesnt want one

Deja vu Doggies

[the_boy_jake]

Don't know if this has been mentioned but here is an interesting thing I just read

Malthouse's extension makes him part of the large contingent of coaches who are contracted until the end of 2009, including Sydney's Paul Roos, West Coast's John Worsfold, Geelong's Mark Thompson, Port Adelaide's Mark Williams, the Bulldogs' Rodney Eade, Richmond's Terry Wallace, the Kangaroos' Dean Laidley, Brisbane Lions' Leigh Matthews, St Kilda's Ross Lyon, Adelaide's Neil Craig and Carlton's Brett Ratten. In all, 12 of the 16 coaches are contracted until 2009.

So on one hand there may be some quality coaches looking for a change and they will see us as a place they will get a fair crack, given that our last two coaches got 5 years each.

On the other hand, if we let Terry's contract run and we say goodbye in September 2009, we could be battling it out with several other clubs for the best available coaches.

[jackstar]

Of course that would only be if the board had/has not already identified a predecessor.

The board knows the identity of Wallace's predecessor. His name is Danny Frawley.

Everything that comes out of Jack's mouth is 100% correct.

you're killing me, daniel. That's champagne comedy.

My opinion is irrevelant.

that's my whole point

and your opinion is less irrevelvant

[mightytiges]

Your exactly right MT about the kid with no pre season and bascially jumping ahead of "" most"" of the starting 18. ( Cotchin)
Question I ask you, where is Richard Tambling and others with there careers then.

Whats cracks me up is the you stick up for people you dont even know

1980 is on the money with Williams as well

LOL how do you know who I know. For your info I know someone well who has followed Port since the 1940s, was a friend of the late "Big Bob" McLean (AFL HOF inductee last year) and whenever he makes it to a Port match he is invited into the rooms pre and post game by Mark Williams. You crack me up with you "on the money" lines   .

As I said last year when this same rumour was posted on here about Williams quitting Port and coaching us in 2008 (IIRC you said that was on the money too lol) - Williams will not leave Port voluntarily. Why would he leave the club he loves and that his dad coached. The Williams family is Port Adelaide. He outlasted Allan Scott didn't he . 

As for the RFC, I stick up for the process to borrow CUB's words. In the past there was no process; just random mayhem and implosions . The club was run on the whim of a minority of idiots who had no official positions at the club yet thought the club was their personal plaything and would pressure weak boards into quick "fix" decisions in panic .

As for how certain players have gone in their careers so far - well firstly the player is mainly responsibile for how he performs barring injury and secondly development of the list is one major factor Wallace will be judged on in around 12-14 months time. Yep Blingers has struggled big time since round 8 (was good before then) and now needs a spell at Coburg but Lids, Moore, Hughes, Morton, White (shocker against Carlton though) and of course Cotch have added more value to the team this year as the year has progressed. Nearly all of them are 21 or under. It's too many of our senior experienced players instead that let us down and yes as we agreed Plough has held onto the same old poorly skilled culprits far too long and has one last chance to offload them this year.

[mightytiges]

So if we dont make the finals in 2009, how many posters on here believe Wallace should be given a contract extension?

Lets see who are the brave ones!

IMO 1980, he'll be gone if we don't make the finals next year. As Jake said the team will need a breakout year in 2009 (unlikely) for Plough to stay on.

[WilliamPowell]

1980 - this is what I posted on this weeks ago - you may have missed it ....

It was my view then and it remains my view now

My view is this

Personally and I posted this somewhere else I don't believe in sacking coaches, especially mid season or mid contract

I am also not a fan of giving contract extensions mid way through a current contract. We did this Spudley after the 2001 final series and look how that panned out 

My view is Tezza should see out his current contract. Any extension should be dependant upon results at the end of next season which is when his current deal ends. Results should and will determine the extension IMV

Simple really 

[Moi]

just for the record, the thread wasn't about contract extentions.  It was for three years after his initial five years had been served.

He needed five years to turnover the list - that's what it's going to take.  If he did that and got us playing competitively, I thought he deserved a further three years after the five to see if he could do something with the list he built.

I did not in any way mean a renegoation of his contract this year.

The three year contract was to make him competitive and every year of that three years we should be in finals.  Actually, they could make it a performance-based contract that if we didn't get there, out he goes.

[Infamy]

I wouldn't give him 3 years, 2 more should be enough and if he has us playing well then a renegotiation will be pretty simple.

[mightytiges]

Giving Plough a new 2 year deal after first giving him 5 years would IMO send a signal that the club re-appointed Wallace without any confidence in him. The club hedging its bets so if he fails (no finals) in his first reappointed year then they can pay him out of the second and final year. IMV the choice has to be either a new 3 year deal or bye-bye. The club either believes he is the coach to take the list onto success or not.

[Francois Jackson]

just for the record, the thread wasn't about contract extentions.  It was for three years after his initial five years had been served.

He needed five years to turnover the list - that's what it's going to take.  If he did that and got us playing competitively, I thought he deserved a further three years after the five to see if he could do something with the list he built.

I did not in any way mean a renegoation of his contract this year.

The three year contract was to make him competitive and every year of that three years we should be in finals.  Actually, they could make it a performance-based contract that if we didn't get there, out he goes.

you have got to be joking MOI.

I know your in love with Terry, richo and god knows who else but the facts are we are 4 years and NO finals.

I couldnt give a fc.uk about being competetive and honourable losses only making finals is acceptable and we wont be doing that anytime soon.

3 year extension....hahahahahahahahaha

[jackstar]

just for the record, the thread wasn't about contract extentions.  It was for three years after his initial five years had been served.

He needed five years to turnover the list - that's what it's going to take.  If he did that and got us playing competitively, I thought he deserved a further three years after the five to see if he could do something with the list he built.

I did not in any way mean a renegoation of his contract this year.

The three year contract was to make him competitive and every year of that three years we should be in finals.  Actually, they could make it a performance-based contract that if we didn't get there, out he goes.

you have got to be joking MOI.

I know your in love with Terry, richo and god knows who else but the facts are we are 4 years and NO finals.

I couldnt give a fc.uk about being competetive and honourable losses only making finals is acceptable and we wont be doing that anytime soon.

3 year extension....hahahahahahahahaha

Daniel , dont bother, these people are set in there ways and do want to see the tiges make finals, all they care about is honoring contracts .
Other coaches have taken teams from near bottom to top four in one and two years with good game plans and winning games they should, at punt road, we are different

[Moi]

3 year extension....hahahahahahahahaha

I don't know of any coach who's had a five year contract to then get one year. 
If you're not prepared to give them three, why give them one at all.
And you don't need to answer that lol
And yes Jack, I'm set in my ways
I'm loyal - try it some time 

[jackstar]

Loyality gets people NO WHERE in life.
Look at employees who give 20 years of the life to there employer and they are told to eff off.
Yeah, loyalty gets you know where.
Ask Matty Knights about loyality. And Darren Gaspar and Andrew Kellaway..  They give Gas and Chubber the chop and bring to the club Mark Grahram and Kent Kinsgley, lol

[1980]

just for the record, the thread wasn't about contract extentions.  It was for three years after his initial five years had been served.

He needed five years to turnover the list - that's what it's going to take.  If he did that and got us playing competitively, I thought he deserved a further three years after the five to see if he could do something with the list he built.

I did not in any way mean a renegoation of his contract this year.

The three year contract was to make him competitive and every year of that three years we should be in finals.  Actually, they could make it a performance-based contract that if we didn't get there, out he goes.

Is that what you were posting in 2004? That he should be given an 8 year contract because he needed 5 years just to turnover the list?

The rest of us thought we'd be playing finals by now and pushing for top 4 in 2009.

[Moi]

The rest of us thought we'd be playing finals by now and pushing for top 4 in 2009.

Who said we won't be?
Why don't you make those comments at the end of the season or when we mathemetically can't make it.