Football Department Review

[DJC]

Both the Geelong and Richmond reviews were initiated 6 years after Thompson and Hardwick took charge, not after 2 1/2 disrupted seasons. The Geelong review was initiated in August 2006 (near the end of the season) and included everybody :

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2006-08-17/g...ew/1240604

It will look into administration, coaching, fitness, medical and sport science, list management, player leadership, recruiting and welfare and development.

That's how you do a review.

I understand the pro review crowd will extol the virtues of being proactive, getting on the front foot, nipping problems in the bud etc., but there is a fine line between proactive and knee jerk, and I'm not convinced our club understands the difference.

The thing is that our review is not a review of the coach, it is a review of the football department.  The length of time Teague has been in the job is largely irrelevant as our football department has been underperforming across the board since Brittain was coach.  Of course, some of the issues that led to Pagan's appointment have been addressed and others have evolved as other coaches, list managers, CEOs and footy department heads have attempted ad hoc remedies.

If anything, the review is too little, too late.  It should have been conducted before Bolton's first season at the helm.