Ex-Swarcliffe Rhino wrote:
I wouldn't be terribly bothered if it is an NRL coach and they only stayed for two years.
Holbrook turned Saints round pretty sharpish and Wigan are still benefitting from Michael Maguires influence years on.
The right coach will be able to put in place the step / keys we need to be successful, Weve become to accustomed to giving leeway to "projects" that are never finished and excuses rolled out. With Blease now overseeing the playing side Im confident that he'll be able to handle the nitty gritty and setting the tone both ethos and recruitment to leave the coach to concentrate on just that, coaching.
Yes if Arthur has Perth lined up for 2027, he's the kind of guy who will probably need to keep his hand in meantime.
Leeds is a good opportunity or a poisoned chalice whichever way you look at it - but what we do have is a lot of junior talent coming through, which I think would greatly appeal to Arthur. Rowley also.
Thing with Blease leading this is that he might make the appointment and consider different candidates than GH would, but if it comes down to paying Arthur £400k per year to get him, will GH and the board back that?
I don't know but I reckon Arthur would cost around double whatever they were paying Smith, and we've also taken on Blease's salary. We also need cash to go after a couple of really good overseas players IMO, and use the Marquee allowance. If we're serious about winning again we're going to have to stop trying to do it on a shoestring.