Three more years for Roos?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Matt79
    Bring it on!
    • Sep 2004
    • 3143

    Three more years for Roos?

    Source

    SYDNEY coach Paul Roos may be only three years from retirement despite taking his Swans a step closer to back-to-back flags.
    Swannies for life!
  • Danzar
    I'm doing ok right now, thanks
    • Jun 2006
    • 2027

    #2
    Re: Three more years for Roos?

    Originally posted by Matt79
    Source
    Longmire?
    Captain, I am detecting large quantities of win in this sector

    Comment

    • swantastic
      Veterans List
      • Jan 2006
      • 7275

      #3
      I'd say it's a MINIMIM of three more years and then we'll just see what happens after that,"
      Most likely more than that.He did say "MINIMUM"
      Now this is a thread that i would expect on the ego -centric, wank session that is redandwhiteonline.com...

      Comment

      • SimonH
        Salt future's rising
        • Aug 2004
        • 1647

        #4
        Roos kind of makes me laugh the way that he always throws out sly digs to all manner of people in meeting his media commitments.

        I read the word "minimum" in this interview to mean, "If you hate me, don't bother counting down the weeks to the end of 2009 until I go; even if I've lost interest in coaching, I'm going to stick around solely to @@@@ you off."

        Comment

        • tantrum
          On the Rookie List
          • Apr 2004
          • 397

          #5
          Not many coaches at the moment could get away with saying they'll hang around for a minimum 3 years!

          Comment

          • ugg
            Can you feel it?
            Site Admin
            • Jan 2003
            • 15961

            #6
            Doesn't that coincides with Tadhg's 'final' contract? Perhaps Leo, Kirk, Micky O and Hall will retire after that season too. Not a bad time to 'jump ship' so to speak.
            Reserves live updates (Twitter)
            Reserves WIKI -
            Top Goalkickers| Best Votegetters

            Comment

            • liz
              Veteran
              Site Admin
              • Jan 2003
              • 16737

              #7
              Originally posted by ugg
              Doesn't that coincides with Tadhg's 'final' contract? Perhaps Leo, Kirk, Micky O and Hall will retire after that season too. Not a bad time to 'jump ship' so to speak.
              Don't think that Micky O will last that long. We need to enjoy it while it lasts - he is an absolute pleasure to watch when on song and we may never see anyone else quite like him.

              Comment

              • Young Blood
                On the rise
                • Apr 2005
                • 541

                #8
                Originally posted by liz
                Don't think that Micky O will last that long.
                Agreed, Mick will be a year to year proposition from here on - the end can come very quickly. Kirk and Leo would also do well to squeeze out another three years.

                Comment

                • giant
                  Veterans List
                  • Mar 2005
                  • 4731

                  #9
                  Let's hope that starts with 2007 as his second half of 2006 has been his best footy for years - fatherhood obviously agees with him!!

                  Comment

                  • Industrial Fan
                    Goodesgoodesgoodesgoodes!
                    • Aug 2006
                    • 3317

                    #10
                    Originally posted by liz
                    we may never see anyone else quite like him.
                    Have you seen Steve Johnson play?

                    The two are quite similar...
                    He ate more cheese, than time allowed

                    Comment

                    • AnnieH
                      RWOs Black Sheep
                      • Aug 2006
                      • 11332

                      #11
                      Originally posted by SimonH
                      Roos kind of makes me laugh the way that he always throws out sly digs to all manner of people in meeting his media commitments.

                      I read the word "minimum" in this interview to mean, "If you hate me, don't bother counting down the weeks to the end of 2009 until I go; even if I've lost interest in coaching, I'm going to stick around solely to @@@@ you off."
                      Agreed.
                      Roosey is a media @@@@-stirrer.
                      He loves to play the media.
                      Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
                      Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

                      Comment

                      • adnar
                        Warming the Bench
                        • Oct 2004
                        • 425

                        #12
                        As much as I like Roosey I think limiting the amount of time that a coach is around a club is a good thing. I think 5-8 years max to keep things fresh new ideas etc.

                        I Hope Micky O is our first to 300.

                        Comment

                        • timthefish
                          Regular in the Side
                          • Sep 2003
                          • 940

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Annie Haddad
                          Agreed.
                          Roosey is a media @@@@-stirrer.
                          He loves to play the media.
                          oh no no no - you obviously haven't been paying attention. now follow me closely, roos is an smug arrogant bully who is bringing more harm to this club than good by never giving a straight answer to the media. we are sick of his arrogance and poor player management. we demand that he reveal the innermost workings of the club publicly because we are TRUE FANS (tm).

                          now repeat ad nauseum whenever things go wrong.
                          then again, i think it would be worth trying 15-16 players on field so what would i know

                          Comment

                          • AnnieH
                            RWOs Black Sheep
                            • Aug 2006
                            • 11332

                            #14
                            Originally posted by timthefish
                            oh no no no - you obviously haven't been paying attention. now follow me closely, roos is an smug arrogant bully who is bringing more harm to this club than good by never giving a straight answer to the media. we are sick of his arrogance and poor player management. we demand that he reveal the innermost workings of the club publicly because we are TRUE FANS (tm).

                            now repeat ad nauseum whenever things go wrong.
                            JESUS CHRIST ... you're game son.
                            Maybe you should have added a "big grin" at the end of your post.
                            Get some protection ... they're gunna crucify you!!!
                            Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
                            Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

                            Comment

                            • timthefish
                              Regular in the Side
                              • Sep 2003
                              • 940

                              #15
                              Originally posted by adnar
                              As much as I like Roosey I think limiting the amount of time that a coach is around a club is a good thing. I think 5-8 years max to keep things fresh new ideas etc.

                              I Hope Micky O is our first to 300.
                              i think it true that any coach can become stale or "lose" the playing group and not necessarily through fault. i don't think it's a good reason to set predetermined limits, however. in a word - sheedy.
                              then again, i think it would be worth trying 15-16 players on field so what would i know

                              Comment

                              Working...