So what's your solution then? How do you propose we get the success on the field and the fan engaging style of play? Just bin Stiles and start again? That will do it?
Don't take this post as some sort of unwavering support for Stiles or unconditional approval for his appointment either. He's the coach now whether you or I like it or not. How do we turn it around? 2019 might be a bit much but I certainly think that a new coach brought in after the RG era needs more than 1 season (or half a season if you read some posters) to get the Reds consistently hitting your KPI's you listed above.
No foe like an old foe
.
My record on this and other matters is clear: I said at the time re 2015's pompously titled QRU/ARU 'in depth review of the QRU's HPU etc' that the whole process was laughable and inept (RG was reappointed soon after this 'review'), and I said that when Stiles was finally appointed HC in 2016, and, worse, then local QRU rugby mates and utter greenhorns were given all the Assistant Coach positions, this in aggregate was a very, very high-risk recipe (a) to disastrously repeat the type of QRU cultural mindset re coach choices that appointed RG in 2012 and (b) more importantly, to ensure the Reds stayed in debacle-mode in w-l % and related output KPIs throughout 2017.
Stiles has proven very little so far. His HC record is rather like the team's; some nice occasional flourishes of skill and intensity are promptly ruined by constant reversions to ill-discipline, poor skills, and lowered concentration and all-of-80 endurance. The Sharks win was one missed kick by Lambie and we cannot consider the Kings a sensible baseline for a proper team skills/team success assessment.
It's a mark of how far have fallen posters here's expectations and general standards of required performance that we see indulgent excuses of 'team in flux as predicted', 'development program underway', 'takes a sustained period to get results and we need patience', and so on.
We have become the ultimate forgivers.
Yet, as I have said elsewhere, all the compelling and most relevant evidence re the matter of how ultimately successful Super XX HCs get results is that such HCs (White, Link, Cheika) created relatively immediate and obvious improvement in w-l rate, team skills, discipline, morale, coherence of attack and defence etc all typically within about 6-8 rounds of their first Super season in charge.
This clearly improved core platform later became the basis of very significant evolving improvement in their respective Year Twos, but the key was the positive evidence was very clearly there in their Year Ones. And let us recall as well: their respective teams were rabbles in the year preceding their appointments as HC, just as were the Reds a rabble for all 2016 (with, btw, Stiles as co-HC for much of that period).
This has not happened with Stiles. Perhaps it soon will and I sincerely hope it does. But as yet I see very few credible, sustained, positive leading indicators that he will be a successful-enough Reds HC.
Turning to what should be done, I would advocate that by round 11-12 a rigorous, independent assessment by parties acting for but outside the QRU is made of Stiles' performance, coupled with confidential, independent discussions with all squad members re same, and a decision is made then as to whether there exists enough solid, credible, considered evidence that he (and the Assistants) be retained for 2018. If not, he should be thereupon replaced and a _genuine_ international search take place in mid-2017 for his replacement.
An obvious factor in all this, and certainly one influencing my opinions as above, is that the QRU has zero time to waste. All its key commercial KPIs are in ski-slope mode and seasoned parties therein will surely know that they must correct these trends very soon or risk another financial crisis, but this time with the ARU's bail-out ability far more questionable and uncertain.
