Choco williams - Could have been essendon coach twice

Football Discussion Dustin Fletcher Hangar
1

I stumbled across this article today which I found interesting. The fact the board rejected a handover situation to hird, instead of putting in place an experienced coach to initially take the reigns is a strange decision for mine.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/sacked-podcast-how-mark-choco-williams-was-offered-essendon-coaching-job/news-story/a9a5b01fdc32afa4202f4e7f1915d614?fbclid=IwAR3UWv1KsvsXGZ8cfZ7Gge5IleZr2UN_OXERiBAmdpf__vyJF9S4Zv7piPk

Mark Williams was sensationally offered the Essendon job that eventually went to Matthew Knights in the 2007 Grand Final week.

And the Port Adelaide premiership coach has revealed he offered Essendon a succession plan with James Hird in the contentious selection process that saw the prodigal son return.

1 Like
2

Choco as coach with Hird assistant was always my preferred outcome when Knights was sacked.

16 Likes
3

reckon we’d have snagged a flag with that set up

4 Likes
4

Could of had choco,ended up with knights…

Thompson was also interested in coming to coach us after the GF in 2007- from his book from memory

5

Choco or Bomber instead of Knights… now that’s what a true sliding doors moment is.

Some AFL communication specialists have no idea what it means.

2 Likes
6

Meh, the team was crap when Knights took over. Whoever replaced Sheeds was sipping from a poisoned chalice and would have been shortly gone.

1 Like
7

which was the exact plan Fog revealed in that infamous thread. To think he got abuse from some because it didn’t quite work out that way.

2 Likes
8

Please post the article. It’s behind a paywall.

9

Could’ve had either one of Williams, Bomber Thompson (he would have accepted the offer to coach EFC) or Hardwick. We chose Knights. Shows the competency of the board at that time…

4 Likes
10

considering Hardwick’s success came after we were onto our 4th senior coach do you think we would have kept him long enough to achieve anything?

Also it says chocco was offered the job so we couldnt have had him instead of knights
Potentially could have had him after knoghts tho

2 Likes
11

Should have been our coach.
Definitely the first time.
As a succession plan makes sense the second time.

But holy crap, the idea we turned down Choco over Knights the first time in unbelievable.

I made a case for him here before Sheedy’s blood hit the floor.

1 Like
12

Um, isn’t it saying he was offered the job and turned us down? So we didn’t turn him down over Knights, he rejected us and then we chose between Knights and Hardwick.

13

TL;DR

But we should have got him regardless.

14

Should’ve been appointed at the end of 2010 after knights was let go. He could’ve ushered Hird into the role, would’ve been much more stable than the bomber Thompson/Hird setup. Now that is a true sliding doors moment.

FWIW, I still think Choco would be a decent option, still think he has a lot to offer. Shouldn’t be finished as an AFL coach IMO

3 Likes
15

Choco wasn’t real happy in 2010. When he went for his interview, he had the feeling that Hird already had the gig.

16

The Podcast this is from is well worth a listen.

Choco is an interesting guy, and we really farked up some coaching processes.

17

I think Thompson would have been given a little longer than Knights. Premiership captain, coming off winning a Grand Final by 20 goals.

18

:man_facepalming:t2:

19

Yep, great listen. Sounds like we offered him the role in the week leading up to the 2007 GF and he asked for more time since he was obviously distracted. Club announces Knight that week.

2 Likes
20

Obviously, the club didn’t want to wait for Williams and didn’t, they gave the coaching job to Matty Knights. They make a quick decision on the run and the wrong decision.

What’s that old saying, nothing like - act in haste repent in leisure.