Is Fleck a better coach than Coetzee was?

Lets look at the matter objectively.  In the last game between the Brumbies and the Stormers last year - the Stormers was humiliated and there were only a few changes to the team who played n Saturday.
Negatives  Kitshoff left the FranchiseDe Allende is injured Catrakillis left the franchise and the first choice replacement injured  
Positive
Du Toit joined the Franchise
One would say the above losses should really have had a negative impact and the Storrmers should because of the 5 negatives and only one positive - the Stormers should have lost the game on Saturday.   
However. that brings me back to a very pertinent question - what caused the turnaround?  I believe it is the change in coach and the better team spirit on Saturday that is the answer,        

     

 So what was your prediction for the game Tokkie?

 My prediction was that the Stormers will be beaten by the Brumbies - based on the players available and without regards to the changing of the coach.  The actual outcome indicates that to my mind the coach issue was important than I originally thought.   Basically the same players put in a much better - although not flawless - performance in the game and that impacted on the outcome of the game.
It could be the fact that the playing style (game plan) was improved by the new coach or a better attribute by the players became evident under the new coach.   A difference could also be evident if the coach and his assistants adjust the issue by the development of a better team spirit, such as the case is iro of the Sharks this year.
Be it as it may - a coach function is both to improve player performances and the team spirit within teams.  That is where some coaches fail badly.                      

But last year the Stormers  were unbeaten after Week 4, and had beaten the Sharks.....so perhaps Coetzee is better than Fleck if I follow your logic....which is of course no logic at all.

 Mozart
The end result was a humiliation of the Stormers by the Brumbies in the last game before they played the same team last Saturday - which you missed entirely in your argument.  
There is no logic in what you say.   What I said about the Sharks is really pertinent.  After the destruction of the team spirit in the case of the Sharks by White - Gold kept the same assistant coaches appointed by White for the whole of last year with disastrous result for the Sharks.  They also kept on last year using players Smit brought in such as Wentzel and Botha. as well as retaining Fransie Steyn and Jannie du Plessis - as proven under-performers. 
The whole scenario changed this year with different assistant coaches and cutting out the garbage from the team - and the results are already evident.   The Sharks is the only team in the tournament who has not been beaten thus far this year.  The attitude of the players this year has been so different from what it was last year that it attracted the attention of both commentators and the media.  
Now back to Coetzee - he ultimately flopped with his game plan and the most notable flops were against the Crusaders and the Brumbies - the latest flop being in the play-offs last year.   Matter of fact the situation in fact is that the replacement of Coetzee, Ludeke and Drotske and the replacement of the assistant-coaches of Gold seem to have a positive impact on the performance of the teams they coached last year.   A typical example is the Rebels game last year - where the Bulls lost the game and the humiliation of the Rebels by the Bulls this year.
There are two issues here at play.  The first one relates to the issue of coach  changes - the second one to the beneficial affects of getting rid of some of the elderly duds that was institutionalized by the coaches mentioned,   For instance the Bulls without duds like Matfield, Kruger, Greyling and Stegmann are better performers than they were last year - despite the loss of a key player like Pollard through injury.
I know it is hard for you to understand the situation - but in the first four rounds of games played in Super Rugby there was a huge improvement by the younger teams now used.   It seems we have at last got rid of most of the duds we used as coaches and players over the last few years.
Use your logic for a change and stop spouting BS all over the site.  

Fleck is twice the coach Coetzee is and Fleck is only just learning his trade

 Dave
Lets face facts - the best thing to happen to SA Rugby was - 
*   getting rid of dud coaches like Ludeke, Coetzee and Drotske; and*   getting rid of the elderly dud players and replacing them with players that can perform.
Mozart tries to dodge the issue.  His forecast was a real disaster for SA Rugby this year and there are signs that on Super Rugby level the teams have actually improved and performs better.  
He still tries to attack individual players he disliked from the word go because they posed a threat to selection of his favourites by another dud coach (Meyer) and supports Coetzee as the future Springbok coach.   If Coetzee is appointed and the Springboks go down to the level where they were in 2014 and 2015, it would be manna from heaven for him.  He will sing about the loss of the dud players and will blame the players.  He will be highly satisfied - since his gloomy forecast will be answered positively.