So Mike your chance to fix Bok rugby....

......I’m curious, what is your team, bench and coaching staff to fix our current malaise.

 First of all I would like to state that this invitation is surprising since you have never suggested reasonable solutions yourself.
However, I am certain that changes needs to be made and the following are to my mind necessary:-
Coaching 
I do not really think that we have suitable coaches available in SA at present,   They all - bar perhaps Ackerman - has all got serious deficiencies.   Of the Super Rugby coaches Mitchell is experienced and probably the best coach of the lot - but he is beginning to show promise with the Bulls,  Du Preez is also doing better - but he is inexperienced,
The problem is that the SA coaches has since re-admission all - bar perhaps Carel du Plessis - all had a serious deficiency.   They all were 10 man rugby specialists and the backline was there for defense only,   People talk about Habana and De Villiers as examples why that is not so, but looking at those two one has to admit they did well despite the coaches and playing individual style rugby despite the coaches.  
Coaches need to discourage inadequate and aimless kicking as a means to hand over possession to the opposition and that became the speciality of SA coaches,   The result has been a constant stream of poor kicking instead of strategic kicking.          
 I would definitely look at a foreign coach like Mitchell, Rennie or even Plumtree as coaches and back them up with specialist coaches to ensure proper functioning of the whole team.     
The backline
The Outside Backs
Of the outside back players in the squad (Rhule, Leyds, Skosan and Coetzee)  only Coetzee has a chance in my book to be a test level player,   However, Coetzee has his own deficiencies, but that could be ascribed to the fact that when carrying balls he has no supporting players in line to carry the ball further and is forced to make poor kicks or crashball.   Proper backline coaching can cause an improvement in the case of Coetzee.
Players that could be considered are Mapimpi, Nkosi, Combrinck, Le Roux and Gelant could come into the picture.   Bosch can also come into the picture and I guess he should be tried at full back.   At flyhalf his small frame would case defense problems.  It is likely that he will be played at full back by Du Preez in the Super Ruugby series next year,
Centers
There is no question marks about the serious problems we have at center.   The only really proven centers we have are Vorster, Janse van Rensburg and Odendaal.   People talk about Am and Gelant - but I am not convinced about whether AM really is good enough and if Mitchell can convert Gelant into a successful center he is one of the players on my list in that position.  ,    
The constant stream of poor half-backs have been a constant in SA rugby and there is no denying that it caused serious deterioration of our center performances,  The second deficiency is that they have been coached out of things like running lines and support play.   The other problem is that no outside backs and centers can really perform with the Meyer and Coetzee non-existence of a game plan.
Since centers were only there to defend - there was a constant stream of playing players out of position - Kriel was one - but there has been others as well,
Halfbacks
There is a major problem here as well.   I do not think that Jantjies can make up the step from Super Rugby to test rugby and that leaves us with Pollard and Robert du Preez, with potential other players to be considered being Willemse and Du Plessis.  
Pollard has a history of brilliant performance at junior level and his initial test matches were brilliant.   However, he was poor in the 2015 tests - but that could be attributed to the game plan of Meyer - who preferred loosies as stand-in flyhalfs.  
Pollard has been playing very little rugby since 2015 and with proper coaching he may succeed - even though he may have deteriorated bafdly from what he was as a junior player.   We will see tomorrow whether there are any signs of required improvement.  
I have high hopes that the future pair could be Rob du Preez and Willemse - while Du Plessis may also be an option.  We need thinking flyhalfs - not robots.
As to scrummies I do not think we have much to offer.   The scrummies since 2015 was deficient and I personally think that Schreuder, Ivan van Zyl, Venter and Papier are the best potential players we will have to look at in future.   Proper coaching can turn them into top class players.
Loosies
I would sensd the present loosies paxcj\king with the exception of Du Preez.   Louw is seriously deficient and became so over the past three years,   Kolisi is another player with serious difficulties in stepping up from Super Rugby to test level rugby and I think that the serious lack of game time by Vermeulen is having a seriously deficient record of performance in 2016 and 2017.   
I have my doubts about Whiteley as well.   He may also be too light to make the step up effectively and would like to see two speedy loosies with ball sense than the donkeys Meyer and Coetzee favoured,
I think we must look at Du Toit as a number 8 - where he effectively played against the Irish and at havng either Kriel or Kwagga Snith as opesiders with Du Preezx as blindside flank.   
However, there are a string of really young loosies - especially in the Stormers team and I think that the next Super Rugby season may identify others as well,.
Locks
There is a constant attack on De Jager - but he was no weaker than Etzebeth in the Irish test.    Fact is we really do not have problems at lock and I would select the lock pairing from the following:-
Etzebeth, De Jager, Schickerling and  Du Toit
Props
Tightheads -  Louw, Malherbe, CoenieLooseheads - Kitshoff, Beast (even though he is not the player he used to be) and Van Rensburg, Van Rooyen
Hookers
Marx, Marais, Akker and Marutlele.
I name a list of players above - but we will have to see how they pan out in Super Rugby next year.   The selection should be of THINKING layers with ball sense and ball skills.   
HOWEVER, WE NEED PROPER COACHING AND COACHES WHO ARE EXPERIECED IN HA NDLING AND WITH PROPER GAME PLANS - NOT THE RUBBISH THAT WAS CLEAR SINCE 2000.   







    

 Maaik, I don't agree with everything, but this is one of your better write-ups in a while.

  Bosch can also come into the picture and I guess he should be tried at full back.   At flyhalf his small frame would case defense problems.So being defensively frail and frot under the high ball is no problem for a fullback. HahahahahahahahaBosch looks too frail for senior rugby. We shall see.We have a number of good centers but no one will perform in this Bok set up. Rohan, Jan Serfontein, Vorster are looking good. Allende has had the rugby coached out of him and because he is big the dolts thinks all he should to is try and carry the ball up.
I agree the two wings are two small. Coetzee just about makes the grade. A flair scrumhalf like Faf will not fit into dumbass Coetzee's rugby "plan".Yes Du Preez and an on form Pollard are the way to go. Jantjes though it must be noted does not play well under Coetzee. Folks please understand Coetzee and backline play are a problem. One must be fair to the players as well.

A few questions to ask......who are the leaders......who can breach the defensive line.......who will lead the defence. To me those have been our major deficiencies this year. ... This team falls apart in the face of adversity, the Aussie away test being one exception. That tendency is typical of a team without leaders, or said another way, of a team without competitors. ... We had 15% more runs than Ireland .....and only made 70% of the metres. Our players expect to be tackled and don’t resist. The only centre I see with a genuine ability to break tackles is Rohan. Why we haven’t tried him and are using Venter instead is a mystery. What price a Huw Jones. .. Our defence is not putting enough pressure on our opponents.....making tackles behind the game line. Nor do we line up in tackler/fetcher mode. So a team like NZ gets over the advantage line and then secures quick ball. .. I don’t see any serious attempt to address those deficiencies. Nor do I find any answers in the Mitchel/Plumtree teams.

 Can we play both Gelant and Bosch in the same back three? Both are similar size and will get exposed due to lack of defence. 
Gifted players, but the fit in the Damien Mckenzie mould. Even wee Damian had to proof himself over 3 seasons that he can Catch, Defend, Kick and attack. 
The only other player with the same attacking threats is Koble, but he to has been severely expose in Super Rugby for poor kicking and tackling. 
You would have to select a bigger wings, but you could almost perhaps play bosch at 10 and galant at 14 with Nkosi on the wing, but we do need a proper 100kg+ winger with pace in the similar mould as Ioani or Savea to be any threat. The only player that has that size is JP Pietersen but he is hopelessly out of form. 

 Mozart
The problem started when Meyer was the coach,   He made no real plans for the replacement of the older players he preferred.   Last year was a huge disaster after fielding 8 experienced players - none of them was up to standard.
We are indeed in trouble with the absence of test-hardened players - but then they must also perform well and those are absent.  
In the shorter term there is no real answer the only way to go is get the right players in and let them get experience,   The same situation was present in the English team in 1997 and yet by 1999 they were real WC contenders,  
The key is to build up a team - it should have started in 2016 but Coetzee was cluless and started out badly by picking duds for the Springbok team on the basis that the  senior players he picked were duds and even the senior players present in the present squad are more or less the worst players on the field of play.
As I indicated Meyer neglected a virtual generation of players by harking back to the players he knew well and the result is obvious at present.  

Not factual Mike, these are some of the new Boks under HM: . 15. Willie, Goosen . 14/11 Basson, Hendricks . 13/12 Taute, Kriel, JJ Englebrecht, Allende, Serfontein, Mapoe . 10 Jantjies, Boshoff, Pollard . 9 Reinach, Vermaak, Piet van Zyl, Paige . 1/2/3 Koch, Coenie, Nyakane, Cilliers, Liebenburg, Marcel, Redlinhuis, Malherbe . 4/5 Lewis, Stephanie, Lomp, Etzebeth, Juandre Kruger . 6/7/8 Daniels, Coetzee, Vermeulen, Mohoje, Kolisi, Jacques Potgieter, Carr, Whiteley. .. Enough for two full teams. And who never got a chance? Jaco Kriel perhaps.....who else? The problem wasn’t that HM never gave new players a chance. They never succeeded, in part because we never settled on a playing style....in part because they were never a new unit, like our 2004 team....and in part because many of them had fatal flaws the fans simply wouldn’t accept. .. Nonetheless, with good initial performances they could have solidified their places.....Pollard did, Etzebeth did, Willie did.

Mozart
How many tests did the players listed by you played for the Springboks?   None bar Etzebeth  of them played more than 10 tests for the Springboks before the WC came up.    The players in the main was brought in to cover for injured players - some was played out of position as well and then dropped like hot potatoes.
That is not a way to develop a squad for the future.   Take for instance the case of Sam Cane who was groomed to replace McCaw.   By the time McCaw retired Cane already  had 16 test appearances.   The same with other youngsters brought in by Hansen,
However, your list of players brought in by Meyer is worthless because the players virtually all  were there for all the wrong reasons and definitely not to build a squad for the future .
   
 

Afraid many played in more than 10 tests . Steppie 11 starts/9 as reserve . Willie. 27 starts/1 as reserve . Coetzee 19 starts/9 as reserve . Pollard 10 starts/3 as reserve . Vermeulen 29 starts . Hendricks 12 starts . Etzebeth 35 starts/2 as reserve _. Basson 9 starts/2 as reserve . JJ 9 starts/3 as reserve . Lomp 5 starts/7 as reserve . Kolisi 11 as reserve . Coenie 4 starts/11 as reserve . . .

 OK - I was wrong about the number of tests by 11 of the players.   But none of them with the exception of Vermeulen, Etzebeth and Coetzee turned out to be really test level players.   I a, not sure about Vermeulen - his numerous injuries and near to retirement age counts against him at present.       

 My view of Meyer lies on the fence between Moz and Maaik. Would Eben have played so many tests under Meyer if Bakkies did not retire? Same for Vermeulen and the injured Spies? Willie came in for Side Show Bob, not? Jean's injuries forced him to try others in the midfield . Same for Fourie du Preez. If it wasn't for serious injuries to older players, his new capped players would have played even less. I'm all for sticking to your proven test players in matches against top opposition, but the fringe players should have gotten more game time against the softer opponents. 

Noooooooo surely not the fence!

 , Not quite a draadsitter, but I tend to float towards a more ballanced view between old and new, young and old...and flair and solid....watch Beeno's "The Rose" vid and pay attention to the words.