Who was the arcihitect of the Golden Lions

After Saturday the oft advanced theory that Swys de Bruin was the brains behing the Lions seems less plausible. But Ackerman has hardly had a Jake White like effect on Gloucester, now scoring 55 points less than it’s opponents and mired in the bottom half of the Premiership table. Ackerman was underated as a player, but may have been overated as a coach...nothing he ever said went beyond the obvious. .. So who was the ‘brains’ in the outfit. My guess is Whiteley had a lot to do with the team and it’s playing style. In contrast to his coaches he has always made insightful comments and was the clear leader of the team...which wasn’t ever as good in his absence.

Many people have wondered if Ackerman was "the" brain or if he even had a brain. I always said time will tell.....It may be safe to assume at this stage, that the senior players like Jantjies and Whitely learnt the skills from John Mitchell. 
Ackerman was a decent assistant and learnt some of the skills. Swiss would have been affected by losing more key players to the Boks since he has been charge- so next years Super15 should give a more certain answer.

Swiss was a backline player- so I had thought that some of the attacking play was due to him.

 Careful SB  - Mozart hates Mitchell even more than he did Ackerman.   

No really he is world class....he just chooses to coach the Bools out of the goodness of his heart.

 
Good question.

Sometimes you find a subordinate excelling at his tasks ... and yet when you promote him because of it, he suddenly looks lost and out of place.

All I'm saying is that at times promoting someone isn't in the best interest of the team. You lose an excellent worker and gain a poor manager. It's lose lose for all concerned.

Some people's calling is to play a lesser role ... to be in the background so to speak ... to serve and not to lead ... yet the role they play could very well be the heart and soul of the entire team ... one that makes all the difference.

Could this be the case with Swys De Bruin?

Maybe he'll learn as time goes by ... but right now, I'm a worried man.  

True CC. So often you get excellent sales people who get promoted to sales managers and then they fall flat. Excellent artisans often become poor workshop managers. I’ve seen it in the SADF as well where you I have often seen some of the best NCOs becoming average to poor commissioned officers. The flip side is, of course also true. I have seen average NCOs become better officers than many who went straight into the commissioned officers stream.

 The Lions beat us (WP) a few weeks ago at Ellis Park. They lost in the semi against a fairly good WP side at home. Hardly a coach/team defining loss. The returning Boks might have been more disruptive to team dynamics than they added value. Various reasons.

There's one factor in rugby that's a lot more important than technical coaching, game plan or player skills and that's spangees. I think Ackers took a lot of the Lions gees with him and they don't look the same without him.

 Draad
Moizart makes a habit to use one incident in games as career-defining.   In the case above one match is career-defining.
The Lionns team was considerably weaker than the team in Super Rugby.

Nice post CC....I also agree with Urinal’s point.

As long as the captain (Ex Sharkie) is off the field they will be sucking wind.
He is a leader who is a game changer for sure.
The saying is that no one player is the team but one great leader makes the team.
Not knocking Akkers or de Bruin but the guy leading on the field is the guiding light for the players and most times don't get the credit they deserve.
Without him, my vote goes for the Sharks to pull off a win.