BA for another year goes without saying. But if that's not possible then Langley is a credible candidate. Certainly ahead of the likes of macnamara, wane, Rowley etc.

A very good insight from Langley on the clubs latest podcast.

Langley has to be the option if faced with a choice between him or McNamara. But then ANYONE is preferable to McNamara. 
Preference obviously is for Arthur to stay for another twelve months, I think one more year could be massive on the field for us and would really help Langley. 

He seems to speak well Langley but its a big risk him taking over if Arthur goes. I would feel much happier if he could work under Arthur for another year at least.

I wonder whether the compromise might be another year for BA with some kind of release clause trigger. I suspect the majority of the improvements that are now apparent were achieved pre season, and another dose of the same might take us to the next level. That approach might at least give us a flexible plan A and a plan B if required.

A good shout is this. It's likely that there will be a number of NRL opportunities for BA in the near future though, so timing may be against us even for that.  

I'm sure there will be, but the harsh reality from BA's point of view is that (as the Perth job proved) he's not the only coach who's looking for a job. If he was really desperate to get back to the NRL at all costs he could probably easily land a role as an assistant, but maybe he's been top dog too log to countenance that? One thing is for sure, personal stuff aside, he gives every appearance of loving his current job. That makes a difference in any walk of life. 

I think the Saints game underlines why we need at least another year of Arthur, or a top coach who shares his vision, to make sure that the changes of this season really bed in and become part of the culture. An appointment like McNamara could easily see this hard work being undone within 3-6 months of taking over, or even passing the reins to an unproven Langley (see Wellens/Woolf).