John Paul II, and if I remember what I've read correctly, John XXIII never appeared on anyone's papabile lists.
There is some tension: Some would like a short-termer, cince this Pope has carried on so long; but that would mean an elderly Pope, and others are hoping for someone who would not be soon infirmed.
Personally, I think that would be a good idea. While JPII has done many good things, one thing that I do not like is the fact that he has replaced everything in the Church with the "according to JPII" version.
Popes usually create "doctrine" the way judges do, by responding to particular cases; they don't create it the way law professors do, by writing textbooks, as this pope has done with his writings that now seem to be quoted more often than those of any other Catholic writer from the past 2000 years. Even the Rosary was not left untouched by JPII.
I would rather see the next Pope be someone who concentrated on the immediate issues of Church governance and left the theoretical to scholars and saints, doing nothing but review it for orthodoxy. A short-termer would probably have the courage to brave the wolves that have gotten into the Church and attempt to get them out. On the other hand, if the short-termer turned out to be an ally of the wolves, at least his term would be limited. But as you say, this would mean an older man, and I'd be surprised if the Council picks someone who is elderly and infirm looking.