Best/worst positions for depth in the NRL

[Red Bear]

Been thinking a bit about this lately with the money the likes of Tedesco are being offered.

I think fullback must be the position with the best depth around. Notwithstanding current injuries to Inglis, Hayne, Coote and Hoppa I'd say every side bar Newcastle has a high quality player at fullback. Given you could probably choose between about 6 players for Australia if fit (Slater, Inglis, Boyd, Hayne, Moylan, Tedesco). Gordon is pretty solid and Hoppa is reasonable, if not top class, so maybe they wouldn't fit the high quality bracket either, but 13/16 points to very good players all over. Storm even have Munster as their back up.

Does this mean it's not worth splashing money on them? A bad fullback really is a liability, but it seems like you should be able to find one of good quality and save your money for elsewhere.

On the other hand, I can't really recall the centre position being this weak in a while. Some really high quality ones have retired recently (Lyon, Hodges, Matai with a few others in the years previous). There just isn't a heap of quality there at present. And again, you look at rep selections, Dugan is consistently getting selected - he's a strong footballer but he can't pass particularly well. Most NSW options outside Jennings seem to be fulbacks moved there (Hayne, Dugan) or a guy like Jack Bird who will end up at lock/5/8 long term. Qld have guys like Chambers, O'Neil who are solid but not outstanding. Leilua and Croker are good.

These things change over time, but do you think this is just a product of how the game is played at present? Fullback, along with hooker, is one of the two players who seem to play both sides of the field (good halves do as well, but for the most part teams run one on one side, one on the other). They also get a heap more space than most players, which makes it slightly eaier to excel. Whereas any good centre ends up at fullback (Inglis for example) or if they are a bit bigger in the back row.

Is there other positions as light on as centre? None spring to my mind

 

[wibble]

Obviously it's to do with touches of the ball (and tackles made).

A centre doesn't really get to touch the ball often, and doesn't have to make that many tackles (of course, the ones they have to make are crucial).

Teams want to bring the players with most skill into the middle, to get the ball more often. It makes you wonder what modern teams would make of greats like Meninga, Rogers, and Renouf. (Mal to 2nd row, other two to fullback?)

 

[macavity]

Been thinking a bit about this lately with the money the likes of Tedesco are being offered.

I think fullback must be the position with the best depth around. Notwithstanding current injuries to Inglis, Hayne, Coote and Hoppa I'd say every side bar Newcastle has a high quality player at fullback. Given you could probably choose between about 6 players for Australia if fit (Slater, Inglis, Boyd, Hayne, Moylan, Tedesco). Gordon is pretty solid and Hoppa is reasonable, if not top class, so maybe they wouldn't fit the high quality bracket either, but 13/16 points to very good players all over. Storm even have Munster as their back up.

Does this mean it's not worth splashing money on them? A bad fullback really is a liability, but it seems like you should be able to find one of good quality and save your money for elsewhere.

On the other hand, I can't really recall the centre position being this weak in a while. Some really high quality ones have retired recently (Lyon, Hodges, Matai with a few others in the years previous). There just isn't a heap of quality there at present. And again, you look at rep selections, Dugan is consistently getting selected - he's a strong footballer but he can't pass particularly well. Most NSW options outside Jennings seem to be fulbacks moved there (Hayne, Dugan) or a guy like Jack Bird who will end up at lock/5/8 long term. Qld have guys like Chambers, O'Neil who are solid but not outstanding. Leilua and Croker are good.

These things change over time, but do you think this is just a product of how the game is played at present? Fullback, along with hooker, is one of the two players who seem to play both sides of the field (good halves do as well, but for the most part teams run one on one side, one on the other). They also get a heap more space than most players, which makes it slightly eaier to excel. Whereas any good centre ends up at fullback (Inglis for example) or if they are a bit bigger in the back row.

Is there other positions as light on as centre? None spring to my mind

Using Newcastle as a measuring stick is a bit rich. We have a passable back row. That's it.

 

[Nightward]

At the Broncos we have a million backs and can fill fullback, wing, and centre slots at the drop of a hat. Halves we are light on, prop-forwards even more so.

At the Australian level I think Centre is fine. Wing is really the odd position out, most Australian wingers are actually centres or fullbacks who are pushed out of position. We don't select many specialty wingers any more for whatever reason.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

Qld have guys like Chambers, O'Neil who are solid but not outstanding. Leilua and Croker are good.

You need to swap the final words of these 2 sentences.

 

[RazorRam0n]

the fullback is more influential to the outcome of a match than a centre or a winger.

most football players coming through the grades can play any position. the clubs dictate their better players fill the middle positions before edge.

it's that simple

 

[Tommy Smith]

Hooker is pretty light on for talent imo.

It seems to be the hardest position to develop youngsters in as you don't see many come through.

This makes Brailey all the more exceptional and one of the most valuable players in the NRL when you factor in his age.

 

[RazorRam0n]

Hooker is pretty light on for talent imo.

It seems to be the hardest position to develop youngsters in as you don't see many come through.

This makes Brailey all the more exceptional and one of the most valuable players in the NRL when you factor in his age.

the wrestle has changed this.

the juggling act is getting a bloke who can deliver fast service without risking a slow play the ball whenever they dart.

dummy halves don't run anywhere near as much as they used to.

 

[Rabbit toes]

Hooker is pretty light on for talent imo.

It seems to be the hardest position to develop youngsters in as you don't see many come through.

This makes Brailey all the more exceptional and one of the most valuable players in the NRL when you factor in his age.

Souths tend to have a great amount of Jnr hookers come through,Luke, Falloon, Peats, mcinnes.. we develop them, nurture them then sign Robbie Farah and Damien f**king cook.

So to summarise
Lol@souffs

 

[davi]

At the Broncos we have a million backs and can fill fullback, wing, and centre slots at the drop of a hat. Halves we are light on, prop-forwards even more so.

At the Australian level I think Centre is fine. Wing is really the odd position out, most Australian wingers are actually centres or fullbacks who are pushed out of position. We don't select many specialty wingers any more for whatever reason.

Any quality winger seems to be the complaint that they should be moved to a different position to get more involved with the attack. Valantine Holmes, Corey Oates, and Brett Morris are obvious examples which is why I think the depth at wing is probably viewed more weaker then it is.

 

[davi]

In terms of a team depth I know the Titans are viewed as one of the weakest in the comp. There feeder club apparently hasn't won a game this season. When they lose prominent players it really hurts them as a team because their light on stock.

 

[wibble]

Hooker is pretty light on for talent imo.

It seems to be the hardest position to develop youngsters in as you don't see many come through.

This makes Brailey all the more exceptional and one of the most valuable players in the NRL when you factor in his age.

Keep your filthy Salary Sombrero away from him !

 

[mxlegend99]

Best: Fullback. Easily
Worst: Centre or Halves

NSW last year had fullbacks playing centre and 5/8th because those players out of position are still better than most of the alternatives. I think most teams have 2 or 3 players capable of being NRL quality fullbacks.

Those players often end up elsewhere because they are too good not to be there. You don't see that in the halves much... you see the opposite really. Average halves get given millions of chances because coaches have no faith in the alternatives.

 

[Bronco18]

dummy halves don't run anywhere near as much as they used to.

Part of that is a the refs giving the markers a wider ambit than they used to.

More on topic, I felt last year there was a real lack of depth in Aus's front row stocks. NSW seem to have a decent amount coming through now that Boyd, Paulo and Vaughn have kicked on.

Backrow is up there with fullbacks for good depth.