Burgess barrage

[Travitoh]

After Luke announced he was leaving we re-signed Cam McInnes to a new deal as we saw him as our next first grade hooker at the time. He was already being groomed to take over.

 

[souths_reborn]

Walker, Stewart, Luke, McQueen, grant.
We lost those players. We lost Luke earlier in the year I know, but we never hit the market for a suitable replacement. I know it was before Sam quit union, but the rumblings that Sam wanted out had already started. Stewart was released about 2 weeks before Sam quit union, I believe we originally thought we didn't have to release anyone, until we had to dump McQueen as grant quickly and at half-outcroP. The Walker Thing may have had other factors involved, but the timing wasn't right. We were struggling to get Sam signed and I believe that that had a factor. These were many other centres available at the time to replace him, but because we had the Sam drama we got Nielsen instead.
That's 5 good players gone, either gone completely or replaced by an inferior cheaper option (cook, nielsen) to make sam fit.
The rationale was that Sam offered something that no other forward can, that that X factor alone would make up for having razor thin forward depth because he'd somehow make other players like the twins and tyrrell/Clark lift. Sam hasn't had that extra bit, that X Factor. We get the old Sam occasionally, we had it for about 10 minutes in the tigers game, but what Sam has provided over the last season and a bit can be done by about 25 other lock/props. While that's good, it's not what we signed a huge contract and released all those players for.

I think there are a number of things that you are overlooking in your assessment of resigning Sam Burgess and the management of our roster. First and foremost, your opinions regarding the replacing of the players we let go are only valid on the assumption that better players were available to be signed. For instance, you refer to us not going out and buying a world class hooker but what hookers were available at the time that would have been an upgrade on McInnes? Hooker is such a key position that all the good ones are often snapped up and retained on long term contracts. I mean there are still clubs right now searching for a top hooker. Saying we should have not resigned Burgess to pursue other players is all good in theory but a lot goes into the club pursuing targets, including the player themselves wanting to come to the club.

Secondly, the players we let go were either past their prime or out of form. For example, Glenn Stewart should never have been signed in the first place because of his injury history and the fact that he was a long serving player at Manly. Chris McQueen had not played a good game for the club since 2013 and had to be dropped during the 2015 season. Tim Grant did nothing special during the one season was at the club and is still searching for his form that saw him represent NSW. The Dylan Walker situation had nothing to do with Sam Burgess regardless of how dubious it may look. Apparently, the club was having numerous problems with the player but the club kept in quiet; the drugs saga with Aaron Gray was the last straw. You mention that we had to bring in cheaper options to replace the departing players who aren't as good; my assessment of that is the players we brought in have performed no worse that ones we let go. If anything, they have performed better - Damien Cook being the best example.

In terms of Sam's performances, I do agree that he was hit and miss for much of last year. I got the feeling that his neck injury may have shaken him up a bit because, if you remember, he was magnificent in our first couple of games against the Roosters and the Knights before the incident occurred. In saying that, he was still easily our best forward and better than most other forwards going around and I still maintain that we were and still are a much better team with him than without him. Also, you seem to overlook the fact that he returned to his best form in the last 4-5 games of the season when we found our form and started winning. I still regard his performance against the Storm in Melbourne, where we got done in extra time, as arguably his finest ever game!

In short, the problems of our club have nothing to do with Sam Burgess or signing alternative players. I do agree the hooking role was a massive concern for us but that was down to Maguire persisting with McInnes for so long. We had a good replacement in the form of Cook and its clear to anyone who has watched even 30 seconds of our games that we are a much better side with him in at hooker. Other reasons for our demise include shocking completion rates, poor defence and penalties conceded at both crucial times and in dangerous areas of the field. In particular, our ball handling was a massive concern with the Burgess twins being the main culprits. There is no way that you can win a game when you are only completing 68% of your sets. Similarly, the defence was a problem but I thought that was more the result of attitude and handling errors/penalties than a lack of quality in the team. Hence, its easy to say that we would have been better off signing better players but once you examine the reasons why we were losing, it becomes clear that the problems within the team had nothing to do with the quality of the players.

 

[callmack1]

I think there are a number of things that you are overlooking in your assessment of resigning Sam Burgess and the management of our roster. First and foremost, your opinions regarding the replacing of the players we let go are only valid on the assumption that better players were available to be signed. For instance, you refer to us not going out and buying a world class hooker but what hookers were available at the time that would have been an upgrade on McInnes? Hooker is such a key position that all the good ones are often snapped up and retained on long term contracts. I mean there are still clubs right now searching for a top hooker. Saying we should have not resigned Burgess to pursue other players is all good in theory but a lot goes into the club pursuing targets, including the player themselves wanting to come to the club.

Secondly, the players we let go were either past their prime or out of form. For example, Glenn Stewart should never have been signed in the first place because of his injury history and the fact that he was a long serving player at Manly. Chris McQueen had not played a good game for the club since 2013 and had to be dropped during the 2015 season. Tim Grant did nothing special during the one season was at the club and is still searching for his form that saw him represent NSW. The Dylan Walker situation had nothing to do with Sam Burgess regardless of how dubious it may look. Apparently, the club was having numerous problems with the player but the club kept in quiet; the drugs saga with Aaron Gray was the last straw. You mention that we had to bring in cheaper options to replace the departing players who aren't as good; my assessment of that is the players we brought in have performed no worse that ones we let go. If anything, they have performed better - Damien Cook being the best example.

In terms of Sam's performances, I do agree that he was hit and miss for much of last year. I got the feeling that his neck injury may have shaken him up a bit because, if you remember, he was magnificent in our first couple of games against the Roosters and the Knights before the incident occurred. In saying that, he was still easily our best forward and better than most other forwards going around and I still maintain that we were and still are a much better team with him than without him. Also, you seem to overlook the fact that he returned to his best form in the last 4-5 games of the season when we found our form and started winning. I still regard his performance against the Storm in Melbourne, where we got done in extra time, as arguably his finest ever game!

In short, the problems of our club have nothing to do with Sam Burgess or signing alternative players. I do agree the hooking role was a massive concern for us but that was down to Maguire persisting with McInnes for so long. We had a good replacement in the form of Cook and its clear to anyone who has watched even 30 seconds of our games that we are a much better side with him in at hooker. Other reasons for our demise include shocking completion rates, poor defence and penalties conceded at both crucial times and in dangerous areas of the field. In particular, our ball handling was a massive concern with the Burgess twins being the main culprits. There is no way that you can win a game when you are only completing 68% of your sets. Similarly, the defence was a problem but I thought that was more the result of attitude and handling errors/penalties than a lack of quality in the team. Hence, its easy to say that we would have been better off signing better players but once you examine the reasons why we were losing, it becomes clear that the problems within the team had nothing to do with the quality of the players.

Truth telling at it's absolute finest!!

 

[Pommy]

Glen Stewart signed for Catalans in September 2015 so he was hardly let go for Sam. Him and Madge hated each other plus he's always seemed a bit of a tosser, did he do a great deal in 2015 to worry about his loss? I can't remember a single thing he did from memory.
Dylan's Walker by all accounts was already heading to Manly for 2017 and he acted like a total child in the wake of his OD, that was in comparison to Grey taking it on the chin and putting in the hard work to make a great start to 2016. I wasn't sad to see him leave, another tosser.
Does anyone know how much Sam actually makes? There were some crazy figures quoted at the time which seem to have been debunked more recently.
Comparing his wages to that of JT doesn't really make any sense when you consider wages have seen inflation since JT penned his deal. Compare him to DCE who resigned at Manly not long before Sams return and it looks like we got him a bargain.

 

[callmack1]

Glen Stewart signed for Catalans in September 2015 so he was hardly let go for Sam. Him and Madge hated each other plus he's always seemed a bit of a tosser, did he do a great deal in 2015 to worry about his loss? I can't remember a single thing he did from memory.

I remember his tackling technique and his shiny head but that's about it.

 

[souths_reborn]

Glen Stewart signed for Catalans in September 2015 so he was hardly let go for Sam. Him and Madge hated each other plus he's always seemed a bit of a tosser, did he do a great deal in 2015 to worry about his loss? I can't remember a single thing he did from memory.
Dylan's Walker by all accounts was already heading to Manly for 2017 and he acted like a total child in the wake of his OD, that was in comparison to Grey taking it on the chin and putting in the hard work to make a great start to 2016. I wasn't sad to see him leave, another tosser.
Does anyone know how much Sam actually makes? There were some crazy figures quoted at the time which seem to have been debunked more recently.
Comparing his wages to that of JT doesn't really make any sense when you consider wages have seen inflation since JT penned his deal. Compare him to DCE who resigned at Manly not long before Sams return and it looks like we got him a bargain.

From memory we are only paying Sam $800k under the salary cap; the other $400k of his $1.2million salary comes from 3rd party deals.

 

[alien]

And now we still have no decent hooker

Lol, except for Farah and Cook!

 

[alien]

Lets be honest Sam Burgess for one reason or another is not the same player he was in 2014. Not sure he ever will be again.

My opinion for a while has been that he plays too many minutes and is too buggered to make as many big hits, and too buggered to break the line to score tries like he used to. Maybe he should be moved to prop where he would be a part of the prop rotation, and play less minutes, so he would be more effective. If this happens then a forward who can play most (or all) of the game, who can make lots of tackles, would be moved to lock.

 

[doyen]

My opinion for a while has been that he plays too many minutes and is too buggered to make as many big hits and breaking the line as much to score tries. Maybe he should be moved to prop where he would be apart of the prop rotation, and play less minutes.

This is the best way to go-----he needs to lead the the way in the engine-room;setting the example for the other forwards ala what Woods does at the Tiges!!! As you say,he can have a breather!

 

[souths_reborn]

My opinion for a while has been that he plays too many minutes and is too buggered to make as many big hits, and too buggered to break the line to score tries like he used to. Maybe he should be moved to prop where he would be a part of the prop rotation, and play less minutes, so he would be more effective. If this happens then a forward who can play most (or all) of the game, who can make lots of tackles, would be moved to lock.

Playing him at prop isn't going to make much of a difference in terms of reducing his fatigue; the only thing playing him at prop will do is narrow his channel on the field see him play directly up the middle more. That's not maximising his potential in my opinion. Playing him at lock allows him to drift into wider areas, run more dynamic lines and take on smaller men in the defensive - all of which make him a more daunting prospect. In saying that, there is no reason why Madge can't take him off at lock; there is no rule that says your lock has to play the full 80.

 

[alien]

Playing him at prop isn't going to make much of a difference in terms of reducing his fatigue; the only thing playing him at prop will do is narrow his channel on the field see him play directly up the middle more. That's not maximising his potential in my opinion. Playing him at lock allows him to drift into wider areas, run more dynamic lines and take on smaller men in the defensive - all of which make him a more daunting prospect. In saying that, there is no reason why Madge can't take him off at lock; there is no rule that says your lock has to play the full 80.

Yeah but the lock might be expected to play 80 minutes because only 8 interchanges are allowed, and the prop rotation uses up 4 interchanges, 2 might be saved for injuries, and 1 or both of the second rowers might need a rest.

 

[Rabbits20]

From memory we are only paying Sam $800k under the salary cap; the other $400k of his $1.2million salary comes from 3rd party deals.

Correct.

 

[Rabbits20]

Lol, except for Farah and Cook!

You tell him alien!!!!!

 

[Rabbits20]

My opinion for a while has been that he plays too many minutes and is too buggered to make as many big hits, and too buggered to break the line to score tries like he used to. Maybe he should be moved to prop where he would be a part of the prop rotation, and play less minutes, so he would be more effective. If this happens then a forward who can play most (or all) of the game, who can make lots of tackles, would be moved to lock.

Problem is we don't have anyone good enough for lock over Sam.

At prop Sam can't roam around as much which is a problem and makes him less dangerous.

 

[Rabbits20]

Playing him at prop isn't going to make much of a difference in terms of reducing his fatigue; the only thing playing him at prop will do is narrow his channel on the field see him play directly up the middle more. That's not maximising his potential in my opinion. Playing him at lock allows him to drift into wider areas, run more dynamic lines and take on smaller men in the defensive - all of which make him a more daunting prospect. In saying that, there is no reason why Madge can't take him off at lock; there is no rule that says your lock has to play the full 80.

He's nailed it this guy.

 

[doyen]

He's nailed it this guy.

The trouble with that theory is that the other players up front aren't able to provide the slightest bit of authority for Sam to roll around like a loose cannon!! In fact,without Sam up front & leading the way we will basically be a laughing stock!! We will need to get on top of the Manly forwards & I believe we can do that if Sam throws his weight around as a true enforcer!!

 

[foreverinourshadow]

After Luke announced he was leaving we re-signed Cam McInnes to a new deal as we saw him as our next first grade hooker at the time. He was already being groomed to take over.

mcinnes is a dud are you all blind....Shadow...

 

[Souths Till I Die]

Yeah but the lock might be expected to play 80 minutes because only 8 interchanges are allowed, and the prop rotation uses up 4 interchanges, 2 might be saved for injuries, and 1 or both of the second rowers might need a rest.

A lot of second rowers play the full 80 now you have to be very athletic as well as strong to play in the second row in modern nrl. If Sutton or turner can't play 80 I know Crichton can. I think Sutton should be coming off the bench. He is getting old now.

 

[alien]

A lot of second rowers play the full 80 now you have to be very athletic as well as strong to play in the second row in modern nrl. If Sutton or turner can't play 80 I know Crichton can. I think Sutton should be coming off the bench. He is getting old now.

I reckon Crichton should be starting in the second row instead of Turner.

 

[Travitoh]

mcinnes is a dud are you all blind....Shadow...

That isn't how it was viewed at the time though.