Do coaches make a difference

[Shorty]

Yes they do, having great players is not the same as having a great team.
It's very difficult to manage players and get it right.
Cows never win a premiership without Paul Green.

I do think if a coach was rubbish at one club...its likely he'll be a dud at the next.
We seem to recycle coaches and some of them aren't ever very good.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

His first year at the Eels the team just avoided the spoon in round 26 by beating the Titans.... the following year, when he was relieved of his post about a month out from the end of the season the team finished with the spoon.... In his first year at the Warriors they've win the same number of games as the Titans and Tigers and just 2 more than the wooden spooning Knights....

He has been given ample opportunity to learn his craft, he has assisted Bellamy and Bennett but I just think he isn't up to it.

Kearney's definitely not up to it, but what's scary as a Kiwi is Kidwell is 3 times as bad. He's an embarrassment.

Coaches make a big difference, but not if the players all of a sudden forget how to catch a ball.

 

[WaznTheGreat]

Coming from the person who thinks BA is a useless coach?? What a total dickhead you are.

You're like the only person on this entire forum who is too dumb to know when im being serious and when im trolling,everyone else is smart enough,low IQ peasant.

 

[forward pass]

You're like the only person on this entire forum who is too dumb to know when im being serious and when im trolling,everyone else is smart enough,low IQ peasant.

Oh I see - I thought you really didn't think much of BA - but you were taking the piss. You think the world of him.

My apologies.

 

[Tronald Crump]

Of course good coaches make a difference. How do think Darius Boyd keeps getting picked.

 

[Lemon Squash]

Yeah brah they do

Mitchell Moses is like 100 times better player now under Brad Arthur than he was at the Tigers,it literally took Brad Arthur only one week to teach Moses how to tackle.

It's been almost as an impressive turnaround of Tom Melbourne under Waller.

 

[Sphagnum]

It's been almost as an impressive turnaround of Tom Melbourne under Waller.

That's the kiss of death right there. If you've been compared to Tom Melbourne the best you can do is finish second.

Well done, mate.

 

[Lemon Squash]

That's the kiss of death right there. If you've been compared to Tom Melbourne the best you can do is finish second.

Well done, mate.

Tom Melbourne will win the Epsom hands and heels

 

[Sphagnum]

Tom Melbourne will win the Epsom hands and heels

You're gonna end up with egg tart on your face making predictions like that.

 

[Lemon Squash]

You're gonna end up with egg tart on your face making predictions like that.

I see what you did there

 

[dannyt]

The Warriors had a reasonable roster this year, not great, the forwards were obviously weak, but there's some reasonable young talent. But every single player under Kearney has gone backwards in 2017. We now have players who can't pass, tackle or know where to stand on the field in defense OR on attack. We have the best completion rate in the comp (or maybe 2nd) because our attack strategy is for the backs to take all the hitups until our forwards recover from the effort of getting back onside before they slowly trundle up to the defense and then fall over. Rinse and repeat. Defence? A staggered line with lots of holes. High five the opposition on the way past or just stand in stunned admiration as they stroll past. Penalties in the back end of sets are a must. Discipline is for winners, we'll have none of that here!
Top coaching is like spinning plates. Get the team well drilled and then add little tweaks here and there. Crappy coaching, REALLY shambollic stuff, is recognising the natural abilities of the players in a squad and then making sure your strategy caters for none of that whatsoever.

Substitute "Dragons" for "Warriors" and "McGregor" for "Kearney" and your statements are still correct, except for the bit about the forwards.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Looking at the rosters for the Raiders and the Warriors, they should at least be making the 8.

The question of the value of good coaches is worth asking, how did these 2 teams in particular not win enough games to contest at the end of the season. Perhaps it underlines the real worth of Bellamy and perhaps Arthur and others.

I don't need to look at the current Raiders and Warriors rosters. I'll refer you to the 1966 and 1967 Roosters to answer your question.

In 1966, the Roosters, then coached by an Englishman named Bert Holcroft,lost every game that season. Jack Gibson was appointed the Roosters coach for 1967 and, with pretty much the same roster as the 1966 side (and any additions were not big name stars either), took the Roosters to a 4th place finish and the semi finals.

 

[Silent Knight]

Of course they do. Sid Foggs have been the official carrier for the Newcastle Knights for 20 years. Their coaches are first class in terms of comfort, reliability and style. Call Sid Foggs today.

 

[hineyrulz]

Tom Melbourne will win the Epsom hands and heels

The Hill stakes is at his mercy.

 

[hineyrulz]

of course they make a difference...

If Bellamy or Bennett are coaching the Raiders they make top 4 and warriors probably make 8.

Big f**king deal, how many Texta's would they have though???

 

[Grapple]

It's not a question of whether or not coaches have an influence or make a difference, it's the question of what exactly their role is or should be.

I think most fans and even clubs buy into the ridiculous fact that the coach is the one most accountable, and even if the clubs don't believe that, they usually save face by changing coaches.
In a healthy organisation a coach can step out of the system without too much disturbance. There are good examples of this in other sports, Luke Walton with The Golden State Warriors, being one.

Does anyone here really think Bellamy leaving for a couple weeks would suddenly result in Melbourne losing or dismantling into some sort of Warriors type mess? (Of course long term absence is different - take Des Hasler for example, he's there, but not there.) Even with the absence of players like Cooper Cronk for example doesn't automatically mean the team will collapse. So Brodie Croft comes in and kills it.... just proves the point that their organisation is doing the right thing.

The sooner people stop buying into this myth and individual responsibility means fair accountability then you'll have greater club success, otherwise you'll just have more of the same - high coach turn over, constant player transfer, shorter contracts etc....

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

We've seen Bellamys ability coaching against instead of with Smith, Slater and Cronk....

Just saying.

 

[Rabbit toes]

Warriors have a meh roster. People get blinded because of the spine, but that's like a Ferrari that only looks good until you try to drive it and find it has no engine.

There's more going on at the Warriors than a coach could fix in a single season. Kearney ain't the answer, he's far from being the only problem.

How do you try to drive a Ferrari with no engine?
Asking for a friend

 

[SBD82]

We've seen Bellamys ability coaching against instead of with Smith, Slater and Cronk....

Just saying.

I think bellamys biggest strength is the long term development of players. A big part of that is the players becoming accustomed to his structures, improving the skills necessary to their role, and understanding his expectations. SOO provides very limited (if any) scope to implement these things.

If Bellamy sticks around following the departures of smith and slater, then I think we will have more evidence either way.

I believe that if he stays he will continue to develop players and have success. I could be very wrong.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

I think bellamys biggest strength is the long term development of players. A big part of that is the players becoming accustomed to his structures, improving the skills necessary to their role, and understanding his expectations. SOO provides very limited (if any) scope to implement these things.

If Bellamy sticks around following the departures of smith and slater, then I think we will have more evidence either way.

I believe that if he stays he will continue to develop players and have success. I could be very wrong.

Agreed it's a very small sample, but the think that Smiths, Slaters and Cronks grow on trees is just weird.
We'll see over time if he stays after the 3 retire.