Kearney is not the problem

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

Can't find the browneye icon......damn

 

[Ron Jeremy]

Can't find the browneye icon......damn

No, but I have some good steven carell gifs?

 

[Barry O'Speedwagon]

No, but I have some good steven carell gifs?

Poor man's R. Gervais (definitely slot receiver).

 

[barney gumble]

Pretty well the same with any team whose coach gets sacked.

They play well the following week. "Dead coach bounce". I'd love to see the actual percentage of teams that win following the sacking of their coach - it'd be high!

So I'm not saying BA is the messiah - it's just a strange phenomenon. But I do get angry at all the defensive rhetoric coming from high profile blokes like Sterlo along the lines of "I wonder how Kearney is feeling watching them play like that?"
This is something that you can criticise players for over a short period of time. But over 40+ games the coach needs to have the finger pointed right at him. And to answer Sterlo's question, the point ought to be made that SK should be feeling pretty crap watching them play like that.
Clearly they CAN be coached to play well, he just couldn't do it.

Absolutely spot on.

There were a few commentators who made similar comments to Sterlos. The last 2 weeks are clear proof that Kearney got it wrong trying to get the team to play boring structure that was so unnatural to a bunch of gifted ad lib blokes who just want to throw the ball around and do what comes naturally to them. This was a subject pointed out adnausium throughout the year.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Kearney sure was a f**kwit.

 

[Suitman]

Absolutely spot on.

There were a few commentators who made similar comments to Sterlos. The last 2 weeks are clear proof that Kearney got it wrong trying to get the team to play boring structure that was so unnatural to a bunch of gifted ad lib blokes who just want to throw the ball around and do what comes naturally to them. This was a subject pointed out adnausium throughout the year.

b g,

Can I ask a serious question here as I've been thinking this for a while?
Why, do we think that a certain style of play fits the Eels?
Why do we, as you claim, have a gifted bunch of ad lib players and other teams don't?
I just don't get it. What's so special about our blokes?
Are they any gifted in an "EELS" style of play than any other set of juniors from any other club?

Suity

 

[Someone]

no, its just bullshit people say. regardless if your throwing the ball around or not, to win a footy game you need completion of sets, solid defence and attack that will produce points. chain reaction guys.

everyone needs to get over kearney and stop whinging. its pathetic. move on ffs.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Pretty well the same with any team whose coach gets sacked.

They play well the following week. "Dead coach bounce". I'd love to see the actual percentage of teams that win following the sacking of their coach - it'd be high!

So I'm not saying BA is the messiah - it's just a strange phenomenon. But I do get angry at all the defensive rhetoric coming from high profile blokes like Sterlo along the lines of "I wonder how Kearney is feeling watching them play like that?"
This is something that you can criticise players for over a short period of time. But over 40+ games the coach needs to have the finger pointed right at him. And to answer Sterlo's question, the point ought to be made that SK should be feeling pretty crap watching them play like that.
Clearly they CAN be coached to play well, he just couldn't do it.

Sterlo's saying what anyone else in the game with any clue is saying - these players outright refused to perform for Kearney. Just like they refused to perform for Anderson in 2010 and Hagan in '08.

So while Kearney might be gone, these players and this attitude (Parramattitude?) are still here and they'll be here next year.

If they'll only perform for a new coach or a coach who doesn't put them under pressure they will continue to crumble when it matters most.

We're still a f**king yo-yo team and it makes me sick that we're still chokers who only perform when the pressure is off.

 

[IFR33K]

Sterlo's saying what anyone else in the game with any clue is saying - these players outright refused to perform for Kearney. Just like they refused to perform for Anderson in 2010 and Hagan in '08.

So while Kearney might be gone, these players and this attitude (Parramattitude?) are still here and they'll be here next year.

If they'll only perform for a new coach or a coach who doesn't put them under pressure they will continue to crumble when it matters most.

We're still a f**king yo-yo team and it makes me sick that we're still chokers who only perform when the pressure is off.

Poo give it a f**king rest. SK has no one to blame, but himself. For all his leadership skills, big face and whatever shit you said about him, truth is he was out of his depth.

He was/is an inept coach, with ridiculous game plans, week in week out. He failed to bring out the best in his players.

If you're so sick of the team, why don't f**k off with your mate. FMD you talk some shit.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yeah mate, take it up with Sterlo and the other experts.

 

[IFR33K]

Yeah mate, take it up with Sterlo and the other experts.

I haven't had to put up with sterlo sucking SK's c**k on these forums for 18 months. He's a dud coach and he's gone. Get over it.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The fact is mate, this playing group have the problem, and they're still here. This is why Sterling and Johns and the blokes who know are going on about it.

Unless Kearney was the entire problem, then we've still got a problem at the club. The commentators wouldn't be disgusted at our players without reason.

 

[IFR33K]

This is why Sterling and Johns and the blokes who know are going on about it.

Unless Kearney was the entire problem, then we've still got a problem at the club. The commentators wouldn't be disgusted at our players without reason.

:crazy::crazy:

No, we got rid of the problem. This team should be a lot higher on the ladder. SK was the reason we weren't able to get above last place. He held us back.

 

[bartman]

The fact is mate, this playing group have the problem, and they're still here. This is why Sterling and Johns and the blokes who know are going on about it.

Unless Kearney was the entire problem, then we've still got a problem at the club. The commentators wouldn't be disgusted at our players without reason.

What unsubstantiated piffle! The commentators write because they're paid to write something - no more expert than how we write on here except they get paid for it (on the back of the pulling power of their name, as ex-players).

"This playing group" changes every year, by an average of about 5 players from the top 25 per season. 2008's 11 wins from 24 games is not "refusing to play", 2010's 10 wins from 24 is not refusing to play either. They stand far about the seasons under our most recent ex-coach, performances that are now being shown up by how "this playing group" has started to play once he was heading out the door.

Every club that is not running first could be said to have some problem. It's clear to most that Kearney seems to have been the main problem of the last two seasons. He's in our past now, why can't you move on from all the empty mythmaking? :crazy:

 

[MarkInTheStands]

b g,

Can I ask a serious question here as I've been thinking this for a while?
Why, do we think that a certain style of play fits the Eels?
Why do we, as you claim, have a gifted bunch of ad lib players and other teams don't?
I just don't get it. What's so special about our blokes?
Are they any gifted in an "EELS" style of play than any other set of juniors from any other club?

Suity

I know this was directed at Barney, but do you mind if I take a swing at this.

Since 1999 our side has never consisted of "Monster" forwards, we have some big men with size and a turn of foot, but we have never really had a bloke so big he would run, hit the line and cause a line break all by himself. Being honest I would say half of the competition does not have a player like that.

As such our sides need to play just before or at the line to generate any penetration. That means we need two things, and these things have been spoken about around here for a while. The first is to have more than one player looking like they are going to receive the ball the next to to actually off load on more than one occasion to keep the opposition guessing.

This does two things,

1) it lessens the number of people involved in the inital contact of the tackle

and

2) Keeps those tackling to conventional tackles and not shoulder charges or other types of tackles.

This gives our big, skilled men time to operate, either to "win" the wrestle or to off load. Either of which has obvious positive consequences to the team.

Now if a head coach wants to change that, wants to go for another style of play, I am all for it they are the coach and they have been selected by our duly elected board members to move the club forward. But if you are going to do that, have the monster forwards as part of your roster before you do it.

Because of the size and skill level of our forwards, the best option for Parramatta is to play a open and ad-lib style of football that is unpredictable and hence difficult to defend against.

Now most other clubs go the other way and have a dominate skilled player or two in the middle of the park organising the plays so you don't commit to the forwards because you want blokes to stop player X's next move which again has a two fold affect.

We don't have a dominant half, just yet but we have a bloke that can play when he is given some space and that is what our ad-lib footy provides him.

Just my thoughts.

 

[oldmancraigy]

no, its just bullshit people say. regardless if your throwing the ball around or not, to win a footy game you need completion of sets, solid defence and attack that will produce points. chain reaction guys.

everyone needs to get over kearney and stop whinging. its pathetic. move on ffs.

So true.

However lets remember why I bumped the thread AFTER the broncos game?

Because it was started by a moronic broncos fan who wanted to say that all our players are useless and crap.
Thought we might be able to unite behind our alleged "reserve grade" team and mock the Broncos moron whose team got the pants thrashed off them by "the problem"

 

[Maroubra Eel]

The fact is mate, this playing group have the problem, and they're still here. This is why Sterling and Johns and the blokes who know are going on about it.

Unless Kearney was the entire problem, then we've still got a problem at the club. The commentators wouldn't be disgusted at our players without reason.

He's gone now. The board finally came to their senses, unlike yourself. Get over it.

 

[lingard]

Sterlo's saying what anyone else in the game with any clue is saying - these players outright refused to perform for Kearney. Just like they refused to perform for Anderson in 2010 and Hagan in '08.

So while Kearney might be gone, these players and this attitude (Parramattitude?) are still here and they'll be here next year.

If they'll only perform for a new coach or a coach who doesn't put them under pressure they will continue to crumble when it matters most.

We're still a f**king yo-yo team and it makes me sick that we're still chokers who only perform when the pressure is off.

I think you`ll be proven wrong.

 

[lingard]

The fact is mate, this playing group have the problem, and they're still here. This is why Sterling and Johns and the blokes who know are going on about it.

Unless Kearney was the entire problem, then we've still got a problem at the club. The commentators wouldn't be disgusted at our players without reason.

You`re very gullible. Do you honestly think that any commentator is going to say, "Yes, that`s right; Parramatta are lucky that Stephen Kearney is gone. He wasn`t a very good coach"? Mate, they say the same thing every time a coach is sacked. They said it about Hagan, they said it about Anderson, they said it when Rick Stone left Newcastle and when Brian Smith left Newcastle and when Kevin Moore left Canterbury, etc, etc, etc. It`s a standard line. The media can`t say anything bad about the coach; but to say it was 'the players' fault, is safe, because they aren`t singling out an individual. You do know that, don`t you? :sarcasm:
And please tell me why you think that the whole Parramatta team would just say "Nope, we`re not going to perform for this coach"? They are professional sportsmen. You think they don`t like winning? You think that Tim Mannah and Hayne and Sandow might decide they don`t particularly care about pressing for State of Origin selection this year because they just don`t want to perform for this coach? You think all the young blokes who made the NRL side this year are going to say "f**k it, I`m not going to perform for this coach. F**k my career, I don`t care"? Are you really that naive?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

You obviously didn't see the difference in intensity the team has shown between their best and their worst this year.

It's nothing to do with them 'choosing' to play poorly; when they're put under pressure they don't have any other choice.