2019 Discussion

[herbert henry1908]

You conveniently forget where we were when he got here. Mediocrity, virtually no finals footbally and a busted salary cap.

We have enjoyed three years of semi final football and success in the lower grades. The completion of the academy.

Remember, this is not his coach. It is Dave's mate. A complete and utter incompetent decision by the Board. The same type of decision that left us mired in mediocrity for 40 years.

Gould stayed too long. Most of his early work was good, but the last 3 years has been poor decision wise.

We had better results in the last 3 years because of the early decisions he took, we’ll now possibly reap bad results because of the decisions in recent years.

The decision to bring back Cleary is on the board, but in a way you can’t blame the board for taking the process away from Gould.



The coaching appointments of the last 8 years have been truly abysmal. Not because of the results on the field, they’ve been just ok. But because we didn’t do proper due diligence. All three appointments were head hunted, no interviews, no proper process. We head hunted mediocre coaches, we got mediocre results.

 

[franklin2323]

You conveniently forget where we were when he got here. Mediocrity, virtually no finals footbally and a busted salary cap.

We have enjoyed three years of semi final football and success in the lower grades. The completion of the academy.

Remember, this is not his coach. It is Dave's mate. A complete and utter incompetent decision by the Board. The same type of decision that left us mired in mediocrity for 40 years.

The roster is Gus though. If the board is running it why do we need Gus then?

Gus' media role is busy too so it is impossible to have the same time to spend as he used too

 

[Pomoz]

Gould stayed too long. Most of his early work was good, but the last 3 years has been poor decision wise.

We had better results in the last 3 years because of the early decisions he took, we’ll now possibly reap bad results because of the decisions in recent years.

The decision to bring back Cleary is on the board, but in a way you can’t blame the board for taking the process away from Gould.



The coaching appointments of the last 8 years have been truly abysmal. Not because of the results on the field, they’ve been just ok. But because we didn’t do proper due diligence. All three appointments were head hunted, no interviews, no proper process. We head hunted mediocre coaches, we got mediocre results.

If you want to measure Gus, we have to base it on results not on your opinion of the decisions he has made. I disagree with your assessment of the coaches, although not the process we adopt, I agree that was abysmal (same for the CEO). Others will have other differing opinions from mine and yours. The point is, we should focus on the outcomes not the "how" (except for breaches of ethics, company rules and the law).

Based on outcomes, Gus has done a good job. The last two years (sacking Hook four weeks out and appointing Cleary) the board have taken control of coaching. They equally should be judged on results. So far so bad.

There seems to be a view the cap is badly managed, I'm not sure how we would know that. Again, we should judge this based on results on the field. Injuries do muddy the waters a bit. We couldn't predict that Mansour and Edwards would come back from injury and perform so poorly. As Martie and others have said, they both need time to readjust so we shouldn't be too harsh yet, but how long do we give it? 2 Months?

 

[herbert henry1908]

If you want to measure Gus, we have to base it on results not on your opinion of the decisions he has made. I disagree with your assessment of the coaches, although not the process we adopt, I agree that was abysmal (same for the CEO). Others will have other differing opinions from mine and yours. The point is, we should focus on the outcomes not the "how" (except for breaches of ethics, company rules and the law).

Based on outcomes, Gus has done a good job. The last two years (sacking Hook four weeks out and appointing Cleary) the board have taken control of coaching. They equally should be judged on results. So far so bad.

There seems to be a view the cap is badly managed, I'm not sure how we would know that. Again, we should judge this based on results on the field. Injuries do muddy the waters a bit. We couldn't predict that Mansour and Edwards would come back from injury and perform so poorly. As Martie and others have said, they both need time to readjust so we shouldn't be too harsh yet, but how long do we give it? 2 Months?

I did judge him on results, which is why I specifically said the early decisions he made led to our recent finals appearances.

But I also feel strongly he’s stayed on too long, the recent decision making has been poor. From 5 year deals for Cartwright & Whare, to appointing Griffin & a 29 year old CEO with no sports admin experience.

You can’t look at the outcomes in isolation when they’ve only just been passable. We’re overrating our recent performances based on the fact we have a history of missing the finals. But let’s look at the results more closely. They really aren’t that good.

From 2012-2015 we had a 45% win rate. In that period we had one good season, a preliminary final.

From 2016 - 2018 we improved slightly to a 58% win rate. In all three finals appearances we failed to make the final four, not really improving year on year.

These are, as I described, fairly mediocre results. Slightly above average in recent times.

Yes, the club is in a better position now then when Gus took over. I thank him for that. But the progress has stalled, which is why I say he stayed too long.



I also don’t understand how anyone could see Ivan Cleary & Anthony Griffin as anything but mediocre coaches.

Ivan Cleary has been coaching for 13 seasons, he has a win rate of 47%. He’s made one grand final.

Anthony Griffin has a career win rate of 55%, but against the best teams it’s really quite bad. He’s never coached a team to a grand final, only once been to the final four.


With a better coach I think we could’ve achieved more in the last few years, not a premiership, but definitely some final four appearances.

 

[Abacus]

If you want to measure Gus, we have to base it on results not on your opinion of the decisions he has made. I disagree with your assessment of the coaches, although not the process we adopt, I agree that was abysmal (same for the CEO). Others will have other differing opinions from mine and yours. The point is, we should focus on the outcomes not the "how" (except for breaches of ethics, company rules and the law).

Based on outcomes, Gus has done a good job. The last two years (sacking Hook four weeks out and appointing Cleary) the board have taken control of coaching. They equally should be judged on results. So far so bad.

There seems to be a view the cap is badly managed, I'm not sure how we would know that. Again, we should judge this based on results on the field. Injuries do muddy the waters a bit. We couldn't predict that Mansour and Edwards would come back from injury and perform so poorly. As Martie and others have said, they both need time to readjust so we shouldn't be too harsh yet, but how long do we give it? 2 Months?

The other factor re player performance is strategy. I'm hoping Dave's mate has a progressive fitness program so we're peaking at season end. I'm doubtful, but hoping anyway.

Short of a published listing of player salaries across the NRL, I'm not willing to criticise the club's cap management. We don't know for certain that we're not underspending for a year or 2 to allow additional funds to pursue a star player. We probably aren't, but again I'm hopeful.

If we're criticising Gus, let's at least be accurate with what he was looking to achieve: rebuild the team under Cleary (v1) and Griffin before handing over to Bennett for a serious 2-3 year tilt at a premiership. The question is whether we'd be in this same position under Bennett? Souths say no.

 

[darkbloom]

There is one thing that is completely overlooked when it comes to assessing performance.

The cost.

Whatever has been built, whatever results have been generated - what it cost to get them is important.

In terms of player development, player comfort, building the roster - I guess Gus has done well.

In terms of publicity he has done exceptionally well for the club.

In terms of crowds, sponsorship, membership - 3 of the more important metric - his impact has been but a blimp, or even been negative.

What has been the cost?

Well, the club has invested around $60m in Rugby League in the last 7 years.That is the losses plus the $20m investment in the Academy.

These investment have come directly from asset sales. There is not much left to sell - so, the true legacy of Gus will be seen in the next 5-7years.

I know many people accept the myth that Gus saved the club from going under. It is a myth - the club was pressed, without doubt, but it was never going under.

 

[Pomoz]

You can’t look at the outcomes in isolation when they’ve only just been passable. We’re overrating our recent performances based on the fact we have a history of missing the finals. But let’s look at the results more closely. They really aren’t that good.

When did we last make the semi finals three years in a row? You don't think that counts for anything and I do, we will have to agree to disagree. Griffin got us to the semi finals three times, how is that a poor decision to hire him? This was achieved with one of the youngest teams in the NRL and a spine in pieces and full of rookies. You think that is poor and I disagree.

Gus can't wave a magic wand and get star players to sign with us. As far as star players go, we are just not in the race. Penrith is a backwater and only those looking for a suburban lifestyle will sign with us. We don't have multiple years of success to fall back on. There is nothing to attract them to our club. We have to build from within until the club has the years of success that attracts players who want to be winners. Things like repeatedly making the semi finals and being successful in all the grades.

I think people have forgotten just how bloody ordinary Penrith has been, Regardless of the fact this year looks terrible so far and Gus has made some stinkers (Corey Payne being the worst) that doesn't wipe out what has been achieved. Griffin got results, you may not like them but he was far from being a bad hire. The start to this year has proven that somewhat.

 

[darkbloom]

Regardless of the fact this year looks terrible so far and Gus has made some stinkers (Corey Payne being the worst) that doesn't wipe out what has been achieved. Griffin got results, you may not like them but he was far from being a bad hire. The start to this year has proven that somewhat.

No, Warren Wilson was the worst - by a street.

 

[Pomoz]

There is one thing that is completely overlooked when it comes to assessing performance.

The cost.

Whatever has been built, whatever results have been generated - what it cost to get them is important.

In terms of player development, player comfort, building the roster - I guess Gus has done well.

In terms of publicity he has done exceptionally well for the club.

In terms of crowds, sponsorship, membership - 3 of the more important metric - his impact has been but a blimp, or even been negative.

What has been the cost?

Well, the club has invested around $60m in Rugby League in the last 7 years.That is the losses plus the $20m investment in the Academy.

These investment have come directly from asset sales. There is not much left to sell - so, the true legacy of Gus will be seen in the next 5-7years.

I know many people accept the myth that Gus saved the club from going under. It is a myth - the club was pressed, without doubt, but it was never going under.

Well, how much it cost is not Gus's problem. It is up to the CEO to make sure the club can afford it. Why do you blame Gus for asset sales, he was GM football not head of the club.

I agree, that based on common sense only, selling off the the poker machine management didn't make sense, but I am not in possession of the financial analysis and the board paper prepared to analyse the deal, perhaps you have seen it? But again, why is that Gus's fault, good or bad decision.

 

[darkbloom]

Well, how much it cost is not Gus's problem. It is up to the CEO to make sure the club can afford it. Why do you blame Gus for asset sales, he was GM football not head of the club.

I agree, that based on common sense only, selling off the the poker machine management didn't make sense, but I am not in possession of the financial analysis and the board paper prepared to analyse the deal, perhaps you have seen it? But again, why is that Gus's fault, good or bad decision.

I don't think I blamed Gus for asset sales. Panthers, when they employed Gus knew from previous experience how he spends on football. I blame the board and the CEO for their failure to control him. But make no bones about any of it - Gus was in control - completely.

Re: the poker machines I haven't seen the analysis but I do know that the club management team advised strongly against it. Again not Gus' decision but the need to get hold funds for football is the atmosphere and culture Gus creates, and he does it very very well.

The bottom line in my opinion is that whatever success Gus has ad - and it has been significant - it has paid for in spades - and those areas under his control, where there is a potential financial return on investment have not produced anything to write home about.

 

[franklin2323]

The other factor re player performance is strategy. I'm hoping Dave's mate has a progressive fitness program so we're peaking at season end. I'm doubtful, but hoping anyway.

Short of a published listing of player salaries across the NRL, I'm not willing to criticise the club's cap management. We don't know for certain that we're not underspending for a year or 2 to allow additional funds to pursue a star player. We probably aren't, but again I'm hopeful.

If we're criticising Gus, let's at least be accurate with what he was looking to achieve: rebuild the team under Cleary (v1) and Griffin before handing over to Bennett for a serious 2-3 year tilt at a premiership. The question is whether we'd be in this same position under Bennett? Souths say no.

https://www.nrl.com/news/2018/12/13...ents-public-and-strengthens-contract-process/

We were 4th in TPA's last year. So someone somewhere is getting overs as we are far from a top 4 roster as TPA's show. Not paying minimum is another thing we know.

As to who is getting what no one knows but the cap isn't being used as best it should. That is on Gus

 

[age.s]

It's easy to judge how the cap is managed based on performances. RCG was re-signed as an Origin quality prop. The problem isn't the money he's on, the problem is he's gone way backwards as a player. Who's fault is it that he's barely NRL standard at the moment? Gus? Ivan? Hook? RCG himself? The other holes in our roster (with the arguable exception of hooker) are due to players playing much worse than you would have expected when they were signed (Mansour & Edwards in particular).

But really, the entire team is going busted. We started this season fat, unfit and slow and have lost games we should have won as a result. That has nothing to do with the cap or the roster and everything to do with our off season preparation which (as I understand) Gus was contractually obliged to stay away from.

Bag 4/5 wins in the first 6 rounds and these discussions aren't happening.

 

[Abacus]

It's easy to judge how the cap is managed based on performances. RCG was re-signed as an Origin quality prop. The problem isn't the money he's on, the problem is he's gone way backwards as a player. Who's fault is it that he's barely NRL standard at the moment? Gus? Ivan? Hook? RCG himself? The other holes in our roster (with the arguable exception of hooker) are due to players playing much worse than you would have expected when they were signed (Mansour & Edwards in particular).

But really, the entire team is going busted. We started this season fat, unfit and slow and have lost games we should have won as a result. That has nothing to do with the cap or the roster and everything to do with our off season preparation which (as I understand) Gus was contractually obliged to stay away from.

Bag 4/5 wins in the first 6 rounds and these discussions aren't happening.

Nailed it.

 

[franklin2323]

It's easy to judge how the cap is managed based on performances. RCG was re-signed as an Origin quality prop. The problem isn't the money he's on, the problem is he's gone way backwards as a player. Who's fault is it that he's barely NRL standard at the moment? Gus? Ivan? Hook? RCG himself? The other holes in our roster (with the arguable exception of hooker) are due to players playing much worse than you would have expected when they were signed (Mansour & Edwards in particular).

But really, the entire team is going busted. We started this season fat, unfit and slow and have lost games we should have won as a result. That has nothing to do with the cap or the roster and everything to do with our off season preparation which (as I understand) Gus was contractually obliged to stay away from.

Bag 4/5 wins in the first 6 rounds and these discussions aren't happening.

In your opinion is this roster better than last year?

For me it's not. There was glaring holes overlooked more than likely because like us fans here Gus and co have overhyped the juniors.

 

[TheFrog]

If Griffin was never going to take us the whole way, the same might be said of Gus.

 

[franklin2323]

If Griffin was never going to take us the whole way, the same might be said of Gus.

This. I think he is too focused on the juniors to make the decisions needed to take the next step

 

[Abacus]

In your opinion is this roster better than last year?

For me it's not. There was glaring holes overlooked more than likely because like us fans here Gus and co have overhyped the juniors.

I don't think the roster is monumentally worse than last year's - I think we've kept the strongest elements of our 2018 team (except Peachey) but now have to rely on other depth players.

Individual player form, coaching and collective fitness are definitely having an impact on results so far.

 

[franklin2323]

I don't think the roster is monumentally worse than last year's - I think we've kept the strongest elements of our 2018 team (except Peachey) but now have to rely on other depth players.

Individual player form, coaching and collective fitness are definitely having an impact on results so far.

To an extent I agree but the x factor players. Speed etc can't be coached. i will concede no one could of predicted the quick demise of Mansour etc. Still I don't see us with a Top 4 roster. Despite spending more than 3 teams. And Storm and NQ would have far less TPA's with Slater and JT going. So to me somewhere along the line something has gone wrong

 

[TheFrog]

In your opinion is this roster better than last year?

We are down 4 quality first graders. A prop, a hooker, a utility and a bench forward, who's now starting elsewhere. None of them have been adequately replaced. In addition we have three players returning from traumatic injuries who haven't fully recovered.

 

[franklin2323]

We are down 4 quality first graders. A prop, a hooker, a utility and a bench forward, who's now starting elsewhere. None of them have been adequately replaced. In addition we have three players returning from traumatic injuries who haven't fully recovered.

I'd agree with that. So if roster is fringe top 8. We are using TPA's and no cap space... Then surely we haven't managed the cap properly