Daily Telegraph: Feleti Mateo launches Eel attack

[Poupou Escobar]

You could say the same for Hayne this year though.

Not really. Hayne came third in the NRL for LBAs which shows there's nothing wrong with him throwing flat passes - it's certainly less risky than offloads in traffic.

Ironically Mateo's best season for us was 2008 when he was playing 5'8th most of the year. Even though we missed the finals he practcially carried us that year, he was far and away our best player.

That's just the thing.

If Mateo's your number one playmaker it means your team is shit. Offloading in traffic isn't the same as a playmaker committing defenders at the line and finding a runner. It's a lot more risky.

You also don't want back rowers being your dominant playmakers on the edge because they lack that easy short option when nothing's on - the edge forward they should be dumping the ball off to isn't there because he is that edge forward.

That's why our attack was so useless in the late 90s when Dymock and Smith were running the show. Great players the pair of them; but they shouldn't have been the primary playmakers.

That final try last night was due to Johnson being good enough to use Mateo as a decoy. If it had been at Parra, whoever our useless half was on that side would either have given Mateo early ball with nothing on, or worse, Mateo would have been at first receiver with the half outside him.

Either way, Mateo (and the Warriors) have been so good in attack this year because Feleti hasn't been their main playmaker. In fact, early in the year when they sucked it was because Cleary was still trying to get his money's worth out of Mateo by making him the focus of the attack.

Which has been proven at two clubs now not to work.

 

[Tony Bongo]

Feleti didn't do much different to when he was here.

The difference is because the Warriors have good halves, Feleti doesn't feel the need to pass so much and so he doesn't make as many errors.

As for last night, he's lucky his shit defence didn't cost them, because he missed 5 tackles against the Tigers and 7 tackles against the Broncos.

He's a good fit for the Warriors but he didn't fit in here, and because he's gone we were able to sign a halfback.

So both clubs are happy. I certainly am and you should be too.

I don't think he would have cost us Sandow at all. I think the alternative has probably equated to the Tonga brothers tops. I personally would have Feleti any day of the week over those two and letting him go is one of our clubs biggest errors in recent times (no matter who you chose to blame). There is no denying that without Feleti the Warriors would not have been playing next week and I would go far as to say they would have even been lucky to even make the eight.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I don't think he would have cost us Sandow at all. I think the alternative has probably equated to the Tonga brothers tops.

The point is he would have cost us someone of the same value.

Whether that's Sandow, Hayne or two quality first graders, Mateo wasn't worth (to us) what he was asking for.

I personally would have Feleti any day of the week over those two and letting him go is one of our clubs biggest errors in recent times (no matter who you chose to blame).

He's an incomplete player no matter where you use him, and whether it's his shit defence, lack of endurance, brain explosions or price, he'll cost any team that signs him.

He's just lucky the Warriors have a good enough team without him that he can come in and add something, while at the same time they're able to cover for his defensive weaknesses (most of the time).

There is no denying that without Feleti the Warriors would not have been playing next week and I would go far as to say they would have even been lucky to even make the eight.

Maybe, maybe not. What matters to our club though, is that in our last three years with him at the club we missed the finals twice - we couldn't rely on him.

Feleti had his chance at Parra and he failed. What he does at the Warriors has got nothing to do with us.

 

[spartan2153]

The point is he would have cost us someone of the same value.

Whether that's Sandow, Hayne or two quality first graders, Mateo wasn't worth (to us) what he was asking for.



He's an incomplete player no matter where you use him, and whether it's his shit defence, lack of endurance, brain explosions or price, he'll cost any team that signs him.

He's just lucky the Warriors have a good enough team without him that he can come in and add something, while at the same time they're able to cover for his defensive weaknesses (most of the time).



Maybe, maybe not. What matters to our club though, is that in our last three years with him at the club we missed the finals twice - we couldn't rely on him.

Feleti had his chance at Parra and he failed. What he does at the Warriors has got nothing to do with us.

Lol

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Fact is Mateo played a major role in getting the Warriors to the GF this year.

In 2009 he played a major role in the Eels getting to the GF too.

He is worth every cent.

 

[Bigfella]

Poo poo everybody costs you somebody of the same value don't they?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Poo poo everybody costs you somebody of the same value don't they?

That's right.

Which is why you don't spend your big money at less important positions, unless you can manage to cover all the most important spots on the cheap. Like the Warriors have done.

It's not just Mateo that would have cost us Sandow (or Hayne down the track) - Hindy and Poore are almost certainly on too much money and are both contributing to why we had such a shit side this year.

Put shit on Bellamy all you want, but he's shown how to allocate a salary cap. He kept Smith, Cronk and Slater at any cost, while allowing non-spine players Folau, Inglis and Blair to leave.

You don't keep players just because they're the best at their position. Because they can cost you somebody more important. This is why we had to let Mateo go.

 

[Eels Dude]

That's right.
Put shit on Bellamy all you want, but he's shown how to allocate a salary cap. He kept Smith, Cronk and Slater at any cost, while allowing non-spine players Folau, Inglis and Blair to leave.
.

It's easy to allocate a salary cap when you cheat :crazy:

 

[lucablight]

The relevance is that big fast bastards will address one of our biggest weaknesses this year - lack of speed+power on the edges.

Our other weakness this year - lack of direction and creativity - will be addressed by Sandow and Roberts.



Which is why we were able to buy so many of them and still spend big on Tonga and Sandow.

The fact is we've massively improved our one-on-one ability on the edges just by adding speed and power. You might notice as well that all of these fringe first graders are young, bringing the possibility of improvement. And even the ones who don't walk into first grade next year will add to our club's depth.

Finally, these kinds of players (big, fast no-names) fit perfectly into the kind of football we're trying to play.



We've also lost a lot of lazy, enigmatic deadshits in the past couple of years. Gone are several players with plenty of skill but who don't try hard enough.

In this day and age, Sandow and Tonga are brilliant signings to address our shortcomings (halves and centres). The rest of the newcomers - young unknowns - are exactly the kinds of players the successful clubs bring into their squads every year. We also have all the young players we re-signed this year who will play an important role in our squad in 2012.

Two high profile signings is enough.



Because halves (and fullbacks and hookers) are more important than edge forwards. That's why Melbourne were happy to let everyone go (including Blair next year) as long as they kept Smith, Cronk and Slater.

They're happy to surround them with no-names.



Because he would have wanted more than a one-year deal. And if we'd kept him we would have been unable to address the other shortfalls in our squad. If Mateo was under contract next year we either don't sign Sandow, or our depth suffers.

Edge forwards are a dime a dozen (we had so many we were able to play two of them at centre for half the season), which is why we've been able to sign about a dozen of them for next year.

Then there's the school of thought, epitomised by the Storm, that you don't pay elite money for anyone outside the team's spine (1, 6, 7, 9).

Mateo might be a special attacking player but he's a defensive weakness, and I put it to you that Smith, Lasalo, Maitua, and half (or more) of the new edge forwards coming next year are all better defenders than Feleti. And all on a lot less money.



That's the kind of short-sighted thinking that got us into this mess.

At the time Mateo signed with the Warriors we needed halves more than anything, and the people in charge wanted to keep some cap space free to get one. That meant not paying Mateo the money he wanted.

As it turns out we had to wait a year to buy that halfback, but we were very lucky we were in a position, salary-cap-wise, to beat Souths' offer.

If we still had Mateo it wouldn't have happened.



No, re-signing Mortimer was exactly what we needed to do. We were weak in the halves and here we found a young, home-grown one who was playing well. The club had no choice but to sign him. Nobody could have predicted he would die in the arse.

As for re-signing Horo, he gives us Mateo's shit defence, as well as half the attacking ability at half the price. It's a fair swap really. Under the salary cap you can't have the best players at every position, and Horo gives us a good enough first grade edge forward, while still allowing us to spend big in more important areas of the field (like halfback).

Anyway, Horo will almost certainly be coming off the bench all next year.

As for Webb, Walker, Hicks and Whatuira, none of them affected our salary cap past this year, meaning none of them stopped us signing new players for 2012 and beyond. Mateo certainly would have. Also, they all play different positions to Mateo, and were all signed to address perceived holes in the squad (replacing Cayless, Grothe and Tahu).

It would have been nice to be able to sign younger or better players but you don't get to choose who comes off contract each year. You can only sign the players available.



Mate, you weren't 'reading between the lines'; you were taking everything at face value.

In the end, the club offered Mateo what they thought he was worth and another club offered more. We would have been idiots to match that, or at least desperate.



He coached the team to play to its strengths (which weren't many). That means he allowed one single player (guess who) to play what was in front of him, and everyone else played a clearly defined role.

That one player came equal first in the NRL for try assists and third for linebreak assists.

I think if we had played any less structured we would have been lucky not to lose by 50 every week.

Our only chance of a win this year was to dominate possession, and that means keeping the offloads to a minimum.

Next year, with more speed out wide and a dynamite attacking half, we'll be able to play with a lot more flair. But this year that kind of play would have only led to a downward possession spiral every week.



I think Horo's as bad as Mateo but like I've already said, he's on half the money. As for our edge defence, it was indeed poor but that's because we didn't have any centres (probably the most important defensive position on the field) for half the season.



Definitely. To be honest I'd be happy to have Inu back but not on huge money.

Sandow was waaaaay more inconsistent than Mateo. He's never even played finals football. He really only kicked on in the second half of this season yet Mateo was one of our best players ever season he was with us (bar 2010). The jury is still out on Ben Roberts. I'm yet to be convinced he's even a first grader let alone someone who'll provide us with "creativity and direction". You know who would have provided us with creativity no question?

How have we massively improved our edges btw? Over the past two seasons we've lost Tahu, Grothe, Inu and Reddy. Does the signing of Willie Tonga really balance out the losses of all those players? I would hardly think so.

What type of football are we trying to play btw? Boring one out hitups that doesn't ask questions of the defence? I certainly hope we see a better "style" of football next season because it was terrible this year.

Where did the no names of the Melbourne Storm get them this year btw? Apart from Adam Blair their forward pack was pretty average and look what happened. The no names were bashed into submission when it counted. Sure they were minor premiers but form is temporary and class is permanent. The likes of Mateo, Mannering, Rapira, Matulino Packer proved to be too classy for the no name Storm pack. Is that what we're trying to do? Sorry but a good player is a good player regardless of their position.

Have you seen the number of players we let go? I find it very hard to believe we couldn't have kept Mateo if we wanted to. Why were you chasing after Mortimer for half a good season instead of signing up our Xfactor player who was one of our best for the past few year? I would hardly say players like Mateo are a dime a dozen. He can do things other players can only dream of. I don't want our team to be the Melbourne Storm 2.0. I want to see the PARRAMATTA EELS play.

Honestly I don't see how people can say we had a crap roster this year and then turn around and defend letting go of our good players that lead to us getting that roster in the first place!

 

[Poupou Escobar]

It's easy to allocate a salary cap when you cheat :crazy:

You're missing the point again.

After Bellamy was forced to adhere to the salary cap and let about a thousand players go, he kept Slater, Smith and Cronk and surrounded them with reserve graders. Now that Blair's off contract he is also being let go, and he's a better player than Cronk. It's just that Blair plays in a less important position than Cronk does, so he's replaceable.

Any of them are expendable as long as Bellamy can keep the spine players.

 

[Tony Bongo]

You're missing the point again.

After Bellamy was forced to adhere to the salary cap and let about a thousand players go, he kept Slater, Smith and Cronk and surrounded them with reserve graders. Now that Blair's off contract he is also being let go, and he's a better player than Cronk. It's just that Blair plays in a less important position than Cronk does, so he's replaceable.

Any of them are expendable as long as Bellamy can keep the spine players.

I would love to see how much that spine would fetch on the open market. I bet if they were up for sale a few years ago all 3 of them wouldn't be there now. The fact is they have got off lightly and are still reaping the rewards of cheating. I think that all contracts their players had with them should have been scrapped and they should have had to bid against every other club for every player.

 

[Eels Dude]

You're missing the point again.

After Bellamy was forced to adhere to the salary cap and let about a thousand players go, he kept Slater, Smith and Cronk and surrounded them with reserve graders. Now that Blair's off contract he is also being let go, and he's a better player than Cronk. It's just that Blair plays in a less important position than Cronk does, so he's replaceable.

Any of them are expendable as long as Bellamy can keep the spine players.

True to a point.

This situation is unique though as no club nor coach has been in that position before. While they were under the cap this year they still advantaged from systematic cheating in year's past. Bringing up Blair is irrelevent as we will only see next year how much him leaving will affect the Storm.

There's no doubt Bellamy is a good coach, but to credit him for managing a salary cap properly when he has never done that is a bit over the top.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Sandow was waaaaay more inconsistent than Mateo.

He's more consistent now.

He's never even played finals football.

He plays for Souths for f**ks sake.

He really only kicked on in the second half of this season yet Mateo was one of our best players ever season he was with us (bar 2010).

Yet Sandow finds form when his contract is up while Mateo turns to shit when his is up. You tell me which one responds best under pressure.

And the beauty is Sandow kept up his form after signing that big contract.

The jury is still out on Ben Roberts. I'm yet to be convinced he's even a first grader let alone someone who'll provide us with "creativity and direction". You know who would have provided us with creativity no question?

Plenty of creativity in Mateo, no doubt. But he doesn't provide direction which is why he can't be used in the halves. He doesn't even have a kicking game.

How have we massively improved our edges btw?

By all the outside backs we've signed for next year, plus the couple Kearney discovered this year.

Over the past two seasons we've lost Tahu, Grothe, Inu and Reddy. Does the signing of Willie Tonga really balance out the losses of all those players? I would hardly think so.

Out of those guys I see three or four blokes with poor attitudes, one that lacks pace and another that either needs more size or more speed to be an attacking threat.

What type of football are we trying to play btw?

One that brings consistent results - you know, the opposite to what we've had to put up with for the past ten years.

Boring one out hitups that doesn't ask questions of the defence? I certainly hope we see a better "style" of football next season because it was terrible this year.

We played to our strengths this year which meant Hayne and the front row.

Next year we have a quality halfback and a lot more strike power out wide. I think we'll play football to suit these extra strengths.

Where did the no names of the Melbourne Storm get them this year btw?

Minor premiers and preliminary finalists. Wouldn't it suck to comfortably make the finals and challenge for the premiership every year. :roll:

Apart from Adam Blair their forward pack was pretty average and look what happened. The no names were bashed into submission when it counted.

Bad luck to them for spending all their money on three players. I think only spending big money on two (Hayne and Sandow) is a better model.

Sure they were minor premiers but form is temporary and class is permanent. The likes of Mateo, Mannering, Rapira, Matulino Packer proved to be too classy for the no name Storm pack. Is that what we're trying to do? Sorry but a good player is a good player regardless of their position.

We have a much better front row than Melbourne. Hell we've got a better front row than the Warriors which is why we beat them.

Have you seen the number of players we let go? I find it very hard to believe we couldn't have kept Mateo if we wanted to.

I don't think we wanted to mate. He was playing like a busted arse last year and he wanted too much for an interchange player.

We needed to go in a new direction and that meant cleaning out a lot of the old shit Parramattitudes in the joint. Regardless of how good they were in attack.

Why were you chasing after Mortimer for half a good season instead of signing up our Xfactor player who was one of our best for the past few year?

Because we needed halves. Back-rowers just aren't as important. Especially when they can't even play good footy with their contract running out.

I would hardly say players like Mateo are a dime a dozen. He can do things other players can only dream of.

He's an enigma. He's better off at a club like the Warriors who don't need to rely on him.

Unfortunately we had to address our weaknesses, which started with the halves, and that meant freeing up a lot of money. We didn't get Quade Cooper but we did end up getting Sandow. Considering we already have Hayne on half a million, we couldn't also have kept Mateo on anything close to that or we would go into next year like the Storm - with three players taking up half our salary cap and nothing but reserve graders around them.

I don't want our team to be the Melbourne Storm 2.0. I want to see the PARRAMATTA EELS play.

We're not the Storm for a couple of reasons. Our attack doesn't revolve around dummy half, and we have a strong front-row.

Given Sandow is a much more instinctive player than Cronk, and Hayne is a better playmaker than Slater, I think you'll see a very different style from us next year.

Honestly I don't see how people can say we had a crap roster this year and then turn around and defend letting go of our good players that lead to us getting that roster in the first place!

Because the players we lost play in positions we already had covered. In the end it would have been good to keep Inu because of losing Grothe and Tahu in the pre-season, and all the injuries to outside backs through the year but next year none of it will matter because we'll have a very good team.

I hope Feleti wins next weekend because he was never ever going to win a grand final at the Eels.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I would love to see how much that spine would fetch on the open market. I bet if they were up for sale a few years ago all 3 of them wouldn't be there now.

I think at least two of them would be there still. Whether or not the third one remained would come down to how happy Bellamy was with the lack of quality in the rest of the team.

They did well to win the minor premirship this year, and I'm sure they'll do well again next year, but I reckon they'll miss Blair. I also wonder how motivated they'll be next year because you could see this year they were 'up' nearly every week. Can they repeat that kind of consistent motivation? f**k I hope not because I hate them.

The fact is they have got off lightly and are still reaping the rewards of cheating.

I agree 100%

I think that all contracts their players had with them should have been scrapped and they should have had to bid against every other club for every player.

Due to federal contract law taking precedence over the NRL's salary cap rules, something like this would have been impossible to do.

While the Storm were able to assemble this side through cheating, the fact remains that they were under the cap this year. What more can the NRL do?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

There's no doubt Bellamy is a good coach, but to credit him for managing a salary cap properly when he has never done that is a bit over the top.

I'm not crediting him; I'm pointing out his priorities.

For the record I think we're much better off with only two players on about half a million and having better depth.

But who could Melbourne really get rid of out of their big three? Cam Smith is the most important player in their side (we saw that in the 2008 grand final) - he's the captain, the goalkicker and directs all their attack around the ruck. On top of that he offers 80 minutes of top notch defence in the middle third.

Then there's Cronk who is also a key leader at the club. He's a great general play kicker, organises all the shifts and is one of the best defensive halfbacks going around.

So that leaves Slater, who is probably the easiest of the three to replace on the field - Widdop or Duffy can play fullback to a high level - and Slater has no kicking game to speak of. But he's Billy Slater for God's sake. He's a Melbourne Storm and NRL icon.

I kind of feel Bellamy is stuck with these three, and therefore stuck with the 22 man reserve grade squad surrounding them (an exaggeration of course but they do lack a lot of quality across the park).

We'll have a lot of balance next year with only Hayne and Sandow as 'indispensibles'. The fact Hayne can kick means we have two kicking options in centrefield, so we can play just about anyone in the 6 jersey. And with our strong front-row and Sandow's brilliance at 7 we don't need a world beater at hooker.

I think we've got a really good team for next year and I'm excited.

 

[SDM]

Has anyone actually argued against PouPou's assertion, or is it just as it appears; 28 jerkoffs missing the point and arguing about the wrong thing?

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Has anyone actually argued against PouPou's assertion, or is it just as it appears; 28 jerkoffs missing the point and arguing about the wrong thing?

What's the argument again?

 

[strider]

:lol:

 

[Gronk]

Has anyone actually argued against PouPou's assertion, or is it just as it appears; 28 jerkoffs missing the point and arguing about the wrong thing?

Is that 29 including you ?

 

[84 Baby]

I kind of feel Bellamy is stuck with these three, and therefore stuck with the 22 man reserve grade squad surrounding them (an exaggeration of course but they do lack a lot of quality across the park).

This is why Bellamy's ability is exaggerated. People believe he is god's gift to lower skilled or younger players. The fact is he realises he doesn't have the cap space (although ignoring the cap always helps) to splash some cash around like we've done, and so he needs to be even more critical of the players he brings in and the juniors he focuses on. Other coaches would do the same if they had the core group he does