Do you want Brad Arthur as coach

[yy_cheng]

Our best moves seems to be instinct plays, where guys with talent back themselves to play what's in front of them. I don't think any of our moves within the coached structures could ever be described as supercool - we have the most predicatble attack in the competition!

BA2.75 supercool move was to give JA 5 mins and Maka a short stint too. Just to confuse the opposition

 

[yy_cheng]

I knew you were joking, just agreeing. It definitely has been coached out of us... for no good result, except when we play Panthers and Storm. Pity there's 13 other teams we have to compete with as well.

I reckon the Panfers will rack 50 on us, then Souths another 50 then Manly another 50.

 

[yy_cheng]

I reckon Gladys could get better results with this team.

 

[King-Gutho94]

I reckon Gladys could get better results with this team.

A blind dog could do better.

BA is done the sooner the powers at be realise the better off we all will be.

 

[King-Gutho94]

Michael potter is available I would be enquiring his management if he wants the main job again seeing as Gus has signed ciraldo.

Potter has improved the dogs ten fold in 6 weeks even there attack is looking better them our dog shit attack atm.

 

[Gazzamatta]

Michael potter is available I would be enquiring his management if he wants the main job again seeing as Gus has signed ciraldo.

Potter has improved the dogs ten fold in 6 weeks even there attack is looking better them our dog shit attack atm.

BA didn't rate Potter and punted him. I wonder why?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

They were inferior because we finished above them on the ladder

That doesn't make them inferior. Our points differential was +15 better than theirs ffs. We won a bunch of close games while they lost a bunch. It was just luck that we finished ahead of them.

 

[lucablight]

That doesn't make them inferior. Our points differential was +15 better than theirs ffs. We won a bunch of close games while they lost a bunch. It was just luck that we finished ahead of them.

The ladder isn’t sorted by points differential. It’s by the number of games won. Also add in the fact that they were missing Thurston then that makes them undoubtedly inferior. We did really well against a Melbourne Storm side that had every right to blow us off the park but we failed against the Cowboys.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

Unless we have a massive form change (and go deep into the finals), this is probably the start of the end of BA.

There has also been the occasional whisper in the media BA was under pressure this year (think Webster has suggested it a few times too) and we needed to go deep into the finals.

But talk of sacking BA today is crazy , the board is to professional for that, if it happens it will be in the offseason….

Additionally I reckon, if the poor form continues, I wouldn’t be surprised if BA walked away (reckon there is more to it BA being offered to the dogs).

Me personally, I was always of the opinion there needs to be a better option to change coaches, however it’s probably time now that a change is simply required (unless a miracle happens this year)

However if it happens we need to be careful who we appointed (and I have some opinions) and not have a Hagan scenario where all Smiths good work wasn’t built on. We need to build on what BA has done (which is massive compared to what we were like when he started)

Anyhow for the rest of the year BA gets my support and I will be cheering on the mighty eels! Next year and what it brings can wait!

 

[Gronk]

Cannot see why most now haven't changed their vote. It's ok to flip just don't flop like BA.

I'd change my vote if there an option which allowed me to replace him with a coach with a proven track record. I'm against sacking for the sake of sacking. That's always been my position because it can send you backwards.

 

[yy_cheng]

Unless we have a massive form change (and go deep into the finals), this is probably the start of the end of BA.

There has also been the occasional whisper in the media BA was under pressure this year (think Webster has suggested it a few times too) and we needed to go deep into the finals.

But talk of sacking BA today is crazy , the board is to professional for that, if it happens it will be in the offseason….

Additionally I reckon, if the poor form continues, I wouldn’t be surprised if BA walked away (reckon there is more to it BA being offered to the dogs).

Me personally, I was always of the opinion there needs to be a better option to change coaches, however it’s probably time now that a change is simply required (unless a miracle happens this year)

However if it happens we need to be careful who we appointed (and I have some opinions) and not have a Hagan scenario where all Smiths good work wasn’t built on. We need to build on what BA has done (which is massive compared to what we were like when he started)

Anyhow for the rest of the year BA gets my support and I will be cheering on the mighty eels! Next year and what it brings can wait!

He could do what da did in 2009 and realise the players aren't good at following his game plan and change the way we play

 

[Noise]

I'd change my vote if there an option which allowed me to replace him with a coach with a proven track record. I'm against sacking for the sake of sacking. That's always been my position because it can send you backwards.

We are already going backwards.

 

[Gronk]

We are already going backwards.

So it's OK to go further backwards ? I don't get your point.

You guys have short memories when we signed Big Face, Broncos signed Seibold, Tits signed Holbrook, Knights signed O'Brien, Dogs signed Barrett. Changing the coach does not bring automatic improvement and you can easily go backwards. I even thought that signing Ricky Stuart would instantly turn us into a powerhouse. FMD let's not even talk about the Cronin Hilditch years.

Change the coach by all means, but I'm against sacking Tigers / Bulldogs style and then working it out later. Get a good guy lined up, sign him and then pay the other guy out. That's the way to do it when you can afford it.

 

[Noise]

So it's OK to go further backwards ? I don't get your point.

You guys have short memories when we signed Big Face, Broncos signed Seibold, Tits signed Holbrook, Knights signed O'Brien, Dogs signed Barrett. Changing the coach does not bring automatic improvement and you can easily go backwards. I even thought that signing Ricky Stuart would instantly turn us into a powerhouse. FMD let's not even talk about the Cronin Hilditch years.

Change the coach by all means, but I'm against sacking Tigers / Bulldogs style and then working it out later. Get a good guy lined up, sign him and then pay the other guy out. That's the way to do it when you can afford it.

We are going further backwards with BA. Get Flanagan.

 

[Gronk]

We are going further backwards with BA. Get Flanagan.

 

[Avenger]

I'd change my vote if there an option which allowed me to replace him with a coach with a proven track record. I'm against sacking for the sake of sacking. That's always been my position because it can send you backwards.

There are always options. There are plenty out there now.

 

[Joshuatheeel]

We are going further backwards with BA. Get Flanagan.

I think Flanagan would be a good option (based on his coaching record), but suspect there is more to him not being seriously considered by any club looking a coach and his offences…..which is not being reported

 

[Gronk]

There are always options. There are plenty out there now.

As I said sign first, sack later.

 

[Chipmunk]

So it's OK to go further backwards ? I don't get your point.

You guys have short memories when we signed Big Face, Broncos signed Seibold, Tits signed Holbrook, Knights signed O'Brien, Dogs signed Barrett. Changing the coach does not bring automatic improvement and you can easily go backwards. I even thought that signing Ricky Stuart would instantly turn us into a powerhouse. FMD let's not even talk about the Cronin Hilditch years.

Change the coach by all means, but I'm against sacking Tigers / Bulldogs style and then working it out later. Get a good guy lined up, sign him and then pay the other guy out. That's the way to do it when you can afford it.

Five of those six coaching changes you mentioned, the sides weren't finalists, and in most cases they were bottom four teams. For whatever reason, the Broncos (probably at Seibolds say so) let every single experienced player/leader depart the club at once, not replace them with adequate players, and they were left with playing with a bunch of kids, which was the start of his demise.

 

[Gronk]

I think Flanagan would be a good option (based on his coaching record), but suspect there is more to him not being seriously considered by any club looking a coach and his offences…..which is not being reported

Do sponsors want him ? Not if they think it impacts their brand.