So, here's a couple of interesting facts:
Remember in '09 and '10 when we were destroying teams on a weekly basis? On average our points differential that season was +9.1 points per game, meaning that (including losses) we scored on average 9.1 points per game more than we conceded. Conversely, this season our points difference is -8.8 points per game, which is the worst in the nearly 18 seasons since the joint venture began playing.
But wait, it gets better. We have averaged less than 20 points per game scored in the past five seasons in a row. In that time, the average points scored across all games and all teams is 20.3 points per game (i.e. the average points scored by an NRL team in the past 5 seasons is 20.3 points per game). To provide further context, the only other time in the history of the JV that we did not score more than 20 PPG was the disastrous 2007 campaign, in which we won 1 from the first 7 and were in last place heading into Rd 16.
What's my point? Well, bear with me. The Bennett era brought about a defense-oriented culture. Clearly this worked with the personnel available to Bennett, as we frustrated (belted) oppositions into leaking points. Problem is, I get the feeling we still think that we are a defense-oriented team. But we're not; we're just a team that isn't very good at either defending or attacking. In fact, our defense has leaked more than 22 PPG for 3 of the past 4 seasons (last year was the exception).
It frustrates me to read comments by our coach and players that we were expected to finish bottom four by most rugby league commentators and that this should somehow be the yardstick by which we are measured. Considering the Eels debacle, we should actually be 12th and two of our victories were against an Origin-affected Cowboys and Storm. And the forecast for the next month is, well, stay indoors. It's gonna get ugly out there.
Is this really the level of mediocrity we should accept?
So my point is actually a hypothesis. I believe that the club's current predicament will manifest itself into the Dragons becoming one of the least supported football teams in the country in 20-30 years time, much the same way as the success of the 50's & 60's led to the Dragons being one of, if not, the most popular sporting franchise in the country. Sure changing demographics will play its part, as the aging/declining Baby Boomer population will impact many areas of society over the next couple of decades. As i mentioned in another thread, I'm a 2nd generation Saints fan (my parents are baby boomers) and i think a large proportion of our supporter base is due to this. But the big concern (and the thing the club can change) is that the style of football over the past 5 years and the sustained period without success are not attractive to the younger generation. Kids want to watch teams lead by JT, Barba and Milford score 40 points a game, not dire contests won 12-10. Add to that the loss of any real identity from the RGRV Strategy and i think there's a real problem for the club moving forward.
Anyway, I'm sure management has it under control. Stay calm and pay your membership.
