Has the Squad over performed up to this point of the season ?

[ALSGI]

we have gone from 100 to 1 in round one to 13 to 1....so yes we have overachieved.

You did well, best I could get was $82.50.

 

[Old Timer]

we have gone from 100 to 1 in round one to 13 to 1....so yes we have overachieved.

Sorry can't agree
The reality is with the squad we had 2016 (keeping mind plenty talked it up) we should have finished higher but we didn't
so in reality we underachieved
This year we have simply got to the level we should have attained last year so we have reversed the underachievement and simply now doing what we were supposed to do in 2016
That is not improving it is simply returning to what the accepted position was supposed to be
Improvement will only occur if we finish higher than what the real expectation was in 2016 and not what we actually achieved due to underperforming
Any measurement against against gross mis performance is avoiding reality

 

[The Damo]

Sorry can't agree
The reality is with the squad we had 2016 (keeping mind plenty talked it up) we should have finished higher but we didn't
so in reality we underachieved
This year we have simply got to the level we should have attained last year so we have reversed the underachievement and simply now doing what we were supposed to do in 2016
That is not improving it is simply returning to what the accepted position was supposed to be
Improvement will only occur if we finish higher than what the real expectation was in 2016 and not what we actually achieved due to underperforming
Any measurement against against gross mis performance is avoiding reality

What was your expectation for 2016? Was it actually top 4? We did underachieve in 2016, but anyone saying we should be aiming for top 4 was delusional. We were terrible last year and your right we should expect better. But so far this year the team is 1-1 with the premiers, one game behind them and better than the broncos. That's not comparing with mediocrity. That's comparing with the best teams. With McCrone as half that's overachieving. So far, which is what the question was.

 

[MilanDragon]

Sorry can't agree
The reality is with the squad we had 2016 (keeping mind plenty talked it up) we should have finished higher but we didn't
so in reality we underachieved
This year we have simply got to the level we should have attained last year so we have reversed the underachievement and simply now doing what we were supposed to do in 2016
That is not improving it is simply returning to what the accepted position was supposed to be
Improvement will only occur if we finish higher than what the real expectation was in 2016 and not what we actually achieved due to underperforming
Any measurement against against gross mis performance is avoiding reality

If we look at that theory then we have to say the squad under-achieved in 2016 based on 2015 results. But in my opinion we over-achieved in 2015, especially given 2012-2014 results. How far do we go back?

I think you're right though, the goal for current year is normally decided by factoring in previous seasons results.

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Considering the Dragons don't have consistency from the most influential position in any team...halfback....yes, it has certainly overachieved so far.

Of course, the season is far from finished, and I have a funny feeling it will be 2015 revisited.

 

[possm]

Nope, not clear. Why did Millard say that? One just as plausible explanation is that they'd had discussions with Packer, he said he thinks he's worth x amount, so millward says we won't know if we can afford that till we've signed others particularly Dugan. Both parties agree to wait.
your scenario assumes Packer didn't think he could improve his worth and the length of a potential contract. I assume he thought he could. If so, he was right, and got a contract that you admit we shouldn't have matched. Give Packer some credit.

My understanding is that Millward himself stated that he acceded to Packer's manager to do a deal with Dugan before Packer. Since when does a player manager set the timetable or schedule our Club signs other players?

I have no doubt Packer would have accepted our offer and it could have been a done deal if Millward moved early. Millward should have just insisted on the deal there and then and if Packer did not like the deal - I'm very sure he did at the time - the Millward should have moved on to another prop at the time. Same goes for Dugan. I don't know if Millward made a play for Tedesco or not but we should have since his contract with the Roosters was for 700k.