I bit off more than I could chew at Eels - Kearney

[TheParraboy]

yeah, he can argue both sides of the argument :lol:

:lol:

 

[lingard]

How did he destroy our team? He brought some good young players here.

If bringing some good players to a team is all you need to be a good coach, then we should have brought in Russell Crowe.

 

[lingard]

I couldn't give a f**k about Kearney, just like I don't care about any of our ex-coaches. I'm just bringing some perspective to the Kearney hate.

In his two years he's left the club in better shape than he found it. You can't say that about any previous coach since Brian Smith.

Nobody hates Stephen Kearney. Everybody hates the results he had with Parramatta. You`re barking up the wrong tree. From the outset you assumed that the majority of forumites have very little knowledge of football, and that they blamed everything on the coach because they couldn`t see that making a football team successful is rather more complicated than just having a 'good' coach. And so, to create some balance, you decided to support the coach. You went so far with this that you ended up making statements that, I`m sure, even you didn`t believe. But you made a big mistake. Because most, if not all, people on this forum know a great bloody deal about football. We all know lots about different facets and different angles and different perspectives of the game - including you. Rugby League is not a simple game. There are thousands of different ways to approach it. Most people understand that. Most people understand that many different ingredients go into making a successful side - not just a 'good' coach. I think nearly everyone here can see that. But nearly everyone here could ALSO see that Stephen Kearney was a huge factor in our continued lack of on-field sucess. He was becoming more and more the biggest problem this club had. And also the simplest problem to solve. By, in effect, playing the opposite of devil`s advocate, you made yourself appear as one of the least knowledgeable footy fans on this forum. And I`m sure you`re not.

 

[lingard]

While form of the last year was terrible - i do believe Kearney has left the eels with a better squad and in better shape then when he started. We finally have a quality half (with plenty of back up options), the back line is full of good young talent with plenty of potential. We now have a fairly young squad. We signed hoppa and if within 12 months of returning to league he finds his 2010 form we will all be very happy - he has the potential to be one of the best backs of the last decade. Our nsw cup side is slowly being filled with younger players instead of journey man ( for 2013 they will have barba, searge, poh, peni, semi, toutia, loco, o'brien, wehbe, matt e, Toby keys, jerome m, , - all under 23.) we have plenty of potential in our Toyota cup side - And nolan has been more proactive in recruiting outside talent. Plus our cap management has been better - we still apparently have plenty to spend.

Kearney may have failed but he also did some good things as well.

Well, is there any real proof that Stephen Kearney did all that? Wasn`t it Peter Nolan who did most of it?

 

[IFR33K]

Well, is there any real proof that Stephen Kearney did all that? Wasn`t it Peter Nolan who did most of it?

We were rumored to be in talks with nearly every player on the market, yet SK could only jag a few this year, despite throwing massive dollars their way.

Yet we are in a great position. FMD](*,)](*,)](*,)

 

[Maroubra Eel]

We were rumored to be in talks with nearly every player on the market, yet SK could only jag a few this year, despite throwing massive dollars their way.

Yet we are in a great position. FMD](*,)](*,)](*,)

No players wanted to come but on the positive side we have heaps of room to move under our cap.
Sure we might be short a few good players, but our cap looks good.

 

[Eelementary]

Nobody hates Stephen Kearney. Everybody hates the results he had with Parramatta. You`re barking up the wrong tree. From the outset you assumed that the majority of forumites have very little knowledge of football, and that they blamed everything on the coach because they couldn`t see that making a football team successful is rather more complicated than just having a 'good' coach. And so, to create some balance, you decided to support the coach. You went so far with this that you ended up making statements that, I`m sure, even you didn`t believe. But you made a big mistake. Because most, if not all, people on this forum know a great bloody deal about football. We all know lots about different facets and different angles and different perspectives of the game - including you. Rugby League is not a simple game. There are thousands of different ways to approach it. Most people understand that. Most people understand that many different ingredients go into making a successful side - not just a 'good' coach. I think nearly everyone here can see that. But nearly everyone here could ALSO see that Stephen Kearney was a huge factor in our continued lack of on-field sucess. He was becoming more and more the biggest problem this club had. And also the simplest problem to solve. By, in effect, playing the opposite of devil`s advocate, you made yourself appear as one of the least knowledgeable footy fans on this forum. And I`m sure you`re not.

Huh. I guess I missed that amendment to the Oxford English Dictionary explaining that terms such as "genius", "clown", "f**ker" and "tool" (to name but a few) are now terms of endearment and/or slight indifference...

Logically, people shouldn't hate the guy, but some of the vitriol spewed forth onto these virtual pages by some of the people here indicates otherwise. I mean, it's perfectly fine to criticise him as a coach for under-performing - he deserves it. But to call a man (or woman, as the case may be) a "clown" or "genius" does not lead to productive criticism of the coach's tenure, but rather opens the door to personal attacks - a door which I'm sure is totally justified in many people's minds, but not to me.

 

[Eelementary]

Well, is there any real proof that Stephen Kearney did all that? Wasn`t it Peter Nolan who did most of it?

Well, Hopoate and Sandow joining the Eels was most likely Kearney's doing. I believe he also jagged Matt Ryan and Joseph Paulo. Kearney also persisted with Ryan Morgan (a good move, too).

I am not sure about who brought Cheyse Blair to the fore.

He lacked in many areas, but it seems he did pretty decently in these areas at least.

 

[bartman]

Huh. I guess I missed that amendment to the Oxford English Dictionary explaining that terms such as "genius", "clown", "f**ker" and "tool" (to name but a few) are now terms of endearment and/or slight indifference...

Are any of those terms used in this thread? If so I must have missed them.

Were any of those terms used in this thread prior to Pou's post #10 (as quoted by Lingard above), claiming Pou is bringing perspective to Kearney hate? If so, I must've missed it.

If not, imo people need to build a bridge about being upset in the past on behalf of Kearney.

 

[Eelementary]

Are any of those terms used in this thread? If so I must have missed them.

Were any of those terms used in this thread prior to Pou's post #10 (as quoted by Lingard above), claiming Pou is bringing perspective to Kearney hate? If so, I must've missed it.

If not, imo people need to build a bridge about being upset in the past on behalf of Kearney.

I wasn't relating it specifically to this thread.

Barty, you're one of the few posters here who dislikes Kearney but refrains from personal attacks on him. It's no secret that I like the guy and I still believe that, given the right environment, he can become a decent coach - however, I admit his tenure here was a failure and I am glad (for everyone's sake) that he chose to part ways. I accept criticism of his coaching and tend to usually agree, but the line, for me, gets drawn when the attacks (for they are not criticisms) turn into near-defamation levels of crudity. There is simply no excusable reason to resort to childish name-calling, and it irks me.

 

[bartman]

I wasn't relating it specifically to this thread.

Ah, fair enough. That might explain the confusion, and the confusion people have about Pou's contribution to the thread.

Barty, you're one of the few posters here who dislikes Kearney but refrains from personal attacks on him.

Cheers mate, but I don't dislike him at all. I just don't rate him as a head coach, and didn't rate/questioned the decision to dump a coach to hire him. And I respect your views on him that you've outlined below.

It's no secret that I like the guy and I still believe that, given the right environment, he can become a decent coach - however, I admit his tenure here was a failure and I am glad (for everyone's sake) that he chose to part ways. I accept criticism of his coaching and tend to usually agree, but the line, for me, gets drawn when the attacks (for they are not criticisms) turn into near-defamation levels of crudity. There is simply no excusable reason to resort to childish name-calling, and it irks me.

I guess I just haven't see any of those comments on here for months, so wasn't sure why it was brought up and into this thread for another run? I'm pretty sure everyone here wishes Kearney well in his future away from head coach at the Eels.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Nobody hates Stephen Kearney. Everybody hates the results he had with Parramatta. You`re barking up the wrong tree. From the outset you assumed that the majority of forumites have very little knowledge of football, and that they blamed everything on the coach because they couldn`t see that making a football team successful is rather more complicated than just having a 'good' coach. And so, to create some balance, you decided to support the coach. You went so far with this that you ended up making statements that, I`m sure, even you didn`t believe. But you made a big mistake. Because most, if not all, people on this forum know a great bloody deal about football. We all know lots about different facets and different angles and different perspectives of the game - including you. Rugby League is not a simple game. There are thousands of different ways to approach it. Most people understand that. Most people understand that many different ingredients go into making a successful side - not just a 'good' coach. I think nearly everyone here can see that.

Brilliant.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

If bringing some good players to a team is all you need to be a good coach, then we should have brought in Russell Crowe.

I never said he was a good coach, I questioned in what way he destroyed the team.

Whatever Kearney's role in our on-field results he recruited well, focused on youth, and left our club in good shape. That doesn't make him a good coach but it sure as shit proves he didn't destroy the team.

 

[Pazza]

left our club in good shape

a wooden spoon in first grade and nyc!! yeah in great shape!

 

[Eels Dude]

Huh. I guess I missed that amendment to the Oxford English Dictionary explaining that terms such as "genius", "clown", "f**ker" and "tool" (to name but a few) are now terms of endearment and/or slight indifference...

Logically, people shouldn't hate the guy, but some of the vitriol spewed forth onto these virtual pages by some of the people here indicates otherwise. I mean, it's perfectly fine to criticise him as a coach for under-performing - he deserves it. But to call a man (or woman, as the case may be) a "clown" or "genius" does not lead to productive criticism of the coach's tenure, but rather opens the door to personal attacks - a door which I'm sure is totally justified in many people's minds, but not to me.

Apart from a couple of recent comments by Sphagnum in either this thread or another, I don't think anyone has used the words you've spoken of or said anything derogatory towards Kearney. I've bagged out Kearney a lot, as had Bartman, IFr33k among others have called him any names like the ones you've mentioned.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

a wooden spoon in first grade and nyc!! yeah in great shape!

How does the results of one season hurt our future prospects?

Both of this year's grand finalists picked up the wooden spoon in the past four years. The 2009 wooden spooners played in the decider the very next year.

We performed poorly in both grades due to too much youth/inexperience in both teams. All these players will be better for the run, which they wouldn't have gotten at a stronger club.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Brilliant.

Brilliant was it?

In lingard's first sentence - "Nobody hates Stephen Kearney" - he shows an ignorance of the facts.

Eelementary and myself have both remarked on the outright hostility directed toward Kearney on this forum. Haters denying their hatred after the fact doesn't change that.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Are any of those terms used in this thread? If so I must have missed them.

Were any of those terms used in this thread prior to Pou's post #10 (as quoted by Lingard above), claiming Pou is bringing perspective to Kearney hate? If so, I must've missed it.

If not, imo people need to build a bridge about being upset in the past on behalf of Kearney.

Nothing about the past is invalidated by starting a new thread you f**king worm.

If the people who don't hate Kearney any more are making current judgements on him, their criticism is likely clouded by the hatred they no longer feel.

This is proven by the massive numbers of people desperate to deny any positives from his tenure - if we're good next year it's because of Stuart; if we're shit it's because of Kearney.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Brilliant was it?

In lingard's first sentence - "Nobody hates Stephen Kearney" - he shows an ignorance of the facts.

Eelementary and myself have both remarked on the outright hostility directed toward Kearney on this forum. Haters denying their hatred after the fact doesn't change that.

Don't be a f**kwit. He broke you down well IMO.

 

[bartman]

Brilliant was it?

In lingard's first sentence - "Nobody hates Stephen Kearney" - he shows an ignorance of the facts.

Eelementary and myself have both remarked on the outright hostility directed toward Kearney on this forum. Haters denying their hatred after the fact doesn't change that.

But why is it still relevant months later, and in this thread? Why the need to keep seeking your version of "balance"?

:-k

*Oh don't worry, I've just noticed your post #98... :lol:.