It's a cut-throat business

[Fingerbang]

I wouldn't have signed Benji either. And they have brought Mulholland in help control and cleanup our roster. He seems like he is doing okay so far. Blooding kids just so we don't lose them is not the answer. Just as losing Jack Bird is not the cause of the problem.

 

[Get2dachopper!]

There is the other side of the coin too....what if these juniors aren't as skillful as Walker, RTS etc. That is a possiblity.

Even Aitken has been copping it from some supporters, saying he isn't showing much. I reckon Aitken has had a great year for his debut season.

Look I'm no coach, but from what I've seen from Bennett, Maguire, hasler, Robinson, you either have the current roster with the potential to challenge (with some tweaks here and there) or you looking at a 2-3 year plan to build a roster to challenge. I'm sure Bennett has to thank brown and griffin for some of his success. I'm sure Brian smith had something to do with building that roster at the roosters. Maguire a lesser extent to Lang, but look at hasler. He took 3 seasons to build that roster at manly. Remember when they were thrashed in a semi in 2005 ( think it was parra) then we thrashed them in 2006? Took a few years to build that roster. It's a cycle.

Question is, where do you think we are in the cycle?

 

[giboz71]

So you think we should be picking Dufty, Izaac Thompson etc for 1st grade now so we don't lose them in the future? Even if they are not ready for 1st grade? In place of who?

No I didn't say that.

I just want to see evidence where we have a plan for our best juniors eventually playing for us instead of helping our rivals try win a comp like Bird is for the sharks. I think I've given some pretty good examples of how other clubs manage this, the Rabbits being the most recent example.

We have coaches who are paid to make these decisions do we not, who to keep and who not to keep? Do you think they've done a good job in the last 4 years?

And if the players you mentioned end up being solid first graders, then I hope there is a plan for them. What, you don't think our current squad could use some help? Do you think our current squad as it stands can win a comp this year or next?

 

[Get2dachopper!]

Btw, I'm not just talking about Bird. Or Hastings. In reality, this kid was always going to end up at the roosters, so I wonder why we even bothered in the first place.

What about a plan to replace Gasnier and cooper? Why wasn't whare kept? And then when whare had lyon and matai in front of him at manly, and gasnier was already gone, with cooper on his last legs, we still dont nab him, frekin gus gould does! Even if he had cooper in front of him, cooper should have perhaps played some second row like Lawrence is at the tigers. Its very poor planning if you ask me.

 

[Fingerbang]

No I didn't say that.

I just want to see evidence where we have a plan for our best juniors eventually playing for us instead of helping our rivals try win a comp like Bird is for the sharks. I think I've given some pretty good examples of how other clubs manage this, the Rabbits being the most recent example.

We have coaches who are paid to make these decisions do we not, who to keep and who not to keep? Do you think they've done a good job in the last 4 years?

And if the players you mentioned end up being solid first graders, then I hope there is a plan for them. What, you don't think our current squad could use some help? Do you think our current squad as it stands can win a comp this year or next?

Yes, our current squad needs help....that being some experience and pace out wide. Someone like Fai Fai Loa who has been mentioned as a possibilty to come back. We won't win it this year or next with Dufty and 1 or 2 other under 20 players in the first grade squad.

And we wouldn't be any better off if we had Bird play for us this year.

 

[The Nick]

Even Aitken has been copping it from some supporters, saying he isn't showing much.

This. People call for more juniors to be blooded but I can't think of a single player to debut for this club that hasn't been shat on by people on this forum because they weren't instantly killing it.

This year I have watched just about every single one of our debutants cop it on this forum.

 

[bottle]

Everyone's an expert.
Why aren't you blokes working for the club managing these issues for them?

 

[giboz71]

Everyone's an expert.
Why aren't you blokes working for the club managing these issues for them?

Well I never claimed to be a rugby league administrator. As I said, as a supporter, I'll assume there are people in the club paid to make these decisions.

I'm simply posing the question, given our results over the past 4 years, can we honestly say our recruitment and retention strategies , juniors, external and the like have been successful? I would argue no. If people think otherwise, that's up to you.

The discussion around Jack Bird is only a small part of it. I can think of many other examples, the latest being who was selected at half in the Brisbane game. If people can't see why I wouldn't question our roster management after that little chestnut, then I don't know what else will.

 

[bottle]

It's easy to sit here and say who should and shouldn't be retained without giving any regard to the salary cap implications.
If it was easy no one would ever lose any juniors.

 

[Get2dachopper!]

It's easy to sit here and say who should and shouldn't be retained without giving any regard to the salary cap implications.
If it was easy no one would ever lose any juniors.

I'm thinking you just wanted to be post number 69 in this thread.......

 

[bottle]

I'm thinking you just wanted to be post number 69 in this thread.......

I find that hard to believe.

 

[True_Believer]

Well I never claimed to be a rugby league administrator. As I said, as a supporter, I'll assume there are people in the club paid to make these decisions.

I'm simply posing the question, given our results over the past 4 years, can we honestly say our recruitment and retention strategies , juniors, external and the like have been successful? I would argue no. If people think otherwise, that's up to you.

The discussion around Jack Bird is only a small part of it. I can think of many other examples, the latest being who was selected at half in the Brisbane game. If people can't see why I wouldn't question our roster management after that little chestnut, then I don't know what else will.

Can you explain to me how this is roster management? I'm not quite getting it.

 

[BennyV]

Can you explain to me how this is roster management? I'm not quite getting it.

For one, we purchased 2 halves with first grade experience to act as backups this year, and let them both go. Not that either were any good, but when the club clearly values first grade experience over silly things like skill, I dont get why they'd leave is with zero backup half options.

 

[giboz71]

Can you explain to me how this is roster management? I'm not quite getting it.

Well I would have thought that a balanced, well planned roster would cater for a scenario where a viable back up would be able to step in in case of injury. Benji is past 30 and hasn't played a full season in 10 years so this was always likely to happen.

Now I assumed that Hutch had been groomed as the anointed back up half, but clearly this is not the case, hence the ridiculous situation of De Belin being slotted in. And we all know how the Brisbane game turned out.

So given the coach's reluctance to put in our annointed back up half in front of a back up prop in a crucial game leads me to assume we have no back up halves this year. Clearly there is no confidence in Hutch.

Hence I question how our roster has been constructed and what contingencies have been planned for this year, given who the club failed to retain. Jack Bird is a good example, as he may have proved quite handy in that situation.

 

[True_Believer]

Well I would have thought that a balanced, well planned roster would cater for a scenario where a viable back up would be able to step in in case of injury. Benji is past 30 and hasn't played a full season in 10 years so this was always likely to happen.

Now I assumed that Hutch had been groomed as the anointed back up half, but clearly this is not the case, hence the ridiculous situation of De Belin being slotted in. And we all know how the Brisbane game turned out.

So given the coach's reluctance to put in our annointed back up half in front of a back up prop in a crucial game leads me to assume we have no back up halves this year. Clearly there is no confidence in Hutch.

Hence I question how our roster has been constructed and what contingencies have been planned for this year, given who the club failed to retain. Jack Bird is a good example, as he may have proved quite handy in that situation.

I actually wouldn't have thought the choice to put JDB into the halves had anything to do with roster management. I would put that down to a game day decision that, in hindsight, didn't pay off.

I don't think there is 'no confidence' in Hutch, I think it was more a decision around an inappropriate time to bring him into the fray. And having watched his performance against the Sharks just weeks before, in my opinion, he still has a long way to go. Throwing him in for a long stint against the ladder leaders in a high pressure game in front of a 35k crowd would have been a huge risk. And to be honest, probably not one I would have agreed with had he been named in the run on side. It's all a huge 'what if' now, but if he hadn't have performed at all and we had lost just the same, he would have copped a flogging on this forum and from the supporters and we would have had calls for him to be 'let go' so we can spend the money elsewhere. Which in the end would have damaged his progression more than allowing him to play the 20 or so minutes he did play as it is.

I'm not agreeing with what Mary did on the night. In hindsight it was not a great decision, but I do agree with holding Hutch back on that night. It would be better to bring him into games of lesser importance and bring him through under less pressure. Let him build his confidence rather than have him take a massive hit his second game in.

As for Bird, there are so many 'facts' flying around in here that it is difficult to know what actually happened to cause him to go to the Sharks. We will never know completely. But as has been said, it does seem as though he wasn't guaranteed a full time first grade spot with them, and it was only through injury that he got his chance. And well done to him, he proved he was up to it and has been able to hold the spot. No matter the reasons for him going over there, it was his choice and we have to move on. For Christ's sake, just get over it.

I think we are building a better team. For the Price years, I don't think we had a plan. We were too concerned with winning there and then, not thinking of the future - and this has obviously affected our depth. I believe that since Mary and Mulholland have come in, there is a plan. Youngsters are getting a go - Aitken, YKG, Hutch. Aitken is similar to Bird, was not first choice but due to roster changes has secured his spot. I think we are on the up. Unfortunately we are a few years behind where we should be. But we are improving and planning for the future. It won't happen in 1 year, but in another year or 2 we will have a formidable team.

 

[giboz71]

I actually wouldn't have thought the choice to put JDB into the halves had anything to do with roster management. I would put that down to a game day decision that, in hindsight, didn't pay off.

I don't think there is 'no confidence' in Hutch, I think it was more a decision around an inappropriate time to bring him into the fray. And having watched his performance against the Sharks just weeks before, in my opinion, he still has a long way to go. Throwing him in for a long stint against the ladder leaders in a high pressure game in front of a 35k crowd would have been a huge risk. And to be honest, probably not one I would have agreed with had he been named in the run on side. It's all a huge 'what if' now, but if he hadn't have performed at all and we had lost just the same, he would have copped a flogging on this forum and from the supporters and we would have had calls for him to be 'let go' so we can spend the money elsewhere. Which in the end would have damaged his progression more than allowing him to play the 20 or so minutes he did play as it is.

I'm not agreeing with what Mary did on the night. In hindsight it was not a great decision, but I do agree with holding Hutch back on that night. It would be better to bring him into games of lesser importance and bring him through under less pressure. Let him build his confidence rather than have him take a massive hit his second game in.

As for Bird, there are so many 'facts' flying around in here that it is difficult to know what actually happened to cause him to go to the Sharks. We will never know completely. But as has been said, it does seem as though he wasn't guaranteed a full time first grade spot with them, and it was only through injury that he got his chance. And well done to him, he proved he was up to it and has been able to hold the spot. No matter the reasons for him going over there, it was his choice and we have to move on. For Christ's sake, just get over it.

I think we are building a better team. For the Price years, I don't think we had a plan. We were too concerned with winning there and then, not thinking of the future - and this has obviously affected our depth. I believe that since Mary and Mulholland have come in, there is a plan. Youngsters are getting a go - Aitken, YKG, Hutch. Aitken is similar to Bird, was not first choice but due to roster changes has secured his spot. I think we are on the up. Unfortunately we are a few years behind where we should be. But we are improving and planning for the future. It won't happen in 1 year, but in another year or 2 we will have a formidable team.

Yes mate, that's a good summary and I agree with everything you say.

I too believe we are improving and believe that Mulholland and Mary have us on the right path. My reference to poor roster management was along the lines of what Benny V said in that we have no real back up halves this year. If Hutch is still a year away, what was our plan this year, given we released Henry and Keating and did not retain Bird?

Anyway, I just hope the club acknowledges that mistakes have been made in these almost 4 years post Bennett. Lessons need to be learned so we can move forward and succeed. Burying your head in the sand and repeating that same mistakes won't help anyone.

 

[Slippery Morris]

Next year they have Kurt Mann as back up half.

 

[chewbacca]

To all you moaners out there.
here is something to really bitch about.
2016 team of former dragons

1) Darius Boyd
2) Brett Morris
3) Josh Morris
4) Dean Whare
5) BJ Leilua
6) Jamie Soward
7) Jackson Hastings
8) Trent Merrin
9) Michael Ennis
10) David Gower
11) Jeremy Smith
12) Beau Scott
13) Jack Bird

solid squad, did i miss anyone?

 

[Vasilevsky]

To all you moaners out there.
here is something to really bitch about.
2016 team of former dragons

1) Darius Boyd
2) Brett Morris
3) Josh Morris
4) Dean Whare
5) BJ Leilua
6) Jamie Soward
7) Jackson Hastings
8) Trent Merrin
9) Michael Ennis
10) David Gower
11) Jeremy Smith
12) Beau Scott
13) Jack Bird

solid squad, did i miss anyone?

3, 4 and 5 were let go when Gasnier and Cooper were the centres. 6 was good but we can see he really needs a ball-playing fullback or halfback. He is good when Moylan plays and pretty bad when he doesn't. 1 was always going to follow Bennett. 7 looks like he may be a big loss but the jury is still out on that. No one knows how big a loss 8 will be. 11 and 12 were bad losses but the 11 and 12 the Dragons have now aren't too bad and much younger. 13 can't play in that position yet. The Dragons ran all over him when he was at 5/8. I can't imagine how badly he would be smashed playing at 13. 9 was a big loss. 10 would have been handy to have around but I don't think he would have changed the fortunes of the team very much at all.