natheel
Coach
- Messages
- 12,137
He's played three games and was okay in one of them.
If that makes him consistent we are in trouble...
Better then etu imo
He's played three games and was okay in one of them.
If that makes him consistent we are in trouble...
did we defend better or did the saints attack go to sleep?This isn't Sks fault at all! We just don't have the cattle to play the style he wants us to play. Against dragons in 2nd half we defended alot better but our attack is lost! We don't have a half that can take the reigns when our forward pack is going forward!
This isn't Sks fault at all! We just don't have the cattle to play the style he wants us to play. Against dragons in 2nd half we defended alot better but our attack is lost! We don't have a half that can take the reigns when our forward pack is going forward!
McGuire was tipped to do nothing this year, and has performed admirably. Webb only had one game but looked very good. Kids like Morgan and Loko have looked average because they have had to mark some of the best in the business and conversely have been given not enough early ball with space to do their thing. But Loko made 130 metres on debut against a side that belted us 30-odd to nil.
There is nowhere to go but up. I agree. But seems to me that Kearney has been able to get the message through to his players - at least partially. Look at the first 20 minutes of the Dogs game. We were all over them, and I dare say it was mostly because we were following the plan of dominating them up the middle. Then Hindy and Hayne did their things and we were behind the 8-ball for the rest of the game. But we looked good in those first 20 minutes. Ditto against the Dragons - we just didn't have the necessary class out wide to shut them down. But up the middle, we were winning the battle.
I feel Kearney has a decent platform from which to build his team around (that is, a decent forward pack that has mostly stood its own this year). As I said, the only way is up.
Then adjust your style to the players you have available. That's what good coaches do. A la Bennett at the Dragons.
Then adjust your style to the players you have available. That's what good coaches do. A la Bennett at the Dragons.
This is the best style for this bunch of players. Sad but true.
If we had better offloaders (Grothe, Inu, Mateo, Cayless) we could go back to off-the-cuff, and if we had better halves we could play with more variety.
With better outside backs we could go with more wide shifts.
But at the moment our strength is at front-row and fullback. That means up the guts for 5 and kick. And inside the 20 we shift it to Hayne.
There's no magic formula that will make us win more games. This is the best we can do until the roster improves.
McGuire would have gone well regardless of coach, imo.And my comment was designed to illustrate that Kearney has indeed been able to lift some of the players to play well. We could also add Casey McGuire to that list.
Agree. Since when is it a good thing for an unproven nrl-level coach to introduce a new attacking "structure" to a club when it seems like the playing staff might take several years to adjust to it?Then adjust your style to the players you have available. That's what good coaches do. A la Bennett at the Dragons.
Agree. Since when is it a good thing for an unproven nrl-level coach to introduce a new attacking "structure" to a club when it seems like the playing staff might take several years to adjust to it?
Isn't it better to employ a coach whose structures can be adaptable, and who has the ability to get the best out of the player he has at his disposal - whatever "structure" is necessary? Add to that a coach that can successfully recruit (if this is indeed the coach's job and not teh footy CEO's), and we're missing out big time with SK at the moment. He's not seeming the coaching messiah that some at the club have been leading along some of us to believe....
You are a coaching and management legend Bart.
I can't, for one minute, undertsand why the Eels didn't hire you instead?
So much experience and so many knowledgable answers. You'd have players on board left, right and centre. You'd have tactics to solve every issue. Obviously, with the support of your multitude of assistant coaches here.
Thousands of fans would be jumping on board to be members, and furthermore, if you had time, you'd be putting your name forward for both a position on the board and the CEO's position.
I can now see where we went sooooo wrong.
Suity
I actually couldn't tell if that was sarcastic or not, then I remembered you aren't a very nice poster.
You are a coaching and management legend Bart.
I can't, for one minute, undertsand why the Eels didn't hire you instead?
So much experience and so many knowledgable answers. You'd have players on board left, right and centre. You'd have tactics to solve every issue. Obviously, with the support of your multitude of assistant coaches here.
Thousands of fans would be jumping on board to be members, and furthermore, if you had time, you'd be putting your name forward for both a position on the board and the CEO's position.
I can now see where we went sooooo wrong.
Suity
f**k dude. Harsh
bartman might be a f**king moron but he's only got the club's best interests at heart.
Why? because I say what I think? And no one else does?
That's fine. I can live with that.
Suity