I agree that Hasler is an exceptional coach. But not just because he was able to build a club from scratch. There are other things involved too. If the definition of a good coach was simply an ability to build a team, a culture, a set of structures, etc; then how would you describe someone like - well, Des Hasler - who can come to a club like Canterbury who had a fairly average set of backs and a poor year last year, and come up with immediate success? I think that demonstrates other abilities and qualities.
For starters Canterbury won 5 of their last 7 games, after their spending spree had started to gel. They have a very good roster, particularly in the forwards. Obviously Hasler identified they only needed a couple of outside backs to challenge, and they got them from clubs that didn't need them any more. With all the players they have off contract they were able to get Inu on the cheap this year by offering him good money starting next year. They couldn't do that if they already had a couple of centres on big money multiple-year contracts.
Hasler finished third last in his rookie season, so he's not a magic bullet. Yet despite not proving anything, he was able to sign some very good players for 2005, including Kite and Kennedy. He was helped by having nearly an entire salary cap to play with for that year - just like he does now at the Bulldogs, with so many big names off contract for next year.
And why can`t Stephen Kearney be judged yet? You mean not judged at all? On any level?
Like I said, I'm happy with the way he's building the squad.
If you think he's not getting the best out of the current players then of course you're right to think Kearney's shit. Personally, I think he is getting the best out of these players. They're just not very good (yet).
And if so, why did you say that he`s 'probably not a good coach'? The reason I keep bringing that quote up, of course, is that it appears almost as a contradiction of everything else you say about him. I`m genuinely interested in why you would make that comment.
A big part was my belief that he'd bought Ben Roberts as the guaranteed halves partner for Sandow, and then arseholed Roberts when his form got patchy. Now he's brought Kelly in and it looks like it'll turn out well, and emjaycee told us Roberts was only brought in as a stop-gap, I'm more comfortable with Kearney's squad management.
But even if Kearney's not a good coach, that doesn't mean he's a bd one. he might just be average, like most other coaches in the NRL. People keep comparing Kearney to Hasler, but the fact is hasler already has a job, and I seriously doubt he would ever have come here. Do the people criticising Kearney for not being Des Hasler also criticise their own wives for not being Kate Upton (or whoever)?
Finally, given the law of diminishing returns I keep banging on about lately, Kearney has plenty of improvement in him. He's only in his second season as head coach, and will be learning much faster than a more experienced coach.
