Gary Gutful
Post Whore
- Messages
- 52,964
It was a deeper analysis than anything our Serbian mate came up with.It's a reasonable analysis Gary.
It was a deeper analysis than anything our Serbian mate came up with.It's a reasonable analysis Gary.
You can't be too careful. And BTW, you did return it to the ocean, yes?...and through every bedroom window.
I flushed it down the shitter, along with 500ml of semen.You can't be too careful. And BTW, you did return it to the ocean, yes?
I flushed it down the shitter, along with 500ml of semen.
So, in short, yes.
They are all first graders, along with the other first graders we've managed to fit under our cap. They only need to do their job, not carry the team.
Well it worked for the past two years. Why would they be the outliers while 2018 is the year that finally proves you right?
But it is sustainable. We just spent two years proving it.I've already told you - playing out of your skin with a high energy, high intensity game is unsustainable. You've asked this question four times now; don't you get it?
I've already told you - playing out of your skin with a high energy, high intensity game is unsustainable. You've asked this question four times now; don't you get it?
But it is sustainable. We just spent two years proving it.
Or are you saying it is unsustainable for more than two years?
I don't think we've been a top team - we aren't spending enough on players for that to be the case - but we are better than mid-table.We didn't play with a high energy, high intensity game for two entire seasons. We were a middle of the road team for all bar 1/3rd of each of those two seasons. That was sufficient enough for us to sneak into the Top 4 last season and would've been sufficient for us to sneak into the Top 8 the previous season.
We might find that level of play again for 1/3rd of a season this year and we may again sneak into the Top 8 or even Top 4 (or we may not find it at all), but don't pretend to yourself we've been one of the top teams for the last two seasons. We're mid table pretenders.
I don't think we've been a top team - we aren't spending enough on players for that to be the case - but we are better than mid-table.
We've won 29 games in those two years. Other teams won this many:
39 Storm
32 Sharks
31 Broncos
29 Eels
28 Cowboys
28 Raiders
27 Panthers
24 Bulldogs
23 Roosters
22 Dragons
22 Seagulls
18 Rabbit-Owes
18 Tigers
18 Titans
17 Warriors
6 Knights
So as you can see, we've been a little bit better than 'mid table pretenders'. I can accept that our team might be less strong than last year with the loss of Radradra, but only Beau Scott would be in decline from our top 17 while French, Gutherson, Moses and Moeroa are all young enough to be better players this year. I still don't think we're a top team as you seem to think I do, but we should be more than competitive. And I'm sure after a bigger sample than three games that it will be reflected on the ladder.
I don't think we've been a top team - we aren't spending enough on players for that to be the case -
I'm referring to our lack of TPAs. Otherwise I think we are getting good value out of our squad.We aren't spending enough money on players? What? You mean we aren't spending enough money on the right players.
I don't think the Cowboys overcame anything last year. Thurston and Scott have become defensive liabilities.Interesting stats.
I'd argue we'r closer to the Raiders over those two years (one top 4 finish, one middling/underachieving season) than we are to the Cowboys, who achieved sustained success despite a stack of injuries and Origin commitments.
Are you suggesting he is 0 and 4. Just like that player that the Warriors got rid of, Kieran Owen?
His favourite Asian beer?
Asahi.
But it is sustainable. We just spent two years proving it.
Or are you saying it is unsustainable for more than two years?