tony soprano
Well-known member
When you getting over 25k a game it becomes a bit ridiculous
Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion
- Thread starter MacDougall
- Start date
The Melbourne system is effective no doubt, but it was Asofa-Solomona who did that I'm pretty sure.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
One thing for sure is that Crichton is not over rated for the Wests Tigers backline. With all due respect on this one King Sirro I have to go with Gould.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
Apologies Lukic. I presumed we were talking about that winger that scored 4 tries that night. My bad.
He doesn't pass the "no dickheads" policy anyway.......
liltiger
Well-known member
As long as he's the one making the move were flying.
Betterdays22
Well-known member
We will see with Crichton. I think a very good, above average centre, but an average fullback. Signed on fullback money so time will tell.
bathursttiger1
Well-known member
I bet that Schuster didn’t get the $1.2 million that he said he was worth.
Tiger_Fanatic3
Well-known member
If figures are to be believed, Schuster and Fifita are on the same salary next year 😳
liltiger
Well-known member
It could, the only one worth it is DCE. Turbo is constantly needing a rebuild, Schuster seems lazy in D and Brooks might fire with DCE but running the team I think he will struggle like he did here, if these guys don't play up to their paypackets, the sea Eagles are stuck for at least 3 years waiting for contracts to expire, or chipping in for them to play elsewhere to free up cap space.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
Its insane. And many still can't focus on 80 mins. The bread and butter of their 25K. However I am a paying member and pay my diligent dues every year. I want to see an investment in my due diligence. Just its not a Wests Tigers membership but rather my family.
Tiger-ferret
Well-known member
Bargain 🤣
Tucker
Well-known member
You just proved my point. You are regurgitating knowledge second hand in an attempt at relevance and some sort of validation on a fan website. That is clearly your goal and its pathetic lol. Who gives a shit about likes? 😂😂😂
Not to get too picky either but since you have pressed the point 3 or 4 times that I had a mistaken fact regarding Ingliss winning the Clive Churchil as a centre in an earlier post, and have used that mistake as a basis to try and attack my credability, I looked it up for confirmation. You are right, he wasnt playing centre. He was the 5/8th! Not the fullback as you have so bullishly claimed and repeated so many times. I guess that fact is meaningless too eh?
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
Like Damien Cook I guess. Good hooker average centre. But Cooks strike rate at centre ain't bad. One game one try for NSW. Not too bad. Crichton I feel is an above average player than most in their rightful positions across all 17 teams. But I understand your point. Valid.
I don't really get this fullback/centre chat.
A good fullback is far more important than a good centre. Inglis and Latrell might be 10/10 centres but lets say 8/10 fullbacks. A team with an 8/10 fullback and 6/10 centre will do better than a team with a 6/10 fullback but 10/10 centre.
A centre plays on only half of the field. That alone reduces their value comparatively. They would go close to touching the ball the least of any position on the field for most teams. Good centres are a luxury, not a necessity. Ok the great ones can create something out of nothing, but a good half is more likely to make an average centre look good than a good centre makes an average half look good.
Centres do need to be good defensively though. You can't carry a major defensive liability in the centres - it's why teams have been consistently tearing us apart down our left edge (the attacking team's right) - Kepaoa and Talau have been making poor decisions and missing tackles that they need to make.
In a game where there's finite resources to be allocated in building a team due to the salary cap, you're better off pouring this money into your spine and middle-forwards than your centres. If your centres are good defenders, are capable of catching and passing and can run a half-decent line, that's all you need. I think a centre pairing of Euan Aitken and Reimis Smith would be perfectly fine for a team that has aspirations of making the top 4, provided they had a good spine and some good forwrds.
A good fullback is far more important than a good centre. Inglis and Latrell might be 10/10 centres but lets say 8/10 fullbacks. A team with an 8/10 fullback and 6/10 centre will do better than a team with a 6/10 fullback but 10/10 centre.
A centre plays on only half of the field. That alone reduces their value comparatively. They would go close to touching the ball the least of any position on the field for most teams. Good centres are a luxury, not a necessity. Ok the great ones can create something out of nothing, but a good half is more likely to make an average centre look good than a good centre makes an average half look good.
Centres do need to be good defensively though. You can't carry a major defensive liability in the centres - it's why teams have been consistently tearing us apart down our left edge (the attacking team's right) - Kepaoa and Talau have been making poor decisions and missing tackles that they need to make.
In a game where there's finite resources to be allocated in building a team due to the salary cap, you're better off pouring this money into your spine and middle-forwards than your centres. If your centres are good defenders, are capable of catching and passing and can run a half-decent line, that's all you need. I think a centre pairing of Euan Aitken and Reimis Smith would be perfectly fine for a team that has aspirations of making the top 4, provided they had a good spine and some good forwrds.
king_sirro
Well-known member
No, I clearly said he played 5/8 for Melbourne and fullback for Souths. Wrong yet again mate. Your failing miserably.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
Whilst being competive and in the top 8 most every season. I'd rather be stuck there for at least 3 years than trying to avoid the wooden spoon for 3 years.
twentyforty
Well-known member
I think all teams strive to identify potential(variety skills etc) and endeavour to have each individual achieve their full potential, pretty sure that is a natural human trait?
Some clubs focus more on development while others are more focused on bigger issues like media views , politics internally and externally, usurping etc.
Wonder why this is so?
One way to keep everyone on point and heading towards the end game is to have individual succession plans and goals, with a clear understanding of how all those goals relate to the big picture.
Its really simple stuff.
Tucker
Well-known member
Nice measured response and one I do not disagree with.
I have stated Latrell would be the fullback in my current South Sydney lineup, due to his versatility and their lack of depth in that position.
That doesnt mean I backtrack on my previous points and if Souths had a young gun fullback coming through such as a Bula (who seemed to spring out of nowhere), Latrell would better serve them as a strike centre because he is a weapon there more than at fullback as proven by his records at Easts, Souths and during rep footy.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
This banter belongs to the Flogging a Dead Horse thread. Can someone please start that thread. It would be huge. 😉 And just to chip in - you's are both right.
