Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

bathursttiger1 said:
Gus said on 100% last night that the Tigers were 3-4 years ahead of the Dogs as far as settling up a pathway development for juniors.
He said that’s how you get a “cellar dweller” off the bottom.
He was positive about where we are heading.
Click to expand...
Cheers for that, I usually watch it, but was busy last night
 
jadtiger said:
You do realise that Brooks rejected being coached by Sheens and Benji,that's how little faith he has in our cunning plan
Click to expand...
Whatever faith Brooks has in our cunning plan I have less faith in Brooks to carry it out.. 10 FREAKING years of him choking and now he has signed elsewhere and his fanboys are still relentlessly trolling this forum and singing his praises .. it really is Stockholm Syndrome on steroids and should be studied as an example of mass hypnosis/psychosis by committed academics.. some people really need help and this situation here is a goldmine for some fearless researcher
 
jirskyr said:
I think that is a high exaggeration.

Yes Dogs outbid Tigers in certain situations, but losing out on a signature is not necessarily about being out-manoeuvred, it may simply be a matter of price. I personally think, and I said this in the past 2 seasons, that Dogs are repeating the mistakes the Tigers made when Ivan joined 2017 and we signed several mid-tier players on high salaries. Those salaries weighed us down long-term and the incoming coach had different ideas that he couldn't properly execute until those contracts were shed.

History has proven that Dogs signed a turkey with TPJ, though we have no idea how he may have performed at Tigers, the non-speculative data available says signing TPJ was actually a loss to the Dogs (and a predictable loss).

It remains very much to be seen whether Ciraldo can in fact coach first grade and he's signed to a big long-term deal, i.e. they are stuck with him (same as Tigers with Benji, to be fair).

2023 Dogs have now recruited some very significant players - Burton, Mahoney, Kikau, TPJ, JAC... but it's not currently working out for them in any meaningful progression.

The ace up the sleeve for the Dogs is Phil Gould, who is very shrewd and has a lot of clout in the game, both media and off-football ops. However Phil Gould alone isn't a panacea and he does not create rapid success everywhere he is employed.

On the other hand, Dogs appear to have very shallow juniors depth, and the juniors they have blooded, the likes of Averillo, Biondi-Odo, Alamoti, are alarmingly average. In that regard I think Tigers are advantaged with stronger juniors and a dedicated Pathways Team.

Since Dogs last played finals 2017, their average table position is 13th and ours is 12th. Currently obviously we are last and they are slightly ahead of us 15th, one of their 5 wins coming at our expense (i.e. we win that game and we are both on 4 wins all year).

So are the Dogs ahead of us by available measures of on-field success? Yes certainly, they are marginally ahead. They lost by a slightly less horrific margin last weekend, against an arguably far less dangerous side.

Are they "so far ahead of WT"? No I don't think there's much basis to make such a claim. But as I said, I've been arguing against Bulldogs comparisons for about 2 years now. The Dogs are still yet to do anything particularly impressive with all the strategy changes they've made and money they've spent. I think they have a thoroughly unimpressive team.

Lastly, and this is not the argument you are making, but it's part of the overall conversation about the Bulldogs nonetheless - if fans are measuring success by marginal advantages over the worst team in the comp (us) then they are setting a horrendously low bar. I think Bulldogs fans are a million miles off where they want to be, and they are not thinking about the Tigers when judging progress.
Click to expand...
There's a bit of delusion in this post. The dogs are/were top 2-4 in every junior grade this season. Our boys are scrapping to make the finals. They have better juniors than we do, and much greater depth than we do.

Gus is also as much of a cancer as he is a God to the media
 
Coastie_Tiger said:
Genuine question I don't rate Flanagan nor do many people on here or at a few other clubs. But he's been killing it in reggies, so the question is, is he any better than Wakeham? ie would people consider Flanagan as a direct swap for Wakeham?
Perhaps then we could go for a Sanders and give him a year to develop further, with Flanagan as a stop gap for a year IF we can't get anyone better who is more experienced.
All this is assuming we have Fainu done and he will be our 6 next year so we can't have two inexperienced halves paired together next season.
Click to expand...
not Flannigan mate everyone has been potting him for the last 3 or 3 years.... always Adam clune lol
 
Jedi_Tiger said:
not Flannigan mate everyone has been potting him for the last 3 or 3 years.... always Adam clune lol
Click to expand...

Not the question mate, it was is Flanagan better than Wakeham? I wasn't clamoring for us to sign him.
Who would you go after that is attainable to replace our much maligned former halfback, or are you about to start supporting Manly?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 851
Coastie_Tiger said:
Not the question mate, it was is Flanagan better than Wakeham? I wasn't clamoring for us to sign him.
Who would you go after that is attainable to replace our much maligned former halfback, or are you about to start supporting Manly?
Click to expand...
we could have paid what another 100k or 150k a year for a further 2 years and probably kept Brooks

instead we may get Fainu (terrific if we do and a good decision to let Brooks go)

if we dont, and we have to settle for Clune or wakeham or flannigan etc it was a stupid decision
 
Coastie_Tiger said:
Not the question mate, it was is Flanagan better than Wakeham? I wasn't clamoring for us to sign him.
Who would you go after that is attainable to replace our much maligned former halfback, or are you about to start supporting Manly?
Click to expand...
he is better than wakeham but not as good as Brooks.
if we land fainu then great move if not and we end up with flannigan or wakeham then stupid move considering Brooks and Sheens wanted him
 
TIGERPOWER said:
Lol and that justifies 11 years of being our highest paid player, our number 7 and never playing a finals game. Are you a tigers supporter or a brooks supporter ?
Click to expand...
tigers all the way, just that plenty of supporters thought he was not even going to get another nrl gig... wrong
stupid move if we don't have a better replacement that's all
 
Coastie_Tiger said:
Not the question mate, it was is Flanagan better than Wakeham? I wasn't clamoring for us to sign him.
Who would you go after that is attainable to replace our much maligned former halfback, or are you about to start supporting Manly?
Click to expand...
Yes, Flanagan is better than Wakeham.. strangely Wakeham seems to have lost 10 yards of pace since his debut for us this year.. truly, he looks like he is running on 1 leg or has weights in his shorts … also, Moses Mbye must be “mentoring “ him as he now just runs sideways looking for support to throw hospital passes AT .. he used to straighten it up, but within 4 rounds in first grade he has totally changed his game… I even think 🤔 he is worried he may be fined if he is tackled with the ball or goes through the defensive line ?
 
Last edited:
So how long do u all think it will take to find out if we get the two boys from manly . I am going for 12 weeks and then we fine out they have signed somewhere else . So put ur time line in and a yes or a no if we get them . Let’s have a little fun before we all start crying about another one that got away 🤪
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 786 (members: 4, guests: 782)
Back
Top