@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Again you can spin it anyway you want but it is a results based game and our record shows we have performed poorly in all facets - and accountablity always starts at the top.
Whether Teddy and Woods handled the contract talks admirably or not, does not excuse the fact that we have promised better results for years and not delivered - and as two over achievers in a poor performing club they cant be held responsible for our lack of success or development as a team. Our current roster is as weak as I can remember it for some time - and yet until Simona was cut their was suggestion that we had cap issues!
Our decision makers/ management have offered little more than things will be better next year, and hopefully it will. One year too late it seems for Teddy and Woods, and the Roosters and the Bulldogs like clubs in strong positions do - took full advantage of it.
You are spinning yourself, in the opposite direction.
Every club promises better results every year, that's the name of the game. Yes we haven't delivered as a CLUB. If you want to excuse the players from lack of club delivery, go ahead, you are probably quite by yourself.
Team accountability starts at the top too - captain and rep-level players. They decided to jump ship for reasons never completely confirmed. If you say it's because the rest of the playing roster was not strong enough, then to hell with them, nobody wants players like around that anyway, that will only play for sides with already strong rosters.
Also hard to complain about the roster strength when you are asking for $1.5-2M combined yourself!!! How many Matulinos and Tui Lolos can we afford for 1 Tedesco and 1 Woods?
Bulldogs are a club in a strong position are they? What low expectations you must have, just higher than Tigers can meet, but low enough that the Bulldogs pass.
Do you think we are the only club that have players that command that sort of money???? Do you want to compete or just point the finger at individuals for our short comings?
The Bulldogs consistently perform well because when they have a bad year they address their weaknesses and recruit well - and their appearances in finals footy supports that. I am not judging them about their position on the ladder at this moment I am judging them as an organisation and their perfornance as a club over a number of years.
I repeat we have been poor in recruitment retention and cap management over a period of years and our roster has suffered because of that and results support that - and it effects ALL the players in the squad not just players the calibre of Woods and Teddy.
Within that roster Woods and Teddy have over achieved and their selection in representative teams again supports that as does the salary and interest that they commanded from strong rival clubs. And while you can question their current form - they have been consistently our best performers.
To put it very simply if we want to be successful we need to do better in managing our cap and attracting quality players and retaining them.
If you think as a club we have done this well we will have to agree to disagree and I am more than comfortable with that.
Well actually I agree with a lot of this, I don't feel this is what your original posts were about, but I agree there have been shortcomings in cap management. I wouldn't go as far as to say recruitment was bad, more that we didn't get 100% out of all the players we recruited. We've had quality players but not quality teams.
The shortcomings of the club over many seasons are the responsibility of everyone, the management, coaching and players. So nobody gets a leave pass. My main point has always been that plenty of people in management have been hooked, everyone really, so there comes a point where you can't keep blaming management for lack of success, both because the current management did not make many of the worst decisions the club has endured and because you've turned over the entire staff.
Nobody in their right mind would say Tigers got all the recruitment decision right. Of course not. Similarly Dogs made some real recruitment mistakes the last 2-3 years and actually they haven't rectified it at all yet, they have been on a fairly steady decline. By their own measurements, that decline started in the place (edge of finals) where Tigers only wish we could hang around, but nonetheless the Dogs are not improving.
Dessie clearly has a plan but time will tell whether it works. It might sound nice to sign Woods and Foran but nobody is convinced that's gonna work out perfectly, given that Woods commands big money for a prop and Foran… well his history speaks for itself. Dogs have a lot of aging or non-producing footballers on big salaries, and if they lose guys like Adam Elliott or Marcelo Montoya because of it, there will be a reckoning from the fans. Heck there's already been one for the loss of Reynolds.
And I agreed with your earlier posts as well, about shortcomings of the club.
The bit I disagreed, that lead to this back and forward, was when you said the top players we have were sick of the mismanagement and poor roster, and that it's a wake up call to the club to make the right fixes. At that point I say, whoa, fair enough the club has made mistakes and finals football has been hard to come by, but at the same time the players are not absolved of blame, and I do not respect that they might leave for "greener pastures".
Part of the reason of not playing finals football is the lack of consistent game-winning excellence from everyone, and the more you pay someone, the more I expect that excellence. James Tedesco has won us several games by himself, truly, and at other times he's gotten us close to winning games. Nobody would say we didn't want to keep Tedesco. But to leave because we aren't winning, well sorry Teddy but your output is not that consistently good, consistently game-changing to wipe yourself of all blame. You are one who faces the least blame, not entirely without blame. Then you ask for a million bucks pay and you are surprised that it has a big impact on the long-term strategy with the roster? If you are genuine about improving the roster, take a pay cut so we can buy more players... it's been done before by footballers!
But nope, he'd rather join a pre-existing roster, regardless that they came second-last last year, if management and finals are the thing that counts, Roosters is one of the places where that works out. Overlooking of course that Roosters have not only won 3 MPs in the last decade, 1 premiership and several GFs, but also one wooden spoon and miss the finals 50% of the time (and if you go back selectively 12 years, they've only made the finals 5/12 times in that period).
That's the stuff where I can't agree with you. Yes decisions have not worked out, yes management has been imperfect, but equally on-field performance has been imperfect too. I do not agree Tedesco and Woods have over-achieved, they'd barely achieved anything at all at club-level. It's not entirely their fault but it's also somewhat their fault. They pull the big bucks.
And yes of course other players pull that kind of money at other clubs, of course! Let's name those players: Cronk, Thurston, Milford, Taumaolo, Inglis, Cam Smith, Cordner, Wade Graham, Darius Boyd. Woods and Tedesco are good, however they aren't in the same grade as those players I've named, even if they want similar money. It's my personal argument that Tigers are forced to pay these overs because of the lack of success, and players take what they can, even if the output is not truly value for money.
But you get trapped, if you don't have continued success, how can you attract more players at modest salaries? Well you can't, so you don't achieve more success, you continue to pay overs for top talent etc. Then you bring in TPAs, where wow rich clubs always seem to maintain a good roster every year, how do they do it? Hmm tough one. I mean, how does James Packer and Rupert Murdoch and Gina Rinehart and Kerry Stokes, Frank Lowy and Uncle Harry... how do they continue to be so successful and hold so much sway?
Well it's money of course. How can Tigers truly ever compete, even with perfect management, with the Broncos juggernaut - 34K members 2017 and $42M in revenue 2016? What are your expectations?
My expectations are that our best, born and bred players, hang around even if the chips are down. They are getting paid, paid very well, so it's not about compensation. If they leave because it might be easier or less frustrating at other clubs, I can understand that, but I don't RESPECT that. Rugby league might not be about loyalty from players any more, but as fans that's all we've got. The only thing that keeps us coming back in the face of losses is loyalty. So when players don't show loyalty, I can't excuse it, I can't accept it, I can't respect it. Even if the club didn't do everything right, I want our best players to stick around, play well, be paid well, and help make the difference to get things right. Ivan Cleary issued that challenge to the roster... and our Top 3 players, plus Ava, bailed. So good riddance, I'm not putting that on the management, it's all on the players. I expected more. You appear happy with that, so good luck to your lowered expectations of the players.
