Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[the_third]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rfWsesSN61I

That’s the best I can find amongst his high 5’s and his tackling of Cleary.

Had an off load until he tried reversing. Could never put a hit on. The Dora haircut destroyed him

Edited for link

 

[jirskyr]

I’m not going to pull your post apart point by point because I’m a few beers in but gee that was a long way of saying the article is pointless then basically proving the exact argument that it was making.
It seems like a few people focused too much on it being a Tigers bashing and missed the point.
There is no point having a salary cap if all the top players go to top teams for less money. That’s the point of the article. The salary cap is meant to distribute the talent evenly and it clearly isn’t, not just for us, we just happened to be one of the examples.

That isn't what the article says. The article doesn't say the cap is pointless, it says despite efforts to equalise the comp, including the cap, there are still haves and have-nots. The disparity might be worse if there was no cap.

It then goes on to ask why Titans and Tigers "can't land the big fish", listing negative issues at both clubs. Breen challenges both clubs to look at themselves to help explain why they aren't winners.

Breen says Tigers need to have a long hard look in the mirror at why they can't sign the talent.

I say - no mirror-looking required, not when Roosters exist. Tigers haven't signed Latrell and couldn't keep Tedesco because ROOSTERS. Same reason why nobody else can win the comp the past 2 years, because ROOSTERS. Whatever they do, they've hit the zenith of success and talent aquisition, something they've been working on for 20 years.

My position is that what Breen raises is a circular argument - how come the lowly teams can't sign the top talent? Well, because they are lowly teams. Breen doesn't give one single suggestion for a solution, an alternative. Pointless article from the journo.

My other argument, which Breen does not make, is that the issue is as much about player branding than clubs nowadays, hence why the idea of "pathways to success" is as important as cash salary. Breen doesn't really explore ideas of the culture of top players, and not just why lower clubs can't entice them, but why top players might be choosing to avoid lower clubs, beyond the obvious.

Breen in fact doesn't make an argument at all. He just says low clubs can't seem to sign good players and he doesn't really know why, except maybe they are a bit crap. Well dug, thanks Neil. It's not an even comp and the low teams can't sign the best players, glad he made an article in the paper about what Blindy Freddy can see.

 

[happy_tiger]

@the third
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Aaron+Woods&&view=detail&mid=216E5890BFCAD2E1B741216E5890BFCAD2E1B741&&FORM=VRDGAR&ru=%2Fvideos%2Fsearch%3Fq%3DAaron%2BWoods%26FORM%3DHDRSC3

 

[the_third]

Found that one happy.

 

[the_third]

In saying that I was a fan for a whole. A character player that we love. Just soft...really soft. A hammy doesn’t cut it as a reason

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Where’s the video @happy_tiger? Many come back from hammy’s some even from dislocated hips and bung shoulders. He is not a shadow of the 2 Qld props you mention.

One of Bons old videos ......and I'm talking Woods when he 1st come into grade .....he ain't worth a pinch of pee these days As a 19 year old in grade Woods was amazing

A lot of it comes down to attitude. It’s been mentioned by a few people who know him personally that he only sees footy as a job. He doesn’t really have a love for it.

 

[happy_tiger]

Where’s the video @happy_tiger? Many come back from hammy’s some even from dislocated hips and bung shoulders. He is not a shadow of the 2 Qld props you mention.

One of Bons old videos ......and I'm talking Woods when he 1st come into grade .....he ain't worth a pinch of pee these days As a 19 year old in grade Woods was amazing

A lot of it comes down to attitude. It’s been mentioned by a few people who know him personally that he only sees footy as a job. He doesn’t really have a love for it.

And I blame stats for a lot of Woods follies ......he became almost addicted to his stats looking good

I'm not defending Woods for what has happened since about 2013/14 but he was a beast of a prop early on

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Where’s the video @happy_tiger? Many come back from hammy’s some even from dislocated hips and bung shoulders. He is not a shadow of the 2 Qld props you mention.

One of Bons old videos ......and I'm talking Woods when he 1st come into grade .....he ain't worth a pinch of pee these days As a 19 year old in grade Woods was amazing

A lot of it comes down to attitude. It’s been mentioned by a few people who know him personally that he only sees footy as a job. He doesn’t really have a love for it.

And I blame stats for a lot of Woods follies ......he became almost addicted to his stats looking good

I'm not defending Woods for what has happened since about 2013/14 but he was a beast of a prop early on

Absolutely. From about 2016 on, he hasn’t been worth jack.

 

[the_third]

Spot on. When did the whisperer get his claws into him?

 

[bbobb]

Where’s the video @happy_tiger? Many come back from hammy’s some even from dislocated hips and bung shoulders. He is not a shadow of the 2 Qld props you mention.

One of Bons old videos ......and I'm talking Woods when he 1st come into grade .....he ain't worth a pinch of pee these days As a 19 year old in grade Woods was amazing

A lot of it comes down to attitude. It’s been mentioned by a few people who know him personally that he only sees footy as a job. He doesn’t really have a love for it.

And I blame stats for a lot of Woods follies ......he became almost addicted to his stats looking good

I'm not defending Woods for what has happened since about 2013/14 but he was a beast of a prop early on

I don’t really understand the hate for Woodsy. Yes he moved on but as I recall he always gave everything he had even after he signed for the Dogs.

In terms of his career, I never saw him as the intimidating prop that threw fear into the opposition (think Klemmer or Marty Tapau). He was a prop with a high work rate, good tackle efficiency with some good footwork at the line who could pop a ball. That’s it. He was never going to be the inspirational leader that people talk about.

In some respects, the captaincy was his downfall as he tried to do too much hence we saw the reversing into the line and too many ineffective hit ups. He seems to be a simple guy that just needed to be clear on his job (25+ tackles, 20 hit ups, 90% tackle efficiency and the odd offload per game).

For the right price, I would have him back as I think he’d excel under a coach like Madge.

 

[crazycat]

I’m not going to pull your post apart point by point because I’m a few beers in but gee that was a long way of saying the article is pointless then basically proving the exact argument that it was making.
It seems like a few people focused too much on it being a Tigers bashing and missed the point.
There is no point having a salary cap if all the top players go to top teams for less money. That’s the point of the article. The salary cap is meant to distribute the talent evenly and it clearly isn’t, not just for us, we just happened to be one of the examples.

That isn't what the article says. The article doesn't say the cap is pointless, it says despite efforts to equalise the comp, including the cap, there are still haves and have-nots. The disparity might be worse if there was no cap.

It then goes on to ask why Titans and Tigers "can't land the big fish", listing negative issues at both clubs. Breen challenges both clubs to look at themselves to help explain why they aren't winners.

Breen says Tigers need to have a long hard look in the mirror at why they can't sign the talent.

I say - no mirror-looking required, not when Roosters exist. Tigers haven't signed Latrell and couldn't keep Tedesco because ROOSTERS. Same reason why nobody else can win the comp the past 2 years, because ROOSTERS. Whatever they do, they've hit the zenith of success and talent aquisition, something they've been working on for 20 years.

My position is that what Breen raises is a circular argument - how come the lowly teams can't sign the top talent? Well, because they are lowly teams. Breen doesn't give one single suggestion for a solution, an alternative. Pointless article from the journo.

My other argument, which Breen does not make, is that the issue is as much about player branding than clubs nowadays, hence why the idea of "pathways to success" is as important as cash salary. Breen doesn't really explore ideas of the culture of top players, and not just why lower clubs can't entice them, but why top players might be choosing to avoid lower clubs, beyond the obvious.

Breen in fact doesn't make an argument at all. He just says low clubs can't seem to sign good players and he doesn't really know why, except maybe they are a bit crap. Well dug, thanks Neil. It's not an even comp and the low teams can't sign the best players, glad he made an article in the paper about what Blindy Freddy can see.

True, but there are things we can change and things we can't:
Sadly we can't change either the cap situation or young players wanting to play for successful teams.

We can look in the mirror and change us.

The cap is unfair. It's probably a lot more fair then other codes, although some codes have more fairness. Wests Tigers cannot change the cap and can only really argue at the fringes.

The wests Tigers can take a good hard look at our facilities and environment compared to other clubs. If our facilities are mediocre and a young recruit is 50/50 they go to a shiny easts facility and see better, they will flip. If they get a tap from Bellamy saying I will make you a superstar like JAC if you come to melbourne they will flip.

With Brett Hodgson and Pat Richards we should be the landing place for anyone wanting to be the next fullback. Yet we have lost some serious talent through bad management and not taking a good hard look at ourselves.

We can't fix the cap, we can change the Tigers.

 

[tiga4eva]

Instilling fear doesn't have to be foul play. I've never seen Woods put a massive shot on and I don't think he ever charges in as hard as he possibly could. He's a carefree character, it's just not in his nature

 

[Spud_Murphy]

Part of a Front Rowers role is intimidation, with and without the ball. Woods has never put fear into the opposition

Tbh most props aren’t really intimidating. The really good ones are, the rest just try to do their job, defending, making metres and carrying the team forward. You couldn’t class someone like Twal as intimidating, yet he does his job for the team well.

 

[TieDye]

"They look at the list of top players who left the Tigers – James Tedesco, Aaron Woods, Mitch Moses, Josh Addo-Carr – and wonder what drove them out."

I really hate this type of list.

**We did everything we could do to keep Teddy and Woods, they didn't want to stay**. Adding to that, we weren't winning much with them in the squad.....

Moses was not a top player at the time either and didn't want to stay. This is a guy who blatantly tanked it in his last few games too and shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as any other player listed.

The Fox yes, that's completely on the club, but he actually wanted to stay.

That’s the entire point of the article.

It's a pointless article.

You don't need to stand in front of a mirror, take a long hard look at yourself and wonder why James Tedesco left. Everyone knows why he left, because Easts came calling and that may have something specifically to do with culture or winning, but it also may be to do with brown paper bags.

Tedesco was also 15 seconds from leaving to Canberra 3 years prior, so clearly he always had one eye on the door. That's about personal success and personal brand, not the club. He said he reneged on the Raiders for his teammates, but 3 years later, that same consideration didn't matter as much anymore. So clearly his commitment to his teammates only extends so far, within the context of being successful.

I get that Tedesco might have been tired of failure, but if you are really that good a footballer and you believe it, surely leaving isn't going to help the club or your teammates. So we can all agree, at some point, be it the first year or the 6th, he decided the toil wasn't worthwhile vs improving his own brand at the expense of his club and teammates. At some point he was caring more about himself than his teammates/club. He's human, I can understand that without respecting it.

You can't really bring Jason Taylor into the Tedesco argument, because Tedesco signed with Canberra months before Jason Taylor became the head coach. Maybe he contributed to Tedesco leaving, but Tedesco has been mentally out the door every time his contract ended.

So Breen raises a circular argument as old as the hills, which is why his article is pointless - how can losing sides sign up top players, if the top players want to join winning sides? You can't create a winning culture if you haven't got the talent first. This isn't chicken and egg, you must have talent before you can win, the question then becomes how to sculpt and combine that talent on a consistent winning basis.

And the answer is simple actually - you need to either pay overs / have mad perks / cheat, or have players who are willing to toil and struggle to transform the club from failure to winning. You can't just have players joining winning teams, otherwise the comp is forever lopsided.

Specifically to the Taylor-Cleary period, unfortunately for the Tigers that one period basically stands-in as a "lifetime failure" concept for many people, when really that's too simplistic. In other words, Breen asks why Tedesco, Woods, Moses and JAC left, when they all left within 12 months of each other (or just a few weeks, if you take out JAC).

It's like asking "why are there so many floods in Australia" just after the great Brisbane flood. It isn't necessarily true that "all the good players leave Tigers", rather, at one particular point in our history we lost a few good players all at once.

The main problem, as I see it, is that year-on-year players are becoming more brand oriented rather than being a "great clubman". It used to be all about the club success and winning with your mates, now it's more about getting ads with Coke and merchandising deals with Nike. So how do the struggling clubs get players to join without the lure of success? And being struggling clubs, normally their other opportunities are also hamstrung - advertising, gate receipts, TPAs etc. It's lose-lose for players who want an easier path.

Jai Arrow is just the Tedesco issue all over again. Legitimate Gold Coast junior, joined the lure of Broncos as soon as he was up for a senior contract, went "home" to Titans on a strong offer and not being at the top of the Broncos pecking order, had standout years and broke into Origin, then left for the lure of Sydney at the next opportunity. Is that the Titans' fault? Somewhat yes, but Arrow has only been there 5 minutes and now he wants out for more money and better chance of finals. And, apparently, his girlfriend is a model and wants to further her career in Sydney. Don't we all!?

What are Titans supposed to do? Sink all their money into keeping Arrow and put themselves into further harm?

I’m not going to pull your post apart point by point because I’m a few beers in but gee that was a long way of saying the article is pointless then basically proving the exact argument that it was making.

It seems like a few people focused too much on it being a Tigers bashing and missed the point.

There is no point having a salary cap if all the top players go to top teams for less money. That’s the point of the article. The salary cap is meant to distribute the talent evenly and it clearly isn’t, not just for us, we just happened to be one of the examples.

Thank you! That’s it Bones.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Part of a Front Rowers role is intimidation, with and without the ball. Woods has never put fear into the opposition

Tbh most props aren’t really intimidating. The really good ones are, the rest just try to do their job, defending, making metres and carrying the team forward. You couldn’t class someone like Twal as intimidating, yet he does his job for the team well.

Terms like that are over used.

 

[pawsandclaws1]

Bruiser Maguire was perhaps my favourite all time Tiger forward. He was a running second row forward from the Nowra Warriors but Warren Ryan made him a prototype prop with high work rate and mobility as well as toughness . Each pack needs a forward like Maguire and this is the type of player we have missed at WTs.

 

[yeti]

Where’s the video @happy_tiger? Many come back from hammy’s some even from dislocated hips and bung shoulders. He is not a shadow of the 2 Qld props you mention.

One of Bons old videos ......and I'm talking Woods when he 1st come into grade .....he ain't worth a pinch of pee these days As a 19 year old in grade Woods was amazing

A lot of it comes down to attitude. It’s been mentioned by a few people who know him personally that he only sees footy as a job. He doesn’t really have a love for it.

And I blame stats for a lot of Woods follies ......he became almost addicted to his stats looking good

I'm not defending Woods for what has happened since about 2013/14 but he was a beast of a prop early on

I don’t really understand the hate for Woodsy. Yes he moved on but as I recall he always gave everything he had even after he signed for the Dogs.

In terms of his career, I never saw him as the intimidating prop that threw fear into the opposition (think Klemmer or Marty Tapau). He was a prop with a high work rate, good tackle efficiency with some good footwork at the line who could pop a ball. That’s it. He was never going to be the inspirational leader that people talk about.

In some respects, the captaincy was his downfall as he tried to do too much hence we saw the reversing into the line and too many ineffective hit ups. He seems to be a simple guy that just needed to be clear on his job (25+ tackles, 20 hit ups, 90% tackle efficiency and the odd offload per game).

For the right price, I would have him back as I think he’d excel under a coach like Madge.

I think you are right. Woods would go well under Madge. However, even if he was available, he is not what we need at this time. We have heaps of workers. We need to unearth another Tapau or JWH.

 

[Goldust]

I’m really diggin some of our young forwards
Just think we need at least one aggressive hitter

 

[gallagher]

Part of a Front Rowers role is intimidation, with and without the ball. Woods has never put fear into the opposition

Tbh most props aren’t really intimidating. The really good ones are, the rest just try to do their job, defending, making metres and carrying the team forward. You couldn’t class someone like Twal as intimidating, yet he does his job for the team well.

Exactly right. Fifita was our loose cannon, intimidating prop, Woods the classic meter eater. It was shaping as a great partnership. After a long time of having a small pack ot had me licking my lips.

 

[finnzo]

I reakon 1 of the best loose cannons in the game at the moment is Nelson alphabet from Melbourne the bloke plays with so much aggression