Tevita Pangai Junior

[avocadoontoast]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

 

[jirskyr]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

 

[WT2K]

Wonder if RFM will be looking for a new home

 

[avocadoontoast]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

I know, but i'd still like to experience that greed at some point.

 

[cochise]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

I'm a Bengals fan and we made the finals 6 years in a row only to be knocked out 1st week every year, that fanbase was in a similar position to how this one is now despite the comparative success and was calling for the coach to be sacked.

 

[Speed2burn]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

 

[hobbo1]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

But they’ll only need 2-3 gun recruits to take them to the next level where as we need at least 12 ..
We are miles behind

 

[jadtiger]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

Many of their supporters want Arthur gone now as they are positive he cant win a premiership.

 

[jrtiger]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Money wise ...I doubt we will ever get another window like this until 2024/2025 ...dependent on current recruitment .....many of the board must be starting to sweat profusely ..... smell a panic buy coming on ......

I don't think they are going to do that, not unless they get over-ruled by someone up high, and I don't think the board gets involved like that.

I asked Hartigan - "what happens if your strategy doesn't work out?" He said "well maybe I'll have to go back to teaching." Seemed adamant they will stick to their guns.

Honestly though, my guess is Tigers thought they'd already made some smart recruitment decisions that should have paid off on the football field. I know they rate Laurie, Blore, Stefano very highly. Of course they hoped Tamou would help add some experience and mentoring, which may indeed have happened, but it's not translated to in-game performance.

Also though, it explains why the club still thinks we can work hard to get out of the problem, because fundamentally the basic elements of the roster are present, it's just that the support players we have are still very green. E.g. Daine Laurie is already quite good, but he's not a comp-leading fullback. But also he's only played about 15 first grade matches, so there's plenty of time left in him.

the only poor signings Hartigan has made is in stop gaps like Leilua and Roberts, both of which are off contract this year, and Tamou who hasn't lived up to expectation. he can't be blamed for M'Bye. Luciano was just about everyone's favourite player up until 6 weeks ago. we have to be patient with the young talent, but we're in dire need of experience to guide them through, which by the sounds of things is what we're after.

I actually think our recruitment is just about as good as it's ever been. yes we've missed out on some high profile players, but we've slowly but surely turned the roster over to be far more superior (on paper) to what we had in 2019 with some talent that will bear fruit in the next two years. I don't think anyone was against any of the moves we made earlier this year, and that certainly includes James Roberts at $150k.

this current recruitment window is the big one. Packer, Reynolds, M'Bye & Leilua all heading for the exits. if we don't get it right we're going to embark on another 3 year cycle of mediocrity. I trust Hartigan enough to believe he will make the right calls.

 

[Needaname]

the dogs are splashing huge amounts of money at a small group of players and not building a well rounded squad. they forget you need 30 players. if we assume the following

TPJ - $750k
JAC - $600k (rising to $750k depending on games at fullback according to CCTW)
Naden - $400k
Allan - $400k
Cotric - $500k
Thompson - $750k
Burton - $650k
Jackson - $500k
Flanagan $300k
DWZ - $350k

that's 52% of the cap spent on 9 players in the squad. it leaves $4.7 million for 21 players, which rounds out at about $225,000 per player on average.

what this means is, is that they're gambling on injuries to their marquee players every single week, because their depth will be horrendous as a result. I much prefer our approach.

It’s the Roosters / Manly model.
1/2 cap on your top 1/3 of your squad.

Funnily enough despite Hartigan coming from there, we’ve adopted the Storm model and more recently the Panthers model.

What Hartigan did do at the Roosters though in order for that model to be successful was recruited the best young min wage players around and early. Bringing them up into the roosters system from a young age, having them look up to learn off the elite players probably top 3 ranked in their own position.
Adding to the youth / development model they found an undervalued exceptional talent in Keary, an experienced back in Gordon and then the following year picked up Cronk / Tedesco, top halfback and best young fullback and the following year added Critchon best young forward.
You would say that Cronk well paid for two years was a winner of a deal.

Manly have gone a similar path. Retaining DCE on big salary, bringing in Tapau and Fonua Blake on mid to high salaries (at the time) transiting from Snake to Tom and Gifty to Jake.
Through in Walker on about 500k Siro / Thompson on about 900k between them and korisou on probably a moderate salary.

A lot of it is luck however having the best winger, the best up and coming half, the most destructive forward and speedy backs might make them more attractive to enable them to start the Roosters model within their juniors.

Time will tell.

great post. difference is between the chooks and the dogs is that I feel as if apart from Burton, JAC and potentially Cotric and Thompson, that it's going to fall down around them. Luke Keary had already won a comp at Souths before heading to the chooks, Tedesco was, well, Tedesco, and the Roosters' ability to poach elite juniors has been documented since the dawn of time. Cronk was the final piece of the puzzle. same goes with Manly, both Trbojevic's, DCE etc are on a different planet, and their juniors are immensely talented.

the dogs don't have any juniors apart from Topine, Averillo and Alamoti that have made me think they're on a similar trajectory. I actually think we're well ahead of them in that department.

I also forgot about Hetherington and Stimson that would be on at least $350k each. I think they're about to blow up their cap again for another 4 years.

Good response.

They always had competitive juniors though and I’m pretty sure only 3 years ago had won the NSW Cup. Most of the players in that side are still part of the top grade. Not sure how their Flegg team is travelling but they are now alligned with Mounties so they will probably end up getting more talent through that stream now.

You would have to think they have decided to turn over some of their senior players and Brought in more young stars with upside.
Each player alone has potential but the key for them will be making them gel.

They still need to add some forwards into the mix. Ava has been a good pick up for them. Napa will probably be moved on and Hoppa as well probably making room for JAC, Burton and maybe TPJ?

 

[jirskyr]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

But they’ll only need 2-3 gun recruits to take them to the next level where as we need at least 12 ..
We are miles behind

Only 2-3 gun recruits? Who do they think they are, Roosters?

 

[Needaname]

Wonder if RFM will be looking for a new home

Signed to end of 22. Rated by them just been injured all season.

 

[hobbo1]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

But they’ll only need 2-3 gun recruits to take them to the next level where as we need at least 12 ..
We are miles behind

Only 2-3 gun recruits? Who do they think they are, Roosters?

As I said they’re miles ahead of us

 

[Speed2burn]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

But they’ll only need 2-3 gun recruits to take them to the next level where as we need at least 12 ..
We are miles behind

Imo their spine is the issue
Forward pack is top 3 easily

But compare all the top 4 teams 1,6,7,9 and they are way behind

 

[jirskyr]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Money wise ...I doubt we will ever get another window like this until 2024/2025 ...dependent on current recruitment .....many of the board must be starting to sweat profusely ..... smell a panic buy coming on ......

I don't think they are going to do that, not unless they get over-ruled by someone up high, and I don't think the board gets involved like that.

I asked Hartigan - "what happens if your strategy doesn't work out?" He said "well maybe I'll have to go back to teaching." Seemed adamant they will stick to their guns.

Honestly though, my guess is Tigers thought they'd already made some smart recruitment decisions that should have paid off on the football field. I know they rate Laurie, Blore, Stefano very highly. Of course they hoped Tamou would help add some experience and mentoring, which may indeed have happened, but it's not translated to in-game performance.

Also though, it explains why the club still thinks we can work hard to get out of the problem, because fundamentally the basic elements of the roster are present, it's just that the support players we have are still very green. E.g. Daine Laurie is already quite good, but he's not a comp-leading fullback. But also he's only played about 15 first grade matches, so there's plenty of time left in him.

the only poor signings Hartigan has made is in stop gaps like Leilua and Roberts, both of which are off contract this year, and Tamou who hasn't lived up to expectation. he can't be blamed for M'Bye. Luciano was just about everyone's favourite player up until 6 weeks ago. we have to be patient with the young talent, but we're in dire need of experience to guide them through, which by the sounds of things is what we're after.

I actually think our recruitment is just about as good as it's ever been. yes we've missed out on some high profile players, but we've slowly but surely turned the roster over to be far more superior (on paper) to what we had in 2019 with some talent that will bear fruit in the next two years. I don't think anyone was against any of the moves we made earlier this year, and that certainly includes James Roberts at $150k.

this current recruitment window is the big one. Packer, Reynolds, M'Bye & Leilua all heading for the exits. if we don't get it right we're going to embark on another 3 year cycle of mediocrity. I trust Hartigan enough to believe he will make the right calls.

I agree and I think if there were better players in the market, we could all feel more optimistic about future recruitment. I think there is a general cognitive dissonance amongst fans, where they realise there aren't many players about, and yet still really want to sign *someone*.

I mean if Dale Finucane is the headline act for off-contract season 2022, it is surely saying something about the dearth of talent. Hectic Cheese if I am not mistaken is not officially off contract until 2023.

 

[hobbo1]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final

But they’ll only need 2-3 gun recruits to take them to the next level where as we need at least 12 ..
We are miles behind

Imo their spine is the issue
Forward pack is top 3 easily

But compare all the top 4 teams 1,6,7,9 and they are way behind

Nevermind…..

 

[Speed2burn]

Our recruitment for next year has been pretty underwhelming, I don’t think anyone would deny that.

I think recruitment is underwhelming in the hope (surely not the expectation) that Tigers sign big-branded players, to get us out of our mess.

I personally never thought that was going to happen, even though I know we have some cap coming free, I don't see the market having much decent cattle just now. I know Tigers are saving pennies, having spoken to Adam Hartigan a few times, I understood what Tigers strategy is.

The whole angst in this thread is about why Tigers aren't signing Pangai, after initial reports we were close. And this is despite almost everyone agreeing that the proposed selling price was excessive, and despite a general reporting in the media that Tigers were front-runners, there are folks very quick to criticise Tigers for not signing a potentially over-priced, known unreliable/risky player.

I think it's reflective of an impatient and unrealistic set of supporters, though I understand why everyone is greedy for a quick fix / quick dose of positive. I personally think only hard work and keeping strict on our long-term roster strategy will yield results. This is based not on some expertise, but on the experience of what the Tigers have tried in the past. The only time we've ever tried to keep a coach on for more than 3 years we did win a comp and make the finals a few times.

But then for folks to say "but but Bulldogs are signing these players" - well yeah, they are, and it's getting them nowhere. Of course, you would expect at least one of their signatures will come good at some point, be it JAC or Burton. But I think to parachute a half into a bad side with bad deficiencies - won't turn out any better I don't think than having Flanagan there or Luke Brooks.

This isn't specifically directed at you, I just jumped on the comment about how bad Bulldogs are.

Interestingly we won the comp in his 2nd year you could argue that we kept him long term because he was successful and not that we were successful because we kept him long term. Though 2010 and 11 support your argument better.

My argument is actually - that I think most coaches need a 5-year cycle to achieve their targets, if they are going to be achieved. There are particularly exceptional coaches (a handful) that get early success and keep it basically ongoing, but they are very rare.

But most coaches have a 5-year cycle of up and down. Some of the better coaches can limit it to 3-years, e.g. Hasler, Bennett.

Tigers haven't given a coach 5 years since Sheens, and Sheens also displayed the 5-year cycle. Cleary probably would have been given 5 years had he chosen to stay. So I don't believe we can fully evaluate Madge until he's had that 5 years.

This isn't to say Madge is going to get the job done - I have serious doubts. But I don't think we have alternatives, not just to give him a decent tenure, but that the backup coach options are ordinary.

Seriously - some people spruiking on here that the next best move would be to sign Flanagan, a recidivist cheat, or Morris, the coach a finals failure team decided to cut loose in favour of a novice. Let's not talk up the Sharks, Morris' two years they limped into the finals (including 2019 when they knocked us out of the race Round 25) and were knocked out first round both times. Shark's finals campaigns since 2016 are 1 W 5 L - not that I wouldn't take it as a Tigers fan, but not a good record.

I long for being knocked out of the first week of the finals.

I agree, but as soon as it happens 2 or 3 times you'll get greedy, I guarantee it.

Case in point parramatta

Sure they are turning into a consistent top 4 team and will likely finish there again, but they are complete cannon fodder come finals time
At some point they must get sick of not converting that season success into a grand final


Many of their supporters want Arthur gone now as they are positive he cant win a premiership.

Most questioned the Moses re-signing aswell for that reason, but then again the NRL is very low in stock of quality 7s

 

[Needaname]

slowly but surely turned the roster over to be far more superior (on paper) to what we had in 2019 with some talent that will bear fruit in the next two years.

This statement resonates with me the most.
Madge arrived in 2019 with the same roster Ivan assembled which most would agree was an experienced / aging roster so a limited premiership window.
The year before our key playmaker is rated officially as halfback of the year. Whether you agree or not it still happened. That season with that in mind, the team still achieves 9th. There was limited growth in any of the side and a very United committed culture but they still couldn’t get it done.
Next year Madge’s first in charge. He gets the same Roster to 9th again. Brooks form didn’t drop, statistically he had a better year and was voted as the best player in the club. Matterson was a valuable pick up and grew with us and in my opinion has not had anywhere near the same impact in a better side at Parramatta.
So alas the writing was on the wall 9th twice with two different coaches and 2 spine players in their best form out of many previous seasons (Marshall and Farah) and the other consistently in good form (Brooks).
This is why we have started another rebuild, the window was closing and the team was far from a premiership contender.
It’s short term pain for much longer term gain.

 

[Krammy]

JAC = topliner = Dogs
Burton = topliner = Dogs
TPJ = topliner = Dogs


Tamou = cheaper option / washed up= us.
Maumolo = cheaper option / good, but lacks speed or class = us
SuA = cheaper option, solid, but lots of flaws = maybe us


Well, if we want to stay where we are and not add any X factor / elite players, we are doing it right...mediocrity.

Sometimes you need to roll the dice and for a few hundred grand more we might have landed all three.

If people think Hartigan and Madge have a plan, that is good.

But it is going to be a very, very slow one at this rate.

It seems Madge is staying. OK, so then a lot of my hope rests on changes that Sheens can bring. I hope Madge is open to Sheen's ideas because clearly players from other teams see us as a basket case at the moment. Fresh ideas, more than anything, is needed to get this club out of this quagmire that we appear to be in.

You don’t think they have been having conversations already?

Probably have. As Sheens learns more when he arrives, there may be some more difficult conversations to be had. Hopefully they are and can stay on the same page.

 

[mike]

JAC = topliner = Dogs
Burton = topliner = Dogs
TPJ = topliner = Dogs


Tamou = cheaper option / washed up= us.
Maumolo = cheaper option / good, but lacks speed or class = us
SuA = cheaper option, solid, but lots of flaws = maybe us


Well, if we want to stay where we are and not add any X factor / elite players, we are doing it right...mediocrity.

Sometimes you need to roll the dice and for a few hundred grand more we might have landed all three.

If people think Hartigan and Madge have a plan, that is good.

But it is going to be a very, very slow one at this rate.

It seems Madge is staying. OK, so then a lot of my hope rests on changes that Sheens can bring. I hope Madge is open to Sheen's ideas because clearly players from other teams see us as a basket case at the moment. Fresh ideas, more than anything, is needed to get this club out of this quagmire that we appear to be in.

You don’t think they have been having conversations already?

Probably have. As Sheens learns more when he arrives, there may be some more difficult conversations to be had. Hopefully they are and can stay on the same page.

Why do you think that? It would be advice and ideas only. Maguire won't be reporting to Sheens.