Tevita Pangai Junior

[jrtiger]

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.

 

[Needaname]

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.

Panthers are the exact model to follow. There are major similarities between leagues club funding, junior bases etc. Gould is the difference. They get players at 16-17 and make them stars. It’s the only way.

Yes but they also purchased some very good talent E.g. Api K, Capewell, Tamou (in his prime) etc... We need to purchase otherwise we are waiting about 5-7 years.

Egan is really decent hooker, and is playing 80 every game for the Warriors.
I’m curious, would the Panthers be any different if they decided to keep Egan and not chase Korisou?

Korisou is better then Egan I think but I don't think he is SOO quality either. I think Korisou looks better then he is because of the players around him.

Well he was credited for being a the biggest change in form for the Panthers from 2019 to 2020. Not so sure he looks better coz of the other players his experience is apparently invaluable. I guess I’m just curious sure there may be a slight advantage in skill recruiting Korisou but I’m not sure they would of hit the ground running as quickly if they kept Egan. Really gutsy decision in my opinion. Considering the Panthers are pushing the whole % of local juniors theme.

 

[weststigerman]

Brandon Smith come down to Concord

He’s rise at 9 this year has been tremendous.

I still think he's a better 13, but he's be good anywhere in the forwards.

He would be our best 9 or 13.

Yep, probably our best 11 or 12 too if we played him there.

 

[jirskyr]

The dogs can look forward to the most judiciary appearances in 2022. TPJ and Hetherington alone make up a season of suspensions...

They can also look forward to a significantly improved roster though. If you were a Dogs fan you’d be looking forward to next year. Us not so much.

Bulldogs are so bad they can only look forward. Tigers have the same # wins in 2021 as Bulldogs have in 2020 and 2021 combined.

To be fair at present we’re not THAT much better. As it stands now would our team for 2022 beat theirs? I’m not so sure.

What are you talking about, we have 5 wins they have 2 wins. That is substantially better. Enormously better. But that's not to say Tigers are good, just to say how bad Bulldogs are. You are kidding yourself if you think there is any equivalence.

Bulldogs have beaten Sharks and Dragons. They are 0/5 against Bottom 8 sides. They have the worst attack in the comp, not just by a small margin either: they are 86 points behind the second-worst attack (Broncos).

Bulldogs defence is 10 points better than Tigers (Bulldogs 3rd worst in comp) and therefore their differential is worst in the comp (and 52 points behind second-worst Broncos).

Bulldogs have been shut-out 4 times in 15 games (over a quarter of all matches) and they have only scored more than 20 points in a match once.

Bulldogs are last in the comp for - line engaged, line breaks, tackle breaks, all runs, all-run metres, kick return metres, try assists, line break assists,

Bulldogs are second-last in the comp for - post-contact metres, offloads,

Worse still, Bulldogs make least errors (and therefore best completion rate) in the comp.

Tigers are better placed than Bulldogs in all categories measured by the NRL except errors/completions and penalties conceded.

 

[avocadoontoast]

The dogs can look forward to the most judiciary appearances in 2022. TPJ and Hetherington alone make up a season of suspensions...

They can also look forward to a significantly improved roster though. If you were a Dogs fan you’d be looking forward to next year. Us not so much.

Bulldogs are so bad they can only look forward. Tigers have the same # wins in 2021 as Bulldogs have in 2020 and 2021 combined.

To be fair at present we’re not THAT much better. As it stands now would our team for 2022 beat theirs? I’m not so sure.

What are you talking about, we have 5 wins they have 2 wins. That is substantially better. Enormously better. But that's not to say Tigers are good, just to say how bad Bulldogs are. You are kidding yourself if you think there is any equivalence.

Bulldogs have beaten Sharks and Dragons. They are 0/5 against Bottom 8 sides. They have the worst attack in the comp, not just by a small margin either: they are 86 points behind the second-worst attack (Broncos).

Bulldogs defence is 10 points better than Tigers (Bulldogs 3rd worst in comp) and therefore their differential is worst in the comp (and 52 points behind second-worst Broncos).

Bulldogs have been shut-out 4 times in 15 games (over a quarter of all matches) and they have only scored more than 20 points in a match once.

Bulldogs are last in the comp for - line engaged, line breaks, tackle breaks, all runs, all-run metres, kick return metres, try assists, line break assists,

Bulldogs are second-last in the comp for - post-contact metres, offloads,

Worse still, Bulldogs make least errors (and therefore best completion rate) in the comp.

Tigers are better placed than Bulldogs in all categories measured by the NRL except errors/completions and penalties conceded.

Why are you getting so worked up? It's just an opinion. I agree we're better that the Dogs, but we're not THAT much better. We've won 5 games this year, Newcastle twice (without Ponga and Pearce), St George twice (without a heap of players) and Penrith with 8 players out.

We haven't beaten a team close to full strength all year. But there's no point arguing about this now, let's see how we go against them in a few weeks. According to you we'll flog them so let's see how that goes?

 

[jirskyr]

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.

Laundry can bump that figure up significantly if he chooses to do so

Who the sponsor? He can't top up anything player salary because he's a sponsor.

 

[happy_tiger]

The dogs can look forward to the most judiciary appearances in 2022. TPJ and Hetherington alone make up a season of suspensions...

They can also look forward to a significantly improved roster though. If you were a Dogs fan you’d be looking forward to next year. Us not so much.

Bulldogs are so bad they can only look forward. Tigers have the same # wins in 2021 as Bulldogs have in 2020 and 2021 combined.

To be fair at present we’re not THAT much better. As it stands now would our team for 2022 beat theirs? I’m not so sure.

What are you talking about, we have 5 wins they have 2 wins. That is substantially better. Enormously better. But that's not to say Tigers are good, just to say how bad Bulldogs are. You are kidding yourself if you think there is any equivalence.

Bulldogs have beaten Sharks and Dragons. They are 0/5 against Bottom 8 sides. They have the worst attack in the comp, not just by a small margin either: they are 86 points behind the second-worst attack (Broncos).

Bulldogs defence is 10 points better than Tigers (Bulldogs 3rd worst in comp) and therefore their differential is worst in the comp (and 52 points behind second-worst Broncos).

Bulldogs have been shut-out 4 times in 15 games (over a quarter of all matches) and they have only scored more than 20 points in a match once.

Bulldogs are last in the comp for - line engaged, line breaks, tackle breaks, all runs, all-run metres, kick return metres, try assists, line break assists,

Bulldogs are second-last in the comp for - post-contact metres, offloads,

Worse still, Bulldogs make least errors (and therefore best completion rate) in the comp.

Tigers are better placed than Bulldogs in all categories measured by the NRL except errors/completions and penalties conceded.

Why are you getting so worked up? It's just an opinion. I agree we're better that the Dogs, but we're not THAT much better. We've won 5 games this year, Newcastle twice (without Ponga and Pearce), St George twice (without a heap of players) and Penrith with 8 players out.

We haven't beaten a team close to full strength all year. But there's no point arguing about this now, let's see how we go against them in a few weeks. According to you we'll flog them so let's see how that goes?

Our victories have relied on getting an uneven share of the ball ...if the Dogs have the best completion rate .......they are a real good chance ...only saving grace might be that teh Dogs and Saints have the most predictable attack ......I'm not confident ...but more confident of us winning a game v Eels,Manly ,Roosters , Souths ,Melbourne ,Canberra , Titans ,NZ ,Brisbane , Penrith

 

[jirskyr]

We haven’t beaten a team close to full strength all year. But there’s no point arguing about this now, let’s see how we go against them in a few weeks. According to you we’ll flog them so let’s see how that goes?

I never said we'd flog Bulldogs, I just said they are by far the worst team in the comp. You said we aren't that much better, I think we are far better, but that's just a reflection of how bad Bulldogs are.

But that's not to say the worst version of the Tigers won't turn up to play Bulldogs, which is very possible.

My primary argument is against Bulldogs being a good side in 2022. I just don't see it, don't believe it. I think their signings are poorly chosen and a false dawn. I think the 2021 signings were just the same - people talked up Flanagan and Cotric and Corey Allan as good signings, and they are still by far the worst team going around.

So I don't mind leaving the Bulldogs out of the conversation totally, if folks stop turning to the Bulldogs as an example of why Tigers recruitment sucks.

 

[avocadoontoast]

We haven’t beaten a team close to full strength all year. But there’s no point arguing about this now, let’s see how we go against them in a few weeks. According to you we’ll flog them so let’s see how that goes?

I never said we'd flog Bulldogs, I just said they are by far the worst team in the comp. You said we aren't that much better, I think we are far better, but that's just a reflection of how bad Bulldogs are.

But that's not to say the worst version of the Tigers won't turn up to play Bulldogs, which is very possible.

My primary argument is against Bulldogs being a good side in 2022. I just don't see it, don't believe it. I think their signings are poorly chosen and a false dawn. I think the 2021 signings were just the same - people talked up Flanagan and Cotric and Corey Allan as good signings, and they are still by far the worst team going around.

So I don't mind leaving the Bulldogs out of the conversation totally, if folks stop turning to the Bulldogs as an example of why Tigers recruitment sucks.

They're terrible, but I think we're pretty shocking too, that's my point. And I wouldn't be surprised one bit if they roll us. If we play like we have the past few weeks against Brisbane they'll beat us too.

I don't think Flanagan, Cotric, Allan have been good signings at all btw. I think JAC and Burton will be great signings. Pangai possibly very good.

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

 

[jirskyr]

The dogs can look forward to the most judiciary appearances in 2022. TPJ and Hetherington alone make up a season of suspensions...

They can also look forward to a significantly improved roster though. If you were a Dogs fan you’d be looking forward to next year. Us not so much.

Bulldogs are so bad they can only look forward. Tigers have the same # wins in 2021 as Bulldogs have in 2020 and 2021 combined.

To be fair at present we’re not THAT much better. As it stands now would our team for 2022 beat theirs? I’m not so sure.

What are you talking about, we have 5 wins they have 2 wins. That is substantially better. Enormously better. But that's not to say Tigers are good, just to say how bad Bulldogs are. You are kidding yourself if you think there is any equivalence.

Bulldogs have beaten Sharks and Dragons. They are 0/5 against Bottom 8 sides. They have the worst attack in the comp, not just by a small margin either: they are 86 points behind the second-worst attack (Broncos).

Bulldogs defence is 10 points better than Tigers (Bulldogs 3rd worst in comp) and therefore their differential is worst in the comp (and 52 points behind second-worst Broncos).

Bulldogs have been shut-out 4 times in 15 games (over a quarter of all matches) and they have only scored more than 20 points in a match once.

Bulldogs are last in the comp for - line engaged, line breaks, tackle breaks, all runs, all-run metres, kick return metres, try assists, line break assists,

Bulldogs are second-last in the comp for - post-contact metres, offloads,

Worse still, Bulldogs make least errors (and therefore best completion rate) in the comp.

Tigers are better placed than Bulldogs in all categories measured by the NRL except errors/completions and penalties conceded.

Why are you getting so worked up? It's just an opinion. I agree we're better that the Dogs, but we're not THAT much better. We've won 5 games this year, Newcastle twice (without Ponga and Pearce), St George twice (without a heap of players) and Penrith with 8 players out.

We haven't beaten a team close to full strength all year. But there's no point arguing about this now, let's see how we go against them in a few weeks. According to you we'll flog them so let's see how that goes?

Our victories have relied on getting an uneven share of the ball ...if the Dogs have the best completion rate .......they are a real good chance ...only saving grace might be that teh Dogs and Saints have the most predictable attack ......I'm not confident ...but more confident of us winning a game v Eels,Manly ,Roosters , Souths ,Melbourne ,Canberra , Titans ,NZ ,Brisbane , Penrith

Well an uneven share of ball is common (i.e. not 50/50), but it depends what margin you mean. We've only exceeded 53% possession in one win.

Wins:
vs Knights Rd 3 we had 52% ball
vs Dragons Rd 8 58%
vs Knights Rd 10 53%
vs Dragons Rd 12 51%
vs Panthers Rd13 52%

 

[happy_tiger]

The dogs can look forward to the most judiciary appearances in 2022. TPJ and Hetherington alone make up a season of suspensions...

They can also look forward to a significantly improved roster though. If you were a Dogs fan you’d be looking forward to next year. Us not so much.

Bulldogs are so bad they can only look forward. Tigers have the same # wins in 2021 as Bulldogs have in 2020 and 2021 combined.

To be fair at present we’re not THAT much better. As it stands now would our team for 2022 beat theirs? I’m not so sure.

What are you talking about, we have 5 wins they have 2 wins. That is substantially better. Enormously better. But that's not to say Tigers are good, just to say how bad Bulldogs are. You are kidding yourself if you think there is any equivalence.

Bulldogs have beaten Sharks and Dragons. They are 0/5 against Bottom 8 sides. They have the worst attack in the comp, not just by a small margin either: they are 86 points behind the second-worst attack (Broncos).

Bulldogs defence is 10 points better than Tigers (Bulldogs 3rd worst in comp) and therefore their differential is worst in the comp (and 52 points behind second-worst Broncos).

Bulldogs have been shut-out 4 times in 15 games (over a quarter of all matches) and they have only scored more than 20 points in a match once.

Bulldogs are last in the comp for - line engaged, line breaks, tackle breaks, all runs, all-run metres, kick return metres, try assists, line break assists,

Bulldogs are second-last in the comp for - post-contact metres, offloads,

Worse still, Bulldogs make least errors (and therefore best completion rate) in the comp.

Tigers are better placed than Bulldogs in all categories measured by the NRL except errors/completions and penalties conceded.

Why are you getting so worked up? It's just an opinion. I agree we're better that the Dogs, but we're not THAT much better. We've won 5 games this year, Newcastle twice (without Ponga and Pearce), St George twice (without a heap of players) and Penrith with 8 players out.

We haven't beaten a team close to full strength all year. But there's no point arguing about this now, let's see how we go against them in a few weeks. According to you we'll flog them so let's see how that goes?

Our victories have relied on getting an uneven share of the ball ...if the Dogs have the best completion rate .......they are a real good chance ...only saving grace might be that teh Dogs and Saints have the most predictable attack ......I'm not confident ...but more confident of us winning a game v Eels,Manly ,Roosters , Souths ,Melbourne ,Canberra , Titans ,NZ ,Brisbane , Penrith

Well an uneven share of ball is common (i.e. not 50/50), but it depends what margin you mean. We've only exceeded 53% possession in one win.

Wins:
vs Knights Rd 3 we had 52% ball
vs Dragons Rd 8 58%
vs Knights Rd 10 53%
vs Dragons Rd 12 51%
vs Panthers Rd13 52%

I probabyl should have said WHEN we have an uneven share of possession ......we have given up a bit of that % late in games .....like if you took out the last 15 minutes of the Melbourne game ....the possession rate would have been unholy

I agree with you if the best WT's show up and the best Dogs show up we win ......but I reckon the Best WT's show up and against Best Broncos ...Broncs win ....

 

[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.

 

[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.

FWIW, I supported us on here pulling out of Pangai after he wanted $700k. He's not worth the risk at that price.

I agree we're not likely to land a big name, but I would hope we can improve our roster. Clearly we're not travelling well at the moment.

 

[happy_tiger]

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 ......

 

[851]

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.

I dont think its the Madge Ideas, Training or culture.

**This Quagmire predates Madge for 15+ years**

The Players we have and the Game's rule changes have further exacerbated the issue.

Bit like 2006 ......

We were supposed to go back to back ?

And we missed the 8

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[avocadoontoast]

I don’t think the board gets involved like that.

By all reports Lee overruled everyone with the re-signing of Nofoaluma which is a bit of a worry.

 

[The-moP]

Well an uneven share of ball is common (i.e. not 50/50), but it depends what margin you mean. We've only exceeded 53% possession in one win.

Wins:
vs Knights Rd 3 we had 52% ball
vs Dragons Rd 8 58%
vs Knights Rd 10 53%
vs Dragons Rd 12 51%
vs Panthers Rd13 52%

Well these stats also show that we have only beaten 3 teams in this competition .. and one of those wins was against a team that was missing a handful of SOO players .. not good .. :-(

 

[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.

Last club Madge coached he displayed that 5-year cycle, but it did include a premiership and several consecutive years of finals. Clearly he knows how to do it, same as Ivan Cleary is capable of coaching a minor premiership side, even if he doesn't do it regularly.

And not to mention that Madge still the only man in 50 years to both get Souths to a Grand Final, and win one.

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.