Who should Madge's assistant coaches be for 2022?

[bbobb]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

I think it varies from team to team. Some run defence and offensive, others assist the coach on these aspects.
It was interesting to watch Cleary let Ciraldo and Webster address the team at halftime - they are obviously playing more an active role. I don't believe Madge has the assistants address the team during the doco.
Listening to Bellyache and he runs all aspects of the team and Madge did come through that system but I do believe that Bellyache is a "one off".
I think having more active and experienced assistants would benefit the Tigers

 

[Tiger5150]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

 

[gallagher]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

 

[Tiger5150]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

 

[avocadoontoast]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

Genuine question, wasn’t the peptide stuff 2012/2013?

 

[gallagher]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

 

[cochise]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He was doping?

 

[Tiger5150]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

 

[Tiger5150]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

Genuine question, wasn’t the peptide stuff 2012/2013?

Proven for then, yes as well as 2011. Not proven or disproven for 2014, 2015 but mass, O2Max, etc etc already established. I cant see any argument that it isnt cheating?

 

[gallagher]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

So he had 2 good years in his career? Awesome.
We still taking about about Flanagan arnt we? His time at cronulla over 8 seasons was successful . No?

 

[gallagher]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He was doping?

Which years?

 

[Tiger5150]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

So he had 2 good years in his career? Awesome.
We still taking about about Flanagan arnt we? His time at cronulla over 8 seasons was successful . No?

Im not questioning that. I was very specific. Are you happy to accept success at any cost, using Flanagans methods?

 

[gallagher]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

So he had 2 good years in his career? Awesome.
We still taking about about Flanagan arnt we? His time at cronulla over 8 seasons was successful . No?

Im not questioning that. I was very specific. Are you happy to accept success at any cost, using Flanagans methods?

Whatever methods he uses under the football depts watch.

 

[yeahcaz]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

So he had 2 good years in his career? Awesome.
We still taking about about Flanagan arnt we? His time at cronulla over 8 seasons was successful . No?

Im not questioning that. I was very specific. Are you happy to accept success at any cost, using Flanagans methods?

To cut in, what methods are you talking about ? People don’t seriously think he’ll come here and start jabbing the players with needles in the first week.

 

[cochise]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He was doping?

Which years?

I don't care which years, he was banned for doping, so was his coach who oversaw the program.

 

[Tiger5150]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

So he had 2 good years in his career? Awesome.
We still taking about about Flanagan arnt we? His time at cronulla over 8 seasons was successful . No?

Im not questioning that. I was very specific. Are you happy to accept success at any cost, using Flanagans methods?

Whatever methods he uses under the football depts watch.

THere you go. Thats fine, that is your opinion and thats cool. Completely acceptable that we both have differing opinions on this. Im not on board for those methods.

We have all just celebrated Benjis retirement and glowingly remembered those magic years. I am incredibly proud of those magic years and the impact that team had on the game.

If those magic years were built on toughness, stamina and belting people and then I found out that we had been cheating by taking illegal supplements, I would not have that same feeling. That is without considering the damage potentially done to the players.

Google the potential side effects of the peptides they were using. Then google what Jon Mannah died of. Tell me you would be OK with that.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjTgsKph73zAhUNbn0KHYxIArQQFnoECCAQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jstage.jst.go.jp%2Farticle%2Fendocrj%2F52%2F5%2F52_5_571%2F_pdf&usg=AOvVaw2vzQBi0PvXtvY3c8vmyxKB

 

[Russell]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

If you have to use supplements to create a culture like "The Cheat" did at the Sharpies.

I'd rather have a different culture.

 

[cochise]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

What is a winning culture. Win at all costs? Win with integrity and principles?

A "winning" culture starts with the players having the right principles and attitude. An attitude that principles dont matter and success can be short cut by taking a supplement or cheating is not a successful culture. A culture that hard work and excellence will get you there is a winning culture.

Melbourne, Roosters, Souffs, Penrith, Manly to an extent have a "winning" culture. A culture established by principles. How can you tell? Because when things go wrong, they have something solid to fall back to and maintain performance. With someone else instilled in those principles to take the place of the last guy.

How did Cronulla go with that? Did their "winning" culture stand the test of time and adversity?

They won a comp and were always strong when he was there. So, yes.

Did it last? Did it stand the test of time and adversity? No. It ran out slowly after the peptides ran out. Track Gallens minutes. He was consistently an 80minute prop for two years. That coincidentally ended at the end of Flannos reign. Because of hard work?

EDIT: Are you serious Gallagher? You would be happy to achieve the "winning" culture the way Flanagan did?

Maybe he game time/performance went down because he was in his late 30's???

He retired 2019. He was an 80min prop for two years. Guess which years.

So he had 2 good years in his career? Awesome.
We still taking about about Flanagan arnt we? His time at cronulla over 8 seasons was successful . No?

Im not questioning that. I was very specific. Are you happy to accept success at any cost, using Flanagans methods?

To cut in, what methods are you talking about ? People don’t seriously think he’ll come here and start jabbing the players with needles in the first week.

A level of trust is placed in coaches by players, some of those players are incredibly young. Flanno has shown he is not worthy of that trust and should not be responsible for the health of players.

 

[cochise]

This thread has thrown up some interesting points, particularly with regards to Flanagan but IMO is skirting around the main issue.

What are the roles of the assistant coaches? This is the start and finish if the decision of who we use.

Is it for tactical input? If so I could see merit to Flanagan however there is a point of diminishing returns. How many have tactical input? Madge obviously. Sheens? Assistants? I can imagine there is a point where it’s too many voices.

Defensive structures? Possibly Pay.

Instilling toughness? Opens to pay and a lots of others.

Culture? Not Flanagan.

This is the first question, the answer will flow from there.

depends if you want a winning culture or a running through the daisies with braided hair culture.

If you have to use supplements to create a culture like "The Cheat" did at the Sharpies.

I'd rather have a different culture.

I'd rather a losing culture than that.

 

[Russell]

Madge needs someone who will challenge him In the coaches box, simple as that. Those 2 duds we just sacked were just his yes men and when his ideas didn’t work (which was clearly very often), we had nothing else to fall back on. If Flanagan is appointed, Madge, if he’s still this great coach everyone claims he is, would really respond to it and put his best foot forward to work together.

My prediction is Flanagan will be the head coach for the majority of 2022. If the Tigers start slow , Madge will be gone by round 8. He is going to want to spend the last $1m - $1.2m wisely.

Don't think so - I can just see it now all those young blokes taking supplements you are not supposed to thinking it is vitamin C.

The guy is a total Mongrel - and if we take him on ....I will have to rethink unfortunately.

Obviously we have someone into supplements hiding behind dislikes. Good on ya!