Why? You enjoy seeing the same thing over and over again?
Seibs mantra: "If it is broke, don't fix it."
I am starting with what we know for a fact. Just one, among a few others.
For a fact, we know our defence isn't working under the blow torch of the new rule, against those teams who have adapted to it. Those who have adapted use attacking shapes which target slow moving defensive lines, like ours, usually on the back foot, and particularly those lines which don't re-form quickly enough in the face of fast moving attacking plays. And also those with shaky edge defences, like our right side, where the winger constantly leaves his wing, leaving gaping holes to exploit. Last game was yet another example of how and where we leak points out wide.
Seibold has admitted publicly we haven't adapted to the new rule. So it's on him to fix it. It's broken. It needs an urgent fix. So why hasn't it been fixed?
A few things come to mind to explain this. First, he couldn't be bothered. Somehow I doubt that. He wouldn't admit publicly our defence is shit under the new rule and then not do anything about it.
That then leaves the real possibility he is working on it and our players are just not following his instructions. On top of that, I doubt it is an easy thing to fix what has been the norm since 2015 if not longer - a "wait for them" approach, a Bennett style, a Bennett legacy. It worked under the old rule when there was a lot more time for the defensive line to form and re-form, and, where our individual tackling was top notch and, the defensive line was coordinated by key players, like our on field leaders.
This year, we have a lot of inexperienced players and no leaders which for mine, goes a long way to explaining why our defensive structure is slow to adapt. Boyd is particularly to blame here IMO. He does little as a leader, which is why he was re-signed, and why he should now resign. Out. Now. By his inaction as a leader on the park, I reckon he is undermining Seibold, and the confidence of younger players, by not putting in. We really need a wise, older head at the back, be it FB or centre. Boyd has simply given up in this vital role, a role again for which he was re-signed, and why I think Seibold has persisted with him, hoping he would come good.
Against the Warriors, I saw good signs of improvement in our individual tackling efforts. That's a start to bring about change. Now, Seibold has to show, as do the players, that the line itself has is adapting to the new rule, by coming forward, being on the front foot to smother attacking plays.
Personally, I think too many players are just not chipping in and doing what they surely know they have to do, individually and collectively. Again, I can't see that this is purely Seibold's fault that they are not. In any case, to change a defensive pattern that has been ingrained in Broncos sides for over 5 years is not an easy task, made a hell of a lot harder if players are not taking the bit between their teeth. It's a big ask, especially if some or more than some players don't want to. Having poor leadership on the field is another key issue here. Either way, Seibold's job here is not easy, and I think blaming him for everything is going too far.
It's on Seibold to do as he said he would - change things, give us a new future. Part of that job is to ensure the players respond. If they won't or can't, then Seibold is not for us, along with a good number of players.
The game against the Dogs will tell a lot .. in defence, which is broke, and needs to be fixed ASAP.
