Exercise: Broncos Cleanout

[Unbreakable]

1. K.Naiqama
2. J.Kahu
3. J.Hodges
4. J.Reed
5. J.Hoffman
6. B.Hunt
7. A.Milford
8. B.Hannant
9. A.McCullough
10. J.McGuire
11. A.Glenn
12. S.Thaiday
13. C.Parker (c)

14. M.Gillett
15. L.Tasi
16. D.Hala
17. J.Wallace

Just a few signings.. come on management.. you can do it..

(( I want to see Hunt and McCullough play a full season in Five-Eighth and Hooker, both playing 80 minutes every game ))

 

[Big Pete]

The amount of flack that McCullough cops for not being able to play 80 is harsh.

12 out of the 16 clubs utilise a back up hooker off the bench.

The 4 that don't include Melbourne, West Tigers, Canterbury-Bankstown & Manly.

Yes, there are some valid criticisms that have been made but the 'he has to play 80!' for me is unwarranted.

 

[Alec]

The amount of flack that McCullough cops for not being able to play 80 is harsh.

12 out of the 16 clubs utilise a back up hooker off the bench.

The 4 that don't include Melbourne, West Tigers, Canterbury-Bankstown & Manly.

Yes, there are some valid criticisms that have been made but the 'he has to play 80!' for me is unwarranted.

Yeah, agreed. Hookers tend to get through more work than any other player on the field, I don't really understand why people expect each one to play the 80. I actually like having a back-up hooker or utility player on the bench.

 

[Unbreakable]

The amount of flack that McCullough cops for not being able to play 80 is harsh.

12 out of the 16 clubs utilise a back up hooker off the bench.

The 4 that don't include Melbourne, West Tigers, Canterbury-Bankstown & Manly.

Yes, there are some valid criticisms that have been made but the 'he has to play 80!' for me is unwarranted.

I'm not criticizing him for not playing 80, I'm criticizing the management, I'm sure Andrew could play 80, he's been playing first grade for 4 years or however long, if he isn't fit enough / developed enough to be able to handle 80 minutes at club level then we need to look elsewhere for a starting hooker.

But as I said, I think he can / could / should, but the management is too worried about developing Hunt (Yeah that turned out well)

 

[broncos4life]

I'm not criticizing him for not playing 80, I'm criticizing the management, I'm sure Andrew could play 80, he's been playing first grade for 4 years or however long, if he isn't fit enough / developed enough to be able to handle 80 minutes at club level then we need to look elsewhere for a starting hooker.

But as I said, I think he can / could / should, but the management is too worried about developing Hunt (Yeah that turned out well)

Why the **** does he need to play 80 tho

 

[Viti]

From those that appear to be available or semi available, I'd go after the following:

Kevin Naiqama (has the speed we need, looks like he might be okay at fullback too)
Marika Koroibete (seriously, the dude is a beast, his speed/size combo is insane)
Kevin Locke (if Sam Tomkins can't be convinced to join us)
Kane Evans (apparently not too happy with not being given a shot at the Roosters. I don't care if he's a blue, he'd be a ****ing great signing)

I've got huge wraps on Evans and I think he could be a very valuable signing + the fact that hes a fijian sort of cancels out the fact that hes a blue for me.

 

[Unbreakable]

Why the **** does he need to play 80 tho

Because it's evident that we need another prop / big man off the bench.. did you watch last weeks game? We had 4 bigs off the bench and we had absolutely no go forward, do you really want to waste a bench spot on Hunt with the chance that he comes on and runs out of dummy half a few times for 10 metres.. If we had great big men with enormous go forward I would be extremely satisfied with a utility off the bench, but with our current roster I can't see it helping us as much as a prop off the bench would.

If it came down to Hunt or Hala off the bench (With our current roster and team set-up), I would choose Hala purely because certain players in our team aren't giving us the go forward we need.

 

[Unbreakable]

I'll even make an example of a game that wasn't last weeks game, the week before against the Bulldogs when we had nearly a full team.

Gillett - 75m
Glenn - 81m
Thaiday - 88m
McGuire - 102m

vs

Tolman - 173m
Graham - 169m
Pritchard - 119m
Kasiano - 82m

And you guys think we can afford the luxury of a utility off the bench..

 

[broncos4life]

Because it's evident that we need another prop / big man off the bench.. did you watch last weeks game? We had 4 bigs off the bench and we had absolutely no go forward, do you really want to waste a bench spot on Hunt with the chance that he comes on and runs out of dummy half a few times for 10 metres.. If we had great big men with enormous go forward I would be extremely satisfied with a utility off the bench, but with our current roster I can't see it helping us as much as a prop off the bench would.

If it came down to Hunt or Hala off the bench (With our current roster and team set-up), I would choose Hala purely because certain players in our team aren't giving us the go forward we need.

It's the quality (or lack there) of those 'big men' that were the problem
Last game. If we had three nrl quality forwards off the bench there would be no need for four of them

 

[Unbreakable]

It's the quality (or lack there) of those 'big men' that were the problem
Last game. If we had three nrl quality forwards off the bench there would be no need for four of them

My point exactly.. our bigs off the bench at the moment to choose from are Hala, J.Wallace, Anderson, Slyney, Lui, Dodds, you could nearly say none of those are NRL standard, and when our starters aren't gaining enough metres to be effective, we need 4 of these dropkicks off the bench to pick up some of the slack and give our fatties a rest.

Once again, if we bought another prop who could actually gain 150m+ consistently, we could probably gamble on a utility off the bench, but not with this squad mate.

 

[Tomstein]

Re: Excercise: Broncos Cleanout

No because if we did that, we'd be letting all these potentially premiership-winning talents leave to other clubs.

**** yes we need a cleanout, and badly. Start with all the fringe players, then move onto what's currently considered our best 17.

Sorry but I don't see too many premiership winning talents in that list otherwise Broncos would be doing a lot better than they currently are. There is so much depth in SEQ broncos have no excuses at all.

 

[Alec]

I'll even make an example of a game that wasn't last weeks game, the week before against the Bulldogs when we had nearly a full team.

Gillett - 75m
Glenn - 81m
Thaiday - 88m
McGuire - 102m

vs

Tolman - 173m
Graham - 169m
Pritchard - 119m
Kasiano - 82m

And you guys think we can afford the luxury of a utility off the bench..

That's not really how it works...having an extra crappy forward in the side (crappy because you'd assume it would be the worst that would be dropped for a utility) isn't going to improve the rest of your pack. In fact, the minutes he'd get on the field would be a waste, since he's the worst forward in the 17.

 

[Tomstein]

Re: Excercise: Broncos Cleanout

No because if we did that, we'd be letting all these potentially premiership-winning talents leave to other clubs.

**** yes we need a cleanout, and badly. Start with all the fringe players, then move onto what's currently considered our best 17.

Sorry but I don't see too many premiership winning talents in that list otherwise Broncos would be doing a lot better than they currently are. There is so much depth in SEQ broncos have no excuses at all.

 

[Big Pete]

I think your points work against you unBreak.

Adding an extra forward to the rotation hasn't really changed anything - especially using the Warriors game, our worst ever home loss, as an example.

At full strength our strength is in the amount of minutes our pack can play. Most can play up to 80 - including McGuire who will come off the bench. With Hala and another forward, you've basically already covered the pack.

If there is one strength this club has over many is in it's depth at hooker. The likes of Baptiste and Granville would be regulars if they were apart of any other club - at ours they're lucky to get a game. Even coming through the ranks I can see Cullen potentially forcing his way into first grade while Berrell certainly has promise too.

Again, I don't think it's a slight on anybody that McCullough doesn't play 80. No hooker his age does on a consistent basis and I believe we need to utilise the strength of our roster. With a Granville and Baptiste on the offer - why wouldn't you use their running game off the bench?

To me it's a better option than finding a place for Sanderson, Lui or Slyney.

 

[Alec]

Fresh legs out of dummy half against tiring forwards is definitely superior in attack to any of those nuffy forwards. Srsly, fresh legs out of dummy half late in the match or late in the halves is one of the most underrated tactics IMO.

 

[Unbreakable]

I think your points work against you unBreak.

Adding an extra forward to the rotation hasn't really changed anything - especially using the Warriors game, our worst ever home loss, as an example.

At full strength our strength is in the amount of minutes our pack can play. Most can play up to 80 - including McGuire who will come off the bench. With Hala and another forward, you've basically already covered the pack.

If there is one strength this club has over many is in it's depth at hooker. The likes of Baptiste and Granville would be regulars if they were apart of any other club - at ours they're lucky to get a game. Even coming through the ranks I can see Cullen potentially forcing his way into first grade while Berrell certainly has promise too.

Again, I don't think it's a slight on anybody that McCullough doesn't play 80. No hooker his age does on a consistent basis and I believe we need to utilise the strength of our roster. With a Granville and Baptiste on the offer - why wouldn't you use their running game off the bench?

To me it's a better option than finding a place for Sanderson, Lui or Slyney.

McGuire and Hannant are our only 2 consistent metre gainers, I would strongly consider an option that involves Hannant at 8 and McGuire at 10, I don't think we can afford to not utilize McGuire, especially this season, based on form my starting team would be -

8 - Hannant
10 - McGuire
11 - Gillett
12 - Thaiday
13 - Parker

14 - Glenn
15 - Hala

That would give us more go forward with McG, and it would also put Thaiday back into the back row, where he's comfortable.

 

[Big Pete]

Ideally I agree 100% but Moose has been disappointing thus far and his defence is a liability. It's been a feature of his game through out this season and was evident on Monday night when he allowed Friend to step out of marker and isolate McCullough who made the cardinal sin of trying to defend on the backfoot close to the line - that's a lesson I learned when I was 10 but I digress.

Moose needs to work for that spot and at this stage, that has to happen from the bench.

I don't mind the idea of Gillett taking Glenn's spot on the left - Alex needs a boot square up the backside.

 

[rnabokov]

You can cut anyone you like but it will make not the slightest difference until we have a true leader and organizer on field, and a quality defensive coach.

The best props will go nowhere when they get the ball standing flat footed, and any team will beat us when our defensive line speed is as slow as ours.