McCullough re-signs with Broncos

[Super Freak]

The fact that you're still incapable of understanding my point is actually incredible. I've already explained several times that when I said "He's a match winner", I meant that in the broad spectrum of him having a knack for making something happen out of nothing, which can turn the course of games, and potentially result in us gaining the momentum or edge required to win said games.

You constantly asking me to watch hours of footage is completely irrelevant when I'm speaking in broad terms, not literal instances of him winning games for us by himself..

I don't think I can explain this any easier for you..

So a game breaker then, or game changer whatever they call it.

But I understood what you meant.. I read the post where you explained it and I wanted you to tell me when he did what you describe above.

I'm not sure I can be any clearer, to be honest.

Despite what you believe, I wasn't trying to start any argument. I was trying to have a discussion but instead of having a civil discussion you decided to lash out.

To avoid it getting any worse, we'll just leave it. How's that?

 

[Unbreakable]

So a game breaker then, or game changer whatever they call it.

But I understood what you meant.. I read the post where you explained it and I wanted you to tell me when he did what you describe above.

I'm not sure I can be any clearer, to be honest.

Despite what you believe, I wasn't trying to start any argument. I was trying to have a discussion but instead of having a civil discussion you decided to lash out.

To avoid it getting any worse, we'll just leave it. How's that?

Game changer, match winner, game breaker.. They're all the same thing in the context I was using it, it's just a term used to describe someone who has incredible individual talent, which you can't deny that Roberts possesses.

I'm happy to have discussions with you for the record, it's just moderately frustrating when they always tend to wind up with you basically just saying "prove it". If you did that to everyone on this forum who made a controversial comment then every single thread would be like this one, thankfully you only target me with it.

Anyway, back on to the original topic, I'm very pleased to have Macca signed long-term, although I am curious about what we paid for him, Hooker is arguably the hardest position to evaluate monetarily speaking, I don't think he's worth more than $450,000 a year, hopefully we didn't pay too much more than that.

 

[Rico]

When members say that Cult, I believe they're referring to Macca's insistence to pick the ball up, tease to run, only to pass it which nobody falls for and how often he usually hits the playmaker with an inaccurate pass which limits their time to come up with the right play.

Now it's a difficult thing to demonstrate because you're literally talking about 2400 touches over the course of the season and comparing that with 30 000 other touches from other dummy halves.

If I had an issue with McCullough, it's that he's predictible and rarely comes up with a big play. In fact, whenever he does come up with a big play he'll usually follow it up with an error. Or whenever he has a good game and you think he's turned a corner, he'll follow it up with a poor one where his only real contribution was a forward pass that cost the Broncos all momentum.

Fair post Pete. I was the same as cult and looking for insight on that - thanks. I think the guys that are largely really happy with him won't have any inference to blame his service as to why we can't hit a field goal.... other reasons IMO from lack of tackle 3 and 4 hard ball runners to deficiencies in kicking etc.

 

[Big Pete]

One reason I didn't bring up but it's worth noting is that McCullough and Hunt are supposedly our chief organisers in attack. So whenever the Broncos look clueless, those two cop it because they're not doing their job and executing a proper gameplan.

 

[Mister Wright]

When members say that Cult, I believe they're referring to Macca's insistence to pick the ball up, tease to run, only to pass it which nobody falls for and how often he usually hits the playmaker with an inaccurate pass which limits their time to come up with the right play.

Now it's a difficult thing to demonstrate because you're literally talking about 2400 touches over the course of the season and comparing that with 30 000 other touches from other dummy halves.

If I had an issue with McCullough, it's that he's predictible and rarely comes up with a big play. In fact, whenever he does come up with a big play he'll usually follow it up with an error. Or whenever he has a good game and you think he's turned a corner, he'll follow it up with a poor one where his only real contribution was a forward pass that cost the Broncos all momentum.

Most often his 'big plays' are defensive ones which nobody here blows a load over. He also made a 'big play' in the WCC to give us our first scoring play. His attacking ability is under-rated on this forum, just like his defensive impact is under-rated. The thing, for me, that proves his worth for the team was last year. We're on a winning streak and top of the table, all of a sudden McCullough gets injured and we hit a slump. But no, it's not because of McCullough, it's because of other factors.

 

[Big Pete]

Generally speaking, defence doesn't receive that much attention on any fan forum because fans are too busy concerned about what the opposition are doing with the ball than what the defence is doing to stop it. Unless they're putting on big hits, it's difficult to be appreciative. It isn't bias, that's just how fans generally perceive the game and often McCullough is regarded as one of the better defensive players in the game.

The Broncos missed him last year, but that's to be expected given the lack of depth at the club. I mean the club had Josh McGuire at dummy half for a game, who ever thought that would be a good idea? But as it turns out, when McCullough did return, the Broncos were still on the back of some hidings so it was difficult to pin-point it as the reason, especially when teams like Melbourne, Penrith and Sydney are blitzing the Broncos.

 

[pagey]

He is a key cog to our team. Bennett obviously wants a spine long term . Great news

 

[Sproj]

I don't think anyone at all underrates Macca's defense and if they do, they are crazy. Everyone knows how good he is defensively.

The problem some of us have with him is his slow service at key times of the game or key areas on a field. But since Hunt is going, maybe whoever comes in will direct Macca better...if only that could be JT for a season!

 

[mitch222]

I think people on here would even find a way to criticize Cam Smith for something

 

[Mister Wright]

I think people on here would even find a way to criticize Cam Smith for something

Great post!

 

[Rally Towel]

I'm generally an advocate of McCullough, so it's good to know we've wrapped him up.

That said, four years is an awfully long deal, so I hope we didn't throw too much coin at him.

Bit of dearth of (available) quality 9's at the moment, but I wouldn't want to be locked in with Macca if the right option came up.

 

[mitch222]

Maccas game style fits our team. Those saying his service out of dummy half is poor are kidding themselves. He gets the ball to the right people every set. Some want an attacking hooker like Farah, but look at what he does to his halves. He cuts them out most of the time and tries to do it himself. Macca gets the ball to Hunt & Milf and he lets them do their job creatively. Our attack hasn't been an issue for years and the defence is a hell of a lot better with him in the middle. He isn't the most flashy guy on your team but you don't need flash in every position especially when you have some pretty talented guys in Hunt, Milf & Boyd on the backline to take responsibility for the teams attack.

 

[Sproj]

Maccas game style fits our team. Those saying his service out of dummy half is poor are kidding themselves. He gets the ball to the right people every set. Some want an attacking hooker like Farah, but look at what he does to his halves. He cuts them out most of the time and tries to do it himself. Macca gets the ball to Hunt & Milf and he lets them do their job creatively. Our attack hasn't been an issue for years and the defence is a hell of a lot better with him in the middle. He isn't the most flashy guy on your team but you don't need flash in every position especially when you have some pretty talented guys in Hunt, Milf & Boyd on the backline to take responsibility for the teams attack.

But I think some of you think that because some of us want better service out of dummy half, that equals flash, it doesn't. Smith is not flashy but he is smart and his service is accurate every time. Macca often passes behind or above his playmakers and once that happens, it costs them some precious seconds which causes the attacking structure to break down or give the defense extra time to get in the Broncos faces.

No this does not mean I am saying he does it every pass or every set. But he often seems to do it when we least need him to, like in the red zone or when chasing points. Also, I think it should be recognised that probably none of us are saying he shouldn't have been re-signed. I would also suggest none of us are saying he isn't a good option. And I am certain none of us are questioning his defense in any way shape or form. But there are better options in the NRL and likely will be in the future. Four years is too long a deal if one of those other options become available.

 

[john1420]

I think people on here would even find a way to criticize Cam Smith for something

Easy..... here goes

Cam Smith's choice of clubs sucks balls :)

 

[john1420]

What I find interesting (or confusing!) is that the opinion here that Macca has slow service and predictability seems very widely believed, and yet Brisbane not only offer him a new deal, but a 4 year deal!

It makes me wonder......

Is BHQ's opinion wrong?

Or is the club simply acknowledging that despite his issues, he is the best (available) man for the job?

And if it is option 2, don't you think the coaching staff would have addressed it?

I mean there are some things you can't teach, but you can coach a guy to not dummy and run so often, etc.

I don't get it, but I just a casual fan (been following the Broncos since 92, but I am not a "scientist" of the game)

Would love to hear some educated opinions from folks that watch more than 1 game a week :)

 

[Sproj]

What I find interesting (or confusing!) is that the opinion here that Macca has slow service and predictability seems very widely believed, and yet Brisbane not only offer him a new deal, but a 4 year deal!

It makes me wonder......

Is BHQ's opinion wrong?

Or is the club simply acknowledging that despite his issues, he is the best (available) man for the job?

And if it is option 2, don't you think the coaching staff would have addressed it?

I mean there are some things you can't teach, but you can coach a guy to not dummy and run so often, etc.

I don't get it, but I just a casual fan (been following the Broncos since 92, but I am not a "scientist" of the game)

Would love to hear some educated opinions from folks that watch more than 1 game a week :)

Don't come in here like that and start asking sensible questions!!! Since I have a problem with Macca's service, clearly I believe it is option 2 and I hope the club is addressing it. He is the hooker for the next four years so I REALLY want them to be addressing it because most other aspects of his game are really good.

 

[Foordy]

what we also need to do IMO, is find a talented rookie as a back up. someone that is capable of putting pressure on Macca's position.

Macca always seems to lift his game whenever there are question over his future ... like when the Smith and Farah coming to us rumours were around

 

[Harry Sack]

what we also need to do IMO, is find a talented rookie as a back up. someone that is capable of putting pressure on Macca's position.

Macca always seems to lift his game whenever there are question over his future ... like when the Smith and Farah coming to us rumours were around

Heartily agree with this.