Sack Griffin/New Coach Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Sack Griffin

Yeah, coaches breaking contract isn't uncommon...mainly because the vast majority of coaches' time ends when the club sacks them anyway! Not often you hear of a coach just move on at the end of their contract (but yes there are exceptions, so don't go pointing out Wayne Bennett leaving the Dragons...).

As for Prince, he cops far too much criticism. Despite his weird beliefs and the fact he hasn't produced anything exciting in recent years, nobody should forget the epicness of this:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RE: Sack Griffin

Yes but Greenberg is a smart CEO who goes out of his way to get the best for his club. Our CEO(s) can't nail the important deals. Yes I know Gee runs recruitment but the CEO can greatly affect the outcome of those situations and especially when it invokes getting the best coaches.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Good point Spwn. Our club has been below par in everything football related for years. It's time for them all to wake up.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

rnabokov said:
I think it is less a case of sacking Hook than seriously questioning the competence of those who thought far far too little about dealing with the leadership and organizing void left by Lockyer's retirement.
Click to expand...

I wanted to emphasise this and build on it. I think this is really the fundamental issue that is stuffing our club at the moment. For a club that has a supposed well earned reputation as a planner and always has a plan (according to a journo from the courier mail last week) we appear to have completely cocked up our succession planning not only in relation to Locky but in relation to Bennett moving on as well.

And I point the finger squarely at one B. Cullen for placing us in this situation. If you accept Bennett's view, he was being either gently or not so gently shoved out of the place by management. Given that he had been here for over twenty years, one would have thought that management would have started the process of ensuring that they had a replacement all lined up of equal or almost equal status. It appears that we just about had Bellamy but that was cocked up by Bruno. From there the wheels completely fell off, Bennett announces he is leaving, and we are left without a high profile and experienced coach. So what does management do, they appoint Ivan (in hindsight perhaps the worst thing that they could have done). We all know the postscript to that little story.


Now, Locky, from about 2008 onwards it should have been fairly obvious that time was running down on Locky's career and we needed to either quickly develop or buy in a marquee player at the club. This need was further compounded when Hunt and Folau pissed off to fumble ball. The player that we looked as though we had been grooming for the role was gone along with our other marquee player. Once again, it looked as though we might have done the right thing and secured Inglis, who would have been ideal given what he has done with Souths. Once again, if Inglis can be believed, the disquiet within the club caused by Ivan (see previous fantastic management decision making) and the fact that Ivan refused to even speak with him during the recruiting process, together with the persuasive powers of one Russell Crowe (and the $ and boats) and the influence of the weather caused him to fly south. Once again, there was no plan B in place once Plan A went.


The inevitable sacking of Ivan occurs, history repeats, there is no other plan in place, and Hook gets the gig by default. Locky retires, there is no marquee signing to replace him, no signing of a competent play maker to lead the side around. It must have been patently obvious that Wallace, despite his heart, his good defence, his ability to play through pain, was not suddenly overnight going to become a creative play making half that we needed. What did the club do to address this issue, sfa.


The claim that this club is well planned and well managed is a farce given the events of the last five years. In my view, that is why we are where we are.


The way forward, someone has to get into Hook's shell like and give him a realistic appraisal of where he is falling down in his role as a coach. This is going to sound counter-intuitive, but there has to be both more structure introduced into both defence and attack, but simultaneously, he has to allow the players to be creative and to take some risks. This also includes his obligations to try as best his can to improve the players he is given. He just does not seem to be doing this at the moment (see below)


Re the players, a serious conversation has to be had with several players (and the group as a whole) to address their attitude because quite simply sometimes they just do not turn up to play. The classic example of this was parramatta. I could tell by the body language as they ran out what we were about to get. Some one has to sit down with individual players and go through where they are falling down in their roles within the team. Eg McCullough - service is too slow, taking a step or two to pass instead of getting the ball away straight away, concentrating on percentage kicks. Maranta - someone teach him some basic finishing techniques, some positional play and how to use his size to his advantage. Norman - to grow a heart, not be so soft on his kick returns and to put his body on the line. I could go on, but you get the idea.


Re recruiting: to recruit a play making half as soon as a good one comes on the market, to either manufacture or buy a fullback that can not only run the second man play but also run the ball back with vigour, a ball playing prop with size, another bigger bodied forward and sometime within the next 1-2 years a good centre.

End of rant.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sack Griffin

Sure there isn't a higher profile coach available at the moment but that doesn't necessarily mean there's not a better option out there. Maybe an assistant or coach from SL or elsewhere that doesn't have the profile of a big name but has the tactical nous and philosophy of a winning coach - Souths found it in McGuire.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Excellent post lynx!

I hope people take the time and do the effort of reading it, because you are on to something...

I think someone needs to sit down with Gee and tell him that he needs to sit down with all the people you mentioned! :winky:
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Having watched every one of our games again and again, IMO, Norman actually does have what it takes to be right up there at the top of the tree - as a 2nd receiver.

Much of his timing in coming up into the line, and his passing are absolutely 1st class BUT he is not a FB, and it seems to me pretty clear that Stuart will do to and for Norman what our coaching staff can't : extract his ego thru his arse with a pair of pliers, remind him it's about the team, not the Norman Show and replace his hitherto extracted ego with heart and soul and passion.

Obviously we couldn't, and can't. Such a shame. Norman could have been exactly what we needed .... as 5/8 with Dugan at FB.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sack Griffin

RNA, once again I agree with you re Norman's potential. I saw something in him even when he was playing under 20's that indicated he could be the one to replace Lockyer. TBH, he has not developed as I expected, but there are still signs there. I wwould have liked to keep him, but given his form in the last 2 years he is not worth what parra are paying, so as a list management decision I can see why they let him go.

So he may develop into that player at parra, but there is a real risk that he just maintains his inconsistent form. Ricky does not have a particularly good history for improving halves, if anything he is harder on them than other positions. Given Norman's reaction to being moved to fullback, he might not take well to some of ricky's tough love.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

rnabokov said:
Having watched every one of our games again and again, IMO, Norman actually does have what it takes to be right up there at the top of the tree - as a 2nd receiver.

Much of his timing in coming up into the line, and his passing are absolutely 1st class BUT he is not a FB, and it seems to me pretty clear that Stuart will do to and for Norman what our coaching staff can't : extract his ego thru his arse with a pair of pliers, remind him it's about the team, not the Norman Show and replace his hitherto extracted ego with heart and soul and passion.

Obviously we couldn't, and can't. Such a shame. Norman could have been exactly what we needed .... as 5/8 with Dugan at FB.
Click to expand...

That is assuming that that sort of attitude can be extracted from Norman, he certainly isn't a 'when the going gets tough kind of guy'. Ricky has more of a reputation for destroying halves confidence than extracting there best.

Griffin has a lot of failings however player management is by far his best asset, if he can't get Norman to care I would certainly doubt Ricky can
 
Re: Sack Griffin

lynx000 said:
RNA, once again I agree with you re Norman's potential. I saw something in him even when he was playing under 20's that indicated he could be the one to replace Lockyer. TBH, he has not developed as I expected, but there are still signs there. I wwould have liked to keep him, but given his form in the last 2 years he is not worth what parra are paying, so as a list management decision I can see why they let him go.

So he may develop into that player at parra, but there is a real risk that he just maintains his inconsistent form. Ricky does not have a particularly good history for improving halves, if anything he is harder on them than other positions. Given Norman's reaction to being moved to fullback, he might not take well to some of ricky's tough love.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts
 
Re: Sack Griffin

lynx000 said:
I wanted to emphasise this and build on it. I think this is really the fundamental issue that is stuffing our club at the moment. For a club that has a supposed well earned reputation as a planner and always has a plan (according to a journo from the courier mail last week) we appear to have completely ****ed up our succession planning not only in relation to Locky but in relation to Bennett moving on as well.

And I point the finger squarely at one B. Cullen for placing us in this situation. If you accept Bennett's view, he was being either gently or not so gently shoved out of the place by management. Given that he had been here for over twenty years, one would have thought that management would have started the process of ensuring that they had a replacement all lined up of equal or almost equal status. It appears that we just about had Bellamy but that was ****ed up by Bruno. From there the wheels completely fell off, Bennett announces he is leaving, and we are left without a high profile and experienced coach. So what does management do, they appoint Ivan (in hindsight perhaps the worst thing that they could have done). We all know the postscript to that little story.


Now, Locky, from about 2008 onwards it should have been fairly obvious that time was running down on Locky's career and we needed to either quickly develop or buy in a marquee player at the club. This need was further compounded when Hunt and Folau ****ed off to fumble ball. The player that we looked as though we had been grooming for the role was gone along with our other marquee player. Once again, it looked as though we might have done the right thing and secured Inglis, who would have been ideal given what he has done with Souths. Once again, if Inglis can be believed, the disquiet within the club caused by Ivan (see previous fantastic management decision making) and the fact that Ivan refused to even speak with him during the recruiting process, together with the persuasive powers of one Russell Crowe (and the $ and boats) and the influence of the weather caused him to fly south. Once again, there was no plan B in place once Plan A went.


The inevitable sacking of Ivan occurs, history repeats, there is no other plan in place, and Hook gets the gig by default. Locky retires, there is no marquee signing to replace him, no signing of a competent play maker to lead the side around. It must have been patently obvious that Wallace, despite his heart, his good defence, his ability to play through pain, was not suddenly overnight going to become a creative play making half that we needed. What did the club do to address this issue, sfa.


The claim that this club is well planned and well managed is a farce given the events of the last five years. In my view, that is why we are where we are.


The way forward, someone has to get into Hook's shell like and give him a realistic appraisal of where he is falling down in his role as a coach. This is going to sound counter-intuitive, but there has to be both more structure introduced into both defence and attack, but simultaneously, he has to allow the players to be creative and to take some risks. This also includes his obligations to try as best his can to improve the players he is given. He just does not seem to be doing this at the moment (see below)


Re the players, a serious conversation has to be had with several players (and the group as a hole) to address their attitude because quite simply sometimes they just do not turn up to play. The classic example of this was parramatta. I could tell by the body language as they ran out what we were about to get. Some one has to sit down with individual players and go through where they are falling down in their roles within the team. Eg McCullough - service is too slow, taking a step or two to pass instead of getting the ball away straight away, concentrating on percentage kicks. Maranta - someone teach him some basic finishing techniques, some positional play and how to use his size to his advantage. Norman - to grow a heart, not be so soft on his kick returns and to put his body on the line. I could go on, but you get the idea.


Re recruiting: to recruit a play making half as soon as a good one comes on the market, to either manufacture or buy a fullback that can not only run the second man play but also run the ball back with vigour, a ball playing prop with size, another bigger bodied forward and sometime within the next 1-2 years a good centre.

End of rant.
Click to expand...

You've nailed it lynx, sums up where we are and why perfectly.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Just one point that struck me when I read this article about Tunza: http://www.nrl.com/former-hitman-tunza-a-papalii-fan/tabid/10874/newsid/72639/default.aspx

"I class myself as a tackler and that's how I was was taught," ...


"It was drummed into me to drop as late as possible and drive in hard."


"That's what makes rugby league, not a shoulder charge or a flashy runner, it's a guy who can hit a person with everything he's got. It's just beautiful."
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Lets not get carried away with ourselves.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Could he really change anything? We all know the majority of our players don't have the required chin.
 
Re: Sack Griffin

Hmmm one of our great ex players is coaching juniors - straight into the head coaching role, he's served his apprenticeship
 
Re: Sack Griffin

If he was our coach Norman would be crying and asking for an immediate release.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
New Posts

Unread

Watch

YouTube
0 0 872
1:34:15
NRL Round 19, 2003 - Melbourne Storm vs Brisbane Broncos
View full media list »

Active Now

  • Broncosarethebest
  • bb_gun
  • Behind enemy lines
  • BroncosAlways
  • Harry Sack
  • Stix
  • Maroon4life
  • leith1
  • phoenix
  • Jazza
  • broncsgoat
  • FACTHUNT
  • Johnny92
  • Santa
  • Robboi_321
  • Battler
  • FaceOfMutiny
  • GCBRONCO
  • barker
  • Xzei
... and 14 more.
Total: 111 (members: 34, guests: 77)
Robots: 236
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.