The Wayne Bennett Super thread!

[jarro65]

I dont care what happens with Kearney. Walters is a much better option. Somebody to take over as head coach when WB hangs up the boots.

Walters has been in/around some pretty good setups coaching wise ..... Melbourne Storm with Bellamy, Knights with Bennett, QLD with Meninga/Hagan ... so it'd be fair to assume that he's learned some handy things as far as coaching goes.

Add to the fact that as a player he was pretty adventurous, it makes for an interesting time at the Broncos if/when he takes over as Boss.

 

[Anonymous person]

Agreed. Whether on the field or off, changes were made when there was a feeling we should have done better. 2007 was the only time I'd consider scraping into the finals as a positive. Looking at our injury toll that year - Lockyer, Hunt, Berrigan off the top of my head. It was a miracle we made the eight. Nothing bad about scraping in under those circumstances - just a gutsy team with a never say die attitude.

were there many unforced changes though? someone leaving the club voluntarily or retiring and being replaced doesnt count as "making a change". we just kept on doing what we had been doing, with the regular old cast and crew. we didnt do anything drastic to try and change our fortunes.

 

[noisetheory]

I dont care what happens with Kearney. Walters is a much better option. Somebody to take over as head coach when WB hangs up the boots.

well i care, in that i hope that he is gone at end of year, regardless!

 

[Big Pete]

were there many unforced changes though? someone leaving the club voluntarily or retiring and being replaced doesnt count as "making a change". we just kept on doing what we had been doing, with the regular old cast and crew. we didnt do anything drastic to try and change our fortunes.

I don't know, pushing the best fullback if not the best player in the game to five eighth to compensate for a 17 year old utility back would have to count as a change right?

Or bringing back the most overrated player and turning him to one of the best centres in the competition.

 

[Anonymous person]

You talking about Hodges?

 

[Big Pete]

Indeed.

And of course those aren't the only examples either, if you went through his stint from 2000-08 there would be a ton of changes but those are examples that come straight to mind that differ from your criteria and played a big role in the 2006 premiership.

You've taken a utilitarianism approach to this where it didn't matter what changes were made, at the end of the day, the results largely remained the same but what I'm saying is that it wasn't through a lack of trying.

 

[Foordy]

walters in means kearney goes, yeah? is kearney going regardless? whats his situation right now?

I wouldn't expect that just because Walters looks to be coming in, it automatically mean Kearney will go.

 

[jarro65]

I wouldn't expect that just because Walters looks to be coming in, it automatically mean Kearney will go.

He'd be at long odds to stay though if Walters lobbed here.

Christ ... we'd have coaches coming out of our arse !!!

 

[Foordy]

He'd be at long odds to stay though if Walters lobbed here.

Christ ... we'd have coaches coming out of our arse !!!

maybe ... but assuming that he will be sacked with the arrival of Walters is setting yourself up for a big disappointment.

he may be sacked of course .... but remember he is the defensive coach and Walters is likely to me more of a halves coach (which i'm not sure we even have ATM).

and he has history working with Bennett, so he MAY have a good relationship with Bennett and Bennett may want to keep him on.

He should have been given the ass with Griffin

 

[jarro65]

maybe ... but assuming that he will be sacked with the arrival of Walters is setting yourself up for a big disappointment.

he may be sacked of course .... but remember he is the defensive coach and Walters is likely to me more of a halves coach (which i'm not sure we even have ATM).

and he has history working with Bennett, so he MAY have a good relationship with Bennett and Bennett may want to keep him on.

He should have been given the ass with Griffin

I agree ... his close relationship with Bennett would more than likely see him stay.....

.. but he's done jack-shit for us since he's been here.

 

[Anonymous person]

Indeed.

well i dont agree with that. hodges killed it at the roosters when he actually stayed on the field, which wasnt all that much.

Why did lockyer move to 5/8th though? Because Ben Ikin retired. again, it was a forced move - it wasnt because of the previous years results, in which we lost the last 8 matches in a row and then were bundled out of the finals in the first week. were there huge changes after that pathetic second half of the season? nope, just the forced ones.

 

[Big Pete]

Hodges wasn't killing it in 2004 when he was signed. He was woefully out of form that year and was ranked as the most overrated player in the competition until he came up here and got his act together under Bennett.

You can't put it down to injuries either because he played 21 games that year, he's yet to reach that mark since that season.

Until he proved himself, a lot of Broncos fans were heralding it as a terrible signing and he's the only Broncos player I've heard been booed when his name was read out at Suncorp.

The Broncos still had Berrick Barnes, Shaun Berrigan & Motu Tony who they could have relied on. Changing Lockyer from the fullback position to five eighth was a huge gamble that played a big part in the way the Broncos played and some of the set plays they would go onto use.

 

[Anonymous person]

Hodges wasn't killing it in 2004 when he was signed. He was woefully out of form that year and was ranked as the most overrated player in the competition until he came up here and got his act together under Bennett.

You can't put it down to injuries either because he played 21 games that year, he's yet to reach that mark since that season.

Until he proved himself, a lot of Broncos fans were heralding it as a terrible signing and he's the only Broncos player I've heard been booed when his name was read out at Suncorp.

The Broncos still had Berrick Barnes, Shaun Berrigan & Motu Tony who they could have relied on. Changing Lockyer from the fullback position to five eighth was a huge gamble that played a big part in the way the Broncos played and some of the set plays they would go onto use.

2004 was all kinds of disrupted for hodges, hence him wanting an immediate release to move back home to brisbane. He mightve been overrated, lots of big name players are, but he wasn't "turned into one of the best centres in the competition" - he already had been one of the best centres in the competition not even 18 months earlier.

Berrick Barnes? 2004 was his first year with the Clydesdales lol. He was hardly going to be the starting 5/8th for the Brisbane Broncos before he'd even played a game for a reserve grade team, and had just finished school the year before. Bennett clearly didn't rate him either, and he left because he was never getting more than 5 minutes game time every 4-5 weeks.

Shaun Berrigan was not a NRL quality 5/8th, and would never have been a NRL quality 5/8th. never an option. yes he played there a few times, like he played at halfback a few times, but there was no way he would have been a serious option.

Motu Tony was never going to get the 5/8th position. wasn't bought to play there, barely played there for the warriors. left after 3 weeks.

Moving Lockyer wasnt really a huge gamble because he played as a 5/8th in attack pretty much every week of the year. and again, it wasn't made because of 2003s poor results, it was made because ikin retired.

 

[Big Pete]

2004 was all kinds of disrupted for hodges, hence him wanting an immediate release to move back home to brisbane. He mightve been overrated, lots of big name players are, but he wasn't "turned into one of the best centres in the competition" - he already had been one of the best centres in the competition not even 18 months earlier.

A lot of players of his ilk can go either way. The point is he was playing some terrible footy in 2004, the signing was by no means a no-brainer and Bennett made it work.

Moving Lockyer wasnt really a huge gamble because he played as a 5/8th in attack pretty much every week of the year. and again, it wasn't made because of 2003s poor results, it was made because ikin retired.

How can you draw that conclusion?

I can see an argument for a 'bit of both' but to say it wasn't made due to poor results is rubbish. Of course they played a factor, if it was working and the Broncos won a premiership could you really see Bennett making such drastic changes?

As it turned out, Ben Ikin didn't really retire, yet when he played, he didn't shift Lockyer out of five eighth. Instead he played out of dummy half so again, he wasn't forced into it with a gun pressed against his temple, he had options and chose to take a risk.

I already threw up a list of names, you can add Casey McGuire & Paul Green to that mix too. You'll make excuses (some of them off base) and list all sorts of reasons why they weren't options but you could do the same with any player including Darren Lockyer. heck, the excuse you made for Barnes could easily be applied to Hunt.

Basically, if this isn't a change, then no coach in the history of the game has made changes.

 

[Anonymous person]

Basically, if this isn't a change, then no coach in the history of the game has made changes.

im not denying he made changes. the changes were pretty much all forced though, not made because of previous poor results.

Casey McGuire? Paul Green? come on lol. Paul Green was over 30 and signed for the origin period and nothing more. he only played during the origin period, 5 games, and then retired. he was never an option.

Casey McGuire was a terrible half, hence why he very rarely played there.

Noone that you have named was a viable option to replace the retiring 5/8th. Hunt coming in at fullback is different, its not the equal most important position in terms of running the team. and again - Bennett clearly didn't rate Barnes, hence giving him absolutely no game time and forcing him to leave.

 

[CaptainHook]

were there many unforced changes though? someone leaving the club voluntarily or retiring and being replaced doesnt count as "making a change". we just kept on doing what we had been doing, with the regular old cast and crew. we didnt do anything drastic to try and change our fortunes.

I disagree. Bennett did make a change to the crew. Several, in fact. Walters, Belcher and Lazarus were all let go at the end of the 2005 season, I think it was. Bennett wrote in his book it was a difficult time and he very nearly left himself. That's when Dean Benton came in with a new fitness regime, training etc. That's a pretty drastic change and it put a lot of pressure on Bennett to deliver. I think Tallis at the time wrote a column that said if Brisbane had another late season fade out then he would have to step aside. I doubt too many would disagree with that sentiment.

You do have a valid point regarding players retiring and not being a forced change. The Broncos did offer Ikin a deal before he retired. It does indicate that he would've been playing in the halves if he decided to play on.

 

[CaptainHook]

im not denying he made changes. the changes were pretty much all forced though, not made because of previous poor results.

What did you make of Berrigan switching to hooker in 2006? I can't remember if he replaced an injured player but it worked wonders. Ignited our attack for the back half of the year and we never looked back.

 

[Big Pete]

im not denying he made changes. the changes were pretty much all forced though, not made because of previous poor results.

Then you can say the same about any significant successful change any coach has made.

Again, Bennett could have persisted with the style he was playing where Lockyer basically did everything from fullback and all the halves had to do was back-up the odd play but changes were made because it wasn't working.