Sure, if we were to judge Bennett by ONLY the 90's, he wouldn't be a GOAT coach. That's exactly my point? It looks like you're reaching to argue a point I'm not even making.
I have not said Bellamy is a shit coach, I said he's probably an excellent coach, but until he does it with different squads at the very least, he can't be spoken about in the same discussion as Bennett. That's just cold hard facts, there is really nothing to argue there.
Bennett has more premierships.
Bennett has had premierships under different spines.
Bennett has had premierships under totally different NRL eras.
Bennett has had premierships with different clubs, including an entirely different team, coaching staff, and culture.
Bennett has had success at both International and SOO levels.
Like they are so far apart from being compared it's not even funny.
Bellamy has proven nothing except that if he has a really good spine, he can get the best out of them. He has proven nothing beyond that, at any level of the game, and he arguably would have lost that spine he put together if he didn't cheat the cap. Smith was seriously considering going to the Titans when they put a huge offer in for him, but surprise surprise he stayed for an even bigger offer at Melbourne.
How can you even make the argument that Bellamy is more adaptable when ALL the evidence points to Bennett not only being more successful, but doing it across a far broader spectrum of variables.
I didn't say Bellamy is more adaptable, only his tactics. I also never started this comparison to other coaches. This all happened because some people like to muddy the waters, so they can point fingers (not talking about you). And muddying the waters is making a comparison between coaches as a whole, when the discussion is only about a single, albeit important aspect of the job: Tactics (the game plan and player selection to apply it).
I'm doing a reset and will try to stay above the sewer which this back and forth between sides has been the last couple of days.
Are Wayne's tactics suited to this roster?
First, what are those tactics?
They are simply to ensure the opponent scores less points than your team by means of grinding defense, kicking game control, sweep fullback play and individual efforts. That's it! Those are his tactics, and they have not changed over his career, EVER.
Second, which players suit said tactics?
This is where the Dragons premiership comes in. Their roster wasn't full of stars, but it was perfect for those tactics, with most of his players capable of that grinding unforgiving defense, great game control from Hornby, great kicking game from Soward, and a fullback very very good at the sweep overlap play from where so many Dragons tries came.
It was ugly, but terribly efficient, which is why the Dragons were the benchmark in those years, and deservedly so!
Note that those tactics are certainly efficient when the attitude is there, which is where WB normally excels at. His work behind the scenes in terms of motivation of individuals and team alike is absolutely unparalleled, as is the relationship he builds with most players, which is why they buy into him in the first place. I don't think anyone doubts that!
Now if you ignore the superstar teams of the 90's, which would probably have won the titles regardless of which tactic was used, the Broncos rosters over the last 2 decades have had more individual quality than those Dragons. We've had arguably the best player to ever lace a boot (also known as the god of rugby league), as well as some other fantastic players, like Hodgo, Webke, Civo or Parker. Yet, we were never the benchmark, not even in 2006 when we did win the title.
Why? Because in the age of the salary cap, unless you have a Dragons type roster, defense and game control will win you most games, but you also need tactical attacking creativity and variation to be that benchmark. I've never seen the latter from Bennett, have you? (Don't confuse individual brilliance with tactical brilliance)
Based on the above, my answer to the original question, is absolutely NO.
Wayne may and will get the players to believe and work hard for each other. We will probably win more games than we'll lose, but we don't have a roster that will be able to defend and control a game well enough to consistently keep the better teams at bay, nor do we have the tactical attacking creativity to consistently score more points than them, which is what this team needs imo (outside of an organiser of course).