Opinion Josh Reynolds or Kyle Flanagan

[Punchbowl Dog]

I’m calling for JR to be 7 against Manly with Nu Brown 14 and I really think this will be strongly considered by CC. On trial form it’s a no brainer, JR was bloody good on Sunday, KF was good in defence but his primary role is offence and the poor bugger just can’t make up for his lack of a running game. I’d like Karl Olapou to spend as much time this year on the field in the top grade with JR, will help him tremendously. As much as it is out of left field JR could be this years missing piece, hopefully he stays relatively injury free. I’ve got nothing personally against young Kyle, probably great kid, loves his mother, all that stuff, but unfortunately he’s a passenger when in possession. Come on CC make this call and unlock our teams potential!

 

[B-Train]

There's no chance there will be major changes from the last trial team, especially in the spine. They've trained all preseason with those combinations, they're not going to throw it all out after one trial loss no matter how much people want them to.

 

[Flanagun]

JR could be a real presence off the bench, but can't hang for 80 minutes a week at NRL pace, fam. Didn't you see how much he was blowing at halftime of the Canberra game? Also, you must have missed my beautiful cross kick for JAC which almost resulted in a try against Nulla and my spectacular try assist against Canberra. The 'gun gonna bring it this year, baby!

 

[Doggiezbrah]

Reynolds is definitely a better player BUT his injury record of the years does concern me. I cannot seeing him staying fit playing 80 minutes every week.

 

[bradyk]

Reynolds if we want the highest chance of winning games. I don't see any reason to have Flanagan over Reynolds since there's a 0.01% chance he's extended. I think when you have someone who's the worst starting halfback in the NRL who's been given multiple years to improve and showed no signs of improvement you need to use a stop gap solution (Reynolds) or youth. You're setting a bad culture letting someone as bad as Flanagan run out every week with no repercussions. He also hasn't earnt a chance to start the season in the 7 either. Then you throw on top Reynolds is my favourite ever Bulldog player I'd rather see him running around compared to a player that has the same impact as a parasite. Even if Ciraldo goes with Flanagan which unfortunately is likely, he won't hold the spot for long.

 

[CrittaMagic69]

Reynolds in his prime couldn't play halfback and there's absolutely no chance he's doing it now. Brown is probably more of chance of replacing Flanagan than Reynolds.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Reynolds if we want the highest chance of winning games. I don't see any reason to have Flanagan over Reynolds since there's 0.01% chance he's extended. I think when you have someone who's the worst starting halfback in the NRL who's been given multiple years to improve and showed no signs of improvement you need to use a stop gap solution (Reynolds) or youth. You're setting a bad culture letting someone as bad as Flanagan run out every week with no repercussions. He also hasn't earnt a chance to start the season in the 7 either. Then you throw on top Reynolds is my favourite ever Bulldog player I'd rather see him running around compared to a player that has the same impact as a parasite.

Do you really believe that Reynolds can make 40+ tackles and play 80 minutes in every game for 27 rounds plus Finals?


Always a Bulldog

 

[bradyk]

Do you really believe that Reynolds can make 40+ tackles and play 80 minutes in every game for 27 rounds plus Finals?


Always a Bulldog

We don't need him for every game, we also don't need him for 80 minutes. There are other ways around it and they're better options than starting with Flanagan. Also we ain't making finals.

 

[Benno Bulldog]

There's no chance there will be major changes from the last trial team, especially in the spine. They've trained all preseason with those combinations, they're not going to throw it all out after one trial loss no matter how much people want them to.

Gould once sacked Mortimer

 

[Bulldogsteve]

There's no chance there will be major changes from the last trial team, especially in the spine. They've trained all preseason with those combinations, they're not going to throw it all out after one trial loss no matter how much people want them to.

CC basically said that on the SEN interview today, he also a few young blokes.

 

[chemdog]

we wont be winning many games either if reynolds plays halfback for the full 80 mins

 

[Flanagun]

Do you really believe that Reynolds can make 40+ tackles and play 80 minutes in every game for 27 rounds plus Finals?


Always a Bulldog

We ain't making the finals, so no need to worry about that lol

 

[B-Train]

Gould once sacked Mortimer

After one trial loss and right before round 1?

I'm not saying Flanagan, Perham etc won't or can't get dropped. But it's not happening now. It would only happen after a few bad losses and if they played poorly.

 

[bradyk]

we wont be winning many games either if reynolds plays halfback for the full 80 mins

You don't need to play Reynolds as a halfback. Burton needs to step up and have more touches and be on the ball more. If Reynolds is starting he's playing as a five-eighth. You don't need a traditional halfback anymore - multiple clubs in the NRL don't. Also I'm pretty confident Reynolds woulddo a better job at halfback than Flanagan anyways because he's that bad.

 

[Freakzilla]

Reynolds in his prime couldn't play halfback and there's absolutely no chance he's doing it now. Brown is probably more of chance of replacing Flanagan than Reynolds.

Tbf Flanagan has never been able to play halfback either.

 

[Flanagun]

We don't need him for every game, we also don't need him for 80 minutes. There are other ways around it and they're better options than starting with Flanagan. Also we ain't making finals.

We don't need our regular starting half back for 80 minutes and we don't need him every week? lol, dude....just lol

 

[TwinTurbo]

We don't need him for every game, we also don't need him for 80 minutes. There are other ways around it and they're better options than starting with Flanagan.

How many minutes is Reynolds going to play?
How many games is he going to play?
Who is going to come on when he goes off?
OR
Who is going to start if he doesn't?

Also we ain't making finals.

With your opinion and $1 I can buy a Maccas Soft Serve Cone.

Always a Bulldog

 

[Flanagun]

Tbf Flanagan has never been able to play halfback either.

Except at Cronulla when I was one of the best prospects in the league, against the Knights when I produced the best Bulldogs debut since SBW, our most recent premierships match against Manly, in which I earned MOTM honours, and a whole bunch of other times. My career has been hijacked by clueless coaches. But hey, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story, baby!

 

[Freakzilla]

After one trial loss and right before round 1?

I'm not saying Flanagan, Perham etc won't or can't get dropped. But it's not happening now. It would only happen after a few bad losses and if they played poorly.

Totally different scenario also. Mortimer was 32 & in his final season. He got dropped for a 23 year old Michael Hagan who would play Origin the next 2 seasons.

 

[bradyk]

How many minutes is Reynolds going to play?
How many games is he going to play?
Who is going to come on when he goes off?
OR
Who is going to start if he doesn't?


With your opinion and $1 I can buy a Maccas Soft Serve Cone.

Always a Bulldog

Ideally 80 but can carry someone on the bench that can play 20-30 minutes if needed. Brown or Averillo could fill in if you want names.

When we can start using our development players (Rajab who should already be top 30)/someone like Oloapu is more ready they're both better options than Flanagan just on potential alone. Rajab already better imo.

Flanagan starting 7 is an inept decision. We had since last year/season to prepare alternatives.

Your last comment shows you're a delusional tosser.