I'd prefer you to be genuine rivals. It would at least make the banter better.This is a trap, Roosters just want us to be shit together.
The Warriors have had stability with Kearney and they struggle to sign players. Saints have had stability for years with McGregor and they haven't signed anyone of note since overpaying for Hunt and Norman.True, maybe not from a specific coaching perspective, but your club has a new board and has had a high turnover of players recently. I suppose what I'm saying is stability at this stage is more important that winning if, IF, you are trying to attract a new and better coach.
Yeah valid points, but your situation is different to those clubs. Their problems are systemic in that the Warriors are content just being in the comp and Mary has been protected by two reviews and the Illawarra faction of the Saints board. Your club has changed boards, coaches, recruitment and retention practices, trainers and spending priorities with the aim to be better. But it takes time, even when you get to where you want to be as a club, it will take time to bed those new practices down and see the results.The Warriors have had stability with Kearney and I don't see they struggle to sign players.
Saints have had stability with McGregor and they haven't signed anyone of note since overpaying for Hunt and Norman.
There's no point having stability when you're seen as a club with no ambition or who is happy to make up the numbers. The stench of a losing culture and lack of progress is far more damaging than whatever stability brings.
I wasn't saying he did have a plan, just that the coach should have these freedoms. The fact that he doesn't have a plan as you said should answer everything we need moving forward. If the answer is that Pay doesn't then why the fuk are we wasting time with him?That would be fine if Pay actually had a plan or a style of football, he doesn’t, it’s not evidenced in our performances nor has he ever been able to articulate it in an interview or press conference. Trying hard isn’t a game plan.
Atta boy, just sticking to the facts .Two coaches in 8 years then..Hasler and Pay. Hardly a revolving door.
No one is disputing the circumstances. Pay didn't inherit the best situation. But if it was a better situation he wouldn't have got the job as he wasn't qualified..Yeah valid points, but your situation is different to those clubs. Their problems are systemic in that the Warriors are content just being in the comp and Mary has been protected by two reviews and the Illawarra faction of the Saints board. Your club has changed boards, coaches, recruitment and retention practices, trainers and spending priorities with the aim to be better. But it takes time, even when you get to where you want to be as a club, it will take time to bed those new practices down and see the results.
Again valid points, and I agree had your club been in a better position Pay may not have gotten the job. He was only ever a good assistant imo. But he's been hired to get you through this bleak period and understandable it's frustrating, but technically you're still in the bleak period and as such Pay should be retained as coach until you're better able to offer a good coach a position and funds to plan and recruit a squad moving forward.No one is disputing the circumstances. Pay didn't inherit the best situation. But if it was a better situation he wouldn't have got the job as he wasn't qualified..
Every coaching job in the NRL is precious and Pay was fortunate to be a head coach at all, let alone for three seasons with the record he has.
The fact that the club is further regressing when 2018 should have been the low point is an indictment on Pay. Three years in, a coach should be making progress with the team or at least developing youngsters. Pay has done neither.
Agreed, but Pay was hired as much for his Bulldogs DNA as he was to oversee you through this really trough period. Pay is not dumb, maybe he even realises he's not cut out for a top coaching role, but hes shown he'll shoulder the burden of getting you through this period and imo he should be given that accolade for later on if nothing else. In 10 years time he may well be given a standing ovation walking onto the stage at your GF winning function as the one who saw you through this period?Your posts are usually well articulated (for a chook) but I’d like to hear your unbiased justification about how Pay is “doing his best”?
Pressure should always be on an NRL coach though and nobody deserves a free ride in such a well paid job
He is not dumb? He has failed to select Wakeham at halfback for a single game, that's pretty fucking dumbAgreed, but Pay was hired as much for his Bulldogs DNA as he was to oversee you through this really trough period. Pay is not dumb, maybe he even realises he's not cut out for a top coaching role, but hes shown he'll shoulder the burden of getting you through this period and imo he should be given that accolade for later on if nothing else. In 10 years time he may well be given a standing ovation walking onto the stage at your GF winning function as the one who saw you through this period?
I'm not prepared to hang my hat on that one decision. He may not be the best coach, but he'd be picking the best at his disposal so I think that says a lot about Wakeham.He is not dumb? He has failed to select Wakeham at halfback for a single game, that's pretty fucking dumb
How much are the dogs paying you?I'm not prepared to hang my hat on that one decision. He may not be the best coach, but he'd be picking the best at his disposal so I think that says a lot about Wakeham.
Where do think all your cap money has gone?How much are the dogs paying you?
Piss off cheatYour board putting pressure on Pay now is a bad look imo. Scapegoating the coach when he's doing his best with that he's got is a red flag to any potential coach. Your board/CEO needs to be out front taking flack for the coach and players or at least taking some pressure off. I realise you guys are a demanding bunch, but constant upheaval achieves nothing.
If our coach was "doing his best with that he's got" as you claim, there'd be no scapegoating or pressure. Roosters would be the very last Club to accept this situation we are presently in.Your board putting pressure on Pay now is a bad look imo. Scapegoating the coach when he's doing his best with that he's got is a red flag to any potential coach. Your board/CEO needs to be out front taking flack for the coach and players or at least taking some pressure off. I realise you guys are a demanding bunch, but constant upheaval achieves nothing.
Ok but lets say you change coaches and get Bennett next month . He will only be able to do what Pay is doing and that is trying to get the best out of the player he's got. Granted he may be more attractive to potential recruits, but you still have cap restrictions and money is as equal to who is the coach in most player decisions on who to play for.If our coach was "doing his best with that he's got" as you claim, there'd be no scapegoating or pressure. Roosters would be the very last Club to accept this situation we are presently in.
We don't know if he has lost the dressing sheds and the Board/CEO already know it...maybe that is part of it, together with the coaching and poor results. No club can blunder along being unsuccessful and not do anything to fix it. Apparently waiting another year isn't in the current plan...but who knows the truth.
All it does is highlights our coaching situation that Pay seems unable to fix and our roster situation that the CEO and Board haven't fixed.
All of them carry the responsibility and all carry the blame. You want the job; you wear the consequences of failure.
What is the other option? bring in another unproven coach for the same results - that would be a death nail for the administration. Its not like a bona fide coach was willing to take us on until we clear the cap squeeze (which is now) and start getting some recruits on board.They extended his contract. Thats rubbish about the old board appointed him and the new board does not really want him and doesnt give support.