Pay Admits Time Running Out

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,748
Reaction score
18,940
If the so called experts were right picking the premierships and wooden spoons every year id be a rich man!!
Yes, they're never 100% accurate, but it's what we should use as an expectation. What else do we have to go off? I have no problems if people have a slightly different opinion using other sources or what they think (I do this myself), but when it's drastically different I find it hard to agree with.
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
11,231
Substance in the rebuttal :-).
How noble of you to set the rules of engagement :-).

Up until 5 seasons ago, the Bulldogs seemed in control of their corporate governance. Along came a person by the name of Castle.
We know the rest of the story and there's no point in repeating it, but the truth is we are still paying the price of that mis-management until the end of this season.
You may be aware that same person this past week was pushed out of Rugby Australia in the same position for a similar poor performance over a similar tenure. Wonder how long it's going to take RA to crawl back from the dungeon just as it's taken the Bulldogs 2.5 years so far with more work to do.

OK, so for 'changes' you address the coaching staff. You seem to have overlooked my comment in my previous post: and how the coaching staff prepare them and if changes are needed there also, which I think is premature at this stage.
If you thought that was a reference to Pay only like many of the calls on here 'Sack Pay!' - you were wrong.
But what did you expect in the year since the Farrar exit when we were still shackled until the end of 2020?
What exactly was Price going to achieve in the 8 months he's been GM of Football with the restrictions the club was still under? I'll tell you exactly what he's been focussed on - junior development - another key factor of successful clubs that was allowed to rot under the previous management of the Three Amigos.
So you say he's been a disappointment because what - you haven't seen big names sign with us so far? What's the measurement?
Why would you go making wholesale changes to the football department now when that was only done 12 months ago without considering the broader plan for 2021 and beyond - which none of us know the details of yet?

As for alleged 'poor relationship with player managers' - that's because the club won't allow said managers to set the agenda?
I say bravo to that - greedy players and managers should be shown that the clubs will not be trampled on because your primma donna client thinks he's worth $1m a season - case in point L. Mitchell.
Perhaps the Rona will reset some expectations of the age of entitlement.

'We are yet to see anything positive out of our Northern NSW Partnership' - there's two - so which one, Greater Northern (Northern Inland NSW) or North Coast (Forster to Grafton)? They were announced in September 2018 and April 2019 respectively.
And you expect exactly what in 18 and 12 months, again when those partnerships are all about pathways and feeding juniors into our system.
And I'm afraid the latter of those partnerships was just damaged by 2 selfish former employees and their antics - 'oh, but it was legal sex!'. That's going to take time to rebuild too. Imagine the mothers of young boys in the region who might be thinking 'I don't want my son associated with that club'.

Anyway, it's clear we disagree and you believe my position has 'no substance' so we can leave it there. I'm looking forward to what we hear from the club between July and September of this year and how things start to shape up for and within 2021. Until then, I see no reason to hit the panic button.
But you're entitled to your views and if you're a voting member, you'll be able to have your say on the matter in February 2022 if you don't agree with the direction. For more clarity, you might like to talk to a board member in the mean time as well.
I’m all for robust & healthy debate, but there needs to be substance in the rebuttal.
Up until 5 seasons ago, if The Bulldogs missed the top 4 it was considered a monumental failure, fast forward to the present, it we make the top 8 it’s considered an achievement- a milestone!
To paint the picture of reality of just how far we’ve fallen, we were once the powerhouse in the same vain as the Broncos, Roosters & Storm- we are now considered in the same ilk as the Titans Warriors.
The changes needed ASAP:-
S Price has quickly learned that running a Football Department is a difficult beast to tame. So far he has been a massive disappointment; there has been no improvement from the Farrar tenure.
Our Recruitment/Pathways group:
M Hughes an amazing stalwart for our Club fantastic underrated footballer & was the architect behind Souths’ 2014 premiership. Implemented the Payhways programme at Penrith (not difficult with their junior catchment). In his current term has only recruited 3 from his old Club, all 3 were released without much ado. His performance so far has been ordinary. Unfortunately past his best
David Hamilton was a recruitment manager at the Titans & Raiders. He was signed by Steve Levinsky Football Operations Manager as they worked closely at the Raiders. He got the nod due to his connections with Northern NSW in his last role in recruitment at the Titans.
Both Hughes & Hamilton have poor relationships with the majority of player managers & is reflective of our unacceptable recruitment position.
He’s assisted by Craig Wilson (pathways & development)former assistant coaching roles at the Eels & Sharks where he also worked with Steve Levinsky at the Sharks.
We are yet to see any positive out of our Northern NSW partnership.
In my humble opinion our coaching staff needs upgrading. Dean Pay has brought in Steve Antonelli who was the coach of The Raiders feeder side Mounties with little success.
While I like Pay he has surrounded himself with some ordinary cohorts.
Pay has brought to the Club from the Raiders
Steve Levinsky
Steve Antonelli
David Hamilton.
While Steve Levinsky has brought in his good mate
Craig Wilson.

I have yet to see any progress or improvement under these appointments.
You guys have made your points clear...
But can anyone explain to me why did we extend Pay's contract by a year only few weeks into the deal and following several losses ?
Despite Hasler's grand finals records we all criticised Dib for renewing his contract yet most restrain from criticising the decision to extend the contract of unproven coach
My concerns, managements failure will be blamed on Pay's failure :blush:
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,748
Reaction score
18,940
You guys have made your points clear...
But can anyone explain to me why did we extend Pay's contract by a year only few weeks into the deal and following several losses ?
Despite Hasler's grand finals records we all criticised Dib for renewing his contract yet most restrain from criticising the decision to extend the contract of unproven coach
My concerns, managements failure will be blamed on Pay's failure :blush:
Hasler should of been re-signed and he was (like you said, only failed to miss the finals once). The only reason Hasler was given the flick is because of collateral damage (he isn't really at fault for what happened in regards to our salary cap imo).

Pay was re-signed because we're still not in a position to get a top coach and it's very unlikely we're going to be able to get one until 2022 (with the most likely candidate being Flanagan). Why wouldn't we re-sign Pay when he's done better than expected and we're only going to be able to get someone at the same level or worse (sideways trade). If we wanted a top coach during these times we had to keep Hasler and because we didn't that's the only thing I can say management wise that I don't agree with (but I also understand why they didn't keep him).
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
11,231
Hasler should of been re-signed and he was (like you said, only failed to miss the finals once). The only reason Hasler was given the flick is because of collateral damage (he isn't really at fault for what happened in regards to our salary cap imo).

Pay was re-signed because we're still not in a position to get a top coach and it's very unlikely we're going to be able to get one until 2022 (with the most likely candidate being Flanagan). Why wouldn't we re-sign Pay when he's done better than expected and we're only going to be able to get someone at the same level or worse (sideways trade). If we wanted a top coach during these times we had to keep Hasler and because we didn't that's the only thing I can say management wise that I don't agree with (but I also understand why they didn't keep him).
Hasler is to blame for our demise and here's why...
He was contracted by Greenturd in total and full control of football matters at the club, not only he coached the most boring football style in the club's history but also was in charge of recruitment and dismissal of players, but the worst thing he did was persuading the board to use his back-ended payments system that also got Manly in trouble...I blame the previous board and Greenturd for trusting him !
 

bradyk

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
2 x NF H2H Champ
NF Top Scorer
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
15,748
Reaction score
18,940
Hasler is to blame for our demise and here's why...
He was contracted by Greenturd in total and full control of football matters at the club, not only he coached the most boring football style in the club's history but also was in charge of recruitment and dismissal of players, but the worst thing he did was persuading the board to use his back-ended payments system that also got Manly in trouble...I blame the previous board and Greenturd for trusting him !
Are you serious? Hasler was told by Castle/Dib to recruit/play to a higher salary cap. Hasler was just doing what he was told to by his boss. Hasler's job was/is coaching.
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
You guys have made your points clear...
But can anyone explain to me why did we extend Pay's contract by a year only few weeks into the deal and following several losses ?
Despite Hasler's grand finals records we all criticised Dib for renewing his contract yet most restrain from criticising the decision to extend the contract of unproven coach
My concerns, managements failure will be blamed on Pay's failure :blush:
Pay wasn't re-signed 'a few weeks into the deal'.
He was originally signed for two years (2018/2019) by Dib after Dib/Castle originally re-signed and then sacked Hasler in 2017.
The current board came to power Feb 2018 after the Hasler debacle and had to negotiate a settlement with Hasler in 2018.
Then in March 2019 they extended Pay for 1 year - my view being because it provided an option either way (renew Pay post 2020 or not, as the cap problem was finally resolved end of 2020).
Seemed like a sensible decision leading into clear cap space for 2021.
Now the Rona has wreaked havoc. Technically Pay's deal still expires at the end of this season, irrespective of how many more games are played this year - same as those players whose contracts expire at the end of this year.
So the question is: renew Pay for 2021 or not. Give him a chance to coach without one hand tied behind his back squad/cap wise or not? If not, who else is available for 2021? Not many top quality coaches it seems.
According to several TK experts we can't sign quality players for 2021 and beyond because they don't rate Pay. We'll see over the coming months how true that is - and whether Pay or someone else is at the helm in 2021...
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
Hasler is to blame for our demise and here's why...
He was contracted by Greenturd in total and full control of football matters at the club, not only he coached the most boring football style in the club's history but also was in charge of recruitment and dismissal of players, but the worst thing he did was persuading the board to use his back-ended payments system that also got Manly in trouble...I blame the previous board and Greenturd for trusting him !
Are you serious? Hasler was told by Castle/Dib to recruit/play to a higher salary cap. Hasler was just doing what he was told to by his boss. Hasler's job was/is coaching.
It's both. Hasler was given unprecedented power and full control of the football department.
Yes, he subsequently took us to two GF's and had we won one or both of them, it's unlikely anyone would've criticised his approach - just as happened at Manly because he won with them twice in 2008/2011 (their record beyond that forms part of this debate).
By late 2016 it become apparent that Hasler had made mistakes having signed certain players on big money with poor results (T-Rex a prime example). It's what led Turvey to publicly say we'd 'Lost our DNA' under Hasler and it cost him his board seat at the time.
Remember Hasler's 'two premierships by 2019' pitch to the previous management? They fell for that hook, line and sinker. Subsequently, during that 'Premiership Window' and with his unprecedented power, a few players were signed to long, back ended contracts and some with 'ratchet clauses' - so as the cap raised, so did their salaries.
Speculation around the cap being $10m for 2018 is largely what led to Foran and Woods being signed on big dollars for that year.
The cap turned out to be $9.5m - and the rest is history. We finally emerge from that mess at the end of season 2020...
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,347
Reaction score
15,419
Are you serious? Hasler was told by Castle/Dib to recruit/play to a higher salary cap. Hasler was just doing what he was told to by his boss. Hasler's job was/is coaching.
The often quoted "higher salary cap" was ~$500k and we were going to be more than $3m over the cap. So the $500k is part of the problem, but a small part in comparison to the back ended contracts that were quickly mounting up. I can't excuse Hasler for allowing such drastic over commitment, sure he was told to "win a premiership" but that's not an excuse for the ridiculous back ending that he was supporting. A large part of the coach's role is to manage the roster within the cap, in the end it's the coaching staff only that knows the strengths and weaknesses of every player, what new talent the team needs and what players to let go. None of that can be done without managing within the salary cap.

This is exactly what happened at Manly before Hasler left to join us, over committed on the Cap and they had to let players go. It just wasn't anywhere near as bad an over commitment as it was for us, where he really stepped it up a level or two.

Hasler's win loss record with us will always be suspect to me, simply because he had $7m/$10m/$13m "worth" of players at his disposal ie, $1m to $3m over the cap every year from 2016 to 2018 inclusive. He achieved this with ever increasing back ending contracts that in end had to be paid after he left.

Go Dogs
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
11,231
Are you serious? Hasler was told by Castle/Dib to recruit/play to a higher salary cap. Hasler was just doing what he was told to by his boss. Hasler's job was/is coaching.
You bet I am serious...
Hasler used the same methods at Manly before...It backfired !
He introduced the same methods to us...We know the results !
Greenturd gave him full control, when Toddy left us the board made a mistake by appointing Rea Rea as CEO primarily to control the business side of things acknowledging Hasler's full control while Dib assumed football decision making that was out of his jurisdiction.
Out of concern in 2014 I asked one of the ( in the know ) people at the club, how is Rea Rea's coordinating with Hasler ?
The answer was, when Todd was there Hasler came back to him at every decision he had to make.
Now, Hasler says to Rea Rea jump and she will say...How high !!!
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
11,231
Pay wasn't re-signed 'a few weeks into the deal'.
He was originally signed for two years (2018/2019) by Dib after Dib/Castle originally re-signed and then sacked Hasler in 2017.
The current board came to power Feb 2018 after the Hasler debacle and had to negotiate a settlement with Hasler in 2018.
Then in March 2019 they extended Pay for 1 year - my view being because it provided an option either way (renew Pay post 2020 or not, as the cap problem was finally resolved end of 2020).
Seemed like a sensible decision leading into clear cap space for 2021.
Now the Rona has wreaked havoc. Technically Pay's deal still expires at the end of this season, irrespective of how many more games are played this year - same as those players whose contracts expire at the end of this year.
So the question is: renew Pay for 2021 or not. Give him a chance to coach without one hand tied behind his back squad/cap wise or not? If not, who else is available for 2021? Not many top quality coaches it seems.
According to several TK experts we can't sign quality players for 2021 and beyond because they don't rate Pay. We'll see over the coming months how true that is - and whether Pay or someone else is at the helm in 2021...
Overall we seem to be reading off the same page...
My bad, it was few weeks into the 2019 season when we extended Pay's contract, my point is it happened a week after a notion was in place to appoint Ben Anderson as a caretaker.
As much as I believe Pay deserves a fair chance, I believe he knew what he was getting himself into...Or did he ?
What concerns me is if Pay isn't there next year...
We might end up with some expensive but unwanted players by the next coach...Back to point zero !!!
As for Pay's lack of signing quality players, I have my doubts until he signs A MARQUEE NRL PLAYER with no issues.
 
Last edited:

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
11,231
It's both. Hasler was given unprecedented power and full control of the football department.
Yes, he subsequently took us to two GF's and had we won one or both of them, it's unlikely anyone would've criticised his approach - just as happened at Manly because he won with them twice in 2008/2011 (their record beyond that forms part of this debate).
By late 2016 it become apparent that Hasler had made mistakes having signed certain players on big money with poor results (T-Rex a prime example). It's what led Turvey to publicly say we'd 'Lost our DNA' under Hasler and it cost him his board seat at the time.
Remember Hasler's 'two premierships by 2019' pitch to the previous management? They fell for that hook, line and sinker. Subsequently, during that 'Premiership Window' and with his unprecedented power, a few players were signed to long, back ended contracts and some with 'ratchet clauses' - so as the cap raised, so did their salaries.
Speculation around the cap being $10m for 2018 is largely what led to Foran and Woods being signed on big dollars for that year.
The cap turned out to be $9.5m - and the rest is history. We finally emerge from that mess at the end of season 2020...
I totally agree, I will add to this...
When he arrived at the club the plan was to win 4 premierships in the next 10 years...I don't know if I should lough or cry.
 

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,207
Reaction score
18,987
Api obviously would have made a big difference. My point was there was some money to spend at that time as confirmed by Hill acknowledging we were chasing all three and had room to sign them. So it's not like we had no money and couldn't sign anyone which is what some were arguing.
I don't recall that Hill has ever commented on recruitment targets unless they've actually landed the signature. The one exception being that we talked about pulling out of the running for Mitchell. And I don't know how that all translates to having a million dollars to spend for this years roster.





Anyway, my stance on all this is that Pay wasn't the coach I'd have chased when Hasler was sacked. But the old board were under extreme pressure to bring back the DNA and made the decision to sign Pay based on fan pressure rather than a glut of evidence that Pay could do the job. That was on the previous board and to an extent, due to pressure applied by the fans baying for blood.

I know Pay hasn't gotten results outside of a couple of late season charges when we're out of finals contention. But he's had a few things to deal with.

- Inexperienced roster. Young players are always a bit more prone to errors and in a good team, the old heads can help calm them. But in our case we've had a majority of young and inexperienced players and this has largely meant that when we made errors, the other youngsters panic and compound that by making more errors. The players developed more composure towards the end of both seasons under Pay.

- Lack of emerging talent. In the past,one of our strengths was that we have always had a strong production line in place. At present we've got to build that back up. We have a few good prospects coming through, but in the past the good youngsters had the benefit of having competition for spots in the junior ranks. It pushed them all to be better. Our current juniors tend to be in a situation where a splash of quality can get by without developing the right work ethic. Natural ability in the lower grades can get you through, but it takes work ethic to make that translate to a strong NRL career.

- Refereeing bias. Some people might see this as tinfoil hat stuff, but I think that across the whole of the NRL, the referees are operating to steer results a certain way. It's not just our club that suffers, but we copped the sharp end of the stick for the last few years.

- Salary cap issues. Not a secret. We've lacked some quality at 1, 6, 7 and 9 for a long while. These are all positions where depth isn't great at any club, so the price of players in any of these positions is high. Our lack of creative attacking football stems from this to a large extent. When Foran has been fit and in form our attack has looked better with one quality half available. Add to that the fact that we haven't got a glut of game breakers from 1-5 either.

Moving forward.
I don't know if Pay will get an extension beyond this season. The players seem to respect him, so that's in his favour. But if he is extended, I hope it's short term (1 season maybe with a clause that a top 8 finish gets him a second year). I wouldn't want him replaced with a coach that is just another big gamble. And to some extent I would like to see if things improve when we have a competitive roster at his disposal. But if we could nab a quality coach with a good record, I wouldn't be shedding tears for Pay either. But it's the club's decision in the end and I'll accept whatever they decide.
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
Overall we seem to be reading off the same page...
My bad, it was few weeks into the 2019 season when we extended Pay's contract, my point is it happened a week after a notion was in place to appoint Ben Anderson as a caretaker.
As much as I believe Pay deserves a fair chance, I believe he knew what he was getting himself into...Or did he ?
What concerns me is if Pay isn't there next year...
We might end up with some expensive but unwanted players by the next coach...Back to point zero !!!
As for Pay's lack of signing quality players, I have my doubts until he signs A MARQUEE NRL PLAYER with no issues.
All good mate.
I'm not sure about the Ben Anderson thing - of course there were whispers but how true was it really?
I just don't think it could've happened with the board saying they've instituted new corporate governance to avoid the mistakes of the past and then move on something that would be clearly seen as nepotism?
Doesn't pass the smell test for mine...

Yes, Dean didn't take the job kicking and screaming but you can hardly blame him - there's 16 Head Coach jobs in the NRL and no doubt thousands of aspirants and probably hundreds of applicants.
You don't get very many shots at it, so for a then rookie coach, you'd unlikely look a gift horse in the mouth.
What was weird to me was Dib said only a week or so before Pay was hired that he'd 'never met' Pay despite media speculation over who was going to take over from Hasler.

I agree with you re: coaching change with several squad changes on the horizon.
Look at the Tigers - Cleary and his bus left Concord and Madge probably faces at least two years to build the squad he wants - seeing the end of the likes of Reynolds and others.
We need to be careful not to fall into the same trap of recruiting players that a new coach then doesn't want.
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,347
Reaction score
15,419
Anyway, my stance on all this is that Pay wasn't the coach I'd have chased when Hasler was sacked. But the old board were under extreme pressure to bring back the DNA and made the decision to sign Pay based on fan pressure rather than a glut of evidence that Pay could do the job. That was on the previous board and to an extent, due to pressure applied by the fans baying for blood.
The rest of the post is excellent except for the above;

The coaching position was advertised and applicants were given time to apply, supply their CV, references and other pertinent information. Michael Maguire was recognised as a leading candidate and he requested to inspect "the books", particularly in regards to our Salary Cap position both current and going forward. After reviewing "the books" he declined to continue with his application. To the best of our knowledge no other NRL level coaches applied for the position. Thus leaving 2 leading candidates, Jim Dymock and Dean Pay, with Pay finally getting the nod.

So to claim that they "made the decision to sign Pay based on fan pressure" would be more applicable if Dymock had got the job, he was our then assistant coach and had arguably more "Bulldogs DNA" than Pay. So if the Board was responding to "fan pressure" then Dymock would have got the nod.

Go Dogs
 
Last edited:

Alan79

Kennel Legend
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
13,207
Reaction score
18,987
The rest of the post is excellent except for the above;

The coaching position was advertised and applicants were given time to apply, supply their CV, references and other pertinent information. Michael Maguire was recognised as a leading candidate and he requested to inspect "the books", particularly in regards to our Salary Cap position both current and going forward. After reviewing "the books" he declined to continue with his application. To the best of our knowledge no other NRL level coaches applied for the position. Thus leaving 2 leading candidates, Jim Dymock and Dean Pay, with Pay finally getting the nod.

So to claim that they "made the decision to sign Pay based on fan pressure" would be more applicable if Dymock had got the job, he was our then assistant coach and had arguably more "Bulldogs DNA" than Pay. So if the Board was responding to "fan pressure" then Dymock would have got the nod.

Cheers
Gary
I haven't seen much written about the applicants for the job. But I would have thought we'd have had more than three applications.
 

D- voice

Kennel Addict
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
7,849
Reaction score
11,231
All good mate.
I'm not sure about the Ben Anderson thing - of course there were whispers but how true was it really?
I just don't think it could've happened with the board saying they've instituted new corporate governance to avoid the mistakes of the past and then move on something that would be clearly seen as nepotism?
Doesn't pass the smell test for mine...

Yes, Dean didn't take the job kicking and screaming but you can hardly blame him - there's 16 Head Coach jobs in the NRL and no doubt thousands of aspirants and probably hundreds of applicants.
You don't get very many shots at it, so for a then rookie coach, you'd unlikely look a gift horse in the mouth.
What was weird to me was Dib said only a week or so before Pay was hired that he'd 'never met' Pay despite media speculation over who was going to take over from Hasler.

I agree with you re: coaching change with several squad changes on the horizon.
Look at the Tigers - Cleary and his bus left Concord and Madge probably faces at least two years to build the squad he wants - seeing the end of the likes of Reynolds and others.
We need to be careful not to fall into the same trap of recruiting players that a new coach then doesn't want.
Out of respect I won't share details about the Ben Anderson story but remember where there is smoke there is fire !
As for signing a rookie coach being Pay or Dymock I supported the idea hoping we would appoint an experienced mentor, if I recall right I nominated either Chris Anderson or Michael Hagan for the roll
It has been a long and dark tunnel, let's hope the light is near !!!
 

DinkumDog

Kennel Immortal
2 x Gilded
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
22,704
Reaction score
41,527
Out of respect I won't share details about the Ben Anderson story but remember where there is smoke there is fire !
As for signing a rookie coach being Pay or Dymock I supported the idea hoping we would appoint an experienced mentor, if I recall right I nominated either Chris Anderson or Michael Hagan for the roll
It has been a long and dark tunnel, let's hope the light is near !!!
Fair enough mate - respect that you know more about the Anderson story and yes, best left for another time :-).

A mentor could’ve been good.
Don’t think Anderson Sr could’ve done it - not only on the board at the time but I remember when he last coached the Chooks he said the stress nearly killed him. Maybe a mentor role wouldn’t have been too hard on him. Hagan was a good coach - premiership winner, Origin etc. He too also stood down from head coaching after his stint at the slimy Eels but likewise maybe a mentor role he could’ve been good. Hindsight. Maybe Deano didn’t want a mentor and felt he was ready - only a few people know the answer to that one...

Agree mate - we are almost out of a long dark tunnel and although there’s more work to do we can be ascendant again.
 

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,347
Reaction score
15,419
I haven't seen much written about the applicants for the job. But I would have thought we'd have had more than three applications.
I don’t know how many there were in total, I only mentioned those that I know that did apply. But it’s an irrelevance to the false claim that Pay was chosen due to “fan pressure”.

Go Dogs
 
Top