A very big sorry in advance as this is going to go bizurk in the comments and get abused also for creating another blog on this matter, if i can ask. This blog is mainly directed to those who are in the middle or are realistic in the views of BA, those who are on either side but think he will stay or leave (think he should go but will likely stay vice versa).
So i started writing this last night then left it for a little and then forgot about it, now Chief has posted something sort of similar in how many finals games will win. My view is a tad different in that will 1 finals win be enough for BA to survive, not worried or concerned as it'll play out as it should and nothing we can do about it but was thinking if we play someone like a Newcastle in week 1 and win, then play say Souths in week 2 and lose convincingly will BA still survive due to 1 finals win? or will he need to get week 3 minimum?
Steven Chammas mentioned a few weeks ago his job is all about how he does in the finals, i believe he did say if go out in straight sets he's gone which is understandable and losing week 1 will do that i believe, but does it count if we win week 1 and lose in week 2? He did mention if they bow out week 1 or week 2 they'll have a conversation about options which is broad as could the board be basing it off how we perform in week 2, say we hold our own v Souths in week 2 and then they come home and win by a little bit do they consider that a decent enough to warrant one more year?
It is fascinating and territory of unknown that will be interesting to see how it will play out, if we get to week 3 then BA deserves 2022, but if they are knocked out week 1 then a question needs to be raised, week 2 is a weird thing as could be the performance that either saves him or sacks him as a loss is likely but doesn't actually mean he's gone from it.
Replies
I was going to say up the top, if i can ask for everyone to be civil and just say an opinion and not abuse others if they disagree, this was not made to start a war haha it was made to see others opinions.
I was actually going to post something similar. I was going to ask the question, are we over-achieving given our squad?
I don't believe we should be looking at our Head Coach position purely in terms of the results from a few games. Even if those games are finals.
We need to take a lot of factors into account, the main one being, are we improving under BA in all areas?
Consider this. Perhaps we get bundled out in Week 2 as expected. However BA is under no illusion that it's good enough either and points to how we need to stay the course because we have x players coming through and we're about to sign Y players from other clubs as well. He's doing the best with what he has. The club agrees that 2022 will be a lot brighter given all this. Perhaps BA agrees to new assistants as well. So the club makes the decision to forge ahead. Is that bad management?
Maybe BA has pushed this squad to over achieve given the talent we have?
But also consider this? Perhaps going backwards for a bit is also ok. Maybe the club believes BA's course is ultimately a dead end. We need to back out of the cul-de-sac to go in a new direction. Meaning we make some significant player changes in key positions and bring in a new coach to play a new brand of footy with new strategies. Our results may tumble for a bit but will ultimately mean we're a stronger team for it and one that can get to the top of the tree.
Bottom line is, it's a huge call and one that needs to be worked through carefully. It can't be simply, lose this game and you're finished.
A few weeks ago Muttman you were on the he should be gone bandwagon, had an epiphany have you Mutt? hahahaha
But yeah as i mentioned in a blog a few weeks ago, the club itself is a very odd, dangerous and uncomfortable spot in 2022 if BA stays on as himself and players want an extension to feel comfortable but the board wouldn't want to incase a repeat and fan backlash, but don't want player unrest and the squad leaving either or do they risk it and go in a new direction and it could backfire.
All i can say is they'll make the decision with the club in mind but do not envy them on the decision making.
Ha no I'm still firmly in the 'he should go camp'. I think it's pretty obvious by now. All I'm saying is we need to go through the process to leave no stones unturned.
Absolutely it's bad management. When you look at the amount of developed players in our top 17 considering ba's 8 years it's bad management. When you see our continental deficiencies in our defensive structures that allow mind boggling 2 man overlaps that's bad management. When you see that our attack is very one out in attacking zones it's bad management. Everything around keeping ba on for another season is absolutely bad management .
Brissy, all that I can do is comment on the facts that Brad Arthur has been at the club for 8 years, and in that time he and his coaching associates have been the biggest failures in the history of the Parramatta Eels in the development of any up and coming player including Juniors. BA's biggest claim to fame was the signing of Jaimon Salmon who was supposed to be the next superstar kid but again ba failed.
When the Bushie came to the club We had Holbrook successfully coaching the 20s making grand finals and finals, so you can't tell me the club was in a terrible state Junior wise, but again BA failed.
The fact is that BA is a total failure and the development pathways term was just an excuse to excuse Arthur's incompetence in everything the dope does. BA go today walk now & front load your effort at the Rouse Hill Centerlink office.
so is it the head coach of the "NRL team" responsible for building the pathways and developing the junior talent underneath, say flegg, matts etc or is ithe responsibility of others?
should all the blame be lumped on BA and the current regime for the failings of the past? i.e. the total and utter disregard of junior pathway development by the previous board and management which setup the arrangement of Wenty as a feeder club to develop the next level down talent?
That was an abject failure as they werent necessarily focussed on the prize - they just wanted to win a NSW cup comp and talent development be damned.
Thus the decision was taken from 2018 review to bring that all back in house to ensure the club have total control of the whole pathways. I think if you take a look at how the flegg, matts and NSW cup teams are doing (with not being overloaded with over the hill players as in the past) i think even the most strident critic will say there is an improvement in performance.
Penriths time to develop their pathways correctly took years and years to achieve and they are only now reaping the rewards.
Chief and guys like you think talent development is a tap you just turn on and turn off - it takes years to right the wrongs of the past.
Its a very simplistic view and something you obviously have little to no depth of understanding of what it takes.....
Rock what you are saying is total bs
nah mate, you just want him gone and want to blame eveything on one person - dont think thats how it happend.
maybe you need to go and read the 2018 review and find out the truth not just how you see it
I'll be happy to have a debate with you in the cupboard. On here it's like sending Morse code
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 8 Next