I was one who was overjoyed when DF was overthrown and 3P took over.
I am now starting to think this was a mistake. Whilst we had a magic run last year, i don't think that was down to DF not being part of the club anymore. I think Hayne playing like a freak had a lot to do with that.
The infighting and administration has become a joke. It appears that players are now opting not to play for the Eels as a result.
At least under DF we were a professionally run organistation and attracting players was never a problem.
So the question i have is are we better or worsre off since Fitzy got the chop?
I, like many here, have read many stories about the board and the club as of late and simply don't know what is true or false.
This is our second year after DF. Whilst last year everything seemd rosey, it's all fallen to shit now and we are looking like a very amatuer organisiation.
Why is that when the Bulldogs have a bad year, they have no problems recruiting 4 or 5 players to rebuild? They recruited well end of 2008 to have a successful 2009. They have done it again next year with another 4 or 5 signings. (I know KK might not be highly rated here, but i think he will do very well at the bulldogs)
Are the bulldogs administration and board that much better than ours? Do other players take Ozzie seriously? It seems like Greenberg is very well respected by everyone. Should we be looking at someone similar to him with good business credentials?
Replies
Since his departure, the club actually made a profit, and the Leagues Club is also blossoming once again, under our new CEO and the Board.
I'm willing to give them time to put the pieces in place, as they nor CEO Paul Osborne can be expected to drastically change things around in 1 year.
I would like to think that they are attempting to create a dynasty at the Parramatta Eels, one that will give the fans some satisfaction, and the results that we would like to see, and ultimately, a GF.
However, something happened after the early success of the Fitzgerald era........and right up to his ultimate demise, Fitzgerald made Price, Kenny and Sterlo feel unwelcome and their contributions irrelevant at the Parramatta club - this to me speaks volumes of Fitzgeralds ego and need for total control and domination.
Simply, Fitzgerald's time had run it's course and his need to control and dominate was beginning to intrefere with decision making.
The choice of hiring Hagan after the knights won the wooden spoon was proof that his decisions were worsening
Not to mention the selling off of Ryan, Tonga McKinnon and co
I think the Osborne era is too early to Judge - but I am concerned about the TALENT evaluating criteria that Parra uses.
Maybe Mortimer is just a second year syndrome - but is he worth the money when clearly KKeating offers so much more ability in the halves
..........., and letting Kingston go while keeping Matt Keating is certainly worth more discussion
.........and letting Mateo go without a fight, certainly is also questionable ????
YES
YES
Parramatta needed fresh blood, new ideas and a change in the stale thought process of an administration that had been in place for an eternity!
So yes we are far better off now than during the Fitzy regime!
Like the current situation with Daniel Anderson, i think we need to give them some time, ie; 12mnths and if they haven't produced then piss them off and re-group. Surely if ultimatums can be placed on a coach for his team's performances, then the same has to be for an ailing administration, considering it is the administration that hires the coach! (although it was the Fitzgerald administration that hired Daniel Anderson, it was still the Parramatta admin regardless of who the leader was at the time)