Bulldogs have pulled out of the race for Metcalf and his asking price is around 1 million dollars. Dragons most likely spot but to get him immediately I wonder if this means they will allow Sua to join us early to free up cap space to get Metcalf immediately. Just seems logical
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies
def worth a try mitch as oniell and rogers are not working recruitment wise something has to change
OK Parra G, you claim my "defense" (of what you don't specify) is "illogical".
What am I defending? I denied the very premise of the demand to have a blog defending MON, so you must be saying I am defending NOT scapegoating? You are thus defending scapegoating?
And if I am being "illogical", you must be able to identify either an invalid or unsound argument.
I'll help you out here. If invalid, you admit my premises could be true but my conclusion false. So identity those premises and that conclusion and then we can assess whether the latter doesn't follow the former.
I'll also help with unsound. You just to have to identify one or more premises you think are just not true. Once you do that we can assess a conclusion to see if it did in fact rely on those premises and whether you are in fact right that the premises you identified as false are indeed false.
Go. I'll wait. I've done all I can to help your argument beat mine!
pS: and to be super helpful, I'll re-state. Any argument relying on scapegoating is faulty and unproductive of good solutions.
I was pointing out the fact that when Anderson was Head of Football here, he was implicated in the salary cap scandal and sacked by Donnelly.
Mark doesn't need me to fight his battles for him. Especially when the majority of your criticism levelled at him is concerning recruitment - an area he only oversees but isn't directly involved with on the day-to-day. We have a head of recruitment and it isn't Mark.
Your argument for Richardson in the past is ill-informed and misguided. Richardson is a CEO. He won't be coming to this club to sit under Sarantinos. Further to that, you talk a lot about recruitment yet Richo's own recruits in Galvin and Luai have already departed. In fact he handed out contracts with the very same player options you railed against and which our club have canned.
Here we go, passing the buck again super on Mark o'neill and recruitment. Thats like saying the recruitment personnel under Phil Gould at the dogs are more responsible for the roster than Phil is.
What a massive load of bullshit . Nobody believes you.
Each club's approach to recruitment is different. Phil Gould is a law unto himself and operates completely differently to virtually every other GM/Head of Football in the game. The Dogs don't actually have a head of recruitment, whereas Parramatta does.
You're measuring Mark against Gus when the 2 have different roles and remits at their respective clubs.
Thats false.. If the recruitment people below Mark aren't meeting kpi's, then its up to Mark to deal with the issue.
If Mark isn't hitting kpi's , its up to Sarantinos to deal with Mark
Thats tge same for all clubs
Not defending MON here, but im all fairness Chiefy, we dont know what/if any are the metrics for the KPIs. MON and Jim came in at a time when things were upside down, so 'success' then vs success now could be very different things
Dont get me wrong, I agree that its time for a change in voice, but thats just me
Was Phil Gould the most influential person in R and R at Penrith super?
Is Head of football Phil Gould themost influential person in recruitment at the Bulldogs super. Why isn't the hof the most responsible for the roster at Parramatta.
But at Parramatta o'neill isn't the most responsible for the roster. Unbelievable. Do you think the average fan is that naive????
Which is why, to agree with Super, none of us should accept these scapegoating critiques. They are misidentifying their targets and their solutions are little more than symbolic changes. Scapegoating as a critique is fundamentally flawed, whenever it is deployed, both mischaracterizing the target of critique and pretending symbolic quick fixes will actually address what are likely problems that are in fact broad, systemic, multi-causal issues.
Chief, Daz can share his opinions regardless of whatever demands or ultimatums you place on him. We don't want this place turning into a boring echo chamber of relentless negativity against the club.
You’re free to continue your persistent attacks on the club. None of your comments have been deleted or edited.
Just be careful you don't overstep the mark into personal cheap shots, which you have so far avoided.
In fact, I’ve only edited one comment in the past few months and that was a recent personal attack on Randy. Ironically, Randy is also on your side of the fence: the Church of Sack MON.
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
of 14 Next