Super's right of course and basically he has thought about how people fit.
Its little subleties like these that get overlooked when we throw lifelines out in desperation to replace someone that arguably had no influence on the game we lost on the weekend.
I am probably regarded as a MON lover, I am actually not but have always defended him when he is being attacked for reasons arguably out of his control. I noted Corynne who is arguably one of the best technical commentators of the game on this site and him putting forward Peter O'Sullivan, a man who directly recruited Dyllan Brown to the Knights for a rediculous sum, that I might add just about everybody agreed upon, was such. I still believe he will regret what he paid that amount for, not because Dyllan isn't any good, but because he is not that good.
I think Ryles has gone out with the objective of that first definition of a player, yes he is good but not that good. Constant misses really hurt our fan base because they look in the rear vision mirror and not the "subjective".
MON is a admistrator of the whole football club, this responsible administration stops at the top 30 selection wise, when Ryles absolutes come into play. But of course MON still fulfils the logistic aspects, just not needs and wants of his own opinions.
MON has no authority to pay overs, just a responsibility to manage within a preset cap. Pay over's and it goes to Saratinos and the Chairman. Would a man like we want to employ be prepared to accept that.....fine lines in management?
Super's Richardson comment reinforces that view.
Bluey raised a number of very good points in selling the benefits that we can offer and an overall stronger sales push....I think that is the path we are heading towards.......so the question arises is our Administrator the person we want doing sales?
First point I would change is calling MON Head Of Football, no such position exists in my opinion. General Manager Football Administration identifies his job more accurately.
A new position then needs to be created as " Manager Recruitment and Retention", this is your salesman, the one that researches scouts feedback and analysis and commuicates with players on their needs, ambitions, frustrations and opportunities. This is a big job and he is not in the first instance an administrator but the go to man that reports back to a committee involving the current incumbents. He is not interested in what arrangements the teams are looking at in logistics, just the R&R of the club. If he runs this role as a business he can build all the ancillory support he requires from that body that encompasses administration, coaching and executive requirements.
It would also put into play a circuit of scouting, where we are looking, other countries, specifically the Island's where Corynne assures us there are a dozen Semi's waiting to come and all other areas of cognisance that can come under that umbrella...... an example I would use would be people like EA who are not just watching our minor grades but all the other clubs our young players play against each week.....I would pay him some expenses for such voluntary roles and collate his feed back accordingly......creating a CIA of the football fraternity you may say...Lol
My summary is structure and responsibilities, all these things may exist, but none mentioned would effect our cap, it would all be an administration expenses well within the financial management of the CEO. One final peice, where that person comes from can be as widespread as your imagination takes it, it could be a Richardson type or it could be a young go getter making early days in the game. A Matt Cameron of the future waiting to be identified.....that person may exist now within the club or be recruited externally, it is up to the administration/executive and the imagination of the leadership that looks to create scenarios like these.....they are usually not accounting or legal types and there lays the problems with most companies these days, they look to the accounting and legal framework and not as visionaries.
Replies
Pops, I think where this is coming from is the idea if we had a sexy GM, R&R or head office, with Singo-like helicopters and killer instincts, we'd be able to sign marquee talent like the Dogs, Roosters or Broncos. Clubs that fit $15-17m of talent into a $12m cap. A messiah. Mr Fix-It.
The first problem is without deep-pocketed benefactors prepared to throw millions away, it ain't happening. Marquee talent has options and won't play for huge unders. I remember in a long interview they asked Cameron Smith, a Storm loyalist and legend, would an extra few hundred thousand swing him away from the Storm, and he admitted it would.
Sure, those little "extras" above and beyond are nice in theory, especially since Saints used a helicopter. But those "extras" can backfire if your bottom line isn't commensurate with it. Players aren't stupid. Kaeon didn't sign with Saints because of a fun helicopter trip. They offered way beyond anything we did or Souths did. Even his friendships their would have contributed more, as enjoyable as it is. Singleton's squadrons of helicopters didn't help the Reds much either.
Not even premiership success — the Panthers four-title reign, the second-best of all time — was enough to convince maquee talent to play for unders. They lost a plethora of marquee talent because they couldn't compete money wise. Mind you, our site concluded Matt Cameron was "rubbish" and the reason our juniors weren't coming of age, when he departed in 2012. Now, he would be viewed through a very different lens after becoming Panthers footy CEO in 2021. If he can't recruit external marquee talent for the Panthers to play for unders, he won't for us, either.
Most players are happy at the Eels, and looked after with their welfare. Most players and people are impressed by Jason Ryles and our front office is slowly commanding more respect from the broader rugby league community. We're creating a better environment. But obviously, we still have a way to, and the Storm hiding was a serious reality check, which the ref helped along. We're not there yet. And unfortunately, it's only hard yakka and unity facing the challenges that will get us out of this hole. And this Thursday is a big challenge for us, between the ears as much as physically.
Do you think Fitzy ever reported to anyone above him? So what's the answer, continue doing the same thing with the same results?
Fitzy wasn't an autonomous power: Fitzy didn't want Jack Gibson at our club, and was outvoted.
The club holds the purse strings. Ultimately, they're still in charge.
Mass sackings and a revolving door, like the Dark Ages, after R1, now would likely lead to years of bottom four and spoons. Even fewer players than now would want to come to an unstable club.
Bad news: It's going to be boring hard yakka, pathways with as astute R&R as possible — on the back of unity within the club — that will get us out of the hole.
The conversation is real and adds value to the debate.
I suppose what I am trying to say is that the current lines of management/positions is not an appropriate mix to achieve the most cost effective results.
I think we are talking about an ongoing evolution that requires both on and off field solutions.
There is no question our resources are restricted, I would like to think that is not a fait accomplee and that we with the right efficiency may see a positive move. There is no obvious reason that a club and region the size of Parramatta should be in the "poor people" queue.
We have to make sure we have the right structure and people in place to maximise what ever opportunities may arise.
Lets not forget this discussion emanated from are rather animated view that MON was the source of a problem and that Richardson was a potential answer....Super correctectly made a relevant point and my intent was to explore a structure more attractive to accomodate such a position.
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1D6Sb9ND1F/?mibextid=wwXIfr
I think we just need to continue to improve our stocks on and off the field never be set in anything we do just continue to improve.I know it sounds simple but this is basically all this is.The results on the field are but a gauge.If we aren't winning I bet you we as a club can go back and look at what we didn't do and where we are weak and this will certainly show out in the mentioned lack of results.