Blues 2018
-
@duluth said in Blues 2018:
Thats probably right. I did say 'should'
If after three years you can't make the top 8 of a 15 team comp he should be sacked.
But he probably wouldn't be held accountable
I see your point but I think that's a bit misleading. If the Blues were in the Aussie conference they would have won it the last two years.
While there are now 5 'wildcard' playoff spots available - the NZ derbies this year have increased from 6 to 8 so 4th place in the NZ conference may not be good enough for a playoff spot like it has been the last two years.
-
hasn't he recently extended his contract?
@KiwiMurph I don't really buy the if the Blues were in the Aussie conference line...they aren't, they should do much better with available player resources.
That said, I think there is more to the Blues woes than coaching.
-
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2018:
hasn't he recently extended his contract?
There was an articles a few weeks ago saying they should announce an extension now. Probably written by a reporter who used to say 'judge him after three seasons'
-
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2018:
hasn't he recently extended his contract?
@KiwiMurph I don't really buy the if the Blues were in the Aussie conference line...they aren't, they should do much better with available player resources.
That said, I think there is more to the Blues woes than coaching.
My point is that saying they cant make an 8 team playoffs in a 15 team comp is misleading as all 15 teams dont exactly have an even chance of making the playoffs.
-
@kiwimurph pretty much a 5 team comp to make the finals.
-
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2018:
hasn't he recently extended his contract?
@KiwiMurph I don't really buy the if the Blues were in the Aussie conference line...they aren't, they should do much better with available player resources.
That said, I think there is more to the Blues woes than coaching.
I think the player resources thing is a bit overdone. The Blues have had the poorest squad in NZ for a number of years now. Yes, there are lots of player in the Auckland region due to numbers, but there is more talent in other franchises and has been for a while now.
-
@nepia at what age? Player numbers in Auckland, NH, Northland and probably include Counties to a point as well, are huge...but at some point something goes wrong ,although I don't think this is directly linked to the issues for Auckland Rugby (League & Union)
League seems to do so much better with recruiting 'kids' than rugby (Warriors aside...) was talking to a lady at work, her 17yr old son has played rugby with a kid right through to form 5 (Year 11?) but last year his mate picked up a contract/scholarship with an Aussie league team, when he visited over Xmas, she said he was huge, bulked up massively...which obviously is a concern in itself for a 17/18 year old...
-
@nepia said in Blues 2018:
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2018:
hasn't he recently extended his contract?
@KiwiMurph I don't really buy the if the Blues were in the Aussie conference line...they aren't, they should do much better with available player resources.
That said, I think there is more to the Blues woes than coaching.
I think the player resources thing is a bit overdone. The Blues have had the poorest squad in NZ for a number of years now. Yes, there are lots of player in the Auckland region due to numbers, but there is more talent in other franchises and has been for a while now.
I agree. Although quite a bit of that talent at other franchises comes from the Auckland region too.
It depends on position too - the Blues/Auckland region produce a heap of quality outside backs - first fives not so much - the Canterbury region is the opposite.
What will be interesting is how successful the Blues region is at keeping the current young crop of talent that has come through the successful Auckland U19 team from last year (Clarke, Plummer, Sotutu, Telea, Waimana Riedlinger-Kapa etc).
-
@taniwharugby The age thing is kind of my point, yes there must be lots of young talent floating around Auckland but it doesn't come through to senior level, so hard to point that particular finger at the current (whoever it is) coach of the Blues.
-
@nepia said in Blues 2018:
@taniwharugby The age thing is kind of my point, yes there must be lots of young talent floating around Auckland but it doesn't come through to senior level, so hard to point that particular finger at the current (whoever it is) coach of the Blues.
It comes through at senior level, but not at the Blues.
Saw a stat that something like a third of all NPC players had been through the Auckland system. They just don't wind up playing for Auckland or the Blues.
-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11997652
Josh Goodhue is another putting pressure on the selectors, something Tuipulotu acknowledges.
"It wasn't tough because I know them personally and they deserve that spot. It wouldn't be fair to be negative towards them because they earned it. Even now coming in, Josh Goodie [Goodhue] has earned the spot.
-
@nzzp said in Blues 2018:
Saw a stat that something like a third of all NPC players had been through the Auckland system. They just don't wind up playing for Auckland or the Blues.
..and Auckland has been fine whenever the coach isn't called Anscombe or White. The production of SR players almost dried up under Anscombe (wierd selections Morland, Berquist, old Ward etc) and started again when Pivac came back.
One of the big issues the Blues had was their self imposed selection restrictions (2 outsiders per squad I think it was?)
When you have historically weak Northland and Harbour sides, and Auckland not producing players in certain positions, that was suicide.The argument never should have been about picking a sub par Lowry or a tackle shy Budd, we should have been recruiting from elsewhere.
Kirwan and Umaga haven't had that restriction. Kirwan probably picked more outsiders in his first year than all previous seasons combinedAnother retention issue was the sub par training facilities where players spend 90% of their time. That was fixed three years ago
A professional coaching structure was another issue. Lam had part timers. That was fixed in Kirwans first year and the coaching structure mirrored the Chiefs
No excuses now.
Umaga has had three years, he can pick from anywhere in the country, he needs to perform.
-
@nzzp said in Blues 2018:
@nepia said in Blues 2018:
@taniwharugby The age thing is kind of my point, yes there must be lots of young talent floating around Auckland but it doesn't come through to senior level, so hard to point that particular finger at the current (whoever it is) coach of the Blues.
It comes through at senior level, but not at the Blues.
Saw a stat that something like a third of all NPC players had been through the Auckland system. They just don't wind up playing for Auckland or the Blues.
The 2016 Auckland RU Annual report claimed
28% of all Mitre 10 Cup players in 2016 have passed through the Auckland rugby development system.
-
@nzzp said in Blues 2018:
@nepia said in Blues 2018:
@taniwharugby The age thing is kind of my point, yes there must be lots of young talent floating around Auckland but it doesn't come through to senior level, so hard to point that particular finger at the current (whoever it is) coach of the Blues.
It comes through at senior level, but not at the Blues.
Saw a stat that something like a third of all NPC players had been through the Auckland system. They just don't wind up playing for Auckland or the Blues.
A third sounds a bit much, doesn't it? I wonder whether that number includes players who have come to the Blues region on school scholarships and have played the odd game for a Blues age grade team?
An example of such a player is Jonah Lowe. He is from Hawke's Bay, went to St John's College (Hastings), then got a scholarship at King's College and played for the Blues U18 team before returning to the Bay. Obviously, there's no way he can be regarded as a product of the Blues region, but are players like him included in that number?
-
@duluth said in Post your Super Rugby predictions:
The Blues:
If they don't make the playoffs Umaga should be sacked.The table will look bad for us in the first couple of months. Only one home game and two byes in the first 6 weeks.
However 6 of the last 7 matches are at home. There is potential for a late charge.I'll make a relatively positive prediction - beaten semi finalists
It's virtually impossible for all NZ teams to make it through. One NZ team at minimum (likely two) will miss out on the finals simply because of the derby games.
To sack a coach based on that is harsh. For a coach to pull a team up in our 'pool of death' is a massive achievement (unless another turns to shit). The key is getting a winning feeling and momentum and the draw does the Blues no favours at all in this regard.
I can see them playing really good rugby, winning most of their overseas games and having close losses to NZ teams. The fans will bring out the pitchforks, demand change and go back to the start again.
-
@crucial said in Blues 2018:
It's virtually impossible for all NZ teams to make it through.
Well that first sentence implies you think they'll come last. You'll note my prediction was relatively positive. I don't think they'll finish 5th for a 3rd time under Umaga. If the damage is limited in the first 6 weeks that draw suddenly looks good.
5th, 5th & 5th should be sackable. Do I think he will get sacked if there is no improvement? Unfortunately the answer is no. It seems Umaga is a special needs coach and should not be judged by the same standards of other coaches
"Judge him after three years" has quickly become "Give him a fourth year" just before the third season kicks off
Accountability is a problem at the Blues. I include the board and the coaches in that.
