Blues win percentage against NZ teams
-
-
@hooroo said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@kirwan said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
Pass mark is winning all the home games.
You can’t compare to the first part of the season and accept mediocrity as the new normal. We are in a hole, a good coach will get you out of it.
If you can’t even win your home games it’s all over.
Mind you, I though he should have resigned after the utter embarrassment of shipping 63 points on Eden Park.
I think the Blues will be like the Chiefs of Pre Rennie days. Hopeless but will beat a NZ team at the wrong time to stuff that teams chances come the pointy end.
we were the kings of coming home with a wet sail. Played awesome open footy when the pressure of actually getting something out of the season was off. Foster was the master of it.
-
What changed? How fast did it change?
-
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
What changed? How fast did it change?
New coach seemed to help, along with have a super AB coach to pull the strings too
-
Yes, that did seem to help
One year was it?
Because I was told to judge Tana after three years.. we're almost at three years now.. now I'm told Tana should get another 2 years added to his contract
The strange thing is I can't find a Blues fan that wants that
-
@hooroo said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
What changed? How fast did it change?
New coach seemed to help, along with have a super AB coach to pull the strings too
And the recruitment of an 1st five totally suited to carving up at Super level. Plus Brodie breaking out about then, plus Cane.
-
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
Yes, that did seem to help
One year was it?
Because I was told to judge Tana after three years.. we're almost at three years now.. now I'm told Tana should get another 2 years added to his contract
The strange thing is I can't find a Blues fan that wants that
Yes and also Razor did it in his first year too!
-
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
What changed? How fast did it change?
really fucking quick actually. And Facebook reminded me the other week, thanks to the memory functions. Rennie came on board, and the first week looked the fucking same as ever, ropey defense, shithouse set piece, headless play.
The next memory was two weeks later, and all of those things had turned around. The cornerstones of decent rugby appeared (after years of neglect), and it allowed our heads-up attack to flourish. And we won back to back comps.
-
@mariner4life said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
What changed? How fast did it change?
really fucking quick actually. And Facebook reminded me the other week, thanks to the memory functions. Rennie came on board, and the first week looked the fucking same as ever, ropey defense, shithouse set piece, headless play.
The next memory was two weeks later, and all of those things had turned around. The cornerstones of decent rugby appeared (after years of neglect), and it allowed our heads-up attack to flourish. And we won back to back comps.
aaahhhh goood times
-
@hooroo said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
What changed? How fast did it change?
New coach seemed to help, along with have a super AB coach to pull the strings too
I'm sure Auckland would look miles better with an All Black first five-eighth and Wayne Smith as assistant.
-
@gt12 said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@hooroo said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
What changed? How fast did it change?
New coach seemed to help, along with have a super AB coach to pull the strings too
And the recruitment of an 1st five totally suited to carving up at Super level. Plus Brodie breaking out about then, plus Cane.
They'd had Donald, who was adequate for the job, should the coach be good enough to get his head on the right space. We'd made the finals with him.
Foster's team were well coached, technically. He's taken that to the ABs. The players liked him.
They were poorly selected, particularly in that off-field stuff was ignored, so lazy and disruptive players stayed in the team. Rennie was ruthless in getting rid of anyone who wouldn't train 100%.
But the real issue was motivation. Foster's teams played well under no pressure, as noted above. When high in the competition they'd fold to lower teams consistently. The way they crumbled in the one final they got was exactly what they were like. I knew it would happen, so could not bear to watch the game, to save my blood pressure.
If Foster coaches the ABs, expect mental brittleness to reappear.
Rennie did inherit a team who were enjoying their rugby and were technically sound. The transformation of the head space was total though.
A great coach could turn the Blues around in a season, I don't doubt that.
:::
Spoiler Text
:::
-
@hooroo said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
Yes, that did seem to help
One year was it?
Because I was told to judge Tana after three years.. we're almost at three years now.. now I'm told Tana should get another 2 years added to his contract
The strange thing is I can't find a Blues fan that wants that
Yes and also Razor did it in his first year too!
Boyd got the Canes a home final in his first year, then won the thing the next year. Fair bit of evidence to suggest a quality coach can make a big difference.
-
i think one of the big changes at the chiefs was attitude and culture.i remember reading an article that said how bad the players were at taking short cut at training etc.
5 yrs ago i dont think i would have been a big believer in how the culture of a team leads to success but the chiefs are a prime example of the difference it can make.
little bit off topic but it seems to be a major problem at the silver ferns at the moment to. -
@no-quarter said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@hooroo said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
@duluth said in Blues win percentage against NZ teams:
Yes, that did seem to help
One year was it?
Because I was told to judge Tana after three years.. we're almost at three years now.. now I'm told Tana should get another 2 years added to his contract
The strange thing is I can't find a Blues fan that wants that
Yes and also Razor did it in his first year too!
Boyd got the Canes a home final in his first year, then won the thing the next year. Fair bit of evidence to suggest a quality coach can make a big difference.
I think the evidence the coach makes a big difference is overwhelming.
I did a check and iirc anyone who won a Super Rugby title did it in their first three years, and for most the turn-around was immediately obvious. McKenzie at the Reds, the most dramatic.
Foster managed a final in his fifth? year, and the team was crap the next, showing it was fluke.
Even great coaches tended to get worse over time, rather than better. (I suspect they don't get worse, just that the opposition know what to expect, so the results slip a bit.)
There is zero chance, based on previous history, that Tana can turn the ship around.
The Chiefs kept hoping Foster would deliver, the Crusaders kept hoping Blackadder would. They didn't, and neither will Tana.
-
It's common to blame the lack of quality first fives on the Blues' fortunes. The accepted theory is you need a world class first five to win Super Rugby. I actually agree with the theory but would also add I didn't think Sopoaga was a World Class first five until all of a sudden he was. This came off the back of years of sticking around, development and most importantly good coaching.
-
Interesting take a couple of factors not considered.
The quality of non-Blues NZ teams change drastically. For example during Lam's 2010 tenure the Chiefs and Highlanders were bottom four on the table.
Umaga has the toughest job because the most damage has been done before him. A quality coach could have turned around things straight after Nucifora went sideways, but the tenures of Kirwan and Lam have done such damage to the culture and reputation of the club the task in front of Tana is harder than Lam who was at least handed a professional sporting team.
That doesn't excuse Umaga - he was handed the team in such poor condition that the bar of initial success was lower than it was for any of the others too, and he is struggling to make it.
