Blues 2018
-
@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.
-
-
@duluth said in Blues 2018:
@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.
I get all that, I just think that coming 5th in the NZ conference is often due to the strength of the other teams rather than the 5th team's inabilities. If all 5 NZ teams are even equally strong one still has to come 5th and likely miss out on finals. Its the structure of the comp whereby finals slots get handed to shit teams from other countries in place of a strong NZ team.
Let's say the three undoubtably strongest teams in the comp are from NZ. That makes a likely 6 losses on the books of the other 2
Aside from that aspect, have a look at AB representation through the teams, or rather top string AB representation. Winning teams attract top signings also and that makes it even harder to recruit.
Whoever comes 5th in NZ is going to carry a fail tag despite their performance levels. -
Prop selection is a tough one too. Manu is probably the better scrummager on the loosehead but he was well off the pace around the field
The change with the attack coach is where I am hopeful. Last year we looked so easy to defend against.
One off runners, no options, hardly any offloads because no one was there. It was so easy for the defence to see who was taking it to the line and smash them.
Then late in matches the players would get frustrated and start with the miracle playsGiven how many narrow loses there were (3 narrow losses to NZ teams and a draw), even a handful of extra tries across the season might flip some results
-
@crucial coming 5th over and over in a group of 5 is a strong indicator you haven't really improved.
Removing the vagueness of the pools with home and away, winning your home derbies is a key focus, you come last in 5, you come last in 5, and if you have done that on 3 previous years without improving your position...
-
Yes its a tough job with high standards.
I don't remember you being so forgiving of Hammett? His results were better. Has any other NZ coach finished last of the NZ teams 3 times and kept their job? I can't imagine the wagons circling other NZ coaching personalities if they got a wooden spoon 3-peat
But it hasn't happened yet.. I expect a tangible improvement and the Chiefs to have a tough season
-
@taniwharugby said in Blues 2018:
@crucial coming 5th over and over in a group of 5 is a strong indicator you haven't really improved.
Removing the vagueness of the pools with home and away, winning your home derbies is a key focus, you come last in 5, you come last in 5, and if you have done that on 3 previous years without improving your position...
That's very much an over simplification. If in the first year you don't win a thing and come last by a mile but by the last year win plenty of cross pool games, have narrow loses against your pool and come last by only a few points you are still improving relative to your own performance.
Don't think umaga should be guaranteed the job forever but if he does get sacked it should be because there is a better option or because of performance across the whole competition rather than just performance relative to the other NZ teams.
-
@duluth said in Blues 2018:
Yes its a tough job with high standards.
I don't remember you being so forgiving of Hammett? His results were better. Has any other NZ coach finished last of the NZ teams 3 times and kept their job? I can't imagine the wagons circling other NZ coaching personalities if they got a wooden spoon 3-peat
But it hasn't happened yet.. I expect a tangible improvement and the Chiefs to have a tough season
For one, Hammett operated under a different comp structure which wasn't as harsh. Secondly T is untouchable because he coached CM to their first Shield. He gets a lifelong pass for that.
