Paddycripps wrote:
Name one good thing Teague has done. Something sustainable. And don't mention the development of the no.1 picks or the no.10 pick.
When Teague took over, we could barely kick a score over 70pts.
Now we score quite well.
When Teague took over, we'd fairly regularly get smashed.
Now we don't.
When Teague took over, our effort and intensity was variable week to week.
That is much better now - we don't give up but we do lapse regularly within games.
Our best now is very competitive; it wasn't when Teague took over.
We have an ongoing fierce debate on TC about whether to play the kids or whether to make them earn it.
I suspect there is a similar debate going on within the MC, although they appear to be prioritising effort and aggression over skill or draft pick number.
At the moment, I believe the difference b/w winning and losing sits more with the players than the coach.
For mine, I think we should be playing Dow, SPS and Parks as well as introducing a few others such as Honey, and Kemp/Carroll/Ramsay when form and fitness warrant.
And by the end of the year, we need to have made definitive calls on O'Brien, Setterfield, Kennedy, and Williamson - do they have a future as senior players or will they only ever be back-up, depth players if the need arises.
So who should make way? I think the most vulnerable from Sunday are: Casboult, Gibbons, Owies, Murphy, Betts, and Setterfield.
I think Owies is doing well and he is learning every game he plays, so he should stay in for them moment. Gibbons has probably reached his ceiling. But, if we are going to play him, I wouldn't be averse to giving him more of a crack in the midfield before we finalise our view of him. Murphy has two sides - good vision and skills in a team lacking both but not accountable/tough enough defensively in a team that can't afford defensive holes. Betts is in good form at the moment so I'd stick with that but by the end of the year, I'd expect others to be taking his spot - either due to form or to give opportunity.