Who Should We Look At For 2015?

[djhabib]

no thanks

 

[sharks2010]

Yuk no thanks

 

[snowman]

he is playing good footy.... maybe

 

[Bundy Shark]

No for me.

 

[CrazyMatt]

Depth only.

 

[deano the p]

If the signing is for depth only I wouldn't have an issue with it but would prefer a younger option.

 

[CHOGM]

I'd take Brown no worries. Every team needs a mr reliable and we don't have one. FB, wing, centre if we need and I can't see him costing too much. We have to have competition for spots in the backline next year and a guy like him will keep them on thier toes.

 

[CrazyMatt]

If the signing is for depth only I wouldn't have an issue with it but would prefer a younger option.

For the most part I agree, but we are going to have A LOT of young backs next year on our roster, at this stage only Micky Gordon has any experience, I'd be happy with an experienced guy for depth, Mitch fits that criteria.

 

[CHOGM]

Can I add all these references to "depth" suggest it's best to have an A team and a B team, when what is needed is a squad where every player has a genuine shot at first grade. Brown has proven at the dogs he can hold a spot in first grade and do everything the coach asks.

Some players are more likely to play firsts than others, and some will get paid more than others, but no player should be in the squad as "depth".

 

[deano the p]

Can I add all these references to "depth" suggest it's best to have an A team and a B team, when what is needed is a squad where every player has a genuine shot at first grade. Brown has proven at the dogs he can hold a spot in first grade and do everything the coach asks.

Some players are more likely to play firsts than others, and some will get paid more than others, but no player should be in the squad as "depth".

No the reference to him being depth is a way of us saying we don't want him as one of our first options but he would be an alright player to come in and do a job when needed.

eg. If we are signing him to be one of our top five options we would rather go for someone better.

 

[CHOGM]

No the reference to him being depth is a way of us saying we don't want him as one of our first options but he would be an alright player to come in and do a job when needed.

eg. If we are signing him to be one of our top five options we would rather go for someone better.

Player A is a good signing as long as he isn't the best we're going after? Yeah I get that, I just don't like the idea of pre ordained spots.

 

[endevour shark]

For the most part I agree, but we are going to have A LOT of young backs next year on our roster, at this stage only Micky Gordon has anyperience, I'd be happy with an experienced guy for depth, Mitch fits that criteria.

We could do a whole lot worse we have in the past!!!!!!! He can cover wing and fullback as well.

 

[josh11223344]

NO. We do this every year and say we need depth and end up signing somebody who offers nothing.

I'm happy with our young backline depth, we either sign a clear upgrade or stick to the young guys we've got.

 

[Tank]

NO. We do this every year and say we need depth and end up signing somebody who offers nothing.

I'm happy with our young backline depth, we either sign a clear upgrade or stick to the young guys we've got.

Agree. Prior,Holdsworth,Grothe ( injury I know) and of course young Blake are examples I suppose.

 

[evertonshark]

Agree. Prior,Holdsworth,Grothe ( injury I know) and of course young Blake are examples I suppose.

Brown isn't as bad as them but he's not great either. Meh

 

[deano the p]

NO. We do this every year and say we need depth and end up signing somebody who offers nothing.

I'm happy with our young backline depth, we either sign a clear upgrade or stick to the young guys we've got.

What backline depth exactly?

Ayshford and Holmes plus what ever under 20's tickle your fancy?

I've only seen a few under 20's games this year but no one has really stood out as NRL ready.

Brown can do a decent job at the NRL level. He is already an upgrade on Ayshford.

Not trying to have a go or anything, just a serious question do you think our under 20's are enough to get us by if we have mass injuries in the backline?

We have lost Stapo, will most likely lose Gards, have been apparently shopping Ayshford and Jono Wright around, the Grothe experiment was a failure.

Every club has solid depth players that can come in and do a job. Our problem is we sign these players as answers to our starting line up issues.

For example if we have a winger, centre and a fullback out who comes in?

 

[Gumby]

What backline depth exactly?

Ayshford and Holmes plus what ever under 20's tickle your fancy?

I've only seen a few under 20's games this year but no one has really stood out as NRL ready.

Brown can do a decent job at the NRL level. He is already an upgrade on Ayshford.

Not trying to have a go or anything, just a serious question do you think our under 20's are enough to get us by if we have mass injuries in the backline?

We have lost Stapo, will most likely lose Gards, have been apparently shopping Ayshford and Jono Wright around, the Grothe experiment was a failure.

Every club has solid depth players that can come in and do a job. Our problem is we sign these players as answers to our starting line up issues.

For example if we have a winger, centre and a fullback out who comes in?

Gal :drunk

 

[hamsy44]

What backline depth exactly?

Ayshford and Holmes plus what ever under 20's tickle your fancy?

I've only seen a few under 20's games this year but no one has really stood out as NRL ready.

Brown can do a decent job at the NRL level. He is already an upgrade on Ayshford.

Not trying to have a go or anything, just a serious question do you think our under 20's are enough to get us by if we have mass injuries in the backline?

We have lost Stapo, will most likely lose Gards, have been apparently shopping Ayshford and Jono Wright around, the Grothe experiment was a failure.

Every club has solid depth players that can come in and do a job. Our problem is we sign these players as answers to our starting line up issues.

For example if we have a winger, centre and a fullback out who comes in?

Any of the under 20's backs would be able to play - how good they are is the real question.

But you don't win a comp on the quality of your depth. You win a comp by having a really good top 17 and a lot of luck with injuries. If you need to rely on depth for a season you are not going to win the comp.

Manly have been so strong for so long by making their top 17 their focus. The Roosters last year won the comp by have a top 17 and not many injuries.

Most sides rely on their kids to fill injury gaps - we rely on journeymen. Our cap gets full of journey men. We need to target only top 13 squad players and develop youth.

Otherwise we will always be also rans.

 

[deano the p]

It's pretty hard to make that happen when the majority of your cap is taken up by forwards and a lot of them are injury prone along with your only big name back.

 

[hamsy44]

It's pretty hard to make that happen when the majority of your cap is taken up by forwards and a lot of them are injury prone along with your only big name back.

Its not hard it just won't happen quickly. Need to manage it over the next couple of years. But there is plenty of cash for a couple of marquee signings and to secure youth.