Reds 2015

[RedsHappy]

Any other instagram watchers note Albert Anae spending a few days in Canberra?

Strange place to take the family for a two- or three-day holiday in May.

I have no insight into AA's possible opinions and plans, but I do know that the focus on these boards re the Reds' recruitment needs and team change requirements has not yet balanced the discussion with the other side of the ledger:

.........namely the Reds (main squad and EPS) players that the QRU wants to retain that will tire of incompetent coaching and poor man management and want to strongly consider departing and/or will depart.

The longer the coaching debacle continues (with the QRU leadership in various forms of denial), the worse this trend, and its negative inner pressures upon the morale of the team, will become.

 

[Parse]

Exactly, good point RedsHappy. I hope you emailed the QRU/Reds and told them that as well!

 

[Slim 293]

I hear Questacon is amazing this time of year.

Canberra is lovely in Autumn..........

 

[suckerforred]

Folowing RedsHappy's post, another thought - Reds have always been seen as a 'young' team and centred on 'home grown' talent to the apparent detriment of the team. Is this as a result of poor management/coaching & is our squad about to get even younger?

 

[gel]

I can't see anyone with any ability sticking around for too much longer if there is a sniff of an opportunity elsewhere.

I am sure there are some thoughts of "I want to stay loyal to the reds", but when faced with the prospect of not getting an opportunity at higher honours and the money that brings, there is a hell of a lot of incentive to move to a team where the coaching staff and structure will promise better development.

Furthermore, I can't see many decent players wanting to come here with a promise of scuttling wallaby chances, guaranteed regression in just about every facet of play and lowering the self confidence.

Doesn't exactly sound like fun times.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Hyperbole much guys? By your rationale, nobody would have wanted to go to the tahs before last year, the brumbies before 2012, the force until now and the rebels at all.

That's not the case. Players follow opportunity.

Also, amazingly, wallabies were still capped from the reds, even when we were shit.

 

[suckerforred]

I spose my point was that players leave the Reds to go to other teams and are replaced within the reds with locals & therefore younger players.

 

[RedsHappy]

Hyperbole much guys? By your rationale, nobody would have wanted to go to the tahs before last year, the brumbies before 2012, the force until now and the rebels at all.

That's not the case. Players follow opportunity.

Also, amazingly, wallabies were still capped from the reds, even when we were shit.

No one said or even inferred any such thing!

This recent discussion concerns the degree to which 'natural and normal' desires to look at better offers ($s and/or playing time) elsewhere will accelerate and become more likely with the 2014 Reds mega-implosion which has clearly affected many Reds players' motivation and morale.

SFR's point I think's an excellent one: if unforced departures of good players from the Reds increases, will in the current circumstances the Reds/QRU have difficulties recruiting the cream of new external replacement players and thus be forced to blood a significant number of home-grown only younger players whom will take more than one season to convert into solid S15/18 players.

Equally, will top external players - looking at the 2014 Reds' results and on-field excellence (the lack thereof) conclude that the RG-coached Reds is a world-class place for skill and team development, and a place likely to soon attain another S15/18 Title?

 

[suckerforred]

Much better said RedsHappy. Thank you.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I agree, a poor program will lead to retention and recruitment issues. Despite this at times, the Brumbies and Waratahs didn't lose too many they wanted to keep, nor have issues attracting players.

In order to ensure optimum retention and recruitment, the Reds need to ensure a quality coaching team I agree. But even if the current coaching team stays, they will still manage to recruit players, still retain players and still have players achieve higher honours, just like they did in the past.

This is because players, much like teams, are at mercy of the market. For example, if a fullback is off contract and surplus to requirements so therefore not being offered something close to there real market value and looking to move right now, the only potential options are the Reds and the Force, as the other 3 have stable long term options there.

Another example, is Colby Fainga'a. Left the Brumbies to go to the Rebels. Not because it was a better program or environment, but he would have better opportunity there and therefore potentially better earning capacity.

 

[gel]

Hyperbole much guys?. <snip>

By no means will this apply to all players - there will always be individuals who buck the trend.

Sorry if I made out like everyone will follow the same formula. Without getting too wordy and putting caveats throughout, I was trying to put it more broadly.

I agree, a poor program will lead to retention and recruitment issues.

That was really what I was trying to get across. It makes it a lot more difficult to retain or recruit the better players when the coaching/management is obviously (seemingly?) not functioning. the lower quality players whose opportunities are more limited will be *largely* (not totally) what's left after a while.

 

[USARugger]

I agree, a poor program will lead to retention and recruitment issues. Despite this at times, the Brumbies and Waratahs didn't lose too many they wanted to keep, nor have issues attracting players.

I'd say the rugby marketplace, both domestic and globally, has changed dramatically since then.

Domestically, clubs are coming 'round the corner to what is beginning to resemble the professional recruiting/retainment strategies seen in the MLB, NFL, NBA, etc..

Globally it's the same, just at a far higher velocity and with significantly more cash to throw around.

As you astutely mentioned, we are all at the mercy of the marketplace as a whole. My greatest fear stems from the fact that this reality is already bearing fruit (not the good kind) within the Reds' organization..coupled with an imbalance in push/pull factors it could devastate the squad over the next few seasons.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Link showed how quickly the right person can turn an under-performing program around. Jake white did it again 2 years later.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with the concern. However, it seems to be being said by some, that this will be further compromised because when they finally recruit a decent coach to oversee the program, they will have to rebuild the squad because the reds will only have substandard players until then. History has shown this isn't necessarily the case.

 

[suckerforred]

TWaS, I agree with you, but I guess my original point was not that we would necessarily be left with 'substandard' players but that the players that we develop to a 'standard' will use the market place to further their outlook in life. Hence we are left with a younger 'rawer' squad. Such a squad can be turned around as Link & Jake and any number of coaches/clubs have shown in the past.

Let's hope it doesn't take long for this to turn around.

 

[Gnostic]

I agree, a poor program will lead to retention and recruitment issues. Despite this at times, the Brumbies and Waratahs didn't lose too many they wanted to keep, nor have issues attracting players.

In order to ensure optimum retention and recruitment, the Reds need to ensure a quality coaching team I agree. But even if the current coaching team stays, they will still manage to recruit players, still retain players and still have players achieve higher honours, just like they did in the past.

This is because players, much like teams, are at mercy of the market. For example, if a fullback is off contract and surplus to requirements so therefore not being offered something close to there real market value and looking to move right now, the only potential options are the Reds and the Force, as the other 3 have stable long term options there.

Another example, is Colby Fainga'a. Left the Brumbies to go to the Rebels. Not because it was a better program or environment, but he would have better opportunity there and therefore potentially better earning capacity.

They simply didn't lose many because despite their poor results players from those franchises were still being selected in the Wallabies. Even in the depths of the Tahs crisis (that some still dispute) significant Tahs numbers were selected for the Wallabies, much to the angst of some Reds posters who will not need to be reminded.

The depth of the Reds failure over the last two years is such that there is no dispute that any more of their players are deserving on form of higher honours. Indeed there is valid argument that half of those selected could have been overlooked if others had not committed overseas.

 

[Gnostic]

Link showed how quickly the right person can turn an under-performing program around. Jake white did it again 2 years later.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with the concern. However, it seems to be being said by some, that this will be further compromised because when they finally recruit a decent coach to oversee the program, they will have to rebuild the squad because the reds will only have substandard players until then. History has shown this isn't necessarily the case.

I still harbour doubts about that point of all the credit going to Link. The ensemble backline play/attack that gained the Reds the 2011 title was in place before Link. I do not downplay what he did with discipline and technical aspects of the forwards and overall application and defence, but seriously ask the question, could the result have been achieved without the work of Mooney and Co to establish those skills we saw gain that title?

 

[Scrubber2050]

Probably not - a Coach, unless he has been in place for several years and has picked all the squad is always subject to the previous bloke's picks . You can tweet it, but the playing group largely remains unchanged . The, as Gnostic said, discipline and technical aspects become the order of the new coach. Credit should always be given to the previous bloke or of course if team continues to get flogged then previous bloke cops a fair bit of stick

 

[Train Without a Station]

I believe Mooney deserves credit Gnostic. But let's not get carried away. This is a professional environment, not a development squad. His job is to win. Finishing 13th out of 14, he didn't really achieve that.

In the depths of all teams' bottom outs there is always positives to take. For the Reds it was their attack. For the Waratahs it was there scrum. For the Reds right now it's the improvement of our set piece.

Players were still getting selected from those teams because good players still do good things and get selected. The lack of Reds in the squad is more of an indication in the lack of rugby class these players have (Basing this on the old saying, "Form is temporary, class is permanent") where they look inept on back foot ball when they looked much more competitive on front foot ball.

Look at Rugby League. Despite the Rabbitohs historically being poor, Nathan Merritt was frequently one of the league's top try scorers. In AFL, Brenden Fevola played in a very poor Carlton team, yet is the most recent example of a consistently high goal kicking key forward.

Players with ability find a way to show it. Tapaui has at times. Cooper has at times. Slipper has at times. The position of the Reds shows that they are a poor coached outfit, because players like Jake Schatz who were in 2013 talked about as potential Wallabies are now not.

Let's not get carried away talking about the Reds "failure" over the last "two years" either. I agree with all comments made about their decline since 2011. But also, it's a competitive environment, you can't always go up. You can't always be significantly improving either. Sometimes you hit the ceiling of your team's ability. Being successful is about staying at the pointy end when you aren't at your best, much like the Reds did in 2012 and 2013.

But if finishing about 3 of the other 4 Australian teams is a failure, I can live with a life time of failure.

I digress though. Back to my point. Despite this "Failure" the Reds players were generally showing their ability to win games better than that of 3/4 of their competitors for Wallaby spots. That's because coaches don't overlook players simply because of where there team is on the ladder, or because a team's program/coaching has them performing below a standard the coach knows they can achieve.

As I said, it isn't good for recruitment and retention, but it's not the end of the world. Obviously players would generally rather go to a better program. Location and opportunity though will cause deviation from this. The Reds are showing right now the drop in coaching ability. Average players previously looked great and now they look subpar due to poor coaching. These players obviously previously played above themselves and now are performing closer to where they would if left to their own devices.

Immediate performance is a bigger concern as a result, not a long term downward spiral because despite only being 5 professional teams, the Reds won't be able to recruit players.

 

[Gnostic]

TWAS you mistake my point. The Reds season in 2008-2009 were failures. But I was a huge fan of the Mooney side because I could see something building. They were the foundation years.

Just as when you build a house the foundations are unglamorous and take the longest to setup so it was with the Reds after years of truly poor results. After Slack I thought Mooney began to build the Reds back up and whilst results are required, too much emphasis to the exclusion of the mode of play is also counter productive. Take the Tahs getting finals results for years despite driving fans away with truly dire play year after year.

 

[Train Without a Station]

No I do get your point. But as I said, in all their depths, there was always positives to take out.

The Tahs driving fans away is irrelevant to this discussion really, we are talking about performance.

Also, didn't Mooney take over from Jones, who took over from Miller, who took over from Slack? I probably missed somebody out there. We all can remember it was a bit of a turnstile.

When the Reds were dire, they had good attack in 2009. This only really started to show in 2009 though. At the same time our scrum was a shambles, our defence was the most porous in the comp and we didn't have a strong line out either from memory and our breakdown work was substandard.

The Waratahs were dire in 2012, yet they had very solid set piece.

The Reds are dire now, yet our set piece has improved.

What the replacing coaches have been able to do in the first 2 cases, is take their strengths and work from there. Under Link the Reds shored up their defence and breakdown work. Bit players became team staples because they could buy into this.

Under Cheika at the Tahs their NH Style dominance was expanded on with a faster moving player.

My point is, there's almost always something to build from, like there still is now. I think we all agree they need to do that building though.