People need to take "long term" out of their argument because while I don't disagree with the thought, it's just not relevant in a situation where a coach doesn't have a long term without wins and a team is well in contention to make the 8 barely a quarter into a season. The moment we start chosing long term over right now is the moment we've eseentially given up. How fickle is that? Even without Roger Tuivasa-Sheck we still have a better team than we did last year where we were well in contention for the 8. If the Warriors took the "long term" mentality above all else they would essentially be saying "we give up this year", Imagine this place if they came out and said that.
7. Shaun Johnson
That's the best option for experience, stability and the potential to win games now. If we were to throw in unknown factors we'd be hoping to get lucky more than anything else. Not saying it couldn't work, but it would be a much bigger gamble.
Absolutely - For a side who has won 43 of the 103 games since the 2011 Grand Final - Winning games is much more important that long term.
They looked long term last year by not playing Tomkins in the halves when Shaun Johnson went down - Many felt they probably gave up last year after Shaun Johnson's injury.