General The Formula for Making the Top 8 Every Year

Well summed up from TeetsNRL TeetsNRL
Screenshot_20220516-120717_Twitter.jpg
 
Top coaches and commentators have said for over 20+ years, that defence wins prems.
Even with NRL fiddling with the rules to speed up the attacking side of the game. Their opinions haven't changed..
For Brownie to fix the warriors? boy where do you start. Just a few opinions to throw in the pot.
- Keep the rookie centres one 1 side of the field by returning Aitken to centre. (Tohu Harris's back now to shore up the D, the other edge forwards are all back on deck but need to pull finger)
- Give Morgan the ultimatum, clearly he's not delivering the defence structures Brownie wants.
- Sorry Stacy but snap up Barrett as attacking coach if the doggies dump him.. He did wonders with the Panthers... all slaps aside Brownie..
- Mohawk needs to not necessarily interfere but needs to make it known him and his stake owner sponsers wants results. And make it known that staff are expendable if goals aren't achieved, as this is a results driven business..
Anyway food for thought, I'm sure a lot on this forum have ideas to table, be good to see them..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kenny44

gpred

Contributor
These stats aren't meant to provide the answer.

They show the current problem and the end goal.

The answer is what goes on in between. Defensive structure, assignments, coaching, attitude, conditioning etc.
Definitely agree that they can help show the problem.

But stats as an end goal is where I differ. Chasing measures as a goal is very difficult, as you have to be sure they are the correct measure. Most of the stats put forward in sports these days are done so because that's what seemed to work for somebody else. At the end of the day, all that really matters is winning, and so you have to be sure that the measures you choose relate to that (and that is a very hard thing to do, and the subject of the entire research field of sports analytics).

An example dear to our hearts is Kearney blindly focusing on completion percentage. Did it help us win? No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fonzie
I think the formula is not defence.

I think we should revamp heard office and put less power in the coach so that person isn't a single point of failure for the entire organisation.

1) Appoint of head of football for recruitment and contracts so the coach doesn't have to to do it.
2) Appoint a three person selection committee. Possibly the head coach, head of football and a specialist selector. Who is there just to be on the selection committee.
3) The coaches main job becomes to coach. And run training drills.

If we do those three things then we are more likely to get more consistent results otherwise we will ride the wave of getting one good coach a generation followed by dross.

All important decisions are made by committee in the business world. Why do things differently in the sports field.
Cricket Head Blackcaps coaches are part of a selection commitee and don't pick the team themselves. Furthermore the selection commitee for cricket picks the batting order.
 
Defensive structures are simple on theory, but are built on trust, commitment and confidence.

The effort is apparent this year as it was last year. But the confidence is low. Commitment questionable trust (when certain players are on together) lacking or I'd say lack of. Communication. More than anything.

However OP is right defensive gets you there in the mix.

Personally and this is just my view Warriors arent playing a Warriors brand of footy. When we do we gain confidence that then translates to trust.

Look at the second half this weekend bs Rabbits. We were free of expectation and stress. They played whats in put in front. Warriors still lack polish but the polish comes with consistency. The teams. Who are at the pointy end tend to also have the lowset number of players used from the available squad which points back to consistency.

Agree with OP assessment ofnthe formula but I'd like to add consistency of playing group also as important.
 
Defence Defence is important he has some pretty inciteful posts. But the way you guys are going on about him your going to give him a big head.

Sorry you meant tackling and defensive structures. Yeah that's important to.

Our best years we have had sides that could defend multiple sets on their line. That is important for any side but more so for us as we go through periods where we turn over a lot of ball. Yes our ball handling and decision making would need to be resolved but we also concede points after these turn overs. Our best years when our defence has been good we have less howlers from the referees as our side plays with more discipline.

We are currently rated 15th for defence. To win comps you want to be 1-6 defensively.

The other part is fitness. A lot of top teams get their fitness up and train defence relentlessly and then work on their ball work. The game may have changed a bit with teams moving the ball more but getting defence and fitness sorted is still a good base to work from.
 

Here's another formula to make the 8.

We could be very lucky to have a whole country to choose from, it's just got to be done right and of course funding.

Would love the club to have a harald Matt's, sg ball, Flegg, women's, and reserve grade behind the warriors.

Mohawk has to pit his money where his mouth is if they are real about building from within.
 
Last edited:
Football department and coaching staff needs to be gutted and rebuilt from the ground up.

Head of football and coach need to be picked as a package. Guys who know their shit and can work together with a clear goal in mind.

Coach gets to pick his staff. No jobs for boys, no "he was a good player way back when". We underdevelop our coaches just as much as players.

Lower grade coaches need to have strong knowledge of the fundamentals, they need to be teachers/educators, and drill into the young guys what it is to be a footballer, not just an athlete.

Maybe then we'll actually have a chance without needing to bring in the leftovers from other clubs.
 
Football department and coaching staff needs to be gutted and rebuilt from the ground up.

Head of football and coach need to be picked as a package. Guys who know their shit and can work together with a clear goal in mind.

Coach gets to pick his staff. No jobs for boys, no "he was a good player way back when". We underdevelop our coaches just as much as players.

Lower grade coaches need to have strong knowledge of the fundamentals, they need to be teachers/educators, and drill into the young guys what it is to be a footballer, not just an athlete.

Maybe then we'll actually have a chance without needing to bring in the leftovers from other clubs.
Agree. The investment made under Watson to be a development club has gone by the way side.

We do have the largest junior nursery. But the path ways are very minimal so we are bound to lose a lot. We no longer have a nyc, nsw/q cup team/ reserve grade team. So keeping the cream will be hard.
 
How so? Is that backed up by junior participation numbers when compared to a place like Western Sydney?
Participation numbers in a sport is indicitative of potential support provided via funding from in Nz's case from governing sport bodies.
Its a skewed metric if we apply registered participants of the sport to Nz. League would be out numbered by the vast majority of most sports played.

But if we consider that majority of all major high schools have an oval ball team and there are major competitions of the other code exist across the nation its these I would consider to be part of the nursery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cces
But if we consider that majority of all major high schools have an oval ball team and there are major competitions of the other code exist across the nation its these I would consider to be part of the nursery.
I have to disagree with the idea that all those who play Union are part of the Rugby League nursery. From my own experience when at high school playing a winter sport was compulsory & League was never an option. It was often belittled by students & teachers alike as "State House Rugby". I continued to hear that derogatory term when I began playing senior Rugby too.
Personally I played at the University Games, because Union wasn't on offer, before I joined a League club at 30. I would hazard a guess that less than 10% of all my teammates across 25 years of Union played a competitive game of League
 
I have to disagree with the idea that all those who play Union are part of the Rugby League nursery. From my own experience when at high school playing a winter sport was compulsory & League was never an option. It was often belittled by students & teachers alike as "State House Rugby". I continued to hear that derogatory term when I began playing senior Rugby too.
Personally I played at the University Games, because Union wasn't on offer, before I joined a League club at 30. I would hazard a guess that less than 10% of all my teammates across 25 years of Union played a competitive game of League
I understand what you're saying. Growing up I also wasnt given the opportunity to pkay leagie for school and had to play on the low if school found out we apparently would lose our positions in school teams.

I get that in a traditional nursery base you wouldnt include them however from a development and recruitment perspective Warriors, have to be. Esepecially given our unique situation of one country club.

Storm have done it successfully Lavea, NAS, Vunivalu, Duffy all from union stronghold schools. We did it via varying degrees Hurrell, Lousi, Lauaki, Laumape.
 
Can’t we just be like the 2005 Tigers and not worry about defence and outscore the opposition?

They were 5 wins from the first 12 that year, which is likely what we’re going to be haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: Since95