Will this football advisory board be in charge of overlooking/revamping the club's horrible recruitment, retention and development policies/programs?
If not, who will?
If so, where should they start/ what kind of knowledge do the respective board members have that can improve on what the club already has in place?

For me it's not good enough that the club signs Foran and has a good 2017 season. I think his impact will wear off not too long after he leaves (assuming he's allowed to play for us in the first place), we need self-sustaining success. To create that we need a few things:
1. A recruitment system that attracts the best young talent form ALL of NZ and possibly Aussie;
2. A development system that gets the BEST out of each of these young talents;
3. A retention system that keeps the cream of the crop HERE;
4. A recruitment system that brings in PROMISING players that will ADD value to the team/club.

Point 4 has looked pretty good since Doyle took over but in saying that, Luke came back over-weight and Roger Tuivasa-Sheck wasn't looking fantastic before he got injured either. We need our imports to be BETTER than they were at their other clubs, not worse. The only players in recent years that have improved imo are Aysh and Thompson. What can these members do about these issues?
 

Inruin

Contributor
Will this football advisory board be in charge of overlooking/revamping the club's horrible recruitment, retention and development policies/programs?
If not, who will?
If so, where should they start/ what kind of knowledge do the respective board members have that can improve on what the club already has in place?

For me it's not good enough that the club signs Foran and has a good 2017 season. I think his impact will wear off not too long after he leaves (assuming he's allowed to play for us in the first place), we need self-sustaining success. To create that we need a few things:
1. A recruitment system that attracts the best young talent form ALL of NZ and possibly Aussie;
2. A development system that gets the BEST out of each of these young talents;
3. A retention system that keeps the cream of the crop HERE;
4. A recruitment system that brings in PROMISING players that will ADD value to the team/club.

Point 4 has looked pretty good since Doyle took over but in saying that, Luke came back over-weight and Roger Tuivasa-Sheck wasn't looking fantastic before he got injured either. We need our imports to be BETTER than they were at their other clubs, not worse. The only players in recent years that have improved imo are Aysh and Thompson. What can these members do about these issues?
I don't think the club has got it very wrong at all IMO.

from your points above:

1. Could be better. They do seem to focus on the Auckland area. However, the reality is that there are 15 other clubs as well as Aussie High schools offering scholarships etc
2. The players themselves need to also put in the effort and not expect everything handed to them as well. Also see point 4 below.
3. I actually think the Warriors have done ok here. A few have been let go that may have been worth keeping. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and sometimes they are going to get it wrong. I think the main problem is signing players to overs for too long based on 'potential' ie Sione Lousi.
4. Until the culture and performance on the field changes it is very hard to attract promising players who want to come here without paying them way over the top. There is a reason that players like Roger Tuivasa-Sheck come here and don't look as good as they did in their previous teams. That reason is our team just isn't that good.

I think the club is on the right path. We need some fine tuning in areas. The biggest issues for me around recruitment and development is that we don't have a good grass roots coaching system. We have tended to use the U20's as the benchmark for whether a player is good or not - this has changed and for the better in recent seasons. We also tend to use players in positions that clearly they are not suited to - Ken Maumalo, Sio Siua Taukeiaho as examples of this. A clear development plan for young players coming through. Fusitua is a good example of learning his trade and developing his experience in the lower grades though this may have been more by good luck than good management. Lolohea is an example of throwing a player in too early for too long even though injuries to key players may have forced this. Kata on the other hand has continued to grow and grow (it could be argued that he has played a consistent position the whole time also)

To call the clubs recruitment, retention and development policies/programs horrible is a bit over the top IMO. Especailly given the number of players in the last few years who have been brought through in to first grade. I think they have also got most decisions right in terms of letting players go. There are always going to be exceptions though.
 
Last edited:

bruce

Contributor
I don't think the club has got it very wrong at all IMO.

from your points above:

1. Could be better. They do seem to focus on the Auckland area. However, the reality is that there are 15 other clubs as well as Aussie High schools offering scholarships etc
2. The players themselves need to also put in the effort and not expect everything handed to them as well. Also see point 4 below.
3. I actually think the Warriors have done ok here. A few have been let go that may have been worth keeping. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and sometimes they are going to get it wrong. I think the main problem is signing players to overs for too long ie Sione Lousi.
4. Until the culture and performance on the field changes it is very hard to attract promising players who want to come here without paying them way over the top. There is a reason that players like Roger Tuivasa-Sheck come here and don't look as good as they did in their previous teams. That reason is our team just isn't that good.

I think the club is on the right path. We need some fine tuning in areas. The biggest issues for me around recruitment and development is that we don't have a good grass roots coaching system. We have tended to use the U20's as the benchmark for whether a player is good or not - this has changed and for the better in recent seasons. We also tend to use players in positions that clearly they are not suited to - Ken Maumalo, Sio Siua Taukeiaho as examples of this. A clear development plan for young players coming through. Fusitua is a good example of learning his trade and developing his experience in the lower grades though this may have been more by good luck than good management. Lolohea is an example of throwing a player in too early for too long even though injuries to key players may have forced this. Kata on the other hand has continued to grow and grow (it could be argued that he has played a consistent position the whole time also)

To call the clubs recruitment, retention and development policies/programs horrible is a bit over the top IMO. Especailly given the number of players in the last few years who have been brought through in to first grade. I think they have also got most decisions right in terms of letting players go. There are always going to be exceptions though.
All these points are valid. I am sure JD & EW have considered these issues and also that there are some similarities with the Blues in that with all the talent in their back yard they are going nowhere. Big committees are a waste of time unless every member has specific responsibilities to bring to the table. This means JD can pick the brains of people committed to the cause instead of having to shoulder the whole mess himself. Targeting overseas Kiwis to come shows they see local recruiting as a problem. The Blues don't have the advantage of the Warriors with that Australian base so hopefully the club should start to outperform the Blues for support and results
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sup42
I don't think the club has got it very wrong at all IMO.

1. Could be better. They do seem to focus on the Auckland area. However, the reality is that there are 15 other clubs as well as Aussie High schools offering scholarships etc
2. The players themselves need to also put in the effort and not expect everything handed to them as well. Also see point 4 below.
3. I actually think the Warriors have done ok here. A few have been let go that may have been worth keeping. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and sometimes they are going to get it wrong. I think the main problem is signing players to overs for too long based on 'potential' ie Sione Lousi.
4. Until the culture and performance on the field changes it is very hard to attract promising players who want to come here without paying them way over the top. There is a reason that players like Roger Tuivasa-Sheck come here and don't look as good as they did in their previous teams. That reason is our team just isn't that good.

You make a fair point, I'm going to throw in a few things I've thought up just now.

1. I understand that good players are in high demand, but I wonder if the Warriors are leaving every stone unturned. How many potential Union Converts have we missed out on? When it comes to discipline/standards and professionalism I think young Union players would be miles ahead of their League counterparts due to the environment that they're exposed to, don't forget our most professional and consistent player started off in Union (Mannering). I do like how the Warriors hold open trials though, it would help spot talent that might have otherwise been missed.

2. I agree that the club environment is a problem but why did it take up until now for the club to realize it's better for a players development that they get elevated to reserve grade? The club is too slow on the up-take, are there other helpful development methods we don't yet know about? Can this board find them? How can we get rid of this sense of entitlement that some players have? Can you even coach desire?

3. For me this one is also about the environment. So many times I hear that a player kicks on at another club because they've been 'put out of their comfort zone'. If the Warriors environment can't get the players out of their comfort zone it needs to change. Again how can the board/club change this?

4. I don't think the team is the only reason some players don't play well. Ayshford had a good season because his hunger and desire pushed him back into form(it was make or break). Luke had an average season because his laziness and comfort dragged him down. We need more of the former, that's what'll change the environment of the club among other things.

Is there anyone on the board who's faced challenges like these? SGH coached the All Blacks so I doubt he had trouble motivating players or upholding high standards, I'm not sure about the other members.

NOTE: I ask a lot of rhetorical questions to keep the creative juices flowing. Don't feel the need to reply to every one. I just like to discuss.
 

bruce

Contributor
Is there anyone on the board who's faced challenges like these? SGH coached the All Blacks so I doubt he had trouble motivating players or upholding high standards, I'm not sure about the other members.
I am slowly warming to SGH.

I might be howled down by his fans here but I think he was seen as a political operator at the Auckland Union when they were still very strong. Regardless he scouted players from all over the place (not just Auckland) in the days when scouting was nowhere what it is now. I am sure he has pushed that one home to JD and EW. Having open trials is piss all to be honest. Decent scouting means you need to know more about the player than what you can see in some no count trial.

If I recall correctly he was called back to help the Blues a couple of times after they went downhill, and he wasn't able to make much of an impression. He has seen many coaches fail at the Blues, including his man Pat Lam. So he will know all about the elephant in the room.

If nothing else he knows what makes a good player, and a good coach. His juices are obviously flowing for the smell of liniment without copping the pressure a head coach does.

So he appears to be the best of the bunch. However knowing JD he will not be working with a committee just for the sake of it, and he will know all the jokes from Wellington about committees. My guess is they don't contribute, they will be given a holiday.
 
I'm a Cleveland browns fan, hence it being half my user name. So i can tell you that Eric Mangini is a turd of a human being. No man mangment ability at all. Tactically he was pretty good which is why he did well at the level below being a head coach but never did well as the main guy
 

bruce

Contributor
I'm a Cleveland browns fan, hence it being half my user name. So i can tell you that Eric Mangini is a turd of a human being. No man mangment ability at all. Tactically he was pretty good which is why he did well at the level below being a head coach but never did well as the main guy
Whose idea was he? Sound like an EW idea from left field. To be fair in the old days Jack Gibson poached a lot of tactics from the NFL but both games have moved on from there.
 
Henry and Kearney have similarities.

Henry in his time in Wales found himself and his wife unsupported once the great redeemer illusion collapsed.

Kearney at the Eels similarly was left by his board to flounder.

Both men achieved significant feats for their international sides.

Kearneys achievements somewhat eclipse most other international coaches from NZ.

Unlike successful footy codes where there is a robust history and support you can count on long term......Kiwi rugby League was dying a rapid death.

Were is not for Kearney the Warriors would have been soley charged with defending the threat to the sport here in NZ.

The Kiwis competitiveness against Australia has probably saved the game somewhat.....albeit temporarily.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eudebrito
Maybe we are getting too tied up in who is on the Board. I don't think anyone there is set in stone. They would have been picked as people with skill sets thought to be of benefit.

As things move along they will add and/or remove people as they think fit. I am not aware of any terms of reference for them to work by.

This is just a start for the Board, like the team lets give them a fair chance. The usual Warriors fans 'we will give you a fair trial then we will hang you'.
 
Whose idea was he? Sound like an EW idea from left field. To be fair in the old days Jack Gibson poached a lot of tactics from the NFL but both games have moved on from there.

He will have been Henry's idea. They have had a association from when Henry was still the AB's coach. Mangini is a smart dude so in this role he will proably be fine. Just can never be the main man. Which clearly he never will be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bruce
To call the clubs recruitment, retention and development policies/programs horrible is a bit over the top

It has been horrible, stop kidding yourself. Melbourne were suppose to suck this year cos of all the newbies they're in the final. They have guys wanting to trial with them to be part of their system - not journeymen looking for a pay cheque. The guy on the wing for storm apparently has played bugger all league and he has done a great job. Warriors coaching has been stink they recruited from england and what happened with those young guys? The warriors have sucked for a while and when I saw ken run out for the first time first grade well my forum remarks were pretty cutting but more directed at the organisation. There is no excuse to have talent like that place has had and lost and be so shit. But then again league has no money so setting up anything with the local scene is fraught with the danger of being bled dry, so whether its a reason or not EW is right to be cautious in getting too involved there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bruce

Inruin

Contributor
It has been horrible, stop kidding yourself. Melbourne were suppose to suck this year cos of all the newbies they're in the final. They have guys wanting to trial with them to be part of their system - not journeymen looking for a pay cheque. The guy on the wing for storm apparently has played bugger all league and he has done a great job. Warriors coaching has been stink they recruited from england and what happened with those young guys? The warriors have sucked for a while and when I saw ken run out for the first time first grade well my forum remarks were pretty cutting but more directed at the organisation. There is no excuse to have talent like that place has had and lost and be so shit. But then again league has no money so setting up anything with the local scene is fraught with the danger of being bled dry, so whether its a reason or not EW is right to be cautious in getting too involved there.
so recruitment have done a pretty good job then given the culture and performance on the field. We gave managed to get players like Luke, Bodene, Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, possibly Foran etc. they have made mistakes, like every club does. overall they have done ok. And who said Melbourne would be shit? They have a very stable core of players that have been there for a number of years.
 
so recruitment have done a pretty good job then given the culture and performance on the field. We gave managed to get players like Luke, Bodene, Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, possibly Foran etc. they have made mistakes, like every club does. overall they have done ok. And who said Melbourne would be shit? They have a very stable core of players that have been there for a number of years.

That's recent recruitment and t there are more than a handful of players on the field, and when those players are injured out of form then what? Then its lolohea, maumalo etc. And what of those that r still getting paid having moved on? That affects recruitment. That is the opposite of retention.
 

Inruin

Contributor
That's recent recruitment and t there are more than a handful of players on the field, and when those players are injured out of form then what? Then its lolohea, maumalo etc. And what of those that r still getting paid having moved on? That affects recruitment. That is the opposite of retention.
and you cant keep them all can you? I'm not sure what you are expecting?
 
so recruitment have done a pretty good job then given the culture and performance on the field. We gave managed to get players like Luke, Bodene, Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, possibly Foran etc. they have made mistakes, like every club does. overall they have done ok. And who said Melbourne would be shit? They have a very stable core of players that have been there for a number of years.

Correction: JD has done a good job. If it weren't for him we'd never had signed Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, Luke, Kearney or Foran.

Doyle has/will continue to improve alot at the club but before him it wasn't great.
Even when we were playing well,making the finals consistently and got to the 2011 GF we still struggled to attract and develop talent. You'd think a GF team with a great up and coming roster (Johnson, Locke, Matulino, Packer etc.) would be able to atttract some good players. The fact that we didn't sign any players of note AND lost our coach, 5/8, origin centre and future captain (taylor) in the following 2 years shows just how useless the club were. Imagine the situation we'd be in if Doyle hadn't joined up.
 

Inruin

Contributor
Correction: JD has done a good job. If it weren't for him we'd never had signed Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, Luke, Kearney or Foran.

Doyle has/will continue to improve alot at the club but before him it wasn't great.
Even when we were playing well,making the finals consistently and got to the 2011 GF we still struggled to attract and develop talent. You'd think a GF team with a great up and coming roster (Johnson, Locke, Matulino, Packer etc.) would be able to atttract some good players. The fact that we didn't sign any players of note AND lost our coach, 5/8, origin centre and future captain (taylor) in the following 2 years shows just how useless the club were. Imagine the situation we'd be in if Doyle hadn't joined up.
That has more to do with the quality of coach he hired. Bluey didnt want any additional players so what do you do? Maloney was never going to stay, Tate was a good decision, Taylor hasn't cut it at the other clubs he has gone to.

So our recruitment is good, regardless of whether it is Doyle by himself or not.
 
and you cant keep them all can you? I'm not sure what you are expecting?

You're right you can't keep em all, people will do what they will. I guess I expect a premiership. It is right to have that expectation. I hoped for a stronger local pathway after 20 odd years, to fill in the 8 or so other positions on the field. I am disappointed in knowing at other clubs someone doesn't have to play league since they were 5 to turn out well in first grade. (That player is an example, not one to base ongoing success - and Be appreciate he plays alongsjde those who have played league for years) But here, you have to play first grade for 5 years before doing the same. Coaches advise recruitment dont they. We're all kidding ourselves if we think the warriors have done a great job. Stephen has a big job.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bruce

bruce

Contributor
Correction: JD has done a good job. If it weren't for him we'd never had signed RTS, Luke, Kearney or Foran.
If it wasn't for JD I shudder to think, and not just about recruitment. he obviously figured the best way to go was to attract Kiwis back home rather than risk journeymen Aussies, although to be fair apart from Sean Long the recent ones have been ok.
That has more to do with the quality of coach he hired. Bluey didnt want any additional players so what do you do?
Bluey was never going to attract anybody, and those who pushed for his appointment should have known that.

That was David Moyes big problem at Manchester United, he couldn't attract anybody.
 

bruce

Contributor
I'm a Cleveland browns fan, hence it being half my user name. So i can tell you that Eric Mangini is a turd of a human being. No man mangment ability at all. Tactically he was pretty good which is why he did well at the level below being a head coach but never did well as the main guy
I have never heard much about Mangini bro. What are his specific tactical skills and how do you think he could help here?
 
That has more to do with the quality of coach he hired. Bluey didnt want any additional players so what do you do? Maloney was never going to stay, Tate was a good decision, Taylor hasn't cut it at the other clubs he has gone to.

So our recruitment is good, regardless of whether it is Doyle by himself or not.

Sorry is your first comment referring to Kearney? If it is I'd have to disagree. Doyle was making positive changes before he signed Kearney and he'd keep making positive changes after he leaves.

The club hired Bluey and the two coaches after him (all 3 being unsuccessful), which supports my point that they (the club/people in charge) haven't been doing their jobs well enough.

Bluey not wanting more players should have been the first sign of his incompetence. Regarding "what do you do?", I'd think that'd be a job for the board/people in charge. Is this guy making the right decision? Does his roster have what it takes to be a threat? They should be asking these questions and they should have a good wealth of knowledge to be able to answer them and then take action. Again, this didn't happen for us back then, hopefully our new football board won't make the same mistake.

We knew a long time in advance that Maloney was leaving and the best replacement we could come up with was Leuluai (who didn't play well until his last few months at the club I might add). Again... recruitment.

I thought Tate was a big loss personally. I think he could have taught Konnie, Fusitua etc. alot, especially in defence and attitude. The more experienced/harened veterans the better I say.

Taylor was seen as a future captain at the panthers while Ivan was there. The only reason he left was because Griffin wanted a different type of player (high impact ball-carrier rather than high work-rate tackle-bot) in the lock position. He's done well at the Tigers and is rated by them too, from what I've read he most likely won't be staying due to them not having room in the cap. Every club needs a Taylor, practically a Simon Mannering 2.0.

Not trying to belittle you mate, just trying to get my opinion out there. You do make fair points though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bruce