Coach of the year nominations

[JohnM]

14 hours ago, Butch said:

Rowley for super greed and definitely cresta at barrow for taking a team that was tipped for relegation to probably 4th. 

Give over, lad.

[daz39]

1 hour ago, Saint Toppy said:

Well for a start Hudds offered Fages double what saints offered to stay to lure him over the pennines

So, Sezer's wage - not really big spending if it was already being spent.

[Josef K]

Peet has done an amazing job but for me it has to be Paul Rowley. 

[FearTheVee]

Woolf's achievements this year given key injuries etc is I think underestimated.  If Woolf wins the GF with a bunch of key players out then he would deserve the accolade but it's decided before then so he won't get it.

I think Watson is unlucky not to be on the list.  He did an enormous amount of hard yards last year and that is paying off this year.  They are a real chance of making both finals (having been so close to winning the cup) which, given where they were when he took over, is a great effort.

From the shortlist - I'm tempted to say Peet but I am a little influenced by the fact that a lot of his success appears to be down to a) having French and Field available regularly and b) the club finally signing some props which are two bonuses that his predecessor did not benefit from.

So that leaves me going for Rowley as things stand.  Brilliant, inventive rugby and results that far exceed expectations.  If Salford progress to a semi final for another shot at OT then it will be a far easier decision.

Edited September 8, 2022 by FearTheVee

[bobbruce]

7 hours ago, Josef K said:

Peet has done an amazing job but for me it has to be Paul Rowley. 

What if Wigan do the double. That’s why it’s crazy to present this and MOS before the GF. 

[Damien]

12 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

What if Wigan do the double. That’s why it’s crazy to present this and MOS before the GF. 

Yes it's ridiculous to do it before the Grand Final and makes no sense. It could literally change everything.

[DimmestStar]

At the start of the year people expected St Helens to be top dogs again. People expected Wigan to be the ultra boring outfit of 2022 and people expected Salford to be in a relegation dogfight.

Saints have more or less lived up to expectations but Hull FC, Hull KR or Castleford would have loved to have had Saints so called 'injury problems'. My goodness if only.

Wigan have been a breath of fresh air under Matty Peet and I admire his humility and the way he conducts himself. The style of play of Wigan has changed from dull to exciting and that's got to be credit to the coach. But 8 away defeats have been a weakness.

Then there's Salford who nobody expected much of at all but have played a brilliant expansive brand of rugby at a fraction of the wages paid by St Helens and Wigan. Of course they are even now not expected to win the GF but even if they don't they are undoubtedly the team who has got the most from the least in 2022.

So it's Paul Rowley for me.

 

[Damien]

6 hours ago, FearTheVee said:

Woolf's achievements this year given key injuries etc is I think underestimated.  If Woolf wins the GF with a bunch of key players out then he would deserve the accolade but it's decided before then so he won't get it.

I think Watson is unlucky not to be on the list.  He did an enormous amount of hard yards last year and that is paying off this year.  They are a real chance of making both finals (having been so close to winning the cup) which, given where they were when he took over, is a great effort.

From the shortlist - I'm tempted to say Peet but I am a little influenced by the fact that a lot of his success appears to be down to a) having French and Field available regularly and b) the club finally signing some props which are two bonuses that his predecessor did not benefit from.

So that leaves me going for Rowley as things stand.  Brilliant, inventive rugby and results that far exceed expectations.  If Salford progress to a semi final for another shot at OT then it will be a far easier decision.

You make it sound like other teams haven't had injuries. Wigan have had plenty of injuries too throughout the season and you mention French being available regularly, he missed the first 6 SL games.

[bobbruce]

16 minutes ago, DimmestStar said:

At the start of the year people expected St Helens to be top dogs again. People expected Wigan to be the ultra boring outfit of 2022 and people expected Salford to be in a relegation dogfight.

Saints have more or less lived up to expectations but Hull FC, Hull KR or Castleford would have loved to have had Saints so called 'injury problems'. My goodness if only.

Wigan have been a breath of fresh air under Matty Peet and I admire his humility and the way he conducts himself. The style of play of Wigan has changed from dull to exciting and that's got to be credit to the coach. But 8 away defeats have been a weakness.

Then there's Salford who nobody expected much of at all but have played a brilliant expansive brand of rugby at a fraction of the wages paid by St Helens and Wigan. Of course they are even now not expected to win the GF but even if they don't they are undoubtedly the team who has got the most from the least in 2022.

So it's Paul Rowley for me.

 

Quite a few of us said Salford squad was a bit light but if they could keep their first 17 fit they were had a good chance of a play off spot. 

[meast]

11 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Well for a start Hudds offered Fages double what saints offered to stay to lure him over the pennines

And?

Maybe Saints didn't rate him enough or make him feel important to pay him what he thought he was worth?

He's a bigger fish at Huddersfield and can demand more ,it's all relative.

[Saint Toppy]

14 hours ago, meast said:

And?

Maybe Saints didn't rate him enough or make him feel important to pay him what he thought he was worth?

He's a bigger fish at Huddersfield and can demand more ,it's all relative.

The whole point I was making was that unlike clubs like Salford & Wakey, Huddersfield have a wealthy board of directors, so their coaches decisions on who to bring in aren't really hampered by money. Watson has had the luxury of being able to build the team he wants so them finishing 3rd in the table isn't that much of a surprise. Not when you compare it to what Rowley has had to work with at Salford, a club unable to spend the full cap and a team largely made up of players that other club's didn't want. For them to make the play-off's in their situation is IMO a far bigger achievement that Hudds finishing 3rd. 

[meast]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

The whole point I was making was that unlike clubs like Salford & Wakey, Huddersfield have a wealthy board of directors, so their coaches decisions on who to bring in aren't really hampered by money. Watson has had the luxury of being able to build the team he wants so them finishing 3rd in the table isn't that much of a surprise. Not when you compare it to what Rowley has had to work with at Salford, a club unable to spend the full cap and a team largely made up of players that other club's didn't want. For them to make the play-off's in their situation is IMO a far bigger achievement that Hudds finishing 3rd. 

So because Huddersfield's owner is rich that means it can't be considered an achievement for us to go from 9th to 3rd and to a cup final and potential grand final too.

But Salford and Wakefield can be given that luxury because they don't have a rich fan as owner?

Yet, Huddersfield are often quoted as being not worthy of a place, often told we "bring nothing" to the sport, told we should be kicked out of the league because our stadium is too big etc etc.

Ken Davy doesn't provide a bottomless pot of cash for splashing out on players, Richard Thewlis has a budget and coaches have to work within that budget, Ken's money goes on everyday running costs like paying the staff and stadium costs not on the team.

We are where we are due to hard work, good coaching, some shrewd, hard working signings and some absolutely class homegrown players who a lot of other clubs would love to have.

This whole thing about Huddersfield splashing money around is nonsense, absolute tosh.

Watson has spent no more than Woolf, Peer, Rowley or even Poching!

[Josef K]

19 hours ago, bobbruce said:

What if Wigan do the double. That’s why it’s crazy to present this and MOS before the GF. 

It’s the same for the MoM for the CC, it is crazy but them’s the rules. 

[Saint Toppy]

3 hours ago, meast said:

So because Huddersfield's owner is rich that means it can't be considered an achievement for us to go from 9th to 3rd and to a cup final and potential grand final too.

But Salford and Wakefield can be given that luxury because they don't have a rich fan as owner?

Yet, Huddersfield are often quoted as being not worthy of a place, often told we "bring nothing" to the sport, told we should be kicked out of the league because our stadium is too big etc etc.

Ken Davy doesn't provide a bottomless pot of cash for splashing out on players, Richard Thewlis has a budget and coaches have to work within that budget, Ken's money goes on everyday running costs like paying the staff and stadium costs not on the team.

We are where we are due to hard work, good coaching, some shrewd, hard working signings and some absolutely class homegrown players who a lot of other clubs would love to have.

This whole thing about Huddersfield splashing money around is nonsense, absolute tosh.

Watson has spent no more than Woolf, Peer, Rowley or even Poching!

I never said it wasn't an achievement to finish 3rd (remembering that it was also under Watson that saw them drop to 9th in the first place). I just don't believe their achievement is anywhere near as remarkable as that of Rowley & Salford given the position they find themselves in compared to Hudds.

Salford can't afford to spend the full cap, they can't afford the same levels of investment in backroom staff and youth teams, their signing's are based almost exclusively around players not wanted by other SL clubs or NRL clubs. Huddersfield don't have those same constraints that Salford do, and arguably should be in contention for a play-off spot every year given what they have at their disposal.

I don't think Huddersfield have 'over-achieved' in finishing 3rd, but compared to most other clubs in SL Salford have massively over-achieved under Rowley this year.

[meast]

3 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

I never said it wasn't an achievement to finish 3rd (remembering that it was also under Watson that saw them drop to 9th in the first place). I just don't believe their achievement is anywhere near as remarkable as that of Rowley & Salford given the position they find themselves in compared to Hudds.

Salford can't afford to spend the full cap, they can't afford the same levels of investment in backroom staff and youth teams, their signing's are based almost exclusively around players not wanted by other SL clubs or NRL clubs. Huddersfield don't have those same constraints that Salford do, and arguably should be in contention for a play-off spot every year given what they have at their disposal.

I don't think Huddersfield have 'over-achieved' in finishing 3rd, but compared to most other clubs in SL Salford have massively over-achieved under Rowley this year.

Huddersfield's recruitment is almost the same as what Salford have done though, and it was Salford's choice not to invest in their youth, you can't say that Huddersfield have a better system because we have more money, we made the decision 10 years or so ago to try and save ourselves money by utilising our youth which we have, Salford chose to spend their money on their first team squad instead.

I'm still not sure what Huddersfield have got at their disposal that Salford or any club haven't?

Pryce, Senior, Senior, Cudjoe, McGillivary, Lawrence, Wardle, English, Hewitt, and Mason are all direct products from our academy, Russell (Wigan) Wilson (Bradford) were signed as 2nd year academy players and have also come through our system since they were 16/17 and have all been an integral part of our side under Watson.

Chris Hill was deemed surplus to requirements at Warrington, Theo Fages had fallen down the pecking order at St Helens, Owen Trout was signed as part of the Kruise Leeming deal and has blossomed into a fine forward, Josh Jones, Luke Yates and Chris McQueen are good, honest, hard working forwards who seem to flourish under Watto, Danny Levi was a bit of a gamble who has paid off

The only signing that stood out for us this year is probably Leutele, but he's leaving.

I'm not sure how Salford or anyone else couldn't have built a side like that too?

Edited September 9, 2022 by meast

[Red Willow]

I personally think Watson's impact at Huddersfield is a greater achievement than Woolf at Saints. The money is a factor in tempting players like Yates away from their contracts, Watson himself was tempted by the money (either personally or for the team) This isn't anything most of the top teams don't also have.

Rowley had to completely rebuild the spine of the team. Marshall left the club in a mess. He was rebuilt that.

[meast]

13 minutes ago, Red Willow said:

I personally think Watson's impact at Huddersfield is a greater achievement than Woolf at Saints. The money is a factor in tempting players like Yates away from their contracts, Watson himself was tempted by the money (either personally or for the team) This isn't anything most of the top teams don't also have.

Rowley had to completely rebuild the spine of the team. Marshall left the club in a mess. He was rebuilt that.

Watson was also tempted by the good academy system and the good young players in our squad that have formed the basis of our squad, something he wouldn't have had at Salford 

Watson had to rebuild after Stone and Woolford, but had to manoeuvre players in and out,. Yates was the first player he wanted and he wanted him here as his skipper, that's a personal and professional trust and compliment to Luke Yates, he was hardly gonna say no was he?

I'm sure you or others could tell us how much Yates left Salford for?

If money wasn't an issue for Huddersfield then why have we put so much into our youth instead of doing what Salford previously, Warrington and Leigh have done, which is to try and buy our success?

[Championi]

Is it a mockery if the giants win the grand final?

[Pete Grady]

On 07/09/2022 at 23:21, meast said:

You can't buy players in RL like you can in football, so that's that argument down.

Watson has done a good job in identifying the areas within the team that needed strengthening and strengthened.

He identified the bad apples and lazy gits and shipped them out.

He's changed the entire culture of the club, and instilled a desire, a will to win and a togetherness, with people he knows and trusts, the same as he did at Salford, he's also overseen yet another bunch of talented academy players.

So, not sure how he's spent big? Maybe you and others can enlighten Huddersfield fans?

Yeah, all sounds good, but Watson has only one game plan, a negative one, to bore the life out of everyone.  

[meast]

1 minute ago, Pete Grady said:

Yeah, all sounds good, but Watson has only one game plan, a negative one, to bore the life out of everyone.  

It doesn't bore me, I enjoy watching Watson's team work harder than the opposition and grind them down.

Of course we never score tries to win games do we let alone good tries.

Go back to sleep

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, Pete Grady said:

Yeah, all sounds good, but Watson has only one game plan, a negative one, to bore the life out of everyone.  

I don't understand this. Salford played great Rugby under Watson.

[meast]

9 minutes ago, Damien said:

I don't understand this. Salford played great Rugby under Watson.

So do Huddersfield, we just have to put in the hard (boring) stuff first

[Red Willow]

23 hours ago, meast said:

Watson was also tempted by the good academy system and the good young players in our squad that have formed the basis of our squad, something he wouldn't have had at Salford 

Watson had to rebuild after Stone and Woolford, but had to manoeuvre players in and out,. Yates was the first player he wanted and he wanted him here as his skipper, that's a personal and professional trust and compliment to Luke Yates, he was hardly gonna say no was he?

I'm sure you or others could tell us how much Yates left Salford for?

If money wasn't an issue for Huddersfield then why have we put so much into our youth instead of doing what Salford previously, Warrington and Leigh have done, which is to try and buy our success?

The money also helps to run these things such as academy, Marwen cut ours when we were ruled out of the license. It cut costs.

I think Salford played some good stuff under Watson, he has the knack of building a tight knot unit. Flair will probably come in time if it isn't there already.

I have no idea how much Yates or Watson were offered and it is none of my business but there was compensation owed for both and that's where the money comes in. 

Personally think watson should have been in ahead of Wool.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

On 07/09/2022 at 18:39, bobbruce said:

Depends who wins the grand final for me any coach who goes on to win it this year will probably get it. I’d like to add a special mention to Powell as I think we all appreciate what he’s been doing at Warrington. 

If Rohan leads Rhinos to the title then the coach of the year award becomes a farce..... 

Edited September 10, 2022 by Bedfordshire Bronco

[bobbruce]

7 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

If Rohan leads Rhinos to the title then the coach of the year award becomes a farce..... 

It’s presented before the Grand Final anyway.