I posted this on the Wigan board just wondering your thoughts on it.....



I appreciate i leave myself open to criticism for posting such thoughts but here goes another one.

Rugby League being such a localised sport filled with basically players and coaches who know each other inside out and given the fact we as a sport seem to relish this fact rather than looking to grow our knowledge and embrace new thinking I guess it is inevitable that successfull players from successfull teams seem to at least be given a shot at coaching.

In the John Monie book he lists or at least the forward list the number of players that have gone on to coach at the top level who played under Monie.

I am a huge believer in the theory that you are a product of your environment, and i think that the Bradford Legacy is very visable.

Wigan, Warrington and Bradford themselves all have coaches at all levels that did there apprenticships or were involved in the successfull period at Bradford, and all these team continue to falter to decieve despite signing on paper quality players.

The skill level of the 3 teams highlighted is poor and rather the emphasis is on the physical side of things. Wire look a huge side this year, having taken on the Bradford Reserve conditioner at the end of last year with Jimmy Lowes.

Wigan have Noble and Foreshaw who cut there teeth in the Bradford era of success/laying the foundations of success, and Bradford themselves have McNamarra and another conditioning coach who came through the same system.

The teams on paper are far superior to the performances on the field, they all play a very basic game plan, and rely on an individual spark to fire them.

I think the Brian Smith and Bradford legacy is evident today and harming the 3 teams in question.

I would also add i do not think Brian Smith is a poor coach, he simply identified a way for the Bradford team to succeed and played to it, he is not limited to this coaching style but those who learned the game under the systems and in the environment he created are.

Brian Smith coached Bradford to play some lovely rugby in 1996. The problem is the legacy left by Matthew Elliot. He introduced the boring but successful land of the slow giant team - look at tapes of his years in charge and you see the style of play change and decline from the Brian Smith style. Sadly because Elliot won trophies, that became your style under subsequent coaches. You need a clear out and a change in the mind set of the club.

Clubs like Saints and Leeds have a mind set of open fast rugby - even though we won nowt for years. Wigan do too which is why their fans dislike Noble.

Tony Smith and Justin Morgan are 2 Brian Smith products who follow his open style of play which adds to my argument that Elliot began the rot

Good post, i would though argue Smith planted the seed Elliot nurtured it and the coaches named are the resultant crop. (nice even if i do say so myself!

)

Way too highbrow - you'll get banned for thinking too deeply instead of just blaming every ref who's ever been in charge of a loss!

Your pack is class.

Your half-backs are average.

Your backs are shocking.

Daniel Anderson is also a product of B Smiths legacy. But not the Bradford one.

While I think the original post does have some basis in it, if you think the rugby being played under Elliott was anything like that played by the team between 2001-2003, and 2005 when they got out of the early season malaise, then you are totally deluded, Elliott's sides won 2 trophies in 4 seasons and by the end it made very painful viewing.

Not as painful as the current lot mind.

Compered to the current fair we a re being treated to the rugby we played under Elliott Was like watching Leeds and Saints.

The principle was the same thought.

Would Leeds or Saints opt to kick for goal with 3 penalties?
No, especially not at home!!!

It's negative, boring and shows the opposition far too much respect, rather than being positive and intimidating by nearly always running penalties and going for the try.

The game has moved on. Leeds & Saints have raised the bar, and Bradford, Wigan, Warrington are too slow to change.

The 'Bradford' connection really shows, and if I were a fan, I'd be worried my team have been left behind.

Bradford need a new coach, and new direction on the field to have any chance of challenging for trophies again.

You've hit the nail.

Quality post.

i always said ,when the bulls were in their prime, that once all the power has gone bradford will have nothing and will be left behind because they were a club who gained success by steamrolling teams out of their way, my team were on the end of it plenty of times.
but now the powerful guys aint there anymore and bradford are having to learn to play a skillful,fast paced game like everyone else,unfortunately its going to take time for the club to adjust to this new style of play, until they do you fans who have been brought up on success will have to suffer too.
you gotta take the rough with the smooth and remember your glory days ( at least you lot still can)

Not sure I agree fully about showing "too much respect", looking at the final score I`d say the respect was warranted. Bulls` fans might actually wonder why, later in the game, they ran two equally kickable penalties instead of taking the two.

I do think though, given the fragmented start to the season (thanks RFL) they possibly should have taken the opportunity to get some much lacking fluency and rhythm into their play. It`s very much a two edged sword; what`s best for the actual game you`re playing and looking forward to the improvements needed for next matches.

We do get this "the game has moved on" and "the bar has been raised" (very Eddie and Stevo!) every season, but it`s no more than empty rhetoric, meaningless time filling garbage, trotted out like a tired old mantra by our men at Sky on a season by season basis. "This years grand final will be the best ever" anyone? I don`t blame them for talking the game up, to be honest. To be quite fair, in a way, I applaud their efforts because it`s rare in the media to hear anything positive about RL, but I do take it all with a large pinch of salt.

As a Bradford fan I should be worried about being left behind? Oh do come on. Due to circumstances beyond the club`s control we`ve played just two games over the opening month of the season and looked decidedly disjointed; hardly surprising really when both teams we`ve played have been a week or so in front in terms of match fitness.

In any case whether we support Bulls Saints Leeds or whoever we have no god given right to be top of the league. The competition is getting harder and there are no `easy` games anymore; that`s one bit of the rhetoric that is true.

People reckoned on that Bradford's 'biff and barge, no plan B' was useless and would never get us anywhere all the way through four Super League titles, four league leaderships, two Challenge Cups and three WCCs.

Bradford have traditionally been a team that had a big, powerful pack that did the damage for them though, they just went through a period of buying power that no one else could match, then they lost that buying power.

Eh? When? Who?

Mmm, how long has the salary cap been in then?

So which world class players did we sign in that period.

I`d also bicker about the word `traditionally`. Since the Smith/Elliott period maybe, but that`s ten years tops. Suppose it might count as `traditional` if you`re about fifteen or younger.

To be fair, in 95-96 when we got the sky SL money, and ahd no salary cap, we signed a hell of a lot of players at a time when Wigan's financial clout was waining, and when Leeds almost went out of business. Saints bought Newlove. Just remember, getting rid of Newlove brought in Nickle, Dwyer and Loughlin, and gave us the money to buy Lowes, McNamara and Spruce on big transfer fees. Add this to the likes of Donougher, Bradley, Calland, jowitt and Paul Cook, and you can see that we spent big on well known players witha point to prove and some relative unknowns who came in and did a good job. however, we did spend wisely, which is where some clubs have fallen short.

Wasn't Cooky pretty much a swap for Carl Hall?

We did get about £240k as part of the Newlove deal too remember so that would've helped sign McNamara and Spruce. Lowes I think we got on the cheap, amazing to think but Leeds really didn't think they needed him.

The Aussies I don't think were wanted by clubs down under.

If anything we made some shrewd recruitment and got lucky too. We did sign some turkeys but nobody expensive.

wasn't one of the reasons for lowes to leave leeds because they were going to play him at second row?

Yes, he was not first choice hooker> and i deliberately missed out Carlos Hassan and Davide Longo!!!