Coach Seibold thoughts so far.... so good

[Nordburg]

This is also O'Brien's 6th year at the Knights, they are currently 13th, they are also ranked dead last in points scored this season by a significant margin.

Meanwhile, we are still in the Top 8 and in finals contention. I am of the opinion that the club should give the coach at least until the end of the year, and if we miss the finals then so be it, the next decision (whatever that may be) gets taken then.

I’m not suggesting Seibold should be removed now,he deserves to at least see out the season and the payout figure is different if they do it now rather than seasons end.But the team has not improved in his 3 years.Still the same issues.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

But the team has not improved in his 3 years.Still the same issues.

But has the squad improved? No marquee signings in that period (Brooks really the only established first grader we've signed) but overall the depth looks better to me, we've re-jigged the pathways to make them more Manly again, and have signed some top young talent in development.
And if we do make the 8 this year.. that will certainly mark an improvement, because we've haven't played finals 2 years in a row since (I forget)

 

[Woodsie]

I'll say it again ... Siebold has had zero ability to enter the player market in any substantial way since he got here ... and with just spare change he has spent wisely ... pensioned off players recruited with peanuts, TKO, Jazz and brown have all contributed above their pay grades and depth ratings.

That plus the re-signing of Ola, Hoppa, Koula and all the players we wanted to retain is also a win for me.

The notion that this team is "his" as yet are nonsense. Normally after 3 years you can say the coach has stamped his DNA on a team ... but this is not the case yet.

I will still reserve my judgement until I see how he recruits with the salary cap space coming his way over the next 12 months.

Signing Fogarty on about $500k less than DCE is a pretty good start for mine ... plus the signing of a couple of promising young forwards is encouraging for the future.

How he spends the cap resulting from the retirement of aloai, the moving on of some deadwood, and the Jake and Turbo contract renewals will be the litmus test.

 

[Phobia]

How he spends the cap resulting from the retirement of aloai, the moving on of some deadwood, and the Jake and Turbo contract renewals will be the litmus test.

I don't know if Aloiai retires anymore. Club has gone silent on that, but Seibold confirmed his season was over.

Honestly, given the quality (or lack thereof) on the market, I'd prefer to keep him, so long as he can return to decent fitness.

 

[Woodsie]

I don't know if Aloiai retires anymore. Club has gone silent on that, but Seibold confirmed his season was over.

Honestly, given the quality (or lack thereof) on the market, I'd prefer to keep him, so long as he can return to decent fitness.

I Just think his pay packet no longer reflects his probable contribution ... if he goes I think the money could be better spent .

 

[Rocky]

I'll say it again ... Siebold has had zero ability to enter the player market in any substantial way since he got here ... and with just spare change he has spent wisely ... pensioned off players recruited with peanuts, TKO, Jazz and brown have all contributed above their pay grades and depth ratings.

That plus the re-signing of Ola, Hoppa, Koula and all the players we wanted to retain is also a win for me.

The notion that this team is "his" as yet are nonsense. Normally after 3 years you can say the coach has stamped his DNA on a team ... but this is not the case yet.

I will still reserve my judgement until I see how he recruits with the salary cap space coming his way over the next 12 months.

Signing Fogarty on about $500k less than DCE is a pretty good start for mine ... plus the signing of a couple of promising young forwards is encouraging for the future.

How he spends the cap resulting from the retirement of aloai, the moving on of some deadwood, and the Jake and Turbo contract renewals will be the litmus test.

Everything on point here - so much so, you will be accused of "accepting mediocrity" from the ASB.

 

[Woodsie]

Everything on point here - so much so, you will be accused of "accepting mediocrity" from the ASB.

ASB ??

 

[double hoops]

I'll say it again ... Siebold has had zero ability to enter the player market in any substantial way since he got here ... and with just spare change he has spent wisely ... pensioned off players recruited with peanuts, TKO, Jazz and brown have all contributed above their pay grades and depth ratings.

That plus the re-signing of Ola, Hoppa, Koula and all the players we wanted to retain is also a win for me.

The notion that this team is "his" as yet are nonsense. Normally after 3 years you can say the coach has stamped his DNA on a team ... but this is not the case yet.

I will still reserve my judgement until I see how he recruits with the salary cap space coming his way over the next 12 months.

Signing Fogarty on about $500k less than DCE is a pretty good start for mine ... plus the signing of a couple of promising young forwards is encouraging for the future.

How he spends the cap resulting from the retirement of aloai, the moving on of some deadwood, and the Jake and Turbo contract renewals will be the litmus test.

There is an argument that Seibs deserves a year without DCE around. Yeah I see where your coming from.

 

[Rocky]

ASB ??

did I mess up the acronym? Anti Seibold Crew.

 

[LeonardCohen]

I'll say it again ... Siebold has had zero ability to enter the player market in any substantial way since he got here ... and with just spare change he has spent wisely ... pensioned off players recruited with peanuts, TKO, Jazz and brown have all contributed above their pay grades and depth ratings.

That plus the re-signing of Ola, Hoppa, Koula and all the players we wanted to retain is also a win for me.

The notion that this team is "his" as yet are nonsense. Normally after 3 years you can say the coach has stamped his DNA on a team ... but this is not the case yet.

I will still reserve my judgement until I see how he recruits with the salary cap space coming his way over the next 12 months.

Signing Fogarty on about $500k less than DCE is a pretty good start for mine ... plus the signing of a couple of promising young forwards is encouraging for the future.

How he spends the cap resulting from the retirement of aloai, the moving on of some deadwood, and the Jake and Turbo contract renewals will be the litmus test.

I disagree a little here. Three years and it's 'your' team. I don't necessarily think he could have landed a big fish, primarily because they probably wouldn't choose to sign at Manly...but history shows that clubs turn over rosters when they want to (looks at Ryles this year and Ciraldo in the last three). Seibs has chosen to stick with a lot of what he already had, believing that it's good enough to get the job done.

I get that people will argue that a number of players are under contract and cannot be moved, but we've seen time and time again what the tap on the shoulder does. Players get shopped all the time and Seibs has elected not to do this. I'm not even suggesting this is the wrong move from him, just pointing out that after three seasons, you've essentially got to own what you've got. Every coach arrives with a previous coach's leftovers and given a club must spend 95% of their cap, paired with the NRL no longer allowing heavily back-ended/deferred contracts, walk into essentially the same predicament.

What we have at Manly is a strategic move by Seibs to go all out for a premiership now, rather than rebuild like say Ryles is doing at Parramatta. Right or wrong? I don't know...but he's made a choice to stick with the core group and put some bargain forwards together, rather than tear the place up and start again. For this reason, after three years, it's partly on him whether he has the cattle or not.

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[Woodsie]

I disagree a little here. Three years and it's 'your' team. I don't necessarily think he could have landed a big fish, primarily because they probably wouldn't choose to sign at Manly...but history shows that clubs turn over rosters when they want to (looks at Ryles this year and Ciraldo in the last three). Seibs has chosen to stick with a lot of what he already had, believing that it's good enough to get the job done.

I get that people will argue that a number of players are under contract and cannot be moved, but we've seen time and time again what the tap on the shoulder does. Players get shopped all the time and Seibs has elected not to do this. I'm not even suggesting this is the wrong move from him, just pointing out that after three seasons, you've essentially got to own what you've got. Every coach arrives with a previous coach's leftovers and given a club must spend 95% of their cap, paired with the NRL no longer allowing heavily back-ended/deferred contracts, walk into essentially the same predicament.

What we have at Manly is a strategic move by Seibs to go all out for a premiership now, rather than rebuild like say Ryles is doing at Parramatta. Right or wrong? I don't know...but he's made a choice to stick with the core group and put some bargain forwards together, rather than tear the place up and start again. For this reason, after three years, it's partly on him whether he has the cattle or not.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Your opinion that he couldn't have landed a big fish is just conjecture ... without any real cap space to spend it is hardly relevant.

Given that the only players in our roster that he could have moved on at the end of last year to have freed up the funds needed to attract a big fish would have been DCE, Turbo, Huamole or Jake ... I doubt the fans or management would have accepted that as sensible at the time.

 

[LeonardCohen]

Your opinion that he couldn't have landed a big fish is just conjecture ... without any real cap space to spend it is hardly relevant.

Given that the only players in our roster that he could have moved on at the end of last year to have freed up the funds needed to attract a big fish would have been DCE, Turbo, Huamole or Jake ... I doubt the fans or management would have accepted that as sensible.

It’s relevant because I’m pointing out that I am not bashing Seibs, nor do I believe that he should be judged on whether he was able to recruit a marquee player…they have to elect to take up a contract at Manly and we seem to miss out on even the fringe players that come on the market. It was my way of providing a contrary opinion to yours, without the short sightedness of suggesting that he is failing on the grounds of not chasing a big fish.

I’ve also explained that he could have cash to spend if he wanted to rebuild the roster but has chosen to stick solid, which is highly relevant to the discussion. I’m not trying to twist your arm or convince you of something, just giving my perspective. I believe that after three years, a coach is accountable for the roster. There will always be variables outside their control, e.g. a shopped player not finding a new home, a marquee player turning down the club’s offer, etc. but that’s happening to every club and coach in the NRL. There’s a point where the direction a coach and club take with their recruitment is no longer the ‘fallout’ of the previous administration and I personally believe that Seibs has passed this point now.

 

[Ohgeez]

I disagree a little here. Three years and it's 'your' team. I don't necessarily think he could have landed a big fish, primarily because they probably wouldn't choose to sign at Manly...but history shows that clubs turn over rosters when they want to (looks at Ryles this year and Ciraldo in the last three). Seibs has chosen to stick with a lot of what he already had, believing that it's good enough to get the job done.

So Tigers with the hat trick of spoons can sign Luai, Turuva, May, etc but you don’t think we could land a big fish if we had the funds? Such a lazy narrative, if you got the money players will come. Simple as that.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

I believe that after three years, a coach is accountable for the roster.

So do you mean Seibold will be fully accountable for our roster next year (which will be after 3 years) or that he is fully accountable this year (ie, after 2 years)?

 

[LeonardCohen]

So do you mean Seibold will be fully accountable for our roster next year (which will be after 3 years) or that he is fully accountable this year (ie, after 2 years)?

three pre-seasons so now. It’s also not a black and white date on a calendar and I don’t even necessarily think he’s done the wrong thing. I just reject the narrative that he’s hamstrung by the cap and stuck with all these players he has no choice over. There’s enough anecdotal evidence in the game to suggest that coaches can come in move the roster around if they see fit. You only have to glance over the number of Dogs players that left mid contract when Ciraldo and Gus decided to go in a new direction. I’m not suggesting it’s easy and that you completely get your own way, but it’s possible to free up cap space and go in a different direction pretty quickly (e.g. Ryles shopping club stalwart Gutho is akin to Manly saying goodbye to Jake T if they want to). After three pre-seasons and three June 30 deadlines, a coach is largely responsible for their roster to the point where previous administration is no longer an excuse.

 

[LeonardCohen]

So Tigers with the hat trick of spoons can sign Luai, Turuva, May, etc but you don’t think we could land a big fish if we had the funds? Such a lazy narrative, if you got the money players will come. Simple as that.

relax, it wasn’t even the point I was trying to make.

I said it ‘tongue in cheek’ because we keep missing out on the players we chase (Sitili Tupouniua, Da Silva, etc). It was to emphasise that I’m not necessarily critiquing Seibold’s roster and/or perceived inability to attract talent and/or manage the cap, just that I think he’s come far enough to be responsible for what’s in front of him.