"Coaching To Win" VS "Playing For The Future"

[Thryleon]

If they learn nothing from experience they're not worth persevering with, and I guess that's where our man Watson comes into it. We should know by now whether he's good enough but he has not been given a proper run at it once in five years so he still remains in the hope that he is good enough. Playing the youth expedites the process, you get a better idea about  each player in a shorter space of time, as opposed to playing Ellard, Rowe and Armfield, who we know are neither top line players nor will they be there in our next premiership. Even a bloke like Andrew Walker is fast approaching this list.

We know if he is good enough.  Frankly, he has a good kick and size going for him and it pretty much ends there.

He isn't up to it.  What you see is what you get.  Another player who we gave a game to, sat him on Travis Cloke when he was the best forward in the competition and that's all she wrote.

he might come good, but he probably won't.

Regarding Ellard, Walker, Armfield and co, we are on a slippery slope.  they could be part of our next flag, but it depends on the rest of the squad. speaking of which, if we lose Judd, Carrazzo, Simpson to retirement these three become important stop gaps for us.

I get the idea.  Play email early find out if they are good enough, but sometimes it's counter productive. They get drafted which means they have some ability but it's harnessing and using it.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the bottom sides who consistently get high draft picks, end up with unfulfilled talent and often it's because they are expected to perform too much too soon..Cripps is one who gas had very few senior games over two years and is blossoming for it. Had he not broken his leg last year, he might not have employed a running coach and come back in ripping condition.  Sometimes it's better that they earn it.

They appreciate it more, and then perform accordingly.