So how far away are we?

[Shugs]

We're a few games in now and we have a solitary win. I'm an eternal optimist but so far I'd class it as Irish - disappointing but we should have won. Glaws - well beaten. Bath - much needed win. Sale - more encouraging and we could have won. Bordeaux - encouraging and we could have got something. So personally I think we're fine margins away. Better discipline, better game management in the final stages and just a bit more precision in the red zone and I think we'll be winning games. Personnel wise our front row looks solid with Owlett and McIntyre now options. JL back at SR with an improved looking WR. Back row options are great with JW outstanding and Vailanu an emerging bonus. LS has looked better and JG is back at 12. Minozzi has looked lively and our wing options are better. I'd still like to see more from Fekitoa. So I don't think we're far away but that's just theory and points on the board are the absolute measure. Do others think we're as close to getting them as I do?

[NellyWellyWaspy]

Me? I think we are close.

[AKWasp]

In all the games we’ve had periods where we could win each game but then thrown it away through poor discipline or opposition quality.

We look more like a team this year and with important players like Gopps, Willis and Dobby fit, we should be just fine for this season and hopefully with a new training base and a more settled squad we can kick on back to where we were a couple seasons ago from next year. This year is about getting that solid foundation

[backdoc]

Our squad is more even and getting more game time; this suggests that if we start winning we can sustain it.

Top 6 definitely achievable.

[mike909]

Could easily go either go either way...or carry on "waving about"

The key will be the next block of Prem games - which is not exactly packed with "givens" starting with Exeter. We're "starting" from a position similar to Newcastle who won one of their first 4, with two close loses, and one of their second 4 with close games, including if I remember, vs us and never recovered their season, chasing results. They were fourth the season before getting relegated.

I think rather than "being near" or not - we are getting to the point (if not there already) when just getting points is more important than playing well. Slightly "doh" comment, but yesterday - we didn't look like a "one win team" except that regardless of our good play - we lost.

It is small margins, we aren't far off and could have won more games...but we didn't. We're not far from playing well  - but we need to adopt/adapt tactics suitable for our position, which is any points will do. Scrappy 9-6 wins work fine for me!

[AKWasp]

Think it’s worth remembering who we’ve lost to so far this season.

Irish was a very infuriating result but they have won 2 games and almost scraped a win away at Sarries.

Glos away was a game that not many of us expected to win but for a large part of the game we were in it.

Bath at home, considering theyre expected in the lower half scrap with us was a must win game and we won- they have also beat chiefs and saints this season (either side of the game with us) so they are not as bad as people think

Finally Sale away, we have only ever won once there and their squad is considered amongst the best in the prem and it was only poor discipline that set us apart from them.

Also worth considering BB are an in form team, 2nd in the league having some very strong players too and we did not look at a worse level to them

At some point performances have to translate into results but I don’t feel too worried and I’m sure those results will come in soon.

[HDAWG]

For me the biggest issue is consistency.

Sometimes our lineout is good one match, then it's bad the next. Same goes for scrum and discipline.

However handling of the ball and offside due to defence are regular problems.

We don't seem to be improving or learning from our mistakes. We either don't improve in aspects, or we improve in one aspect at the sacrifice of another aspect. It means losing matches is more frustrating because there are glimpses of good things, but no drive to improve our overall performance.

[wasps]

I think we'll be fine as I believe it'll come together, but I think it'll take a while before we're actually playing well.


While it's important to rotate players and keep them fresh, it's also very important to have some consistency of selection - it's an almost impossible balance ( and it's also impossible to judge )


However, having Launchbury and J. Willis available will be massive for us.
With those 2 as regulars, our pack should be capable..... And by that, I mean they shouldn't be our weak link in any game.

We know that Robson is a class scrum half, and with our back 3 options we have some serious attacking ability.
It may not be Wade, WlR, Piutau, Beale type quality, but it's definitely a back 3 will real intent to go forward and score points.


It's all about us making something of our 10, 12 and 13's.
I think we need to pin it on Sopoaga, Gopperth and Fekitoa / DeJongh.
If we can get those 3 working with the rest of our backs, it'll make it so much easier to bring others in at the end of games to get them changing seamlessly.

We need to get something working first though... Then we can work on the consistency and rotation.

[westwaleswasp]

I don't think it matters too much who we have lost to, because our league and cup pool are strong- any win is great, no team is a gimme. Whoever beats us will be a decent outfit.
The problem is one decent outfit will go down, just as per last year. So we need a win soon, which is trite but also true. On performance terms we are close, they might be like buses and come back to back. One thing is for sure, our youngsters are looking good- does anyone not have Willis senior is not first choice now?
We look like depth is there at 9, for example, which is a bonus.  Miller too- played well, a reminder of happier times- and we seem to have depth up front in the front and back row.
All in all lots to be positive about providing we can get some league wins.

[wasps]

As you say, every game is important cos none are easy.
If we accept that there's a need for rotation, then what does first choice really mean?

Does it mean we can't rest Jack Willis, or that we rarely rest him. Does that help us / him?
Should we save him for games against the likes of Saracens and Exeter (assuming the best teams in the league), or should he be rested for those games so we can target the ones against the teams around us?


As said above, I'm of the school of thought that we should be playing our best 23 every week at the moment until we get some consistency and then start resting some.
However, I get that not everyone feels like that and that rest / rotation is required throughout the season to ensure that we're stronger for longer, reduce our injuries, and have something left in the tank at the end of the season.
I just don't see how that really works with a "first choice player"


But to actually answer your question, for me, when I write team sheet, it starts with Joe, Jack and Dan... Then I roll a dice for the rest

[NellyWellyWaspy]

As you say, every game is important cos none are easy.
If we accept that there's a need for rotation, then what does first choice really mean?

Does it mean we can't rest Jack Willis, or that we rarely rest him. Does that help us / him?
Should we save him for games against the likes of Saracens and Exeter (assuming the best teams in the league), or should he be rested for those games so we can target the ones against the teams around us?


As said above, I'm of the school of thought that we should be playing our best 23 every week at the moment until we get some consistency and then start resting some.
However, I get that not everyone feels like that and that rest / rotation is required throughout the season to ensure that we're stronger for longer, reduce our injuries, and have something left in the tank at the end of the season.
I just don't see how that really works with a "first choice player"


But to actually answer your question, for me, when I write team sheet, it starts with Joe, Jack and Dan... Then I roll a dice for the rest

I don't agree. If we are to compete long term with the top 3, then every player in the squad has to eventually become first choice. And, if you start with, x, y and z are on the sheet, then we will always take a hit when that person gets injured. Rotation is a MUST, given availability.

Quick fix now or longer term success? I will go for the latter. As long as we can avoid the drop for now, if there is one.

[wasps]

NWW...
I absolutely understand the argument for constant rotation, and our long string of injuries would certainly at weight to the argument for resting players more often.
However, I don't think that necessarily translates to long term success... Although maybe it would translate to long term player welfare, which is hugely important.


You may want all of your senior squad being first choice at some point, but in reality there will always be some players that are better than others.


I don't feel that you find consistency quickly by changing the matchday squad each week or each month.
I really feel that you want to get to a point where you're happy and picking up wins - then you can "promote" (definitely not the right word to use) some of the bench players to starters and the process should be seamless.
The next in line players then get a spot on the bench, and the first choice get a rest.
After a few games those who are now starting get a rest, and start to mix to first choice, 3rd choice and 2nd choice players... And again, it should be seamless.

However, the key to it is to be winning games in the first instance, and logically, the way to start winning games is to get your best players playing regularly

[Hymenoptera]

If someone gets an injury and we have to put in the 'no 2', if they havent had any gametime the drop can be massive. Take 9, rotation through injury has shown us he can mix it, if he sat on the bench we'd never have known and run Dan into the ground.
Im for rotation but not at the expense of consistency and winning habit.

[westwaleswasp]

I guess you need a bit of management vis-a-vis game time etc. I think Dai selected well for this week, we learnt a lot and much if it was positive to boot.

First choice does not mean much, but in terms of contract renewal it means something. For example, Willis is probably worth more to the team than he is on, because frankly we can't be paying him enough given his herculean efforts.
I suspect that Cruse is worth as much to us than TT now, because he has improved beyond expectation whilst TT languished with injury. Zz too has been a revelation.

I don't want to be negative, but I suspect that Shields, Carr, Young, Vailanu, Reider etc. will be aware that Willis is above them, frankly I thought Ashley was smashing this weekend, and when Young is fit competition for a starting slot will be high.
I am not sure how much money those guys are on, but I suspect the next time contracts are up there might have to be some rejigging. Bassett seems to have dropped down the pecking order, one wonders what that might happen when his contract comes up again- he is presumably on a first choice renumeration package, especially given the non switch to Saints. Maybe he will pick up, idk, but the point is a player becoming first choice who was not before may be looking for a pay rise to reflect their status eventually, which may be acommodated if others drop. That appears to be how it works in soccer where status is defined by salary, albeit in a non salary cap market.

[wasps]

I wonder how often players stay at a club when their contract decreases. I suspect most then look elsewhere.

So, if we assume that we have to increase Willis and Cruse's contracts fairly significantly at next renewal, then it stands to reason that we'll lose some senior players to pay for it (after all, we're not Saracens)


This is why I'm not too sure that the "long term" progression really exists.
In most cases each new season is almost a completely new start with some senior players leaving if their own volition and some players not being offered the contracts they want.



Hymenoptera is definitely correct in that your 2nd choice player needs to have some game time to ensure that they're ready to go when called on from the bench or for injury cover.
It's such a difficult balance to do that AND keep a team winning in a consistent way.
Makes me glad I'm not in charge of selection, but I suppose it's about bringing players from the bench with sufficient time on the clock for them to get up to speed when we're winning games well