Club DNA

[yonathonjoung]

Been thinking on and off about what defines some clubs and how some people still think the Dolphins don't have an identity, or as I would rather call it, a DNA. We know what defines the Storm and the Panthers, the most successful clubs in recent memory, but what defines us? What players fit our DNA and which ones don't? What would you rather the DNA be?

So far I think it's a club of overachieving. Few clubs do better with worse luck, but a lot of clubs do worse with better luck.

Good players of the DNA IMO: Ray Stone, Max Plath, Kurt Donoghoe, etc.

Bad fits for the DNA: Milford, Pangai Jr, etc.

 

[Equaliser]

Been thinking on and off about what defines some clubs and how some people still think the Dolphins don't have an identity, or as I would rather call it, a DNA. We know what defines the Storm and the Panthers, the most successful clubs in recent memory, but what defines us? What players fit our DNA and which ones don't? What would you rather the DNA be?

So far I think it's a club of overachieving. Few clubs do better with worse luck, but a lot of clubs do worse with better luck.

Good players of the DNA IMO: Ray Stone, Max Plath, Kurt Donoghoe, etc.

Bad fits for the DNA: Milford, Pangai Jr, etc.

It's a bit early to try to define it yet. Give Woolf a couple of years and see where we are.

 

[mr_c]

Doesn't matter what playrr it. Is long ss they. Are on same page as coach saa nothing wrong with the n mill both did what was needed. At club coaches. Know how bring. Best outta some look at molo n cobbo

It's not. DNA more players belive in the process woolf n Bennett had

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

Id love the club to have a Ray Stone feel.

Love his work eithic, love the no celebration. Love the team is greater then the player/win is bigger then individual try vibe he gicves off.

90% of other players are the opposite

 

[Red]

Been thinking on and off about what defines some clubs and how some people still think the Dolphins don't have an identity, or as I would rather call it, a DNA. We know what defines the Storm and the Panthers, the most successful clubs in recent memory, but what defines us? What players fit our DNA and which ones don't? What would you rather the DNA be?

So far I think it's a club of overachieving. Few clubs do better with worse luck, but a lot of clubs do worse with better luck.

Good players of the DNA IMO: Ray Stone, Max Plath, Kurt Donoghoe, etc.

Bad fits for the DNA: Milford, Pangai Jr, etc.

Isn't the DNA in a constant state of flux? Though, whatever it is clubs like the Storm and Penrith have had for a while now, we want. Even though Melbourne have become perennial GF losers.

 

[yonathonjoung]

Id love the club to have a Ray Stone feel.

Love his work eithic, love the no celebration. Love the team is greater then the player/win is bigger then individual try vibe he gicves off.

90% of other players are the opposite

This is exactly what I mean, and there is a reason I put him first as my example.

Isn't the DNA in a constant state of flux? Though, whatever it is clubs like the Storm and Penrith have had for a while now, we want. Even though Melbourne have become perennial GF losers.

Of course it changes, but there is something that works for those two that others don't have, and some teams seem to be losing sight of let alone catching up. Again I say overachievers and that's not a bad thing to hang your hat on in a game, long as everything in the club administration gets the right people on the park.

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

This is exactly what I mean, and there is a reason I put him first as my example.

Yeah a know, early morning post, couldn't be assed quoting you. Totally agree with you though.

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

Isn't the DNA in a constant state of flux? Though, whatever it is clubs like the Storm and Penrith have had for a while now, we want. Even though Melbourne have become perennial GF losers.

Yep, great point. I think that's what we want too in relation to the Storm comment.

Because culture is tested with personnel changes, its always in a state of flux. I think thats where guys like Bennett, being people managers succeed in this sport. They indoctrinate new comers into their culture when signing them. Unlike say the Bulldogs, who let the Penrith rubbish (cockiness), take over their hard working dogs of war mentality. Now, culture wise they are in limbo, without a winning mentality.

Bellamy is hard and mentality focused. Its why I liked the Bromwich signings to start. It was about creating a good dressing room, with great ethics.

Woolf seems to have a good mentality, and with recruitment, its should be all about "NO DICKHEAD POLICIES" that worked so will for the Sydney Swans back in the day.

I think your post addresses the biggest challenge faced by our sport when it comes to success, and the first thing that needs addressing or installing when your a new club, or a new coach to a failing club.

 

[mr_c]

Yep, great point. I think that's what we want too in relation to the Storm comment.

Because culture is tested with personnel changes, its always in a state of flux. I think thats where guys like Bennett, being people managers succeed in this sport. They indoctrinate new comers into their culture when signing them. Unlike say the Bulldogs, who let the Penrith rubbish (cockiness), take over their hard working dogs of war mentality. Now, culture wise they are in limbo, without a winning mentality.

Bellamy is hard and mentality focused. Its why I liked the Bromwich signings to start. It was about creating a good dressing room, with great ethics.

Woolf seems to have a good mentality, and with recruitment, its should be all about "NO DICKHEAD POLICIES" that worked so will for the Sydney Swans back in the day.

I think your post addresses the biggest challenge faced by our sport when it comes to success, and the first thing that needs addressing or installing when your a new club, or a new coach to a failing club.

one thing i notice especailly with the teams that go well for so long is they don't have to be flashy or big names just be on the same page think this is wgere other clubs fail they expect get big names and don't bring what club needs ( which sometimes is good reailty check ) guys like stone knows his role as been round the blocks long time so know what is expected same with kenny n jesse all 3 know 3 things winning culture and new bennett know woolf is getting guys like molo n co who hes had a repore with in past

 

[yonathonjoung]

Yeah a know, early morning post, couldn't be assed quoting you. Totally agree with you though.

Don't sweat it. All good.

Yep, great point. I think that's what we want too in relation to the Storm comment.

Because culture is tested with personnel changes, its always in a state of flux. I think thats where guys like Bennett, being people managers succeed in this sport. They indoctrinate new comers into their culture when signing them. Unlike say the Bulldogs, who let the Penrith rubbish (cockiness), take over their hard working dogs of war mentality. Now, culture wise they are in limbo, without a winning mentality.

I think your post addresses the biggest challenge faced by our sport when it comes to success, and the first thing that needs addressing or installing when your a new club, or a new coach to a failing club.

Bulldogs really could slip with what they switched up end of 2025. As for that challenge of coaching and leadership it's why I'm afraid for Perth.

one thing i notice especailly with the teams that go well for so long is they don't have to be flashy or big names just be on the same page think this is wgere other clubs fail they expect get big names and don't bring what club needs ( which sometimes is good reailty check ) guys like stone knows his role as been round the blocks long time so know what is expected same with kenny n jesse all 3 know 3 things winning culture and new bennett know woolf is getting guys like molo n co who hes had a repore with in past

So we are chasing straight shooters, hard heads, and people on the same page. Exactly what I think.

 

[Dolph]

Yep, great point. I think that's what we want too in relation to the Storm comment.

Because culture is tested with personnel changes, its always in a state of flux. I think thats where guys like Bennett, being people managers succeed in this sport. They indoctrinate new comers into their culture when signing them. Unlike say the Bulldogs, who let the Penrith rubbish (cockiness), take over their hard working dogs of war mentality. Now, culture wise they are in limbo, without a winning mentality.

Bellamy is hard and mentality focused. Its why I liked the Bromwich signings to start. It was about creating a good dressing room, with great ethics.

Woolf seems to have a good mentality, and with recruitment, its should be all about "NO DICKHEAD POLICIES" that worked so will for the Sydney Swans back in the day.

I think your post addresses the biggest challenge faced by our sport when it comes to success, and the first thing that needs addressing or installing when your a new club, or a new coach to a failing club.

Sometimes it's hard to know who is going to be a dickhead or was but has ceased being a dickhead and what a dickhead actually is. I mean, sometimes like Todd Carney we all know he was a dickhead but it seems now he's a model citizen. No drinking, does volunteer work and etc. Russell Packer was another. In a couple of years that Manly hooker who was locked up might be another.

People deserve a second chance unless they killed someone.

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

Sometimes it's hard to know who is going to be a dickhead or was but has ceased being a dickhead and what a dickhead actually is. I mean, sometimes like Todd Carney we all know he was a dickhead but it seems now he's a model citizen. No drinking, does volunteer work and etc. Russell Packer was another. In a couple of years that Manly hooker who was locked up might be another.

People deserve a second chance unless they killed someone.

Yep. Some clubs have to take a risk.

So they take a punt like saints did on Packer.

I dont want to be a club that needs to takr risks. Get those foundations right. And try say the course.

Not as easy as it sounds.

 

[mr_c]

Yep. Some clubs have to take a risk.

So they take a punt like saints did on Packer.

I dont want to be a club that needs to takr risks. Get those foundations right. And try say the course.

Not as easy as it sounds.

i think taking punts best option look at molo all the trash spoken about him people shut up pretty quick same with cobbo people will shut up pretty quick when gains confidence ( thats big thing i see from webby his gives them confidence )

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

i think taking punts best option look at molo all the trash spoken about him people shut up pretty quick same with cobbo people will shut up pretty quick when gains confidence ( thats big thing i see from webby his gives them confidence )

They can be a good option when they pay off. The Dragons have been taking punts for 15 years. They are still shit. They need to take a punt though, because noone will join them.

The house always wins at casinos, and that's why taking punts are massive risks. If your not taking punts, the success comes more often from the choice. They aren't news worth though, so you don't hear about them often.

 

[mr_c]

They can be a good option when they pay off. The Dragons have been taking punts for 15 years. They are still shit. They need to take a punt though, because noone will join them.

The house always wins at casinos, and that's why taking punts are massive risks. If your not taking punts, the success comes more often from the choice. They aren't news worth though, so you don't hear about them often.

the reason why clubs like dray gons n co fail is one reason and one reason only a ex dragons spoke in media recently how it was hurting the club ( and others ) they get any player to come here not pick up players that will create a team around tigers eels drags perfect example doesn't help any coach in there go forward ( quiet like what gc are doing i think in time they be better and stronger )

 

[Josh]

They can be a good option when they pay off. The Dragons have been taking punts for 15 years. They are still shit. They need to take a punt though, because noone will join them.

The house always wins at casinos, and that's why taking punts are massive risks. If your not taking punts, the success comes more often from the choice. They aren't news worth though, so you don't hear about them often.

Koloamatangi was a decent signing. He's probably the second best prop. To get him for a mil a year was a steal.

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

Koloamatangi was a decent signing. He's probably the second best prop. To get him for a mil a year was a steal.

Lets see.

I reckon he will be a waste of money with Kyle at 7 running the show. They should have funneled that into a 7, then get a serviceable prop. Flanno, with this signing is trying to save his son in 2027. Without a proper 7 with an adequate kicking game, that guy is going to get murdered coming off his line most of the time.

That's an outrageous call by me, but I put my nuts on the line, so there it is.

KK is probably the first signing that they have made that isn't a risk in a long time. And he is a great player and worth every cent. But I dont think he turns the Dragons around. They have a park football quality 7, outside backs with no speed and are aging, and forwards who support the nickname cake (that says it all). Him and Su'a will be the leading lights in 27 unless they make more drastic changes between now and then.

With all the issues they have top to bottom, he doesn't change them at all. West Tigers are a similar type of club. They made massive moves for last season. Same old Tigers.

 

[Josh]

Lets see.

I reckon he will be a waste of money with Kyle at 7 running the show. They should have funneled that into a 7, then get a serviceable prop. Flanno, with this signing is trying to save his son in 2027. Without a proper 7 with an adequate kicking game, that guy is going to get murdered coming off his line most of the time.

That's an outrageous call by me, but I put my nuts on the line, so there it is.

KK is probably the first signing that they have made that isn't a risk in a long time. And he is a great player and worth every cent. But I dont think he turns the Dragons around. They have a park football quality 7, outside backs with no speed and are aging, and forwards who support the nickname cake (that says it all). Him and Su'a will be the leading lights in 27 unless they make more drastic changes between now and then.

With all the issues they have top to bottom, he doesn't change them at all. West Tigers are a similar type of club. They made massive moves for last season. Same old Tigers.

I hope Kyle Flanagan lasts another year but I think the noise is becoming too much now. The problem with a halfback is which good ones are on the market? Have to go with a young, unproven halfback. So Wayne took a punt on Katoa. And it was a punt. How often are the best halfbacks in the lower grades not suitable for NRL?

 

[Liverbird with Phins up]

I hope Kyle Flanagan lasts another year but I think the noise is becoming too much now. The problem with a halfback is which good ones are on the market? Have to go with a young, unproven halfback. So Wayne took a punt on Katoa. And it was a punt. How often are the best halfbacks in the lower grades not suitable for NRL?

Katoa was a punt due to his age.

Here is the difference. When Bennett takes a punt is it really a massive punt? 1, he is the master coach, he can polish a turd player wise. So Bennett taking a risk in a lot of cases isnt a risk because he has the ability to make men out of boys talent wise. 2, Bennett didnt become the goat taking punts, he is the goat because he is a great judge of talent therefore able to build a squad.

So, in my opinion, despite what I said in the first sentence. Do I really think Katoa was a punt? No, due to thr person taking the punt.

I do think your right in a lot of cases. Just not with Bennett or Bellamy. Those two maybe be taking what seems like a risk to you or I. However, to them and their football brains its not a risk, because they know what they are doing.

St George on the other hand. They seem to be playing netball in the NRL

 

[Josh]

Katoa was a punt due to his age.

Here is the difference. When Bennett takes a punt is it really a massive punt? 1, he is the master coach, he can polish a turd player wise. So Bennett taking a risk in a lot of cases isnt a risk because he has the ability to make men out of boys talent wise. 2, Bennett didnt become the goat taking punts, he is the goat because he is a great judge of talent therefore able to build a squad.

So, in my opinion, despite what I said in the first sentence. Do I really think Katoa was a punt? No, due to thr person taking the punt.

I do think your right in a lot of cases. Just not with Bennett or Bellamy. Those two maybe be taking what seems like a risk to you or I. However, to them and their football brains its not a risk, because they know what they are doing.

St George on the other hand. They seem to be playing netball in the NRL

I think Ivan Cleary is the best coach. Shane Flanagan is good except for his massive blind-spot. I'm surprised someone from above hasn't taken it (that blind spot) out of his hands.

Wayne is a good judge but he's made a few rather large blunders. Didn't want Cam Smith or Thurston early on in their careers.