Recruitment : Thu Nov 26, 2020 1:38 pm
A very broad topic (by design). We give the club a lot of stick over recruitment. Signings from Australia that have failed, young players that have been signed and not kicked on etc etc.I wonder how bad we are compared to other clubs? Are we the only ones who sign duffers? Do any of our signings prove to be equal or even better than expected? Do we take more gambles than other teams?
We all remember the total disasters eg Aso****
Then there are the panic buys eg Sullivan and Latu which no one expected much of.
There are the ones who go off the rails, “Mr Sandow can you stop that sniffing and pay attention please”.
There are the successes that took a while to settle in M King, M Monaghan..
The successes from the off J Monaghan
Better than expected Hicks and Hiku
The youngsters that didn’t make it Smith and (seemingly Johnson)
The ones that did T King and to an extent his brother.
We have the off the wall experiments eg Burrell.
My conclusion is that EVERY signing is a gamble. We tend not to remember the successes eg M Cooper but only the failures.
When looking at success rates I think we have to look at our direct competitors. Saints for example are often lauded but look at their signings under Cunningham, mainly dross.
With lower ranked teams they are spending less on recruits so tend to expect less and occasionally will unearth a gem.
Would any of us have been happy with signing Inu when Salford did, I suspect not.
Sorry this turned into a waffle but I think the topic is pertinent so fill your boots!