germain wrote:Friday Knight Lights wrote:
Or because you build an expansive game plan from solid foundations? Lineen played very basic rugby before Toonie rocked up at Glasgow and left the team solid and in the right place to go forward. We didn't do well under Solomons because he is not a good coach and signed bad players. We won't build a castle on quicksand, you need solid foundations before you build the house.
I worry about Melrose and Ayr coaches as they are both the best teams in the Prem and always have been, is that not massively helped by their superior resources?
In fact, Solomons' era has been so difficult to watch that I don't want anything like that to happen again, even if it's for building foundations or whatever. I don't know what to expect with Cockerill but what I know is that I've never been fed up with rugby looking a team coached by Lineen as I've been with Solly.
Let's wait for Chrystie but if he wins something, he will have achieve something more than Dalziel. Your point could still be valid but it is more about Cairns who has not been able to reach any final yet. Is it due to Cairn's abilities or Currie's resources?
Lineen hasn't coached at the top level for a long time, the under 20s were a brutal watch this year. You'd be just as fed up watching that for a couple of years as with Solly. If Cockerill wins nobody will complain - It's rare you hear fans say 'it's great we won the league/cup/games but I wish we played more exciting stuff' . Solomons' Edinburgh was far better than the Hodge/Scott/Wilkins flustercuck. Many would have taken Robinson back and he's from the same school of thought at Cockerill and Solomons - you build a formidable pack and a backline capable of exploiting the holes they punch. Solomons' problem wasn't philosophy it was he just wasn't a very good coach.
Yeah very fair point, I do wonder about Melrose and Ayr having such good resources but Dalziel looks to have worked out okay - although it could just be we had a generational year for the under20s. Who knows.