Bellamy's first year at Melbourne

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

v Newcastle L 28-44
v Cowboys L 12-32
v Brisbane L 16-36
V Souths L-14-41
v Canterbury L 4-50
v Canterbury L 0-30

Just a smattering of the losses Bellamy endured in his debut season coaching Melbourne. Remember, it took him four years to make a grand final, and five years to win one.

Brian Smith is in year 1 at the Roosters.

[Guest]

v Newcastle L 28-44
v Cowboys L 12-32
v Brisbane L 16-36
V Souths L-14-41
v Canterbury L 4-50
v Canterbury L 0-30

Just a smattering of the losses Bellamy endured in his debut season coaching Melbourne. Remember, it took him four years to make a grand final, and five years to win one.

Brian Smith is in year 1 at the Roosters.

Correct, and almost 2 million dollars over the cap in order to make those premierships.

Next you'll tell me that Finch won them those premierships.

Deadset Verlaine, you havent changed.

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

Correct, and almost 2 million dollars over the cap in order to make those premierships..

Non-sequitor.

No relevence whatsoever to the topic.

[Guest]

Non-sequitor.

No relevence whatsoever to the topic.

Correction. Your entire point in this thread is about Bellamy's ability to turn a club into a winner and a potential premiership contender.

Yet, the facts have been pointed out that the storm rorted the cap for years by up to what? 1.6 million dollars I believe?

So by this thread and your logic, Smith must rort the cap by almost 2 million dollars in order to achieve the above logic?

Bellamy has NEVER won a grand final legally and under competition rules.

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

Correction. Your entire point in this thread is about Bellamy's ability to turn a club into a winner and a potential premiership contender.

Yet, the facts have been pointed out that the storm rorted the cap for years by up to what? 1.6 million dollars I believe?

So by this thread and your logic, Smith must rort the cap by almost 2 million dollars in order to achieve the above logic?

Bellamy has NEVER won a grand final legally and under competition rules.

Let's get this straight. You think Melbourne were two million dollars over the cap in 2003? Incredible.

But let's say they were. That just highlights my point even further. Even with half a team of out and out champions, they still copped half a dozen floggings. Even if they were cheating the cap in 2003, it still took 4 years to make a grand final.

My point is, we should not lose hope just because of a few beatings in what is Brian Smith's first year at the helm.

[Guest]

Let's get this straight. You think Melbourne were two million dollars over the cap in 2003? Incredible.

But let's say they were. That just highlights my point even further. Even with half a team of out and out champions, they still copped half a dozen floggings. Even if they were cheating the cap in 2003, it still took 4 years to make a grand final.

My point is, we should not lose hope just because of a few beatings in what is Brian Smith's first year at the helm.

2004: Melbourne finished 5th
2003: Melbourne finished 6th
2005: Melbourne finished 6th
2006: Melbourne finished 1st, made grand final (reported to have started cheating the cap in this season)
2007: Melbourne finished 1st, won the grand final (in the middle of their salary cap rort)
2008: Melbourne finished 1st, finished runners up (still in the middle of their salary cap rort)
2009: Melbourne finished 4th, won the grand final (and still in the middle of their rort)

So what you're saying Verlaine, is that if we can finish in the top 8 for 3 consecutive years (like Bellamy achieved whilst under the cap), then rort the cap for the next 4 years, win two premierships and two runner up awards, then we'll be an absolute force to be reckoned with and that your logic was indeed correct?

Your love for Bellamy is blinding you. Sure, he made the top 8 for three consecutive years (whilst under the salary cap). Is that considered a good turn around? Sure. Though I'm not sure what your competitive nature is, however making the 8 is completely pointless if you do not go on to win the premiership. It's just another "season" of ups and downs.

Fact? And it's something you have failed to debate so far. "Bellamy has NEVER, yes I repeat, NEVER won a premiership"

His best finish in the NRL? 5th.

So whats your point?

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

Your love for Bellamy is blinding you. Sure, he made the top 8 for three consecutive years (whilst under the salary cap). Is that considered a good turn around? Sure. Though I'm not sure what your competitive nature is, however making the 8 is completely pointless if you do not go on to win the premiership. It's just another "season" of ups and downs.

Fact? And it's something you have failed to debate so far. "Bellamy has NEVER, yes I repeat, NEVER won a premiership"

His best finish in the NRL? 5th.

So whats your point?

I can't stand Bellamy.

My point is, he endured some shocking losses in his first season at Melbourne, even with quality troops as his disposal.

For those people who are already losing faith, my point is that it takes more than one year to turn a club around.

[Guest]

my point is that it takes more than one year to turn a club around.

And 1.6 million dollars over the salary cap as well.

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

And 1.6 million dollars over the salary cap as well.

Look, being over the cap doesn't have anything to do with the initial defeats the club experienced in 2003, Bellamy's first year.

[Guest]

Look, being over the cap doesn't have anything to do with the initial defeats the club experienced in 2003, Bellamy's first year.

Tom, come on, did you even read my last post?

I stated, that finishing in the top 8 for 3 years straight is nothing exciting to write home about.

You on the other hand, are talking about bellamy, premierships, ect ect. There is a difference Tom.

I'll straighten it out for you ok?

Bellamy has achieved 3 straight years of finishing in the top 8 (whilst his club has been found to have been under the salary cap). This my friend, whilst is a good season, it's not what any football team should set their goals for.

The aim of our competition is to win a premiership. Did Bellamy build that Melbourne team and turn them into a top 8 team? Yes. Though he never won a premiership. So this "logic" of yours is pointless.

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

Tom, come on, did you even read my last post?

I stated, that finishing in the top 8 for 3 years straight is nothing exciting to write home about.

You on the other hand, are talking about bellamy, premierships, ect ect. There is a difference Tom.

I'll straighten it out for you ok?

Bellamy has achieve 3 straight years of finishing in the top 8 (whilst his club has been found to have been under the salary cap). This my friend, whilst is a good season, it's not what any football team should set their goals for.

The aim of our competition is to win a premiership. Did Bellamy build that Melbourne team and turn them into a top 8 team? Yes. Though he never won a premiership. So this "logic" of yours is pointless.

Did Melbourne suffer some heavy defeats in 2003? Yes or no?

If the answer is "yes", well, then, I don't have any more to add.

I don't know what you're saying ... that we should give up because of these heavy defeats. Is that it? Are you saying that I'm wrong to compare Bellamy's first season in Melbourne with Smith's first season at Easts? To me, it's a perfectly straight forward comparison.

[Guest]

Did Melbourne suffer some heavy defeats in 2003? Yes or no?

If the answer is "yes", well, then, I don't have any more to add.

I don't know what you're saying ... that we should give up because of these heavy defeats. Is that it? Are you saying that I'm wrong to compare Bellamy's first season in Melbourne with Smith's first season at Easts? To me, it's a perfectly straight forward comparison.

They had a few big losses, sure. Unlike you Verlaine, I can answer a question, something you've refused to do in this thread

My point (for the 100th time in this thread) is that sure, Bellamy got this team and turned it around. Regardless, what your logic is based around is still deemed by myself as utter failure. Why? Because Bellamy's best finish in those 3 years is 5th. You can aim for mediocrity Tom, but I want premierships.

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

They had a few big losses, sure.

That's all I am trying to establish.

[Guest]

That's all I am trying to establish.

Right, and by your logic, a "turn around" is making the finals every season for 3 years and bowing out therefore, accepting mediocrity.

[Tom Verlaine's Ghost]

Right, and by your logic, a "turn around" is making the finals every season for 3 years and bowing out therefore, accepting mediocrity.

You can argue, if you want, that Melbourne didn't improve from 2003 onwards, but I doubt whether you'll find much support for that argument outside of certain fundamentalist circles.

Well, it's been fun. Just like old times. But I'm off to bed, now. Night.