Originally Posted by
Dr.Gonzo
Everything I said was with the understanding that Souths are one of the top four teams in the league, that is the context for this discussion. When I was giving my critique it was suggesting that factors/players you mentioned were overvalued, there is no outright dismissal of significance. We're talking about who is the best of the best. I don't care about credentialism or popularism, Rothfield's opinion is of zero significance to me, he's an idiot.
Your assertions lead me to believe you rate Souths close to the top of these four teams, possibly on top with the most value. You also did not agree with my concerns matching up against opposition forward packs. Perhaps it was a little facetious of me to assign you a wager on Souths this week, however if I accepted all you asserted as truth I would favour souths outright, so I'd take + money.
You know who else Greg Inglis is a better athlete than? Andrew Johns, doesn't change the fact Johns was a better footballer. Last time I checked this was a team sport, leadership should not be ignored as a factor, we're trying to address who is the most valuable. I agree with alot of what you have to say but my thought process and analysis differs. I'd disagree and argue good athletes grow on trees, it's Inglis' skill and positional play in combination with his athleticism that makes him the great player he is. He's no better an athlete than Uate. I can only repeat, Smith has outperformed Inglis in finals games every time they have been involved together. His performances are on another level to Inglis, I see no reason to ignore this formline.
Anyway, It's been an interesting discussion. Only thing left to ask is how do you rate Manly against Souths at full strength on a neutral venue, am I unfairly assuming you have Souths above them?