Tony Smith's record speaks for itself.

Many (not all) but many of Leeds' record totals against teams were set during his time leading the club. Considering the many point-fests enjoyed by Warrington this season I imagine the same can be said for them.

Flat-track bullying at it's finest and nothing wrong with that as long as the grit is there to win the close games as well and by and large you have to conclude it was and still is.

Smith may not turn Wakey into Champions but im pretty sure he would improve them. The mark of a good coach is surely getting individual players to perform as well as they possibly can and then getting them all to play as a team. Smith seems to be able to achieve this better than most other coaches in SL as his record proves.
As someone has already pointed out Wire have won trophies the last 2 seasons. Their first for many years.
If you think things went so wrong in 2005 then you have unrealistic expectations. We reached both finals, losing narrowly in the CC and to a Salary cap cheating Bulls in the GF. Won the WCC and played some of the best RL ever seen at Headingley.

People totally under estimate the importance of hunger and desire from players. In a nutshell attitude.

Warrington are not in the same position as Leeds were in 2004. Warrington have aged players, coming to an end. They did have hunger as never achieved much, but now that hunger will to a degree have been met.

By contrast, the Leeds players that achieved the same feat had many years ahead of them and a desire and hunger to dominate for a period. On the oppossite, when Wigan did it they had a great core that grew with the team, but made changes every year in positions to ensure they maintained the dominance.

Smiths done a great job in getting his tools in the right places to turn around Warrington, but he doesn't have the same tools has he had at Leeds, to prolong it. And I am not convinced, in a salary capped sport that he could do the same way Wigan did either.

Yeah. They're crowing now, cock 'o' north aren't they? But soon they will be right down in the pack again, made to look like fools. The cycle complete. AHAHAHAHA

I've never claimed it's all down to the coach. But some of it is down to the coach. You need a strong squad too, but strong squads still need a good coach to deliver.

Tony Smith consistently gets the best out of a given squad. For Leeds 2004 the best meant being good enough to win a title. He did that. Others had failed with what were, on paper, stronger squads. At Wakey, that best might be 9th or 10th place. Would Smith deliver that where Kear has failed? Impossible to say. But I do think a good coach makes a difference.

If you look at 2003 Leeds vs 2004 Leeds, personnel was similar. Would Powell have won the title? Again, totally impossible to say, but I don't believe he would. Obviously a lot of the young players were a year older and wiser, and we added Marcus Bai, but I noticed a very different attitude in 2004, particularly in defence. He made a good team into a winning team.

"Similar" is different to the same. You might think it impossible to say about Powell and 2004, but I don't. As far as I am concerned Leeds would have won it in 2003 had Powell not had ripped away from him two very important players. Hence why I highlighted the word "Similar".

No doubt in my mind with how that team played that it was only natural to take the next step in 2004, even without Smith.

The question which probably would be highlighted more. Would that same Powell team have been as good as the Smith one? and probably further add to that, would that same team have gone on for future years domination? Personally, I would have to say probably not in both cases. But 2004 was always going to happen after that 2003.

Just to clarify that last point simply. IMO Powell would have won the title in 2004, but it probably wouldn't have been in the same style as the Leeds team, and nor IMO would he have gone on to dominate likes Smith side.

You only have to look at the defensive change in lee briers to prove what you said and i think thats one of the key elements Tony Smith brings to any side he coaches

They had two easy runs in the CC both years it is no surprise that the first time they came up against a decent side Wigan took them to the cleaners. Leeds got to the CC final this year without playing a side above them in league until the final!!

What happened in the play offs in 2009 - they didn't make it and 2010 they failed to win either game. So you can question whether he is the x factor?

On here much is said of Smith's ability to improve players but at Warrington - Atkins, Monagahan, Solomona, Myler, Hodgson have all been added in the last 2 years. Any side that adds that to the likes of Morley, Brears, Carvell, Monagahan, Westwood is going to have a pretty good chance of winning something no matter who is coaching them. The side he took over is not the side he is coaching now.

Smith took over from Lowes in time to face Leeds in Round 4 after Warrington had opened with 3 losses. Leeds won a tight game 20 -14 but only after Chris Riley had coughed up a kick return after a great kick-chase and jarring tackle by Jones-Buchanan, allowing McGuire to score the winner unopposed.

The following week was Warrington's rock bottom where they were stuffed 60 - 8 away at Harlequins and Matt King responded to the away support with an ill-advised gesture.

They won the following week at home to Hull KR and ended the season in 10th winning just over half of their remaining fixtures. They also took out the Challenge Cup so obviously five more wins there.

2010 - Another Challenge Cup triumph and a 7 place improvement in SL to finish the Regular Rounds in 3rd.

2011 - Finishing 1st while recording the biggest pts difference in a SL season.

A just reward for investment, management and coaching. 10th to 1st in two seasons is the kind of meteoric rise sadly lacking in SL but well done to Warrington - pity they're aren't more clubs out there capable of this.

I think thats a little misleading. Warrington were a club set up for success. I think even an average coach would have taken Warrington on a rise which could be described as 'meteoric' after the disasters which were Cullen and Lowes and with the talent at Smiths disposal. But it did take a very good coach to actually get them winning something. I'm interested in what happens over the next two or three seasons with Wire, because I dont think its beyond the realms of possibility that Smith under-achieved with Leeds. Both Wigan and Wire imo, show signs of hitting the same wall Leeds did last year and their success wont have the same longevity we did so well to achieve.
That isnt to denigrate what Wire have done however, i wish all our clubs could show the same level of ambition and follow through Wire have. Im just questioning Smiths part in it. Has he been particularly lucky in getting Hudds on the cusp of a sugar daddy, and two teams in Leeds and Wire which needed simply the finishing touches to success?

It details the position (on the field) that Smith took over in 2009. They'd lost the opening 3 rounds (26-14 at St Helens - respectable, 20-40 home to Les Catalans - warning bells - 48-22 at Belle Vue - call the paramedics) his arrival had an immediate impact when facing the reigning Champions followed by hitting rock bottom the following week highlighting the enormity of the task in hand. The recovery from the 0 from 5 start in 2009 (without the benefit of a pre-season) was a very reasonable first step with the Challenge Cup bagged along the way.

Warrington, have always been a top division side that I can recall and have always looked capable of mounting a challenge but their League placings in the SL Era (prior to Smith's appointment) says it all: 5, 9, 10, 7, 6, 7, 10, 6, 8, 4, 6, 7, 6, Smith 10 +CC, 3+CC, 1

Such as been their mid-table mediocrity that it has taken till this fantastic season to virtually reach parity in the SL Regular Rounds:

Played 428, Won 209 (49%), Drew 6 (1%), Lost 213 (50%), Pts For 10953, Pts Agst 10929, Pts Diff 24, Avg Scr (25.59 - 25.54)

There is a line at the end that covers the transformation of Warrington spearheaded by the appointment of Smith, 'a just reward for investment, management and coaching.' Not all of the vast improvement in performance, mental attitude and consistency is attributable to the coach but a good deal of it is IMO. Whether those levels can be sustained going forward is yet to be seen but the base is now there when previously it was missing.

In 2006 some peeps on here were claiming smith was some kind of evil dictator now he's the lord of all creation.

Again the nonsense about how we'd have won the GF under DP? Unbelievable.

Could not agree more. The leap between what was served up under Powell to the stuff we produced under Smith was enourmous. Powell simply didn't have 'it' as a coach. For whatever reason.

There is a difference between winning the GF and the way that Smith did it, as you say.

Powell would have won the GF in 2004, just about any coach would have took that side to winning the GF in 2004. They wouldn't however have done it in the same style, or dominated for as long.

It's not hard to differentiate the difference.

No he wouldn't and no they wouldn't.

Yes he would and yes they would. Anyone can play that childish game.

I'd agree that we improved hugely in 2004. But I doubt whether Smith would've been any more successful than Powell was in 2003, had he taken over a year earlier. For me, a group of talented young players was just a little bit green that year. I'm not sure Smith, or anyone else, could have made things happen faster than they did.

No they can't.

More seriously, as stated above, I don't believe Powell would have won the grand final with Leeds in 04. Neither of us can prove our positions though, so they remain opinion. Happy to agree to disagree.

On Smith, he has coached two clubs, in Leeds and Wire, who were similar in that the resources were in place to win things, but who had consistently failed to deliver the silverware theose resources demanded. In both cases he won major silverware in his first full season. Could be coincidence. Personally I don't think so. He's not the Messiah, he's not Watne Bennett, but he is a very good coach. IMO, obviously.

Ok, only you and King Whino can play the childish game then.

Leeds did not have the mental edge to win the title with Powell as coach as evidenced by the results against the Bulls in 2003. Powell is the perfect example of the difference a coach can make.

I'll flip this around. Leeds would have won their first title in 2003 if Smith was coach instead of Powell.

Pretty soon the posters who discredit Smith will run out of excuses. His record speaks for itself and cannot be argued with.

He was also well liked by his players, despite what some on here would have you believe. Contrast what they said publicly about him when he left with what they have been saying about Bluey.

There is no "evidence". Are you seriously suggesting that the year extra the players had at super league, and the experience of been in a Challenge cup final and losing GF eliminator, did not better preparte them for the following season?



He'd have done the exact same achievement as Powell in 2003. I still maintain had the Walker and Bailey incident not come up, Powell would have succeeded that year. That team got stronger and stronger through the year, and as the players grew with one another gaining more experience.



This is your problem, and yours only. There is a difference between not recognising what Smith did for this club and the achievements he made, and saying that we would have won in 2004 anyway.

Smith developed the team superbly. He played a superb blend of rugby, and he made Leeds into a dominant force for a lasting period. That still does not take away that in 2004 Leeds had a team of players that were far better than the competition with or without Smith. Smith's legacy for me is the style of rugby and the development of players giving Leeds a dominant period to look back on, rather than credited with winning our first championship in 32 years.

They were better "preparted" in 2004 because they had a better coach "preparting" them.

Your opinion. You're entitled to it. However, since 2003 Smith has won two SL titles, two challenge cups and to league leaders shield. Those are facts,. Powell has yet to prove your opinion of what he can do is valid. When he had the opportunity, he didn't do it.

That team could not get over the hump of the Bulls that year with our without Bailey and Walker. I still maintain Smith would have gotten them over that hump,

Eh?

Ok, and?

Actually, it's both.

Actually, if we want to compare properly. Powell took over a complete shambles of a side in 2002, with specific instructions to get rid of the deadwood, and develop the brilliant youngsters coming through. IMO he was aided here by a pretty bad injury crisis in 2002 and the pressure off him, which gave him the opportunity to blood those great youngsters.

In 2003 he had to run with those players, and he had got rid of deadwood and dressing room trouble. Those players grew together superbly and got stronger and stronger and stronger as the year went on. Putting away any agendas and bias, had it been any other ref than Russell Smith at the Millenium stadium that year, Leeds would have walked away with a CC win. As I said even after that the team kept getting stronger, then had two majory players in that season pulled away from them at the business end of the season.

Funny enough what happened with Walker and Bailey, the squad actually came out and said made them stronger and wiser. So in the long term it aided the development of young players at the club.

Now compare and contrast. Smith went to Warrington when it was a shambles, he had to get rid of deadwood, but with the added aid of massive investment from a rich chairman. On top of this he also had to develop young players. Smith's first year in the league was worse than Powells first. Smith's second year was a mirror image of Powells second year. Smith's 3rd year, well that's a mirror image of his first at ours, which would have been Powells 3rd.

There is absolutely no evidence what so ever that Smith would have improved on Powells 2003 year.

The only evidence that IMO isn't even subjective, and one I think we agree on, is that Smiths quality of rugby that he got his team to play was of a quality that any coach would have struggled to match, and Powell probably certainly would not have got close to.