Exeter Rhino wrote:
Anyone think Lowes would have been a better replacement for Noble than McNamara?
Lowes didn't work out for Warrington but that situation was rather different to Bradford's. Lowes seems tougher and more inspirational than McNamara. For example, I can't imagine Lowes would let the likes of Tanya Arnold get under his skin, as McNamara did in a post-match interview after his famous 30 point capitulation against the Catalans in the CC (I forget the year!).
Didn't Lowesy also have some time at Salford [?] before Wire? To be honest, he didn't break any pots [or win any..] at either of his early appointments so, when you add in the time he's spent at Leeds RU, you'd have to suggest he's had a bit of a necessary learning curve, which we're currently benefitting from.
There are two points from your post, firstly as I mention in the first paragraph, the short answer is probably not. There was also far too much off-field action at the time of McNamara's time at the Bulls, not least the fact that the money had run out and players were having to be sold to [almost] balance the books, so it would have been an unattractive appointment for any rookie coach and it's very difficult to be emphatic and say Jimmy would have had any more success at the time.
Secondly, and I don't
really want to broach the subject, but we shouldn't get
too carried away with what Jimmy has done. He's been in charge for a couple of months and got 10 out of 10, but it is just a couple of months - so it's a good start but there is still a long way to go and no one is counting chickens - though it's very fair to say most fans are now looking a lot more optimistically at the future, which is a nice change.
