RugbyRebels

Simply hypothesis:

In order to get back into the England test side Sam Simmonds needs to first move from playing no.8 at club level and convert himself into Exeter’s openside?

Discuss....

That would require Exeter to completely change the way they use the pack.

If he does all the things you want from a 7, then the number on his back during club matches really doesn't matter.

Which Tyler wrote:That would require Exeter to completely change the way they use the pack.

If he does all the things you want from a 7, then the number on his back during club matches really doesn't matter.

Exactly.

I suppose for the sake of his career, that sort of enlightened view needs to be shared by Jones. Unfortunately, Jones's dismissal of Armand's cause might suggest otherwise. A cynic might advise the pair to swap numbers, carry on as they are and see if any of the international coaching crew notices.

Personally I don’t see him playing much for England.

It’s sad but I can see him ending up in the same category as Thacker.

It’s nothing to do with the number and everything to do with the systems Exeter and England play.

Baxter typically plays with his 6 at 7, his 7 at 8 and his 8 at 6. This seems to be designed to support a very structured multi-phase gameplan where each player has pretty specific roles assigned for when/where they are used for each play.

England don’t play that way so I think there’s almost 0 chance we’d switch it around to accommodate Simmonds. I think he’s a great player, but not so great that I’d build my England back row to suit the way he plays.

He’s an option at 7 more in the mould of Michal Hooper, but then he’s competing with Tom Curry, Underhill and Ludlam at the very least, not to mention other options such as Willis, Earl and Ben Curry.

Tigersman wrote:Personally I don’t see him playing much for England.

It’s sad but I can see him ending up in the same category as Thacker.

I agree that his England chances may be limited but I wouldn’t compare him with Thacker (who definitely is too small). Sure he’s small for an 8 compared to the likes of Billy or Vermeulen but 1. he’s not really a traditional 8 and 2. most teams aren’t really playing massive beasts at 8 any more. It seems to be evolving in to a 3rd flanker role really.

Scrumhead wrote:It’s nothing to do with the number and everything to do with the systems Exeter and England play.

Baxter typically plays with his 6 at 7, his 7 at 8 and his 8 at 6. This seems to be designed to support a very structured multi-phase gameplan where each player has pretty specific roles assigned for when/where they are used for each play.

England don’t play that way so I think there’s almost 0 chance we’d switch it around to accommodate Simmonds. I think he’s a great player, but not so great that I’d build my England back row to suit the way he plays.

He’s an option at 7 more in the mould of Michal Hooper, but then he’s competing with Tom Curry, Underhill and Ludlam at the very least, not to mention other options such as Willis, Earl and Ben Curry.

Ah. The Andy Robinson model.

Not sure how you see it as Ewers playing like a 7 though? Unless you just mean a Hask role of boshing the first ruck and not worrying about much else.

It's futile that any of us even attempt to have this conversation but I agree it's far more about the structure/roles/balance of a particular backrow than whether Simmonds can play flanker. Didn't NZ rotate their classic backrow once against one of the minnows, to have 6. McCaw 7. So'iaolo 8. Collins, just for a laugh?

I wonder if Simmonds can throw in a lineout?

Simmonds is clearly too short to be a forward, and thus should retrain as a 9 or a 12

Digby wrote:Simmonds is clearly too short to be a forward, and thus should retrain as a 9 or a 12

Has he got Italian blood in him, then?

Scrumhead wrote:It’s nothing to do with the number and everything to do with the systems Exeter and England play.

Baxter typically plays with his 6 at 7, his 7 at 8 and his 8 at 6. This seems to be designed to support a very structured multi-phase gameplan where each player has pretty specific roles assigned for when/where they are used for each play.

England don’t play that way so I think there’s almost 0 chance we’d switch it around to accommodate Simmonds. I think he’s a great player, but not so great that I’d build my England back row to suit the way he plays.

He’s an option at 7 more in the mould of Michal Hooper, but then he’s competing with Tom Curry, Underhill and Ludlam at the very least, not to mention other options such as Willis, Earl and Ben Curry.

Has Simmonds not earned all his caps at 8? I accept your points but I just wonder about Simmonds being, at the very least, an alternative to Wilson as the backrower on the bench. I don't like the idea of having to do a shuffle when the replacement is made and prefer a bench man who can play in any of the three positions. In the last 20, for example, replacing a tiring Billy V with Simmonds has merit. His raw pace against a tiring team might add something different.

Oakboy wrote:

Digby wrote:Simmonds is clearly too short to be a forward, and thus should retrain as a 9 or a 12

Has he got Italian blood in him, then?

Mostly I was just trying to get into the spirit of the thread

Simmonds has a very specific skill set which fits exeter's game plan really well as explained by scrumhead. I don't see it working at test level.

We need to be looking for a guy who can compliment curry/underhill/willis. To me that is a large physical ball carrier who can generate go forward in tight spaces. I'm not sure there really is any one currently, but billy is still only what 28/29(?) so no real rush.

I don't see what Simmonds offers working too well given England's tactics so far, but there's surely no requirement we can't try to do something different?

twitchy wrote:Simmonds has a very specific skill set which fits exeter's game plan really well as explained by scrumhead. I don't see it working at test level.

We need to be looking for a guy who can compliment curry/underhill/willis. To me that is a large physical ball carrier who can generate go forward in tight spaces. I'm not sure there really is any one currently, but billy is still only what 28/29(?) so no real rush.

Problem I have is that Billy is coasting imo and is increasingly looking like a latter day version of Deano or even Easter. Understand he’s best in heavy traffic however I feel in many ways he’s slightly overrated, by the cognescenti in the same way Farrell is as well as being slightly overweight, on the slow trundling side for a backrow and arguably has a less than wholehearted approach to diet (given Jones’ quip about his liking for the odd bacon sandwich or 3 ). Would like to see a much quicker and more athletic alternative starting in 6 Nations (and it would help if they were a lineout target too so I’m not advocating Simmonds for the 8 shirt).

Mikey Brown wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:It’s nothing to do with the number and everything to do with the systems Exeter and England play.

Baxter typically plays with his 6 at 7, his 7 at 8 and his 8 at 6. This seems to be designed to support a very structured multi-phase gameplan where each player has pretty specific roles assigned for when/where they are used for each play.

England don’t play that way so I think there’s almost 0 chance we’d switch it around to accommodate Simmonds. I think he’s a great player, but not so great that I’d build my England back row to suit the way he plays.

He’s an option at 7 more in the mould of Michal Hooper, but then he’s competing with Tom Curry, Underhill and Ludlam at the very least, not to mention other options such as Willis, Earl and Ben Curry.

Ah. The Andy Robinson model.

Not sure how you see it as Ewers playing like a 7 though? Unless you just mean a Hask role of boshing the first ruck and not worrying about much else.

It's futile that any of us even attempt to have this conversation but I agree it's far more about the structure/roles/balance of a particular backrow than whether Simmonds can play flanker. Didn't NZ rotate their classic backrow once against one of the minnows, to have 6. McCaw 7. So'iaolo 8. Collins, just for a laugh?

I wonder if Simmonds can throw in a lineout?

I’m not? Ewers is the 8 playing at 6, Armand or Vermeulen (who are both 6s) play at 7 and Simmonds and Kvesic (who are really 7s) play at 8.

But for Exeter’s system, most coaches would pick it as Armand/Vermeulen at 6 Simmonds/Kvesic at 7 and Ewers at 8.

Exe see Simmonds as an 8, though as noted above, its what players do rather than what number they wear that is the most important thing.
Is he an option for England? Certainly, though that would depend on who else you employed in your pack and in particular your back row mix.
It might be that his opportunities will be limited given the other back row options we have. Lets see how his season goes. He lost most of a year to injury but if he can get back to where he was before injury he is sure to attract attention.

twitchy wrote:Simmonds has a very specific skill set which fits exeter's game plan really well as explained by scrumhead. I don't see it working at test level.

We need to be looking for a guy who can compliment curry/underhill/willis. To me that is a large physical ball carrier who can generate go forward in tight spaces. I'm not sure there really is any one currently, but billy is still only what 28/29(?) so no real rush.

He’s just turned 27.

To get the most out of Simmonds you need to get him carrying the ball lots. And then you need enough heavy duty carriers that Simmonds can do most of his carrying slightly wider.

If you can achieve that then he could be a huge asset. As ever it’s the balance of the pack/team that’s important.

Personally I’d have a few others ahead of him, just for those balance reasons.

Scrumhead wrote:It’s nothing to do with the number and everything to do with the systems Exeter and England play.

Baxter typically plays with his 6 at 7, his 7 at 8 and his 8 at 6. This seems to be designed to support a very structured multi-phase gameplan where each player has pretty specific roles assigned for when/where they are used for each play.

England don’t play that way so I think there’s almost 0 chance we’d switch it around to accommodate Simmonds. I think he’s a great player, but not so great that I’d build my England back row to suit the way he plays.

He’s an option at 7 more in the mould of Michal Hooper, but then he’s competing with Tom Curry, Underhill and Ludlam at the very least, not to mention other options such as Willis, Earl and Ben Curry.

who?

Scrumhead wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Scrumhead wrote:It’s nothing to do with the number and everything to do with the systems Exeter and England play.

Baxter typically plays with his 6 at 7, his 7 at 8 and his 8 at 6. This seems to be designed to support a very structured multi-phase gameplan where each player has pretty specific roles assigned for when/where they are used for each play.

England don’t play that way so I think there’s almost 0 chance we’d switch it around to accommodate Simmonds. I think he’s a great player, but not so great that I’d build my England back row to suit the way he plays.

He’s an option at 7 more in the mould of Michal Hooper, but then he’s competing with Tom Curry, Underhill and Ludlam at the very least, not to mention other options such as Willis, Earl and Ben Curry.

Ah. The Andy Robinson model.

Not sure how you see it as Ewers playing like a 7 though? Unless you just mean a Hask role of boshing the first ruck and not worrying about much else.

It's futile that any of us even attempt to have this conversation but I agree it's far more about the structure/roles/balance of a particular backrow than whether Simmonds can play flanker. Didn't NZ rotate their classic backrow once against one of the minnows, to have 6. McCaw 7. So'iaolo 8. Collins, just for a laugh?

I wonder if Simmonds can throw in a lineout?

I’m not? Ewers is the 8 playing at 6, Armand or Vermeulen (who are both 6s) play at 7 and Simmonds and Kvesic (who are really 7s) play at 8.

But for Exeter’s system, most coaches would pick it as Armand/Vermeulen at 6 Simmonds/Kvesic at 7 and Ewers at 8.

Ah. Read that as his 6 plays the 7 role. So Ewers really is the Martin Corry shifted from 8 to blindside in this scenario.

Anyway, back to Jamie Forrester and whether he's got enough dog to play 8 in an Eddie Jones team.

Timbo wrote:To get the most out of Simmonds you need to get him carrying the ball lots. And then you need enough heavy duty carriers that Simmonds can do most of his carrying slightly wider.

If you can achieve that then he could be a huge asset. As ever it’s the balance of the pack/team that’s important.

Personally I’d have a few others ahead of him, just for those balance reasons.

That's the issue isn't it. Basically building up a pack around him. I don't think his attacking abilities are all that game breaking as to justify it.

Raggs wrote:

Timbo wrote:To get the most out of Simmonds you need to get him carrying the ball lots. And then you need enough heavy duty carriers that Simmonds can do most of his carrying slightly wider.

If you can achieve that then he could be a huge asset. As ever it’s the balance of the pack/team that’s important.

Personally I’d have a few others ahead of him, just for those balance reasons.

That's the issue isn't it. Basically building up a pack around him. I don't think his attacking abilities are all that game breaking as to justify it.

Certainly nothing clear on that front yet. There are more soft edges to a defence in the club game, and stepping up to test level might be beyond what he offers. That said it's often hard to get a read on a player until they've played 10-15 games and had a chance to find their feet, process the reduced time and so on. If we're sticking with an attack game based on man go smash then there seems little point in looking

jngf wrote:

twitchy wrote:Simmonds has a very specific skill set which fits exeter's game plan really well as explained by scrumhead. I don't see it working at test level.

We need to be looking for a guy who can compliment curry/underhill/willis. To me that is a large physical ball carrier who can generate go forward in tight spaces. I'm not sure there really is any one currently, but billy is still only what 28/29(?) so no real rush.

Problem I have is that Billy is coasting imo and is increasingly looking like a latter day version of Deano or even Easter. Understand he’s best in heavy traffic however I feel in many ways he’s slightly overrated, by the cognescenti in the same way Farrell is as well as being slightly overweight, on the slow trundling side for a backrow and arguably has a less than wholehearted approach to diet (given Jones’ quip about his liking for the odd bacon sandwich or 3 ). Would like to see a much quicker and more athletic alternative starting in 6 Nations (and it would help if they were a lineout target too so I’m not advocating Simmonds for the 8 shirt).

Seriously?

Banquo wrote:

jngf wrote:

twitchy wrote:Simmonds has a very specific skill set which fits exeter's game plan really well as explained by scrumhead. I don't see it working at test level.

We need to be looking for a guy who can compliment curry/underhill/willis. To me that is a large physical ball carrier who can generate go forward in tight spaces. I'm not sure there really is any one currently, but billy is still only what 28/29(?) so no real rush.

Problem I have is that Billy is coasting imo and is increasingly looking like a latter day version of Deano or even Easter. Understand he’s best in heavy traffic however I feel in many ways he’s slightly overrated, by the cognescenti in the same way Farrell is as well as being slightly overweight, on the slow trundling side for a backrow and arguably has a less than wholehearted approach to diet (given Jones’ quip about his liking for the odd bacon sandwich or 3 ). Would like to see a much quicker and more athletic alternative starting in 6 Nations (and it would help if they were a lineout target too so I’m not advocating Simmonds for the 8 shirt).

Seriously?

If he looks like Easter or Deano we can agree he has a problem

Your perfect candidate sounds like it might be He Man.