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.