I just want to point out the most important statistics under Brian McDermott:

in 1.5 seasons

1 Super League Title
2 Challenge Cup Finals, 1 to play, 1 lost on some very dodgy refereeing

yes, we've had some bad results (away at Stains, home to Pies), but we've had some great ones (last weekend, Wire semi last year). When it matters, we have been able to play rugby at a higher level than any other team in Super League.

Contrast this to McClennan: Blown off the park by Wire in the 2010 CC final, couldn't live with Wigan in the playoffs semi in 2010. Out of the CC in 2008 & 2009.

So far under BMD we have contested every major final available. And I'd put money on us continuing that record this year. And that's what matters.

thats not what this is about. i suggest you read peter smiths excellant piece in tonights evening post

I think it's worth taking into account that league form and finishing position have been more than a good indicator of who is going to be in the GF and who isn't since the 1998 GF debut. On only 2 occaisions have a team from outside the top 2 won the title, and you could say that this Leeds team would be the one you would think could pull off a win from 5th given their pedigree. And as we know when the Bulls did it they benefitted from a Saints team missing key players thanks to Terry Newton in the semi and they breached the cap as well.

So, was last year a "one off" or the "shape of things to come"? Maybe the change to the playoff system has made it more likely that a team can come through from outside the top 2, maybe last year was an anomoly and playing poorly for large parts of the season and finishing outside the top 2 is going to be as unproductive as it's been for the seasons 1998 to 2010.

I also think that in the past Leeds have been able to underperform yet have still been a level above the opposition, I also think back to certain seasons where fringe players in the squad such as Liam Botham, would come into the team and actually rise up to match the established players. Botham, as an example, had many fine games for Leeds and did some good things. It's much better when guys like that go up a level when they get their chance rather than the rest of the team dropping down a level when not at full strength.

League form has imo, has to be a major target for all clubs in pre-season preparation and planning - i'd be surprised if it wasn't.

I read it and get what he's saying. The only thing I'd argue with is that he seems to imply Leeds' success has been built solely on big game performance. I'd say the opposite, Leeds's success has been built on consistancy. Top 2 placings 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009 and then the stones to get nto the GF and win it 4out of 5 years in that period. The confidence the boys got in 2004 after the dissapointment of 2003 was built on finishing top by a record margin, it enabled them to cope with the loss to the Bulls in the first playoff game and then still have the mental strength to see off a strong Wigan and then take the Bulls in the final.
I'd go further and say that all that league consistancy in the past was money in the bank and gave the big names at our club, who have been through all that, the deep down core strength to do what we did last year. Saints had it too - a relatively poor campaign for them, being overshadowed by Wigan in 2010 and Warrington now league leaders would have finished most teams, but they were strong enough to beat Wigan twice and claw their way back to Old Trafford, just like we did.
I don't believe any other team finishing 5th would have done what we did last year - except maybe Saints - the two most [iconsistant[/i teams of the last 9 or 10 seasons.

Leeds may well do it again this year, we have some of the most gifted, competitive, intelligent and skillful players I've ever seen in a Leeds shirt. Sinfield, Peacock, McGuire, Burrow and the rest really are that good. Who knows, if we hadn't lost Peacock and McGuire at the end of 2010 we may have been going for our 6th in a row this year.

Im saying the opposite mate. We should be aiming for top two.

Not arguing there, I know where you're coming from, I also happen to think league form is a target for all teams with ambitions of lifting the championship trophy, not just something the fans want to see. How much did the boys want to finish top in 2009 after comments made about them "upsetting the odds" in 2007 and 2008 - and that was after leading the league for much of both those years and ending up 2nd FFS!

I'm not a fan of the argument that goes along the lines of "do you want A. up and down league form and a win in the GF or B. good league form and no trophy at the end". History shows that good league form is usually one of the requirements for winning the championship - ie. finishing top 2. It's usually the case that you get C. good league form and a trophy.
This Leeds team is a bit special, last year it messed up the stats a bit thankfully. Or there is the possibility that messing about with the playoff system year after year has finally proved to be a disaster and the regular season now does actually mean nothing as long as you finish top 8.

I would like a 12 team league and a top 5 play off. Far to many meaningless games nowadays and the standard is poor. I can hardly remember more than 4 or 5 good games all season

Genuine question.

If (...and it's a very big IF) we were to win the Challenge Cup this year would we be triple Champions being the reigning World Club Champions, reigning Super League Champions and Challenge Cup winners? Or do you have to achieve all three in the same year?

We would be "Triple Champs/Holders" until of course the GF was won by someone different.
Saying that though to do the "Triple" you'd have to win ALL 3 in the same season imo if that makes sense!

Four trophies available, standard grand slam rules apply I believe

DHM makes some good points. I agree with most he said. We certainly have proved to be consistent over the years. This certainly is a very special and gifted side. I'm sure the glory days aren't over yet.
I think the problem still lies in the poor quality of the opposition making it possible to loose so many games yet eventually still end up with honours. If the competition ever does become more even then the need to focus on winning consistently throughout the season will become more important.
But will such as Cas, wakey, wildness and London ever really be that good on a regular basis?

Are you saying we are not aiming to be in the top two?

Where did i say that? Its impossible to go flat out all year. Its my opinion leeds are happy with top four and are aiming to hit the end of season in form, with momentum and as fresh as possible. Nothing wrong with that, they find it works for them. Tony smith has continually rested his older players so they do the same.

Well then we agree. IMO it is easier to rest your top players when the side is on form and the reserves, particularly the youngsters, have a better chance to gain confidence at the higher level. The battle-hardened experienced first teamers are better equipped mentally to come through a trough in performance and play themselves back into form. If we now retain the good form I would not be suprised to see the odd oldie rested over the next few weeks. But first we have to beat Bradford.