Exeter chiefs 2017/18 season thread. Chance to top the premiership.

[BPM]

Yeah - that’s the sort of lineup I’m expecting.

You could play your U15 side and beat Quins at the moment.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Cordero seems to finally be gaining real confidence at the Chiefs. I’m really hoping we give him a run at FB but I can’t see Baxter risking it in the semis. Really want him to stay on for a bit longer; we’ve really wasted his talent since he’s been here.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

Cordero signed on for another year

 

[Chief Pete]

Great news....

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

A serious change up is needed at Exeter Chiefs. We’ve gotten ourselves into the unfortunate situation of having a good squad. In some ways, this is actually a worse position to be in than the likes of Bath, Northampton, Harlequins etc. Those teams don’t have good squads, they have squads with some very good players and some poor players. For them, that’s really not such a bad thing as it gives them specific areas in which to build. For example, Bath have some very good players in their starting XV; the likes of Obano, Ewels, Louw, Underhill, Faletau, Joseph, Rokoduguni and Watson, as well as Cokonasiga coming in who are all in the international, or in the case of Faletau, world class bracket. However where they fall short is in their lack of quality players in other key positions; tighthead, scrum half, fly half, inside centre, as well as depth on the bench. That’s ok for them as the management know that those are the areas in which they need to strength their side. Chiefs face the opposite issue in that in a starting XV (Hepburn, Cowan-Dickie, Williams, Lees, Hill, Ewers, Armand, Simmonds, White, Simmonds, Woodburn, Hill, Slade, Nowell, Turner) there is no weak link, however there are also very few players that can be considered to be in the international bracket and none that are anything resembling world class. What this means is that it makes it very hard for us to improve our XV or target particular areas in which we need improvement. For this reason we’re doomed to remain as a good side, while never being able to truly challenge the top tier of European rugby such as Leinster or Saracens, packed with world class players. There are a few ways in which we can improve on this:

Firstly, we desperately need to cut down the size of our squad. We have 60 senior players. Saracens (who are the benchmark of English rugby) have a squad of ~40 players. As a rough breakdown of squad numbers:

Exeter Saracens Difference

Hooker 6 4 2

Prop 10 6 4

Lock 10 5 5

Back Row 10 10 0

Scrum Half 4 5 -1

Fly Half 3 2 1

Centre 8 4 4

Back Three 9 6 3


Now let’s look at the extra players included in the ‘Difference’ of each position:

Hooker: Paul Davis, Shaun Malton. Neither have gotten any game time in the Prem, Europe or LV this season

Prop: Billy Keast, Jack Owlett, Marcus Street, Moray Low. None have started, only Street and Low have gotten any Premiership game time, Keast hasn’t even appeared in the LV.

Lock: Holmes, Caufield, Atkins, Lonsdale, van der Sluys. None have appeared in the Premiership or Europe. Have gathered only a handful of minutes between them in the LV.

Fly Half: Harvey Skinner. No time in the Premiership, Europe or LV.

Centre: Strong, Laverick, Hendrickson, Campagnaro. Only Hendrickson has had game time in the Premiership and it’s only been off of the bench.

Back Three: Cully, Bodily, O’Flaherty. Only Bodily got a couple of starts at the start of the season in the Prem and O’Flaherty has had one off of the bench. Cully hasn’t appeared in the LV.


So basically, Chiefs have a lot of players that between them will be taking up a large chunk of the salary cap that contribute nothing to our goals in the Premiership or Europe. At least we get to dominate the LV though, the mark of truly great club… Ultimately the cap would be much better spent on bringing in top tier players, which brings me onto the next point.

Identifying our weaknesses. Obviously the entirety of the Chiefs setup can’t be replaced so we need to find out the key areas in our 23 that need improving on. So, assuming a first choice 23 of:

1. Alec Hepburn 9. Nic White 16. Jack Yeandle

2. Luke Cowan-Dickie 10. Joe Simmonds 17. Ben Moon

3. Harry Williams 11. Olly Woodburn 18. Tomas Francis

4. Mitch Lees 12. Sam Hill 19. Sam Skinner

5. Jonny Hill 13. Henry Slade 20. Thomas Waldrom

6. Dave Ewers 14. Jack Nowell 21. Stuart Townsend

7. Don Armand 15. Lachlan Turner 22. Gareth Steenson

8. Sam Simmonds 23. Ian Whitten

What are the primary weaknesses? What I thought was glaringly obvious today was our lack of ability to go forward or break the line. With that in mind, I’d say that our weaknesses come in the second row, the back row and at fullback. Lees and Hill are both good players, Hill having just been included in the England squad and Lees having previously toured with the Saxons. However neither are anything special. Lees is a seriously big unit but as Jack Yeandle once said about him “he has tits on his back, he’s more than curvaceous.” At 122kg he’s enormous but a large amount of that is fat and at second row that has serious drawbacks. He’s a poor lineout option, as evidenced today by him having the ball stolen from him in a 5 metre lineout today. He’s also got poor fitness and lacks technical ability at breakdown. When compared to the modern breed of locks; Itoje, Kruis, Launchbury etc. Lees looks more like the kind of player you find in a local clubs 2nd XV. Hill is the better of the two, but still has his flaws. He’s almost the binary opposite of Lees in that he’s very tall and very fit, making a great lineout option and has good workrate around the pitch, however he lacks size and so is no real threat ball in hand or at the breakdown. Of the two, Hill is the one who should be kept around. Lees has been good to the club but he’s not up to the standard of a club who should be aiming to win Europe. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; we should go in for Attwood. He’s been tearing up trees at Toulon and Bath don’t seem too keen on getting him back. He’d fit in brilliantly to the Chiefs style of play; big and physical. Skinner looks good but will never be anywhere near the level of Itoje or Kruis, or even Attwood for that matter. Then the back row. It may come as a surprise to many to name this as one of our areas of weakness, but it is. People often talk about Ewers and Armand as being these giant ball carriers who are unstoppable in contact. For a 125kg behemoth, Ewers goes nowhere and Armand tends to carry too high and rarely gains much yardage. He’s far more effective carrying in the wide channels. When you combine that with the 103kg Simmonds, our back row lacks any real go forward. I’m a big fan of Ewers but at 27 he’s not getting any younger and really isn’t the player people make him out to be. I’d keep him on the bench, but a shuffle in the starters is needed. Armand is a 6 and should play there, while Simmonds should move to 7 to make way for a real ball carrier at 8. We’ve been linked to Morgan and he’d be a great coop for us. Beyond that there’s a ton of talent at 8 in NZ and SA that’s unlikely to be used by the national teams. There may be scouting opportunities down there. Finally, fullback. Our back line lacks X Factor and the most glaring weakness is at fullback. We haven’t re-signed Turner and Dollman is just average. This problem should be easily fixed considering we have Cordero in our squad but Baxter seems reluctant to use him at FB. Obviously these aren’t the only changes that need to be made and they aren’t going to catapult us into European contention but they’re a start. We’ve made the Prem Final 3 years running and if we cut our squad down we should be able to offer a hefty amount so should be able to tempt players towards us.

Finally, our game plan. Our attack revolves around keeping the ball for as long as possible and crashing the ball towards one touchline before passing it 40 metres deep to the other wing to try and find holes. There is no fundamental issue with this idea however our execution is poor. Passing the ball deep is perfectly fine as long as you use that depth to come onto it at pace, but somehow players are still static when they receive the ball. That should be easily rectified. Just run onto the ball. The other issue is the previously discussed lack of ball carriers to gain real yards when we’re going through the crash portion of the plan. Bringing in a more threatening fullback would also mean that we could take advantage of a stretched defence. At the moment the lack of individual threats means that defences can rush up on us without worrying about being beaten on the outside or through a dog leg.

Obviously these changes can’t be implemented immediately and will be gradual over time but ultimately they need to be implemented for us to become the best club in England and Europe.

 

[Scotty]

I never realised our squad was that big, agree it needs cutting down. Glad cordero is staying but not really a fan of cuthbert coming in. With a squad like ours made of solid players i disagree we are in a bad place, i think a much better place than the likes of bath, we have a consistant winning side so now we need to get rid of some players and buy some top quality forwards who carry hard and break the gainline. Ewers is targeted but when he does make a break he has a good pass/offload. I dont know who we could sign though

hepburn lcd williams(when fit) im happy with as our first choice

Hill skinner second row but both young and need a replacement for lees now

Ewers Armand simmonds 3 great players in their own right but with waldrom off we need another big carrier.

So we need a FB lock No8(specialist no8 not a back rower). Would have liked woodward at FB when he was available before gloucester but oh well

 

[Scotty]

So season over, i started this thread saying we should top the prem, play offs anything can happen but over the course of the season we did it.

So for next season have your say, who should we be signing? Who should be dropped, pointless signings, tweak to coaching staff or anything else? What is needed to top and win next years as well as be competitive in europe.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

Would also suggest getting rid of Francis and bringing in another TH.

 

[BPM]

Some interesting stuff here ...

I think the biggest difference would be successfully implementing a plan B. As I said earlier in the thread, I think Baxter is trying to do this either through introducing different types of players from the academy (Simmonds x2) or through signings such as Cordero. A fit Devoto and Campagnaro also offer more x-factor in midfield than the willing but limited Hill and Whitten.

The squad definitely needs to be trimmed. It feels like there’s a good chunk there who just aren’t to become Premiership players.

Signings need to be definite upgrades and I think the suggestions of Attwood and Morgan would be ideal as they are both proven at the highest level and would fit Chiefs’ gameplan pretty much straight off the bat.

I think the general formula for a successful/balanced squad for a top club should be a test class first choice (not necessarily a current test player), a solid Premiership performer as an understudy, a promising young player pushing them and a quality veteran (a Waldrom type) here and there.

Chiefs kind of have this, but the balance is off in certain spots.

I’d prioritise another hooker (I’m not convinced Innard is Premiership standard, albeit it’s limited evidence). Two locks - a first choice to replace Lees and a better squad option than the likes of Freeman, Atkins etc. A number 8 to replace Waldrom and back up 10 - probably someone with decent top level experience but who is OK to play second-fiddle to Simmonds/Steenson.

I’d have to have a think about specific players though ...

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

Some interesting stuff here ...

I think the biggest difference would be successfully implementing a plan B. As I said earlier in the thread, I think Baxter is trying to do this either through introducing different types of players from the academy (Simmonds x2) or through signings such as Cordero. A fit Devoto and Campagnaro also offer more x-factor in midfield than the willing but limited Hill and Whitten.

The squad definitely needs to be trimmed. It feels like there’s a good chunk there who just aren’t to become Premiership players.

Signings need to be definite upgrades and I think the suggestions of Attwood and Morgan would be ideal as they are both proven at the highest level and would fit Chiefs’ gameplan pretty much straight off the bat.

I think the general formula for a successful/balanced squad for a top club should be a test class first choice (not necessarily a current test player), a solid Premiership performer as an understudy, a promising young player pushing them and a quality veteran (a Waldrom type) here and there.

Chiefs kind of have this, but the balance is off in certain spots.

I’d prioritise another hooker (I’m not convinced Innard is Premiership standard, albeit it’s limited evidence). Two locks - a first choice to replace Lees and a better squad option than the likes of Freeman, Atkins etc. A number 8 to replace Waldrom and back up 10 - probably someone with decent top level experience but who is OK to play second-fiddle to Simmonds/Steenson.

I’d have to have a think about specific players though ...

Singleton and Schonert (replace francis) especially if Warriors go down. Atwood as first choice and Dom Day as a weathered vet. Kalamafoni or Mafi if you can get hold of either and Swiel as the fly half. Probably not gonna happen, but what I would like to see

 

[BPM]

What about:

Hooker - Socino (Newcastle)
Lock - Attwood (Bath) & Nott (Sale)
Number 8 - Morgan (Gloucester)
Fly Half - Marshall (London Irish)

I’d be interested to see what Caulfield could do if given an opportunity at lock. He looked good for the U20s but hasn’t really had much of a look in so far in the Premiership.

 

[RedruthRFC]

Some good points / posts here. I've wondered for a few years whether the loyalty that the club show to players who clearly fit with the club's ethos is leading to a squad that's too big / watered down a squad.

@TobyBeastTeague thanks for your leg work with the stats you've provided. The last time I remember the size of Exeter's squad coming up here it became clear that comparisons to other teams are tough to make based on how each club reports their squad (i.e. are lists complete and do they include academy players). Also, it's tough to say what sort of value each player represents without knowing what each of them is getting paid. That being the case, some on the list might not be too much of a financial burden. Taking Billy Keast (who did play 15 minutes of LV rugby according to stat bunker) as an example, he's still an academy player to won't be taking up much cap room, I don't know if whatever Pirates are paying for his services can be offset against the cap. He's still young for a prop and is getting significant game time in The Championship, so the investment being made now could easily repay the club in spades in the future. That's not to say that some of the non-academy / older players on your list don't look like they offer particularly good value. For example, I scratched my head at the signing of van der Sluys and am still doing so now, Malton is another that springs to mind (although Stat Bunker says he has played a fair bit more than your source gives him credit for).

In terms of new signings, some good shouts have been made so far, I'm not well enough up to speed with who is / isn't a free agent so can't add any names to the shopping list, but certainly agree with the areas that were highlighted as needing strengthening.

The playoff games were the first couple of games that I'd seen Exeter play for a little while, but they left me wondering whether Exeter has become too obsessed with putting the ball through more phases than there are players on the field to the exclusion of everything else. I'm not saying that they were playing BaaBaas style rugby earlier in the season, but they were bringing runners off the wing a lot more often which created more opportunity than trying to bludgeon their way over the line yard by yard. Sure enough, Woodburn's form is not what it was earlier in the season and Nowell had two poor games in the playoffs.

Lastly, I'm left wondering if Baxter is in danger of being too obsessed with developing his own talent / bringing it through from lower divisions to the detriment of the club's development. Given how well this approach has worked since the club's promotion, but given where the club is now, I feel like more genuine star quality is needed in order to kick on to the next level. Maybe the addition of Kevesic, Cordero and Cuthbert signals a change of attitude (although the first two have yet to look like great signings). I know that the club said earlier in the season that there was cap room and funds in place for additional signings, but maybe the prospect of building a hotel is taking priority over marquee signings - they've always been clear on how they balance the books and I applaud them if this means limiting ambitions in the short term for future gain.

 

[RedruthRFC]

What about:

Hooker - Socino (Newcastle)
Lock - Attwood (Bath) & Nott (Sale)
Number 8 - Morgan (Gloucester)
Fly Half - Marshall (London Irish)

I’d be interested to see what Caulfield could do if given an opportunity at lock. He looked good for the U20s but hasn’t really had much of a look in so far in the Premiership.

Good shout on Socino, he would certainly be an upgrade if he's third choice and would push Yeandle for second choice, although Yeandle's form looks to have improved over the season for me.

I'd like to see Caulfield get more of a look in too. It's a bit boring and an easy criticism to make, but I still wonder if he is big enough. Saying that, he's done well in The Championship apparently, which is a league that doesn't want for physicality.

 

[BPM]

How tall/heavy is Caulfield? He looks plenty big enough to me?

 

[RedruthRFC]

How tall/heavy is Caulfield? He looks plenty big enough to me?

It looks like he has bulked up since he started playing senior rugby and is now a more than respectable 18 stoneish. He hasn't done any growing in that time though and is still listed at just 6'4". As I say, I'm keen to see him have a chance to prove himself as he has some positive attributes, but I'm sceptical as to whether he's rangy enough to be a good quality Premiership second row.

 

[BPM]

Fair enough.

Good point on Baxter’s apparent desire to develop his own talent/bring players through from the Chamionship. Clearly there are some good examples of where it has worked, but it’s not an approach that is going to turn Chiefs in to a real European force.

Kvesic is a funny one. It seemed as though Baxter was really excited to get him and he made some comments about wanting to bring back a more attacking side of his game and then he barely played him.

Cordero makes sense if they want to develop a different, less predictable attack but Cuthbert is almost a polar opposite which is a little strange. I’m not sure what to make of it? I think Cuthbert could actually be very effective for Exeter, but he’s not going to help in developing a plan B.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I just struggle to see where Cuthbert will fit in. He's not better than Nowell or Woodburn. Nowell isn't really any good as a FB so they can't shift him there to accommodate Cuthbert. And I don't think Cuthbert's good enough to justify shifting Nowell to 13 and dropping Hill/Slade. Maybe he'll make the bench as an impact sub? But even so I think I'd prefer Whitten, Campagnaro or Devoto.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I just struggle to see where Cuthbert will fit in. He's not better than Nowell or Woodburn. Nowell isn't really any good as a FB so they can't shift him there to accommodate Cuthbert. And I don't think Cuthbert's good enough to justify shifting Nowell to 13 and dropping Hill/Slade. Maybe he'll make the bench as an impact sub? But even so I think I'd prefer Whitten, Campagnaro or Devoto.

This is another one of those situations in which it's hard to comment on how good or bad a signing is without knowing the terms of the contract. Assuming he's been signed to a contract that values him based on the level to which he's been playing recently, I don't have a problem with the signing. He brings experience and fits the Exeter winger mould assuming they persist in bringing wingers in field as extra receivers and has the potential to prove to be a bargain if a change of scenery proves to be a catalyst to get him back playing anywhere near his best. I don't think that it's reasonable to assume that he's been brought in as a first XV / XXIII player.

Re: Jack Nowell, the position debate rages on and I'm no closer to an answer than I was a couple of years ago. I still think he has a higher ceiling at 13 or 15 than he does on the wing. At the moment, he just needs a prolonged spell of fitness to get back to his best.

 

[Chief Pete]

I think Chiefs and especially Rob Baxter got caught between two trains of thought last summer, on one hand a small well run club who pride's itself on bringing through youth, the community and living within it's means etc, on the other your going into the new season as defending premiership champions, which means maybe going against some of the ideals which got you there in the first place, in the end our recruitment was pretty poor given our gravitas at the time and our biggest name signing Matt Kvesic struggled although I still think he'll come good.

Hopefully I'd like to see the squad get trimmed of the fat, at least 15 players phased out, with players of the standard of Attwood and Morgan coming in, along with the odd vet and promising youngster coming in.

As for the Nowell position debate I'd like to see him given a go at 13 with Slade at 12, I think playing him at 13 would hide his deficiencies and give him the best platform to use his skillset.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I think Chiefs and especially Rob Baxter got caught between two trains of thought last summer, on one hand a small well run club who pride's itself on bringing through youth, the community and living within it's means etc, on the other your going into the new season as defending premiership champions, which means maybe going against some of the ideals which got you there in the first place, in the end our recruitment was pretty poor given our gravitas at the time and our biggest name signing Matt Kvesic struggled although I still think he'll come good.

Hopefully I'd like to see the squad get trimmed of the fat, at least 15 players phased out, with players of the standard of Attwood and Morgan coming in, along with the odd vet and promising youngster coming in.

As for the Nowell position debate I'd like to see him given a go at 13 with Slade at 12, I think playing him at 13 would hide his deficiencies and give him the best platform to use his skillset.

For me Nowell’s best position is definitely as a 13 but what I question is whether Cuthbert (or whoever else would take up the wing spot) is a good enoigh player to justify dropping Hil and moving Slade into 12. Last season was probably Slade’s worst ever and it’s the season in which he played 12 much more than any other position. On paper he should be a 12 but in practice he’s so much better as a 13.

 

[Chief Pete]

For me Nowell’s best position is definitely as a 13 but what I question is whether Cuthbert (or whoever else would take up the wing spot) is a good enoigh player to justify dropping Hil and moving Slade into 12. Last season was probably Slade’s worst ever and it’s the season in which he played 12 much more than any other position. On paper he should be a 12 but in practice he’s so much better as a 13.

With what's available right now I'd go (if all fit)

9 White
10 Simmonds
11 Woodburn
12 Slade
13 Nowell
14 Short
15 Cordero

Maybe a change of partner would improve Slade's game? I'd at least look at it...

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

With what's available right now I'd go (if all fit)

9 White
10 Simmonds
11 Woodburn
12 Slade
13 Nowell
14 Short
15 Cordero

Maybe a change of partner would improve Slade's game? I'd at least look at it...

I agree that’s probably how we’d get our best players onto the pitch but it looks very lightweight which would mean completely changing our attacking structures. Nowell’s not a bad carrier by any means but he’s no Hill or Whitten.

 

[Chief Pete]

I agree that’s probably how we’d get our best players onto the pitch but it looks very lightweight which would mean completely changing our attacking structures. Nowell’s not a bad carrier by any means but he’s no Hill or Whitten.

I don't think changing our attack is a bad thing, if we play a top team who are on form our attack's been pretty blunt at times anyway, take the final, once Sarries got ahead we had no answer, we were not clever enough IMO, so I'd be happy with a bit of change, and I'm talking the very best teams here Sarries, Leinster etc, which is where we want to be on a regular basis..

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I don't think changing our attack is a bad thing, if we play a top team who are on form our attack's been pretty blunt at times anyway, take the final, once Sarries got ahead we had no answer, we were not clever enough IMO, so I'd be happy with a bit of change, and I'm talking the very best teams here Sarries, Leinster etc, which is where we want to be on a regular basis..

I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with our attack, it clearly works quite well for us, it’s that we don’t have the players to carry it out to the highest standard. We lack out and out carriers in the pack (bringing in Attwood and Morgan would rectify this) as well as truly explosive backs beyond Hill. Cuthbert could be the answer to that, if he works off of his wing.

 

[Chief Pete]

I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with our attack, it clearly works quite well for us, it’s that we don’t have the players to carry it out to the highest standard. We lack out and out carriers in the pack (bringing in Attwood and Morgan would rectify this) as well as truly explosive backs beyond Hill. Cuthbert could be the answer to that, if he works off of his wing.

I think it does work well most of the time, until you play a top team who's on it and then we've been worked out on those occasions, it only equate's to a couple of games a season ie the Leinster games and the final, fine margins, just my opinion.

Attwood and Morgan would be excellent addition's, are these just rumour's or people's opinion? not seen the links.

 

[Pieter Steph du Teague]

I think it does work well most of the time, until you play a top team who's on it and then we've been worked out on those occasions, it only equate's to a couple of games a season ie the Leinster games and the final, fine margins, just my opinion.

Attwood and Morgan would be excellent addition's, are these just rumour's or people's opinion? not seen the links.

Morgan was linked a while back but Attwood's just my opinion.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I think it does work well most of the time, until you play a top team who's on it and then we've been worked out on those occasions, it only equate's to a couple of games a season ie the Leinster games and the final, fine margins, just my opinion.

I agree. It reminds me of how England match up against Ireland (and I fear New Zealand, time will tell). Even when England were winning everything, once I'd seen the way Ireland fronted up to New Zealand physically in Chicago, I couldn't see how England could an Irish team playing like that. Thus far they haven't. I felt the same about Exeter versus that Saracens side and upset one or two expressing that opinion in the match day thread.

One thing that's just occurred to me, which is strange given all the talk about England at the moment, the shortcomings highlighted in this thread and the defensive frailty created by defending too narrowly shown in the final, do Exeter need an attack and defence coach?

 

[Chief Pete]

I felt the same about Exeter versus that Saracens side and upset one or two expressing that opinion in the match day thread.

I think that was me lol, you were right though Sarries were great on the day and we simply had no answer, I think the only NH club side who could have coped would be Leinster but I had to have faith in the team and hoped we'd win the arm wrestle upfront and go from there but In my opinion Sarries worked us out very quickly and sadly no plan B to fall back on.

 

[RedruthRFC]

I think that was me lol, you were right though Sarries were great on the day and we simply had no answer, I think the only NH club side who could have coped would be Leinster but I had to have faith in the team and hoped we'd win the arm wrestle upfront and go from there but In my opinion Sarries worked us out very quickly and sadly no plan B to fall back on.

I think I went out after posting, so didn't expand on my point, but would have done so with the Ireland vs England example I mentioned above. It's not so much about how good or bad the sides are, I certainly wasn't meaning Exeter were a bad side, just that they match up badly against the Sarries lineup. I'd have been interested in any opinion even if I didn't agree with it, e.g. "dominate the set piece", despite a few saying Exeter would win, nobody was letting on how they would do it. Sadly, it seems that Baxter didn't know either!

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

I think that was me lol, you were right though Sarries were great on the day and we simply had no answer, I think the only NH club side who could have coped would be Leinster but I had to have faith in the team and hoped we'd win the arm wrestle upfront and go from there but In my opinion Sarries worked us out very quickly and sadly no plan B to fall back on.

Like Sarries and Leinster, Chiefs are well coached (with the exception of Plan B) with a good culture.

The difference for me is simply the calibre of their top players. Sarries and Leinster have Lions and the core of their national sides. Chiefs have a few Eng internationals but they're all pretty peripheral. In a few years Eng might be built around Hepburn, Williams, Slade and a couple of Simmonds, but not yet. Whether to try to buy in stardust is a difficult question.