Collingwood FC needs your input

[Monkey King]

He was front loaded, partly for tactical reasons to scare off rivals at the draft, and also because we knew we had to keep some room free for potential pay increases to Pendles Sidebottom Beams etc. Ball got on average about the same he was getting at StKilda, which was a good pay packet.

As I said, his initial contract price was a gambit to get him to the Pies. In the end he got about $350k, which is hardly a "big money" recruit.

The Wood trade was fine, I agree. It was medium term thinking. Didnt work out only because he was a party boy. But it was not designed to bring us immediate success. There was no urgency to the trade, unlike Jolly and Ball who were expected to make an immediate impact.

Your list was at a different stage. I'd say Wood's recruitment was aimed at him having an impact around 2010. So no surprise that when you got there and Wood wasn't looking like delivering, you took the rare opportunity of recruiting a premiership ruckman who could. The point being that the reasons behind wanting a ruckman who could have immediate impact can be seen as nothing more than reasons of list management and opportunity. Claiming it as being a result of the succession simply because it correlates with the succession plan is simple minded IMO.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

As I said, his initial contract price was a gambit to get him to the Pies. In the end he got about $350k, which is hardly a "big money" recruit.

He averaged more than 350 over the course of his contract

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Your list was at a different stage. I'd say Wood's recruitment was aimed at him having an impact around 2010. So no surprise that when you got there and Wood wasn't looking like delivering, you took the rare opportunity of recruiting a premiership ruckman who could. The point being that the reasons behind wanting a ruckman who could have immediate impact can be seen as nothing more than reasons of list management and opportunity. Claiming it as being a result of the succession simply because it correlates with the succession plan is simple minded IMO.

Our list in 2007 was one kick away from playing Port in a Grand final and given their performance, we may have won a flag. We made the semis from 8th spot (a game out of fourth in an even season) in 2008 despite our season being derailed by Didak and the Shaw brothers and made the prelims in 2009. Our window was open the whole time. Being unable to compete in the ruck definitely cost us the match in 2007 and made a discernable difference in 2008 and 2009. Jolly was also a goalkicking ruckman, something we lacked that the likes of Geelong had.

Wood was 23 in 2010, not the age ruckmen usually have come into full bloom by. Still a development player. He was only 22 when he as you put it "looked like he wasnt delivering" and Collingwood recruited Jolly. Of course he wasnt delivering, he was only 22!!!

 

[MarkT2]

Just on your other points, Lockyer had his deficiencies, so did Ball. Difference being at the time of Ball's recruitment they were in different stages of their career. And again, Ball was no unprecedented signing and Jolly wasn't really either apart from the fact he was a ready to roll ruckman.

Ball was specific for a need that wasn't adequately filled. Same with Jolly. He (Ball) had deficiencies as did quite a few players on the list that didn't require replacement. As I said the important factor was what they were good at and what we needed in the context of the list.

I don't know how many times it needs to be said. Correlation is not causation. Whether Jolly was the only ruckman ever taken full stop under Malthouse, doesn't mean the succession plan had anything to do with it. It's a totally illogical way of looking at the world that you believe this is a form of absolute confirmation. At this point I just rub my anti-bear socks and thank goodness I've yet to be attacked by a bear.

Yeh, I studied statistics too but I never claimed what you say. That's your slant made in an attempt to support your own circular argument. Jolly is just a piece of evidence.

It's just silly to think Malthouse wasn't trying his best to get a list into premiership contention prior to the succession plan.

Of course it is and no one has said any different. The entire argument is about urgency brought about by finality of tenure. You keep trying to turn the debate into something it isn't. I don't think Collingwood would have won the 2010 premiership had MM not had a clear and looming deadline. I thought and said that then and the CEO said as much a few weeks ago. It wasn't just the coach or the recruitment, the whole club and particularly the players had a sencee of urgency I have never seen at Collingwood. Whether Collingwood/Eddie should have changed course after the win is another debate entirely but I am sure as hell glad the 2009 deal was done.

You're glad to have Malthouse now so we are all happy.

 

[MarkT2]

Your list was at a different stage. I'd say Wood's recruitment was aimed at him having an impact around 2010.

No it wasn't. If an equivilent to Jolly played at Collingwood in 2007 we quite likely beat Geelong ion the PF. Ottens v your disguard was the decisive factor. Bryan was another example of trying to make do in the ruck stocks.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

As I said, his initial contract price was a gambit to get him to the Pies. In the end he got about $350k, which is hardly a "big money" recruit..

Yet earlier you said pick 30 was an unfair offer and StKilda were right to reject it. I wish you'd make your mind up about Luke Balls value. Pick 30 for a player on 350k a year....sounds like the Pies ripped themselves off!

 

[Collingwoodity]

More amused at watching Eddies head get reader and reader.
Hopefully it pops like a balloon.

s**t posting in the F/S complemented by s**t posting in this thread. Well done.

 

[Colonial]

s**t posting in the F/S complemented by s**t posting in this thread. Well done.

One sided bias. Hmm good to see Collingwood fans making Western Sydney look like the upper class

 

[Collingwoodity]

Davis didn't just leave. Had a great 2011 and was offered less money to stay. His presence was badly missed in 2012 (though I think we were all glad Taylor had one less thing to crap on about). That was poor list management.

Why didn't Carlton pick up Davis after having a 'great 2011'. God knows Carlton was pushing for the flag in the off-season. Missed opportunity for Carlton. That was poor list management.

 

[Collingwoodity]

One sided bias. Hmm good to see Collingwood fans making Western Sydney look like the upper class

You can't spell and showed your bias towards Collingwood already in this thread. "one sided bias"

 

[Colonial]

You can't spell and showed your bias towards Collingwood already in this thread. "one sided bias"

Wow a spelling mistake. Gutted.
Please, every pie fan ive read thinks any benefit to their club is fair and any benefit to others is unreasonable.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Why didn't Carlton pick up Davis after having a 'great 2011'. God knows Carlton was pushing for the flag in the off-season. Missed opportunity for Carlton. That was poor list management.

To be fair they had Eddie Betts

(who they subsequently let go to make room for Dale Thomas)

 

[Collingwoodity]

Wow a spelling mistake. Gutted.
Please, every pie fan ive read thinks any benefit to their club is fair and any benefit to others is unreasonable.

Simply not true. I specifically considered it fair that GWS, GC, Port and Freo be allowed access to academies for 25-30 years to allow the F/S rule to apply equally to them. Then the academy access should be distributed equally because equal is what is fair and equitable.

Read slowly before perpetuating the usual "I hate collingwood because of Eddie/[insert unsubstantiated reason]"

 

[Collingwoodity]

To be fair they had Eddie Betts

(who they subsequently let go to make room for Dale Thomas)

Davis was playing in the backline in 2011. Certainly could have replaced a Duigan type in 2012.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Davis was playing in the backline in 2011. Certainly could have replaced a Duigan type in 2012.

Was kidding really.

Bottom line is that the end of Davis's career is nobody's fault but his own. He had told the club he was retiring then changed his mind very late, well after salaries had been negotiated, leaving little wriggle room for retaining him. Then he decided hed only play for the Eagles or Dockers, who didnt want him so it was impossible for Collingwood to organise a trade for him.

We're only talking a matter of one year anyway. God knows what output we'd have got from him in 2012, he was very inconsistent throughout his career. Pie haters always talk about his stellar 2011 (and he was very good) but they tend to conveniently omit the fact that his form was so bad that he was dropped for the 2010 GF replay.

As for the "he was in the backline" argument....well yes he was. Makes one wonder why Malthouse never tried that in the previous 11 seasons. Perhaps it was another sign of his new-found urgency. Replacing him with Krakouer in 2011 nearly won us another premiership.

 

[Collingwoodity]

Was kidding really.

Bottom line is that the end of Davis's career is nobody's fault but his own. He had told the club he was retiring then changed his mind very late, well after salaries had been negotiated, leaving little wriggle room for retaining him. Then he decided hed only play for the Eagles or Dockers, who didnt want him so it was impossible for Collingwood to organise a trade for him.

We're only talking a matter of one year anyway. God knows what output we'd have got from him in 2012, he was very inconsistent throughout his career. Pie haters always talk about his stellar 2011 (and he was very good) but they tend to conveniently omit the fact that his form was so bad that he was dropped for the 2010 GF replay.

No doubt. And I agree with you.

But I was just following the Carlton's poster's illogical assertion to it's absurd conclusion.

 

[ThatsjustDappa]

There was certainly no urgency then despite the Magpie rucks being humiliated in the 2007 GF.

What happened? They got lit up by a couple of dwarves or something...?

 

[Falchoon]

The Wood trade was fine, I agree. It was medium term thinking. Didnt work out only because he was a party boy. But it was not designed to bring us immediate success. There was no urgency to the trade, unlike Jolly and Ball who were expected to make an immediate impact.

Ignoring 'the vibe'

How much of the 2010 flag success would you attribute to Jolly and Ball?

The Pies were already adept at making the finals, Jolly got pantsed by Minson and Hudson in the first final, Ball was good defensively and in close and the Pies won easily. In the second final Ball was poor and Jolly broke even with Ottens. In the granny Ball was pantsed and it's fair to say a couple of 3rd stringers got on top of Jolly.

Yet these 2 are heralded as the difference brought on by the succession plan, I don't get it?

 

[Power Raid]

Just shut the **** up!

ok,

so what advantages do you think collingwood gets?

 

[Fadge]

How much of the 2010 flag success would you attribute to Jolly and Ball?

The Pies were already adept at making the finals, Jolly got pantsed by Minson and Hudson in the first final, Ball was good defensively and in close and the Pies won easily. In the second final Ball was poor and Jolly broke even with Ottens. In the granny Ball was pantsed and it's fair to say a couple of 3rd stringers got on top of Jolly.

Yet these 2 are heralded as the difference brought on by the succession plan, I don't get it?

I didn't realise the 2010 season commenced with a finals series?

I could have sworn there were 22 games prior to that stage that determined the teams to qualify for the finals the the rankings thereof?

 

[Fadge]

Or one in the past 25 years ... depends on how you wanna look at it I guess.

I guess you could look at it that way if the succession plan was announced 25 years ago?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I didn't realise the 2010 season commenced with a finals series?

I could have sworn there were 22 games prior to that stage that determined the teams to qualify for the finals the the rankings thereof?

Dane Swan was poor in the first GF. Hence he made no contribution to Collingwoods premiership

 

[Falchoon]

Dane Swan was poor in the first GF. Hence he made no contribution to Collingwoods premiership

I wouldn't go that far, he was much better than both Ball and Jolly.

 

[Sector 7G]

Why didn't Carlton pick up Davis after having a 'great 2011'. God knows Carlton was pushing for the flag in the off-season. Missed opportunity for Carlton. That was poor list management.

Because as Timmy pointed out once he had been stiffed by Bucks he only wanted to go home to WA. The fact is his presence was missed in 2012. Mick came out in the media and said if he was still coach Leon would have still been at the Pies.

Edit We also didn't need a 30yr old running back when we had Yarran playing the same role at a similar level in 2011. Can you see the logic there?

 

[Monkey King]

He averaged more than 350 over the course of his contract

It's reported to be between $340-350.

It's a congruent viewpoint here on Ball; no need to make up my mind. He wasn't a "big money" recruit at that price, although I can understand the confusion given his initial contract price; but as you know, that was just a gambit to get him to the Pies. Rolled the dice in letting him go into the draft, such was the lack of urgency in his recruitment, and in the end you got a mid-priced player and paid unders in getting him to the club. Good recruitment; yes. Only done because of the succession plan; I don't think so.