Competitions Collingwood All Time Draft

Remove this Banner Ad

Tarkyn_24 said:
Bucks from full forward. That game against Brissy in 2006 is all the evidence we need.

Or at centre half back, for all the baths he gave Carey,

Bloke was a machine.

I loved your team Trickster. Hated drafting after you every second round though :p
Click to expand...
I was actually thinking of shifting Bucks up forward at one point... He certainly could have played either forward or back more if we had the luxury and in this day and age with players being up the ground, he would have dominated there too.

Haha - Same here Tarks! I think we pinched a few from each other :)
 
Now Magpies 42 faces the music ...
Magpies 42
Backs: Lardie Tulloch, Bill Proudfoot, Charlie Utting
Half Back: Fred Froude, Ben Reid, Jack Ross
Centre: Ron Richards, Marcus Whelan, Steele Sidebottom
Half Forward: Jiggy Harris, Murray Weideman, Vin Doherty
Forward: Brody Mihocek, Ross Dunne, Jamie Elliott
Followers: Peter Moore, Barry Price, Ray Shaw

The good: Great full-back, centre half-forward and rucks, and a great bunch of Machine era ‘support actors’ with lesser names like Fred Froude, Jacky Ross, Vin Doherty and Jiggy Harris holding down the four flanks. Love all of those – especially good to see Jacky being remembered. Good to see the underrated Brody Mihocek getting some love too!

Question marks: The biggest one for me is probably Twiggy at full-forward. He didn’t play there a lot, largely because a certain Peter McKenna had dibs on the spot, so it feels like it might be a bit of a stretch for him to hold down the spot.

Best line: The ruck division. Moore and Shaw exactly where they should be, and Price is a great pick-up (even if he was more a centreman than a ruck-rover). Still a very good on-ball division.

Weakest link: I hate to say it but, aside from Twiggy as a FF, it’s probably Ron Richards. He wasn’t a great wingman, although he obviously had a blinder in the 1953 GF: he was more a fighter and a scrapper. Compared to some of the others in that spot, he probably suffers a little by comparison.

Player quality: Pretty good. 11 of the 125 greatest, so pretty much right where you’d expect to be with 11 teams competing. 7/10

Team balance: Very good. Pretty much everyone played where they’re meant to, except for Twiggy, and three talls in the forward line. 8/10

Summary: A really well balanced team that perhaps lacks a little of the star factor of some rivals, but is likely to play well together. Three big blokes with runners alongside in defence, and a similar approach in attack.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Now for some frustrating news ... there's going to a short delay before my next assessments come through. I'm heading down to Phillip Island shortly to spend a couple of days with my 92-year-old mum, and will largely be off the radar for that time. So apologies to you all, and especially to those who I know are still waiting - half_back_flank, iGNITER, Pie 4 Life, Cityslick1 and Gouki 88. I hope to resume transmission late Tuesday. Sorry!!
 
Lardieslads said:
Now for some frustrating news ... there's going to a short delay before my next assessments come through. I'm heading down to Phillip Island shortly to spend a couple of days with my 92-year-old mum, and will largely be off the radar for that time. So apologies to you all, and especially to those who I know are still waiting - half_back_flank, iGNITER, Pie 4 Life, Cityslick1 and Gouki 88. I hope to resume transmission late Tuesday. Sorry!!
Click to expand...
After all the effort you've put in, and discussion you've ignited I think a few days off to spend with the family is pretty well-earned! Hopefully the weather is nice :)
 
Lardieslads said:
Now Magpies 42 faces the music ...
Magpies 42
Backs: Lardie Tulloch, Bill Proudfoot, Charlie Utting
Half Back: Fred Froude, Ben Reid, Jack Ross
Centre: Ron Richards, Marcus Whelan, Steele Sidebottom
Half Forward: Jiggy Harris, Murray Weideman, Vin Doherty
Forward: Brody Mihocek, Ross Dunne, Jamie Elliott
Followers: Peter Moore, Barry Price, Ray Shaw

The good: Great full-back, centre half-forward and rucks, and a great bunch of Machine era ‘support actors’ with lesser names like Fred Froude, Jacky Ross, Vin Doherty and Jiggy Harris holding down the four flanks. Love all of those – especially good to see Jacky being remembered. Good to see the underrated Brody Mihocek getting some love too!

Question marks: The biggest one for me is probably Twiggy at full-forward. He didn’t play there a lot, largely because a certain Peter McKenna had dibs on the spot, so it feels like it might be a bit of a stretch for him to hold down the spot.

Best line: The ruck division. Moore and Shaw exactly where they should be, and Price is a great pick-up (even if he was more a centreman than a ruck-rover). Still a very good on-ball division.

Weakest link: I hate to say it but, aside from Twiggy as a FF, it’s probably Ron Richards. He wasn’t a great wingman, although he obviously had a blinder in the 1953 GF: he was more a fighter and a scrapper. Compared to some of the others in that spot, he probably suffers a little by comparison.

Player quality: Pretty good. 11 of the 125 greatest, so pretty much right where you’d expect to be with 11 teams competing. 7/10

Team balance: Very good. Pretty much everyone played where they’re meant to, except for Twiggy, and three talls in the forward line. 8/10

Summary: A really well balanced team that perhaps lacks a little of the star factor of some rivals, but is likely to play well together. Three big blokes with runners alongside in defence, and a similar approach in attack.
Click to expand...
That is great, spot on and thank you!

I checkmated myself at FF. Left it too late. I thought we were light on for quality ruckman which is why I went early on the mercurial Moore. In hindsight I should have moved him forward and picked another ruck, or picked a FF with one of my early picks…but with Weids taken with my second I wanted to balance the team a bit. Bottom line is I had no idea we had so many good ruckman!

I deliberated on Ron, and opted to take for his GF performance as you said but mainly because I wanted to balance the skill in my team with some grit and determination…every great team has a player that will sacrifice their game for the team. By all reports Weidemen was like that too.

Just noticed your name, Lardie Tulloch a favourite of yours?
 
magpies42 said:
That is great, spot on and thank you!

I checkmated myself at FF. Left it too late. I thought we were light on for quality ruckman which is why I went early on the mercurial Moore. In hindsight I should have moved him forward and picked another ruck, or picked a FF with one of my early picks…but with Weids taken with my second I wanted to balance the team a bit. Bottom line is I had no idea we had so many good ruckman!

I deliberated on Ron, and opted to take for his GF performance as you said but mainly because I wanted to balance the skill in my team with some grit and determination…every great team has a player that will sacrifice their game for the team. By all reports Weidemen was like that too.

Just noticed your name, Lardie Tulloch a favourite of yours?
Click to expand...
Yes, not so much because of his style of play or anything but, back when I wrote ACOTB in 1991, I was very taken with his name! I just thought Lawrence Gideon Tulloch - shortened to Lardie - was hilarious for some reason. Us historian types are easily amused, I guess :)
 
Lardieslads said:
Now for some frustrating news ... there's going to a short delay before my next assessments come through. I'm heading down to Phillip Island shortly to spend a couple of days with my 92-year-old mum, and will largely be off the radar for that time. So apologies to you all, and especially to those who I know are still waiting - half_back_flank, iGNITER, Pie 4 Life, Cityslick1 and Gouki 88. I hope to resume transmission late Tuesday. Sorry!!
Click to expand...
Enjoy your time away.

I can handle Pie 4 Life‘s review for you if you’d like ;) :p
 
I know our minds will all be turning towards the 'real' but much less entertaining Draft tomorrow night by now, but in the meantime here is my take on the very interesting line-up chosen by half_back_flank ...
Half_back_flank
Backs: Leon Davis, Jack Finck, Bill Strickland
Half Back: Ernie Wilson, George Clayden, Ben Johnson
Centre: Jack Crisp, Bob Rose, Michael Taylor
Half Forward: Harry Chesswas, Travis Cloke, Mick Bone
Forward: Ted Rowell, Ron Todd, Con McCarthy
Followers: Neil Mann, Bill Serong, George Angus

The good: Great collection of players, with a seriously good spine, a brilliant half-back line and a good mix of eras represented. You have arguably the club’s greatest ever player in Bobby Rose. Ron Todd could have been the greatest full-forward in VFL/AFL history if he’d stayed. Clokey is one of the few great CHFs we’ve had. And Micky Bone is a great get for half-forward with your last pick, even though he’s technically more the classic rover/forward pocket (I would have swapped him with Rowell)

Question marks: Bill Strickland in the back pocket and George Angus as rover. Sorry but I can’t make sense of either of those! Strickland was a champion centreman – as far as I know he never played in defence at CFC (or with Carlton beforehand) – so sticking him in a back pocket was a bit odd (you explained how it happened a couple of pages back) And Angus is actually a big bloke – a follower. He’s not a rover at all! So I can’t explain that one …

Best line: The half-back line of Wilson, Clayden and Johnson is a beauty. Ernie is one of my favourites and was an absolute steal at #183. He and Benny would give great run, and Ernie and George would scare the living daylights out of any opposing forwards.

Weakest link: The absence of a quality rover. Actually, the absence of any first rover as things stand!

Player quality: Outstanding. 14 out of the 18 were in our 125, and Crispy was one of the others (Michael Taylor and Harry Chesswas too). 9/10

Team balance: The positioning of both Angus and Strickland hits this rating. 6.5 or 7/10

Summary: This was so very nearly a great team. Give it a good rover in place of Angus, and make better use of Billy Strickland, and you’ve got everything you need in the rest of it to make this one of the best sides in it. Very canny selections with the last couple of picks (Wilson and Bone) too. In fact, the more I look at it, the more you’ve got everything you need in the team: move Angus to the back pocket, Strickland to the centre, Bobby Rose to rover and swap Mick Bone with Teddy Rowell and … voila!!
 
Thanks very much for taking the time to critique my 18 Michael.

The Strickland positioning was inexcusable, as I said earlier it was just a case of associating the two Bills together and not bothering to research further.

Must admit when putting together my side I struggled to make the distinction between centremen, rovers, ruck rovers and followers. Thanks to your explanation a few pages back I've got my head around it, alas too late to change my side. As someone born in '90, it has basically been dumbed down to a midfielder. Inside mid, outside mid and occasionally a tagger is as specific as it gets these days so it's been a great learning curve on the positional specifics of yesteryear (one of many great things learnt through participation in this draft). All your changes make sense and I agree, very proud of that half back line.

Thanks again.

P.S. - Collingwoodforever has been my most visited site on my phone's safari app for a while now, a good indication of how much I relied on it to build my side. Looking forward to the updates and also the retrospective B&F announcements.
 
Last edited:
I know we're all counting down the minutes now until Nick D officially becomes one of us, but until then ...

iGNITER
Backs: Phil Manassa, Simon Prestigiacomo, Alan Toovey
Half Back: Scott Burns, Craig Kelly, Jeremy Howe
Centre: Alan Atkinson, Gavin Brown, Leo Wescott
Half Forward: Paul Williams, Rene Kink, Daniel Wells
Forward: Phil Carman, Peter McKenna, Travis Varcoe
Followers: Graeme Jenkin, Paul Licuria, Tony Shaw

The good: A really good defensive six, and some genuine excitement in the forward line with McKenna, Carman and Rene Kink, plus the explosiveness of Paul Williams. A good ruck too: Jerker was underrated as a tap ruckman, and Licca and Shawry were both great, gutsy accumulators.

Question marks: Not many, aside from Daniel Wells (see below) Not sure about Gavin Brown in the middle – not sure he played there too much? Maybe Alan Atkinson not of quite the same quality as some other wingmen? And Shawry and Licca both a bit too similar in the ruck – would like a bit more pace in there.

Best line: Hard not to love any forward line that has both Carman and McKenna in it, but I love the half-back line too. The hardness of Kelly and Burns, plus the intercept high-flying of Howie. Cracking line.

Weakest link: Daniel Wells. Hard to justify that selection on his output in a Collingwood jumper.

Player quality: Pretty good. 11 of the 125, plus Jeremy Howe. But Wells is a big no from me!6.8/10

Team balance: Very good. Most players are where they should be, bar Wells and maybe Rowdy. 8/10

Summary: This is a very good team. But it could so easily have been even better. Alan Atkinson was a good player but there were better wingmen still around when you took him at 125 (eg, Bill Twomey Snr, Charlie Pannam Jnr, Percy Gibb). And I know Wells was your last pick, but I still think there were better options (maybe even Rod Oborne?).
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lardieslads said:
I know we're all counting down the minutes now until Nick D officially becomes one of us, but until then ...

iGNITER
Backs: Phil Manassa, Simon Prestigiacomo, Alan Toovey
Half Back: Scott Burns, Craig Kelly, Jeremy Howe
Centre: Alan Atkinson, Gavin Brown, Leo Wescott
Half Forward: Paul Williams, Rene Kink, Daniel Wells
Forward: Phil Carman, Peter McKenna, Travis Varcoe
Followers: Graeme Jenkin, Paul Licuria, Tony Shaw

The good: A really good defensive six, and some genuine excitement in the forward line with McKenna, Carman and Rene Kink, plus the explosiveness of Paul Williams. A good ruck too: Jerker was underrated as a tap ruckman, and Licca and Shawry were both great, gutsy accumulators.

Question marks: Not many, aside from Daniel Wells (see below) Not sure about Gavin Brown in the middle – not sure he played there too much? Maybe Alan Atkinson not of quite the same quality as some other wingmen? And Shawry and Licca both a bit too similar in the ruck – would like a bit more pace in there.

Best line: Hard not to love any forward line that has both Carman and McKenna in it, but I love the half-back line too. The hardness of Kelly and Burns, plus the intercept high-flying of Howie. Cracking line.

Weakest link: Daniel Wells. Hard to justify that selection on his output in a Collingwood jumper.

Player quality: Pretty good. 11 of the 125, plus Jeremy Howe. But Wells is a big no from me!6.8/10

Team balance: Very good. Most players are where they should be, bar Wells and maybe Rowdy. 8/10

Summary: This is a very good team. But it could so easily have been even better. Alan Atkinson was a good player but there were better wingmen still around when you took him at 125 (eg, Bill Twomey Snr, Charlie Pannam Jnr, Percy Gibb). And I know Wells was your last pick, but I still think there were better options (maybe even Rod Oborne?).
Click to expand...

Absolutely brilliant loving this
 
Lardieslads said:
I know we're all counting down the minutes now until Nick D officially becomes one of us, but until then ...

iGNITER
Backs: Phil Manassa, Simon Prestigiacomo, Alan Toovey
Half Back: Scott Burns, Craig Kelly, Jeremy Howe
Centre: Alan Atkinson, Gavin Brown, Leo Wescott
Half Forward: Paul Williams, Rene Kink, Daniel Wells
Forward: Phil Carman, Peter McKenna, Travis Varcoe
Followers: Graeme Jenkin, Paul Licuria, Tony Shaw

The good: A really good defensive six, and some genuine excitement in the forward line with McKenna, Carman and Rene Kink, plus the explosiveness of Paul Williams. A good ruck too: Jerker was underrated as a tap ruckman, and Licca and Shawry were both great, gutsy accumulators.

Question marks: Not many, aside from Daniel Wells (see below) Not sure about Gavin Brown in the middle – not sure he played there too much? Maybe Alan Atkinson not of quite the same quality as some other wingmen? And Shawry and Licca both a bit too similar in the ruck – would like a bit more pace in there.

Best line: Hard not to love any forward line that has both Carman and McKenna in it, but I love the half-back line too. The hardness of Kelly and Burns, plus the intercept high-flying of Howie. Cracking line.

Weakest link: Daniel Wells. Hard to justify that selection on his output in a Collingwood jumper.

Player quality: Pretty good. 11 of the 125, plus Jeremy Howe. But Wells is a big no from me!6.8/10

Team balance: Very good. Most players are where they should be, bar Wells and maybe Rowdy. 8/10

Summary: This is a very good team. But it could so easily have been even better. Alan Atkinson was a good player but there were better wingmen still around when you took him at 125 (eg, Bill Twomey Snr, Charlie Pannam Jnr, Percy Gibb). And I know Wells was your last pick, but I still think there were better options (maybe even Rod Oborne?).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback Lardieslads. I will take 8/10 any day. Was pretty close to a 9/10 if I had of done a slightly different structure/last pick I guess.

Must have been having a few beers when I decided to take Wells (I also watch a few replays so it may have been one of the games he played and kicked a few). Super talented - but you are right in saying probably output at Collingwood there were better options.

Ultimately the one I wish I had of done and the player is still available is to take Goldsack at my last pick. That way I could have moved Burns to the middle and had Brown across half forward.

Very happy with the star power of the forward line and alot of X-factor. Not sure many defences would be comfortable with it.

Sincerely appreciate the time you took to critique these sides, I have found this draft really enjoyable and hopefully the same group who participated in this are keen to go around again in some way shape or form.
 
iGNITER said:
Ultimately the one I wish I had of done and the player is still available is to take Goldsack at my last pick. That way I could have moved Burns to the middle and had Brown across half forward.
Click to expand...

Still can't believe no one picked the 150 game premiership winning Goldsack. As those last few picks were being made I was basically sitting here yelling at my computer for someone to choose him. Versatile enough to slot into a few positions as well.
 
manicmagpie said:
Still can't believe no one picked the 150 game premiership winning Goldsack. As those last few picks were being made I was basically sitting here yelling at my computer for someone to choose him. Versatile enough to slot into a few positions as well.
Click to expand...
Without wanting to sound disrespectful to Tyson, his entire career I think can be surmised as him being a “Jack of all trades, master of none” type player. On the cusp of selection but I can completely understand why he wasn’t picked by anyone
 
Tarkyn_24 said:
Without wanting to sound disrespectful to Tyson, his entire career I think can be surmised as him being a “Jack of all trades, master of none” type player. On the cusp of selection but I can completely understand why he wasn’t picked by anyone
Click to expand...
He was a ‘good average player’.
In the 26…but not always in the 22 type of player.
A great role player.
 
Now it's Pie 4 Life's turn to face the music ...

Pie 4 Life
Backs: Tom Langdon, Harry Saunders, Jack Murphy
Half Back: Max Richardson, Paddy Rowan, Syd Coventry
Centre: Des Healy, Wayne Richardson, Mick McGuane
Half Forward: Tarkyn Lockyer, Anthony Rocca, Brodie Holland
Forward: Percy Rowe, Dick Lee, Terry Waters
Followers: Arthur Leach, Taylor Adams, Shane O’Bree

The good: Some real individual quality with Dick Lee, Syd Coventry, Wayne Richardson, Des Healey, Mick McGuane and more. Also great to see Paddy Rowan (Percy Rowe) getting the nod at CHB, and the underrated Harry Saunders at full-back.

Question marks: Syd Coventry. You select one of our greatest ever ruckmen, a guy who filled that role in four successive Premierships – but then play him on a half-back flank! I don’t get that at all. Besides being a waste, it also unbalances the defence overall, and contributes significantly to the feeling of the back six being a bit on the slow side. Max Richardson is probably the only smallish guy in there (and even he wasn’t that quick) – there’s very little dash out of the back half, and no tight small defender.

Wayne Richardson was a great get at pick 31 but he really is a pure rover. Don’t think he played in the centre that much. Similarly, don’t think McGuane played on a wing that much. Maybe O’Bree to a wing, McGuane to the middle and Richo as a rover? (while admitting in today's game they'd all just be midfielders anyway)

The forward line is also a bit heavy. The only saving grace is that Dick Lee was not a 'big target' kind of full-forward: he was much more agile and moved about a lot. But even so, flanking him with both Percy Rowe and Terry Waters? Not a lot of crumbing support there!

Best line: The half-forward line works nicely together – and with a strong 2000s feel about it.

Weakest link: There's no individual player who feels like a particularly weak link, although Jack Murphy and Arthur Leach probably suffer a little by comparison with some of their rivals.

Player quality: Pretty good. 10 of the 125, so slightly below par, but Tay Adams is one of the other choices so finishes about par. 7/10

Team balance: Syd Coventry on a half-back flank, a too-heavy forward line and a too-tall back half don’t help the balance at all. 6/10

Summary: There are some good players here and the makings of a decent team, but a few odd placements/selections have had a knock-on effect and affected the overall quality of the team. If Syd goes into the ruck then you immediately have (a) a better ruck and (b) a swifter defence, presuming you took a runner for the HBF. Another small/medium forward might have been better instead of either TW or Percy too.
 
Lardieslads said:
Now it's Pie 4 Life's turn to face the music ...

Pie 4 Life
Backs: Tom Langdon, Harry Saunders, Jack Murphy
Half Back: Max Richardson, Paddy Rowan, Syd Coventry
Centre: Des Healy, Wayne Richardson, Mick McGuane
Half Forward: Tarkyn Lockyer, Anthony Rocca, Brodie Holland
Forward: Percy Rowe, Dick Lee, Terry Waters
Followers: Arthur Leach, Taylor Adams, Shane O’Bree

The good: Some real individual quality with Dick Lee, Syd Coventry, Wayne Richardson, Des Healey, Mick McGuane and more. Also great to see Paddy Rowan (Percy Rowe) getting the nod at CHB, and the underrated Harry Saunders at full-back.

Question marks: Syd Coventry. You select one of our greatest ever ruckmen, a guy who filled that role in four successive Premierships – but then play him on a half-back flank! I don’t get that at all. Besides being a waste, it also unbalances the defence overall, and contributes significantly to the feeling of the back six being a bit on the slow side. Max Richardson is probably the only smallish guy in there (and even he wasn’t that quick) – there’s very little dash out of the back half, and no tight small defender.

Wayne Richardson was a great get at pick 31 but he really is a pure rover. Don’t think he played in the centre that much. Similarly, don’t think McGuane played on a wing that much. Maybe O’Bree to a wing, McGuane to the middle and Richo as a rover? (while admitting in today's game they'd all just be midfielders anyway)

The forward line is also a bit heavy. The only saving grace is that Dick Lee was not a 'big target' kind of full-forward: he was much more agile and moved about a lot. But even so, flanking him with both Percy Rowe and Terry Waters? Not a lot of crumbing support there!

Best line: The half-forward line works nicely together – and with a strong 2000s feel about it.

Weakest link: There's no individual player who feels like a particularly weak link, although Jack Murphy and Arthur Leach probably suffer a little by comparison with some of their rivals.

Player quality: Pretty good. 10 of the 125, so slightly below par, but Tay Adams is one of the other choices so finishes about par. 7/10

Team balance: Syd Coventry on a half-back flank, a too-heavy forward line and a too-tall back half don’t help the balance at all. 6/10

Summary: There are some good players here and the makings of a decent team, but a few odd placements/selections have had a knock-on effect and affected the overall quality of the team. If Syd goes into the ruck then you immediately have (a) a better ruck and (b) a swifter defence, presuming you took a runner for the HBF. Another small/medium forward might have been better instead of either TW or Percy too.
Click to expand...
Yeah I knew I’d get penalised for Syd. I went too much into realism for the “if my team plays this team” thinking his size would get monstered against the modern day rucks. As soon as you were pointing out that fact I knew I’d buggered up.

Thanks for the feedback, also realised I was too top-heavy. Wasn’t sure about forwards, only knew the talls well over time. My main goal was silky ball users.

But appreciate the feedback 🙂
 
Pie 4 Life said:
Yeah I knew I’d get penalised for Syd. I went too much into realism for the “if my team plays this team” thinking his size would get monstered against the modern day rucks. As soon as you were pointing out that fact I knew I’d buggered up.

Thanks for the feedback, also realised I was too top-heavy. Wasn’t sure about forwards, only knew the talls well over time. My main goal was silky ball users.

But appreciate the feedback 🙂
Click to expand...
Would’ve been a 10/10 for both if you’d kept Tarkyn in your backline ;)

Edit to say: I think the struggles around positioning for some of our champions of yesteryear in a modem context is exactly why I strayed so much to contemporaries when fielding my structure. Very hard to balance team balance/realism/performance with accolades/achievements/records from a bygone era, but I do think that is a strength of Michael’s assessments that both components are being scored. I definitely understand your decision making in that context.
 
Tarkyn_24 said:
Would’ve been a 10/10 for both if you’d kept Tarkyn in your backline ;)

Edit to say: I think the struggles around positioning for some of our champions of yesteryear in a modem context is exactly why I strayed so much to contemporaries when fielding my structure. Very hard to balance team balance/realism/performance with accolades/achievements/records from a bygone era, but I do think that is a strength of Michael’s assessments that both components are being scored. I definitely understand your decision making in that context.
Click to expand...
Yes there are definitely advantages to more recent inclusions simply because they're better understood and you know how they play. I'm fortunate in that I know how many of the older guys played too and, even adjusting for things like relative heights, have a better understanding of where and how they might fit into a side (or not!). I'm also definitely too pedantic re things like ruck-rover/rover/centre etc :) But FWIW, I'm still amazed at how much info the younger competitors here have taken on with regards to our older champs. It's really been impressive, despite the occasional hiccup along the way ...
 
Lardieslads said:
Yes there are definitely advantages to more recent inclusions simply because they're better understood and you know how they play. I'm fortunate in that I know how many of the older guys played too and, even adjusting for things like relative heights, have a better understanding of where and how they might fit into a side (or not!). I'm also definitely too pedantic re things like ruck-rover/rover/centre etc :) But FWIW, I'm still amazed at how much info the younger competitors here have taken on with regards to our older champs. It's really been impressive, despite the occasional hiccup along the way ...
Click to expand...
It’s good, we all absolutely defer to you for these judgements!! Anything that improves my understanding of our history is very much appreciated :)
 
Lardieslads said:
Yes there are definitely advantages to more recent inclusions simply because they're better understood and you know how they play. I'm fortunate in that I know how many of the older guys played too and, even adjusting for things like relative heights, have a better understanding of where and how they might fit into a side (or not!). I'm also definitely too pedantic re things like ruck-rover/rover/centre etc :) But FWIW, I'm still amazed at how much info the younger competitors here have taken on with regards to our older champs. It's really been impressive, despite the occasional hiccup along the way ...
Click to expand...
Got me anxiously thinking about the specific placement of my players now! :D
 
So last night seemed to go OK (although I still couldn't help but torment myself about what might have been possible had we held on to our first pick), and in our own little version we're now down to the last couple...
Cityslick1
Backs: Isaac Quaynor, Jack Regan, Mal Michael
Half Back: Ray Byrne, Darcy Moore, Bob Rush
Centre: Geoff Raines, Scott Pendlebury, Eddie Drohan
Half Forward: Mike Richardson, Bill Twomey Jr, Ian Graham
Forward: Trevor Steer, Jordan De Goey, Archie Smith
Followers: Wes Fellowes, Dayne Beams, Thorold Merrett

The good: Some good individual talent here, with established champs like Regan and Merrett joined by more modern heroes like Pendles and Darcy Moore. Also great to see Archie Smith get some long overdue recognition for his amazing goalkicking feats in the club’s earliest days. Trevor Steer and Ian Graham are also very good gets in the forward line.

Question marks: There’s a few. Too early for IQ in one back pocket? Did Mal Michael do enough in his time here? (maybe) I don’t think Geoff Raines’ output as a Magpie was good enough to get him a spot. Wes Fellowes had one great year but otherwise lacked the rucking credentials of many of his rivals. And I’m not convinced Bill Twomey spent much time at CHF. He could play centre, wing and spent some very productive afternoons at FF, but I’m not sure he played CHF all that often.

Best line: If it was Richmond-era Raines then the centre line would have been awesome! But as it is I’ll go with the forward line, just because I like Trevor, and I’m chuffed to see Archie in there. JDG is a good option at FF but Ian Graham would have worked there just as well, if not better.

Weakest link: Much as I like him, I don’t think IQ has done enough to warrant a guernsey just yet. Hopefully time proves it a prescient selection! But not now.

Player quality: Not great. Only five of the team were in our 125 greatest, although recent additions Moore and JDG may one day go close. 6/10

Team balance: Backs, centre line and rucks are all good. But forward line is a bit free-form, with Bill Twomey at CHF and Ian Graham on a flank. Still pretty good overall. 7/10

Summary: The main problem here is simply the quality of the players in the team. It has about half the number of what would be considered an average number of top shelf players. And while some of the others are undoubtedly very good players (think Beams, Graham, Drohan, Smith, Steer), they actually outnumber the more established names to such an extent that the team simply doesn’t have the individual quality of some of the others. Sorry!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Player Watch All time Pendlebury records watch
2 3 4
Replies
80
Views
9K
jmac70
jmac70
magpielicious
Time Sniper is reported and suspended.
2 3 4 5
Replies
107
Views
5K
The Royal Sampler
The Royal Sampler
TradeDraft
List Mgmt. 2024 Mid Season Draft
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
174
Views
5K
McOrist
McOrist
76woodenspooners
Analysis A journey back in time to 1 Sept 2021
Replies
13
Views
824
Pleasedontfail11
Pleasedontfail11
PonsfordMagpie
Toast Round 4 = Collingwood 77-72 Hawthorn
21 22 23 24 25
Replies
618
Views
14K
sideswipe
sideswipe
Jen2310
List Mgmt. 2024 Draft Class
2 3
Replies
52
Views
4K
Soups
Soups
Apples
Didaka Award: Rnd 4 - Collingwood V Hawthorn
Replies
22
Views
383
Mollythedolly
Mollythedolly

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top