COLLINGWOOD. NEXT 5 YEARS?

[Finnishpie]

You keep posting the same “cliff” stuff. We’ve just added perryman, Houston. Are likely to add membrey for free who’s bloody underrated IMO. Condon could potentially be playing vfl by June. McGuane next year. There’s plenty of turn over. And we aren’t replacing pendles or sidey at their best… calling them AA is delusional. Port however are required to replace an AA player, who we’ve just got

I do keep positing it. Because the question was asked about next 5 years. What's more, both Bucks and Cornes have mentioned it. Cornes I take less seriously. Bucks though....

 

[timokane]

I think the captaincy of Collingwood will be annouced at the 2025 season launch and its Darcy Moore

30

Darcy Moore

Age

29

Ht

203cm

Wt

100kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.1

3star

K

7.0

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

4.8

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

169.1

3star

D

13.9

3star

K

7.3

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

4.9

5star

T

0.7

1star

MG

182.0

3star

D

6.8

2star

K

4.2

2star

HB

2.6

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.8

4star

MG

87.4

2star

to hand the batton to Nick Daicos be like the hand over around the xmas break.
Moore will be vice captain tho.
But its Nick as Pies captain.

 

[Fat Jesus]

I think the captaincy of Collingwood will be annouced at the 2025 season launch and its Darcy Moore to hand the batton to Nick Daicos be like the hand over around the xmas break.
Moore will be vice captain tho.
But its Nick as Pies captain.

A few years to go yet before Nick is Captain.

 

[Finnishpie]

I think the captaincy of Collingwood will be annouced at the 2025 season launch and its Darcy Moore to hand the batton to Nick Daicos be like the hand over around the xmas break.
Moore will be vice captain tho.
But its Nick as Pies captain.

Give Nick a chance to win a Brownlow first.... Christ.

 

[Finnishpie]

None of those 5 listed have been All-Australian quality for years, if ever

Sidebottom, Elliot, Pendlebury and Howe were all AA quality. Probably not now, but not so long ago.

 

[soreplums]

As long as we have trade capital we can bring in quality 22 year olds ready to go to replace our retirees with cap availability

 

[gouki88]

Sidebottom, Elliot, Pendlebury and Howe were all AA quality. Probably not now, but not so long ago.

Elliott was never, and Howe was borderline at best. None have been for years.

 

[Finnishpie]

Elliott was never, and Howe was borderline at best. None have been for years.

I said AA quality. Had a few things luck-wise been different, Howe and Elliot were good enough to make the AA team. Injuries got Elliot, the imbecilic emphasis on midfielders counted against him and Howe. i'm not a formalist here, so my point, as my words indicated, was that at their best they were AA quality. The other four "replacements" are unlikely to reach those levels. that seems pretty uncontroversial to me.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

I said AA quality. Had a few things luck-wise been different, Howe and Elliot were good enough to make the AA team. Injuries got Elliot, the imbecilic emphasis on midfielders counted against him and Howe. i'm not a formalist here, so my point, as my words indicated, was that at their best they were AA quality. The other four "replacements" are unlikely to reach those levels. that seems pretty uncontroversial to me.

The point is that even in 2023, when we won the premiership, none of those four guys were playing at an All-Australian level. We don't need to replicate them at their best to be a good side, just them at the level they were at last year.

They had in the past, but we don't need to replace Pendlebury's output from 2011, we have to replace his output from, at best, last year. And while he was still a fine player, he was not at an AA level in 2023, so it's unreasonable to form a negative outlook based on the fact that the replacement for Pendlebury won't be as good as Pendlebury in his prime.

The players we get can be at least as good as the old and below their best versions of those 4 players - That's not completely fanciful.

 

[Finnishpie]

The point is that even in 2023, when we won the premiership, none of those four guys were playing at an All-Australian level. We don't need to replicate them at their best to be a good side, just them at the level they were at last year.

They had in the past, but we don't need to replace Pendlebury's output from 2011, we have to replace his output from, at best, last year. And while he was still a fine player, he was not at an AA level in 2023, so it's unreasonable to form a negative outlook based on the fact that the replacement for Pendlebury won't be as good as Pendlebury in his prime.

The players we get can be at least as good as the old and below their best versions of those 4 players - That's not completely fanciful.

I notice you don't focus on the post that reads: "None of those 5 listed have been All-Australian quality for years, if ever"

But to the point at hand. You're right, we don't need to replace those players with All-Australians. We simply need to build a premiership team. If you don't have concerns about 2026 and after that's fine. Plenty do, including Buckley, and about half the other commentators. I think we'll contend next year, but then we'll be overtaken by Gold Coast and likely several others.

I think the Geelong example is the exception. The Hawthorn/Richmond example more likely. None of us know for sure. We're all making calculated guesses. So we may end up like Geelong... we may. On the other hand, to not take the Richmond example seriously is, as I said, DELUSIONAL. If people can't accept it's a chance -- however small in their estimation -- they are suffering from fantastical thinking.

 

[sr36]

You keep posting the same “cliff” stuff. We’ve just added perryman, Houston. Are likely to add membrey for free who’s bloody underrated IMO. Condon could potentially be playing vfl by June. McGuane next year. There’s plenty of turn over. And we aren’t replacing pendles or sidey at their best… calling them AA is delusional. Port however are required to replace an AA player, who we’ve just got

Plus, even if they're right. What was the alternative? Keep our first and take some mediocre second round picks to the draft? How the hell would that stop a 2026 cliff caused by impending retirments that they're predicting? Houston, Perryman and whoever we add next year on the other hand are a bloody good chance of stopping it. Wiithout mentioning that we've just significantly increased our chances of winning the flag.

 

[sr36]

I notice you don't focus on the post that reads: "None of those 5 listed have been All-Australian quality for years, if ever"

But to the point at hand. You're right, we don't need to replace those players with All-Australians. We simply need to build a premiership team. If you don't have concerns about 2026 and after that's fine. Plenty do, including Buckley, and about half the other commentators. I think we'll contend next year, but then we'll be overtaken by Gold Coast and likely several others.

I think the Geelong example is the exception. The Hawthorn/Richmond example more likely. None of us know for sure. We're all making calculated guesses. So we may end up like Geelong... we may. On the other hand, to not take the Richmond example seriously is, as I said, DELUSIONAL. If people can't accept it's a chance -- however small in their estimation -- they are suffering from fantastical thinking.

What would you have done that would have given us a better chance of staying up?

Of course a Richmond style drop is a possibility - for every team in contention (although the academy teams are somewhat future proofed in terms of talent), but if you don't think that a Richmond like drop is a possibility and actually more likely with a draft strategy, then you're the delusional one. A draft strategy would have given us way less chance of success over the next two years and made it much more likely that we'd plummet with our impending retirements.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

If we traded out Noble, Richards and not traded in Houston, Perryman and Membrey then at best we would have had picks 13, 27, 36, 39 and 52. We would have also lost out F1st as well.

No way those 5 picks would be better than Houston, Perryman, Noble, Membrey and Richards in the short term (2025-2027). And long term the chances are also slim unless we are talking 2030+.

Draft picks dont stop us from having a Richmond like drop away that they had this year. They take years to develop and they are speculative at best. Even the addition of Houston, Perryman and Membrey may not stop it either but that guaranteed talent will at least delay it and give us another shot at the flag. If our injuries are good in 2025.

On a side note all clubs bottom out at some stage and we will as well. But the thing is well run clubs like us don't bottom out for long. While poorly run clubs like Carlton spend years winning spoons.

 

[sideswipe]

Plus, even if they're right. What was the alternative? Keep our first and take some mediocre second round picks to the draft? How the hell would that stop a 2026 cliff caused by impending retirments that they're predicting? Houston, Perryman and whoever we add next year on the other hand are a bloody good chance of stopping it. Wiithout mentioning that we've just significantly increased our chances of winning the flag.

The way to prevent the ageing cliff is by being ageist and dumping players before they get old. If only we had managed out Pendles, Steele, Howe and a few others about three years ago, we would be flying in 2026.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Aussie pie]

I’m going to disagree with Fly and say we need to draft kids now!!! Top end picks before the Tassie compromised draft class. So next year Tom McGuane good start. Then we need a spine for the future. Knowing keys take awhile to develop. So get them asap so Moore, McStay and Checkers can teach them, that’s how the draft should work. We’ve done that with our rucks getting Smitt but the spine is spineless

 

[manicpie]

I’m going to disagree with Fly and say we need to draft kids now!!! Top end picks before the Tassie compromised draft class. So next year Tom McGuane good start. Then we need a spine for the future. Knowing keys take awhile to develop. So get them asap so Moore, McStay and Checkers can teach them, that’s how the draft should work. We’ve done that with our rucks getting Smitt but the spine is spineless

Which draft picks are you using to get these kids.

 

[Jen2310]

I’m going to disagree with Fly and say we need to draft kids now!!! Top end picks before the Tassie compromised draft class. So next year Tom McGuane good start. Then we need a spine for the future. Knowing keys take awhile to develop. So get them asap so Moore, McStay and Checkers can teach them, that’s how the draft should work. We’ve done that with our rucks getting Smitt but the spine is spineless

tbf, even in the tassie draft in 2027 we could have Ted Fraser (F/S), Cooper Bracantisano (nga) and Eli Kravic (nga)
2026, maybe Max Christian if he becomes a prospect. So not all doom and gloom.
But preferrably we keep our 2026 first rounder

 

[Aussie pie]

tbf, even in the tassie draft in 2027 we could have Ted Fraser (F/S), Cooper Bracantisano (nga) and Eli Kravic (nga)
2026, maybe Max Christian if he becomes a prospect. So not all doom and gloom.

Ok, didn’t know that so that’s good and then maybe the Roccas? Still I don’t want to rely on NGA’s and F/s picks with the changes to the rules coming where we could quite possibly miss them because we don’t have high enough picks because we traded them for a 27 year old middle of the road role player.
It really is a game of chance and luck sometimes. The Hawks got lucky in the early 2000’s with their picks while the tigs totally stuffed it up.

 

[Aussie pie]

Which draft picks are you using to get these kids.

The picks we don’t give away for middle of the road role players which is why I said I disagree with fly.

 

[Jen2310]

Ok, didn’t know that so that’s good and then maybe the Roccas? Still I don’t want to rely on NGA’s and F/s picks with the changes to the rules coming where we could quite possibly miss them because we don’t have high enough picks because we traded them for a 27 year old middle of the road role player.
It really is a game of chance and luck sometimes. The Hawks got lucky in the early 2000’s with their picks while the tigs totally stuffed it up.

Of course, I totally get it. The good thing is what you probably can always find he points now with the new rules where you can trade 2 years in the future.
You don't want to rely on potential FS/NGA this far out, but would be a bonus. Hopefully we keep our 2026 first and get some good kids in.

 

[HoraceStrasbork]

Ok, didn’t know that so that’s good and then maybe the Roccas? Still I don’t want to rely on NGA’s and F/s picks with the changes to the rules coming where we could quite possibly miss them because we don’t have high enough picks because we traded them for a 27 year old middle of the road role player.
It really is a game of chance and luck sometimes. The Hawks got lucky in the early 2000’s with their picks while the tigs totally stuffed it up.

Early on the tigers nailed it through the rookie draft

 

[Finnishpie]

What would you have done that would have given us a better chance of staying up?

Of course a Richmond style drop is a possibility - for every team in contention (although the academy teams are somewhat future proofed in terms of talent), but if you don't think that a Richmond like drop is a possibility and actually more likely with a draft strategy, then you're the delusional one. A draft strategy would have given us way less chance of success over the next two years and made it much more likely that we'd plummet with our impending retirements.

I am happy with the decisions this year. We go all in -- okay, that was what we had to do this time around.

Last year, however, I would not have traded for Shultz and I would not have let Ginnivan go (though I understand he's a bit of a fool, then again, so has De Goey been in the past). As a general rule, I am in favour of maintaining first round draft picks unless there's a really, really, good reason to trade them.

Last year, I would also have probably seen if one or two of of our over-30s wanted to go to, say, North or Gold Coast, if there was interest - though I suppose Adams went, so that was one aging player off the list. Still, I think the age of our list is a problem, and the issues lie in the past. I have doubts that Mitchell will be able to return to any kind of elite level, think Sidebottom will drop off a bit again. Pendlebury and Howe will come off marginally too, Cox is probably past his best, the list goes on -- Elliot, who knows?. I get the decision to keep them all, but 9-10 players over 30/32 is a problem with its foundation a year ago.

The other relevant factor is the lack of youth coming on: Macrae, McInniss, Dean, etc. The loss of Murphy hurt. So that has skewed things a bit, making things a little worse than anyone predicted -- making all sides right in a way.

But this year, we did as well as we could with a not-very good hand. As I said, we will contend this year. So I'm for that. Then the year after the problems set in. We'll just have to see though. I've been wrong before. But who hasn't?

 

[Fat Jesus]

I am happy with the decisions this year. We go all in -- okay, that was what we had to do this time around.

Last year, however, I would not have traded for Shultz and I would not have let Ginnivan go (though I understand he's a bit of a fool, then again, so has De Goey been in the past). As a general rule, I am in favour of maintaining first round draft picks unless there's a really, really, good reason to trade them.

Last year, I would also have probably seen if one or two of of our over-30s wanted to go to, say, North or Gold Coast, if there was interest - though I suppose Adams went, so that was one aging player off the list. Still, I think the age of our list is a problem, and the issues lie in the past. I have doubts that Mitchell will be able to return to any kind of elite level, think Sidebottom will drop off a bit again. Pendlebury and Howe will come off marginally too, Cox is probably past his best, the list goes on -- Elliot, who knows?. I get the decision to keep them all, but 9-10 players over 30/32 is a problem with its foundation a year ago.

The other relevant factor is the lack of youth coming on: Macrae, McInniss, Dean, etc. The loss of Murphy hurt. So that has skewed things a bit, making things a little worse than anyone predicted -- making all sides right in a way.

But this year, we did as well as we could with a not-very good hand. As I said, we will contend this year. So I'm for that. Then the year after the problems set in. We'll just have to see though. I've been wrong before. But who hasn't?

Schultz is a gun. Ginnivan is not a good footballer. Believe what you will.
Schultz worth a first rounder. Houston worth the same plus having to lose Richards in the process.
The Club is doing just nicely.

 

[sr36]

I am happy with the decisions this year. We go all in -- okay, that was what we had to do this time around.

Last year, however, I would not have traded for Shultz and I would not have let Ginnivan go (though I understand he's a bit of a fool, then again, so has De Goey been in the past). As a general rule, I am in favour of maintaining first round draft picks unless there's a really, really, good reason to trade them.

Last year, I would also have probably seen if one or two of of our over-30s wanted to go to, say, North or Gold Coast, if there was interest - though I suppose Adams went, so that was one aging player off the list. Still, I think the age of our list is a problem, and the issues lie in the past. I have doubts that Mitchell will be able to return to any kind of elite level, think Sidebottom will drop off a bit again. Pendlebury and Howe will come off marginally too, Cox is probably past his best, the list goes on -- Elliot, who knows?. I get the decision to keep them all, but 9-10 players over 30/32 is a problem with its foundation a year ago.

The other relevant factor is the lack of youth coming on: Macrae, McInniss, Dean, etc. The loss of Murphy hurt. So that has skewed things a bit, making things a little worse than anyone predicted -- making all sides right in a way.

But this year, we did as well as we could with a not-very good hand. As I said, we will contend this year. So I'm for that. Then the year after the problems set in. We'll just have to see though. I've been wrong before. But who hasn't?

Can I put it to you that this potential cliff that you saw last year, was looming a couple of years before that. When Fly was appointed, the overwhelming majority assumed he was going to have to rebuild. And I have little doubt that some of the applicants would have pitched themselves as the man to oversee a rebuild.

Thankfully, the selection panel didn't think like you do and appointed a coach who advocated winning and getting us straight back up the ladder after a shit year. Otherwise we'd already be off the cliff.

The way I see it, our mature recruiting has already extended a team that was due for a re-build if that was your mentality. And this latest off season should see it extended beyond the initial wave of retirees. And I think we'll be able to continue to extend our period of contention for a while to come.

I love what they're doing.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Can I put it to you that this potential cliff that you saw last year, was looming a couple of years before that. When Fly was appointed, the overwhelming majority assumed he was going to have to rebuild. And I have little doubt that some of the applicants would have pitched themselves as the man to oversee a rebuild.

Thankfully, the selection panel didn't think like you do and appointed a coach who advocated winning and getting us straight back up the ladder after a shit year. Otherwise we'd already be off the cliff.

The way I see it, our mature recruiting has already extended a team that was due for a re-build if that was your mentality. And this latest off season should see it extended beyond the initial wave of retirees. And I think we'll be able to continue to extend our period of contention for a while to come.

I love what they're doing.

What's happened & is happening now is a re-inventing of what we know & how we use to view things & the direction we can now see things going.

I can't be clearer than that.