Beholden to the senior clique

[PetterdHoisted]

Want to preface this by saying that Fly McRae is not the only one, at all, and is still pretty wet behind the ears for an AFL senior coach and up against 300-400 game legend players, so it's understandable.

Still, Collingwood, what a fascinating case study in the exalted status of a senior player clique overriding all sanity checks at a club.

2025 prelim: Pendlebury a classic old man calf injury in minutes, Howe one of the worst starts to a final of any player possibly ever, Cox dropping a chest mark in the first 10 seconds, Sidebottom 5 metres behind McLuggage after 5 steps.

What does a club do when a 30+ clique is so high on the pedestal that, not only are they not put out to pasture, but the club actually doubles down on other older players (Membrey, Houston to a lesser extent, in the Pies case)?

Has it happened at your club? What is the way out if a youngish coach can't tell club legend players that it was time quite a while ago?

 

[Mr Cheese]

I feel at Freo we've gone the opposite route; the Leonardo DiCaprio of the AFL if you will...

 

[MrPenguin]

Got no idea what you are talking about mate why would any club give long and lucrative contracts to older players? Seems like the leaders of such clubs would be derelict in their duties. Would hate to see that at my club.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

I feel at Freo we've gone the opposite route; the Leonardo DiCaprio of the AFL if you will...

Freo ticked a box or two, and at least still have a pick in the top 20

Pies were indeed 'all in' in a different way, and no insight or admission from McRae's presser that this was a 'last dance' thing for a lot of players

God knows when the Pies next have a draft pick.

 

[PerthBoy86]

Pendles and Sidey have the smarts and experience, and are the glue holding it all together. Kind of need them for the time being, who else has the experience, composure and IQ to be the generals for now? There's Moore, Howe, Elliott etc, but they're getting up there too.

 

[north_lad]

I highly recommend the Brad Scott strategy of delisting them all at the same time, worked out brilliantly for us

 

[lalorGOAT]

I don't understand what the plan is for collingwood here? Why are they so desperate for one more flag than they are willing to stake their entire future for it?

They are going to end up worse than North just for a slim chance at another flag.

Not to mention playing Pendlebury who was apparently injured in the warm up? Bizarre.

 

[Mr Meow]

I don't understand what the plan is for collingwood here? Why are they so desperate for one more flag than they are willing to stake their entire future for it?

They are going to end up worse than North just for a slim chance at another flag.

Not to mention playing Pendlebury who was apparently injured in the warm up? Bizarre.

People compare them to Geelong. But who are the next group of players coming through or taking over?

Okay Daicos is their Holmes.

But then who is their SDK? Their Smith? Their Dempsey? Their Neale? Their Humphries? Their O'Sullivan? Their Mullin? Their Ollie Henry (once he finds form again)?

Is their mid 20s group as solid as Miers, Stengle, Zuthrie, Henry, Close? Do they have a "best young player" like Mannagh somewhere?

There's 13 players who are doing a lot of work for the Cats and I'm just not sure the Pies have that mix on their list.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Want to preface this by saying that Fly McRae is not the only one, at all, and is still pretty wet behind the ears for an AFL senior coach and up against 300-400 game legend players, so it's understandable.

Still, Collingwood, what a fascinating case study in the exalted status of a senior player clique overriding all sanity checks at a club.

2025 prelim: Pendlebury a classic old man calf injury in minutes, Howe one of the worst starts to a final of any player possibly ever, Cox dropping a chest mark in the first 10 seconds, Sidebottom 5 metres behind McLuggage after 5 steps.

What does a club do when a 30+ clique is so high on the pedestal that, not only are they not put out to pasture, but the club actually doubles down on other older players (Membrey, Houston to a lesser extent, in the Pies case)?

Has it happened at your club? What is the way out if a youngish coach can't tell club legend players that it was time quite a while ago?

Coaches trust experienced guys. That's usually why they're experienced - because for years they're able to do the basics well, follow the plan, and not crumble under pressure so coaches keep giving them games. Even if their individual output isn't the same as a younger more talented player, coaches will almost always go with who they trust.

I don't think it's necessarily a 'clique' thing. I think it's that the coach values trust over almost everything else.

It becomes an issue though obviously when everyone can see that these guys are cooked, yet the coach can't.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

People compare them to Geelong. But who are the next group of players coming through or taking over?

Okay Daicos is their Holmes.

But then who is their SDK? Their Smith? Their Dempsey? Their Neale? Their Humphries? Their O'Sullivan? Their Mullin? Their Ollie Henry (once he finds form again)?

Is their mid 20s group as solid as Miers, Stengle, Zuthrie, Henry, Close? Do they have a "best young player" like Mannagh somewhere?

There's 13 players who are doing a lot of work for the Cats and I'm just not sure the Pies have that mix on their list.

To be fair, the conversation around Geelong at the moment is largely skewed by the individual performance of a 35yo on Friday night.

 

[Mr Meow]

To be fair, the conversation around Geelong at the moment is largely skewed by the individual performance of a 35yo on Friday night.

And to be even fairer with a suitable amount of justified respect - Smith, Holmes, Atkins, Dempsey, Miers, Mannagh, Zuthrie, SDK, Mullin and co. have had great finals series in their roles too. Only Atkins has (recently) hit the big 3-0.

 

[Franc de Borges]

The Carlton clique is the job you want. Coaches are beholden to guys that have zero performance KPIs.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

I don't understand what the plan is for collingwood here? Why are they so desperate for one more flag than they are willing to stake their entire future for it?

They are going to end up worse than North just for a slim chance at another flag.

Not to mention playing Pendlebury who was apparently injured in the warm up? Bizarre.

I think they're relying on the 'everyone wants to play for Collingwood' factor.

They get ANZAC Day, Queen's Birthday, play at the MCG every second week in front of 80000 people in prime time slots, etc. etc.

It certainly looks dire for them, but the big clubs that play in the big games, always seem to draw talent and bounce back pretty quickly.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

And to be even fairer with a suitable amount of justified respect - Smith, Holmes, Atkins, Dempsey, Miers, Mannagh, Zuthrie, SDK, Mullin and co. have had great finals series in their roles too. Only Atkins has (recently) hit the big 3-0.

No doubt - but even with that, they'd have lost on Friday night if not for the heroics of a 35yo.

So that may suggest that these guys just aren't that good? If they all had a great finals series, yet Geelong needed Dangerfield to put on what has been described as arguably the best individual prelim final performance of all time to win - that might be highlighting a problem rather than a positive.

Maybe Geelong have great depth, but are really thin on impactful players? After Cameron and Dangerfield.

If Dangerfield didn't do what he did, Geelong would have lost and people would be asking why their depth players didn't step up. They'd be questioning all of the guys you listed.

Or maybe their depth players are just playing their roles, and will step up and replace the Dangerfield and Cameron when they're required to?


But I mean, hypothetically if Pendlebury had 35 touches, kicked 3 and dominated stoppages and contests, Collingwood would have won last night.

 

[Mr Meow]

No doubt - but even with that, they'd have lost on Friday night if not for the heroics of a 35yo.

So that may suggest that these guys just aren't that good? If they all had a great finals series, yet Geelong needed Dangerfield to put on what has been described as arguably the best individual prelim final performance of all time to win - that might be highlighting a problem rather than a positive.

Maybe Geelong have great depth, but are really thin on impactful players? After Cameron and Dangerfield.

If Dangerfield didn't do what he did, Geelong would have lost and people would be asking why their depth players didn't step up. They'd be questioning all of the guys you listed.

Or maybe their depth players are just playing their roles, and will step up and replace the Dangerfield and Cameron when they're required to?


But I mean, hypothetically if Pendlebury had 35 touches, kicked 3 and dominated stoppages and contests, Collingwood would have won last night.

Sure, the "if this, if that" hypothetical game can be played all day.

People have been telling Geelong supporters "but what if you didn't have these 30+ year olds" for exactly 15 years in a row.

We are getting good contributions across all of our age ranges, continue to draft and develop well, and remain an attractive destination for good players to head to.

Dangerfield didn't star in our most recent finals against Brisbane, which we won and went very close to winning. He had many acceptable but not dominant games against good teams throughout the year which we won. Likewise Cameron and Stewart.

Dangerfield, Cameron, Stewart and Blicavs are the 4 remaining veterans of importance and they will be around for an amount of time that frustrates opposition supporters.

 

[Worm4]

The coach knows that he has Nick Daicos , and bugger all else. If bugger all else move on, then Nick Daicos all of a sudden becomes a lesser player. The coach is protecting little Nicky as long as possible.

 

[deck]

The coach knows that he has Nick Daicos , and bugger all else. If bugger all else move on, then Nick Daicos becomes all of a sudden becomes a lesser player. The coach is protecting little Nicky as long as possible.

Need to be more like Carlton. 30 years and counting and still as far away as ever.

 

[windyhill]

but the big clubs that play in the big games, always seem to draw talent and bounce back pretty quickly.

Essendon the exception to this rule.

 

[PhatBoy]

No doubt - but even with that, they'd have lost on Friday night if not for the heroics of a 35yo.

So that may suggest that these guys just aren't that good? If they all had a great finals series, yet Geelong needed Dangerfield to put on what has been described as arguably the best individual prelim final performance of all time to win - that might be highlighting a problem rather than a positive.

Maybe Geelong have great depth, but are really thin on impactful players? After Cameron and Dangerfield.

If Dangerfield didn't do what he did, Geelong would have lost and people would be asking why their depth players didn't step up. They'd be questioning all of the guys you listed.

Or maybe their depth players are just playing their roles, and will step up and replace the Dangerfield and Cameron when they're required to?


But I mean, hypothetically if Pendlebury had 35 touches, kicked 3 and dominated stoppages and contests, Collingwood would have won last night.

We’d have lost without Atkins as well. And probably without Bailey Smith. Dangerfield was best on ground but take out either of those other two performances and the result probably changes.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

We’d have lost without Atkins as well. And probably without Bailey Smith. Dangerfield was best on ground but take out either of those other two performances and the result probably changes.

Sure. I'd add Blicavs to that list too. He was awesome.

 

[StillAtLarge]

The worst thing was Pendlebury tweaking his calf in the warm up and still putting his hand up to play. It completely killed them

 

[Lach72]

People compare them to Geelong. But who are the next group of players coming through or taking over?

Okay Daicos is their Holmes.

But then who is their SDK? Their Smith? Their Dempsey? Their Neale? Their Humphries? Their O'Sullivan? Their Mullin? Their Ollie Henry (once he finds form again)?

Is their mid 20s group as solid as Miers, Stengle, Zuthrie, Henry, Close? Do they have a "best young player" like Mannagh somewhere?

There's 13 players who are doing a lot of work for the Cats and I'm just not sure the Pies have that mix on their list.

Yeah they need to prioritise guys like Ed Allan now.

Unfortunately they’ve already signed Sidebottom and Pendles.

But they’re aging EVERYWHERE.

The list of players 29 and above is huge.

 

[kreuze_missile]

I feel at Freo we've gone the opposite route; the Leonardo DiCaprio of the AFL if you will...

North went full Leo.

Still haven’t come back from it.

Be warned.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

The worst thing was Pendlebury tweaking his calf in the warm up and still putting his hand up to play. It completely killed them

yeah again, is there anyone at the club who would dare say to Pendles 'you are sitting this one out'

certainly not last night

sanity check overridden on a smaller scale in that case

list management is where is has happened on a grander scale at the Pies, imo

 

[PetterdHoisted]

We’d have lost without Atkins as well. And probably without Bailey Smith. Dangerfield was best on ground but take out either of those other two performances and the result probably changes.

Chris Scott is the least likely to become beholden, of any coach, imo

Seems to be way more analytical than emotional compared to most coaches?

Geelong, as usual, are the exception to the rule, the oldies are moved on when the time is right. Probably Hawkins got a little longer than he should have, that I could see.