Best team from last 27 years

[Timmy from Thomastown]

In a team from 1990 onwards surely not many 1990 premiership players get picked. For many of them that was the pinnacle of their careers and due to age and injury and worse went downhill pretty quickly after that. To capture this properly you really need to go back to about 1987 so you can include something approaching the full careers of our premiership heroes.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

If it’s only 1-2 years players like Medhurst and Anthony come into contention. A team of best year vs body of work would make for an interesting comparison.

Anthony doesn’t come ever into contention. His stats in his freak year were a fluke. He had a good yeah and just kicked straight.

 

[loki04]

He was, but it was just that - 2 years. McGuane was outstanding player for longer and would've been even longer than that without injuries, IMO anyway.
If was to put Tarrant in I'd probably swap him with A.Rocca

Tarrant would of made a brilliant 3rd tall fwd imo he was still great as a main man but he would of been unbelievable as a 3rd wheel. He was running 16km a game back then up and down the wings, many mids dont even regularly hit that mark now days (a lot only hitting the 14-15km mark).

 

[35Daicos]

If it’s only 1-2 years players like Medhurst and Anthony come into contention. A team of best year vs body of work would make for an interesting comparison.

In a team from 1990 onwards surely not many 1990 premiership players get picked. For many of them that was the pinnacle of their careers and due to age and injury and worse went downhill pretty quickly after that. To capture this properly you really need to go back to about 1987 so you can include something approaching the full careers of our premiership heroes.

This (selection "rules") is a very interesting discussion in it's own right, and there's obviously no clear answer on the topic!

It's just about impossible to ignore what players like Daicos and Millane did for us prior to 1990, but it shouldn't come into the thinking. Yet it would! Realistically, Darren Millane shouldn't be in the team at all (I'm still not leaving him out!). Adam Treloar has probably played at least as much good football for us so far as Millane did in 1990-91, yet I'd say most would scoff at the thought that he be chosen in front of him. Again, it's hard to know how the team should be chosen. At least some of the 1990 premiership heroes (Brown & Wright for lots of years, McGuane & T. Shaw for enough) kept playing for plenty of time to perhaps make them easier to pick.

I just realised I hadn't actually named a team anywhere in this thread (I thought I had!):
B. J. Clement ~ G Pert ~ S Burns
HB. S Morwood ~ B Reid ~ H Shaw
C. G Brown ~ N Buckley (c) ~ D Millane
HF. D Swan ~ T Cloke ~ M McGuane
F. P Daicos ~ A Rocca ~ A Didak
R. D Monkhorst ~ S Pendlebury ~ T Shaw
I. C Tarrant ~ P Williams ~ G Wright ~ S Sidebottom

C. L Matthews

E. B Grundy, S Prestigiacomo, S Russell, G Crosisca.

 

[barrackers]

Anthony doesn’t come ever into contention. His stats in his freak year were a fluke. He had a good yeah and just kicked straight.

That’s sort of what I was referencing - one freak best year vs sustained form over 3-4+ years. If I were selecting a team based purely on freak/career best year the team would be a lot different.

 

[sr36]

In a team from 1990 onwards surely not many 1990 premiership players get picked. For many of them that was the pinnacle of their careers and due to age and injury and worse went downhill pretty quickly after that. To capture this properly you really need to go back to about 1987 so you can include something approaching the full careers of our premiership heroes.

I reckon you may be overestimating the importance of this team, particularly whether or not it accurately reflects contributions from 1990 onwards.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

That’s sort of what I was referencing - one freak best year vs sustained form over 3-4+ years. If I were selecting a team based purely on freak/career best year the team would be a lot different.

My point is that Anthony had a good year but accurate goal kicking inflated how good it really was.

 

[Knightmare]

I can never help myself with these and I'll go from 1990 and extend it to be 29 years to continue on from the intent of the original idea.

I'm finding over recent years a lot of those older guys are getting passed by. Grundy has prime Monkhorst comfortably beat on 2018 play (2018 Grundy I considered the best in the competition last year). Morwood would have been in there previously but the play of Crisp and Howe these past two years has him beat with his 1990 form and certainly the years following not as strong as his play in the 80s and also has passed Maxwell/Lumumba by who both would get strong consideration for this kind of team as seriously good defenders but just not as talented. Paul Williams who would have been a fixture in past editions just misses out among others.

B: Heath Shaw James Clement Leon Davis
HB: Jack Crisp Ben Reid Jeremy Howe
CEN: Steele Sidebottom Nathan Buckley Dale Thomas
HF: Dayne Beams Travis Cloke Chris Tarrant
F: Jordan De Goey Saverio Rocca Peter Daicos
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Scott Pendlebury Dane Swan
BENCH: Adam Treloar Alan Didak Darren Millane Mick McGuane

Coach: Mick Malthouse

The only player I may be jumping the gun on is De Goey though on 2018 play I like him in there and feel over the next few years he can create separation between others who may be considered in his place presently. Darcy Moore in a year or two I wouldn't discount for this list but he's obviously not there yet. With Tarrant being able to swing back and 2011 Reid in my view Collingwood's best that season and flat out special during the 2010/2011 seasons it's not a must but perhaps more-so something I'd consider doing to gain that more genuine second ruck for this group if I didn't think it would make this group too tall.

It's also a hard balancing act when considering - do you go career achievement or the guy who had the best season or two and call them off their best season. Leon Davis had two flat out incredible seasons and the rest of his career was inconsistent - but seeing that one season of him playing in defence where he didn't seem to lose a 1v1 and was the best kickout option in the game it's hard not having him. Reid with all the injuries many wouldn't have there, but those 2010/2011 seasons were just so special I feel he was during those years the clear best key defender in the game with not only his intercepting special in the way you'd say of a McGovern today, but that kicking - low, fast through the air 60m passes to targets up the field was just unreal and something a bit like with Davis' kickouts I wouldn't be without.

 

[35Daicos]

I can never help myself with these and I'll go from 1990 and extend it to be 29 years to continue on from the intent of the original idea.

I'm finding over recent years a lot of those older guys are getting passed by. Grundy has prime Monkhorst comfortably beat on 2018 play (2018 Grundy I considered the best in the competition last year). Morwood would have been in there previously but the play of Crisp and Howe these past two years has him beat with his 1990 form and certainly the years following not as strong as his play in the 80s and also has passed Maxwell/Lumumba by who both would get strong consideration for this kind of team as seriously good defenders but just not as talented. Paul Williams who would have been a fixture in past editions just misses out among others.

B: Heath Shaw James Clement Leon Davis
HB: Jack Crisp Ben Reid Jeremy Howe
CEN: Steele Sidebottom Nathan Buckley Dale Thomas
HF: Dayne Beams Travis Cloke Chris Tarrant
F: Jordan De Goey Saverio Rocca Peter Daicos
FOLL: Brodie Grundy Scott Pendlebury Dane Swan
BENCH: Adam Treloar Alan Didak Darren Millane Mick McGuane

Coach: Mick Malthouse

The only player I may be jumping the gun on is De Goey though on 2018 play I like him in there and feel over the next few years he can create separation between others who may be considered in his place presently. Darcy Moore in a year or two I wouldn't discount for this list but he's obviously not there yet. With Tarrant being able to swing back and 2011 Reid in my view Collingwood's best that season and flat out special during the 2010/2011 seasons it's not a must but perhaps more-so something I'd consider doing to gain that more genuine second ruck for this group if I didn't think it would make this group too tall.

It's also a hard balancing act when considering - do you go career achievement or the guy who had the best season or two and call them off their best season. Leon Davis had two flat out incredible seasons and the rest of his career was inconsistent - but seeing that one season of him playing in defence where he didn't seem to lose a 1v1 and was the best kickout option in the game it's hard not having him. Reid with all the injuries many wouldn't have there, but those 2010/2011 seasons were just so special I feel he was during those years the clear best key defender in the game with not only his intercepting special in the way you'd say of a McGovern today, but that kicking - low, fast through the air 60m passes to targets up the field was just unreal and something a bit like with Davis' kickouts I wouldn't be without.

This is a very interesting exercise, KM, and picking such teams is always a lot of fun. You could probably find as many faults with the team I (and others) have named as I would with your side! You're not going to keep everyone happy!

You haven't named one of our all-time greats in Gavin Brown. Did you really mean to leave him out?! He played 11 seasons for us from 1990 onwards, and only had the three prior to 1990. For mine, he's one of those from back then (with Daicos, McGuane, Millane and T. Shaw) who are still in the 'untouchable' category when it comes to selecting this side!

 

[Tarkyn_24]

B: M Lokan - J Frost - H Schade
HB: D Stanley - T Walker - A Corrie
C: C Morrison - R Cook - A Iacobucci
HF: C Egan - T Davidson - B Crocker
F: L Rounds - J Paine - D King
R: D Fanning - J Rowe - J Barham
INT: G Richards - K Ugle - J Russell - T Lane

I just can’t see where this side could be improved.

A couple of minor improvements.

 

[Knightmare]

This is a very interesting exercise, KM, and picking such teams is always a lot of fun.

You could probably find as many faults with the team I (and others) have named as I would with your side! You're not going to keep everyone happy! You haven't named one of our all-time greats in Gavin Brown. Did you really mean to leave him out?! He played 11 seasons for us from 1990 onwards, and only had the three prior to 1990. For mine, he's one of those from back then (with Daicos, McGuane, Millane and T. Shaw) who are still in the 'untouchable' category when it comes to selecting this side!

It will be like that where absolutely you'll look at the next persons team and think 'how has that guy been left out?' and 'surely they're not behind xyz.' And there is a lot of personal preference that comes into it. Someone could make an argument for Maxwell as the best captain/leader the club has had and while not individually as talented as any listed in my defence they have a fair case for his inclusion. Some may play the long term cards.

Brown would have been in an older edition going back probably 2-3 years but doesn't quite make my team today. If someone had a Luke Ball or Taylor Adams ahead of him, I'd agree with you and go Brown first.

Treloar/Beams. They might be some Brown could be argued ahead of, but I'd take those guys ahead of Brown personally. But that is a definite conversation and I wouldn't hold it against anyone who went Brown over those guys.

De Goey? Possibly could take Brown over De Goey as De Goey has only had the one year where he has dominated, but I think on talent De Goey last year proved to be on another level and will create separation between himself and Brown. Anyone with a two year rule, fair enough.

The reality with Brown though is (and I'll concede outright he played in a lower possession era compared to today with fewer handballs and fewer short kicks) but he never even one 465+ disposal season in the 90s. And other than 1990 as a forward and 1999, the other seasons were sub 20 goal seasons. So he's not one I'd say must be selected. I also give him bonus marks for the way he played and his leadership qualities which add value. I just don't rate that ahead of Beams who has had 741d and 28g in a season or Treloar with two 600d+ seasons where he not only wins it but has genuine explosiveness to go with it.

As my side indicates by the bench positions Mcguane, Millane and Didak will be the next three to go as the next least safe from my group and with them it's not a matter of if but when they'll be passed by others as is the case when you make all-time teams or best teams from a crazy long period like this. Other than really Buckley (for mine still stacks up favourably to anyone who he played against and those who have played since), really anyone could in time eventually lose their spot.

 

[Tarkyn_24]

I can’t believe anybody can justify having Leon in something like this.

He spent parts of his career unable to even cement his spot in the 22 with his contemporaries. Think 2003 and 2010 where he was in and out of the side.

 

[35Daicos]

I just thought Chris Tarrant, probably needs a higher rating. Have I neglected him?
Leon Davis I just leave out because his finals and GF record hurts him a bit.

As for Tarrant, you may well have!! I found a spot for him in my side (only on the bench, but that hardly matters these days) because of not just his obvious talent, but his ability to play well at both ends made him an essential selection.

Leon Davis was just a brilliant player. To be picked as an AA up forward and down back is an incredible achievement. On pure ability he has a fair few of those being selected in front of him covered. I ended up with about 30 names that I was considering for the team, and it's definitely fair to say I kind of forgot about him (not on purpose), but I'm sure that his failure to perform in those big games is what caused that to happen. It's unfortunate that a mostly-successful career will always be tarnished in the eyes of many due to that. Sadly, it is how it is!

 

[Knightmare]

I can’t believe anybody can justify having Leon in something like this.

He spent parts of his career unable to even cement his spot in the 22 with his contemporaries. Think 2003 and 2010 where he was in and out of the side.

With Davis 4 of his last 5 years were successful. 2009 and 2011 seasons he was elite, 2007/2008 he was effective. The rest of his career he was inconsistent and his performances have been poor in big games for the most part.

2011 back pocket Davis was exceptional and if the criteria is to create a side and win one game and you can grab any player from any era. Give me 2011 Leon Davis and let me stick him in the back pocket. I wouldn't even play the big game card against 2011 Leon having no letdowns during that season or finals series. It was a special season. Anyone with his kickout (was it something like 70+ successive targets hit?) and 1v1 wins (did he even lose a 1v1 for the season? if he did it may only have been one or two - he just never seemed to lose a 1v1) from 2011 will recognise exactly how special and really historic a season it was.

The only shame with Davis is he wasn't moved back sooner. Had the move been made, we may be talking about him in the same conversation as McLeod and Wanganeen.

My criteria for the above team is based on prime performance, so it's putting aside the bad seasons of all these guys and going with their best years and going with a team to win one team. Best of Davis, best of Reid, best of Tarrant, best of Sav, best of Daisy and De Goey. Different team entirely if it's a career award selection and placing a greater weighting on consistency over their careers of total career value which would churn out very different results.

 

[Anzacday]

B: M Lokan - J Frost - J Russell
HB: D Stanley - T Walker - A Corrie
C: J Aish (c) - R Cook - A Iacobucci
HF: C Egan - T Davidson - C Morrison
F: L Rounds - J Paine - D King
R: D Fanning - J Rowe - J Barham
INT: G Richards - K Ugle - B Kinnear - T Lane

I just can’t see where this side could be improved.

Julian Rowe - another one I got wrong.
A latter day Chris Dalkin.

 

[jathanas]

This (selection "rules") is a very interesting discussion in it's own right, and there's obviously no clear answer on the topic!

It's just about impossible to ignore what players like Daicos and Millane did for us prior to 1990, but it shouldn't come into the thinking. Yet it would! Realistically, Darren Millane shouldn't be in the team at all (I'm still not leaving him out!). Adam Treloar has probably played at least as much good football for us so far as Millane did in 1990-91, yet I'd say most would scoff at the thought that he be chosen in front of him. Again, it's hard to know how the team should be chosen. At least some of the 1990 premiership heroes (Brown & Wright for lots of years, McGuane & T. Shaw for enough) kept playing for plenty of time to perhaps make them easier to pick.

I just realised I hadn't actually named a team anywhere in this thread (I thought I had!):
B. J. Clement ~ G Pert ~ S Burns
HB. S Morwood ~ B Reid ~ H Shaw
C. G Brown ~ N Buckley (c) ~ D Millane
HF. D Swan ~ T Cloke ~ M McGuane
F. P Daicos ~ A Rocca ~ A Didak
R. D Monkhorst ~ S Pendlebury ~ T Shaw
I. C Tarrant ~ P Williams ~ G Wright ~ S Sidebottom

C. L Matthews

E. B Grundy, S Prestigiacomo, S Russell, G Crosisca.

Very good side, but I'd have Tony Francis over Russell.

Couple more things to ponder on:

1. As an aside does having Daicos make Didak redundant?
2. Is T.Shaw more of an asset than someone who's star shone bright but for not as long e.g. Daisy?

 

[35Daicos]

It will be like that where absolutely you'll look at the next persons team and think 'how has that guy been left out?' and 'surely they're not behind xyz.' And there is a lot of personal preference that comes into it. Someone could make an argument for Maxwell as the best captain/leader the club has had and while not individually as talented as any listed in my defence they have a fair case for his inclusion. Some may play the long term cards.

Brown would have been in an older edition going back probably 2-3 years but doesn't quite make my team today. If someone had a Luke Ball or Taylor Adams ahead of him, I'd agree with you and go Brown first.

Treloar/Beams. They might be some Brown could be argued ahead of, but I'd take those guys ahead of Brown personally. But that is a definite conversation and I wouldn't hold it against anyone who went Brown over those guys.

De Goey? Possibly could take Brown over De Goey as De Goey has only had the one year where he has dominated, but I think on talent De Goey last year proved to be on another level and will create separation between himself and Brown. Anyone with a two year rule, fair enough.

The reality with Brown though is (and I'll concede outright he played in a lower possession era compared to today with fewer handballs and fewer short kicks) but he never even one 465+ disposal season in the 90s. And other than 1990 as a forward and 1999, the other seasons were sub 20 goal seasons. So he's not one I'd say must be selected. I also give him bonus marks for the way he played and his leadership qualities which add value. I just don't rate that ahead of Beams who has had 741d and 28g in a season or Treloar with two 600d+ seasons where he not only wins it but has genuine explosiveness to go with it.

As my side indicates by the bench positions Mcguane, Millane and Didak will be the next three to go as the next least safe from my group and with them it's not a matter of if but when they'll be passed by others as is the case when you make all-time teams or best teams from a crazy long period like this. Other than really Buckley (for mine still stacks up favourably to anyone who he played against and those who have played since), really anyone could in time eventually lose their spot.

Thanks for the (as always) polite response.

My way of looking at this is to not act as if the game was being played this week, using modern-day tactics. I simply look at how good the players were/are at the time they played and concede that they should be good enough to adjust, no matter what the era. Common sense says that players like Tony Shaw (even Greg Williams) may not get a spot on an AFL list these days because of their "handicaps", so it's not an easy thing to manage!!

Gavin Brown is in Collingwood's official Team of the Century, and that selection would have been based largely on what he did from 1990-2000 (not 1987-89). So most of his best football was played in the "qualifying period" for this team. For mine it's unthinkable that such a player is left out. I enjoy the statistical analysis of things, but I don't see how it really comes into play in a case like this. I'll always pick teams for this sort of exercise the same way, based entirely on how good players were in their era, and believe the good ones from the old days would still be good today. Otherwise, you might as well leave the likes of Dick Lee, the Collier's and Coventry's out of our best-ever team!!

 

[jathanas]

It will be like that where absolutely you'll look at the next persons team and think 'how has that guy been left out?' and 'surely they're not behind xyz.' And there is a lot of personal preference that comes into it. Someone could make an argument for Maxwell as the best captain/leader the club has had and while not individually as talented as any listed in my defence they have a fair case for his inclusion. Some may play the long term cards.

Brown would have been in an older edition going back probably 2-3 years but doesn't quite make my team today. If someone had a Luke Ball or Taylor Adams ahead of him, I'd agree with you and go Brown first.

Treloar/Beams. They might be some Brown could be argued ahead of, but I'd take those guys ahead of Brown personally. But that is a definite conversation and I wouldn't hold it against anyone who went Brown over those guys.

De Goey? Possibly could take Brown over De Goey as De Goey has only had the one year where he has dominated, but I think on talent De Goey last year proved to be on another level and will create separation between himself and Brown. Anyone with a two year rule, fair enough.

The reality with Brown though is (and I'll concede outright he played in a lower possession era compared to today with fewer handballs and fewer short kicks) but he never even one 465+ disposal season in the 90s. And other than 1990 as a forward and 1999, the other seasons were sub 20 goal seasons. So he's not one I'd say must be selected. I also give him bonus marks for the way he played and his leadership qualities which add value. I just don't rate that ahead of Beams who has had 741d and 28g in a season or Treloar with two 600d+ seasons where he not only wins it but has genuine explosiveness to go with it.

As my side indicates by the bench positions Mcguane, Millane and Didak will be the next three to go as the next least safe from my group and with them it's not a matter of if but when they'll be passed by others as is the case when you make all-time teams or best teams from a crazy long period like this. Other than really Buckley (for mine still stacks up favourably to anyone who he played against and those who have played since), really anyone could in time eventually lose their spot.

KM I enjoyed reading your selections, and I think nominating De Goey is a daring choice. It was fun to read.

I will point out that Gavin Brown's contribution is difficult to encapsulate through statistics. Your numbers are thorough and undeniable but there is no statistic to measure courage or the ferocity of someone's attack on the ball. In 1990 he inspired in the Grand Final, and in the subsequent dark years that followed he was played everywhere including defence.

Not all possessions/contests are the same, some can be game or even team defining. I'd argue that leaving Brown out is depriving the side of that rare quality.

 

[35Daicos]

A couple of minor improvements.

I think Richard Cole should be very happy (or very annoyed if he has a sense of humour) about missing this side!! Perhaps name a few emergencies, or had you run out of ideas once you got to 22 of these "special players"?!

 

[sirlothie]

KM I enjoyed reading your selections, and I think nominating De Goey is a daring choice. It was fun to read.

I will point out that Gavin Brown's contribution is difficult to encapsulate through statistics. Your numbers are thorough and undeniable but there is no statistic to measure courage or the ferocity of someone's attack on the ball. In 1990 he inspired in the Grand Final, and in the subsequent dark years that followed he was played everywhere including defence.

Not all possessions/contests are the same, some can be game or even team defining. I'd argue that leaving Brown out is depriving the side of that rare quality.

Gavin Brown is in the same category as Cyril Rioli, they don't look that impressive on paper but those who watched them to their thing know they were something special. Brown also spent a lot of time in positions you wouldn't really gather a lot of possessions but I would definitely have him in the side. A true Collingwood legend.

 

[Knightmare]

Thanks for the (as always) polite response.

My way of looking at this is to not act as if the game was being played this week, using modern-day tactics. I simply look at how good the players were/are at the time they played and concede that they should be good enough to adjust, no matter what the era. Common sense says that players like Tony Shaw (even Greg Williams) may not get a spot on an AFL list these days because of their "handicaps", so it's not an easy thing to manage!!

Gavin Brown is in Collingwood's official Team of the Century, and that selection would have been based largely on what he did from 1990-2000 (not 1987-89). So most of his best football was played in the "qualifying period" for this team. For mine it's unthinkable that such a player is left out. I enjoy the statistical analysis of things, but I don't see how it really comes into play in a case like this. I'll always pick teams for this sort of exercise the same way, based entirely on how good players were in their era, and believe the good ones from the old days would still be good today. Otherwise, you might as well leave the likes of Dick Lee, the Collier's and Coventry's out of our best-ever team!!

I'll concede I'm looking at it as the modern game. I was actually looking at it thinking - there isn't enough forward pressure? And there isn't as much as is ideal, but that's still a problem even today we're really wrestling with in the front half to an extent. Honestly Gavin Brown would still be fine today and a good component, but I don't believe he would star as a Nathan Buckley would if he played today.

Tony Shaw I agree with you on about playing today would be harder for him (I still think he could play a role but he might not make every team at his height and with his poor kicking) but Greg Williams I feel would translate well and could be something like a slightly better and stronger Lachie Neale. He's not tall at 176cm but he's a strong man and physical size and strength can still win you the ball. Even against today's 190cm+ mids.

Another exercise could be the Team of the Century v the Team Since? Who from the team of the Century would really make a Collingwood All-time team?

There are plenty of snubs in the Collingwood Team of the Century who should be there ahead of others. Peter McKenna perhaps the most glaring top of mind. As with any team, I'd want to switch around half the names. But we're always going to have our own views of who is better than who because there are so many difference cases that can be made for any number of players. But that's half the fun of it.

 

[Knightmare]

Gavin Brown is in the same category as Cyril Rioli, they don't look that impressive on paper but those who watched them to their thing know they were something special. Brown also spent a lot of time in positions you wouldn't really gather a lot of possessions but I would definitely have him in the side. A true Collingwood legend.

I know where you're coming from with Brown. He'd negate. Play a hard/courageous brand of footy. He'd play the team roles. It wasn't all about stats with him. He's a good component and adds value to any team. I know his game.

Even with that knowledge. And maybe it's having not seen his early 90s play outside of the '90 GF, I don't quiet have him ahead of Beams/Treloar who bring more ball winning and hurt-factor. Though the compromise is defensively/team/leadership. Just depends how you want the team to play. I just wouldn't want to miss out on 2012 Beams or 2016 Treloar in the midfield.

If I wasn't so daring in adding De Goey as a forward, subbing Brown in would be easy, but I'm just loving what I saw too much from De Goey last year and expecting more of that. And maybe that's me being prisoner of the moment. But his close to the season was game-changing special.

 

[35Daicos]

Very good side, but I'd have Tony Francis over Russell.

Couple more things to ponder on:

1. As an aside does having Daicos make Didak redundant?
2. Is T.Shaw more of an asset than someone who's star shone bright but for not as long e.g. Daisy?

Thanks. I definitely like my side more than any I've seen posted so far, but I guess that makes sense!!

1. I don't see Didak as an "untouchable" in a side like this, fine player that he was. He may not be there in a few years time, but still okay for now. Probably a move to the bench is coming soon enough, and then replaced in the team one of these days.
2. I raised the issue on the previous page (it may well have come up before then) as to just what "rules" we were supposed to adhere to when selecting this team (apart from the obvious 1990> bit). It's really tricky knowing whether or not a player who had a good patch (maybe two years only) deserves a spot, or should it go to someone who played consistently well over a long period (in the qualifying years).

The best of Brodie Grundy is way better than anything e.g. Jolly or Monkhorst could muster, but so far he's done it for just one big season. I picked the Monkey, but hedged my bets and named Grundy an emergency. Assuming Grundy keeps playing well he will leave any rivals behind quite soon.

The best of D. Thomas was obviously phenomenal; he played a major part in a premiership win. Hardly anyone will pick Thomas (I didn't), yet Darren Millane had just the two years (1990-91) - one phenomenal year, one pretty good one. He surely did not play better football in that time than Daisy did, and Treloar has probably done as much for us already as what Millane did (1990-91). Bias has to come into it; it has with me and I've picked Millane. Unfortunately, it's nearly impossible to ignore what such players did prior to 1990, and that's what makes this exercise kind of impossible! It's still lots of fun, that's for sure!

 

[Shaneprice97]

Imagine plonking a fit and healthy 2011 Reid and Davis into the current backline

 

[sirlothie]

Thanks. I definitely like my side more than any I've seen posted so far, but I guess that makes sense!!

1. I don't see Didak as an "untouchable" in a side like this, fine player that he was. He may not be there in a few years time, but still okay for now. Probably a move to the bench is coming soon enough, and then replaced in the team one of these days.
2. I raised the issue on the previous page (it may well have come up before then) as to just what "rules" we were supposed to adhere to when selecting this team (apart from the obvious 1990> bit). It's really tricky knowing whether or not a player who had a good patch (maybe two years only) deserves a spot, or should it go to someone who played consistently well over a long period (in the qualifying years).

The best of Brodie Grundy is way better than anything e.g. Jolly or Monkhorst could muster, but so far he's done it for just one big season. I picked the Monkey, but hedged my bets and named Grundy an emergency. Assuming Grundy keeps playing well he will leave any rivals behind quite soon.

The best of D. Thomas was obviously phenomenal; he played a major part in a premiership win. Hardly anyone will pick him (I didn't), yet Darren Millane had just the two years (1990-91) - one phenomenal year, one pretty good one. He surely did not play better football in that time than Daisy did, and Treloar has probably done as much for us already as what Millane did (1990-91). Bias has to come into it; it has with me and I've picked Millane. Unfortunately, it's nearly impossible to ignore what such players did prior to 1990, and that's what makes this exercise kind of impossible! It's still lots of fun, that's for sure!

A lot of Millane nostaglia is based around 'what if', we have seen what Daisy amounted to as an older player (not much), whereas Millane died at his peak or just entering his peak at 26 so there was never really a decline in his abilities as we see with everyone else as nature takes hold.

I'd pick Millane based on what he would have done for the rest of the 90's had he stayed alive, probably definitely the next Collingwood captain after Shaw as long as he didn't get up to more mischief, and one of the most imposing, dominating wingmen I've ever saw. He was my childhood hero so I am biased but as far as Colllingwood players I've seen, (late 80's onwards) Millane definitely deserves his spot based on what he already did do let alone what he was gonna do...