Competitions Collingwood All Time Draft

Remove this Banner Ad

View attachment 1261028
With pick 51, I choose Neil Mann. Started as a forward (48 goals in '47 from 16 games), then moved to the backline (runner up in a Copeland in '48). But it was his efforts when thrown into the ruck from 1951 was when he really excelled.

- Premiership ruckman '53
- Best finals player '53 and '55
- Copeland trophy '54, runner up '53, third place '55
- 3rd in the '53 brownlow, 2nd in '54.
- Vice captain '50 - '54
- Captain '55 and '56
- Victoria ‘54 – ’56.


Back:


_______ _______ _______

Half Back:

_______ _______ _______

Centre:

_______ Bob Rose _______

Half Forward:

_________ Travis Cloke ________

Forward:

Ted Rowell Ron Todd ________

Followers

Neil Mann _______ ________​

iGNITER you’re up
Bloody hell. If we could only convince a bookie to take bets on the next pick…
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It's great to see some of the stars from our very early days being acknowledged! Just on Champion of the Colony, however, while it sounds good to say that a player "won" it, it's an "award" that these days doesn't have any real credibility! The AFL Record Season Guide still includes the list of "winners", and Collingwood Forever gives it a mention but also points out it's lack of authenticity.

The Wikipedia article has this to say:
View attachment 1260801
View attachment 1260802
View attachment 1260810

Genuinely, this has dead set floored me. When reading my Pop’s copy of the official century of Collingwood book, they placed such a great importance on this “champion of the colony” title. As a 10 year old, I just blindly accepted that it was something legitimate. Now at 31 I finally realise it was just one blokes opinion just from reading a few articles. Mullens is the master troll.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Even though I’m sure my targets will be taken, the wait is killing me!
It's come to the stage of the draft where I've had one player I really want, but know they're not the best nor have the accolades others do, but for structure and importance (plus someone I admired as much as anyone), and trying to justify taking them over next-best scenario.
 
It's come to the stage of the draft where I've had one player I really want, but know they're not the best nor have the accolades others do, but for structure and importance (plus someone I admired as much as anyone), and trying to justify taking them over next-best scenario.
That sounds like two of the players on my list…
 
That sounds like two of the players on my list…
Haha I really hope I'm not reaching with the next selection, accolades wise 100% but importance to a team, priceless. That said, he's still got to get through to my pick...
 
It's come to the stage of the draft where I've had one player I really want, but know they're not the best nor have the accolades others do, but for structure and importance (plus someone I admired as much as anyone), and trying to justify taking them over next-best scenario.

As long as it’s not who I want! ;)
 
I would like to put forward a complaint, I should have been allowed to pick Darcy Moore on a father-son basis :)
 
I would like to put forward a complaint, I should have been allowed to pick Darcy Moore on a father-son basis :)
Obviously Darcy didn’t agree to the nomination & chose to go into the general draft pool.
You should have visited his house & given him a pair of Nike boots.
 
If other club boards don’t follow this, their missing something. Have already started doing a few just to keep myself occupied…

Ablett, Ablett, Farmer, Scarlett, Bartel…
Hutchison, Reynolds, Coleman, Madden, Hird…
Martin, Bartlett, Bourke, Hart, Stewart…
😆

Yeah, I'm sure it will get their attention and then it will happen.

What you are listing though is the club's gun players - the really interesting bit here is the need to make decisions about which ones to take and which ones to leave on the table - that is the toughest part!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top