Do Collingwood need to enter a rebuild phase?

[THE_GUN]

I'm not going to say Collingwood is heading for a cliff / crash, as I don't know their list well enough.

However, I will say that: Established Premiership Coaches will not enter a rebuild willingly, they will top up and try for another flag (even if they have just won multiple).

• Clarkson did it (fail)
• Simmon did it (fail)
• Hardwick did it (fail)

I think Collingwood's best chance of another flag is recruiting an elite Free Agent or two (e.g. Rowell and King).

Agree but Sheedy did it a few times but them days were a bit different and he knew he would be around in 5-7 years to reap the benefit, These days the coaches are usually coaching for the next 2-3 years and must get results

 

[Cyclops]

Sure but you were complaining about not having the same access to FS and academy picks that Brisbane have had, yet you got arguably the best player in the game via FS(pick 4), as well as his brother(pick 57 yes but AA and BnF winner, picked around the same point as Harris Andrews) and your captain(pick 9).

Then Collingwood also got Quaynor(pick 13) via their NGA in 2018 as well as Reef McInnes in 2020(pick 23).

So up until last year and this year, Collingwood have actually matched Brisbane for the amount of father son and NGA selections since 2018 taken in the national draft, the difference being that yours were taken earlier than Brisbane's, which is why you tried calling it out. Collingwood also drafted the same amount of players from Brisbane's NGA academy in the ND this year that Brisbane did themselves, albeit later in the draft.

The only true outlier is Harris Andrews, who Brisbane matched a 2nd round bid with pick 61, who was drafted in 2015.

Ty Gallop is too early to call, being a first year player who'll be pushed out of the side by Oscar Allen next year.

TLDR: Collingwood have benefitted more than any other club in the past decade from father son/NGA picks bar Brisbane and Gold Coast. Western Bulldogs might have been up there if not for JUH going AWOL.

The only reason you're complaining about Brisbane is because their picks are more recent although certainly they are in a better spot having unfettered access to academy prospects whilst the rest of us(Collingwood included) actually have to follow AFL guidelines. I certainly won't argue with you on that one.

Who is complaining? I appreciate the dramatic irony that Collingwood has recruited so many father-son picks when the rule was brought in to nobble us, and I freely admit it favours our club heavily, because our players are fertile and loyal.

I mention father-sons because Brisbane has 9only recently) had a rash of excellent picks, and we can't reasonably create a recruitment strategy around this because of the lead time involved (typically 18 years). neither did they, but they were smart enough to use available resources including academies, which we have less access to.

This is why we aren't copying Brisbane's method. So who do we copy? Geelong and before them Hawthorn were very successful with mature top ups. That's our stolen plan.

I feel Brisbane have been treated horribly since their foundation and (while I whinged like a mf back in 02-03) I think they deserve the success they have worked for. The few times the AFL have thrown them an accidental bone they turned it into steak dinner, unlike Sydney, Giants and Suns who have been pumped with competition distorting advantages for a return of two 92) flags.

I think they have it even harder than the WA clubs (and when all is said and done, WA faces a high disadvantage with the sheer volume of travel). I know its a shorter flight, but Perth has a similar climate to Sydney, and only one zone removed either side for QLD and VIC/SA. The lions and Suns play across three climatic zones, tropical, subrop and med. that north/south 2000km feels longer that the east west 3000km.

Spare me the cliff. We have a plan, it produced flags for Geelong and hawthorn and arguably Richmond: I hope we are at or around their level and win it again before Daicos retires.

It seems more productive than "keep the 2018 side together as long as possible because it wasn't a lucky flag, we deserved it, then tank" while the fans criticise finalists for finalling.

 

[bzparkes]

Who is complaining? I appreciate the dramatic irony that Collingwood has recruited so many father-son picks when the rule was brought in to nobble us, and I freely admit it favours our club heavily, because our players are fertile and loyal.

Which rule are you talking about? The change when matching? That originally happened because of Hawkins.

I mention father-sons because Brisbane has 9only recently) had a rash of excellent picks, and we can't reasonably create a recruitment strategy around this because of the lead time involved (typically 18 years). neither did they, but they were smart enough to use available resources including academies, which we have less access to.

Yep but up until the 2024 draft, you've had the same amount of high picks on your list that Brisbane has via your NGA

Andrews was a pick in the 60s(matching a mid 2nd rounder) and Hipwood was pick 14, although hasn't really ever lived up to it.

This is why we aren't copying Brisbane's method. So who do we copy? Geelong and before them Hawthorn were very successful with mature top ups. That's our stolen plan.

Every club gets mature top ups but neither Geelong, nor Hawthorn, have ignored the pointy end of the draft for multiple years either. Collingwood's biggest failure was burning 3 first rounders in 2020 but that was a Covid year and happened to everyone. Unfortunate timing to have multiple first rounders for them.

Spare me the cliff. We have a plan, it produced flags for Geelong and hawthorn and arguably Richmond: I hope we are at or around their level and win it again before Daicos retires.

Well, everyone has their doubts about Geelong's salary cap legitimacy but Richmond got their success from spending time at the bottom and picking up some top end talent via the draft(not club-tied) and topping up from 2016(Prestia) onwards.

It seems more productive than "keep the 2018 side together as long as possible because it wasn't a lucky flag, we deserved it, then tank" while the fans criticise finalists for finalling.

West Coast had already started to plan to transition the list in 2021. Simpson said so in later interviews. A mix of covid issues, which were late to WA, and horrendous issues caused by an outdated S&C plan(as well as some laziness by the player) caused WCE's implosion. Club certainly made some bad decisions around that time, that's for sure.

Also not sure how you can claim '18 was 'lucky', considering WCE ultimately beat your mob 3 times that year.

 

[Fadge]

Collingwood's biggest failure was burning 3 first rounders in 2020 but that was a Covid year and happened to everyone. Unfortunate timing to have multiple first rounders for them.

So Collingwood failed by using their 3 first rounders in 2020 on draftees (first pick was #17) who haven't made it at Collingwood (McInnes still on the list, so there's still a watch there), but it happens to everyone?

And you wonder why Collingwood's preference is to trade for proven quality AFL players, who we know exactly what we're going to get at the level?

 

[bzparkes]

So Collingwood failed by using their 3 first rounders in 2020 on draftees (first pick was #17) who haven't made it at Collingwood (McInnes still on the list, so there's still a watch there), but it happens to everyone?

And you wonder why Collingwood's preference is to trade for proven quality AFL players, who we know exactly what we're going to get at the level?

Well, as I said in a previous post, Hine should've been shown the boot a lot earlier, as he'd had way too many missed in the draft prior to that.

 

[Cyclops]

Which rule are you talking about? The change when matching? That originally happened because of Hawkins.



Yep but up until the 2024 draft, you've had the same amount of high picks on your list that Brisbane has via your NGA

Andrews was a pick in the 60s(matching a mid 2nd rounder) and Hipwood was pick 14, although hasn't really ever lived up to it.



Every club gets mature top ups but neither Geelong, nor Hawthorn, have ignored the pointy end of the draft for multiple years either. Collingwood's biggest failure was burning 3 first rounders in 2020 but that was a Covid year and happened to everyone. Unfortunate timing to have multiple first rounders for them.



Well, everyone has their doubts about Geelong's salary cap legitimacy but Richmond got their success from spending time at the bottom and picking up some top end talent via the draft(not club-tied) and topping up from 2016(Prestia) onwards.



West Coast had already started to plan to transition the list in 2021. Simpson said so in later interviews. A mix of covid issues, which were late to WA, and horrendous issues caused by an outdated S&C plan(as well as some laziness by the player) caused WCE's implosion. Club certainly made some bad decisions around that time, that's for sure.

Also not sure how you can claim '18 was 'lucky', considering WCE ultimately beat your mob 3 times that year.

You weren't lucky to beat us, we were lucky to be within 5 of you in that Grand Final. I know you knocked off Richmond earlier in the season but that was their flag to win and they were stopped by diarrhea.

The original F/S was made so Ron Barrassi would go to Melbourne instead of Collingwood. He was zoned to Collingwood because of suburban zones, which grew somewhat informally I am told, but were whipped into shape to ensure "fairness" ie robbing well run clubs to help bad clubs. To be fair it was Fitzroy (the first superpower, they got to six flags real fast), Collingwood, Carlton and perhaps Essendon dominating that era, so it wasn't just us they were taking flags off.

Please don't start with the Geelong cap malarkey. they aren't the best at that sort of cheating, if you want to see off the books shenanigans the big Melbourne clubs like us, as well as you and the Crows are probably more guilty.

Geelong had a very shonky "definitely not a mafiosa" president back in the 00's, and while they do have political clout (as their fans are concentrated in some interesting electorates in Victoria) they aren't massively wealthy like the Pies, Crows, Eagles and to a lesser extent Essendon and Carlton. Youse and us have the supporters and connections to make that happen, when Geelong tries they get caught in half arsed silliness.

 

[doppleganger]

Well, as I said in a previous post, Hine should've been shown the boot a lot earlier, as he'd had way too many missed in the draft prior to that.

Hine performed a few different roles in his 20 years at the Pies having been List Manager for a large part, the overall player acquisition strategy is bigger than ensuring you take the right kid with pick 14.

He started at the Pies in 2003 - we played in finals in 14 of his 20 seasons with us (including PF 9 times). That is a strong effort and indication that our list management team was doing something right.

Everyone has misses at the draft.

Guess Hine is like Pendles, should have been given the flick in 2021 when they moved on Buckley as that was when we needed to rebuild...but didn't.

 

[bzparkes]

Hine performed a few different roles in his 20 years at the Pies having been List Manager for a large part, the overall player acquisition strategy is bigger than ensuring you take the right kid with pick 14.

He started at the Pies in 2003 - we played in finals in 14 of his 20 seasons with us (including PF 9 times). That is a strong effort and indication that our list management team was doing something right.

Everyone has misses at the draft.

Guess Hine is like Pendles, should have been given the flick in 2021 when they moved on Buckley as that was when we needed to rebuild...but didn't.

Sure but we had similar with O'Brien(although he started a decade earlier at WCE than Hine did at the Pies) and generally, people in the same role for such a long time really struggle to adapt when things change.

Same reason Nisbett should've been moved on a long time earlier and why Eddie overstayed his welcome at Collingwood. Eventually you need fresh eyes in.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

...and the youngest lists, how are they doing?

We cant copy Brisbane, as we don't have access to the quality f/s and quantity of academy players.

I dont have the picks to compare but Schulz and Houston surely have played more quality games than the picks we swapped out, and likely will do more at the Pies than those players elsewhere.

I dont buy the cliff. Yes we will fall sometime, but this path has worked for other clubs, and the draft gluttons are mostly cellar dwellers.

The youngest lists only need to show promise and can then build through the trade period, like Freo did with Bolton and Jackson, Hawthorn with Barrass and Battle, Brisbane with Neale and Daniher.

Did the Schulz trade not give Freo the chance to draft Murphy Reid?

The cliff is quite clearly there. You've got a heap of players you still rely on heavily over 30 and almost nothing coming through in the under 25 bracket, not named Daicos. The top 10 in your B&F had 4 players over 30, and only 2 under 25.
That's a perfect recipe for a list to fall off a cliff, especially if you have any injuries to your core.

 

[Cyclops]

The youngest lists only need to show promise and can then build through the trade period, like Freo did with Bolton and Jackson, Hawthorn with Barrass and Battle, Brisbane with Neale and Daniher.

Did the Schulz trade not give Freo the chance to draft Murphy Reid?

The cliff is quite clearly there. You've got a heap of players you still rely on heavily over 30 and almost nothing coming through in the under 25 bracket, not named Daicos. The top 10 in your B&F had 4 players over 30, and only 2 under 25.
That's a perfect recipe for a list to fall off a cliff, especially if you have any injuries to your core.

Apparently we fell off the cliff in 2024 too, but the dead cat bounce took us to within a game (albeit a fairly unwinnable one) of another grand final. The cliff isn't there yet, we finished higher than you.

I feel we have young players coming through but this year is when we find out if that's bulldust.

 

[doppleganger]

Sure but we had similar with O'Brien(although he started a decade earlier at WCE than Hine did at the Pies) and generally, people in the same role for such a long time really struggle to adapt when things change.

Same reason Nisbett should've been moved on a long time earlier and why Eddie overstayed his welcome at Collingwood. Eventually you need fresh eyes in.

I don't disagree with that, but slightly different perspective to your original line of thought that he should be moved on because the Pies had a few bust early draft picks.

Leppa is now list and talent strategy manager.
O'Bree is recruitment manager, and he would have the broad team of scouts under him.

If we decide we need a young KPF and decide to draft one, but they don't develop...it ain't time to move Leppa on.

 

[doppleganger]

The top 10 in your B&F had 4 players over 30, and only 2 under 25.
That's a perfect recipe for a list to fall off a cliff, especially if you have any injuries to your core.

Hawks top 2 in their BnF were both 30+

Hawks had 3 under 25, the difference being IQ (25) is 1 year older than Newcombe (24)

 

[doppleganger]

Apparently we fell off the cliff in 2024 too, but the dead cat bounce took us to within a game (albeit a fairly unwinnable one) of another grand final. The cliff isn't there yet, we finished higher than you.

I feel we have young players coming through but this year is when we find out if that's bulldust.

Correct.

We have close to 20 players on the list who have yet to play 20 games (probably half yet to even debut).

We need a few to bob up and become regulars - likely candidates are Parker, Harrison, Hayes, Anderson, West, Steele, Allan, Buller.

If they don't step up that is when the cliff might come, not because Howe and Sidey may retire at the end of 2026.

 

[Fadge]

Hawks top 2 in their BnF were both 30+

Hawks had 3 under 25, the difference being IQ (25) is 1 year older than Newcombe (24)

It's almost as though the better teams in the comp are the ones with the older, more developed and more experienced players, as opposed to the development teams....

 

[Robertio]

Correct.

We have close to 20 players on the list who have yet to play 20 games (probably half yet to even debut).

We need a few to bob up and become regulars - likely candidates are Parker, Harrison, Hayes, Anderson, West, Steele, Allan, Buller.

If they don't step up that is when the cliff might come, not because Howe and Sidey may retire at the end of 2026.

No one said it's because Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Howe and Elliot approaching 35 may retire, people have been saying all your young players are mostly untried. You need 3 young players to give you the output of those old blokes and i doubt that will happen so after next season Pies could be going backwards.

 

[Fadge]

LOLOLOL.

Carlton folk spend 3 years telling us Blake Acres

13

Blake Acres

Age

30

Ht

193cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.5

4star

K

8.9

3star

HB

8.6

5star

M

3.7

4star

T

3.2

5star

CL

1.9

4star

D

12.7

3star

K

5.0

2star

HB

7.7

4star

M

4.0

4star

T

2.7

4star

CL

1.0

3star

D

8.2

2star

K

3.8

2star

HB

4.4

4star

M

1.2

2star

T

2.4

4star

CL

1.8

4star

is better than Steele Sidebottom

22

Steele Sidebottom

Age

34

Ht

184cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

27.4

5star

K

14.1

5star

HB

13.3

5star

M

5.5

5star

T

3.7

5star

CL

3.2

5star

D

24.0

5star

K

12.0

5star

HB

12.0

5star

M

4.5

4star

T

4.3

5star

CL

2.3

4star

D

31.6

5star

K

14.4

5star

HB

17.2

5star

M

4.2

4star

T

4.2

5star

CL

6.0

5star

, and now Sidebottom is irreplaceable when he retires...

Oh boy.

 

[timokane]

Kind of the great unknown times now at the Pies.

Anything and everything is possible for better or worse.

Stepping into the unknown now.

Hard what to make actually.

Like the rest of the world.

 

[doppleganger]

No one said it's because Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Howe and Elliot approaching 35 may retire, people have been saying all your young players are mostly untried.

???
You said the thread was to talk about how the Pies will replace our aging stars?

lets talk about how the Pies will replace all theie aging stars, not all of them will play to they're 35, Tom Mitchell for example, it happens quick.

And like your example, Mitchell was crucial in the 23 GF team, come 25 he was replaced by Long.

You need 3 young players to give you the output of those old blokes and i doubt that will happen so after next season Pies could be going backwards.

Yeah, we need three of the younger players step up...that is what all clubs would expect every year.

 

[doppleganger]

It's almost as though the better teams in the comp are the ones with the older, more developed and more experienced players, as opposed to the development teams....

That is true, except on bigfooty tis much better to be young and have potential then be experienced and a proven AFL standard player.

 

[Mynamesinuse]

That is true, except on bigfooty tis much better to be young and have potential then be experienced and a proven AFL standard player.

There’s always a tipping point. Always has been.
No club can ignore an aging list profile forever.

 

[doppleganger]

There’s always a tipping point. Always has been.
No club can ignore an aging list profile forever.

What is the tipping point?

Brisbane are the second oldest lost - av age of 25.6, and they have 8 players 30 or older come 2026.

Melbourne are the 3rd oldest - av age of 25.5, and they have 12 players 30 or older come 2026

How long until Brisbane need to rebuild their old list? When do Melbourne need to?

Why would you want WC or Ess lists (the two youngest) over Brisbane or Collingwood's (the two oldest)?

 

[Mynamesinuse]

What is the tipping point?

Brisbane are the second oldest lost - av age of 25.6, and they have 8 players 30 or older come 2026.

Melbourne are the 3rd oldest - av age of 25.5, and they have 12 players 30 or older come 2026

How long until Brisbane need to rebuild their old list? When do Melbourne need to?

Why would you want WC or Ess lists (the two youngest) over Brisbane or Collingwood's (the two oldest)?

You’ve obviously forgotten about the exceptional stockpile of young players Brisbane have added.

 

[doppleganger]

You’ve obviously forgotten about the exceptional stockpile of young players Brisbane have added.

So the Lions age profile and number of players over 30 isn't a concern?

Do they not have a tipping point?

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

No one said it's because Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Howe and Elliot approaching 35 may retire, people have been saying all your young players are mostly untried. You need 3 young players to give you the output of those old blokes and i doubt that will happen so after next season Pies could be going backwards.

I dont think you need 3 young players. You just need to find 3 new quality players every year to replace the output of the retiring players. For example this year we need to find players to play the games that WHE, Cox, Mitchell and Mihocek played last year. Probably about 45 games. So 2 to 3 players could cover that output.
The issue with this is we could have 2 to 3 new players who can do that but we won't realise that they can do the job until they play a few games.
In a lot of ways we have been adding about 3 players a year to our AFL team.
For example in 2021 we discovered players like McInnes , McCreery and Ginnivan*
In 2022 we got Daicos, Lipinski, Johnson* and Harrison
In 2023 we got Hill, McStay, Frampton and Mitchell*
In 2024 we got Schultz, Long, Sullivan
In 2025 we got Perryman, Houston, Membrey

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Hawks top 2 in their BnF were both 30+

Hawks had 3 under 25, the difference being IQ (25) is 1 year older than Newcombe (24)

This is funny.
Now let me see which top rated youngsters on the Pies list will push into their top ten, compared to the 4-5 I could name for Hawthorn.