"Eddie Fails Test"

[pongo_3931]

So, first up, do you folks take what this article says as valid? Are we as supporters not putting pressure on the club? And is this a good thing?

I'm reminded that Richmond supporters arrived in droves to insist the instating of Ben Cousins. Now the merit of that action and subsequent decisions I'm not interested in, but I use it as a point that clubs can run differently. Are we better off getting involved? Or sitting in the stands and letting it all unfold?

And if Grants view is legitimate and our season continues to falter, do we as members insist that the spin stops and we get fed a version of club life closer to the truth?

Scource: Herald Sun Team Blog

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/afl/ourteam/index.php/heraldsun/comments/eddie_fails_test/

Eddie fails test

Trevor Grant Tuesday, May 19, 2009 at 01:06pm





EDDIE McGuire walked to the microphone, cleared his throat and looked out on a sea of expectant faces with suitable solemnity.

Tonight is the moment of truth, said the Collingwood president.

We cannot go on kidding ourselves we are a successful club.

No, this isn’t a report on McGuire addressing the Magpie faithful at the Lexus Centre on Sunday night.

These words were retrieved from a dusty file dated October 29, 1998, the day he turned 34 and was voted into the presidency, and the job of releasing Collingwood from the shackles of mediocrity.

When he started his mission of salvation on an unprecedented wave of goodwill, McGuire was too clever to promise premierships.

What he offered was a club that would harness its off-field strength to become a powerful competitor again.

Although the club’s serious financial losses of late raise questions, it is generally accepted McGuire has been at the heart of a Collingwood economic recovery.

Yet, if you believe the core business of a football club is to win matches, the cold, hard figures show that on McGuire’s watch - now into its 11th season - Collingwood has regressed.

Indeed, the bottom line in the win-loss column reveals McGuire as the most unsuccessful of the club’s long-term presidents.

Collingwood has won 47 per cent of its games under McGuire. Under Allan McAlister (1986-1995) the figure was 55 per cent and under John Hickey (1976-1982) 56 per cent.

Going further back, Harry Curtis’s reign (1924-1950) produced 65 per cent, as did Tom Sherrin’s (1963-74), while under Syd Coventry (1950-1962) it was 61 per cent.

Only the stop-gap presidency of Kevin Rose (1996-98), with 39 per cent, prevents McGuire’s reign from being the worst in club history.

Of course, losing more games than you win could be accepted if the victories are big ones. The McGuire period has produced three top-four finishes and two Grand Final losses in 10 seasons.

Under Sherrin, the Magpies reached three Grand Finals and made the top four 10 times.

Under Hickey it was five Grand Finals, while under McAlister the Pies made only one Grand Final, in 1990, but it produced the club’s first premiership in 32 years.

Some may argue McGuire cannot be blamed for team performance. But the board appoints the coaching staff, and no president has more board influence than McGuire.

What sets McGuire apart is his ability to avoid any serious heat as the club goes backwards in the arena that matters most to his constituency.

Working on the basis that division is death, McGuire has micro-managed a sustained program to flush out dissent, all the way down to the cheer squad. It has been a great success.

Whereas his predecessors had to deal with the threat of supporter unrest, McGuire enjoys relative serenity.

Yes, they are as one at Collingwood these days, but, to pinch a line from McGuire, how long can they go on kidding themselves they are a successful club?

 

[Snag Breac]

Collingwood isn't Richmond. Collingwood isn't shambolic. I don't see anything to be gained by supporters storming the Bastille at the Lexus Centre.

How much of a crisis are we in, and how much is media beat-up? I've just posted my view of the MM situation in the MM thread. It also pertains to the club as a whole. No point repeating it here.

Anyway, it's only Trevor Grant.

 

[Optimax]

Collingwood isn't Richmond. Collingwood isn't shambolic. I don't see anything to be gained by supporters storming the Bastille at the Lexus Centre.

How much of a crisis are we in, and how much is media beat-up? I've just posted my view of the MM situation in the MM thread. It also pertains to the club as a whole. No point repeating it here.

Anyway, it's only Trevor Grant.

i will give trevor grant some support he is at leasta collingwood supporter

 

[pongo_3931]

I'll rephrase, should supporters get more involved with the club at a political level? Is there a point where this becomes a bad thing?

Bare in mind I've never attended an AGM and am one of the younger BF members, so my knowledge of the history of the club is somewhat less than others.

 

[MarkT]

I have said for years but we, Collingwood members and supporters, are FAR to accepting of our shortcomings. We place far too few demand on our board. You don’t have to be a Richmond supporter to see this administration has failed to deliver. You have to be a Richmond supporter to see how docile and accepting our membership base is at an AGM.

We can have discipline problems off field that culminate in key players missing finals, bomb out in the finals, lose more money than many of our members can even comprehend, accept a completely hand picked board without a single reservation irrespective of the forgoing and notwithstanding one of the hand picked was Brad Cooper and we accept “I take responsibility but I wasn’t here”.

Honestly, is subject actually up for debate?

Frankly, Collingwood members get what they ask for.

 

[mattys123]

I honestly think that one of the problems that exists with football clubs, and this includes Collingwood, is that the percentage of the actual membership that has any "power" is so low.

Only Social club members can vote at each election, and nowadays, with so many Collingwood supporters taking up memberships with the AFL or MCC, which provide far better options for GF and finals access, the majority of Collingwood supporters dont have any power at all.

I am an AFL club support member, have been since 1985 at good old Waverley, and also buy reserved seats for all our 11 home games, yet to be able to have any influence, I would have to spend even more money for a social club membership which offers very little but the option to vote.

I was a social club member in the Vic Park days, but dont see the use in it anymore, and therefore put forward a proposal;

That all members of the Collingwood Football Club have the right to vote at club elections, and therefore we would get a greater representation from Collingwood members at each election.

By the way, if an election was held tomorrow, and if I could vote, I would keep Eddie but vote against at least 2 board members in favour of some new football focussed board members.

 

[Genc the Magpieman]

i will give trevor grant some support he is at leasta collingwood supporter

That is true and the article is spot on.

Eddie has become the new McAlister, the human headlline.

Get out and take Mediocre Mick with you.

Thanks and see you later.

 

[DNine]

I think Eddie will redeem the revolt, if he cuts MM. He needs to do this properly, or we will see ourselves some pretty dull times. Will Eddie be as stubborn as Mick. I have more faith in Eddies intellegence, but not for long, if one bit of ink goes on a special piece of paper. We hae already given Malty $9000,000 for Ten Years and NOT ONE CENT of mine will go toward making it $10 million. No premierships!! . Thats disgraceful. While Geelong paid what $4.5 million, and they have one, and nearly had two.

I really worry too what these Pubs are doing. The type of thing that can nearly bankrupt us if they don't sell. We are in a recession, and we could be one of the big named victims. Maybe they will ship us off to Tassie, we will need to to stay afloat. The Tassie Magpies, how does that grab us