Once to often? PLEASE are your ears painted on? Hmm and you also change Administrators Coaches Bootstudders etc
Eddie... how long is too long?
- Thread starter Bunk Moreland
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
Poor Eddie. The Collingwood presidency is the only thing that gives him relevance. As a TV and radio commentator / celebrity he is yesterday's man...
- Mar 2, 2015
- 19,073
- 34,300
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
One premiership in 25 years lol
Don't listen to 'em, Eddie. Keep going. We luv ya!
Don't listen to 'em, Eddie. Keep going. We luv ya!
- Thread starter
- #54
What about actual measures?
2010 vs 2019. Among 16/18 clubs, where were Collingwood ranked for...
Onfield performance (1st vs 3rd)
Years since flag (0 vs 9)
Home crowds (1st vs 2nd)
Membership?
Revenue?
Profits?
Drafting & recruiting success?
Training facilities?
People say it’s been a success, but it’s perhaps “not a failure” is a better description.
For an on and off field powerhouse like Collingwood, that’s big.
Is Eddie ruthlessly driving Collingwood forward like he was then?
A lot of this is the theory behind max terms and renewal.
That’s the idea of progress... that you always believe there’s something better. Otherwise you’d never have changed a thing in 150 years.
Has Collingwood progressed? Or is it slightly slipping or just standing still?
Eddie worked absolute magic for many years. That magic, like all things, may have come to an end.
“Still doing well” isn’t how market / industry leading organisations stay on top.
Yes, there is merit in having maximum terms in place, but in Collingwood and Eddie's case, for the most part it works at the moment, so why change. They are league best off field. Every club, with the possible exception of West Coast, would love to have been as strong off field for so long. The question was posed about who would stand against him, Craig Kelly had been interviewed be Mike Sheahan and, when asked about if he would like to be Collingwood president, stated it would be something he would love to do. Is also successful enough to potentially do it.
As for the review, if Buckley failed after the review, then not only was Buckley probably gone, there could have been a very strong case for Eddie to have joined him. He put all his chips on Buckley. They were nowhere for a few years with Bucks in charge.
Despite that, people forget how ordinary Collingwood were before he became President. They were almost broke and were terrible on field. Everything they have now is due to him. As much as I don't particularly like him, geez I wish we had an Eddie McGuire at our club instead of the useless clown currently there, that, unlike Eddie, can step down whenever he wants unchallenged.
And lastly, one of the great joys in life during the footy season is seeing the look on Eddie's face on the TV if the pies are getting thrashed. Don't take that away from the rest of us.
As for the review, if Buckley failed after the review, then not only was Buckley probably gone, there could have been a very strong case for Eddie to have joined him. He put all his chips on Buckley. They were nowhere for a few years with Bucks in charge.
Despite that, people forget how ordinary Collingwood were before he became President. They were almost broke and were terrible on field. Everything they have now is due to him. As much as I don't particularly like him, geez I wish we had an Eddie McGuire at our club instead of the useless clown currently there, that, unlike Eddie, can step down whenever he wants unchallenged.
And lastly, one of the great joys in life during the footy season is seeing the look on Eddie's face on the TV if the pies are getting thrashed. Don't take that away from the rest of us.
A lot of people saying it’s too long, but not 1 person has said he could be replaced with person X, because of Y & Z.
There is zero point replacing someone just because of the amount of time they have been in their position, unless there is someone in the wings that has an advantage in an area of importance going forward.
Can anyone articulate who that person is?
There is zero point replacing someone just because of the amount of time they have been in their position, unless there is someone in the wings that has an advantage in an area of importance going forward.
Can anyone articulate who that person is?
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I remember Eddie saying way back when he wanted to turn Collingwood into the Manchester United of the AFL. He sort of has. Except that like the EPL the AFL hasn't sat still. Hawthorn and Geelong became Man City/Chelsea, and Richmond did a Liverpool and remembered that they used to be good in the 80s and could be again. Bulldogs did a Leicester and WC, Syd, Adel etc. reminded him that there's not just one place that produces good/rich teams.
He's a hands on president. Even if the club would continue to function just as well without his leadership of the board, having someone with his profile helps keep them prominent. Anything that looks like disadvantaging Collingwood even a tiny bit Eddie will whinge and whinge loudly, and everyone will hear it. Compare that to our guy, does anyone know who he is? Didn't think so. Our Chairman and board are very much behind the scenes people and the figureheads are the senior coach and players.
The Dogs have had two presidents over the last 30 years. Gordon, then Smorgon, then back to Gordon again. Jeff Kennett has had a couple of goes at Hawthorn, though he made it so you can't do that job for life. I reckon the time for Ed to step down was when he took on the CEO job at Channel 9, and he could have come back. They've been financially solid since the 2000s and a consistent financial powerhouse for the last decade. When he leave it will be for good so he'll probably hang around a while yet.
He's a hands on president. Even if the club would continue to function just as well without his leadership of the board, having someone with his profile helps keep them prominent. Anything that looks like disadvantaging Collingwood even a tiny bit Eddie will whinge and whinge loudly, and everyone will hear it. Compare that to our guy, does anyone know who he is? Didn't think so. Our Chairman and board are very much behind the scenes people and the figureheads are the senior coach and players.
The Dogs have had two presidents over the last 30 years. Gordon, then Smorgon, then back to Gordon again. Jeff Kennett has had a couple of goes at Hawthorn, though he made it so you can't do that job for life. I reckon the time for Ed to step down was when he took on the CEO job at Channel 9, and he could have come back. They've been financially solid since the 2000s and a consistent financial powerhouse for the last decade. When he leave it will be for good so he'll probably hang around a while yet.
And he's still there.
I mentioned Craig Kelly in my post just above yours. Not sure that he can bring anything that Eddie can't. Whilst being successful with his sports agency, don't know if he brings a point of difference. Was a premiership player, may have that going for him. So a suggestion had been made.
Good post. Though am aware that Justin Langer is on the board at West Coast. Sadly, like us, you don't get to vote on board members or the chairman do you?
they are league best off field...KPI‘s would indicate they are behind Richmond at present. Turn over, sponsorships, average home crowds and last but not least memberships. In some cases they have slipped dramatically.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
We get no say in the board. It irks me that the club basically treats members like ATMs, but by the same token in my time watchingwhile continuing to be a financial powerhouse they've delivered 4 flags from 7 GF appearances and have only missed the finals 7 times in 28 years so it's hard to be unhappy about that.
They have been consistently better off field for a longer period of time than Richmond have been. I will grant you Richmond may be in front in that regard now, but if you are going to tell me that has been the case consistently for the last 5-10 years, you are dreaming. Collingwood have been strong off field for a long time now, no matter on field results. Am yet to be convinced that the same could be said about Richmond.
I did say as of now....however check Tiger profits for last 15 years you may be surprised.
Try going for a club that has the treats its members as less than tokens, whilst not delivering a flag and only 1 grand final appearance in 21 years, soon to be 22. Neither are they as successful off field, though not too bad. That also stays in power, despite paying a player outside of the salary cap and losing that club draft picks for 2 consecutive years, and hid the fact until said player ratted them out to move to another club. That also refused to sack a head assistant coach that had been there and outlasted 3, maybe 4, senior coaches, whilst no flag was delivered, and a football operations manager that also made the players go on a camp that has had repercussions of players leaving to this day, and has made the club fodder for both the media and opposition fans. They went and paid people a large amount of money to tell them what I, you and every person on this board could tell them for nothing. And at the end of all this, they would still wonder why I won't buy a membership or season ticket if they ever read this post.
Maybe I will be surprised. I did agree with you that Richmond were possibly better off now. I would suggest though, that if you asked most neutrals which club they would like there own to be run like off field in the last 15 years, and they had a choice between Collingwood or Richmond, I would suggest the vast majority would say Collingwood.
Maybe you should try to poach Eddie I am sure he is available for the right amount. You did make the 2017 GF.
Not such a stupid idea. Most club supporters would love a president like him, that is why Collingwood supporters love him. It hurts to say that, and it wouldn't be a popular opinion, but it doesn't make it any less true.
I know we made the 2017 GF, after finishing minor premiers, but that just covered up the issues that were, and still are, going on. 1 grand final in 21 years is an appalling record. Only 3 prelims in that time. That is very poor.
Tell me, do you think the camp that happened after the 2017 GF loss would have happened at Richmond under Peggy O'Neal's watch, or at Collingwood under Eddie McGuire's watch. Do you think any other President/Chairperson would have ratified such a camp happening. Rob Chapman did. There in that rant began. The club is a mess off field, and will continue to be until the people running it depart. The people that appointed Brett Burton, who was sacked after the review by Dunstall and Pavlich told them they needed to go, are still there. Not only that, the members of the club, have no say in whether he should be on that board.
Then again, Rob Chapman is a former Bank CEO, and considering the foundings of the Royal Commision into that sector recently probably tells you the type of person he is.
And that's probably why other teams have success and Collingwood don't, Kennet has probably been the next loudest in line and probably a church mouse in comparison. The way I see Collingwood under Ed in a broad sense: (Not necessarily wholly and solely responsible)
- Financial? Tick
- Highest profile (debatable)? Tick
- Membership growth? Tick
- Facilities? Tick
- Coaching and footy staff? Pretty good. Tick
- Administration staff? Not real bad not real good. 50/50
- Scandals and player misdemeanours?, as bad as any other club. Cross
- Injury management? Consistently worst or near worst year after year. Cross
- The most important! On field performance - massive, massive fail! Cross.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Needs to be noted that most clubs are very different now to when Eddie took over. Richmond had 27,000 members when Eddie came to power and didn't even have 10,000 5 years before that. Hawthorn were going to merge with Melbourne in 1996 and also had 27,000 members in 1998. They only got into 5 figures after winning their 6th flag in about 9 years. Best team of the 80s meant 10,000 members. GWS probably have that now. Geelong had 20,000 members and Kardinia Park was run down and held 27,000. The suggestion of a club having 100,000 members was like saying that Tony Lockett was going to kick 37 that week.
Times have changed and Eddie made sure Collingwood rode the wave as one of the powerhouses of the 2000s onward. It shits the rest of us but he always has Collingwood at the forefront of anything whether it's hosting The Footy Show with Sam in 1999 or Friday Night Footy on Fox in 2019. He's very good at selling things as "for the game" when his #1 focus is always Collingwood. Some things do genuinely benefit everyone, but you're not going to see him taking up the cause for Geelong to play home finals at KP vs Melbourne clubs or a non MCG Grand Final.
I do like a few things about the way his club runs, though. Their 2010 flag side had Ball and Jolly as the highest profile recruits. It was mostly drafted players plus Leigh Brown who was a discard. He hasn't turned it into an ego project and bought a heap of stars in trade and free agent moves. Footy dept from the outside seems to be able to run its own race. Didn't like the Malthouse-Buckley thing which seemed forced but since Ed has been there they've had two long term coaches. When it looked like Buckley was going to be out the door they did the full review thing and changed pieces around him which seems to have worked. Stability is important, even though 2012-2017 didn't really go to plan.
Times have changed and Eddie made sure Collingwood rode the wave as one of the powerhouses of the 2000s onward. It shits the rest of us but he always has Collingwood at the forefront of anything whether it's hosting The Footy Show with Sam in 1999 or Friday Night Footy on Fox in 2019. He's very good at selling things as "for the game" when his #1 focus is always Collingwood. Some things do genuinely benefit everyone, but you're not going to see him taking up the cause for Geelong to play home finals at KP vs Melbourne clubs or a non MCG Grand Final.
I do like a few things about the way his club runs, though. Their 2010 flag side had Ball and Jolly as the highest profile recruits. It was mostly drafted players plus Leigh Brown who was a discard. He hasn't turned it into an ego project and bought a heap of stars in trade and free agent moves. Footy dept from the outside seems to be able to run its own race. Didn't like the Malthouse-Buckley thing which seemed forced but since Ed has been there they've had two long term coaches. When it looked like Buckley was going to be out the door they did the full review thing and changed pieces around him which seems to have worked. Stability is important, even though 2012-2017 didn't really go to plan.
Hawk_francais
Cancelled
- Sep 20, 2015
- 3,509
- 7,036
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
If Collingwood continue to average only 4 flags per century I'm fine with it.
- Feb 21, 2006
- 20,735
- 19,581
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
- Feb 21, 2006
- 20,735
- 19,581
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Turtles, NYJets, Celtics, Tottenham
One premiership in 25 years lol
Don't listen to 'em, Eddie. Keep going. We luv ya!
I would kill for a premiership every 25 years
- Jun 9, 2015
- 12,055
- 9,285
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Change the name to Eddiewood?
