Eddie... how long is too long?

[PonsfordMagpie]

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?

As I said earlier, it's been too long but I've always wanted to see him challenged and held to account rather than go through years without any sort of legitimate opposition.

If no one stands against him, he's probably the best person for the job.

As a member, if an opposition ticket was formed and I was compelled and persuaded by their plans on what they want to achieve I may consider voting out McGuire. If the opposition ticket resembled what we saw with Richmond at the end of 2016, I'd be inclined to keep McGuire on board.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

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.

Yes I heard about Craig Kelly, but nothing came of it. Further, I think he's too committed to his sporting agency these days.

Another name that popped up a few years ago was Peter Murphy. Murphy also undertook the club review in 2017, so maybe that was a tactic by McGuire to keep him on side.

 

[Natho]

I was hoping this thread was about Eddie Betts and his shorts becoming too long. I guess I was wrong

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Why change something for the sake of change?

Mcguire has been successful while at the helm of Collingwood and the pies have enjoyed a lot of success on and off the field. Clubs that have continuity and consistency in a)board/governance and b) footy dept are the clubs that enjoy success. It is no surprise that the most stable clubs are the most successful (West Coast, Collingwood, Geelong and recently Richmond).

Many of Richmond's issues in the 90's and 00's stems from instability within their club that impacted on their football. It is no surprise that once they got the right people in the right roles (O'Neal, Gale and Hardwick) and had stability and continuity that they found success.

The other thing that is specific to Collingwood is why would a club get rid of arguably the most influential president in the game. Eddie has a lot of clout in the industry. To put him on the trash heap seems misguided.

Leaving Victoria Park in a disgraceful mess and the people of Collingwood with a near-11 million dollar repair bill when Eddie (and others) decided it was time for the Pies to cut and run...it's an appalling legacy.

Mayor Meadows said herself the Pies robbed the community.

It's just like TV, all skin deep, if you can make sure people are looking the other way when you skip your spiritual home leaving a multi-million dollar repair bill, and wave a shiny new Lexus sponsorship in their face, they think you are doing an amazing job.

I do think Eddie is a great talk show host though, and a good footy commentator.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

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.

On-field performance (1st vs 3rd)

• 4th overall in terms of W-L record behind Geelong, Hawthorn and Sydney.
• 1 flag equal to Geelong, Sydney, Western Bulldogs and West Coast and behind Hawthorn (3 flags) and Richmond (2 flags).
• 3 grand final appearances equal with Sydney (3 grand finals) and only behind Hawthorn (4 grand finals).
• 6 finals appearances equal with Richmond. Clubs ahead of them are Geelong (9 finals), Sydney (9 finals), Hawthorn (8 finals) and West Coast (7 finals).

Years since flag (0 vs 9)

• Richmond (0 years)
• West Coast (1 year)
• Western Bulldogs (3 years)
• Hawthorn (4 years)
• Sydney (7 years)
• Geelong (8 years)
• Collingwood (9 years)
• Port Adelaide (15 years)

Home crowds (1st vs 2nd)

AVERAGE HOME CROWDS

• 2010 = 63,256 (1st)
• 2011 = 61,488 (1st)
• 2012 = 59,799 (1st)
• 2013 = 55,487 (1st)
• 2014 = 48,009 (2nd) - behind Adelaide (48,046)
• 2015 = 47,259 (2nd) - behind Richmond (49,877)
• 2016 = 46,188 (2nd) - behind Adelaide (46,784)
• 2017 = 46,815 (3rd) - behind Richmond (55,950) and Essendon (50,812)
• 2018 = 49,898 (3rd) - behind Richmond (61,175) and West Coast (53,250)
• 2019 = 58,975 (2nd) - behind Richmond (59,987)

Membership?

• 2010 = 57,617 (1st)
• 2011 = 71,271 (1st)
• 2012 = 72,688 (1st)
• 2013 = 80,456 (1st)
• 2014 = 80,793 (1st)
• 2015 = 76,497 (1st)
• 2016 = 74,819 (2nd) - behind Hawthorn (75,351)
• 2017 = 75,985 (1st)
• 2018 = 75,507 (5th) - behind Richmond (100,726), Hawthorn (80,302), West Coast (80,290) and Essendon (79,319)
• 2019 = 85,226 (3rd) - behind Richmond (103,358) and West Coast (90,445)

Revenue?

• 2010 = $75,524,500 (1st)
• 2011 = $75,592,030 (1st)
• 2012 = $69,249,166 (1st)
• 2013 = $75,238,531 (1st)
• 2014 = $76,819,714 (1st)
• 2015 = $66,485,870 (2nd) - behind Hawthorn ($70,986,527)
• 2016 = $71,475,457 (1st)
• 2017 = $77,736,469 (1st)
• 2018 = $82,074,011 (2nd) - behind West Coast ($82,265,015)
• 2019 = $72,558,512 (3rd) - behind Richmond ($92,244,775) and West Coast ($88,660,496)

Profits?

NET PROFIT (LOSS)

• 2010 = $1,700,724
• 2011 = $2,141,736
• 2012 = $7,835,080
• 2013 = $5,225,741
• 2014 = $2,017,992
• 2015 = $848,076
• 2016 = ($2,622,623)
• 2017 = ($2,732,624)
• 2018 = $112,052
• 2019 = $3,875,111

 

[BronCrow]

As I said earlier, it's been too long but I've always wanted to see him challenged and held to account rather than go through years without any sort of legitimate opposition.

If no one stands against him, he's probably the best person for the job.

As a member, if an opposition ticket was formed and I was compelled and persuaded by their plans on what they want to achieve I may consider voting out McGuire. If the opposition ticket resembled what we saw with Richmond at the end of 2016, I'd be inclined to keep McGuire on board.

Thankfully for yourself you would have the ability as a member to be able to instigate change at Collingwood if you felt it was needed. I believe that is the case at all Victorian clubs. Unfortunately, those of us who support either South Australian clubs or either Western Australian clubs cannot. Not sure about each Sydney team or Queensland team.

 

[BBC1967]

Thankfully for yourself you would have the ability as a member to be able to instigate change at Collingwood if you felt it was needed. I believe that is the case at all Victorian clubs. Unfortunately, those of us who support either South Australian club or either Western Australian club cannot. not sure about each Sydney or Queensland team.

Do all Pies members have the right to vote? It may have changed, but a mate of mine, who was low tier member complained he could not vote Eddie out even if he wanted to.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Do all Pies members have the right to vote? It may have changed, but a mate of mine, who was low tier member complained he could not vote Eddie out even if he wanted to.

No. Only certain members have voting rights.

 

[PonsfordMagpie]

Thankfully for yourself you would have the ability as a member to be able to instigate change at Collingwood if you felt it was needed. I believe that is the case at all Victorian clubs. Unfortunately, those of us who support either South Australian club or either Western Australian club cannot. not sure about each Sydney or Queensland team.

I know the WA Clubs are owned by the Western Australia Football Commission.

What's the situation with the SA teams? I'm unfamiliar with it.

 

[BBC1967]

No. Only certain members have voting rights.

A bit strange and undemocratic? All Adult Richmond members have voting rights. Not trying to be smart.Thanks for info.

 

[Scotland]

Membership numbers are pretty dubious. I'd want a certain level of financial commitment before giving people a vote.

 

[juss]

Hawthorn = 4
Brisbane = 3
Geelong = 3
Sydney = 2
West Coast = 2
Richmond = 2
North Melbourne = 1
Essendon = 1
Port Adelaide = 1
Collingwood = 1
Western Bulldogs = 1

I think under McGuire, we should have won another flag considering the number of Grand Finals we made in his time as President but it's a game of margins as we all know.

That's not on Eddie. His job is to have the club succeed off field and out the right people and strategies in place. The Grand Final failures aren't on him.

 

[BBC1967]

Membership numbers are pretty dubious. I'd want a certain level of financial commitment before giving people a vote.

Like what? How much makes you a worthy member over there? Just because you can afford to pay more does not make you any better. In Collingwood's case "side by side" slogan rings very hollow.

 

[Scotland]

Like what? How much makes you a worthy member over there? Just because you can afford to pay more does not make you any better. In Collingwood's case "side by side" slogan rings very hollow.

Like actually having at least an 11 game membership. We had 90,000 members last year. Everyone knows it's the 40,000 odd people that pay good money to have a seat every week that make the club financially stable. Being able to claim that more people like us than 16 or 17 other teams is great, but it doesn't pay the bills.

If all you are willing/able to contribute is a 3 game GA membership or a pet membership etc. should you really get a say in how the club is run? If that's how they want to go then that's their prerogative, but I can't see many clubs going down that path. Should kids and pets get a vote?

If I go and buy one share in Woodside for $28 I don't suddenly have the same voting rights as someone who owns 10,000 shares. Like it or not, club membership in professional sport is financially driven. We are talking about organisations that turn over close to $100m now and employ scores of people over and above the playing lists, it's not a vote for year 5 class president.

 

[BronCrow]

Do all Pies members have the right to vote? It may have changed, but a mate of mine, who was low tier member complained he could not vote Eddie out even if he wanted to.

Sorry, as I am not a Collingwood supporter I don't really know, it was an assumption on my behalf. Having read this, it is an incorrect one.

I do know that only 2 of the 9 members of the Crows can be voted on by the members. Completely undemocratic.

 

[BronCrow]

Like actually having at least an 11 game membership. We had 90,000 members last year. Everyone knows it's the 40,000 odd people that pay good money to have a seat every week that make the club financially stable. Being able to claim that more people like us than 16 or 17 other teams is great, but it doesn't pay the bills.

If all you are willing/able to contribute is a 3 game GA membership or a pet membership etc. should you really get a say in how the club is run? If that's how they want to go then that's their prerogative, but I can't see many clubs going down that path. Should kids and pets get a vote?

If I go and buy one share in Woodside for $28 I don't suddenly have the same voting rights as someone who owns 10,000 shares. Like it or not, club membership in professional sport is financially driven. We are talking about organisations that turn over close to $100m now and employ scores of people over and above the playing lists, it's not a vote for year 5 class president.

Agree with you about the 3 game GA membership or pet membership shouldn't really entitle you to have a say in how the club is run. That is very different though to none of the members having any say on who on the majority of the board members are to represent them. When they are appointed by any other means, all it does is breed a culture of self interest on the board, as has happened at the Crows.

 

[windyhill]

You'd think the smug campaigner would want a breather. Ego's a funny thing.

 

[PP34]

I'm not the biggest fan of the bloke but I see no real reason why you would move him on, the club has been continually in good shape under his tenure.

Yeah I like to rip into the bloke for some of his buffoonery and even outlandish footy comments over the year but in terms of being a club president I wish Carlton had someone like him over the years.

Pretty much my entire time growing up Collingwood has been playing deep into September with a couple of years out. The club continues to be somewhere players want to go to.

If Buckley continued missing finals I think that would have spelt the end for him. I think now he’ll leave on his own terms.

 

[Evolved1]

Yeah I like to rip into the bloke for some of his buffoonery and even outlandish footy comments over the year but in terms of being a club president I wish Carlton had someone like him over the years.

Pretty much my entire time growing up Collingwood has been playing deep into September with a couple of years out. The club continues to be somewhere players want to go to.

If Buckley continued missing finals I think that would have spelt the end for him. I think now he’ll leave on his own terms.

The Tony Shaw coaching years were great. You younguns missed out.

 

[Hawkie_McHawkHawk]

People like this Bunk Moreland chap ask questions for the sake of passing the time- The bottom line is Collingwood are in a really good position: no shortage of money, are competitive most years, could easily have two flags in the last decade and are very much relevant. The question isn’t even worth asking. If it ain’t broke and all that.
The only people that would argue otherwise are biased in their dislike for Collingwood or Eddie.

 

[Red mist]

This won't be popular among a large section of Collingwood supporters, but it's been too long.

It's not healthy having one person lead the club for essentially a generation.

The club should have imposed term limits, particularly after the 2017 review recommended it.

 

[Red mist]

This won't be popular among a large section of Collingwood supporters, but it's been too long.

It's not healthy having one person lead the club for essentially a generation.

The club should have imposed term limits, particularly after the 2017 review recommended it.

When he drives Standards and has built what he has in his tenure then absolutely he is right For the club.
I guess in the long run the club could always give back its investments for training facilities Championed by his lobbying. Sure, he has fingers in too many pies but the head wobbler done good.

 

[JustaBattler]

Essendon would kill to have Eddie- I think that is what the OP is saying....

 

[Tiger2709]

Membership numbers are pretty dubious. I'd want a certain level of financial commitment before giving people a vote.

There is already, it's $50 and must be a person, i.e no pets.

Membership revenue shows that most of the top clubs revenue is about correct for the numbers and home crowd numbers as well, except maybe WCE that are still limited by stadium size and with a bigger stadium would be the biggest club in all likelyhood.

 

[Tiger2709]

Surely the only question is, whether there is someone out there that could do the job better, I doubt it that anyone is available that could do it better, so they may as well stick with the Devil they know.