Roast Enough is Enough

[StCicatriz]

Imagine if Richmond didn’t get huge memberships. Don’t think many thought not joining was a good idea. Same with nearly every single club mentioned

in actual fact richmonds membership had trended downwards in the year they made their move and implemented change. which was 2010. they had 35k members. that trended all the way up to 75k. then they got the massive boast from their flag.



Gale and Dimma had them playing finals in their 3rd year. look at the trend prior to their change. it mirrors us somewhat.

so richmond literally are the argument for change and the catalyst for change seems to be when it bottoms out and stagnates.

if you look at that and we stay to the same time frame, we play finals in 2023. its offset slightly by a year or two.

 

[plugger66]

in actual fact richmonds membership had trended downwards in the year they made their move and implemented change. which was 2010. they had 35k members. that trended all the way up to 75k. then they got the massive boast from their flag.

View attachment 701779

Gale and Dimma had them playing finals in their 3rd year. look at the trend prior to their change. it mirrors us somewhat.

so richmond literally are the argument for change and the catalyst for change seems to be when it bottoms out and stagnates.

If you say so. It went down one year then went 18k yet only finished 12th. Come on you can do better than that.

 

[George]

it's interesting. many of those clubs you mentioned were in a very precarious position not long ago. it seems the clubs who have rebounded enacted meaningful change on the back of poor performance both on field and off it. they didn't argue loyalty or make excuses for their position. they changed the leadership of the club and moved in a different direction.

for example WCE were near on insolvent in the 90s, here's a good quick summary:

From a hell of an existence and near collapse to financial powerhouse

When the West Coast Eagles joined the Victorian Football League in the 1980s, they were essentially set up to fail — and soon the club was broke and on life support. How times have changed, writes Clint Thomas.

www.abc.net.au

if i re-call Geelong and hawthorn were in a similar position in the 90s. Hawthorn near on merged. Geelong were close to bankrupt, riddled with debt. Geelong now play its own games at its own stadium, built by the government, in a similar way to how we have had our new digs built. they get the best stadium return of any club. over 90c in the dollar. brian cook was brought in.

Collingwood towards the late 90s found its self in a similar mess. again they changed the leadership. in comes eddie. then malthouse. they haven't looked back since.

Richmond is the most recent example. imagine if they genuinely believed in the excuses and stuck with Wallace and Wright. which is funny cause i reckon we are mirroring them quite a lot right now!

I think all clubs at some point have been in financial hardship but I'm not sure that holds any relevance to right now. Historically the clubs that have been well off financially have always done better on-field. There's always outliers like the Eagles flags in the mid 90's and the Bulldogs in 2016. But usually a sign of a strong club is how well backed they are by members, sponsors, and the people employed at the club. You kind of proved my point anyway. Richmond were a rabble and the results showed as much. They actually campaigned for members to donate to their fund to get them back competitive again. You look at the top four teams over say 5 years at a time and you'll see it's quite obvious. Even after it became a national competition. Easy to pick low hanging fruit for a team that has an entire state to leverage on ala the interstate clubs. Much harder to do it in Melbourne with 10 teams - so support IMO is even more crucial in a football state with 10 teams vying for any kind of ascendency.

I think there's almost a direct correlation between being a top four side and being a strong club financially.

 

[StCicatriz]

I think all clubs at some point have been in financial hardship but I'm not sure that holds any relevance to right now. Historically the clubs that have been well off financially have always done better on-field. There's always outliers like the Eagles flags in the mid 90's and the Bulldogs in 2016. But usually a sign of a strong club is how well backed they are by members, sponsors, and the people employed at the club. You kind of proved my point anyway. Richmond were a rabble and the results showed as much. They actually campaigned for members to donate to their fund to get them back competitive again. You look at the top four teams over say 5 years at a time and you'll see it's quite obvious. Even after it became a national competition. Easy to pick low hanging fruit for a team that has an entire state to leverage on ala the interstate clubs. Much harder to do it in Melbourne with 10 teams - so support IMO is even more crucial in a football state with 10 teams vying for any kind of ascendency.

I think there's almost a direct correlation between being a top four side and being a strong club financially.

yeap and all cut their losses with the administration that delivered those losses.

it's interesting though, melbourne has had more clubs come back from the brink in the last 30 years. it shows that if you are bold enough to make change you can see some serious results. we just need motivation for change. there's this trend where if you haven't got it in done in 6 years, you're never going to get it done.

can you name a club that backed in it's CEO and Coach that hadn't delivered finals in 6 seasons that went on to become successful?

 

[plugger66]

yeap and all cut their losses with the administration that delivered those losses.

it's interesting though, melbourne has had more clubs come back from the brink in the last 30 years. it shows that if you are bold enough to make change you can see some serious results. we just need motivation for change. there's this trend where if you haven't got it in done in 6 years, you're never going to get it done.

can you name a club that backed in it's CEO and Coach that hadn't delivered finals in 6 seasons that went on to become successful?

Pies

 

[George]

yeap and all cut their losses with the administration that delivered those losses.

it's interesting though, melbourne has had more clubs come back from the brink in the last 30 years. it shows that if you are bold enough to make change you can see some serious results. we just need motivation for change. there's this trend where if you haven't got it in done in 6 years, you're never going to get it done.

can you name a club that backed in it's CEO and Coach that hadn't delivered finals in 6 seasons that went on to become successful?

No I can't, I'm not entirely against change either. And there will be change at board level at the end of the year. But I was talking about being a strong club financially and to do that we need the support of as many people as we can - members included.

 

[StCicatriz]

No I can't, I'm not entirely against change either. And there will be change at board level at the end of the year. But I was talking about being a strong club financially and to do that we need the support of as many people as we can - members included.

I think we are in need of some pruning before we get real growth. Needs to be significant change. The sooner we can enact it the better.

I'm looking at it long term rather than the short term.

I feel our club constitution will dictate we need a strong CEO rather than president and board. Due to there being limits on tenure.

Do other clubs have similar limits?

 

[Saint Watto]

it's interesting. many of those clubs you mentioned were in a very precarious position not long ago. it seems the clubs who have rebounded enacted meaningful change on the back of poor performance both on field and off it. they didn't argue loyalty or make excuses for their position. they changed the leadership of the club and moved in a different direction.

All those 5 clubs have won a flag/flags in the last 10 years...….win a flag and the bucks roll in.

As I have posted a few times before....the Dogs took nearly a Mill in Merch at Whitten oval the day after they won the flag.

I've always believed that if we had of pinched 09 or 10....we wouldn't be discussing the money issue.

Sure...we had been some major cockups in admin the last 15 years......it's a big gig getting everyone on the same page.....far too often egos or knuckle heads get involved(Archie Fraser anyone)…..Butters rolling up high at board meetings.....it goes on and on.....and what goes on at other clubs and us that you never hear about.

Some very interesting/topical posts above.

I guess those interested could look at last years annual report and see what we actually spent the money on.

One of Bassett's key objectives was to get our debt down...…...playing in China was one major step.....kudos to the club for doing something a little different....NZ not with standing.

A "little birdie " whispered in my ear last Friday that the dollar outcome is far larger than forecast.

And of course......this years will be avail in Nov.

I firmly believe we're tracking in the right direction.....until otherwise shown to me.

 

[George]

I think we are in need of some pruning before we get real growth. Needs to be significant change. The sooner we can enact it the better.

I'm looking at it long term rather than the short term.

I feel our club constitution will dictate we need a strong CEO rather than president and board. Due to there being limits on tenure.

Do other clubs have similar limits?

Yes I am pretty sure there's limits. Even if you think long term, the support of members is crucial for things like sponsorship and fixturing.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Pies

I reckon if anyone other than Ed was in charge he was gone.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

that's flat out wrong. i wish people would stop pushing that ********.

i dont think wce have made as many mistakes as us over the course of this rebuild. hell even the course of history since their introduction. i would need more than two hands to count the devastating mistakes me have made since this century. tbh the only one i would put at the feet of wce was the drug saga. there's not a lot that goes wrong. we get things right but our issues is our highs are not as often as our lows in terms of decisions we make. we tend to have them crash and burn in a spectacular way where the effect from it is felt seasons later.

the spend on moorabbin was if i re-call around 5m. that's a great example of money spent wisely. for what is, is it now over a 60m facility? thats a fabulous achievement. we need more of that, especially for trying to generate money outside of football and paying down the debt.

its the one thing people use to counteract any argument against the management of the club. eventually the dust will settle, there will be no more construction projects, then what do we hang our hat on?

well that is totally wrong .. i actually know for a fact money wasted by the WCE , the fact is doesnt hurt them means it doesnt get reported .. i can tell you from people working on their new home base that they blew almost $150k on a very stupid mistake that i cant in good faith go into detail about .. i can tell you there have been multiple appointments made within the club that have "quietly gone away" only one Ben Cousins working part time there got air time but there have been many more ...
the differance is the WCE with their strong financial position can absorb these without it hurting them.. we cant...
we have made mistakes this century no one is saying we havent but the ship is righting itself against your feelings on the bloke Finnis has actually got the club running in a much more professional manner than it has ever in our history been run ... we still have some way to go but your assumption that we are going backwards is totally off the mark .. if WCE is the benchmark of what they achieve with next to zero financial restrains then you really need to have another look at the remarkable things we have been able to achive as our club given our financial restrains..

What exactly do you want from the club ? what is it that you think we have wasted money on this year ? you keep mentioning that until we show we can use the money responcabilly you wont give .. so what have we flittered away THIS YEAR? its easy to roll off the mistakes of the last decade but this year what have we wasted ?

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

it's interesting. many of those clubs you mentioned were in a very precarious position not long ago. it seems the clubs who have rebounded enacted meaningful change on the back of poor performance both on field and off it. they didn't argue loyalty or make excuses for their position. they changed the leadership of the club and moved in a different direction.

for example WCE were near on insolvent in the 90s, here's a good quick summary:

From a hell of an existence and near collapse to financial powerhouse

When the West Coast Eagles joined the Victorian Football League in the 1980s, they were essentially set up to fail — and soon the club was broke and on life support. How times have changed, writes Clint Thomas.

www.abc.net.au

if i re-call Geelong and hawthorn were in a similar position in the 90s. Hawthorn near on merged. Geelong were close to bankrupt, riddled with debt. Geelong now play its own games at its own stadium, built by the government, in a similar way to how we have had our new digs built. they get the best stadium return of any club. over 90c in the dollar. brian cook was brought in.

Collingwood towards the late 90s found its self in a similar mess. again they changed the leadership. in comes eddie. then malthouse. they haven't looked back since.

Richmond is the most recent example. imagine if they genuinely believed in the excuses and stuck with Wallace and Wright. which is funny cause i reckon we are mirroring them quite a lot right now!

did fans walk out on those clubs to make those changes ???
it was actually on the back of the fans sticking the fat that they were able to turn around their misfortunes... Hawthorn perhaps is the best example .. on the brink of merge you reckon fans doing what you are say you are doing was going to help them fight off the merge talks ? hell no !! it was the fear that their club was going to not exist that made them dig deep and pay up more ... the reserection funds to keep the hawks going was fan driven it was the fans saying "we dont want to lose our club" them putting their money in to bring them off the canvas ...

the moves hawthorn made we tried ... we were in tassie ... that was ours but our bloody short sighted fans made enough noise about the fact we didnt win there that we walked away thinking that if we manage to pull off a flag in that period we wouldnt need the tassie money cause our fans would rally around us ... Guerra not able to get the boot to the ball and a lacklustre qtr against the Swans and we failed at that ... small moments that put us behind...
we try again this time with NZ and now China and our fans even though we made great money out of the ventures say they are fails because we lost the bloody game ... so you say the club make poor choices well ill put it that we make a choice to fix things but our fans get too impatent waiting for the pay off that we have to abandon them... its a knife edge we cant afford to not do these money making ventures but if the fans jump off we cant affort to keep doing them either ...

 

[DarkSaint]

I'm all for the club selling games to whoever wants to buy them in order to get Money. However when we do stupid sh!t with that money like extend a coach's contract before even a game is played in his last season is just plain stupidity which adds up and explains why we are constantly in the sh!tter. I would understand if Cho was of Clarko's calibre and we wanted to lock him away, but i do not think there was 1 club out there sniffing around wanting to poach him for us.

Yes we don't have the money other clubs do, but we as a club shoot ourselves in the foot more than most which doesn't help one bit. We can keep harping on about fan base, memberships etc, but Christ even the Dogs won a flag who imo were worse off than us. There is bad luck and then there is just not being competent and we have exhausted all of our bad luck and are now in the latter bracket.

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

I think we are in need of some pruning before we get real growth. Needs to be significant change. The sooner we can enact it the better.

I'm looking at it long term rather than the short term.

I feel our club constitution will dictate we need a strong CEO rather than president and board. Due to there being limits on tenure.

Do other clubs have similar limits?

we have gone down this road a hundred times .... you want Finnis sacked ... ok so lets play this game
we sack him - who do we replace him with ?
who wants to touch St Kilda when the first CEO in a generation to actually move the club forward gets the arse... who do we get ? Nisbet wouldnt touch us with a barge pole, Cook wouldnt come near us... its all good to say we need better people but who are these better people ? and more importantly how are we to afford them ? and what do we have to offer them to want to come to us ?
its like sacking Jack Steele cause he isnt Dustin Martin but then only able to afford and bring to the club Chris Masten....

 

[st_trav_ofWA]

I'm all for the club selling games to whoever wants to buy them in order to get Money. However when we do stupid sh!t with that money like extend a coach's contract before even a game is played in his last season is just plain stupidity which adds up and explains why we are constantly in the sh!tter. I would understand if Cho was of Clarko's calibre and we wanted to lock him away, but i do not think there was 1 club out there sniffing around wanting to poach him for us.

Yes we don't have the money other clubs do, but we as a club shoot ourselves in the foot more than most which doesn't help one bit. We can keep harping on about fan base, memberships etc, but Christ even the Dogs won a flag who imo were worse off than us. There is bad luck and then there is just not being competent and we have exhausted all of our bad luck and are now in the latter bracket.

look we all look back on the extension for richo as a mistake NOW and hinesight is we didnt need to do it when we did but we are certainly not the only club in the land to have ever read the coaching situation wrong .. as a club we were wanting to present a stability and a faith in our coach that we were on the right path .. we had just missed finals for the second time by a game and % we were on the up and pretty much everyone was content that under Richo we were heading in the right direction .. turns out we read it wrong the cliff was coming and we fell right off (again thats not a St Kilda exclusive event many clubs mis read their position)..
so we stuffed up we knew we needed to fix the problem but we have richo contracted we could either
a) sack him wear the heat of that cop the financial hit of that and do as we have done by refreshing the list
b) ride the wave with him see if better support around him can fix the issues and refresh the list

either way we went the win/loss ratio was going to be about the same either way the work to the list was going to be the same just doing option b means we dont get smashed in the media for sacking a coach , we dont get cained by the AFL for sacking a coach, we save some payout money...
for all the talk of wasting money yes we made a mistake signing him up again but what is more responcible use of money throwing more money down the drain to remove him with little to no onfield benifit or wearing in and fixing it when it is less costly ??

 

[StCicatriz]

well that is totally wrong .. i actually know for a fact money wasted by the WCE , the fact is doesnt hurt them means it doesnt get reported .. i can tell you from people working on their new home base that they blew almost $150k on a very stupid mistake that i cant in good faith go into detail about .. i can tell you there have been multiple appointments made within the club that have "quietly gone away" only one Ben Cousins working part time there got air time but there have been many more ...
the differance is the WCE with their strong financial position can absorb these without it hurting them.. we cant...
we have made mistakes this century no one is saying we havent but the ship is righting itself against your feelings on the bloke Finnis has actually got the club running in a much more professional manner than it has ever in our history been run ... we still have some way to go but your assumption that we are going backwards is totally off the mark .. if WCE is the benchmark of what they achieve with next to zero financial restrains then you really need to have another look at the remarkable things we have been able to achive as our club given our financial restrains..

What exactly do you want from the club ? what is it that you think we have wasted money on this year ? you keep mentioning that until we show we can use the money responcabilly you wont give .. so what have we flittered away THIS YEAR? its easy to roll off the mistakes of the last decade but this year what have we wasted ?

name them! i haven't heard that at all.

a 150k is nothing on a 60 million dollar facility. it's literally a deviance of 0.25%. in other words nothing. do you really think there is not similar things occurring in other construction projects including our own? i mean media reports state we've paid richo 650k a year. that's 1.3 million. i'd rather blow 150k on some stupid stuff on the moorabbin project than 1.3 on a coach none of us want to be there anyway.

also on WCE their retention rate within in their players is amazing. when they leave they stay involved at the club. they kicked off things a decade plus ago, that we have only just started to do now. it's not just about

its not just money either, otherwise we wouldn't have the capability to do it now. the difference is in the decision making and where you spend your money. some things don't require a full spend either, such as partnerships. the difference in football dept spend between us and the highest club is 5 million. 25 million compared to 30 million at collingwood. however if you compare us to WCE the difference in football dept spend is a tick over 1 million. richo's salary is roughly half of it. the value WCE have obtained is in partnerships and leveraging the people who have been involved in their club. something we have been incredibly poor in doing.

do you think that 1.2 million difference in football dept spend is the difference between success and not?

here's some things that are costing us now:
1) inability to get appointments right. across three major lines: Football GM, List Manager and Senior Coach. we are onto our 3rd footy GM. our 3rd list boss. we also appointed then extended richo twice.
2) lack of protection to remove richardson without a substantial payout given that was raised as a deterrent to removing him. meaning you are carrying a bloke to implement and oversee a football dept program that is sub par. which affects the core of the business, the onfield results.
3) inability to get the development pathway right during the development phase of the list,
4) draft blunders like McCartin at Pick 1
5) i disagree with this but its something you've raised before, the failed plan that was then binned. but from my perspective the inability to implement the actions required to meet the strategy outlined by the board,
6) poor onfield results that meant the we didn't realise the full capability of the new improved stadia deal,
7) financial losses accrued through 2013-2016.

we can go back further and look at what previous administrations have done. the problem is these mistakes stay around. they're big ticket items. it lingers. meaning the first thing even one raises when the new administration starts is how much legacy crap they have to overcome. so this stuff just keeps compounding.

 

[StCicatriz]

we have gone down this road a hundred times .... you want Finnis sacked ... ok so lets play this game
we sack him - who do we replace him with ?
who wants to touch St Kilda when the first CEO in a generation to actually move the club forward gets the arse... who do we get ? Nisbet wouldnt touch us with a barge pole, Cook wouldnt come near us... its all good to say we need better people but who are these better people ? and more importantly how are we to afford them ? and what do we have to offer them to want to come to us ?
its like sacking Jack Steele cause he isnt Dustin Martin but then only able to afford and bring to the club Chris Masten....

why are people obsessed with needing to know a ready made replacement based on public opinion. i doubt anyone on here could name 20 of the best performed CEO's in business within this country without googling for some financial results and company size to make their decision.

so why do we look at it and go, who do we replace him with? there's no one!

of course there's someone. we didn't sit there and go "well we have to keep netters or fraser because there's no one else".

the idea it's nisbet or cook is hilarious. they wouldn't even move to the pies. so it's not a case of club size or who we are. it's just they won't move.

there is always someone and that's the responsibility of the chairmain and board to find.

 

[StCicatriz]

did fans walk out on those clubs to make those changes ???
it was actually on the back of the fans sticking the fat that they were able to turn around their misfortunes... Hawthorn perhaps is the best example .. on the brink of merge you reckon fans doing what you are say you are doing was going to help them fight off the merge talks ? hell no !! it was the fear that their club was going to not exist that made them dig deep and pay up more ... the reserection funds to keep the hawks going was fan driven it was the fans saying "we dont want to lose our club" them putting their money in to bring them off the canvas ...

the moves hawthorn made we tried ... we were in tassie ... that was ours but our bloody short sighted fans made enough noise about the fact we didnt win there that we walked away thinking that if we manage to pull off a flag in that period we wouldnt need the tassie money cause our fans would rally around us ... Guerra not able to get the boot to the ball and a lacklustre qtr against the Swans and we failed at that ... small moments that put us behind...
we try again this time with NZ and now China and our fans even though we made great money out of the ventures say they are fails because we lost the bloody game ... so you say the club make poor choices well ill put it that we make a choice to fix things but our fans get too impatent waiting for the pay off that we have to abandon them... its a knife edge we cant afford to not do these money making ventures but if the fans jump off we cant affort to keep doing them either ...

the point is fans dropped off. the $$$ dropped off. then they were forced to act. changes were made. yes money was tipped it, but was it more than before they all dropped off, no. it was a rally point. they didn't carry the same administration moving forward to saw them in that position they were trying to correct.

so it's the fans fault we left tassie? last i checked it was GT's recommendation to the board that got carried. another dumb decision.

china is a smart move. NZ was a smart move. leaving tassie was a dumb decision.

 

[StCicatriz]

I'm all for the club selling games to whoever wants to buy them in order to get Money. However when we do stupid sh!t with that money like extend a coach's contract before even a game is played in his last season is just plain stupidity which adds up and explains why we are constantly in the sh!tter. I would understand if Cho was of Clarko's calibre and we wanted to lock him away, but i do not think there was 1 club out there sniffing around wanting to poach him for us.

Yes we don't have the money other clubs do, but we as a club shoot ourselves in the foot more than most which doesn't help one bit. We can keep harping on about fan base, memberships etc, but Christ even the Dogs won a flag who imo were worse off than us. There is bad luck and then there is just not being competent and we have exhausted all of our bad luck and are now in the latter bracket.

spot on.

 

[Mikka84]

I reckon if anyone other than Ed was in charge he was gone.

Strong President.

 

[jwikked]

Strong President.

It’s easy to dislike Eddie but for all his faults, I’d still kill to have him in charge at the Saints with the passion he’s got for his club. I don’t think there’s a better ally for any club than Eddie at Collingwood. They’re very lucky to have him.

 

[plugger66]

name them! i haven't heard that at all.

a 150k is nothing on a 60 million dollar facility. it's literally a deviance of 0.25%. in other words nothing. do you really think there is not similar things occurring in other construction projects including our own? i mean media reports state we've paid richo 650k a year. that's 1.3 million. i'd rather blow 150k on some stupid stuff on the moorabbin project than 1.3 on a coach none of us want to be there anyway.

also on WCE their retention rate within in their players is amazing. when they leave they stay involved at the club. they kicked off things a decade plus ago, that we have only just started to do now. it's not just about

its not just money either, otherwise we wouldn't have the capability to do it now. the difference is in the decision making and where you spend your money. some things don't require a full spend either, such as partnerships. the difference in football dept spend between us and the highest club is 5 million. 25 million compared to 30 million at collingwood. however if you compare us to WCE the difference in football dept spend is a tick over 1 million. richo's salary is roughly half of it. the value WCE have obtained is in partnerships and leveraging the people who have been involved in their club. something we have been incredibly poor in doing.

do you think that 1.2 million difference in football dept spend is the difference between success and not?

here's some things that are costing us now:
1) inability to get appointments right. across three major lines: Football GM, List Manager and Senior Coach. we are onto our 3rd footy GM. our 3rd list boss. we also appointed then extended richo twice.
2) lack of protection to remove richardson without a substantial payout given that was raised as a deterrent to removing him. meaning you are carrying a bloke to implement and oversee a football dept program that is sub par. which affects the core of the business, the onfield results.
3) inability to get the development pathway right during the development phase of the list,
4) draft blunders like McCartin at Pick 1
5) i disagree with this but its something you've raised before, the failed plan that was then binned. but from my perspective the inability to implement the actions required to meet the strategy outlined by the board,
6) poor onfield results that meant the we didn't realise the full capability of the new improved stadia deal,
7) financial losses accrued through 2013-2016.

we can go back further and look at what previous administrations have done. the problem is these mistakes stay around. they're big ticket items. it lingers. meaning the first thing even one raises when the new administration starts is how much legacy crap they have to overcome. so this stuff just keeps compounding.

Just out of interest how is it 1.3 million on Richo? I know people like putting mayo on their story to help but you know its one year not two. We were still playing under Richo last year whether he was extended or not. We were still only winning 4 games.

Relly apart from the richo extention every other club could have the same issues that you have raised.

Anyway you not giving your membership money next season should solve these issues. Not. If everyone felt the same as you then the club would fold. Yes fold. No members, no club. Luckily most don't stamp their feet and say im not joining until its all fixed. God knows how you tell if its all fixed if as you say it has nothing to do with not winning. Im pretty sure when you look in the mirror its all about not winning.

 

[plugger66]

Strong President.

And we might have one now. Seems to be saying everything right. And off the ground it seems we are moving as quick as a poor club can and all in the right direction.

 

[Mikka84]

It’s easy to dislike Eddie but for all his faults, I’d still kill to have him in charge at the Saints with the passion he’s got for his club. I don’t think there’s a better ally for any club than Eddie at Collingwood. They’re very lucky to have him.

Absolutely. Been one of the best Presidents for the last half century. When it gets tough, he stands up for the club and all involved. Like you, I'd kill for someone like him with us. I'm hoping Basset becomes this person, but so far i'm on the fence.

 

[Mikka84]

And we might have one now. Seems to be saying everything right. And off the ground it seems we are moving as quick as a poor club can and all in the right direction.

See above. On the fence, but early days. Hoping he gets better. He's certainly better than Summers so far.