Thread starter
#1
**warning. This is reasonably long, and my opinion only**
As 2005 closes another chapter in the chequered history of Collingwood, it’s time to look forwards (and backwards) to see how things might be looking for 2006. Is the glass half full, half empty, or cracked and leaking unstoppably? The 2005 season finished in almost perfect textbook fashion for a team looking to keep their priority draft pick. We ‘let’ the Bulldogs kick out to a 40 point lead at quarter time, and then played the goal-for-goal game until the end of the match. No humiliation like the previous week, but still no four points.
There are many positives to take out of the last four weeks, but also many negatives. The resurgence of Jason Cloke was (for me) a highlight. The desperation he showed whenever he went near the ball was great to see, and hopefully he will be rewarded by sticking around for at least another year. Ben Davies showed some good signs to finish the season, and hopefully can be promoted and continue his growth. Nick Maxwell’s ‘rebirth’ as a half-forward probably wasn’t the most successful move, but he certainly didn’t look out of his depth. Personally I’d rather see him entrenched in defence (as per the article in Black and White magazine during the year!). James Clement has sewn up another All Australian spot, which is a pretty impressive achievement for a backline that conceded the second highest aggregate for the year. And what can we say of the captain, Nathan Buckley? His appearance as a forward pocket where he kicked 17 goals in 7 games showed that he has potential to play out the next couple of years as a successful forward.
The negatives are easier to spot when the team is struggling. Many players looked disinterested, and appeared to refuse to chase their opponents in the last few rounds (Lonie, C Morrison to name two). Many others let their disposals slip (Lockyer), while others just didn’t appear to care and went half-hearted at everything (Egan). With five players delisted at the time of writing, there should be another few before the year is done.
Onto the general review of the team and where they go from here. This review looks at each part of the ground separately, and assesses the current players, and potential players going forward.
Backline
The core playing group are there, albeit starting to age. Prestigiacomo and Wakelin are the elder statesmen, but should still have a few good years left. Clement is still the lynchpin, and will continue to be so for (hopefully) another 5 years at least. With Maxwell improving by leaps and bounds this season, we can only hope he bulks up a bit over the off-season, and comes back the same player, but stronger. He should be able to eventually fill Wakelin's role in three years or so. Jason Cloke is more interesting. He finished the year across half-forward, and even in the ruck. However, with the expectation that we will have a stronger ruck contingent, he shouldn’t be needed there, and I would expect to go back to the backline once more. Cole has gone monumentally backwards in 2005, and is close to a delisting. He will get his last chance next season to be fully fit and play to the best of his ability. Lonie has also disappointed, possibly because nobody’s quite sure where he belongs. Should he be on a half back flank providing run and long kicking to the forwards, or should he be on a wing/half forward where he can kick long goals? We may not get to find out next year. Lockyer struggled in his field kicking most of this season, and in fact played up forward for a while also. As for his spot on the team, I would have to place him in the backline.
Key Players for 2006: Clement, Maxwell, J Cloke, Lockyer
Emerging Players: H Shaw, O'Brien, Swan
Fading Players: C Morrison, Prestigiacomo, Wakelin, Cole, Lonie
Requirements: A full-back to replace Prestigiacomo, and perhaps one more short running player.
Midfield
What can be said about our midfield that hasn’t been done to death all year? First of all, in the midfield we have been close to full strength all season, yet this is where we have been hurt the most, so injuries aren’t the excuse. R Shaw will return to the wing/half-back line, where he will give us the much needed Graeme Wright-type run through the middle to attacking 50. Johnson should also come back next year fully fit, and provide run on the other wing. We have missed players like these, but generally we have been full strength. Licuria has played injured for most of the second half of the year, and in my eyes, has been disappointing despite polling votes in the TMN MVP. Holland certainly got the most out of himself, and had a solid year. Unfortunately, ‘solid’ may not be enough to win matches. O'Bree went through a purple patch during the year, but went a little quiet in the latter stages. He averaged just under 19 touches a game, but the effectiveness of his disposals slipped as the year fell away. Woewodin played in the midfield, generally as a tagger, and was actually effective. But for mine, he is just too slow (both in physical movements, and decision making), and there are more players who are at least a bit faster in either or both categories. Other players through the middle were Burns (who played a lot more up forward), Didak, Davis, Rowe, Iacobucci, and Davies.
The ruckmen is a separate paragraph. Who would have expected at the start of the year that we would have to rely on a rookie-listed player and a second-year player to shoulder the ruck burden for most of the year? Fanning and C Cloke tried manfully, but were seriously out-classed and out-experienced throughout the season. When Fraser appeared briefly he showed us some form (against Hawthorn and Melbourne), but overall appeared for the Black and White just five times. Richards set a record for being “one week” in the injury list from about round 5, yet managed to remain “one week” until Round 21, where (in hindsight) he was rushed back into the senior team to get some game time under his belt. He was seriously outclassed in his showings on the park (despite recording 17 and 12 hit outs), and the optimist in me says that he didn’t go backwards by these showings; he was just underdone from being injured all year. Hopefully he gets a full pre-season in, proves his fitness, and can start again in 2006.
Key Players for 2006: Richards, Fraser, Licuria, Holland, R Shaw, Johnson
Emerging Players: Fanning, C Cloke, Davies, Rowe, Iacobucci
Fading Players: Burns, O'Bree, Woewodin
Requirements: quick, skilled “hard nut” midfielders
Forwards
When Rocca went down like he had been shot against the Kangas in Round 4, did we think our forward line was so fragile that the structure went down with it? On the plus side, T CLoke debuted, and played pretty well in his first year. He faded later in the season, but was otherwise solid. Tarrant received more attention that before, and his frustration showed later in the season. To have our top seven forwards not playing in the latter stages of the year really summed up our situation. Despite this, we still ‘won’ the most inaccurate team in 2005, and that is a worry. On paper, we have a scarily good forward structure with the following names fighting for a spot: Fraser, Tarrant, Rocca, T Cloke, Caracella, Didak, Davis, Egan, Rusling, Buckley. Now all we need to do is get them all out onto the park at the one time.
Key Players for 2006: Tarrant, Rocca, Didak, Buckley(?)
Emerging Players: T Cloke, Egan, Rusling
Fading Players: Caracella, Buckley(?)
Requirements: Consistency, accuracy, and a lack of injuries.
Remainder
That leaves a few players that haven’t yet been delisted, but not mentioned above. Not sure where they fit into the side, they reside in the “leftover” pile:
Walker – another player who doesn’t know what he is. Is he a tall backman? A back-up ruckman? A tall forward? He’s not quick, he’s not tough, and he’s not accurate with his kicking. Being contracted for next year, he will stay on, but I guess he will fill roles as they come up through injures.
King – looked to be a good prospect last year, but injuries and food slowed his progress this year to the point of not appearing at all! I would expect him to end up delisted before draft day.
Brent Hall – Yet another “tall” without a home. When players like Brent debut, and they appear totally lost, I’m not sure if it’s the player not being up to it, or the coach playing him in the wrong positions. From a height point of view, we are well covered all over the ground (injuries aside), so I don’t know where he will fit into the side going forward. Should be another ruckman, and already has more bulk on him than Richards and Fraser.
Of course with delistings come draft picks, and potentially experienced players from other sides. Therefore this article will change regarding the Key/Emerging players in each part of the ground once the 2006 list is finalised.
As 2005 closes another chapter in the chequered history of Collingwood, it’s time to look forwards (and backwards) to see how things might be looking for 2006. Is the glass half full, half empty, or cracked and leaking unstoppably? The 2005 season finished in almost perfect textbook fashion for a team looking to keep their priority draft pick. We ‘let’ the Bulldogs kick out to a 40 point lead at quarter time, and then played the goal-for-goal game until the end of the match. No humiliation like the previous week, but still no four points.
There are many positives to take out of the last four weeks, but also many negatives. The resurgence of Jason Cloke was (for me) a highlight. The desperation he showed whenever he went near the ball was great to see, and hopefully he will be rewarded by sticking around for at least another year. Ben Davies showed some good signs to finish the season, and hopefully can be promoted and continue his growth. Nick Maxwell’s ‘rebirth’ as a half-forward probably wasn’t the most successful move, but he certainly didn’t look out of his depth. Personally I’d rather see him entrenched in defence (as per the article in Black and White magazine during the year!). James Clement has sewn up another All Australian spot, which is a pretty impressive achievement for a backline that conceded the second highest aggregate for the year. And what can we say of the captain, Nathan Buckley? His appearance as a forward pocket where he kicked 17 goals in 7 games showed that he has potential to play out the next couple of years as a successful forward.
The negatives are easier to spot when the team is struggling. Many players looked disinterested, and appeared to refuse to chase their opponents in the last few rounds (Lonie, C Morrison to name two). Many others let their disposals slip (Lockyer), while others just didn’t appear to care and went half-hearted at everything (Egan). With five players delisted at the time of writing, there should be another few before the year is done.
Onto the general review of the team and where they go from here. This review looks at each part of the ground separately, and assesses the current players, and potential players going forward.
Backline
The core playing group are there, albeit starting to age. Prestigiacomo and Wakelin are the elder statesmen, but should still have a few good years left. Clement is still the lynchpin, and will continue to be so for (hopefully) another 5 years at least. With Maxwell improving by leaps and bounds this season, we can only hope he bulks up a bit over the off-season, and comes back the same player, but stronger. He should be able to eventually fill Wakelin's role in three years or so. Jason Cloke is more interesting. He finished the year across half-forward, and even in the ruck. However, with the expectation that we will have a stronger ruck contingent, he shouldn’t be needed there, and I would expect to go back to the backline once more. Cole has gone monumentally backwards in 2005, and is close to a delisting. He will get his last chance next season to be fully fit and play to the best of his ability. Lonie has also disappointed, possibly because nobody’s quite sure where he belongs. Should he be on a half back flank providing run and long kicking to the forwards, or should he be on a wing/half forward where he can kick long goals? We may not get to find out next year. Lockyer struggled in his field kicking most of this season, and in fact played up forward for a while also. As for his spot on the team, I would have to place him in the backline.
Key Players for 2006: Clement, Maxwell, J Cloke, Lockyer
Emerging Players: H Shaw, O'Brien, Swan
Fading Players: C Morrison, Prestigiacomo, Wakelin, Cole, Lonie
Requirements: A full-back to replace Prestigiacomo, and perhaps one more short running player.
Midfield
What can be said about our midfield that hasn’t been done to death all year? First of all, in the midfield we have been close to full strength all season, yet this is where we have been hurt the most, so injuries aren’t the excuse. R Shaw will return to the wing/half-back line, where he will give us the much needed Graeme Wright-type run through the middle to attacking 50. Johnson should also come back next year fully fit, and provide run on the other wing. We have missed players like these, but generally we have been full strength. Licuria has played injured for most of the second half of the year, and in my eyes, has been disappointing despite polling votes in the TMN MVP. Holland certainly got the most out of himself, and had a solid year. Unfortunately, ‘solid’ may not be enough to win matches. O'Bree went through a purple patch during the year, but went a little quiet in the latter stages. He averaged just under 19 touches a game, but the effectiveness of his disposals slipped as the year fell away. Woewodin played in the midfield, generally as a tagger, and was actually effective. But for mine, he is just too slow (both in physical movements, and decision making), and there are more players who are at least a bit faster in either or both categories. Other players through the middle were Burns (who played a lot more up forward), Didak, Davis, Rowe, Iacobucci, and Davies.
The ruckmen is a separate paragraph. Who would have expected at the start of the year that we would have to rely on a rookie-listed player and a second-year player to shoulder the ruck burden for most of the year? Fanning and C Cloke tried manfully, but were seriously out-classed and out-experienced throughout the season. When Fraser appeared briefly he showed us some form (against Hawthorn and Melbourne), but overall appeared for the Black and White just five times. Richards set a record for being “one week” in the injury list from about round 5, yet managed to remain “one week” until Round 21, where (in hindsight) he was rushed back into the senior team to get some game time under his belt. He was seriously outclassed in his showings on the park (despite recording 17 and 12 hit outs), and the optimist in me says that he didn’t go backwards by these showings; he was just underdone from being injured all year. Hopefully he gets a full pre-season in, proves his fitness, and can start again in 2006.
Key Players for 2006: Richards, Fraser, Licuria, Holland, R Shaw, Johnson
Emerging Players: Fanning, C Cloke, Davies, Rowe, Iacobucci
Fading Players: Burns, O'Bree, Woewodin
Requirements: quick, skilled “hard nut” midfielders
Forwards
When Rocca went down like he had been shot against the Kangas in Round 4, did we think our forward line was so fragile that the structure went down with it? On the plus side, T CLoke debuted, and played pretty well in his first year. He faded later in the season, but was otherwise solid. Tarrant received more attention that before, and his frustration showed later in the season. To have our top seven forwards not playing in the latter stages of the year really summed up our situation. Despite this, we still ‘won’ the most inaccurate team in 2005, and that is a worry. On paper, we have a scarily good forward structure with the following names fighting for a spot: Fraser, Tarrant, Rocca, T Cloke, Caracella, Didak, Davis, Egan, Rusling, Buckley. Now all we need to do is get them all out onto the park at the one time.
Key Players for 2006: Tarrant, Rocca, Didak, Buckley(?)
Emerging Players: T Cloke, Egan, Rusling
Fading Players: Caracella, Buckley(?)
Requirements: Consistency, accuracy, and a lack of injuries.
Remainder
That leaves a few players that haven’t yet been delisted, but not mentioned above. Not sure where they fit into the side, they reside in the “leftover” pile:
Walker – another player who doesn’t know what he is. Is he a tall backman? A back-up ruckman? A tall forward? He’s not quick, he’s not tough, and he’s not accurate with his kicking. Being contracted for next year, he will stay on, but I guess he will fill roles as they come up through injures.
King – looked to be a good prospect last year, but injuries and food slowed his progress this year to the point of not appearing at all! I would expect him to end up delisted before draft day.
Brent Hall – Yet another “tall” without a home. When players like Brent debut, and they appear totally lost, I’m not sure if it’s the player not being up to it, or the coach playing him in the wrong positions. From a height point of view, we are well covered all over the ground (injuries aside), so I don’t know where he will fit into the side going forward. Should be another ruckman, and already has more bulk on him than Richards and Fraser.
Of course with delistings come draft picks, and potentially experienced players from other sides. Therefore this article will change regarding the Key/Emerging players in each part of the ground once the 2006 list is finalised.

