How has Collingwood managed to be so successful since 2001 while Carlton and Essendon have not?

[PerthBoy86]

Arguably the big 3 Vic clubs, 15, 16 and 16 VFL/AFL premierships with the biggest overall supporter bases in Vic, yet since the Bombers lost in 2001, neither Carlton or Essendon have played in a GF (and barely won any finals), while Collingwood have played in 5 grand finals (if we count 2010 as one) and always seem to be challenging, albeit still losing most GFs, at a frequency similar to Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong and the Coasters.

I know Carlton has had it's struggles, as has Essendon, a lot related to club management, scandals etc, but how come the Pies keep challenging while these two other greats are in the doldrums? What changed since the 90s?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

• strong off field leadership and board.
• Solid recruiting
• Good development

Simply put, those clubs - Collingwood included - make more good decisions that other clubs.

Like Essendon and Carlton.


Carlton have churned through Collins, Morgan, Pratt, Kernahan, LoGiudice and Sayers as president.
Malouf, Swann, Trigg, Liddle and Cook as CEO.

Essendon seem more stable off field with long tenures to Jackson, McMahon, Tanner and Campbell. Would suggest maybe Dodoro is more to do with their lack of success.

In similar time frames.

Coll: McGuire (pres 22 years) Pert (CEO - 11 years)
WCE: Nesbitt (CEO - 23 years) Cransberg (Pres - 12 years).
Syd: Colless (Pres - 18 years), Pridham ( Pres - 9 years) Ireland (CEO - 9 years).
Haw: Dicker (Pres - 9 years), Kennett (Pres - 11 years [2 terms]), Fox (CEO - 7 years [poached by MCC]), Silvers (CFO - 10 years).
Gee: Cook (CEO - 23 years), Costa (Pres - 11 years [tenured]), Carter (Pres - 10 years [tenured]).

LoGiudice at 8 years as president is the most tenured role Carlton have had since the mid 90s. Maybe those faceless men of Carlton who act as powerbrokers have seen too many lose their place, and caused too much upheaval. Who knows.
After decades of mediocrity the Tigers finally got some stability. Backed Hardwick, long term captain in Cotchin and Gale and O'Neal have been there for quite some time. Along comes success. Would say all would have had some stable management of the list management and recruitment team.

 

[jc37]

I think a big part of it is onfield leadership.

Buckley was like an onfield coach when he played and Pendlebury is similar. Maxwell was very good as well. Onfield coach/players are difficult to find. The Hawks had Hodge and Mitchell which obviously coincided with their great era. Cats have also had great leadership on field.

I think this is under rated but if you are a coach looking to implement a game plan with younger players trying to find their feet it helps having seasoned professionals guiding them on field.

Carlton and Bombers have had good leaders but none that are exceptional or exceptional as a group.

 

[Danw0w]

Culture and being a well run club

 

[naysayer]

Struggling to see the relevance of the comparison.

 

[Tiger2709]

I would hardly say Collingwood has been so successful?

Geelong Richmond and Hawthorn all have more flags in that time and both Geelong and Richmond are in general better run clubs over the last decade.

All it takes is get a good President to recruit a good CEO who recruits a good coach that then sets up a good football department who recruit good players, establish a good culture of success, get a bit of luck as well and away you go...Too easy.

 

[Taper]

Collingwood and Essendon have both won 2 flags and a spoon in the AFL era. Not sure why they're being lumped in with Carlton who are the modern day equivalent of 20th century St Kilda.

 

[jj1978]

Throw in a salary cap scandal and/or drug scandal into the Collingwood football club and let see how they'd cope. The after effects of those on both clubs have created an interesting domino effect into the psyche and fabric of the clubs and resulted in major changes that still have somewhat not recovered.

 

[GastevsBeard]

I think it can be summarised as failure to adapt to a changing landscape (more professional, more rules, more governance)

Richmond were the poster boys of failure to adapt to the VFL/AFL shift, before the course began to slowly change in the late 2000s

I think Carlton and Essendon adjusted just fine to the AFL world, but failed to adapt to the rapid increase in professionalism in the early 2000s (strict salary caps, equalisation measures etc)

 

[JyeDye]

They've won 1 flag in that time....

 

[WillHayward]

• strong off field leadership and board.
• Solid recruiting
• Good development

Simply put, those clubs - Collingwood included - make more good decisions that other clubs.

Like Essendon and Carlton.


Carlton have churned through Collins, Morgan, Pratt, Kernahan, LoGiudice and Sayers as president.
Malouf, Swann, Trigg, Liddle and Cook as CEO.

Essendon seem more stable off field with long tenures to Jackson, McMahon, Tanner and Campbell. Would suggest maybe Dodoro is more to do with their lack of success.

In similar time frames.

Coll: McGuire (pres 22 years) Pert (CEO - 11 years)
WCE: Nesbitt (CEO - 23 years) Cransberg (Pres - 12 years).
Syd: Colless (Pres - 18 years), Pridham ( Pres - 9 years) Ireland (CEO - 9 years).
Haw: Dicker (Pres - 9 years), Kennett (Pres - 11 years [2 terms]), Fox (CEO - 7 years [poached by MCC]), Silvers (CFO - 10 years).
Gee: Cook (CEO - 23 years), Costa (Pres - 11 years [tenured]), Carter (Pres - 10 years [tenured]).

LoGiudice at 8 years as president is the most tenured role Carlton have had since the mid 90s. Maybe those faceless men of Carlton who act as powerbrokers have seen too many lose their place, and caused too much upheaval. Who knows.
After decades of mediocrity the Tigers finally got some stability. Backed Hardwick, long term captain in Cotchin and Gale and O'Neal have been there for quite some time. Along comes success. Would say all would have had some stable management of the list management and recruitment team.

I agree with your three points and great overall post.

But "stability" is a difficult one.

If we say stability is the key then the logical conclusion of that is simply allow the incumbents to remain in their position for a long period of time and somehow magically things turn for the best.

But I think it's a chicken and egg scenario.

Stability only works when you have the right people in place in the first place.

Putting a dickhead in power for twenty years won't get you results just because you are "stable"..

Underneath stability is having the right people and culture.

Being stable but with a s**t culture and dickheads in charge won't get results. Stability requires good foundations.

And this is Carlton's real problem.

Dickheads in charge and in power and the power struggles and politics between dickheads.

Same as the Bombers previously.

The Eagles are now too stable. Blokes have become so comfortable and pleased with themselves they start making poor decisions.

The key metric is making more good decisions than bad decisions.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The Pies have been around the mark and have played in a few GF but the reality is they have won only one of them in 21 years and you need to go back to 1990 for their previous one.
How do you define success. Are flags no longer the mark?

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Eddie Mcguire.
He managed to get the pies out of the boys club mentality.

Peggy did it at the tigers, and chief did it at the hawks.


The bombers and blues have not had anyone do that (in fact, they get rid of anyone that tries)

 

[My Tilly]

They've won 1 flag in that time....

Played in multiple grand finals.
Never down for long.

 

[Freomaniac]

Played in multiple grand finals.
Never down for long.

Are you talking about Collingwood right? I love it when you said a club is and was never down for long.

I remember magpies struggling in the mid 1990s until the early 2000s.

Magpies played finals in 1994. They had to rebuild and didn't make finals and won finals until they made that grand final in 2002.

You also said that west coast "never been down for long"

 

[timokane]

better feeling club then both blues and bombers.

Collingwood has that wow factor about it.

Carlton and essendon are bit gloomy and depressing to be honest to be part of.

 

[RuFiO]

COLA

 

[My Tilly]

Are you talking about Collingwood right? I love it when you said a club is and was never down for long.

I remember magpies struggling in the mid 1990s until the early 2000s.

Magpies played finals in 1994. They had to rebuild and didn't make finals and won finals until they made that grand final in 2002.

You also said that west coast "never been down for long"

West Coast finished 5th in 2020.
9th in 2021 and been down for two years now.

We aren't talking the 90's, it's the 00's and Collingwood have been consistently making finals.

 

[Pistol Night]

Throw in a salary cap scandal and/or drug scandal into the Collingwood football club and let see how they'd cope. The after effects of those on both clubs have created an interesting domino effect into the psyche and fabric of the clubs and resulted in major changes that still have somewhat not recovered.

Simple. Don’t cheat and you too can lose a few GFs like us

 

[JyeDye]

Played in multiple grand finals.
Never down for long.

They've accomplished less then Hawthorn, Geelong, Sydney, West Coast, Richmond, Brisbane. The same as Port Adelaide, Bulldogs. That's 8 teams with more or the same level of flags in that time. Carlton and Essendon have been completely incompetent, but Collingwood have not been 'so successful'. In fact, if you move the timeframe 1 year earlier, Essendon have accomplished the exact same as them.

 

[Elixuh]

Because Collingwood doesn’t do stuff like this

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Arguably the big 3 Vic clubs, 15, 16 and 16 VFL/AFL premierships with the biggest overall supporter bases in Vic, yet since the Bombers lost in 2001, neither Carlton or Essendon have played in a GF (and barely won any finals), while Collingwood have played in 5 grand finals (if we count 2010 as one) and always seem to be challenging, albeit still losing most GFs, at a frequency similar to Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong and the Coasters.

I know Carlton has had it's struggles, as has Essendon, a lot related to club management, scandals etc, but how come the Pies keep challenging while these two other greats are in the doldrums? What changed since the 90s?

Wtaf.

Big 3 Vic clubs, since 2001?

Grand Final wins:

Collingwood zero

Carlton zero

Essendon zero

Sama same.

We call them the COCE ZERO threesome. A menage-a-trois of ******* zilch.

Those are the big 3 Vic clubs you say. They are ******* peloton clubs at best.


And you are right, 100k+ members 6 years running, triple Grand Final winning, 90k+ to 7 consecutive MCG finals so far Richmond belongs nowhere near any of that shower.

 

[Pistol Night]

Wtaf.

Big 3 Vic clubs, since 2001?

Grand Final wins:

Collingwood zero

Carlton zero

Essendon zero

Sama same.

We call them the COCE ZERO threesome. A menage-a-trois of ******* zilch.

Those are the big 3 clubs you say, and I am pleased you recognised these peloton clubs this way.


And you are right, 100k+ members 6 years running, triple Grand Final winning, 90k+ to 7 consecutive MCG finals so far Richmond belongs nowhere near any of that shower.

Why don’t we count 2010 again? I can never remember your rational disqualification of certain flags?

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Why don’t we count 2010 again? I can never remember your rational disqualification of certain flags?

Count it as what?

I am going by Grand Final wins and nobody won the 2010 Grand Final.

 

[Pistol Night]

Count it as what?

I am going by Grand Final wins and nobody won the 2010 Grand Final.

Ah that’s right. I knew we couldn’t claim that