Is it time?

[Saintly Viewed]

Ed answers to the members. He doesn't own the club.

That is correct.
The club is not his personal fiefdom.
My biggest concern is, that we as a club shouldn't be beholden to one person. We should be capable enough to function brilliantly with a different leader, the club should be strong enough to stand on its own feet.

Also I feel in ways Ed sees himself and being president as part of who he is. That's nice for him, and all, but not sure it's healthy for us. Just my observation.
It's not like he'd be lost to Collingwood.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I'm not advocating ed moves now, but succession should be on the discussion agenda.

 

[Tazzaye]

Find someone who would do a better job then Eddy

 

[noideaatall]

Spot on. Our fans haven't got a clue. We wanted Malthouse sacked and look where that got us now we are still not happy we want to destroy the club in to the ground .

I just thought I'd throw out a line and see what I get, having watched your success over the years. Caught a minnow or a river monster?

I am not personally looking forward to the day that Ed steps down and I'm pretty sure I won't be until or unless someone comes along to challenge who can show the members clearly how he can do a better job. I'm certainly not in favour of Eddie grooming anyone for the role because I don't believe that it's his job nor his choice. Such things are a choice for the members and I believe it's necessary for the role to be fought for, not passed on to some anointee.
...
It's a NO from me!

I have the opposite opinion on the role, believe it in the best interests of the club to be united in any change. Simple reason that fighting for it would inevitably involve mud slinging (if not publicly at least behind the scenes).

The love for Ed scares me a bit. If he wasn't our president (and a damn good one) he wouldn't be my cup of tea. Bloke is only human and humans are never good at letting go of power (particularly over things they love).

 

[PieNSauce]

I'm not advocating ed moves now, but succession should be on the discussion agenda.

I disagree because I don't see the President's role as one that requires succession planning. For me, the president presides until such time as he is either deposed through a vote from the members or chooses to retire. My feeling is that if Ed right now could see a better option as president he would seriously consider retirement and the only rightful alternative to that IMO is that someone challenges and wins the hearts and minds of the members. From a personal perspective, I haven't been able to come up with one good reason why I would want Ed to either name his end date or step down from a job that he is passionate about and appears to do very well.

 

[PieNSauce]

I just thought I'd throw out a line and see what I get, having watched your success over the years. Caught a minnow or a river monster?



I have the opposite opinion on the role, believe it in the best interests of the club to be united in any change. Simple reason that fighting for it would inevitably involve mud slinging (if not publicly at least behind the scenes).

The love for Ed scares me a bit. If he wasn't our president (and a damn good one) he wouldn't be my cup of tea. Bloke is only human and humans are never good at letting go of power (particularly over things they love).

I can accept that you have a different view but for me the presidency and the board must be selected and approved by the members. I have no problem with the incumbent president supporting a candidate and allowing the members to decide but the concept of grooming someone who has not been chosen by the members is just as if not more fraught and divisive than having a contest for the role IMO.

 

[noideaatall]

I havent seen McGuire ever stop trying to further the cause of the club. And there is no one better that has presented to take over. So having your little tantrums about things that don't go the way you want them, are exercises in futility.

I absolve you from your sins in the name of Gary, his son and Fabulous Phil. Sing five renditions of "Good old ..." and visit the snark thread. Go and sin no more my son.

 

[noideaatall]

I can accept that you have a different view but for me the presidency and the board must be selected and approved by the members. I have no problem with the incumbent president supporting a candidate and allowing the members to decide but the concept of grooming someone who has not been chosen by the members is just as if not more fraught and divisive than having a contest for the role IMO.

Ahh I get it, bit slow this time of the morning. I agree. Still Ed could nominate a year he wanted to move on rather than be forced.

 

[jmac70]

Find someone who would do a better job then Eddy

No one can doubt Ed's contribution to the club, he basically saved it. There is an old saying, "absolute power corrupts absolutely". Now I'm not suggesting Ed is corrupt, but that perhaps some of his decisions reflect his belief that he knows what is best for the club. In short I am concerned that Ed thinks he is the club.

I think we need to move towards the Hawthorn model of limiting presidential terms. This ensures that egos don't get in the way of sound decisions.

 

[PieNSauce]

Ahh I get it, bit slow this time of the morning. I agree. Still Ed could nominate a year he wanted to move on rather than be forced.

Agree but I don't want him doing that unless there is an obvious candidate that excites the members. Until now I have neither seen nor heard of any candidate that gets me remotely excited so for that reason I don't believe that the time is right.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I disagree because I don't see the President's role as one that requires succession planning. For me, the president presides until such time as he is either deposed through a vote from the members or chooses to retire. My feeling is that if Ed right now could see a better option as president he would seriously consider retirement and the only rightful alternative to that IMO is that someone challenges and wins the hearts and minds of the members. From a personal perspective, I haven't been able to come up with one good reason why I would want Ed to either name his end date or step down from a job that he is passionate about and appears to do very well.

Fair points.
The part I don't agree in your post, is that Ed would consider an acceptable alternative and retire.
Just think he's so interwoven in Collingwood it's become part of him. He's not going to give it up, he'll leave when he's an old old man.
I'm not fussed if he's there or not, just think Collingwood should be able to be much more than one person, we should function brilliantly and without a beat skipped with a change of board positions including presidents.

 

[PieNSauce]

No one can doubt Ed's contribution to the club, he basically saved it. There is an old saying, "absolute power corrupts absolutely". Now I'm not suggesting Ed is corrupt, but that perhaps some of his decisions reflect his belief that he knows what is best for the club. In short I am concerned that Ed thinks he is the club.

I think we need to move towards the Hawthorn model of limiting presidential terms. This ensures that egos don't get in the way of sound decisions.

My problem with that type of model is the potential that we move on a really competent president in favour of someone who royally stuffs the club up. Memories of the "New Magpies" are still very raw for me and I have no desire to go back there.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Find someone who would do a better job then Eddy

If there is no body capable to do the job, then something is glaringly wrong with Collingwood football club.
Our club can't be beholden to one person or it falls over?
Some names bandied about include:
John Wiley, Craig Kelly.
I'd throw in John Bertrand as a possible.
Then there are the current board members, recent board members etc.

 

[PieNSauce]

Fair points.
The part I don't agree in your post, is that Ed would consider an acceptable alternative and retire.
Just think he's so interwoven in Collingwood it's become part of him. He's not going to give it up, he'll leave when he's an old old man.
I'm not fussed if he's there or not, just think Collingwood should be able to be much more than one person, we should function brilliantly and without a beat skipped with a change of board positions including presidents.

The problem for me in accepting that view is the amount of speculation that forms its basis. For me, Ed has already made it public that he has considered stepping down. That indicates to me that it is entirely possible that he would do just that if the time was right. At the same time, I think that Ed has always shown that he wants to do what is best for the club and those facts combined lead me to believe that what I suggest is entirely possible if not likely.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

The problem for me in accepting that view is the amount of speculation that forms its basis. For me, Ed has already made it public that he has considered stepping down. That indicates to me that it is entirely possible that he would do just that if the time was right. At the same time, I think that Ed has always shown that he wants to do what is best for the club and those facts combined lead me to believe that what I suggest is entirely possible if not likely.

I agree it should be peaceful and transition should be smooth because the media will run the fires and pour petrol on them.
That Ed has mentioned retiring so to speak, then evoking his family saying to stay and fight, to me betrays he's not remotely thinking of going anytime soon.
Ed brings a verve and a frontman approach to the role.
He's the PR and voice of the club (sometimes that goes askew) but lots of the work is the (shock horror!) the CEO and his team getting sponsors. Ed offers the generated publicity, the spruik etc.
But it's a big team, and many people work hard for Collingwood.
But ed holds the edifice together which is to his credit.
Yet it's become "him" as Collingwood, and for me our club should be beyond that.
It's hard getting real talent as president, that is true.
My two best presidents, observed from afar were Frank Costa of Geelong and David Smorgon of Footscray.
Both did things that Ed did, pull their club from difficult times, with less supporters than we have, less gaffes and passed on their clubs in better shape to successors.
Frank Costa was my best ever president and with great great respect leaves Ed in his wake in his manner and representation.
But Eds done a great job. Been terrific. Happy for him to stay but not forever.

 

[DrDavoren]

There are a lot of quality pros and cons in this thread, I think eventually he will make the call himself.
He looked a little under the pump early on in the season in the grandstands but I think behind the scenes was influential in putting some things in place to improve the team such as Gubby return.

Glad he has reduced his media time a little, and I bet he wishes as we all do he could have some moments back....

No doubt he bleeds black and white, I hope he walks rather than a ugly uprising forcing him out.

 

[PieNSauce]

I agree it should be peaceful and transition should be smooth because the media will run the fires and pour petrol on them.
That Ed has mentioned retiring so to speak, then evoking his family saying to stay and fight, to me betrays he's not remotely thinking of going anytime soon.
Ed brings a verve and a frontman approach to the role.
He's the PR and voice of the club (sometimes that goes askew) but lots of the work is the (shock horror!) the CEO and his team getting sponsors. Ed offers the generated publicity, the spruik etc.
But it's a big team, and many people work hard for Collingwood.
But ed holds the edifice together which is to his credit.
Yet it's become "him" as Collingwood, and for me our club should be beyond that.
It's hard getting real talent as president, that is true.
My two best presidents, observed from afar were Frank Costa of Geelong and David Smorgon of Footscray.
Both did things that Ed did, pull their club from difficult times, with less supporters than we have, less gaffes and passed on their clubs in better shape to successors.
Frank Costa was my best ever president and with great great respect leaves Ed in his wake in his manner and representation.
But Eds done a great job. Been terrific. Happy for him to stay but not forever.

Not too much to disagree with there except that I have to ask the question; Does Eddie really think of himself as Collingwood or is that just public perception? Give me a definitive answer to that question and I might agree with just about everything in your post. Right now, all I see is a president that has done a bloody good job and who continues to do so.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Not too much to disagree with there except that I have to ask the question; Does Eddie really think of himself as Collingwood or is that just public perception? Give me a definitive answer to that question and I might agree with just about everything in your post. Right now, all I see is a president that has done a bloody good job and who continues to do so.

I'm sure your are right there is a lot of media blubbering about Ed.
I just feel that when people are doing a role like Ed for so long it becomes part of their own self perception.
It's a natural human trait and instinct.
And it's hard for even the wisest leaders to give up positions.
I'm happy giving Ed the benefit of the doubt.
One thing I should have said, and Ed is fantastic with this, he's boundless energy and drive after all these years is exemplary. There is NO doubt his passion, drive, work ethic, his love for Collingwood.
And he has kept the club stable, the coaching stable (transition or not, it is done) backed his people and team.


I think I've just talked myself into thinking Ed should stay longer.
Great great Collingwood man.
Will rank with Harold Curtis, Ern Copeland, Gordon Carlyon as admin, leadership types.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Is it time Eddie gave us a time for his departure?

It's probably a topical question ...

... IIRC the last time his position was ratified in the AGM was start of 2014, IIRC the board has three year terms, so he's probably coming up for re-election. It'll be either start of 2017 or 2018. Baltimore Jack do you know?

Keep an eye on the CFC website, they announce that kind of stuff around this time of year, in the dark hours of the season.

If anybody wants to challenge then they'd better get their skates on and start preparing, because Ed already has ...

.... In the absence of finals, what better way to appease the AGM crowd than to bring Gubby back and sack half the assistants?

 

[76woodenspooners]

One of the few statements to come out of Jeff's mouth that I agree with is the notion people in a position such as Eddies should set a use by date.

It's a fair point.

There are a lot of people asking/commenting in this thread "If not Ed, then who?" or "Nobody could do a better job than Ed" ...

... Which is what happens when they're a high profile personality who have been in the role for 17 years. It's difficult to imagine anybody else doing the role, isn't it? And anybody who challenges is likely to be somebody nobody has never heard of before, and who would be swamped by Ed's high profile.

Who ever heard of Andrew Newbolt or Richard Garvey before they were President of Hawthorn? And yet they're doing alright?

Ironically, Ed has heavily leveraged his role as President of CFC to build his profile. He's done well.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Has Eddie reached the point where this is appropriate?

Reasons:
- his media persona is impacting negatively on the club.

It does at times, but it also impacts positively at times as well. Part of the Collingwood rhetoric is "it's all about us", and Ed's media profile fits that quite well.

He has enemies out there, ...

Difficult to achieve any kind of success in this world without making enemies somewhere. Some of Ed's enemies are in the media, but all they're doing is working to keep his profile elevated. Does Ed have enemies who are powerful, and are more powerful than him and his allies? Probably not.

... has a mouth ...

He does. 99% of what comes out of it is Collingwood neutral. 0.9999999999% is Collingwood positive. 0.0000000000001% is Collingwood negative (in 17 years, there's been the Jessica Rowe boning, the Adam Goodes King Kong, and the Caroline Wilson drowning ... Anything else?). I'm not defending that negative stuff - it's been pretty bad. But many folks will weigh up the good with the bad and feel Ed comes out ahead.

... and together that means flack for the club

Flack from whom? Apart from the three examples I gave above which transcend football, the rest is just grist for the mill.

- onfield results have declined for 5 years,

Just playing devil's advocate (not apologist) but they typically do after winning a premiership. Hawthorn is very much the exception rather than the rule.

overall the onfield record while he has been president is not that overwhelming

Depends how you look at it. If you count Premierships over that period and compare us to Hawthorn, Brisbane, Geelong or Sydney, then yeah, some clubs have done better.

But if you count up the number of times over the 17 years that you've been able to whistle smugly as you stroll past the water cooler on a Monday morning ... Ed has delivered pretty well.

- the succession plan was a failure, Eddie, if anyone, was the architect and must take responsibility

Year 1 of the succession plan delivered a Premiership to a club that's only won one other since 1958. It always astounds me folks call the succession plan a failure given that fact.

- players leaving the club disenchanted, does Eddie bear any responsibility here

Can't please everybody.

- drug issues,

Which the club (mainly Pert) has come out as a strong voice against?

... bad boy group,...

Very popular with the fans. Who doesn't love Swanny? And Dids? And Johnson? And Tarrant?

C'mon, compare the 'The Ratpack' to 'The Beaks' (Travis Cloke, Cameron Wood, Alan Toovey, Tyson Goldsack) tell me which group you'd rather be an honorary member of???

- the whole Balme/Gubby business raises some questions about the communication within the club

Does it?

- off field has been a fantastic success for the club during his presidency, hate to see it end on a bad note

It's had its downs as well. We almost went bust in 2009 over the Pubs saga.

- nothing worse that a strong leader having to be pushed out, leaving bad blood and a power vacuum

Very true

- the notion that his, or anyones foot, is to big to replace is always a sign things are out of balance

Agree 100%

- 2017 is a critical year for the club. Fail to make the finals and reappoint Bucks or sack him will both feed a "someone has to pay" attitude out and potential thoughts/attempts at a coup.

Ed is a shrewd political operator, he knows how to navigate this stuff as well as anybody.

Something that's worth considering is who the folks are who vote for the board. Look around BigFooty Collingwood or look around a Pies MCG crowd and you will see the full cross section of society represented. However go to a Collingwood AGM and you will see a quite narrow demographic of the supporter base. Average age would be above 60 - most will have been Collingwood supporters for a very long time. They're the folks who decide Ed's fate.

I'd like to see Eddie announce his departure within a three to five year time span during this off season. Do it in style, do it while he is still loved, do it before the club is divided.

Good idea. He could use it to buy himself time, shore up support, and then change his mind

Eddie has been the constant through this period

IMHO, it's a fair question you ask, but I think some of the reasons you've given imply that you're trying to justify a prejudged opinion.

 

[76woodenspooners]

He saved the club from extinction. He can be president for as long as he wants for all I care.

And he almost sent the club into extinction too.

Towards the end of the 2009 season we got within weeks away from being shutdown by the Westpac bank. The only reason we weren't is because of the million dollars we raised through the 'Club 5' campaign to pre-sell five year memberships. We then went on to win a Premiership ($$$), divest ourselves of the pubs debacle, and the rest is history .

 

[76woodenspooners]

He has unfinished business.

Eddie will always have unfinished business.

Heck, he wants to build a 60,000 seat stadium next to the MCG ... And after that idea is quashed / realised (take your pick) there'll be something else that comes along.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Doesn't really matter what I do. Ed put the succession plan in place and it has been a complete failure.

The succession plan delivered our club's 15th Premiership, how can you possibly say it's been a complete failure?

 

[MISFITS]

If there is no body capable to do the job, then something is glaringly wrong with Collingwood football club.
Our club can't be beholden to one person or it falls over?
Some names bandied about include:
John Wiley, Craig Kelly.
I'd throw in John Bertrand as a possible.
Then there are the current board members, recent board members etc.

John Wiley?
The Melbourne Club boy. The one who interviened in the ASADA investigation despite his government appointed drugs commission role.
Fitzpatricks mate. No thanks.

Kelly. Yes, great sports management acrament but he will make Buckley Coach for life as he and Pert were the two key figures that removed Malthouse for Bucks.

Bertrand? The West Australian. Not sure. He had his hands full with the mess that is Swimming Australia.
I am with you 90 percent Saintly, but more of these nominations then we should definitely keep Ed as president for life!