Malthouse Megathread

[Knightmare]

Mick Malthouse, 12 years at Collingwood, one flag.

Jock McHale, 38 years, 8 flags.

Only one is great.

Mick was good for us, he did the job we asked of him, but never really excelled in the role, because let's face it there is only one ultimately successful team each year, and Mick only reached the top of the mountain once with us.

We've only had one truly great coach in our history, and it will be a shame the day MM over takes him for games coached.

I see it a little differently.

Premierships are the ultimate determinant of success. McHale has been our G.O.A.T but I think Mick should still be honoured and acknowledged after his coaching career by the club and still go down as a Collingwood great. He turned us around from who we were under Tony Shaw (a group with some incredible talents but not a team with any real chemistry and a group without a winning culture or any level of depth). Mick changed all this. Got rid of the weaker characters and created a better rounded team, not reliant on one star as we were. We got to 4 grand finals (1 successful) in his 12 year stint. Not the worst record and considering where we came from a very, very good return.

We are a better club because we have had Mick. Fact. And there is no comparison between Collingwood in 1999 and Collingwood now and his success and contribution to the club should be based around this. He did only help us up the mountain once and I agree success should be measured by premiership first, but he changed our club and made us a powerhouse we just weren't and this is where the value came from with Mick and why he deserves to be considered a great. Regardless of how things ended.

Show we are the bigger men.

 

[Max Levern]

No doubt Malthouse left the club in a better place. I heard an interview of him explaining the situation when he came to the club. As Knightmare has explained he instilled values and developed a winning culture, which in my opinion is the most important aspect of a successful business model. When the list was developed in 09,10,11 you knew coll would be a very well drilled team that employed unrelenting attack of the ball and a superior ability to win the contested/ defensive phases. imo he was the best coach in the comp in 2010,11. I'm trying not to copy you knightmare but he had this aura about him which is reflected through the players, like he knew something other didnt. I cant explain it very well lol.

When Magquire first announced the succession plan i'm sure he thought it was a good idea because they weren't exactly contenders. It was only a year or two into the plan which MM took them to being favourites and Eddie was on a hiding to nothing. I also have liked buckleys start to his career if i think the players or coll aren't as dominant.

Also do buy into the premiership stats. Its a lot harder to win flags given the competitive nature of AFL. The powers that be have made being continually successful being hard through salary caps, drafting ect because its bad for business if any one team is winning all the time. Just goes to show that brisbane and to a greater extent Geelong were very special clubs.

 

[Mark_K]

Mick Malthouse, 12 years at Collingwood, one flag.

Jock McHale, 38 years, 8 flags.

Only one is great.

Mick was good for us, he did the job we asked of him, but never really excelled in the role, because let's face it there is only one ultimately successful team each year, and Mick only reached the top of the mountain once with us.

We've only had one truly great coach in our history, and it will be a shame the day MM over takes him for games coached.

How many teams when in the comp at that stage though?

I get your point, but you can word or use a statistic to help win any argument.

Mick was a very good to great coach here, no question, but i think more people are annoyed with Mick the person, not Mick the coach.

 

[SuperSub17]

How many teams when in the comp at that stage though?

There were 8 from 1897-1907, 10 from 1908-1924 (except for a few war years), and 12 from 1925-1986 (except a few war years). Therefore much easier to win a flag earlier on.

 

[Vicky Park]

Mick Malthouse, 12 years at Collingwood, one flag.

Jock McHale, 38 years, 8 flags.

Only one is great.

Mick was good for us, he did the job we asked of him, but never really excelled in the role, because let's face it there is only one ultimately successful team each year, and Mick only reached the top of the mountain once with us.

We've only had one truly great coach in our history, and it will be a shame the day MM over takes him for games coached.

Absolutely agree. I'm new to this forum, and admit I have not read all the previous posts on this thread. But this much I know - Malthouse is a narcissist. Its all about him. His ego drove him to petulant public outbursts last year, and he severely damaged our flag chances. He should not be mentioned in the same sentence as Jock McHale. I thank Mick for his contribution to our 2010 flag, but he was one of many people at the club who pulled together for the premiership. And he was remunerated very well.

 

[Mark_K]

There were 8 from 1897-1907, 10 from 1908-1924 (except for a few war years), and 12 from 1925-1986 (except a few war years). Therefore much easier to win a flag earlier on.

Exactly.

We need to be careful when comparing stats from different eras.

 

[Maggie5]

I applaud you Knightmare for you ability to be unbiased but unfortunately for me it is MM the man that I cannot accept. The man lacks honesty and integrity. His comments re J.Cloke, his obvious favoured treatment of some players (undeserving IMO), treatment of R.Shaw, Scotland, Betheras.
I never ever felt he was a Collingwood person (don't know why) and would argue with fellow fans, didn't seem sincere. It was all about me and not team, although he talked about team. He may be a good coach I think the jury for me is out as didn't do that much at the Bulldogs, has the whole of WA at his disposal at the Eagles and 9 years before the succession plan. No need to point out that he took us to grand finals - didn't win and that is the measure.
Shame if Jock McHale's record is broken by this man as Jock's record given the grounds, resources, part-time players is outstanding.

 

[lethalburns]

I think people give Mick far too much credit and Eddie not enough

Was Mick a great manager of players and a good role model? Yes, certainly

Did he transform our club into the professional business outfit it is today? Hell no. Are you kidding me ? He was a cog in overall vision that he did not create

Eddie was the one that drew a line in the sand and transformed our club. He brought the international sponsors, he delivered us the best coach available in 99, he delivered the state of the art facilities, he hired the leading business talent available at the time....

Hell if it was not for Ed digging his heels in Mick would have been gone at the start of 2002. We looked like the worst team in the AFL the night we lost to Carlton in the wet.

Mick left our club on a high and should consider himself fortunate. We supported him when the media was savaging him at the end of 2009 and then in 2010 he was one Stevie Milne bounce away from a hiding to nothing.

 

[jmac70]

Mick Malthouse, 12 years at Collingwood, one flag.

Jock McHale, 38 years, 8 flags.

Only one is great.

Mick was good for us, he did the job we asked of him, but never really excelled in the role, because let's face it there is only one ultimately successful team each year, and Mick only reached the top of the mountain once with us.

We've only had one truly great coach in our history, and it will be a shame the day MM over takes him for games coached.

I have seen two flags in my life time and he got one of them so in terms of that he was pretty great. His record does not compare to Jock McHale's but who's does? Mick certainly has his faults but he does seem to have a knack of getting guys to play for him. As I said earlier, I hope to god the game has passed him by and that he is a spectacular failure.

What odds that the game in which he breaks Jock's record is against us?

 

[Malifice]

I guess it doesn't bother me greatly because i don't fear Carlton at this point, or Malthouse given his age and the aging list with no youth at Carlton at the minute.

Hang on, were not bloody St Kilda. With Russell and Thorntons departure we only have seven players on the list over 25: Walker and Mclean (26 each), Simpson, Duigan and Carrazzo (28), Judd turned 29 four days ago (same age as Waite) and Scotland is 32.

A selection of players 25 years and under:

Murphy 25
Kruezer 23
Gibbs 23
Robinson 23
Yarran 21
Betts 25
Armfield 25
Garlett 23
Laidler 23
Henderson 22
Watson 20
Mitchell 20
Casboult 22
Lucas 21
Hampson 24
Touhy 22
(Plus McInnes, Bootsma, Bell, Mcarthy, Joseph, Buckley and everyone else)

Pretty sure we are a younger side than Collingwood although cant find stats to back that up.

Edit - found it:

2012 Playing List Averages:

5th youngest according to these stats.

Apparently our list is younger, less experienced and has less 100+ game players than Collingwoods, and I doubt you would consider your list 'ageing'.

Micks got a bit to work with here.

 

[Maggie5]

Wonder whether our opinion of him will change once his book is released?
Just watched Before the Game on 10, they replayed part of his speech about not coaching against his boys. Made me sick.

 

[Mark_K]

Hang on, were not bloody St Kilda. With Russell and Thorntons departure we only have seven players on the list over 25: Walker and Mclean (26 each), Simpson, Duigan and Carrazzo (28), Judd turned 29 four days ago (same age as Waite) and Scotland is 32.

A selection of players 25 years and under:

Murphy 25
Kruezer 23
Gibbs 23
Robinson 23
Yarran 21
Betts 25
Armfield 25
Garlett 23
Laidler 23
Henderson 22
Watson 20
Mitchell 20
Casboult 22
Lucas 21
Hampson 24
Touhy 22
(Plus McInnes, Bootsma, Bell, Mcarthy, Joseph, Buckley and everyone else)

Pretty sure we are a younger side than Collingwood although cant find stats to back that up.

Edit - found it:

2012 Playing List Averages:

5th youngest according to these stats.

Apparently our list is younger, less experienced and has less 100+ game players than Collingwoods, and I doubt you would consider your list 'ageing'.

Micks got a bit to work with here.

Your best players are the old blokes.

Half those kids you named i don't even rate.

I don't think any Carlton fan can deny that their recruiting and development of their younger players has been anywhere near on par in the last 5 years.

 

[Old Spice]

The other thing Mal is that St Kilda is not that much older than us, but we all know their best players are getting over the hill. As Mark mentions, a lot of your best players are getting fairly ripe - like Judd 29, Carrazzo 29 in Dec, Scotland 32, Waite 29, Simpson 28.

 

[Malifice]

Your best players are the old blokes.

Like most sides.

Ball and Swan are 28, Didak, Krakouer, and Maxwell are 29, Jolly is 30. Wont count Tarrant and Johnson (both 30+) for obvious reasons.

Thomas, Pendles, Cloke, Harry O, Goldsack, Wood, Toovey are all 25.

You dont rate: Murphy, Kruezer, Gibbs, Robinson, Yarran, Betts, Armfield, Laidler, Henderson, Garlett, Touhy, Watson, Mitchell, Bell, Casboult, Hampson, Lucas etc?

Reckon you could find a spot on your list for most of those named above.

Even Hampson (who is no world beater) would be an upgrade on Dawes.

Not being a smart ass, but youre dramatically underselling the quality (and age) of our list.

 

[daics_35]

I think Mick will make a fair bit of bit of changes at the club. The first player he will get rid of is Joseph I rekon. He hates limited players who can only tag.

 

[the distributer]

I like Mick, but my hatred of Carlton must take precendence here, i liked Leigh as well but that turned to shit very quickly.

 

[the distributer]

Hang on, were not bloody St Kilda. With Russell and Thorntons departure we only have seven players on the list over 25: Walker and Mclean (26 each), Simpson, Duigan and Carrazzo (28), Judd turned 29 four days ago (same age as Waite) and Scotland is 32.

A selection of players 25 years and under:

Murphy 25
Kruezer 23
Gibbs 23
Robinson 23
Yarran 21
Betts 25
Armfield 25
Garlett 23
Laidler 23
Henderson 22
Watson 20
Mitchell 20
Casboult 22
Lucas 21
Hampson 24
Touhy 22
(Plus McInnes, Bootsma, Bell, Mcarthy, Joseph, Buckley and everyone else)

Pretty sure we are a younger side than Collingwood although cant find stats to back that up.

Edit - found it:

2012 Playing List Averages:

5th youngest according to these stats.

Apparently our list is younger, less experienced and has less 100+ game players than Collingwoods, and I doubt you would consider your list 'ageing'.

Micks got a bit to work with here.

Not a heap of quality there though, Murph is the only A grader, the rest are either injury prone or unproven.

 

[daics_35]

Like most sides.

Ball and Swan are 28, Didak, Krakouer, and Maxwell are 29, Jolly is 30. Wont count Tarrant and Johnson (both 30+) for obvious reasons.

Thomas, Pendles, Cloke, Harry O, Goldsack, Wood, Toovey are all 25.

You dont rate: Murphy, Kruezer, Gibbs, Robinson, Yarran, Betts, Armfield, Laidler, Henderson, Garlett, Touhy, Watson, Mitchell, Bell, Casboult, Hampson, Lucas etc?

Reckon you could find a spot on your list for most of those named above.

Even Hampson (who is no world beater) would be an upgrade on Dawes.

Not being a smart arse, but youre dramatically underselling the quality (and age) of our list.

Not a fan of Lucas, I think he has had enough chances and has disapointed, could be trade bait but he is still young. From the list you wrote, I would take most players except Armfield, Henderson, Watson and Lucas. The rest we could find a spot on our list.

 

[Malifice]

As Mark mentions, a lot of your best players are getting fairly ripe - like Judd 29, Carrazzo 29 in Dec, Scotland 32, Waite 29, Simpson 28.

Waite averages less than 12 games a season for the past 4 or so, so losing him wont be as bad as expected as we already pretty much play 50% of our games without him (We also have young KPP's coming up in Mitchell, Casboult, Watson, McInnes, Mcarthy and Rowe).

Judd is a gun but isnt irreplaceble (see West Coast).

Simpson, Scotland and Carrazzo can play. Midfielder/ utilities are not the hardest to pick up in the draft; we are also grooming Yarran to fill Scotty role as HB sweeper and midfield rotations (along with Gibbs and Touhy), and have Lucas and Buckley waiting in the wings (and the midfielder we select at #11/ Josh Caddy this year). Bell has shown some signs as well, and Mclean and Walker can push in there as well (at 26 both players are only 1 year older than Pendles and Thomas).

Our starting 6 backline is young and settled (Jamison, Laidler, Henderson, Yarran, Touhy and Watson would be my first 6 picked and Jamison is the oldest there at 26 - the rest are all 22). Bootsma, Duigan, Davies are backups.

Same deal with our forward line (barring Waite). Walker (26) Betts (25) and younger.

Ironically its the mids that needs youth at the moment. Murphy is the youngest of our regular onballers at 25. Gibbs will be pushing in there soon you would expect (I doubt Malthouse will be leaving him in the HBF/ Sweeper role).

 

[Malifice]

Not a fan of Lucas, I think he has had enough chances and has disapointed, could be trade bait but he is still young. From the list you wrote, I would take most players except Armfield, Henderson, Watson and Lucas. The rest we could find a spot on our list.

Lucas has had chronic hammies. Being managed conservatively, but not an ideal start for the kid. Has shown signs though. Watson was showing plenty this year before he injured himself.

Tough on Henderson. Has been very good down back for us. Untill he too was injured.

 

[Knightmare]

Edd has been excellent for Collingwood also and his passion for the club goes without equal. Really in combination with Mick and a number of other staff (Butters, Hine and so on) have done so much for the club over the past 10 and a bit years.

It's never one guy. It's the quality of many that we have had. All the above have had big impacts in making us who we are now and all deserve credit for their respective roles.


As for the Carlton list. They are in a good position. While many of the 'stars' are nearing the end there is still a very, very good core group coming through and if they add Cloke I would be backing them in for the premiership next year and I'd back them to take Hawthorn.
In all honesty Carlton were my preseason premiership tip this year with Hawthorn the runners up, early signs this year were promising for Carlton but the injury of Murphy exposed a midfield weakness and they have since struggled. If Mick can develop Gibbs through the midfield, stabilise the backline (his specialty as a defense first guy), fast track some of those in their early 20s who should really have broken out this year and add Cloke to that forwardline I think they will very hard to beat with all bases covered around the ground.

 

[Old Spice]

Carlton are a 100 miles from Hawthorn.

 

[daics_35]

Edd has been excellent for Collingwood also and his passion for the club goes without equal. Really in combination with Mick and a number of other staff (Butters, Hine and so on) have done so much for the club over the past 10 and a bit years.

It's never one guy. It's the quality of many that we have had. All the above have had big impacts in making us who we are now and all deserve credit for their respective roles.


As for the Carlton list. They are in a good position. While many of the 'stars' are nearing the end there is still a very, very good core group coming through and if they add Cloke I would be backing them in for the premiership next year and I'd back them to take Hawthorn.
In all honesty Carlton were my preseason premiership tip this year with Hawthorn the runners up, early signs this year were promising for Carlton but the injury of Murphy exposed a midfield weakness and they have since struggled. If Mick can develop Gibbs through the midfield, stabilise the backline (his specialty as a defense first guy), fast track some of those in their early 20s who should really have broken out this year and add Cloke to that forwardline I think they will very hard to beat with all bases covered around the ground.

I don't know if they have the skillful players to go past the Hawks but they are 1 key forward away from being a top 3 side in the comp, no doubt about that.

 

[Malifice]

The big thing with carlton is our best and worst are miles off.

On fire, we look a million bucks. We beat you guys twice this year (and I rate you guys), and we are one of the few sides able to match it with Geelong over the past few years despite their dominance.

The only side to really have the wood over us is Hawthorn, and to a lesser extent St Kilda.

Then we go out and get pantsed by GC and Port.

On the plus side, those losses took away the 'downhill skier' and 'flat track bully' tags!

Bridging the gap between our worst and best is the key; and its something that MM has already adressed as his number 1 priority.

 

[Knightmare]

I don't know if they have the skillful players to go past the Hawks but they are 1 key forward away from being a top 3 side in the comp, no doubt about that.

Hawthorn are a unique team with their skills by foot and it is hard to equal what they have with their outside ball movement but I do consider this also to be a strength of Carlton's so even in a shootout I don't see them having the difficulties we have this year (just I can't imagine Mick allowing a shootout with his defense first mentality for it to really matter). Carlton's ball movement has really impressed me this year and has probably been one of the features they haven't had great difficulty with this year. They like Hawthorn have that similar ability off half back to really break down the zone with their rebound - whether it be through the pace of say Yarran or the footskills of Scotland among others. Much better than what we have in this department at this point in time.

The Carlton tall group (Def: Jamison, Henderson *has been out of position up forward and is not unlike Reid as a key defender*, Fwd: Cloke *assumed for this scenario*, Waite, Ruck: Kreuzer, Hampson) is superior to Hawthorns small key defenders and limited ruck division and this for me gives them the big edge. Add to that a very strong midfield group which when healthy has superior star power then a very effective group of outside players, defenders and small and medium forwards and this team probably has even more quality to their list than Hawthorn do.