Universal Love Nathan Buckley - The Greatest.

Remove this Banner Ad

Pie eyed said:
I will take Bucks handing the Norm Smith to anyone at all, as long as Houli hands the Cup the Pendles.
Click to expand...

Houli is just the cup ambassador, the competing clubs choose who they want to actually present the cup if they win.

Last time we got Peter McKenna to do it, which begs the question - who do you want to present the cup next time we win it?

For me, given Collingwood’s history we should always choose someone who never got the chance to hold one up during their playing career.

So, whether it’s this year (pretty please) or whenever I want Jimmy Clement to be the one.
 
biggiemediums said:
Highly doubt from this post you have any idea what success is.
Click to expand...

Haha yep I’ve no idea what success is…

So do you define success as sharing a brownlow with two other players? That had the count back rule still been in force, Roo wins easily. Is that what you mean by success?

Is success when you are captain and you berate your team mates and question their character during the 2003 grand final while lions players chuckle amongst themselves at stoppages?

Is having Heath Scotland tell you that you aren’t a good leader cause you don’t listen to anyone a sign of success?

Is over training like a madman and ripping your hamstrings and bringing an early end to your career success?

Is attaining the nickname “FIGJAM” success?

This is a thread labelling Buckley our greatest champion. Is Nathan flat out our greatest or most successful champion since 1892? No he is not.

Is he top 3 in our champions from 1980 - maybe - but I doubt it because he didn’t have all the attributes you need in a champion.

Personally, if there was a draft of Collingwood champion players to pick from over the last 40 years - I’d select in no particular order P.Daicos, Swan, Shaw (T and H), Cloke, Rocca, Pendlebury, P. Moore, Clement and Millane ahead of Buckley.

In my view, a great or successful champion is able to get the best out of his teammates, as well as himself in the attempt to attain the ultimate success. A champions peak usually lasts from age 22 to 32. And I don’t really think Buckley did that.

Until Malthouse got to Collingwood lets be honest - Buckley played bruise free football, coasted on the outside, had little if any defensive effort and had zero idea how to lead a group of men. Sadly that last thing, no idea how to lead a team, was a trait that would follow him into coaching.

Just look at the period 2001-2003 period. He doubled his tackles in that period to average 4.6 tackles a game. His contested possession went through the roof too. He was 30 at this point. We needed that kind of output and domination in the middle from him at age 24. What we got was a bloke floating loose on the HBF picking up easy touches until he peaked in his very late 20s.

Granted, there were less tackles in a game back then, but my point remains - from 94-99 he was an outside player that offered little by way of contested possession, defensive pressure or leadership.

He was a supremely skilful footballer with an amazing kick but Nathan was not a great leader of men. Where is Buckley in this list of Captains?
  • R. Shaw
  • Moore
  • Williams
  • T.Shaw
  • Brown
  • Buckley
  • Burns
  • Maxwell
  • Pendlebury

I’d say the Shaws, Moore, Maxwell, Pendlebury and Williams were better captains. He might have been as good as Brown and Burns.

You can’t be labelling a guy our “greatest” if he ain’t even close to being our greatest captain in the last 40 years.

Talk about viewing his career with rose coloured glasses. People remember his 02-03 seasons and seem to think he played like that from the day he walked thru the door in 94. That’s just not the case.

He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.

Look at Pendlebury, his performance has been elite from basically 2009 (if not earlier). We have had at least 13 years of brilliance from him. We pretty much got Buckley at his best from 2001 to 2003 and then injuries hit. That’s 3 peak elite seasons out of 13 or 14 seasons.

So considering all of the above, I think it’s perfectly valid to question the core of this thread - the assertion that Buckley was our greatest champion - because Nathan objectively, for a myriad of reasons, just isn’t.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

Log in to remove this ad.

manicmagpie said:
Houli is just the cup ambassador, the competing clubs choose who they want to actually present the cup if they win.

Last time we got Peter McKenna to do it, which begs the question - who do you want to present the cup next time we win it?

For me, given Collingwood’s history we should always choose someone who never got the chance to hold one up during their playing career.

So, whether it’s this year (pretty please) or whenever I want Jimmy Clement to be the one.
Click to expand...
Get Daics to present it.

Then get some pics of all the Daicos' with the cup.
 
Heater3923 said:
Haha yep I’ve no idea what success is…

So do you define success as sharing a brownlow with two other players? That had the count back rule still been in force, Roo wins easily. Is that what you mean by success?

Is success when you are captain and you berate your team mates and question their character during the 2003 grand final while lions players chuckle amongst themselves at stoppages?

Is having Heath Scotland tell you that you aren’t a good leader cause you don’t listen to anyone a sign of success?

Is over training like a madman and ripping your hamstrings and bringing an early end to your career success?

Is attaining the nickname “FIGJAM” success?

This is a thread labelling Buckley our greatest champion. Is Nathan flat out our greatest or most successful champion since 1892? No he is not.

Is he top 3 in our champions from 1980 - maybe - but I doubt it because he didn’t have all the attributes you need in a champion.

Personally, if there was a draft of Collingwood champion players to pick from over the last 40 years - I’d select in no particular order P.Daicos, Swan, Shaw (T and H), Cloke, Rocca, Pendlebury, P. Moore, Clement and Millane ahead of Buckley.

In my view, a great or successful champion is able to get the best out of his teammates, as well as himself in the attempt to attain the ultimate success. A champions peak usually lasts from age 22 to 32. And I don’t really think Buckley did that.

Until Malthouse got to Collingwood lets be honest - Buckley played bruise free football, coasted on the outside, had little if any defensive effort and had zero idea how to lead a group of men. Sadly that last thing, no idea how to lead a team, was a trait that would follow him into coaching.

Just look at the period 2001-2003 period. He doubled his tackles in that period to average 4.6 tackles a game. His contested possession went through the roof too. He was 30 at this point. We needed that kind of output and domination in the middle from him at age 24. What we got was a bloke floating loose on the HBF picking up easy touches until he peaked in his very late 20s.

Granted, there were less tackles in a game back then, but my point remains - from 94-99 he was an outside player that offered little by way of contested possession, defensive pressure or leadership.

He was a supremely skilful footballer with an amazing kick but Nathan was not a great leader of men. Where is Buckley in this list of Captains?
  • R. Shaw
  • Moore
  • Williams
  • T.Shaw
  • Brown
  • Buckley
  • Burns
  • Maxwell
  • Pendlebury

I’d say the Shaws, Moore, Maxwell, Pendlebury and Williams were better captains. He might have been as good as Brown and Burns.

You can’t be labelling a guy our “greatest” if he ain’t even close to being our greatest captain in the last 40 years.

Talk about viewing his career with rose coloured glasses. People remember his 02-03 seasons and seem to think he played like that from the day he walked thru the door in 94. That’s just not the case.

He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.

Look at Pendlebury, his performance has been elite from basically 2009 (if not earlier). We have had at least 13 years of brilliance from him. We pretty much got Buckley at his best from 2001 to 2003 and then injuries hit. That’s 3 peak elite seasons out of 13 or 14 seasons.

So considering all of the above, I think it’s perfectly valid to question the core of this thread - the assertion that Buckley was our greatest champion - because Nathan objectively, for a myriad of reasons, just isn’t.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
WOW.
The guy dedicated his life to our club and this is how you think of him.

I'm speechless.

Is he above criticism?
No. Nobody is.

But this is just pure disrespect for one of the greatest clubmen we have had.
 
ottoman said:
WOW.
The guy dedicated his life to our club and this is how you think of him.

I'm speechless.

Is he above criticism?
No. Nobody is.

But this is just pure disrespect for one of the greatest clubmen we have had.
Click to expand...

The writer of that post seems to be obsessed with Buckley in a bad way. What kind of battler takes the time to write that much crap denigrating a club champion?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Buckley was a tremendous champion of the game. His consistency, professionalism and his brilliant long kicking were areas where he has never been surpassed.

When he began he regularly kicked 55-60 metres drop punt goals, even in difficult conditions. I recall a game vs Geelong, I think he dobbed 4, and in the final quarter we had a series of shots on goal to wrest the lead. First Pert 9a truly skilled kick) to a shot form 40, but the swirling wind took it. Then Paul Williams ( another brilliant kick) marked a little further out: he missed too. Finally Bucks marked it at 45 on the tightest angle of the three and it sailed straight through.

Even after his leg injury (around 2000 was it an ankle? And after that the hammies played up more) he was still a superb drop punt. He rarely resorted to the torp but was capable with that too.

His preparation was legendary, he was capable of playing on mercurial blokes like Peter Matera (who he touched up twice in his first season) as well as a beast like Wayne Carey. Sheedy once played David Hille as a tagger on Bucks, and he was always tagged hard and attracted hard hits too.

Buck's consistency was supreme: I don't think there has been a more consistent champion than him: only Wayne Carey, and perhaps Dunstall come close. I think he had less bad quarters than most players have bad games.

Criticism? Stick it in your arse, there are other threads for that.
 
Heater3923 said:
Haha yep I’ve no idea what success is…

So do you define success as sharing a brownlow with two other players? That had the count back rule still been in force, Roo wins easily. Is that what you mean by success?

Is success when you are captain and you berate your team mates and question their character during the 2003 grand final while lions players chuckle amongst themselves at stoppages?

Is having Heath Scotland tell you that you aren’t a good leader cause you don’t listen to anyone a sign of success?

Is over training like a madman and ripping your hamstrings and bringing an early end to your career success?

Is attaining the nickname “FIGJAM” success?

This is a thread labelling Buckley our greatest champion. Is Nathan flat out our greatest or most successful champion since 1892? No he is not.

Is he top 3 in our champions from 1980 - maybe - but I doubt it because he didn’t have all the attributes you need in a champion.

Personally, if there was a draft of Collingwood champion players to pick from over the last 40 years - I’d select in no particular order P.Daicos, Swan, Shaw (T and H), Cloke, Rocca, Pendlebury, P. Moore, Clement and Millane ahead of Buckley.

In my view, a great or successful champion is able to get the best out of his teammates, as well as himself in the attempt to attain the ultimate success. A champions peak usually lasts from age 22 to 32. And I don’t really think Buckley did that.

Until Malthouse got to Collingwood lets be honest - Buckley played bruise free football, coasted on the outside, had little if any defensive effort and had zero idea how to lead a group of men. Sadly that last thing, no idea how to lead a team, was a trait that would follow him into coaching.

Just look at the period 2001-2003 period. He doubled his tackles in that period to average 4.6 tackles a game. His contested possession went through the roof too. He was 30 at this point. We needed that kind of output and domination in the middle from him at age 24. What we got was a bloke floating loose on the HBF picking up easy touches until he peaked in his very late 20s.

Granted, there were less tackles in a game back then, but my point remains - from 94-99 he was an outside player that offered little by way of contested possession, defensive pressure or leadership.

He was a supremely skilful footballer with an amazing kick but Nathan was not a great leader of men. Where is Buckley in this list of Captains?
  • R. Shaw
  • Moore
  • Williams
  • T.Shaw
  • Brown
  • Buckley
  • Burns
  • Maxwell
  • Pendlebury

I’d say the Shaws, Moore, Maxwell, Pendlebury and Williams were better captains. He might have been as good as Brown and Burns.

You can’t be labelling a guy our “greatest” if he ain’t even close to being our greatest captain in the last 40 years.

Talk about viewing his career with rose coloured glasses. People remember his 02-03 seasons and seem to think he played like that from the day he walked thru the door in 94. That’s just not the case.

He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.

Look at Pendlebury, his performance has been elite from basically 2009 (if not earlier). We have had at least 13 years of brilliance from him. We pretty much got Buckley at his best from 2001 to 2003 and then injuries hit. That’s 3 peak elite seasons out of 13 or 14 seasons.

So considering all of the above, I think it’s perfectly valid to question the core of this thread - the assertion that Buckley was our greatest champion - because Nathan objectively, for a myriad of reasons, just isn’t.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
Excellent post, I've never understood this obsession with Buckley, he wasted most of his playing career and his coaching was disastrous. Good commentator though, he should stick to that.
 
ottoman said:
WOW.
The guy dedicated his life to our club and this is how you think of him.

I'm speechless.

Is he above criticism?
No. Nobody is.

But this is just pure disrespect for one of the greatest clubmen we have had.
Click to expand...
For mine there’s so many wasted words in their vent. I read the first the few paragraphs, very briefly skimmed the next couple and completely skipped anything remaining. Is that a sign of a successful post??
 
ottoman said:
WOW.
The guy dedicated his life to our club and this is how you think of him.

I'm speechless.

Is he above criticism?
No. Nobody is.

But this is just pure disrespect for one of the greatest clubmen we have had.
Click to expand...
He has his strengths and his flaws, it’s unfortunate he stuck around the club for an extra 10 years only to display all his flaws.
 
Heater3923 said:
Haha yep I’ve no idea what success is…

So do you define success as sharing a brownlow with two other players? That had the count back rule still been in force, Roo wins easily. Is that what you mean by success?

Is success when you are captain and you berate your team mates and question their character during the 2003 grand final while lions players chuckle amongst themselves at stoppages?

Is having Heath Scotland tell you that you aren’t a good leader cause you don’t listen to anyone a sign of success?

Is over training like a madman and ripping your hamstrings and bringing an early end to your career success?

Is attaining the nickname “FIGJAM” success?

This is a thread labelling Buckley our greatest champion. Is Nathan flat out our greatest or most successful champion since 1892? No he is not.

Is he top 3 in our champions from 1980 - maybe - but I doubt it because he didn’t have all the attributes you need in a champion.

Personally, if there was a draft of Collingwood champion players to pick from over the last 40 years - I’d select in no particular order P.Daicos, Swan, Shaw (T and H), Cloke, Rocca, Pendlebury, P. Moore, Clement and Millane ahead of Buckley.

In my view, a great or successful champion is able to get the best out of his teammates, as well as himself in the attempt to attain the ultimate success. A champions peak usually lasts from age 22 to 32. And I don’t really think Buckley did that.

Until Malthouse got to Collingwood lets be honest - Buckley played bruise free football, coasted on the outside, had little if any defensive effort and had zero idea how to lead a group of men. Sadly that last thing, no idea how to lead a team, was a trait that would follow him into coaching.

Just look at the period 2001-2003 period. He doubled his tackles in that period to average 4.6 tackles a game. His contested possession went through the roof too. He was 30 at this point. We needed that kind of output and domination in the middle from him at age 24. What we got was a bloke floating loose on the HBF picking up easy touches until he peaked in his very late 20s.

Granted, there were less tackles in a game back then, but my point remains - from 94-99 he was an outside player that offered little by way of contested possession, defensive pressure or leadership.

He was a supremely skilful footballer with an amazing kick but Nathan was not a great leader of men. Where is Buckley in this list of Captains?
  • R. Shaw
  • Moore
  • Williams
  • T.Shaw
  • Brown
  • Buckley
  • Burns
  • Maxwell
  • Pendlebury

I’d say the Shaws, Moore, Maxwell, Pendlebury and Williams were better captains. He might have been as good as Brown and Burns.

You can’t be labelling a guy our “greatest” if he ain’t even close to being our greatest captain in the last 40 years.

Talk about viewing his career with rose coloured glasses. People remember his 02-03 seasons and seem to think he played like that from the day he walked thru the door in 94. That’s just not the case.

He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.

Look at Pendlebury, his performance has been elite from basically 2009 (if not earlier). We have had at least 13 years of brilliance from him. We pretty much got Buckley at his best from 2001 to 2003 and then injuries hit. That’s 3 peak elite seasons out of 13 or 14 seasons.

So considering all of the above, I think it’s perfectly valid to question the core of this thread - the assertion that Buckley was our greatest champion - because Nathan objectively, for a myriad of reasons, just isn’t.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...

You forgot the bit when Buckley brushed past you and didnt sign your autograph book....
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Hmm, Buckley isn't a great player because he wasn't a great captain, and Tony Shaw was a better player? Quality discussion.

Bob Rose felt Bucks was the best Collingwood player he ever saw. Think I'll rate that opinion a little higher than some anon who seems like they haven't seen a game in their life.
 
Imagine using the opinion of woman bashing Heath Scotland to form an opinion on Nathan Buckley...
 
I think people who have lived a few years will understand the type of person buckley was when he was a player. He didn't give himself or others a break when it came to commitment. That doesn't excuse those team-mates who didnt want to put any effort in and resented his attitude. You have to ask yourself as a fan whether you want a team of blokes who dont want to put much effort in, or a team of blokes who spend every minute trying to get better and are hard on each other if they arent perfect. Now most teams have a few of both types and trick is to find a happy middle ground.

I suspect that the guy who named buckley figjam was probably a lazy fat beer-guzzling slob who probably still goes to parties and tells people that he was the genius who came up with that nickname.... his "great" achievement in life..
 
Markfs said:
I think people who have lived a few years will understand the type of person buckley was when he was a player. He didn't give himself or others a break when it came to commitment. That doesn't excuse those team-mates who didnt want to put any effort in and resented his attitude. You have to ask yourself as a fan whether you want a team of blokes who dont want to put much effort in, or a team of blokes who spend every minute trying to get better and are hard on each other if they arent perfect. Now most teams have a few of both types and trick is to find a happy middle ground.

I suspect that the guy who named buckley figjam was probably a lazy fat beer-guzzling slob who probably still goes to parties and tells people that he was the genius who came up with that nickname.... his "great" achievement in life..
Click to expand...
Didn't realise there were only two types of people who played AFL
 
Heater3923 said:
Haha yep I’ve no idea what success is…

So do you define success as sharing a brownlow with two other players? That had the count back rule still been in force, Roo wins easily. Is that what you mean by success?

Is success when you are captain and you berate your team mates and question their character during the 2003 grand final while lions players chuckle amongst themselves at stoppages?

Is having Heath Scotland tell you that you aren’t a good leader cause you don’t listen to anyone a sign of success?

Is over training like a madman and ripping your hamstrings and bringing an early end to your career success?

Is attaining the nickname “FIGJAM” success?

This is a thread labelling Buckley our greatest champion. Is Nathan flat out our greatest or most successful champion since 1892? No he is not.

Is he top 3 in our champions from 1980 - maybe - but I doubt it because he didn’t have all the attributes you need in a champion.

Personally, if there was a draft of Collingwood champion players to pick from over the last 40 years - I’d select in no particular order P.Daicos, Swan, Shaw (T and H), Cloke, Rocca, Pendlebury, P. Moore, Clement and Millane ahead of Buckley.

In my view, a great or successful champion is able to get the best out of his teammates, as well as himself in the attempt to attain the ultimate success. A champions peak usually lasts from age 22 to 32. And I don’t really think Buckley did that.

Until Malthouse got to Collingwood lets be honest - Buckley played bruise free football, coasted on the outside, had little if any defensive effort and had zero idea how to lead a group of men. Sadly that last thing, no idea how to lead a team, was a trait that would follow him into coaching.

Just look at the period 2001-2003 period. He doubled his tackles in that period to average 4.6 tackles a game. His contested possession went through the roof too. He was 30 at this point. We needed that kind of output and domination in the middle from him at age 24. What we got was a bloke floating loose on the HBF picking up easy touches until he peaked in his very late 20s.

Granted, there were less tackles in a game back then, but my point remains - from 94-99 he was an outside player that offered little by way of contested possession, defensive pressure or leadership.

He was a supremely skilful footballer with an amazing kick but Nathan was not a great leader of men. Where is Buckley in this list of Captains?
  • R. Shaw
  • Moore
  • Williams
  • T.Shaw
  • Brown
  • Buckley
  • Burns
  • Maxwell
  • Pendlebury

I’d say the Shaws, Moore, Maxwell, Pendlebury and Williams were better captains. He might have been as good as Brown and Burns.

You can’t be labelling a guy our “greatest” if he ain’t even close to being our greatest captain in the last 40 years.

Talk about viewing his career with rose coloured glasses. People remember his 02-03 seasons and seem to think he played like that from the day he walked thru the door in 94. That’s just not the case.

He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.

Look at Pendlebury, his performance has been elite from basically 2009 (if not earlier). We have had at least 13 years of brilliance from him. We pretty much got Buckley at his best from 2001 to 2003 and then injuries hit. That’s 3 peak elite seasons out of 13 or 14 seasons.

So considering all of the above, I think it’s perfectly valid to question the core of this thread - the assertion that Buckley was our greatest champion - because Nathan objectively, for a myriad of reasons, just isn’t.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
The fact he was able to tackle and win contested ball suggests he could have if he thought was the best thing to do to assure victory. The fact is he was our best user, so it made most sense to have him on the outside receiving the ball.

He came from a different era, was uncompromising…how do you question someone’s leadership look what we achieved 2002 and 2003.

You don’t understand how back injuries work, it has nothing to do with over training. It is a career ender for most people.

Whether he is our best captain or champion is obviously up for debate, but he’s definitely in the conversation.

He was man enough to acknowledge his faults as a coach and a human and I respect him for that. He gave his all, and was ultimately unlucky.
 
Heater3923 said:
Haha yep I’ve no idea what success is…

So do you define success as sharing a brownlow with two other players? That had the count back rule still been in force, Roo wins easily. Is that what you mean by success?

Is success when you are captain and you berate your team mates and question their character during the 2003 grand final while lions players chuckle amongst themselves at stoppages?

Is having Heath Scotland tell you that you aren’t a good leader cause you don’t listen to anyone a sign of success?

Is over training like a madman and ripping your hamstrings and bringing an early end to your career success?

Is attaining the nickname “FIGJAM” success?

This is a thread labelling Buckley our greatest champion. Is Nathan flat out our greatest or most successful champion since 1892? No he is not.

Is he top 3 in our champions from 1980 - maybe - but I doubt it because he didn’t have all the attributes you need in a champion.

Personally, if there was a draft of Collingwood champion players to pick from over the last 40 years - I’d select in no particular order P.Daicos, Swan, Shaw (T and H), Cloke, Rocca, Pendlebury, P. Moore, Clement and Millane ahead of Buckley.

In my view, a great or successful champion is able to get the best out of his teammates, as well as himself in the attempt to attain the ultimate success. A champions peak usually lasts from age 22 to 32. And I don’t really think Buckley did that.

Until Malthouse got to Collingwood lets be honest - Buckley played bruise free football, coasted on the outside, had little if any defensive effort and had zero idea how to lead a group of men. Sadly that last thing, no idea how to lead a team, was a trait that would follow him into coaching.

Just look at the period 2001-2003 period. He doubled his tackles in that period to average 4.6 tackles a game. His contested possession went through the roof too. He was 30 at this point. We needed that kind of output and domination in the middle from him at age 24. What we got was a bloke floating loose on the HBF picking up easy touches until he peaked in his very late 20s.

Granted, there were less tackles in a game back then, but my point remains - from 94-99 he was an outside player that offered little by way of contested possession, defensive pressure or leadership.

He was a supremely skilful footballer with an amazing kick but Nathan was not a great leader of men. Where is Buckley in this list of Captains?
  • R. Shaw
  • Moore
  • Williams
  • T.Shaw
  • Brown
  • Buckley
  • Burns
  • Maxwell
  • Pendlebury

I’d say the Shaws, Moore, Maxwell, Pendlebury and Williams were better captains. He might have been as good as Brown and Burns.

You can’t be labelling a guy our “greatest” if he ain’t even close to being our greatest captain in the last 40 years.

Talk about viewing his career with rose coloured glasses. People remember his 02-03 seasons and seem to think he played like that from the day he walked thru the door in 94. That’s just not the case.

He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.

Look at Pendlebury, his performance has been elite from basically 2009 (if not earlier). We have had at least 13 years of brilliance from him. We pretty much got Buckley at his best from 2001 to 2003 and then injuries hit. That’s 3 peak elite seasons out of 13 or 14 seasons.

So considering all of the above, I think it’s perfectly valid to question the core of this thread - the assertion that Buckley was our greatest champion - because Nathan objectively, for a myriad of reasons, just isn’t.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
What a dreadful post.

It’s like going to someone’s birthday party and taking a dump on the cake.
 
Last edited:
Heater3923 said:
He was a Bryce Gibbs type until Malthouse taught him to play football properly. And reaching your peak at 29/30, it’s just not good enough. That’s not success when he had the potential to be doing that and dominating the league from at least age 24.
Click to expand...

I had a laugh at this. The obvious anomosity by malthouse for buckley was due to buckley not needing malthouse....Whatever you say about buckley, even in those days when he he was dismissive of people who didnt give 100%, I dont think he would have approved of malthouse's circle of special players who sucked up to him and were his favourites. You could argue that both were alpha males and we've certainly seen enough evidence over 4 decades that malthouse wanted to be the centre of all the accolades, and to say malthouse taught buckley how to play is a hoot, especially when people still go on about figjam buckley. Isnt the contradiction obvious? As an aside, I still remember Mick straining to hold the premiership cup up with Nick maxwell.... he was on his tippy toes but he wouldnt let go.
 
I t is funny that you can post in this thread about Bucks but not in the other one namely"Buck,s hits a new low" well so be it I am going to post exactly what I was going to post in that thread. This is that Bucks has hit a new low with his latest comments and before anyone says I am a Buckley hater I have loved him since he was a Margurey medalist and said I only want to play for Collingwood and stuck with us through thick and thin even after Port came into the comp and had he gone there I am certain they would have won more than 1 flag with Nathan in their side.

And though I am upset at his comments I still love him and will forever. thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Carringbush2010
Sliding doors, what if we won in 2018, and kept Buckley and the same FD? Where would we be now?
2 3
Replies
65
Views
2K
Bianconeri
Bianconeri
The Royal Sampler
What If The Greatest Trick The Devil Ever Pulled…
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Carringbush2010
Carringbush2010
jmac70
Prediction The Roll
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
jmac70
jmac70
Aussie pie
  • Locked
List Mgmt. The obvious (we need a key forward)
Replies
9
Views
413
Maggie5
Maggie5
jmac70
Toast 2024 - The Year of the Magpie
Replies
15
Views
1K
BigVic
BigVic
The Phantom
Injury The Concussion Discussion.
Replies
12
Views
692
The Royal Sampler
The Royal Sampler
steviewonder36
How do we copy the Geelong and Swans models of not bottoming out?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
991
Knoxy
Knoxy

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top