Opinion Paul Licuria AMA video

[magpies42]

Very uninspiring from a ‘board member’, it’s gonna be good just trust us…even though we all sat by and watched as Eddie supposedly destroyed the club. So if he did what is the rest of the board doing still appointed. And if he didn’t and the club is in as good shape as he says then it’s all Eddies doing, so again what is the board still doing there.

 

[domus]

Very uninspiring from a ‘board member’, it’s gonna be good just trust us…even though we all sat by and watched as Eddie supposedly destroyed the club. So if he did what is the rest of the board doing still appointed. And if he didn’t and the club is in as good shape as he says then it’s all Eddies doing, so again what is the board still doing there.

I think people get sweetened up by the fact a former club great and current board member has given us his time and spoken in such an open manner, but when you analyze what he says, it doesn't make a lot of sense and you could also accuse him of being a part of the past decade of mismanagement and failure. Why should we stick with a group that admit we played horrible footy for much of Buckley's tenure, tried to buy a flag knowing it was a swing and a miss type scenario with no long term plan for ongoing success and believe him when he says now we are going to do it the right way-just you wait and see.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Very uninspiring from a ‘board member’,

Paul Licuria really is a board member, no need for the single quotes!

it’s gonna be good just trust us…

What could he have said that would have inspired you?

… even though we all sat by and watched as Eddie supposedly destroyed the club.

Who is saying that Eddie destroyed the club? Licuria did’t say that, he had nothing but praise for Ed in the video?

Do you think Eddie destroyed the club?

So if he did, what is the rest of the board doing still appointed?

Ed resigned of his own volition. He decided he wanted to finish up (Given his kids were finishing high school …)

This was announced around December 2020, and it was intended that he run a 12 month handover.

In February 2021, after the heat from his bungled press conference releasing the Do Better report, Ed decided to bring his finish date forward to step down immediately.

Nothing to do with destroying the club. Not really much to do with the other board members needing to stand down.

And if he didn’t and the club is in as good shape as he says then it’s all Eddies doing, so again what is the board still doing there.

The club is not a static thing. Times change, and we must change with the times.

 

[magpies42]

I think people get sweetened up by the fact a former club great and current board member has given us his time and spoken in such an open manner, but when you analyze what he says, it doesn't make a lot of sense and you could also accuse him of being a part of the past decade of mismanagement and failure. Why should we stick with a group that admit we played horrible footy for much of Buckley's tenure, tried to buy a flag knowing it was a swing and a miss type scenario with no long term plan for ongoing success and believe him when he says now we are going to do it the right way-just you wait and see.

He presents horribly, I would not be putting him forward for these things. Can’t answer the tough questions either

 

[76woodenspooners]

I think people get sweetened up by the fact a former club great and current board member has given us his time and spoken in such an open manner, it’s
but when you analyze what he says, it doesn't make a lot of sense …

What bits didn’t make sense to you?

For me, probably the only thing I disagreed with was him playing down of the importance of the board … but I do understand why he did that and I don’t hold it against him.

And there were a few things where he showed far more patience than I would have (“Could you imagine Collingwood having its own stadium?” and “Can you explain why players are sometimes demoted to play in the VFL?”) … but that just makes Licuria a better person than I am.

OTTOMH, I can’t think of anything that I thought was implausible or contradictory?

… and you could also accuse him of being a part of the past decade of mismanagement and failure.

He’s only been on the board for three years, six months?

Why should we stick with a group that admit we played horrible footy for much of Buckley's tenure, …

We did alright ‘18 to ‘20, it can’t have been that terrible?

… tried to buy a flag knowing it was a swing and a miss type scenario with no long term plan for ongoing success

We got within a kick of it being a ‘swing and a hit’, and as Licuria said himself, if comes off then you look like a rockstar.

Licuria joined the board Feb 2018, so that strategy had been cast before he joined.

… and believe him when he says now we are going to do it the right way-just you wait and see.

Nobody in the footy business, least of all board members, are graduates of ‘How to win Premierships’ school. Sometimes they need to make mistakes and learn from them. Sometimes they need to take a punt and have it pay off, or have that punt not pay off but not let it discourage them. Imagine what kind of merry mess we’d be in if we sacked anybody when they’d made a mistake or a bad decision?

If you were in that board presentation in October 2017, and if you were told “I promise you this strategy will take us from 13th this season to a place in next year’s grand final … and then it’ll be in the lap of the gods what happens next”. You and every other Collingwood fan would have taken that in a heartbeat.

The footy club’s state is not static. A strategy for success in 2017 would be different to a strategy for success in 2021. Now you might ask WTF is Licuria talking about a 20 year plan then? Plans can include evolutionary strategies …

… for example, China is currently 40 years into their 250 year plan, but that doesn’t mean that the stuff that they’re doing today is merely reeling off the stuff that they planned 40 years ago that they would do.

 

[Trickster]

btw he did make the good point of what would the fans want.... key figures who can nail a media conference or people who can oversee winning a premiership... he said it in a nice complimentary way

Those people also tend to attract sponsorship dollars and key people who can hopefully win a premiership. They're not mutually exclusive.

I for one am concerned about our finances in future years with regards to sponsorship retention / acquisition and member retention / growth which may be impacted by Covid but exacerbated by our on-field, off-field issues.

 

[Trickster]

5 flags within 20 years

Carlton (1906-1915) = 9 years
Collingwood (1902-1919) = 17 years

Collingwood (1910-1928) = 18 years
Collingwood (1917-1929) = 12 years

Collingwood (1919-1930) = 11 years
Collingwood (1927-1935) = 8 years
Collingwood (1928-1936) = 8 years

Melbourne (1939-1955) = 16 years
Melbourne (1940-1956) = 16 years
Melbourne (1941-1957) = 16 years
Melbourne (1948-1959) = 11 years

Melbourne (1955-1960) = 5 years
Essendon (1942-1962) = 20 years
Melbourne (1956-1964) = 8 years
Essendon (1946-1965) = 19 years

Richmond (1967-1980) = 13 years
Carlton (1968-1981) = 13 years
Carlton (1970-1982) = 12 years
Hawthorn (1971-1986) = 15 years
Carlton (1972-1987) = 15 years
Hawthorn (1976-1988) = 12 years
Hawthorn (1978-1989) = 11 years

Hawthorn (1983-1991) = 8 years
Carlton (1979-1995) = 16 years

No one has achieved this feat in the 21st century, so Licuria and the board are aiming very high which I admire. We would have to be something akin to Hawthorn/Carlton of the 70s and 80s to reach that goal.

No one's achieved this in the Draft era. Hawthorn and Carlton in 80s / 90s has a large pay check proportion to their first 4.

I'd say the likelihood of us winning 5 in 20 in this era of evenness, 18 teams, salary caps, draft, soft caps etc is less than 1 in 1000 (no statistical analysis just gut feel really).

 

[76woodenspooners]

Those people also tend to attract sponsorship dollars and key people who can hopefully win a premiership. They're not mutually exclusive.

Good point. Probably something to add to my reaction to the video is a concern whether the PR side is not as important as he implies?

I’m not going to hang him for it …

… but a ‘let’s just let the footy do the talking’ at a time when we’re in development mode does make me nervous.

I for one am concerned about our finances in future years with regards to sponsorship retention / acquisition …

What makes you concerned?

(What makes me concerned is that we still don’t have a paying sponsor for our training centre … has it been 6 months or 18 months since the Holden deal expired? Also so much advertising $$$ is going online now, it must surely be getting more difficult to attract paying sponsors, especially in a crowded Victorian Sporting landscape)

… and member retention / growth which may be impacted by Covid but exacerbated by our on-field, off-field issues.

On field issues? We’ve been out of finals contention for half a season. Our membership has been buoyant over far longer periods of poor off-field performance.

Off field issues? I just don’t see that many paid up members will toss their toys out of the cot and say “I’m not going to renew my membership because Jeff Browne is / isn’t the President”.

 

[magpies42]

Paul Licuria really is a board member, no need for the single quotes!



What could he have said that would have inspired you?



Who is saying that Eddie destroyed the club? Licuria did’t say that, he had nothing but praise for Ed in the video?

Do you think Eddie destroyed the club?



Ed resigned of his own volition. He decided he wanted to finish up (Given his kids were finishing high school …)

This was announced around December 2020, and it was intended that he run a 12 month handover.

In February 2021, after the heat from his bungled press conference releasing the Do Better report, Ed decided to bring his finish date forward to step down immediately.

Nothing to do with destroying the club. Not really much to do with the other board members needing to stand down.



The club is not a static thing. Times change, and we must change with the times.

There is a lot to answer here, let me try my best.

Lica doesn’t present like a board member, hence the ‘’. He’s a footballer, and absolutely a footballers view is important running a club but do they need to take up a board position.

To justify such substantial change in the club, you’d want some non-contradictory rationale…and a clear strategy for the way forward. I see no real change to anything that wasn’t already in place or underway…so why the change? This bleeds into your next question.

I was vehemently against Eddie leaving and the same with Buckley. Eddie did some things wrong, but a heck of a lot right…and I would have preferred he steer us back on course, before departing. He was forced to step down by the media, and our flippy floppy fan base….I don’t think anybody thought Eddie would leave the club alive.

Buckley on the hand did absolutely nothing wrong the entire time he was at the club, and some how managed to coach a defective list pretty well. I’m not against change but have an idea of why your are changing and what the alternative looks like. In my view a head coach is only changed if he has lost the players, that was not the case with Buckley. They should have got the system around him right, better players, better assistants…with Kevin and Wright they’ve managed to address the injury and list issues at least…hopefully. But even that was too little too late! The fact they have a list of 92+ coaching candidates with selection criteria as their process does not fill me with much joy…it’s not groundbreaking stuff, and particularly considering the last time they did that they appointed and intelligible bulldogs supporter to the board…if she was any good I’d imagine she’d be on the bulldogs board.

So much wrong with it all I don’t know where to begin, no strategy no rationale for the change…in any scenario the current board should not be leading the club into the future.

 

[Trickster]

What makes you concerned?

My concern about our finances are that we had one of the best spruikers of the club which attracted sponsors and resulted in free air time for them which had them lining up. Granted it may have started to turn negative from the release of Do Better but prior to that he was a walking billboard for Emirates, Lexus, Holden etc.

I don't think the current board have the same level of connections to generate the seemingly endless sponsors we had. Given the current climate of covid and fewer dollars to top it off, I believe we'll take a bigger hit.

That will be exacerbated by the board room battles and departure of Bucks who was also a wonderful ambassador and spokesperson for us, particularly if we don't land Clarko.

My membership concerns are based on what's happening on-field now (plus the projected 3-5 yr rebuild according to club) but also the impact to our supporters of Eddie and Bucks departing in fairly ordinary circumstances (irrespective of whether they should have gone or not).

I've read your posts saying Eddie was resigning anyhow and he just brought that forward. That depends on who you listen to. Some say he was pushed to stand down, hence his initial end of 2021 announcement.

 

[Trickster]

There is a lot to answer here, let me try my best.

Lica doesn’t present like a board member, hence the ‘’. He’s a footballer, and absolutely a footballers view is important running a club but do they need to take up a board position.

To justify such substantial change in the club, you’d want some non-contradictory rationale…and a clear strategy for the way forward. I see no real change to anything that wasn’t already in place or underway…so why the change? This bleeds into your next question.

I was vehemently against Eddie leaving and the same with Buckley. Eddie did some things wrong, but a heck of a lot right…and I would have preferred he steer us back on course, before departing. He was forced to step down by the media, and our flippy floppy fan base….I don’t think anybody thought Eddie would leave the club alive.

Buckley on the hand did absolutely nothing wrong the entire time he was at the club, and some how managed to coach a defective list pretty well. I’m not against change but have an idea of why your are changing and what the alternative looks like. In my view a head coach is only changed if he has lost the players, that was not the case with Buckley. They should have got the system around him right, better players, better assistants…with Kevin and Wright they’ve managed to address the injury and list issues at least…hopefully. But even that was too little too late! The fact they have a list of 92+ coaching candidates with selection criteria as their process does not fill me with much joy…it’s not groundbreaking stuff, and particularly considering the last time they did that they appointed and intelligible bulldogs supporter to the board…if she was any good I’d imagine she’d be on the bulldogs board.

So much wrong with it all I don’t know where to begin, no strategy no rationale for the change…in any scenario the current board should not be leading the club into the future.

Well written and articulated M42. I agree with everything you've written and share the same views re Ed and Bucks.

 

[domus]

What bits didn’t make sense to you?

For me, probably the only thing I disagreed with was him playing down of the importance of the board … but I do understand why he did that and I don’t hold it against him.

And there were a few things where he showed far more patience than I would have (“Could you imagine Collingwood having its own stadium?” and “Can you explain why players are sometimes demoted to play in the VFL?”) … but that just makes Licuria a better person than I am.

OTTOMH, I can’t think of anything else that I thought was implausible or contradictory?



He’s only been on the board for three years, six months?



We did alright ‘18 to ‘20, it can’t have been that terrible?



We got within a kick of it being a ‘swing and a hit’, and as Licuria said himself, if comes off then you look like a rockstar.

Licuria joined the board Feb 2018, so that strategy had been cast before he joined.



Nobody in the footy business, least of all board members, are graduates of ‘How to win Premierships’ school. Sometimes they need to make mistakes and learn from them. Sometimes they need to take a punt and have it pay off, or have that punt not pay off but not let it discourage them. Imagine what kind of merry mess we’d be in if we sacked anybody when they’d made a mistake or a bad decision?

If you were in that board presentation in October 2017, and if you were told “I promise you this strategy will take us from 13th this season to a place in next year’s grand final … and then it’ll be in the lap of the gods what happens next”. You and every other Collingwood fan would have taken that in a heartbeat.

The footy club’s state is not static. A strategy for success in 2017 would be different to a strategy for success in 2021. Now you might ask WTF is Licuria talking about a 20 year plan then? Plans can include evolutionary strategies …

… for example, China is currently 40 years into their 250 year plan, but that doesn’t mean that the stuff that they’re doing today is merely reeling off the stuff that they planned 40 years ago that they would do.

Sorry, Ithat prelim in 2019 summed our tenure under buckley perfectly. I have said before that i have come away from Collingwood losses happier and more at peace than many of the games we won during the Buckley years.

Lica may been new to the board but I'm sure he has had a position at the club for much longer. I stand corrected if my memory is deceiving me.

As for contradictory statements. He said we are now building for sustained success over a long period of time. Clearly that suggests our strategy over the past decade under Bucks was a short term, badly mismanaged mess , strategically speaking.

 

[Carringbush2010]

My 'hope' is when we whittle down to the available candidates for the new coach that we want that Lica is able to convince that coach that the club is stable, i:e said coach that we want is not turned off by the meejah speculation.

Any coach worth their wouldn't need convincing however.

 

[Markfs]

Those people also tend to attract sponsorship dollars and key people who can hopefully win a premiership. They're not mutually exclusive.

I for one am concerned about our finances in future years with regards to sponsorship retention / acquisition and member retention / growth which may be impacted by Covid but exacerbated by our on-field, off-field issues.

You seem to underestimate how collingwood sells itself. The media reports every single nod of a head, a step out of line. Some of the smaller clubs get nowhere near the publicity that the club generates. You also seem to gloss over the negative aspects of eddie's mouth. A year or so ago, I think it was holden that said that they were going to concentrate on sponsoring the women because of eddie's gaffs. It's been 20 bloody years and he still cant divest himself of his broadiness. The lack of turnover in the directors had been brought to this attention a million times and he was still dragging his feet, and finally his inability to allow the footy side to run the show has brought problems consistently - the malthouse-buckley transition, the gubby saga, the beams saga. These are only the big ones. I have thought to myself that it's only because the club is so big that eddie's stuff-ups havent stuffed it up entirely.

So I dont think we need a megastar to run the club. We need a solid administrator and a board that relies on the expertise available to it on the footy side. The the Saudis dont think that they get tens of millions of free advertising from their piddly little sponsorship of the club, then they can go and buy some more nags, as far as i'm concerned.

 

[Markfs]

My 'hope' is when we whittle down to the available candidates for the new coach that we want that Lica is able to convince that coach that the club is stable, i:e said coach that we want is not turned off by the meejah speculation.

Any coach worth their wouldn't need convincing however.

You would hope that one of the criteria for the job is that the coach actually wants to do it.....

 

[Carringbush2010]

You would hope that one of the criteria for the job is that the coach actually wants to do it.....

Of course that's a given, I would hope that the 'noise' around the club instability isn't the deal breaker.

Highly unlikely that would be though given any coach worth their salt wouldn't view the club as so unstable that the coaching position would be on shaky ground.

 

[76woodenspooners]

There is a lot to answer here, let me try my best.

I’m striving to be open minded about our current state. I’m not specifically pro or anti anyone, I’m just trying to read the tea leaves about what’s good for Collingwood …

… so I’m grateful to read different points of view

Lica doesn’t present like a board member, hence the ‘’. He’s a footballer, and absolutely a footballers view is important running a club but do they need to take up a board position.

Taking into consideration of what the job description for a board member is: (1) Represent the interests of the members (2) Oversee organisational governance (3) Oversee high level organisational strategy (4) Oversee the appointment of strategic roles within the club (CEO, CFO, Footy boss, senior coach) and (5) attract sponsorship money into the club.

Given those responsibilities, it’s not unreasonable that we have a person on the board who has a football background …

… and there are not too many folks who have a footballing background who wear double breasted suits and insist on talking from behind a podium. Those kind of things are typically a personal preference anyway.

To justify such substantial change in the club, you’d want some non-contradictory rationale…

To be fair, there is an EGM group who have a couple thousand signatures from Collingwood members who reckon there hasn’t been enough change?

Plus there seems to be a fair portion of the membership who are demanding we win Premierships. We haven’t been winning Premierships. Many folks think the relevant people had been given enough time and opportunities to do that. So something needs to change.

… and a clear strategy for the way forward.

I agree. I believe they do have a strategy and a vision, but it needs to be communicated to the members.

I see no real change to anything that wasn’t already in place or underway…

I disagree. General membership and fan engagement has improved out of sight in the last six months.

We have had change to the list profile from the last off season, we’ve brought in a lot of youth.

We’ve had a large change to back room footy personnel. We’re not going to suddenly play a very different gameplan, but we can reasonably expect things to change onfield

…so why the change? This bleeds into your next question.

I was vehemently against Eddie leaving …

A lot of members were vehemently in favour of Eddie leaving … not because they hated him, but simply because they thought the club had gotten stale and out of ideas.

But here’s the dilemma …

Ed leaves, taking his finely honed media skills with him, and instead we get an ex-footy player getting on YouTube for 90 minutes with a beer in hand, listening to fans’ concerns and answering questions ….

Some people see that as a breath of fresh air, and some people don’t.

and the same with Buckley. Eddie did some things wrong, but a heck of a lot right…and I would have preferred he steer us back on course, before departing. He was forced to step down by the media, and our flippy floppy fan base….

Our fan base is us.

We had the longest serving President. Our senior coach was the longest current serving who hadn’t won a Premiership. They both had a fair innings.

Buckley on the hand did absolutely nothing wrong the entire time he was at the club, and some how managed to coach a defective list pretty well.

Some people blame the list, some people blame the coach. Who is right?

Our “defective list” did manage to defeat the top of the ladder team on Queens Birthday, so they can’t be all that defective?

I’m not against change but have an idea of why your are changing and what the alternative looks like.

I agree. I reckon they have done this, but they just haven’t communicated it to the members very effectively …

…. But given that they’re not PR people (by Lica’s own admission), and there are elements of the membership who will crucify them for whatever they do, it’s easy to see why they’d be a tad reticent.

They should have got the system around him right, better players, better assistants…

Somebody should tally up the number of assistants that Buckley had over his journey as senior coach … I’d reckon it’d be around 20.

Plus I would have thought Buckley would have a decent say in who his assistants are?

with Kevin and Wright they’ve managed to address the injury and list issues at least…hopefully.

Can hardly criticize Walsh’s appointment as Buckley had worked under him before. If Walsh was somebody that Buckley didn’t want to work under then Walsh would never have come back to the club?

But even that was too little too late! The fact they have a list of 92+ coaching candidates with selection criteria as their process does not fill me with much joy…

What are you expecting?

Do you think they should just make a captains call?

it’s not groundbreaking stuff, and particularly considering the last time they did that they appointed and intelligible bulldogs supporter to the board…if she was any good I’d imagine she’d be on the bulldogs board.

She is a Collingwood member (albeit for 18 months) … why would they put Collingwood members on the Bulldog’s board?

She’s a medical doctor with background in sports medicine … seems relevant to a footy club who (1) has struggled with injuries the last 10 years (2) has no medical knowledge on the board and (3) is about to build a $70 million medical facility … ?

She’s an ex-elite sports person … seems relevant to a sporting club who currently only has one other person on the board who falls into that category?

She’s passionate about women’s sports … seems relevant to a sporting organisation that has 4 women’s teams?

I know people were upset that she didn’t meet the 2 year member qualification … but her board predecessor (Waitslitz) didn’t either and he didn’t get that blowback.

So much wrong with it all I don’t know where to begin, no strategy no rationale for the change…in any scenario the current board should not be leading the club into the future.

Collingwood will go through change regardless of whether it is with this board, or another board.

If there does end up being a board challenge, shouldn’t we keep an open mind about what is best for Collingwood?

The last President got 23 years to sort the joint out. I agree with you that he did a lot of good things for Collingwood. A large portion of our supporter base wasn’t behind him when he moved us from Victoria Park, but it worked out, and many have since come around.

Our new President has only been in place for 4 months, and in that short space of time I think the club has done some good things ….

… that of course can change, but I think it needs some time. I’m keeping an open mind.

 

[Swoop Luke]

Great job Swoop Luke

Also posted the YouTube link on Nick’s Bulletin Board.

thanks legend! i appreciate the kind words <3

 

[76woodenspooners]

My concern about our finances are that we had one of the best spruikers of the club which attracted sponsors and resulted in free air time for them which had them lining up.

I think it’s a good point and I partially agree.

It probably depends on your point of view … if you own a TV (I don’t) and watch mainstream media (Very very rarely for me) or listen to commercial radio (rarely for me) in Melbourne (not me) … then you appreciate Ed’s media profile.

But fewer people are consuming media that way. I don’t know what media you consume, but if you generally follow commercial media then there are people in this country who you’ve likely never even heard of who have a much higher profile than Ed, especially amongst young people with disposable income. Plenty of advertising dollars are following those people, and it’s only getting bigger.

I’d also add that Ed is part of the Melbourne establishment. His power base is in Melbourne. That’s valuable for exposure in Melbourne … but for sponsors looking for National media exposure his profile isn’t as great as Melbourne based folks probably think it is.

I don't think the current board have the same level of connections to generate the seemingly endless sponsors we had. Given the current climate of covid and fewer dollars to top it off, I believe we'll take a bigger hit.

Agree, that it is a concern, it’d be a good question to ask.

Saying that, I would be satisfied by anybody putting forward an argument that we can’t rely on the traditional sponsorship methods going forward, and for us to thrive we need to evolve with the times.

That will be exacerbated by the board room battles …

Outside of rumours suggested by Caro, and even she has never been definitive about it, we have no evidence of any problems amongst our board.

Sure, there are folks who think they should be on the board instead of the incumbents - but that’s a different thing and not something our board can do much about.

and departure of Bucks who was also a wonderful ambassador and spokesperson for us, particularly if we don't land Clarko.

Yeah, it’ll be interesting to see who we get as coach from a PR point of view.

My membership concerns are based on what's happening on-field now (plus the projected 3-5 yr rebuild according to club) but also the impact to our supporters of Eddie and Bucks departing in fairly ordinary circumstances (irrespective of whether they should have gone or not).

Short of Buckley retiring, his departure was handled as well as could possibly be (and obviously he himself was a big part of that)

Ed’s was probably more divisive, but again, short of him being carted out of the joint in a pine box - it was probably always going to be divisive.

I reckon that there is sufficient critical mass amongst the membership base who accept that it was time for change for both Buckley and Ed … but that doesn’t mean they don’t still love and respect them.

As an aside, I suspect Hawthorn have far bigger problems in that area. Could you imagine if we’d just sacked a four time Premiership coach? It’d be war!

 

[magpies42]

I’m striving to be open minded about our current state. I’m not specifically pro or anti anyone, I’m just trying to read the tea leaves about what’s good for Collingwood …

… so I’m grateful to read different points of view



Taking into consideration of what the job description for a board member is: (1) Represent the interests of the members (2) Oversee organisational governance (3) Oversee high level organisational strategy (4) Oversee the appointment of strategic roles within the club (CEO, CFO, Footy boss, senior coach) and (5) attract sponsorship money into the club.

Given those responsibilities, it’s not unreasonable that we have a person on the board who has a football background …

… and there are not too many folks who have a footballing background who wear double breasted suits and insist on talking from behind a podium. Those kind of things are typically a personal preference.



To be fair, there is an EGM group who have a couple thousand signatures from Collingwood members who reckon there hasn’t been enough change?

Plus there seems to be a fair portion of the membership who are demanding we win Premierships. We haven’t been winning Premierships. Many thinks the relevant people had been given enough time and opportunities to do that. So something needs to change.



I agree. I believe they do have a strategy and a vision, but it needs to be communicated to the members.



I disagree. General membership and fan engagement has improved out of sight in the last six months.

We have had change to the list profile from the last off season, we’ve brought in a lot of youth.

We’ve had a large change to back room footy personnel. We’re not going to suddenly play a very different gameplan, but we can reasonably expect things to change onfield



A lot of members where vehemently in favour of Eddie leaving … not because they hated him, but simply because they thought the club had gotten stale and out of ideas.

But here’s the dilemma …

Ed leaves, taking his finely honed media skills with him, and instead we get an ex-footy player getting on YouTube for 90 minutes with a beer in hand, listening to fans’ concerns and answering questions ….

Some people see that as a breath of fresh air, and some people don’t.



Our fan base is us.

We had the longest serving President. Our senior coach was the longest current serving who hadn’t won a Premiership. They both had a fair innings.



Some people blame the list, some people blame the coach. Who is right?

Our “defective list” did manage to defeat the top of the ladder team on Queens Birthday, so they can’t be all that defective?



I agree. I reckon they have done this, but they just haven’t communicated it to the members very effectively …

…. But given that (by Lica’s own admission) they’re not PR people, and there are elements of the membership who will crucify them for whatever they do, it’s easy to see why they’d be a tad reticent.



Somebody should tally up the number of assistants that Buckley had over his journey as senior coach … I’d reckon it’d be around 20.

Plus I would have thought Buckley would have a decent say in who his assistants are?



Can hardly criticize Walsh’s appointment as Buckley had worked under him before. If Walsh was somebody that Buckley didn’t want to work under then Walsh would never have come back to the club?



What are you expecting?

Do you think they should just make a captains call?



She is a Collingwood member (albeit for 18 months) … why would they put Collingwood members on the Bulldog’s board?

She’s a medical doctor with background in sports medicine … seems relevant to a footy club who (1) has struggled with injuries the last 10 years (2) has no medical knowledge on the board and (3) is about to build a $70 million medical facility … ?

She’s an ex-elite sports person … seems relevant to a sporting club who currently only has one other person on the board who falls into that category?

She’s passionate about women’s sports … seems relevant to a sporting organisation that has 4 women’s teams?

I know people were upset that she didn’t meet the 2 year member qualification … but her board predecessor (Waitslitz) didn’t either and he didn’t get that blowback.



Collingwood will go through change regardless of whether it is with this board, or another board.

If there does end up being a board challenge, shouldn’t we keep an open mind about what is best for Collingwood?

The last President got 23 years to sort the joint out. I agree with you that he did a lot of my good things for Collingwood … although a large portion of our supporter base wasn’t behind him when he moved us from Victoria Park. But it worked out, and many have since come around.

Our new President has only been in place for 4 months, and in that short space of time I think the club has done some good things ….

… that of course can change, but I think it needs some time. I’m keeping an open mind.

Fair enough. I get your well thought out perspective, disagree in parts but that’s ok.

What I don’t agree with though is Bridie’s appointment and her passion for the bulldogs and WOmens sport. Who gives a rats about women’s sport?! We are about AFL premierships, I said it at the time and Lica confirmed it…the board and resources were spread too thin to effectively service all of our ‘product lines’. The AFL team suffered as a result, I don’t see how Bridies passion for women’s sport helps the AFL team win premierships. Sure it would be great to have the women’s teams humming and winning but not at the expense of AFL premierships.

 

[jackcass]

Fair enough. I get your well thought out perspective, disagree in parts but that’s ok.

What I don’t agree with though is Bridie’s appointment and her passion for the bulldogs and WOmens sport. Who gives a rats about women’s sport?! We are about AFL premierships, I said it at the time and Lica confirmed it…the board and resources were spread too thin to effectively service all of our ‘product lines’. The AFL team suffered as a result, I don’t see how Bridies passion for women’s sport helps the AFL team win premierships. Sure it would be great to have the women’s teams humming and winning but not at the expense of AFL premierships.

The Collingwood Football Club, me, and I assume a lot of other people, especially given women make up over 50% of the population.

 

[magpies42]

The Collingwood Football Club, me, and I assume a lot of other people, especially given women make up over 50% of the population.

Just because you’re a woman doesn’t mean you prefer women’s sport. I watch our AFLW team and I’ve got nothing against it…at the end of the day however the success of the Collingwood FC will be measured on AFL premierships. Nothing should detract from that.

 

[jackcass]

Just because you’re a woman doesn’t mean you prefer women’s sport. I watch our AFLW team and I’ve got nothing against it…at the end of the day however the success of the Collingwood FC will be measured on AFL premierships. Nothing should detract from that.

I didn't say it did, but it certainly doesn't hurt the chances.

I disagree that AFL premierships is the only measure of success.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Fair enough. I get your well thought out perspective, disagree in parts but that’s ok.

What I don’t agree with though is Bridie’s appointment and her passion for the bulldogs and WOmens sport. Who gives a rats about women’s sport?!

I do.

You can find threads on here by me suggesting we should establish a women’s AFL team - posted around five years before the establishment of AFLW. So in my case there’s a bit of confirmation bias

Times change. We have to evolve with the times. It wasn’t so long ago (within my lifetime) that nobody gave a rats about women’s tennis but these days they share the same prize purse as the men.

The pace of evolution of women’s footy has defied the hopes of even the most optimistic supporters. IMO we’re well on course, that within my lifetime, women’s Premierships will be celebrated as much as the men’s are.

That obviously didn’t happen in year 1, and it’s not happening in year 5, but fast forward to year 30 and consider that everybody who will be playing the game (and a fair portion of the membership) will not be conscious of there having ever being a time when there weren’t both men’s and women’s teams.

We are about AFL premierships, I said it at the time and Lica confirmed it…the board and resources were spread too thin to effectively service all of our ‘product lines’.

You’re taking the view that it’s a zero sum game, that the forces are subtractive. Perhaps if we didn’t have our VFLW team playing in the Grand Final, those resources could have been translated into raising our Men’s team one or two places up their ladder?

Lica also pointed out that there are additive forces. What value do you put on having international athletes (Diamonds players) setting training standards around the joint?

The AFL team suffered as a result, I don’t see how Bridies passion for women’s sport helps the AFL team win premierships.

Our VFLW girls are favourites to win the Premiership in a few weeks (Covid permitting) … if they can pull that off, I would have thought that would create a bit of buoyancy and optimism in the Holden Centre?

Nobody within the clubs or even the gutter trash media at their worst has ever suggested that a women’s program is compromising a men’s program.

But there is one example that I find insightful … Carlton’s 2018 season.

AFL wooden spoon
AFLW wooden spoon
VFL very average
VFLW average

If you just have your AFL team underperforming then it’s hard to guess if it’s systemic or cyclical. But when you have a large body of work like Carlton had in 2018 … then it’s a good sign that their club has systemic problems and it’s time for the board to go. Hindsight has only reinforced that. It’s only now in 2021 that they’ve finally moved their President on.

 

[magpies42]

I didn't say it did, but it certainly doesn't hurt the chances.

I disagree that AFL premierships is the only measure of success.

I agree with your latter statement. But the Collingwood FC success is measured primarily on the success of the men’s team…1st 2nd 3rd is AFL then VFL then daylight and the AFLW. So with that in mind bringing on a board member that is passionate about women’s sport is a disgrace. It’s not aligned with our strategy and if it is then welcome to mediocrity for ever and a day.