Port - THE BIG LOSERS

[MarkT]

Originally posted by captain boyd
I MUST DISGREE WITH MOST IN THIS FORUM


WELL DONE TO PORT FOR STICKING TO THERE GUNS AND NOT ALLOWING

ANOTHER CLUB

A PLAYER MANAGER

A PLAYER

BEND THEM OVER

IT IS GREAT TO SEE CLUBS GETTING SMARTER AND TOUGHER.THE GAME CANNOT AFFORD TO KEEP BOWING TO THE WHIMS OF OTHERS.

CLUBS MUST START TO ACT RESPONSIBLY SO THINGS LIKE PAY CUTTS,AFL HANDOUTS ETC DO NOT RUIN THE FABRIC AND INTEGRITY OF THE GAME


WELL DONE PORT ON BEING TRUE TO YOURSELF

Love Collo.
xxx

 

[Cyclops]

Port weren't smart, but I think its a pity Stevens has stitched them up. I wish he'd stay, but if he has to go, maybe he could've done a Kane Johnson (stay on a year and wait for another trade). Port have lost out, and although in part its due to their stiff necks, the player could've done better.

I'd love to have Stevens at Collingwood, but I also would've liked to have Gehrig, Everitt, Black (I don't know why now, but then I did) Soloman etc etc.

Basically Collingwood hasn't been hurt by this at all. Blokes still want to play for us and we're the second best side around. What it does demonstrate is that some clubs (Sydney & Port recently) won't deal evenly with Collingwood because they consider us a threat, a top side they don't want to improve one jot.

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

Originally posted by Magpie
Lost there best midfielder for nothing. Its like loosing a Buckley, Voss and Cousins for nothing. They'll find it tought next year Port against the quality teams, real tough.

I would have thought Josh Francou would be considered by most THEIR (not there) best midfielder.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by Cyclops
Port weren't smart, but I think its a pity Stevens has stitched them up. I wish he'd stay, but if he has to go, maybe he could've done a Kane Johnson (stay on a year and wait for another trade). Port have lost out, and although in part its due to their stiff necks, the player could've done better.

I'd love to have Stevens at Collingwood, but I also would've liked to have Gehrig, Everitt, Black (I don't know why now, but then I did) Soloman etc etc.

Basically Collingwood hasn't been hurt by this at all. Blokes still want to play for us and we're the second best side around. What it does demonstrate is that some clubs (Sydney & Port recently) won't deal evenly with Collingwood because they consider us a threat, a top side they don't want to improve one jot.

Add Colbert and Brown to the list of players who Collingwood have missed.

As morgoth said, which marquee player will go to Collingwood from another club seeing what happened to Stevens. Conversely which player will go to Port (except draft picks) knowing they can never leave unless they say so.

Both clubs are monumental losers in this whole process. Not as far as this draft goes, but in context of reputation and future trading prospects. Reputations have been severley damaged by arrogance and incompetence.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by morgoth
Port lost out but the reputational damage to the Pies is huge. Getting a good player to move clubs is a big step for the player, for them to nominate means they are putting their trust in you to do the deal.

We did not do the deal, who will listen to us next time? I do not know who we should have traded but at the end of the day it should have been done.

Our response, 'the trade period needs to be reviewed'. Grow up Balme and learn to play by the rules and stop whinging. We had 3 weeks to get our act together and did not.

We lost noting in terms of playing stocks, but the repuational damage will take years to fix and we also have helped our no one enemy.

There are a lot of very unhappy Pie fans at the moment.

And morgoth, dont ever troll the Saints again after what your mob has managed to do since 2.30pm on Saturday 27th of September culminating in the Stevens and trade week debacle.

Your right to point fingers has been completely shattered by first your players, and now your administrators.

 

[MaccasNeighbour]

Originally posted by DarkRider
Understand what you are saying, but what did Port achieve ? They have nothing !
except
the satisfaction of saying that they would not accept a crappy trade offer from their fellow chokers.

I think PAP and its supporters have said over and over that they are happy with that result. So what's your point?

 

[morgoth]

Joffa we still crap all over your club in every field imaginable, over any time period.

Just cos I am disapointed in my club does not mean I have foresaken them. Unlike a lot of clubs we will be back. I have been through this before and no dount will go through it again.

One good thing about footy is there is always next year.

 

[MarkT]

Joffa, getting the big names is not what I want Collingwood to do. The only big name I wish we landed was Everitt and we appantly decided was wasn't the right type. IMO we should have paid the price for the trade and salary and punted the personality and MM's influence because he was the missing ingrediant. The rest I couldn't care a toss about in the bigger picture.

You say marquee players will not target Collingwood, well their managers still will and most of them have been manager inspired bargaining chips anyway. Nevertheless I don't want the big names. They are generallt to expensive and far too often they are dissapointing when they arrive. Perhaps you are right they players will be put off but I don't care because they are counter productive more often than not. Missing players because we don't want to trade away our emerging talent is bloody fantastic as far as I'm concerned. Of course it always depends on the circumstances and as I have said often, we should can that and go for a ruckman.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by morgoth
Joffa we still crap all over your club in every field imaginable, over any time period.

Certainly crap on us when it comes to losing Grand Finals. one all in flags since I've been on the planet morgoth, so you dont crap on us in that department. Head to head in GF's is on nil in Saints favour. Vis a vis your statement above is factually incorrect.

Just cos I am disapointed in my club does not mean I have foresaken them. Unlike a lot of clubs we will be back. I have been through this before and no dount will go through it again.

One good thing about footy is there is always next year.

Well you should foresake them. They bring you nothing but heartache and false dawns. When will Collingwobble be back morgoth? Next year? Your list is weaker now than the one that was just humiliated in the GF, and you reckon you will be back. Good luck, to you mate.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Your list is weaker now than the one that was just humiliated in the GF, and you reckon you will be back. Good luck, to you mate.

HUH?
Weaker by Scotland?
Surely you don't mean weaker by Richo, Freeza and Molloy?

Maybe you mean weaker by the inclusion of Lockyer, Rocca and Brayden Shaw? Or weaker by the development of a large group of first and second year players as well as a group of young players that have continually improved since 2000 and 2001?

Nope, got me me Joffa. What the heck do you mean?

 

[hotpie]

Mark you have omitted Davidson King and (hopefully) Richards, who should all be regulars in our side over teh next 2 years.

Plus pick 17!!!

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by MarkT
Joffa, getting the big names is not what I want Collingwood to do. The only big name I wish we landed was Everitt and we appantly decided was wasn't the right type. IMO we should have paid the price for the trade and salary and punted the personality and MM's influence because he was the missing ingrediant. The rest I couldn't care a toss about in the bigger picture.

Handy, considering you cant land one. So you wouldn't want a Gehrig, or a brown, or a Stevens? Hmmmm. Eddie said St.Kilda played hard ball with Everitt, interperate that as "we offered them s hit and we amazed they didn't fall at our feet and thank us for it".
Collingwood have blown it because they wont play ball, not because of hard ball.

You say marquee players will not target Collingwood, well their managers still will and most of them have been manager inspired bargaining chips anyway. Nevertheless I don't want the big names. They are generallt to expensive and far too often they are dissapointing when they arrive. Perhaps you are right they players will be put off but I don't care because they are counter productive more often than not.

All I am saying Mark, is that Collingwood would have surely told Stevens they wanted him and would trade for him. When the blowtorch was applied to the Collingwood belly, they blinked first (cant think of one more cliche to put in this sentance). This sends a message that if you are told by Collingwood they will trade for you, be wary, their track record is not too good (there another cliche yippee)

Missing players because we don't want to trade away our emerging talent is bloody fantastic as far as I'm concerned. Of course it always depends on the circumstances and as I have said often, we should can that and go for a ruckman.

Yes, i agree totally. Dont trade your emerging talent. But make sure you can carry out your promises to established players eager to join your club.

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by Joffaboy

Originally posted by MarkT
But make sure you can carry out your promises to established players eager to join your club.

we didnt breach any promise to Stevens. We were happy to take him but were not going to give away Didak or Presti.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by hotpie
Mark you have omitted Davidson King and (hopefully) Richards, who should all be regulars in our side over teh next 2 years.

Plus pick 17!!!

Yes but I didn't want to scare the poor bloke. I mean he hopes his mob can make a finals series and win a flag. Do you reckon he knows Barry Breen retired a few years back?

I also ommitted the worlds fastest keg - Shak.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Handy, considering you cant land one. So you wouldn't want a Gehrig, or a brown, or a Stevens? Hmmmm. Eddie said St.Kilda played hard ball with Everitt, interperate that as "we offered them s hit and we amazed they didn't fall at our feet and thank us for it".
Collingwood have blown it because they wont play ball, not because of hard ball.

We've landed selective ones. Rocca would be last unless you count O'Bree as an up and comer. As I said the only player who was freely available recently who we should have taken IMO was Everitt and you know as well as anyone why we would have been reluctant. Stafford would have been a good get but he wasn't on the market in the same. We should have chased a ruckman somewhere along the line but all the profile players who we didn't get since 2000 I am happy not to have paid the price for bar maybe Everitt.

What does playing ball mean? Paying the asking price. Well our young players have PROVEN the worth of that decision just like you HOPE yours will prove the worth of St.Kilda's decisions to retain draft picks. We have a group of young players who keep improving. Surely you trade if you are happy with the price. If not you don't.

Name 1 player that Collingwood missed out on who would have won Collingwood a premiership in 2002 or 2003 and tell me who we wouldn't have in their place. I already nominated Everitt so we'll leave him aside for the moment. Who else did we miss out on that we SHOULD have taken?

If you compare Collingwood of today to the Collingwood of 1990 we are 2 GF's up. After a low period we made 2 finals series in '88 & '89 and couldn't win a final. In 199 we improved some more and won. The only difference to how we are assessed right now is that we did better in 2002 and 2003 than we did in 1998 and 1999.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
All I am saying Mark, is that Collingwood would have surely told Stevens they wanted him and would trade for him. When the blowtorch was applied to the Collingwood belly, they blinked first (cant think of one more cliche to put in this sentance). This sends a message that if you are told by Collingwood they will trade for you, be wary, their track record is not too good (there another cliche yippee)

It send a clear message to every player. manager and club. We won't trade over the odds. If that makes profile players reluctant to nominante Collingwood then well and good. If we REALLY want someone we'll pay the higher price. tell me how we could have dealt to get Stevens? Who would you have have traded? Didak or Presti? While you are at it, tell me why you think Collingwood told Stevens they would do a deal no matter what the cost.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Yes, i agree totally. Dont trade your emerging talent. But make sure you can carry out your promises to established players eager to join your club.

You have no idea what promises were made. You also have no idea how happy Stevens is to go to Carlton. You don;t even know for sure that he won;t put a big price on head and end up at Collingwood. All you know for sure is that you can have a go at Collingwood again. Please yourself but you are doing exactly what you accuse people of doing in respect of your club which is carrying on like a pork chop using well worn cliches and rhetoric with no idea of the facts.

 

[manmountain]

Originally posted by Macca19


We asked for one of Licuria/Didak/Presti/Lonie and pick 17. Now Licuria and Presti rightly wouldnt be accepted. Didak may. Lonie and pick 17 youd think they would do. But no. They offer us Scotland, McGough or Neon Leon.

Gee....fancy asking for a player that might actually make our side next year for an established gun!

So players who are good enough to play in the Magpie 22 that has humiliated you in the past 2 finals series, aren't good enough to get into your 22?

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by manmountain
So players who are good enough to play in the Magpie 22 that has humiliated you in the past 2 finals series, aren't good enough to get into your 22?

FWIW I woudl have agreed to the pick 17 plus Lonie trade

I also would have traded Licuria or Didak in a straight swap (keeping the draft pick). Presti is not for sale IMO.

 

[Whisky_McKay]

Let me see if I have got this right.

Stevens was never on Collingwoods list.
Stevens is still not on Collingwoods list.

Port would not trade Stevens to Collingwood for picks 17 and 35.
Port let Stevens go for absolutely NOTHING.

And Port supporters are laughing at Collingwood.

Figure that one out for me someone.

 

[morgoth]

Mate if I walked away from the Pies for our efforts the Aints would not have any supporters. Don't forget the 26 wooden spoons Joffa.

We are disapointed but have still acheived more than any other club bar one over the last 2 years.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by MarkT
Name 1 player that Collingwood missed out on who would have won Collingwood a premiership in 2002 or 2003 and tell me who we wouldn't have in their place. I already nominated Everitt so we'll leave him aside for the moment. Who else did we miss out on that we SHOULD have taken?

Even though this is a ridiculous question (no one player can win you a GF just like that).

Gehrig - are you telling me that you would not find a place in Collingwoods 22 for him either down back or up forward?

Colbert - another who would walk straight into any AFL starting 22.

Everitt - as you have mentioned

Brown - Hmmmmm

Stevens - as above.

It has to do with team balance and structure and setup, so I think any of the above would walk straight into the Collingwood startig 22.

If you compare Collingwood of today to the Collingwood of 1990 we are 2 GF's up. After a low period we made 2 finals series in '88 & '89 and couldn't win a final. In 199 we improved some more and won. The only difference to how we are assessed right now is that we did better in 2002 and 2003 than we did in 1998 and 1999.

Collingwood have done extremely well since their cellar dweller days by using the draft. Almost good enough to win a flag. Mabye with one of the above players Collingwood would have won one.

It send a clear message to every player. manager and club. We won't trade over the odds.

Sends a clear message to all players and clubs that Collingwood expect to get good players for inferior trades.

If that makes profile players reluctant to nominante Collingwood then well and good. If we REALLY want someone we'll pay the higher price. tell me how we could have dealt to get Stevens? Who would you have have traded? Didak or Presti?

Yes. If you wanted Stevens


While you are at it, tell me why you think Collingwood told Stevens they would do a deal no matter what the cost.
You have no idea what promises were made. You also have no idea how happy Stevens is to go to Carlton.

Personally I have no idea. Max Stevens said on radio that Nick Stevens had met Collingwood (and Carlton) a week before the trade and agreed in principle on finances. But that has nothing to do with the deal of geting him to either club.
However from circumstantial evidence known Collingwood must have given Nick Stevens confidence that they would attempt to draft him.

We do know

1) Stevens sent a letter telling Port that he was going to leave three weeks prior to the draft. He stated his preferred club as Collingwood as his dad had played there etc. he also stated that he understood that in the AFL a trade had to take place and he was happy to go into the PSD if a trade could not be done.

2) One week before trade week he thrashes out a deal with Collingwood.

So Collingwood must have known for at least three weeks that Stevens wanted to go to them. That was the case up until negotiations broke down on Wednesday night. Are you seriously telling me that Collingwood did not encourage by word or deed Nick Stevens to declare his preferred option was Collingwood?

Now this is all supposition, and even though you think i am bashing Collingwood, it is not the case. I merely stated that with Collingwoods record of non trades, and the latest with Stevens, any player would be less willing to deal with Collingwood, as would any club.


You don;t even know for sure that he won;t put a big price on head and end up at Collingwood.

Unless Max Stevens publicly lied on Melbourne radio last Saturday, Stevens will be playing in all likelyhood with Carlton 9or possibly the Bulldogs). So I can safely say I do know what Stevens will do.

All you know for sure is that you can have a go at Collingwood again. Please yourself but you are doing exactly what you accuse people of doing in respect of your club which is carrying on like a pork chop using well worn cliches and rhetoric with no idea of the facts.
You must have been conversing with Deej for too long Mark. So now i am a Collingwood kicker.
I presented the facts as I know them
1) Collingwood's trades for big names have been poor in recent years
2) Collingwood knew for weeks prior to the draft that Stevens want to go there.
3) The result from the Stevens case falling through is that because of Collingwoods poor trade history, and the failing again to land the big catch, players would be unwilling to look at Collingwood as an option. As well rival clubs would not look at Collingwood as a suitable trade partner because of their history, and because of the Stevens deal.

So call me a Collingwood kicker, get all paranoid. I presented an argument based on fact (and sorry for trying to keep it light with acknowledgement of the cliches i was using. i must remember I am posting with MarkT the logical), you have done in your last paragraph what you get so haughty about when you are accussed of which is diverting the issue with personal attacks on the messengers character.

You mask your posts in a veneeer of pseudo objectivity, but resort to the character assasination when it suits.

Whatever you may be Mark, you will never brook any critisism of your club, no matter how it is presented.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by morgoth
Mate if I walked away from the Pies for our efforts the Aints would not have any supporters. Don't forget the 26 wooden spoons Joffa.

Morgoth, we know we are crap but are trying to improve.

We dont carry on about how great we as in your clubs case. You arrogantly state how great you are but without achieving anything. When will it sink in your club is mediocre when it comes to achieving success?

We are disapointed but have still acheived more than any other club bar one over the last 2 years.

You achieved exactly the same as the other 14 non preimership winners - nothing.

 

[morgoth]

I accept the critism but I will not roll over and play dead when I am told not to troll the Aints anymore. I may not troll next year then again I might.

If Thomas fails to get the Aints to finals I will be crawling out from under my bridge.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by morgoth
I accept the critism but I will not roll over and play dead when I am told not to troll the Aints anymore. I may not troll next year then again I might.

If Thomas fails to get the Aints to finals I will be crawling out from under my bridge.

lololololololol - look forward to it Morgoth. If the Saints dont make the finals I will be joining you.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Gehrig - are you telling me that you would not find a place in Collingwoods 22 for him either down back or up forward?

Colbert - another who would walk straight into any AFL starting 22.

Everitt - as you have mentioned

Brown - Hmmmmm

Stevens - as above.

Gehrig - where would he play? he had a good close to 2003 and would have been handy at times but he isn;t what we lack. He isn't as good as tarrant or Rocca and Fraser is a better long term option. I'd rather have Presti and Wakelin in the kep back posts at present. Cameron Cloke, Davidson and Walker are our developers for these positions. Gerhig fit and in form would get a game at Collingwood but so would Molloy.

Colbert - not interested. Been average at North IMO and was expensive.

Brown I like but were we ever in that one?

Stevens - all been said. IMO he is just another good midfielder. We have 3 ahead of him at present. Therefore how much can he add? Take away who we had to trade and we wouldn't enhance our premiership chances IMO.

Joffa, the point is these guys were not worth a big price to Collingwood given what our strengths and weakenesses are. Yes most would walk into side but we'd only get them for players who would walk into the side they came from and had already walked into our side.

Now while we are at it, what did it cost us not getting Black and whoever else was coming to Collingwood?

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Collingwood have done extremely well since their cellar dweller days by using the draft. Almost good enough to win a flag. Mabye with one of the above players Collingwood would have won one.

No theyb wouldn't have. In 2002 we could have won with a ruckman IMO. As I said a million times, that has been our big mistake. In 2003 perhaps it wouldn't have mattered who we put in but a ruckman and Rocca would have been a great start. Another miodfielder would have made no difference in either year. Our midfiled has been our strength. A key back is a requirement for the future but another like Colbert would have added very litle over the last 2 years. Sure a J.Brown would be great but we haven't missed out on one of those have we?

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Sends a clear message to all players and clubs that Collingwood expect to get good players for inferior trades.

And? So good players won't want to come to Collingwood? We'll see. As I said, if they are the right ones I hope we do the deal. If not I hope we don't.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Yes. If you wanted Stevens

But Joffa this is the whole point. Do Collingwood have pay whatever Port ask no matter what we asess as the cost? That is stupid. That is exactly what I am glad we don't do. I am very glad we don't feel compelled to do these deals by outside pressure or potential criticism.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Personally I have no idea. Max Stevens said on radio that Nick Stevens had met Collingwood (and Carlton) a week before the trade and agreed in principle on finances. But that has nothing to do with the deal of geting him to either club.
However from circumstantial evidence known Collingwood must have given Nick Stevens confidence that they would attempt to draft him.

We do know

1) Stevens sent a letter telling Port that he was going to leave three weeks prior to the draft. He stated his preferred club as Collingwood as his dad had played there etc. he also stated that he understood that in the AFL a trade had to take place and he was happy to go into the PSD if a trade could not be done.

2) One week before trade week he thrashes out a deal with Collingwood.

So Collingwood must have known for at least three weeks that Stevens wanted to go to them. That was the case up until negotiations broke down on Wednesday night. Are you seriously telling me that Collingwood did not encourage by word or deed Nick Stevens to declare his preferred option was Collingwood?

Now this is all supposition, and even though you think i am bashing Collingwood, it is not the case. I merely stated that with Collingwoods record of non trades, and the latest with Stevens, any player would be less willing to deal with Collingwood, as would any club.

Joffa, apart from the fact good players want to play for Colingwood, at least until last week, what does this all mean? You've gone to all that trouble to show Stevens wanted to play for Collingwood and Collingwood wanted him. Ok these are givens. Sureley we encouraged him and I would hope so. He's a good player.

Did we promise to get him?
Did we say no matter what the cost?

OR did we say we'll try and do the deal but no gurantees?

You don't know yet you make acusations. Collingwood didn't want to pay the asking price. That's as simple as it gets. The price was too high IMO so I am glad.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Unless Max Stevens publicly lied on Melbourne radio last Saturday, Stevens will be playing in all likelyhood with Carlton 9or possibly the Bulldogs). So I can safely say I do know what Stevens will do.

I strongly suspect he will be at Carlton as per the arrangement they made with him which would be a bit like the one we made with him. Do you assume carlton told him they'd trade pick 2 and renegged though?

Originally posted by Joffaboy
You must have been conversing with Deej for too long Mark. So now i am a Collingwood kicker.
I presented the facts as I know them
1) Collingwood's trades for big names have been poor in recent years
2) Collingwood knew for weeks prior to the draft that Stevens want to go there.
3) The result from the Stevens case falling through is that because of Collingwoods poor trade history, and the failing again to land the big catch, players would be unwilling to look at Collingwood as an option. As well rival clubs would not look at Collingwood as a suitable trade partner because of their history, and because of the Stevens deal.

You KNOW all that do you? Give me a break Joffa. Poor results? The result of trades not made is players kept and drafted. The results of these decision are 2 grand final appearances. Good results given wehere we were but poor given what might have been I guess. I maintain it is the non trades that have seen us get to where we are now and not the lack of trades that has seen us not get further. The development of our squad has been very good and that is deliberate policy. Part of that is not to overtrade.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
So call me a Collingwood kicker, get all paranoid. I presented an argument based on fact (and sorry for trying to keep it light with acknowledgement of the cliches i was using. i must remember I am posting with MarkT the logical), you have done in your last paragraph what you get so haughty about when you are accussed of which is diverting the issue with personal attacks on the messengers character.

I don't quite have your hair trigger Joffa so I won't go as far as Deej. No attack on your character either Joffa. i have no animosity at all towards you and i admire your passion re The Saints and a few other issues I've seen you comment on. IMO you do love to slam Collingwood though. I don't mind having a crack back of fighting the good fight for the Pies though. Of course we both know it's all inconsequential but we do it anyway.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
You mask your posts in a veneeer of pseudo objectivity, but resort to the character assasination when it suits.

I don't think so but sorry if you've ever been offended by me Joffa. As I said, I reckon you get into my club. That isn't a character assination as far as I'm concerned. If you are referring to anything I may have said to others there are a few other I've had the odd crack at but I know who they aer I know why.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Whatever you may be Mark, you will never brook any critisism of your club, no matter how it is presented.

Maybe it's in the presentation? Maybe the content?
No Collinbgwood are beyond reproach so you point is acedemic.

In all seriousness Joffa I had plenty of arguments with Collingwood supporters on Collingwood sites. Here I mainly fight the good fight as I said. I have been quite critical of Collingwood's recruiting in the past. My issues are also who we don;t get or more to the point what we have not made it our business to get. Someone like Stevens is not what we need to gain ground on Brisbane, Port, Adelaide or other premiership rivals.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by MarkT
Gehrig - where would he play? he had a good close to 2003 and would have been handy at times but he isn;t what we lack. He isn't as good as tarrant or Rocca and Fraser is a better long term option. I'd rather have Presti and Wakelin in the kep back posts at present. Cameron Cloke, Davidson and Walker are our developers for these positions. Gerhig fit and in form would get a game at Collingwood but so would Molloy.

Colbert - not interested. Been average at North IMO and was expensive.

Brown I like but were we ever in that one?

Stevens - all been said. IMO he is just another good midfielder. We have 3 ahead of him at present. Therefore how much can he add? Take away who we had to trade and we wouldn't enhance our premiership chances IMO.

Joffa, the point is these guys were not worth a big price to Collingwood given what our strengths and weakenesses are. Yes most would walk into side but we'd only get them for players who would walk into the side they came from and had already walked into our side.

No point in me trying to argue with you on your opinions on the above players as you obviously will have a different opinion to mine. But thats fine, thats what a discussion forum is all about.

I was attempting to answer your question. The answer was inadequete but then again the questions terms of reference was also quite narrow.

Now while we are at it, what did it cost us not getting Black and whoever else was coming to Collingwood?

Black and possibly Colbert are both arguments against going for a high paid player, Everitt, Gehrig, Brown, and Stevens would only enhance the Collingwood 22.

But Joffa this is the whole point. Do Collingwood have pay whatever Port ask no matter what we asess as the cost? That is stupid. That is exactly what I am glad we don't do. I am very glad we don't feel compelled to do these deals by outside pressure or potential criticism.

No of course not Mark. My point is that Collingwood have form when landing a big name comes about. I speculated some of these big name losses could have added to the possibility of a good Collingwood becoming a premiership Collingwood. You say not, thats where we differ.

Joffa, apart from the fact good players want to play for Colingwood, at least until last week, what does this all mean? You've gone to all that trouble to show Stevens wanted to play for Collingwood and Collingwood wanted him. Ok these are givens. Sureley we encouraged him and I would hope so. He's a good player.

Did we promise to get him?
Did we say no matter what the cost?

As you pointed out, I dont know what was promised to Stevens, or if anything at all was promised. As Stevens says in his letter to port, he understands that he may not be traded to Collingwood.

OR did we say we'll try and do the deal but no gurantees?

In this type of AFL environment there can be no guarantees.

You don't know yet you make acusations. Collingwood didn't want to pay the asking price. That's as simple as it gets. The price was too high IMO so I am glad.

I dont make accusations at all. I stated from circumstantial evidence, that Collingwood and Stevens had an agreement, but because Port would not take In their opinion players who would not make their 22 and inferior draft picks, the deal fell through.

I strongly suspect he will be at Carlton as per the arrangement they made with him which would be a bit like the one we made with him. Do you assume carlton told him they'd trade pick 2 and renegged though?

No i dont suspect that Carlton told him they would trade their no 2 draft pick. in fact Max Stevens said it was never considered or put up.

You KNOW all that do you? Give me a break Joffa. Poor results? The result of trades not made is players kept and drafted. The results of these decision are 2 grand final appearances. Good results given wehere we were but poor given what might have been I guess.

No mark you give me a break. i am entitled to speculate and have an opinion on the outcome of the Stevens non deal.

I make those opinions in the context of Collingwoods failed attempts at other big names and in the context of your president Eddie McGuire stating that Collingwood would be agressive and strong during the trading week.

From what i have read, heard and seen, i am entitled to make those suppositions. This is after all a football discussion board, and where opinions are given and argued over.

I maintain it is the non trades that have seen us get to where we are now and not the lack of trades that has seen us not get further. The development of our squad has been very good and that is deliberate policy. Part of that is not to overtrade.

Good, that is your opinion. But not the opinion of your club who has actively courted the big names, obviously with the though odf improving your team.

I don't quite have your hair trigger Joffa so I won't go as far as Deej. No attack on your character either Joffa. i have no animosity at all towards you and i admire your passion re The Saints and a few other issues I've seen you comment on. IMO you do love to slam Collingwood though. I don't mind having a crack back of fighting the good fight for the Pies though.

Apart from a healthy dig at morgoth and a couple of other Pie supporters and calling the Pies the Wobbles, please find one post where i got into Collingwood over the GF. I dont attack clubs, unless I believe it is warranted. Usually it is when a supporter will make outregeous claims about the success or greatness or some such about their club. or if I see blatant hypocricy. Cllingwood is no more or less important to me than the other 14 rival clubs. I would have supported Collingwood against the Lions if it wasn't for my dislike for Eddie Everywhere and his attempted bullying and railroading of clubs he deems as less than Collingwood.


Of course we both know it's all inconsequential but we do it anyway.
I don't think so but sorry if you've ever been offended by me Joffa. As I said, I reckon you get into my club. That isn't a character assination as far as I'm concerned. If you are referring to anything I may have said to others there are a few other I've had the odd crack at but I know who they aer I know why.
Maybe it's in the presentation? Maybe the content?

You have no need to apologise over anything you have posted in this thread Mark. You are right, I can sometimes have a hair trigger especially about the Saints. It comes from a lifetime of being on the defensive because of my teams ineptitude attempts at a being a football team for over a century. If a Saints supporter based their self esteem on the team they supported, they would be in a lot of trouble. I bristle at uncalled for slagging of the Saints and will respond in kind and usually with both barrels. We dont need to be told we are crap, we all know it. But when a clubs direction is so crystal clear as the path the Saints have taken and the barrage is constant, retailatory action is to always be expected.

in this case me opinion was not based on a dig at the Pies. It was based on the way i saw the trading period and the possible washup of it.



No Collinbgwood are beyond reproach so you point is acedemic.

In all seriousness Joffa I had plenty of arguments with Collingwood supporters on Collingwood sites. Here I mainly fight the good fight as I said. I have been quite critical of Collingwood's recruiting in the past. My issues are also who we don;t get or more to the point what we have not made it our business to get. Someone like Stevens is not what we need to gain ground on Brisbane, Port, Adelaide or other premiership rivals.

I tend to do the same on Saints forums if need be, so I understand where you are coming from.