Progress?

[No SPIN]

Nah the club would be naive not too. Its backwards thinking like yours that has seen us us tumble down the ladder. Cutting spending never results in positive results unless you're employing the absolute best in the business, which we aren't.

Also if that's what Ed's attitude is its time for change because a stubborn approach of "we're above a tax" certainly isn't helping ATM.

FWIW if we know the tax is going that's a different discussion because it'll naturally allow us to spend more, but not spending money due to a nominal tax is a joke when it's been the difference between a finals berth and mediocrity this year.

Sco - I agree with you but your flogging a dead horse - going over the FD limit is fraught with issues.
I can guarantee Eddie wouldn't hesitate to overspend if he believed the risks were worth it.

 

[Gone Critical]

Don't worry I'll back you in. That sort of scuttlebutt doesn't come out unless there's some truth to it. Besides it just sounds like a Collingwood high performance type move. Putting injured blokes back out on the field and not checking open wounds for signs of infection. We're at the cutting edge here people because GC tells us it's so!

C'mon Sco that's exactly not what I am saying. I have no idea whether injury management has been 1st class, abysmal or somewhere in between. Just like everyone else on this board.

 

[Quicky]

To me this is a thread about discussing the merits of the progress of the footy team over the 2016 season. Something we can all probably make some educated guesses and assessments due to our own footy knowledge through playing, watching studying coaching or all of the above. These views are worth discussing.

The continued drift into the medical , sports science and admin side of the workings of the club just derails this for me. If you have some special knowledge in these areas spill it and we would love to hear of your expertise but the continued guesstimations are really just pissing in the wind.

The avoidable wound infections in a split webbing is the one I like best. I operate all the time in a sterile environment, with clean wounds and excellent blood supply which is the number one ingredient you need to avoid a wound infection. I would love to find out from the posters expert in this area who are posting here how I can make my wound infections avoidable. My patients would be over the moon it if I could find the answer to that question. The idea that a dirty wound in an area with a terminal blood supply like the webbing should be free of the risk of infection is a big step forward in surgical management. I want in on this.

With your background, and the information that we have at hand, do you see any issues with our injury management? Could it be improved somehow?

 

[Scodog10]

Sco - I agree with you but your flogging a dead horse - going over the FD spend is fraught with issues.
I can guarantee Eddie wouldn't hesitate to overspend if he believed the risks were worth it.

There are no risks though. Look we may not always see eye to eye on the direction of the club and that's cool, but I'm just not sure you completely get this one. Have a look at the NBA every club that will play finals next year has exceeded the soft cap and will pay the luxury tax. There is no stigma around it aside from what we choose to put on it.

There is literally nothing negative about it because the extra investment will lead to improved performance which generates further revenue which pays for the tax.

You mentioned above that Robbo would just write a smear article about it? My answer would be, so what? Were he to do that it would be just another indicator of his lack of knowledge. The AFL get what they want and so do we everybody wins.

Have faith on this one because it's the right move and the best chance Buckley has of succeeding, IMO, and whilst I don't have faith in him I can at least acknowledge that it's in the best interests of the club that he does succeed because he's the incumbent coach.

 

[Quicky]

Don't worry I'll back you in. That sort of scuttlebutt doesn't come out unless there's some truth to it. Besides it just sounds like a Collingwood high performance type move. Putting injured blokes back out on the field and not checking open wounds for signs of infection. We're at the cutting edge here people because GC tells us it's so!

I think a bit of respect should be shown to GC here. He has experience and qualifications in this area we don't. I'm more inclined to listen to your comments on the economy of the netball team because of your experience there. The same applies to GC on injuries.

 

[Scodog10]

C'mon Sco that's exactly not what I am saying. I have no idea whether injury management has been 1st class, abysmal or somewhere in between. Just like everyone else on this board.

I know and irony doesn't translate well in written form unfortunately.

The absolute statement that no one has any idea isn't on though I've heard and seen enough to not need a doctorate in medicine to know we've dropped the ball. Again I'm truly fascinated by your take on it all though because your obviously a lot smarter than 99% of posters on here.

How's about when I get the time I'll dialogue each incident across the past three years so we've got a timeline to compare to other clubs like Hawthorn or Sydney who just continue to get it right? I think the last time we discussed this in depth I made the comparison that our high performance group was the "P's get degrees" type when what we really need is high achievers. That doesn't mean they aren't capable in their chosen field more that it hasn't worked with us so let's fix it moving forward!

 

[Gone Critical]

With your background, and the information that we have at hand, do you see any issues with our injury management? Could it be improved somehow?

My view is I would hope it would be looked at closely again and gone over with a fine tooth comb to discover if their are intrinsic problems with our staff as a root cause of the injury issues.

I think that is a wise course of action as an ongoing review anyway but in particular given our injury issues of recent seasons. We have already done a significant review at the end of 2014 when Dr Chris Bradshaw replaced the previous incumbent and the weights guy was let go.

From the evidence we have at hand this season I have no feel at all whether the medical and conditioning staff are doing a good, bad or indifferent job. I would need far more understanding of the area and far more information about the specific cases involved to even get into a discussion. I just have no idea at all about the answer to this question.

 

[Gone Critical]

I know and irony doesn't translate well in written form unfortunately.

The absolute statement that no one has any idea isn't on though I've heard and seen enough to not need a doctorate in medicine to know we've dropped the ball. Again I'm truly fascinated by your take on it all though because your obviously a lot smarter than 99% of posters on here.

How's about when I get the time I'll dialogue each incident across the past three years so we've got a timeline to compare to other clubs like Hawthorn or Sydney who just continue to get it right? I think the last time we discussed this in depth I made the comparison that our high performance group was the "P's get degrees" type when what we really need is high achievers. That doesn't mean they aren't capable in their chosen field more that it hasn't worked with us so let's fix it moving forward!

No worries would love to hear your info again. For what it's worth I am not suggesting we have the high achievers and we may have major issues. Chris Bradshaw does seem to have a good reputation but even that should be taken with a grain of salt. Short answer is I don't know.

 

[No SPIN]

There are no risks though. Look we may not always see eye to eye on the direction of the club and that's cool, but I'm just not sure you completely get this one. Have a look at the NBA every club that will play finals next year has exceeded the soft cap and will pay the luxury tax. There is no stigma around it aside from what we choose to put on it.

There is literally nothing negative about it because the extra investment will lead to improved performance which generates further revenue which pays for the tax.

You mentioned above that Robbo would just write a smear article about it? My answer would be, so what? Were he to do that it would be just another indicator of his lack of knowledge. The AFL get what they want and so do we everybody wins.

Have faith on this one because it's the right move and the best chance Buckley has of succeeding, IMO, and whilst I don't have faith in him I can at least acknowledge that it's in the best interests of the club that he does succeed because he's the incumbent coach.

I remain satisfied that EDDIE is no fool and would not hesitate to do this were the risk worth it - he is not one to shirk an issue or not try to do everything possible to get an edge.

 

[Scodog10]

I think a bit of respect should be shown to GC here. He has experience and qualifications in this area we don't. I'm more inclined to listen to your comments on the economy of the netball team because of your experience there. The same applies to GC on injuries.

I get how that comment could be taken that way and it wasn't how it was meant. The whole topic of injuries just frustrates me because we could and should be doing so much better.

Ultimately I've posted far too much in this thread anyway and I just want the football department fixed so I can go back to posting positively. Is there any chance we can take a mulligan after preliminary final night 2011?..

 

[Quicky]

My view is I would hope it would be looked at closely again and gone over with a fine tooth comb to discover if their are intrinsic problems with our staff as a root cause of the injury issues.

I think that is a wise course of action as an ongoing review anyway but in particular given our injury issues of recent seasons. We have already done a significant review at the end of 2014 when Dr Chris Bradshaw replaced the previous incumbent and the weights guy was let go.

From the evidence we have at hand this season I have no feel at all whether the medical and conditioning staff are doing a good, bad or indifferent job. I would need far more understanding of the area and far more information about the specific cases involved to even get into a discussion. I just have no idea at all about the answer to this question.

It would make an interesting question at the AGM. Have we reviewed our our high performance team? Who reviewed it? What are their qualifications to do so? What did the review involve?

If you were to put that question to the board, how would you frame it?

 

[Aishofhearts]

Given what I've heard along the journey the only shit I'm reading has come from your direction lol.

I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next guy but there hasn't been a real one since Kennedy and only loons believe in them.

 

[Aishofhearts]

Ultimately I've posted far too much in this thread anyway and I just want the football department fixed so I can go back to posting positively. Is there any chance we can take a mulligan after preliminary final night 2011?..

There's nothing to be fixed mate, this is the new landscape, players train the same way they play, flat out with manic obsessive urgency. And if they don't the other club wins. The attrition rate is here to stay, the players are formula 1 racing cars, unbelievable performance, but it's always redlining to win and engines will blow.

Don't waste your time on blame, this is the new game!

 

[Quicky]

I get how that comment could be taken that way and it wasn't how it was meant. The whole topic of injuries just frustrates me because we could and should be doing so much better.

Ultimately I've posted far too much in this thread anyway and I just want the football department fixed so I can go back to posting positively. Is there any chance we can take a mulligan after preliminary final night 2011?..

I like your posts. They open up all kinds of interesting questions. I think they are well and truly justified given our injury history and results with injury management. Gone Critical rightly brings up the question about the knowledge required to qualify and quantify such comments. In addition to the specific details we'd need on top of that to comment with any authority. We can't, because we don't have the expertise in the field or access to the information. But it doesn't mean they can't and shouldn't be posed to the club to justify the poor results, we don't need to be an expert to see those.

It's a shame the only mechanism to do that for the regular punter is via the exorbidantly priced legends membership attending the AGM and asking the question directly. He/she might have a chance, if fortunate enough to get air time with the question (no certainty).

 

[Scodog10]

No worries would love to hear your info again. For what it's worth I am not suggesting we have the high achievers and we may have major issues. Chris Bradshaw does seem to have a good reputation but even that should be taken with a grain of salt. Short answer is I don't know.

I've heard good things about Chris too. Also despite the issues I've had here and there with the club docs I'm definitely anti the rehab team more than any other within the make up of the high performance structure.

For instance if the club medicos stop allowing injured players to return to the field my concerns on them reduce significantly.

FWIW can you please nuke this new troll account that's popped up lol?

 

[Gone Critical]

It would make an interesting question at the AGM. Have we reviewed our our high performance team? Who reviewed it? What are their qualifications to do so? What did the review involve?

If you were to put that question to the board, how would you frame it?

I would frame the question around how and who was doing the review and what where the questions we were looking to answer and how did we go about achieving those answers.

Specifics of our player management would be off limits for confidentiality reasons and to maintain the clubs Intel from the rest of the competition.

So something like this

"We all have concerns based around the clubs ongoing injury rates and high performance program. What does the club see as the vital questions we need answered in this area to enable improved performance? Who is doing the review, why were they chosen and how will they perform this review to make sure we uncover the answers we need?"

I would assume from the outset the answer would be general and specifics wouldn't be given. As such seeing how the club goes about answering the questions and who they involve would probably give the best idea as to how serious they were at providing the answers v looking to be doing the right thing.

 

[good4footy]

Yes I understand how it works - but imagine Robbo in the HS writing an articles about the haves and have nots based on overspending despite paying the tax - and it effectively has us front and and centre.
Just another opportunity to bash the club.

Really...so what. The day we make decisions on what Robbo may write is the day we pack it in as a club.

As for the have not etc those stories are already written every year. The club just needs to stop being stingy and spend what needs to be spent.

 

[Mame]

Im not sure why this part of my post seems to be a sticking point with a few people? Just because Grundy has had a good couple of months, suddenly there seems to be the thought that a genuine ruck coach isn't needed? How about instead of subscribing to that theory, we subscribe to the theory that Grundy, despite his current form, could possibly be even better than he currently is if he had a genuine ruck coach teaching him his craft?
Is it really that hard for people to admit that our players, even the ones in good form, could be better if they were all getting the right coaching? Grundy, is a super talent, and was always going to end up as one of the better, if not best rucks in the competition, but if he's given the right coaching support, the sky is the limit. I want our club to give our players the best chance of succeeding, and if that means blowing the footy dept cap and paying a tax, then so be it.

Fair enough but if you take away that time you take away the credit for existing coaches. I'm all for even better coaching though.

 

[Collingwoodity]

I like your posts. They open up all kinds of interesting questions. I think they are well and truly justified given our injury history and results with injury management. Gone Critical rightly brings up the question about the knowledge required to qualify and quantify such comments. In addition to the specific details we'd need on top of that to comment with any authority. We can't, because we don't have the expertise in the field or access to the information. But it doesn't mean they can't and shouldn't be posed to the club to justify the poor results, we don't need to be an expert to see those.

It's a shame the only mechanism to do that for the regular punter is via the exorbidantly priced legends membership attending the AGM and asking the question directly. He/she might have a chance, if fortunate enough to get air time with the question (no certainty).

Most professions must adhere to a set of professional standards. In fact, many professions are governed by a governmental regulatory body to ensure that the work being carried out is to the required standard.

Only Collingwood knows if the club's medical/fitness etc department has carried out its work to the required standard.

Mistakes occur, should be investigated and rectified. Not hidden.

My concern is that Collingwood are more focused on running Collingwood as a business than an on field successful football club that it would prefer not to reveal the truth about any inadequacies in its medical/fitness department to the public.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ketchup]

Most professions must adhere to a set of professional standards. In fact, many professions are governed by a governmental regulatory body to ensure that the work being carried out is to the required standard.

Only Collingwood knows if the club's medical/fitness etc department has carried out its work to the required standard.

Mistakes occur, should be investigated and rectified. Not hidden.

My concern is that Collingwood are more focused on running Collingwood as a business than an on field successful football club that it would prefer not to reveal the truth about any inadequacies in its medical/fitness department to the public.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope not. I would imagine the last 3-4 years have led to less membership, less attendances and less sponsorship money which would reduce our bottom line. After 3-4 years of that at a multi million dollar company alot of senior officials would be getting the sack from the board! That doesn't happen here.

 

[Gone Critical]

My concern is that Collingwood are more focused on running Collingwood as a business than an on field successful football club that it would prefer not to reveal the truth about any inadequacies in its medical/fitness department to the public.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am sure that is true but at the same time if those inadequacies exist I am sure the club would act on them quickly. The medical fitness staff at a club dont have any great cache, they are not a favorite son who there may be angst in sacking. If they don't perform they will be out the door. At the same time I agree their failings will be kept behind closed doors if possible

Realy the biggest difficulty here I would see is how the club would make those assessments. In sacking a player or coach the assessments of them would be made from within the club. In the case of a doctor, physio etc a professional from outside the club would be the only person who could make a meaningful review and such a person isn't always easy to locate in what is a pretty small field (sports med)

 

[Mame]

Interesting. Games against Dogs and Hawks coming soon.

 

[Ulahoopski]

If (big if) Collingwood win their last 4 games and with big margins against Tiggers and Suns, then it a spot in the finals is still not beyond the realms of possibility. NOrth's last 4 games are all against teams above them on the ladder so they could conceivably lose all of them. Go Doggies.

 

[Aishofhearts]

Bugger Whorethorn, look at those baby Pies.

 

[Big Bryza]

Before the season started nearly everyone said finishing in the bottom of the 8 was the minimum acceptable result.

The goal posts changed when Swan and Elliott were ruled out for the season as well as a promising half back in Ramsay.