The mind games begin

[Cousin of Daicos]

You are a flog and your football knowledge is limited at best.

Awesome insight.

I agree and I doubt he is a Pies Fan

No you're right, I paid $435 for this:

To hopefully give me the right to troll Collingwood on BigFooty.

What the?

Do you actually watch us play the Dogs?

Eagleton has done little when we've played them generally.

Didn't you also say that Brad Johnson did bugger all against us last year? The guy who actually received Brownlow votes against us?

In fact, last year Eagleton tacked up 9 disposals in game one against us, then 16 in the next. For a guy who plays as outside as Eagleton does, and is as poor defensively, he has to rely on ball accumulation to be effective really. 25 touches over the course of two games is not tearing us up whatsoever.

I honestly don't know how closely you watch our games, but based on your opinions on opposition players, I'm guessing it isn't too closely.

Posessions don't mean everything. Daniel Rich was one of the most influential players on the ground against Carlton last year in the final, with what? 10 posessions?

Paul Licuria should have taught you that posessions can mean NOTHING in a game of football. I'm surprised Swans Brownlow voting didn't. Umps barely noticed him racking up cheap disposals.

When Eagleton DOES get the ball against us, he's always hurt us with run and penetrating kicks. But I'll leave you to continue to live in your fanatsy world where we're the best side in the comp and the obvious flag favourites with a list of superstars at our disposal.

 

[TradeDraft]

No you're right, I paid $435 for this:

To hopefully give me the right to troll Collingwood on BigFooty.

Well I am just saying you are very Negative about the Team. Well I guess you have your Thoughts but I think you are in the Minority

 

[smiddaz123]

Posessions don't mean everything. Daniel Rich was one of the most influential players on the ground against Carlton last year in the final, with what? 10 posessions?

Paul Licuria should have taught you that posessions can mean NOTHING in a game of football. I'm surprised Swans Brownlow voting didn't. Umps barely noticed him racking up cheap disposals.

When Eagleton DOES get the ball against us, he's always hurt us with run and penetrating kicks. But I'll leave you to continue to live in your fanatsy world where we're the best side in the comp and the obvious flag favourites with a list of superstars at our disposal.

**** me man, what is the point saying shit like the bolded? I've never over hyped any players without reason. I've been opposed to god knows how many things about the club, and have been bagged out for being opposed to it. I've said many times I don't think we can ever win a flag with Malthouse, no matter who we have on our list. That doesn't mean I'm going to sit at a keyboard throwing random tantrums over everything to do with the club. I actually manage to find enjoyment in following AFL without the team winning a flag. If the only way you're going to enjoy following the club is if we're winning flags, the you're not going to have a fun time, because winning Premierships is not something done easily.

Saying stuff like the bolded is fairly weak. You're generalising everyone else on this board, and it seems to me you get on on some stupid "me against them" mentality.

Daniel Rich was one of the most influential players because he stepped up when he was needed. Eagleton did not do this. He had ZERO effect on the game. He did nothing in close, he offered zero defensive pressure. All Eagleton did was float around the ground picking up a cheap possession every now and then. Rich won his own ball, Eagleton did not, never has, never will. He's a soft player, he lacks intelligence when he has the ball. He can kick the ball long and run, that is literally it.

Why can you honestly not admit it when you're wrong about an opposition player. You've made no mention of your ridiculous opinion of Brad Johnson's performance against us I see as well, surprisingly.

And guess what? Who actually cares if a guy gets the ball and runs with it against us if he's paying ZERO attention to his man. I'm personally happy to let Eagleton get the ball 10 times a game if he's letting his man do whatever he wants.

 

[StringyDog]

God damn I hope he plays, a 34 year old with a dodgy calf, YES PLEASE, 21 vs 22 from minute one, YES PLEASE.

Having said that, not for one minute do I actually believe he will play, they simply can't risk it for a 10 minute "bonus" you get out of milestone matches.

Play him please Rodney, PLEASE.

Geeze, you make him sound like an old man on last legs, when in fact he is THE most resilient player in the AFL and has been for a long long time.

Had you seen his sprint work at training you would not be saying that, in fact you would probably be saying why are they saying Johnson is not playing round 1, the only thing he is lacking is match fitness, it certainly won't be case of 21 vs 22.

 

[Snag Breac]

I rate you guys higher than st kilda, and I reckon the bulldogs do too.

I think this game is very very important to either team to establish themselves early in the season. Its psychological more than anything. Having brad johnson there for his 350th will give the dogs an edge(hopefully), and winning their first game against a quality opponent will boost them even further. Its very important.

To those wishing him for an injury.

He's a champ, and very comely to boot. Doubt that any Pies people would actually wish him ill.

A question for you, cosmicr - do you think the Dogs have real depth this year? Or is that a potential weakness?

 

[medhurstISGOD]

Did anyone read the comment on that link?

"Bird Jonson is inger pron and not chump play bulldigs is hack team and not wins the flags in 010 and them chock in the final aginst hack saint. the might bombers will win in 010 the might david hill is champ ruck and he is captin of might bomber and he is"


​

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

**** me man, what is the point saying shit like the bolded? I've never over hyped any players without reason. I've been opposed to god knows how many things about the club, and have been bagged out for being opposed to it. I've said many times I don't think we can ever win a flag with Malthouse, no matter who we have on our list. That doesn't mean I'm going to sit at a keyboard throwing random tantrums over everything to do with the club. I actually manage to find enjoyment in following AFL without the team winning a flag. If the only way you're going to enjoy following the club is if we're winning flags, the you're not going to have a fun time, because winning Premierships is not something done easily.

Saying stuff like the bolded is fairly weak. You're generalising everyone else on this board, and it seems to me you get on on some stupid "me against them" mentality.

Daniel Rich was one of the most influential players because he stepped up when he was needed. Eagleton did not do this. He had ZERO effect on the game. He did nothing in close, he offered zero defensive pressure. All Eagleton did was float around the ground picking up a cheap possession every now and then. Rich won his own ball, Eagleton did not, never has, never will. He's a soft player, he lacks intelligence when he has the ball. He can kick the ball long and run, that is literally it.

Why can you honestly not admit it when you're wrong about an opposition player. You've made no mention of your ridiculous opinion of Brad Johnson's performance against us I see as well, surprisingly.

And guess what? Who actually cares if a guy gets the ball and runs with it against us if he's paying ZERO attention to his man. I'm personally happy to let Eagleton get the ball 10 times a game if he's letting his man do whatever he wants.

I made the bolded stamtement because it seems ok for everyone else to make far more ridiculous statements about me without any sort of consequence, not sure why I can't do that same.

If the moderators were doing their job here, there'd much more legitimate discussion going on as opposed to what appears to be nothing more than a circle jerk about how great Collingwood is.

I honestly don't CARE who got the Brownlow votes against us. The last time I recall Brad Johnson doing any GENUINE damage against us was many many years ago.

For whatever reason, everytime I think of the Bulldogs straight away Eagleton and Cooney pop into my head (and after last year, Lake). Both those players stick out in my mind as players I remember hurting us at crucial points in many recent Bulldogs clashes.

I'm terribly sorry if my opinion doesn't match up with yours, I'll do my best to be more compliant in the future.

I enjoy the football when I'm AT THE FOOTBALL. I'm not at the football right now, I'm not caught up in the emotion and the fun of it. I'm at work posting from a computer.

I'm not obliged to only say nice things and get excited about Collingwood here.

 

[Optimax]

Maybe you should do some work instead of taking photos of membership cards and just plain sooking?

 

[Optimax]

By the way, I'm sorry, but was Paul Licuria the number 1 turnover player (at LEAST top 3) for something like 3 years running? Or was that my imagination?

this was indeed your imagination

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Maybe you should do some work instead of taking photos of membership cards and just plain sooking?

Or I could do whatever I want?

The fact that you choose to ignore what you see in front of you isn't my issue.

My support for Collingwood was called into question simply because I wont take part in a circle jerk. How else do you propose I prove who I support?

 

[HFF]

Opti, what's going on?

Looking at your username, haven't they given you the "gig" yet?

What's the hold up? Red-tape?

 

[TradeDraft]

Or I could do whatever I want?

The fact that you choose to ignore what you see in front of you isn't my issue.

My support for Collingwood was called into question simply because I wont take part in a circle jerk. How else do you propose I prove who I support?

Saying Something Positive would be a Good Start

 

[Dammit]

I honestly don't CARE who got the Brownlow votes against us.

Doesn't that just say it all really??

 

[Muse]

I must say, I'm keen to play the Bulldogs at their best because to be the best you have to beat the best. If we lose, we don't have any excuses really we have brung two players in that fit two voids out from last year, and on that note the two players we brung in are no slouches.

If we win, Bulldogs have no excuse either if they say we beat them with an unfit side well they will just have to take that up with Rocket Eade. I want two perfectly fit premiership contenders going head to head, I for one actually don't mind if we lose this game, ofcourse I will be head over heels if we win, but if we lose we're obviously not doing something right and we can try to fix that over the season.

Bring on a fit Bulldogs, I'm excited!

 

[Optimax]

Opti, what's going on?

Looking at your username, haven't they given you the "gig" yet?

What's the hold up? Red-tape?

About the new mod?

My guess is as good as yours mate, im sure VV will introduce whoever it will be eventually.

Thanks for all the noms though.

 

[TradeDraft]

If we win, Bulldogs have no excuse either if they say we beat them with an unfit side well they will just have to take that up with Rocket Eade. I want two perfectly fit premiership contenders going head to head, I for one actually don't mind if we lose this game, ofcourse I will be head over heels if we win, but if we lose we're obviously not doing something right and we can try to fix that over the season.

Bring on a fit Bulldogs, I'm excited!

As long we don't get Flogged

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

this was indeed your imagination

Maybe you should read more newspapers throughout the year during a footy season.

VERY quick Google search found this...

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,21548237-23211,00.html

But just as poor kicking has been a constant at Collingwood since Malthouse took over as senior coach - Collingwood was the undisputed clanger king in 2001 and 2005 and has begun this season the same way - the Magpies are determined to finally change the script.

The dilemma for Malthouse is that some of the players he relies on to apply this pressure and win the hard ball - Paul Licuria and Shane O'Bree to name just two - are among the club's worst kicks.

Johnno was the culprit of this particular article.

The player who personifies this duality is Ben Johnson. Last year, Johnson ranked in the AFL's top three players for effective kicks. He was also the second-worst clanger culprit, with 33 ill-directed kicks landing in the arms of opposition players.

I'm sure I could do some more digging.

 

[HFF]

About the new mod?

My guess is as good as yours mate, im sure VV will introduce whoever it will be eventually.

Thanks for all the noms though.

Yeh, no problem.

You just seem to have this bit of "attitude" that we seem to be lacking with the mods team on this board (not to say our other mods are no good because they do let alot of things go which is always heaps of fun) but you would compliment the set-up quite well IMO.

It's almost like a Jack Anthony type of "attitude/arrogance/spunk" with your posts.

 

[Optimax]

the article is all about johnson

Im not saying we didnt have clangers but that article refers to johnson not Licuria

You said it was licuria not johnson, YOU WERE WRONG!

 

[absy]

Since we aren't going to win why bother discussing all this shit eh, may as well give my membership back!

Obviously we aren't as good as anyone since the season hasn't started yet, so easy to tell .

 

[Zahki]

You'd think anyone with poor disposal will be shaped up or shipped out come Buckleys reign. He's gone on record multiple times saying that basic skills will be increasingly important as time goes on.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

the article is all about johnson

Im not saying we didnt have clangers but that article refers to johnson not Licuria

You said it was licuria not johnson, YOU WERE WRONG!

Even though you rarely do so.

Read my post again.

 

[Optimax]

Even though you rarely do so.

Read my post again.

I read it, I know you admit ths article refers to bj.

I put this to you find the article that proves your "fact" about licuria and I'll stop, I know you can't find solid proof of this "fact" so I don't think I'm in much trouble.

Also licuria was dropped because he couldn't get the ball due to foot speed issues (lack of the main one) not ball disposal, he wasn't the best kick but played to his limitations

 

[mattys123]

Maybe you should read more newspapers throughout the year during a footy season.

VERY quick Google search found this...

Yep, because Google searches, Fox sports articles (Sydney based company) and newspaper articles always tell the truth.

Seriously, anyone who "bags" Licuiria or O'Bree for what they have given for this football club really do need to be questioned for their alliance.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I read it, I know you admit ths article refers to bj.

I put this to you find the article that proves your "fact" about licuria and I'll stop, I know you can't find solid proof of this "fact" so I don't think I'm in much trouble.

Also licuria was dropped because he couldn't get the ball due to foot speed issues (lack of the main one) not ball disposal, he wasn't the best kick but played to his limitations

Hence why I said very quick Google search.

you'd be surprised how hard it is to fin d ANY clanger stats, let alone stats one ONE player who retired 2 years ago.

I regularly read articles and stats throughout footy seasons, and repeatedly saw Licca topping the clanger count. But off the bat, I'm going off memory.

But like I said in my post, I can do some digging, which I have been, but as I said, clanger stats are hard to find. AFL website is behaving funny here.