Thoughts On The Collingwood Final

[TheLeftFist8]

The delistings this year will indeed tell a very important tale. We don't have many players left aged 26+ - three backboners and four veterans (with Burton having been re-signed). It will be VERY interesting to see how many of these players are asked to leave once trade week is over. Will we keep all 7, planning on remaining there and thereabouts in 2009? Or, will we bite the bullet and accept that we're not going to win the flag in 2009, sending 3-4 of them off to retirement?

Good post.

I believe we will again make bottom half of the 8 in 09. On ladder position it wont appear to be an improvement. However, if it is a year we develop young blokes, phase out the old blokes, AND play to our ability in finals then next year will be a success...and will lead to ladder and finals success in 2010 onwards.

John Reid (understandably) skirted around the issue of delistings and how many on 5AA tonight. In the end he gave the impression of a 'middle of the road, not conservative but not aggressive approach' resulting in 6ish (maybe 5) draft picks. Did say we'd be unlikely to be like some clubs who will have '10, 9, 8 or even 7 picks'.

So given the Petrenko-Biglands exchange, that equals a likely 6 or 7 delistings...i am hoping for 7 or 8.

Of the old/backbone that should imo include Biglands, Bassett + McGregor, Goodwin, and at least one of Doughty or Shirley.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

I don't think there needs to be that much of a step back, if any. If you look at our opposition from the weekend they have had 18 players aged 21 and under play senior football this season. Despite this they are not bottoming out by any stretch of the imagination.

John Anthony (20 years old, 10 games)
Nathan Brown (19, 21)
Marty Clarke (21, 32)
Travis Cloke (21, 76)
Ryan Cook (20, 10)
Chris Dawes (20, 4)
Brad Dick (20, 6)
Chris Egan (21, 27)
Tyson Goldsack (21, 31)
Sam Iles (21, 7)
John McCarthy (18, 4)
Harry O'Brien (21, 58)
Scott Pendulbury (20, 53)
Ben Reid (19, 6)
Danny Stanley (20, 4)
Dale Thomas (21, 61)
Alan Toovey (21, 17)
Sharrod Wellingham (20, 12)

We have had 9.

Patrick Dangerfield (18 years old, 2 games)
Richard Douglas (21, 37)
Jarrhan Jacky (19, 3)
Chris Knights (21 - 22 in 2 weeks, 49)
David Mackay (20, 18)
Brad Moran (21 - 22 in 2 weeks, 9)
Andy Otten (19, 2)
James Sellar (19, 1)
Kurt Tippett (21, 18)

Comparing the age groups, Collingwood have invested 439 games in their 21 and under players. We have invested 139. And did our older, more experienced heads prove decisive on Saturday?

We are scared to play youth. We are scared they might make errors. We fear failure. We do not back their talent.

Too be honest, Collingwood isn't the model we should be looking at. Apart from having a brilliant coach, they have an ordinary list. take out their fasher/sons ( Cloke/Shaw) and their top 5 draft picks (Didak/Thomas/Fraser). I don't see Collingwood being a force in the next 3 years at least.

But your right, we must play the kids in 2009 ahead of 2nd stringers.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

From what we've seen so far, Mackay, Vince & Porplyzia look like they could be tier-one. VB, Knights, Reilly & Douglas are all backboners, in decreasing order of ability. VB is the most experienced of these players, with just 76 games. It's far too early to make the call over the 2007 draftees.

Too many backboners ultimately leads to mediocrity - getting stuck in the middle of the pack, neither moving closer to the next flag nor falling out of contention completely. This is the death by 1000 cuts. Tier One talent though is hard to come by unless you get lucky with a Father/Son selection or hit rock bottom. Adelaide have done neither.

I have been lashed for suggesting Knights as a backbone player .....I am glad I have at least one ally

I agree Porplyzia, Mackay, and Vince will all be tier one ......People say that you can't tell who will develop becuase certain players have so few games.

Mackay shows that talent identification is easy as soon as some players step foot on a footy field

 

[achancely]

Too be honest, Collingwood isn't the model we should be looking at. Apart from having a brilliant coach, they have an ordinary list. take out their fasher/sons ( Cloke/Shaw) and their top 5 draft picks (Didak/Thomas/Fraser). I don't see Collingwood being a force in the next 3 years at least.

But your right, we must play the kids in 2009 ahead of 2nd stringers.

Collingwood may not finish first, but they have a coach and mentality that wins finals. Invaluable. They will face Hawthorn in a prelim most likely, and if they topple them, they are the one team you can see beating Geelong.

A silly chance for the premiership with a bog-average list, which says a lot about both their desire, team ethic and coach.

 

[crowsup]

I must be thick or something. I don't undertand you guys that say we need to bottom out before we can win a flag.
So, as you seem to be very opinionated and so sure of yourselves, can, at least one of you, tell me this:
1) Which of the last 7 premiership winners bottomed out to come back up and win the flag.
2) How long ago did they bottom out and how many seasons did they bottom out for.
3) Which are the players they picked up while at the bottom, that helped them win the flag.
4) What is the position on the ledder you think should be considered bottoming out.
Before you say that I should go and find out for myself, remember that I am not the one that believes we should bottom out. The onus is on you to supply facts that prove that That is what it takes to win a flag.

 

[bomba4eva]

The big question facing the Crows is how will these kids develop? How many of them will develop into backboners themselves and how many will develop into tier-one players? The Crows have long had difficulty with ridding their lists of backbone types, hopefully this will change with Rendell & Craig in charge of the list - rather than the previous Fantasia & Ayres combination.

From what we've seen so far, Mackay, Vince & Porplyzia look like they could be tier-one. VB, Knights, Reilly & Douglas are all backboners, in decreasing order of ability. VB is the most experienced of these players, with just 76 games. It's far too early to make the call over the 2007 draftees.

Too many backboners ultimately leads to mediocrity - getting stuck in the middle of the pack, neither moving closer to the next flag nor falling out of contention completely. This is the death by 1000 cuts. Tier One talent though is hard to come by unless you get lucky with a Father/Son selection or hit rock bottom. Adelaide have done neither.

The delistings this year will indeed tell a very important tale. We don't have many players left aged 26+ - three backboners and four veterans (with Burton having been re-signed). It will be VERY interesting to see how many of these players are asked to leave once trade week is over. Will we keep all 7, planning on remaining there and thereabouts in 2009? Or, will we bite the bullet and accept that we're not going to win the flag in 2009, sending 3-4 of them off to retirement?

Yep, good post, agree with much of that. Too many battlers currently in your squad. The elite players with class is what your team lacks and will struggle to find with constant 5-8th finishes. This off-season is vital for your club. Craig needs to make the tough decision. Knights for example could have kept Peverill but bit the bullet and is looking to youth. Will the likes of Massie, Doughty etc. be given a reprieve or is Craig indeed looking to the future and making the wise choice to move these players on. If you were to continue playing the same players next year I think you will pay very dearly for the next 3-5 years after that. The new teams won't help your plight if you do decide to struggle on for one more year withthe same group. Very important couple of months coming upfor the Crows.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I must be thick or something. I don't undertand you guys that say we need to bottom out before we can win a flag.
So, as you seem to be very opinionated and so sure of yourselves, can, at least one of you, tell me this:
1) Which of the last 7 premiership winners bottomed out to come back up and win the flag.
2) How long ago did they bottom out and how many seasons did they bottom out for.
3) Which are the players they picked up while at the bottom, that helped them win the flag.
4) What is the position on the ledder you think should be considered bottoming out.
Before you say that I should go and find out for myself, remember that I am not the one that believes we should bottom out. The onus is on you to supply facts that prove that That is what it takes to win a flag.

I agree 100% ......SEN1116 did a list of the all time best top 10 draft picks and in doing so went thru all the top 10 picks for the last 15 years .......gee there was more crap selections than success stories.

This supports Cro-Mo's theory that the draft is indeed a lottery

So does bottoming out guarantee you success via low draft picks .....NO

IIRC there has only been one #1 draft pick to ever play in a premiership

But you have as equal a chance of picking up a quality player at #16 as #5

Take these:

Kosi ...pick 2 .....whats his current value

Rioli ....pick 12 .....almost rising star overall winner and definate star of future

H.Taylor ...pick 17 .....automatic defender in a likely Geelong GF team

R. Palmer .....pick7 ....winner of rising star .....that was to Freo who finished 1oth nOT bottom 3

I think we have done OK with Dangerfield .....most would agree

Then what about Bock, Rutten, Goodwin, Bassett, Griffin, & Porplyzia as rookies

Why is finishing bottom then guarantee anyone of success .....got me beat

 

[beagle2]

I must be thick or something. I don't undertand you guys that say we need to bottom out before we can win a flag.
So, as you seem to be very opinionated and so sure of yourselves, can, at least one of you, tell me this:
1) Which of the last 7 premiership winners bottomed out to come back up and win the flag.

Brisbane Sydney and the eagles(Judd) Port had their inaugural picks and Geelong their F/s Whilst not every high pck is a champion and not every low pick a dud a premiership team will have a number of star playersand low picks will only turn up the odd one Not enough to win a grand final Currently we dont have a single star player What are our chances of pick 10being a star 4/5 of 5/8 of fa

 

[Crow-mo]

I’m looking forward to hearing who is a better option than Craig. He has proven he can coach, he is a passionate AFC man and I firmly believe that when he gets his own list (I’m going to say this until we no longer have Goodwin, Edwards, Mcleod, Doughty,Shirley and Massie on the list) and he will be successful in finals and he will win us multiple flags

when he gets his own list?

2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

he's been there a while now. that's a hell of a luxury you're affording him, 5 years grace minimum until you get your "own list".

 

[Crow-mo]

John Reid (understandably) skirted around the issue of delistings and how many on 5AA tonight. In the end he gave the impression of a 'middle of the road, not conservative but not aggressive approach' resulting in 6ish (maybe 5) draft picks. Did say we'd be unlikely to be like some clubs who will have '10, 9, 8 or even 7 picks'.

Hoorah, common sense prevails.

now if we can show the same approach at the trade table...

 

[Crow-mo]

Too be honest, Collingwood isn't the model we should be looking at. Apart from having a brilliant coach, they have an ordinary list. take out their fasher/sons ( Cloke/Shaw) and their top 5 draft picks (Didak/Thomas/Fraser). I don't see Collingwood being a force in the next 3 years at least.

But your right, we must play the kids in 2009 ahead of 2nd stringers.

we've already said that Collingwood IS the model we are basing ourselves on.

could it be that they just have a better coach? after all, their average list always OVER-performs comes finals time.

 

[Cap]

when he gets his own list?

2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

he's been there a while now. that's a hell of a luxury you're affording him, 5 years grace minimum until you get your "own list".

well you can hardly count '04

but this year would be his last you would think - i.e next year would be his first season with his own list

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

when he gets his own list?

2004
2005
2006
2007
2008

he's been there a while now. that's a hell of a luxury you're affording him, 5 years grace minimum until you get your "own list".

can we also somehow find a way to blame Ayres for blowing 1st rounders on Meesen, Pfeiffer and Sellar.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

can we also somehow find a way to blame Ayres for blowing 1st rounders on Meesen, Pfeiffer and Sellar.

Can't put Sellar in that list ......

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

we've already said that Collingwood IS the model we are basing ourselves on.

could it be that they just have a better coach? after all, their average list always OVER-performs comes finals time.

I thought Geelong was the model? I wouldn't mind some Collingwood like toughness in our players, would make for a nice change. I have never seen a Crows side tackle so poorly. Is this the least aggressive Crows side we have ever seen?

 

[King Elvis]

Player Development & Club Culture are more important than draft picks.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Player Development & Club Culture are more important than draft picks.

Absolutely

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Player Development & Club Culture are more important than draft picks.

Yep and 1st round draft picks are more important than 3rd round draft picks.

 

[King Elvis]

Yep and 1st round draft picks are more important than 3rd round draft picks.

We should trade away our first rounder for three second rounders.

 

[Crow-mo]

I thought Geelong was the model? I wouldn't mind some Collingwood like toughness in our players, would make for a nice change. I have never seen a Crows side tackle so poorly. Is this the least aggressive Crows side we have ever seen?

sorry wasn't clear.

we have stated we are basing our list management and rebuilding efforts on the collingwood model.

we have tried to change our gameplan more in line with Geelong.

off field/on field

 

[Vader]

John Reid (understandably) skirted around the issue of delistings and how many on 5AA tonight. In the end he gave the impression of a 'middle of the road, not conservative but not aggressive approach' resulting in 6ish (maybe 5) draft picks. Did say we'd be unlikely to be like some clubs who will have '10, 9, 8 or even 7 picks'.

Sounds like they're backpedaling as fast as they can. So much for "aggressive list management" as promised back in June/July. Disappointing.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

We should trade away our first rounder for three second rounders.

Sounds like a plan

 

[jenny61_99]

Sounds like they're backpedaling as fast as they can. So much for "aggressive list management" as promised back in June/July. Disappointing.

I don't think we can afford to be as aggressive as originally planned, mainly because we will be losing a lot of experience as it is. As pointed out in a couple of other threads, we already have a void in the important 22-28 year old 100+ gamer bracket. I was convinced that one of Doughty/Massey/Shirley had to go, now I am not so sure. While we are bringing along the younger brigade, we need this blue collar worker experience to shore up the side IMO.

 

[WALL-e]

I'll be dissapointed if I don't see aggressive management.

Draft it up now or pay the price 5 years from now, and we can be having the same discussion.

Everyone wants everything now, wingigng, moaning, well back luck, you want you cake, it has to bake..hmm that rhymes.

 

[johnnypanther]

as for the Crows, we need to spend 6 weeks tackling, get the Wallabies during training, something !!!!

my 1yo grandson can tackle harder & more effectively than the AFC players

IMO tackling has been one of our big minuses over the last 2-3 years - i'm convinced that our tackling coach thinks we are playing touch football