Time to go back a step

[FuManchu]

Sweet, i live in Mount Ommaney.
What you thinking the pies should chase trade week?
Cousins with our second rounder in the national draft?

Cousins ideally, but will he be around in 3 years time?

I think we should make a big play for Warnock, because funnily enough, every time I saw him play, he was better than Sandilands, who is not that bad either. And I would be sniffing around hawthorn and geelong to see who is not getting a game and seeing if they are ripe for the picking.

 

[Breakthelines]

Cousins ideally, but will he be around in 3 years time?

I think we should make a big play for Warnock, because funnily enough, every time I saw him play, he was better than Sandilands, who is not that bad either. And I would be sniffing around hawthorn and geelong to see who is not getting a game and seeing if they are ripe for the picking.

Doesn't Warnock want to go to Carltoon?
I think you could get 3-4 years from Cousins.

 

[well left]

Sweet, i live in Mount Ommaney.
What you thinking the pies should chase trade week?
Cousins with our second rounder in the national draft?

I'll throw my 2 cents in.

I can't see Kerr coming to Collingwood. I just don't think we will be able to get the trade done. We have pick 11 and would need that and one in the top 10 to get it across the line. Anyone willing to trade their top 10 pick will probably be after Kerr themselves and will do us no favours.

I'd love to trade for a ruckman and get rid of Bryan but I'm not sure what can be done here. I know FuManchu wants to trade Fraser and I kind of see his point but I just don't think it will happen. Maybe picking White up as a back-up instead of Bryan is a step-up. Trading for a young up and coming ruck will just pit them against Wood when we need to be getting game time into them. Fraser and Wood in the 1's with White and Keefe in the 2's looks OK.

I'm not sold on Harris and do not think he will move after media reports on the weekend. If we want an inside mid (and I think we should be chasing one) I'd go for Thomson from Port or Schmidt from the Swans. Both are young players looking for more game time who would fit in with the rest of our youth and would be cheaper than Harris.

I'd make a big play for Reilly and would be prepared to give up our first rounder or our 3rd round and Rusling if we decided Rus needed to go. I'd even consider Goldsack as we have Reed coming in.

If we could trade a R. Shaw or Cox or Johnson and get another 2nd round that would be great also. I love the reports from TRS on Hanneberry and if we could get him and Cousins in the second round that would be great.

Obviously not all of that would happen but is what I think we should be considering. They are not major additions (with the exception of Reilly) but would continue to improve our list.

 

[FuManchu]

Doesn't Warnock want to go to Carltoon?
I think you could get 3-4 years from Cousins.

Where he wants to go and where he ends up in the great AFL trading game can be two very different things.

Freo dont mind trading with us and if we have some players of use for them, ie: Johnson, then who knows what can happen.

as for Cousins, he is worth the risk for a number of reasons, even if only he showed that you can play up the guts.

 

[Optimax]

Problem is unlike T Shaw in his last year MM wont do it for the next coach.

Shaw didnt prune a list he had a shitful list.

HE could of delisted all on there bar Sav rocca, Ant rocca and Buckley and be showed to pruning the list.

Our window hasnt closed in fasct barely open, geelong in 06 finished 10th and our list is of comparable age top theres then.

 

[tess]

Tony Shaw played every player on our List in the Seniors during 1999 for the next coach to see what he had, he sacrificed his coaching career *cough cough* for the Clubs future.

 

[mdc]

Tony Shaw played every player on our List in the Seniors during 1999 for the next coach to see what he had, he sacrificed his coaching career *cough cough* for the Clubs future.

What deserving player has MM not played? I'd say that even those that don't watch VFL would have a pretty good idea about all the players on the senior list, bar Thoolen.

I'm all for critical analysis of MM's philosophy - I certainly don't agree with everything he does - but it seems to me that a lot of those calling for his head are doing so just for the hell of it.

 

[kevind]

Shaw didnt prune a list he had a shitful list.

HE could of delisted all on there bar Sav rocca, Ant rocca and Buckley and be showed to pruning the list.

Our window hasnt closed in fasct barely open, geelong in 06 finished 10th and our list is of comparable age top theres then.

Yes, but the big difference is Geelong had a veritable stable of superb midfielders plus an incoming star in Selwood that was always going to produce a superb midfield, we don't!! The importance of a great midfield who can kick the ball well hopefully will not be lost on any Pies supporter after Saturday!!

 

[mdc]

Yes, but the big difference is Geelong had a veritable stable of superb midfielders plus an incoming star in Selwood that was always going to produce a superb midfield, we don't!! The importance of a great midfield who can kick the ball well hopefully will not be lost on any Pies supporter after Saturday!!

I agree in principle, but Geelong didn't exactly have a "veritable" stable of superb mids.

Yablett was a low-possession small forward in 2006, Selwood had a massive injury qn mark over him, Bartel went from 2 brownlow votes in 2006 to 29 in 2007 etc etc...

 

[kevind]

Where he wants to go and where he ends up in the great AFL trading game can be two very different things.

Freo dont mind trading with us and if we have some players of use for them, ie: Johnson, then who knows what can happen.

as for Cousins, he is worth the risk for a number of reasons, even if only he showed that you can play up the guts.

A Collingwood supporter who dares to tell it how it really is. Very refreshing!!!!! I think we should retire Wakelin, Rocca, Burns, Presti, Holland and Lonie(already gone). The first 3 have been great warriors for the club, but the last 3 weeks has proved we don't desperately need them. Unless the following highly unlikely, but at the same time mouthwatering trades happen

pick 11 + Reid- Kerr
2nd round pick + Fraser- Warnock
3rd round pick - Cousins

In that impossible case scenario we would look to keep Rocca, Burns and Presti, as we would be some chance to be a contender.

In reality, we will not get any deals like that above over the line, therefore we will still have a second rate midfield that will not get us close to a premiership. I am amused to read that some posters think that getting Harris from NM will make us a contender. What we really need is 2 class midfielders,not players of the ilk of Harris.

We also need genuine midfielders, not converted midfielders like O'Bree(back pocket), Lockyer(back pocket), Thomas(forward flanker) ect as we have found out that you can rotate them all you like to cover deficiencies, but it will always fall over when it really counts.

 

[kevind]

I agree in principle, but Geelong didn't exactly have a "veritable" stable of superb mids.

Yablett was a low-possession small forward in 2006, Selwood had a massive injury qn mark over him, Bartel went from 2 brownlow votes in 2006 to 29 in 2007 etc etc...

What I was referring to was that their young midfield group had all the necessary skills- they were natural midfielders- stamina, pace, athletic ability, capable of getting the ball inside and outside, and best of all, they were all superb kicks. Plus there is about 6 of them.

What do we have ? Pendleberry, Swan, Thomas, O'Bree- none of whom are great kicks. We have McCarthy who could be a very good midfielder to add to that list and Leon, who has been very good this year as players with the necessary kicking skills, but beyond that the cupboard is absolutely bare.

In other words unless we have massive recruiting success in the coming months , we don't have any players who could possibly become as good as the players in Geelong's midfield.

 

[FuManchu]

Shaw didnt prune a list he had a shitful list.

HE could of delisted all on there bar Sav rocca, Ant rocca and Buckley and be showed to pruning the list.

Our window hasnt closed in fasct barely open, geelong in 06 finished 10th and our list is of comparable age top theres then.

they had the semblance of current team already there for 5 to 7 years by then and a hell of a lot of inner turmoil that year. We dont have the semblance of a midfield as yet, we have one genuine midfielder in Pendlebury. Davis is an opportunist, so too is medhurst. Didak is more a flanker than a centreman, but he could step up depending on his motor. We have no ruck anyway to feed our non midfield. We are lacking two KPP backmen. Brown may step up, but Maxwell and O'Brien are not KPP backs.

For so long Malthouse has been admired for getting the best out of what he had. Why the hell didnt he concentrate of getting the best there is to offer instead? I would have preferred that, rather than his us against them ethos which delievers 100% sometimes, but it is 100% working from a lower talent base. He has been negligent in terms of game plan and list management. He has neglected the rucks, and has been happy to have a pedestrian midfield since the time he got there and now in the space of 2 years has seen a very god backline decimated by retirements. He should have seen that one coming 4 years back and done something then.

He has not got the capacity to counter a dynamic tall. The reason we do so well against Geelong is that we can shut them down, thru the midfield and they dont have a dynamic tall forward. Hawthorn do and they kill us every time. Franklin now has led the way and he will be the trend others try and set over the next 5 years. What contigency has Malthouse got for the next 5 years to counter this trend? I cant see an effective negator of a dynamic tall forwards in our midst. can anyone?

 

[Frankie23]

This is a joke, we are a just about to enter our time for a major tilt at a premiership, and you want to take a step back????

Last week we had the 2nd youngest team to win a final EVER, the only other was Brisbane in 2000 (hint hint)

We have so many developing players, and players just about to enter there prime years (Swan, Didak and Davis)

And does everyone forget Didak, Shaw, Rocca, Reid, Rusling, Burns, Fraser missed huge chunks of the year due to various reasons

The only way is up with these kids, and although i think net year we will again finsh between 8th and 3rd, with a few new kids, and possibly a Cousins or Kerr, 2010 is our year.

 

[FuManchu]

This is a joke, we are a just about to enter our time for a major tilt at a premiership, and you want to take a step back????

Last week we had the 2nd youngest team to win a final EVER, the only other was Brisbane in 2000 (hint hint)

We have so many developing players, and players just about to enter there prime years (Swan, Didak and Davis)

And does everyone forget Didak, Shaw, Rocca, Reid, Rusling, Burns, Fraser missed huge chunks of the year due to various reasons

The only way is up with these kids, and although i think net year we will again finsh between 8th and 3rd, with a few new kids, and possibly a Cousins or Kerr, 2010 is our year.

The only way up is to get rid of players who no longer are in the long term interests of the club. Rocca is a week to week proposition and when he does play he is hit and miss. Presti, well ............ the game has passed him by. Burns is still handy, but not long term again. O'bree is pedestrian. Lockyer, well, I do like him, but other than a negating role, he will have limited opportunities and then there are the periphial players that just are not part of the future.

And malthouse, he is yesterdays man, with yesterdays plan.

 

[Pie eyed]

I hope Collingwood realise that the window has closed again and that they really need to prune the list harshly, including getting rid of some you dont want to.

With the list the way it is, we will not win a flag. We need to say goodbye to Burns ( sorry a great servant, but he wont be around for the next tilt at the flag) O'Bree (he is a plodder and not a game breaker) Presti (as he is now injury prone) Rocca (he too is now too injury prone and wont be around for the next serious tilt) Egan ( enuf said). And probably some more

Unless we accept a bit of pain for the next 2 years, we wont have the opportunity to bring in enough fresh faces to be matured and seasoned enough when our next rise on the ladder should occur.

I know people think we are close, but in reality, we are an effective midfield and one or two KPP in the backline short of a seriuos tilt at the flag.

IN a few years some of our promising players like Pendlebury and Thomas will be seasoned players and leaders. That is when we should be looking to rise up the ladder again. Geelong and Hawthorn should probably be starting to wane a little and a new generation of contenders coming thru. And mark my words, that will include a very good Carlton outfit.

We should also consider a trade for fraser, he is a good player when on song and not injured but he has held us back the last 2 seasons with his injuries and he is not a ruckman as such. Trade him now when he has some value to offer.

Supporters will hate to hear this, but the last two years have been some of the most inconsistant years of football I have ever seen from the club. I'd rather know that the team running out is in a rebuilding phase and is developing than the current state where I dont know if we are going to slay the giants or lose to the minnows as has been the case the last 2 years. This current team structure and personnel just aren't cutting it.

It is almost like the club is trying to hang onto the periphery of the 8 at any cost and trying to avoid any fall on the ladder. In the great cycle of football these days, you have to drop to rise again. The Hawks being a perfect example. They had a massive list pruning and accepted the pain of being at the bottom, and are now reaping the rewards .

If I knew we would be in their position in 3 years time if I was prepapred to be near the bottom for the next 2 years, I'd sign up right now. At the moment we are just treading water. Not drowning, not really forging ahead either.

The outcome of your proposal is in you avatar.

 

[DAWESOME!!]

A massive effort from a couple of drama queens in this thread. Remember it's always easy to throw your hands up, say "this isn't working" and advocate tearing down what's there for the promise of a clean slate. George W. Bush thought that would work well in Iraq. The problem is that the rebuilding of that clean slate isn't nearly as simple or as guaranteed as people assume.

You need to be prepared to make calls on some players, but you also need to recognise that fielding a team who are all under 23 just isn't going to work. Young players can lose their way, not know how to respond when challenged and most significantly, generally don't run the long seasons out very well - all those things come from experience but more particularly from the experience of watching how good older players do those things. Our young mids will learn a hell of a lot more if they are preparing and playing alongside a player like Burns.

I think the 'bottoming out' and rebuilding thing is a bit of a myth anyway. It's one route to improve your list, but its not the only route. It's failed for more teams than its succeeded. And even the current couch analyst's darlings, Richmond, Carlton and Hawthorn are dubious examples of the trend. Carlton didn't nearly make the finals this year because they bottomed out. They nearly made the finals because the best player of his generation walked out of his club and was persuaded to come to theirs - coupled with Brendan Fevola having the season of his life. For all their top draft picks, they wouldn't have got out of the bottom four if not for those two events. The idea of Richmond as a dominant team of the future is a joke. There's more to being a good football club than having some draft picks. I feel quite confident in predicting that Richmond may have one or two good years in the next five or six, but that they won't be a genuine threat for a premiership and they'll also miss the finals in at least three of the next six years. For all their "gun" young players, they're massively reliant on three or four players who are in the last couple of years of their career - at the end of 2009, they'll be talking about 2010 as a rebuilding year.

And Hawthorn... bloody hell, how is Hawthorn an example that's usable to the rest of the comp. What you do is ass-rape Fremantle for their first round picks (ok, we managed that once) while simultaneously bottoming out, and then you use one of those picks to select a once-in-thirty year player. 1) Freo have apparently finally realised that first round picks are important. 2) The next few years drafts after this will be compromised, and no-one is going to trade us a higher pick in this years draft, so no matter what we won't be able to get handfulls of top picks like some clubs have done in the past. 3) Hawthorn got very lucky in the stars lining up for them to recruit Buddy - not too mention lucky that other factors haven't derailed his career yet. Unless we can be sure we're going to get the next reincarnation of Gary Ablett Snr, I don't think tanking to the bottom is a worthwhile strategy.

Finally, I think the idea that's been mentioned on this board a few times in the last couple of days that our KPBs are no good because they got monstered by Franklin and Fevola this year is laughable. Those two players were awesome this year and were nigh on unstoppable on many occasions no matter who was on them. In some games this year, Buddy would have got his 8-10 scoring shots if Steven Silvagni in his peak was playing on him. We haven't had a real monster/genius full forward in the game since Ablett Snr and Lockett past their peaks, and in their day, they would have games where they kicked 9-10 goals on the best full backs in the land. By the criteria that a KPB has to be able to quell Franklin and Fevola to be good enough, there isn't a single good backman in the game.

 

[Pie eyed]

A massive effort from a couple of drama queens in this thread. Remember it's always easy to throw your hands up, say "this isn't working" and advocate tearing down what's there for the promise of a clean slate. George W. Bush thought that would work well in Iraq. The problem is that the rebuilding of that clean slate isn't nearly as simple or as guaranteed as people assume.

You need to be prepared to make calls on some players, but you also need to recognise that fielding a team who are all under 23 just isn't going to work. Young players can lose their way, not know how to respond when challenged and most significantly, generally don't run the long seasons out very well - all those things come from experience but more particularly from the experience of watching how good older players do those things. Our young mids will learn a hell of a lot more if they are preparing and playing alongside a player like Burns.

I think the 'bottoming out' and rebuilding thing is a bit of a myth anyway. It's one route to improve your list, but its not the only route. It's failed for more teams than its succeeded. And even the current couch analyst's darlings, Richmond, Carlton and Hawthorn are dubious examples of the trend. Carlton didn't nearly make the finals this year because they bottomed out. They nearly made the finals because the best player of his generation walked out of his club and was persuaded to come to theirs - coupled with Brendan Fevola having the season of his life. For all their top draft picks, they wouldn't have got out of the bottom four if not for those two events. The idea of Richmond as a dominant team of the future is a joke. There's more to being a good football club than having some draft picks. I feel quite confident in predicting that Richmond may have one or two good years in the next five or six, but that they won't be a genuine threat for a premiership and they'll also miss the finals in at least three of the next six years. For all their "gun" young players, they're massively reliant on three or four players who are in the last couple of years of their career - at the end of 2009, they'll be talking about 2010 as a rebuilding year.

And Hawthorn... bloody hell, how is Hawthorn an example that's usable to the rest of the comp. What you do is ass-rape Fremantle for their first round picks (ok, we managed that once) while simultaneously bottoming out, and then you use one of those picks to select a once-in-thirty year player. 1) Freo have apparently finally realised that first round picks are important. 2) The next few years drafts after this will be compromised, and no-one is going to trade us a higher pick in this years draft, so no matter what we won't be able to get handfulls of top picks like some clubs have done in the past. 3) Hawthorn got very lucky in the stars lining up for them to recruit Buddy - not too mention lucky that other factors haven't derailed his career yet. Unless we can be sure we're going to get the next reincarnation of Gary Ablett Snr, I don't think tanking to the bottom is a worthwhile strategy.

Finally, I think the idea that's been mentioned on this board a few times in the last couple of days that our KPBs are no good because they got monstered by Franklin and Fevola this year is laughable. Those two players were awesome this year and were nigh on unstoppable on many occasions no matter who was on them. In some games this year, Buddy would have got his 8-10 scoring shots if Steven Silvagni in his peak was playing on him. We haven't had a real monster/genius full forward in the game since Ablett Snr and Lockett past their peaks, and in their day, they would have games where they kicked 9-10 goals on the best full backs in the land. By the criteria that a KPB has to be able to quell Franklin and Fevola to be good enough, there isn't a single good backman in the game.

You must concede that if we chuck in the towel now we are assured of picking up at least 2 Buddy Franklins, an Ablett and probably quite a few
Hodge type players.....and Judd can't be that happy at Carlton.....$$$$$$ talks. (I hope you can tell I am being sarcastic as hell here)

 

[FuManchu]

The outcome of your proposal is in you avatar.

So getting rid of players who have rarely played this year is bad?

go figure

 

[tess]

A massive effort from a couple of drama queens in this thread.

Welcome pally, been a while since we have been able to exchange views. Now how about you put yours on the line and name these two Drama Queens you talk of, or is that you prefer to be a sniper and tar everyone who has posted in this thread with the Drama Queen tag.

 

[well left]

So getting rid of players who have rarely played this year is bad?

go figure

Don't think anyone is really saying that FuManchu.

What I think most people are saying is we can't get rid of absolutely everyone all at once. It would effectively cripple our list and we'd be delisting Rocca and O'Bree for 5th and 6th round draft picks. As much as they will not be their for the next premiership tilt, they are going to be better for the club next year than a pick 75 who will not make it.

Wakelin and Lonie are gone. Holland probably also. If Burns goes that makes 4. You would probably add Iles and Egan to the departure list and maybe trade/delist two of R. Shaw, Johnson and Cox and we are left with 8 vacancies on the list.

Elevate Wellingham and Macaffer and trade for Adam Thomson (for example) and that leaves 5 live picks in the draft. That gives us plenty of scope to rejuvenate the list. We play Stanley, Wellingham and McCarthy next year and hope that they force an O'Bree or Lockyer out of the side.

At the end of next year, we can then move O'Bree, Rocca, Presti and maybe Lockyer on but we can not do it all at once.

 

[Pie eyed]

Don't think anyone is really saying that FuManchu.

What I think most people are saying is we can't get rid of absolutely everyone all at once. It would effectively cripple our list and we'd be delisting Rocca and O'Bree for 5th and 6th round draft picks. As much as they will not be their for the next premiership tilt, they are going to be better for the club next year than a pick 75 who will not make it.

Wakelin and Lonie are gone. Holland probably also. If Burns goes that makes 4. You would probably add Iles and Egan to the departure list and maybe trade/delist two of R. Shaw, Johnson and Cox and we are left with 8 vacancies on the list.

Elevate Wellingham and Macaffer and trade for Adam Thomson (for example) and that leaves 5 live picks in the draft. That gives us plenty of scope to rejuvenate the list. We play Stanley, Wellingham and McCarthy next year and hope that they force an O'Bree or Lockyer out of the side.

At the end of next year, we can then move O'Bree, Rocca, Presti and maybe Lockyer on but we can not do it all at once.

This is the point.
We have the nucleus of a flag side right now. All we should be doing is fiddling around the edges.
I'll go an a limb and say Wood, with a big pre-season and a bit of experience under his belt, will show a vast improvement next season. Along with Fraser managing to get injury free and Bryan, who is massively under-rated we should be looking at a better than average Ruck.
Surround these three with a decent midfield, hopefully including Cousins and possibly Kerr as well and we have a quality engineroom primed to supply the forwards with some quality delivery.
With Rocca as the main focus for another year, Cloke can get back to doing what he does best with Didak, Davis, Medders, Thomas, Anthony and numerous others creating havoc when the ball hits the ground.
Rusling, fingers crosses, will provide a bit of forward depth to boot.
Our backline is the area which will look a bit thin without Wakes next season but Brown should go on from this season and if Presti goes around again he will be the anchor point. Add Maxwell, , Harry O'brien, Marty Clarke, Heath Shaw and Rhyce Shaw (if he escapes the trade table) and our run out defence is more than well looked after.
The likes of Wellingham, McCarthy, McCaffer and the very untried players Thoolen, Dick et al should also be given eary runs to gain even more depth.

Apart from the retired players the only obvious delisting's I can see are Egan and possibly Toovey. Both of whom many see as potential best 22 players but many ohers would say have failed to deliver and in Egan's case failed to seem like tries.

Despite the fact this is the potentially the last "uncompromised draft" for a while I think our work in that area has been done.
What you should be looking for apart from a Cousin and /or Kerr is an le of established backman and a solid swing type player to shore up both ends should we need it. Who, well I'm not much on following other sides but the likes of Max Rooke as a back and say another Maxwell type player..

 

[1970]

I would say that FuManchu is not far off the money on this one.

My reasoning would be that at some point Collingwood may have to consider dispensing with a club culture that was entrenched by and large by the 70's and continues to linger on. Interestingly, it works hand in hand with Malthouse at the helm IMO.

That culture is that Collingwood teams play above themselves in finals, the individuals in those teams understandably endear themselves to the club and the supporters, and as a result we hang onto players for far too long in the hope that everything will fall into place next year.

Like most teams, if Collingwoood had a decent run with injuries we could give it a good shake any day of the year but the law of averages says that won't happen.

It is all well and good to say that suspending Shaw and Didak sends a message that Collingwood won't tolerate certain behaviour but it wouldn't be a bad idea to also set some ground rules that say we won't tolerate recruiting players who aren't very good at kicking a football!

But why do we recruit players in the hope they will improve their kicking along the way?

Because somewhere in the psyche of the club is this idea that we want to see a player play above himself because he is wearing a Collingwood jumper, we want to see a team of blokes who can't get anywhere near the All Australian side but still win their way into a Grand Final.

The players that have been mentioned in this thread by FuManchu and other are just those types of players.

But they will still be there next year, and we will still be hoping that somehow it will all fall into place for them - and for us - but it probably won't happen.

And in 12 months time we wll still be wondering whether the same names should go around one more time. Cos you never quite know.

And if some those young blokes come on and can learn to kick the ball with precision into the forward line, well, who knows what they could do...

 

[DAWESOME!!]

Welcome pally, been a while since we have been able to exchange views. Now how about you put yours on the line and name these two Drama Queens you talk of, or is that you prefer to be a sniper and tar everyone who has posted in this thread with the Drama Queen tag.

I've never been on this forum before - you have me confused with someone else I think.

I think it is evident from my post that I'm taking issue with the approach FuManchu is suggesting - precisely because I think its a bit of an overly dramatic reaction. I'll concede it maybe wasn't the politest phrase to use - consider it withdrawn, and I'll simply say I strongly disagree for the reasons i listed in my post.

 

[FuManchu]

I would say that FuManchu is not far off the money on this one.

My reasoning would be that at some point Collingwood may have to consider dispensing with a club culture that was entrenched by and large by the 70's and continues to linger on. Interestingly, it works hand in hand with Malthouse at the helm IMO.

That culture is that Collingwood teams play above themselves in finals, the individuals in those teams understandably endear themselves to the club and the supporters, and as a result we hang onto players for far too long in the hope that everything will fall into place next year.

Like most teams, if Collingwoood had a decent run with injuries we could give it a good shake any day of the year but the law of averages says that won't happen.

It is all well and good to say that suspending Shaw and Didak sends a message that Collingwood won't tolerate certain behaviour but it wouldn't be a bad idea to also set some ground rules that say we won't tolerate recruiting players who aren't very good at kicking a football!

But why do we recruit players in the hope they will improve their kicking along the way?

Because somewhere in the psyche of the club is this idea that we want to see a player play above himself because he is wearing a Collingwood jumper, we want to see a team of blokes who can't get anywhere near the All Australian side but still win their way into a Grand Final.

The players that have been mentioned in this thread by FuManchu and other are just those types of players.

But they will still be there next year, and we will still be hoping that somehow it will all fall into place for them - and for us - but it probably won't happen.

And in 12 months time we wll still be wondering whether the same names should go around one more time. Cos you never quite know.

And if some those young blokes come on and can learn to kick the ball with precision into the forward line, well, who knows what they could do...

Well said, and I'll go even further and say Malthouse wouldn't know what to do with a Franklin type. I reckon he'd resent his natural abilities and force him to play like a soldier rather than a talented footballer whose abilities transcend team discipline. I think Malthouse wants a team of soldiers and unfortunately, AFL football requires a bit of inspiration as well as malthouse's perspiration ethic.

If 5 years ago, after the 2003 debacle, (which should have been ours without doubt), if anyone had said we will give Malthouse ANOTHER 7 years to win a flag, which is in effect what most are proposing here, 7 years to build a team and win a flag, everyone would say no way. Way too long.

But thats what in effect you are saying. And in another two years, and we are still 4th to 8th, therabouts, winning a few big games during the years and tickling everyones fancy with supposed promise that we can compete with the big ones, and YET still havent delievered, will you AGAIN say OH, another 2 years????????

He's had 9 years. 9 years of failed campaigns, 9 years of either getting close, but never close enough, or being at the bottom. Its time. Move on Mick and let a new generation take over and take with you players who are not part of the new generation, those who have given service but struggle to get on the park, or when they do, they are shown up to be pedestrian soldiers, much in your image as a player.

 

[FuManchu]

Don't think anyone is really saying that FuManchu.

What I think most people are saying is we can't get rid of absolutely everyone all at once. It would effectively cripple our list and we'd be delisting Rocca and O'Bree for 5th and 6th round draft picks. As much as they will not be their for the next premiership tilt, they are going to be better for the club next year than a pick 75 who will not make it.

Wakelin and Lonie are gone. Holland probably also. If Burns goes that makes 4. You would probably add Iles and Egan to the departure list and maybe trade/delist two of R. Shaw, Johnson and Cox and we are left with 8 vacancies on the list.

Elevate Wellingham and Macaffer and trade for Adam Thomson (for example) and that leaves 5 live picks in the draft. That gives us plenty of scope to rejuvenate the list. We play Stanley, Wellingham and McCarthy next year and hope that they force an O'Bree or Lockyer out of the side.

At the end of next year, we can then move O'Bree, Rocca, Presti and maybe Lockyer on but we can not do it all at once.

So you keep Rocca, who is a year older, cant get on the park increasingly moreso, and when he does, he produces one in every 5 games, MAYBE, and O'Bree, has has never been able to kick, is about as fast as a rusted car. For what purposes do these two serve anymore? Rocca is not going to develop anyone by playing inconsistant football, he most likely will keep dawes out, and he proabably will be even more prone to injury. Great player in his heyday, but that is well past. he is not doing our list development any good by taking up a spot on the list or a place on the ground.

O'Bree, well, he is pedestrian, and wont bust a game open, cant kick, is slow, he is no example to anyone but to players who know they are mediocre and live in hope no-one has recognised this.

Lockyer, I have more time for, he is fair disposal and next year, should be playing out of the back line, picking up the small forward, but definitely not in the middle.

Burns, well, I reckon he will go, but if he doesnt, he too is still of value as an inside player, but he wont be around for our next realistic tilt, which by the way will NOT be next year. So if the philosophy is to build for the next tilt, I'd quietly suggest he should perhaps retire and allow someone else the chance to prove themselves.

We dont have anywhere near the team structure or game plan to even think we can challenge Geelong or Hawthorn and maybe one or two others that will go ahead of us next year. Stop deluding yourselves that because we match up well against geelong that we are top 2 or 3. We are 6th, and next year, even with or without a lot of these players we will be around 8th.