Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #376
No Cloke just ahead. Was a strong partnership that year and part of a team that had a few avenues. Most finals teams have a bigger goalkicker though.
Autopsy Why don't Collingwood have better key forwards?
- Thread starter Sweet Jesus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #377
That probably only works if you have a gun KPF who is prepared to do the hard work. Reiwoldts role in the flag and even his career is greatly underplayed for mine. He has averaged 60goals a year for 8 seasons in a row now, elite performance. He was the key to that forward line working not the little players. Not many teams have a Jack Reiwoldt. At Pies we don't.
Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #378
I am tending to agree with you. We lack A grade talent. I have looked at all the finals sides since 2010 and its rare to make the 8 without someone kicking >40 goals for the year. Usually you need at least one well over 40 or at a pinch multiple kickers over 40 for the season. Every finals side in 2017 had that and only 3 who didn't make the finals did have that goal kicker. Brown NM, Lynch GC and Garlett Melb. Matches up very similarly each season.
Coming into 2016 it was the biggest reason I thought we would struggle to make the finals. I think we will struggle again as the only one who looks a real chance to kick 40 or more is Elliott and thats only a chance. Its a combination of a lack of quality forward and our poor footskills and inside 50s that puts us in this position. At the end of the day the list lacks top end class which is why we are in this position and it will probably be a little while before we see real improvement in the list to where it is a realistic finals chance.
- Apr 26, 2011
- 10,430
- 12,338
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Wimbledon AFC
Because they recruited mayne
Doesn't that hurt your argument?
Neither of those two would be considered good tall forwards, yet with a dominant midfield feeding them the ball they were effective. A bloke like Reid could kick 40-50 if our midfield clicks and he gets a full season as the key target.
But if the ball isn't coming down their with any fluency, it will give the forwards no chance.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #382
No.
The two teams that won premierships in 2006 and 2007 were not examples of teams with no key forwards. They both had a guy who kicked 60+ goals. Do Collingwood have such a player?
The point is it's still handy to have a tall forward kicking 60 goals, regardless of whether you consider them a "good tall forward". It's unclear whether Collingwood have a player who can do that.
You say Reid could kick 50 goals in a season. That remains to be seen. If he did, I think Collingwoood would be a lock to play finals.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #383
People are quick to embrace magic rules, aren't they?
Richmond won with just Riewoldt as their tall forward so now that's the only way to win a flag?
With the present game style? You mean "the way Richmond played"?
That doesn't suddenly become the template for the whole competition. Adelaide were the best side in the competition all year with a tall forwardline. They fell over on GF day but that doesn't turn the universe on its ear. They were still very effective for 24 weeks out of 25.
That said, of course you want everyone applying pressure in the F50. That reflects the changing demands of tall forwards, not that they are now somehow obsolete. This big kneejerk reaction will last until midway through 2018 and then whoever is leading the pack at that point, that will become the new template. All it proves is that there's more than one way to skin a cat.
Q-Stick with a dominant midfield had a couple of 50 goal seasons
Q-Stick without a dominant midfield was barely able to crack 30 and looked bog ordinary half the time.
The important part is having the strong midfield that control the game and put it to the advantage of the forwards, if you do that bog average like Jack Anthony and Q-Stick can be 50 goal forwards.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #385
If you're referring to when he played for Collingwood, I'd suggest he was over the hill by then.
Regardless, my point stands. Both WC and Geelong had key forwards who had good seasons in those premiership years. I doubt WC would have won the flag in 2006 without Lynch's contribution.
So Collingwood should have no problems. They can just stick Mason Cox in the goal square and everything will be dandy.
Who needs a key forward?
Last edited:
Snake_Baker
The one true King of the North
- Apr 24, 2013
- 81,024
- 153,169
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Essendon Lawn Bowls Club
- Banned
- #386
Who needs players when you have Nathan Buckley?
How much Collingwood money has Eddie forked out to get his mate a flag so far?
Half a Billion?
How much Collingwood money has Eddie forked out to get his mate a flag so far?
Half a Billion?
No, Q-Stick barely avg more than a goal a game for West Coast if you take away his two good seasons when you were flying.
You don't need a gun KPF to be a strong team, if you have a strong midfield then a serviceable player can do the job.
It is more important to get the midfield scoring and putting the ball to the advantage of what forwards you do have.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #388
Sure, in a variety of roles. He played in defence at one point and became a back-up ruck when we unravelled.
As I said, I doubt WC would have won the flag in 2006 without Lynch's contribution. That was perhaps the biggest improvement from 2005 to 2006. He was an important player. He kicked three goals out of 12 in the GF. Two more came from Hansen at CHF. We definitely don't win without those guys, Lynch in particular.
So if Collingwood can't do that, having stacked the midfield, wouldn't that be an even more galling failure?
If you reckon you don't even need a genuine key forward, there can be no excuses. Because the midfield is one of the better ones going around.
Last edited:
Josh kennedy says hi
Pies midfield reads well, but hasn't been functioning well as a team.
When we were a great team in 10-11, we had Didak, Swan, Pendles, Sidey, Beams, Jolly as mids who would get 20 or 30 goals.
Now we have no mids who do this.
Pendles and Sidey don't impact the scoreboard anymore, Adams n Grundy don't score and Treloar blazes away more often than not. Mids rack up the ball, but not hurting teams.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #391
As I said, there can be no excuses given the extent to which recruiting has prioritised the midfield.
I tend to think Collingwood won't improve significantly until something changes or clicks with the forward six.
But if your view is that you don't really need a genuine key forward, then Collingwood should be better than they have been.
As long as they can kick it to the cardboard cut-out you've picked at FF, what's the problem?
The problem is the mids can't or don't kick it to the advantage of the cardboard cut out, and the cardboard cutouts we have are as fragile as feck so are normally being repaired anyway.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #393
Ok, you've said that. My point is that you've bent over backwards to stack the midfield. If the midfield can't do its job, then isn't that worse than simply not having a gun key forward?
If recruiting midfielders has been the focus, and it's still not up to scratch, then that's an even more acute failure.
Also, no serious attempt has been made to replace or upgrade the cardboard cut-outs in attack, so that's a problem too, no?
The other half was probably raised towards your team so you could stay alive
Hey GC, with all due respect I'd argue our development has been near if not the worst in the comp the last 3-4 years and I'd argue also that is the major factor of where we are for a number of reasons. IMO the list talent wise has the potential to be as good as a tigers or dogs list even if slightly unbalanced, it won't be no gws or adelaide but I certainly wouldn't paint a picture of "no hope" as it seems you feel it is
In simple terms you could ask this question, but it's probably a case of terribly poor development as opposed to whether or not we have a good forward. IMO Moore should be a good KP forward but he's up against it considering the delivery I50 which turns out to be a rebounding goal the other way any way, no one can argue the coaching / development has been anywhere near "good"; it has been deplorable for the last 3-4 years. IMO that's why where we are at, I'd argue the bulk of the list has potential that frustratingly has not reached it because of the lack of good development. If that are improves then you'll see our good forward
Snake_Baker
The one true King of the North
- Apr 24, 2013
- 81,024
- 153,169
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Essendon Lawn Bowls Club
- Banned
- #398
The other half was probably raised towards your team so you could stay alive
That's about 20 years of our budget,
I'm just wondering how much longer you lot are going to put up with this crap.
Aren't you sick of your club being a rich blokes play thing for him and his mates?
Snake_Baker
The one true King of the North
- Apr 24, 2013
- 81,024
- 153,169
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Essendon Lawn Bowls Club
- Banned
- #399
Gone Critical
Moderator
- Moderator
- #400
I wouldn't say no hope. If things click for us in 2018 we could sneak a spot in the 8 but overall I would judge the talent on our list being in the bottom half of the competition. I think both the Dogs and the Tigers are clearly more talented top end although the Dogs seem unsettled as a club. That's no surprise given they are recent flag teams. Agree development has not been great and it's common each year for a team or two to make a big jump up the ladder. Hopefully that's us but I like the look of a few other lists being more likely than us. Demons, Saints and I suspect Carlton have better developing lists, feel sick for saying the Blues. Likely to be ahead of us in the next few seasons would be my guess.
