Your unpopular opinions about Collingwood? (pls respect folks' rights to their opinions)

[MeisterBot]

1. Fasolo is so over-rated
2. Langdon to play in the middle
3. Frost will be our best defender
4. Elliot to kick over 60

Agreed on 1 and especially 2.

I think Langdon will become our version of Burgoyne. Who knows if he'll be as good, but he has that air of being able to play anywhere to a high degree.

 

[Rustin Cohle]

Making Cloke the focal point of our forward line is the worst on-field decision Collingwood has made in the past decade.

 

[speedytiger]

I like watching footy at etihad

 

[Good_Old]

I like most of BBB's posts.

 

[wednesdaywarrior]

1. I find a percentage of our supporters disappointing when they express their frustration by bagging out and or bronxing our own players during the game. This suggests poor loyalty, fickleness, an ability to only express support when things are going well and makes a mockery of the line 'side by side'.

2. I am not class conscious and come from lowly stock but I secretly wish we had less tattoos and more university degrees. I was jealous when I read that Will Langford was seen reading a philosophy text.

3. I just don't believe in Seedsman.

 

[wednesdaywarrior]

PS would love to be proven wrong on 3

 

[Baird]

His ball use dwarfs every other elite mid other than Mitchell and maybe Watson, even this year which is widely discussed as one of his worst and Champion data still had him with a better rating than Ablett before he wen't down with injury, and they use an unbeleivably comprehensive system(Not supercoach) and the next behind the 2 of them(JPK) was

CD ranks Beams as the 106th best player in the comp

 

[Chilli Con Incarnate]

Scott Pendlebury is extremely overrated and inconsistent. His best is good enough to win games off his own boot, but he only plays that way two or three times a year.

 

[cakewalk_1]

5. Heritier Lumumba' speech at the Copelend Trophy night!

 

[jmac70]

Collingwood will make the semi-finals next season.

 

[BoxMatrix]

Making Cloke the focal point of our forward line is the worst on-field decision Collingwood has made in the past decade.

Having a focal point in the forward line has been the worst decision in the past decade apart from 2010. In 2010 Didak led the goalkicking with around 40 goals. And their were plenty of players with around the same total. Now our forward line relies solely on Cloke meaning we don't score as much.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I am so over the Side-by-Side slogan

 

[loki04]

I am so over the Side-by-Side slogan

Ditto.

 

[Prochard123]

JPK's girlfriend is hotter than Alex Davis

w0w

 

[Prochard123]

Minimum 10 players will be delisted again at the end of 2015.

You don't need to comment here, anything you say would be automatically classified as "unpopular"

 

[ThisIsJake]

CD ranks Beams as the 106th best player in the comp

For the player ratings system they take into account your last 40 games, and when he came back from injury last year he was getting good numbers but having not so much impact which probably took a hit on his ratings. He would probably be in th top bracket for this year alone.

 

[Gibbsy]

CD ranks Beams as the 106th best player in the comp

Champion Data predicted Sam Jacobs to come second in the Brownlow medal this year.

 

[mike123]

Tony Armstrong will be a gun and a great pick up.

Can't believe it took me to the third page to give Tony a mention in an unpopular opinion thread

 

[ThisIsJake]

Scott Pendlebury is extremely overrated and inconsistent. His best is good enough to win games off his own boot, but he only plays that way two or three times a year.

Really? even people who don't rate him can usually agree that he is consistent. It's why he came 1st in both the lou richards medal and the age player of the year by far, because they award a top 5 and it's extremely rare not to see him in the top 5 players on the ground.

 

[dirts]

Saw this on the Port board. Interesting thread. Here's a few of mine:

1. I thought Jesse White had a good year. Yes, he didnt he kick as many goals we would have liked, he was however very good around the ground and didn't get in Cloke's way all the time.

2. I don't mind Carlton. I really don't. They don't bother me at all. Hawthorn seems more like a rivalry to me.

3. I wanted Lumumba to stay. He provides that X factor that we need and his year was not as bad as people made it out to be.

Any other opinions?

On point 2 - Carlton are the embodiment of everything that is dark and evil in this world. Lest we forget.

My opinions that may rub against the grain;

1). The Seed - so far from the second coming. I just don't see it.
2). Elliot belongs in the front half - not a midfielder.
3). Sick of every young promising player we have being muted for the midfield (read Langdon, Elliott, Marley etc). Can't these guys just be outstanding in their positions?
4). Outside of Ben Hart - I don't rate our assistants.
5). I think Rodney Eade provides very limited value to our club and we only gave him the role we did to try and prove to the football world that the succession plan job for Mick was real.
6). The longer we go - the more I regret we agreed to Clokes contracts demand and our value for money.
7). Peddles has started dropping his knees when he is about to be tackled to get high contact frees and we all just pretend he hasn't started doing this cos we all hate Selwood so much.

Ahhh... Now that I have that off my chest, can't wait to see the Welcome Darcy Moore thread tomorrow.

 

[Markfs]

There's way too much idle chat about Collingwood..

 

[DuckToaster]

On point 2 - Carlton are the embodiment of everything that is dark and evil in this world. Lest we forget.

2). Elliot belongs in the front half - not a midfielder.

Disagree with Elliot. He is a midfielder and wants to play as a midfielder. I'd keep him forward for as long as possible but he is destined for midfield as his career progresses.

 

[Manic Magpie]

We won't win a premiership within whats left of my lifetime. We have neither the cattle nor the coach capable of leading us to the promised land. Collingwood are destined for a long spell in the lower half of the ladder.

 

[Knightmare]

Mine would be that Collingwood are letting veterans go too early and that the whole theory of getting guys to retire when their best 22 relevance ends is wrong as a construct is counterproductive to winning. Overall I don't agree with guys retiring on top. I'd instead be looking to get every last benefit out of every good veteran. The pay in the AFL is pretty good and guys generally enjoy playing and want to remain as long as they can in the game.

Collingwood see 30 as retirement age unless you're a star and that is normal across the industry and only those contenders tend to keep their veterans longer. I don't see a retirement age as relevant but for those wanting to quantify an approximate retirement age of around 33/34 is more what I would be looking at and longer if they're still productive or there is still a benefit for keeping them at the club.

I have no issue using veterans for 2-3 years at VFL level just as depth and to help the development of youth. Ball and Maxwell are perfect examples. Both are incredible leaders and having them around the club greatly fast-tracks the development of the youth. Even if Maxwell can only play five games and is not best 22 quality that wouldn't concern me. He is someone who can help young players develop, though next year in the absence of Scharenberg I would contend that Maxwell would still be a best 22 player if healthy. Ball similarly would also with Beams leaving without question be best 22 quality next year but I would have looked even beyond 2015 with him and looked into 2016 and possibly 2017 even if he is just insurance with his leadership value and ability to help the youth develop tremendously beneficial.

Didak, Krakouer and Jolly last year I also would have retained. With Didak and Krakouer, I don't believe in sleeping on 31 year olds. 31 year olds often have better seasons than 30 or 29 year olds. At advanced footballing ages there is typically a high randomness relating to yearly performance with much of that relating to the heightened incidence of injury but even so at that age it is entirely possible that either of Didak or Krakouer if not both could have had best 22 quality seasons. Additionally all three from a leadership standpoint, clash or no clash with Nathan would have helped the development of our youth accelerate further. All three had ambition to continue playing and with that desire still there to play they would all still at minimum fill the depth requirements at their various positions while still helping the young players develop.

Within this construct I would also suggest that recruiting depth is unnecessary and that veterans and developing players should make up that depth with early-mid career guys who are not and do not project to become best 22 players the ones that should go. If it is an established veteran though, that I would be open to.

--
This post goes in the unpopular opinions section mostly because I imagine most would disagree with my what would be extreme view compared to the views of most within the industry.

In saying that do you research on the historical production of 31 year olds at AFL level compared to the other years in their careers. Look at the AFL and the average list ages of those winning teams. Look at other sports and see the benefits veteran leadership has on development and winning - it also clearly exists in the AFL with Sydney, Hawthorn and Geelong prime examples of this as well as ourselves up to this point with some of the quality veterans we have had on our list.

I see seen strong enough correlations in the AFL and abroad in other sports to have over time developed this strong belief.

 

[good4footy]

The club has a better idea about 'things' than people on this board.


Edit - this was not in response to the post above.