Youth v Experience

[CaptainDangerfield]

Vader, I have no problem with our Big 4 playing on provided we were really a good chance at a flag this year. But with a 1-8 record against top 4 sides and no real intention to improve our list during trade week I'm not sure how we thought we were going to get better.

Would a good club like Geelong have given ageing stars another year knowing a premiership was unlikely or would they have looked to the future. You just need to look at Freo last week and Melbourne today to see what an inject of youth can bring to a club.io

BTW Are Collingwood the most protected ^&%^^^ club in the competition. Disgraceful umpiring.

 

[footy4ever]

Vader, I have no problem with our Big 4 playing on provided we were really a good chance at a flag this year. But with a 1-8 record against top 4 sides and no real intention to improve our list during trade week I'm not sure how we thought we were going to get better.

Would a good club like Geelong have given ageing stars another year knowing a premiership was unlikely or would they have looked to the future. You just need to look at Freo last week and Melbourne today to see what an inject of youth can bring to a club.io

BTW Are Collingwood the most protected ^&%^^^ club in the competition. Disgraceful umpiring.

And how would you have done this?
...Traded shirley for Judd and then swapped our first pick for Ablett?

 

[footy4ever]

(^^^^^^^)

Ps

yes collingwood are a protected species. Melbourne were shafted when it counted most

 

[amer]

Yeah CD, who should we have stitched up in the last trade period? Who was available that we could realistically have gotten?

 

[amer]

So sick of the bullshit written on here about how bad Reilly is. We have all this adoration for the young peerless stars coming thru - unfounded idolatry, and dismiss quality players like Reilly.

Reilly is NOT a quality player. He is a player who does not do what's required when the chips are down.

 

[Alex99]

Yeah CD, who should we have stitched up in the last trade period? Who was available that we could realistically have gotten?

we clearly have areas of weakness and hopefully Neil Craig has identified these areas and is continually doing something about fixing them. AFL clubs don't just 'wait and see' who's avaliable, they activilly seek out players to fix problem areas and then sell the club to that player to make a move. The club was working on Darren jarman for 5 or 6 months before the trade period. He didn't magically become avaliable.

We need to 'make' things happen in terms of players trades, not 'wait' for someone to become avaliable. However as Neil Craig doesn't rate the trade period, we won't 'make' something happen.

 

[amer]

We need to 'make' things happen in terms of players trades, not 'wait' for someone to become avaliable. However as Neil Craig doesn't rate the trade period, we won't 'make' something happen.

Can't really say this categorically. We don't know what goes on behind closed doors in terms of the trade process and directives from higher up. We get fed a nice stock-standard summation that Triggy scribbles onto a napkin the night before and passes to Craig, telling us only what they want us to hear; for all we know we're actually pretty active in putting the question to certain opposition personnel.

We've picked Symes and Moran up via trades; the latter was starting to show improvement leading up to his injury and gave us a 200cm presence in the middle; time will tell if he legitimately improves our list, and time will also tell if our list blueprint is more or less complete as the club seems to think.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

we clearly have areas of weakness and hopefully Neil Craig has identified these areas and is continually doing something about fixing them. AFL clubs don't just 'wait and see' who's avaliable, they activilly seek out players to fix problem areas and then sell the club to that player to make a move. The club was working on Darren jarman for 5 or 6 months before the trade period. He didn't magically become avaliable.

We need to 'make' things happen in terms of players trades, not 'wait' for someone to become avaliable. However as Neil Craig doesn't rate the trade period, we won't 'make' something happen.

Amazing when you think the coach has come out publically on numerous occasions and said he doesn't rate trade week (maybe because we always get shafted) yet people still think a good enough excuse for us sitting by meekly was because no one came knocking. What a crock.

Make no mistake about it, premierships have been built on sound trading. Just ask the AFC premiership sides of 97/98.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

(^^^^^^^)

Ps

yes collingwood are a protected species. Melbourne were shafted when it counted most

mate, i can't remember when I have a more one sided display of umpiring. It must be heart breaking to be a Melbourne supporter and lose like that.

 

[footy4ever]

Reilly is NOT a quality player. He is a player who does not do what's required when the chips are down.

You stick to your assessment, I'll stick to mine.

 

[Crow-mo]

Goodwin is not the penetrating, danger midfielder he was 4 or 5 years ago.

and still he wins our B&F last year, if he doesn't miss a couple of games. Without the 3 extra games, Bernie finishes 2nd.

 

[footy4ever]

You stick to your assessment, I'll stick to mine.

The stats had the frees about even, but there is no stat that reads

'bullshit free kicks/non free kicks, to ensure collingwood don't lose and eddie doesnt cry'

...and there is clearly a case for it to be included.

 

[Crow-mo]

To mention Reilly in the same sentence as Griffin was bad enough, but to suggest Reilly lacks intestinal fortitude is not on, absolute b/s!!!!!

Anyone that has played 120 games in the cauldron that is AFL football is definately no squib!!!!

leaving aside, the emotives of it all.

as a player, Reilly is a big disappointment. He has never taken the next step to being a genuinely useful player, and we've all had hopes for him at one point or another.

is he a scrub? probably not, as you say 120 games is fairly compelling. But all things considered, he has disappointed and he won't be hitting 200 for selection reasons.

 

[Geoffa32]

I dont see age being a problem. However when a player is old it is time to go. There is a difference.

For me Burton and Hentchel are in that catagory. The game, when it gets tough, has past both of them.

We saw last week in the first quarter how dangerous Macca is. He is still tagged, and still contributes. Edwards is probably as good as he ever was, ditto Dogga. I would say Goodwin has lost a yard and his decision making at times is not up the fast pace of AFL, but is not old, yet. But I dont think any of these guys are in our Premiership side of 20????


In two seasons time our oldest player could be Scott Stevens at 30.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

leaving aside, the emotives of it all.

as a player, Reilly is a big disappointment. He has never taken the next step to being a genuinely useful player, and we've all had hopes for him at one point or another.

is he a scrub? probably not, as you say 120 games is fairly compelling. But all things considered, he has disappointed and he won't be hitting 200 for selection reasons.

Reilly should now be one of the senior players leading the youngsters but he is really still a man without a position with minimal onfield presence. Not good for a guy who has been in the system for 9 years.

Question for you CM. Given our lack of depth and class in the midfield is time to move Goodwin permanently from the backline back into the midfield rotations? Yeah it would be nice allow Goody to maybe prolong his career in the backline but surely if we are to have an sort of chance this year it's more about going for broke and less about prolonging goodwins career.

 

[Crow-mo]

Question for you CM. Given our lack of depth and class in the midfield is time to move Goodwin permanently from the backline back into the midfield rotations? Yeah it would be nice allow Goody to maybe prolong his career in the backline but surely if we are to have an sort of chance this year it's more about going for broke and less about prolonging goodwins career.

if it were up to me? No. I don't move him.

firstly I don't think he can take the wear and tear of a full time midfield role, and he offers more value down back given our game plan relies so heavily in setting up, running it out of half back.

But just as importantly we need to see how many of our young guys can really step up, taking the prime moving roles in the middle. particularly when challenged, tagged, and the opposition is dominating. if we are going anywhere, they need to step up - and its not before time.

if they wilt, then we don't have it.

 

[Crow-mo]

as far as what Geelong has done, that's just a prime example of applying the "list cloggers" theory.
which is an idea or philosophy we clearly don't subscribe to.

I don't know if its right or not, but its not like our results are putting us out as league leading thinkers. which was certainly true in 2005/6 - now everyone else innovates, and we are slow and steady.