2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

[Tio_Ray]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by robbieando
Tio Ray

Grayham has a very valid point. While I admit Eddie has done a fanastic with Collingwood and he can't be faulted with the way he turned the club around - he can't rest on what he has done so far. He has to keep improving Collingwood to that next level. It might seem simple to you, but it is anything but.

First of all - all Collingwood fans love him for what he has done. He pretty much has run of the place for as long a he wants, no one will challenge him because they know they will lose by a large margin. So for the next 5 years at least he won't be challenged maybe even more. So to keep improving the club might not become his greatest focus knowing he can't be knocked from power because he is so popular. Simular happened with Big Jack at Carlton - look at how much he was loved 3 years ago.

All I'm saying is be careful and don't let Eddie rest easy because once he does, all the good work he has done so far might be worth nothing the day he finally leaves Collingwood and there is no way to say your next president will do a simular job to what Eddie has done. Work much be undertaken for not only this year, but also 10 years down the track.

Thanks for the basics kid.....Look robbieando...please listen to me, this is a free taste of what its like to follow the Mega club that Collingwood is...Eddie Mcguire is bigger than Elvis ok, he gets more exposure in Australias media than Jonny Howard and President Bush combined. We of the Magpie Army don't have to even read or hear the news to know what Eddie is doing....we have all you other club supporters that will tell us what he is doing...its like you all collectively died and went to," Magpie and Eddie Mcguire News telling Hell"

The day Eddie does anything bad towards Collingwood I'm sure Grayham will be the first to tell us all about it...hehehehehehehe..so no need for you to worry about collingwoods culture of success anymore...we will still have the best club president for sometime more...feel free to pass on my email your own club president....I'll see if Eddie is willing to give him some tips.

By the way...when Eddie is crowned Emporer of the known free footy world and takes up residence in the new summer palace he is having built in the new MCG Stadium (the Winter palace being Olympic Park) .... I shall have him thankyou for caring so very very much...always nice hearing from the little people.

Love,

Tio_Ray.

 

[Mcchawk]

Originally posted by JUBJUB
Stop ya bitching and just post your own thoughts on Hawthorn.

I don't own a handbag unlike some

 

[Mcchawk]

Originally posted by ScouseCat
Geelong were 5th after round 16 last year don't forget. Our kids are a year older, more developed and a year more experienced. There's no reason why Geelong couldn't be somewhere around that position this year providing they don't get too many injuries and they can sustain their form.... something we've not done in the previous couple of seasons.

No chance 6th at best

 

[ScouseCat]

Originally posted by Mcchawk
No chance 6th at best

Fair enough mate but how about doing one for your own club??

 

[Mcchawk]

Originally posted by ScouseCat
Fair enough mate but how about doing one for your own club??

Can't be stuffed but i think we'll finish no higher than 5th

 

[St-KriS]

Final Ladder Position? 7th
Best & Fairest? Lenny Hayes
Leading Goalkicker? Steven Milne - 61
Most Improved? Nick Dal Santo
Most Votes in Brownlow? Nick Riewoldt

Biggest talking point as far as your club is concerned?
St Kilda's young team actually lives up to it's potiental

Name 3 players to watch out for? Nick Dal Santo, Xavier Clarke & Leigh Montagna

Biggest strength of your team? Forward/Defence/Midfield Midfield

If you were to be assured of beating ONE team, who would that be?
Essendon because it'll let the competetion know that St Kilda will NOT be easy beats this year

Most memorable win? a 100 point thrashing of Carlton has St Kilda fans delirious

What will your team be known for the most in 2003? A great mildfield and aggressive tackling.

In 15 words or less, describe your coach?
Grant Thomas - Unproven, this is his year to prove his worth

 

[JUBJUB]

Originally posted by Mcchawk
I don't own a handbag unlike some

I thought you would've run of crying to AFLHQ like the other Hawk sooks,Hitman & Moccasin.

 

[Damp Squarie]

ADELAIDE FOOTBALL CLUB

Final Ladder Position? 3rd

Best & Fairest? Tyson Edwards

Leading Goalkicker? Wayne Carey & Ronnie Burns (draw)

Most Improved? Ken McGregor

Most Votes in Brownlow? Rhett Biglands

Biggest talking point as far as your club is concerned?
The Crows post thier longest winning streak

Name 3 players to watch out for?
Brent Rielly, Ben Rutten and Trent Hentschel

Biggest strength of your team?
Depth

If you were to be assured of beating ONE team, who would that be?
West Coast

Most memorable win?
Norf in a high scoring thriller at Telstra Dome.- Carey BOG

What will your team be known for the most in 2003?
Lucky bastard$

In 15 words or less, describe your coach?
Gary Ayres- Good Record - has every confidence in his players & vice versa

 

[Mcchawk]

Originally posted by JUBJUB
I thought you would've run of crying to AFLHQ like the other Hawk sooks,Hitman & Moccasin.

Jub Jub bit of a generalisation?

 

[MarkT]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by grayham
Ok, just for you, the 100th time. Blind faith in anyone is a fools paradice.

I have no argument in principle that blind faith is foolish. I would go further and say it is downright dangerous. You make a leap, though, to assume the Collingwood members have this blind faith. Presumably you base that on the level of support Eddie receives from Collingwood supporters. Apart from there being a distinction between supporters and members relating predominantly to their level of involvement in the club and familiarity with relevant club issues (generalisation), I would argue that the high level of support is neither universal nor blind. The basic reality is that Eddie has done a great job for our club. He has received due recognition for what he has actually done. Not what he said he will do or what he may do but what he has achieved by his own efforts. It is more than just the on field results and the financial aspect too. It is also the philosophical aspect – i.e., what our club means to us and what it represents. That is something that had gone astray over the years. It is also a clear point of distinction in the direction of Collingwood under Eddie and, say, Carlton under Elliot.

Originally posted by grayham
Eddie may be there for a long time, as any sort of challanger wouldnt stand a chance.

I suspect you are right. I also think you have misunderstood or misrepresented the reasons. No challenger stands a chance at present because there is little probability that another candidate could demonstrate they could do a better job for Collingwood. The fact is, the runs have been put on the board. That always makes it hard to dislodge an incumbent.

Originally posted by grayham
Therefore Eddie can do as he pleases. There has been a similar situation at Carlton and look at them now.

Another leap. Eddie can not do as he pleases. Just because he has done a great job to date and enjoyed deserved support for what he has done, does not mean he can do as he pleases. He has to keep getting results. You seem to know little of Collingwood’s history, particularly its recent turbulent boardroom history. Challenges had been thick on the ground and the election battles have been bloody. The recent Carlton fiasco is merely a poor imitation of some recent Collingwood battles. McAllister was given too long I will admit. In hindsight he should have gone sooner but he was the incumbent when the drought was broken and received the reflected glory associated with that.

There has not been a similar situation at Carlton at all. You have nothing to base that on whatsoever. The Carlton version of democracy and the Collingwood one are poles apart. The Carlton philosophy and the Collingwood one are similarly divergent. Most important, there has been absolutely no evidence to suggest the sort of issues that ripped Carlton apart are present at Collingwood, whereas that could not have been said of Carlton over the last 20 years. You cannot use an example like that without drawing any parallel Grayham. You are drawing from an example of a club controlled by one man under a different electoral system, with a different philosophical outlook which has long shown it’s hand and been known to have operated in the manner i8n which it was finally “convicted”. It supports your original assertion about incumbents being unquestioned but to assume Eddie is Jack and/or Collingwood are Carlton is simply unsupportable. It is no more likely than Collis and Sydney being akin to Elliot and Carlton.

Originally posted by grayham
As in all governance, having a strong opposition is the best position for an entity to be in.

I agree in principle. What do you know of opposition at Collingwood? History says they have actually had too much opposition in the past with various ego driven candidates ripping the club apart to gain power. The first thing that struck me about Eddie’s presidency was the manner in which he won control and the inclusiveness of the new board.

In spite or your assertion, Eddie does not enjoy universal support, not is his every move greeted with rapturous applause. FWIW I am critical of some of the recruiting decision, notably any attempt to lure Carey and the failure to get a ruckman in two pre seasons. More important from a direct involvement perspective, I think he handled the Nick avis saga poorly. I have said that here and more so on a Collingwood board. There have been other things I and other have not agreed with. That’s life. I look at the whole and say Eddie has been fantastic for Collingwood. I really couldn’t care less about anything he does for football or for/to any other club. IMO he is good for football but if you disagree then I don’t care.

You and other misread much of the Eddie defense from Collingwood supporters. Eddie is attacked for farting in public on forums such as this and accused of all sorts of things without substantiation by the likes of yourself. I often defend him as do other Collingwood supporters and some non Collingwood supporters. That is not blind faith. That is the Collingwood way. We don’t let our own become the targets of uninformed slander without standing up for them. Eddie hardly needs my words for defense or justification but he represents my club so I will continue to stand up for him when people like yourself have a crack at him despite having little understanding of the issues and/or having questionable motivation. Eddie bashing is a bit like Collingwood bashing. It’s a pass time for some people and a lifestyle for others. That’s all part of the deal and Collingwood people wouldn’t have it any other way.

Originally posted by grayham
I know this will fly over your head, so don’t bother replying unless you have something other than personal insults to trade, or diversionary tactics.

I leave those tactics to you Grayham. Think what you like about me, but I am more than comfortable to stand on my personal insult or diversionary tactic record here. These are in fact precisely the reasons I read little of what you write these days. I always attempt to justify my views. Right or wrong I stand by what I say and I am willing to intelligently debate the issues.

 

[grayham]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

You have wasted a lot of typing time here to present only a few points. Eddie has taught you well. Smoke and mirrors are a good defense.

The distinction between collingwood supporters and members is very minor indeed, since membership is a complete subset of supporters. There is at least a majority of members who support Eddie without looking at the bigger picture. That you may disagree with, but thats really splitting hairs.
All Eddie needs to survive is that majority of blind faith. Through his media exposure he can maintain at least a high percentage of that group. No challanger is going to have the media exposure of Eddie so can never hope to debate in a public forum. Its obvious to outsiders how Eddie manipulates facts to his (and collingwoods advantage), and the same could be expected in internal politics.

If you think McAlister was hard to move, then Eddie would be even harder for the above reasons if he led them into the same predicament. Collingwood are essentially a conservative club, as most traditional clubs are.

It would pay for Collingwood folk like yourself to take on board some of the views of outsiders like myself and many others. We are not here to make your life a misery, although when your head swells it is obviously our duty to knock it down a little. We can see what is going on without the blinkers of your recent successful climb up the ladder.
Lilke it or not, Eddie is a major factor in AFL football. His influence greatly exceeds just his own club. For that he must take some responsibility. It is naive to suggest he should only be concerned about Collingwood. Hopefully he will grow into that role, but as yet he is barely realised there is anything outside victoria.

At present he has enormous power and little responsibility. A dangerous mix. The football equivalent of George dubya, where America=collingwood. Only answerable to america, but directly influences the world.

Originally posted by MarkT
I have no argument in principle that blind faith is foolish. I would go further and say it is downright dangerous. You make a leap, though, to assume the Collingwood members have this blind faith. Presumably you base that on the level of support Eddie receives from Collingwood supporters. Apart from there being a distinction between supporters and members relating predominantly to their level of involvement in the club and familiarity with relevant club issues (generalisation), I would argue that the high level of support is neither universal nor blind. The basic reality is that Eddie has done a great job for our club. He has received due recognition for what he has actually done. Not what he said he will do or what he may do but what he has achieved by his own efforts. It is more than just the on field results and the financial aspect too. It is also the philosophical aspect – i.e., what our club means to us and what it represents. That is something that had gone astray over the years. It is also a clear point of distinction in the direction of Collingwood under Eddie and, say, Carlton under Elliot.

I suspect you are right. I also think you have misunderstood or misrepresented the reasons. No challenger stands a chance at present because there is little probability that another candidate could demonstrate they could do a better job for Collingwood. The fact is, the runs have been put on the board. That always makes it hard to dislodge an incumbent.

Another leap. Eddie can not do as he pleases. Just because he has done a great job to date and enjoyed deserved support for what he has done, does not mean he can do as he pleases. He has to keep getting results. You seem to know little of Collingwood’s history, particularly its recent turbulent boardroom history. Challenges had been thick on the ground and the election battles have been bloody. The recent Carlton fiasco is merely a poor imitation of some recent Collingwood battles. McAllister was given too long I will admit. In hindsight he should have gone sooner but he was the incumbent when the drought was broken and received the reflected glory associated with that.

There has not been a similar situation at Carlton at all. You have nothing to base that on whatsoever. The Carlton version of democracy and the Collingwood one are poles apart. The Carlton philosophy and the Collingwood one are similarly divergent. Most important, there has been absolutely no evidence to suggest the sort of issues that ripped Carlton apart are present at Collingwood, whereas that could not have been said of Carlton over the last 20 years. You cannot use an example like that without drawing any parallel Grayham. You are drawing from an example of a club controlled by one man under a different electoral system, with a different philosophical outlook which has long shown it’s hand and been known to have operated in the manner i8n which it was finally “convicted”. It supports your original assertion about incumbents being unquestioned but to assume Eddie is Jack and/or Collingwood are Carlton is simply unsupportable. It is no more likely than Collis and Sydney being akin to Elliot and Carlton.

I agree in principle. What do you know of opposition at Collingwood? History says they have actually had too much opposition in the past with various ego driven candidates ripping the club apart to gain power. The first thing that struck me about Eddie’s presidency was the manner in which he won control and the inclusiveness of the new board.

In spite or your assertion, Eddie does not enjoy universal support, not is his every move greeted with rapturous applause. FWIW I am critical of some of the recruiting decision, notably any attempt to lure Carey and the failure to get a ruckman in two pre seasons. More important from a direct involvement perspective, I think he handled the Nick avis saga poorly. I have said that here and more so on a Collingwood board. There have been other things I and other have not agreed with. That’s life. I look at the whole and say Eddie has been fantastic for Collingwood. I really couldn’t care less about anything he does for football or for/to any other club. IMO he is good for football but if you disagree then I don’t care.

You and other misread much of the Eddie defense from Collingwood supporters. Eddie is attacked for farting in public on forums such as this and accused of all sorts of things without substantiation by the likes of yourself. I often defend him as do other Collingwood supporters and some non Collingwood supporters. That is not blind faith. That is the Collingwood way. We don’t let our own become the targets of uninformed slander without standing up for them. Eddie hardly needs my words for defense or justification but he represents my club so I will continue to stand up for him when people like yourself have a crack at him despite having little understanding of the issues and/or having questionable motivation. Eddie bashing is a bit like Collingwood bashing. It’s a pass time for some people and a lifestyle for others. That’s all part of the deal and Collingwood people wouldn’t have it any other way.

I leave those tactics to you Grayham. Think what you like about me, but I am more than comfortable to stand on my personal insult or diversionary tactic record here. These are in fact precisely the reasons I read little of what you write these days. I always attempt to justify my views. Right or wrong I stand by what I say and I am willing to intelligently debate the issues.

 

[jefffff34]

Originally posted by ScouseCat
If you were to be assured of beating ONE team, who would that be?
Collingwood - we play them twice, always great to beat the Carring Bush!!

Small things please small minds...... but anyway.......

Collingwood

Final Ladder Position? 1st
Best & Fairest? Shane O'Bree
Leading Goalkicker? Chris Tarrant
Most Improved? Richard Cole
Most Votes in Brownlow? Nathan Buckley

Biggest talking point as far as your club is concerned?
Winning the Grand Final

Name 3 players to watch out for?
Rhyce Shaw (I dunno why, might get a couple of votes in the VFL), Richard Cole, Justin Crow

Biggest strength of your team? Forward/Defence/Midfield Even side

If you were to be assured of beating ONE team, who would that be?
Fremantle - play them in Melbourne

Most memorable win?
2003 Grand Final

What will your team be known for the most in 2003?
Being the premiers

In 15 words or less, describe your coach?
Master of September

 

[snakebite01]

Adelaide

Final Ladder Position 2nd (after minor round)
Best & Fairest Mark Riccuito
Leading Goalkicker Wayne Carey
Most Improved Matthew Bode
Most Votes In Brownlow Mark Riccuito

Biggest Talking Point Adelaide play the Prelim in Melbourne after finishing 2nd due to Brisbane finishing 1st

3 Players to watch out for Brent Reilly, Martin mattner, Ben Rutten

Biggest Strength Midfield

One team assured of beating Richmond

Most memorable win Port Adelaide in R5 to beat them for the first time for points in 6 appearances and to start the season with a clean 5-0 record.

What will your team be known for most in 2003? Our ability to finsih teams off in the final quarter.

In 15 words or less, describe your coach Honest, loves it tough, holds a lot of respect from players.

 

[FIGJAM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by grayham
At present he has enormous power and little responsibility. A dangerous mix. The football equivalent of George dubya, where America=collingwood. Only answerable to america, but directly influences the world.

Yeah, but the AFL aren't soft****s like the UN!

 

[ScouseCat]

Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by Hoggy
Small things please small minds...... but anyway.......

I'll have to take your word for that Hoggy.

 

[jefffff34]

Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by ScouseCat
I'll have to take your word for that Hoggy.

Good.

 

[MarkT]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by grayham
You have wasted a lot of typing time here to present only a few points. Eddie has taught you well. Smoke and mirrors are a good defense.

Just adressing your few point Grayham. I see you started where you left off - nowhere.

Originally posted by grayham
The distinction between collingwood supporters and members is very minor indeed, since membership is a complete subset of supporters. There is at least a majority of members who support Eddie without looking at the bigger picture. That you may disagree with, but thats really splitting hairs.

It's not a big issue but how would you know?
Even if Eddie is supported without question, what has he done or not done to justify otherwise? The truth is nothing and therefore there is no evil save for your assumption that he is inherently a bad person who will do untold evil to Collingwood or the world because he has somehow brainwashed people to blindly follow him. All of this James Bond stuff is pretty amusing but baseless.

The fact is, Eddie has great support among Collingwood people because he is a passionate Collingwood supporter who stepped up to be counted and succeeded. It really is that simple Grayham.

Originally posted by grayham
All Eddie needs to survive is that majority of blind faith.

All Eddie needs to survive in his role as Collingwood president is continued motivation on his part and continued success in his role as well as the lack of a better alternative. It really is that simple Grayham.

Originally posted by grayham
Through his media exposure he can maintain at least a high percentage of that group. No challanger is going to have the media exposure of Eddie so can never hope to debate in a public forum. Its obvious to outsiders how Eddie manipulates facts to his (and collingwoods advantage), and the same could be expected in internal politics.

The media exposure is a clear advantage for Eddie and Collingwood. I have never said any different. You make the leap to translate that into something detrimental whereas I say it is all dependant on how it is used. Irrespective of how it is used, though, is the bigger issue here which is your assumption that having the media exposure is inherently a bad thing. It is no more a bad thing in a football context than being an ex AFL official or captain of industry which carry their own advantages.

As far as using the media in elections, from a personal perspective, I would be against airing the dirty laundry in public and would therefore tend to go against someone who I felt was doing that. The point I made about Eddie reign to date though, is that there has been a clear lack of political blood letting, contrary to our post 1958 history.

In any event, I go back to the same point. Just because Eddie is a media personality, it does not follow he will use his powers for evil instead of niceness. Get Smart was just American television.

Just like everyone else Eddie presents his side of any story more vigorously than any contrary view. There is nothing startling in that. Manipulation of facts to prove your point? Well here we are doing just that with each other on a forum where 99% of what is said does the same. Yeh it happens. Is it a capital offense? I bloody hope not.

In the end people have to be discerning consumers, listeners, watchers and everything elsers.

Originally posted by grayham
If you think McAlister was hard to move, then Eddie would be even harder for the above reasons if he led them into the same predicament. Collingwood are essentially a conservative club, as most traditional clubs are.

There was no problem moving Big Al at all. Not sure about the conservative tag but it depends on what your reference frame is I guess. Throughout its history Collingwood would have been as innovative as any football club and a lot more so than most. It is fair to say that post 1958 Collingwood forgot what made it great to an extent and among other things, lost some of it innovative nature. Politically Collingwood have been far from conservative. Historically some catholic influence may have trended toward conservatism. I don't see any relevance though to the di9scussion about Eddie inherent evil nature and his bent for taking over the world via the Collingwood presidency.

Originally posted by grayham
It would pay for Collingwood folk like yourself to take on board some of the views of outsiders like myself and many others. We are not here to make your life a misery, although when your head swells it is obviously our duty to knock it down a little. We can see what is going on without the blinkers of your recent successful climb up the ladder.

Grayham, I listen to many views on all sorts of topics from world events to football issues. I am discerning about what information I accept and I general am a skeptical person. I am under no illusions about Eddie or Collingwood. In the name of rivalry I may appear to have a swelled Collingwood head but I am a realist by nature. To that extent I do not accept many of the premises which underline your views expressed on this matter. That does not make me blind to anything. On the contrary it is you who I se as unable to accept anything but a predisposed viewpoint. FWIW I still don't see what it is you can see going on and what our recent climb up the ladder is masking.

Originally posted by grayham
Lilke it or not, Eddie is a major factor in AFL football. His influence greatly exceeds just his own club. For that he must take some responsibility. It is naive to suggest he should only be concerned about Collingwood. Hopefully he will grow into that role, but as yet he is barely realised there is anything outside victoria.

Eddie has little or no responsibility to you as a football supporter. He has a responsibility to Collingwood as an elected official. He has a responsibility to his employers who are numerous but do not include the AFL. He has the same responsibility to the AFL as any other club president via his clubs licensee status in the AFL. Being in the media has, in the eyes of some, responsibility. To whatever extent that is true he has that responsibility. He has no responsibility to act for the good of football, although I strongly disagree that he acts to the detriment of football in practice. I do not believe he is or should be only concerned with Collingwood. That is unrealistic. He most certainly should be Collingwood first though from my perspective because I have the ability, in theory at least, to remove him from his position of responsibility at my/our club.

All this crap about equal time for other clubs and the greater glory of the competition is just that though. No person has to devote equal time to all clubs in the media. There is an expectation of a level of unbiased coverage from the general public. That expectation is not necessarily based on anything tangible or realistic but it exists nonetheless. This expectation is clearly not made of Eddie as an overtly Collingwood person and certainly would be unexpected based on his even greater demonstrable Collingwoodness since becoming President. In other words, you know what you get so make your choice.

FWIW I like it that Eddie is a major factor in AFL football. I mostly like it because it benefits Collingwood. I make no bones about that.

Originally posted by grayham
At present he has enormous power and little responsibility. A dangerous mix. The football equivalent of George dubya, where America=collingwood. Only answerable to america, but directly influences the world.

Once again you use analogies that prove nothing. You could compare him to Stalin, Hitler or Pat cash and it would be just as irrelevant. For a start the level of Power is not equivalent, the demonstrated behavior is different but most of all the AFL can directly control clubs and have a license agreement which is their big stick. What is you think Collingwood has done exactly that equates it with America? Is it because they or Eddie do not agree the Swans should have a salary cap concession AND Zone concessions? Are there other issues you mistakenly think Eddie has single handedly controlled?

 

[grayham]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

By reading that, you are as blind and blinkered as Rohan. And this essentially is the problem because of the power and lack of accountability it gives the ambitious Eddie McGuire.

And as usual you are on the diversion. Whatever you think of me or the swans, has zero to do with this debate.

To reply in depth would just be to rehash what I have already said. You are closed to anyone elses view when it comes to Eddie Mcguire, so there is little point. Why dont you stay on Nicks board?

Originally posted by MarkT
Just adressing your few point Grayham. I see you started where you left off - nowhere.

It's not a big issue but how would you know?
Even if Eddie is supported without question, what has he done or not done to justify otherwise? The truth is nothing and therefore there is no evil save for your assumption that he is inherently a bad person who will do untold evil to Collingwood or the world because he has somehow brainwashed people to blindly follow him. All of this James Bond stuff is pretty amusing but baseless.

The fact is, Eddie has great support among Collingwood people because he is a passionate Collingwood supporter who stepped up to be counted and succeeded. It really is that simple Grayham.

All Eddie needs to survive in his role as Collingwood president is continued motivation on his part and continued success in his role as well as the lack of a better alternative. It really is that simple Grayham.

The media exposure is a clear advantage for Eddie and Collingwood. I have never said any different. You make the leap to translate that into something detrimental whereas I say it is all dependant on how it is used. Irrespective of how it is used, though, is the bigger issue here which is your assumption that having the media exposure is inherently a bad thing. It is no more a bad thing in a football context than being an ex AFL official or captain of industry which carry their own advantages.

As far as using the media in elections, from a personal perspective, I would be against airing the dirty laundry in public and would therefore tend to go against someone who I felt was doing that. The point I made about Eddie reign to date though, is that there has been a clear lack of political blood letting, contrary to our post 1958 history.

In any event, I go back to the same point. Just because Eddie is a media personality, it does not follow he will use his powers for evil instead of niceness. Get Smart was just American television.

Just like everyone else Eddie presents his side of any story more vigorously than any contrary view. There is nothing startling in that. Manipulation of facts to prove your point? Well here we are doing just that with each other on a forum where 99% of what is said does the same. Yeh it happens. Is it a capital offense? I bloody hope not.

In the end people have to be discerning consumers, listeners, watchers and everything elsers.

There was no problem moving Big Al at all. Not sure about the conservative tag but it depends on what your reference frame is I guess. Throughout its history Collingwood would have been as innovative as any football club and a lot more so than most. It is fair to say that post 1958 Collingwood forgot what made it great to an extent and among other things, lost some of it innovative nature. Politically Collingwood have been far from conservative. Historically some catholic influence may have trended toward conservatism. I don't see any relevance though to the di9scussion about Eddie inherent evil nature and his bent for taking over the world via the Collingwood presidency.

Grayham, I listen to many views on all sorts of topics from world events to football issues. I am discerning about what information I accept and I general am a skeptical person. I am under no illusions about Eddie or Collingwood. In the name of rivalry I may appear to have a swelled Collingwood head but I am a realist by nature. To that extent I do not accept many of the premises which underline your views expressed on this matter. That does not make me blind to anything. On the contrary it is you who I se as unable to accept anything but a predisposed viewpoint. FWIW I still don't see what it is you can see going on and what our recent climb up the ladder is masking.

Eddie has little or no responsibility to you as a football supporter. He has a responsibility to Collingwood as an elected official. He has a responsibility to his employers who are numerous but do not include the AFL. He has the same responsibility to the AFL as any other club president via his clubs licensee status in the AFL. Being in the media has, in the eyes of some, responsibility. To whatever extent that is true he has that responsibility. He has no responsibility to act for the good of football, although I strongly disagree that he acts to the detriment of football in practice. I do not believe he is or should be only concerned with Collingwood. That is unrealistic. He most certainly should be Collingwood first though from my perspective because I have the ability, in theory at least, to remove him from his position of responsibility at my/our club.

All this crap about equal time for other clubs and the greater glory of the competition is just that though. No person has to devote equal time to all clubs in the media. There is an expectation of a level of unbiased coverage from the general public. That expectation is not necessarily based on anything tangible or realistic but it exists nonetheless. This expectation is clearly not made of Eddie as an overtly Collingwood person and certainly would be unexpected based on his even greater demonstrable Collingwoodness since becoming President. In other words, you know what you get so make your choice.

FWIW I like it that Eddie is a major factor in AFL football. I mostly like it because it benefits Collingwood. I make no bones about that.

Once again you use analogies that prove nothing. You could compare him to Stalin, Hitler or Pat cash and it would be just as irrelevant. For a start the level of Power is not equivalent, the demonstrated behavior is different but most of all the AFL can directly control clubs and have a license agreement which is their big stick. What is you think Collingwood has done exactly that equates it with America? Is it because they or Eddie do not agree the Swans should have a salary cap concession AND Zone concessions? Are there other issues you mistakenly think Eddie has single handedly controlled?

 

[The_Flying_Egg]

Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Final Ladder Position? 7th
Best & Fairest? Luke Darcy/Nathan Brown
Leading Goalkicker? Nathan Brown - 73
Most Improved? Lindsay Gilbee
Most Votes in Brownlow? Luke Darcy

Biggest talking point as far as your club is concerned?
How the youngens will go.

Name 3 players to watch out for?
Chris Grant, Jordan McMahon, Robert Murphy, Lindsay Gilbee (i couldn't decide who to get rid of so I kept 4)

Biggest strength of your team? Forward/Defence/Midfield
The first 5 or 6 players. Small goalkicking options

If you were to be assured of beating ONE team, who would that be?
Brisbane

Most memorable win?
Brisbane

What will your team be known for the most in 2003? Young players, Luke Darcy and Nathan Brown's brilliance

In 15 words or less, describe your coach?
Sexy

 

[ramjet]

grayham, what is it you are suggesting eddie is attempting? im not saying your right or wrong as its all opinion anyway i guess but youve yet to explain your concerns. as a pie fan, im happy with what eddie has done for the club. as a footy fan in general i understand and appreciate the concerns some people hold, particularly from interstate, regarding eddie's role in the media and therefore his status within the AFL as a whole. i dont agree with all of those concerns but most pie supporters accept there are obviously differing view points out there. we dont blindly follow eddie because he is president of our club, as im sure you dont with colless, or the leader of the political party you support, or your boss, or the coach of your kid's sport team.... im genuinely interested, as im sure markT is, as to what you are worried eddie might be up to, now or in the future. maybe we are being deceived...but by what?

 

[grayham]

Originally posted by ramjet
grayham, what is it you are suggesting eddie is attempting? im not saying your right or wrong as its all opinion anyway i guess but youve yet to explain your concerns. as a pie fan, im happy with what eddie has done for the club. as a footy fan in general i understand and appreciate the concerns some people hold, particularly from interstate, regarding eddie's role in the media and therefore his status within the AFL as a whole. i dont agree with all of those concerns but most pie supporters accept there are obviously differing view points out there. we dont blindly follow eddie because he is president of our club, as im sure you dont with colless, or the leader of the political party you support, or your boss, or the coach of your kid's sport team.... im genuinely interested, as im sure markT is, as to what you are worried eddie might be up to, now or in the future. maybe we are being deceived...but by what?

I think you are missing the point. The point being that blindly following someone leads to trouble in the end, unless they are a saint. Eddie has built an incredibly large power base while only being answerable to a small minority. Put it this way, if something was found to be up, it would be a lot easier to get rid of Wayne Jackson than Eddie McGuire.

It actually was a bit messy to remove McAlister, as it was for any president like Elliott, etc. And McAlister was a monkey's arse of a president. For Collingwood, with all its supporters and money, and media access to not make a profit is an outrage. To win a spoon and stay down the bottom of the ladder is pure imcomptence. Ask yourself, with all the advantages Collingwood have over someone like St Kilda, North or even Sydney, why arent they top in sponsorship, recent flags, off-field facilities. Eddie has just done what should have been done already, and yet is regarded as a saint. What would it take for him to be disposed? How long could he put a media spin on something thats wrong? . Answer: A lot longer than McAlister and Elliot.... And therefore potentially more damaging. Imagine if Elliot has lasted another couple of years at Carlton.
See?

 

[FIGJAM]

For once grayham, I agree with you.

It is important for us to keep arms length when looking at the CFC Presidency. The decisions that he makes that affect our Club are what he hangs his hat on and if and when he makes an error, we should be of the state of mind to act upon that error.

As yet, he hasn't made any, so we'll keep giving him encouragement.

Maybe you think it's good practice to maybe kick him in the guts while he's doing a good job. Make sure he's not getting too big for his boots. To make sure he's fallible. I don't...in fact it's seriously friggen stupid!!

 

[Scarlett Pimp]

Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

GEELONG

Final Ladder Position? 6th
Best & Fairest? Matthew Scarlett
Leading Goalkicker? Cameron Mooney - 53
Most Improved? David Wojcinski
Most Votes in Brownlow? Steven King

Biggest talking point as far as your club is concerned?
The Kitty Cats nonsense.

Name 3 players to watch out for?
James Kelly, Andrew Mackie, James Bartel

Biggest strength of your team? Forward/Defence/Midfield
Defence. Two All-Australians.

If you were to be assured of beating ONE team, who would that be?
Hawthorn

Most memorable win?
Any of them

What will your team be known for the most in 2003?
The fastest, tallest, youngest team in the league taking it right up to everyone. And Matt Scarlett's hair (it is HUGE at the moment)

In 15 words or less, describe your coach?
Looks like David Wojcincki. Played with Essendon. There you go, I've said it.

 

[MarkT]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 2003 Predictions - Your Own Club

Originally posted by grayham
By reading that, you are as blind and blinkered as Rohan. And this essentially is the problem because of the power and lack of accountability it gives the ambitious Eddie McGuire.

There you go with your unsubstantiated assertions again. I may be blinkered and maybe even as much as Rohan but frankly that means nothing to Eddie McGuire whatsoever in respect of his ambitions. Regardless, you have gone with your traditional Eddie has power, Eddie is evil paranoia.

What is it you think the ambitious Eddie McGuire is out to achieve? What is his evil agenda?

Originally posted by grayham
And as usual you are on the diversion. Whatever you think of me or the swans, has zero to do with this debate.

No diversion, that is your fallback position as demonstrated in this thread yet again. The Swans question was at the end in response to your point and is genuine. It has nothing to do with any of the issues discussed whatsoever. I am interested to know what exactly you have a problem with. You have mentioned the zone issue yourself in many discussions with me.

I don't have a problem with Swans at all despite what you have accussed me of in the past. I actually think it is important that the AFL has representation in Sydney. From a historical perspective, I think they were r*ped by the VFL for the predominant purpose of getting live Sunday football on the television but that is not their fault at all.

Originally posted by grayham
To reply in depth would just be to rehash what I have already said. You are closed to anyone elses view when it comes to Eddie Mcguire, so there is little point. Why dont you stay on Nicks board?

If I am more closed than yourself then I would be amazed. I have been critical of Eddie when warranted. I will admit it has been more on a Collingwood site than a general like this but it has not been confined to Collingwood places.

Grayham, the fact that I don't agree with whatever it is you actually think the problem really is is not evidence that I am closed minded. You cannot conclude that everyone who doesn't agree with you is unable to accept alternate views. I have consistantly debated the issues re Eddie, conflicts, etc. etc. In fact the lsat time I did so with you you resorted to lies in an attempt to discredit my arguments and mask the lack of anything more than generalisations in your own.

 

[ramjet]

Originally posted by grayham
I think you are missing the point. The point being that blindly following someone leads to trouble in the end, unless they are a saint. Eddie has built an incredibly large power base while only being answerable to a small minority. Put it this way, if something was found to be up, it would be a lot easier to get rid of Wayne Jackson than Eddie McGuire.

It actually was a bit messy to remove McAlister, as it was for any president like Elliott, etc. And McAlister was a monkey's arse of a president. For Collingwood, with all its supporters and money, and media access to not make a profit is an outrage. To win a spoon and stay down the bottom of the ladder is pure imcomptence. Ask yourself, with all the advantages Collingwood have over someone like St Kilda, North or even Sydney, why arent they top in sponsorship, recent flags, off-field facilities. Eddie has just done what should have been done already, and yet is regarded as a saint. What would it take for him to be disposed? How long could he put a media spin on something thats wrong? . Answer: A lot longer than McAlister and Elliot.... And therefore potentially more damaging. Imagine if Elliot has lasted another couple of years at Carlton.
See?

you still seem convinced those at collingwood and the supporters themselves are blindly following eddie. we do actually have the ability to think for oueselves, have our own ideas, thoughts, suggestions, criticisms of the club and/or eddie. personally, i think ed should get off the salary cap issue. it may be unfair in parts and necessary in others, but its not dictated by collingwood or eddie. its the afl's job to sort it out. ed has the right to object and kick up a fuss if he wants to, but we dont all immediately take on his view point.

the suggestion that collingwood should be streets ahead of the rest of the comp because of media exposure etc, while a thought that makes my day, simply isnt realistic. at the end of the day, membership and sponsors do not come from snippets about ed on the 6 o'clock news. even the footy show itself doesnt provide much incentive for major sponsors to get involved. as with all clubs, and i personally think this is the way it should be, its the on-field success that dictates growth off- field. the number one priority of any club is to remain viable to compete in the following year's comp. to do that, they simply must perform on the paddock. the draft, 'equal' salary caps for all clubs etc even the playing field. collingwood picks its draftees from the same pool sydney or any other club does. taking the argument of higher costs of living in the harbour city etc, both clubs have the same salary cap in which to pay those players. the facilities of nearly all clubs now are comparative and therefore no side has a distinct advantage in training methods or resources.
so this leaves the players themselves and the coaching panel/footy dept personell at each respective club that makes the difference. the way it should be. quality coaches, players and teams are rewarded, although sometimes only eventually, with success. the ability to lure a quality coach such as malthouse is an advantage for us, but we're did that advantage come from? aside from mick's personal reasons in wanting to return to victoria, do you really think he chose collingwood because ed has his own footy show? or that ed is a public figure in the footy and business world? he took on a side that had finished wooden spooners...its a challenge to him and he clearly saw an opportunity to succeed with a refreshed and revitalised club, an achievement made possible by....drum roll...ed. not because of his status in the footy world but because he had begun an earnest restructuring of the club. he employed people he believed would work for the benefit of the club, not themselves as you perhaps suggest he is doing for himself. greg swann is the perfect example. you cannot beat quality people within the club. ed has earned the respect of the majority of pie followers and members through his results and to suggest this should be expected due to a tv show, well i think youre scraping the barrel a bit.
i agree that he is in fairly unique position given his roles within the media and collingwood and his perceived control of the afl. this hardly makes him an scourge on footy.