Are Collingwood good enough to sustain this run, take 3rd, beat Geelong and make the GF ?

[St DAC]

For me the question isn't so much whether Collingwood can beat the other top 4 sides; on their day any of the top 4 can beat any of the other top 4 sides.

The question is can they do it 3 times in a month? IMO no, but someone will have to to grab a flag, and no-one is unbeatable on any given day. They are playing some pretty good footy at the moment.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

The majority of the football loving public is hoping...no.

Understandably so.

If Collingwood can't win, I hope the Saints win it. I like seeing records being set like the one you guys have. It's good for the game.

It also helps that you've only won one premiership anyway.

There'd be a lot of romance about a Collingwood v S.Kilda Grand Final though. On form, it looks like that's what we're gonna get. But form can change in one week.

 

[The Fireman]

Understandably so.

If Collingwood can't win, I hope the Saints win it. I like seeing records being set like the one you guys have. It's good for the game.

It also helps that you've only won one premiership anyway.

There'd be a lot of romance about a Collingwood v S.Kilda Grand Final though. On form, it looks like that's what we're gonna get. But form can change in one week.

A 1 point win ? the point to be kicked by Milne..yeah I could wear that but my ticker wouldn't

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

A 1 point win ? the point to be kicked by Milne..yeah I could wear that but my ticker wouldn't

Personally, I'd prefer Jack Anthony kicking for goal 40m out on a 45 degree angle after the siren with Collingwood 5 points down

 

[Macca19]

Its shaping up to be a very interesting finals series. All of the top 7 are good enough on their day but all have question marks over either their historical finals form, injuries, form against top 4 sides etc.

I think Collingwood are good enough to to get to a Prelim, but not sure if they can get one further than that.

 

[understudy]

Why start a thread if you have nothing to say about it??

See champ this topic is worthy of a thread and people are interested in discussing it ....

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

OK - this is not a troll, and it's not bitterness over the weekend's result

I think there's a few people in the media and on BF who are seriously overrating Collingwood this year (good to see a few Collingwood supporters here being more realistic).

Yes, they are a good team and yes they are very well coached. And yes, they beat Adelaide on the weekend (but we played very badly and it is a game we should have won).

But have a look at the record this year - who they've beaten, and where they got enough wins to (probably) finish top 4.

They play Geelong and St Kilda once each (lost both)
They play Carlton and Essendon twice each, in a year when both of those sides are middle of the ladder at best (1-1 in both cases)
They play Sydney twice (1 win and one TBA)
They play Melbourne twice (2 wins)

Switch a few games around in the fixture (like give them 2 each against Saints and Cats instead of, say, Melbourne and Sydney) and bingo, they're on 11 wins and fighting it out in the bottom half of the 8.

Yes, I know you can only beat who you play, and I know it's swings an roundabouts with the fixture - but the point is, if you're going to rate Collingwood as a contender it has to be on the evidence, and the evidence is thin.

Based on the fixture I don't rate Collingwood any higher in the Premiership contention stakes than Adelaide or Brisbane. And I don't rate Adelaide's chances

Teams Collingwood play once this season and their 2008 ladder position:
Geelong 1
Hawthorn 2
StKilda 4
North Melbourne 7
Port Adelaide 13
Fremantle 14
West Coast 15

Average ladder position of the teams we play once this season = 8th in 2008 and 9th in 2009

So the benefits of only playing Geelong and StKilda once are offset by the losses in only playing Port, Freo and West Coast once. PLUS Hawthorn and North have gone backwards and we only get to play them once.

Its a fair draw.

PS dont forget neither Geelong of StKilda have played Collingwood twice, nor have they played each other twice. Instead they have drawn easier games. The same argument applies to them as you are trying to apply to Collingwood.

 

[arrowman]

...Abotu our draw, it's the same almost every year. Don't whinge. We've been playing Essendon and Carlton twice for about what? 100 years? NOW you decided it's unfair?
...Get over your crying at the fact that you THOUGHT Adelaide might have been a chance this year. ...Get over it, we are in the ladder position we DESERVE to be. We're not as good as St.Kilda or Geelong, but better than everyone else, so we're third.

I think I made it clear in my post that I'm not complaining about the draw, and I'm not crying about Adelaide's position. And I don't know where you got the idea that I "thought Adelaide might have been a chance this year" - IMHO we are exactly where we should be on the ladder.

And Collingwood, as you say, deserves to be where they are on the ladder.

No crying, no whingeing, no cries of "unfair".

My point, which I think was pretty clear, is: given the imbalance in the AFL draw, it is dangerous to draw conclusions about any side's chances (well, apart from the top 2 perhaps) based on their ladder position and win-loss record. You have to consider who they've played.

And the simple reality is that if Collingwood had played the Saint and Cats twice instead of once, there's a fair chance they'd be 11-8 instead of 13-6, and fighting for 5th-7th spot.

The only thing that makes Collingwood a better flag chance than the teams below them is the double chance. I will not be surprised if they go out in straight sets. They certainly won't get past the PF. IMHO.

And yes, you're right, Collingwood were not good on Saturday night. Neither were we. If we have played better, we would have won and people wouldn't be banging on about Collingwood's flag chances. If you had played better you would have won by more.

If we'd both played at our best, it would have been a cracker of a game

 

[AG]

See champ this topic is worthy of a thread and people are interested in discussing it ....

Of course it's a worthy topic but it's just weird when people start a thread with their OP is 'discuss'.

 

[anubis]

Geelongs issue will be not having a stable team coming into the finals.In 2007/8 the grand final winners had a pretty good run injury wise come finals time,this year geelongs is terrible.If they put in a effort like they did on friday night we will beat them by 15 goals.I think if the cats get all there cattle on the park and going i think they will win the flag as in my opinion they are the best team in the comp.But the way things are going at the moment we are a real chance to knock them over

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

And the simple reality is that if Collingwood had played the Saint and Cats twice instead of once, there's a fair chance they'd be 11-8 instead of 13-6, and fighting for 5th-7th spot.

And the simple reality is that if Collingwood had played the Kangaroos and Dockers twice instead of once, there's a fair chance they'd be 15-4 instead of 13-6, and locked into second spot.

It cuts both ways, pal. The facts are that on average of the seven teams we only play once, we have a fair and equitable distribution of good bad and indifferent opponents.

 

[arrowman]

Teams Collingwood play once this season and their 2008 ladder position:...

There's more to it than calculating average ladder positions, you have to use a bit of judgement as well. And my judgement, based on both the draw and what I have seen of Collingwood, is that Collingwood's position on the ladder has been inflated by the draw. Not a lot - I do rate the Pies as a good side - but enough to say that their flag chances are not that much better than 2-3 sides below them.

Its a fair draw.

I never said anything about "fairness". Whether the draw is "fair" or not is beside the point.

PS dont forget neither Geelong of StKilda have played Collingwood twice, nor have they played each other twice. Instead they have drawn easier games. The same argument applies to them as you are trying to apply to Collingwood.

Yes, but that's
where the judgement comes in, alongside the numbers.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I think I made it clear in my post that I'm not complaining about the draw, and I'm not crying about Adelaide's position. And I don't know where you got the idea that I "thought Adelaide might have been a chance this year" - IMHO we are exactly where we should be on the ladder.

And Collingwood, as you say, deserves to be where they are on the ladder.

No crying, no whingeing, no cries of "unfair".

My point, which I think was pretty clear, is: given the imbalance in the AFL draw, it is dangerous to draw conclusions about any side's chances (well, apart from the top 2 perhaps) based on their ladder position and win-loss record. You have to consider who they've played.

And the simple reality is that if Collingwood had played the Saint and Cats twice instead of once, there's a fair chance they'd be 11-8 instead of 13-6, and fighting for 5th-7th spot.

The only thing that makes Collingwood a better flag chance than the teams below them is the double chance. I will not be surprised if they go out in straight sets. They certainly won't get past the PF. IMHO.

And yes, you're right, Collingwood were not good on Saturday night. Neither were we. If we have played better, we would have won and people wouldn't be banging on about Collingwood's flag chances. If you had played better you would have won by more.

If we'd both played at our best, it would have been a cracker of a game

I fail to see how you played badly.

You rebounded from half back better than I've ever seen a team do so, you won the clearances, you had 16 more inside 50s and I THINK had more scoring shots (could be wrong there).

Difference was, our defense actually played pretty well. But again, even then I don't think they did that well as the game could have been almost iced in the second quarter.

Adelaide played well, they just struggled a bit in the forward line. Anyone that thinks Adelaide played badly is deluded. Teams DO play well and lose games you know. Look at the 07 Prelim. Can't complain about that game at ALL. Umpiring was good, Collingwood played very well, Geelong played very well, and we just weren't quite good enough. Yeah, we were missing Josh Fraser, and Rocca, Bucks and Clement were playing hurt, but that's the choice the club made, and again, we still played very well, and fell short.

Losing doesn't automatically mean you 'must have played badly'. If Collingwood had played as well as you guys did on Saturday night, we would have won by about 10 goals. You ran the ball from the back line and through the middle with EASE.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

There's more to it than calculating average ladder positions, you have to use a bit of judgement as well. .

The only objective way to judge whether a team has a good draw or otherwise is to work out the average strength of the eight opponents you play once, based on the ladder positions the year prior.

The Crows seem to have the short straw, I agree with you there. The average 2008 ladder position of the teams they play once is 10th.

Its more that the Crows have had the rough end of the pineapple rather than the other way around. Collingwood's draw has been pretty fair.

 

[Grumpy Bum]

I fail to see how you played badly.

You rebounded from half back better than I've ever seen a team do so, you won the clearances, you had 16 more inside 50s and I THINK had more scoring shots (could be wrong there).

Difference was, our defense actually played pretty well. But again, even then I don't think they did that well as the game could have been almost iced in the second quarter.

Adelaide played well, they just struggled a bit in the forward line. Anyone that thinks Adelaide played badly is deluded. Teams DO play well and lose games you know. Look at the 07 Prelim. Can't complain about that game at ALL. Umpiring was good, Collingwood played very well, Geelong played very well, and we just weren't quite good enough. Yeah, we were missing Josh Fraser, and Rocca, Bucks and Clement were playing hurt, but that's the choice the club made, and again, we still played very well, and fell short.

Losing doesn't automatically mean you 'must have played badly'. If Collingwood had played as well as you guys did on Saturday night, we would have won by about 10 goals. You ran the ball from the back line and through the middle with EASE.

Just about every team owns the corridor against us. Even Aaron Davey carved us up on the QB thru the middle after 1/4 time. We just surrender the corridor and play wide. Thats Malthouses plan most games. Maybe he should read Lyons article in todays Age about the corridor.

 

[Quicky]

I think you are under rating Collingwood list, its quite decent and has quite a bit of talent ...

We are also obviously in form, have momentum and are relatively injury free which is a massive bonus and plus ....

OH MY GOD Stop the press, Understudy posted something positive

This is single handedly the most positive thing I have ever seen you write on this site

Onya Undies, the positivity is buried in there somewhere deep, just gotta keep it up

 

[Cheshire Cat]

I think we might lose to Collingwood should we play them first week. This might not be the end of the world though. At the moment we are running out of game to get into form. The more games the better from now on. Of course a loss would mean meeting the saints in the prelim but we've got to beat the buggers eventually anyway

 

[Sainters08]

The saints would be shitting bricks, they got hold of us when we had 10 different players running around earlier in the year, they also handed us a belting in the finals last year, however we where missing loads of decent players yet again and had the youngest finals side in AFL history..

Oh well still a long way to go yet.. But we have nothing to lose this year. Still a young developing side.. Unlike the saints and cats, they are getting old and the windows about to close for a good 5-10 years..

We also smashed the saints twice last year..

What a load of shit!

We're 19-0, looking at 22-0.

You beat us twice last year, so what? you didn't 'smash' us. First one by 9 points without our Captain and a Top 5 player in the comp.

Second time by 14 points. Beat us fair and square as far as I remember.

But we 'smashed' you when it counted, in the finals.
You may have been missing Didak/Shaw (loads?) but we lost a player within the first 10 minutes of the game, limiting rotations.
We also played without Luke Ball nor Michael Gardiner.

 

[DidakDelight]

The stars are in alignment, it is indeed the year of the magpie.

We wont go back-to-back though unfornately because we'll have Cloke, L.Brown, Didak, Shaw & Maxwell all suspended until round 10 next year after doing what's necessary to bring up Premiership #15

 

[AG]

We wont go back-to-back though unfornately because we'll have Cloke, L.Brown, Didak, Shaw & Maxwell all suspended until round 10 next year after doing what's necessary to bring up Premiership #15

Suspended for diving?

 

[Grumpy Bum]

There seems to be a lot of mental energy trying to speculate on outcomes of matches at least 3 weeks away.

At this stage St Kilda are looking the goods against all comers. The rest are chasing. Thats how it stands right now.

 

[strategy]

If its an evening match then there is a chance as Geelong HATE playing at night.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

What a load of shit!

We're 19-0, looking at 22-0.

You beat us twice last year, so what? you didn't 'smash' us. First one by 9 points without our Captain and a Top 5 player in the comp.

Second time by 14 points. Beat us fair and square as far as I remember.

But we 'smashed' you when it counted, in the finals.
You may have been missing Didak/Shaw (loads?) but we lost a player within the first 10 minutes of the game, limiting rotations.
We also played without Luke Ball nor Michael Gardiner.

It's funny, I thought the same thing about the game earlier in the year.

I checked back, we were actually only really missing Didak and Davis in that game. In our defense, those two are two of our most important players, but I'd still wager you would have won comfrotably.

For two reasons.

1) You were in peak form back then
2) We weren't anywhere near the form we're in now

I'd say if we played you guys now, it would be a far more competetive game, that St.Kilda would more than likely win.

For us to beat you guys in the granny, Collingwood needs 3 key ingredients:

1) Injuries to some key Saints
2) A Full list to pick from in form and fit
3) St.Kilda needs to have a rare off day

I personally think that's the only way we can beat you this year, but we'll have to wait and see.

 

[DidakDelight]

It's funny, I thought the same thing about the game earlier in the year.

I checked back, we were actually only really missing Didak and Davis in that game. In our defense, those two are two of our most important players, but I'd still wager you would have won comfrotably.

For two reasons.

1) You were in peak form back then
2) We weren't anywhere near the form we're in now

I'd say if we played you guys now, it would be a far more competetive game, that St.Kilda would more than likely win.

For us to beat you guys in the granny, Collingwood needs 3 key ingredients:

1) Injuries to some key Saints
2) A Full list to pick from in form and fit
3) St.Kilda needs to have a rare off day

I personally think that's the only way we can beat you this year, but we'll have to wait and see.

Or we iron their key players out and give a few players sniping jobs while we focus on the footy and win the flag.

Just ask Ron Barrassi about this

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

For us to beat you guys in the granny, Collingwood needs 3 key ingredients:

1) Injuries to some key Saints
2) A Full list to pick from in form and fit
3) St.Kilda needs to have a rare off day

I personally think that's the only way we can beat you this year, but we'll have to wait and see.

As it stands we have 1 and 2 covered (although 1 is not chronic at this stage for the Saints) while 3 is not so critical. After all we are 2-2 with them over the past two seasons. They can hardly claim have the wood over us. In fact Geelong are 2-1 over us in the same period, yet everybody pencils us in as certain winners over Geelong. It doesnt make a lot of sense.

The gap is closing by the week.