COLLINGWOOD. NEXT 5 YEARS?

[Fat Jesus]

Yeah I reckon they will give him 2 more years to just play the game, probably at 2027.

28/29 I think. Just my opinion.

 

[loki04]

28/29 I think. Just my opinion.

Yeah potentially might depend on Moore.
Or if a list rebuild happens might want a fresh face leading it.

 

[sr36]

Yeah potentially might depend on Moore.
Or if a list rebuild happens might want a fresh face leading it.

I think Nick will be calling the shots in the midfield as early as this year, but let Moore keep the public face part of the role as long as he wants it.

 

[loki04]

I think Nick will be calling the shots in the midfield as early as this year, but let Moore keep the public face part of the role as long as he wants it.

Maybe a VC role see how the players vote.

 

[76woodenspooners]

That post sums up a lot of what is wrong with the world.

If you break that down, the 2023 had little to do with the coaches and players.

Not saying that.

Just saying that the people who appointed the coaches and recruited the players, etc, etc had a very key role to play in determining success or failure.

Consider a motor car, pick a particular motor car. Imagine all the work that went into creating it …

Do you think of the people on the production line doing manual labour? Or do you think about the designers with their clay models? Or do you think about the engineers solving complex problems of Computational Flow Dynamics and Failure Mode and Effect Analysis? Or do you think of some executive in an office who sits behind a desk who is making the big decisions and bringing all the departments together?

Now consider whether you believe the brand of that motor car is a good brand or not relative to others in the market? How long have you felt that way about that brand? Now which role up and down the chain do you think has most contributed to you feeling that way?

It was down to the brilliance of Korda and co - for selecting the selection panel that then selected McRae. Great job old chap.

We’ll likely never really know the individual contributions, but key on that panel were -

• Wright, who was appointed under Ed.
• Anderson, who was appointed under Ed.
• Murphy, who was lauded for his work on the 2017 review. And had subsequently been invited onto the board by Ed.

I’m not lionising Ed here, because without Korda & co we might not have moved Buckley on.

You just knew that person you placed on the panel would make all the difference. There was no luck involved at all.

Absolutely there is luck.

There is the luck of which way the ball bounces. But if your team isa lot better than the other team, then it doesn’t matter which way the ball bounces.

It’s all about maximising your luck.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I think the captaincy of Collingwood will be annouced at the 2025 season launch and its Darcy Moore to hand the batton to Nick Daicos be like the hand over around the xmas break.
Moore will be vice captain tho.
But its Nick as Pies captain.

Nick is a great player, but there’s no rule that says your best player would or should be a good captain. Nick Maxwell was never our best player and yet he was a great captain.

Having a 22 year old lead a bunch of 30+ year olds doesn’t sound like a great idea? Imposing leadership on a young athlete often impacts their game, and would we want to risk that with N.Daicos? What competitive benefit would we get out of it?

IMO Maynard would make a great captain.

Maybe when N.Daicos gets to around 26 (4 years time) is when he’ll come into consideration for captaincy. That’s around the age Moore and Pendlebury were when they became captain.

 

[sr36]

Not saying that.

Just saying that the people who appointed the coaches and recruited the players, etc, etc had a very key role to play in determining success or failure.

Consider a motor car, pick a particular motor car. Imagine all the work that went into creating it …

Do you think of the people on the production line doing manual labour? Or do you think about the designers with their clay models? Or do you think about the engineers solving complex problems of Computational Flow Dynamics and Failure Mode and Effect Analysis? Or do you think of some executive in an office who sits behind a desk who is making the big decisions and bringing all the departments together?

Now consider whether you believe the brand of that motor car is a good brand or not relative to others in the market? How long have you felt that way about that brand? Now which role up and down the chain do you think has most contributed to you feeling that way?



We’ll likely never really know the individual contributions, but key on that panel were -

• Wright, who was appointed under Ed.
• Anderson, who was appointed under Ed.
• Murphy, who was lauded for his work on the 2017 review. And had subsequently been invited onto the board by Ed.

I’m not lionising Ed here, because without Korda & co we might not have moved Buckley on.



Absolutely there is luck.

There is the luck of which way the ball bounces. But if your team isa lot better than the other team, then it doesn’t matter which way the ball bounces.

It’s all about maximising your luck.

There's no doubt that upper mmt can have a massive impact, particularly when implementing change, and I don't mean of personnel.

However one thing that recruiting in footy should teach us is that there is no one with a magical eye who just knows - all recruiting departments have their big successes and big failures. And thats in a realm where individual performance is so much more visible and measurable than it is when employing managers, where there is and has to be a lot more vibe based guessing involved.