List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade Talk 2016 Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aware he was to play more forward in 2016 BUT in which position did get injured? Certainly wasn't in the forward line. That was 2016 right?

He started on the bench. Had been on the ground for about a minute. When he got injured, the ball was cleared from our defence and kicked to the wing, where you'd expect a half forward to have pushed up to in those circumstances. Not really sure how you can claim that he certainly wasn't playing forward.
 
He started on the bench. Had been on the ground for about a minute. When he got injured, the ball was cleared from our defence and kicked to the wing, where you'd expect a half forward to have pushed up to in those circumstances. Not really sure how you can claim that he certainly wasn't playing forward.
Because he wasn't running directly off the bench in to the forward line.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It actually annoys me that you ask that. Didn't you watch Collingwood play?
You are annoyed? Oh dear. We can't have that.
And in answer to your question, not in those days, I started later and thought he played further up the ground.
 
Half forwards play ahead of the ball, but if the ball is in the backline they don't run to the goal square. He was injured where a half forward would aim to be in that circumstance.
He was on the field for all of a minute and never entered inside 50. Give it a spell
 
You are annoyed? Oh dear. We can't have that.
And in answer to your question, not in those days, I started later and thought he played further up the ground.
Played in the middle a lot in 2010. We had a deep midfield that rotated. Didak off the top of my head started collecting about 400 possessions in 08 09 to about nearly 600 possessions in 2010 when he played a lot more in the middle.
 
I'd argue that modern day flankers play like midfielders, so he doesn't really play like a flanker either. To me, he doesn't really play like an AFL player. Having said that, he may develop into a handy 2nd ruck, if footy goes in the right direction for him.
Look you're not wrong, but I think the point is he doesn't play like a KPP despite his size.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think Greenwood has other value to the team. Firstly, he seems like an excellent tagger ... and all teams need at least one of those. Secondly, he is tough. He takes it up to the opposition tough guys and helps our skilled youngsters actually play their games. Successful teams need tough players (look at Hawthorn's example) and we have Adams and Maynard, but we need Greenwood.
Why do we need Greenwood when as you say we have Adams and Maynard. Its all good being a tough guy but when you have other tough guys who are better than you, you need to offer more than just being tough.
 
He is not the same polite, friendly and level headed man who took the club to court so he could walk to Melbourne for nothing?
The exact same bloke, who was getting paid peanuts by the club to be arguably the best player in the land. Peter himself will tell you he went about it the wrong way, but the club were just as guilty.
 
Why do we need Greenwood when as you say we have Adams and Maynard. Its all good being a tough guy but when you have other tough guys who are better than you, you need to offer more than just being tough.
I agree we have too many inside types and this a greenwood might be expendable if it helped get us a young KPP , but you are being a little hard on him Mike.
He kicked more goals than any other midfielder in 2016, and finished I think 6 th in the Copland ( not sure on that). Given his tagging roles that is a pretty fair output, but I guess in terms of age and potential suitiors he fits the bill better than others. His rating #1 I'm goals from mids tells you our other mids poor last year in this aspect ( especially some of the higher rated ones )
 
Is it just me or is anyone else concerned by our zig zagging approach to cutting experience from the list then insisting we need to add experience because we are too young.
I have the same concerns with height given we bragged last year we had one of the tallest lists in the Comp , and now we are bereft of KPP.
It's a bit scattergun at best, at worst digging a big hole for ourselves
 
Is it just me or is anyone else concerned by our zig zagging approach to cutting experience from the list then insisting we need to add experience because we are too young.
I have the same concerns with height given we bragged last year we had one of the tallest lists in the Comp , and now we are bereft of KPP.
It's a bit scattergun at best, at worst digging a big hole for ourselves

Most of the experienced players who have left this year have retired. How could we have prevented that?
 
Is it just me or is anyone else concerned by our zig zagging approach to cutting experience from the list then insisting we need to add experience because we are too young.
I have the same concerns with height given we bragged last year we had one of the tallest lists in the Comp , and now we are bereft of KPP.
It's a bit scattergun at best, at worst digging a big hole for ourselves

How much experience did we cut at the end of this season?

Swan, Toovey and Macaffer all retired. Cloke asked to be traded. Not a hell of a lot we can do there. We wanted Swan to stay but his leg was a write off, Toovey and Macaffer were no longer AFL standard and Cloke hasn't been pulling his weight for 3 season and asked to leave.

Unless you're referring to Buckley's tenure as a whole?
 
Is it just me or is anyone else concerned by our zig zagging approach to cutting experience from the list then insisting we need to add experience because we are too young.
I have the same concerns with height given we bragged last year we had one of the tallest lists in the Comp , and now we are bereft of KPP.
It's a bit scattergun at best, at worst digging a big hole for ourselves
Wait until after trade period.
FA are the easiest to deal with, they get done first.
We got the 2 druggies still to come in, Stewart and WHE are in our sights.
Age profile still not too bad, given loss of 4-5 veterans and we get 2 back.
 
Is it just me or is anyone else concerned by our zig zagging approach to cutting experience from the list then insisting we need to add experience because we are too young.
I have the same concerns with height given we bragged last year we had one of the tallest lists in the Comp , and now we are bereft of KPP.
It's a bit scattergun at best, at worst digging a big hole for ourselves
Adding one or two,players essentially for free (besides salary cap which must get paid to 95%) is hardly zig zagging in my view.
The feeling would bebthwy add something of value for period of time. Not sure who has gone out could do the same. NB swan is retired because of injury so that's just bad luck, not pushed.
Cloke? That's a whole different ball game. He could take the Collingwood challenge or he's going elsewhere to see if he can reboot. All,fair to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top