Collingwood's decline

[juss]

They aren't even that bad. If their down year is somewhere between 8th-10th and they bounce back and make the finals next year, there's nothing wrong with that at all. I personally think they will still rally to finish 8th.

They've made the finals every year for the last 8 years or something, including a flag and numerous prelims. One slightly down year (mind you they haven't even missed the 8 yet, they're only out on percentage), with a younger team, and people are quick to criticism. Yet apart from Hawthorn, Sydney or Geelong, they have been the most impressive team over the last 8 years (Freo and the Saints don't count, neither have won a flag). Their demise is so over exaggerated, they'll still probably finish a finals side.

 

[doppleganger]

The nucleus of the Hawks team has largely stayed the same, including their one year fall in '09. The difference is while Hawthorn gave up top picks to get serious talent (Burgoyne, Gunston etc), Collingwood went for recycled players and kids.

The difference is that Collingwood were UP from 2007 and only slipped down in 2013.

The Hawtorn team wasn't UP continuously, and only a handful of 08 premiership players backed up in 2013.

At the end of 2008, neither club traded.
At the end of 2009, Hawthorn snaffled Burgoyne and Gibson...Collingwood snaffled Jolly and Ball.
At the end of 2010, Hawthorn snaffled Hale and Cheney...Collingwood snaffled Tarrant n Krakouer.

Collingwood were 'topping up' for a couple of years.

The problem with Collingwood is that our veterans form fell away earlier than expected, ie none of those 4 have given the Pies much after 2011 at all...where the Hawthorn guys are winning BnFs and still great contributors.

The Hawks have also got great returns from their drafting of late, guys like Breust, Smith, Poppy, Stratton have been great and are up to 80 odd games played now....bloody Reid and N.Brown are still not up to 100 games for us yet!!

 

[Sttew]

I keep saying, Collingwood's biggest problem is the hype surrounding the club. Blame Eddie? Probably.

But this is far from a team in crisis. Its had some fairly significant injury problems this year, coupled with the sudden retirement of Nick Maxwell, and the not unexpected decline in form of youngsters. Many of us even predicted at the beginning of the year that 2014 could be a lean year for Collingwood with 2015 looking better.

So what's the big deal? Expectation! This side cannot keep under the radar. It attracts so much press that even the players seem to believe some of what they read (e.g., Elliott and Pendelbury quoted in the papers saying Pies will still play finals and Elliott going one better and saying Pies can win the premiership)

 

[doppleganger]

All coaches need their best players playing well if they're going to get results.

Unless you're part of the inner sanctum you don't know why those players aren't performing to their potential. Not sure I'd blame Buckley for that. If those players lack motivation post a flag or have peaked in their career, then Buckley has no choice but to plan for life without them

The only issue that needs to be addressed is that we have had 3 years of injury problems under Buckley.

It started as bad luck type injuries with the spate of knee's in 2012, but then prolonged problems to guys like Thomas, Reid, Beams, N.Brown, Fasolo and lesser names like Freeman and Sinclair keep struggling with ongoing problems that wipe out entire seasons.

 

[lmach]

They'll be alright. They're in a far better position than Carlton.

 

[blue healer]

The 2010/2011 gameplan was figured out. Mick himself dropped it completely for the 2011 grand final. The game changes and it's foolish to believe that we could've kept tracking the same course and raked in flag after flag. We chose to adapt and reload and you can't fairly assess whether that was the right decision yet.

Failure to retain which players exactly? Only Shaw of the players that've left since 2011 have produced quality.

Cloke? Surely you don't mean last year's All Australian CHF and arguably the best contested mark in the game? Which teams would he be the #2 forward at?

The fact is we've lost four close games due to lack of composure, which comes with a side with 11 sub-50 gamers. That's not even mentioning missing a very structurally important player in Reid for the entire year up until this point.

Eleven sub 50 gamers sounds good but in the final washup means little if those players do not develop up to expectation. Interestingly Adelaide also had 8 players in yesterdays game under 50 games, they also had 9 players between 50 & 100 games compared to your 4 and an average 7 games per player less experience. I'm not so sure that the inexperience factor was as great as you think.

I recall doing a comparison in 2011 after we'd lost to the Pies and you guys averaged around 20 odd games more than us. I recall thinking at the time that we were about 12 months behind your team in experience and that the future was looking pretty good for us. History told a different story and just reinforces my opinion that potential, in many cases, is just a word.

Having said all that I wouldn't be slashing my wrists if I was Pies fan just yet and I'm also not yet convinced that Buckley cannot coach. It does seem, from the outside that his intention is to create his own list and has been prepared to put his job on the line to do this. Only time will tell if this strategy works, but I'd be prepared to give him that time.

I liked the fact that he was prepared to let a very good player, in Shaw, go for the potential greater good but would really question some of the decisions made at the trade table or FA.

I believe that the Pies made a very bad decision to take Lynch in FA and cast Dawes out. Seemed to me that Dawes bled black and white and only the year before being squeezed out had taken unders just to stay. I guess you could argue that his 2012 was disappointing but I seem to recall that he had been required to spend a lot of time in the ruck for which he didn't seem suited.

I think he would be much more value to the Pies than the 2 that have been stopgapped in to replace him. Just wondering what you guys feel about this trade in retrospect.

 

[TedDougChris]

Is this a thing like the AFL's themed rounds ?? Every week has to have a club in 'Crisis'.....

 

[Sttew]

They'll be alright. They're in a far better position than Carlton.

That means very little today. Carlton have been down for so long....

 

[hench]

It's funny how they gave Buckley a pass the last two years because he was still working with Mick's team and he was reprogramming the players to play the style he wanted.

At the start of this season it was now Buckley's team. And now they won't make the 8.

 

[doppleganger]

Eleven sub 50 gamers sounds good but in the final washup means little if those players do not develop up to expectation. Interestingly Adelaide also had 8 players in yesterdays game under 50 games, they also had 9 players between 50 & 100 games compared to your 4 and an average 7 games per player less experience. I'm not so sure that the inexperience factor was as great as you think.

I recall doing a comparison in 2011 after we'd lost to the Pies and you guys averaged around 20 odd games more than us. I recall thinking at the time that we were about 12 months behind your team in experience and that the future was looking pretty good for us. History told a different story and just reinforces my opinion that potential, in many cases, is just a word.

Agree that there are no guarantees with young kids, but the point is that they young kids were showing enough to have the Pies sitting in the 8 for most of the season, the Pies trotted out a much younger team against the Dogs and were duly pipped at the post...plenty saw this as a massive upset at the time, because most people perceive the Doggies as a young team rebuilding and the Pies a team gunning for finals and flags.

Will the kids come on, time will tell.

I liked the fact that he was prepared to let a very good player, in Shaw, go for the potential greater good but would really question some of the decisions made at the trade table or FA.

H.Shaw may have given us a bit more class to sneak a couple of extra wins, but he may also have thrown a couple away with his brain fades...pretty easy decision to move him on for a L.Ball replacement IMO.

I believe that the Pies made a very bad decision to take Lynch in FA and cast Dawes out. Seemed to me that Dawes bled black and white and only the year before being squeezed out had taken unders just to stay. I guess you could argue that his 2012 was disappointing but I seem to recall that he had been required to spend a lot of time in the ruck for which he didn't seem suited.

I think he would be much more value to the Pies than the 2 that have been stopgapped in to replace him. Just wondering what you guys feel about this trade in retrospect.

Dawes is a limited player who hasn't progressed his game much at all since 2010.
He is a 1 goal per game KPF who works hard, is a good clubman but aint really that great.

To get pick 20 for him was a good trade, similar to offloading Wellingham.....both guys looked ok in a Collingwood side that was dominant, but when asked to perform larger roles they don't step up.

Lynch was a stop-gap whilst Grundy matures, Lynch was ok in 2013......similar output to Dawes, but injured this year.

Sure we could have kept Dawes and Wellingham, but they would not have us up in contention at the moment, and they would be losing value in terms of trade too. Doubtful clubs would give up pick 20 for Wellingham or Dawes now.

 

[Black Flag]

They'll be alright. They're in a far better position than Carlton.

don't know about that.

all of a sudden ppl are starting to catch on to all carlton's young talent. collingwood have some good young'ns too though.

it's actually pretty close.

 

[Cristiano Ronaldo]

Yep, and I have the same views about your club as well to be honest.

Nah United will climb under Louis

 

[Black Flag]

That means very little today. Carlton have been down for so long....

define, "down".

 

[Falchoon]

I think after 3 years it's safe to say that pushing ahead with the succession plan in 2011 was a blunder. What's scary, is that many supporters have protected themselves from facing this by claiming the plan was responsible for the 2010 premiership and hence, already a success before Buckley even took over. Some running the club have even deluded themselves with this mental fail-safe; but if you're not prepared to admit your error, how can you expect to learn from it?

While some supporters expected the team to drop this year as they rebuilt to a degree, the question needs to be asked why a club ball deep in contention would ever plan to go backwards? It's not like you're guaranteed to rise back up again. Premiership contention is a difficult place to get to and you don't just piss it away with a rebuild and culture change right when the pieces have fallen into place - you grab the chance with both hands. You'd think a club with 2 flags in the last half a century would have appreciated that.

In dismissing all things Malthouse they've possibly gone overboard in dismissing Malthouse's Premiership clock theory. Whilst in the window of 10-1, they've attempted to rewind the alarm back to 8pm but have instead rewound to 8am.

We've all done it, forgotten that little red dot.

Where their theory seems to have gone awry, and the Dawes example illustrates it, (and it's probably been repeated with Wellingham, Shaw, Thomas etc) is to trade a player of the now (the bird in hand) for a player of the future via a draft pick (bird in the bush). This in fairness has resulted in a bunch of promising youngsters, but the other part of the theory was to in the interim replace that player with a free agent, and this is where it clearly hasn't worked. Lynch, White, Adams, Armstrong, Karnezis, Russell and Young have completely missed the mark and it's probably been predicated on over valuing the Ball, Jolly trades via the succession plan.

I'd suggest they also overdid their moneyball midget valuations.

 

[ok.crows]

How many times do Adelaide play in Adelaide a season? How many times do Collingwood play in Melbourne a season? How many games are there in each city each week? Once again poor reasoning.

Bullshit. Adelaide playing at Adelaide Oval against an interstate side on a Sunday evening is directly comparable to Collingwood playing against an interstate side at the MCG on a Sunday evening ... as directly comparable as any two games can be. Adelaide are drawing 10,000 more than the Pies are to similar games.

 

[Sttew]

define, "down".

Out of contention; not taken seriously; perennial mid tier; not a premiership threat; deficient in many key performance areas; .....basically average

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

Broomhead looked really promising, He'll fit in nicely when he comes home to Alberton

 

[Black Flag]

Where their theory seems to have gone awry, and the Dawes example illustrates it, (and it's probably been repeated with Wellingham, Shaw, Thomas etc) is to trade a player of the now (the bird in hand) for a player of the future via a draft pick (bird in the bush).

the theory and execution were lacking. this is not rocket science.

 

[mike123]

In dismissing all things Malthouse they've possibly gone overboard in dismissing Malthouse's Premiership clock theory. Whilst in the window of 10-1, they've attempted to rewind the alarm back to 8pm but have instead rewound to 8am.

We've all done it, forgotten that little red dot.

Where their theory seems to have gone awry, and the Dawes example illustrates it, (and it's probably been repeated with Wellingham, Shaw, Thomas etc) is to trade a player of the now (the bird in hand) for a player of the future via a draft pick (bird in the bush). This in fairness has resulted in a bunch of promising youngsters, but the other part of the theory was to in the interim replace that player with a free agent, and this is where it clearly hasn't worked. Lynch, White, Adams, Armstrong, Karnezis, Russell and Young have completely missed the mark and it's probably been predicated on over valuing the Ball, Jolly trades via the succession plan.

I'd suggest they also overdid their moneyball midget valuations.

Adams has had a good last month and will be one of the best mids in the comp in a few years to come. The rest are rubbish.

 

[Black Flag]

Out of contention; not taken seriously; perennial mid tier; not a premiership threat; deficient in many key performance areas; .....basically average

pretty arbitrary definition... and goes against your argument. we were a kick off a prelim a couple of years ago.

keep trying though.

 

[nowhereneargeelong]

Pies lose, and its front page news.....still. This is part of the problem, and it couldn't happen to a better team.

Personally I like the look of the front page today.

More please.

 

[Sttew]

pretty arbitrary definition... and goes against your argument. we were a kick off a prelim a couple of years ago.

keep trying though.

Hey this thread isn't about Carlton.

 

[Black Flag]

Hey this thread isn't about Carlton.

excuse me for responding to your comment about..... umm, carlton.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

I keep saying, Collingwood's biggest problem is the hype surrounding the club. Blame Eddie? Probably.

apart from the monumental **** up of the succession plan, eddie has been the best thing that ever happened to the pies. if he's the reason that falling out of top 8 is being labelled 'a crisis' then he's done an amazing job.

 

[Jesse Custer]

carlton is worse.