Colllingwood list over-rated...

[September Action]

...saw in some thread a comment along these lines.

I guess only time will tell but it's interesting the way your heart always rates your own above par. Problem is, it affects objective trading. I mean Welly, Sack, Macaffer, Reid, Dawes and others are decent prospects but somehow in our minds, they are already 200 gamers when it comes to trade talk. The reality is that we'd be lucky if half of them hit 100 games. And yet, no one wants to part with anything for proven talent such as Ball, Fev and Jolly, not to mention Judd, Stevens, Gehrig etc. before them. Heh - lets offer Cox and pick 1000 for Ball...it ain't going to happen.

I think some Collingwood supporters need to accept that trading is a punt which requires an actual wager. Imagine if we had dealt for Judd and lost Didak. I love Dids as much as anyone but who who you rather have had out there against Geelong in the prelim? Dids remains enticingly good but will never have the game smashing ability of the Judd.

Is it time to get serious about ourselves, and more importantly, our players?

 

[pies75]

]...saw in some thread a comment along these lines.[/B]
I guess only time will tell but it's interesting the way your heart always rates your own above par. Problem is, it affects objective trading. I mean Welly, Sack, Macaffer, Reid, Dawes and others are decent prospects but somehow in our minds, they are already 200 gamers when it comes to trade talk. The reality is that we'd be lucky if half of them hit 100 games. And yet, no one wants to part with anything for proven talent such as Ball, Fev and Jolly, not to mention Judd, Stevens, Gehrig etc. before them. Heh - lets offer Cox and pick 1000 for Ball...it ain't going to happen.

I think some Collingwood supporters need to accept that trading is a punt which requires an actual wager. Imagine if we had dealt for Judd and lost Didak. I love Dids as much as anyone but who who you rather have had out there against Geelong in the prelim? Dids remains enticingly good but will never have the game smashing ability of the Judd.

Is it time to get serious about ourselves, and more importantly, our players?

this is mentioned whenever anything to do with collingwood comes up. just biased oppo supporters, especially on big footy

 

[Lexus Rose Oval]

Now I understand what you saying but some of it is crap. I am sick of people saying we cant land a big fish most of the time its out of our control, The Judd case was out of our hands we didnt have a low enough pick to satisfy West Coast and Judd wasnt going to shaft West Coast they would have wanted something like Didak and Pendles for Judd which would have been stupid to do and do you think we would be better off without Didak and Pendles but we added Judd to our list? The stevens deal if i remember right was that Port wanted Didak and Presti which is stupid again unless we were ******ed, and with Gehrig i dont think west coast wanted to have any dealing with us during that era. The only big fish that turned us down has been J.Brown when we offered him big $ a couple of years ago. So i think the pies will offer whats right and even over pay if its needed. Like we did with Cam Wood because 2 yrs ago Wood wasnt worth pick 14 but we traded for potential i have no doubt the pies will make the right moves.

 

[mattys123]

Yeah, we should've traded Didak for Stevens, that would have been like, well just awesome.

Oh wait, NO IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN.

Seriously, I'm sick of the same old shit, it's a fact that our trading has actually been very good and selective over the years, rather then throwing everything at every big name just because a few supporters and media say we should.

We may over rate our list, but guess what, that is our strength on the field.

MM said it himself, this side doesnt know how good it is, or where it's weaknesses are, it doesnt know who it should beat, and shouldn't beat, it just believes it can beat anyone on it's day.

If we miss out on every "big fish" this week (which now seems impossible) I will still go into next year with an optimistic viewpoint, because I just can not see anything but improvement in our list.

The obvious questions have come up once again. Should we throw all our draft picks away for one shot at a flag? Should we bring in a half wit of a human being even though he can destroy sides and turn games off his own boot? Should we trade our well gained and discovered youth for a player(s) with problems that define them?

The answers will come in the next few days, but we have the right to over estimate our list, because we have spent years putting this list together, so that in the next few years we can have a crack at the holy grail.

I am one who also over estimates this list (as you may have seen from my reviews) but I reserve this right as I believe we have a list capable of pushing for a flag in the next 2-4 years.

Bring on the next 3 days, if we get someone, great, if we don't, meh, we will have the same list we had last week, the list that made a preliminary final despite injuries at the worst time of year, and despite some of or "stars" dropping form at the worst time of year.

GO PIES, I trust you.

 

[Zahki]

This is a side effect of our list being mostly young. People don't want to give up most of our players because what they are, but because what they could be. The only older players on our list are either guns (Swan, Didak, Davis), or too old to be of any interest to other clubs (O'Bree, Lockyer), leaving our youth.

But of course no-one wants to trade Beams, Anthony, Sidebottom, Cloke, Brown, Reid, because hey, what if one of them becomes the new Ablett or Riewoldt!?

 

[Chazz Michaels]

...saw in some thread a comment along these lines.

I guess only time will tell but it's interesting the way your heart always rates your own above par. Problem is, it affects objective trading. I mean Welly, Sack, Macaffer, Reid, Dawes and others are decent prospects but somehow in our minds, they are already 200 gamers when it comes to trade talk. The reality is that we'd be lucky if half of them hit 100 games. And yet, no one wants to part with anything for proven talent such as Ball, Fev and Jolly, not to mention Judd, Stevens, Gehrig etc. before them. Heh - lets offer Cox and pick 1000 for Ball...it ain't going to happen.

I think some Collingwood supporters need to accept that trading is a punt which requires an actual wager. Imagine if we had dealt for Judd and lost Didak. I love Dids as much as anyone but who who you rather have had out there against Geelong in the prelim? Dids remains enticingly good but will never have the game smashing ability of the Judd.

Is it time to get serious about ourselves, and more importantly, our players?

Spot on OP.

Tha majority of Pies supporters are pretty deluded as to genuine talent in our side.

We don't have much.

Didak (only performed in one final)
Swan (does nothing in finals)
Davis (we play with 17 men infinals)
Pendlebury (only TRUE megastar)
Thomas (does nothing in H&A, but loves finals which is good)
Sidebottom (see Thomas, but is still super young)
Beames (opposite to Thomas)
Anthony (Needs to really get his strength up, gets out bodied WAY too easily)

Outside of those name, we don't really have any REAL talent. Even the list I've made you could possibly cut some more names in the years to come.

 

[KissStephanie]

Imagine if we had dealt for Judd and lost Didak.

Come on now. West Coast would have never accepted that offer. They certainly would have wanted more than that. Port Adelaide wanted Alan Didak for Nick Stevens, and I didn't want that, and time has proved it to be correct. Collingwood finished where they probably should have finished in 2009. In fourth spot. They are a team that can beat any team on a certain day, but much younger than the other three teams in the top-4. There should be improvement to come from within, while I don't expect as much improvement to come from within regarding those other teams.

Tha majority of Pies supporters are pretty deluded as to genuine talent in our side.

I actually think that you're deluded and unable to look at Collingwood's players objectively. You aren't the only Collingwood supporter that is unrealistically negative and critical though. However, there are definite areas that needs to be addressed as shown when Scott Pendlebury missed the last four matches of the season. That loss was irreplaceable and effected the rest of the midfield structure and entry into the forward line.

 

[Mental Magpie]

Spot on OP.

Tha majority of Pies supporters are pretty deluded as to genuine talent in our side.

We don't have much.

Didak (only performed in one final) This year! (Forgot about the W/Coast - 2007 finals series - DNP in 2008)
Swan (does nothing in finals) As Above!
Davis (we play with 17 men infinals) True - 22 game H&A Superstar
Pendlebury (only TRUE megastar) Agreed!
Thomas (does nothing in H&A, but loves finals which is good) Wrong on H&A front. Agreed finals wise.
Sidebottom (see Thomas, but is still super young) 1st year player.
Beames (opposite to Thomas) 1st year player.
Anthony (Needs to really get his strength up, gets out bodied WAY too easily) 1st year as a KPF & kicked 50. Top Effort

Outside of those name, we don't really have any REAL talent. ??? Our defence is ROCK SOLID. Even the list I've made you could possibly cut some more names in the years to come. A physically fit Medhurst? A mentally fit Cloke? MaCaffer has X factor, Dawes is just a baby (had a knee reco a couple of years back & playing as a KPF) MaCarthy (injuries all year) Nathan Brown. Rusling Can't be bothered thinking of any more!

Yep; you're right. We're shit! No talent. Finals 4 years in a row!

 

[Chazz Michaels]

I actually think that you're deluded and unable to look at Collingwood's players objectively. You aren't the only Collingwood supporter that is unrealistically negative and critical though. However, there are definite areas that needs to be addressed as shown when Scott Pendlebury missed the last four matches of the season. That loss was irreplaceable and effected the rest of the midfield structure and entry into the forward line.

I'm talking GENUINE talent. Yeah, we have some 'good' players:

Maxwell, O'Brien, Shaw, Fraser, Cloke, Dick, Anthony.

But as far as GENUINE superstars, we only have one. And he's not even quit ehtere YET, but will be soon and that's Pendlebury.

The Didaks, Davis', Swans and co. Yeah, they're all great players, but they're not the sort fo players you basically can't win without, players that make SUCH a difference to your side that it's obvious to Stevie Wonder that they're not on the field.

That's what Judd, Fevola, Hodge, Franklin, Reiwoldt, Goodes and Selwood are. Players that have a dramatic impact on your teams performace.

As I've said, taking my Collingwood loving glasses off (which most of you struggle to do), Pendlebury is the only player we have that is in that bracket. That's not enough in my eyes, we need more.

Fevola would be perfect for us imho.

 

[Chazz Michaels]

Yep; you're right. We're shit! No talent. Finals 4 years in a row!

I didn't say we're shit.

You can't be top 4 and SHIT. But you can be overrated/lucky.

I mean, North Melbourne made the top 4 last year. NORTH MELBOURNE. They basically tripped over and fell in there. Or should I say WE tripped over and they fell in there.

Ditto for Collingwood in 2002. We made 4th with THIRTEEN WINS. THIRTEEN. We were HARDLY a true top 4 side that year. We got lucky, and flew through the finals under the radar and almost pinched it.

My point being, that you can't JUST look at ladder positions/finals made as an indication of your sides true quality, it goes deeper than that.

Personally? and I know this is going to piss some people off, I actually think overall, our list is probably better than it's being made to look. I know that kind of goes against what I just said, but I think our game plan (which is terrible and outdated) and the way we're coached in general, makes our list look worse than it is.

Combine that with some of the players that continue to get games which shouldn't (players like Johnson, Toovey and Lockyer taking the place of young players like Wellingham) and it just compounds the issue.

I think a better game plan, and the removal of some dead wood would actually shine a better light on our list, and I look forward to seeing the changes that Nathan Buckley will bring and I feel he will actually get more out of our list than Mick has.

I like what Mick Malthouse does OFF FIELD. He has pioneered many of the standards all clubs adopt. The miriad of specialist coaches, overseas training, overseas coaching training, player devlopment etc. Are all great initiatives. I personally just don't like what he does ON FIELD. Which is why the Buckley/Malthouse double act could work wonderfully, but it COULD also fall flat on it's face if Mick doesn't let go.

 

[MarkT2]

Collingwood finished where they probably should have finished in 2009.

They finished where I said they would from the end of last year to the last day of this year. This isn’t the issue though.

The issue is what sort of list should Collingwood have. We have had daft picks as high as anyone’s, a few father sons and a few quality players wanting to come to Collingwood. The fact we haven’t got the best list in the comp is a failure of list management over a decade and everyone keeps praising the coach and the football department for achieving more than the list warrants. The reality is they have achieved less than the clubs resources and opportunities should demand.

 

[KissStephanie]

But as far as GENUINE superstars, we only have one. And he's not even quit ehtere YET, but will be soon and that's Pendlebury.

Besides Ablett and Selwood, how many superstars does Geelong have? I don't believe that they have any other superstars. How many superstars does St.Kilda have besides Nick Riewoldt?

As I've said, taking my Collingwood loving glasses off (which most of you struggle to do), Pendlebury is the only player we have that is in that bracket. That's not enough in my eyes, we need more.

I think you're having difficulty looking at Collingwood's players objectively and you're being unfairly critical because you're not comparing Collingwood to other teams. I don't believe that many teams have more than one or two that fit into that superstar category. I also happen to believe that it's not the amount of high end players that a team has to win a premiership, but how good the bottom six players are, and I think Collingwood's low-end players and the depth created since the standalone VFL team was introduced has improved dramatically in the past two years. Carlton has had two superstars in recent years with Judd and Fevola, but they have been average at best because their bottom six players are ordinary.

Fevola would be perfect for us imho.

I agree with you regarding this.

 

[shawthing09]

I think our list is just as commonly under rated as it is over rated.

I have lost count on the amount of people (and this generally comes from oppo supporters) who have said things along the lines of "I don't know how you guys did it, cuz like, your teams like, not that good, but you just kept winning and that"

The thing is a lot of the players on our list are still early in their development and on top of that the list as a whole in terms of team chemistry and knowing the roles and structures is still fairly early in it's development.

The problem is that with the unknown you have people with all different ranges of imaginations and mentalities. To put a terrible metaphor to it as the clay is being moulded everyone gets a different idea of what is being made.

The fact is most of the deals to trade to get one of those "big names" would have involved losing multiple young up and comers for one older proven player. Which gets tricky in terms of will you be able to cover and fill those gaps structually in time to have a crack at the flag before your sexy new big name is on the decline.

As for the assumptions of players in finals by Chazz I have to wonder if your memory goes back longer then the last 12 months.

2 label first year players as if their cards are stamped is crazy at best. Also whilst Swan's finals series was below his best he certainly wasn't hopeless. He got all the attention and had a lot more pressure to win the inside ball without Pendles. His overall disposals went down but the fact that we were starved of the ball for all but 2 quaters of the finals series would account for some of that. I wouldn't of thought his hardball gets or clearance numbers had gone down much during the finals series.

 

[smiddaz123]

Besides Ablett and Selwood, how many superstars does Geelong have? I don't believe that they have any other superstars.

Matthew Scarlett
Paul Chapman
Jimmy Bartel
Corey Enright
Steve Johnson

imo

How many superstars does St.Kilda have besides Nick Riewoldt

Lenny Hayes

 

[MarkT2]

I think our list is just as commonly under rated as it is over rated.

Our list is underrated by outsiders and our coach is over rated by 99% of the know universe. Our board is weak and conservative.

1 flag in half a century and none in a decade of this administration is unequivocal failure. Only blind loyalty by a massive supporter base keeps the status quo. Where else has an administration and coach lasted a decade without a flag? I can't think of an AFL/VFL club, including ours and I’ve never heard of a major professional club elsewhere in the world. It may have happened but I’d love to see examples where it has ended in success after a decade.

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

Our list is underrated by outsiders and our coach is over rated by 99% of the know universe. Our board is weak and conservative... blahdy... blahdy blah...

Wouldn't it be time-saving if you posted once and then just provided links back to it for the future.

 

[mdc]

Matthew Scarlett
Paul Chapman
Jimmy Bartel
Corey Enright
Steve Johnson

imo

Most unnecessary imo of all time, I reckon. Saying Geelong has no superstars is like saying the rainbow has no colours.

 

[shawthing09]

Besides Nick Riewoldt and as Smiddaz mentioned Lenny Hayes, there is a guy by the name of Nick Dal Santo who goes alright. I also heard that Goddard had a pretty good year too.

The arguement of whether it's the quality of the top 6 or the bottom 6 players in your group is highly flawed. In reality it's all about the balance of quality and where the quality is. WCE certainly didn't have a great bottom 6, which was shown by how quickly they declined after losing 2 of their top 6. On the other hand a side like Carlton this year had the problem where the gap between their best players and their bottom 6 really restricted them. St Kilda had a similar problem for a long while.

 

[KissStephanie]

Matthew Scarlett, Paul Chapman, Jimmy Bartel, Corey Enright, Steve Johnson

Not in my opinion. Scarlett and Chapman I agree with though. The other three are very good.

Lenny Hayes

St.Kilda has two then, and I think Dane Swan is the equal of Lenny Hayes for different reasons, and I also feel that Collingwood's bottom six are better than St.Kilda's. They are definitely better in the mid-range because they are much older and more experienced. They are more advanced for sure.

Most unnecessary imo of all time, I reckon. Saying Geelong has no superstars is like saying the rainbow has no colours.

Yes, they have about four or five and that is the reason they are the best team of the past three years. No other team has nearly that many. It's not just Collingwood.

Besides Nick Riewoldt and as Smiddaz mentioned Lenny Hayes, there is a guy by the name of Nick Dal Santo who goes alright. I also heard that Goddard had a pretty good year too.

Yes they are good players, but Dal Santo was dropped in 2008.

The arguement of whether it's the quality of the top 6 or the bottom 6 players in your group is highly flawed.

I believe the bottom six is extremely important, but the OP failed to take that into account.

In reality it's all about the balance of quality and where the quality is. WCE certainly didn't have a great bottom 6, which was shown by how quickly they declined after losing 2 of their top 6.

West Coast didn't lose two of their top six though. They lost two of their top two or three. Geelong's bottom six is okay, but in my opinion they would fall away dramatically without Ablett and Selwood.

On the other hand a side like Carlton this year had the problem where the gap between their best players and their bottom 6 really restricted them. St Kilda had a similar problem for a long while.

St.Kilda's bottom six is not as good as Collingwood's in my opinion. They are ahead in other areas though, but they are also older and more experienced.

 

[ant22]

Spot on OP.

Tha majority of Pies supporters are pretty deluded as to genuine talent in our side.

We don't have much.

Didak (only performed in one final)
Swan (does nothing in finals)
Davis (we play with 17 men infinals)
Pendlebury (only TRUE megastar)
Thomas (does nothing in H&A, but loves finals which is good)
Sidebottom (see Thomas, but is still super young)
Beames (opposite to Thomas)
Anthony (Needs to really get his strength up, gets out bodied WAY too easily)

Outside of those name, we don't really have any REAL talent. Even the list I've made you could possibly cut some more names in the years to come.

Let me get this straight.

Swan is no good in finals even though he has 1 bad half in the 3 finals matches he played. Close to our best against the sts and some had him as our best against the crows.

Beams you have already pigeon holed has a based finals player and sidebottom a good one after 1 good final

Didak was far from our worst in the finals but agree he could do more.

Not sure you have much credilbiity left after those comments.

 

[smiddaz123]

Besides Nick Riewoldt and as Smiddaz mentioned Lenny Hayes, there is a guy by the name of Nick Dal Santo who goes alright. I also heard that Goddard had a pretty good year too.

Yeh, they were awesome this year. I didn't consider them to have genuine superstar status before 2009.....the guys I mentioned have produced genuinely elite years multiple times imo, which puts them above Nicky Dal and Goddard for me.

 

[Chazz Michaels]

Matthew Scarlett
Paul Chapman
Jimmy Bartel
Steve Johnson

Lenny Hayes

This, and add Dal Santo, Goddard and Fisher to that list.

Besides Ablett and Selwood, how many superstars does Geelong have? I don't believe that they have any other superstars. How many superstars does St.Kilda have besides Nick Riewoldt?I think you're having difficulty looking at Collingwood's players objectively and you're being unfairly critical because you're not comparing Collingwood to other teams. I don't believe that many teams have more than one or two that fit into that superstar category. I also happen to believe that it's not the amount of high end players that a team has to win a premiership, but how good the bottom six players are, and I think Collingwood's low-end players and the depth created since the standalone VFL team was introduced has improved dramatically in the past two years. Carlton has had two superstars in recent years with Judd and Fevola, but they have been average at best because their bottom six players are ordinary.I agree with you regarding this.

I'm sorry, but our bottom six, is a fair way behind Geelongs and St.Kilda's bottom six. Which would explain why we failed so badly in the finals.

We all got very overexcited, myself included. But in the cold light of day, after seeing that Geelong prelim first hand, I realised that that was probably the biggest difference between us, and the top 3.

Our bottom players are just too far behind the bottom players from the top 3. You could even throw Hawthorn in there when they have a full list to pick from.

Most unnecessary imo of all time, I reckon. Saying Geelong has no superstars is like saying the rainbow has no colours.

See Stef, not Smiddaz then, he was only responding to her.

 

[Dundalis]

Not in my opinion. Scarlett and Chapman I agree with though. The other three are very good.St.Kilda has two then, and I think Dane Swan is the equal of Lenny Hayes for different reasons, and I also feel that Collingwood's bottom six are better than St.Kilda's. They are definitely better in the mid-range because they are much older and more experienced. They are more advanced for sure.Yes, they have about four or five and that is the reason they are the best team of the past three years. No other team has nearly that many. It's not just Collingwood.
Yes they are good players, but Dal Santo was dropped in 2008.I believe the bottom six is extremely important, but the OP failed to take that into account.West Coast didn't lose two of their top six though. They lost two of their top two or three. Geelong's bottom six is okay, but in my opinion they would fall away dramatically without Ablett and Selwood.St.Kilda's bottom six is not as good as Collingwood's in my opinion. They are ahead in other areas though, but they are also older and more experienced.

Ablett, Bartel, Selwood, Scarlett, Chapman and Johnson are all superstars.

How do people not rate Bartel a superstar? His role is marginalised at Geelong. He is a fantastic in and under player, can roost it 60 metres pin point and is great overhead. He's a fantastic player and Brownlow medalist, but doesn't get enough game time on the ball at Geelong due to their depth. At Collingwood he would be easily our best midfielder, at Geelong he's probably 3 on the depth chart, maybe lower because of his versatility where some others can only play midfield. And Johnson is a 20 ppg player that can regularly get you 50 goals a season. There aren't many other players if any that can do that, not even Didak.

The above post is the definition of the OP's topic, not only that, but overrating our own in comparison to other teams.

St. Kilda have Hayes, Riewoldt, Goddard and Dal Santo. The fact Dal Santo was dropped in 2008 means what exactly? He had a bad patch? The bloke's an All-Australian and if Pendlebury is a superstar, then so is Dal Santo.

I'll tell you one thing about our bottom six, and the bottom six from St Kilda and Geelong. You set up a skills contest, of kicking and handballing, and the bottom six of Geelong and St Kilda will run rings around us. Our skills are terrible in comparison, both at the top 6, and especially at the bottom 6 of the sqaud.

 

[mdc]

How do people not rate Bartel a superstar? His role is marginalised at Geelong. He is a fantastic in and under player, can roost it 60 metres pin point and is great overhead. He's a fantastic player and Brownlow medalist, but doesn't get enough game time on the ball at Geelong due to their depth.

Not to mention he's very good defensively too. Freak of a player, and would be the no.1 mid at most clubs. In big games, I'd take him over Selwood too.

 

[Chazz Michaels]

Ablett, Bartel, Selwood, Scarlett, Chapman and Johnson are all superstars.

How do people not rate Bartel a superstar? His role is marginalised at Geelong. He is a fantastic in and under player, can roost it 60 metres pin point and is great overhead. He's a fantastic player and Brownlow medalist, but doesn't get enough game time on the ball at Geelong due to their depth. At Collingwood he would be easily our best midfielder, at Geelong he's probably 3 on the depth chart, maybe lower because of his versatility where some others can only play midfield. And Johnson is a 20 ppg player that can regularly get you 50 goals a season. There aren't many other players if any that can do that, not even Didak.

The above post is the definition of the OP's topic, not only that, but overrating our own in comparison to other teams.

St. Kilda have Hayes, Riewoldt, Goddard and Dal Santo. The fact Dal Santo was dropped in 2008 means what exactly? He had a bad patch? The bloke's an All-Australian and if Pendlebury is a superstar, then so is Dal Santo.

I'll tell you one thing about our bottom six, and the bottom six from St Kilda and Geelong. You set up a skills contest, of kicking and handballing, and the bottom six of Geelong and St Kilda will run rings around us. Our skills are terrible in comparison, both at the top 6, and especially at the bottom 6 of the sqaud.

Good to see there are other people on here that share a similar view.