Which player do you miss the most?

Remove this Banner Ad


None of the players you listed have achieved 600 disposals in a season, or 450 kick seasons whereby more than half of their kicks were "long kicks", while also achieving kicking efficiencies of over 80% in each season during his prime.
Having this with a scoreboard impact mostly through the midfield of over a goal a game is what made Nathan's contributions as a footballer so special, because likely no one else has achieved to this level in each of these specific categories.
 
Gungadin said:
Had a soft spot for Rene Kink. When he was on song, he broke packs open just by breathing on them. He was a talented hair dresser as well. Kinky Cuts his salon was called;)
Click to expand...
lol yeah I remember Kinky cuts - they used to advertise in the game-day program.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

No....none of them had six hundred disposals seasons, bit hard to do when you play CHF or CHB in a bottom side. But all of them led their teams out of the wilderness. Two won premierships as captains, Two of them won Brownlow medals (Bobby won three), Two led the VFL goalkicking and all of them played 250+ games (two of them played 300+) in a time when you had to get your own footy and an ACL meant the end of your career.

Look I mean no disrespect to Nathan Buckley he was a great player and I like to think he'll be our next premiership coach...but he'd be embarrassed to be compared to Ted Whitten, Bob Skilton or Kevin Murray.:)
 
Knightmare said:
None of the players you listed have achieved 600 disposals in a season, or 450 kick seasons whereby more than half of their kicks were "long kicks", while also achieving kicking efficiencies of over 80% in each season during his prime.
Having this with a scoreboard impact mostly through the midfield of over a goal a game is what made Nathan's contributions as a footballer so special, because likely no one else has achieved to this level in each of these specific categories.
Click to expand...
Two small forwards in the history of VFL/AFL football have gone within a few goals of the century. Daicos & Leigh Mathews. Daicos also missed a few of his best years with feet stress fractures and a knee reco. Leigh Mathews told him that footy may have passed him by before he came back to win a B&F in the centre and then kick near on 100 goals in a premiership year. Had Daicos spent his best years as a midfielder I am sure he could have rivaled any records not just at Collingwood but at any club.

The reason Daicos is known as a small forward is because he was better than all the mids who could not have hoped to get near him as a goal kicker. I saw him kick bags of 6 as a mid at Vic Park regularly. I saw him turn games more (far more) than any other player that has played for Collingwood in my lifetime. I only saw the 13 as a small forward on TV but no one in a Collingwood jumper has gone close to that sort of complete mastery of the ball and opponent in any match.
 
Robroy22 said:
No....none of them had six hundred disposals seasons, bit hard to do when you play CHF or CHB in a bottom side. But all of them led their teams out of the wilderness. Two won premierships as captains, Two of them won Brownlow medals (Bobby won three), Two led the VFL goalkicking and all of them played 250+ games (two of them played 300+) in a time when you had to get your own footy and an ACL meant the end of your career.

Look I mean no disrespect to Nathan Buckley he was a great player and I like to think he'll be our next premiership coach...but he'd be embarrassed to be compared to Ted Whitten, Bob Skilton or Kevin Murray.:)
Click to expand...

Those guys were greats in their eras.

But inserting a 184cm CHB? A 171cm mid/fwd? A 178cm mid? In today's AFL. Sure they're still going to help. They're all greats of the game and greats of any era I believe can play in any era.

But their games aren't going to be as great in today's AFL as they were in their eras with the evolution of the game with the players of today and the way the game is played today.

Nathan Buckley today is the same as Nathan Buckley during his playing days. He is still a good height for a midfielder in today's game, strong and athletic. Covers more than enough ground and covers more ground than the majority today's midfielders still. The extra pressure and numbers around the footy is a new element to navigate, as the zones would be. In saying that I think today's era would suit Nathan more even than his era, because like many of those Hawthorn kickers, Nathan has that long, low bullet of a kick which can go over the zones before defences can adjust, and so few if any of today's great midfielders truly have that.

MarkT2 said:
Two small forwards in the history of VFL/AFL football have gone within a few goals of the century. Daicos & Leigh Mathews. Daicos also missed a few of his best years with feet stress fractures and a knee reco. Leigh Mathews told him that footy may have passed him by before he came back to win a B&F in the centre and then kick near on 100 goals in a premiership year. Had Daicos spent his best years as a midfielder I am sure he could have rivaled any records not just at Collingwood but at any club.

The reason Daicos is known as a small forward is because he was better than all the mids who could not have hoped to get near him as a goal kicker. I saw him kick bags of 6 as a mid at Vic Park regularly. I saw him turn games more (far more) than any other player that has played for Collingwood in my lifetime. I only saw the 13 as a small forward on TV but no one in a Collingwood jumper has gone close to that sort of complete mastery of the ball and opponent in any match.
Click to expand...

With Daicos and Matthews it depends on what you want. If I want a small forward. They'd both be great. And I'm also not going to disagree with the notion that both can push up through the midfield, because they both can, even today, even though you would choose with both to play them forward with that where they both did the most damage.

Daicos if he was a full time midfielder. I'd list him more as a very good midfield option rather than a star, as he was as a forward. He never had a single 500 disposal season, let alone a 600 disposal season. Tackle and mark numbers also very low. So there wouldn't be that same extreme level of excitement around Daicos the midfielder.

I personally view midfielders as a more critical cog in winning relative to general or small forwards as they're involved in more plays more often. And as per my comments earlier. You can and really would want to run every play through Buckley because no one had to do or did more from the perspective of finding the footy in bunches and then also providing meaningful touches that could penetrate at speed and consistently hit targets. And with what our midfield lacks being someone with the elite footskills and elite all-round game of a Buckley. I'd take Buckley over Daicos and Matthews for today's Collingwood team (though I'll acknowledge that, that 1977 season by Matthews was special on another level).

If I'm making an All-time team. Daicos would not feature on my team. Like so many great small forwards, he had his terrific years, and his not so terrific years, with those five 50+ goal seasons his special seasons.
On an All-time team Matthews would be my forward pocket. Then I'd be going with the great key forwards, probably Ablett SNR and fill the other forward positions with great midfielders who can also have an impact forward of centre.
 
Knightmare said:
Those guys were greats in their eras.

But inserting a 184cm CHB? A 171cm mid/fwd? A 178cm mid? In today's AFL. Sure they're still going to help. They're all greats of the game and greats of any era I believe can play in any era.

But their games aren't going to be as great in today's AFL as they were in their eras with the evolution of the game with the players of today and the way the game is played today.

Nathan Buckley today is the same as Nathan Buckley during his playing days. He is still a good height for a midfielder in today's game, strong and athletic. Covers more than enough ground and covers more ground than the majority today's midfielders still. The extra pressure and numbers around the footy is a new element to navigate, as the zones would be. In saying that I think today's era would suit Nathan more even than his era, because like many of those Hawthorn kickers, Nathan has that long, low bullet of a kick which can go over the zones before defences can adjust, and so few if any of today's great midfielders truly have that.



With Daicos and Matthews it depends on what you want. If I want a small forward. They'd both be great. And I'm also not going to disagree with the notion that both can push up through the midfield, because they both can, even today, even though you would choose with both to play them forward with that where they both did the most damage.

Daicos if he was a full time midfielder. I'd list him more as a very good midfield option rather than a star, as he was as a forward. He never had a single 500 disposal season, let alone a 600 disposal season. Tackle and mark numbers also very low. So there wouldn't be that same extreme level of excitement around Daicos the midfielder.

I personally view midfielders as a more critical cog in winning relative to general or small forwards as they're involved in more plays more often. And as per my comments earlier. You can and really would want to run every play through Buckley because no one had to do or did more from the perspective of finding the footy in bunches and then also providing meaningful touches that could penetrate at speed and consistently hit targets. And with what our midfield lacks being someone with the elite footskills and elite all-round game of a Buckley. I'd take Buckley over Daicos and Matthews for today's Collingwood team (though I'll acknowledge that, that 1977 season by Matthews was special on another level).

If I'm making an All-time team. Daicos would not feature on my team. Like so many great small forwards, he had his terrific years, and his not so terrific years, with those five 50+ goal seasons his special seasons.
On an All-time team Matthews would be my forward pocket. Then I'd be going with the great key forwards, probably Ablett SNR and fill the other forward positions with great midfielders who can also have an impact forward of centre.
Click to expand...




It's ok....now I know you're joking! lol...took me a while to get it...but yeah good one!....Daicos wouldn't be in an all time team...yeah lol...good one! Leigh Matthews would only make your side as a forward pocket....lol...(sides do not split)...
I spose you'd pick GAJ as your midfielder over Lethal too?

I'm guessing you never saw any of the players I mentioned previously (Murray, Whitten, Skilton, Arthur) actually play or perhaps you'd afford them a little more respect. Does Wayne Carey impress?? Well Ted Whitten was Wayne Carey with mud and grunt...and he could dominate games from both CHF or CHB (he'd make AA in both positions)

You marvel at Buck's kicking ability....have a look at Bobby Skilton Knighter....he could (and did) kick 60m drop kicks off both sides of his body and hit forwards on the chest with bullet like passes from the centre of the ground. Yeah he was small....so was Barry Cable....but they were exceptional footballers...easily the equivalent of Bucks.

"Bulldog" Murray was Gavin Brown like. Played out of his size range constantly and pitted himself against every one of the games greats of his era. He carried the Lions for 15 years and willed them into finals once or twice. He played with incredible courage wearing a back brace after injuring his spine early in his career. His courage was legendary and he would easily fit into any half back line in today's era.

Saying Daics and Lethal don't have the stats of today's players is a joke Knighter and you know it! It's like comparing today's FF's to Hudson and McKenna. A great FF today averages about 2-3 goals a game. FF's back then were average if they kicked 4 a game. Daics and Lethal were both impact players. If Daic's had 25 possies as a centreman he'd be likely to have set up 10-12 goals himself. If Bucks had 35....he might have been involved in 6-8 scoring chains.

I'm gonna stop now cos I respect your views on players (most of the time!!) but maybe its just my age that makes me so sure that the old champs would more than hold their own in today's game. They may be smaller athletes but they "knew more about footy" and they could all find the footy at will (like Swanny does today). Contested footy was more vital in their day and all of these players were marvellous 1:1 players. I reckon any of them would improve any side they played in today. (just like Buck's would too)
 
I'll jump into the Daics/ Bucks discussion. I would pick Daicos for excitement/ brilliance and match winning ability. Bucks was more consistent in playing at near his best more often. You need to be careful with tackle numbers, given that tackles per game have almost doubled in the past 15 years, so lining them up in absolute numbers distorts things a touch.
In trying to line then up many have focused rightly on their relative kicking ability.
I think Bucks has the edge as a long kick, but the game had changed and the ability to cover more distance in less time was more important in Buck's time than Daics. I would add that Daicos' kicking skills would suggest he could of adapted.
It is without debate that Daicos was a far superior non preferred kick than Buckley and a mile better shot for goal.
 
Robroy22 said:
It's ok....now I know you're joking! lol...took me a while to get it...but yeah good one!....Daicos wouldn't be in an all time team...yeah lol...good one! Leigh Matthews would only make your side as a forward pocket....lol...(sides do not split)...
I spose you'd pick GAJ as your midfielder over Lethal too?

I'm guessing you never saw any of the players I mentioned previously (Murray, Whitten, Skilton, Arthur) actually play or perhaps you'd afford them a little more respect. Does Wayne Carey impress?? Well Ted Whitten was Wayne Carey with mud and grunt...and he could dominate games from both CHF or CHB (he'd make AA in both positions)

You marvel at Buck's kicking ability....have a look at Bobby Skilton Knighter....he could (and did) kick 60m drop kicks off both sides of his body and hit forwards on the chest with bullet like passes from the centre of the ground. Yeah he was small....so was Barry Cable....but they were exceptional footballers...easily the equivalent of Bucks.

"Bulldog" Murray was Gavin Brown like. Played out of his size range constantly and pitted himself against every one of the games greats of his era. He carried the Lions for 15 years and willed them into finals once or twice. He played with incredible courage wearing a back brace after injuring his spine early in his career. His courage was legendary and he would easily fit into any half back line in today's era.

Saying Daics and Lethal don't have the stats of today's players is a joke Knighter and you know it! It's like comparing today's FF's to Hudson and McKenna. A great FF today averages about 2-3 goals a game. FF's back then were average if they kicked 4 a game. Daics and Lethal were both impact players. If Daic's had 25 possies as a centreman he'd be likely to have set up 10-12 goals himself. If Bucks had 35....he might have been involved in 6-8 scoring chains.

I'm gonna stop now cos I respect your views on players (most of the time!!) but maybe its just my age that makes me so sure that the old champs would more than hold their own in today's game. They may be smaller athletes but they "knew more about footy" and they could all find the footy at will (like Swanny does today). Contested footy was more vital in their day and all of these players were marvellous 1:1 players. I reckon any of them would improve any side they played in today. (just like Buck's would too)
Click to expand...

Peter Daicos would be in the discussion for an all time AFL second team, but even then I'd probably more likely fit him into my all time AFL third team. He'd be a long way off making my all time first team.

A front half of an all time AFL first team could be made up of P.Hudson, Lockett, Dunstall. Ablett SNR, Carey and Matthews.

I'd also have Coleman, McKenna, Pratt, Coventry, K.Bartlett and Wade ahead of Daicos as forwards, and they'd all make my all time AFL second team. And that's before going through all the midfielders who could easily start forward.

As for Leigh Matthews. He can play wherever he likes on any team. And likely would be a rotational mid/fwd with his scoreboard impact. He provided too much scoreboard impact not to be used forward of centre.

Bob Skilton can kick as well as he wants. At 171cm while as per my previous post, greats of any era and can great in any era, he would not be as great because at that size, it's not going to be as easy to get as much ball when today's mids are bigger, stronger and more athletic than those Skilton played against.

I'll take guys with size and skill over small guys with just skill anyday. I'd rather have a guy who as well as being able to kick can win high volumes of contested ball and take a grab.

Players who kicked 100 goals, 10 or more years ago would not today provide the same scoreboard impact. There is more pressure around the ball making it harder for those kicks into the forward 50 to be as precise. Defenders are taller, bigger and stronger, and also much more attackative looking more to play from in front. There are zones stopping forward movement leading to lower scoring games. In the back half, defenses now are smart enough to clog up space and not allow easy marks on the lead as was possible in previous eras. It's not longer as simple as kick it to the go-to-guy and let them go to work. The game has gone such an incredibly long way past that.

Contested ball is an area that translates in all eras, and you are right that it was more of a pure contested ball winning game previously, particularly with less numbers around the ball. But you underestimate the size of the bodies today. Midfielders today are bigger than we've seen in previous eras, and the average players in all positions are substantially taller and with it bigger bodies. These bodies do a lot more damage than the bodies of yesteryear. So you'd find today's midfielders for contested ball winning in the most part would come out on top.
Again great midfielders who could win the contested ball in their era could also do the same today. But they'd have a harder time doing it as easily today. That's for sure.
You only have to talk to past players about how much more the bumps and tackles hurt, and how much harder it is v the bigger bodies of today.
 
Was always a little sad when Sav left.

But of the current ex pies. Really miss Heater, he loved the club so much it's just a shame he couldn't keep it together
 
Peter Daicos would be in the discussion for an all time AFL second team, but even then I'd probably more likely fit him into my all time AFL third team. He'd be a long way off making my all time first team.....
I may be old...but if you can show me a better or effective forward pocket than Daics then I'll stand corrected (oh and please don't suggest Leigh Matthews because "lethal" played FF in his latter years.)

A front half of an all time AFL first team could be made up of P.Hudson, Lockett, Dunstall. Ablett SNR and Matthews.
Ok...if you want to pick a forward line of all Full Forwards.....where is Gordon Coventry or Pratt or Todd or Coleman?? it's either stats based or it's not? Cos that forward line would have no defensive capability at all....great players all of them but all competitive marking FF's, not modern forwards at all?

I'd also have Coleman, McKenna, Pratt, Coventry, K.Bartlett and Wade ahead of Daicos as forwards, and they'd all make my all time AFL second team. And that's before going through all the midfielders who could easily start forward.
Seriously Knighter? "Hungry" wasn't good enough to tie Peter Daicos's boots mate...compare him to an outside runner please, a Craig Bradley or a GAJ.....but never Daics. One was an artist bamboozling entire defences by himself....the other ran into untold numbers of goals handballed over the top to him by Cloke, Balme, McLean....etc (ewww that comparison makes me shudder)

As for Leigh Matthews. He can play wherever he likes on any team. And likely would be a rotational mid/fwd with his scoreboard impact. He provided too much scoreboard impact not to be used forward of centre.
Totally agree he could play anywhere mid to forward but as his career was 80% as an onballer that'd be where he should play I'd contend.

Bob Skilton can kick as well as he wants. At 171cm while as per my previous post, greats of any era and can great in any era, he would not be as great because at that size, it's not going to be as easy to get as much ball when today's mids are bigger, stronger and more athletic than those Skilton played against.

You're using the Usain Bolt argument Knighter...he's the biggest, fastest human being there's ever been and if footy was just about athleticism...you'd be right....but its not and it never has been and Bobby Skilton, Barry Cable, Thorold Merrett, Robbie Flower, Greg Williams and many more great small players would be just as great today. Puopolo goes alright...and Skilts is probably ten times the player Poppy is. These blokes had far more "nous" than today's players and whilst they're not as big...they'd still get the ball because of their natural abilities and in Skilton's case he'd use it better than 99% of today's players. Train them up to be just as fit and they'd still be guns today.

I'll take guys with size and skill over small guys with just skill anyday. I'd rather have a guy who as well as being able to kick can win high volumes of contested ball and take a grab.
So I'm guessing Gavin Brown would have been too small? He'd beat any three of your tall midfielders in a fight for the ball Knighter....small maybe....big heart....you can't breed that!

Players who kicked 100 goals, 10 or more years ago would not today provide the same scoreboard impact. There is more pressure around the ball making it harder for those kicks into the forward 50 to be as precise. Defenders are taller, bigger and stronger, and also much more attackative looking more to play from in front. There are zones stopping forward movement leading to lower scoring games. In the back half, defenses now are smart enough to clog up space and not allow easy marks on the lead as was possible in previous eras. It's not longer as simple as kick it to the go-to-guy and let them go to work. The game has gone such an incredibly long way past that.

And yet in your all time AFL forward line you picked exactly that: guys who kicked 100 goals more than ten years ago?
Just for the record...Plugger would have allowed guys to take up the space in front of him for about 3 seconds....then bodies would have been getting dismembered! Abblett too was most unapologetic in dealing with players trying to block his space (he nearly took Micky Gayfer's head off one day at the G)
Hudson would have loved a defender playing in front of him....he edged defenders under the ball all the time anyway!
And coaches setting up zones in front of these guys would have run the risk of losing 2-3 players a quarter through collision injuries. Dunstall, Lockett, Ablett....they wouldn't miss a chance to cork or knee opponents standing there as marking bags! Forwards today could take a leaf out of their books...if a bloke blocks your path to a mark...he gets moved!

Contested ball is an area that translates in all eras, and you are right that it was more of a pure contested ball winning game previously, particularly with less numbers around the ball. But you underestimate the size of the bodies today. Midfielders today are bigger than we've seen in previous eras, and the average players in all positions are substantially taller and with it bigger bodies. These bodies do a lot more damage than the bodies of yesteryear. So you'd find today's midfielders for contested ball winning in the most part would come out on top.
Again great midfielders who could win the contested ball in their era could also do the same today. But they'd have a harder time doing it as easily today. That's for sure.
You only have to talk to past players about how much more the bumps and tackles hurt, and how much harder it is v the bigger bodies of today.

I agree that contested ball players from any era would continue to enjoy the contest. But Skilton, Murray, Whitten and Arthur weren't just ordinary players from their day. They were the Fyfe's, Rance's, Carey's and Pavlich's of their era. In today's footy these blokes would revel in the contest just like Tony Shaw would. They dealt with pain themselves mate!
Look at Magro's hit on Jezza or Voss's on Richo....blokes back then knew how to inflict and absorb pain. They'd have handled today's hits Ok as well.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Daicos was such a good player he was played forward because the coach, being none other than Leigh Matherws, valued gaol kicking ability above all else. I recall him saying early in 1990 that had he realised just how good Daicos was up forward he would never have played him on the ball and that was when he was our best midfielder, having won the 1988 Copeland as a midfield and arguably having as good a year in 1989 as a midfielder. His 1985 to 1987 seasons were ruined by injury. In 1990 he kicked 97 goals but he actually started the year on the ball and played small stints on the ball throughout the year. Not only did he kick 97 goals but he had over 300 kicks and over 400 disposals.
 
MarkT2 said:
Daicos was such a good player he was played forward because the coach, being none other than Leigh Matherws, valued gaol kicking ability above all else. I recall him saying early in 1990 that had he realised just how good Daicos was up forward he would never have played him on the ball and that was when he was our best midfielder, having won the 1988 Copeland as a midfield and arguably having as good a year in 1989 as a midfielder. His 1985 to 1987 seasons were ruined by injury. In 1990 he kicked 97 goals but he actually started the year on the ball and played small stints on the ball throughout the year. Not only did he kick 97 goals but he had over 300 kicks and over 400 disposals.
Click to expand...

Nightmare knows his stuff but he is horribly wrong about Daicos. No other player in my lifetime could do the things he could. The buzz in the crowd when he was anywhere near the ball was amazing. A true Collingwood legend.
 
jmac70 said:
Nightmare knows his stuff but he is horribly wrong about Daicos. No other player in my lifetime could do the things he could. The buzz in the crowd when he was anywhere near the ball was amazing. A true Collingwood legend.
Click to expand...


AFL legend. No one else like him. Ever.
 
Gold pure gold, but watch that Montreal screwjob
BringouttheGimp said:
BS51PVnCMAExIAo.jpg
brethart_600x337.jpg
Click to expand...
ld
 
For the guys that weren't lucky enough to see Daics play and witness his puppetry of the Sherrin, he was able to manipulate the football like men can do to a drone with the aid of remote controls and current technologies...


Daics could make the ball bounce, bend, swing, dribble, dance, spin, fly through the sky like an icbm... The guy was Harry Potter with a football.

Never wasted a kick, was super reliable, was a great mark, was great at everything - and all with a rooted body for over half a decade.

When on was unstoppable. Was pure silk and poetry in motion.

Lets hope one of his young fellas possesses the Daicos Magic. Let's hope we are as fortunate as Geelong was with Junior.

Would be marvelous if it happens and we are debating whether the boy was better than the old man.
 
Buckley was the best and would be just what we need now.
But Daicos and Carman were something else, absolute freaks in their own way.
Will never be convinced that 77 would not have been different if Fabulous was on the ground playing for us.
Best side for me from My time reference 1976 onwards

B. Clement Pert Shaw A
HB. Burns Picken Richardson W
C. Brown Buckley (c) Millane
HF. Cloke T Cloke D Carman
F. Daicos Moore P Didak
R. Thompson Pendlebury Swan
I. Francis McGuane Reid Barham

C. Matthews
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Which player do you miss the most?

Similar threads

PowerfulPies2023
Which Premiership meant the most to you?
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
Gora
Gora
B
What do you want for Xmas
Replies
9
Views
146
Scud2
Scud2
jmac70
Roast Missing finals after a flag
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
4K
Pie eyed
Pie eyed
Black_White
  • Poll
Game Day Grand Final 2024: Who Do You Want To Win and Why?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
185
Views
5K
Tadpole
Tadpole
Hairydawg
Who have you been most wrong about?
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
150
Views
6K
Aussie pie
Aussie pie
Aussie pie
  • Poll
Oppo Camp Who will you follow in the finals assuming we don’t make it?
2 3 4
Replies
82
Views
3K
Mollythedolly
Mollythedolly
Kappa
Do we have the worst under 25 in the Comp?
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
250
Views
10K
sr36
sr36

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top