Yes, St. Kilda's example is a tale of caution.

Melbourne is really lacking a gorilla to protect some of our younger guys and stars at the moment. We need some sort of part animal in the team to intimidate opponents when required. This is still a short-term thing but it's really obvious, I think.

I really hope DB has it in him, as I like him. But we may find in a year or two, if things don't continue on the ascent, we may need to chase someone like Paul Roos.

Gorillas make crappy footballers. Let's not go down that path.Also, how did Paul Roos go against Dean Bailey this year?

Edited October 3, 201014 yr by Chook

Gorillas make crappy footballers. Let's not go down that path.Also, how did Paul Roos go against Dean Bailey this year?

He took a pretty ordinary team very close to the preliminary final.

That's like saying "How did Mick Malthouse go against Bailey?"

The biggest difference with Collingwood this year is that they have brought their "A" mental game against allcommers this year. On paper they don't appear too remarkable. Their game plan is old fashioned and predictable. They don't have any forward of note except Didak. Nine of their premiership players have played 60 or less games. A lot of their younger players seem to be developing much faster than ours. 90% of the game is played upstairs which they have done this year and thats an area Melbourne still fails badly and all the prime draft picks in the world wont help. Melbourne matched outstandingly well against them this year when switched on. To bad we still cherry pick when we want to be on. 8/22 for us this season is less than par. Should have been minimum 11/11 with the talent and depht at the club. If we didn't tank last year we would have likely won the same. Thats my big jealousy gripe.

I was surprised this morning when Caroline Wilson pointed out during the Offsiders (ABC-TV) that, 7 of the Collingwood players had 50, or less games in them; 9 with less then 60, is even more remarkable. On first impression, it does make us appear to have been under-achievers, in 2010.

But, in 2010, we had to rely quite heavily on our youngsters. They all played very important parts in our wins and near wins - e.g. Pettherd in his last game of the year, against the Maggies, the ball getting abilities of Scully and Trengove, the leaping and finishing off by LJ, and more.

It was not the "kids" who got Collingwood over the line - with maybe, 1 or 2 exceptions.

It was the steady discipline and desperation, of Maxwell, Shaw,Pendlebury,Ball (I hate to say it) Jolly, etc.,the experienced players,who created the opportunities for the win. Of course, that is not to discount the contributions of the young guys.You don't win a Grand Final, without everyone contributing. But, the kids were often, a (very able) support group.

Therefore, because we have chosen to bring our young group forward, and do not have - or perhaps some might say, have let go - so much experience, inconsistency such as we saw this year, is understandable.

However, if by the middle of 2011, we are still blaming failures on the "young and inexperienced" group, then we have a problem.

I was surprised this morning when Caroline Wilson pointed out during the Offsiders (ABC-TV) that, 7 of the Collingwood players had 50, or less games in them; 9 with less then 60, is even more remarkable. On first impression, it does make us appear to have been under-achievers, in 2010.

But, in 2010, we had to rely quite heavily on our youngsters. They all played very important parts in our wins and near wins - e.g. Pettherd in his last game of the year, against the Maggies, the ball getting abilities of Scully and Trengove, the leaping and finishing off by LJ, and more.

It was not the "kids" who got Collingwood over the line - with maybe, 1 or 2 exceptions.

It was the steady discipline and desperation, of Maxwell, Shaw,Pendlebury,Ball (I hate to say it) Jolly, etc.,the experienced players,who created the opportunities for the win. Of course, that is not to discount the contributions of the young guys.You don't win a Grand Final, without everyone contributing. But, the kids were often, a (very able) support group.

Therefore, because we have chosen to bring our young group forward, and do not have - or perhaps some might say, have let go - so much experience, inconsistency such as we saw this year, is understandable.

However, if by the middle of 2011, we are still blaming failures on the "young and inexperienced" group, then we have a problem.

Correct. Now that junior Mac is off our list. What is our average age and experience in relation to Collingwoods??

Age isn't the only factor.

If collingwood was subjected to the injuries we had over the course of the season, they wouldn't have won the flag.

Age isn't the only factor.

If collingwood was subjected to the injuries we had over the course of the season, they wouldn't have won the flag.

Every club has injuries 25 we cannot use that as an excuse. We need at least 30 guys on the list ready to go at anytime during the season.

The Filth used 35 players in the seniors this year. Unprecedented for a GF winner.

Edited October 3, 201014 yr by why you little

Every club has injuries 25 we cannot use that as an excuse. We need at least 30 guys on the list ready to go at anytime during the season.

The Filth used 35 players in the seniors this year. Unprecedented for a GF winner.

It is correct to say "age isn't the only factor". But, younger players are the future of our club. It is more important to put the "50+ games" into them, than to hold on to older or struggling "middle years" players, who will never make it.

The more of the younger players, who have 50+ games in them, the closer we will be, to creating that "rump" of guys who are ready to slot in, at any time.

A much better long term policy, than 4 points...in 2010.

Every club has injuries 25 we cannot use that as an excuse. We need at least 30 guys on the list ready to go at anytime during the season.

The Filth used 35 players in the seniors this year. Unprecedented for a GF winner.

But only had 1-2 on the injury list, come round 22. A fresh playing list coming into the finals enabled them to go all the way and smash the Saints.

Yep, if Melbourne are going to spend some money, I'd be happiest seeing it deployed on a top class fitness person. There is bad luck. But it's funny that some teams (usually the top ones) seem to cop less of it than others.

But only had 1-2 on the injury list, come round 22. A fresh playing list coming into the finals enabled them to go all the way and smash the Saints.

Not disputing that, But what enabled them to be in such good nick so late in the season? was it luck, Rotations or just pure ass??

With both Melbourne and Collingwood having such young groups, how is it collingwood can play in front of big crowds each week and maintain a high pressure, whereas we the MFC can only do it sporadically?

Not disputing that, But what enabled them to be in such good nick so late in the season? was it luck, Rotations or just pure ass??

With both Melbourne and Collingwood having such young groups, how is it collingwood can play in front of big crowds each week and maintain a high pressure, whereas we the MFC can only do it sporadically?

Didn't you answer that earlier, by agreeing with me that, Collingwood's "experienced" players are sufficient enough in numbers and possibly at their collective peaks and that is a major factor, in why they got there?

Not disputing that, But what enabled them to be in such good nick so late in the season? was it luck, Rotations or just pure ass??

With both Melbourne and Collingwood having such young groups, how is it collingwood can play in front of big crowds each week and maintain a high pressure, whereas we the MFC can only do it sporadically?

We don't have a Swan, Didak, Cloke etc.

Swan gathers huge tallies of possessions every week. He has a great football brain and is a terrific clearance player.

Didak is a magician who can slot a goal from any angle. Very effective in the midfield too.

Cloke may be a hopeless set-shot but he's a good contested mark and lead-up forward who doesn't stop presenting.

We don't have any of that yet.

Didn't you answer that earlier, by agreeing with me that, Collingwood's "experienced" players are sufficient enough in numbers and possibly at their collective peaks and that is a major factor, in why they got there?

My original question was to know the respective ages and games played between collingwood and melbourne, now that junior has left the building..

My original question was to know the respective ages and games played between collingwood and melbourne, now that junior has left the building..

Apologies, I thought that was a rhetorical question.

I can't answer right now, but I see your point.

It felt strange during the year, to hear that several of the sides we played in 2010, were on average younger than us.

I usually discounted that, by thinking the average blew out, thanks largely, to Junior and Cam.

But nobody looked at the amount of games our young guys had played, as opposed, to the opposition.

2011 is a different game. Many of the young guns have at least one season together, under their belts and it is time for the new leader group, to step up and join the "senior" players such as Green and Davey - for they have suddenly become the "experienced" players who will have to lead us forward, to that ever so elusive "golden chalice"... Go Dees in 2011 and beyond!

Apologies, I thought that was a rhetorical question.

I can't answer right now, but I see your point.

It felt strange during the year, to hear that several of the sides we played in 2010, were on average younger than us.

I usually discounted that, by thinking the average blew out, thanks largely, to Junior and Cam.

But nobody looked at the amount of games our young guys had played, as opposed, to the opposition.

2011 is a different game. Many of the young guns have at least one season together, under their belts and it is time for the new leader group, to step up and join the "senior" players such as Green and Davey - for they have suddenly become the "experienced" players who will have to lead us forward, to that ever so elusive "golden chalice"... Go Dees in 2011 and beyond!

Yes, some people on here may not like it too much, but 2011 is a year where excuses cannot be tolerated, sure we are a young side-But so were the 2010 premier team.

A lot about next year i believe should be about mental toughness-Who Really wants to succeed? Its a hard call i know, but Football is a brutal Game.

The pressure excerted in those 8 Grand Final Quarters was intense, sure The Pies were lucky to get a second crack yes, but cripes they were so well drilled yesterday from the first bounce, i was amazed. That is the Level & beyond is where the club has to get. Bails is a tough nut, and i have faith he knows this well.

Yes, some people on here may not like it too much, but 2011 is a year where excuses cannot be tolerated, sure we are a young side-But so were the 2010 premier team.

The Pies premiership team were a good 12 months on average older than the MFC side this year and had a cumulative 400 to 700 games more of experience. And the numbers look a little worse if you take Junior out. There is a huge gulf of experience between the Pies and ourselves. In 2010, Collingwood brought in Ball, Jolly and Brown all with 180 games experience. MFC brought in Scully, Trengove and Gysberts who had little. Ring a bell.

And as for sorting out mental toughness, we will still be blooding new players next years in Tapscott, Blease and others while we try and get games into other young players who have played 50 games or less. We should expect improvement next year but it helps to have a sense of realism to that expectation.

The Pies in 2010 were formed around a nucleus of experienced, mature well coached players. We are getting there but we aint at the flag stage yet.

At least the football club have a better idea of where things are at without having to stoop to ra ra statements and cliches.

If any side should feel like they have missed the boat is St Kilda with an average age of 26+ years. Gone so close in consecutive years and might end up being the perennnial bridesmaid

The Pies premiership team were a good 12 months on average older than the MFC side this year and had a cumulative 400 to 700 games more of experience. And the numbers look a little worse if you take Junior out. There is a huge gulf of experience between the Pies and ourselves. In 2010, Collingwood brought in Ball, Jolly and Brown all with 180 games experience. MFC brought in Scully, Trengove and Gysberts who had little. Ring a bell.

And as for sorting out mental toughness, we will still be blooding new players next years in Tapscott, Blease and others while we try and get games into other young players who have played 50 games or less. We should expect improvement next year but it helps to have a sense of realism to that expectation.

The Pies in 2010 were formed around a nucleus of experienced, mature well coached players. We are getting there but we aint at the flag stage yet.

At least the football club have a better idea of where things are at without having to stoop to ra ra statements and cliches.

If any side should feel like they have missed the boat is St Kilda with an average age of 26+ years. Gone so close in consecutive years and might end up being the perennnial bridesmaid

Oh i agree the saints have missed the boat-my brother is Gutted.

Next year we will be playing new players, but thats no excuse to not bring Mental toughness in at the same time-As long as our leaders stand up.

I don't expect us to win the flag next year, but at the same time i will not except a mediocre year and hear the old chestnut "The Team is still young" I say that because a lot of collingwood were young and they were not passengers in those finals-They produced.

Stage one for us is winning games away from the MCG

WYL & Rhino, I agree with both of you.

The facts about the number of games are important, but we must know where we are heading this time - and that is, the highest result: starting with our first premiership in nearly (which also might be) 50 years!

True, Collingwood was built around a hard core, over a few years.

Our core had grow quite stale, through a reluctance to do the right thing and start again - until now.

We are developing a new core - we either retired, or let go what we had, over the last 2 years.

This was not done without forethought - unlike before.

But, it was realized, we needed a new game plan (with several options)if we are to be the force, we want our club to be.

And to achieve that, we needed to cut our ties with the "old days", on the field, whilst at the same time, bringing back the great history and achievements of the "original" Australian Rules Football Club.

It's a tall order, but if anyone can do it, I believe the current administration and the nucleus of players now in place, can make Melbourne, once again, be the GREATEST side in the competition !

Go Dees!

Edited October 3, 201014 yr by BangkokDemon

Oh i agree the saints have missed the boat-my brother is Gutted.

Next year we will be playing new players, but thats no excuse to not bring Mental toughness in at the same time-As long as our leaders stand up.

I don't expect us to win the flag next year, but at the same time i will not except a mediocre year and hear the old chestnut "The Team is still young" I say that because a lot of collingwood were young and they were not passengers in those finals-They produced.

1. We had few reliable leaders in the senior playing group this year. We have one less in 2011 with Junior gone. Collingwood had the following players with over 100 games in their GF team. Ball Brown Cloke Didak Swan Pendlebury Jolly Shaw OBrien Maxwell etc. Getting the picture. Over the year Collingwood have evolved out of the 22 Davis, Fraser , Lockyer and Presti. A BKK D has pointed out there is a hard core there

2. Do the sums and you will see that Collingwood are further along the evolutionary path. You are bleating on the same terms as "we should stop accepting mediocrity". Its boring and its ill informed.

1. We had few reliable leaders in the senior playing group this year. We have one less in 2011 with Junior gone. Collingwood had the following players with over 100 games in their GF team. Ball Brown Cloke Didak Swan Pendlebury Jolly Shaw OBrien Maxwell etc. Getting the picture. Over the year Collingwood have evolved out of the 22 Davis, Fraser , Lockyer and Presti. A BKK D has pointed out there is a hard core there

2. Do the sums and you will see that Collingwood are further along the evolutionary path. You are bleating on the same terms as "we should stop accepting mediocrity". Its boring and its ill informed.

i am well aware of where the list is, but i stand by the fact that i will not accept mediocrity-you can call it boring, but as far as i am concerned this entire club has dodged bullets for years and years. With new training facilities this summer the fitness of the boys should improve.

I am hoping training above the shoulders improves in the same direction.

I know if it was me out there next year, playing for Jimmy would give me an extra ounce. Who knows how far that could carry the team??

WYL & Rhino, I agree with both of you.

The facts about the number of games are important, but we must know where we are heading this time - and that is, the highest result: starting with our first premiership in nearly (which also might be) 50 years!

True, Collingwood was built around a hard core, over a few years.

Our core had grow quite stale, through a reluctance to do the right thing and start again - until now.

We are developing a new core - we either retired, or let go what we had, over the last 2 years.

This was not done without forethought - unlike before.

But, it was realized, we needed a new game plan (with several options)if we are to be the force, we want our club to be.

And to achieve that, we needed to cut our ties with the "old days", on the field, whilst at the same time, bringing back the great history and achievements of the "original" Australian Rules Football Club.

It's a tall order, but if anyone can do it, I believe the current administration and the nucleus of players now in place, can make Melbourne, once again, be the GREATEST side in the competition !

Go Dees!

Well said BD i take all of what you say on board-But i just want to make sure with all those changes we the club do not sit back and accept average performances, they will happen for a year or two, but we must never accept them. The Footy Dept and the players must walk from them and just say "It's not on".

In 2010 we got 7 games at the 'G to start the season, i doubt that will happen for a while again-and those early games are important.

This summers pre season should be fascinating with the new facilities now being used (next door to the Filth too. i like that)

i am well aware of where the list is, but i stand by the fact that i will not accept mediocrity-you can call it boring, but as far as i am concerned this entire club has dodged bullets for years and years. With new training facilities this summer the fitness of the boys should improve.

I am hoping training above the shoulders improves in the same direction.

I know if it was me out there next year, playing for Jimmy would give me an extra ounce. Who knows how far that could carry the team??

WYL, I think we all agree that there is no longer a place in this club for anything but the best.

I don't think the current administration and coaching staff want anything else either.

Just playing a few "inspiring" games in the H&A season and winning a final, is no longer enough for anyone.

Do you think young guys like Scully, Trengove and their ilk, along with the more "experienced" Sylvia, Frawley and even Dunn - not to say guys such as Green and Davey, who would dearly love to play out their careers as champions in a champion side, will accept anything less, than the same success we all want ?

I don't.

And, that's why - as anxious as I am - I believe, this mob can do it !!

WYL, I think we all agree that there is no longer a place in this club for anything but the best.

I don't think the current administration and coaching staff want anything else either.

Just playing a few "inspiring" games in the H&A season and winning a final, is no longer enough for anyone.

Do you think young guys like Scully, Trengove and their ilk, along with the more "experienced" Sylvia, Frawley and even Dunn - not to say guys such as Green and Davey, who would dearly love to play out their careers as champions in a champion side, will accept anything less, than the same success we all want ?

I don't.

And, that's why - as anxious as I am - I believe, this mob can do it !!

i hope all those players you mentioned above will only accept the best Yes. But is the Best they strive for as good as it can get. This is what worries me about all the victorian clubs who have been starved of success for years.

As i said the new training facilities should help, but the coaches and trainers we have must be top notch.

I suppose what i am getting at is this....would those young kids playing for collingwood yesterday play as well for the MFC??

I think 2011 is going to tell all of us a lot about this club, because the administration and the supporters have Kick started the place over the last 3 years, it is now the Footy Dept. that must push for excellence.

The coach who replaces wellman has got to be good.

i hope all those players you mentioned above will only accept the best Yes. But is the Best they strive for as good as it can get. This is what worries me about all the victorian clubs who have been starved of success for years.

As i said the new training facilities should help, but the coaches and trainers we have must be top notch.

I suppose what i am getting at is this....would those young kids playing for collingwood yesterday play as well for the MFC??

I think 2011 is going to tell all of us a lot about this club, because the administration and the supporters have Kick started the place over the last 3 years, it is now the Footy Dept. that must push for excellence.

The coach who replaces wellman has got to be good.

It's not just about "line" coaches - as they are now called (yuk!.

Wellman taught the back"line" very well.

But, it's not him playing.

In the end it is up to players to perform - they are not robots.

Remember the days of "playing coaches" - Barrassi?

There were no "line coaches" back then.

It was a much slower and less "scientific" game, I admit.

The players had to use their brains - they still have to use their brains.

Have faith in the players.

After all, it is them on the field.

They are the ones who have the ultimate responsibility - to bring home the flag...for Melbourne.

That Victorian clubs have been starved and had to fight a system the AFL created, to build up interstate clubs should be an incentive to show them, that despite the odds (and this AFL support for the Suns and GWS is yet another example)we are better than anyone else.

Thinking about that, isn't that exactly what Jimmy and the boys have done already ?

The AFL tried to push us in all sorts of ways, to relocate, to merge, to close down etc..

It didn't happen.

But, it won't have been worthwhile, until those guys on the field are running around the MCG at 5pm on either, the last Saturday of September, and/or the first Saturday of October, embracing the Red & Blue brigade and holding that glorious trophy up high for all all to see!

Then, of course, there's the year after and the many years after that!!

Now, tell me, what player wouldn't want to be part of that??

Edited October 3, 201014 yr by BangkokDemon