Cloke and Collingwood - to part or not to part?

[Range Rover 1,935]

In the main I agree, as I'm also in favour of developing from within and said so during a PM with another poster recently. But I'm also in favour of assessing opportunities on their individual merits. Templeton and Moore were failed moves, despite the latters Brownlow, but when you say "you learn from your mistakes", it's too simplistic. Lockett went to Sydney and played in a GF, Greg Williams went to Carlton and won a flag, Barry Hall got his act together and Sydney wouldn't have won the 2005 flag without him. Much depends on how high you rate Cloke. I rate him very highly.

The bottom line for me is can we become a premiership threat with Travis Cloke in the forward-line within the next 5 years ? And I'd make any decisions with that premise in mind. Flags aren't won easily and after such a premiership drought it would be remiss of the club not to consider their options. It all gets back to a chance at a flag, well for me anyway.

You say we'd "hamstring" our ability to retain and find other players. Would we ? This is part of the assessment. No-one would advocate selling the farm for just one player, but it may be possible to get Cloke and manage the rest of our list accordingly. As supporters we're guessing.

Btw, when assessing the Cloke option you also said "and retain players who would be much more valuable to us". What do you mean by "much more valuable to us" ? The last time I looked we didn't have a player on our list that was "much more valuable" than a 25 year old 196cm/110 kilo, 70 goal a year key forward. I appreciate that you're speculating 4-5 years down the track, but lists aren't static. The list will keep evolving and our ability to meet players requirements in a successful culture should be manageable. There won't be new "franchise" teams offering bucket loads and most players don't want to leave successful clubs, which is why luring Cloke is probably unlikely.

I stumbled across a post today I made on Demonland in 2006. Most supporters at the time expected we were in for success in the years 2007-2009. That now seems laughable, but my point is that one should never look too far ahead. There are times when an opportunity comes along that may place you far closer to a flag than you'd otherwise be and my advice would be to at least look at the opportunity versus cost.

Agree with your post. These football industry formulas people work with nowadays ... 'x) draft picks plus y) development plus z) premiership window' or whatever variation it is can only ever be a guideline. We're operating in a cut-throat 18-team comp and if an opportunity bobs up on the radar sometimes you've got to say stuff it and hang your balls on the line to accelerate the process. Otherwise, in all likelihood, life will forever find a way to shove you to the back of the line.

Yes, issues will arise down the track if we secure Cloke on big coin but so be it. We work them out on the run. Success has a funny way of enticing people to stay.

I always come back to that saying ... "a good plan today is better than a better plan tomorrow". Travis Cloke is not Kelvin Templeton. He is Travis Cloke.

And together with Clark he suddenly changes the whole face of the football club and we can all start walking from Richmond station to the G again with a confident gait in our step.

[Carrot Top 947]

I was listening to Sports Central on Perth radio 6pr last night (3AW sister station). Brad Hardie said that the word on the street is that Pies have offered Cloake 3 years @ ~750,000 a year, Dockers @ 900,000, and Dee's 1.1 mill.

Then they also discussed how the demons seem to get into bidding wars with Freo and insinuated that it had something to do with Schwab and Connelly?! Think that’s a bit farfetched, but they seemed to think us making a play for Clark and now Cloake is an ego trip for Schwab against this old club

not sure if it has any merit

None at all. We are trying to fill the same holes as them. They missed Clark so it's only natural they chase the next top forward that comes up.

I'm unsure myself. If the rumours are right then it's a lot of money and a lot of eggs in one basket, but then again with less and less space in the forward lines these days a one grab man mountain is always a good thing. But a million good things a year? I dunno.

[hardtack 10,127]

Agree with your post. These football industry formulas people work with nowadays ... 'x) draft picks plus y) development plus z) premiership window' or whatever variation it is can only ever be a guideline. We're operating in a cut-throat 18-team comp and if an opportunity bobs up on the radar sometimes you've got to say stuff it and hang your balls on the line to accelerate the process. Otherwise, in all likelihood, life will forever find a way to shove you to the back of the line.

Yes, issues will arise down the track if we secure Cloke on big coin but so be it. We work them out on the run. Success has a funny way of enticing people to stay.

I always come back to that saying ... "a good plan today is better than a better plan tomorrow". Travis Cloke is not Kelvin Templeton. He is Travis Cloke.

And together with Clark he suddenly changes the whole face of the football club and we can all start walking from Richmond station to the G again with a confident gait in our step.

I find myself nodding in agreement with your posts far too often lately RR ;-)

[Range Rover 1,935]

I find myself nodding in agreement with your posts far too often lately RR ;-)

Thank you for underlining the point Htack. Even on Demonland nothing's impossible!

[Roost It 1,434]

He'd look good in a Melbourne guernsey with a Premiership medallion round his neck, mind you so would most of us.

[monoccular 16,158]

I went Saturday just to watch him as have never seen him in the flesh and only watched clips of him from the TAC Cup days.

He still is skinny but has definitely getting more muscle around his arms, chest and legs from the old footage. Someone said on here I think that he has put on about 10kgs. Wouldn't be surprised but he is still thin.

They played him full forward all day starting about 15m out from goal with Fitzy sitting about 15m out on the other side. There werent many search leads outside the arc. Think he was told to stay close to home.

He didn't take any big pack marks Saturday but one on one his hands were great at least 4 or 5 times. His opponent looked young also with a similar build. Cooky held his own and his hands looked really good. Every grab of his just stuck. No fumbling at all.

He will never be a cloke build wise, more of a Kosi I think.

Think Jack Reiwoldt/Kozitsche.....

Thanks for all that

Still looks a "useful prospect" then.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Carlton have just announced the re-signing of Gibbs (2014) and Krooza (2015) so you would think they'd be out of the running. Surely even they would've run out of recycled brown visy paper bags by now.

[monoccular 16,158]

We need a gun mid.

BUT

I'd love to see Gary Lyon come out on the footy show and say that he knows from a credible source that cloke will not play for collingwood next year. It'd be fantastic, even if a complete lie

LOL

[old dee 22,930]

He'd look good in a Melbourne guernsey with a Premiership medallion round his neck, mind you so would most of us.

Not sure I would Roost it

just I little old, pretty sure everyone would twigg I was well past it.

[old55 21,360]

Tim Harrington will know what the impact of a big long Cloke contract is on future player payments - that will be factored in. We won't have to worry about David Cloke, Travis will be on a contract to the end of his career so there'll be no more contract negotiations and if where and when he's played becomes an issue then David is the least of our worries. I'm open to the idea if TH does the sums and they come up OK - we don't know how much front-loading space we've got but it could be substantial. Free agency is the big game changer here - the fact that we don't have to give 2 1st rounders like Geelong did for Ottens makes an enormous difference - we can have our FA Cloke and eat our midfield draft too.

[DemonWA 3,448]

I wouldnt want to sign him up for more than 3 years

Think about how quickly Green fell from grace? I wouldnt want to be payign Cloke 1.1 million in 5 years time when he might well be past it

[Range Rover 1,935]

I wouldnt want to sign him up for more than 3 years

Think about how quickly Green fell from grace? I wouldnt want to be payign Cloke 1.1 million in 5 years time when he might well be past it

I don't see the comparison. One is a mid-sized forward the other is a forward 50 arc gorilla who in a worst case scenario will become a goal mouth gorilla in his twighlight years.

He 'aint gonna get any smaller.

[mauriesy 6,815]

I wouldnt want to sign him up for more than 3 years

Cloke has just turned 25, 7 months older than Clark, to whom we gave 4 years.

[DemonWA 3,448]

a goal mouth gorilla in his twighlight years.

he'll probably miss from the goal mouth!

[DemonWA 3,448]

Cloke has just turned 25, 7 months older than Clark, to whom we gave 4 years.

Mitch Clarke has been a great pick up, but longer contracts should be reserved for younger guys IMO (Trengove being the perfect example of when and why to offer such a long deal IMO)

[old dee 22,930]

Mitch Clarke has been a great pick up, but longer contracts should be reserved for younger guys IMO (Trengove being the perfect example of when and why to offer such a long deal IMO)

Not sure even then you would want to give someone a 5 year deal.

IMO there are probably a hand full in the league.

I do not see Trengove as a five year deal player at this point.

Might be in a year or two, nothing yet suggests to me he will be more than a good player.

In fact no one at the Dees suggests 5 years.

They might in two years time but not now.

As for Cloke IMO he is a good player in a good side who is at best an average kick.

How would he go in a team that gives him half the chances he gets at the Pies.

That is the $64 question!

[rjay 23,927]

In the main I agree, as I'm also in favour of developing from within and said so during a PM with another poster recently. But I'm also in favour of assessing opportunities on their individual merits. Templeton and Moore were failed moves, despite the latters Brownlow, but when you say "you learn from your mistakes", it's too simplistic. Lockett went to Sydney and played in a GF, Greg Williams went to Carlton and won a flag, Barry Hall got his act together and Sydney wouldn't have won the 2005 flag without him. Much depends on how high you rate Cloke. I rate him very highly.

The bottom line for me is can we become a premiership threat with Travis Cloke in the forward-line within the next 5 years ? And I'd make any decisions with that premise in mind. Flags aren't won easily and after such a premiership drought it would be remiss of the club not to consider their options. It all gets back to a chance at a flag, well for me anyway.

You say we'd "hamstring" our ability to retain and find other players. Would we ? This is part of the assessment. No-one would advocate selling the farm for just one player, but it may be possible to get Cloke and manage the rest of our list accordingly. As supporters we're guessing.

Btw, when assessing the Cloke option you also said "and retain players who would be much more valuable to us". What do you mean by "much more valuable to us" ? The last time I looked we didn't have a player on our list that was "much more valuable" than a 25 year old 196cm/110 kilo, 70 goal a year key forward. I appreciate that you're speculating 4-5 years down the track, but lists aren't static. The list will keep evolving and our ability to meet players requirements in a successful culture should be manageable. There won't be new "franchise" teams offering bucket loads and most players don't want to leave successful clubs, which is why luring Cloke is probably unlikely.

I stumbled across a post today I made on Demonland in 2006. Most supporters at the time expected we were in for success in the years 2007-2009. That now seems laughable, but my point is that one should never look too far ahead. There are times when an opportunity comes along that may place you far closer to a flag than you'd otherwise be and my advice would be to at least look at the opportunity versus cost.

I just think it tips the scale out of balance, if we are paying a player over odds it effects the team dynamic. Geelong built a team culture and players were payed under their market value to hold that team, no player would have accepted that deal if say Ablett was on a huge contract, that's why Geelong had to let him go. They lost their star and still won another flag.

Collingwood have kept their stars on lesser money that's also why they won't pay Cloke what others will offer, it tips the balance. He knows this and it is more likely he is really pushing for the extra year. If he gets 5 he stays at the money offered.

I'm for building from within as you state you are and I also like you think if we find a good fit we need to look at the player but not at the risk of the team.

Players will be falling out from GC at the end of this year and GWS the next, lets not blow it all on one man.

I don't think the money and term that is being quoted for Cloke is worth it. In fact I think it is a beat up to be truthful.

[rpfc 27,531]

Well, I am off the fence on this one - I think he has got a few more flags in him and I would love it if we got him.

We would be closer to a flag and my uncles are Collingwood fans, it would derail them for 5 years.

The club - not my uncles...

[old55 21,360]

I wouldnt want to sign him up for more than 3 years

Just simply say you're not interested then.

The reason why his dad is telling Collingwood 5 years is because we and Freo have offered him at least that many.

[DemonWA 3,448]

Just simply say you're not interested then.

The reason why his dad is telling Collingwood 5 years is because we and Freo have offered him at least that many.

Im not interested in Travis Cloke

[old dee 22,930]

Just simply say you're not interested then.

The reason why his dad is telling Collingwood 5 years is because we and Freo have offered him at least that many.

That may be true old55 but it may also just be a gambit on his behalf to up the ante.

He may just be saying to the Pies ok if you cannot match the $ amount but I will except less on a 5 year deal.

There is so much we do not know that all our thoughts are probably worthless because we base them little actual information.

my guess is he stays at the pies on an increased rate over 4 years.

Absolute guess on my part

[simma02 53]

We need to splash money at mid fielders - not Cloke.

[Range Rover 1,935]

That may be true old55 but it may also just be a gambit on his behalf to up the ante.

He may just be saying to the Pies ok if you cannot match the $ amount but I will except less on a 5 year deal.

There is so much we do not know that all our thoughts are probably worthless because we base them little actual information.

my guess is he stays at the pies on an increased rate over 4 years.

Absolute guess on my part

Even if it is a gambit it's a gambit with weight because Cloke Snr can just point to Mitch Clark and say "if he got 5, so can Trav".

Cloke will get a 5-year deal whether it's at Collingwood, Freo, us or some other club. The Clokes are sitting on gold and they know it.

[old55 21,360]

That may be true old55 but it may also just be a gambit on his behalf to up the ante.

He may just be saying to the Pies ok if you cannot match the $ amount but I will except less on a 5 year deal.

There is so much we do not know that all our thoughts are probably worthless because we base them little actual information.

my guess is he stays at the pies on an increased rate over 4 years.

Absolute guess on my part

gee thanks for that

[old dee 22,930]

gee thanks for that

My point old55 is that we are all just guessing.