Nothing was done at the club without Eddie’s imprimatur but there was a board  in place and it had the responsibility of oversight. Those back ended contracts, the Grundy deal and the decision to get  Beams back were all done with board approval and they will be called upon in due course to answer for that!

12 hours ago, Blistering said:

They’re in for a world of pain unless Bucks starts getting some W’s. Lucky for them, they play North this week.

GO ?!

10 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I heard a whisper last Saturday that the AFL told The Filth to get rid of those 3 players last Summer or get done for Salary Cap breaches.

That was always the most likely reason for the sudden panicky dumping of 3 best-22 players. That it was spun as clearing up cap space to launch a bid at a superstar some time in the future only confirmed that.

 

9 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Eddie left a trainwreck 

This will become increasingly obvious as Pendles, Sidebottom, and a few others retire, with no-one coming through to replace them.

 

8 hours ago, faultydet said:

How funny would it be to see Norf bid with pick 1 for Daicos, and the pies spend their entire draft points matching it?

I think it's a highly likely scenario, and the Pies (fans at least) are aware of it. They will have to go into points deficit to match, apparently.

He sounds like someone we should go after

They would have expected to be mid table or better, so trading out their first pick to get Daicos made sense.  At 17th, this now looks silly as the points loss they take- moving from giving up pick 12, say, to giving up pick 2 on top of having to use up all their (diminished) points plus extras for one player- may cause them draft grief for an extra year.

i would have run screaming, too.

 

Buckley is still there though.   The dangers of hiring a golden child as coach.

In Collingwood's defense they went all out for a flag in 2017 and were within a kick of one in 2018. I imagine that even with their list issues had they won the flag everything would be BAU for them and they'd be in "rebuild" mode rather on the brink of collapse. Imagine what a difference one goal can have on the future of a club.

As much as it is always fun to criticise Collingwood, Buckley or anyone associated with that club, much of their current pain likely results from having been runner up in 2018. It is understandable that the club tried "topping up" after being one Dom Sheed kick from a premiership. It hasn't worked, but if it were my club, I would have been pleased that they tried.

 

It really cannot be understated just how appallingly bad Collingwood's list management and overall progress through 2020 into 2021 has been.

14 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I’m hoping that they have a few wins before they play us so they don’t have to treat the QB game as their grand final although we do need their crowd.

Also would prefer they finish about 4th last so that come draft time, someone nominates Nick Daicos ahead of their pick.

The same one that numbered 24,397 vs Gold Coast this weekend?

 

4 minutes ago, praha said:

In Collingwood's defense they went all out for a flag in 2017 and were within a kick of one in 2018. I imagine that even with their list issues had they won the flag everything would be BAU for them and they'd be in "rebuild" mode rather on the brink of collapse. Imagine what a difference one goal can have on the future of a club.

Snap!

It is my understanding that allegedly Beams was paid outside the salary cap through personal means of one or a few leviathan(s) of the club.

If this is true, what galls me is that the AFL have provided a means around engaging in punitive and public measures.

If this is true, then we are all witnesses to a sport which unfortunately whilst bedded in grass roots, is now as cynical as any business.

We know this to be true and yet we still engage with it - we are complicit.

Perhaps I need to go support the local BFL teams more fervently.

Edited May 6, 20214 yr by Engorged Onion

9 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

If this is true, what galls me is that the AFL have provided a means around engaging in punitive and public measures.

They didn't want to be seen to be "doing a Carlton" to C'wood. Instead they are letting them do it to themselves.

 

26 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

As much as it is always fun to criticise Collingwood, Buckley or anyone associated with that club, much of their current pain likely results from having been runner up in 2018.

It's very sad that their fairy tale turned out to be a bloke slipping on a banana peel. But Pies fans at the time queried the recruitment of Beams, Grundy's huge $$$ when they were already squeezed for cap space, and a number of other questionable list management decisions.

Just now, Mazer Rackham said:

They didn't want to be seen to be "doing a Carlton" to C'wood. Instead they are letting them do it to themselves.

 

It's very sad that their fairy tale turned out to be a bloke slipping on a banana peel. But Pies fans at the time queried the recruitment of Beams, Grundy's huge $$$ when they were already squeezed for cap space, and a number of other questionable list management decisions.

Why not @Mazer Rackham?

10 hours ago, A F said:

Tom Morris said tonight on FOX that Guy asked to resign after trade week last year, but will stay until the end of the mid season draft. It doesn't really make sense to me and sounds like Collingwood are continuing the spin.

Not sure if it is spin.  The Age gives a different angle: list-manager-ned-guy-quits

"Guy arrived at the end of 2017 and inherited a salary cap that had for years back-ended and extended contracts to push problems down the road with large, long-term deals.

That (2 first round draft picks for Beams) deal was done on the basis that Beams was a top-10 midfield talent in the league coming into a side that was a kick off a premiership, but also with significant pressure from the board to bring the former Magpies premiership player back to the club from Brisbane.

He also signed Brodie Grundy to a seven-year deal worth about $925,000 a year amid strong pressure from the board to retain the ruckman and in a climate of a hemorrhaging salary cap where the only way to retain Grundy was to commit to a long-term deal."

 

The article goes on and it sounds to me they really wanted to keep him.

I'm guessing the mess he inherited, the Board interference in Beams/Grundy and maybe other list management, being made to trade 3 required players and its spin going terribly wrong, through no fault of his made him realise what a mess he was in.  Also the realisation that it would take years to repair the list and before it started to perform again.

I would walk to.

Edited May 7, 20214 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Keep going Collingwood.

 

Coll also traded out their second round pick - currently pick 21. 

So picks 2 and 21 have gone down the gurgler for 5 -6 picks in 2020 that were in the mid teens to mid 30's range.  All to protect their Daicos position this year.  Huge own goal.  Double own goal if they have to go into points deficit this year and chew up part of their 2022 first round pick.  They will probably trade it out but it just prolongs the pain. 

Their first pick this year is the Bulldogs second - currently pick 35.  Add in any F/S, Academy picks and that goes out to mid 40's.

World of pain for years.

34 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Coll also traded out their second round pick - currently pick 21. 

So picks 2 and 21 have gone down the gurgler for 5 -6 picks in 2020 that were in the mid teens to mid 30's range.  All to protect their Daicos position this year.  Huge own goal.  Double own goal if they have to go into points deficit this year and chew up part of their 2022 first round pick.  They will probably trade it out but it just prolongs the pain. 

Their first pick this year is the Bulldogs second - currently pick 35.  Add in any F/S, Academy picks and that goes out to mid 40's.

World of pain for years.

If what @Engorged Onion wrote is true, they should have been Carltoned and denied access to 2 or 3 drafts.

Imagine how that would have gone with Daicos having to play for another club.

So they are due to be in the wilderness like Carlton have been for 15 years.

They've been 'topping-up' for a flag for a long time now and, though close, it never came.  Putting off an investment in youth for so long has cost them in picks and development, but has mainly meant that good players went underpaid and are now expecting/promised a huge bump that their output doesn't justify.

If this was done a couple of years ago, they would have had some very good trade currency, as it now stands, they have very little.  No one on earth would take on Grundy's contract, Pendlebury (their best player) is in his twilight, Howe and Sidebottom are on their last legs as well and DeGoey has flashing red lights all over him.

Couple of talented kids in Daicos and Quaynor, couple in their prime in Adams and Moore... but then some massive, gaping holes in the list.

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

They didn't want to be seen to be "doing a Carlton" to C'wood.

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

Why not @Mazer Rackham?

I think they felt like they went too hard on Carlton back in the 00's and set them (a "big 4" money generating bums-on-seats club) back too far.

They've always shied away from confrontation with Eddie, so the thought of doing something like that to the Pies with him still in charge, and on the airwaves too, sent chills up and down their spines.

So (reminiscent of when Demetriou just happened to call the Essendon pres and casually dropped that 'a club -- Lord, who knows which one?' was going to be raided by ASADA the next day) Gil called Eddie and said, 'gosh, I wouldn't want to be any club caught over the salary cap in 2021. Just saying. How's the wife and kids?'

 

1 hour ago, Mazer Rackham said:

Instead they are letting them do it to themselves.

Draft pick order as at the end of Round 7:

Richmond: 13, 14, 23, 31, 45, 49
Collingwood: 38, 56, 74, 92, 110, 128

Some old stagers are due to retire and how are they going to replace them with pick 74 & 92? It's almost as if the AFL had stripped them of draft picks.

1 hour ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

They've been 'topping-up' for a flag for a long time now and, though close, it never came.  Putting off an investment in youth for so long has cost them in picks and development, but has mainly meant that good players went underpaid and are now expecting/promised a huge bump that their output doesn't justify.

 

Didn't help that when they did go to the draft it didn't work out well. Scharenberg and Freeman for example would be filling those gaps now. I don't think they have been scrutinised enough for the drafting over the years.