Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

AN_Inkling wrote:

Brenny wrote:Ceglar is going to have to step up too at some point.

I don't think Shae will ever debut, and Ceglar is going to be next inline after Wood.

Ceglar could be 4-5 years away, at least. That's if he even makes it. Not too many quality rucks under 24. Most that are playing in the firsts, were very early picks.

Hence why I said after Wood

I don't want to go through a patch again where we don't have a dedicated ruckman.

Ruck cost us in 2007. Don't want to go through that again.

Without stating the bleeding obvious, a massive few weeks coming up for him. Looking forward to see how he goes.

Brenny wrote:Jolly is 30 too. Wont be around too too much longer.

The Pies have put a succession plan (for better or worse) in place for the head coach. I'd be surprised if Hine doesn't have a Plan A, B, C and D for our ruck.

Assuming Jolly retires after 2013 season, what we need is a 26-29 year old big bodied ruck man, not injury prone, who can go forward or back ready to go.

Plan A would be for Woods to step up as No#1 ruck with Keefe / Ceglar / Shae as number 2

Plan B would be for Keefe / Shae (doubtful) to step up as No#1 with Ceglar, Keefe, Shae, or some draft recruit as number 2. Wood will have been delisted if Plan A doesn't work.

Plan C would be for us to trade for a ready built ruck around the 28-30 years mark just as we did with Jolly. The target would be someone in an underperforming team or a club on the rebuild where the player sees their dream of a premiership gone. If it was 2013 now I'd think someone like Cox, Brogan, or Jamar would fit the bill, though most of these guys would be past it when then 2014 season starts.

Plan D? I don't have one, but I'm not Hine.

^^ When we drafted Ceglar & with resepct to Ruck planing Hine basically said:

Current / Short term Ruck = Jolley,
Short term - medium term = Wood,
Long term = Ceglar.

Hopefully Wood turns out well, needs some mongrel though. His tap work is improving & he can take a good contested mark, he is a good kick needs to be more consistent as well.

If this option doesn't work out I reckon throw a few carrots at Bellchambers from the Dons.

watt price tully wrote:^^ When we drafted Ceglar & with resepct to Ruck planing Hine basically said:

Current / Short term Ruck = Jolley,
Short term - medium term = Wood,
Long term = Ceglar.

Hopefully Wood turns out well, needs some mongrel though. His tap work is improving & he can take a good contested mark, he is a good kick needs to be more consistent as well.

If this option doesn't work out I reckon throw a few carrots at Bellchambers from the Dons.

bellchambers has also taken time to develop. the bombers fans used to mock and pillory him.

jamar took time to develop and only in the last season or so has been very prominent.

Kreuzer is more a soft Leigh Brown without a defensive side, but a better goalkicker, than a Darren Jolly.

Wood....you are not a good ruckman

Commentators saying he has been good today.

Good job today - developing nicely, contested well, won a good few against a quality ruckman in Minson. They got a run on when he went off.

Was up against Minson and struggled quite a bit....Dogs won a lot of clearances too easily.

Was serviceable around he ground.

Would have been humiliated by Hudson and we can not depend on him against Ottens. Jolly must return

any chance we could entice that Mumford off the swannies, ala jolly.?

That was definitely a step in the right direction for Woody.

What'sinaname wrote:Wood....you are not a good ruckman

I'm not going to comment just yet, as I only saw about 20 minutes of the game. But what I thought I saw was a fairly talented tap ruckman in the making.

15 possies, five tackles, some great work in the wet. A big pass for mine.

He didn't win the hit-outs by a fair way, but the main thing was he was competitive for the whole game. Well done Woody.

Go the Pies