Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

thompsoc wrote:Why do you keep posting your opinion as a fact!

I don't even...

thompsoc wrote:

5 from the wing on debut wrote:According to Jon Ralph on SEN this morning, it will be Cloke to the Dogs in exchange for 4th round pick 59.

The joke continues!

A joke, lousy pick that, tell them to get rooted pronto. They just won a flag, ante up you tightarses.

kymbo5@yahoo.com.au wrote:I just watched some highlights of WHE and this bloke is exactly what we need up forward. If we can nab him for pick 59 then it could well be the steal of the century.

I haven't seen him (or if I have I can't remember), can you elaborate on what he had that was impressive? Thanks.[/quote]

try this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWrnzHd2_sk

Piesnchess wrote:

thompsoc wrote:

5 from the wing on debut wrote:According to Jon Ralph on SEN this morning, it will be Cloke to the Dogs in exchange for 4th round pick 59.

The joke continues!

A joke, lousy pick that, tell them to get rooted pronto. They just won a flag, ante up you tightarses.

So you would prefer missing out on WHE and Cloke remaining and spending the last year of his contract playing in our two's ?

5 from the wing on debut wrote:

Piesnchess wrote:

thompsoc wrote: The joke continues!

A joke, lousy pick that, tell them to get rooted pronto. They just won a flag, ante up you tightarses.

So you would prefer missing out on WHE and Cloke remaining and spending the last year of his contract playing in our two's ?

Is it any certainty a very late 59 can get this done, is it cast iron guaranteed, I bet its not. ? If they want him badly enough, then ante up and give us a pick in the 30s, then, something decent for him. Hell, they just won a flag, the welfare handouts and handups are over for them, we have to look after our own backyard, get savage, stuff them, let them pay something at least half decent for him.

Piesnchess wrote:

5 from the wing on debut wrote:

Piesnchess wrote: A joke, lousy pick that, tell them to get rooted pronto. They just won a flag, ante up you tightarses.

So you would prefer missing out on WHE and Cloke remaining and spending the last year of his contract playing in our two's ?

Is it any certainty a very late 59 can get this done, is it cast iron guaranteed, I bet its not. ? If they want him badly enough, then ante up and give us a pick in the 30s, then, something decent for him. Hell, they just won a flag, the welfare handouts and handups are over for them, we have to look after our own backyard, get savage, stuff them, let them pay something at least half decent for him.

I don't know if the WHE/pick 59 trade is a certainty or not. Time will tell.

I understand your sentiments but we have to be realistic about the trade value of Cloke. He wants out & if he remains he will play in the VFL unless injuries hit (maybe I should say he will play in the AFL unless injuries don't hit?). His trade value is poor. If the Dogs don't want him who does? I don't see any other clubs lining up for him.

Piesnchess wrote:

5 from the wing on debut wrote:

Piesnchess wrote: A joke, lousy pick that, tell them to get rooted pronto. They just won a flag, ante up you tightarses.

So you would prefer missing out on WHE and Cloke remaining and spending the last year of his contract playing in our two's ?

Is it any certainty a very late 59 can get this done, is it cast iron guaranteed, I bet its not. ? If they want him badly enough, then ante up and give us a pick in the 30s, then, something decent for him. Hell, they just won a flag, the welfare handouts and handups are over for them, we have to look after our own backyard, get savage, stuff them, let them pay something at least half decent for him.

this pick seems to be about facilitating a trade and helping cloke get to his destination. given the club has no real desire to retain him it hardly has the whip hand.

think better wrote:Watching the grand final I reckon Cloke will be very good for the Doggies. Grundy took mark after mark in defence which wouldn't happen with him having to mind Cloke.

Leigh Matthews said he didn't think Cloke could have a role as he can't ruck as well as play forward. I don't think that's necessarily correct. Sure if he could ruck that would be better but he provides a contested marking target with good small players around him.

If that was true why didn't Cloke open up opportunities for Blair and DeGoey to kick bags of goals in our forward line. Also I don't think Cloke would have stopped Grundy from marking, just as he didn't stop other tall defenders taking marks against him during the year. If he plays the same way for WB as he played for us this year he will struggle next year. If he buckles down with a different attitude under a new coach next year, he could be a great player again, but it will be the same familiar role he played for us and not a rucking role as you suggest (he can't ruck).

BucksIsFutureCoach wrote:

think better wrote:Watching the grand final I reckon Cloke will be very good for the Doggies. Grundy took mark after mark in defence which wouldn't happen with him having to mind Cloke.

Leigh Matthews said he didn't think Cloke could have a role as he can't ruck as well as play forward. I don't think that's necessarily correct. Sure if he could ruck that would be better but he provides a contested marking target with good small players around him.

If that was true why didn't Cloke open up opportunities for Blair and DeGoey to kick bags of goals in our forward line. Also I don't think Cloke would have stopped Grundy from marking, just as he didn't stop other tall defenders taking marks against him during the year. If he plays the same way for WB as he played for us this year he will struggle next year. If he buckles down with a different attitude under a new coach next year, he could be a great player again, but it will be the same familiar role he played for us and not a rucking role as you suggest (he can't ruck).

Realistically, Cloke will be competing with Cordy, Redpath and Campbell as the other KPP in the Doggies F50 along side Boyd. He's ahead of all 3 of those for 2017 I'd reckon. Hell, GF performances aside he's still ahead of Boyd. Will free up Crameri and Stringer as the 3rd tall - medium forward options, or even allow Stringer to spend time in the midfield.

V Boyd:
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_p ... 1=S&fid2=S

V Cordy
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_p ... 1=S&fid2=S

V Redpath (although he and Campbell more logically competing with Boyd)
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_p ... 1=S&fid2=S

V Campbell
http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_p ... 1=S&fid2=S

Ultimately though, who actually gives a fat rats clacker about whether he'll fit into their side. It's where he wants to go and they want him. Make it happen.

WarrenerraW wrote:

kymbo5@yahoo.com.au wrote:I just watched some highlights of WHE and this bloke is exactly what we need up forward. If we can nab him for pick 59 then it could well be the steal of the century.

I haven't seen him (or if I have I can't remember), can you elaborate on what he had that was impressive? Thanks.

try this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWrnzHd2_sk[/quote]

Thanks - have taken a look, some nice grabs, the best part of which they were one grab, not juggled. Good signs. Appreciate you forwarding the footage address.

RudeBoy wrote:

mooretreloar wrote:Paul Connors from Herald Sun article:
"We'd like to think the deal will be done, forget the pick for a second, there's an understanding I think from both parties that probably time's up for Travis at the Pies, the relationship is healthy and fine but I think a new home will be good for him"

Point 1: pick 59 is overs, we are lucky to be getting anything. It is not Travis Cloke of 2010 or 2011, it is Travis Cloke of 2016, who played VFL for large stints in 2016.
Point 2: the statement above blows the argument of blaming Buckley for this out of the water.
Point 3: we are not 5 years into a 5 year plan, we are 3 years into a 5 year plan. The rebuild started at the end of 2013.

I'm a Buckley fan and I'll be glad to see the back of the Cloke clan, but I've got to disagree with what you said about 5 yr plans. Seriously, the Bulldogs showed you can go from boiled lollies to scorched almonds in 2 years.

Started their rebuild in 2010. For the 3rd time I will post a comparison of their rebuild compared to ours.

Bulldogs: 1st yr 10th, 2nd yr 15th, 3rd 15th, 4th 14th, 5th 6th, 6th flag.
Collingwood: 1st yr rebuild 11th, 2nd yr 12th, 3rd yr 12th.

People are conveniently forgetting all the hard work Brendan McCartney did with their young list. He taught them the defensive side of the game, which you saw be so successful in the GF. No doubt Luke Beveridge has done a sensational job, but he came in after all the hard work was done. The list had been built, they had been taught the proper way to play, and Beveridge took full advantage of this, whilst also adding his own imprimatur on the team.

John Wren wrote:

Piesnchess wrote:

5 from the wing on debut wrote: So you would prefer missing out on WHE and Cloke remaining and spending the last year of his contract playing in our two's ?

Is it any certainty a very late 59 can get this done, is it cast iron guaranteed, I bet its not. ? If they want him badly enough, then ante up and give us a pick in the 30s, then, something decent for him. Hell, they just won a flag, the welfare handouts and handups are over for them, we have to look after our own backyard, get savage, stuff them, let them pay something at least half decent for him.

this pick seems to be about facilitating a trade and helping cloke get to his destination. given the club has no real desire to retain him it hardly has the whip hand.

The arrangement must be absolutely about getting Cloke to his preferred destination. We did the same thing for, eg, Ben Davies when he couldn't be offered a game and we should certainly do the same thing for a former senior player who has played almost 250 games for the Club.

Pies4shaw wrote:

John Wren wrote:

Piesnchess wrote: Is it any certainty a very late 59 can get this done, is it cast iron guaranteed, I bet its not. ? If they want him badly enough, then ante up and give us a pick in the 30s, then, something decent for him. Hell, they just won a flag, the welfare handouts and handups are over for them, we have to look after our own backyard, get savage, stuff them, let them pay something at least half decent for him.

this pick seems to be about facilitating a trade and helping cloke get to his destination. given the club has no real desire to retain him it hardly has the whip hand.

The arrangement must be absolutely about getting Cloke to his preferred destination. We did the same thing for, eg, Ben Davies when he couldn't be offered a game and we should certainly do the same thing for a former senior player who has played almost 250 games for the Club.

100% agree this is part of it.
Other elements are a) it allows us to get his salary off our books, so this automatically deflates what we are prepared to accept and b) the facts are that he played VFL 50% of the year and multiple experts have declared him gone, so his currency is nowhere near what it was.

I had heard a 5th round pick was going to be our compensation, which for mine is about right, so we have done the best we can to get it up to a 4th rounder.

mooretreloar wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:

mooretreloar wrote:Paul Connors from Herald Sun article:
"We'd like to think the deal will be done, forget the pick for a second, there's an understanding I think from both parties that probably time's up for Travis at the Pies, the relationship is healthy and fine but I think a new home will be good for him"

Point 1: pick 59 is overs, we are lucky to be getting anything. It is not Travis Cloke of 2010 or 2011, it is Travis Cloke of 2016, who played VFL for large stints in 2016.
Point 2: the statement above blows the argument of blaming Buckley for this out of the water.
Point 3: we are not 5 years into a 5 year plan, we are 3 years into a 5 year plan. The rebuild started at the end of 2013.

I'm a Buckley fan and I'll be glad to see the back of the Cloke clan, but I've got to disagree with what you said about 5 yr plans. Seriously, the Bulldogs showed you can go from boiled lollies to scorched almonds in 2 years.

Started their rebuild in 2010. For the 3rd time I will post a comparison of their rebuild compared to ours.

Bulldogs: 1st yr 10th, 2nd yr 15th, 3rd 15th, 4th 14th, 5th 6th, 6th flag.
Collingwood: 1st yr rebuild 11th, 2nd yr 12th, 3rd yr 12th.

People are conveniently forgetting all the hard work Brendan McCartney did with their young list. He taught them the defensive side of the game, which you saw be so successful in the GF. No doubt Luke Beveridge has done a sensational job, but he came in after all the hard work was done. The list had been built, they had been taught the proper way to play, and Beveridge took full advantage of this, whilst also adding his own imprimatur on the team.

All that may be true, but 2 years ago, some of their best players simply abandoned the club, including Griffin (captain), Higgins and Cooney. Their coach was sacked, their CEO resigned and they lost a major sponsor. In short, the Bulldogs were a basket case. From that they recovered and won a flag within 2 years. So my point is simply that there are far too many unknown variables in football to be able to carefully map out a plan 5 years in advance. Instead, clubs need to ensure they get the best out of their team every week and every year.

RudeBoy wrote:

mooretreloar wrote:

RudeBoy wrote: I'm a Buckley fan and I'll be glad to see the back of the Cloke clan, but I've got to disagree with what you said about 5 yr plans. Seriously, the Bulldogs showed you can go from boiled lollies to scorched almonds in 2 years.

Started their rebuild in 2010. For the 3rd time I will post a comparison of their rebuild compared to ours.

Bulldogs: 1st yr 10th, 2nd yr 15th, 3rd 15th, 4th 14th, 5th 6th, 6th flag.
Collingwood: 1st yr rebuild 11th, 2nd yr 12th, 3rd yr 12th.

People are conveniently forgetting all the hard work Brendan McCartney did with their young list. He taught them the defensive side of the game, which you saw be so successful in the GF. No doubt Luke Beveridge has done a sensational job, but he came in after all the hard work was done. The list had been built, they had been taught the proper way to play, and Beveridge took full advantage of this, whilst also adding his own imprimatur on the team.

All that may be true, but 2 years ago, some of their best players simply abandoned the club, including Griffin (captain), Higgins and Cooney. Their coach was sacked, their CEO resigned and they lost a major sponsor. In short, the Bulldogs were a basket case. From that they recovered and won a flag within 2 years. So my point is simply that there are far too many unknown variables in football to be able to carefully map out a plan 5 years in advance. Instead, clubs need to ensure they get the best out of their team every week and every year.

Fair call, they were in massive strife after 2014. But, despite this all of the building blocks had been implemented and full credit to Beveridge for taking the building blocks and achieving the ultimate.

Agree clubs need to get the best out of their team week in week out, year in, year out.

Just making the point that the majority of the hard work of rebuilding was done before Beveridge arrives and he inherited a young list that had been trained the right way. Also, full credit to their recruiting department for putting together a list before Beveridgd arrived capable of winning both the AFL and VFL in the 1 season.