This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
https://magpies.net/
Wallace & King are 2 that I think know there shoit and generally make balanced assessments.John Wren wrote:i disagree with your assertion about wallace. i'd take on board his views a lot faster than the vast majority on here. ultimately, it is just one opinion in a sea of opinions. he gave us a d minus which i thought was a touch harsh but i don't think we were a b minus. dwayne russell said we had a stellar trade period. what you think of wallace is how i think of russell.Damien wrote:The guys on AFL.com gave us a B- which is a pretty solid score in anyone's language.
Terry Wallace has been shit canning us on trade radio and SEN. Saying it was some sort of disaster for us. His voice fair dinkum makes my ears bleed. Imagine listening to that all day. Really knows Jack shit about it as far as I'm concerned. Needs another Rod Grinter coat hanger!
we were very much hamstrung with what we could get for beams given we only really had one team we could deal with. the giants made a mockery of stating that x player was not for trade. this showed up brisbane but they held their ground. to have considered to have done really well we needed to have secured an aish type.
It could be a case of the "blind leading the blind".Tannin wrote:Would you feel better if I promised you, hand on heart, that the total experience in our back half would improve rapidly in 2015? Trust me on this: every single week, even if we go in with youngsters like Frost, Keefe, Williams, Langdon, Seedsman and Sinclair, our total back half experience will increase by an amazing six games in every single round of 2015.melliot wrote:an experienced player in our back 6 is really needed
Very True. How we look at it now could be totally Different in year time and longerjackcass wrote:This process of rating trading periods is all very subjective. Will always be assessed down when you lose established senior players and replace them with lesser known types. That changes completely if Crisp has a breakout year and Greenwood and Varcoe at a minimum maintain their 2014 form.
Ask me again this time next year and I'll let you know what I think.
A lot of recruiters were probably thinking the same thing, particularly if the club need was for midfield pace rather than KPPs, hardly defines him as a commentator.Wokko wrote:Wallace preferred Tambling over Buddy Franklin.
In all fairness I think it's a combination of both, but tilted more towards the recruitment department now than perhaps when Wallace was in charge of the Tigers.melliot wrote:Do we credit Buckley for drafting or Hine?
Do we blame Buckley for drafting or Hine?
(Note: I request a sensible answers to these questions, not a ""perceptive fellow"" or "Bux is amazing" bias answer!)
It's the head recruiters job, not the coaches. So why is the Tambling v Buddy drafting Wallace's mistake?
One of the more biased anti-Collingwood commentators so this must have been tough for him. Interesting that he really rates Crisp and I guess that highlights why people arrive at differing assessments, we all have our own opininions on the relative merits of the players in question.watt price tully wrote:I really don't like Dwayne Russell's commentary, I found him annoying. Having said that I'm surprised to find myself linking him here. He thought Collingwood was the trade winner. Here are his reasons:
http://media.mytalk.com.au/3AW/audio/16 ... nepies.mp3