Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Wonka wrote:

Brodie Grundy has played his last game for Collingwood, according to the Herald Sun’s Jon Ralph, after a crucial meeting which saw the club declare his salary needs to be off-loaded.


“Let me tell you what’s happening - I can’t explain why it’s happening,” Ralph said on On the Couch.

“So at Collingwood Brodie Grundy has played his last game at the club, barring an extraordinary backflip. This has all been driven by Collingwood, not Grundy.

“My understanding is the football boss Graham Wright met with Grundy’s management and said we need his cap space off the boks. It enabled him to look around, he chose Melbourne over Port Adelaide and Geelong.

“He only wants to go to Melbourne, he will go to Melbourne. The Pies have a little bit of interest in Sam Hayes, who is the Port Adelaide tap ruckman.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-tr ... 897f156563

Please no to Sam Hayes, has taken years in the SANFL to look remotely competent, and port preferred to be ruckless in the last half of this season rather than play him

If we are going for another Ruck it should be Lloyd Meek, as i suggested somehwere else on here

stui magpie wrote:Let it go Eddie, Grundy wasn't the only player who struggled to cope with the Covid lockdowns and bubbles. Living in that QLD bubble having to live and breathe work 24/7 would have sucked.

We offered the contract, he accepted. Fault if there is any is with us.

Wrong!

Once you accept a big contract, you better live up to it. If you fail to live up to it, the you should expect severe criticisms.

And it doesn't matter why. Lockdowns, bubbles, injury aren't an excuse once you declare yourself in the upper echelon of players.

Ever since he signed his new deal, there are only two stats that he has improved on. Inside 50s and clangers.

Whether he lives up to his lofty salary or not, is irrelevant …. He still gets his money. Every cent. Even if he walks out onto the field and sits his arse on the ground and sunbakes or comes out and get 2000 tap outs and kicks 17.

So who do you think made the mistake here…..?

It’s about risk assessment and risk mitigation…. And the club fk’ed up big time with this one.

pietillidie wrote:

eddiesmith wrote:

burnsy17 wrote:Nope.

A smart boss would say to my demands “go fk yourself, there are plenty of you out there at a reasonable price!”

Grundy has zero fault.

But I don’t like his contract and I don’t care if he leaves.

So you’ve never bagged a player I take it given you have zero expectations on them to be expected to perform? It’s not their fault they play shit…

Unfortunately, that's not what you're doing, though. Everyone looking on with an ounce of world experience knows you're reacting to Grundy for reasons of your own psychology. At a guess I'd say it's disappointment or bitterness, which are common enough and things many of us struggle with, but obsessing over others is no substitute for getting a grip of yourself.

Grundy is a high performer and was so long before the money and contract bidding process came along. That intrinsic motivation is what led him to be drafted and to excel to begin with, so the question as to what is hampering him lies well beyond thinly disguised personal reactions.

That’s some funny shit

Dees first pick is 32. They traded their first pick last year.

You hear all kinds of things. And the return we get will determine how much of his salary we pay.

I heard a straight swap for Weideman could be the go. That of course would mean they take on nearly all of his contract. But would you do that trade? eddiesmith, very interested in your thoughts on that one.

I think any hopes of WCE trading pick 2 for Jackson, and then that pick coming our way are far fetched. WCE's pick 20, or Freos pick 14 could be more realistic.

But I just want to say this. I dont want Grundy gone. But I do want that horrible contract gone. I certainly dont want him going to the Dees. And I want the club to find a good ruckman if he does leave. It just sucks that we're going to feel "ripped-off" if we take unders.

(Let's not forget that Jackson is leaving the Dees and he is not as good of a ruck as either Gawn or Grundy, but as a forward he is better than both).

OK Deeees want him, then as I have said before, they can pay out his whole contract,none of that Treloar bullshit stuff, paying him to play against US, plus in straight swap, give us Oliver, and Weideman as the steak knives. Done and dusted, if they are REALLY keen. Other than that, they can get rooted, stuff them.

Presti35 wrote:Dees first pick is 32. They traded their first pick last year.

You hear all kinds of things. And the return we get will determine how much of his salary we pay.

I heard a straight swap for Weideman could be the go. That of course would mean they take on nearly all of his contract. But would you do that trade? eddiesmith, very interested in your thoughts on that one.

I think any hopes of WCE trading pick 2 for Jackson, and then that pick coming our way are far fetched. WCE's pick 20, or Freos pick 14 could be more realistic.

But I just want to say this. I dont want Grundy gone. But I do want that horrible contract gone. I certainly dont want him going to the Dees. And I want the club to find a good ruckman if he does leave. It just sucks that we're going to feel "ripped-off" if we take unders.

(Let's not forget that Jackson is leaving the Dees and he is not as good of a ruck as either Gawn or Grundy, but as a forward he is better than both).

That sums my thoughts up too, I would prefer he is with us, but its just not doable at his current salary

im actually ok with him going to Melbourne as i cant see how he and Gawn can improve Melbourne, if he went to a club with a poorer ruck he would improve them

What'sinaname wrote:

stui magpie wrote:Let it go Eddie, Grundy wasn't the only player who struggled to cope with the Covid lockdowns and bubbles. Living in that QLD bubble having to live and breathe work 24/7 would have sucked.

We offered the contract, he accepted. Fault if there is any is with us.

Wrong!

Once you accept a big contract, you better live up to it. If you fail to live up to it, the you should expect severe criticisms.

And it doesn't matter why. Lockdowns, bubbles, injury aren't an excuse once you declare yourself in the upper echelon of players.

Ever since he signed his new deal, there are only two stats that he has improved on. Inside 50s and clangers.

No, when you've taken the responsibility to grant a massive contract as a leader you hope that the risk you took, dependent as it is on the frailties of the human body, individual psychology and chance events, doesn't come unstuck.

All kinds of things impact people's performance, from contextual change to episodic events, undiagnosed conditions and a delayed grappling with personal issues. The latter is very common in the case of high performers given they have often deferred social and psychological maturity in order to achieve.

The mind is a fragile physical entity, and far more so than a knee or an ankle. Things coming unstuck or intervening periodically shouldn't surprise anyone. No amount of money necessarily changes that, as much as people looking on imagine it should (which is a naive projection).

This kind of stuff just shouldn't surprise anyone. Often people really do need a change of scenery to help support new thinking, though there's no guarantee that will help, either.

Stuff happens in life. Why this needs to be explained is beyond me, but there you go.

Presti35 wrote:Dees first pick is 32. They traded their first pick last year.

You hear all kinds of things. And the return we get will determine how much of his salary we pay.

I heard a straight swap for Weideman could be the go. That of course would mean they take on nearly all of his contract. But would you do that trade? eddiesmith, very interested in your thoughts on that one.

I think any hopes of WCE trading pick 2 for Jackson, and then that pick coming our way are far fetched. WCE's pick 20, or Freos pick 14 could be more realistic.

But I just want to say this. I dont want Grundy gone. But I do want that horrible contract gone. I certainly dont want him going to the Dees. And I want the club to find a good ruckman if he does leave. It just sucks that we're going to feel "ripped-off" if we take unders.

(Let's not forget that Jackson is leaving the Dees and he is not as good of a ruck as either Gawn or Grundy, but as a forward he is better than both).

I’d want more than Weideman even if Melbourne is taking on his entire contract as we could probably get Weideman for nothing when he gets delisted!

If we’re expected to pay 30% then we’d be expecting s first round pick minimum, if the Dees are willing to the entire contract then you’d have to expect less.

I’d probably prefer a lesser trade and lose the entire contract, that $300k could be the difference between a b grader and an elite a grader in next years trade period.

Amazing (horrific) to think we could accept pick 32 just to get the contract gone.

Weideman is contracted for one more year. So maybe it'll be 32 and Weideman? Gee whizz, is there any hope that he can turn it around and do a Peter Wright (Become a good FF).

Why would we be accepting weideman if we have McStay coming in?

no wonder Henry wants out

Weidemann is a spud so no thanks.

MAY-Z wrote:Why would we be accepting weideman if we have McStay coming in?

no wonder Henry wants out

Henry wants to live his Geelong dream. Club’s just covering their bases. End of story.

Dogs are getting pick 14 for Dunkley. If we only get pick 32 and a vfl player, then that means Dunkley is twice as good as Grundy? Da fuq.

Presti35 wrote:Amazing (horrific) to think we could accept pick 32 just to get the contract gone.

Weideman is contracted for one more year. So maybe it'll be 32 and Weideman? Gee whizz, is there any hope that he can turn it around and do a Peter Wright (Become a good FF).

Fear not, Presti. The options are limitless. The Dockers pick( s ) coming back will likely come into play, just as the Dees future picks could ( which we could then on trade to come back into the 2022 draft )
The real issue here is not dragging the trade out. If Grundy stays, he stays but if he goes, you want the trade done early so we can do more with the swag of picks we would have ( including futures ) Same with Henry, you don’t want the trades dragging out because you’re stuck with the outcome rather than turning them into a preferred asset.
It’s very rare to see players swapped for players these days. Nearly every player that’s moved on has his worth determined by draft picks. This allows the club to reload with those additional picks and customise a new trade opportunity elsewhere. Even if we did pick up a Dees player coming back, it would very likely be a separate and later outcome.

burnsy17 wrote:It’s grundys fault he played shit. It’s not his fault the club paid him $1M a year to do so. That blame sits solely with the club. They should never have paid him $1M a year.

Reliable source told me blame Eddie Mac for Grundy’s contract.