Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

inxs88 wrote:Cheers mate. Not sure which word made me laugh more:

* Cluster **** OR
* Pauperoos

Kudos again bro.
Yes very fond of both of those terms; I claim no rights whatsoever to their advent, but they sure are practical for use of this forum!

Should we expect North to try and offload a few more in trade week?

Not that we want any of them, just saying they've got plenty of others over 30 and others 29ish.

stui magpie wrote:^

Right decision, questionable timing yes.

Would it have been better to leave it to after they finish their season and deny the players a farewell?

I reckon it says they are being realistic that their chances of going deep in September are slim this year, so they might as well be up front, let the players have their farewell lap as it were and see what happens.

Personally, I'd rather be going into the finals knowing each game could be my last than thinking I was still a prospect to play then finding out afterwards.

Agree, which is why I suggested questionable. You could easily make a case for either argument.

Presti35 wrote:Should we expect North to try and offload a few more in trade week?

Not that we want any of them, just saying they've got plenty of others over 30 and others 29ish.

I reckon they'll still believe they're in their window so will hold quite a few of them.

jackcass wrote:

Presti35 wrote:Should we expect North to try and offload a few more in trade week?

Not that we want any of them, just saying they've got plenty of others over 30 and others 29ish.

I reckon they'll still believe they're in their window so will hold quite a few of them.

They know their window is already shut, which is why they are off-loading these guys now. If they thought for one moment they'd have a chance for a flag next year, Boomer would be retained, as he is currently one of their best players.

Unbelievable that they have put this decision out there before their finals campaign. Why not say to them your contract next year depends on how you and we fare in the finals. Giving them a farewell game in Melbourne this week doesn't make sense. Surely they should be putting the message out there that they hope to be back playing in Melbourne again in a final in 2016. Or have they put up the white flag? Plenty of time for farewells next year, like the swans did with Goodes this year.
I can understand Geelong doing this last year with Kelly Johnson and Stokes because they missed finals.
I'd be seriously peeved if I followed North.

uncanny wrote:Unbelievable that they have put this decision out there before their finals campaign. Why not say to them your contract next year depends on how you and we fare in the finals. Giving them a farewell game in Melbourne this week doesn't make sense. Surely they should be putting the message out there that they hope to be back playing in Melbourne again in a final in 2016. Or have they put up the white flag? Plenty of time for farewells next year, like the swans did with Goodes this year.
I can understand Geelong doing this last year with Kelly Johnson and Stokes because they missed finals.
I'd be seriously peeved if I followed North.

Harvey's manager (and Petrie's i think) has said that the players demanded to know now.
So what other choice did North have? Only to lie.

Harvey's manager also said it is not North's fault about the media/players reaction, again it is the player's choice how this has been handled. The players did not want to do any media this week.

piedys wrote:

inxs88 wrote:Cheers mate. Not sure which word made me laugh more:

* Cluster **** OR
* Pauperoos

Kudos again bro.
Yes very fond of both of those terms; I claim no rights whatsoever to their advent, but they sure are practical for use of this forum!

yes, the pauperoos is a great label. i think it might have been hats who coined it. i use it frequently.

RudeBoy wrote:

jackcass wrote:

Presti35 wrote:Should we expect North to try and offload a few more in trade week?

Not that we want any of them, just saying they've got plenty of others over 30 and others 29ish.

I reckon they'll still believe they're in their window so will hold quite a few of them.

They know their window is already shut, which is why they are off-loading these guys now. If they thought for one moment they'd have a chance for a flag next year, Boomer would be retained, as he is currently one of their best players.

Happy to agree to disagree. They have developing replacements for all the players they've let go thus far, even Harvey.

This whole retirement scenario smacks of Brayshaw stupidiness

magpieazza wrote:This whole retirement scenario smacks of Brayshaw stupidiness

Yep tend to agree. From what I know and hear, North are going to lose literally thousands of members next year.

Their problem I know.

magpieazza wrote:This whole retirement scenario smacks of Brayshaw stupidiness

I cannot stand Brayshaw but he has done a good job at getting the Roos into the black. The have declared a profit over the last 8 years and have reduced debt. When considering their supporter base this is a great outcome for them. It is a pity that more clubs have not been as successful in turning around their off field fortunes and not have to rely upon the AFL for handouts so as to keep them afloat.

It is obvious that they do not have the fire power to win a premiership with their current and aging list and there is little up side to these four players being part of the club for the next couple of years.

Whilst the timing seems a bit off, if the players demanded to know their position now then the club had few options.

At the same time I do not think Brayshaw has a lot to do with the footy department.

Member 7167 wrote:

magpieazza wrote:This whole retirement scenario smacks of Brayshaw stupidiness

I cannot stand Brayshaw but he has done a good job at getting the Roos into the black. The have declared a profit over the last 8 years and have reduced debt. When considering their supporter base this is a great outcome for them. It is a pity that more clubs have not been as successful in turning around their off field fortunes and not have to rely upon the AFL for handouts so as to keep them afloat.

It is obvious that they do not have the fire power to win a premiership with their current and aging list and there is little up side to these four players being part of the club for the next couple of years.

Whilst the timing seems a bit off, if the players demanded to know their position now then the club had few options.

At the same time I do not think Brayshaw has a lot to do with the footy department.

A pretty good summation.

However, I still reckon Boomer was playing well enough to have been retained. He's still one of their top 4 or 5 players imo and is not slowing down. It makes me wonder whether Scott has ever rated Boomer's contribution to the team. Father time had clearly caught up with the others.

RudeBoy wrote:

Member 7167 wrote:

magpieazza wrote:This whole retirement scenario smacks of Brayshaw stupidiness

I cannot stand Brayshaw but he has done a good job at getting the Roos into the black. The have declared a profit over the last 8 years and have reduced debt. When considering their supporter base this is a great outcome for them. It is a pity that more clubs have not been as successful in turning around their off field fortunes and not have to rely upon the AFL for handouts so as to keep them afloat.

It is obvious that they do not have the fire power to win a premiership with their current and aging list and there is little up side to these four players being part of the club for the next couple of years.

Whilst the timing seems a bit off, if the players demanded to know their position now then the club had few options.

At the same time I do not think Brayshaw has a lot to do with the footy department.

A pretty good summation.

However, I still reckon Boomer was playing well enough to have been retained. He's still one of their top 4 or 5 players imo and is not slowing down. It makes me wonder whether Scott has ever rated Boomer's contribution to the team. Father time had clearly caught up with the others.

Correct rude boomer was easily in there top 4-10 players every week and after 430 games should be afforded the right to call time in his own career as long as he can hold his place in the side and is contributing in a positive manner. For mine it says a lot about the club to treat a champion like that. Very poor look. If he played at our club and we did that I would be up in arms over it.
I know the circumstances are different but look at the way we sent Swanny out with his presser even MM & Bucks could bury the hatchet for a day to honour a club great and that's the way it should be

jackcass wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:

jackcass wrote: I reckon they'll still believe they're in their window so will hold quite a few of them.

They know their window is already shut, which is why they are off-loading these guys now. If they thought for one moment they'd have a chance for a flag next year, Boomer would be retained, as he is currently one of their best players.

Happy to agree to disagree. They have developing replacements for all the players they've let go thus far, even Harvey.

A pretty good thread from me Jackcass??