This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
As its clearly obvious we want to be defensive first.
Please explain the Buckley coaching plan
What is he doing and how will it make us contend finals again?
Did you watch/listen to his presser yesterday? He explained it (sort of ) then. My interpretation was that he wants the defensive game to be the basis and they are now looking to add "layers" over this. For example, toady we looked to the corridor much more frequently going forward and I assume this is one of these layers.
It was quoted last night, “defence wins premierships”, but you also have to have the ability to score... which we haven’t cracks as we don’t have the personnel for yet...
the dees went through the middle almost exclusively and won, when we went through the middle we looked dangerous, we need to cultivate this style more.
^ Seedsman hasn't done much, really. He's in his tenth season of senior football and will be 30 at the start of next season. That was his 122nd game, so he's averaged about 12 games a year. He's averaged about 12 games a year at Adelaide. He'd get a game at Collingwood on today's form, at the moment - but he's no star. He's a fringe player having his career season.
It's ridiculous to compare his post-Collingwood career with Shaw. Shaw played 152 games for GWS in 7 seasons. He was one of their first players picked, week in, week out. He played 325 AFL games. At present, he's over 200 games ahead of Seedsman and I doubt Seedsman will get within 150 of him. .
Seedsman has turned out to be the biggest blunder we have made as a club. he is the player we traded that has gone on to have the best career post collingwood. Heath Shaw maybe second, but we got taylor adams for him so it was a fair trade (and made sensibly based on relative ages and the state of the list).
Ian Bremner was the worst by a mile. We couldn;t stop Nick Davis. Scott Russell was another who was still a good player and better than Seedsman. Then there was Phil Carman to add to the mix,
PyreneesPie wrote:Something I was wondering about during the game - why did we trade Seedsman? Was it because he was a bit injury prone or was he part of a deal to get someone else? Treloar maybe? Those two long goals he kicked were just magnificent.
We got a second rounder (#32) which we sent to the Dees with Kennedy for Howe, so some might call it a win win....I thought we should have kept him then, and still think so now
Seedsman was the subject of the spray that Lamumba gave to Buckley because Buckley used a homophobic nickname for Seedsman that some other players were using. Lamumba believed that the coach should know better. Buckley then victim blamed Seedsman and got rid of him.
As its clearly obvious we want to be defensive first. We need to pull the trigger and move to offensive play.
Its difficult to understand Nathan Buckley who in his press conference said nothing had changed and wants us to be a defensive side.
I'm totally confused by these comments. The crap we put in against Geelong was truly the worst game of football. It was not that it was just defensive.
The frustrating part is how we move the ball. The constant sideways backward overhandball whatever you want to say. The players make too many mistakes and turn the ball over.
How deliberate can this be and how can you even be happy with this play.
Today was great because we played forward and took the game on. How can you say nothing has changed in our style of play.
Please explain the Buckley coaching plan
What is he doing and how will it make us contend finals again?
Im not sure why posters think he did something different today.
The difference is when you play a rubbish team, you have more chance of executing what you set out to achieve. The better teams don’t allow you to move the ball quickly. That’s one of the reasons why they are a decent team in the first place.
Did Fagen change his game plan and decide to move the ball slower after half time when Melbourne came back in the second half ? Melbourne simply made it more difficult for the Lions to move the ball quickly. That’s what good teams do but the crap ones, not so much.
As its clearly obvious we want to be defensive first. We need to pull the trigger and move to offensive play.
Its difficult to understand Nathan Buckley who in his press conference said nothing had changed and wants us to be a defensive side.
I'm totally confused by these comments. The crap we put in against Geelong was truly the worst game of football. It was not that it was just defensive.
The frustrating part is how we move the ball. The constant sideways backward overhandball whatever you want to say. The players make too many mistakes and turn the ball over.
How deliberate can this be and how can you even be happy with this play.
Today was great because we played forward and took the game on. How can you say nothing has changed in our style of play.
Please explain the Buckley coaching plan
What is he doing and how will it make us contend finals again?
Im not sure why posters think he did something different today.
The difference is when you play a rubbish team, you have more chance of executing what you set out to achieve. The better teams don’t allow you to move the ball quickly. That’s one of the reasons why they are a decent team in the first place.
Did Fagen change his game plan and decide to move the ball slower after half time when Melbourne came back in the second half ? Melbourne simply made it more difficult for the Lions to move the ball quickly. That’s what good teams do but the crap ones, not so much.
The different today was we had a competent forward in Jamie Elliott. Had a look through our games this season, and we were pretty much always the worse off in efficiency inside 50, but we got it in there as much as any other team we have played, but haven’t had the talent to convert... The game plan would be fine if you can kick goals, (obviously) that is the area that needs the most improvement.
PyreneesPie wrote:
Steady on. No-one here is saying that he should still be playing for us, Mr M.
Being impressed by something an opposition player executes can be just that. An admiration for a skill well performed. Sometimes curiosity is just simply that too - there doesn't have to have a hidden agenda behind it.
Fair enough! I was just gobsmacked by repeat posts in the game day thread saying this is why we should never have traded him. Short memories! Glad he pulled the finger out and did well at Adelaide and yeah, he would’ve been handy today on that form
Seedsman has turned out to be the biggest blunder we have made as a club. he is the player we traded that has gone on to have the best career post collingwood. Heath Shaw maybe second, but we got taylor adams for him so it was a fair trade (and made sensibly based on relative ages and the state of the list).
Seedsman on the other hand was traded for nothing. As i watched Callum brown play yet another useless game, i was left to wonder why cant we allow the kids to grow out of their stupid phases (and leave them rotting in the reserves until the find themselves). Why do we have to teach them a lesson so that other clubs benefit.
I cant help but think that Stevo will also one day grow out of his stupid phase and we will rue that trade as much as we must rue the seedsman trade.
The worst thing is that We plucked Seedsman out of nowhere.
Hello E. Seedsman and Ben Kennedy for Jeremy Howe and Rupert Wills (Pick 65)was the gist facts of the trade. So to state that we lost seedsman for nothing is factually incorrect. Seedsman has been in and out of the Crow side over his 6 seasons and it's only this year for the first time, he hasn't been omitted. I think most Pies fans rate Howe ahead of Seedsman.
No disrespect to the man, he’s done well to finally make something of a career, but goodness gracious me. One of the more lazy, “Is PLAYER-X actually playing today” Magpies I’ve seen play the past 20 years. One of the more lucky ANZAC Day medallist’s. He always had the skill and ability, but pretty much missed just about every goal on the run for us, couldn’t find the pill regularly, and coasted on his ANZAC Day medal plaudits for a while there while living the party life. By his own admission. An outside player who could barely find the ball from half back, and was always going to be either traded or delisted. Good to see him playing some decent footy (decent, not great), but it took 2-3 seasons before he could even be considered a Crows mainstay.
Hindsight is always 20-20, especially 5+ years later.
Last edited by Raw Hammer on Sun Jun 06, 2021 8:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
) then. My interpretation was that he wants the defensive game to be the basis and they are now looking to add "layers" over this. For example, toady we looked to the corridor much more frequently going forward and I assume this is one of these layers.
