Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

That went well

This was the deal we were after all along, right or wrong we got it done, we now have the cap space and can offer the Hawks a suitable pick for Titch.

We can also realistically tell the Cats to get $@&^#.

What a debacle!

Mr Miyagi wrote:Can’t see him regaining 2018 form after his knee injury and now that he’s at Melbourne I hope he doesn’t prove me wrong

All we need to do is play something the same size of Silvagni in the ruck when we play Melbourne....simples!

LaurieHolden wrote:I have the same feelings as when Peter Moore left.

Hopefully like Moore, Grundy doesn't become a premiership player.

So after being told last night we wouldn't accept pick 27 we have accepted pick 27. LOL. Hopefully that stance knocked at least $50,000 a year off the price we'll be paying towards Grundys salary for the next 5 years.

If we've ended up with a commitment of 150K a season then pick 27 is acceptable for a saving of at least 750K a year should Grundy remained.

tbaker wrote:

eddiesmith wrote:I think some people have forgotten how shit he was for the last 2.5 years cos he didn’t play most of this year they’re still remembering 2018…

In 5 of his 6 games this season he was ranked in the top handful of pies players. How shit was that? It's clear who has forgotten....

This is the whole problem with the few remaining Grundy fans, you’re obsessed with stats and SC points.

He can get 50 hitouts and be completely ineffective which he has been on numerous occasions.

But he did pick up a Brownlow vote in those 6 games so must have been superb.

McStay picked up just as many votes in those 6 games and will cost us half of what we paid Grundy…

In the end it was either 27 or keep him which was unlikely as if that bridge hadn't been burned by the drawn out saga it was definitely charred.

So it is what it is, by accepting 27 we hopefully should have pushed more salary back to the D's which it seems was GW's primary motivation.

We can argue until we have multicoloured faces about whether he should or shouldn't have been given that large contract, but the fact remains that he was and the previous administration signed off on it, but the current one didn't want to continue it.

That should be no reflection on Grundy in any way.

^agree, Wright said as much in the SEN interview. 100% on the club.

swoop42 wrote:So after being told last night we wouldn't accept pick 27 we have accepted pick 27. LOL. Hopefully that stance knocked at least $50,000 a year off the price we'll be paying towards Grundys salary for the next 5 years.

If we've ended up with a commitment of 150K a season then pick 27 is acceptable for a saving of at least 750K a year should Grundy remained.

It's an appalling business transaction, however you cut it. The Club should be ashamed that it has handled things this poorly. Melbourne received two first-round picks for a guy who may or may not ever become a good ruckman and we just handed them a former all-Australian and dual best and fairest at a time when their premiership-window list has a gaping hole in the ruck area - yet we rolled over for pick 27. Pathetic. It's difficult to imagine any club other than Collingwood negotiating its trading so badly.

This is no slight on Brodie Grundy, but two years ago I had conversations with Collingwood supporters and we all agreed that a 7 year contract on 900k+ a year was crazy for him. Even 3 years on the same money he's been getting would have reasonable for him, but not the contract we gave him. It was always going to end this way with the new administration salvaging what they can for him. We did the best of a bad lot which you can add to the Treloar, Phillips, Stephenson and Beams deals. I personally don't think Nathan Buckley was responsible for any of this but he loses his job over it and Graham Wright has to right the ship. The highest paid player on a long term contract now is Darcy Moore. He should have another 7 good years in him. As far as the gremlins go I assume that Grundy is the last one and now we can get on with building a premiership team.

Pies4shaw wrote:...It's difficult to imagine any club other than Collingwood negotiating its trading so badly.

North Melbourne are at least on a par, if not worse. That's no consolation though.

Pies4shaw wrote:

swoop42 wrote:So after being told last night we wouldn't accept pick 27 we have accepted pick 27. LOL. Hopefully that stance knocked at least $50,000 a year off the price we'll be paying towards Grundys salary for the next 5 years.

If we've ended up with a commitment of 150K a season then pick 27 is acceptable for a saving of at least 750K a year should Grundy remained.

It's an appalling business transaction, however you cut it. The Club should be ashamed that it has handled things this poorly. Melbourne received two first-round picks for a guy who may or may not ever become a good ruckman and we just handed them a former all-Australian and dual best and fairest at a time when their premiership-window list has a gaping hole in the ruck area - yet we rolled over for pick 27. Pathetic. It's difficult to imagine any club other than Collingwood negotiating its trading so badly.

Respectfully again, its actually a business lead decision. We wont be complaining if losing Grundy lands us a big fish. Remains to be seen who said big fish is.
Its been what, 2 hours? Move on mate, he's the enemy now.

Pies4shaw wrote:

swoop42 wrote:So after being told last night we wouldn't accept pick 27 we have accepted pick 27. LOL. Hopefully that stance knocked at least $50,000 a year off the price we'll be paying towards Grundys salary for the next 5 years.

If we've ended up with a commitment of 150K a season then pick 27 is acceptable for a saving of at least 750K a year should Grundy remained.

It's an appalling business transaction, however you cut it. The Club should be ashamed that it has handled things this poorly. Melbourne received two first-round picks for a guy who may or may not ever become a good ruckman and we just handed them a former all-Australian and dual best and fairest at a time when their premiership-window list has a gaping hole in the ruck area - yet we rolled over for pick 27. Pathetic. It's difficult to imagine any club other than Collingwood negotiating its trading so badly.

It’s not an appalling business decision. The decision was made that his $1m had to be gone from the salary cap

You can’t negotiate much of a better deal when no one else was interested, ask yourself why no one else was interested instead of spending all your time on here being less useful than Eddiesmith

Melbourne dont have a gaping hole in the ruck, they have the best ruckman in the league.

After 2018 Club felt it was in contention. Adelaide was at the door.

Clubs do these stupid things when they think they are on the cusp of raising the cup. Even by 2020... it still felt we were on the up.
History says otherwise... but history had not been written then.

We expect, and all other club supporters expect their club doesn't give up contention because they refused to keep one of their top players.

He had been AA and no reason to expect he couldn't be again.

So, he bent us over, but has performed below par for the last 3 years.. still a good player.. but the higher you get up the tree, the shakier it becomes.


Maybe we should have given him to Adelaide. But if we lost another GF after that.. I wonder what the armchair experts would be saying today.