Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

LaurieHolden wrote:

Pies2016 wrote:

The Black and White Lion wrote:Josh Weddle thank you

Sadly, can’t happen. 2 year minimum for draftees. He was drafted last year.
They might ask about Grainger - Barras but the reality is you hardly ever see player only trades these days.

James Blanck is still rookie listed with the Hawks after 2 years.
I'll have to do a bit of digging, but can't a player walk / be eligible to be traded to a playing / full list contract if they've been on a rookie list after two years?

Regular viewers will recall he was the player that ran into Naicos in our R21 loss.

Not sure about Blanck, they change the rookie rules every year. What I do know is that if you are traded from a clubs rookie list, you must be elevated to your new clubs primary list. Re the above, I was referring to Weddle only, who was selected in the N D. Weddle was selected immediately before Allan. I knew Collingwood were keen on Weddle but it would have been interesting if Weddle was still there, would we have still picked Allan ( who was considered the big slider on the night ) Weddle in particular, does look a talent though.

I was hoping (if true) that one of his mates published it and it wasn't really him, otherwise the betrayal is pretty massive.

Pies2016 wrote:

LaurieHolden wrote:

Pies2016 wrote: Sadly, can’t happen. 2 year minimum for draftees. He was drafted last year.
They might ask about Grainger - Barras but the reality is you hardly ever see player only trades these days.

James Blanck is still rookie listed with the Hawks after 2 years.
I'll have to do a bit of digging, but can't a player walk / be eligible to be traded to a playing / full list contract if they've been on a rookie list after two years?

Regular viewers will recall he was the player that ran into Naicos in our R21 loss.

Not sure about Blanck, they change the rookie rules every year. What I do know is that if you are traded from a clubs rookie list, you must be elevated to your new clubs primary list. Re the above, I was referring to Weddle only, who was selected in the N D. Weddle was selected immediately before Allan. I knew Collingwood were keen on Weddle but it would have been interesting if Weddle was still there, would we have still picked Allan ( who was considered the big slider on the night ) Weddle in particular, does look a talent though.

I suspect you're indeed correct. More wishful thinking to hope we might salvage something from this 'situation'.
Unfortunately this is not a one lady owner that used it to drive to the shops trade in. Everyone knows it has had reliability issues and a we're not in a strong bargaining position as a result.

LaurieHolden wrote:If the latest 'chat' going around in respect to why Ginnivan has been punted following him leaking the McStay and his partners 'video', then we want Ginnivan nowhere near the Club. It's more than the video released, it's the spitefulness behind it
Players 'hate' him as a result.
Ginnivan did this on his own accord, bloke is toxic.

This is a Face Ache rumour so it should be treated with a grain of salt. A 4-year deal and more cash is very attractive to a kid who now has a Premiership Medallion. We will get SFA for him as they have nothing to offer. Personally, as he's not on that much dollar I would keep him to his contract and see how we go next year. He can spend all year in the VFL and sure we get nothing for him the following year but we are getting nothing now. Force him into the draft.

partypie wrote:Although his grand final appearance was not spectacular, his efforts as sub versus Melb and GWS were amazing. If he has to be traded then I hope the price is high.

No he died in the finals, lowest rated player on the ground in both finals as a sub averaging 5 disposals and no goals, GF 7 disposals no goals.

Final Home and Away game is the one I'd be showing Hawthorn (albeit against weak opposition) 3 goals and highest rated player on the ground. But for a big time player he was a complete finals flop and the goals have dried up ever since the free kicks stopped.

I have no issues with Ginni exploring options. He's smart enough to read the room - Hill passed him and Schultz will play forward leaving no room for Ginni. He either finds a team where can plays seniors, or end up playing VFL or being a sub at the Pies.

And let's face it, the support for Ginni is more about showing him support in the face on ongoing external criticism rather than because of his on field exploits. A bit like the Collingwood cheer to cancel out the boos of Bruz.

If he stays, great, if he goes, that's OK too. If we get a second round pick, then it's a fair trade.

Thankfully the Club has chosen to move on the situation quickly. Leaves us with 3 years of development deficit and a player down, but a future second round is as good as we can hope for this late in the trade period and without a competitive tender from multiple Clubs.

I really wish people wouldn’t jump straight to assuming the worst about our own players based on little information. The Jake Niall articles paint a starkly different picture from what we’re hearing in this thread about Ginnivan being a sook, screwing the club over, etc. If he’s been told that he’s likely to be surplus to requirements next year (and it’s hard to deny that possibility in light of the Schultz trade) and another club has come knocking to say they do want him, then he and his manager would be silly not to be open to it. I’ve always said this, but football careers can be over in a flash, and clubs show little loyalty to players when hard list decisions need to be made. So players owe it to themselves to act in their own best interests.

As for the malicious, frankly laughably far-fetched gossip going around about Ginnivan and another player, I would have thought we’d all have learned by now not to believe every random thing we hear on the internet, let alone use it to cast aspersions on someone’s character. And when I say "malicious", the malice lies not just with the original manufacturing of the rumour but with everyone who passes it on. We can be much better than that.

Kingsofclutch wrote:

partypie wrote:Although his grand final appearance was not spectacular, his efforts as sub versus Melb and GWS were amazing. If he has to be traded then I hope the price is high.

No he died in the finals, lowest rated player on the ground in both finals as a sub averaging 5 disposals and no goals, GF 7 disposals no goals.

Final Home and Away game is the one I'd be showing Hawthorn (albeit against weak opposition) 3 goals and highest rated player on the ground. But for a big time player he was a complete finals flop and the goals have dried up ever since the free kicks stopped.

I kept hearing how great he was as a sub in the finals. Was he, really? Was I watching a different set of games? Boy do people inflate the smallest thing Ginni does. Like one handball is treated like 15 possessions. I don’t quite understand the rhapsodising over everything he does. I mean you know you’re clutching at straws when you hear his running patterns brought up on social media as a defence for why he held his own.

We have all been very happy wit the way the new administration and coaching as approached list management over the last two years. From my point of view I trust any future decisions that will be made in relation to this matter. They know what they are doing and they have all the information they need to continue to put a highly competitive list together. We may never know all the contributing factors around the outcome of this situation either way. I’ll stick by their decisions.

I’m 100% behind the club, they haven’t made a bad decision this year or last.

SwansWay wrote:I kept hearing how great he was as a sub in the finals. Was he, really? Was I watching a different set of games?

Well, yes, you must have been. We don't make the Grand Final without his work against GWS. Maybe someone else could have/would have done that work - but there's no need to sell it short.

David wrote:I really wish people wouldn’t jump straight to assuming the worst about our own players based on little information. The Jake Niall articles paint a starkly different picture from what we’re hearing in this thread about Ginnivan being a sook, screwing the club over, etc. If he’s been told that he’s likely to be surplus to requirements next year (and it’s hard to deny that possibility in light of the Schultz trade) and another club has come knocking to say they do want him, then he and his manager would be silly not to be open to it. I’ve always said this, but football careers can be over in a flash, and clubs show little loyalty to players when hard list decisions need to be made. So players owe it to themselves to act in their own best interests.

As for the malicious, frankly laughably far-fetched gossip going around about Ginnivan and another player, I would have thought we’d all have learned by now not to believe every random thing we hear on the internet, let alone use it to cast aspersions on someone’s character. And when I say "malicious", the malice lies not just with the original manufacturing of the rumour but with everyone who passes it on. We can be much better than that.

yes and no, i don't think its the case here at all.

I think he's stevo mark 2. fame went to his head, he doesn't want to do the work to learn a few more tricks. hes got a good footy brain, we will miss that, but he lacks grit. Just have a look at how Stevo has fared, who arguably had far more talent, not to mention height, than Ginnie, he was going to kill it in the gym, but he's still a skinny runt, and no one thinks anything of him anymore.

The Coach said publicly "read the room" after he went to the track the night before the GF, thats actually a lot from a coach that likes to keep his methods and comments in house. So what does Ginny do? says "**** you I'm a Premiership player" and dresses as a jockey on mad Monday.

so hes happy with 1 medal? he did sweet **** in the GF, ignored Sidey when he could have had the chance to put us an extra 5 points clear.

it's just a bloody shame that he's wearing the medal and Noble isn't.

ive always loved Ginnie, but im so disappointed. Gutless.

VicParkTragic wrote:We have all been very happy wit the way the new administration and coaching as approached list management over the last two years. From my point of view I trust any future decisions that will be made in relation to this matter. They know what they are doing and they have all the information they need to continue to put a highly competitive list together. We may never know all the contributing factors around the outcome of this situation either way. I’ll stick by their decisions.

this

Pies4shaw wrote:

SwansWay wrote:I kept hearing how great he was as a sub in the finals. Was he, really? Was I watching a different set of games?

Well, yes, you must have been. We don't make the Grand Final without his work against GWS. Maybe someone else could have/would have done that work - but there's no need to sell it short.

3 kicks, no tackles, no goals, hard to sell it any other way than short.

*and that was his good final.