Autopsy Collingwood: Where to from here?
- Thread starter Jake98
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Where the Pies didn't maintain their output, no hypocrisy at all
3 in 66 years, Every year?
I have some spare time
You keep talking about contending across multiple threads
Is this a gut feel/opinion or statistical analysis?
Well it really is very simple for those of us who are logical and rational.
When a team that regularly contends, including having contended in 2 of the last 3 seasons (including winning a flag) improves their list, they are positioning themselves well to contend again.
Conversely, as an example, if a hypothetical mid table team makes list decisions that takes their list backwards, they are highly unlikely to improve from a team that hasn't contended in more than two decades, to a contender.
But I can appreciate why you wouldn't understand it.
I referenced a post code of 22000. You referenced Carlton initially
If reasonably fit and healthy the Pies will make a preliminary next year.
So it's more opinion rather than any statistical analysis
Missing finals 2 of the last 4 years isn't a constant ongoing contender
Take that back further, 3 flags in 60 odd years, it's more of a participant rather than a ongoing contender
In the world of CArr0w....
Contending 50% of the time isn't a 'regular contender'.... (which is the term I used, as opposed to 'ongoing')
Yet the same person gets highly offended when I refuse to annoint his own team as a contender midway through a season, when they're yet to contend for anything, and fail to eventuate as a contender...
Oh my.
And out comes playing the poster
Regular is 50/50?
You must have me confused with someone else, i never got offended, I knew our range before the start of season
But again, this isn't about Carlton.
Oh boy indeed, it's merely opinion for you, as statistics don't strengthen your theory
This is how you deflect when challenged and struggle to debate the subject matter
Collingwood: Where to from here?
Stay on topic fadge
When between 2 and 4 teams contend for the premiership each year from 18 teams, a 50% contention rate is pretty good.
You should probably be aware of that given Carlton have a 0% contention rate over the last 25 years.
So seeing Carlton make the changes they did, which clearly weakened their list, whilst seeing Collingwood clearly strengthen their list, is 'merely an opinion'?
Carlton:
Out: Owies, Kennedy, Martin, Pick 12, F1, F2
In: Haynes, Pick 3
Collingwood:
Out: Noble, Richards, F1, Pick 36
In: Houston, Perryman, Membrey
Oh boy...
Last edited:
Collingwood have been in contention 3 of the last 13 years. That is shyte.
You have won 2 Grand Finals in the last 66 seasons. That is diabolical.
Make that 4.
2018, 2019, 2022, 2023.
Interesting you stopped at 2012, which excludes 2010 and 2011.
But 4 times in contention since 2012, which is the same number of times that Richmond have been in contention since 1983.
Great call out.
Is this your private, flawed analysis,
Not really in contender category though
Again, nothing to do with Carlton
Again, nothing to do with Carlton
You used the same theory over the last 3 seasons, and failed
Oh my
You really do struggle fadge
We could if someone could stay on topic
2019 lol. Richmond won the Grand Final with a percentage of 456%. Against a team who beat Collingwood the week before despite having several key players missing & playing on Collingwood's home ground.
Precisely what do you think Collingwood were in contention for?
Similar threads
