View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
robevpau1
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
|
Post subject: Brodie Grundy positional change? | |
|
Mentioned by Matthew Lloyd on Footy Classified - that with Cox/Cameron doing well in the Ruck - should we possibly consider transforming Brodie into a Full Forward/back-up Ruck? Interested in the opinion of others. |
|
|
|
|
magpie57
Joined: 04 May 2005 Location: Hobart
|
Post subject: Re: Brodie Grundy positional change? | |
|
[quote="robevpau1"]Mentioned by Matthew Lloyd on Footy Classified - that with Cox/Cameron doing well in the Ruck - should we possibly consider transforming Brodie into a Full Forward/back-up Ruck? Interested in the opinion of others.[/quote]
I have been thinking this same thing, it certainly wouldn't hurt to try.
We just might find the big power forward that people have been craving. _________________ one-eyed pie and proud of it |
|
|
|
|
Ronnie McKeowns boots
Ronnie Mckeowns boots
Joined: 27 Jul 2020
|
Post subject: | |
|
Bloke struggles to take contested marks, and is not quick off the mark _________________ "You hate a mean man, a grasping man, a man who wants everything and gives nothing. That’s Collingwood. They are a law unto themselves"
Jack 'Captain Blood' Dyer |
|
|
|
|
What'sinaname
Joined: 29 May 2010 Location: Living rent free
|
Post subject: Re: Brodie Grundy positional change? | |
|
magpie57 wrote: | robevpau1 wrote: | Mentioned by Matthew Lloyd on Footy Classified - that with Cox/Cameron doing well in the Ruck - should we possibly consider transforming Brodie into a Full Forward/back-up Ruck? Interested in the opinion of others. |
I have been thinking this same thing, it certainly wouldn't hurt to try.
We just might find the big power forward that people have been craving. |
Good in theory, but......Grundy averages half the number of marks in a game than Travis Cloke. More concerning, Grundy averages fewer marks a game than Cameron and Cox.
If you look at contested marks, the comparison is even more scary. Collingwood's all time leaders in contested marks are:
A Rocca
T Cloke
D Cameron
J Crow (he played just 1 game)
M Cox
Grundy is 20th |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
Post subject: | |
|
Good discussion. Things to consider with Cox as a ruckman. The sample size remains to small to determine if he is a quality AFL ruckman YET, albeit we will know over the next few weeks. Cox is 32 at the start of next season.
Things to consider with Grundy as a key forward -
Height ✔️
Goal kicking accuracy ✔️
Strong mark ❌ ❓
Agility ❌
Reads play well ✔️❓
Burst Pace ❌
Ground level / defensive capabilities ❌
He’s also a dual best and fairest as our number one ruckman. He’s an aerobic beast but that’s one of the very few qualities you don’t need as a deep KPF.
Elliot Miochek McCreery Henry Cameron ( or Cox ) Ginnivan looks pretty good to me and it’s been winning us games with heavy rotations through the forward line ( and no Kruger for now ) I don’t see how Grundy as a forward makes us any better, given that someone in that starting six would have to miss out. You could try it for shits and giggles but that would mean changing a winning formula. That’s a no from me. |
|
|
|
|
Swanny2011
Joined: 08 Dec 2020
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yeah he is very slow off the mark, and is not a great overhead. There is nothing I have seen in his makeup to suggest he can hold down a key position other than ruck. However he has a good tank and is good at winning ground ball contests. So why not play him at least 20/30 percent as a midfielder? This would be unique to any other side in the comp. |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
Post subject: | |
|
The way I see it, Cox and Cameron are a great double act, and Grundy should have to earn his place back in the team, via the VFL. I reckon Cox has one more season in him, next year, and then will retire, so we do need Grundy, yes. _________________ Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
Boot
Joined: 22 Feb 2013
|
Post subject: | |
|
There is no doubt that Collingwood have a good problem to deal with the emergence of Darcy Cameron and Mason Cox as serviceable ruckmen who can both pinch hit up forward as well as 2 time All-Australian Club champion Brody Grundy who is probably the highest paid player at the club.
In the short term its not something that the club has to resolve since Grundy is going to be out injured for another 5 or 6 weeks, but if we assume that Cameron & Cox maintain their current form and fitness, it will be very interesting to see how Fly McRae and his coaching team manage the return of Grundy into the team.
So called experts claim Collingwood can't play all three in the same team given it will "unbalance" the team, yet there was no problem when we had Roughhead in the team with Grundy and Cox/Cameron in combination.
Given the form of Cameron & Cox I'd love to see Grundy be eased back into the team as a key defender to release Darcy Moore to be a more attacking weapon at CHB instead of FB. Grundy has the size and strength to compete with the likes of opposition key forwards but the question is if he has the footy smarts and closing speed to be effective in a key defensive role. Also at question is Grundy’s disposal skills which could be a concern if he is to fit back into the team as a KPD.
Lots of media talk that Grundy should be introduced back into the team as a key forward, but I’ve never seen him as a great contested marking forward which is why I think he is more likely to fit into a key defensive role than a KPF. Also if Cox & Cameron are both playing then they can provide the marking power up forward to supplement Mihocek and Henry as out marking forwards.
Fitting Grundy into the defensive group would necessitate moving one of the incumbents out and this may come down to which two of Grundy, Howe or Murphy fits into the team. Difficult choice to make.
I was interested to see Fly McRae laughed at the idea that Grundy wouldn’t be an automatic selection when he recovers from his knee injury at the post Melbourne victory press conference, so he seems committed to using Grundy as out number one ruckmen. _________________ Collingwood Domination. Envy of the Nation! |
|
|
|
|
SwansWay
Joined: 13 May 2015
|
Post subject: | |
|
Grundy's issue is his lack of versatility. He's played in that one position and doesn't have lots of other strings to his bow which will allow him to play in other positions. He's not a forward, even though I bloody wish he was able to take that role, it's wishful thinking. I said this after the Freo game to my dad, that maybe Grundy being out has allowed Cameron / Cox to find their identity in our team. And to their credit, they've flourished with roles that don't allow them to go cold sitting planted in the forward line all day. Cox covers the ground better than Grundy. Brodie is a bit of a lumberer. For mine, we see how this combo goes over the next month or so but if they keep performing as they have been, I would not want Grundy back in the team at their omission.
Let's hope Grundy can recapture his form from a few years ago, but I'd honestly like to see us put him on the trade table. We have Begg emerging who I think will be okay in a couple of years. You don't need a star ruckman. Most can get by with a moneyball player in the ruck. Unless Grundy can be a goal kicking ruckman or take contested marks around the ground, he's unfortunately going to fall behind. |
|
|
|
|
piffdog
Joined: 18 Jun 2021
|
Post subject: | |
|
The challenge is our depth. Imagine right now Cox or Cameron miss 4 weeks with an (make something up). How comfortable do we all feel about not having Grundy? Granted he is waaay to expensive to have as a backup… If somehow we traded Grundy we would surely want to be adding a journeyman ruck to the ranks.
Remember Cox is 31 and as good as he’s going two things are highly likely:
-we lose a game and he has just a couple touches and we’ll all be off him
-there is almost zero chance he is playing in our next flag
The good news is we have an excellent ruck on our books (Grundy) who will come back. Need to find how we can maximise him for the team’s benefit. Wether that’s forward, back, ruck I don’t know - that’s Fly’s job. Maybe we get a bit of currency if Cox moves on that we wouldn’t have had if he didn’t get this chance to show he’s still got something to offer. _________________ It's never as good/nor bad as it seems... |
|
|
|
|
Jezza
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010 Location: Ponsford End
|
Post subject: | |
|
I think it's laughable that Grundy needs to earn his spot back through the VFL.
Grundy would only play VFL to regain some fitness from a long-term injury, but otherwise he's an automatic selection everyday of the week.
Too many people are getting carried away because Cox played his first decent game in years. I might be convinced he's turned a corner if he does it on a consistent basis. _________________ | 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ I think we all know that threads about Grundy all finish up as trolling, however genuinely they start. |
|
|
|
|
Ronnie McKeowns boots
Ronnie Mckeowns boots
Joined: 27 Jul 2020
|
Post subject: | |
|
The only thing troll like is our salary cap, its as ugly as a troll in any case, and a key reason for that is an albatross-around-the-neck contract for 7 years at a million a year for a 2 time AA player who cant bloody mark and is as slow as a brewery wagon! |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007 Location: Elwood
|
Post subject: | |
|
I don't know what to do about Grundy. All I know is that if Grundy returns to the side and we go back to playing Cox as a full time forward, it'll destroy the poor guy. |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
Post subject: | |
|
I think there's merit in the idea, but honestly, I think Cameron has looked more like a good forward/ruck option. Overall, I fear playing 3 rucks would make us far too slow and top heavy. |
|
|
|
|
|