Mitch Robinson anyone?

Remove this Banner Ad

Grundy has mongrel, competitiveness and intelligence, despite the fact he's a bit hot headed. Massive fan. Darcy's got intelligence in spades, athleticism, passion, competitiveness and football nous. Greenwood's a hard nut with a competitive streak. Williams certainly has mongrel, looking forward to an undistracted season.

All up they've contributed four seasons to Collingwood. So it's not as if we've been blessed with mongrel over the last few seasons. You've made a good point though, perhaps we've already filled our mongrel quota without punting on a loose cannon like Mitch Robinson.


And that's my point exactly
 
OK so I have been just as critical as most people of Robinson. He has been silly on and off the field many times.

But he plays with some heart - something we lack outside a few senior guys.

I wouldn't be opposed to using our second round pick for him as long as he's willing to curb his social life and concentrate on his footy. He is still a young guy with a bit of x-factor......I think a change of clubs may bring out the best in him

Off field sillyness, who really cares. Its the dumb things he does on the field that really count against him. Tempting...but NO
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Recruit him on the understanding he's here solely to take out the oppositions best in crunch games. See target, hit target, here's you're couple of hundred k, thanks and goodbye.
If only it was that simple.
 
OK so I have been just as critical as most people of Robinson. He has been silly on and off the field many times.

But he plays with some heart - something we lack outside a few senior guys.

I wouldn't be opposed to using our second round pick for him as long as he's willing to curb his social life and concentrate on his footy. He is still a young guy with a bit of x-factor......I think a change of clubs may bring out the best in him
gif_frame_drop_3_gif_gifsicle_140_aac31212f5.gif
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I really like him. I know it's not popular opinion but I think he would walk into our team.

I guess comparisons can be made between him and Blair as opinions seems to be similar.
 
Blair isn't the best player but saying Robinson would get a game ahead of him is an insult to him.
 
Ten thousand midfielders, and no one to kick it too. Great thinking.

Robinson kicks it to no one anyways so he's bad kicking won't hurt them.
 
This post just proves this guy is simply a troll. Nobody with half a brain could argue that Robinson is a gun. This bloke constantly bags the club and our players then calls a delisted scum player a gun. What a fool.
Try watching Collingwood v Carlton's last game and tell me who their best player was. He's a decent footballer no doubt forgetting his idiotic attitude. Can you distinguish between the two? Probably not.. Because you probably think every player on our list in a gun instead.
 
Mitch Robbinson is a gun guise, super cerial, we should get him.
 
I agree TG. I am not sure that I would call him a gun, because that should be saved for players who get 30+ possessions a game, and are the best in the comp, but Robinson is a very good player. For all the people who think we should of kept Heath Shaw, here is a player that makes up for Shaw in ability. As for the off field stuff, what is there to lose, we give him a chance, if he stuffs it up, we delist him instantly. Easy! Look at the Hawks, they took a chance on Dale Garlett and he did not succeed and they took him off the list. Didn't hurt them much, and they used a decent pick on the guy. Robinson would be dirt cheap, and would line up every week in our team if he was not injured.
 
Try watching Collingwood v Carlton's last game and tell me who their best player was. He's a decent footballer no doubt forgetting his idiotic attitude. Can you distinguish between the two? Probably not.. Because you probably think every player on our list in a gun instead.

I do not think all our players are guns. Bringing in Robinson adds virtually nothing to our list. He would be 20-25 on our list at best and would be taking up opportunities that should be going to our kids. Yes he would be depth if we lost more experienced players through injury but is in no way a gun as you claim.
 
I do not think all our players are guns. Bringing in Robinson adds virtually nothing to our list. He would be 20-25 on our list at best and would be taking up opportunities that should be going to our kids. Yes he would be depth if we lost more experienced players through injury but is in no way a gun as you claim.

That is the whole point of bringing him in. Our kids, are not ready to be thrown in the deep end """Together""" and expect any competitive result. Sure we should be giving SOME of our kids an opportunity, but they shouldn't be getting regular games, unless they prove their worth. Prove to be increasing consistency.

Some of the comments about Robinson, I am unsure whether some on here have the slightest idea on who Robinson is. If you say that you think the risk is there with his off field behaviour, that is another thing. If you say he misses too many games through suspension, that also is more valid than the argument of where he sits in our order. Because that argument is just way off.

We have single figures of players who average more possessions than him. We have single figures as to who in our side has a better Disposal efficiency, and he is tough at the contest, is good at his defensive game, tackles well, and is not the average player people make out he is. Yet somehow despite ALL the key indicators in the world, he somehow slips to 20-25 on our list. Well, I disagree, you give me 20-25 players that statistically are better than Robinson, and I will believe you. Until then, your are talking no sense at all.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top