I'm gonna say it, MILLER

[MAXIMUM GRUNDAGE]

 

[eskimo]

Newton might have the ability to leap, but he doesn't. He is a complete waste of space.

I agree that Dunn gives the improved mobility, but you would also get that from Miller. Dunn isn't exactly a speedster.

Paul Johnson is almost as useless as Newton.

The reality is that he is currently the best forward option to replace Petterd. If he doesn't perform at senior level then he should be dropped.

 

[MFCforever]

Coming from a bloke that wants to recall Brad Miller.

By the way, did we obtain another Martin that I don't know about?

PJ to replace Martin.

Bail replaces Petterd.

McKenzie gets his spot back from Rivers.

Dunn has done some ruckwork but having another legitimate ruckman in Paul Johnson allows us to leave Jamar up forward for longer periods, also Johnson can rest forward and could also become a forward option.

Quick for a big bloke, fairly reliable set shot and would most likely attract Brian Lake due to his size which sends a lesser defender to Green who would most likely get Lake otherwise.

What I was trying to say either player for Martin depending on match-ups.

Now let me get this straight, you want to bring a 3 gamer(Bail) in who hasn't played footy for 2 weeks straight back into the side?

 

[MFCforever]

We can expose the Dogs backline this week by playing a small faster forward line. Lake and Williams are good on the bigger guys but can be exposed on the lead if we play some lead up targets on them and dont bomb away to dud talls like Miller.

I think we have a very sneaky chance this week, we have troubled the Dogs in the past, we run with them all day last year at the G.

Bail in for Petterd
McKenzie in for Martin.

Bail hasn't played for 2 weeks? Has he? Is he still injured?

 

[MFCforever]

Miller has kicked 5 goals from 3 games at Casey, that's not overly impressive for a forward.

If that's what's pushing for selection then I'd prefer to get games into a future prospect that has potential.

What evidence have you got to suggest his goal kicking from set shots has improved? I haven't seen any of this so called improvement.

Also if we need Miller down back then our defence is in massive trouble and I'd prefer to use a legitimate back-up ruck who can pinch hit down forward in PJ than a "legitimate" forward who can pinch-hit (debatable) in the ruck.

Brad Miller -Match Winner and Very Versatile

I had Miller start in the back line. He started on Ablett and did a great job on him - Ablett hardly had a touch. At half time, we were down by seven points - and we moved him to the forward line, and he kicked three goals two behinds in the second half. Millsy had a fantastic game. I rated him as excellent, because he did the job in the back, then he went forward, and he was really our match winner, and very versatile.

 

[Dez!]

Newton might have the ability to leap, but he doesn't. He is a complete waste of space.

In this new game plan that we are going with, I disagree with this. Bailey has repeatedly stated that a main focus of our forward line is forward defensive pressure and in terms of applying that forward defensive pressure Newton is a better choice than Miller.

I agree that Dunn gives the improved mobility, but you would also get that from Miller. Dunn isn't exactly a speedster.

Dunn has the engine to run all day and can run through the midfield, Miller cannot.

Paul Johnson is almost as useless as Newton.

You're offering nothing but your opinion, why not back it up with some reasons? I'm all for debating this but I've at least offered some reasons as to why I'd prefer other players to Miller yet you just rebut with "player xxx is useless".

The reality is that he is currently the best forward option to replace Petterd. If he doesn't perform at senior level then he should be dropped.

Based on what? His 5 goals in 4 games at Casey? With the amount of physical condition and AFL experience that Brad Miller has, he should be dominating at VFL level.

Just a little comparison for this year for arguments sake.

Brad Miller
- 26 years of age (27 this year)
- Drafted pick #55 in the 2001 AFL Draft
- Debuted in round 7 2002

Jack Watts
- 19 years of age
- Drafted pick #1 in the 2008 draft
- Debuted round 11 2009

These two have played 4 games for Casey this year and Miller has 5 goals while Jack has 3 goals. Jack has been playing predominantly on the wing floating forward while Miller has spent every game (except one half of a game) in the forward line yet Miller only has two more goals than Jack.

You'd think that a man that has had eight and half pre-seasons (I'll count his draft year as only half a pre-season not a full one) would be far ahead of a kid who has had half a pre-season last year (draft year) and an interrupted pre-season this year but Miller isn't.

For me that is unacceptable for a recall to play AFL football.

*Note this wasn't a post advocating to play Watts (although I'm not against that), just a comparison for arguments sake*

Now let me get this straight, you want to bring a 3 gamer(Bail) in who hasn't played footy for 2 weeks straight back into the side?

Bail did enough in his two games this year to earn an instant recall and the poor form of some players helps that case, so yes.

Two weeks is nothing.

 

[LITTLE STINGA]

Brad Miller -Match Winner and Very Versatile

I had Miller start in the back line. He started on Ablett and did a great job on him - Ablett hardly had a touch. At half time, we were down by seven points - and we moved him to the forward line, and he kicked three goals two behinds in the second half. Millsy had a fantastic game. I rated him as excellent, because he did the job in the back, then he went forward, and he was really our match winner, and very versatile.

He done a good job on a player that hasn't had a kick so far this season. Awesome.

At least he killed 2 birds with 1 stone. He played his match winning game for the year so we don't have to play him from now on and he may have done enough to impress the Gold Coast. That's all I was hoping for.

 

[Demon Revival]

In this new game plan that we are going with, I disagree with this. Bailey has repeatedly stated that a main focus of our forward line is forward defensive pressure and in terms of applying that forward defensive pressure Newton is a better choice than Miller.



Dunn has the engine to run all day and can run through the midfield, Miller cannot.



You're offering nothing but your opinion, why not back it up with some reasons? I'm all for debating this but I've at least offered some reasons as to why I'd prefer other players to Miller yet you just rebut with "player xxx is useless".



Based on what? His 5 goals in 4 games at Casey? With the amount of physical condition and AFL experience that Brad Miller has, he should be dominating at VFL level.

Just a little comparison for this year for arguments sake.

Brad Miller
- 26 years of age (27 this year)
- Drafted pick #55 in the 2001 AFL Draft
- Debuted in round 7 2002

Jack Watts
- 19 years of age
- Drafted pick #1 in the 2008 draft
- Debuted round 11 2009

These two have played 4 games for Casey this year and Miller has 5 goals while Jack has 3 goals. Jack has been playing predominantly on the wing floating forward while Miller has spent every game (except one half of a game) in the forward line yet Miller only has two more goals than Jack.

You'd think that a man that has had eight and half pre-seasons (I'll count his draft year as only half a pre-season not a full one) would be far ahead of a kid who has had half a pre-season last year (draft year) and an interrupted pre-season this year but Miller isn't.

For me that is unacceptable for a recall to play AFL football.

*Note this wasn't a post advocating to play Watts (although I'm not against that), just a comparison for arguments sake*



Bail did enough in his two games this year to earn an instant recall and the poor form of some players helps that case, so yes.

Two weeks is nothing.

WOW, someone is actually making a good solid argument, well done Dez...

 

[MFCforever]

In this new game plan that we are going with, I disagree with this. Bailey has repeatedly stated that a main focus of our forward line is forward defensive pressure and in terms of applying that forward defensive pressure Newton is a better choice than Miller.



Dunn has the engine to run all day and can run through the midfield, Miller cannot.



You're offering nothing but your opinion, why not back it up with some reasons? I'm all for debating this but I've at least offered some reasons as to why I'd prefer other players to Miller yet you just rebut with "player xxx is useless".



Based on what? His 5 goals in 4 games at Casey? With the amount of physical condition and AFL experience that Brad Miller has, he should be dominating at VFL level.

Just a little comparison for this year for arguments sake.

Brad Miller
- 26 years of age (27 this year)
- Drafted pick #55 in the 2001 AFL Draft
- Debuted in round 7 2002

Jack Watts
- 19 years of age
- Drafted pick #1 in the 2008 draft
- Debuted round 11 2009

These two have played 4 games for Casey this year and Miller has 5 goals while Jack has 3 goals. Jack has been playing predominantly on the wing floating forward while Miller has spent every game (except one half of a game) in the forward line yet Miller only has two more goals than Jack.

You'd think that a man that has had eight and half pre-seasons (I'll count his draft year as only half a pre-season not a full one) would be far ahead of a kid who has had half a pre-season last year (draft year) and an interrupted pre-season this year but Miller isn't.

For me that is unacceptable for a recall to play AFL football.

*Note this wasn't a post advocating to play Watts (although I'm not against that), just a comparison for arguments sake*



Bail did enough in his two games this year to earn an instant recall and the poor form of some players helps that case, so yes.

Two weeks is nothing.

Miller has better defensive pressure than Newton. The main reason Newton has been dropped numerous times is because he needs to get urgency in his game. Urgency=pressure.

Miller is not a midfielder so why are we comparing with Dunn when last season Dunn ran with the best mids in the comp. Miller would be brought into the side purely as a forward like ummmmmm Pettard.

You are contradicting yourself when saying Miller has only kicked 5 goals yet saying our game plan is based on forward pressure. So which 1 is it? Simple fact Miller is currently the best forward at Casey and has also played more than 1 game down back.

Whether Bail did enough in his first 2 games is not the point. He is basically a fisrt year player and will not get a re-call straight in the 1's when you've got Jetta,Maric,Gysberts and co playing well at Casey.

Now Watts and Millers stats. From my point of view this is even more reason to play Miller. Bash Miller up in the 1's and Let Watts learn his craft, play footy and get some confidence up at Casey. He is not ready the club say this not only us punters.

Also, Brad Gotch's report this week of Milsy was pretty damning.I think he will play and I hope he does or possible Johnson. Bail not a chance.

 

[MFCforever]

In this new game plan that we are going with, I disagree with this. Bailey has repeatedly stated that a main focus of our forward line is forward defensive pressure and in terms of applying that forward defensive pressure Newton is a better choice than Miller.



Dunn has the engine to run all day and can run through the midfield, Miller cannot.



You're offering nothing but your opinion, why not back it up with some reasons? I'm all for debating this but I've at least offered some reasons as to why I'd prefer other players to Miller yet you just rebut with "player xxx is useless".



Based on what? His 5 goals in 4 games at Casey? With the amount of physical condition and AFL experience that Brad Miller has, he should be dominating at VFL level.

Just a little comparison for this year for arguments sake.

Brad Miller
- 26 years of age (27 this year)
- Drafted pick #55 in the 2001 AFL Draft
- Debuted in round 7 2002

Jack Watts
- 19 years of age
- Drafted pick #1 in the 2008 draft
- Debuted round 11 2009

These two have played 4 games for Casey this year and Miller has 5 goals while Jack has 3 goals. Jack has been playing predominantly on the wing floating forward while Miller has spent every game (except one half of a game) in the forward line yet Miller only has two more goals than Jack.

You'd think that a man that has had eight and half pre-seasons (I'll count his draft year as only half a pre-season not a full one) would be far ahead of a kid who has had half a pre-season last year (draft year) and an interrupted pre-season this year but Miller isn't.

For me that is unacceptable for a recall to play AFL football.

*Note this wasn't a post advocating to play Watts (although I'm not against that), just a comparison for arguments sake*



Bail did enough in his two games this year to earn an instant recall and the poor form of some players helps that case, so yes.

Two weeks is nothing.

Yet Newton has had roughly 7 preseasons, is not getting a kick at Casey, performed terribly in his 2 games this year and you want him in the side. Your so called argument is full of contradictions.

 

[Mr Rude]

MFCforever.

It seems you spend more time reading Brad Gotch's Casey reports than watching our games of football. If you actually watched our games you would have seen Bail is well desering of his place in the seniors. I would go as far as saying he would slot into any sides AFL team on current form.

Change your username to BradGotchMeLovinBadMiller.

 

[Dez!]

Miller has better defensive pressure than Newton. The main reason Newton has been dropped numerous times is because he needs to get urgency in his game. Urgency=pressure.

Newton's defensive game inside our forward 50 exceeds Millers comfortably, Newton was dropped because Martin had got some form at Casey and was a better option as a back-up ruckman and he wasn't kicking goals.

Miller is not a midfielder so why are we comparing with Dunn when last season Dunn ran with the best mids in the comp. Miller would be brought into the side purely as a forward like ummmmmm Pettard.

Read the post.

He was saying Miller would be a better back-up ruckman than Dunn which I replied that Dunn gives us an extra runner while Miller adds nothing in the forward line. I was comparing what they offer if they were back-up ruckman.

Dunn = Decent pinch hitting in the ruck/extra runner in the midfield/forward target

Miller = Nothing in terms of a pinch hitting ruckmen/adds little to nothing up forward

You are contradicting yourself when saying Miller has only kicked 5 goals yet saying our game plan is based on forward pressure. So which 1 is it? Simple fact Miller is currently the best forward at Casey and has also played more than 1 game down back.

Our forward line runs on forward defensive pressure, how is that and Miller only kicking 5 goals related let alone a contradiction? We want our forwards to apply defensive pressure inside our attacking 50 and kick goals.

Let me give you a bit of reading then:

Brad Miller - 8 Kicks, 2 Handballs, 3 Marks, 3 Tackles
Brad Miller worked hard without much reward. His strength is his leading, and his ability to outrun his opponent - So, he created a lot of contests, but Geelong rolled the numbers out in front of him, which made it difficult. He wanted to contribute to the hardness side of the game, and he certainly did that. His leadership was terrific with all the young guys. I’d say that Brad would be one of the instigators of why we got across the line with the win, because he never gave up, he kept pushing the boys, kept the spirit up - didn’t worry about the scoreboard, and before we knew it, we’d hit the front at the 23 minute mark. Brad played a big part in that.

Brad Miller - Kicks 9, Handballs 8, Marks 9, Tackles 2
I was pretty happy with Millsy. I thought he and Stef were our two best forwards. He took nine marks, but he kicked two behinds. So that probably detracted for him a bit on the scoreboard but his work rate was good.

Brad Miller -
I rated Millsy as good. I thought he was the main forward target for us, which was good. He just seemed to be the main one who could attract the footy, and actually do something with it. He took nine marks, which was a fantastic effort in the conditions. His ability to provide leadership and direction to a setup in the forward line was great, and he kicked a long range goal in the last , which put us within a kick. He’s an important player, and even more so with his experience in a young group.

Brad Miller -
I had Miller start in the back line. He started on Ablett and did a great job on him - Ablett hardly had a touch. At half time, we were down by seven points - and we moved him to the forward line, and he kicked three goals two behinds in the second half. Millsy had a fantastic game. I rated him as excellent, because he did the job in the back, then he went forward, and he was really our match winner, and very versatile.

Those are Brad Gotch's reviews of Brad Millers game at Casey, notice how there is only one mention of him defence? You would think that if he had switched to the back line in any of those games then Gotch would have mentioned so in his player review, yet it's only mentioned once.

Whether Bail did enough in his first 2 games is not the point. He is basically a fisrt year player and will not get a re-call straight in the 1's when you've got Jetta,Maric,Gysberts and co playing well at Casey.

I believe he deserves to go straight back in after his performances and I also believe Bailey will reward him for his efforts in those two games.

Now Watts and Millers stats. From my point of view this is even more reason to play Miller. Bash Miller up in the 1's and Let Watts learn his craft, play footy and get some confidence up at Casey. He is not ready the club say this not only us punters.

How is it more of a reason to play Miller? Fine let Watts get his confidence up at Casey as long as Miller stays there as well, play someone like PJ which helps give us the option to play Jamar up forward for longer periods,.

If Jamar was resting forward he would attract the Dogs best defender in Brian Lake which would give whoever Lake was on (I'm assuming Green or Sylvia) a lesser defender. Hell even PJ may even get Lake put on him when he's up forward due to his size, whereas if we play Miller he'd get their 4th best defender behind Green, Sylvia and Bate.

Yet Newton has had roughly 7 preseasons, is not getting a kick at Casey, performed terribly in his 2 games this year and you want him in the side. Your so called argument is full of contradictions.

I never said put Newton into the side this week.

My changes for this week would be:

In: Bail, McKenzie, Johnson
Out: Petterd, Rivers, Martin

 

[KTLK]

Newton's defensive game inside our forward 50 exceeds Millers comfortably, Newton was dropped because Martin had got some form at Casey and was a better option as a back-up ruckman and he wasn't kicking goals.



Read the post.

He was saying Miller would be a better back-up ruckman than Dunn which I replied that Dunn gives us an extra runner while Miller adds nothing in the forward line. I was comparing what they offer if they were back-up ruckman.

Dunn = Decent pinch hitting in the ruck/extra runner in the midfield/forward target

Miller = Nothing in terms of a pinch hitting ruckmen/adds little to nothing up forward



Our forward line runs on forward defensive pressure, how is that and Miller only kicking 5 goals related let alone a contradiction? We want our forwards to apply defensive pressure inside our attacking 50 and kick goals.

Let me give you a bit of reading then:









Those are Brad Gotch's reviews of Brad Millers game at Casey, notice how there is only one mention of him defence? You would think that if he had switched to the back line in any of those games then Gotch would have mentioned so in his player review, yet it's only mentioned once.



I believe he deserves to go straight back in after his performances and I also believe Bailey will reward him for his efforts in those two games.



How is it more of a reason to play Miller? Fine let Watts get his confidence up at Casey as long as Miller stays there as well, play someone like PJ which helps give us the option to play Jamar up forward for longer periods,.

If Jamar was resting forward he would attract the Dogs best defender in Brian Lake which would give whoever Lake was on (I'm assuming Green or Sylvia) a lesser defender. Hell even PJ may even get Lake put on him when he's up forward due to his size, whereas if we play Miller he'd get their 4th best defender behind Green, Sylvia and Bate.



I never said put Newton into the side this week.

My changes for this week would be:

In: Bail, McKenzie, Johnson
Out: Petterd, Rivers, Martin

Dear Dez,

Re: Miller - I agree with you.

Re: Johnson - What happen if Hudson smashes him in the ruck and the dog's midfielders get the first ball opportunity and spears it to their FF zone (ie Hall/Higgins etc)? This case, it will increase pressure in the Dee's defence and provide less opportunities in the FF zone towards Jamar's end.

I understand why you include Johnson in the ruck and have Jamar as a FF target which is fair enough. I think if you want to see the Dee's midfielders get the first ball opportunity from the ruck, obviously Jamar is the better option than Johnson.

 

[KTLK]

Surely we can't have both Warnock and Miller in the back half. How many goals are we going to concede due to basic skill errors.

When was the last time Rivers actually had a good game? I'm sick and tired of Rivers living off his past glorys. I hope the coaching staff don't have the same ideas as big footy because if they do we will get belted.

Re: Miller - I agree with you. This is because there will be too many talls in the backline with Warnock, Frawley, Garland, Rivers and Miller which is unnecessary especially against a smaller mobile FF team like the doggies.

This is where I can't see Miller coming in the side.

What the Dee's need is to bring in McKenzie and Bail to add tackling pressure as well as pace to combat the doggies midfielders and their run.

For Rivers, I can understand he had a shocker. Isn't Rivers one of the 22 in the team? If so, isn't it abit harsh to drop him just because he had just 1 bad game?

If Rivers continues this shocking form for the next few weeks, then "yes", he should be dropped and get some form in the second's.

 

[jinny1]

MFCForever has no idea....

 

[Dez!]

Dear Dez,

Re: Miller - I agree with you.

Re: Johnson - What happen if Hudson smashes him in the ruck and the dog's midfielders get the first ball opportunity and spears it to their FF zone (ie Hall/Higgins etc)? This case, it will increase pressure in the Dee's defence and provide less opportunities in the FF zone towards Jamar's end.

I understand why you include Johnson in the ruck and have Jamar as a FF target which is fair enough. I think if you want to see the Dee's midfielders get the first ball opportunity from the ruck, obviously Jamar is the better option than Johnson.

I'm not saying Jamar plays as a forward the whole game but if we have a legitimate ruckman in Johnson backing him up it would allow him to spend more time up forward than he has this season due to him rucking solo.

If the Dogs midfield started to get on top that's when I'd send PJ forward and bring Jamar back into the middle.

Jamar could ruck 65% of the game and spend the other 35% up forward, he'd still be rucking most of the game but it would give him just that extra bit of time up forward which could cause the Dogs defence some problems.

 

[KickLongTackleHard]

Hate to be a wet blanket, but I don't know why we debate changes so much. Why not just see who the in's and out's actually are on Thursday and then comment?

 

[Demon 16]

I agree with Rude - Bail straight back in if fit. Same with McKenzie.

Any of you biatches interested in Gysberts or Strauss this week?

 

[saj_21]

I agree with Rude - Bail straight back in if fit. Same with McKenzie.

Any of you biatches interested in Gysberts or Strauss this week?

According to the VFL match report, Bail was a late withdrawal from Casey. Haven't heard about Mckenzie i assume he will face a fitness test, i would love to see Gysberts play. Johnson, Miller and Cheney all pushing for selection.

 

[KTLK]

I'm not saying Jamar plays as a forward the whole game but if we have a legitimate ruckman in Johnson backing him up it would allow him to spend more time up forward than he has this season due to him rucking solo.

If the Dogs midfield started to get on top that's when I'd send PJ forward and bring Jamar back into the middle.

Jamar could ruck 65% of the game and spend the other 35% up forward, he'd still be rucking most of the game but it would give him just that extra bit of time up forward which could cause the Dogs defence some problems.

Having Johnson in the FF is not a good option. He kicking for goals is worse then Miller

 

[Dez!]

Having Johnson in the FF is not a good option. He kicking for goals is worse then Miller

PJ's set shots are actually pretty decent, he may also attract the best defender just by his size which could be a bonus for us with Green or Sylvia getting a lesser defender.

 

[LG UniT]

Whether Bail did enough in his first 2 games is not the point. He is basically a fisrt year player and will not get a re-call straight in the 1's when you've got Jetta,Maric,Gysberts and co playing well at Casey....

....Also, Brad Gotch's report this week of Milsy was pretty damning.I think he will play and I hope he does or possible Johnson. Bail not a chance.

Bail is better than you are giving him credit for and to be honest I think Bailey likes the way he goes about his footy. I personally think McKenzie, Bail and Johnson will come back in. Bail and McKenzie to toughen up the midfield and Johnson to do his new all important job (play the percentages and help Jamar rest his massive frame)

 

[MFCforever]

Bail is better than you are giving him credit for and to be honest I think Bailey likes the way he goes about his footy. I personally think McKenzie, Bail and Johnson will come back in. Bail and McKenzie to toughen up the midfield and Johnson to do his new all important job (play the percentages and help Jamar rest his massive frame)

Bail has never played in the midfield.

 

[Dez!]

Bail has never played in the midfield.

He hasn't played in the midfield for Melbourne but he was a midfielder for Mt Gravatt before being drafted, use to be an endurance runner as well if I remember correctly.

He'll become part of the midfield rotation when he returns to the team I would imagine.