Miller

[IDGAF]

I don't mind the move..JR will be flogged in 2011 without some support..Griff will take time with overhauls on both shoulders..we're crying out for someone to stand tall as JR attracts all the attention...if Pod can work, no reason why miller who is arguably 5 x the player couldnt work out as a foil

Comparing him to "Leroy" Brown @ the filth is the best positive i can draw from it ... failing that it is a puzzling move and ... dare i say it ...

.... "something Wallace would do" ..

 

[santa claws]

Comparing him to "Leroy" Brown @ the filth is the best positive i can draw from it ... failing that it is a puzzling move and ... dare i say it ...

.... "something Wallace would do" ..

no its not wallace aka miller of the ex tiger persuasion would trade pick 19 or worse for a player like miller.

sheesh he gave up pick 42 and downgraded pick 8 to pick 13 to get an under achiever like polak.
we are using one of two mature rookie picks which by the way can only be used on mature players to get miller if you cant see the difference your blind.

 

[santa claws]

lets forget the player and look solely bat the process. for so many reasons we are going thru the right process here.
we may all debate the merits of each player who comes to our club but the main thing is we are going thru the right process more often than not we will benefit by doing so.

for what its worth miller is not one i would chase but i perfectly understand why we would.

 

[IDGAF]

no its not wallace aka miller of the ex tiger persuasion would trade pick 19 or worse for a player like miller.

sheesh he gave up pick 42 and downgraded pick 8 to pick 13 to get an under achiever like polak.
we are using one of two mature rookie picks which by the way can only be used on mature players to get miller if you cant see the difference your blind.

Oh ... my impaired vision does not see past our apparent youth policy

oh wait ... ... Craig Cameron thought he was good on 02

sorry ... carry on

 

[IDGAF]

for what its worth miller is not one i would chase but i perfectly understand why we would.

Coz Melbourne is so "developed" and brimming with KPP`s

 

[Equus]

Oh man, I love that Festivus episode.

I'm not sure where to stand in this recruitment... I know he costs nothing but surely we can find equally or more talented in the amateur league?

 

[IDGAF]

... I know he costs nothing but surely we can find equally or more talented in the amateur league?

... somewhere ....ANYWHERE

 

[Richm0ndrule]

Might be the new waterboy!

 

[peejay]

Didn't he kick 10 goals in his last game of VFL footy?

Jesus if one of our guys did that, to quote Cogga rules "we would be pulling our puds" over this.

 

[Andy_Mac]

Didn't he kick 10 goals in his last game of VFL footy?

Jesus if one of our guys did that, to quote Cogga rules "we would be pulling our puds" over this.

He kicked 10 against GC a couple of weeks before the end of the year. He was actually in pretty good goal kicking form down in the VFL and also kicked 5 against Port up in Darwin.

Still a strange selection if you guys pick hium up. I woild have thought Miller would want GC. More oppertunity etc.

Although with JR8 drawing the best defender Miller might actually go alright.

 

[scroda]

i'd be quite happy to take him. good lead up forward, if melbourne had a full forward and could play miller up the ground, then he may have been ok. we have Jack so i think Miller could suit

more than happy to give him a go

 

[CoggaRules]

To those that are bagging this decision to take Miller as a matured aged rookie, you have NFI. Perfect for where we are at atm and what we are trying to do, i.e. develop our kids without them being flogged week in week out by bigger stronger bodies.
Experience, mongrel, strength, offers himself as a target, that ticks all the boxes as a cheap get for us.
Do I dare make a comparison to another "dud" that now has a premiership medal? Leigh Brown anyone?

 

[lesrythmes]

Exactly Cogga. Who else is going to fill a mature rookie spot? It's basically short term help for Riewoldt, which he needs very, very badly. Could get him over the line for another Coleman if nothing else.

 

[Barnzy]

To those that are bagging this decision to take Miller as a matured aged rookie, you have NFI. Perfect for where we are at atm and what we are trying to do, i.e. develop our kids without them being flogged week in week out by bigger stronger bodies.
Experience, mongrel, strength, offers himself as a target, that ticks all the boxes as a cheap get for us.
Do I dare make a comparison to another "dud" that now has a premiership medal? Leigh Brown anyone?

Because recruiting old recycled hacks in the past has worked so well? As for your comparision with Leigh Brown, he would be useless at Richmond without good players around him. He was a liablity in the GF but got carried by his teammates.


We had Polak as insurance this year which wasn't very useful so why do we need another? You're pretty much replacing hack for hack.

Exactly Cogga. Who else is going to fill a mature rookie spot? It's basically short term help for Riewoldt, which he needs very, very badly. Could get him over the line for another Coleman if nothing else.

Short-term decisions rarely turn out well when rebuilding. I still don't understand the logic. We survived this year and now there's going to be another pre-season under the kids belt. Why go drafting in Miller when he's not needed? Regardless of cost we've been down this road before but people are so blinded by the hooneymoon period of the new coaches they're happy to accept anything. If Miller comes to Richmond we haven't learnt a thing. Hope GC take him as one of their 10 pre-listed players so we can't.

 

[lesrythmes]

You don't know what you're talking about, it's a completely different story to the past when there was no such thing as a 'mature age rookie'. It's basically Miller or nothing, so even if he plays 22 for Coburg we haven't lost anything. Not even a spot on the list.

 

[Barnzy]

You don't know what you're talking about, it's a completely different story to the past when there was no such thing as a 'mature age rookie'. It's basically Miller or nothing, so even if he plays 22 for Coburg we haven't lost anything. Not even a spot on the list.

Clearly you don't since the mature rookie rules were around this year when Polak was on our list.

Also if we want insurance anywhere or perhaps another mature option (maybe VFL/WAFL, etc) the only area of the list it should be is ruck which is far worse off than the forwards and makes much more sense. Vickery will be playing more forward and that just leaves Graham and Browne. Much more logical.

 

[CoggaRules]

Because recruiting old recycled hacks in the past has worked so well? As for your comparision with Leigh Brown, he would be useless at Richmond without good players around him. He was a liablity in the GF but got carried by his teammates.


We had Polak as insurance this year which wasn't very useful so why do we need another? You're pretty much replacing hack for hack.



Short-term decisions rarely turn out well when rebuilding. I still don't understand the logic. We survived this year and now there's going to be another pre-season under the kids belt. Why go drafting in Miller when he's not needed? Regardless of cost we've been down this road before but people are so blinded by the hooneymoon period of the new coaches they're happy to accept anything. If Miller comes to Richmond we haven't learnt a thing. Hope GC take him as one of their 10 pre-listed players so we can't.

man, you are defeating your own argument. You suggest we should not have taken him because we are rebuilding, but on the other hand you suggest you hope the GC take him. Now why would you think the GC who are definitely building, take a recycled hack as you say?

 

[Barnzy]

man, you are defeating your own argument. You suggest we should not have taken him because we are rebuilding, but on the other hand you suggest you hope the GC take him. Now why would you think the GC who are definitely building, take a recycled hack as you say?

To fill a hole.

They will have to play first year talls and will have little options, we won't. Totally different situations.

 

[CoggaRules]

To fill a hole.

They will have first year kids playing and little options, we won't.

we wont have first year kids playing? or sorry, Griff with 4 games, Post with 4 or 5, Goo with 3, etc etc, is different yeah?
Not to mention you kinda discount the new influx of draftees to the list, and you can add to that the Protection they would get when playing at Coburg.

 

[Barnzy]

we wont have first year kids playing? or sorry, Griff with 4 games, Post with 4 or 5, Goo with 3, etc etc, is different yeah?

Gourdis is a defender.

Post has played 14 games, about to turn 21 and is coming into his 3rd year. Big boy and I expect him to play 15+ games next year.

Vickery same as above but has 20+ games experience. Will play more forward as alraedy been stated.

Griffiths will probably play 5-10 in his 2nd year, won't be required to play more.

Also of course Riewoldt 5th year, around 70 games experience.

So who do the GC have? 1st year talls. Exactly. Totally different situations. The only short-term fix/insurance that would make any kind of sense whatsoever would be ruck as I said.

 

[CoggaRules]

Gourdis is a defender. Why bring him up?

Post has played 14 games, about to turn 21 and is coming into his 3rd year. Big boy and I expect him to play 15+ games.

Vickery same as above but has 20+ games experience. Will play more forward as alraedy been stated.

Griffiths will probably play 5-10 in his 2nd year, won't be required to play more.

Also of course Riewoldt 5th year, around 70 games experience.

So who do the GC have? 1st year talls. Exactly. Totally different situations. Ruck insurance would make far more sense as I said.

ok dude, the questions are as follows:

1. Do you think DH did a good job in year 1 of his plan to rebuild from the ground up?
2. Was there much in what unfolded that suggested he was looking for quick fixes?
3. Do you think he is dissullioned and thinks we can compete for a finals spot by the move to take Miller as a mature age rookie?
4. Do you have faith in the direction we are heading and who is steering?

 

[CoggaRules]

Did we not learn from the Kent Kingsley debacle?

Kent wasnt taken as a mature age rookie dude.

 

[Tiger_Stripes]

Did we not learn from the Kent Kingsley debacle?

Kent Kingsley - PSD

Brad Miller - Mature Rookie



Go back to Essendon.

 

[Barnzy]

ok dude, the questions are as follows:

1. Do you think DH did a good job in year 1 of his plan to rebuild from the ground up?
2. Was there much in what unfolded that suggested he was looking for quick fixes?
3. Do you think he is dissullioned and thinks we can compete for a finals spot by the move to take Miller as a mature age rookie?
4. Do you have faith in the direction we are heading and who is steering?

I've already given my reasons as to why I don't want Miller. Your questions are irrelevant.

 

[CoggaRules]

I've already given my reasons as to why I don't want Miller. Your questions are irrelevant.

LMAO...I rest my case.
Your reasons are you reasons, the fact is that the brains trust have gone against your reasons. So it seems your reasons conflict their reasons. So the questions are relevant.