One-Eyed Richmond Forum

Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: Rampstar on November 27, 2014, 08:31:39 PM

Title: We should have had
Post by: Rampstar on November 27, 2014, 08:31:39 PM
12: Either Weller Lever Garlett Laverde or Durdin
33: either Lonie or Blakely
52: Gore

There is nothing we can do except laugh at our own stupidity and mediocrity
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 27, 2014, 08:33:04 PM
Yeah but life is special

Everybody love everybody pls
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Andyy on November 27, 2014, 08:33:34 PM
Time will tell. I hope you're wrong. But I think you're right :(
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Rampstar on November 27, 2014, 08:37:49 PM
Imagine how happy people would have been if we had picked

Laverde
Lonie
Gore

as our first 3 picks or

Garlett
Lonie
Gore


or any of the combinations like that

Instead we have to be disappointed again.
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: The Machine on November 27, 2014, 08:49:03 PM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Phil Mrakov on November 27, 2014, 08:49:38 PM
Laverde is a bust
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: 🏅Dooks on November 27, 2014, 08:50:28 PM
Yeah but life is special

Everybody love everybody pls

Everything is wonderful
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: big tone on November 27, 2014, 08:51:13 PM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup
It's in my opinion too.  :thumbsup
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: WilliamPowell on November 27, 2014, 08:56:37 PM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup

Agree with this

BTW Ramps I not disappointed

I am actually excited knowing we've taken 5 kids!

When was the last time we took 5 kids, not a recycled bloke in sight

Will they all make it? Who knows but I look forward to seeing how they go

Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Rampstar on November 27, 2014, 09:03:33 PM
the only reason I started this thread is because invariably people will say who would you have picked. I did this so as to not hide behind supposed unfair criticism that I level at the club. In time we will all see howit pans out.
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: big tone on November 27, 2014, 09:09:54 PM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup

Agree with this

BTW Ramps I not disappointed

I am actually excited knowing we've taken 5 kids!

When was the last time we took 5 kids, not a recycled bloke in sight

Will they all make it? Who knows but I look forward to seeing how they go
I think the last time we took 5 kids, only the number 1 draft choice was any good.
Stop being 'Mr Positive and I support all things Richmond' and have an opinion on these kids.  :sleep
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: tony_montana on November 27, 2014, 09:12:13 PM
I would have gone leverde lever over Ellis but still think Ellis will be a solid player
Would have gone Wigg over menedue but also think menedue will become a player

The rest is up in the air - Drummond looks close to being physically ready and happy with mcKenzie
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: (•))(©™ on November 27, 2014, 09:15:26 PM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup

And we shall.

The anger and frustration is aimed at the track record of our star recruiter.

Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: WilliamPowell on November 27, 2014, 09:28:34 PM
Stop being 'Mr Positive and I support all things Richmond' and have an opinion on these kids.  :sleep

"Support all things Richmond"?

Give me a break. Have handed out some huge whacks to this club in 2014.

And I gave my opinions on these kids.

I don't know if they will make it. But guess what? I want them too

what I do know is they haven't run a time trial yet let alone kicked a football in anger and people are already writing them off.

I won't do that

I will support each of them and see what happens
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 27, 2014, 09:35:49 PM
Everyone wants them to. You are not special.

Now move past this and focus on the topic

Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Owl on November 27, 2014, 09:38:07 PM
I'm pretty pumped about our last pick
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: the claw on November 27, 2014, 09:42:53 PM
unfortunately i had a big day at work and missed the whole freakin thing.

have said constantlyi if we were to take a mid
12 laverde or de goey if there.  if both gone one of 4 talls. durdin lever who ididnt think would slip, goddard and marchbank. only marchbank was gone. would have been happy with any one of the 5 still there. cstill think it prudent to take the quality tall if availble. so durdin would probably have been it.
we took ellis a player it seems  we had locked in for ages . good luck to him and he has my support.

33  for me jackson nielson, connor blakely both still there. . i rate blakely a better inside player than corey ellis. tyler kietel was one i had in contention here  and he didnt get drafted so what do i know.
with blakely available i would have thought he was the go. best inside mid in the draft imo.  but ffs can we complain about menadue here . i dont think so there is some serious upside to him imo. he fits real needs like serious pace, great skills nice height 188cm  and a frame that should be okay. dont see how anyone can complain about this pick. to top it off hes as skinny as they come but he doesnt flinch and wins a surprising amount of ball for himself.

52 well i would have taken kietel or oscar nmcdonald  here. have often said we need both  kpds and kpfs. it was a chance to address a real need.we took drummond im not sure hes a poor pick and probably worth taking here.

anyway have to rush out  will say quickly i dont think the draft too bad apart from pick 12 who i dont rate. we did okay overall i think . glad we gave mckenzie a chance at the end we do need his type.
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 27, 2014, 09:46:38 PM
Might grow to 200cm

Historically very few 200cm kfp have been successful

Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: wayne on November 28, 2014, 10:27:01 AM
People would have been happy if we took Sellar over Riewoldt on draft night. How about now?
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 28, 2014, 10:28:29 AM
i wanted seller.  8)

fat little tasmainia 3rd tall that playing against inbreds who only famous cuz of his cousin? pfft no thanks
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: the claw on November 28, 2014, 10:39:01 AM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup
i think most of here give the youngsters a chance. but most of us arent fool enough to back the club  not with their record.

we all have players we wanyed.  me there were players still there i wanted rather than those the club selected  at every pick bar the last one. i think most are in this boat hence the angst of most id say.

it agin seems to me with all the talk going around that we were locked in at 12 and no matter who slipped we were taking ellis.

like many laverde was one i wanted de goey the other, i like weller a bit as well. but for me durdin lever and goddard were still there and i just couldnt go past durdin. i would have opted for the tall at 12 and hoped a good inside mid would slip to 33 which hppened in blakeley.

imo our first two picks should have gone
12 durdin/lever/ goddard/laverde
33 blakeley.

after this its open slather but there were a few we overlooked.

Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 28, 2014, 10:59:59 AM
Quote

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the ramps, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a rampster

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.






unban ramps pls  :-\
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: the claw on November 28, 2014, 11:16:27 AM
Might grow to 200cm

Historically very few 200cm kfp have been successful
see you can learn if you concentrate. no excuses now you have done it once you can do it again. ::)
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Judge Roughneck on November 28, 2014, 11:18:31 AM
so are we not worried that mckenzie, possibly at the 200cm range depending on growing

will not make it seemingly based on historically there have very few 200cm kpfs that have been successful

whoops
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: Penelope on November 28, 2014, 02:35:27 PM
club needs to give mckenzie a lead hat to ensure he doesnt grow to be 200cm+. if he does reach that height may as well trade or delist him.
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: TigerMonk on November 28, 2014, 02:53:00 PM
relax everyone. None of you will know anything about these kids till they have their first run at the level. These young lads don't even know themselves if they will make the elite level until they have been tried, So give them support. They are all in the draft because they are good footballers. Many have failed before them & many more will fall but get behind the club & cut them some slack. Support the club for a change instead of bagging it out every year.  :banghead  It won't matter if your a #1 or a #50 pick. The number don't make or break you. It's your ability, skills, & footy smarts that make you elite & then you grow wiser.

SUPPORT  :gotigers
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: wayne on November 28, 2014, 04:24:21 PM
relax everyone. None of you will know anything about these kids till they have their first run at the level. These young lads don't even know themselves if they will make the elite level until they have been tried, So give them support. They are all in the draft because they are good footballers. Many have failed before them & many more will fall but get behind the club & cut them some slack. Support the club for a change instead of bagging it out every year.  :banghead  It won't matter if your a #1 or a #50 pick. The number don't make or break you. It's your ability, skills, & footy smarts that make you elite & then you grow wiser.

SUPPORT  :gotigers

 :clapping
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: WilliamPowell on November 28, 2014, 07:12:27 PM
relax everyone. None of you will know anything about these kids till they have their first run at the level. These young lads don't even know themselves if they will make the elite level until they have been tried, So give them support. They are all in the draft because they are good footballers. Many have failed before them & many more will fall but get behind the club & cut them some slack. Support the club for a change instead of bagging it out every year.  :banghead  It won't matter if your a #1 or a #50 pick. The number don't make or break you. It's your ability, skills, & footy smarts that make you elite & then you grow wiser.

SUPPORT  :gotigers

x 3

 :clapping :bow :clapping
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: camboon on November 28, 2014, 07:26:30 PM
X 44
Inside mid and an injection of speed ticked some boxes for me
Can't believe people buy the crap the media dish up on who they rate - I call BS
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: the claw on November 28, 2014, 10:20:09 PM
so are we not worried that mckenzie, possibly at the 200cm range depending on growing

will not make it seemingly based on historically there have very few 200cm kpfs that have been successful

whoops
was collingwood worried cloke would grow or us whith or hawthorn with roughy riewoldt and on and on.

 ffs primary school kids know that by 18 theres very little growth left for the vast majority of people.

by the way im still waiting for your list of top level kpfs. its sad when a bloke isnt big enough to admit hes wrong its called little idiot syndrome i think i say again put up or shut up.
its funny watching you you admit not seeing any of the kids play but are the most vocal when it comes to criticising them mate how any one can take you serious is beyond me.
it really is like dealing with a 12 yr old.
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: yellowandback on November 29, 2014, 06:30:59 AM
so are we not worried that mckenzie, possibly at the 200cm range depending on growing

will not make it seemingly based on historically there have very few 200cm kpfs that have been successful

whoops

Absolute genius troll  :clapping
Disappointing there haven't been more bites  :lol
Title: Re: We should have had
Post by: eliminator on November 29, 2014, 02:44:24 PM
in your opinion only!!! Give the young men a chance and back the club :thumbsup

Agree with this

BTW Ramps I not disappointed

I am actually excited knowing we've taken 5 kids!

When was the last time we took 5 kids, not a recycled bloke in sight

Will they all make it? Who knows but I look forward to seeing how they go


Agree very important to invest in youth. We have recruited pace which we badly needed and at least one inside mid which we also needed. Only time will tell if we made the right decisions. I hope for the club and the supporters these selections turn out to be inspired choices.