"We're not good enough": Hardwick

[Hellenic Tiger]

You know damn well coach that rfc has recruited poorly h
Under  the Fale -Halfwit regime
People on these sites refuse to speak the truth they hide behind political correctness and continue to put their faith into a failing system
This website is run by rfc propaganda and we all know that equals under achievement
I have thirty years of evidence
The rfc sadly has only Trent Cotchin to hang their hats on
When you can't beat the GCS two years running the club is not progressing
It's full of hacks and poor reality tv stars a bit like the who try to moderate on this website
The rfc cannot hide anymore the runs are not on the board and have been continuously on display
It's an indisciplined club from the top and the results shine onto the field
MM would cut out this immature thieving and unprofessional galavanting that we put up year in year out

I wish opposition supporters would stop trolling this forum   

All he's doing is peddling some easy and superficial answers.

Remember as rfctigers 05 has mentioned

"This website is run by rfc propaganda and we all know that equals under achievement"

Maybe she should start her own website and tell the world what he seems to know but we don't.

Rebuild what rebuild we just had different terms for it

in 1983 it was bidding wars with Collingwood
in 1990 it was Save Our Skins
in 2003 it was the top ups we had to have under Miller
in 2012 its the DimSim and Fail happy hour

All hail the evidence of the last 30 years all hail the current regime.

Mick Malthouse has all the coaching answers.
Neil Balme is the list accumulator.
We'll get Graeme Richmond out of the cryogenic machine and Alan Schwab away from the red light districts of interstate cities.

We'll use the FTF to gain the DNA of Sheeds Hart KB Michael Greene Stewart Clay Barrott Balme Bourke and pretty much the rest of the 73/74 back to back side and we'll create stem cells and create humans from that DNA and raise them to play decent footy so we can be fighting ready by the 2032 season. That is our one an chance.

Oh we'll bring Clay Samson to the club too as he is a premiership player also that should keep the rank and file happy and ensure the riff raff that all we do at the club involves premiership people and not people from failed regimes like Dim Sim who really was never involved in 3 flags not successful. Benny Fail who was involved in a crap era but even though he is a successful educated man nope he aint the answer either.

I'm sold I reckon we need to board the club give the FTF back to the fans who donated it and shut up shop. We have a % of 106 compared to 86 last year and 72 the year before but we lost to GC 17 twice so we are crap the statistics don't lie.

We beat Hawthorn and Sydney but Hawthorn lost last night and we lost to Northern Bullants last week sack the coach and the board.

We are crap and until someone comes with a magic potion, formula or recipe that can be turn us from duds one year to Premiership wInners of back to back to back flags in 3 and then we have a sprinking of about four more flags in the next 10 years with a couple of near misses I am neither inclined to have the patience nor the committment to follow this garbage organisation again.

Rfctigers05 you are so so right bloke.

[rfctigers05]

We continue to wee up the same wall
It's administration  from the top who refuse to be accountable for failure but they signed up Hardwick again and have seen his poor recruiting just look at the duds playing for Coburg today
David Astbury couldn't stand up  if he had four legs
Darrou Verrier have tails bigger than an Italian grandmother
Maric and miller are a waste of oxygen let alone space etc etc

[Penelope]

all hail Mick, the messiah
 

he'll even give us next weeks lotto numbers
 

eliminate child poverty
 

and bring world peace
 

actually RFC is not worthy of the great man
 

Would you take Malthouse as coach if he wanted to come here?

if we were looking for a new coach and he wanted in, yes, as much as i dislike the turd.

As a coach though, he will not solve all the problems at the club, from the top down, perceived or real. Only someone clinically insane could think that a coach could do that

Nor do go for this messiah complex that people seem to get, first for sheedy, now for mick.

[Chuck17]

all hail Mick, the messiah
 

he'll even give us next weeks lotto numbers
 

eliminate child poverty
 

and bring world peace
 

actually RFC is not worthy of the great man
 

Would you take Malthouse as coach if he wanted to come here?

if we were looking for a new coach and he wanted in, yes, as much as i dislike the turd.

As a coach though, he will not solve all the problems at the club, from the top down, perceived or real. Only someone clinically insane could think that a coach could do that

Nor do go for this messiah complex that people seem to get, first for sheedy, now for mick.

As least we will get a respit from jackstars crap for a bit if MM gets on board

[Penelope]

I think you may be dreaming on that one chucky

[the claw]

na i think most of us are saying you dont judge players on their first 2 or 3 seasons.  thats especially true for talls or any player that is very skinny when drafted. plain old common senses and history tells us all they take time not just at richmond but at all clubs. i dont see anyone blaming pat coaches for picks taken since 09 of course the likes of miller and jackson have coppd it because of performances prior to 09.
history also tells us that there is not a great success rate with picks after the 3rd round, again that applies to all clubs. gp look for yourself.

Ok Claw, I looked up hawks drafting of late picks in the last 3 years.


Hawthorn
2009 draft:
Stratton round 3, pick 46
Suckling round 5, pick 70
2010 draft:
Puopolo round 4, pick 66
2011 draft:
Breust,  round 4, pick 77


Looks like they've done ok.

all clubs have had the odd good pick
.

lets see i cant be bothered doing late nd and psd as well  seeing as how you include rookies its easier to tally up players taken in the rookie draft. so will just do rookie picks.

of the nearly 1000 rookie picks used how many have been successes. thats right close to nearly 1000 players have been taken in the rookie draft and only about 1 in 6 would be deemed successes depending on what you would call a successful pick..
most of those  succesful rookies taken would be mature rookies with  the vast majority of successes being nothing more than good foot soldiers.
so again i ask what should our expectations be with these picks. even if you set a generous and easy to achieve criteria for a successful pick the hit miss ratio would remain very high.

as stated it would be a similar thing with late nd picks and psd picks used on kids. high hit miss ratio with nothing more in the main than good footsoldiers with the odd gem.  obviously  the earlier the pick becomes the higher the success rate that would be pretty clear  to just about anyone.

the question is what expectations do we place on these picks.  seems you think theres a very high success rate with them and every late pick and rookie pick we use should be successful.

just a final comment. id say the best we have done any yr with late nd picks is 03 with jackson 53, tuck 71, and raines 73. we missed with morrison 64, hartigan 70, fletcher 79, and archibald 89. we did rookie kelvin moore that yr as well.

ben stratton is a third round pick in 09. they missed with all of their nd  picks after the third round in 09. pretty sure i said after the first 3 rounds.
if you took the time have a proper look at hawthorn you will probably find they are doing marginally better than most teams when it comes to hit miss ratio with late nd psd and rookie picks. but its still a high overall hit miss ratio.

im sorry if you have high expectations with these types of picks thats your problem not mine or the clubs. these picks are a numbers game where you take heaps and turn em over until you find a decent one. it really is that simple and it really is pointless slashing your wrists over failed picks when taken so late.

[Tigeritis™©®]

na i think most of us are saying you dont judge players on their first 2 or 3 seasons.  thats especially true for talls or any player that is very skinny when drafted. plain old common senses and history tells us all they take time not just at richmond but at all clubs. i dont see anyone blaming pat coaches for picks taken since 09 of course the likes of miller and jackson have coppd it because of performances prior to 09.
history also tells us that there is not a great success rate with picks after the 3rd round, again that applies to all clubs. gp look for yourself.

Ok Claw, I looked up hawks drafting of late picks in the last 3 years.


Hawthorn
2009 draft:
Stratton round 3, pick 46
Suckling round 5, pick 70
2010 draft:
Puopolo round 4, pick 66
2011 draft:
Breust,  round 4, pick 77


Looks like they've done ok.

all clubs have had the odd good pick
.

lets see i cant be bothered doing late nd and psd as well  seeing as how you include rookies its easier to tally up players taken in the rookie draft. so will just do rookie picks.

of the nearly 1000 rookie picks used how many have been successes. thats right close to nearly 1000 players have been taken in the rookie draft and only about 1 in 6 would be deemed successes depending on what you would call a successful pick..
most of those  succesful rookies taken would be mature rookies with  the vast majority of successes being nothing more than good foot soldiers.
so again i ask what should our expectations be with these picks. even if you set a generous and easy to achieve criteria for a successful pick the hit miss ratio would remain very high.

as stated it would be a similar thing with late nd picks and psd picks used on kids. high hit miss ratio with nothing more in the main than good footsoldiers with the odd gem.  obviously  the earlier the pick becomes the higher the success rate that would be pretty clear  to just about anyone.

the question is what expectations do we place on these picks.  seems you think theres a very high success rate with them and every late pick and rookie pick we use should be successful.

just a final comment. id say the best we have done any yr with late nd picks is 03 with jackson 53, tuck 71, and raines 73. we missed with morrison 64, hartigan 70, fletcher 79, and archibald 89. we did rookie kelvin moore that yr as well.

ben stratton is a third round pick in 09. they missed with all of their nd  picks after the third round in 09. pretty sure i said after the first 3 rounds.
if you took the time have a proper look at hawthorn you will probably find they are doing marginally better than most teams when it comes to hit miss ratio with late nd psd and rookie picks. but its still a high overall hit miss ratio.

im sorry if you have high expectations with these types of picks thats your problem not mine or the clubs. these picks are a numbers game where you take heaps and turn em over until you find a decent one. it really is that simple and it really is pointless slashing your wrists over failed picks when taken so late.

Your kidding right?
After waffling on You asked us to look up late picks in the draft. So I looked up 2 teams in hawthorn and Carlton and gave you a list of picks after round 3. So far those picks looked to be right on the money. 
So all you give me is another page of waffle and that's your answer?
Pathetic!
The truth is that some clubs looked to have done a good job with recruiting players even late in the draft and rookies. But some clubs are just still poo.
Also some clubs can develop players that slot right in the senior team when required and some clubs are useless at development.
 Our club has a history of mediocrity and it's a disease in the club and it needs to be dealt with. 
To start with they can maybe try and poach the best recruiter and best development team.
Why not?

[Penelope]

is there a reason you only list those that you perceive to be a success rather than all picks so there is some sort of perspective?

[Tigeritis™©®]

is there a reason you only list those that you perceive to be a success rather than all picks so there is some sort of perspective?

Those guys have played matches and done reasonably well.

......And it looks better.

[Go Richo 12]

is there a reason you only list those that you perceive to be a success rather than all picks so there is some sort of perspective?

I think Mr T has taken a randomised sample of his choice for his research project, Al.

An analogy i like to use on Rookie/ late picks is the horse racing/ greyhound industry. There are so many horses/ greyhounds out there being trained for the track that ony a very small percentage actually get to a race.

Footballers are the same, therefore i think it is a success that a rookie even plays a senior AFL game.

[Jackstar is back!!!]

And yes .we beat Brisbane last night
Honestly who really cares if we finish 9th or 12th is irrelevant .
Wouldn't give this year a pass

[Smokey]

And yes .we beat Brisbane last night
Honestly who really cares if we finish 9th or 12th is irrelevant .
Wouldn't give this year a pass

Of course you wouldn't.

[the claw]

na i think most of us are saying you dont judge players on their first 2 or 3 seasons.  thats especially true for talls or any player that is very skinny when drafted. plain old common senses and history tells us all they take time not just at richmond but at all clubs. i dont see anyone blaming pat coaches for picks taken since 09 of course the likes of miller and jackson have coppd it because of performances prior to 09.
history also tells us that there is not a great success rate with picks after the 3rd round, again that applies to all clubs. gp look for yourself.

Ok Claw, I looked up hawks drafting of late picks in the last 3 years.


Hawthorn
2009 draft:
Stratton round 3, pick 46
Suckling round 5, pick 70
2010 draft:
Puopolo round 4, pick 66
2011 draft:
Breust,  round 4, pick 77


Looks like they've done ok.

all clubs have had the odd good pick
.

lets see i cant be bothered doing late nd and psd as well  seeing as how you include rookies its easier to tally up players taken in the rookie draft. so will just do rookie picks.

of the nearly 1000 rookie picks used how many have been successes. thats right close to nearly 1000 players have been taken in the rookie draft and only about 1 in 6 would be deemed successes depending on what you would call a successful pick..
most of those  succesful rookies taken would be mature rookies with  the vast majority of successes being nothing more than good foot soldiers.
so again i ask what should our expectations be with these picks. even if you set a generous and easy to achieve criteria for a successful pick the hit miss ratio would remain very high.

as stated it would be a similar thing with late nd picks and psd picks used on kids. high hit miss ratio with nothing more in the main than good footsoldiers with the odd gem.  obviously  the earlier the pick becomes the higher the success rate that would be pretty clear  to just about anyone.

the question is what expectations do we place on these picks.  seems you think theres a very high success rate with them and every late pick and rookie pick we use should be successful.

just a final comment. id say the best we have done any yr with late nd picks is 03 with jackson 53, tuck 71, and raines 73. we missed with morrison 64, hartigan 70, fletcher 79, and archibald 89. we did rookie kelvin moore that yr as well.

ben stratton is a third round pick in 09. they missed with all of their nd  picks after the third round in 09. pretty sure i said after the first 3 rounds.
if you took the time have a proper look at hawthorn you will probably find they are doing marginally better than most teams when it comes to hit miss ratio with late nd psd and rookie picks. but its still a high overall hit miss ratio.

im sorry if you have high expectations with these types of picks thats your problem not mine or the clubs. these picks are a numbers game where you take heaps and turn em over until you find a decent one. it really is that simple and it really is pointless slashing your wrists over failed picks when taken so late.

Your kidding right?
After waffling on You asked us to look up late picks in the draft. So I looked up 2 teams in hawthorn and Carlton and gave you a list of picks after round 3. So far those picks looked to be right on the money. 
So all you give me is another page of waffle and that's your answer?
Pathetic!
The truth is that some clubs looked to have done a good job with recruiting players even late in the draft and rookies. But some clubs are just still poo.
Also some clubs can develop players that slot right in the senior team when required and some clubs are useless at development.
 Our club has a history of mediocrity and it's a disease in the club and it needs to be dealt with. 
To start with they can maybe try and poach the best recruiter and best development team.
Why not?

its prety simple for nearly all of us but some dont have the intelligence to grasp a simple fact. what part of 1 in 6 did you not understand pretty sure anyone with just a bit of common sense took that to mean the whole not a tiddly piddly bit that suits. either get real stop being diingenuous or stuff off i dont have the inclination to stuff around with dim wits.

so hawthorn have used 20odd nd picks after the third rnd,  psd and rookie picks from 2009 onwards.   you come up  with how many players?  did i hear you say 3 players bruest, puopolo, and suckling.  now that would be what ratio. what do you think just roughly now. can i hear you say 1 in 6.

now  be honest with yourself and your fellow posters and tell us  how many of the 1000 odd rookies taken would be deemed succesful picks. the simple truth   that a 10 yr old could grasp is the vast majority of picks are failures yet you expect these picks when we use them to be succesful every time we use them.
you have backed yourself into a corner and your not big enough to admit your wrong. most of us are happy to learn as we go and acknowledge we get some things wrong.  others are so small minded and shallow well they never get a thing wrong and arent man enough to admit when they are wrong.
you may want to argue for arguments sake me i dont have time for it and have better things to do. come and see me when you can grasp a few things just a bit better we may be able to have a decent conversation then.

finally again i ask  of the 1000 odd rookie picks how many have been succesful  seems you have neither the intelligence  to work it out or the balls to tell us. cant be seen to be wrong now can we.

[Jackstar is back!!!]

And yes .we beat Brisbane last night
Honestly who really cares if we finish 9th or 12th is irrelevant .
Wouldn't give this year a pass

Of course you wouldn't.

Well you tell me why you would give us pass.as I cannot see any reason
Until you win more games than you lose.would think its a failure

[Loui Tufga]

And yes .we beat Brisbane last night
Honestly who really cares if we finish 9th or 12th is irrelevant .
Wouldn't give this year a pass

Of course you wouldn't.

Well you tell me why you would give us pass.as I cannot see any reason
Until you win more games than you lose.would think its a failure

Maybey because this season has been our best season in the past 5 years.....that's a start!