Re: Treloar and collingwood list being better than Richmond's ... -- AFL Ranting

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Monday, May 13, 08:15:39am [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20/08/16 9:55am
Author: TT
Author Host/IP: 101.176.37.207
Subject: Re: Treloar and collingwood list being better than Richmond's ...
In reply to: sukmeov 's message, "Re: Treloar and collingwood list being better than Richmond's ..." on 10/08/16 1:04pm

Supporters always overrate their own.
Grundy, Moore, Fasolo and Reid as first tier? Dreamin'. Not close. Maybe one day. Maybe not.
Both lists have players with "potential". Means jack shit. Who's coming through at Tigerland? Rioli, CEllis (not BEllis), Lennon, Markov - some may make it, some won't.
You can have Vickery, by the way.
Honestly, Richmond and collingwood are where they should be on the ladder based on talent available. Both have players injured and horribly out of form. The coaching may be a factor, but that suggests you rate Buckley substantially lower than Hardwick? Hardwick a supercoach? Is that what you're suggesting?
Prime real estate - possibly - but being the worst house on a good street doesn't necessarily translate to guaranteed market increase in the short term. Not without bulldozing shit or a major reno.
I'm extremely disappointed with how Richmond is traveling this year. But it is still much the same list as the one that has made the eight three years in a row (and failed horribly in finals). That shit is psychology, not ability.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: Treloar and collingwood list being better than Richmond's ... -- TT, 20/08/16 10:00am