The only thing that needs tweaking is your understanding of the 2 lists and what has transpired and really, football in general. There is so many permutations and factors. 18 months ago Foley wasn't playing; on the weekend he had 40 possessions and is up and running. Martin wasn't playing 18 months ago. Riewoldt wasn't what he is now 18 months ago. Deledio wasn't playing at CHB 18 months ago....shall I continue ??

I haven't even touched on Melbourne's variables from now to 18 months ago. But, I'm crossing my finger's you may have some understanding or inkling that there has been fundamental differences in the timeframe.

HT that is exactly what i am saying, The Tigers List has come along in leaps & bounds in the last 18 months, whilst the MFC seems to have stagnated at least since the new year.

I am merely trying to work out why? The answer i suspect will be something small, but it has the ability to ruin this season and a lot of the gains made last year if it is not resolved.

Very true.

Over a year ago I attended a Wellman's lunch in which McLardy (an old Boy) attended and Connolly was guest speaker. Connolly spent the first 5 minutes humourously deriding Richmond's list and stating how the next 10 years was incredibly bleak for them. He even made a couple of poor sod Tigers fans identify themselves by putting their hands in the air, much to the guffaws of the rest of us.

Even Richmond supporters I know acknowledged that whilst they went down the reaches of the ladder before Melbourne they were in fact 18 months behind in development after Hardwick cut hard into the list.

Richmond have no right to be playing as well as us and certainly no right to be better, but no doubt the apologists on here will do their utmost to make excuses.

Cotchin is finally starting to show his worth, Martin impacts games, Foley's last two games have been good, Deledio is important off half back and Riewoldt is a quality key forward. In the main though they have some very ordinary C graders, many of whom wouldn't get into our side. A blend of a best 22 would be interesting.

Your Richmond friends are wrong. They were not 18 months 'behind' us in terms of development.

Their ceiling is a lot lower than ours though.

They won't have nearly as many top end talents peaking at the same time, but they are still ahead.

2 different and often confused concepts.

I think the answer will be somewhere in between...but if i was a betting man, i would say Hardwick will get the absolute Max out of his list as did John Northey at the MFC between '87-'91.

Edited May 4, 201114 yr by why you little

Your Richmond friends are wrong. They were not 18 months 'behind' us in terms of development.

Their ceiling is a lot lower than ours though.

They won't have nearly as many top end talents peaking at the same time, but they are still ahead.

2 different and often confused concepts.

How do you account for our more games experience and same age lists ?

Explain to me why they're wrong. I'll analyse (pick apart) your stats and offerings when I get the chance later today.

How do you account for our more games experience and same age lists ?

Explain to me why they're wrong. I'll analyse (pick apart) your stats and offerings when I get the chance later today.

I think you know the answers Hannabal. Devils advocate for a minute and respond to yourself (if you dont mind).