I'm not against the idea at all, even Curnow is a bit of a risk, our team desperately needs that sort of speed and x factor

The player that Rioli has become could have only worked at the Hawks, he is not the type of player, that would make a bad team look good, he is pure icing, cameo type of players can only work at really good team.s

I think Cyril Rioli (and hopefully Daniel) is better than that. He has benefitted from being in a wealthy club with exceptional development and medico staff, but I still think he'd be good in a 'bad' team. Should we pass on Daniel Rioli because of where we have come from or should he be considered because we are aspiring to become a 'good' club?

Disagree in your view that Cyril could only have worked at Hawks, he could have the same sort of influence in half the teams in the competition. I imagine he would be just as important and influential at the likes of Sydney, Fremantle, West Coast, Geelong, Collingwood, Port Adelaide, Adelaide, North Melbourne, Richmond.

you are spot on the point is he would not have lasted long on our list if we had pick cameos are no good if you're getting beaten by 80 points every week.

Edited October 30, 201510 yr by don't make me angry

Hawks are waiting at pick 15 for Rioli. He has some special talent. Hawks can wait 2 years fkr his body size to be AFL ready

I'm not against the idea at all, even Curnow is a bit of a risk, our team desperately needs that sort of speed and x factor

Agree UDF. That's why I don't mind Millera (spelling, sorry) as a possible at 7 - presuming a couple of the others are taken. Still short on line breakers.

Agree UDF. That's why I don't mind Millera (spelling, sorry) as a possible at 7 - presuming a couple of the others are taken. Still short on line breakers.

Agree. And don't the hawks have a plethora of line breakers. Running line breakers (Rioli, Hill, Smith) and line breakers by deft disposal (Hodge, Mitchell, gibbo, Burgs).

Agree. And don't the hawks have a plethora of line breakers. Running line breakers (Rioli, Hill, Smith) and line breakers by deft disposal (Hodge, Mitchell, gibbo, Burgs).

Moonshadow, I do think we have been guilty in the past of seemingly sticking to a rigid criteria. It's no surprise -when you have been as poor as we have, there's probably incredible pressure to take the safe or expected option. I'm happy for us to take a bit of a punt at 7. Our ball movement at times last year was pretty ordinary so why not take on a player with a bit of x factor (Millera)

Edited October 31, 201510 yr by Return to Glory

Moonshadow, I do think we have been guilty in the past of seemingly sticking to a rigid criteria. It's no surprise -when you have been as poor as we have, there's probably incredible pressure to take the safe or expected option. I'm happy for us to take a bit of a punt at 7. Our ball movement at times last year was pretty ordinary so why not take on a player with a bit of x factor (Millera)

No, I don't think we have been guilty of taking the safe option. Cook and Gysberts are examples of where we have come unstuck taking a punt.

We need to make reasoned decisions with all our picks and in particular high picks, I wouldn't be happy if we were taking a punt.

I don't want to take a punt at 7. Hoping for a reasoned choice. If that's Rioli, so be it. I'm not hugely up to date with this year's crop, but I feel safer with the decision makers we currently have than at any time over the last 10 years. Having said that, I like what I have seen of Rioli so far.