I simply dont think he has the smarts to be an effect key back, a good forward will outthink him 7 days a week.

Wholeheartedly agree he has all teh personal attributes, just not the footy ones. trade him !! while we can and get value for him. Possibly new fields with different tact might see him valuable to another team.

We simply work better as a unit when he's not stagnating the forward game.

No ones questions his work ethic or dedication.. but folk, this is a sport at its elite level. You need to be effective to be in the team. In our team he hasnt proved effective. This is not a charity run, its a business. Its the business of winning.

Out of curiosity wat is the age diffrence between Miller and Bell?

Out of curiosity wat is the age diffrence between Miller and Bell?

miller 1983

bell 1985

2 years difference

Interesting in that case we persisted with Bell for long enough I dont see why we cant with Miller, Bell has come good so will Miller

Interesting in that case we persisted with Bell for long enough I dont see why we cant with Miller, Bell has come good so will Miller

Bell has talent

Miller only has endeavour !!

Bell has talent

Miller only has endeavour !!

That's right.

There was never a question mark over Bell's talent.

I read an interesting article in the age couple of weeks back on Bell about how Melbourne nearly gave up on him etc, and luckily they didnt. I think its the same case with Miller, bit of persistence, encouragement, get the boy some confidence he is fine. All I am going to say is last years final against Fremantle that was a stellar game by Miller

miller 1983

bell 1985

2 years difference

Interesting in that case we persisted with Bell for long enough I dont see why we cant with Miller, Bell has come good so will Miller

bandwagon, that makes no sense at all...miller is older, which means he has had longer than bell - and by deduction must have had more chances.

bell is two years younger and has played only 39 matches to millers 84.

miller has had DOUBLE the opportunities bell has had and hasnt dominated at afl level at any stage. yes he kicked 3 in 10 minutes against the tiges once, and he has had a number of good serviceable games this year, but we lost those games. and he was really our only key tall forward. i like miller and think he has a lot to offer, but he has played the best part of 100 games and we still dont know if there is any chance he'll make it, and we don't know what position to play him in.

*shakes head*

*shakes head*

That's two minutes of your life you won't be getting back!

That's two minutes of your life you won't be getting back!

the biggest problem is i had to read it again because i knew it didnt make sense the first time lol

bandwagon, that makes no sense at all...miller is older, which means he has had longer than bell - and by deduction must have had more chances.

bell is two years younger and has played only 39 matches to millers 84.

miller has had DOUBLE the opportunities bell has had and hasnt dominated at afl level at any stage. yes he kicked 3 in 10 minutes against the tiges once, and he has had a number of good serviceable games this year, but we lost those games. and he was really our only key tall forward. i like miller and think he has a lot to offer, but he has played the best part of 100 games and we still dont know if there is any chance he'll make it, and we don't know what position to play him in.

*shakes head*

We know to play him at Centre Half Forward not in defence. And it does make sense. Miller is only 2 measly years older, Bell has been the first to admit he sucked and wanted to prove himself and come good and he did that. Miller deserves that change too. He isnt as bad as everyone makes out. What about Godfrey? Good hard nut, his skills arent silky, he has spent a good half of his career in the VFL yet we have persisted and look at him this year, he is playing well. Miller is a lot younger than him. Miller kicks goals end of story. Yes he makes poor decisions hello he isnt a bloody senior yet let the kid make some mistakes. I will be the first to admit I get frustrated at him cos just looking at him u can tell when he has no confidence. But a bit of faith goes a long way and obviously I am not the only one that thinks he has it in him to become a superstar, obviously a lot of people at the club see that too

Brad Miller clearly has valuable personal attributes that have been in short supply at MFC and that's why he was (prematurely) elevated to the leadership group. He has limitations as a footballer but has the right attitude. It damages our structure playing with him at CHF........

........I reckon we should persist with him in 2008, this year's a bust.

Great and intelligent summation Old !!!

We know to play him at Centre Half Forward not in defence. And it does make sense. Miller is only 2 measly years older, Bell has been the first to admit he sucked and wanted to prove himself and come good and he did that.

I'm not a Miller basher, in fact, I've been one of his strongest supporters as I'm a fan of his workrate and attitude.

However, you can't compare Bell's development to Miller's.

Bell spent the first few years at Melbourne on the injury list, and was struggling with back problems and OP up until the middle of last year.

With the exception of last year, Miller has been relatively injury free the entire time he has been on our list.

Miller and Rivers were drafted in the same year, one player has excelled, the other hasn't. But at pick 55, Milsy was always going to be a risk, and he has proved that his draft value was just about right. He is an ok footballer, without being spectacular, and unlike in the past, he now has some stiff competition. Bate, Dunn and even Sylvia are all better CHF propositions because they are good contested marks, they are a better kick for goal, and most importantly, they have a better goal sense, and a better football brain. These are just the facts.

But I do like Miller, and I like him because he works as hard as anyone out there, and he has the right attitude about him, which is why I'd like to see him succeed at Melbourne.

Will he succeed as a CHF? No, plain and simple. He doesn't have the required skill-set to play that position (which is no shame, it is probably the hardest position on the ground).

I think that with a full pre-season as a defender, he could successfully take over from Holland. He has reasonable pace, he is aggressive, and as others have already noted, it is easier to defend and be led to the ball, than make the play.

IMO, it is the only way he'll survive on our list beyond 2008.

Yeah Rivers is a star, I agree with u on that, however Miller is not as bad as you and everyone else is making out. Everyone seems to forget he was everywhere in our final against Fremantle, that game has stuck in my mind cos he was our shining star and clear best on ground. Thats what he can be all the time and I believe that. And others at the club believe it too because they have kept at him. When Miller plays in defence it does not work at all, we tend to lose those games. He likes it up forward he is confident

bandwagon, im not bagging miller out. what doesnt make sense is that you concluded that daniel bell is two years younger than miller and that because bell is playing good football we should give miller more of a go.

i like miller and i dont want him gone. but he will never be a superstar. servicable. good performer, possibly, but superstar? never.

2 years difference between Miller and Bell yes. 2 years is nothing is what I am saying! 4 or 5 yes that is big, 2 is nothing. Bell is prob a more mature footballer than Miller but everyone acts like Miller has been around forever and is in his 30s. He is still young. Miller has the potential he just needs to bring it out, I have faith Miller will be a superstar I saw it against Fremantle I have confidence he can do that every week

miller 1983

bell 1985

2 years difference

Interesting in that case we persisted with Bell for long enough I dont see why we cant with Miller, Bell has come good so will Miller

2 years difference between Miller and Bell yes. 2 years is nothing is what I am saying! 4 or 5 yes that is big, 2 is nothing.

thats clearly not what you said. what you said was:

Interesting in that case we persisted with Bell for long enough I dont see why we cant with Miller

that implies that we have given bell more chances than miller.

maybe you were thinking that, but you sure weren't writting it.

like it or not.. miller has atleast to the end of the season...

and u might say he has been crap this year... but its not the case... he has been overshadowed by bad losses... and poor perfomances on a team basis

I think Miller is and can be good, although he needs more fine work on overhead marking and goal kicking abilities. He should be given the opportunity {via Sandringham} to show his true worth.

He played better for us at CHF along with a wild attitude {ok, it landed him in hot water everytime} but at least he was playing at his peak and Melbourne were winning games back then...

thats clearly not what you said. what you said was:

that implies that we have given bell more chances than miller.

maybe you were thinking that, but you sure weren't writting it.

Yeah we have technically as Bell has been very injury prone and we have had him on the list for a long time and he has played very very little

miller is two years older, and has been played in double the amount of games that bell has been played in and you still say that bell has been given more chances than miller?

miller is two years older, and has been played in double the amount of games that bell has been played in and you still say that bell has been given more chances than miller?

*shakes head*

Sucked in again I see!

Belly hasn't been around as long, and hasn't been given nearly as many games to prove himself. Your point doesn't actually make sense.

Time for a new one I think.

I'm sorry, but I must be missing the point.....

Other than being a little similar in age, why are we comparing these two ?!!!

They really are very different examples.

only because 'on the bandwagon' decided that because miller was two years older than daniel bell, miller should be given extra time to develop.

im sorry? did i hear you right? that doesnt make sense to you either? thank god.

there is no reason why we should be comparing these two except that 'bandwagon' wanted to use this (terrible) example to support brad miller.

i am not bagging brad miller. but her comparison, and arguments regarding bell and miller and their age, make as much sense as saying that i am wearing new shoes which is why i slipped over, i should wear my old shoes.

They are chalk and cheese......

The way I see it each player will develop individually, some faster than others, others will be slower stepping up to the mark.

Therefore I refuse to judge one players rate or pace of development (this includes his age or the number of games he has played) to another because we are dealing with numerous individuals who will come into their own (or not) in their own time, and not at some club or supporter specified rate.

Bell is younger and has played less games but has come on in leaps and bounds this year and deserves better than to be compared to anyone.

I hope that made some sense :D !!!