Inner Demon

I'll be excited for the kid if it's true, but I think Miller deserves it more.

I post here to educate others.

Bruce is already 50% off the books anyway now that he's on Veteran's list. He's not taking up that much cash.

Of course. You're quite free to be wrong. I would suggest you would be fairly comfortable with that position by now.

Unfortunately a player like Gray - a mid-sized, 22 year old, highly talented forward, who just kicked 5.4 with 20 touches in a big game - if he's not staying at Port, he's going to GC.

I can't imagine how any really quality players will move clubs at the end of this year outside of going to GC.

Lighting facade won't be of much use to us. We won't play there.

Poor decision making is not even close to the same thing as being undisciplined.

Every player in every team in every game is guilty of making a poor decision throughout the course of a match. It's not because they're "undisciplined".

Would take Gray in a heartbeat. Not as a replacement for anybody, just as an addition to our forward line depth. He is very talented.

Grimes to Gia and/or Higgins throughout the game I'd say.

Hale got 1 goal doing that.

He's not saying that big forwards will never kick goals again, he's saying the more mobile "big" forwards are going to kick the lion's share of the goals in years to come.

If Watts can play this style of game at 196cm+ it makes him extremely dangerous.

Check your facts please.

http://www.bcna.org.au/content/view/558/554/

In 2007 it was done before a Sydney game at Telstra Stadium. What is to say it won't be in Brisbane or Adelaide in the next two years? Women in those states suffer from this insidious disease just as much as women in Melbourne

I did check my facts, which is why I said it's the second time it's been held at the MCG.

So why, against such appalling and young opposition didn't Danny Hughes, or anyone else in our forward line, take the game by the scruff and win it??

My opinion, because Brad Miller, right now, is better than those other players and is more deserving a spot in the senior side this week.

As an aside, you're being a shade arrogant dismissing the evaluation of the coach of the team in favour of your own rather thin analysis.

I suppose that's why he's "deceptively" quick as opposed to "obviously" quick.

Incidentally, I haven't posted this as a form of praise for Matthew Bate, moreso part of an ongoing discussion about the need for forwards taller than the (as nominated by some) magic number of 193cm.

You mean like the way the one-off colour change dilutes the MFC brand?

I assume you're basing this on the assumption that the AFL are then going to give us this game again in the future? I seem to remember a few years back where we started this and it was then moved on to other higher-drawing clubs the next year. Otherwise it is just an anomaly and serves as little to no incentive when the sponsorship agreements come up for renewal at the end of next year.

Do you think the yellow armband in Clash For Cancer also dilutes our brand?? After all, our guernsey doesn't have a yellow band on it any more than it has a pink yoke.

You remember incorrectly. This is only the 2nd time Field of Women has been held at the MCG. We started it, and it continues to belong to us.

I thought this article would be worth posting to add to the occasional discussion on this forum regarding our perceived need for more "tall forwards". Here's Garry Lyon's feelings on the matter.

Garry Lyon article

Based on that notion we may as well have a novelty guernsey every week! What a way to get the sponsors' logos in the paper!

These measures you speak of also look at exposure over time - a few days/one night/one weekend will barely register. Otherwise you run the risk of the sponsors only jumping on board when we support these kinds of events.

No, that would be ridiculous. We wouldn't get any media exposure if we just did it every week. It would completely dilute the value of the event and lose all relevance and impact. Doing it just once is how you maximise this opportunity.

On this occasion, you're wrong that an event of this nature will barely register on our yearly figures. This is our biggest stage, media-wise, of the year by a long way. The figures are weighted based upon the TV ratings, attendance and print media exposure around and during the game and this is the biggest stage we will get all year on all of those scores so it makes terrific sense to leverage that opportunity with a value add for our sponsors who also get to have their brands associated with a great charity cause.

Only one problem here - it's not our jumper.

Speaking now as a marketer, I'm not sure how you deduce that this will result in greater revenue flows. Greater sponsorship offers will come once we are a consistently succesfull venture as this means larger crowds and better fixturing. I'm not sure sponsors will reward us for supporting a cause, as they would be better off donating the extra sponsorship money directly to the charity.

The way this works, is that extra media exposure of the guernsey we are wearing (to play along with your nit-picking) results in more eyeballs on the logos on our guernseys. This in turn boosts the media monitor valuations of our major sponsorships and delivers greater perceived value to our sponsors.

Going forward, when it comes to renewing our major sponsorships, these figures are then used, in part, to estimate the value of the overall sponsorship at which point it impacts upon our revenue.

You may think this sounds like a tenuous thread between this event and future revenues, but these are the measures used within the industry.

Do the people asking why aren't the Dogs wearing pink too not realise how ridiculous that is????

Doesn't seem all that difficult to figure out.

Balls, our jumper colours are darker than what they were last year. It can be plainly seen when holding guernseys from last year and this year side by side.

If Brad Miller is so 'useless' and Daniel Hughes is so full of ability and 'the future' then why is it Daniel Hughes didn't kick a matchwinning 3.2 in a half of football after beating the opposition's key forward in the first half??

The case for Hughes' inclusion boils down to - "He's new and shiny" - while Brad Miller's case is based upon actual form.

Did they wear all pink did tehy? I missed that.

They replaced one of the most sacred icons in Australian sport, the Baggy Green, with a Baggy Pink.

Seriously mate, you're worried about a few jibes from commentators who need to fill dead air?? If we're down by 10 goals, we've got bigger problems on the night than a bit of pink on the guernseys.

Biggest non-issue ever. It's for charity mate. Just relax.

How many of these 'new to the game' people do you really believe there are that are randomly tuning in and deciding they won't support the team that is supporting an enormous one off charity event? Ludicrous reasoning. Why not consider the flip side of how many women who otherwise believe AFL Clubs to be uncaring havens of chauvisism might tune in and take note of one Club really putting in to contribute to the biggest women's health issue there is???

If wearing a bit of pink just once in the name of such an enormously worthy cause is good enough for the Australian Cricket Team, then I can't see how it's not good enough for us.

You want one of the top 3 tap ruckmen of the season so far to be our permanent full forward?????

Why?!?!?

????????

Who said he was BOG? I heard he was just average. 3 goals does not a BOG performance make. Though you're probably right, I'd say he's Hughes' biggest threat. Had Miller hung on to play round 2, we might have won against the Pies with a big body in attack and no Presti. And then how we played for rounds 3-5 Miller would be everyone's new lovechild.

Casey coach Brad Gotch.

Brad kicked 3.2 in the second half after spending the first half nullifying the opposition's key forward, premiership player Nathan Ablett.

To me, when a forward goes does injured, that writes his ticket for a recall.

I understand the points being made that this is time for experimentation. Of course we're not flag contenders, but mathematically, we most certainly are finals contenders right now. Somehow getting a win against WB would strengthen that position considerably.

I don't buy the like-for-like argument. That's not how you select a football team.

A player being on the list is not a compelling enough argument for giving them a game in Round 7 when the team is 3-3. That argument gains more weight in Round 16 when the team is 5-10.

Really??? A bloke on our rookie list who's shown nothing but glimpses at VFL between chronic injuries is suddenly the closest bloke to selection with all our young kids pushing for another go?? We're 3-3 with a chance to make a statement against a Top 4 side on Friday Night Footy. Now is not the time for experimentation. Hughes' chance will come eventually if he keeps working. Others have earned it for right now, that surely includes Casey BOG Brad Miller.

Morton test!! That went by so fast!!

Surely a game at Casey first... Mustn't get all excited about him potentially coming straight back in...

Just a smidgeon of a chance...???