Matthew Lloyd?

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 1:49pm

"St Kilda president Greg Westaway predicted the club would seek another tall forward to boost its stocks next season in a bid for its first premiership since 1966." http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,865 ... 51,00.html

As I've said many times this year, I'd be happy to see us try Sam Gilbert across half forward (especially if we got Adreajs Everitt to play down back), or BJ could quite clearly also do it, but if we don't want to go down those roads, we could do a lot worse than getting Matthew Lloyd (giving Tom Lynch time to develop).
Give Lloyd his favourite goalsquare back (with Kosi) and put Sir Nick back to CHF for the next two years. Lloyd clearly has more footy in him and Nick spends so much time leading to the wings now, that it wouldn't change us that much. It would be like our set-up when we had the G-Train leading out of the goalsquare for years. (When we actually kicked goals).
We kicked 30 goals in 3 finals this year (2 in excellent conditions). We need someone else up there. Lloyd has clearly been unhappy at Essendon and a change might give him his mojo back.

ttufc7 · Post: # 834436Post **ttufc7** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 1:52pm

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...............................are you serious?

plugger66 · Post: # 834440Post **plugger66** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 1:54pm

Its the first of April.

st.byron · Post: # 834441Post **st.byron** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 1:55pm

Why not get Scotty Lucas as well.
Lloyd retired. He wasn't pushed.
Crazy suggestion.

FortiusQuoFidelius · Sun 27 Sep 2009 1:59pm

Tosser

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:00pm

FortiusQuoFidelius wrote:Tosser

It takes one to know one, doesn't it?

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:02pm

If not him, who? The Prez says we're going after a tall forward. How many others are floating around? Are we just going to pluck one from our butt cracks? He looks to be in much better shape that either Gardi, or King were, when we got them. I have no doubt he could have an impact next year.

thirty-seven!? · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:03pm

Whilst Lloyd is a poor suggestion, this is a very interesting article to mention... By tall forward though, i wonder if he is suggesting a third tall (190cm-ish and mobile) or a key position (195cm-ish)??

Also, the fact he mentions that all players are signed for 2010 is a very big positive - does this mean that the likes of Goose, X Clarke and Milne etc have all agreed on terms???

thirty-seven!? · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:05pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:If not him, who? The Prez says we're going after a tall forward. How many others are floating around? Are we just going to pluck one from our butt cracks? He looks to be in much better shape that either Gardi, or King were, when we got them. I have no doubt he could have an impact next year.

Yeah, understand your angle, but he DID retire - it was an issue of not enjoying his footy anymore... So i doubt we will see him in another team's colours next year.

Plus, our game plan means that key forwards still need to move up the ground to present - they cant just sit in the goalsquare ala what Lloyd wants to do...
Remember Gehrig in 2008 as he attempted to play up the ground?? It didnt work...

St Fidelius · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:05pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote: Lloyd has clearly been unhappy at Essendon and a change might give him his mojo back.

This has to be clearly tongue in cheek, surely

Why not try for Barry Hall

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:19pm

Are you kidding? Barry Hall could be brilliant in our forward line, but he's apparently come to terms with the Bulldogs. For two years, by the way. They obviously don't see your joke.

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:22pm

thirty-seven!? wrote:
Yeah, understand your angle, but he DID retire - it was an issue of not enjoying his footy anymore...

Of course he didn't, because he was being played out of position and didn't get along with his coach. If he could manage to play at CHF this year, he could play at full forward for us next year.

st.byron · Post: # 834488Post **st.byron** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:24pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:
thirty-seven!? wrote:
Yeah, understand your angle, but he DID retire - it was an issue of not enjoying his footy anymore...
Of course he didn't, because he was being played out of position and didn't get along with his coach. If he could manage to play at CHF this year, he could play at full forward for us next year.

He's past it. 32 at the start of next season. Chose to retire himself. End of story.

plugger66 · Post: # 834490Post **plugger66** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:25pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:
thirty-seven!? wrote:
Yeah, understand your angle, but he DID retire - it was an issue of not enjoying his footy anymore...
Of course he didn't, because he was being played out of position and didn't get along with his coach. If he could manage to play at CHF this year, he could play at full forward for us next year.

Do you realise Matty Lloyd has actually retired. Was speaking to Bob Murray last night maybe he might play for us next year if we ask him.

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:29pm

You think you're pretty funny, don't you?

Barry Hall retired 3 months ago. He's now apparently just agreed to terms for a 2 year deal with the Bulldogs.
Michael Jordan retired. Then came back and won something like 3 more championships.
Tim Watson retired and from memory came back a year or two later and played in another premiership.

Are all those facts funny?

I see lots of you putting this idea and/or me down, but where are the alternate suggestions? This post has been on here for a fair while now and according to the article a "tall forward" is our priority, so where are the alternate suggestions?

plugger66 · Post: # 834501Post **plugger66** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:34pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:You think you're pretty funny, don't you?

Barry Hall retired 3 months ago. He's now apparently just agreed to terms for a 2 year deal with the Bulldogs.
Michael Jordan retired. Then came back and won something like 3 more championships.
Tim Watson retired and from memory came back a year or two later and played in another premiership.

Are all those facts funny?

Barry Hall quit the Swans. He didnt retire. Michael jordan didnt play AFL I dont think and Tim watson came back to the same club. Lloyd had options to play elsewhere but still retired.

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:39pm

plugger66 wrote:
Michael jordan didnt play AFL I dont think

What the f*** does that have to do with anything? Is it somehow harder to come out of retirement in the AFL than the NBA? What a stupid thing to say.
"I dont think" is right on the money.

plugger66 · Post: # 834507Post **plugger66** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:42pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Michael jordan didnt play AFL I dont think
What the f*** does that have to do with anything? Is it somehow harder to come out of retirement in the AFL than the NBA? What a stupid thing to say.
"I dont think" is right on the money.

Well lets go get Michael Jordan because he has as much hope of playing for the saints as Matthew Lloyd. Matter of fact he probably has more chance.

st.byron · Post: # 834510Post **st.byron** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:44pm

AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:You think you're pretty funny, don't you?

Barry Hall retired 3 months ago. He's now apparently just agreed to terms for a 2 year deal with the Bulldogs.
Michael Jordan retired. Then came back and won something like 3 more championships.
Tim Watson retired and from memory came back a year or two later and played in another premiership.

Are all those facts funny?

I see lots of you putting this idea and/or me down, but where are the alternate suggestions? This post has been on here for a fair while now and according to the article a "tall forward" is our priority, so where are the alternate suggestions?

Not putting you down, just think it's a crazy idea. Did you hear Lloyd prevaricating about whether or not he wanted to go on when he was doing special comments on the ABC for the prelim? And even if he cold be coaxed out of retirement, have a look at the Bombers forum. Many on there calling for him to pull the pin and saying that he's finished.
He's way past his ability to dominate the goal square like he used to.
He's retired of his own accord.
It's an idea that just isn't going to happen.

thirty-seven!? · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:48pm

We'd be better going for a younger bomber who could play that role - Michael Hurley anyone?? Would be next to impossible, but with his recent 'incident,' and love of the Saints, he could be 2% easier to get...

97% sure it wouldnt happen...

But thats still 3% better chance than landing Lloyd...

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:49pm

plugger66 wrote:
Well lets go get Michael Jordan because he has as much hope of playing for the saints as Matthew Lloyd. Matter of fact he probably has more chance.

How do you work that out?

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:54pm

st.byron wrote:
AnythingsPossibleSaints wrote:You think you're pretty funny, don't you?

Barry Hall retired 3 months ago. He's now apparently just agreed to terms for a 2 year deal with the Bulldogs.
Michael Jordan retired. Then came back and won something like 3 more championships.
Tim Watson retired and from memory came back a year or two later and played in another premiership.

Are all those facts funny?

I see lots of you putting this idea and/or me down, but where are the alternate suggestions? This post has been on here for a fair while now and according to the article a "tall forward" is our priority, so where are the alternate suggestions?
Not putting you down, just think it's a crazy idea. Did you hear Lloyd prevaricating about whether or not he wanted to go on when he was doing special comments on the ABC for the prelim? And even if he cold be coaxed out of retirement, have a look at the Bombers forum. Many on there calling for him to pull the pin and saying that he's finished.
He's way past his ability to dominate the goal square like he used to.
He's retired of his own accord.
It's an idea that just isn't going to happen.

That's fair enough, it was just a suggestion. No need for anyone to get their nickers all in a knot.
I have no doubt they would have been calling for Lloyd to go on the Bombers forum, because he didn't want to be there. Who's going to play well when they're not happy? They were probably saying the same thing on the Bulldogs forum about Farren Ray and on the WCE forum about Michael Gardiner and the Geelong forum about Steven King, etc.

Beej · Post: # 834518Post **Beej** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:55pm

Centrebet odds

To play for St Kilda in 2010
Start:

Closing:

Market is open.
Pay on who has more chance of playing for the St Kilda FC

Matthew Lloyd 250.00
Michael Jordan 260.00
OLB 150.50

AnythingsPossibleSaints · Sun 27 Sep 2009 2:58pm

Lots of hilarious posts on here, but 257 have now viewed this thread, with an apparent quote from our President and not one has put forward a legitimate alternative. I guess it's easier to mock, than actually use your brains.

Beej · Post: # 834551Post **Beej** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 3:32pm

Seeing as not taking our opportunities was the major reason for defeat, I reckon we should hand a blank cheque to this bloke

Matthew Lloyd?

Matthew Lloyd?

Re: Matthew Lloyd?