Roo = Brownlow?

[damienc]

I know. It is ridiculously early to be talking about winning the league's B & F.

But the way our skipper is playing at the moment, and if he keeps playing the way he is playing, he would have to be a big chance.

Surely he picked up close to the maximum votes from the umpires in every game he has played so far?

The coaches, ours and the opposition, have all noticed and rewarded him accordingly.

Just sheer genius, as it turns out, to make him into a midfielder, come forward, come whatever.

In the Anzac tradition. Age will not weary them, nor the years condemn. Certainly true for Roo.

The guy keeps getting better as he gets older. Extraordinary.

Quite frankly I can't think of a more worthy recipient. But I am biased.

[The_President]

Was paying $1001 to win it in the pre season

[Con Gorozidis]

I was thinking of doing the exact same post. He will definitely get 15+ votes.
Currently $81.

[The Barometer]

Richo got close in his last couple of years when he started playing more on the wing. Roo > Richo

[BigMart]

No

Dangerfield will

[bigcarl]

The roaming role has certainly given him a renewed lease on life. Allows him to use his best attribute - his enormous tank - to full advantage and he no longer has to beat three opponents every time he contests. He'd be a good Brownlow chance were we to win enough games. Which we may not

[silverhalo]

The skip is in sensational form but the fact that we're not winning enough games means he misses out on a lot 3 vote games - need to get over the line against particularly the good sides as we are seriously threatening to do.

[BigMart]

He'd be sitting on 6 or 7 votes ATM

Luke Parker, Danger, Mitchell, Jack Viney
A mile in front ATM

[Jacks Back]

How does he fair as far as previous brownlow votes go? Do the umpires give him votes?

[bigcarl]

How does he fair as far as previous brownlow votes go? Do the umpires give him votes?

When he's a clear best afield, like the Melbourne game

[saintspremiers]

I wish they changed the Brownlow voting system so teams that don't win have players in with a chance.

If it was an out of 10 vote and you gave the votes still to the top 3 players you wouldn't get BOG getting 3 times the votes of the third best player!

ie. Current system: Player A 3 votes, Player B 2 votes, Player C 3 votes.

My system (a fairer one) Player A 8 votes, Player B 7 votes Player C 6 votes

If player A is exceptional he could get 10 votes. Two players who played very similar standard games could get the same number of votes also.

[degruch]

I wish they changed the Brownlow voting system so teams that don't win have players in with a chance.

We've had our fair share of winners during poor seasons, so have other teams, so I don't think that's an issue. I agree to some extent though, if it were similar to the coaches votes system it would be a better indication of a player's standing.