Re: Small squad numbers : Thu Feb 06, 2025 4:55 am  

Connoris way better than miller at full back .

Re: Small squad numbers : Thu Feb 06, 2025 2:38 pm  

Miller has to be first choice full-back. He had a few ropey games last season, true, but IMO the positive more than balanced out the negative, especially with the more focused direction he received from Arthur. I would say that Miller just about turned out to be our best signing last season, just edging Croft, who had fewer negative elements in his game but didn't deliver enough performances worthy of his price tag.

For the sake of the team, Connor can bring quality to a number of backline positions. Conversely, we'd be wasting Miller's x-factor if we moved him on to the wing, or heaven forbid, tried him in the centres or the halves. We don't need him to learn more specialist positions at this stage in his career.

Re: Small squad numbers : Thu Feb 06, 2025 7:17 pm  

Exeter Rhino wrote:

Miller has to be first choice full-back. He had a few ropey games last season, true, but IMO the positive more than baljanced out the negative, especially with the more focused direction he received from Arthur. I would say that Miller just about turned out to be our best signing last season, just edging Croft, who had fewer negative elements in his game but didn't deliver enough performances worthy of his price tag.

For the sake of the team, Connor can bring quality to a number of backline positions. Conversely, we'd be wasting Miller's x-factor if we moved him on to the wing, or heaven forbid, tried him in the centres or the halves. We don't need him to learn more specialist positions at this stage in his career.

In my book first choice full back should go to whoever is playing better in that position, and at the moment it's Connor's shirt to lose. Can't agree with your view re Croft/Miller last year. I thought Croft was head and shoulders the classiest player in team and despite playing behind a beaten pack he provided some genuine "clutch" moments. While I enjoyed watching Miller, and will again, he was very inconsistent and by his own admission contributed directly to some very damaging defeats. I thought he improved greatly under Arthur, but he's still along way from being our best player.

Re: Small squad numbers : Fri Feb 07, 2025 9:01 am  

Exeter Rhino wrote:

Miller has to be first choice full-back. He had a few ropey games last season, true, but IMO the positive more than balanced out the negative, especially with the more focused direction he received from Arthur. I would say that Miller just about turned out to be our best signing last season, just edging Croft, who had fewer negative elements in his game but didn't deliver enough performances worthy of his price tag.

For the sake of the team, Connor can bring quality to a number of backline positions. Conversely, we'd be wasting Miller's x-factor if we moved him on to the wing, or heaven forbid, tried him in the centres or the halves. We don't need him to learn more specialist positions at this stage in his career.

Miller was better than Croft last year?
Really?
You must have watched different games to me.
Miller really needs to improve this year for me.

Re: Small squad numbers : Fri Feb 07, 2025 10:24 am  

Simmo71 wrote:

Miller was better than Croft last year?
Really?
You must have watched different games to me.
Miller really needs to improve this year for me.

Not that it means much but he wasn't the only one that thought that (I thought Croft was our best player by the way) Miller was 6th in the Man of Steel final rankings, Croft was 9th

Re: Small squad numbers : Fri Feb 07, 2025 12:52 pm  

Miller was good. Especially post coach change. Croft was just as good, but more consistent for me.

Miller early season had a touch of the Brad Dwyers about him.