View Full Version : Will we miss Mcphee & why?
zen dice man
17 Jan 2010, 15:52
Just watched the 09 Anzac day game, following the Brisbane game R19 09 I think. McPhee proved to be an excellent defender smashing T Cloke, then providing a very effective target across HF against the Lions doing very well
in the first Qrt in particular.
Who this year will replace Mcphees role at Essendon this year & thereafter & why?
Ultimately I want to know if you think we will miss him & what we can do to replace what he gave the side?
Go Bombers :thumbsu:
Frothies Mcveigh
17 Jan 2010, 16:07
Despite what people say bout him being terribe and turning it over heaps i think he will be missed coz of all the other things he did like push up forward and 3rd man up, its even worse we lost him for nothing.
windyhill
17 Jan 2010, 16:08
Will not miss the brain fades. Big body will be hard to replace he didn`t mind the bash & crash. Good footballer Smoky, definetly missed.
zen dice man
17 Jan 2010, 16:21
Personally think that he was worthy of a
3 yr deal although at $75k less than asking.
He was only 26 - bout to reach his prime
Better lead up target cross the wing/ high HF than Monfries as a marking target anyway.
With the exit of Lloyd & Lucas, and the lack of development with Gumby I think his departure will leave a significant hole as others have to wear better defenders/ attackers /opposition players he would normally have to take.
( I was a massive critic - which you should know I feel )
Watching the Essendon v Hawthorn Rd.22 game a couple of days ago reminded me why I won't miss him.
In terms of structure he will be missed more in the short term than Welsh.
Lets hope that Hurley, Hooker etc can lift a level.
Skeeta Olly
17 Jan 2010, 17:23
In the short term, we'll miss him.
Hard body, hard at contests. You rarely get that out of 1st or 2nd year players.
zen dice man
17 Jan 2010, 17:50
Hooker is no way near Mcphee as a replacement yet - if ever. Whilst handy LJ is still learning the craft & has a long way to go. Not really sure where LJ fits into the equation, maybe a key utility switcher, prefer him as a key back but needs to take more marks. McPhee was a damn good mark that's for sure.
I would not want to waste Hurley playing McPhee's role as third tall/ high HF / CHB - ok occasional games at CHB. But not as a wing link up high fwd, that would be too
low a return.
Tailypo
17 Jan 2010, 18:09
Daniher is another that might be suited to play McPhee's role. Just putting it out there.
dave_27
17 Jan 2010, 18:16
I honestly havent thought any more about him or his position since the pre season draft.
Probably shows how little I rated him in recent years.
bomberwheeler
17 Jan 2010, 18:20
Who!
Go Bombers 2010
The Donners
17 Jan 2010, 18:48
Aside from Watson, the beauty of Essendon's game style is no single player leaves a large hole.
zen dice man
17 Jan 2010, 19:38
Aside from Watson, the beauty of Essendon's game style is no single player leaves a large hole.
The loss of Ryder, Fletch, Pears or Hurley would also leave a signifant hole.
Without Lloyd, Lucas or Mcphee : with injury q's marks over Gumby, Neagle,
Hille and with q's marks over the ability of Still, Hooker, Laycock & the new guy to play AFL - Mcphees exit could still hurt us plenty.
The Donners
17 Jan 2010, 19:44
The loss of Ryder, Fletch, Pears or Hurley would also leave a signifant hole.
Without Lloyd, Lucas or Mcphee : with injury q's marks over Gumby, Neagle,
Hille and with q's marks over the ability of Still, Hooker, Laycock & the new guy to play AFL - Mcphees exit could still hurt us plenty.
Lucas was finished. We beat St. Kilda without Lloyd and we beat Carlton both times without McPhee.
zen dice man
17 Jan 2010, 20:00
Love your optimism Donners. Sure we can site one or two games where
we were missing either/ both & through some fortune & skill we won.
But how many games did we win in those circumstances? More than we lost ? Don't think so.
Me I am more circumspect. Lloyd & Lucas played 270 games each, Mcphee played 142 got us. Replacing them with so many kids is going to hurt.
Even the most able child needs to be nurtured. Over the short & medium term a team without these guys to support our youth is going to be up & down - more so than last year with our sub 50% wins....
After a finals campaign in 09, that probably won't happen again for us till 2011 or later. But shit I hope losing Mcfumbles doesn't matter...& we make the finals. Without a Salmon like second year from Hurley, we are going to moss the finals/
After watching the 2007 win against West Coast again the other day i would so no we will not miss him.
He is a slightly above average player with a good work rate. He has had just as many poor games in the last 3 years as he has had good ones and gets over rated becasue of his AA year where he was allowed to run his own race from a half back flank without having to play on anyone too tough.
If we can not replace him then we really do have some serious issues with the list !
In the short term, we'll miss him.
Hard body, hard at contests. You rarely get that out of 1st or 2nd year players.
I agree. We will miss his mature body and experience in 2010.
Having said that we shouldn't miss him in the long term as he was more athlete than footballer and simply covered up his limited talent with a good work rate.
Shane Hird
17 Jan 2010, 21:52
I will will not miss him in the slightest.
Glad he's gone and look forward to seeing one of the young blokes cement a spot where he did so well once a month.
Why people say "Watching _______'s game vs ____ in Round _____ of ______ makes me think we should/shouldn't have kept him" bemuses me. Perhaps I should say I watched Lloyd's 2008 game vs. Melbourne and think we should've kept him. What a stupid argument. You weigh up the season as a whole for 2009 and perhaps give some, but small, weighting to 2008.
Will we miss him? In 2010, of course we will. Naivety to suggest otherwise. Beyond this year I agree Ant's comment that it will reflect badly upon this club and our list management if he's still a hole to be filled.
For this year we can't assume NLM will fill the hole because McPhee's defensive skills were a lot better than NLM's. Daniher is probably the long term replacement but I wouldn't hold my breath for him to break out in 2010.
Slattery_20
18 Jan 2010, 09:08
Personally think that he was worthy of a
3 yr deal although at $75k less than asking.
He was only 26 - bout to reach his prime
Better lead up target cross the wing/ high HF than Monfries as a marking target anyway.
With the exit of Lloyd & Lucas, and the lack of development with Gumby I think his departure will leave a significant hole as others have to wear better defenders/ attackers /opposition players he would normally have to take.
( I was a massive critic - which you should know I feel )
That bolded would assume he's been improving over the last couple of years. Most footballers don't, and I think it's pretty fair to say he reached his peak in 2004.
He was a good, reliable, solid contributor. A seriously good mark.
Unfortunately, that's all he was, pretty limited with his decision making & prone to shocking bouts of stupidity. Replaceable.
From memory I can't remember him ever taking the 1st defender as a forward, and his spells as a defender weren't much to write home about.
kelvin_sheedy
18 Jan 2010, 21:36
Yes. He's a better option than half the team.
He could have played Monfries role and played it much much better.
A lot of premiership sides have good swingmen that can go forward or back.
Piss poor management to let a bloke go for free.
ghostdog
19 Jan 2010, 07:12
[quote]Why people say "Watching _______'s game vs ____ in Round _____ of ______ makes me think we should/shouldn't have kept him" bemuses me. Perhaps I should say I watched Lloyd's 2008 game vs. Melbourne and think we should've kept him. What a stupid argument. You weigh up the season as a whole for 2009 and perhaps give some, but small, weighting to 2008.
I think the people you are referring to would bank on the potential of the player as exhibited in Round ___.
ghostdog
19 Jan 2010, 07:14
Yes. He's a better option than half the team.
He could have played Monfries role and played it much much better.
A lot of premiership sides have good swingmen that can go forward or back.
Piss poor management to let a bloke go for free.
Yep.
shalvross
19 Jan 2010, 09:58
Yes. He's a better option than half the team.
He could have played Monfries role and played it much much better.
A lot of premiership sides have good swingmen that can go forward or back.
Piss poor management to let a bloke go for free.
I have to disagree here about the mgmt comment. My take is poor form from McPhee to wait until after trade week to announce his intentions. And in all honesty, what would we have realistically got for him in trade week? Draft pick 65? Another fringe player? Any interest at all? In the end we took a pre season draft pick and got Hardingham. Who knows, this could turn out to be a master stroke, it could be a complete disaster, or it could come up evens. We'll have to wait and see.
And my take on whether or not we'll miss McPhee? We might in the short term, but I think someone will step up and relish the opportunity and by mid season, we'll have well and truly forgotten about McFumbles.
It's piss poor by both parties involved. Clubs should have their players re-signed before trade week imo. If they don't or if there's a stalemate (regardless of whose to blame) then you ship em off. Essendon should've given the ultimatum to both Welsh and McPhee. Not interested in hearing this Welsh>Mcphee loyalty bullshit. If you're loyal, you love the club, you want to play and the deal is negotiable then you friggin deal with it and move on. What's more, there's ample time to have negotiated new deals. It's not like you need to wait till the season's ended before re-signing players that you want.
Personally, I'd still prefer to have McPhee over Welsh, but that's irrelevant. All players should be subject to that ultimatum if they're out of contract. Club > player end of story and it was more Essendon's failure to enforce that upon both players that led to McPhee's exit.
Big Blow Hard
19 Jan 2010, 11:35
Very Short term pain for long term gain. McPhees role will be filled over the next few years by a number of options.
I like McPhee, but I am not sad that he has gone. He was the poster child for Essendons mediocrity over the last few years of Sheedy's reign. Players like him made to feel they were better than what they were, and given too much latitude.
I wish him good luck at Freo, maybe he will come out and be a better player, I hope he does, for his sake. But, it was not going to happen here at Essendon.
Bring on the next generation.
Call Me Cake
19 Jan 2010, 13:08
Love your optimism Donners. Sure we can site one or two games where
we were missing either/ both & through some fortune & skill we won.
But how many games did we win in those circumstances? More than we lost ? Don't think so.
Me I am more circumspect. Lloyd & Lucas played 270 games each, Mcphee played 142 got us. Replacing them with so many kids is going to hurt.
Even the most able child needs to be nurtured. Over the short & medium term a team without these guys to support our youth is going to be up & down - more so than last year with our sub 50% wins....
After a finals campaign in 09, that probably won't happen again for us till 2011 or later. But shit I hope losing Mcfumbles doesn't matter...& we make the finals. Without a Salmon like second year from Hurley, we are going to moss the finals/
What you don't seem realize is that Lloyd has been inconsistent for a while now, and there's no doubt some of it had to do with him messing up his hamstring back in 2006.
Ever since then, his goal kicking consistency has been decreasing as he was getting older and older, until it eventually took a toll on his career at the dawn of his retirement. He obviously never really got back to his best. Thus the team then had to take the liberty in spreading the goal scoring abilities all over the forward line preemptively, in order to keep making some sort of impact after Lloyd's imminent departure.
We had time to get used to the idea of Lloyd not being at FF anymore, it's not as if it happened out of no where; (ala Fevola). Particularly in 2009, where he only managed to kick 35 goals in total. Most of our goals during last year's big games came from a spread of players who will make an even bigger stand next year, we haven't been reliant on him for a while now and yet we were still able to improve (games won) on the season prior. The man was a champion at the club and many will recognize this for years to come, but it was clear his time was up.
Sure, we didn't get anything for Lloyd, this is because we didn't need to. Why would we? We've already set our our sights on Gumbleton, Neagle, Still, Carlisle and Hurley as young prospects up forward for a while now and the maturity/experience in Davey, Monfries, Hille and Williams to lead them. With Ryder in there somewhere.
In my opinion, Essendon's handling of Lloyd's departure has been more of a "transition" for it's forward line than Carlton's sudden break stop regarding Fevola. Based on this, I expect the Bombers to fair better when it comes to kicking goals and adapting to a working gameplan in 2010 compared to the Blues/other young developing clubs.
As for Lucas, his impact up forward since 2007 has minimized more so than Lloyd's. Kicking 18 goals in 2008, and 22 in 2009, it was quite obvious that being 32 wasn't helping him nor was it an indication that he was going to get any better or back to his best. As with Lloyd, Essendon have had enough time to look at other options and not rely too heavily on him in terms of winning games and moving forward.
McPhee was a good player, but will not get any better - his departure will not make a drastic difference in our gameplan come 2010. If there's anyone that was vital to our true aspirations, it was Lovett's speed, but he was never going to clean up his act off the field and thus Essendon have actually gained something in regards to him leaving as far as our long term future is concerned. Travis Colyer's speed will bode well to replace his impact on the field. :thumbsu:
Looking back 3 years, it's amazing how much our team has changed since then. I'm excited for the future, a total revamp is what we needed. Most people will realize that soon enough. :)
thebigboy
19 Jan 2010, 13:57
Very Short term pain for long term gain. McPhees role will be filled over the next few years by a number of options.
I like McPhee, but I am not sad that he has gone. He was the poster child for Essendons mediocrity over the last few years of Sheedy's reign. Players like him made to feel they were better than what they were, and given too much latitude.
I wish him good luck at Freo, maybe he will come out and be a better player, I hope he does, for his sake. But, it was not going to happen here at Essendon.
Bring on the next generation.
Spot on the money :thumbsu:.
Mad Bomber Sean
19 Jan 2010, 16:20
Watching a few games recently he has really stood out for being a good consistant contributor ( perhaps played out of position). He was unfairly maligned imo when he played for us. I feel that I underated him as a player during the last few years. He suffered in playing in a bad team at a tough time.
The way he left us was very unsatisfactory. Both club & player should have made that work.
I feel that his departure will take about 2 years to resolve. So much depends now on the development of so many young players - He will be missed for the time being at least.
Not gonna miss anyone who's heart isn't really in it, especially one who isn't much better than average and who is less consistent than most.
Whether he left for free or not, i'm not really fussed, other players will bleed for this team.
morebeer
19 Jan 2010, 17:13
Congratulations to McFumbles and his management for finding a team dumb enough to give him more years, more bucks and a permanent midfield role. He must be smarter than he looks because he knew he probably wouldn't make it to year 3, Connors knew too.
Not sure why people are blaming the club, he decided to sign with Freo. Knocked back our deal. Didn't give us the option to trade him either. How often does a senior player quit the club without giving them a chance to do a deal?
Another kid gets a chance.
Ludwig van Bertstare
19 Jan 2010, 17:38
No. Wanted him gone for years.
TheDon35
20 Jan 2010, 09:07
No. This year we'll see the re-emergance of the Bombers with many of the young talent getting a chance to fill important rolls which had been idling over the past 4 or 5 years.
kelvin_sheedy
20 Jan 2010, 09:52
Not really seeing we'll be able to play Myers in his role who's got soft hands, can kick the ball long and accurately, is great overhead, great mobility, is a top bloke and most importantly is a high draft pick.
High draft pick = success so Myers is a much better prospect than McPhee.
I'm glad we've lost a valuable member of our best 22.
TheDon35
20 Jan 2010, 11:01
Not really seeing we'll be able to play Myers in his role who's got soft hands, can kick the ball long and accurately, is great overhead, great mobility, is a top bloke and most importantly is a high draft pick.
High draft pick = success so Myers is a much better prospect than McPhee.
I'm glad we've lost a valuable member of our best 22.
I'm not saying he wasn't in our best 22, just that it's a good time for both to part ways. I actually think he's a better player than most give him credit for. I just think the side will benefit long term from empowering a number of our youngsters with more responsibility. Draft position aside.
I'm not saying he wasn't in our best 22, just that it's a good time for both to part ways. I actually think he's a better player than most give him credit for. I just think the side will benefit long term from empowering a number of our youngsters with more responsibility. Draft position aside.
We already got rid of Lloyd and Lucas to facilitate the development of younger players. Peverill, J. Johnson, Solomon and M.Johnson are all prior examples. All those players were arguably past it and were not guaranteed a spot in the 22, therefore it was justified... however McPhee is different. Only 26 and still very much apart of our best 22. The argument is therefore null and void.
We don't need a drastic culling of senior players just to let more kids get a game. If our club was generally worried about youth player development amongst then they would've bent over backwards to secure a new VFL partnership and/or a succession plan that sees an Essendon reserves side back in the competition.
Call Me Cake
20 Jan 2010, 12:22
However McPhee is different. Only 26 and still very much apart of our best 22.
He may have been 26, but there was no indication that he was going to get any better, let alone go back to his 2004 All Australian performance.
IMO, he was going to be dead weight in a couple years anyway, and as we've found out now, he really had no passion for the club itself.
What the younger ones have shown, is a determination to improve, a determination to succeed, for the club and for success in the long term future. With McPhee, however, he knew just as most of us did that he was nearing the 'golden' age. The age in which players either play at their consistency, or drop and fall. This is why I believe he wasn't going to get any better for the club and was only "making up the years", as they say. Scrapping up as many bulk years in a contract as he could get.
I don't want a player who will not push himself enough to get better or back to his best just because his final days are nearing on him.
I'd rather preemptively take care of this before it would have become a problem for us in the future.
Also, here's a thread from mid-2007, talking about the same sort of frustration/fumbles we had to put up with 2 seasons later. Clearly a trend that he wasn't going to get anymore football conscious as he was back when we first picked him up.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=348338
shalvross
20 Jan 2010, 12:30
We already got rid of Lloyd and Lucas to facilitate the development of younger players. Peverill, J. Johnson, Solomon and M.Johnson are all prior examples. All those players were arguably past it and were not guaranteed a spot in the 22, therefore it was justified... however McPhee is different. Only 26 and still very much apart of our best 22. The argument is therefore null and void.
Lloyd was offered a 1 year contract and was told he would have to earn his spot, but he decided to retire. So we didn't get rid of him.
McPhee was offered a 2 year contract but decided that he wanted 3 years.Then he wanted to be with Mark Harvey and play in the midfield. And then he didn't like how Lloyd was treated along with any other reason he could think of to support his decision to leave the club. So we didn't get rid of him. He left.
No one can argue with the other delistings. All were finished at the EFC.
Some people on here want to look at the glass half empty and say how we will suffer dreadfully and McPhee cannot be replaced by anyone on our current list. Others disagree.
I'd like to think I'm one of the latter.
He may have been 26, but there was no indication that he was going to get any better, let alone go back to his 2004 All Australian performance.
IMO, he was going to be dead weight in a couple years anyway, and as we've found out now, he really had no passion for the club itself.
What the younger ones have shown, is a determination to improve, a determination to succeed, for the club and for success in the long term future. With McPhee, however, he knew just as most of us did that he was nearing the 'golden' age. The age in which players either play at their consistency, or drop and fall. This is why I believe he wasn't going to get any better for the club and was only "making up the years", as they say. Scrapping up as many bulk years in a contract as he could get.
I don't want a player who will not push himself enough to get better or back to his best just because his final days are nearing on him.
I'd rather preemptively take care of this before it would have become a problem for us in the future.
Also, here's a thread from mid-2007, talking about the same sort of frustration/fumbles we had to put up with 2 seasons later. Clearly a trend that he wasn't going to get anymore football conscious as he was back when we first picked him up.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=348338
Grossly incorrect. The fact he stalled his decision to leave was a testimony to how much he loved the club and how torn he was to wanting an extra year. Look how often he enjoyed representing Essendon in the media. By numerous accounts he was held in high regard by the playing group and was a pretty popular bloke. He gave us what, 6 years?, and we're assuming he doesn't have the passion for this club after that long? Please... he would've left earlier had that been the case.
Also, the comment regarding his desire to push into the midfield was just a smokescreen for the third year he desperately wanted, as I can see him failing at that and returning (in a successful capacity) to a utility defender/forward.
Also strongly disagree that he would've been a dead weight. May've struggled towards the end of a renewed contract but if not in the best 22 he'd definitely be on the fringes and pushing for selection.
Lloyd was offered a 1 year contract and was told he would have to earn his spot, but he decided to retire. So we didn't get rid of him.
McPhee was offered a 2 year contract but decided that he wanted 3 years.Then he wanted to be with Mark Harvey and play in the midfield. And then he didn't like how Lloyd was treated along with any other reason he could think of to support his decision to leave the club. So we didn't get rid of him. He left.
No one can argue with the other delistings. All were finished at the EFC.
Some people on here want to look at the glass half empty and say how we will suffer dreadfully and McPhee cannot be replaced by anyone on our current list. Others disagree.
I'd like to think I'm one of the latter.I was paraphrasing Lloyd, Lucas and the others under "get rid of" but to be more precise you're correct: a 1 year deal was on the cards with no favours and implying without captaincy.
Boldened part: Careful when you say "suffer dreadfully", as that may be the opinion of some but not certainly not mine. I never said we'd suffer but I did say we'd struggle to replace him. There's a difference and I believe it will be noticeable but not disasterous as you're inferring.
To suggest the "half full, half empty" approach implies a very black and white scenario as to how McPhee's exit will affect the team and in my opinion it will be a mixed reaction: ie. Daniher has a promising year showing a lot of potential but doesn't reach McPhee's level as a defender for at least 2 years.
This brings me full circle to my first point about older players having already been moved on and plenty of opportunities existing for younger blokes. With the exception of Fletcher and NLM, we don't have any experienced defenders.* Hurley and Pears have shown a lot of maturity in 2009 (on the field of course ... *sigh* @ Hurley's off-field indiscretion) but that doesn't imply Daniher has. His time will come and McPhee would've still been a valuable contributor in 2010 and most likely 2011.
He may not have been getting any better as a player but I can't see him getting any worse should he had continued in the same role at Essendon.
*Mcveigh and Welsh who have played a lot down back now operate as defensive midfielders.
morebeer
20 Jan 2010, 20:49
Looking forward to watching Freo's comedy capers this year. With McPheeble, Keppers and Solly it will be a contest winning, brain freezing, turnover fest. They will be must watch TV.
Dont stress over losing high priced, under achieving flankers, they are expendable. Give a kid a go.
Slattery_20
21 Jan 2010, 07:51
Grossly incorrect. The fact he stalled his decision to leave was a testimony to how much he loved the club and how torn he was to wanting an extra year. Look how often he enjoyed representing Essendon in the media. By numerous accounts he was held in high regard by the playing group and was a pretty popular bloke. He gave us what, 6 years?, and we're assuming he doesn't have the passion for this club after that long? Please... he would've left earlier had that been the case.
Screw this 'loving the club' stuff. I expect players to act professionally, and repay what the club's done for them, and represent it with honour and committment. Ultimately, they're paid to play footy and the club chooses them, not the other way around. 99% of talk about "bleeding for the club" is bollocks.
That said - the guy won a B&F here. He was a 1st team player for 5-6 years.
He would (should?) have had a lot of mates that he's come through with. IIRC some of those guys like McVeigh & Welsh were his groomsmen - & he's good mates with Hirdy too. He turned his back on them for one more year, when they are all happy to sign. He turned his back on them when the offer was perfectly reasonable.
PS I dunno how losing a guy who's played half-forward for most of the last two years affects our backline.
Screw this 'loving the club' stuff. I expect players to act professionally, and repay what the club's done for them, and represent it with honour and committment. Ultimately, they're paid to play footy and the club chooses them, not the other way around. 99% of talk about "bleeding for the club" is bollocks.Thanks for proving my point. He's first, and foremost, paid to play footy and obviously the extra year was a sticking point before his "love of the club" becomes a factor. Essendon did not choose him by supporting him on a third year and therefore the blame can't be squarely directed at McPhee for not re-signing before trade week.
Also, even though he is a professional wanting a third year, that it didn't stop him from thinking long and hard of leaving the club he has certainly called home for the majority of the last decade.
That said - the guy won a B&F here. He was a 1st team player for 5-6 years.
He would (should?) have had a lot of mates that he's come through with. IIRC some of those guys like McVeigh & Welsh were his groomsmen - & he's good mates with Hirdy too. He turned his back on them for one more year, when they are all happy to sign. He turned his back on them when the offer was perfectly reasonable."Perfectly reasonable" is subjective to your perception and an oversight of the other factors that pushed him for a third year in his deal request. ie. other senior players being shown the door, more and more competition for spots (a good thing for the club, but not for the individual wanting the best deal possible), the financial security of that extra year (remembering his actual wage demands were not that high). etc.
Just because the club and the player didn't reach an agreement doesn't mean he's turned his back on the club and his mates at the club. Wtf are you smoking?
PS I dunno how losing a guy who's played half-forward for most of the last two years affects our backline.
/facepalm
Slattery_20
21 Jan 2010, 12:48
Oh, what a good bloke, he waited, nervously wracking his conscience, until after trade week to really start negotiating. Until they held all the aces. What a legend! :D
He wasn't asked to take a pay cut.
He wasn't put on 1-year deals.
I'm sure he would have been amply remunerated.
He wasn't demoted to the 2s or told that his spot would be filled with youngsters.
He'd been played regularly under both his senior coaches.
All of those, I could sorta understand as reasons for looking elsewhere.
McVeigh wouldn't come out and openly sledge him unless he felt slighted.
Ditto Knights, ditto Robson.
More fool Freo.
Round 2 should be a cracker.
Call Me Cake
26 Jan 2010, 14:58
Round 2 should be a cracker.
Cracker?
We'll be the only ones with the ball. :rolleyes:
Skeeta Olly
26 Jan 2010, 17:11
Cracker?
We'll be the only ones with the ball. :rolleyes:
Nah he's right, the match is going to be an absolute Salada.
http://www.cepolina.com/freephoto/f/other.food/cracker.snack.bread.jpg
centrelink1
26 Jan 2010, 17:14
It will be interesting seeing McPhee play against us. I hope for his sake he does well... but not TOO well.
Notorious_29
27 Jan 2010, 04:55
Cracker?
We'll be the only ones with the ball. :rolleyes:
Who's going to kick your goals? Seriously who is going to kick more than 30-35 goals for you this season.
Hurley? (The guy who recently ALLEGEDLY assaulted an Indian taxi driver, resulting in possible assualt charges or club suspension)
Hille? (The ruckman who is a good chance not to be ready for round 1)
Gumby? (The guy who snaps a leg when he hears the word "football")
Mark Williams? (Enough said, reminds me of the trade for Monix for the washing machine in SemiPro)
I'm out of ideas? :cool:
Slattery_20
27 Jan 2010, 06:14
Our leading goal-kicked had 35 last year. We'll manage.
Big Blow Hard
27 Jan 2010, 08:08
Who's going to kick your goals? Seriously who is going to kick more than 30-35 goals for you this season.
Hurley? (The guy who recently assaulted an Indian taxi driver, resulting in possible assualt charges or club suspension)
Hille? (The ruckman who is a good chance not to be ready for round 1)
Gumby? (The guy who snaps a leg when he hears the word "football")
Mark Williams? (Enough said, reminds me of the trade for Monix for the washing machine in SemiPro)
I'm out of ideas? :cool:
You have mostly answere your own question dumbass.
Hurley - If played solely forward is extremely capable of kicking 35+ goals. His incident with the taxi driver has nothing to do with his ability to tear most teams, especially Freo, a new asshole.
Hille - I suggest you read a newspaper or two, Hille is well and truly on track to be ready rd 1. And if not rucking, has proven he can kick many goals as a resting forward. Quick off the mark, tall and strong mark, hard to match up on when forward. Probably won't kick 3 but only due to time spent forward.
Gumby - Still unknown, but certainly seems capable. Only time will tell on him and his body. Seems to have stayed injury free since his operation. Beware.
Williams - How is trading for a multiple 60+ gps player a bad thing. Alot of players have injury riddled seasons. Write him off at your own peril. Definitely 35+ goals
Then add.
Monfries - Not sure exactly how many he got last year, but again is a player capable of kicking 30 +. Is better every year and a grea shot on goal.
Neagle - For all the bagging he gets for being unfit, don't neglect the fact he is a fast leading, strong mark, great shot on goal forward, coming into the season with maybe his best preseason to date (despite the operation) Neagle is capable of 50+ this season.
Not to mention the many midfielder capable of going forward nd kicking goals. Throw in Ryder occasionally and I think the question you should be asking is, "Where aren't our goals going to come from"
Bookmark this. Essendon will haveone of the most potent forward lines going forward. The predictability of goingto Lloyd or Lucas is gone, and our avenues to goal will become many and unpredictable.
Certainly too much for Frail Freo to deal with. ;)
Slattery_20
27 Jan 2010, 08:26
Why play nicely, BBH?
Who's going to kick your goals? Seriously who is going to kick more than 30-35 goals for you this season.
Hurley? (The guy who recently assaulted an Indian taxi driver, resulting in possible assualt charges or club suspension)
Hille? (The ruckman who is a good chance not to be ready for round 1)
Gumby? (The guy who snaps a leg when he hears the word "football")
Mark Williams? (Enough said, reminds me of the trade for Monix for the washing machine in SemiPro)
I'm out of ideas? :cool:
Realistically, we can hope for 100+ goals from Williams (35), Gumbleton (20), Neagle (30) and Monfries (25).
Lloyd and Lucas completely tailed off in the second half of the season. Disappointing from Lucas who from memory kicked four consecutive bags of three goals midway through the season before he magically disappeared again.
But the replacements are there ... they just need a chance to shine.
Who's going to kick your goals? Seriously who is going to kick more than 30-35 goals for you this season.
Which Fremantle players apart from Pav and Sanidlands should we be worried about? Scott Thornton still running around?
Who's going to kick your goals? Seriously who is going to kick more than 30-35 goals for you this season.
Given our leading goal kicker only kicked 35 and the next best was 25 i don't think it will be that hard.
Hurley? (The guy who recently assaulted an Indian taxi driver, resulting in possible assualt charges or club suspension)
Possible suspension ? Maybe but it will only be 1 or 2 games if he gets suspended. It is more likely that he won't kick the most goals because they will use him in defense. If he plays forward he will kick more than 35 goals in 10 games !!
Hille? (The ruckman who is a good chance not to be ready for round 1)
You want to bet he wont run out in round 1 hotshot ?
Never believe everything you read in the media ;)
He could play forward and kick 20 to 30 but he will play ruck so he wont be the leading goal kicker.
Gumby? (The guy who snaps a leg when he hears the word "football")
No he wont. Will be happy enough if he plays 15 games and kicks 15 goals.
Mark Williams? (Enough said, reminds me of the trade for Monix for the washing machine in SemiPro)
Well done. Guess you have the memory of a 3 year old.
Two seasons ago he kicked 46 goals playing third target to Buddy and Roughead. He has not missed any of pre season and has shown no signs of any injury problems with his knee. If he plays 22 games he will kick 40 plus goals.
I'm out of ideas? :cool:
Because you did not have any in the first place :eek:
Hell even if Neagle stands around up forward and averages his 1.5 goals a game without getting any better he will kick 33 which is only 2 short of the Lloyd total from last year.
So where will we get the goals from ? Like last year we will rely on a spread of players kicking between 15 and 40 goals.
Which Fremantle players apart from Pav and Sanidlands should we be worried about? Scott Thornton still running around?You idiot. They have Palmer. Bloody elite kick, that guy.
Notorious_29
27 Jan 2010, 13:49
:) :)
U Got Reimered
27 Jan 2010, 15:26
I am surprised that no one has suggested this, which leads me to believed I may be stoned to death. But in MY OPINION the replacement seems obvious......
KYLE REIMERS!!!!
Not just a replacement, but an improvement. Can fill a swingman role quite easily. Can defend. Can definately kick goals as we sore at training on Monday. And more importantly doesn't take crap from no man!!!
It may have been desired to have Reimers play more in the guts, but we seems to have plenty of players to play there that would do just as well as Reimers.
Please let me know what you guys think...
(haha McFumbles.... Makes me laugh every time)
Which Fremantle players apart from Pav and Sanidlands should we be worried about? Scott Thornton still running around?
S Hill goes all right.
I think Essendon will go OK, however you have to notice losing your number 1 & 3 goal kickers (actually your 8th too with Lovett) ...it is going to take your next in line attackers to a place where they have not been and you would want a season out of Neagle/Gumbleton as a combo.
Trouble is if there are injuries and you say have to push forward a bigger body from your defence or ruck ...it hurts these areas instead.
If Gumbleton and Neagle hold down spots with Williams ....Paddy can stay back and form a very good defensive partnership back there and Hille can stay in the ruck where he is a pretty valuable commodity these days.
Skeeta Olly
27 Jan 2010, 19:50
Lose Lloyd and Lucas
Gain Williams and Hille.
Win.
I am surprised that no one has suggested this, which leads me to believed I may be stoned to death. But in MY OPINION the replacement seems obvious......
KYLE REIMERS!!!!
Not just a replacement, but an improvement. Can fill a swingman role quite easily. Can defend. Can definately kick goals as we sore at training on Monday. And more importantly doesn't take crap from no man!!!
It may have been desired to have Reimers play more in the guts, but we seems to have plenty of players to play there that would do just as well as Reimers.
Please let me know what you guys think...
(haha McFumbles.... Makes me laugh every time)
Definitely stoned.
Call Me Cake
28 Jan 2010, 01:10
I think Essendon will go OK, however you have to notice losing your number 1 & 3 goal kickers (actually your 8th too with Lovett) ...it is going to take your next in line attackers to a place where they have not been.
Alright, time to settle this Lloyd/Lucas BS.
Lloyd was never going to go back his best. Thus, Essendon were forced to take the liberty in spreading the goal scoring opportunities all over the forward line preemptively, in order to keep making some sort of impact after Lloyd's imminent departure. You say this imminent departure will take us to a place we haven't been, I disagree. We had time to get used to the idea of Lloyd not being at FF anymore, it's not as if it happened out of no where; (ala Fevola). Particularly in 2009, where he managed to kick 35 goals in total. Most of our goals during last year's games came from a spread of players who will only take a bigger stand next year. We haven't been reliant on him for a while now and yet we were still able to improve (games won) on the season prior (as evidenced below). The man was a champion at the club and many will recognize this for years to come, but it was clear he thought his time was up.
2008
Lloyd plays 21 games and kicks 62 goals.
Essendon finish 12th on 8 wins and 14 losses.
2009
Lloyd plays 18 games and kicks 35 goals.
Essendon finish 8th on 10 wins and 11 losses and 1 draw.
We've lost 3 less games in 2009 compared to our run in 2008. Effectively improving without Lloyd's major contribution regardless of our ladder position.
As for Lucas, his impact up forward since 2007 has minimized more so than Lloyd's. Kicking 18 goals in 2008, and 22 in 2009, it was quite obvious that being 32 wasn't helping him nor was it an indication that he was going to get back to his best.
Gaining a mature forward in Williams (who is capable of kicking 60+ let alone 35+ and as a partnership to Monfries) will ensure more back up if needed. Meanwhile, Hille will provide a few surprises, with other goal sneaks in Davey, Ryder, Reimers, ect; running amok and guiding young prospects such as Hurley, Gumby, Neagle, Still and Carlisle into action.
I agree with you on Lovett though, but he was never going to clean up his act off the field and thus Essendon have actually gained something in regards to him leaving as far as our long term future is concerned.
Paddy can stay back.8or4Z5Dm1L8
Back? Hmm, nah. :thumbsu:
Good luck at Etihad in Round 2. I hope for your sake those sour crackers taste good. ;)
Skeeta Olly
14 Aug 2010, 12:47
I'll say it now, but I think we'll miss McPhee next year.
Jan - 2 - 2010.
Thought I'd bump this.
I know he hasn't set the world on fire at Fremantle (pun intended), but this year we've clearly lacked two things. An experienced and solid bodied player and some leadership. We lost Lloyd, Lucas, McPhee and Lovett last year. Neither Lovett or Lucas would have help out position this year, Lloyd is 50/50 but I think McPhee would have.
He was hot and cold in 2009, but McPhee's experience and ability to swing forward and back would have helped us this year.
Interested to see what others think.
Notorious_29
14 Aug 2010, 13:02
Who's going to kick your goals? Seriously who is going to kick more than 30-35 goals for you this season.
Hurley? (The guy who recently ALLEGEDLY assaulted an Indian taxi driver, resulting in possible assualt charges or club suspension)
Hille? (The ruckman who is a good chance not to be ready for round 1)
Gumby? (The guy who snaps a leg when he hears the word "football")
Mark Williams? (Enough said, reminds me of the trade for Monix for the washing machine in SemiPro)
I'm out of ideas? :cool:
Leading goal kicker - Monfries (23)
Call Me Cake
14 Aug 2010, 14:30
You have a point Olly, he could have helped us as far as 2010 is concerned.
I have to say, 2010 has been a disappointment on all fronts, apart from the kids and having Gumbleton back (no pun intended), I think everyone expected more (even though we probably couldn't have changed things like injuries and suspensions). So it's not surprising to see that most people would have considered the club to be "good enough on it's own" in 2010, when it comes to it's departed players.
However, the long term is more important, IMO. McPhee can get stuffed. :thumbsu:
I think we're missing McPhee, Lovett and Lloyd (and maybe Lucas if he managed to learn how to run again). While all of those players had downsides last year their upsides would have really helped us this year.
Lloyd may be half dead by this point of the season but he'd still help free up players like Hurley, Gumby and Neagle.
We may have dodged a bullet by trading Lovett but we still have no real replacement for his spot in the team and we're not as good at running the ball from the backline to the forwardline.
McPhee did some stupid things but he still did his job and got the ball, plus we could use a player of his size and experience in such a small and young team.
I think we're missing McPhee, Lovett and Lloyd (and maybe Lucas if he managed to learn how to run again). While all of those players had downsides last year their upsides would have really helped us this year.
Lloyd may be half dead by this point of the season but he'd still help free up players like Hurley, Gumby and Neagle.
We may have dodged a bullet by trading Lovett but we still have no real replacement for his spot in the team and we're not as good at running the ball from the backline to the forwardline.
McPhee did some stupid things but he still did his job and got the ball, plus we could use a player of his size and experience in such a small and young team.
Any time you let a best 22 player just walk out the door for nothing it is a complete failure by the club. MCPhee was our highest mark taker in 2009 & regardless of how high or low you rated him he was an asset at a club that is short on assets & we let it go for nothing. The signs of trouble at teh club have been sooooooo obvious but too many are blind.
As for Lloyd let me remind all here of Dustin Fletcher in say 2006. He was struggling a bit & showing signs of age. FFS we bought in Mal Michael just to give him some relief. We could very easily have pushed Fletch aside then & most likely would have if Kepler & Lee had of come on. Instead we nursed a champion through & he repaid us in spades. Did we do the same for a champion in Lloyd? After 1 year where his return was just below 2 goals a game he was gone. The 35 goals he managed to achieve despite being shunted out for Neagle is a fair way above anything anyone has achieved this year.
Lovett is another example of this club not recognising the worth of its resources. He was our 3rd highest possesion winner in 2009. Thats right, the club with a shytfull midfield got rid of the guy who had the ball more than all bar 2 teamates (argueably the best user). Did we replace him with another mid - of course not, we got a mid sized forward player with an even worse attitude to playing, less ability & in far worse condition. Great work!
I just wish i had a bridge I could sell the club.
kelvin_sheedy
15 Aug 2010, 11:49
Any time you let a best 22 player just walk out the door for nothing it is a complete failure by the club. MCPhee was our highest mark taker in 2009 & regardless of how high or low you rated him he was an asset at a club that is short on assets & we let it go for nothing. The signs of trouble at teh club have been sooooooo obvious but too many are blind.
As for Lloyd let me remind all here of Dustin Fletcher in say 2006. He was struggling a bit & showing signs of age. FFS we bought in Mal Michael just to give him some relief. We could very easily have pushed Fletch aside then & most likely would have if Kepler & Lee had of come on. Instead we nursed a champion through & he repaid us in spades. Did we do the same for a champion in Lloyd? After 1 year where his return was just below 2 goals a game he was gone. The 35 goals he managed to achieve despite being shunted out for Neagle is a fair way above anything anyone has achieved this year.
Lovett is another example of this club not recognising the worth of its resources. He was our 3rd highest possesion winner in 2009. Thats right, the club with a shytfull midfield got rid of the guy who had the ball more than all bar 2 teamates (argueably the best user). Did we replace him with another mid - of course not, we got a mid sized forward player with an even worse attitude to playing, less ability & in far worse condition. Great work!
I just wish i had a bridge I could sell the club.
Beautifully summed up.
The mistakes of the past year are unforgivable and heads must roll. I want more than just the coach gone.
threeleggedgoat
4 Sep 2010, 16:07
I dunno about the rest of you but from what I've seen of his game today I'm hardly missing the classic McPhee brain-fade :D
McFart (as in brain fart).
SirJimi05
4 Sep 2010, 16:17
I dunno about the rest of you but from what I've seen of his game today I'm hardly missing the classic McPhee brain-fade :D
Today? What about the rest of the year? He has been shite all year. His worst season in.....well, possibly ever.
We definitely won that deal. Freo lose again.
Skeeta Olly
4 Sep 2010, 16:25
Today? What about the rest of the year? He has been shite all year. His worst season in.....well, possibly ever.
We definitely won that deal. Freo lose again.
Even though we got nothing..
My thoughts exactly.
As crap as McPhee has been for probably 18 games this year, we lost him for nothing.
He would've been in our starting 22 this year, and we lost him for nothing.
Still dirty on him.
Notorious_29
4 Sep 2010, 16:35
Just kept Hodge to 3 possessions in a half and absolutely no influence at all, 2 possessions which were from soft free kicks. Not a bad effort really.
he'd be doing even better if he was touching the ball less.
Notorious_29
4 Sep 2010, 17:11
McPheeeeeee :thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu:
goa was good, goal assist was a typical mcphee aimless kick that got lucky
Not sure what some of you guys are on, Mcphee has had a good 2nd half of the year and at the moment he is one of the best players in a final. He is the big winner, 3 year contract and he gets to play for a good team instead of us.
TeamHurley
4 Sep 2010, 17:17
Got over the initial annoyance of him dogging us and now actually hopes he plays well. The brain fades still crack me up.
Towling up Hodge today and did the same thing to judd.
Maybe the midfield call wasn't so stupid afterall.
Notorious_29
4 Sep 2010, 17:18
goa was good, goal assist was a typical mcphee aimless kick that got lucky
Essendon finish bottom four, McPhee is kicking goals in finals footy.
Sour grapes much?
Essendon finish bottom four, McPhee is kicking goals in finals footy.
Sour grapes much?
Go watch your team play finals and stop trolling us over s*** no one gives a crap about.
Definitely missed his work rate/ethic and big body.
Don't miss the brain fades.
of course there are sour grapes. a best 22 player who was respected by the players walked out for money and didn't even have the grace to try to get a trade done. The fact that McPhee for the majority of your season has been crap is of course pleasing to us, and the fact that today we've seen him do what we always liked about him (mark well, defend well) and what we always hated about him (make shit decisions ie going for goal 50m out on the boundary when Pav was free in the pocket and Sandi was 1 on 1 in the goal square) is also pleasing to us.
It should be no surprise that we have sour grapes considering his treatment to us.
Essendon finish bottom four, McPhee is kicking goals in finals footy.
Sour grapes much?
Your teams playing finals and your posting on here?
My eyes would be glued to the telly (if I couldn't go) without a computer in sight.
SirJimi05
4 Sep 2010, 17:34
Even though we got nothing..
Yes. He has been an absolute **** this season. The only decent footy he has played is since he has been given run with roles as a result of being shite at everything else.
Freo are paying him $370k over 3 years. We win!
Maybe the midfield call wasn't so stupid afterall.If only that's what he actually meant when he said it.Essendon finish bottom four, McPhee is kicking goals in finals footy.
Sour grapes much?Get the **** out.of course there are sour grapes. a best 22 player who was respected by the players walked out for money and didn't even have the grace to try to get a trade done. The fact that McPhee for the majority of your season has been crap is of course pleasing to us, and the fact that today we've seen him do what we always liked about him (mark well, defend well) and what we always hated about him (make shit decisions ie going for goal 50m out on the boundary when Pav was free in the pocket and Sandi was 1 on 1 in the goal square) is also pleasing to us.
It should be no surprise that we have sour grapes considering his treatment to us.Your teams playing finals and your posting on here?
My eyes would be glued to the telly (if I couldn't go) without a computer in sight.Well said.
kelvin_sheedy
4 Sep 2010, 17:59
Yep, we win.
We're bottom 4 while he's just played in a winning final.
We are a laughing stock, have sacked our coach but we've saved a bit of coin to pay guns like Mark Williams and Brent Prismall.
We are in front right now on the bigfooty ladder.
Ben the Gooner
4 Sep 2010, 18:03
I dunno about the rest of you but from what I've seen of his game today I'm hardly missing the classic McPhee brain-fade :D
McPhee was very good today.
Would be in my top 3.
OzBomber
4 Sep 2010, 18:14
Yep, thought he was great today. Shut down Hodge completely, kicked a crucial goal and was generally very good.
yeh, he's great, plays the shutdown role with aplomb - but is there a dumber footballer in the league when the footys in his hands?
me thinks not
BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!
4 Sep 2010, 21:25
Don't miss him turn coat.didn't even have the decency to ask for a trade.
Prick.
footycool
4 Sep 2010, 22:55
He ditched us and didnt even have the decency to get a trade for it. In my eyes he will always be remember for that.
Douchebag of the highest order.
yeh, he's great, plays the shutdown role with aplomb - but is there a dumber footballer in the league when the footys in his hands?
me thinks not
our number 5.....
Brent Prismall#9
4 Sep 2010, 23:45
our number 5.....
Don't start.
Yep, we win.
We're bottom 4 while he's just played in a winning final.
We are a laughing stock, have sacked our coach but we've saved a bit of coin to pay guns like Mark Williams and Brent Prismall.
We are in front right now on the bigfooty ladder.
At this stage the jury is still out.
Mcphee was ordinary in the first half of the year but has been good in the second half of the year.
Overall his year has not been as good as 2009.
But if we bring Prismall and M.Williams into the equation - We are losing big time.
M.Williams gave us nothing and I dont high hopes in 2010 and 2011.
Prismall is just an average player who will probably be gone at the end of 2011.
kelvin_sheedy
5 Sep 2010, 09:38
At this stage the jury is still out.
Surely you don't really believe this.
Freo are a young side and added a hard bodied guy to help the kids. It's a team game and he's been an important cog plugging holes and protecting the kids.
Team performance is > individual and he's sacrificed a lot of his game and the team is flying. He gives that thing you complain ad nauseum about - defensive pressure.
Oh, and they got him for free. Harvey has his contract extended and the guy who let him go because he was pedantic about 2 or 3 year contracts is now on the unemployment line.
The math is pretty simple.
Kelvin, you would've given McPhee 3 years? Come off it.
The Donners
5 Sep 2010, 10:22
McPhee is no good. The only loss for the Bombers is a big body.
Surely you don't really believe this.
Freo are a young side and added a hard bodied guy to help the kids. It's a team game and he's been an important cog plugging holes and protecting the kids.
Team performance is > individual and he's sacrificed a lot of his game and the team is flying. He gives that thing you complain ad nauseum about - defensive pressure.
Oh, and they got him for free. Harvey has his contract extended and the guy who let him go because he was pedantic about 2 or 3 year contracts is now on the unemployment line.
The math is pretty simple.
McPhee is no good. The only loss for the Bombers is a big body.
Donners you should read Kevlin's post because he articulated precisely why we missed McPhee this year.
Hard body, willing to sacrifice his own game for the betterment of the team, protects the kids.
That more than makes up for 2-3 brain fades p/g.
kelvin_sheedy
5 Sep 2010, 10:49
Kelvin, you would've given McPhee 3 years? Come off it.
Why not?
I would have front loaded his contract so the third year is basically a minimum wage.
The Donners
5 Sep 2010, 11:02
Donners you should read Kevlin's post because he articulated precisely why we missed McPhee this year.
Hard body, willing to sacrifice his own game for the betterment of the team, protects the kids.
That more than makes up for 2-3 brain fades p/g.
His own game is what he's protecting Freo from! :thumbsu:
Holding the ball up, blazing away from 50 on the boundary. Had it not been for Harvey giving him the run with role McPhee would've been dropped.
I couldn't think of an easier gig than making sure your opponent doesn't get a touch. It's the job of shit footballers.