Retired #18: Michael Hurley šŸ» - Staying on in a coaching and player welfare role! - 3/10

18 - Hurley.jpg

Contract Status: Retired
Last Game Played: Currently in the side
Injury Status: Comes back from injury to play his final game for the club this weekend - 18/8
2022
He's back! Playing a half in the VFL this weekend - 15/7
Joins main training in the next couple of weeks! - 15/6

Had a calf setback, now running again - 28/4

Wants to play a half in the VFL in the next couple of weeks - 30/3

Joined main training? - 3/3
Ahead of schedule, doing some big running loads - 16/2
Progressing well, R1 'too soon' to return, no time frame - 11/1
On track for playing return around Round 6 - 12/3

2021
Ahead of schedule, running soon - 15/12
Hip replacement surgery - 10/10
Placed on the inactive list, will not play in 2021 - 31/5
Hopes to play the last 6 weeks of the season if not sooner - 26/4
At the club daily doing 1-2 hours of exercise for recovery - 23/3
On the mend - 19/3
Apparently using the hot/cold pools at the club, progress? - 5/3
Limping on crutches with an IV at the preseason game - 25/2
Discharged, recuperating at home... again. No time frame on return - 17/2
Apparently back in hospital - 15/2
Discharged from hospital, recuperating at home. No timeframe - 9/2
In hospital with an infected leg - 4/2

My Boy Draft 2022: Claim here
 
Last edited:

Cadillac

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 25, 2016
5,986
14,156
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I reckon the Dogs would. They'll lose their first covering for JUH. Geelong and St. Kida I think have other more pressing needs, I could see Brisbane being interested as well.
We are already paying one cooked footballer in Bruce 700k a year. I donā€™t know why adding Hurley who looks just as cooked. And paying him at least 500k and giving up a first round pick for him would do us any favours. Hurley looks a shadow of what he was when we wanted him in 2016.
 
We are already paying one cooked footballer in Bruce 700k a year. I donā€™t know why adding Hurley who looks just as cooked. And paying him at least 500k and giving up a first round pick for him would do us any favours. Hurley looks a shadow of what he was when we wanted him in 2016.
With McKenna going I'm sure we'll pay part of it, we probably need to do so to make the cap floor if Daniher goes too
 

fairbump_playon

Premiership Player
Jun 27, 2014
4,757
7,607
AFL Club
Essendon
We are already paying one cooked footballer in Bruce 700k a year. I donā€™t know why adding Hurley who looks just as cooked. And paying him at least 500k and giving up a first round pick for him would do us any favours. Hurley looks a shadow of what he was when we wanted him in 2016.
Dammit theyā€™re onto us
 
We are already paying one cooked footballer in Bruce 700k a year. I donā€™t know why adding Hurley who looks just as cooked. And paying him at least 500k and giving up a first round pick for him would do us any favours. Hurley looks a shadow of what he was when we wanted him in 2016.
He could play on Bruce at training. Surely that is worth a first round pick :p
 
With McKenna going I'm sure we'll pay part of it, we probably need to do so to make the cap floor if Daniher goes too

We will not trade Hurley. Now I am not saying it is a bad idea but we will not do it.
 
On the off chance we can apply some pressure to the ball carrier and give him half a chance heā€™s still a bloody good footballer. Looks sore at the moment but his intercept marking has got better with age even if his kicking is not as game breaking as it used to be.
 
Available against the Dees pending fitness test.

Essendon could regain Michael Hurley for its season-ending clash with Melbourne at Metricon Stadium on Saturday.

An ongoing ankle issue forced the experienced backman to miss Saturdayā€™s clash with Port Adelaide, with a fitness test later in the week to determine his availability to face the Demons.

ā€œMichael originally injured his ankle against Richmond in our game in Darwin. He re-aggravated it against Geelong and pulled up quite sore,ā€ head of medical services David Rundle said.

ā€œHe was not able to train effectively last week, so he was unavailable to play against Port Adelaide. He has made good progress over the past few days and ran well today.

ā€œWe will see how the ankle responds to the main training session later in the week before determining his availability to play.ā€
 
I feel like he probably won't play. Three guys were declared available last week and played scratch, while two other regulars were omitted. Looks like we're using these couple of weeks to shuffle magnets and test things out ahead of re-signings, the trade period and the draft. With Harvey moved out of the coaching panel and Kelly and Rutten shuffling around to cover his absence, it would appear that we have shifted gears recently (jury out on whether we've selected 1st or 6th).
 
Minor point really
It is but you would expect your captain to want to play if he thinks he can. We are in an even worse state if one of our leaders can not be bothered fronting up if he is okay to play. If he is not fit then fine. No real point.
 
To the forward line?

 
Jul 23, 2018
6,479
7,553
AFL Club
Essendon
Not a great show of faith if they're trying to hide him in the forward pocket. He's obviously not what he was but i thought there was still a role in defence for him just for his experience, voice and direction, especially considering he still has 2 years on his contract. Struggling for best 22 if we're being honest as Ambrose (when fit) is a better option as lockdown and Ridley and Francis are better options as 3rd/4th talls. Hooker even though he only has a year left id have slightly ahead of Hurls as a fwd/def swingman off the bench.
 
Not a great show of faith if they're trying to hide him in the forward pocket. He's obviously not what he was but i thought there was still a role in defence for him just for his experience, voice and direction, especially considering he still has 2 years on his contract. Struggling for best 22 if we're being honest as Ambrose (when fit) is a better option as lockdown and Ridley and Francis are better options as 3rd/4th talls. Hooker even though he only has a year left id have slightly ahead of Hurls as a fwd/def swingman off the bench.
So we can't find a position for him?

I'm seeing it differently, I think that they are building flexibility with our older forwards and the backs. If we have Hurley, Hooker and Stewart ready to roll in either position, it gives us maximum flexibility to insert Jones, Reid, Brand, Bryan, Cox into the team a little earlier without throwing them to the wolves. The more experienced players can rotate with them during a game if the opposition get a hold of younger guys.
 
Back