-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Blumfield
- Thread starter Beasty
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
tassieswan
Cancelled
No he's not worth a pickel.
I think a few would agree with you, but, I also know that a few would agree with me when I say:
NO.
Why? Because his groins are totally stuffed and we already have other players, particularly younger players, who would play in the role we would ask Blummers to play in.
He can go play as a Bendigo-only player and help with the development of kids, in the way that Moorcroft did this year..but, not on the senior list.
NO.
Why? Because his groins are totally stuffed and we already have other players, particularly younger players, who would play in the role we would ask Blummers to play in.
He can go play as a Bendigo-only player and help with the development of kids, in the way that Moorcroft did this year..but, not on the senior list.
I disagree with you Pazza. I remember him being a handy player and he was fit during the year but wasn't given a fair amount of game time. He could be a handy pick up, much like Murphy, further I'd rather have him than ZAntuck or Graham or whoever elses name has been bandied around.
Also, any chance of picking up Moorcroft, will he nominate?
Also, any chance of picking up Moorcroft, will he nominate?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Slash is going to be 29 in the new year..so in short no.
Why do I get the feeling that people wanting Blumfield, Moorcroft etc are trying to reunite the 2000 premiership team by stealth?
Next year will be 5 years since that success..for ********'s sake..CAN WE ALL ********ING WELL MOVE ON FROM 2000?
I'd rather have Stanton and Dyson playing than ********ing Blumfield and Moorcroft..we need to give kids like these 2 as much experience and game time as possible!
Why do I get the feeling that people wanting Blumfield, Moorcroft etc are trying to reunite the 2000 premiership team by stealth?
Next year will be 5 years since that success..for ********'s sake..CAN WE ALL ********ING WELL MOVE ON FROM 2000?
I'd rather have Stanton and Dyson playing than ********ing Blumfield and Moorcroft..we need to give kids like these 2 as much experience and game time as possible!
he will be struck down by injuries again like he did this year and last year............nothing seemed to go right for him since the 2000 GF has it? i dont think essendon should draft him, they need younger guys to play in the team and get game time.
pazza said:
Where has the groin injury come from? From my understanding he only had two injuries. His knee and his quad. His quad is fine and it's now his knee which is the major concern (as it was in 2001/2002) but post season surgery removed floating bone and he is now well into his rehab and very confident of returning to full fitness under John Quinn.
JB can seriously play football and I would love to have him back. We desperately need another goal kicking midfielder and Justin also has the ability to push forward and become a marking option. He has more strings than a Stanton/Dyson, minus the burst of pace and is a significantly different player. None of our kids are ready to go straight into the middle next season, the simply aren't big enough, while they will make an impact as outside midfielders Blumfield will make his impact in other areas.
Agree with you about Moorcroft. Would never entertain the thought of having him back on the senior list.
marcuz
Norm Smith Medallist
Blumfield will not make us a better football team. He may make bendigo better so he can go play for them if he likes.
Enough of this topping up horseshyte...time to bite the bullet and start building a decent team for the future as we are further away from a flag than most fans think.
Enough of this topping up horseshyte...time to bite the bullet and start building a decent team for the future as we are further away from a flag than most fans think.
It's the mentality behind picking him up more than anything else that i strongly disagree with. The thing that made us such a great club in the late 90s, early 00's was we didn't pick up oldish players from other clubs, we drafted and nurtured our own talent (apart from all the 2nd string ruckmen, Grgic, Robran, Eastaugh). It was a system that worked beautifully, and now we are gradually moving away from it, and we find ourselves in this 6-8th spot rut that we don't look like getting out of for a while. Sure, he'll come cheap, and he might give us reasonable service. But it isn't the Blumfields, Murphys or Alveys that are going to make us a top 4 side again. It is the Watsons, Winderlichs, Dysons, etc, that are going to take us to the next level. They need game time but they won't get it whilst we have a bunch of rejects filling spots in the team.
I used to laugh at the likes of Collingwood and Carlton as time and time again they traded their future away for yesterday's heroes.
I used to laugh at the likes of Collingwood and Carlton as time and time again they traded their future away for yesterday's heroes.
I say no to getting blumfield back!
- Thread starter
- #11
Yes i can see where you are all coming from.
But i just think that he could be worth a bit of a gamble. If he can get fit he would be valuable in our senior side. Also he will be determined show all the coaches at richmond that he still has a couple of years left in him.
hes expierience could also be quite valuble.
But i just think that he could be worth a bit of a gamble. If he can get fit he would be valuable in our senior side. Also he will be determined show all the coaches at richmond that he still has a couple of years left in him.
hes expierience could also be quite valuble.
His age, form, injuries and attitude turn me off.
If we're gonna pick up Blumfield, might as well pick up Mark Graham and Darren Hulme while we're at it
no offence to you guys but blummers is a receiver and you don't have that fabulous 2000 side anymore.Beasty said:
take my word for it he's a dud now and he's not worth picking up.
based on your two seasons with him in which he was plauged by injury? or the games in which he was fully fit, but sitting on the pine cause Frawley had no faith in him?
If all your players are in and under, who are you going to pass it to when the ball finally comes out?
If all your players are in and under, who are you going to pass it to when the ball finally comes out?
Awesome Scotty
Debutant
- Oct 4, 2004
- 146
- 0
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Seriously, we dont need him. He is injury prone, out of form and he is over 25.
I think it would be better if we invested in a younger young (if were gonna take part int he PSD), such as Pratt.
I think it would be better if we invested in a younger young (if were gonna take part int he PSD), such as Pratt.
what did u trade him away for?
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Blumfield headed the group that was let go becuase of the salary cap pressure we put ourselves in...as a side note, the form of the 4 players let go...Blumfield, Heffernan, Caracella and Moorcroft was another massive factor..yet all were after significantly more than what they had been on previously.
thanks, i already knew that, and i realised thats what i actualy asked for....but what i meant was what did u get in return for those 4 players?? or did u just delist them?pazza said:
underthebridge said:
Heffernan, we traded him for the draft pick we got Jason Laycock with, Blumfield, I forgot. Moorcroft was delisted. Cara... well, we got Mcphee and Cupido outta that.
Cooldude said:
Caracella and a pick in the 50's netted us McPhee, Cupido and Pick 17.
Heffernan and Pick 17 were traded for pick 12 (after Carlton got penalised that became pick 10) and we drafted Laycock.
Blumfield was pick 30 (later 28)?? and we got Darren Walsh.
Can I ask where all this negative hateful stuff i coming from?
You guys say throw Stanton and Dyson on the wings - they are in their 2nd heckin'g year of football - aren't you asking a bit too much of them. They should have time to develop, not be expected to be core to our structure. We have a young list, and soon we will be light on for experience and leadership. not saying we have to go after Blumfield, but 1 year on base salary isn;t exactly a bad thing. We all know what he is capabel of, and to those who think he is past it, he is 26 or so? Geez I'm glad you all ren't recruitment officers else no one would be worth a second look ever. We would never have had Barnes in 2000, Allan never would have been at the club, Port never would have taken Pickett or Wanganeen. etc,
You guys say throw Stanton and Dyson on the wings - they are in their 2nd heckin'g year of football - aren't you asking a bit too much of them. They should have time to develop, not be expected to be core to our structure. We have a young list, and soon we will be light on for experience and leadership. not saying we have to go after Blumfield, but 1 year on base salary isn;t exactly a bad thing. We all know what he is capabel of, and to those who think he is past it, he is 26 or so? Geez I'm glad you all ren't recruitment officers else no one would be worth a second look ever. We would never have had Barnes in 2000, Allan never would have been at the club, Port never would have taken Pickett or Wanganeen. etc,
marcuz
Norm Smith Medallist
Pevers-Legend said:
Your comparing blumfield to pickett and wanganeen? Both those guys were 23-24 and going into the prime of their footballing careers.
Allan and Barnes were ruckmen and the filled a void in our list. Blumfield fills nothing and the team that finished last considers him not good enough to be in their future plans..that alone should be a good enough reason to ******** him off.