Delisted Michael Barlow [delisted]

Remove this Banner Ad

Barlow is a long way ahead of Miles. Barlow is a more effective mid. He is a great inside ball getter. He is an accumulator. Miles on the other hand, he isn't as effective on the inside anymore. He is regressing. There is a reason why Hardwick targeted Prestia - and Caddy. But even then, I think Barlow is a better contested player than either of those guys. He would automatically free up Martin, and he can effectively tag. Barlow would be a good fit for the Tiges.
Urrr why you try to make them stronger . Best suite to GC interm of competition .
 
Would be an excellent bargin bin pick up for Hawthorn IMO.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Id love him at the Hawks but I can't see him fittng in purely because we just offloaded two club champions to bring our younger players through.

Would be a bit rich to turf a 30yo Lewis and bring in a 28yo Barlow irrespective of his talents.

I think JOR, Woodward, Langford etc all need exposure to see whether they have what it takes going forwards.
 
Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to why Freo have delisted him? Contract breakdown and/or doesn't fit within Freo's rebuild strategy or?

We have Fyfe, Mundy, Neale, Bennell, B Hill and S Hill all in front of Barlow in the midfielder. Having Barlow as the 7th midfielder would rob games of our emerging midfield. Plus, we will be running more players through the midfield such as Walters.

Plus, the game has increased in pace and Barlow isn't the quickest player. His spread in slow and his clearance are not clean enough.

Also, we have the oldest list and we need to get younger, and Barlow will be turning 29 in December.
 
Id love him at the Hawks but I can't see him fittng in purely because we just offloaded two club champions to bring our younger players through.

Would be a bit rich to turf a 30yo Lewis and bring in a 28yo Barlow irrespective of his talents.

I think JOR, Woodward, Langford etc all need exposure to see whether they have what it takes going forwards.

Barlow would be on fk all, surely...

None of those three you've listed will make it.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

We have Fyfe, Mundy, Neale, Bennell, B Hill and S Hill all in front of Barlow in the midfielder. Having Barlow as the 7th midfielder would rob games of our emerging midfield. Plus, we will be running more players through the midfield such as Walters.

Plus, the game has increased in pace and Barlow isn't the quickest player. His spread in slow and his clearance are not clean enough.

Also, we have the oldest list and we need to get younger, and Barlow will be turning 29 in December.
True but I still would have kept him over a bum like Suban and day.
 
This is just ****ed. I've always thought he would be worth more to us than any other club and now we've let him go for nothing.

Gold Coast should pick him up, but you would have thought they would have given us a throw away pick given they have a gazillion. Maybe Mick doesn't want to go?

Only explanation that makes sense is that there's someone out there who has assured him that he'll be picked up as DFA for a bit longer than we would have given him.
 
Would take and think he'd be a good fit, but would he play on the minimum? Can't see us offering more than that seeing as we cleared two club legends for cap space. I think Gold Coast would offer him a decent pay packet as well.
 
I'd have taken him at the Eagles if we hadn't brought in Sam Mitchell (Sam Mitchell!).

His card was marked pretty early on this season with Freo, clearly ready to move forward without him and only got some games later on before his injury due to other injuries in the squad - that said, he is a quality player (and person from all reports), so I would expect another team to have a dip - GC, Richmond and Carlton could do worse than add him to their midfields for the experience and big body. Adelaide and Hawthorn at the other end of the scale.

Will be playing decent footy somewhere in the league next year I think.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top