Can't find the previous Hurley thread but, After not only yesterday's performance, but previous games it highlights we need a power full back. T Mac can be easily beaten by some of the clever power forwards in the Comp and Dunns brain fades cost us badly.

Hurley would slot in down back nicely and with the rights tools he can push forward too. He's quick and strong and rarely has brain fades.

lets hope Goodwin and Macartney can persuade him?

Out of all the clubs that would be targeting Hurley, I'm also hoping that the Goodwin/McCartney influence and possibly to some degree that of Melksham before he was suspended, would prove invaluable in luring Hurley over.

He's a must for our backline.

He would be the perfect get for our needs and age bracket.  If not him someone like him please.

I mean we need another quick classy midfielder but I'm sure most of us are fed up with T Mac oftenly getting bags kicked on him and Lynden Dunn's brain fades.

i think Hurley is mates with Watts?

Yep. We need a gorilla handler who can reliably beat or break even with top forwards.TMac and Dunn have their days but they're not in that A grade category. Probably our biggest weakness in personnel. (Leaving aside our leaky press.)

The club knows and have stated we are one tall KPP down so I'm sure he will be a priority...

Hurley seems more important than Prestia at this stage.

Prestia looked ordinary last night but a 20 goal thrashing can do that.

1 hour ago, McQueen said:

Out of all the clubs that would be targeting Hurley, I'm also hoping that the Goodwin/McCartney influence and possibly to some degree that of Melksham before he was suspended, would prove invaluable in luring Hurley over.

He's a must for our backline.

Agree, have him as the cornerstone of our defence, McDonald will be all the better for it by becoming our #2 defender, and we wouldn't need to rely on his shonky skills and decision-making anywhere near as much.

Dawes is out of contract too, so that would free up some cash.

 

38 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Hurley seems more important than Prestia at this stage.

Prestia looked ordinary last night but a 20 goal thrashing can do that.

Agree with that Biff, but i would happily take both

agree... 5 year deal , $500,000 a year for Hurley. He would make us a seriously strong contender

3 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

agree... 5 year deal , $500,000 a year for Hurley. He would make us a seriously strong contender

would cost more than that i reckon Norm, I think Carlisle cost that Saints 750 a year

2 hours ago, deefella said:

I mean we need another quick classy midfielder but I'm sure most of us are fed up with T Mac oftenly getting bags kicked on him and Lynden Dunn's brain fades.

i think Hurley is mates with Watts?

My understanding from DLand analysis of yesterday's match is that T Mac didn't get a bag kicked on him because our backline setup is that people protect zones and don't man up on a particular opponent, therefore no one gets a bag kicked against them. From what I could see on the replay is that Membey or Nick often found themselves on a mismatched opponents.

I am old school I don't get this zoning stuff, you have to matchup at least on the key forwards when required. TMac should have had one mission, run with Nick wherever he goes and spoil, negate, and run off him, occasionally maybe. The lack of pressure exerted up forward and by our mids meant the backs were sitting ducks. 

But I agree if Hurley is available let's throw the kitchen sink at him. 

Gee, this is really a bag TMAC posting. Give the bloke a break,

This time last year you were probably touting him as an All Aust. AS I said on another post he leads our 1% which often does not get noticed by some people. He is only 22 and probably the  best CHB for his age in the AFL

Hurley would be a great get. 

TMac wasn't solely to blame for the mess yesterday, our entire defensive unit was constantly caught out and shamed themselves with the number of uncontested possessions they conceded in the back 50. 

25 minutes ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Hurley would be a great get. 

TMac wasn't solely to blame for the mess yesterday, our entire defensive unit was constantly caught out and shamed themselves with the number of uncontested possessions they conceded in the back 50. 

I think some of the blame needs to shifted to the lack of defence up the ground and our game plan of zoning down back. 

1. Prestia

2. Hurley 

In that order.

Midfield is still our priority. If we had more A grade mids in our team, guys like TMac would not have been under so much pressure. Hard to stop goals if the ball is coming into our defence "at a million miles an hour", as Roos said. The game is still won in the middle. Don't get me wrong, would like to see Hurley at MFC, but not above mids.

I'd even go for two of Prestia, Heppell and/or Cogniglio (for example, or similar) over Hurley. 

Every club will be targeting Hurley, we can have a crack but I'll believe it when I see it 

1 minute ago, Moonshadow said:

1. Prestia

2. Hurley 

In that order.

Midfield is still our priority. If we had more A grade mids in our team, guys like TMac would not have been under so much pressure. Hard to stop goals if the ball is coming into our defence "at a million miles an hour", as Roos said. The game is still won in the middle. Don't get me wrong, would like to see Hurley at MFC, but not above mids.

I'd even go for Prestia, Heppell and/or Cogniglio (for example, or similar) over Hurley. 

Just about to say the same thing. Hurley isn't going to be able to stop anyone if they have 5 midfielders running in front of our 5 midfielders. 

We looked very tired yesterday. The zone broke down because we were stuffed. We need more time to get preseasons into guys, and we need to learn from yesterday in terms of rest for our young guys, and the leg speed needed on that ground.

Lay off Tom too. He's not perfect yet but his upside could be huge. I'd bet that 17 teams would take him over Hurley too. 12 months off footy for a drugs charge is unchartered territory. At least we know what we've got.

 

1 hour ago, DavidNeitz9 said:

would cost more than that i reckon Norm, I think Carlisle cost that Saints 750 a year

Saints may have paid overs a bit to get someone who fits in their culture ?

13 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

I think some of the blame needs to shifted to the lack of defence up the ground and our game plan of zoning down back. 

The coaches either have a poor  defensive plan B or cannot adequately convey plan A

Yesterday definitely out coached. 

Would be wanting serious coin. 

I'd be nearly as tempted by Dyson Heppell.

8 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

Just about to say the same thing. Hurley isn't going to be able to stop anyone if they have 5 midfielders running in front of our 5 midfielders. 

We looked very tired yesterday. The zone broke down because we were stuffed. We need more time to get preseasons into guys, and we need to learn from yesterday in terms of rest for our young guys, and the leg speed needed on that ground.

Lay off Tom too. He's not perfect yet but his upside could be huge. I'd bet that 17 teams would take him over Hurley too. 12 months off footy for a drugs charge is unchartered territory. At least we know what we've got.

 

I will assume that wasn't aimed at me as I didn't pot him where you quoted me.

Hurley would be highly suitable for our needs. 

A better team defensive effort and more coherent structure would also be highly suitable!

If we could get Hurley for 500k a season it would be astonishing and a no-brainer. But unfortunately the talk is closer to 900k, which is waaay beyond what I'd be ok with paying at this stage of our growth.

Maybe in three years when (touch wood) we are looking to seal a list gap in order to really dominate the league, yes, but not now when all it does is push 'inflation' of player salaries when we don't quite have the glamour and reputation to retain players on discount rates.

I don't believe there is a player in the league that has such a disparity between his best & worst than Tom and it wouldn't be so bad if he played 6 good ones & then 1 bad one but it is much more a cycle of 1 good then 1 bad. 

To to suggest that Clubs would prefer Tom over Hurley is madness. Tom's market value would be $400 - $450k pa and Hurley would be closer to $850 -$900k pa. 

Hurley can play in all 4 key positions whilst Tom is probably only a CHB as he isn't physically strong enough to play as a last line FB because he can't match it with the gorillas as a deep defender. 

I pray for Hurley as it might also be a key factor in convincing Hogan that we might then be able to compete with the big boys. 

35 minutes ago, goodwindees said:

I don't believe there is a player in the league that has such a disparity between his best & worst than Tom and it wouldn't be so bad if he played 6 good ones & then 1 bad one but it is much more a cycle of 1 good then 1 bad. 

To to suggest that Clubs would prefer Tom over Hurley is madness. Tom's market value would be $400 - $450k pa and Hurley would be closer to $850 -$900k pa. 

Hurley can play in all 4 key positions whilst Tom is probably only a CHB as he isn't physically strong enough to play as a last line FB because he can't match it with the gorillas as a deep defender. 

I pray for Hurley as it might also be a key factor in convincing Hogan that we might then be able to compete with the big boys. 

The gap between Tom's best and his worst is certainly far too wide. And he frustrates me almost more than any other Melbourne player. However, to suggest he's not still one of the best defenders in the competition on his day (which is usually say 10-15 games a year) is a fallacy. And saying Tom's market value is $400-450k is absolute bullocks. Particularly, if you're saying Hurley (who is solid and I would certainly take) is worth $850-900k.

2 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

My understanding from DLand analysis of yesterday's match is that T Mac didn't get a bag kicked on him because our backline setup is that people protect zones and don't man up on a particular opponent, therefore no one gets a bag kicked against them. From what I could see on the replay is that Membey or Nick often found themselves on a mismatched opponents.

I am old school I don't get this zoning stuff, you have to matchup at least on the key forwards when required. TMac should have had one mission, run with Nick wherever he goes and spoil, negate, and run off him, occasionally maybe. The lack of pressure exerted up forward and by our mids meant the backs were sitting ducks. 

But I agree if Hurley is available let's throw the kitchen sink at him. 

yep same happened with Daniher. He kept marking over smaller opponents or no-one. It was almost like we were doing for the long term no matter what till we get it right, despite losing the game.