Posted: 2 Days, 18 Hours ago
Danyle Pearce
|
#374909 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 17 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374913 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 17 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374914 |
|
Disagree, Pearce would add what we don't have - a speedy on-baller that isn't scared of taking off with great boot and won't just drop the ball when confronted by an opposition player.
But Pearce will be much more expensive than a straight swap for Griffo - he also has no connection with the EGirls (which means he won't even be considered by the WC Dookers).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 17 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374921 |
|
From a midfield point of view we need blokes who are inside midfielders. Hill is outside, Pitt is outside, Morabito is more outside than in. I don't think Pearce fits the bill.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 16 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374923 |
|
We have plenty of inside mids - McPhee can play that role, but Mundy, Barlow, Broughton are our regulars. Pav will be an insider when he's in the guts. Crowley on occasion, Fyfe and the pig on occasion...
Speedy outsiders are required.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 16 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374928 |
|
McPhee, Crowley and De Boer are not inside midfielders. They are taggers/run-with players who play on inside midfielders. There is a significant difference. When you look at a centre bounce and see Crowley, De Boer and Mundy up against Selwood, Bartel and Johnson you see 2 taggers and an inside midfielder/clearance winner against 3 inside midfielders/clearance winners. Crowley and De Boer are reactive - they are not ball winners. McPhee is in the same category.
Mundy and Barlow are absolutely inside midfielders who win clearances and Pav is also in that category when he's in the centre. However, his disposal from the clearance is not necessarily the best and, in any event, I want him camped in the forward 50 kicking 70 goals next year. I'm not sure you could put Broughton in as an inside midfielder either. We are deficient in this area when compared with Geelong, Collingwood, Hawthorn, Carlton and probably West Coast. They are the teams we'll need to beat to play finals and progress in September.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 16 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374931 |
|
Speed is good, so is a bit of grunt. One more obvious statement - Griff is staying.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 16 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374932 |
|
Probably a good idea to do your vomit routine on a white bloke occasionally. You'll get a reputation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 16 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374933 |
|
Pearce couldn't get a permanent gig with Port this season.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 16 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374934 |
|
Michael Barlow couldn't get a permanent gig with anyone the season before Fremantle picked him up.
He's got pace and he can kick - and Ross Lyon did some good things with Brett Peake at the Saints.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 15 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374935 |
|
Pearce would be a perfect fit for us. I'd rather him than Mitch Clark.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2 Days, 13 Hours ago
Re:Danyle Pearce
|
#374950 |
|
Inside outside??? Whatever; I just think if Freo can recruit a quality midfielder fairly cheaply it will be a bonus. I understand we should expect Morobito back but bare in mind he is still young and developing. Hopefully we will have a season where Mundy and Barlow will play together most games in the season but that said it feels like compared to other good teams its too noticeable when one of Mundy or Barlow don't play for an extended period of time.
|
|
|
|
|
