Smokey for 3

Filthy · Post by **Filthy** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:14 am

http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/real ... 27150.html

Phew!!!

BERT · Post by **BERT** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:21 am

Don't think it was ever in doubt Filth. If it was, why would Carlton sign Ackland if Smokey was available.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:22 am

Good stuff

. Although the length of it may raise a few eyebrows, but i guess there are two ways to look at it:

a) Giving him three years is a show of faith that 2004 wasn't a fluke and the club expects him to be able to play to that level after disappointing 2005-06 (perhaps injury plagued). It's good that we've got a guy signed for 3 years who's capable of being an All-Australian quality player.

b) When you're giving guys who've been magnificent for 8 or 9 years two year contracts (Lucas), giving McPhee 3 years on the back of two ordinary seasons may be a little hard to swallow.

In this case, i'll opt for rationale (a). I reckon he'll be back close to AA form sooner rather than later to justify the 3 year deal.

DC · Post by DC » Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:46 am

Good to hear.

McPhee WILL NOT be back to AA form this year if he is played all over the shop like last season.

McPhee is NOT an AA midfielder, and expressed to Sheedy that he DID NOT want to simply play on the HBF, but play more in the midfiled.

Where he plays will determine how much impact he will have on a game.

Lloyd will not be AA if he plays in the backline. Nor will Hird.

ealesy · Post by **ealesy** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:30 am

McPhee got three years

Seriously considering the past two years he has had (sure injury has played a part) and the fact that JJ struggled to get his two years after half a poor season, that's pretty surprising.

Club must be confident of him getting back to his 2004 form.

Western Red · Post by **Western Red** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:30 am

Well f*** my brown dog.

I posted on another link that this is exactly what McPhee should be given and copped a pasting!!!!

As mentioned before if Lucas didn't get 3 years he should get a better manager!!!!!

Ossie · Post by **Ossie** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:38 am

Great stuff. Still reckon he can be an excellent player for us.

And as jimmyc said, it's a great display of faith from the club that they believe he can get back to his B&F winning ways.

j-mac31 · Post by **j-mac31** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:45 am

Ossie wrote:Great stuff. Still reckon he can be an excellent player for us. And as jimmyc said, it's a great display of faith from the club that they believe he can get back to his B&F winning ways.

Yes he CAN, but the past couple of years he hasn't, while Lucas has been tireless and very good.

Siging Bolton again and McPhee given 3 years - seems a bit like rewarding mediocrity to me.

tom9779 · Post by **tom9779** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:18 am

list management sounds like a tricky business.

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:33 am

That is a f****** disgrace. How does he get 3 years for playing like shit when Lucas could only get 2 years?

They said that Lucas only got 2 due to his age, but he has had a decent run with injury. McPhees past two years have been pathetic to say the least. All he could hang his hat on was that he beat tarrant (big deal) and he gave away too many poor free kicks. Should never have got more than two years.

And this sends a bad message to the rest of the group. This says that if you aint happy with your deal, then just wait and the club will blink.

robrulz5 · Post by **robrulz5** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:02 pm

It's good to see that he is staying at the club but 3 years may be a year too much with his form of lately. Hopefully 2007 can be a big year for him.

Ossie · Post by **Ossie** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:54 pm

j-mac wrote:
Ossie wrote:Great stuff. Still reckon he can be an excellent player for us. And as jimmyc said, it's a great display of faith from the club that they believe he can get back to his B&F winning ways.
Yes he CAN, but the past couple of years he hasn't, while Lucas has been tireless and very good.

The Lucas offer was obviously shocking, but McPhee is still young and we have seen his potential. I don't mind it.

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:15 am

Past COUPLE of years? He was our highest bronwnlow vote getter last year, with a fair ammount of injury. I have not seen him play a bad game in the whole time he's been at the bombers.

He and Lovett for mine are they keys to our future success. Both have proven potential to be match winners.

I cannot believe this place sometimes one ORDINARY year and people jump straight off. Pathetic.

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:21 am

I dont think anybody has jumped off. I think most are suprised that he got his wish of three years when others who wanted more than 2 years (some more than 1), didnt get it or had to sweat on it during trade period.

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:17 pm

CHanged my mind. McPhee is a dud, shoudl've traded him.

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:53 pm

Stats for his "shocker" of a year in 06.

2nd in Marks
5th in tackles
5th in Kicks
10th in Handballs

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:03 pm

effective kicks and handballs?

I noticed you conveniently left out free kicks against and clangers.

Windy_Hill · Post by **Windy_Hill** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:25 pm

I am confused - Jason Johnson wins the B&F last year and the club only reluctantly offers him a 2 year deal after almost losing the guy over the opening offer of 1 year.

McPhee, injury prone for two seasons now, hasnt had any impact during that time gets a three year deal without much fuss??

Stange times indeed

Sismis · Post by **Sismis** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:23 am

Frees against, ave 1.6 a game.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pp-e ... dam-mcphee

Still looking for stats on clangers.

Point is even in his worst year he is valuable contributer. As he said on the website. With injuries behind him he will tear it up.

How is he comparable to JJ? Have a look at their ages. Pretty simple equation.....