Manchego Cheese wrote:
cimm1979 wrote:
Mr Cheese please don't come on this forum and trott out "Daisy is good for memberships" .
It would have to be the most piss weak excuse of all time.
A mid 20 pick might be good about now. Daisy looks 48 years old, can't kick (unless it's to Mick in the change rooms) and lasts about 1.5 quarters.
He's awesome!!!
I think it a reality of the game. It wouldn't have been the decisive factor in acquiring him, least of all from the footy dept, but the guys in the office would've been pleased to get a known player in. Creates a bit of buzz, a bit of excitement.
Thomas has played 4 games for us, with a minimum of 84 more available to him over the life of this contract. How about we reserve judgement as to the merits of getting him/his impact until he's played a few more?
No, let's judge him from day ONE!
He's not some 17 year old kid, he's a mid 20's established footballer.
Right now he's busted. He'll produce nothing of value this season.
Next season is the part of the rebuild, so no value there.
Season following, still rebuilding, aiming for what , 10th?
60+ games later and we are still wandering around the middle and he's 30ish.
So, we have recruited this guy for our push for a top 8 finish in the last year of his contract?
Mr Cheese, I'm not sure MM has played this one all that well.
Even when going backwards to ultimately go forwards there's always room for good players, no matter their age.
I suppose all clubs who are struggling should immediately trade/delist any player with some sort of cache, whether it be on or off field.
I'm quite happy to have acquired Thomas. Furthermore, I'm more than confident he'll play good footy for us.
Currently he's played four matches in the navy blue. By virtue of this I'm prepared to delay issuing a judgment on him.