The Phantom Horseman wrote:
Crookes had some good moments for us (Fev) this year but his defence is very hit and miss (tends to jump pout of the line looking for the big hit, with mixed results). Think the general view of Fev fans was that he'd be useful to have back but only at the right price, seems he was on a fair whack at Hull and he's probably going to have to be realistic about his current market value.
Exactly. I'm not sure why more than one has made the point that Crookes was at his best for us in his last season, well - duh! isn't that what you want, players who improve, and get to quite a high standard? The only counter-argument would have been "so he's been oustanding this year ... but next year he might be crap". A pure pessimist argument based on no evidence, if ever there was one.
Crookes was
very good outside Lulia. He is being damned with faint praise unfairly. Yes his centre created chances and half chances - but Crookes finished them off, rarely failing, and crashing through for some great scores that belied his size. Of course, he was also out that season for ages with a bad injury.
We would certainly have kept him, but it was precisely because he had put in such a good season that his stock rose and his agent was able to negotiate a deal with Hull that we couldn't match. That works both ways, he's not on any quota, and if the price was right now I think he'd be very dangerous at Championship level.
I agree prop and halfback cover would be a priority but there's no guarantee anything we can afford and want will come along. I'm not going overboard on Crookes btw, there are significant risks, which would have to be reflected in the wage (he got a payoff from Hull so isn't skint) - I just suggested him as an interesting option. But as someone once said, he's not the messiah - he's a naughty boy.
