One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: tiger till i die on May 01, 2010, 10:17:47 PM
-
he kicked 6 goals for the swans .. how did we look past him? :banghead
-
not a fit for us at this stage of his career. The guy deserves a quality side for his last 1-2 years, he wouldve struggled to get a kick in our fwd line.
-
He is a quick fix forward 1 year maybe 2 for a side like the Swans, he is ideal, they will probably play finals as usual, maybe even a GF tilt. For us, we would be wasting his time and our money and would be better developing a forward who will come into his own with our team.
-
Some people just don't get it.
-
Some people just don't get it.
yeh bro some times i dont get it i am only a young tiger/ AFL fan so im still learning whats good and whats bad
-
he kicked 6 goals for the swans .. how did we look past him? :banghead
Because we don't have anywhere near the skill level to deliver those type of returns to Bradshaw. He wouldn't get 3 kicks a game with us the way we deliver to our forward line so he was not a good fit for us. If it had of been us in 3 years time then maybe, but not at present.
-
he kicked 6 goals for the swans .. how did we look past him? :banghead
Because we don't have anywhere near the skill level to deliver those type of returns to Bradshaw. He wouldn't get 3 kicks a game with us the way we deliver to our forward line so he was not a good fit for us. If it had of been us in 3 years time then maybe, but not at present.
he might teach our arrogant forwards (Jack and Mitch) some humility.
-
Some people just don't get it.
yeh bro some times i dont get it i am only a young tiger/ AFL fan so im still learning whats good and whats bad
Sall good mate. :thumbsup He is a terrific player, and would be fantastic up forward for any side. He is trying to go out with a bang with a mature side that is having a tilt at finals. He would be getting some rolls royce delivery from the swans too. We are in a rebuilding phase so he would be marking time with us while we develop.
-
I just don't believe it, how did we go past him, how did we go past Hall, Fev, Seaby, etc....etc.... because no one thought it was moving forward... :banghead We needed at least two of these sort of players for the experience factor. Many on this forum wanted youth and they got it and now they are bagging them... :banghead :banghead
-
Bradshaw would have been a good pickup if we could have drafted about 15 of his team mates as well
-
I just don't believe it, how did we go past him, how did we go past Hall, Fev, Seaby, etc....etc.... because no one thought it was moving forward... :banghead We needed at least two of these sort of players for the experience factor. Many on this forum wanted youth and they got it and now they are bagging them... :banghead :banghead
Bradshaw would not have been a good fit for us at all WAT. He relies on good supply to produce satisfactory output and there would have been precious little of that for him in the next year or 2, so his game time returns would have been quite poor. And as far as his experience goes, he is not a leader and in fact, is quite self-centred, again not a good fit for our kids. The type of leadership our kids need right now is lead-by-example stuff, both at training and in matches. Bradshaw would have been a huge disappointment to our club, given that our expectation would have been either a Cousins type influence - "watch me, this is how it's done", or a Richo type output - 60 goals in a poor side. Bradshaw is a fine player in the right side but that side was most definitely not us at the end of 2009.
Hall would have decked someone within the first half of the season if he played with us this year. His ability to manage his frustrations is suspect to say the least, and he was just way too much of a risk of being a bad on-field influence, as well as being seriously short term. No benefit in having him.
Fev, similar to Hall in that too much risk of being a disruptive or distracting influence, although he is one who could have produced some scoreboard returns even in our poor side. But is this year (or even next year ) about scoreboard returns?
Seaby is probably the only one that might have been worth looking at but he was very expensive in terms of the price on his head and given that his exposed form was shallow to say the least, there was a very good likelihood of us screaming for Cameron's/Jackson's/Hardwick's head if he failed to improve and we had paid the premium asked. McMahon anyone? He is a hindsight choice and that's all that is making the fantasy of chasing him seem like a folly.
-
Bradshaw would not have been a good fit for us at all WAT. He relies on good supply to produce satisfactory output and there would have been precious little of that for him in the next year or 2, so his game time returns would have been quite poor. And as far as his experience goes, he is not a leader and in fact, is quite self-centred, again not a good fit for our kids. The type of leadership our kids need right now is lead-by-example stuff, both at training and in matches. Bradshaw would have been a huge disappointment to our club, given that our expectation would have been either a Cousins type influence - "watch me, this is how it's done", or a Richo type output - 60 goals in a poor side. Bradshaw is a fine player in the right side but that side was most definitely not us at the end of 2009.
You clearly have more of an idea of his character than me smokey, but I have to think that Jack, Post & co would learn more about KPF play watching him, and that Moore McGuane and co would learn more about KPD play by playing on him.
-
I just don't believe it, how did we go past him, how did we go past Hall, Fev, Seaby, etc....etc.... because no one thought it was moving forward... :banghead We needed at least two of these sort of players for the experience factor. Many on this forum wanted youth and they got it and now they are bagging them... :banghead :banghead
Is this a joke post?
Hall cost the Bulldogs their 3rd round pick, so it would have lost us Astbury
Fevola cost the Lions their 1st round pick plus a kpp taken with Pick 8, so it would have cost us something like Vickery & Griffiths
Mark Seaby cost the Swans Picks 22 & 118 plus Amon Buchanan in return for Pick 28, so we again would have had to give up our 2nd rounder and lost Griffiths again for someone later in the draft
Bradshaw would have cost us nothing in the PSD, however he still wanted a 3 year deal at 31 years of age on big money.
We should be trading away players who are 27 years old or over, not trying to recruit them
-
Bradshaw would not have been a good fit for us at all WAT. He relies on good supply to produce satisfactory output and there would have been precious little of that for him in the next year or 2, so his game time returns would have been quite poor. And as far as his experience goes, he is not a leader and in fact, is quite self-centred, again not a good fit for our kids. The type of leadership our kids need right now is lead-by-example stuff, both at training and in matches. Bradshaw would have been a huge disappointment to our club, given that our expectation would have been either a Cousins type influence - "watch me, this is how it's done", or a Richo type output - 60 goals in a poor side. Bradshaw is a fine player in the right side but that side was most definitely not us at the end of 2009.
You clearly have more of an idea of his character than me smokey, but I have to think that Jack, Post & co would learn more about KPF play watching him, and that Moore McGuane and co would learn more about KPD play by playing on him.
His character is an interesting one Jake. It was well known around the traps up here that he was self-centred and egotistical - it was all about Daniel - and though my opinions come third hand, they come from those with first hand contact so I'm inclined to believe some of them, if not all. The old 'smoke and fire' situation. Its hard not to view his actions in leaving Brisbane because Fevola was coming, in any other light. He might have talked up the "loyalty" factor but thats crap - he wanted a 3 year contract and to remain a 'big fish'. Fevola coming guaranteed him neither so he left. All about Daniel. He has never demonstrated much of a liking for the 'fight', the head down tail up, work our butts off method of dealing with adversity on the field, indeed he is prone to go missing in games for long periods, especially when the chips are down.
An interesting comparison when you mention Jack learning from him:
Bradshaw averages 5.3 marks per game in his career, Jack already averages 5.2.
Bradshaw averages 9.8 disposals per game in his career, Jack already averages 11.2.
Bradshaw averages 1.0 tackles per game in his career, Jack already averages 2.3.
Bradshaw averages 2.3 goals per game in his career, Jack averages 1.3.
Bradshaw averages 1.1 behinds per game in his career, Jack averages 1.0.
So all things considered, I don't think Bradshaw would be much value to our list, either in terms of match day returns or passing on experience and leading by example. He is one of those AFL players fortunate to have been surrounded by good players all his career that have allowed him to maximise his value to the team, when in fact he would have appeared quite ordinary if he was less fortunate in the choice of club he was with. I think the only thing of real benefit that Bradshaw could pass on his how to kick straight - he is a very reliable and competent kick for goal.
-
not a fit for us at this stage of his career. The guy deserves a quality side for his last 1-2 years, he wouldve struggled to get a kick in our fwd line.
there's also a school of thought that he could play a key role in establishing a viable forward structure that would assist not only the likes of JR and MM but also a better functioning team meaning we actually capitalise on our I50's. Meanwhile the likes of Astbury and Griff are allowed to develop at their own pace and let their form dictate when they are selected as opposed to how desparate we are. Any way just a thought I know it sounds radical ::)
-
An interesting comparison when you mention Jack learning from him:
Bradshaw averages 5.3 marks per game in his career, Jack already averages 5.2.
Bradshaw averages 9.8 marks per game in his career, Jack already averages 11.2.
Bradshaw averages 1.0 tackles per game in his career, Jack already averages 2.3.
Bradshaw averages 2.3 goals per game in his career, Jack averages 1.3.
Bradshaw averages 1.1 behinds per game in his career, Jack averages 1.0.
Very interesting post Smokey, especially those stats. :thumbsup
-
11.2 marks per game? That's really high.
-
I just don't believe it, how did we go past him, how did we go past Hall, Fev, Seaby, etc....etc.... because no one thought it was moving forward... :banghead We needed at least two of these sort of players for the experience factor. Many on this forum wanted youth and they got it and now they are bagging them... :banghead :banghead
Is this a joke post?
Hall cost the Bulldogs their 3rd round pick, so it would have lost us Astbury
Fevola cost the Lions their 1st round pick plus a kpp taken with Pick 8, so it would have cost us something like Vickery & Griffiths
Mark Seaby cost the Swans Picks 22 & 118 plus Amon Buchanan in return for Pick 28, so we again would have had to give up our 2nd rounder and lost Griffiths again for someone later in the draft
Bradshaw would have cost us nothing in the PSD, however he still wanted a 3 year deal at 31 years of age on big money.
We should be trading away players who are 27 years old or over, not trying to recruit them
Is yours a joke post??
Where did I say trading draft picks, we could could have traded players, and yeah great idea, lets trade our experience out of the club... ??? 27 years old, wow thats really old isn't it?????
-
not a fit for us at this stage of his career. The guy deserves a quality side for his last 1-2 years, he wouldve struggled to get a kick in our fwd line.
there's also a school of thought that he could play a key role in establishing a viable forward structure that would assist not only the likes of JR and MM but also a better functioning team meaning we actually capitalise on our I50's. Meanwhile the likes of Astbury and Griff are allowed to develop at their own pace and let their form dictate when they are selected as opposed to how desparate we are. Any way just a thought I know it sounds radical ::)
:clapping :clapping. Thats what i'm talking about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I just don't believe it, how did we go past him, how did we go past Hall, Fev, Seaby, etc....etc.... because no one thought it was moving forward... :banghead We needed at least two of these sort of players for the experience factor. Many on this forum wanted youth and they got it and now they are bagging them... :banghead :banghead
Is this a joke post?
Hall cost the Bulldogs their 3rd round pick, so it would have lost us Astbury
Fevola cost the Lions their 1st round pick plus a kpp taken with Pick 8, so it would have cost us something like Vickery & Griffiths
Mark Seaby cost the Swans Picks 22 & 118 plus Amon Buchanan in return for Pick 28, so we again would have had to give up our 2nd rounder and lost Griffiths again for someone later in the draft
Bradshaw would have cost us nothing in the PSD, however he still wanted a 3 year deal at 31 years of age on big money.
We should be trading away players who are 27 years old or over, not trying to recruit them
Is yours a joke post??
Where did I say trading draft picks, we could could have traded players, and yeah great idea, lets trade our experience out of the club... ??? 27 years old, wow thats really old isn't it?????
We don't have any players good enough to trade for players like Hall, Fevola or Seaby, unless we trade away our kids.
I'd like to know who you think we could have traded away for those mature kpp and rucks.
Any player over 27 is not going to be around when we are successful, better off getting more kids into the side
-
not a fit for us at this stage of his career. The guy deserves a quality side for his last 1-2 years, he wouldve struggled to get a kick in our fwd line.
there's also a school of thought that he could play a key role in establishing a viable forward structure that would assist not only the likes of JR and MM but also a better functioning team meaning we actually capitalise on our I50's. Meanwhile the likes of Astbury and Griff are allowed to develop at their own pace and let their form dictate when they are selected as opposed to how desparate we are. Any way just a thought I know it sounds radical ::)
I highly doubt he would help us capitalise on our f50's, seen the way the ball comes in? There is no rush for us atm anyhow so I see no problem in rotating our young fwds reiwoldt/astbury/post/rance/griffiths/vicks and morton throughout the season
based on form.
Not to mention that he wouldn't be enjoying his footy with us. Cuz had no chice he was for the scrap heap so he was grateful, players like bradshaw who are in their twilight have no motivation to play for a shocking footy team when he can still contribute towards a premiersp tilt. See your point, but wouldn't have worked
-
11.2 marks per game? That's really high.
Sorry Danog, cut and paste error! 11.2 disposals - have corrected my original post. :-[
-
not a fit for us at this stage of his career. The guy deserves a quality side for his last 1-2 years, he wouldve struggled to get a kick in our fwd line.
there's also a school of thought that he could play a key role in establishing a viable forward structure that would assist not only the likes of JR and MM but also a better functioning team meaning we actually capitalise on our I50's. Meanwhile the likes of Astbury and Griff are allowed to develop at their own pace and let their form dictate when they are selected as opposed to how desparate we are. Any way just a thought I know it sounds radical ::)
I highly doubt he would help us capitalise on our f50's, seen the way the ball comes in? There is no rush for us atm anyhow so I see no problem in rotating our young fwds reiwoldt/astbury/post/rance/griffiths/vicks and morton throughout the season
based on form.
Not to mention that he wouldn't be enjoying his footy with us. Cuz had no chice he was for the scrap heap so he was grateful, players like bradshaw who are in their twilight have no motivation to play for a shocking footy team when he can still contribute towards a premiersp tilt. See your point, but wouldn't have worked
hmmm, how were the swans travelling when Lockett arrived ::)...Howza about the ol sainters when Gherig lobbed ???..We had plenty of money to splash around given the space in our cap, Im sure we could have provided all the motivation in the world..try $10,000 per goal
-
not a fit for us at this stage of his career. The guy deserves a quality side for his last 1-2 years, he wouldve struggled to get a kick in our fwd line.
there's also a school of thought that he could play a key role in establishing a viable forward structure that would assist not only the likes of JR and MM but also a better functioning team meaning we actually capitalise on our I50's. Meanwhile the likes of Astbury and Griff are allowed to develop at their own pace and let their form dictate when they are selected as opposed to how desparate we are. Any way just a thought I know it sounds radical ::)
I highly doubt he would help us capitalise on our f50's, seen the way the ball comes in? There is no rush for us atm anyhow so I see no problem in rotating our young fwds reiwoldt/astbury/post/rance/griffiths/vicks and morton throughout the season
based on form.
Not to mention that he wouldn't be enjoying his footy with us. Cuz had no chice he was for the scrap heap so he was grateful, players like bradshaw who are in their twilight have no motivation to play for a shocking footy team when he can still contribute towards a premiersp tilt. See your point, but wouldn't have worked
hmmm, how were the swans travelling when Lockett arrived ::)...Howza about the ol sainters when Gherig lobbed ???..We had plenty of money to splash around given the space in our cap, Im sure we could have provided all the motivation in the world..try $10,000 per goal
ridiculous comparisons ::) Lockett and gherig had years ahead of them to grow into a successful unit, how long did they both play on for once making the switch? bradshaw will be enjoying retiremnt and we'll still be poo, you're talking crap now bo
-
hmmm, how were the swans travelling when Lockett arrived ::)...Howza about the ol sainters when Gherig lobbed ???..We had plenty of money to splash around given the space in our cap, Im sure we could have provided all the motivation in the world..try $10,000 per goal
Actually (and sadly) Mr Bojangles, I remember it quite well and they were travelling well down an upward path of improvement. The club had plummeted after the heady Edelstein days and the AFL sent Barassi to Sydney as a 'public' face to coach the club and engage the local population. Even though his 2 years were not statistically great he impacted heavily in the areas of positive PR and cultural change - he was the father of the culture that is the modern day Sydney. In his 2nd of 2 years as coach he recruited Lockett to add to a growing list of promising juniors that was being assembled. He stepped down at the end of '04 and Eade took over. In Lockett's 2nd year with the club they played in a Grand Final. Sydney won 1 game 2 years before Lockett, 4 games the year before him, 8 in his first season and then a Grand Final. Lockett added to a list that was already on it's way. In 3 years time will be our time to look for and possibly chase a Lockett but not yet.