Author Topic: Bradshaw  (Read 3130 times)

Offline tiger till i die

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 786
Bradshaw
« on: May 01, 2010, 10:17:47 PM »
he kicked 6 goals for the swans .. how did we look past him?  :banghead

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2010, 10:21:48 PM »
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.

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #2 on: May 01, 2010, 10:23:32 PM »
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.  
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline tigersalive

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2772
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2010, 10:52:24 PM »
Some people just don't get it.
EAT EM ALIVE!

Offline tiger till i die

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 786
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2010, 11:41:45 PM »
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
 

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2010, 09:09:43 AM »
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.

Offline yellowandback

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4025
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2010, 09:27:24 AM »
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.
It's that simple Spud
"I discussed (it) with my three daughters, my wife and my 82-year-old mum, because it has really affected me … If those comments … were made about one of my daughters, it would make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I would not have liked it at all.”

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2010, 09:46:55 AM »
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.
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2010, 10:46:46 AM »
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
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Offline Chuck17

  • The Shaun Grugg of OER
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13309
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2010, 11:08:27 AM »
Bradshaw would have been a good pickup if we could have drafted about 15 of his team mates as well

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2010, 11:12:09 AM »
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.

Offline the_boy_jake

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1770
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2010, 11:21:11 AM »


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.

Offline Infamy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4426
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #12 on: May 02, 2010, 11:33:45 AM »
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

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2010, 12:02:37 PM »


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.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2010, 02:32:35 PM by smokey_58au »

Offline bojangles17

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5618
  • Platinum member 33 years
Re: Bradshaw
« Reply #14 on: May 02, 2010, 12:16:54 PM »
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 ::)
RFC 1885, Often Imitated, Never Equalled