More Brock banter...

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

The Ox on SEN has claimed Brock will be the next skipper, and as soon as next year. When Pickering asked about his age and whether or not he was a bit young, the Ox became even more determined to shove it down his throat...

Now I know we keep hearing about how everyone reckons he'll be the skipper, but it's still nice when it crops up.

In the same sgement he spoke about how Gaddy was one of the most extraordinary captains he'd ever come across with his work ethic...

When Pickers probed him about how he felt being overlooked for Neita, he quickly changed the topic, and when Pickers pushed him he ignored the question...

oooooooh.....

[BrownlowBruce 1]

bruce will get it if neitz steps down in next 1-2 years

[maximum bob 462]

bruce will get it if neitz steps down in next 1-2 years

Good call. Bruce deserves it. In my opinion his contribution to the MFC has been undersung. He's committed, is a great role model, goes hard and is a great finisher.

When he retires my favourite memories will be him shadowing Hird everywhere he went in the games they've played against each other, shutting him down and then running off him and booting some significant goals.

Cam is a true Dees player and deserves the honour of being captain. No-one's going to argue that Brock is next in line.

It basically depends on when Neita retires.

[Yze_Magic 3]

If Bruce gets it I will absolutely cry

Brock is the obvious replacement. Age is not an issue.

[timD 994]

This argument is garbage. Of course age is an issue - it bloody well should be. I'll say this once more for the cheap seats:

(a) Captaincy is earned - Brock hasn't earned it;

(B) It is not the best thing for his footy - getting out in more than 70 % of the games is more important;

© His form - and let's fact it, Brock has not BOG'd more than a few times a year - his form is not that great that often.

(d) there is more to captain than good form - do we really want to risk compromising form that is far from constant to promote support hero-worship?

Others have earned a right to get the nod before Brock. Let's see if he can string more than one good season together in a row. People on this site grossly over-rate what he's done. It makes me sick you're so desparate and used to mediocrity. He's got to earn it for god's sake - otherwise the captaincy is a popularity contest and you debased it horribly. AT 20 or 21 he would have to be exceptional to have done so - in my mind he is a long way from captain.

[Left Field 313]

Take the point about getting onto the paddock but in terms of productivity/minutes played Brock is right up there.

Happy to see Brock captain next year if we have moved into rebuild mode. Otherwise, let someone (not necessarily Bruce unless his kicking improves) hold the role for a couple of years through our peak.

[kryton 0]

Take the point about getting onto the paddock but in terms of productivity/minutes played Brock is right up there.

Happy to see Brock captain next year if we have moved into rebuild mode. Otherwise, let someone (not necessarily Bruce unless his kicking improves) hold the role for a couple of years through our peak.

Just as long was we don't pick 5 captains.

[BrownlowBruce 1]

This argument is garbage. Of course age is an issue - it bloody well should be. I'll say this once more for the cheap seats:

(a) Captaincy is earned - Brock hasn't earned it;

(B) It is not the best thing for his footy - getting out in more than 70 % of the games is more important;

© His form - and let's fact it, Brock has not BOG'd more than a few times a year - his form is not that great that often.

(d) there is more to captain than good form - do we really want to risk compromising form that is far from constant to promote support hero-worship?

Others have earned a right to get the nod before Brock. Let's see if he can string more than one good season together in a row. People on this site grossly over-rate what he's done. It makes me sick you're so desparate and used to mediocrity. He's got to earn it for god's sake - otherwise the captaincy is a popularity contest and you debased it horribly. AT 20 or 21 he would have to be exceptional to have done so - in my mind he is a long way from captain.

well said, he is exceptional player and is perhaps slightly over-rated at this stage in his career. St kilda game maybe has made him look perhaps better than he is. im am not doubting his ability, but cam bruce has also performed in big games and almost every game for a long period of time.

i am also spectical about brock as he has been very injruy prone in his short career

Take the point about getting onto the paddock but in terms of productivity/minutes played Brock is right up there.

Happy to see Brock captain next year if we have moved into rebuild mode. Otherwise, let someone (not necessarily Bruce unless his kicking improves) hold the role for a couple of years through our peak.

next year no chance. there was an article in the herald sun about 1-2 weeks ago, about russel robertson. dont know if any one read it. one particular paragraph that stood out.

talkin about the leadership group, the article is slightly unclear

"Cameron Bruce is probably going to be our next leader and (David Neitz) `Neita's' the captain. There were going to be a couple of changes and Millsy (Brad Miller) and I were the ones who missed out."

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/com...5E19769,00.html

im assuming robo might be suggesting bruce could be the next captain.

one of my old school friends dad works with the melbourne leadership group according to him at the start of 2006 Cam Bruce was considered the next captain of MFC. maybe that has changed slightly, but who better to captain than somone so versatile and consistant.

[classy dees 42]

Brock will captain the MFC at one stage. That is a given. The question is when.

IF brock plays 22 (+ finals) games this year to his capacity, he will be captain next year.

IF he doesn't play more than 15 or so, irrespective of performance, Bruce may get it.

People often forget that whilst Brock was sensational last year against st kilda in the EF, bruce was also very very good.

This is a call that cannot be made now, but rather at the end of the season, with the added knowledge of the two player '07 performance.

If i had to pick now, I would very marginally choose Brock simply because of what he did in the last qtr against the saints. that was a very special performance from a 20 yr old. I would like bruce to captain the club at one stage, but it just depends on this year's performances

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

This argument is garbage. Of course age is an issue - it bloody well should be. I'll say this once more for the cheap seats:

(a) Captaincy is earned - Brock hasn't earned it;

(B) It is not the best thing for his footy - getting out in more than 70 % of the games is more important;

© His form - and let's fact it, Brock has not BOG'd more than a few times a year - his form is not that great that often.

(d) there is more to captain than good form - do we really want to risk compromising form that is far from constant to promote support hero-worship?

Others have earned a right to get the nod before Brock. Let's see if he can string more than one good season together in a row. People on this site grossly over-rate what he's done. It makes me sick you're so desparate and used to mediocrity. He's got to earn it for god's sake - otherwise the captaincy is a popularity contest and you debased it horribly. AT 20 or 21 he would have to be exceptional to have done so - in my mind he is a long way from captain.

Wow. You've thought about this before, and it clearly gets you going there. (I'm assuming you're Tim from demonology, but correct me if I'm wrong)

I'd like to offer what by now must be just another opposing view to add to the long list in both parties.

As you say, age, playing regularity and whether or not he deserves it are big issues, but I think he's pretty close in all those areas.

Firstly, age shouldn't be as big a consideration as maturity. From the outside at least, he appears to have a more mature head on his shoulders than many of our players up to and including some of the 28-year-olds. Now this is just from my perspective, and I admit it's a limited one. But should the club choose to go with him, I'd imagine they'll look at this aspect a HELL of a lot more than we do, and if they find that he's grown-up enough, then I'll back them. There's no evidence to the contrary in the public eye at this stage.

In terms of earning a captaincy, fair enough. Even Buckley, who is a long-time captain, and one of the better ones going around had to wait a bit longer than Brock. An interesting point was made on SEN today though. Often the captain of a club isn't their best player. The role of captain can often go to a guy the players will rally around when the going gets tough. It appears as though they are ALREADY doing this, and for a number of reasons. His good form, toughness, the type of footy he plays and the fact that he's already starting to call the shots. These are just a few of the "captain-like" things he does. In this sense he does more than some of his seniors. Now I understand Bruce leads when he's out there, as does Green and co. But none of those guys were anywhere near rating themselves highly enough to lead at the age Brock is, which suggests that in a few years he'll be streets ahead of anyone else as a leader. Why not promote him early to get the learning done? Well there's plenty of reasons why not to as you've raised, but there's also plenty of reasons to get him in the role as soon as possible.

Just because he's been fairly regularly injured doesn't mean he shouldn't do the job. Particularly with players like Bruce and green ready to step in for the matches he misses. Personally I don't believe there's any reason to think from now on we can expect, at best, only 18 games from the guy. When he reaches 24 I'll be more convinced about whether or not he's prone to injury.

Have to disagree about your point about being BOG in only a few matches. A few BOGs a year with solid leading footy in the others is fine too. He's only going to expand on this.

Also your last point about "form that is far from consistant." I'm stunned at this. His form has been pretty darn good as far as I can tell. Has anyone else played more consistantly besides, obviously, Neitz and McDonald? Don't go down the path of playfully suggesting JMac for the role temporarily as you'll get shot down, trust me. I can't for the life of me see how anyone on this site over-rates what he's done. He absolutely bloody deserves our adulation. He's played footy at the highest level, has won a number of matches off his own boot, including a final. And I'm floored by the fact that you believe we're so used to mediocrity. I would have said our canonisation of Brock (which is only in its embryonic stages) is exactly the opposite. We've had almost no players come through and do so much in so little an amount of time. Surely pushing this guy into a position of power at the club is a GOOD thing?

The captaincy debate is not a popularity contest, as you say. It's a question of rewarding all the aspects that make him so highly rated (so that younger players will follow suit) such as training and match-day work-rate, and selecting a player who can inspire his team-mates when the going gets rough. He's proven, at least to me, that providing a good example is something he does without exception.

Look, there's no question it's early for him to be captain. But that shouldn't necessarily be SUCH a big deterrent. Even you would have to agree that in a few years he WILL be the best candidate. In my view, Brock is exceptional enough to be skipper now. If you compare him to Neita, it raises an interesting dilemma. As long as Neitz is playing, he should be captain of Melbourne. But IMO he is not a captain that LEADS per ce. By default, when he's playing well he PASSIVELY inspres his team-mates. But when he goes missing, they go missing. Players like Primus could have rotten days like that and somehow convince the younger guys to put in by barking instructions and waving and pointing like a crazy person. In a sense ACTIVELY leading his squad. I reckon Brock has shown a propensity already to do this, and most importantly, DO IT IN THE MIDDLE, where he can make a difference when the going gets rough, unlike Neitz who can only run into defence, leaving us down a player in the forward line.

For what it's worth I'd like to see Neita in the role this year and next, but I'm starting to believe this will be his last, unfortunately.

- If, in this season or next, DURING his captaincy he was to get hurt, I'd be behind the appointment of EITHER Bruce or Green as season-long stand-in skippers, as I reckon without Neitz on the park, you'd need the leadership to stay with players 27 and up.

- Pending the form of all 3 in 2007, I'm behind any one of Green, Bruce or Brock as captain for 2008, but Green and Bruce can only be considered caretaker captains should they be given the job. This is also providing Neitz is still playing and has handed back the captaincy.

Sorry about the long reply.

[Madness 44]

I'm probably a bigger brock fan then anyone else, but can anyone else remember these sort of talks 2 years ago with brad miller? Nuff said...

[Yze_Magic 3]

I'm probably a bigger brock fan then anyone else, but can anyone else remember these sort of talks 2 years ago with brad miller? Nuff said...

They are worlds apart

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

They are worlds apart

I dont normally do this but I agree with Yze Magic on two fronts.

1. The issues between Miller and McLean in leadership are at least worlds apart.

2. Brock McLean will become the next captain of Melbourne.

Cam Bruce needs to focus on delivering consistently on that potential he has shown for so long. He needs to stamp himself in big games. He has not done that enough. FCS I would not place any weight on Robbo's interview in the Sun. He even cited Yze, Bizzell and White as fine leaders and all three have been dumped from leadership roles in the past couple of years. What would he know?

I would have Brad Green before I would have Bruce.

Leadership is combination of an number of factors with age being a consideration not a prerequisite. There have been a number of examples of successful youg captains who have had the right attributes for role (Carey, Kernahan, Cam White and Steven Fleming in cricket).

I look forward to Brock's ascension to captain when Neitz steps down.

[Jaded No More 57,800]

Also your last point about "form that is far from consistant." I'm stunned at this. His form has been pretty darn good as far as I can tell. Has anyone else played more consistantly besides, obviously, Neitz and McDonald?

You're right on all these issues, particularly the consistency one.

In fact, McLean is the equal most productive player on the ground along with Judd.

He averages 22.4 disposals a game, hardly inconsistent. I don't remember too many games where he played and had no impact. He also has the ability to come straight back from injury and dominate, that's rare.

He is my next captain, and I'm hopeful that come the end of this season everyone will agree.

[occo 2]

If Bruce gets it I will absolutely cry

Brock is the obvious replacement. Age is not an issue.

Mick Muldhouse once said "to give the responsibility to a player of a young age can distroy their career by 2-3 years". Meaning the responsibilities of captening are overwhelming and can someone of a young age take that responsibility + keep his personal football at first grade. Contrary to this i think brock deserves it. He has shown leadership on and off the field and can break games apart (ie St Kilda where he tore them apart and his celebrating of his 2 goals). To not give him the captency COULD (and i underline could) send him the wrong impression. Neitz out next year then i think he is the man. No rotating captains...they just dont work in my opinion

[Seekers SEECAMP 0]

Nice thesis Dappa...you must be unemployed?

Cam Bruce is highly respected amongst the playing group and in my view is a role model for all footballers, both aspiring and current AFL players.

Injury aside and despite his critics, his form and output for the club has been of a consistently high standard. In addition,he is one of the few remaining players who has come through the old system and will be close to clocking 10 years service with the Mfc. I believe we will see even greater feats from him in coming seasons and I would have him Captain the club before McLean.

Whilst Brock has had a significant impact on the club on a couple of levels, I woud hesitate to expect him to shoulder such a responsibility (and prestigious) role just yet. This is not to say that he does not have the support of the playing group.

The point about age is an interesting one and is well made. Mind you, out of the 4 names mentioned, I would only pick one of them who has really proved themselves to be a leader amongst men.

[mordja 187]

IMO the captaincy will look after itself and as much as I love Brock I would give it to Bruce first, even if the bloke cant kick.

Regardless, please do not even contemplate Miller and Chook in the same thought process, its insulting.

[Rivers Run Red 182]

I'm interested to see what you all think of Lynden Dunn's potential leadership abilities. I dont know if any of you read the article on him in last weeks article in the Herald Sun. (maybe it was early this week I cant remember exactly).

The basis of the article for those who missed it was that Dunn has been helping underprivliged and problematic kids to aspire to do something with thier life, and to basically be a role model for them. For mine if he is able to grow as a footballer and keep these morals he will be definate leadership material.

And IMO i think that Bruce has the poise and i think will make a great captain. Thats not to say Brock wont ever be captain of the MFC.

[CarnTheDees 52]

...

Agree

[old55 21,287]

We've got a very good leadership group, if as expected Neitz steps aside in 2008 Bruce, McLean and Green have an opportunity to stake their claim in 2007.

If Cam Bruce led from the front and polled high or even won the 2007 Brownlow or NSM - then he'd be hard to deny.

No-one's a bigger fan of McLean than me.

Green would be a very good captain too.

[bjgc 0]

Our best player should be the next captain so ATM it would be Bruce, but if we are to become a premiership threat then McLean is going to need to have an awesome year. If he does then he should be captain. Bruce is a very good player but McLean has star written all over him. So ATM Bruce will get the job but I'm hoping for the team's sake that McLean becomes the player we all think he is so he can get the captaincy.

[Jaded No More 57,800]

Our best player should be the next captain so ATM it would be Bruce, but if we are to become a premiership threat then McLean is going to need to have an awesome year. If he does then he should be captain. Bruce is a very good player but McLean has star written all over him. So ATM Bruce will get the job but I'm hoping for the team's sake that McLean becomes the player we all think he is so he can get the captaincy.

Bruce is not our best player (well you could argue that he is or he isn't), and besides, a captain doesn't necessarily have to be your best player. He has to be right up there, but there is more to being a captain than having skills.

I'm going to wait and see whether Bruce can play consistently throughout the season, and more importantly win us a final. He is yet to do that, in fact, up until last year he was one of many senior players who went missing in September.

I don't see the point in delaying the inevitable. Brock will be captain one day, having an in-the-meantime captain seems like a pointless exercise. Age has nothing to do with leadership, you either have it or you don't... Brock has plenty of it.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Bruce is not our best player (well you could argue that he is or he isn't), and besides, a captain doesn't necessarily have to be your best player. He has to be right up there, but there is more to being a captain than having skills.

I'm going to wait and see whether Bruce can play consistently throughout the season, and more importantly win us a final. He is yet to do that, in fact, up until last year he was one of many senior players who went missing in September.

I don't see the point in delaying the inevitable. Brock will be captain one day, having an in-the-meantime captain seems like a pointless exercise. Age has nothing to do with leadership, you either have it or you don't... Brock has plenty of it.

Agree with everything you say, but I want to pull you up on one thing.

Bruce won (or at least had a lot to do with) the Carlton final in 2000. It was a long time ago, yes but I believe he has shown himself at Finals level, even if it was just the once.

[Demon Disciple 10,928]

Bruce won (or at least had a lot to do with) the Carlton final in 2000.

I would have thought Brad Green moreso than Bruce

[Seekers SEECAMP 0]

Jaded,

Whilst people here have opinions (of which they are entitled to), I am a little bemused by the 'evergreen' swings in your opinions. For instance, the topic of future captaincy of our club. Now, this is not a criticism, merely an observation.

Take for example this comment you made in late '05 re Brad Miller...

"I'm not worried about his goal-kicking, when in range he usually goes alright. It is not his fault that he hardly ever takes a mark inside 50.

He does need to become less one-dimensional with his handballing, I'd love to see him take a mark and going for a run, or kicking it long to the goal-square.

As far as Milsy is concerned, I can think of only two things:

Future captain

CHF not CHB/FB [end quote]

If the club were to have taken your advice back then and not 'delay the inevitable' by appointing Miller, would you still have stood by your comments to this day?

Perhaps I am reading it all wrong; perhaps you refer to 'future' as in after Brock?