I'am interested to know why Melb,Rich or Freo decided against taking Bradshaw.

I would've thought the 31 year old leading all-time Brisbane goal scorer and three-time premiership player would have been given at the very least some serious thought. Melbourne didn't even give an announcement why he isn't worthly of our selection/interest. Is it because his club of choice is Sydney or was it because as a result of Robbo being delisted that we for sentimental reasons avoided making a tough decision that was in the best interests of the football club.

In my opinion Bradshaw was the best player available and the ideal candidate for us, to hold down the forward line for two years while the developing Watts/Jurrah show makes its way to town. It is also debatable that Bradshaw displays more leadership qualities than the recently loved/scorned Luke Ball.

So why didn't we select him?

Because if the decision was made for the above stated reasons I personally couldn't give a rats where his club of choice was and in regard to Robbo, such sentimental moves have no place in football if you want to win a flag.

I'am interested to know why Melb,Rich or Freo decided against taking Bradshaw.

I would've thought the 31 year old leading all-time Brisbane goal scorer and three-time premiership player would have been given at the very least some serious thought. Melbourne didn't even give an announcement why he isn't worthly of our selection/interest. Is it because his club of choice is Sydney or was it because as a result of Robbo being delisted that we for sentimental reasons avoided making a tough decision that was in the best interests of the football club.

In my opinion Bradshaw was the best player available and the ideal candidate for us, to hold down the forward line for two years while the developing Watts/Jurrah show makes its way to town. It is also debatable that Bradshaw displays more leadership qualities than the recently loved/scorned Luke Ball.

So why didn't we select him?

Because if the decision was made for the above stated reasons I personally couldn't give a rats where his club of choice was and in regard to Robbo, such sentimental moves have no place in football if you want to win a flag.

No... it doesn't...

So why didn't we select him?

No idea. Perhaps we felt that 6 odd years of MacDonald was > 2 odd years of Bradshaw

It amazes me that time after time after time, supporters ask why the club didn't do something that would contradict everything they state publicly as being their modus operandi.

They aren't saying it just for fun.

The people in charge have integrity and are true to their word.

That should be all the answer you need.

How many years was Bradshaw asking? Melbourne would probably only give him a 1 year deal.

he is too old, we have a good forward line anyway. Will only last 1 year or 2 just when we get near the cup

Hmm the more that I think about it, it could also be the case of Melbourne playing the percentages securing Joel Macdonald instead of playing hard ball and potentially ending up with nothing if Bradshaw and Macdonald nominate for ND/rookie draft.

No, it's not about that. It's about not picking up a player for 2 seasons when we are not yet in a position to win a flag. Bradshaw may be the difference between us winning 8 games rather than 7 in 2010, ie) who cares?

Joel McDonald has a much great chance of being part of our flag side than Bradshaw because McDonald will still be playing when we are challenging for a flag.

I'am interested to know why Melb....decided against taking Bradshaw.

Good point.

There are some wondering if too much onus is being put on young players to muscle up and take on a challenge in the forward line that should be at least a year or two away. They worry about both direction and their young mates.

Age + injuries = no

he is too old, we have a good forward line anyway.

Disagree. When I compare our forward line with the rest of the league, it really looks impotent. Jurrah is the only player capable of kicking 4+ goals. Bate spends most of his time as a high HF while Miller isn't good enough, Aussie can't get on the park and Watts isn't ready.

Bradshaw may have been the difference between winning 4-6 games and winning 9-11 games next year.

Picking Bradshaw wouldn't be about winning games, well next year anyway. It would be a decision based around helping develop our young forwards for the future. Watts & Jurrah would have learnt alot playing beside someone as good as Bradshaw, it would have fast tracked their development.

However, Bradshaw doesn't want to go to a developing club like Melbourne or Richmond. It's the same as Ball, why pick someone who has no interest in playing with your club?

Great idea worthy of discussion but it's unlikely that a player like Bradshaw who has no allegience to the MFC would sacrifice the final couple of years of his playing career to assist our development.

Whilst the team is in the rebuilding stage one of the priorities is to get game time into the younger players.

In this case Bradshaw would have been taking game time off other younger forwards and as the club is not in the position to challenge for a premiership at the moment ,what would be the point in picking up Bradshaw?

I love discussing things that are no longer relevant...

It's not pointless, it's valuable hindsight into how things happened, and how our decisions are irreversible.

Hmm the more that I think about it, it could also be the case of Melbourne playing the percentages securing Joel Macdonald instead of playing hard ball and potentially ending up with nothing if Bradshaw and Macdonald nominate for ND/rookie draft.

Playing the percentages ? It's a no-brainer. More like being smart. This has all been discussed beforehand.

We've all known for sometime, even pre- National Draft that Joel MacDonald was going to be a Melbourne player.

rpfc sums it up pretty much.

I love discussing things that are no longer relevant...

It's not pointless, it's valuable hindsight into how things happened, and how our decisions are irreversible.

I'm sure that all of these exact same conversations have been had and points been made about 6 weeks ago, except we were only 97% sure of the outcome.

I'm sure that all of these exact same conversations have been had and points been made about 6 weeks ago, except we were only 97% sure of the outcome.

97%. Good enough for me.

The 3% was.... had the FD rolled out the ol' Powerpoint Presentation for Joel Mac. Thank god someone revamped it.

If it must be re-visited, it was confirmed when Joel Mac by-passed the ND with sights firmly on the PSD. End of story. (barring a breakdown at training).

I love discussing things that are no longer relevant...

It's not pointless, it's valuable hindsight into how things happened, and how our decisions are irreversible.

That's hilarious, your recent posts have made this place much more bearable over the off season

Bradshaw may have been the difference between winning 4-6 games and winning 9-11 games next year.

We definitely wouldn't have won eleven games instead of four, purely on the strength of having Bradshaw in the team. He's good, but he's not a gamebreaking superstar who'll win us seven games off his own boot.

He might have been worth an extra win or two, but whose to say McDonald won't be? We have a talented but inexperienced backline, and a handy 26 year old defender will do a bit to remedy that. It could also free someone up to move further up the ground; if it let's us try Martin or Garland up forward, it might help us fix some of the problems you alluded to. I actually think it's at least highly debatable that Bradshaw, at this stage in his career, will be emphatically more influential than McDonald over the next 3 years, let alone the next 6.

That's hilarious, your recent posts have made this place much more bearable over the off season

Agree. Some though, need to lighten up. *Cough - H*

Reading this thread ....... That's three minutes of my life I will never get back

Jesus.

Cos he's old.

Close thread.

I'am interested to know why Melb,Rich or Freo decided against taking Bradshaw.

I would've thought the 31 year old leading all-time Brisbane goal scorer and three-time premiership player would have been given at the very least some serious thought. Melbourne didn't even give an announcement why he isn't worthly of our selection/interest. Is it because his club of choice is Sydney or was it because as a result of Robbo being delisted that we for sentimental reasons avoided making a tough decision that was in the best interests of the football club.

In my opinion Bradshaw was the best player available and the ideal candidate for us, to hold down the forward line for two years while the developing Watts/Jurrah show makes its way to town. It is also debatable that Bradshaw displays more leadership qualities than the recently loved/scorned Luke Ball.

So why didn't we select him?

Because if the decision was made for the above stated reasons I personally couldn't give a rats where his club of choice was and in regard to Robbo, such sentimental moves have no place in football if you want to win a flag.

drafting bradshw would have been a back would step he want's too much money and too many years he has only got one year left in him,this is one of the swans biggest mistake, as big as when they took stingy,

I'am interested to know why Melb,Rich or Freo decided against taking Bradshaw.

I would've thought the 31 year old leading all-time Brisbane goal scorer and three-time premiership player would have been given at the very least some serious thought. Melbourne didn't even give an announcement why he isn't worthly of our selection/interest. Is it because his club of choice is Sydney or was it because as a result of Robbo being delisted that we for sentimental reasons avoided making a tough decision that was in the best interests of the football club.

In my opinion Bradshaw was the best player available and the ideal candidate for us, to hold down the forward line for two years while the developing Watts/Jurrah show makes its way to town. It is also debatable that Bradshaw displays more leadership qualities than the recently loved/scorned Luke Ball.

So why didn't we select him?

Because if the decision was made for the above stated reasons I personally couldn't give a rats where his club of choice was and in regard to Robbo, such sentimental moves have no place in football if you want to win a flag.

Not sure about the Dockers but Bradshaw didnt want to go to Melbourne or Richmond and i can understand a player with basically 2 years of his career to go preferring a top eight side

The Swans will suit him even though his best football is behind him

Melbourne has already made it clear that players being recruited need to fill the criteria of a rebuilding a team and Bradshaws age alone makes this void

Ball was a different circumstance than Bradshaw and after Ball chose the ND i am glad we lost all interest

Quite happy we chose MacDonald at 25 with 80 games of defensive experience

Our Defence has 2 years playing together and the addition of MacDonald will be a bonus as he will want to prove Brisbane wrong

In the next 1 - 2 years i would expect both Bruce and our Captain to be retiring which will give oppurtunities for some younger players

Our Backline seems to be coming along quite well and with some new blood such as Strauss and ex Lion MacDonald will only strengthen it

Rivers who has won a leadership role might be the impetus he needs to take the next step that we have been waiting on for awhile now

Warnock , Frawley and Garland look set in stone for years to come

Then we have Bennell who has been impressive

Our Utility option in Martin is quite capable of filling any KP when required

Looking foward to watching our defence blossum

I am glad we didnt take Bradshaw and i certainly didnt want Ball

In the next 1 - 2 years i would expect both Bruce and our Captain to be retiring which will give oppurtunities for some younger players

McDonald will retire at the end of the year, but Bruce and Green (Vet eligible in 2011) will not see any competitors for the Vet List until Miller (2013), Jamar (2013), Davey (2014), and Moloney (2015).

So Bruce could keep going for 3 or 4 years at only the expense of a rookie.