Better get used to this sort of thing happening.

In 2012 "Cam Bruce" can go to the club of his choice via Free Agency - we do get a compensation pick though.

http://www.afl.com.au/tabid/208/default.aspx?newsid=89809

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:06, AllenIsLord13 said:

And if you really have so much blind faith in the recruiting/ R&D side of the club - two words for ya:

DAVID HALE!

WTF!

So Hawthorn are geniuses for going after Bruce and we are stoopid for going after Hale? But hang on....where did Hale end up??

Not making a lot of sense Allen! Like your handle though, he was good.

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:16, Roost It said:

I was going to reply but I can tell that talking sense to you is going to be a waste of my time.

Just one thing though, On David Hale, we refused to pay over the odds for a 27 year old player of questionable talent and somehow that's a failure!

I think he means that because TH and DB went after him in the first place they forfeit their claims for good judgment.

But I would argue that 1st post is a forfeit of good judgment.

MFCSS

"For everyone that can go wrong, will go wrong. And it only happens to Melbourne, and we never have a decent FD, and why can't we be more like Collingwood. I really wish we could attract and keep players - other clubs never lose players like we do."

why is there so much resistance here?

Stop playing the man and go the ball! Admit the policy is ridiculous!

Sure there may be "no room for sentiment" in the footy dept - but, correct me if i'm wrong - NONE of you are actually in the footy dept, and are actually "fans"??

Notwithstanding Bruce not playing in the GF - him and Green were there when we used to win!! Regularly!! When we used to be the 3rd most successful finals-bound team of the decade outside of Eagles/ Lions (before 2008!)

How can you refer to this as a "failed past"!?!?

Sure, my assessment of White is coloured, but are you re-writing history in saying that was a great move?? Name me one good ruck between White -> Jamar...

Point about Hale was that we were willing to offer anything more than a pie & a Coke for a guy who couldn't even make his teams best 22, and is - at best - uncoordinated! But we'll play hardball for a few extra dollars on a true proven club man who's now apparently wasted his best years helping out a club which in the end showed him zero respect!

I realise there's flaws in his game - but outside of Scully, Davey, Grimes, Green and Sylvia - there's a pretty short list of guys on our team who when they get the ball we don't have to hold out breath on where the disposals gonna go!

Accusing me of wanting to be more like Collingwood?? Sounds more like that's what you guys want with an average age of 22, but without half the resources or a 3-time premiership coach!

My first post may contain innacuracies (please feel free to correct them), but that's becoz i'm passionate about this club, passionate about how shite this policy is - and can't believe the abject apathy on here for a true club stalwart!

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:50, AllenIsLord13 said:

... When we used to be the 3rd most successful finals-bound team of the decade ...

The prosecution rests, your Honour

we have been doing a rebuild for 3 years. geelong were at this stage in 2000, 01, 02 and 03. and they didnt win anything till 07. that means we have 4 more years to build.

same with the saints. 01, 02, 03 and they are in grand finals in 09 and 10. it takes time. not instant gratificiation.

having a policy of 30year olds get 1 year and reassess at the end of every year is SMART.

  On 08/11/2010 at 03:10, old55 said:

The prosecution rests, your Honour

I prefer to it the 3rd most successful losers.

  On 08/11/2010 at 03:10, old55 said:

The prosecution rests, your Honour

Please learn to read accurately. From 2000 - 2006, Deez were in Finals 5 out of 7 years

Topped only by WCE & Lions,

Matched only by Bombers and Port!

So yes, we were the 3rd most successful finals-bound team up until that point, and you now have a new-beaut statistic you can tell all your mates about - that is, if you dare to revisit the "bad old years"!

Case closed!

except, we didnt win a flag....

  On 08/11/2010 at 03:37, AllenIsLord13 said:

Please learn to read accurately. From 2000 - 2006, Deez were in Finals 5 out of 7 years

Topped only by WCE & Lions,

Matched only by Bombers and Port!

So yes, we were the 3rd most successful finals-bound team up until that point, and you now have a new-beaut statistic you can tell all your mates about - that is, if you dare to revisit the "bad old years"!

Case closed!

You just don't get it but at least you're consistent.

Brucey and "the 3rd most successful finals-bound team up until that point" - that's a match.

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:50, AllenIsLord13 said:

why is there so much resistance here?

Stop playing the man and go the ball! Admit the policy is ridiculous!

The policy is great, and is regular practice now in almost every AFL club. Offering longer than 1 year contracts for players over 30 is dangerous. Look at Brad Johnson.

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:50, AllenIsLord13 said:

\Notwithstanding Bruce not playing in the GF - him and Green were there when we used to win!! Regularly!! When we used to be the 3rd most successful finals-bound team of the decade outside of Eagles/ Lions (before 2008!)

How can you refer to this as a "failed past"!?!?

Well it certainly wasn't successful. My definition of success is a flag. We made up the numbers for years, we were what the Western Bulldogs are now. That isn't success.

  On 08/11/2010 at 01:10, belzebub59 said:

Why do you or anyone suppose the club is at fault in these negotiations ? Bruce was the one who went away to think one supposes . Melbourne had offer(s) on table . Just wasn't to Bruce/nixons liking. They docked around not the club . It wanted resolution , Bruce wanted to invoke what he thought to be leverage and he came unstuck and is now pointing the finger everywhere but at himself.

It takes two to tango...........

I'd suggest that to lay 100% of the blame for a communication breakdown at the feet of one of the parties is a tad unrealistic

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:16, Roost It said:

I was going to reply but I can tell that talking sense to you is going to be a waste of my time.

Yes. Like banging your head against a brick wall.

I'd probably just suggest he'd be better off reading the entire forum message board to gain a better understanding.

Fwiw, the club showed him loyalty he was a required player by offering him another contract on top of his etched out 12 year career at the club. You want to bang on about loyalty ? Sheez.

  On 08/11/2010 at 03:49, High Tower said:

Fwiw, the club showed him loyalty by offering him another contract on top of his etched out 12 year career at the club. You want to go on about loyalty ? Sheez.

The Club didn't offer Bruce a contract because of loyalty - they offered him a contract because they thought he would be useful.

However, that's okay because the Club doesn't owe Bruce, just like he doesn't owe the Club.

Fixed

Fwiw, my post wasn't really directed at you - it was aimed at what I find to be a weird idea that one or both parties have some moral duty to the other.

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:50, AllenIsLord13 said:

Sure, my assessment of White is coloured, but are you re-writing history in saying that was a great move?? Name me one good ruck between White -> Jamar...

Jeff White retired end of 2008.

Mark Jamar All Australian 2010.

Great move. Arguably one of the best ever.

  On 08/11/2010 at 04:03, Inner Demon said:

Jeff White retired end of 2008.

Mark Jamar All Australian 2010.

Great move. Arguably one of the best ever.

A natural cycle that bore fruit.

  On 05/11/2010 at 05:00, Curry & Beer said:

you don't know anything about the inner life of the football club, none of you do. I tell you what he is a better kick than Tom Scully and Jack Grimes but nobody would ever suggest that is justification for either of them being dropped/delisted. There are several players who get regular games who are as soft as s--t but you don't hear about that either. The only things I've ever heard about Bruce is that he is the ultimate professional, and is highly respected at the club, and now he and Green are the only ones left who are over 27. I don't know how many times it needs to be repeated, but it amazes me that some body could finish in the top10 of the B+F ten years running, 5 times in the top5, WIN IT 2 YEARS AGO and make it again THIS YEAR and people still reckon he serves no purpose. How can anyone justify that?

I agree. I reckon he has been a great and loyal servant, still has plenty of footy in him,will benefit from the improvement of the younger guys as he will not attract such attention and will still be an an endurance machine.. I am very sorry he is going and feel he should be playing out his career with his mate Brad Green. The club seems to be taking a "one size fits all" approach for guys 30 or more.. Well I reckon Cam has similar physical qualities to Robert Harvey and Michael Tuck. Has still got at least 3 good years in him. not to mention the mentor status he provides to a group of "Pups"...

  On 08/11/2010 at 02:50, AllenIsLord13 said:

My first post may contain innacuracies (please feel free to correct them), but that's becoz i'm passionate about this club, passionate about how shite this policy is - and can't believe the abject apathy on here for a true club stalwart!

I'm passionate but that doesn't lead me to inaccuracies of the type you type. McDonald was a hamstring shy of becoming a liability and Bruce wanted the club to pay more than his worth. With GC and GWS in the club needs to keep balancing the books oh so carefully. Our TPP could become the biggest threat to our desire of multiple premierships. Oh and another thing you don't judge success on being the 3rd most finals bound team for a decade you judge it on Premierships, and we have none over the last decade. The Bruce, White, Yze era was another in a long line of failed attempts to drag this club beyond mediocrity. I'll tell you one of the reasons we didn't win a Premiership with those 3, they're all soft as jello. I advise you to harden up like the club is finally doing.

  On 08/11/2010 at 04:02, Rogue said:

Fwiw, my post wasn't really directed at you - it was aimed at what I find to be a weird idea that one or both parties have some moral duty to the other.

I've worded it better anyway.

Bailey has revealed that when Bruce rang him to say he wanted to come in for the "chat", Bailey had asked Bruce was there anything he could do to change his mind...(Bruce had made his mind up). - SEN

Come to think of it...

Didn't a couple of weeks ago, when Nixon was spruiking that Bruce was overseas, someone posted on 'land that they'd seen Bruce at the races with... Buddy Franklin, funnily enough a player from the team which has lured him into the PSD..?

Seems like Brucey may have had designs on knifing the club for some time before he revealed his hand...

  On 23/10/2010 at 06:40, E25 said:

I've got a feeling another team has been in his ear, trying to get him go in the PSD.

Either essendon or carlton, I'd reckon.

All baseless speculation at this stage.

  On 23/10/2010 at 10:01, PeterJames said:

Saw him at the races with Buddy hawks maybe?

Good call Pete James.

  On 08/11/2010 at 11:56, E25 said:

Come to think of it...

Didn't a couple of weeks ago, when Nixon was spruiking that Bruce was overseas, someone posted on 'land that they'd seen Bruce at the races with... Buddy Franklin, funnily enough a player from the team which has lured him into the PSD..?

Seems like Brucey may have had designs on knifing the club for some time before he revealed his hand...

During trade week?

Ouch. Thanks Brucey.

  On 08/11/2010 at 11:59, E25 said:

Good call Pete James.

Head-wobble much????