FT that's very much the point. Circumstances conspired to inflate Bruces worth. Those circumstances have changed. That 'thud' you hear is Cam coming back to earth !!

Precisely.

We slashed Bruce's contract in half and that was still market in my eyes.

He was in the right place at the right time for the contract he had and now he wants assurances that he will play AFL when he is 33.

You can't shift policy and make allowances for that.

He isn't and never was in Bailey's blueprint.

People don't you understand these footballers? They just want somebody to love, that's all.

It doesn't sound like money is now the issue though. I think Bruce probably just wanted an assurance that as long as he is still in our best 22 he would continue to get a game. (I think this is a pretty justifiable stance to take given he only gets one crack at it.) I also think Bailey needs to consider the long-term impact on the club culture of continuing to build for the future. IMO most of the older MFC players will have a lot of sympathy for Bruce’s situation and taking this path could eventually see him eventually lose the players.

It doesn't sound like money is now the issue though. I think Bruce probably just wanted an assurance that as long as he is still in our best 22 he would continue to get a game. (I think this is a pretty justifiable stance to take given he only gets one crack at it.) I also think Bailey needs to consider the long-term impact on the club culture of continuing to build for the future. IMO most of the older MFC players will have a lot of sympathy for Bruce’s situation and taking this path could eventually see him eventually lose the players.

So now Bailey is in danger of losing the players?

FFS.

From what I have read and heard, Bruce wanted a stipulation of a second year after a certain amount of games played.

Is that fair enough?

What if he plays the 15 games that gets him 2012 and then does his knee? Or gets dropped?

The players are not idiots - they know this business.

And they also know that a very good contract was on the table and Bruce baulked.

If anyone hsa 'lost' the players down at Olympic Park it's Cameron.

I am not saying Bailey has lost the players. But it is naïve to think that this is not a danger for all coaches. It happens all the time. (Particularly to underperforming coaches with anonymous playing records. Look at Jeff Gieschen.)

You are right on one thing though – the players are not stupid and the older ones in particular will remember playing for a coach who tanked and also how it ended for their mates White, Robertson and Bruce et al. They will not want to see this happen to them.

You are right on one thing though the players are not stupid and the older ones in particular will remember playing for a coach who tanked and also how it ended for their mates White, Robertson and Bruce et al. They will not want to see this happen to them.

They're smart enough to realise all good things come to an end at some stage. They're smart enough to know that each of those mentioned by you had good footy careers; long footy careers. And that eventually it will happen to them, one day, but not until after long established footy careers - if they knuckle down hard enough and get the best out of themselves.

You are right on one thing though – the players are not stupid and the older ones in particular will remember playing for a coach who tanked and also how it ended for their mates White, Robertson and Bruce et al. They will not want to see this happen to them.

Well, he was trying to win them a flag...

Maybe in this future these disgruntled players with long memories have won flags because Bailey was so driven.

You are right on one thing though – the players are not stupid and the older ones in particular will remember playing for a coach who tanked and also how it ended for their mates White, Robertson and Bruce et al. They will not want to see this happen to them.

There have been some pretty flimsy arguments levelled against Bailey's list management approach, but this must be the winner in terms of baseless, unsupportable drivel. When Bailey put this policy in place a few years ago, he did so because he didn't think we had a list capable of winning a flag, and thought the only way to win one was to rebuild from the ground up. Your Whites, Robbos and Yzes (in a nutshell; anyone not part of our next premiership tilt) had to go, so as to free up salary cap space and spots on the list, giving us plenty of room to recruit as many new players as possible.

Hence, the policy will only be in place until Bailey thinks we have recruited a list capable of winning a flag. When we're pushing for a flag, we will have no reason to delist older guys with a year or two of good footy left in them, or to give games to a young player in place of an older guy who's playing better football. All of this would be abundantly bloody clear to anyone on the playing list, if not to all Melbourne supporters.

I doubt that Davey, Jamar or Sylvia are going to jump ship out of concern that if they stick around they'll be "shafted" as soon as they turn 30, like Bruce, Yze, White, and (apparently) Alan Jakovich were.

Bailey is in the process of trying to recruit and build a list of players that can win a flag. Bruce wasn't going to be part of that, so Bailey isn't going to lose any sleep over his departure.

If he really wanted to keep Bruce then he would have just given him the terms he wanted, but he didn't. What does that say?

As for losing the players, once we have a list that can win a flag then I'm sure that Bailey will do everything he can to keep them together. I don't think too many players will be looking to leave when we're pushing for a flag.

If we made a prelim in 2011, do you think Brad Green would leave the club if he was offered a one year contract?

Bailey is in the process of trying to recruit and build a list of players that can win a flag. Bruce wasn't going to be part of that, so Bailey isn't going to lose any sleep over his departure.

If he really wanted to keep Bruce then he would have just given him the terms he wanted, but he didn't. What does that say?

As for losing the players, once we have a list that can win a flag then I'm sure that Bailey will do everything he can to keep them together. I don't think too many players will be looking to leave when we're pushing for a flag.

If we made a prelim in 2011, do you think Brad Green would leave the club if he was offered a one year contract?

Never felt so optimistic to how club is travelling for a very long time. The biggest time/money waster and serial wet sponge at the club is gone. Bailey Goosed the Bruce!

Edited November 9, 201014 yr by america de cali

Bruce's departure, along with others now raises the serious dilemma of: who are we all going to be divided on ?

Frosty's gone.. PJ's gone... Bruce...gone

What a strange coincidence that all those that seem to have divided opinion on these boards are no more....believe it or not !!! lol

Bruce's departure, along with others now raises the serious dilemma of: who are we all going to be divided on ?

Frosty's gone.. PJ's gone... Bruce...gone

What a strange coincidence that all those that seem to have divided opinion on these boards are no more....believe it or not !!! lol

Nathan Jones is still there, as is Cale Morton, Jamie Bennell and Liam Jurrah. But for the last one, we're just divided as to whether he'll be a star, or a God.

The way Bailey has gone about it over the past few years has been pretty poor.

Great servants of the club who have been burned:

Jeff White - great servant of the club

Addam Yze - gave his all

Robbo - gave heaps to our club

McDonald - did us all proud

Now Bruce

Surely apart of the clubs heritage is to recognise those who have served our club well in a dignified manner. The chopping of Robbo, White, McDonald and Yze were anything but done respectfully.

The Demons have done well in fixing many areas, they need a bit of work done in the football department.

There is no doubt in my mind that the FD are trying to develop a culture and in it a climate that everyone is playing for their spot and if the FD does not feel you warrant being on the list- they will turn you over- however IMO- doing this to Bruce & Junior is going a little too far- but we will never know the exact situation that happened.

Nathan Jones is still there, as is Cale Morton, Jamie Bennell and Liam Jurrah. But for the last one, we're just divided as to whether he'll be a star, or a God.

very true... lucky , otherwise it was going to get dull .lol

There is no doubt in my mind that the FD are trying to develop a culture and in it a climate that everyone is playing for their spot and if the FD does not feel you warrant being on the list- they will turn you over- however IMO- doing this to Bruce & Junior is going a little too far- but we will never know the exact situation that happened.

You were very confident that Bruce had a verbal agreement with Melbourne and would play on next year. So was DB and the club. Any inside goss or thoughts on what went wrong?

You were very confident that Bruce had a verbal agreement with Melbourne and would play on next year. So was DB and the club. Any inside goss or thoughts on what went wrong?

Ricky Nixon !!!

You were very confident that Bruce had a verbal agreement with Melbourne and would play on next year. So was DB and the club. Any inside goss or thoughts on what went wrong?

I was thinking the same thing today....interested to hear

Lots of comments ... but I can't agree with some of the posts:

- Plenty of clubs have the same policy as Melbourne. Crawford and his one year deals has been mentioned. Brett Harvey is another who has been on one year deals for quite some time.

- McDonald is a different case to Bruce. He had played for 4 years longer - and the last year on a one-year deal.

- None of the Melbourne players who have been supposedly "pushed out" were picked up by other clubs. They really were passed their use-by date.

- Bruce obviously feels/felt that he would be dumped at the end of 2011. Who knows. It's a shame he didn't have the gumption to play the year, on a good salary, and let his football do the talking. It's hard to blame the FD for not having confidence in him, when he clearly doesn't have much confidence in himself.

Personally, I think it's unfortunate, but very hard to point the finger at the FD in this, and it sends an important message to the players: Earn your place.

Meanwhile, I think it's a great opportunity for the likes of Maric, Jetta, Strauss and perhaps McNamara if he's re-rookied. Unfortunately, could also have been a great chance for Cheney - who might now find himself kept out of the Hawthorn team by one of the players who kept him out at Melbourne.

It doesn't sound like money is now the issue though. I think Bruce probably just wanted an assurance that as long as he is still in our best 22 he would continue to get a game. (I think this is a pretty justifiable stance to take given he only gets one crack at it.) I also think Bailey needs to consider the long-term impact on the club culture of continuing to build for the future. IMO most of the older MFC players will have a lot of sympathy for Bruce’s situation and taking this path could eventually see him eventually lose the players.

FFS, please read Mike's article in the Hun today.

he walked !!!... wanted more $$$$ and captaincy !!!!

Barb.

You embarrass yourself and your family!!

I cannot believe you really have said this.

Knowing the person this amazes me!!

Barb.

You embarrass yourself and your family!!

I cannot believe you really have said this.

Knowing the person this amazes me!!

You might want to change your user-name. What's the world coming to when True Believer is a cynic, but Realist won't face the truth?

- Bruce obviously feels/felt that he would be dumped at the end of 2011. Who knows. It's a shame he didn't have the gumption to play the year, on a good salary, and let his football do the talking. It's hard to blame the FD for not having confidence in him, when he clearly doesn't have much confidence in himself.

If he thought we were going to move him on after 2010 regardless, it wouldn't have mattered how well he played. If he had this view, it would have only been reinforced by the fact McDonald played some pretty good footy and was still moved on. Bruce has a chance to move Clubs now, but I think it'd be too late to make a move after 2010.

If he thought we were going to move him on after 2010 regardless, it wouldn't have mattered how well he played. If he had this view, it would have only been reinforced by the fact McDonald played some pretty good footy and was still moved on. Bruce has a chance to move Clubs now, but I think it'd be too late to make a move after 2010.

Mcdonald's is a different case IMO.

Mcdonald did play some good footy this year, but also had a hamstring injury that (from memory) was a usual 3 week hammy that streched out for 6 weeks and he returned to play OK footy toward the end.

He was 34 and had been on single year contracts for the last few years if memory serves.

Mcdonald's is a different case IMO.

Mcdonald did play some good footy this year, but also had a hamstring injury that (from memory) was a usual 3 week hammy that streched out for 6 weeks and he returned to play OK footy toward the end.

He was 34 and had been on single year contracts for the last few years if memory serves.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were I'd wager that McDonald's termination was in Bruce's thoughts.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were I'd wager that McDonald's termination was in Bruce's thoughts.

May well have been, but wrongfuly so IMO.