More Brock banter...

[Jarka 767]

Is it just me or does going back and dragging up a quote from two years ago to prove your argument seem a bit, well, excessive?

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I would have thought Brad Green moreso than Bruce

That's why I wrote "had a lot to do with", implying that he didn't win the game on his own. However, along with others (including Green) he was a significant contributor.

[Geddy Lee 582]

Is it just me or does going back and dragging up a quote from two years ago to prove your argument seem a bit, well, excessive?

The internet is serious business.

[Jaded No More 67,600]

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

Future captain

CHF not CHB/FB [end quote]

I still stand by my comment that Miller has a lot of leadership potential. If you read back you'll see that I clearly stated that your captain does not have to be your best player. At the time when I wrote this, the club had the same views as me, because they appointed Miller a Vice Captain. If he continued on from 2005, instead of getting injured in 2006 and having a poor season, he would still be in the leadership group and people would be throwing his name up along with Bruce, Brock and Green. I cannot forsee injuries or form slumps.

Are you saying that Brock may have a form slump and find himself in the same situation as Miller? I guess that could happen. Bruce could also injure his knee tomorrow and spend a year on the sidelines, or stuff up the shoulder again (heaven forbid). We can't predict what will happen in a month, a year, or 5 years from now. The point I was making is that you can't teach leadership. McLean is a born leader, so is Miller. Say what you want about his skills, or his footy brain, you can't deny his leadership qualities, in fact I'm pretty certain that it was the main reason we drafted him.

BTW, I never advocated to appoint Miller captain straight away (notice the word 'future'). He still had a lot to prove, and still does. Brock on the other hand, has done more than Miller at this stage.

CB, I stand corrected, he did play a big part in winning that final in 2000. But as you said, that was a long time ago. Would be great to see him do that again!

[timD 994]

Dear Dappa, thanks for teh considered response.

I'm timD from demonology...if that's who you mean.

I want to state just a few points.

Age is a major consideration. There are two things to consider. first, maturity relates to age. Second we cannot judge his maturity. Third (i missed a point) i do not care how mature a 21 year old is - it is very hard to have someone of that age tell a 26 year-old to do anything. The age represents a limiting factor on maturity and particularly authority. It also represents a limit on learning how to be good when things are hard. Does Brock know how to stand up to BIg media and corporate attention (as he will be required to as captain) at 21? Will it impact on his footy. Need we risk that?

"Just because he's been fairly regularly injured doesn't mean he shouldn't do the job." - umm, yes it does. Tell me, how to hamil go as captain when injured. Howe did the saints go? What about when hayes got injured as captain, or ball, or reiwoltd? It had a pretty clear impact on their team - in fact it still does. On that note, what does the St. Kilda experience of young captains tell you about whether it is a good idea?

"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. "

It has been at times. There are also times where he has really struggled. The comparison with Judd is flattering. Judd has had a marked impact on games when heavily tagged. Brock has NEVER had to deal with this, and NEVER influenced games like Judd has. He may well in the future, but I doubt it. Lets compare like with like.

"...he has won a number of matches off his own boot, including a final." Name another match he has won off his own boot.

"Look, there's no question it's early for him to be captain. But that shouldn't necessarily be SUCH a big deterrent. "

WHAT? - you'll risk increasing his profile, increasing his pressure, increasing his off-field committements and hope that he can carry the inside mid-role and not get injured (like he has every year) and do o.k., at his age AND hope that the added responsibility won't influence him negatively? I see a lot of potential downside and NO upside at all.

" In my view, Brock is exceptional enough to be skipper now. " Based on what? One good final. A few excellent games...a good attitude over three years...that's all it takes?

My argument can be condensed: The probabilty of Brock being too young is high now. We gain nothing from him being captain in 12-24 months. Let him earn it over the next three years. At 25, with 8 years of footy left, than he'll have a much better chance at being the captain we need.

My prediction: Brock will be consistently injured throughout the year; by mid 2008 there will be many posters campainging for Nathan Jones to be captain, with all the same arguments Dappa...just you watch.

[bleed blue blood 0]

Personally I think Netiz should have given up the captaincy this year to allow a different player to take the reins of the football club. I think the biggest problem with the MFC is lack of leadership.

Bruce is the obvious choice as captain. He performs week in, week out, is willing to sacrifice his own game for the better of the team (see him playing on Tarrant last year) and is very good in the media. I think the players respect his football ability but whether they respect him as a person and a leader I have yet to be convinced. If Miller is lazing around at CHB (as we all know he has done), I really can't see Bruce running down there and telling him to pull his head in let alone Miller actually listening to him. If Barry Hall or Michael Voss were to do the same thing, I guarantee that player would end up BOG for fear of his life!

Brock is still too young and is injury prone. As someone has already said, he needs to learn how to manage his body and put a few seasons together before he will be considered a captain. I feel he is very much in the same boat as Mark Coughlan from Richmond. He was touted as the saviour of the club and definately the next captain but a bout of osteitus pubis and two knee reco's later sees him in doubt for his career let alone being captain. If Brock can learn to listen to his body, he will be future captain material.

There have been a few names brought up that are definately not captain material; Green, Yze, White, Miller. Yze and Green play for themselves, White is getting old now and Miller is, well, Miller.

Selecting a captain and a leadership group should not be taken lightly. It does not solely affect the players chosen but also those ones that aren't chosen. Take Carlton for example, they put Gibbs into the leadership group before he has even played a game. Murphy's name was thrown around this preseason as a possible captain! Now if I were a player like Fisher, Thornton, Carrazzo etc. who have been there a few years and have all played well, I'd be a bit dissappointed if I had to 'look up' to a first year player. Almost as if an electrician has to take orders from his apprentice.

It's a bit of a long first post but I hope I got my point accross.

[Jaded No More 67,600]

Just on ABC 7pm news....

The police have recorded conversations between drug dealers as part of an undercover investigation.

One of the conversations recorded was between two drug dealers discussing Cousins and Kerr, another conversation was between Kerr and his drug dealer.

Kerr was telling the drug dealer how the drugs he took made him feel very strange and forget where he was. I think they said it was a horse sedative that he bought.

Funnily enough, the dealer asked Kerr about the following week's game, and Kerr said "we're playing Melbourne at home, we should beat them"... didn't stop him from tearing us a new one unfortunately! <_<

The plot thickens now, and it will be interesting to see what West Coast does with this new information.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

I would have Brad Green before I would have Bruce.

Agreed. He went a LONG way to convincing me he was a lot more than a flashy frontrunner in 2006.

Nice thesis Dappa...you must be unemployed?

Absolutely spot on, me old matey... though I work on a contract basis, so work can be fairly seasonal with me. (excuses, excuses)

Hey Tim. Don't recall you posting here too much, though obviously you have. Nice of you to offer your thoughts.

Ok, I'll try and make this quick as our posts are probably putting people to sleep. Well, mine anyway.

You make a pretty persuasive argument, and you make it well... However (there's always a however).

"Maturity relates to age", yes, but maturity is far from being DEFINED by age. Going by this theory we should put ALL the oldest players in the leadership group and make them captains (extremist, I know). I reckon, first see if he's up to it, then look at his D.O.B. Otherwise we're just selling ourselves short.

I'm not saying he's as good as Judd, but I will say there's a fair amount of evidence to say he could LEAD just as well, if not better. And how old is Judd? When was he placed in the leadership group? Brock's there at the end of his third year.

"We cannot judge his maturity." Correct, as I pointed out. So what? We're not here to make the final decision. From what little I can see, he's clearly a cut above the rest. If the club goes with the decision to promote him, I have no grounds to disagree. He's not failed at anything yet, and he's been as responsible as you could possibly expect a player to be.

"It's very hard for a 21-year old to tell a 26 year old what to do." I can see how someone would say this, but I have to say from experince that this is just a rule that's born to be broken. A total generalisation. It's fair enough to assume a teenager can't push around the older guys, but if he's PROVEN that he can call the shots with 200 game players then what more do you need to know? For what it's worth, I'm 27 and I don't mind being told what to do by a young bloke if he's CLEARLY got everyone's respect and is a better candidate for leadership than me. If the older players at MFC can't follow orders from a MFC sanctioned leader, then THEY are at fault.

Now one of the bigger things. It's a very easy thing to say the evidence of Reiwoldt, Hayes and Ball as captains suggests we shouldn't give young guys a go for fear of the same syndrome repeating itself. But I'll say this... I'll never compare a potential future demon leader to ANYONE at St. Kilda, especially their so-called leaders. Great players all, and as skilled, tough and talented as you'd ever want a single player to be, but just because they failed, or were unlucky enough to be injured during their tenures doesn't mean Brock will be. There's any number of reason NOT to select ANY of the players that lend themselves to leadership roles at MFC, but IMO the excuses not to promote Brock come from one place, and one place alone... fear. I'm utterly convinced, albeit on a fair amount of faith, that Brock will take whatever confidence the club shows in him and run with it. There will be no timidity, and no tears if he injures a shoulder. Call me a fantasist, but that's what I BELIEVE, not think. "Need we risk that?" that's the crux of our debate. IMO there's no-one coming through that could mean as much as a leader as Neita does, save Brock. No, we don't NEED to risk it, but it's an acceptable risk, as it was for St.Kilda.

When has he struggled? I mean, when recently? Obviously we can't apply his first couple of years, anyone would struggle a bit then. You're spot on when you say a comparison to Judd is flattering. It's also pointless, so I'll stop from pursuing that from here on in.

"Winning games off his own boot" is clearly the wrong phrase to use. What I meant was that there's no dees in and under player who's made his impact in recent years, and who even when not on song, can still get you clearances in a way no other current demon can, besides maybe JMac and perhaps Jones and Bate in a few years. Off his own boot? Maybe not so much, but he's more than done his job on all but only a few occassions.

"WHAT? - you'll risk increasing his profile.......that's all it takes?" (big paragraph)

Absolutely. Absolutely I'd risk it, and you're missing the upside. The fact that the demons would finally have an A-Grade leader, in a confirmed captaincy role IN THE CENTRE for the first time in god knows how long, probably since Flower, or maybe Viney. That's as enormous an upside I can think of, just about. I can tell you (and I expect you to take this only for what it's worth) from many close friends who know him personally that this will not come as a surprise for him. His family, and those close to him had him pencilled in as future skipper WHEN HE WAS DRAFTED. He KNOWS this is coming, and he'll be as prepared as any 21 year old could possibly be. This will not be thrust upon him without his knowing. Make no mistake, the rumours of his being bred for leadership are NOT exaggerated.

Having said all that, I'm not going to be terribly upset if he's not put forward straight away. Like I said, there are a number of players I'd be satidfied with (some more than others), so there'll be no kicking and screaming from me if he's not named at the next opportunity.

Oh, and your prediction is right on about Jones, but it doesn't detract from my point. I'LL still be campaigning for Brock, I'm sure. Maybe I'll be having this debate with you in reverse. Wouldn't that be a pleasant dilemma.

To sum up, there's plenty of reasons NOT to select Brock, Bruce, Robbo or Green. And many of them rely on speculation from BOTH our sides of the arguement. For what it's worth, if Brock is selected I'll celebrate, and if he cops a knee in week one, I'll still say it was the right choice. IMO we can't NOT select a captain because of what can go wrong. I hope we pick one based on what he CAN become. I hope the demons heirarchy shows some faith and rolls the dice, as in short, I reckon he's worth the "risk." But that's just me, I'm happy to be proven wrong, as long as we're trying SOMETHING daring.

[Madness 44]

Onfield of course brock is better than miller, and I wasn't being insulting, just stating fact. But hey, I could be completely wrong and I hope I am! Brock was a school captain and does very much look like a born leader, but I just think it's too much pressure for a 21yo (22yo next year).

[Seekers SEECAMP 0]

I still stand by my comment that Miller... because they appointed Miller a Vice Captain.

Miller was not a VC..he was part of the leadership group. By no means does this position place a mortgage on the captaincy. Just ask Yze, Dog,Biz & Nicho.

[Gorgoroth 12,686]

i think brock is the next real captain of MFC

if thats means next year or in 3 who knows, but on last years performances of when both bruce and green captained MFC i would have green ahead by a mile, i dont like bruce as captain, i dont think he handled it well last time

[Jaded No More 67,600]

I still stand by my comment that Miller... because they appointed Miller a Vice Captain.

Miller was not a VC..he was part of the leadership group. By no means does this position place a mortgage on the captaincy. Just ask Yze, Dog,Biz & Nicho.

He was one of 4 Vice Captains, as not one of the 4 leaders under Neitz were given official titles of "Vice" or "Deputy Vice", but that's all irrelevant details really.

As I said at the time, he has the potential to be a future captain. All eventual captains start out as deputies in the leadership group, and Miller was no different. The only thing that is holding him back from being a great leader, is finding consistency on the field, and while Bruce is undoubtedly a much better footballer, he too is prone to long acts of disappearance and IMO he is not a born leader (of course this is purely an outsiders observation, and I could be wrong).

Glad you have time to search through the archives for things I said two year ago.

[BrownlowBruce 1]

Personally I think Netiz should have given up the captaincy this year to allow a different player to take the reins of the football club. I think the biggest problem with the MFC is lack of leadership.

Bruce is the obvious choice as captain. He performs week in, week out, is willing to sacrifice his own game for the better of the team (see him playing on Tarrant last year) and is very good in the media. I think the players respect his football ability but whether they respect him as a person and a leader I have yet to be convinced. If Miller is lazing around at CHB (as we all know he has done), I really can't see Bruce running down there and telling him to pull his head in let alone Miller actually listening to him. If Barry Hall or Michael Voss were to do the same thing, I guarantee that player would end up BOG for fear of his life!

Brock is still too young and is injury prone. As someone has already said, he needs to learn how to manage his body and put a few seasons together before he will be considered a captain. I feel he is very much in the same boat as Mark Coughlan from Richmond. He was touted as the saviour of the club and definately the next captain but a bout of osteitus pubis and two knee reco's later sees him in doubt for his career let alone being captain. If Brock can learn to listen to his body, he will be future captain material.

There have been a few names brought up that are definately not captain material; Green, Yze, White, Miller. Yze and Green play for themselves, White is getting old now and Miller is, well, Miller.

Selecting a captain and a leadership group should not be taken lightly. It does not solely affect the players chosen but also those ones that aren't chosen. Take Carlton for example, they put Gibbs into the leadership group before he has even played a game. Murphy's name was thrown around this preseason as a possible captain! Now if I were a player like Fisher, Thornton, Carrazzo etc. who have been there a few years and have all played well, I'd be a bit dissappointed if I had to 'look up' to a first year player. Almost as if an electrician has to take orders from his apprentice.

It's a bit of a long first post but I hope I got my point accross.

so that leaves us with no captain awesome.

Agreed. He went a LONG way to convincing me he was a lot more than a flashy frontrunner in 2006.

Green better than bruce last year? HAHAHA u have got to be kidding mate.

lets not make us get at all the stats and just agree bruce was far more consistant than him.

ok now lets talk about brock performin in BIG GAMES.

BIG GAMES = finals or games we must win.

brock has played 4 finals

had one big game and one good game (both last year)

no impact watsoever on the other two.

look at the big games we had last year must win games. carlton sydney geelong ect.

im far from convinved he STOOD strong/strongest

Cameron Bruce Name Brock McLean

146 Career Games 47

27 Age 21

190 cm Height 184 cm

85 kg Weight 88 kg

24 2006 Games 18

12.7 Kicks Per Game 13.8

9.8 Handballs Per Game 8.6

22.4 Disposals Per Game 22.3

7.3 Marks Per Game 5.2

0.9 Goals Per Game 0.8

0.8 Behinds Per Game 0.2

4.1 Tackles Per Game 4.3

0.2 Hitouts Per Game 0.1

1.1 Frees For Per Game 0.9

1.0 Frees Against Per Game 1.2

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Oh dear.

First. Green better than Bruce last year? No-one said that, least of all me. I said Green went a long way to convincing me he was captain material. Read posts before you blaze away passing comment.

This is the worst kind of stat counting. First of all, it's completely beside the point as neither player fulfills the same role, and neither are anywhere NEAR the same age. But worst of all, you're counting stats comparing players in a debate that has been, to this point, entirely devoted to the subject of captaincy. There's no stat for how effectively a player leads.

And none of this "let's just agree" malarkey. I'll agree when I agree.

[timD 994]

Thanks again for the considered response Dappa.

I think that we are seeing the same variables but weighting them slightly differently. After doing that a bunch of times we get our various positions. We probably don't actually disagree by much on much.

For what it is worth, I think that Green is the more deserving candidate at the moment. That may well change in two-three years from now. And I do not see that captaincy something to be daring with - hard-nosed, pragmatic and successful, yes. Daring - why?

[Slartibartfast 16,867]

Bruce is undoubtedly a much better footballer, he too is prone to long acts of disappearance and IMO he is not a born leader (of course this is purely an outsiders observation, and I could be wrong).

Why do people have Bruce in the gun so much?

Bruce is one of the most skillful players in the league. He is clearly one of our best. Last year in 24 games he never had less than 14 possessions other than when he did a tagging role on Peter Bell in the Freo final. Nine times he had more than 25 disposals.

From where I sit in the stands he doesn't look to be a leader, that I agree with. But "long acts of disappearance"?

Give me a break!! Perhaps it's time to adjust your expectations Jaded!!

[Rivers Run Red 187]

I think Mark Stevens summed it up in todays paper...

"McLean, a born leader, will be Melbourne captain. It is just a metter of when."

[Goodvibes 3,596]

I like the Bruce, Brock, Brad (Green that is) co-captain option. It's the classical fence sitting position but I can see the three of them working really well. All of them possess a fine work ethic, the ability to communicate well with teammates and in the media. They all play in the midfield and can have a real influence. Brock and Bruce are probably two of our best three players along with Trapper and Green will be close to that level after an injury free year. He found a lot of the ball last year and was only let down by uncharacteristic poor disposal. Post-season operation has hopefully fixed that problem. Add Rivers and maybe a matured Travis to the leadership group next year and we're looking better than we have for a long time in terms of leadership. But having said all that - long live Neita!!

[classy dees 42]

Why do people have Bruce in the gun so much?

Bruce is one of the most skillful players in the league. He is clearly one of our best. Last year in 24 games he never had less than 14 possessions other than when he did a tagging role on Peter Bell in the Freo final. Nine times he had more than 25 disposals.

From where I sit in the stands he doesn't look to be a leader, that I agree with. But "long acts of disappearance"?

Give me a break!! Perhaps it's time to adjust your expectations Jaded!!

Great post fan.

in the EF last year, brock would have got 3 brownlow's, but bruce would have got 2 and probably green 1. if we get a few games again this year where this happens, we will be pushing it come the end of september.

[Gorgoroth 12,686]

i hate the more than 1 captain crap, it cheapens the role of captain, thats what vice captains are for, id love us to have 1 captain, 1 vice captain and 3 deputy vice captains which together for the "leadership" group

[occo 2]

i hate the more than 1 captain crap, it cheapens the role of captain, thats what vice captains are for, id love us to have 1 captain, 1 vice captain and 3 deputy vice captains which together for the "leadership" group

Well in that case for the future (3-5 years) it should be Brock (captain), Bruce (vice capt), Bate, Jones, Johnstone (deputy sherrifs...of i mean captains)

[Goodvibes 3,596]

i hate the more than 1 captain crap, it cheapens the role of captain, thats what vice captains are for, id love us to have 1 captain, 1 vice captain and 3 deputy vice captains which together for the "leadership" group

I get the feeling that Jonathon Brown might well agree with you. Seems to have worked in Sydney. It will be interesting to see if it's just a trend or whether it becomes stock standard.

[Jaded No More 67,600]

Give me a break!! Perhaps it's time to adjust your expectations Jaded!!

Talk about manipulating the argument!

I never said Bruce wasn't a great player, in fact I'm pretty sure I made it very clear that he is one of our best.

But if I remember correctly, you were one of many who were dirty with Bruce a couple of years ago. Yes, he was good last year, and yes he was injured the year before, but he was also very much in the same group along with Yze and Green and some other senior players who often didn't go hard enough, and often didn't show up when it mattered most. Has he changed since? Yes, absolutely (not as much as Green mind you), does that automatically make him captain material? I don't think so.

My expectations of Bruce are very reasonable. I want him to perform at his best 9 out of 10 games, and I'm confident he can do that. I don't expect him to lead the team while he does it though. My argument isn't that Bruce is not a good enough player to be captain, it's that he isn't a natural leader. If we were appointing captains on skills alone, we'd have to hand the job over to TJ... a perfect example of why it takes more than an ability to play, to be a good leader.

[Seekers SEECAMP 0]

He was one of 4 Vice Captains, as not one of the 4 leaders under Neitz were given official titles of "Vice" or "Deputy Vice", but that's all irrelevant details really.

Glad you have time to search through the archives for things I said two year ago.

To label a player a Vice captain when he is not is hardly irrelevant in any context of a discussion.

Irrespective of my opinions and Fans perspectives on Bruce, whats relevant here is that nothing he has stated is fabricated or contrived.