Brad Sewell

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

After the footy today (Saturday) I was listening into SEN for a few hours, and they were talking about various things, and at one point Brad Sewell's name came up, and the host of the program (albeit a YOUNG host, whoever it was) mumbled something about him being in line for AA honours if he keeps up his form.

Now, regardless of whether or not you agree, it's certainly true that the Dorks have unearthed a player. From memory they offered us Sewell in exchange for Ferguson... How does that make us all feel?

A run with/defender/rebounder type who shows a LOT of good signs, in exchange for a courageous but limited tall defender who we TRIED to trade the following season, and who, let's be honest, is under threat to have his AFL career ended.

I can't help but be annoyed when I consider our small defenders and taggers:

- Bell is young and looks like a 200 gamer.

- Petterd looks to have all it takes, and seems like he won't even need that long to make regular impact in games.

- Wrecker is a gun, but is the wrong side of 28.

- Buckley looks ok, but is still a massive unknown.

- CJ is beginning to frustrate.

- Then there's the Brown/Ward/Wheatley lot who people hate.

By my count, out of that lot, besides Whelan, we have 2 small defenders that should go the distance in Bell and Petterd. CJ has shown a bit, though not enough, and Buckley still has time. But it doesn't inspire confidence does it?

Then when you consider our pure running tagger types, we have:

- JMac who SURELY hasn't got ALL that much further to go.

- Bruce, who is one of our best taggers, but is used elsewhere too often to be called one.

- Godfrey, who lo and behold is far from our worst so far, and if Daniher sees another year, you'd think he'd probably stay on the list. Who'd have thunk it? Even if Daniher DOES go, there's so many players who's careers are as good as over, we may not be able to afford to lose a guy who's only 26 (but looks 45).

- Bartram, who is a player. Pure and simple. And he has the rest of his career ahead of him.

Again, do we think there would be room there for a Brad Sewell? Petterd may grow into becoming a good run-with player when the occassion calls for it. And if he does, that makes a grand total of 2 players who SHOULD be at the club for the next 200 games or so. Godfrey won't go far past 30, JMac is great but old, and Bruce isn't a career tagger. Sewell would be IDEAL now.

I saw someone's top-ten players before the year started, and they had Stevie Baker in it. I laughed so hard I nearly puked, but I do acknowledge that Baker is, at the moment, just about the premier tagger in the business. We have no-one who compares to him in those stakes really. At least not in 2007.

I now get a little bit shirty whenever Sewell's name is brought up... There's no getting around it. If Ferg washes up, and Sewell continues playing HALF his games as well as he has in 6 rounds, then it will be considered a blunder on an otherwise good recruiting report-card. And for the record, I realise Hawthorn suggested the trade to us, not the other way around.

Thoughts?

[godees 647]

I'm pretty sure it was Ferg who refused the deal as he was contracted. I think we were going to do it if he said yes.

[Gorgoroth 12,317]

exactly it was fergs who said no

[9. David Neitz 0]

Same old boring tripe...sick to death of reading posts of others whining about Sewell, Armstrong, Jolly and others who have nothing to do with our club. They should be deleted.

[grazman 6,427]

Dan its an interesting topic you make and for most of us footy tragics is the reason why footy forums exist in the first place... if only....

My understanding of the Ferguson/Sewell trade (and I am happy to be corrected because obviously this is all based on heresay) is that both clubs were keen for the trade to go ahead. The Hawks wanted a tall defender and we were very keen on acquiring Sewell as a tagger/small defender. My mail was that Fergs wasn't all that keen to leave and in the end the clock ran out before we could get the deal over the line. It does go to show however, that we do have some astute judges in the footy dept. because at that stage Sewell was still a relative unknown.

As far as our current small defenders go I think we are in pretty good shape.

Of course we have Wheels as the elder statesman, but his soft tissue injuries now are a real concern. I think in Bell, Bartram and Petterd we have players that are the future of our defence (along with Carroll, Riv and Frawley) All three have the flexibility to move into the midfield if need be, and all three have courage, skills and pace - and significantly discipline to do a job. (I am still heading the movement to make Belly a tagger though!)

CJ is a source of frustration for me because I look at him and see a wingman. Yes I loved watching his dad play, but its not just nostalgia -He has height, pace, accurate foot skills (including the ability to kick goals) and excellent vision. I know some on here have already stamped his ticket and think he doesn't have what it takes, but the way he is used in the side at the moment is driving me spare... I guess there's a reason why I post of forums and others get paid to make these decisions.

[brey9186 102]

looking back it would have been a great swap, and hawthorn do need some height down back

but, what can you do

about steven baker, i went to carlton vs st kilda, and for alot of the time, just watched baker play on murphy, it was the best tagging role i have ever seen, he would push and bump and scrag and hit and wrestle mark murphy at every chance he got, he even was able to run off him a fair bit to deliver the ball inside 50, i would love for someone to be able to play that type of role for melbourne

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Same old boring tripe...sick to death of reading posts of others whining about Sewell, Armstrong, Jolly and others who have nothing to do with our club. They should be deleted.

Sookie sookie lala. If you don't want to read it, don't read it.

And to everyone else, thankyou for reminding me about the Ferguson wish to stay at the club. Certainly changes things doesn't it? And like people say, the footy department tried to make what looks like being the right call. Can't help circumstance though.

Ta...

[Don24 103]

im pretty sure we were requesting sewell for fergy but they didnt want to give him up.... but yeah he would be a much better tagging option than godfrey! ha

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Are you serious? Godders has been awesome. But I take your point. Going forward I'd prefer Sewell.

[Adzman 2,085]

Would Sewell have been the same player at melbourne? COMPUTER SAYS NO!

I can recall 2 season where the hawks played kids and got SMASHED week in week out. Playing kids is not something that is done at the MFC. IF Sewell has been traded to the dees, he would have been used as depth and would have not developed to this point. Sewell played some ordinary games, but they stuck with him and are now reaping the benefits.

IF Fergo had of been traded, he would be a starting player and would have developed more. Fergo could still be a great player....just not in the red and blue.

This is not a case of "we should have made the tradE", it unearths a greater issue, one of not giving guys a few extra weeks to build form and have a fair chance.

CJ is a great example of this.