Remove this Banner Ad

Broughton

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redgum
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Scham said:
The Morton deal makes the Broughton deal look better. Melbourne have out done us again. WCE really screwed them good and proper.
Click to expand...

Disagree. Morton is shit. Has a nice kick on him but is a massive sook and lacks a set of testicles
 
I'm surprised the Eagles picked up another squib. They already play a pretty uncontested brand of football.
 
Freo Shark said:
But we bid for both Goddard and Cloke, we're not short of cap space.
Click to expand...

Pearce would've come in on similar money to Broughton. We have no idea how other re-signings would've been handled had Goddard or Cloke come to Fremantle. Ibbotson still hasn't been re-signed. McPhee was only re-signed after Cloke and Goddard were off the market.

How much would you pay a defender that isn't a distributor out of defence (Pearce, MJ and Duffield) isn't a KP player (Dawson and McPharlin) can't rotate onto talls (Johnson and McPhee) and doesn't add much to your midfield rotation? At some point you have to look at the numbers and say "Broughton is a really solid player, but in his current role under this coach, he is being overpaid. I wonder what we can get for him..."

That doesn't mean we shouldn't have done better than pick #37.
 
He didn't want to stay and he went for a bag of chips.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

The deal that Hawthorn got for Gilham makes me even more angry about the shitty Broughton deal.
 
Freo Shark said:
But we bid for both Goddard and Cloke, we're not short of cap space.
Click to expand...

That's part of the evidence in my mind.

Apparently port were interested in Broughton but then lost interest when they saw how much he would get paid in the last year of his contract. Now if we have as much cap space as they say we could have easily offered to pay some of his remaining contract (North did this with Hale). Port had better picks than GC to offer 30 and 31 but appeared unwilling to take on his large salary. So we took the lesser pick so we could save on cap space.

I find it interesting that Broughton reportedly has a back ended contract. Last year we had cap space to offer Clark a reportedly large salary(let's say 600k) but then obviously the deal feel through. So we were left with 600k cap space for the 2012 season with no one to really fill it (Dawson would've taken some). So we do what anyone would do and we front load a bunch of contracts to free up space for next year, but we don't front load Broughton's.

So now we've apparently freed up 1mil + to offer Cloke from 2013 even with Broughtons back ended contract. But we didn't get Cloke so we have 1mil cap space for 2013 and yet we choose not to use any of it on making Broughton a more desirable trade target. I think we're freeing up a shit load of cap space to play with
 
Bender571 said:
That's part of the evidence in my mind.

Apparently port were interested in Broughton but then lost interest when they saw how much he would get paid in the last year of his contract. Now if we have as much cap space as they say we could have easily offered to pay some of his remaining contract (North did this with Hale). Port had better picks than GC to offer 30 and 31 but appeared unwilling to take on his large salary. So we took the lesser pick so we could save on cap space.

I find it interesting that Broughton reportedly has a back ended contract. Last year we had cap space to offer Clark a reportedly large salary(let's say 600k) but then obviously the deal feel through. So we were left with 600k cap space for the 2012 season with no one to really fill it (Dawson would've taken some). So we do what anyone would do and we front load a bunch of contracts to free up space for next year, but we don't front load Broughton's.

So now we've apparently freed up 1mil + to offer Cloke from 2013 even with Broughtons back ended contract. But we didn't get Cloke so we have 1mil cap space for 2013 and yet we choose not to use any of it on making Broughton a more desirable trade target. I think we're freeing up a shit load of cap space to play with
Click to expand...

Or preparing for the inevitable million a year Fyfe contract
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Jentleman Geff said:
What evidence do you have for Broughton 'cracking it'? There was no challenge from the club to improve, it was a simple message that he was surplus to requirements. You are inferring a lot from very, very little evidence that Broughton didn't 'buy in'.

Sometimes it's as simple as the coach looking at the list and identifying a player that is good but doesn't slot easily into any defined role in the game plan. It's as simple as Broughton being a jack of all trades but not a true master of any, and the club taking the opportunity to get something for him.
Click to expand...

Done and dusted now but all I'll say now is you have zero evidence to suggest he was "surplus", thats just your theory. You said yourself he was a good player yet sold for nothing. Do the maths and it doesn't add up... But there is a smoky haze surrounding the GB/Lyon rift and where there is smoke.....
 
pistol17 said:
But there is a smoky haze surrounding the GB/Lyon rift and where there is smoke.....
Click to expand...
No there isn't. It just makes it more palatable if you make Broughton the devil.

It's strange how every player we've passed on in the draft or moved on from the club has a massive character flaw.
 
Jentleman Geff said:
I'm surprised the Eagles picked up another squib. They already play a pretty uncontested brand of football.
Click to expand...
They had a glaring deficiency in their list when Swifty pulled the plug and ran away, so they needed to replace him with someone they knew had the runs on the board already.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

freofan_mundy said:
Don't get that logic. Isn't 37 going to be an untried player? Even 13 would have been an untried player.
Hawks got a great deal there.
Click to expand...

They got a deal that was ok, not something that should be making Freo fans even more angry about the Broughton trade. The Broughton trade is bad by itself, no need to compare it to other teams trading.
 
Jesus H Christ.. 37 pages worth of whinging that we traded a solid HBF'er (of which we have another 3 prime age players who whilst fall slightly short of Broughts, the difference is relatively negligable) for a pick which most seem to agree is all of about 10 spots lower than his FREE market value. Yes probably ordinary, but what trade is ever favourable to both parties? Could be worse, we could have searched out Cale Morton to add to our list

We must be going slightly better than we have in previous regime's if this is the bearbug of everyone's offseason

I pray we pick a superstar with 37 so i can ram this thread up gravvy/clay/JG's arse.. you are the master of selective examples/arguments/retrospective keyboard wars.. why you arent working in a football department somewhere must be a mystery to you?
 
dont bowl there said:
They got a deal that was ok, not something that should be making Freo fans even more angry about the Broughton trade. The Broughton trade is bad by itself, no need to compare it to other teams trading.
Click to expand...

The Broughton trade is bad by itself. But even worse when you consider we received far less than another team did for their 28 year old lessar player with a fairly recent ACL injury, who only played six games this year and is a fringe player.

Comparison is the only way to judge trades.
 
yakka man said:
The Broughton trade is bad by itself. But even worse when you consider we received far less than another team did for their 28 year old lessar player with a fairly recent ACL injury, who only played six games this year and is a fringe player.

Comparison is the only way to judge trades.
Click to expand...

I disagree with the bolded, there are so many different factors involved in each trade. GWS have 5 first round draft picks and players they have rights to that they may not want. Hard to compare trades when at the moment there is such a great discrepancy between what each team has to trade.

Also Broughtons contract would have been a lot higher than Gilham etc.
 
dont bowl there said:
I disagree with the bolded, there are so many different factors involved in each trade. GWS have 5 first round draft picks and players they have rights to that they may not want. Hard to compare trades when at the moment there is such a great discrepancy between what each team has to trade.

Also Broughtons contract would have been a lot higher than Gilham etc.
Click to expand...

GC have an end of first round compensation pick which would've been pick 22 in this years draft. That would've been a fair trade.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom