Cameron Bruce

[TheBoss]

Good post Dr Awkward. It really shows that some MFC supporters do not have their head screwed on properly when they can't acknowledge that Bruce was a very good player throughout his career.

On another topic, I notice a lot of people saying Bruce's departure is good as it opens a spot for a young player. Wouldn't it have been more beneficial to have the kids compete for spots in the side with more experienced players instead of handing them games on a silver platter for the sake of experience. It'll encourage them to become more competitive, instills a greater work ethic and will reward players for earning their spot.

 

[CaloHawka]

you guys should of given him 2 years which is exactly what the mighty Hawks will do.
You lost 10 years of pure experience

 

[stretcharmstrong]

you guys should of given him 2 years which is exactly what the mighty Hawks will do.
You lost 10 years of pure experience

If by "should of" you mean should have, no we shouldn't have. We have a policy as do most other clubs and the player doesn't get to dictate terms to the club, the club comes first. It's sad to see him go, especially like this, but the club did the right thing.

 

[TheBoss]

It's sad to see him go, especially like this, but the club did the right thing.

Sorry Stretch, but its too early to come to that conclusion. No one is able to evaluate the decision MFC made to let Bruce walk until the end of the 2011 (and possibly the 2012) season*.

*Assuming he plays on elsewhere

 

[Demon 16]

No we won't. He was on the veteran's list, we will get an extra rookie pick for him.

Good point. Damn!

 

[AndrewD]

Re: Bruce quits club

I don't like this good luck to him rubbish. He's a traitor and he should be treated like one.

If you want the club to act in a professional manner and do the very best to ensure its success then you can't start whinging when the players do exactly the same thing. Melbourne didn't offer what Cam Bruce wanted so, being a professional and wanting to ensure his professional success, he quit the club.

I don't like it and, given that Hawthorn are the club sniffing around, I become instantly suspicious (they would have known Melbourne's policy on contracts for older players and I remember the Gibson situation from last year). Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways. If you want the players to be entirely faithful to the club and put it above their professional and/or personal interests then the club has to do the same thing. But that means the club has to compromise itself and that isn't the way to become successful. I'm sorry he's going but I'm glad to see we remained firm in our convictions; as we did regarding Hale.

I still say, good luck to him. He gave Melbourne his best footballing years (didn't leave during his prime - an act I would have felt stronger about) but now someone else will get his last year or two.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Re: Bruce quits club

the thing is, what he wanted was a guarantee he would be playing (confirmed by DB stating he felt he wasn't in the long term plans of the club)

not getting that is fine by me

very disappointing, i wish him the best, but this doesn't sit well with my perception of Bruce

 

[Djcjdees]

Re: Bruce quits club

Difficult to know what to think without all the details.

If he was holding out for money, the club should take the blame. If he wanted 2 years, then sorry Cam but that was never going to happen.

Looking on the positive side though, should leave a bit of money and an extra spot to go after someone in the PSD.

Tend to agree with this.

These decisions have to be made if we are to go forward. Yes we lost an experienced player, but as much as I like him, it must be noted that he was no Crawford/Harvey/Johnson.

That's not tosayhe didn't serve the club, as he was with us through some pretty shite times, but he was aptly remunerated.

I think he should have taken the year, the competition from the younger guys may have improved his footy, who knows

 

[LITTLE STINGA]

Bruce was an over paid prima donna who had a sook because we wouldn't over pay him anymore. He shouldn't be getting the respect he is getting on here. We don't need selfish leaders like him around the place anyway.

 

[Watts Up]

you guys should of given him 2 years which is exactly what the mighty Hawks will do.
You lost 10 years of pure experience

Let's see what you think if he ends up at the Hawks. What's that song of yours again..."all for one and one for all"....certainly not C.Bruce.

 

[Ant_]

you guys should of given him 2 years which is exactly what the mighty Hawks will do.
You lost 10 years of pure experience

Oh really?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...op-rival-pay-cut/story-e6frf9jf-1225949813583

With the Hawks tight under the salary cap, they can offer him a one-year contract that may end up paying him only the AFL's average wage if he plays most games next year.

 

[Demon 86]

Sorry Stretch, but its too early to come to that conclusion. No one is able to evaluate the decision MFC made to let Bruce walk until the end of the 2011 (and possibly the 2012) season*.

*Assuming he plays on elsewhere

Actually you're wrong. The benefits of the decision have nothing to do with football as such- it's the point that no one player should be able to dictate terms of their contract- especially terms that are in breach of the clubs policies (one year deals for 30 year olds and no guarentees of future contracts or playing time).

IMO the MFC have already won this decision by sticking to their guns.

 

[RandB]

So it was purely about his concern over being delisted at the end of the year regardless of how he played. My McLean point stands, Brock had a concern and raised it promptly with the end result him moving on.

Bruce leaves us with nothing and would have had his concerns for a while. I understand him wanting to prolong his career but given how well he's been looked after over the years by the club this result of walking to the draft doesn't sit well.

 

[Watts Up]

So it was purely about his concern over being delisted at the end of the year regardless of how he played. My McLean point stands, Brock had a concern and raised it promptly with the end result him moving on.

Bruce leaves us with nothing and would have had his concerns for a while. I understand him wanting to prolong his career but given how well he's been looked after over the years by the club this result of walking to the draft doesn't sit well.

Hence why he elected not to go to on the China trip a few weeks ago.

 

[RandB]

Hence why he elected not to go to on the China trip a few weeks ago.

naturally

 

[stretcharmstrong]

Actually you're wrong. The benefits of the decision have nothing to do with football as such- it's the point that no one player should be able to dictate terms of their contract- especially terms that are in breach of the clubs policies (one year deals for 30 year olds and no guarentees of future contracts or playing time).

IMO the MFC have already won this decision by sticking to their guns.

Yeah, you're absolutely right D86. Regardless of the outcome, MFC made the correct decision. Thinking about it in terms of the result, for example how well Bruce plays next year, is completely irrelevant. The stance/process or whatever you want to call it, was right.

 

[TheBoss]

Actually you're wrong. The benefits of the decision have nothing to do with football as such- it's the point that no one player should be able to dictate terms of their contract- especially terms that are in breach of the clubs policies (one year deals for 30 year olds and no guarentees of future contracts or playing time).

IMO the MFC have already won this decision by sticking to their guns.

This might backfire when you have out of contract players in the 28-30 age gap. They might switch clubs early to pro-long their career knowing that MFC will make any negotiation difficult.

The policy should not be set in stone, it's moronic. Should be assessed on an individual basis.

 

[bing181]

They might switch clubs early to pro-long their career knowing that MFC will make any negotiation difficult. The policy should not be set in stone, it's moronic. Should be assessed on an individual basis.

What is there in any of this to show that there's a policy that's set in stone rather than being on a case-by-case basis??

Surely it's precisely because Bruce was assessed on an individual basis that all this has come about. He was seen as perhaps not being 100% essential in 2012.

This is the same FD that gave McDonald a 2-year contract when he was 30+.

Once again, sure, it hurts, but hard to blame the FD. Right decision/process, unfortunate consequences.

 

[Demon 16]

Oh really?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...op-rival-pay-cut/story-e6frf9jf-1225949813583

Correct me if Im wrong Ant_ but that article is slightly misleading in that he has to be offered a 2 year contract if picked up in the draft.

So if he was offered $250k over 1 year by Melbourne, he would have to be offered $125k per year by his new club to be taking an effective cut. Surely he wont be playing for less than $125k - Im note even sure youre allowed to pay a 10 year veteran that little?

That being said, I dont think we should have offered him 2 years. The only reason he could be upset is if the club didnt offer it before trade week and misled him into thinking he would get a better offer - and the club are saying that didnt happen.

 

[Bartram_Class]

Correct me if Im wrong Ant_ but that article is slightly misleading in that he has to be offered a 2 year contract if picked up in the draft.

So if he was offered $250k over 1 year by Melbourne, he would have to be offered $125k per year by his new club to be taking an effective cut. Surely he wont be playing for less than $125k - Im note even sure youre allowed to pay a 10 year veteran that little?.

Not to mention the fact that it appears he left assuming he was going to get delisted at the end of 2011.

No reason that 1-year, 250k deal wouldn't have been renewed if he had a good enough year. (Incidentally, I reckon it would have been closer to 350K)

 

[master bate]

Not to mention the fact that it appears he left assuming he was going to get delisted at the end of 2011.

No reason that 1-year, 250k deal wouldn't have been renewed if he had a good enough year. (Incidentally, I reckon it would have been closer to 350K)

Come on we all know there was every chance his contract wouldn't have been renewed.

This all stems from Junior getting axed.

My mail is that the club made the Junior decision out of the blue and told him roughly half and hour before they scheduled a press conference. Apparently Jimmy had to be out of town after that so they rushed it so Jimmy could be at the press conference. Luckily Junior being the ultimate professional didn't complain but it's obviously put Bruce off side.

The Junior decision wasn't a bad one, but it wasn't handled as well as it could be, which has led to Bruce leaving.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

My respect for JMac following his retirement was tripled (as if it hadn't been already)
he knew what was in the best interests of the club and he didn't complain or bitch about anything, he knew he had had a good time in the game

fantastic bloke

 

[WinmarToLockett]

I think there's been a huge lack of respect shown to players like Robertson, White, McDonald, Bruce. Players of their calibre who have shown loyalty to the red and blue deserve to be rewarded and given the chance to end their careers a little bit more gracefully than they have been allowed.

 

[Geddy Lee]

I think there's been a huge lack of respect shown to players like Robertson, White, McDonald, Bruce. Players of their calibre who have shown loyalty to the red and blue deserve to be rewarded and given the chance to end their careers a little bit more gracefully than they have been allowed.

White and McDonald were tough calls but were the right ones. They were both great players and bled for this jumper.

Robertson was like Johnson from the Bulldogs and played a season too long. His case study would have taught the FD much about making the tougher calls, such as the aforementioned.

Bruce was offered a contract and we will never know the full story. However, he was overpaid and perhaps underperformed for the last few years so many supporters are quite bitter about his departure. As soon as the going got tough, etc.

 

[TheBoss]

Robertson was like Johnson from the Bulldogs and played a season too long.

Yet he was still the leading goal scorer despite playing only half a season. He still had something to offer at AFL level, albeit in less capacity than in previous years. I would have kept him over other forwards who stayed on such as Newton and Hughes.