Scott Lucas

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:53 am

BenDoolan wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Do you see Brisbane wanting to trade Jonathon Brown?

Bit different...isn't the beast only about 24-25?

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 10:56 am

Anonymous wrote:
BenDoolan wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Do you see Brisbane wanting to trade Jonathon Brown?
Bit different...isn't the beast only about 24-25?

Yeah....but even better "currency" then!

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:20 pm

Makes no sense and no comparison mate. Brisbane are devloping the same as us, but Brown will be still around for that run at a flag.

Also without Brown they have no strong forward target while we would still have Lloyd and a devloping Gumbelton.

azza78 · Post by **azza78** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:40 pm

Brisbane would not trade J. Brown, and not just because he's a superstar talent. Brown is also a highly respected player, a team leader and he bleeds maroon, blue and gold. Much like Lucas (except Lucas bleeds red & black).

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:59 pm

azza78 wrote:Brisbane would not trade J. Brown, and not just because he's a superstar talent. Brown is also a highly respected player, a team leader and he bleeds maroon, blue and gold. Much like Lucas (except Lucas bleeds red & black).

Spot on. That's what I was getting at....

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:02 pm

But what you missed out on, or deliberatly failed ot mention was what I pointed out. When we are done devloping Lucas will be gone. We can get something while he has value.

I have a new school mentaility, while you are trapped in teh old school.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:11 pm

Essendon4eva wrote:But what you missed out on, or deliberatly failed ot mention was what I pointed out. When we are done devloping Lucas will be gone. We can get something while he has value.

I have a new school mentaility, while you are trapped in teh old school.

Jonathon Brown's body will not hold up for him to be around for more than 4 years IMO. They may as well get some "value" out of him by trading him off for another young gun forward like Gumbleton. It makes good economic sense, don't you think?

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:16 pm

See now, you are trying to be a smart ass. You are guessin Brown will get injured. While our club has basically said Lucas will not be there in 5 years.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:23 pm

Essendon4eva wrote:See now, you are trying to be a smart ass. You are guessin Brown will get injured. While our club has basically said Lucas will not be there in 5 years.

Well, it's common sense. It aint rocket science. The guys shoulders and knee is tinkering on collapse. If you do not know this, then you are an ostrich. Jonathon Brown will not be there in 5 years.

azza78 · Post by **azza78** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:27 pm

It has nothing to do with being 'old school' E4E. And I certainly appreciate the point you're making. Getting value for an older player while we still can makes some sense. But it's not as simple as that.

Lucas' achievements at Essendon are widely-known. Simply, the guy is one of the best to pull on the red and black. You do not trade players who have contributed so much away. Should we have traded Madden and TD? Timmy Watson? Should St Kilda have traded Harvey? Collingwood with Buckley? Hell no. Doing so would completely ruin morale and team harmony, and risk a supporter backlash. For what? A couple of kids who might turn out to be good players.

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 2:53 pm

That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:00 pm

Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.

And how did Jason Johnson react? He was filthy and still is. It may have a lot to do with his "form" this year. Think about it.

Rossoneri · Post by **Rossoneri** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:10 pm

Des Headland.

Simply proves that one midfielder doesnt improve the team, unless he is an exceptional one.

So unless we get Kerr or Judd for Lucas, then there is no point.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:20 pm

Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.

Times change and people move on but there are still lessons to be learned from history and the EFC has it's own dark past in this regard.

1986...we traded two quality clubmen (Bradbury and Carey, neither were anywhere near as good as Lucas) and picked up Raines and Richardson (both quality midfielders, especially Raines) to boost the team.

End result, massive disruption to the team, morale went to shite and we struggled to make the finals.

Raines and Richardson both left at the end of the year.

Anyway E4E, you have your views which you are entitled to, and the rest of us appear to have the opposite view. Such is life.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:24 pm

swoodley wrote:
Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.
Times change and people move on but there are still lessons to be learned from history and the EFC has it's own dark past in this regard.

1986...we traded two quality clubmen (Bradbury and Carey, neither were anywhere near as good as Lucas) and picked up Raines and Richardson (both quality midfielders, especially Raines) to boost the team.

End result, massive disruption to the team, morale went to shite and we struggled to make the finals.

Raines and Richardson both left at the end of the year.

Anyway E4E, you have your views which you are entitled to, and the rest of us appear to have the opposite view. Such is life.

Ah yes, Raines & Richardson. Absolute disaster. They in fact lasted until the end of 1987 - a very shiteful year indeed.

swoodley · Post by **swoodley** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:28 pm

BenDoolan wrote:
swoodley wrote:
Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.
Times change and people move on but there are still lessons to be learned from history and the EFC has it's own dark past in this regard.

1986...we traded two quality clubmen (Bradbury and Carey, neither were anywhere near as good as Lucas) and picked up Raines and Richardson (both quality midfielders, especially Raines) to boost the team.

End result, massive disruption to the team, morale went to shite and we struggled to make the finals.

Raines and Richardson both left at the end of the year.

Anyway E4E, you have your views which you are entitled to, and the rest of us appear to have the opposite view. Such is life.
Ah yes, Raines & Richardson. Absolute disaster. They in fact lasted until the end of 1987 - a very shiteful year indeed.

Ah...my mistake Ben...must have had something to do with the fact that I was overseas that year and missed the whole season. That helps prove my point even more though as we were even worse in '87 than we were in '86.

BenDoolan · Post by **BenDoolan** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:38 pm

swoodley wrote:
BenDoolan wrote:
swoodley wrote:
Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.
Times change and people move on but there are still lessons to be learned from history and the EFC has it's own dark past in this regard.

1986...we traded two quality clubmen (Bradbury and Carey, neither were anywhere near as good as Lucas) and picked up Raines and Richardson (both quality midfielders, especially Raines) to boost the team.

End result, massive disruption to the team, morale went to shite and we struggled to make the finals.

Raines and Richardson both left at the end of the year.

Anyway E4E, you have your views which you are entitled to, and the rest of us appear to have the opposite view. Such is life.
Ah yes, Raines & Richardson. Absolute disaster. They in fact lasted until the end of 1987 - a very shiteful year indeed.
Ah...my mistake Ben...must have had something to do with the fact that I was overseas that year and missed the whole season. That helps prove my point even more though as we were even worse in '87 than we were in '86.

You were spot on about the disharmony and damaged morale those trades caused. Both Raines & Richardson refused to take a pay cut at Collingwood so they were obviously chasing the $. Essendon's desperate bid to cover the long term injury loss of gun midfielders in Watson, Williams, Baker and the reitrement of Bryan Wood, they decided to chop club favourites in Bradbury & Carey to secure the services of those two guys. They were never "accepted" by the playing group and we turned to shit rather quickly.

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 4:14 pm

BenDoolan wrote:
Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.
And how did Jason Johnson react? He was filthy and still is. It may have a lot to do with his "form" this year. Think about it.

His form is bad because football has passed him by. Anyone can see that and we were all saying that when he wanted the two year contract.

ealesy · Post by **ealesy** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:35 pm

Essendon4eva wrote:
BenDoolan wrote:
Essendon4eva wrote:That is the difference in mentality. Are you a ruthless football club wanting to get back on top, or care more about being nice?
I'm also not saying he HAS to go. Put his name out there and see what we can get. We had no hisitation putting Jason Johnson's name up.
And how did Jason Johnson react? He was filthy and still is. It may have a lot to do with his "form" this year. Think about it.
His form is bad because football has passed him by. Anyone can see that and we were all saying that when he wanted the two year contract.

Bullshit about 85% of this Board were pleading with the club to give him his 2 years and were pissing their pants thinking he would walk out on the club and nominate for the PSD if we didn't give him what he wanted.

Tell you what, if we got a decent offer, he wouldn't have been in the red and black this year.

JJ was a good player, a good midfielder, they aren't too hard too replace. Scott Lucas is a very good key position player, they are much harder to replace and hence why he won't be shopped around.

Essendon4eva · Post by **Essendon4eva** » Thu Aug 16, 2007 5:40 pm

Did you read the initial post? I said we are re-building for an era where Lucas will be gone. How hard is that to understand? SO instead f letting him retire and getting nothing, lets put his name out there and see what we can get.
Plus, it was implied Johnson is not playing well because we went to trade im. he is not playing well because the game has passed him by.