The Breust conundrum

Remove this Banner Ad

Must say, the free kick he gave away in his first interaction of the game was one of the funniest I’ve ever seen - just for sheerly how bad it was. 🤣

Clearly he wanted to impact the game hard!
too much pent up energy!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think you may have missed the point.

The coach was clearly not being sentimental when he suggested a much loved player might not get a game next year and should go to West Coast to finish his career.

A poster on here who seemed to have a lot of inside knowledge on the matter suggested Sam actually wanted to break his contract the year before, and head to west coast after the 3-pete was completed. However, we said no, wanting him around to go for the 4-peat. WC still wanted him the following year, and we let him go when he asked again. So if anything, letting a player that was still playing good footy break his contract because he'd provided such good service over the years WAS about sentiment. Mitchell was nowhere near as cooked as Lewis was (IMO), we got very little for him on the trade, and ended up needing his on-field leadership. Forcing him to play out his contract at Hawthorn would have been the hard nosed approach.

I'd let Bruest get his 300 if it was up to me, could easily be done as a win-win with careful management of his expectations for next year.
 
A poster on here who seemed to have a lot of inside knowledge on the matter suggested Sam actually wanted to break his contract the year before, and head to west coast after the 3-pete was completed. However, we said no, wanting him around to go for the 4-peat. WC still wanted him the following year, and we let him go when he asked again. So if anything, letting a player that was still playing good footy break his contract because he'd provided such good service over the years WAS about sentiment. Mitchell was nowhere near as cooked as Lewis was (IMO), we got very little for him on the trade, and ended up needing his on-field leadership. Forcing him to play out his contract at Hawthorn would have been the hard nosed approach.

I'd let Bruest get his 300 if it was up to me, could easily be done as a win-win with careful management of his expectations for next year.
Breust isn't as invested in getting to 300 as most of us are. If he gets there he gets there. It all depends on his groin issue and whether he feels he wants to go through another preseason.
 
Breust isn't as invested in getting to 300 as most of us are. If he gets there he gets there. It all depends on his groin issue and whether he feels he wants to go through another preseason.
Shocked GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
 
while he is kicking goals let him stay.. what is another year for oneof our greats
Like Breust is always a threat.
Just get the ball to him.

People often blame forwards when the delivery is terrible.

Imagine being the opposition in a tight game and you see Luke Breust, one of the greatest medium forwards coming off the bench.

OG Super-Sub
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Whatever happens for the rest of the season I hope we do everything possible to get him to 300 games even if it means another year.

Something truely great about the 300 game club, and it would carry Breust into one of the all time greatest small forwards. Getting the current group to see that will make a marked difference in future years.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top