View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
foxychick
jay
Joined: 18 May 2004 Location: Melbourne
|
Post subject: Bruce or Johnstone?! | |
|
Who'd you rather have Cameron Bruce or Johnstone? _________________ 🖤🤍🖤🤍 |
|
|
|
|
labrooy
Joined: 18 Sep 2003 Location: Toowoomba, Qld
|
Post subject: | |
|
For ability to dominate games Travis Johnstone would be the one but Bruce is a far more consistent player. As we need consistency I guess if we had to pick one it would be Cameron Bruce. Both would be nice though. |
|
|
|
|
Pa Marmo
Side by Side
Joined: 16 Jun 2003 Location: Nicks BB member #617
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pure talent Johnstone. But talent isnt enough. Cameron Bruce is consistent and deadly by foot which is just what we need. _________________ Genesis 1:1 |
|
|
|
|
Sultan of spin
Joined: 31 Aug 2003 Location: Burnley
|
Post subject: | |
|
You guys have pretty much hit the nail on the head with your assessments of Bruce Vs Johnstone. I would agree and say Bruce if I had a choice between the 2, but I certainly wouldn't complain if we got Johnstone |
|
|
|
|
Cakewalk
For a minute there I lost myself , I lost myself
Joined: 30 Mar 2003 Location: Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
Bruce is more of a sure thing , while Johnstone has more potential as a gamebreaker.
I'd play it safe and go Bruce because Johnstone's too much of a headcase. _________________ "Are you an angry man? Are you envious? Do you get envious? I have competition in me. I want no one else to succeed. I hate most people. At times, I look at people and I see nothing worth liking. " |
|
|
|
|
Brown26
Joined: 14 Sep 2001 Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
|
Post subject: | |
|
I;d take Bruce but I think we could get Johnstone, while Melbourne will cling on to Bruce a bit stronger. Either or...
- Ben |
|
|
|
|
d9 tank
Joined: 04 Oct 2002 Location: Victoria
|
Post subject: | |
|
Bruce is a much better option overall, but Johnstone has shown he steps up to the plate in big games and would come much cheaper.
Taking that into consideration I'd go for Johnstone and hopefully have enough trade bait left over to target another solid player, rather than spend it all on Bruce. |
|
|
|
|
PiesFan
Joined: 28 Sep 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Looks like Johnstone will be easier to obtain and cheaper, so i would go Johnstone |
|
|
|
|
Nath
Joined: 04 May 2004 Location: Victoria
|
Post subject: | |
|
Johnstone has the bigger upside, Bruce will peak in 2005 and then level out for a few years. A healthy Johnstone has a lot to offer still, only thing would be that Johnstone may not have the 'personal attitude' the club is looking for given the recent spate of indiscretions. |
|
|
|
|
Joel
Joined: 23 Mar 1999 Location: Mornington Peninsula
|
Post subject: | |
|
I wouldn't mind either, but Bruce would probably be more consistent over a longer period.
If Johnstone is to come to Collingwood then he will need a kick up the arse. |
|
|
|
|
vinnie_vegas69
Joined: 18 Sep 2004
|
Post subject: | |
|
I think Bruce's ability to dominate is underrated, he can certainly control a game when he's getting the footy, and every time you see Collingwood playing badly, it tends to be because they either can't get their hands on the footy, or their posession is poor, and neither of those things would be a factor for Cameron Bruce.
My vote goes to Bruce for sure. We have enough players who can play brilliantly, but don't. Let's get another guy that will perform week in and week out. |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree
Joined: 22 Jun 2004 Location: John Wren's tote
|
Post subject: | |
|
Bruce looks the more consistent out of these two. Johnstone looked alright in that first final, but he seems to get injured a lot, plus his haircut effects his hard ball gets. _________________ " Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
ConBigWig
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Johnstone by a mile. _________________ Con Nose Evrythin, you see
"Reality is an illusion caused by a lack of alcohol" |
|
|
|
|
Culprit
Joined: 06 Feb 2003 Location: Port Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
In reality we have pick 7 in a draft where the best players will be gone by pick 6. To get anyone that can play we will have to part company with something. Pies are being mentioned so we have no chance it's all about pushing their wage up. |
|
|
|
|
3rd degree
Joined: 22 Jun 2004 Location: John Wren's tote
|
Post subject: | |
|
Look on the bright side for once Culprit better than having pick 17. Anyway it has been proven often late picks can be suprise stars why early picks never always live up to their ratings. Either Bruce or Johnstone would be handy. But I like Bruce more, better kick on him and less injury prone. _________________ " Ohhh Banksy and out comes the Note Book".
www.facebook/the hybernators |
|
|
|
|
|