Would like to swap our first rounder next year for Ports two late pick this year.
Randell and Stephens would then be ours.
We really need to to get some quality midfielders in this year.
In other one or two year we will see a major drop off with JPK and Parker.
I do not think our academy picks next year are that brilliant, but in a year who can tell?
doof-doof
I still want Young. One of the best HBF in the making I have seen for some time.Originally Posted by MattW
Barling did play midfield at underage level but I get the feeling that Swans see that his development plateaued. Quite a solid unit when he was younger so not sure if he developed early and then everyone caught up.
Brewer is a pretty solid player as well without being spectacular.
What I am seeing now is that with the academy becoming stronger and stronger each year there really isnt a lot between the top ten academy level players . They all from under 16s onwards start the preseason at the same time as the seniors so they are all well trained, fit and well drilled so it then comes down to things like Speed , ability to hit targets etc.
If I was recruiting at the moment and with the way the game has developed at junior levels , all of the players that reach the academy or TAC sup levels are reasonably fit. Therefore the things that stand out in players for me are :
1. Speed - your either fast or your not and no amount of training will give you it.
2. Ability to hit targets/ goals - I see a lot of players that can get the ball but thats no use if you cant then hit a target. Similarly a player that can kick a goal more often than not whether it be from a set shot or on the run is actually not that common. Many of the boys that make the higher levels come form midfields at club level so it is amazing how few actually have good goal kicking ability.
3. Footy smarts - knowing the right options and playing with sense are important.
4. Coachability and professionalism - Putting away ego is important and it is amazing at the higher rep levels in kids football how some kids cant hide their personal grudge over why Billy has the starting midfield role over them and how many kids will try to do something really tricky rather than the simple team stuff as they think it will help them to be noticed .
Silly comment from some who has been exposed for his poor judgement. My comments are entirely inline with the swans management.
The fact that the swans had to come out and publically say they won't bid on green to nullify all the nuffy talk of going after another clubmust be embarrassing for you.
Yeah, totally agree.
Now days there are very few surprises in the top 20 picks. Almost all clubs rank them similarly.
The difference between them making it or not as a player starts depends on a whole bunch or random factors.
Then it is a bit of a surprise that Martin isn't on the list. I do agree with you that Parks, Thorne and Ellem are the most likely. Parks played some excellent games for our NAB League team and for the Allies. Thorne is a real honest toiler. While Ellem is the one I am most keen to see go around again. For ten minutes here and quarter of an hour there, he looked dominant in NAB League games. Hopefully, with some more conditioning and experience, he can convert that to periods of dominance at NEAFL level.
This thread has only gone to cement my colours as red and white, due to them being exactly the same as the responsible, professional club based out of Moore park.
Others have shown their colours to be more blue*, than red or white.
(Blue being the opposite colour to orange, ie. Obsessed with damaging GWS even if it hurts the swans).
#notrealfans
Good points. Point four interests me. I while back, I was wondering why some obviously talented players, can't seem to transfer junior or NEAFL form to the AFL. I suspect that one contributing reason, is that pretty well every draftee grows up being either the best player, or one of the best, in all the previous teams that they've played in. In some cases, this could engender the development of a narcissistic attitude. When those players are put it in a situation where they are not amongst the best players, then some self defeating defence mechanisms could be activated.
I just walked past Tom Green in Canberra airport. I’ll say this: he is a goddamn HUGE unit.
Why let facts get in the way Agent Orange? Up until yesterday 4pm, the most recent comment from Swans management, albeit unofficial, was Tom Harley telling Blood Spirit in early November "If Tom Green is still on the board at pick 5 at the draft, we will bid on him. We expect GWS to match."
The Swans didn't "come out and publically say they won't bid on green to nullify all the nuffy talk ..." KB was asked a question by Cal Twomey on draft radio and his answer was not "no" it was (after a pause) "probably not"
I've always suggested we should go after Green as meeting a need for the Swans. You've argued we shouldn't go after Green as it would upset GW$ and he's not that good, despite almost universal ranking of him (including by Champion data) as a top 5 player.
Let's bid on him, he will be the best player available at 5
I'm confused by KB saying yesterday "We would prefer to call the name of the player that we want, and will get"
Surely you bid on the player you most want. I don't know if this is related to Flanders saying he'd rather not leave Victoria (I read this last night and cannot find the article) and our need to demonstrate to whoever we pick that they were our first choice?
Or if we think Flanders would be a better option than Green because he's quicker
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks