NAB AFL Pre-Season/Rookie Drafts

[Auntie.Gerald]

NEXT !!

so strategy or players of fancy for the Swannies ?

can someone update me on the new rules re the two over 23yrs an be added etc ?? to rookie list ??

How many players can we go for in view of our current list ??

[lwjoyner]

Surely we must add a full back (a Chris Luff) orand a chb (competition for Reid) like a Dylan Grimes. We now have flankers galore.

[lwjoyner]

surely now is the time to add a couple of tall key defenders to bolster our list,
Perhaps a Chris Luff and Dylan Grimes both tall key defenders.

[caj23]

hopefully we'll take Dylan McNeil as a NSW rookie

[Nico]

Surely we must add a full back (a Chris Luff) orand a chb (competition for Reid) like a Dylan Grimes. We now have flankers galore.


Have you forgotten Heath Grundy?

[DST]

Pretty sure we will add some KP height in the rookie draft.

There was no need to do this in the national draft as most keen watchers knew the KP talent was thin and not worth put them on gauranteed 2 year contracts.

Therefore a number slipped to the rookie draft where they can have a look at them for a year on the list and see whether they are worth preserving with.

DST
:D

[10Totti10]

Panos????? Very good kick for goal, great ability, SA (who always produces great forwards). Might as well!!! McNeil also good option.

[Justice]

Does anybody know if players from NSW that have been delisted from other teams, such as Ryan Davis (West Coast), could be rookie selected as priority NSW rookies prior to the rookie draft?

I am unsure due to the fact they have been outside of NSW for the past season.

Cheers

Justice

[Rod_]

Prediction Henry will be a rookie in the PSD, IMO

Rod_

[Justice]

hopefully we'll take Dylan McNeil as a NSW rookie

Good chance as he is training (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87783/default.aspx) with the squad.

Cheers

Justice

[Bas]

Panos????? Very good kick for goal, great ability, SA (who always produces great forwards). Might as well!!! McNeil also good option.

Panos training with Port at present.

[ugg]

Good chance as he is training (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87783/default.aspx) with the squad.

Cheers

Justice
Dean Terlich training with the Power, that is interesting. Would have thought Sam Rowe would have been more in demand.

[707]

Can't seem to fnd anything on the AFL website, does anyone know if we moved the two veterans to outside the list by the 2pm third list deadline today?

If we did it may mean we are going to use more than one PSD pick, if we didn't it means we don't rate anyone available as worth more than a one year rookie spot - other than Bradshaw of course.

Did we get an answer as to whether ex NSW players like Ryan Davis are available as pre rookie draft nominations?

[liz]

Can't seem to fnd anything on the AFL website, does anyone know if we moved the two veterans to outside the list by the 2pm third list deadline today?




Given there is an article stating that both West Coast and Port have cleared space for a PSD pick, it seems unlikely that the Swans have chosen to clear space for an additional senior spot. You would expect it to be mentioned in the same article if they had.

[rojo]

Anyone know what has happened to our young Irish recruit?

[Reggi]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87783/default.aspx

Hope he gets a rookie spot

[DST]

Anyone know what has happened to our young Irish recruit?

Not sure, at last reports Coney was still on the list and I have not seen anything to suggest de-listed him to remove the last year of his international rookie contract.

They would not be paying him so you would expect that they have retained him as the second international rookie in the hope he may want to come out in 2010 and give it another go.

DST
:D

[ugg]

I think rojo is referring to the new Irish recruit Chris McKaigue. A report in on an Irish site said he just left Ireland to commence pre-season training here.

[SimonH]

Dean Terlich training with the Power, that is interesting. Would have thought Sam Rowe would have been more in demand.I thought odd as well. Terlich at his best is a fine state league player, but I can't really see where he has the weapons to be an AFL player; and he had quite frankly a mediocre 2009 where he lost confidence badly, and was dropped from the Norwood league side once or twice. Conversely, Sam Rowe just got better and better. And screams out as exactly the sort of player GC could use.

Wouldn't get too hung up on Port train-on list, though. Most players who train with them are never picked up; and conversely, they regularly rookie players (even SA boys) who weren't training with them!

Sadly, I have absolutely no idea whether NSW boys (or boys who lived in NSW for a while) who are no longer NSW residents, qualify for the local rookie rule. Because we (absolutely outrageously) picked up the delisted SA boy Smokey Davis under the local rookie rule a few years back, I suspect that origin doesn't matter (or help) and all that matters is that you're a current resident of NSW and have been here continuously for X period. We should definitely take Malcolm Lynch from under the noses of the Bulldogs, if I'm wrong and the rules are more liberal.

Presuming always that he misses in the PSD, I fear that Matthew Panos won't last past the first 5 GC selections; he's far more capable of walking in and being competitive at VFL league level from round 1, 2010, than most 18yo rookie prospects in the pool. If he does last past GC, I'm quietly confident that he'll make it to the Swans' first selection. If we want him.

[SimonH]

Not sure, at last reports Coney was still on the list and I have not seen anything to suggest de-listed him to remove the last year of his international rookie contract.

They would not be paying him so you would expect that they have retained him as the second international rookie in the hope he may want to come out in 2010 and give it another go.

DST
:DNope, definitely is delisted (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86555/default.aspx). They just took their sweet time about doing it.

Incidentally, is that nominal list of 9 rookie slots that the AFL say we have available, really accurate? I believe that all other clubs are getting 2 extra rookie slots as a sop for the concessions to GC17, to take them up to a maximum combined list size of 46 (usually 44). See Brisbane, the only other club operating under the same rules as us, who have 40 players on their senior list but allowance for another 9 rookies (i.e. 46 plus 3 local rookies). Shouldn't we be allowed to have 11 on our rookie list next year, if we want to?

[Steve]

Sadly, I have absolutely no idea whether NSW boys (or boys who lived in NSW for a while) who are no longer NSW residents, qualify for the local rookie rule. Because we (absolutely outrageously) picked up the delisted SA boy Smokey Davis under the local rookie rule a few years back, I suspect that origin doesn't matter (or help) and all that matters is that you're a current resident of NSW and have been here continuously for X period. We should definitely take Malcolm Lynch from under the noses of the Bulldogs, if I'm wrong and the rules are more liberal.

IIRC the rule was you had to have resided in our region for the preceding 3 years - intended to allow flexibility to recruit genuine locals, but did create that loophole that a 21/22 y/o who had been on our list for 3-4 years and then delisted still qualified.

No idea whether that rule still exists in the same form - if so we could conceivably list the likes of DOK, Laidlaw and Brabazon that way if we wanted to.

But I don't think there has ever been any flexibility to use it for the likes of Lynch or Ryan Davis who have been on other club's lists and not residents of Sydney in the last few years.

[smasher]

Would love to pick up Grimes and McNeil in the rookie draft.McNeil reminds me of Bird ,only tougher.

[Primmy]

You have to admire Henry Playfair. He is listed as Permission to Train with Sydney.

[Auntie.Gerald]

looks like Playfair is moving into Media / Marketing anyway ??

ie the Play Fair segments and no interest from other clubs no doubt !

[Mr Magoo]

I also note that Mieklejohn is training with Port. Is this the same guy from a few years back who played for the swans?

[Jeffers1984]

I also note that Mieklejohn is training with Port. Is this the same guy from a few years back who played for the swans?

yep. Same guy.

[royboy42]

And also Ablett is not named on anyone's train on list....

[ugg]

I also note that Mieklejohn is training with Port. Is this the same guy from a few years back who played for the swans?
I don't see his name on the list?

[Mr Magoo]

I think I saw it in an article in one of the melbourne papers internet page that talked about Cloke being injured and not being able to train with them because of it.

[rojo]

I think rojo is referring to the new Irish recruit Chris McKaigue. A report in on an Irish site said he just left Ireland to commence pre-season training here.

Thanks Ugg, that's the one. Good to hear he is on his way. Seemed like he had completely gone off the Swan's radar - maybe just because of the excitement surrounding the draft. Having a 'happy' Tadgh around should help him settle in.

[bennyfabulous]

I just watched his highlight reel. Seems to be quite an exciting athlete for such a big man. Any chance that he could become a swan in the rookie draft?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZYr4YqzYK0

[Legs Akimbo]

[QUOTE=bennyfabulous;469106]I just watched his highlight reel. Seems to be quite an exciting athlete for such a big man. Any chance that he could become a swan in the rookie draft?

I suspect it would be hard for him to move away from the Sudanese community in Melbourne. I think if he gets drafted, it will be with a local club.

[Auntie.Gerald]

Legs

36% melb and 24% sydney make up the 20,000 plus sudanese people who have come to Aust in recent yrs.

So not a big change to come to Sydney - and we would welcome with arms open........ no doubt !

page 5 http://www.immi.gov.au/living-in-australia/delivering-assistance/government-programs/settlement-planning/_pdf/community-profile-sudan.pdf

[Auntie.Gerald]

A names for PSD

do we have any spots left ?? if so how many >>??

Serhat Temel

Serhat Temel - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86897/default.aspx)


George Long - mid


George Long - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87046/default.aspx)

Luke Thompson - tall


Luke Thompson - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86892/default.aspx)

David Mirra


David Mirra: Highlights - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/video/tabid/76/videoid/51079/david+mirra+highlights/default.aspx)

Oliver Tate


Oliver Tate - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86919/default.aspx)

[Auntie.Gerald]

We get pick 4 of the PSD but what picks do we get after that ??

NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft order is as follows:
1. Melbourne
2. Richmond
3. Fremantle
4. Sydney Swans
5. West Coast
6. Port Adelaide
7. Essendon


The 45 names to watch out for in the NAB AFL Pre-Season/Rookie Drafts - here are 10 to start


The 45 names to watch - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87708/default.aspx)


1 - Michael Barlow (Werribee)
2 - Daniel Bradshaw (Brisbane Lions)
3 - Cameron Cloke (Carlton)
4 - Joseph Dare (Geelong Falcons)
5 - Majak Daw (Western Jets)
6 - Josh Donaldson (West Perth)
7 - Josh Dyson (Eastern Ranges)
8 - Mitch Fisher (Geelong Falcons)
9 - Matt Fowler (Gold Coast)
10 - Mitch Golby (Gippsland Power)

[707]

We get pick 4 of the PSD but what picks do we get after that ?

Gold Coast get the first five, then it's the usual order. We're number five so five to GC plus five means we get pick 10, 26, 42.

We can take any NSW player before the roookie draft so Dylan McNeill should be coming our way providing one of the three uncommitted teams in the PSD don't take him. There is also a Sydney Uni player training with us too from memory.

Pick 10 would mean most of the obvious choices like Dare, Grimes, Hooper, Daw etc will probably be gone. Tankers will certainly take Liam Jurrah's cousin with their first pick if GC don't.

As we only have one pick in the PSD it would appear that we kept the two vets inside the list and didn't move them to outside in order to free up more PSD picks that would have given us first choice of the rookies. Maybe we don't rate any of them of worth a two year contract.

[giant]

But I don't think there has ever been any flexibility to use it for the likes of Lynch or Ryan Davis who have been on other club's lists and not residents of Sydney in the last few years.

Yes, Davis would be the other NSW boy of interest.

[ugg]

An article on Terlich's chances with the Power.

http://www.bordermail.com.au/news/local/sport/football-australian-rules/terlich-survives-power-cut/1700032.aspx

[707]

I don't see Mieklejohn's name on the list?

He was invited to train with Poor Power but had gone on holiday overseas so couldn't train so therefore didn't get onto the approved train with lists.

It's interesting the difference in Adelaide between the two clubs. Adelaide rarely has anyone train with them preseason whereas Power invite a couple of dozen every year.

With Power down to just one tested ruckman in Brogan, they are almost certain to take someone like Cameron Cloke in the PSD as insurance.

[DST]

Adding to pick 4 in the PSD to round out our senior list we have the following in the rookie draft:

10. SYDNEY SWANS
26. SYDNEY SWANS
39. SYDNEY SWANS
52. SYDNEY SWANS
63. SYDNEY SWANS (International)
71. SYDNEY SWANS (NSW Scholarship)
75. SYDNEY SWANS (*NSW Pre Selection)
77. SYDNEY SWANS (*NSW Pre Selection)

Pick 63 is for the new Irishman, pick 71 is for Nathan Gordon and I would be shocked if we didn't list Dylan McNeil as a pre-selected NSW rookie.

So that leaves 10, 26, 39 and 52 and possibly 77 for another pre-selected rookie such as the Sydney Uni bloke that is training with us.

Hopefully a couple of tall fella's are left at 10 and 26 to take a punt on and Henry Playfair (if fit) will be looked at for picks 39 and 52.

DST
:D

[DST]

As we only have one pick in the PSD it would appear that we kept the two vets inside the list and didn't move them to outside in order to free up more PSD picks that would have given us first choice of the rookies. Maybe we don't rate any of them of worth a two year contract.

Reason we kept both Vets inside the list, is that we didn't need the cap space and we are now allowed to name two of our rookies before the year starts that can play senior football without the need for a player to be added to the long term injury list.

That would indicate that Playfair will be picked up (if fit) and nominated as one of those rookies to play at any time.

Smart move by the club.

DST
:D

[sharp9]

If that list is accurate we could have 10 rookies altogether. Is that because international rookies are not counted in the official "how many rookies you can have" list?

[Auntie.Gerald]

PS/rookie draft preview: club by club - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/88007/default.aspx)


SYDNEY SWANS
Pre-season selections: 1 (4)
Rookie selections: 8 (10, 26, 39, 52, 63)
Locked in: Chris McKaigue - international (71), Nathan Gordon - NSW scholarship (75), TBC - NSW pre-selection (77), TBC - NSW pre-selection
Needs: The Swans may look at another young forward, but otherwise look likely to draft for 'best available'
In their sights: Along with Daniel Bradshaw in the pre-season draft, recruiting Irishman McKaigue and promoting NSW scholarship holder Gordon, the Swans will have access to two local NSW youngsters before the rookie draft starts. Expect them to take Murray Bushranger Dylan McNeil, with Sydney Uni's Sam Crichton in the mix. Big man Henry Playfair is a chance to be redrafted as a mature-age rookie.

[liz]

If that list is accurate we could have 10 rookies altogether. Is that because international rookies are not counted in the official "how many rookies you can have" list?

3 (current) + 8 (picks listed) = 11.

Standard rookie list is 8 nowadays, plus the last three are special extras.

Non-Irish count as extras, though didn't seem as if Pyke was ever classified as International from that point of view (and not sure if they are only allowed to be extra in their first year on the list).

[Plugger46]

Reason we kept both Vets inside the list, is that we didn't need the cap space and we are now allowed to name two of our rookies before the year starts that can play senior football without the need for a player to be added to the long term injury list.

That would indicate that Playfair will be picked up (if fit) and nominated as one of those rookies to play at any time.

Smart move by the club.

DST
:D

Yep, pretty smart stuff from the club except picking up Playfair.

[707]

It's interesting how in discussions prior to the National Draft, most people were dismissive of late draft picks (60+) being of much value.

Now we're on the eve of the Rookie Draft, there is a bit of excitement as to who we may pick up.

To put that into perspective, 75 players were taken in the ND, another 7 will go in the PSD and we have our first pick in the Rookie Draft at 10, 26, 39. Those picks effectively become pick 92, 108, 121 in this year's pool.

There should be someone reasonable available at pick 10 (a player who could/should have gone in the ND) but after that it looks thin.

Of real interest will be Gold Coast's tactics with their five picks at the start of the Rookie Draft, will they load up on more kids or go for mature age players.

[DST]

It's interesting how in discussions prior to the National Draft, most people were dismissive of late draft picks (60+) being of much value.

Now we're on the eve of the Rookie Draft, there is a bit of excitement as to who we may pick up.

To put that into perspective, 75 players were taken in the ND, another 7 will go in the PSD and we have our first pick in the Rookie Draft at 10, 26, 39. Those picks effectively become pick 92, 108, 121 in this year's pool.

There should be someone reasonable available at pick 10 (a player who could/should have gone in the ND) but after that it looks thin.

Of real interest will be Gold Coast's tactics with their five picks at the start of the Rookie Draft, will they load up on more kids or go for mature age players.

There is a reason, no need to put these playes on gauranteed 2 year contracts at higher wages as opposed to a 1 year rookie deal on a smaller base.

Provides greater flexibility for the list going forward.

DST
:D

[TheGong]

3 (current) + 8 (picks listed) = 11.

Standard rookie list is 8 nowadays, plus the last three are special extras.

Non-Irish count as extras, though didn't seem as if Pyke was ever classified as International from that point of view (and not sure if they are only allowed to be extra in their first year on the list).

LIz, fairly sure international rookies have to 23 and under. Mike Pyke would have been too old to be classed as an international rookie.

[BSA5]

There should be someone reasonable available at pick 10 (a player who could/should have gone in the ND) but after that it looks thin.

Don't forget, we can (and almost certainly will) preselect Dylan McNeil as a NSW player (assuming he's not picked up in the PSD), who looks a decent quality player and would probably go first or second round in the rookie draft otherwise. So we're getting decent quality there. McNeil plus a Grimes/Dare/Panos, and maybe Hooper if he lasts, would be a very good rookie draft already. Add in Gordon, who has been preselected as a NSW Scholarship player, and McKaigue, the Irishman, and that's a very decent boost to our talent ranks.

I think the apparent riches available in the rookie draft are a result of the poor draft pool, rather than despite it. The talent pool has been described not as wholly poor, but with a short peak which levels out quickly. So, there's a bigger difference between pick 15 and pick 5, but a smaller difference between pick 70 and pick 40, and an even smaller difference between rookie picks and the last of the ND picks.

[Red]

We get pick 4 of the PSD but what picks do we get after that ??Gold Coast get the first five, then it's the usual order. We're number five so five to GC plus five means we get pick 10, 26, 42.
If GC have the 1st five PSD picks, what's to stop them swooping on Bradshaw?

[liz]

If GC have the 1st five PSD picks, what's to stop them swooping on Bradshaw?

They have the first 5 rookie picks, not PSD.

[The Big Cat]

Where are all these blokes going to play? If we have a good year with injuries then potentially we'll be looking to slot about 25 blokes into a reserves team where there are restrictions on how many listed players can play at any one time. Some blokes will be only playing every second week.

[707]

Where are all these blokes going to play? If we have a good year with injuries then potentially we'll be looking to slot about 25 blokes into a reserves team where there are restrictions on how many listed players can play at any one time. Some blokes will be only playing every second week.

Good point. Is it a maximum of 12 listed players that can play for the reserves?

Probably hasn't shown up in previous years because the injury list has been long but 22 in the AFL team (23 if they take a back up player) plus 12 = 34/35.

Say 38 on the list plus 8 rookies = 46 so you'd need to have 10+ players not available to play.

[liz]

Say 38 on the list plus 8 rookies = 46 so you'd need to have 10+ players not available to play.

If the club takes its full quota it will be 38 + 11.

Given the club struggled to have more than 10 or so players available for the reserves last year, I suspect that having a dozen or so "left over" players will be a problem they'll be happy to address.

I believe there is now provision for the excess Swans to be farmed out around the other ACTAFL clubs to ensure they get a game (and hopefully improve the competitiveness of the competition as a whole).

(BTW, the number of Swans allowed in the team is greater than 12. Ugg probably knows what the current rules are but there is one limit for the total in the team as a whole, and another limit on the number who can be on the ground at any one time.)

[eggbeater]

when excess reserve players are 'farmed' out to other teams, are they at a disadvantage in that if they have a blinder, they're not noticed as much and this may affect their chance to play seniors?

[robamiee]

on the AFL site Matt Burgan says we will likely take
10 - Sydney Swans - Jack Weston (Gippsland Power)
26 - Sydney Swans - Kallen Geary (Bendigo Pioneers)
39 - Sydney Swans - Henry Playfair (Sydney Swans)
63 - Sydney Swans - Chris McKaigue (County Derry, Ireland - international)
71 - Sydney Swans - Nathan Gordon (NSW/ACT Rams - NSW scholarship)
75 - Sydney Swans - Dylan McNeil (Murray Bushrangers - NSW pre-selection)
77 - Sydney Swans - Sam Crichton (Sydney Uni - NSW pre-selection)


yet he has Panos going to Carlton at pick 15...surely we would take Panos who was extremely unlucky not to be picked in the ND..

Anyone have any info on Weston and Geary

[707]

Jck Weston, Gippsland Power, 190cm, very quick, agile, great skills, played CHB, HBF, wing, kicked 25 goals in TAC Cup this year.

Kallen Geary, brother of the other two Geary's on AFL lists. 177cm, small defender or midfielder, B&F at Bendigo Pioneers 2008 & 2009.

Panos couldn't last until Carton at pick 15.

Remember, there's four live picks in th PSD, mostly kids you'd think, five picks to Gold Coast, probably 2-3 kids there, so that's 6-7 kids gone befre the Rookie draft proper.

You'd think Panos, Dare, Grimes, Hooper, Daw would go early

[707]

Just checked out Matt Burgan's Rookie Draft predictions. He has us as the only team to pass on a selection (pick 52). Why would we be passing and why are we the only team to pass a selection?

He has Ryan Davis (Sydney boy, ex Weagles rookie via NSW Scholarship, and he can play) going to the Weagles with pick 53. Why would we pass with pick 52 rather than bring him home and give him a try if he was still available

What does Burgan know that we don't?

[DST]

Just checked out Matt Burgan's Rookie Draft predictions. He has us as the only team to pass on a selection (pick 52). Why would we be passing and why are we the only team to pass a selection?

He has Ryan Davis (Sydney boy, ex Weagles rookie via NSW Scholarship, and he can play) going to the Weagles with pick 53. Why would we pass with pick 52 rather than bring him home and give him a try if he was still available

What does Burgan know that we don't?

As far as I know we can only use all three NSW pre-selection rookier picks if we are going to use all our live normal rookie picks.

The NSW rookier picks have to be submitted after the PSD and before the rookie draft, so the club has probably indicated to Matt that we are only going to use 2 NSW pre-selected rookies which precludes us from using the final live rookie pick we have.

Of couse this is all dependent on whether McNeil and Cricton get through the PSD.

DST
:D

[liz]

As far as I know we can only use all three NSW pre-selection rookier picks if we are going to use all our live normal rookie picks.


:D

What is your source for that explanation of the rules? It is not an intepretation I have ever heard before so am curious.

[DST]

What is your source for that explanation of the rules? It is not an intepretation I have ever heard before so am curious.

Not sure, but I had heard that us and Brisbane could only use all the pre-selected rookies if we used all the live picks.

I would assume it is a way for the AFL to make sure that we don't just bypass the rookie draft and pre-select NSW rookies only.

DST
:D

[liz]

Not sure, but I had heard that us and Brisbane could only use all the pre-selected rookies if we used all the live picks.

I would assume it is a way for the AFL to make sure that we don't just bypass the rookie draft and pre-select NSW rookies only.

DST
:D

You may be right, though I don't see any logic in it if it is correct. If the Swans decide, for whatever reason, that they don't want to take their full quota of rookies, wouldn't the AFL be keener for them to take more NSW boys than non-NSW boys (from a game growth point of view). Wouldn't seem to make sense to discourage the Swans (or Lions) from doing so if that is what they wanted.

[Bas]

Matt Burgin has the nsw pre-selections as live picks.


The final intake: who your club could pick - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/88057/default.aspx)

[Claret]

Pre-season Draft

Pick one (Melbourne): Joel Macdonald (Brisbane Lions)
Pick two (Richmond): Dylan Grimes (Northern Knights)
Pick three (Fremantle): Adam McPhee (Essendon)
Pick four (Sydney Swans): Daniel Bradshaw (Brisbane Lions)
Pick five (West Coast): Ryan Neates (Claremont)
Pick six (Port Adelaide): Scott Harding (Brisbane Lions)
Pick seven (Essendon): Kyle Hardingham (East Fremantle)

[Bas]

Our picks are:

10,26,39,52,63,71,75,77

[Claret]

Bit of a surprise that Port went for Harding - I wonder where that leaves Cloke.

Also surprising was the Bombers taking Hardingham, considering he's been training with Freo and they were expected to Rookie him.

[Claret]

Late mail is that Ablett, of the Luke variety, won't be going to the Gold Coast and may be redrafted by the Swans - can't see it happening, but you never know.

[Claret]

For once the mail was good (at least partly so far) - no Ablett to GC.

We've taken Playfair with our first pick as a mature age rookie. Guess that means no Panos.

[caj23]

Playfair pick 10

Why use our first pick on him - never going to be touched by anyone else:confused:

[hammo]

We used our first rookie pick on Playfair. We obviously don't rate the available talent and must be satisfied with our NSW picks.

[Brettb]

Playfair pick 10

Why use our first pick on him - never going to be touched by anyone else:confused:

Totally agree, could have used our last pick on him

[lwjoyner]

if thats true what a joke. why not pick up some young players. playfair wont get a game. better to use for future.

[Jeffers1984]

Panos taken yet?

[Claret]

Also surprising was the Bombers taking Hardingham, considering he's been training with Freo and they were expected to Rookie him.

Further to this story - Freo took Michael Barlow with their first pick in the Rookie Draft, and he was training with Essendon. Perhaps some Adam McPhee induced tit-for-tat.

[ugg]

What an anticlimax - the only suspense left now is whether we have pre-selected McNeil and Crichton.

[Claret]

Panos taken yet?

No Panos anywhere yet.

We passed on our 2nd pick!

[troyjones2525]

what are we doing? We had a good off season up until now!:confused:

[caj23]

Totally agree, could have used our last pick on him

Passed on our 2nd pick - looks like a non-event for us.

Remaining picks are Irish Mckaigue, promoted Gordon, and hopefully McNeill and Chrighton

As stated above we obvioulsy dont rate the young talent left behind. Not many familiar names being selected either (e.g. pick 33 and still no Panos)

[Captain]

I know nothing about this Panos dude but no one in the football industry seems to want him!

Has anyone on here actually seen him play??

[hammo]

No Panos anywhere yet.


No one is touching Panos. He must be a head case.

[caj23]

what are we doing? We had a good off season up until now!:confused:

don't stress it TJ, we have a free hit at McNeil who is a good prospect, not too fussed about missing on anything else, although a tall would have been nice

[Claret]

Not many familiar names being selected either (e.g. pick 33 and still no Panos)

... or Temel

[lwjoyner]

a joke again, pass at 26 and carlton pick up Dawes at 31, what are they doing in sydney forgotten how to use the system our back line needs bolstering.

[BSA5]

This is like finding out Christmas is canceled! I WANTED MORE ROOKIES GODDAMMIT!

Interestingly, this is the second year in a row we've selected far fewer than our total allocated number of rookies. Financial pressures? Salary cap?

[ugg]

This is like finding out Christmas is canceled! I WANTED MORE ROOKIES GODDAMMIT!

Interestingly, this is the second year in a row we've selected far fewer than our total allocated number of rookies. Financial pressures? Salary cap?
List management issues.

[caj23]

This is like finding out Christmas is canceled! I WANTED MORE ROOKIES GODDAMMIT!

Interestingly, this is the second year in a row we've selected far fewer than our total allocated number of rookies. Financial pressures? Salary cap?

passed on our 3rd pick

perhaps the restrictions of player numbers in Canberra has also contributed?

Hopefully we take 3 NSW rookies

[troyjones2525]

Well this is just plain old disappointing! Obviously we dont have any money to pay the rookies. Only explanation.

[Donners]

Have they run out of lockers or something?

[lwjoyner]

its beyond being funny, must be money problems.

[caj23]

No Laidlaw at North - looks like he missed out, nothing on D O'Keefe at Geelong either, although i think they still have some picks left

[cruiser]

if thats true what a joke. why not pick up some young players. playfair wont get a game. better to use for future. Didnt we do that with Kirk? And Buchanan?

[hammo]

I wouldn't read too much into it. We have a very young list as it is so do we really need to add more kids? With the NSW picks and Irish we've added 3 kids today.

The glaring hole for me is a project tall defender but I suppose young Reid fits that mould.

[Donners]

Nice to see Richmond re-draft Polak.

[Claret]

No one is touching Panos. He must be a head case.


Panos to the Dogs with 48. I had the same thought as you hammo, must have interviewed poorly.

Polak re-drafted by the Tigers, good news.

McKaigue confirmed to Swans.

Pick 71 (Sydney Swans): Nathan Gordon (East Coast Eagles)

Pick 75 (Sydney Swans): Dylan McNeil (Murray Bushrangers)

[troyjones2525]

I would have rather us take a punt on a tall young defender like Joe Dare or even Mitch Thorpe from Hawthorn instead of Playfair! I guess i can only hope now that he can stay injury free, have a blinder and make me eat my words!:)

Well we've at least got another one now in the Irishman!!!

Passed on our last pick! That sucks.

[ugg]

No Crichton, there goes all my pre-planned Red Dwarf references :(

[Donners]

So it's:

Pick 10 (Sydney Swans): Henry Playfair (Sydney Swans)
Pick 63 (Sydney Swans): Chris McKaigue (County Derry, Ireland)
Pick 71 (Sydney Swans): Nathan Gordon (East Coast Eagles)
Pick 75 (Sydney Swans): Dylan McNeil (Murray Bushrangers)

[caj23]

No Crighton for us

Thorp, Temel, Hartigan, Luff some of the bigger names to miss out, as well as our own Laidlaw, Ablett and O'Keefe

[Jeffers1984]

Wait what happened to Mcneil? or did i miss something

[lwjoyner]

i am very disapponted,4 passes. I beleive that we supports need some explanations as to why. I agree with the previous post Joseph Dare was available before our first pass/ We need defenders tall ones at that. Atarting to be disapponted after a good trade, national draft and pre season.

[reigning premier]

Thought Ryan Davis might of been a show......

[reigning premier]

i am very disapponted,4 passes. I beleive that we supports need some explanations as to why. I agree with the previous post Joseph Dare was available before our first pass/ We need defenders tall ones at that. Atarting to be disapponted after a good trade, national draft and pre season.

So LRT, Ted, Grundy, Mattner and Pyke aren't enough?

[Jeffers1984]

sure we didn't get Panos and a few others but we got our main man in BRADSHAW! that's all i really care about now.

Onwards to 2010!

[desredandwhite]

[QUOTE=lwjoyner;469888]i am very disapponted,4 passes. I beleive that we supports need some explanations as to why. /QUOTE]

Maybe there wasn't anyone else considered good enough?

Each of these rookies costs, what, 40-50k? Footy clubs aren't in the habit of shelling out money just because they have spots. If the recruiting staff don't think there's anyone who fits into the plans of the club, there's no point picking them.

[Donners]

So LRT, Ted, Grundy, Mattner and Pyke aren't enough?

Since when is Pyke a defender? Mattner is a running back, not a key defender, and Grundy is not somebody I'd have a lot of faith in one-on-one.

[Bas]

I was called away from the computer just as the rookie draft started. Came back and nearly passed out myself.

What is going on? I hope the club explains. I wanted MORE.

Just have to have faith. The Club has done a good job until now.

[goswannie14]

i am very disapponted,4 passes. I beleive that we supports need some explanations as to why. I agree with the previous post Joseph Dare was available before our first pass/ We need defenders tall ones at that. Atarting to be disapponted after a good trade, national draft and pre season.What a load of bull@@@@. The club knows what they are doing. Why should they let all of the secrets of the club out because you're not happy with a couple of draft picks?:rolleyes:

[707]

Someone on RWO must have contacts inside the club to find out why we passed on so many opportunities. I'm sure we'd all like to know the real reasons.

If it's financial, let's do what the Dogs have done.

I just hope none of the players we could have got become stars elsewhere.

An explanation by the club anyone?

[caj23]

Meh a bit disappointed as its always exciting when some new blood is bought in, but given our fruitful trading and national draft period I'm still happy.

McNeill was probably a bit of a bonus as a free hit, I would have liked another developing key defender, particularly as names like Luff and Hartigan went undrafted.

I guess costs of recruiting and relocating a rookie, coupled with opportunities in the reserves were behind the decision not to participate. If (a big if) Playfair can get himself fit, he is a handy backup in the reserves, in fact I was actually very impressed with his output when he played seniors for us back in 2008.

[Plugger46]

What a load of bull@@@@. The club knows what they are doing. Why should they let all of the secrets of the club out because you're not happy with a couple of draft picks?:rolleyes:

Absolutely bang on the money. We've had a fantastic trade and draft period and people without the facts are annoyed that we've passed on a few rookie spots. :rolleyes:

[RogueSwan]

No Crichton, there goes all my pre-planned Red Dwarf references :(

Well spin my nipple nuts and send me to Alaska. :)

[Captain]

Quality over qantity in my book. That's exactly what we have done.

[reigning premier]

Since when is Pyke a defender? Mattner is a running back, not a key defender, and Grundy is not somebody I'd have a lot of faith in one-on-one.

Pyke will play as a defender this year. Mattner is a tall running back yes and Grundy is more than handy one on one. Especially against a 3rd, 4th and 5th fwd.

[reigning premier]

Absolutely bang on the money. We've had a fantastic trade and draft period and people without the facts are annoyed that we've passed on a few rookie spots. :rolleyes:


I would of liked one more youngster. Especially seeeing as we passed so many times early on when there was young guns still available.

[caj23]

Pyke will play as a defender this year. Mattner is a tall running back yes and Grundy is more than handy one on one. Especially against a 3rd, 4th and 5th fwd.

Hopefully Pyke won't be playing seniors this year and if he does as a key back then we will be a rabble.

I admire what he has achieved but he'll never be anything more than a ruckman as he simply doesn't have the smarts to play anywhere else, and given he is 24-25 he probably never will.

[ernie koala]

Quality over qantity in my book. That's exactly what we have done.

Playfair....quality :confused:
He's slow with poor agility, a lousy kick for goal,he's soft at the contest..and for the cherry on top..has chronic hamstring problems .
Surely his spot would of been better occupied by a young player with some potential/ upside.

[Bas]

Playfair....quality :confused:
He's slow with poor agility, a lousy kick for goal,he's soft at the contest..and for the cherry on top..has chronic hamstring problems .
Surely his spot would of been better occupied by a young player with some potential/ upside.

And the Club chose him with our first pick. Maybe he improved over summer.

[liz]

Playfair....quality :confused:
He's slow with poor agility, a lousy kick for goal,he's soft at the contest..and for the cherry on top..has chronic hamstring problems .
Surely his spot would of been better occupied by a young player with some potential/ upside.

Doesn't look like it was an either/or. The club had plenty of opportunities to recruit a younger player if they deemed there were any there worth the development cost.

[Plugger46]

Playfair....quality :confused:
He's slow with poor agility, a lousy kick for goal,he's soft at the contest..and for the cherry on top..has chronic hamstring problems .
Surely his spot would of been better occupied by a young player with some potential/ upside.

Yeah, he's a long way off quality. Can't see him playing anyway with Goodes, Jesse, Bradshaw and possibly Johnston or Currie all playing forward. So I'm still very happy with what we've done throughout the off-season.

[Captain]

Playfair....quality :confused:
He's slow with poor agility, a lousy kick for goal,he's soft at the contest..and for the cherry on top..has chronic hamstring problems .
Surely his spot would of been better occupied by a young player with some potential/ upside.

I actually forgot about Playfair. Besides him we got quality over quantity:p

[ernie koala]

Doesn't look like it was an either/or. The club had plenty of opportunities to recruit a younger player if they deemed there were any there worth the development cost.

Time will tell if the recruiters missed out here or not. What we do know is that Playfair doesn't add much in the way of quality or durability, IMO a waste of a spot.

[Bas]

Roos was going to use Ablett to mentor the kids in reserves. He declined the offer and now finds himself out of the AFL.

Playfair probably put his hand up to take his spot knowing he would have the same fate.

You won't find the Club saying they skipped all the picks because they didn't think anyone was any good.

[rojo]

The Swans' footy department is probably freaked out with so many new, mostly young footballers running around, outnumbering the senior players about 2 to 1, already. New territory - couldn't cope with any more!

[liz]

Time will tell if the recruiters missed out here or not. What we do know is that Playfair doesn't add much in the way of quality or durability, IMO a waste of a spot.

But he is not really a waste of a spot if available spots is not a constraining factor. He clearly hasn't cost anyone else a spot on the rookie list because we are going in 4 short of the total rookies we are entitled to.

[Claret]

Put your hands up if you're hard to please . . . . . . sheesh.

We have done outstandingly well since September - appreciate that fact and get a grip.

I've just had a novel thought . . . . Anybody here criticising the decision not to draft extra rookies think that they know more about the kids/adults we passed up on than the club's recruiters? Anybody else seen them play once, let alone the required several occasions?

[ugg]

Reading between the lines from Roos's statement about McNeil


We originally hadn?t budgeted for anyone in the rookie draft? but that was an indication of how surprised we were

it would seem that the club didn't think any of the available players was worth the cost.

What the club says - Official AFL Website of the Sydney Swans Football Club (http://www.sydneyswans.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7106/newsid/88176/default.aspx)

[dimelb]

... Pyke ... he'll never be anything more than a ruckman as he simply doesn't have the smarts to play anywhere else, and given he is 24-25 he probably never will.
I've cut a bit, but I don't think it changes anything of substance. I bet he proves you wrong on the bits I've left.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

there was young guns still available.

Bit hard to describe them as guns when they're basically leftovers.

[caj23]

I've cut a bit, but I don't think it changes anything of substance. I bet he proves you wrong on the bits I've left.

Yeah - I hope he does prove me wrong

I just get the feeling that we got him a couple of years too late because he is a great athlete and quick learner. I think he'll pick up the basic skills in the short term, but things like body work, positioning, and picking the best option to dispose of the ball are things that take years to learn

[Jewels]

Put your hands up if you're hard to please . . . . . . sheesh.

We have done outstandingly well since September - appreciate that fact and get a grip.

I've just had a novel thought . . . . Anybody here criticising the decision not to draft extra rookies think that they know more about the kids/adults we passed up on than the club's recruiters? Anybody else seen them play once, let alone the required several occasions?

Absolutly spot on!
The recruiting department has done brilliantly and those that are complaining are impossible to please.

[Primmy]

Very disappointed for Luke Ablett. Shame he didn't get a gig.

Someone out there has forgotten we now have a Tadgh in our backline too.

Tadgh, Mal, Marty, Rhyce....running.........wow.

[j s]

If it's financial, let's do what the Dogs have done.
Trade for Barry Hall?

[Hartijon]

Yeah - I hope he does prove me wrong

I just get the feeling that we got him a couple of years too late because he is a great athlete and quick learner. I think he'll pick up the basic skills in the short term, but things like body work, positioning, and picking the best option to dispose of the ball are things that take years to learn

I hope he proves me wrong too but KPP's work,like you mention: positioning,spoiling, anticipating a forwards actions really takes hundreds of game experiences to know what to do under extreme pressure.Like instinctively knowing where NOT to kick cf to knowing the best place to kick...that takes time to pick up. Then as I have previously posted the Riewolds can still give you a bath! I would hate to se Pykey matched against these skillful CHforwards. The only option for him would be to take them out as close to the first bounce as possible and even up the odds...but thats not the Swans way..particularly now Barry has gone.

[smasher]

Playfair....quality :confused:
He's slow with poor agility, a lousy kick for goal,he's soft at the contest..and for the cherry on top..has chronic hamstring problems .
Surely his spot would of been better occupied by a young player with some potential/ upside.

Maybe he had another year on his contract and rather than just pay him out as St Kilda have done with Allan and Fisher,we have given Henry another chance.That's the only reason I can think of keeping him for.

[DST]

Maybe he had another year on his contract and rather than just pay him out as St Kilda have done with Allan and Fisher,we have given Henry another chance.That's the only reason I can think of keeping him for.

Looks like the club decided to spend their rookie cash on re-jigging the marketing and membership departments instead.

Can't blame them based on comments here from last year, how they stuffed up the markerting and membership side of things in Sydney and that needed to be addressed.

DST
:D

[DST]

I have no issue with them re-drafting Playfair for another year.

If his body is right, then he provides a ready made replacement forward or back if we have a run of injuries.

DST
:D

[hammo]

I don't understand the complaints. We have 7 rookies on the list which would be close to the highest number of any club.

Our recruiters obviously didn't rate the talent available today and we were lucky to be able to take McNeil as a NSW selection.

[DST]

Liz, it still looks like the rules preclude us using from having using any more pre-selected NSW rookies if we don't use our live picks first.

Playfair was are only live rookie pick and hence they only used one pre-selected NSW rookie.

Must be some sort of obsecure rule.

DST
:D

[ugg]

Liz, it still looks like the rules preclude us using from having using any more pre-selected NSW rookies if we don't use our live picks first.

Playfair was are only live rookie pick and hence they only used one pre-selected NSW rookie.

Must be some sort of obsecure rule.

DST
:D
Brisbane had 3 Qld pre-selections (Yoshiura, Beams, McCauley) but only 2 live picks (Golby, Dyson)

[Primmy]

I don't mind Hank being reissued a pass. He is obviously valued by the PTB, so that ought to be good enough for us.....though from our past record we obviously doesn't work to that tune v ery often.

[robamiee]

Why the hell didn't we take Panos, he went through to pick 48

[Jewels]

Why the hell didn't we take Panos, he went through to pick 48

Perhaps for the same reason he wasn't taken with the 47 picks prior.

[Hartijon]

Why the hell didn't we take Panos, he went through to pick 48

Two reasons; Where would you play him even if he could make the 1's.We are well served in forwards for a couple of years with Bradshaw and many more with White,plus D-L.
Secondly.there has to be a reason why he was not snapped up.Maybe attitude?

[Auntie.Gerald]

forgive me for not understanding the eligibility of players that can have a run in the Swan's reserves...........

but I am guessing that we can grab a few players to fill in when we are short on numbers but is there any stipulation from where >>??

ie can Chricton come and fill in when we need xtra's due to injuries ??

that way we can have him for free !!

[BSA5]

While I'm sure many of us, like myself, are disappointed with the lack of goodies this rookie draft, some perspective please! I'm cut because I was looking forward to seeing more new faces in Swans colours, but blaming the club? Please. I trust the coaching and recruitment staff implicitly in matters such as this. They're there for a reason. They may make mistakes occasionally, which will be revealed in time, but they're in a far better position to make calls on this than we are. Surgeons make mistakes occasionally, but you'd still choose one over the average punter to operate on you. This entire rookie draft could turn out to be duds! And anyway, we still added three new faces in the rookie draft with Gordon, McKaigue and McNeil (loving the Gaelic names much?). Just because there were no completely new names, just because the draft was a bit of an anti-climax, doesn't mean it was a bad one.

Sure, we can have our opinions, and personally I would have invested at least one more pick (of course I have no idea how our salary cap and budget is looking at the moment) but issuing a "please explain", demanding answers, is absolutely ridiculous.

Anyway, very happy with what we actually got. I've been a fan of McNeil since seeing him in the 2008 TAC Cup Grand Final, he's a genuine tough nut. While he could simply fade away into obscurity, never to play a game, he seems like the sort of player who, if he makes it, will make it big. The parallels to Kirk are definitely there: Albury boys, missed out first time around, rookie listed, tough nut inside players. Not to put too much pressure on the lad!

[robamiee]

i think he was worth the risk considering we passed what 2 or 3 picks...

[wedge.maverick]

I've seen Panos a couple of times and I can see why he went late in the rookie draft. He is purely a full forward who has nothing else in his game other than being a strong mark and an accurate kick. He is well suited to 1988 but not 2010.He lacks agility and doesn't have a lot of scope for improvement and in general a few of these types missed out today (Temel, Hartigan, Luff)in preference of older mature types(Playfair,Cloke,Podsiadly).

McNeil will be a terrific pick up and it wouldn't surprise me if he played in 2010 if we get hurt by injuries.

As for the lack of rookie picks I can understand there being financial issues as this is the start of GWS' impact. We currently have at least 7 scholarship players on the books and will add more in the future so there is some coin tied up there. I can also understand extra funds being channelled into the marketing and membership depts in preparation for GWS. We could have taken Bottin-Noonan as a rookie as well but made the decision that he wouldn't make it. As for Crichton he could quite easily play as a top up in the ressies as Gordon did last year and going back previous years Quade and Hayes.

[Robbo]

Pretty sure it's about 15k for each rookie drafted, and obviously the club didn't think it was worth paying that much for what is left.

[liz]

Pretty sure it's about 15k for each rookie drafted, and obviously the club didn't think it was worth paying that much for what is left.

I think the cost is substantially more than $15k. I'm not sure that would even cover the base salary, let alone the costs required to develop players. I think I read somewhere, once (but can't provide any source so I could be plucking this out of mid-air) that the total cost of each player drafted is around $200k over a couple of seasons once you factor in all the support and development staff required. For a rookie, I presume the initial committment is less, given that you can shed them after a year if you want. And it is not strictly a marginal cost. But for each additional high risk, likely low return 18yo you add to the list, you either have to invest more in development resources, or spread the exsiting resources more thinly.

[Nico]

I think the cost is substantially more than $15k. I'm not sure that would even cover the base salary, let alone the costs required to develop players. I think I read somewhere, once (but can't provide any source so I could be plucking this out of mid-air) that the total cost of each player drafted is around $200k over a couple of seasons once you factor in all the support and development staff required. For a rookie, I presume the initial committment is less, given that you can shed them after a year if you want. And it is not strictly a marginal cost. But for each additional high risk, likely low return 18yo you add to the list, you either have to invest more in development resources, or spread the exsiting resources more thinly.

I reckon I read somehwere last year that the cost of a rookie for salary cap purposes is about $40,000.

[DST]

I reckon I read somehwere last year that the cost of a rookie for salary cap purposes is about $40,000.

That is correct and there are match payments for playing reserves football as well.

Roos mentioned during a recent conference where he spoke and I was lucky enough to attend, that players taken in the draft who are on the list for two years are about a $350,000 investment each when taking into wages, development coaching and all the other little things are taken into account like food, physio, rehab, tape and travel and that's before a game is played and extra match payments start flowing.

DST
:D

[Auntie.Gerald]

on a positive note back in 2001 a young under 6 footer was drafted at no.36 by Hawthorn. This player has gone on to be one of the best possession winners in the AFL and Captain of his team and win a premiership

I think Dylan McNeil will be like a sponge around Brett Kirk but it would not hurt him to watch a few of Sam Mitchell's games back in 2002, 03, 04 and right thru to his 2009 season.

Sam is approx 179cm and Dylan at 178cm will no doubt end up a similar stocky build just like Sam and he he has a similar tenacity which is difficult to manufacture.

I watched Dylans you tube footage etc and the kid can play and if he masters being an old style stoppage player like Sam Mitchell or Brett Kirk ie goes onto to dominate breakdowns via possession, hand passing and vision then the world is his oyster !!

every season or two a smokey comes along and defies the odds......this kid has grit !

lets get back on the positive ladies and gents........we have had an incredible off season so far............I can not wait for 2010

bursting :) :eek:

[liz]

I think Dylan Mitchell will be like a sponge around Brett Kirk but it would not hurt him to watch a few of Sam Mitchell's games back in 2002, 03, 04 and right thru to his 2009 season.



Who is Dylan Mitchell?










;)

[Auntie.Gerald]

I think he is Sam Mitchell's brothers love child ??

:confused:

here's hoping

[liz]

Not sure if it's already been posted, but here is an interesting article on McNeil, written shortly before the ND.


McNeil works to new heights - AFL.com.au (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/87206/default.aspx)

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Getting excited about McNeil, he's done it the hard way and seems like a genuinely tough and determined kid.

I'm tired of hearing about how short he is, that hasn't stopped many other players from becoming very good footballers and in some cases champions of our game. He's not a KPP, he's a midfielder so his height is fine. I don't expect him to be taking overhead marks, I expect him to be getting his hands on the ball and hopefully he's got some speed in his legs too.

On that note, is he known for being quick?

P.S. Does anyone else think he looks like Sinclair in that picture?

[SimonH]

That is correct and there are match payments for playing reserves football as well.

Roos mentioned during a recent conference where he spoke and I was lucky enough to attend, that players taken in the draft who are on the list for two years are about a $350,000 investment each when taking into wages, development coaching and all the other little things are taken into account like food, physio, rehab, tape and travel and that's before a game is played and extra match payments start flowing.

DST
:DFor 2010, it's a pitiful $34,300 (http://aflpa.com.au/sites/all/files/AFLPA_AFL_CBA_2007_2011_FINAL.pdf) (see page 72). They don't get any match payments on top of that for playing in Canberra, that's for sure-- the real money relies on them being upgraded and playing seniors. They do get relocation costs (if required) and about $7700 living allowance (see page 81).

Of course running a football club requires that you spend money on player welfare, coaching, administration, housing etc. But it's important to distinguish between the net cost of that sort of thing (total costs divided by number of players) and the marginal cost-- meaning that you don't hire another doctor, build another training facility, hire another coach etc just because you have 4 more rookies. And it's the marginal cost that decides whether we can afford to take rookies.

Let's face it: where the club is on record as saying that it didn't expect to lose both BBBH and MOL in the last year, and lost another 5 or so experienced players (and their wages) as well, creating a huge salary cap hole, then it splashed money around (mostly sensibly) to pick up some experienced AFL players, it's a bit bloody rich (pun intended) for it to say 'we're too poor, we couldn't possibly afford to look after our complement of rookies'.

It would be an act of supreme, and history strongly suggests unwarranted, arrogance for a club to say "we've looked over all thousand-odd kids and young men who remain outstanding after the ND, and we're as sure as we need to be, that none of them will carve out a long-term AFL career". The world just doesn't work that way-- ask Brett Kirk, Heath Grundy, Paul Bevan, Kieran Jack, Ed Barlow etc.

The bottom line is that for a modest financial saving, we are giving away a smallish but significant competitive advantage to other clubs (or more accurately, are throwing away the advantage that local rookie rules give us). That (lack of) advantage will add up over the years, if we persist in this policy.

[Auntie.Gerald]

remember this video was one year ago at 17yrs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yGFxHM8djQ

AFL Draft Info: Dylan McNeil (Murray Bushrangers/NSW-ACT) – Draft Profile (http://www.afldraftinfo.com/2009/11/dylan-mcneil-murray-bushrangersnsw-act.html)


Strengths

> Ball magnet with excellent attack and ball winning skills in traffic (prolific HBG and clearance winner)
> Clean hands
> Good tackling pressure in close and strong attack on the man
> Reads the play well and typically well positioned at stoppages
> Very clever, creative decision maker with very good vision in and out of traffic
> Very good engine
> Clean and sharp feeder
> Well balanced and strong through the core. ? keeps his feet in traffic and rarely pushed off the ball
> Courageous

Weaknesses

> Undersized at only 175cm ? conceding around 10cm to the average midfielder
> Slowish pace off the mark, reasonable evasiveness but little top speed.
> Limited versatility for AFL ? inside midfield seems to be the only fit

[eggbeater]

Average disposal, but nothing a kid like him can't work out.

[Legs Akimbo]

remember this video was one year ago at 17yrs

Strengths

> Ball magnet with excellent attack and ball winning skills in traffic (prolific HBG and clearance winner)
> Clean hands
> Good tackling pressure in close and strong attack on the man
> Reads the play well and typically well positioned at stoppages
> Very clever, creative decision maker with very good vision in and out of traffic
> Very good engine
> Clean and sharp feeder
> Well balanced and strong through the core. ? keeps his feet in traffic and rarely pushed off the ball
> Courageous

Weaknesses

> Undersized at only 175cm ? conceding around 10cm to the average midfielder
> Slowish pace off the mark, reasonable evasiveness but little top speed.
> Limited versatility for AFL ? inside midfield seems to be the only fit

I like the look of him from the video. He seems to have very clean hands, has good vision and handballs really well. Kicking is a bit weird. He has a clean kicking action with a nice straight leg but results clearly not great even when in the clear. Maybe something to do with the way he is holding or dropping the ball. He also seems to kick to a player rather than to space.

[Jewels]

Let's face it: where the club is on record as saying that it didn't expect to lose both BBBH and MOL in the last year, and lost another 5 or so experienced players (and their wages) as well, creating a huge salary cap hole, then it splashed money around (mostly sensibly) to pick up some experienced AFL players, it's a bit bloody rich (pun intended) for it to say 'we're too poor, we couldn't possibly afford to look after our complement of rookies'.
Where did they say that?

It would be an act of supreme, and history strongly suggests unwarranted, arrogance for a club to say "we've looked over all thousand-odd kids and young men who remain outstanding after the ND, and we're as sure as we need to be, that none of them will carve out a long-term AFL career". The world just doesn't work that way-- ask Brett Kirk, Heath Grundy, Paul Bevan, Kieran Jack, Ed Barlow etc.

The bottom line is that for a modest financial saving, we are giving away a smallish but significant competitive advantage to other clubs (or more accurately, are throwing away the advantage that local rookie rules give us). That (lack of) advantage will add up over the years, if we persist in this policy.

Your joking, surely!!!!

Perhaps they chose not to take any more rookies, not for financial reasons but simply because the time and work needed to be put into ALL the newbies would just be spreading the work load that bit too far and is a better LONG TERM INVESTMENT spent on the boys we have already picked up.

The truth is, I don't know why they passed up the picks, you don't know why they passed up the picks, NONE OF US, ON HERE, KNOWS WHY THEY PASSED UP THE PICKS.
All I do know is that THEY SEEM TO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING and for us to be so damn critical is ridiculous!

[dimelb]

remember this video was one year ago at 17yrs ...
... Undersized at only 175cm ? conceding around 10cm to the average midfielder

He's grown 3cm in the last year and I dare say hasn't finished yet.

[BSA5]

It would be an act of supreme, and history strongly suggests unwarranted, arrogance for a club to say "we've looked over all thousand-odd kids and young men who remain outstanding after the ND, and we're as sure as we need to be, that none of them will carve out a long-term AFL career". The world just doesn't work that way-- ask Brett Kirk, Heath Grundy, Paul Bevan, Kieran Jack, Ed Barlow etc.

The bottom line is that for a modest financial saving, we are giving away a smallish but significant competitive advantage to other clubs (or more accurately, are throwing away the advantage that local rookie rules give us). That (lack of) advantage will add up over the years, if we persist in this policy.

Bull@@@@. We still recruited 4 rookies. They were just rookies we all expected. We still have a rookie list 7 places long. I dare say that would be longer than most. The money saved could have been budgeted to our football department, to give us an edge there. Who knows? It also allowed us to make sure we get guys like Mumford, Kennedy, McGlynn and Bradshaw over. Are you complaining about any of those guys? I'd choose them over Panos, Dare, Hooper (though I did want him) and Crichton.

[wedge.maverick]

He's grown 3cm in the last year and I dare say hasn't finished yet.

He measured 175cm 75kg at draft camp so he hasn't grown and has probably stopped. It won't hinder in any way though.

[BSA5]

He measured 175cm 75kg at draft camp so he hasn't grown and has probably stopped. It won't hinder in any way though.

He's 178 cm now...

[wedge.maverick]

He's 178 cm now...

That's 3 cm in 2 months he is growing. Sorry.;)

[Steve]

The whole 'we may as well take as many players as we can regardless of whether they're any good, just in case one might improve out of sight' argument doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

AFL is far from the only industry/profession where there is fierce competition for the best talent - but you don't see the top companies in their industries hiring all the stragglers they can find a desk for, just because there might be a 0.0001% chance they could be a good CEO one day.

We're putting our money into identifying and developing potential talent, which again is what is done in all other decent organisations.

[707]

Today's Age suggested budgetary constraints meant we didn't take our quota.

Given the comprimised drafts in 2010 and 2011, I would have thought we should have at least used pick 10 as there were still a number of players available that were rated "highly" -were considered likely ND picks. Here I'm thinking Dare, Weston, Panos, Hooper etc.

Time will be the arbitor of course, we may have saved money or we may have missed out.

[cruiser]

Put your hands up if you're hard to please . . . . . . sheesh.

We have done outstandingly well since September - appreciate that fact and get a grip.

I've just had a novel thought . . . . Anybody here criticising the decision not to draft extra rookies think that they know more about the kids/adults we passed up on than the club's recruiters? Anybody else seen them play once, let alone the required several occasions? Thanks Claret, my thoughts exactly.

[Aaron]

I trust the staff know much more than we do but here are a few comments.
1. We had a list of 46 players last year including the likes of Fosdike ( I think the staff would have known his fate at PSD 2008). We have 45 this time.

2. We have two OUTSIDE veterans last year, but our 2 veterans are now listed as INSIDE which will affect the salary CAP and budget.
3. We had an operating lost for 2 successive years now.
4. The number of listed players we can have in reserve game is RESTRICTED.
5. The composition of the whole team has changed. There are now more younger and inexperienced players that require development and welfare attention. Some of the new recruits are still young and have good potential to guarentee our future.
6. We have invested more than 400 K for scholarship players ( I think we have 6 and may add more)
7.The Wetern Bulldog raised $50,000 at a fundraising event at Whitten Oval on Monday night(14/12) to allow them to have the fifth Rookie. WE HAVE 7 Rookies

[Chilcott]

I trust the staff know much more than we do but here are a few commnets.
1. We had a list of 46 players last year including the likes of Fosdike ( I think the staff would have know his fate at PSD 2008). We have 45 this time.

2. We have two OUTSIDE veterans last year, but our 2 veterans are now listed as INSIDE which will affect the salary CAP and budget.
3. We had an operating lost for 2 successive years now.
4. The number of listed players we can have in reserve game is RESTRICTED.
5. The composition of the whole team has changed. There are now more younger and inexperienced players that require development and welfare attention. Some of the new recruits are still young and have good potential to guarentee our future.
6. We have invested more than 400 K for scholarship players ( I think we have 6 and may add more)
7.The Wetern Bulldog raised $50,000 at a fundraising event at Whitten Oval on Monday night(14/12) to allow them to have the fifth Rockie.


Have noted your comments Aaron. But what are you trying to imply?

[Aaron]

Have noted your comments Aaron. But what are you trying to imply?

It means NO COMPLAINT from me. I am happy with what we have achieved in the Draft process.

[Hartijon]

It means NO COMPLAINT from me. I am happy with what we have achieved in the Draft process.

Yeah,me too. The 46 last year to 45 this year does not truly indicate the huge increase in workload on everyone in the club including the older players. Settling such a large number in, getting a strong statistical base ,knowing their strengths and weaknesses, checking their diets, organising new routines for them.Every coach from Roosey downwards has a huge challenge with this new bunch. Then there is the "Youth Factor " with hours of wise counsel needed and allowance for their exuberance and handling their frustrations if they don't get selected.

As much as I would like to have seen Panos or Crichton in our squad,I believe that the recruiters and club have made a wise decision financially although I don't really know, but certainly a wise one in Human Resource management.Even if we took these available blokes then could not develop them enough through games in the B's or opportunities in the A's they would be off at the first opportunity and all our investment would be wasted.

[liz]

This is a bit of an embarrassing article from Jake Niall - embarrassing because the premise behind it is that the Swans couldn't find a single rookie to draft from the whole state...despite the fact they actually drafted two.

Swans prove NSW is a no-go zone for talent (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/swans-prove-nsw-is-a-nogo-zone-for-talent-20091215-kuho.html)

He also neglects to mention that two NSW/ACT players were taken in the main draft, and another 3 or 4 (apart from Gordon) have been given rookie spots on other clubs' lists.

[BSA5]

This is a bit of an embarrassing article from Jake Niall - embarrassing because the premise behind it is that the Swans couldn't find a single rookie to draft from the whole state...despite the fact they actually drafted two.

Swans prove NSW is a no-go zone for talent (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/swans-prove-nsw-is-a-nogo-zone-for-talent-20091215-kuho.html)

He also neglects to mention that two NSW/ACT players were taken in the main draft, and another 3 or 4 (apart from Gordon) have been given rookie spots on other clubs' lists.

Shocking journalism. Of course, most people who read it won't have any idea who Dylan McNeil or Nathan Gordon are, nor any of the other NSW players taken in this draft. They may once they start playing senior football, but by that time the details of this article will have faded and just the general impression will remain, reinforcing the anti-AFL bias in NSW, and the anti-NSW bias in the AFL.

[SimonH]

Where did they say that?Um, here? (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/swans-prove-nsw-is-a-nogo-zone-for-talent-20091215-kuho.html)

"it passed on four non-compulsory selections, due in large part to budgetary constraints" and "The club said that tight finances were part of the reason."


Your joking, surely!!!!My joking what? I don't have a joking surely (but it may be a good Xmas present for the man that has everything).


Perhaps they chose not to take any more rookies, not for financial reasons but simply because the time and work needed to be put into ALL the newbies would just be spreading the work load that bit too far and is a better LONG TERM INVESTMENT spent on the boys we have already picked up.

The truth is, I don't know why they passed up the picks, you don't know why they passed up the picks, NONE OF US, ON HERE, KNOWS WHY THEY PASSED UP THE PICKS.
All I do know is that THEY SEEM TO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING and for us to be so damn critical is ridiculous!Well, THEY SEEM TO PRETTY MUCH HAVE TOLD US (see above). No club has ever said 'we didn't pick up any more rookies because our coaching staff are over-stretched with the young talent we have, and it was just beyond them to develop more kids as well'. Nor would any club that values its credibility ever say such a thing.

What we know is: Adelaide 47, Brisbane 46, Carlton 46, Collingwood 47, Essendon 46, Fremantle 46, Geelong 47, Hawthorn 48, Melbourne 46, North Melbourne 46, Port Adelaide 47, Richmond 46, St Kilda 47, Swans 45, West Coast 46, Bulldogs 46. The difference is relatively slight, until you realise that we're entitled to have on average a list 3 players larger than all other clubs bar the Blions.

And some of the above clubs are on the bones of their arse-- North Melbourne and the Bulldogs' accountants have, in the recent past, signed off in their annual report that but for support of the AFL, the organisation is insolvent. The ND and RD are a numbers game-- even where the odds are way less than 50% on any given bet, the more balls you have in the draw, the better your chances of coming out a winner. Remember that we took not one single freakin' new player in the open part of the RD, and so every player available after pick 9 was one that we passed on (b/c we could have taken Playfair anywhere). And there was some undeniable quality out there-- not perfect, of course, but still quality. You'd be a rich man if you could identify now which ones, but we know that there will be some players picked after pick 10 in the 2009 AFL rookie draft, who will go on to be 100+ game players.

So the club's finances certainly indicate we're no Adelaide, Weagles or Essendon. We might not even be a mid-tier fiscal club like Blions, Freo, Hawthorn, Geelong. But even if we're in the bottom rung of clubs financially, we're doing worse than the rest of the bottom rung on this issue. it's a mistake to cut your on-field stocks to save money unless everything else has been cut first. And in terms of the way the club conducts its business, I haven't seen that happening. When in financial trouble, the absolute last thing you cut is on-field investment-- putting it on the field is the core of why you exist.

I have no problem at all with our 45-man list as it stands. It's a good list. It's just that it should have been larger. If you think that's over-critical, then maybe you shouldn't be looking a thread that has in its name "Rookie Drafts". Because in a thread with that name there has to be some silly outside chance of someone mentioning, in passing, that in a draft where only one other club passed at all, we managed to pass four times.

[liz]

So the club's finances certainly indicate we're no Adelaide, Weagles or Essendon. We might not even be a mid-tier fiscal club like Blions, Freo, Hawthorn, Geelong. But even if we're in the bottom rung of clubs financially, we're doing worse than the rest of the bottom rung on this issue. it's a mistake to cut your on-field stocks to save money unless everything else has been cut first. And in terms of the way the club conducts its business, I haven't seen that happening. When in financial trouble, the absolute last thing you cut is on-field investment-- putting it on the field is the core of why you exist.


You are ignoring the significant amount invested in the scholarship scheme. No other club has as many scholarship kids as the Swans (and only the Pies and Hawks come close). Time will tell what the hit rate is from the scholarship scheme (and the soon-to-be-replacement-scheme of the Academies). But the club has been quite open about the fact it is investing heavily in that scheme as a way of developing and recruiting young talent outside the traditional draft system.

You are right, to an extent, that the rookie system is a numbers game but it is a very low return on largish numbers and it really is impossible to say whether the Swans going into 2010 one rookie short of the average is really going to cost them even a handy player, let alone a decent one.

[caj23]

Lions didnt take their full complement of rookies either

[707]

If it was just financial then I think we've sold ourselves short. I agree that the very last place to make cuts is players, even though the strike rate is low with rookies, you may have just passed over a Kirk, Jack, Grundy, Mattner, Cox, Fletcher, Q Lynch, Priddis, Morris, Bock, Rutten, Drummond, Lockyer, Lovett, Sandilands, Rooke, Sewell, Aaron Davey, Jolly, Brogan, Pearce, Milne, etc, etc.

Yes, it is a lottery but you've got to have as many balls in the barrel as you're allowed and right now we're three balls short. After we first passed, 15 clubs took 27 players, excluding redrafts, so 15 other clubs wanted their share of the lottery balls.

By using our first three picks, we could have got two or three of the following players, and I for one would have liked to seen them trying out in red and white rather than other colours - Jack Weston, Joe Dare, Matthew Panos, Andrew Hooper.

As I've said before, time will be the arbitor on these guys and even with no new (not previously selected) rookies, the trade period has been unbelievable for us, I reckon we've got some bargains. I just think that for the money involved we should have had another three balls in play.

[Hartijon]

If it was just financial then I think we've sold ourselves short. I agree that the very last place to make cuts is players, even though the strike rate is low with rookies, you may have just passed over a Kirk, Jack, Grundy, Mattner, Cox, Fletcher, Q Lynch, Priddis, Morris, Bock, Rutten, Drummond, Lockyer, Lovett, Sandilands, Rooke, Sewell, Aaron Davey, Jolly, Brogan, Pearce, Milne, etc, etc.

Yes, it is a lottery but you've got to have as many balls in the barrel as you're allowed and right now we're three balls short. After we first passed, 15 clubs took 27 players, excluding redrafts, so 15 other clubs wanted their share of the lottery balls.

By using our first three picks, we could have got two or three of the following players, and I for one would have liked to seen them trying out in red and white rather than other colours - Jack Weston, Joe Dare, Matthew Panos, Andrew Hooper.

As I've said before, time will be the arbitor on these guys and even with no new (not previously selected) rookies, the trade period has been unbelievable for us, I reckon we've got some bargains. I just think that for the money involved we should have had another three balls in play.

Your logic is right of course but what some of us are saying is that "If we could have ,we would have!" and that we have no reason to doubt the judgement of the Club on these issues as they have proven themselves first class judges of Footy talent. The other issues like finance and staffing are hard to comment on . So relax ,sit back and enjoy the 2010 Swans all 45 of them. Its a fantastic squad with ever kind of player even the x factor ones I so favoured recruiting last season.If Hooper,Panos or Dare win a Brownlow remind us of your posting!