Real Footy .... Gloom And Doom.

[BRISWAN]

Just reading an article on R/F which states that we are unfortunate that we are in a decline at the wrong time.
This is supposedly due to our lack of quality players and the introduction of West Sydney who will halve our revenue potential.
Don't these journoes follow what is going on within our camp?

[goswannie14]

No! Do you expect journos to do research?

[RogueSwan]

I added a comment to that article yesterday, still to show up, pointing out that the players we have lost have not been at their peak for quite a while, arguably Hall was still playing well.
realfooty article (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/how-will-your-club-fare-in-2010-20091224-ldsv.html)
I also pointed out that we pushed both grand finalists all the way in our matches.

[ShockOfHair]

Yeah, I saw that too. Talk about silly season. The writer managed to get it wrong on every count. Seemed to think it was a big blow to lose Hall, Crouch and Barry, not realising they played about 30 games between them last year. He also didn't seem to have noticed the late season revival or our new recruits except Bradshaw.

Just checked the markets for 2010. On Centerbet, Swans are $51 (10th) for the flag and $3 (9th) to make the eight. That's not unreasonable but not a bad punt for the eight.

[Legs Akimbo]

Utterly stupid article by an ignorant 'journalist'.

Says on the one hand that loss of mumford will be sorely felt by Geelong and then rates him a fringe player gained by Sydney. Something about cake and eating it?

[liz]

Yeah, I saw that too. Talk about silly season. The writer managed to get it wrong on every count. Seemed to think it was a big blow to lose Hall, Crouch and Barry, not realising they played about 30 games between them last year. He also didn't seem to have noticed the late season revival or our new recruits except Bradshaw.



Did they play as many as 30 between them? I thought Hall played around a dozen, Leo a couple and Crouch just a handful.

The two losses from last season we are going to feel are Jolly and O'Loughlin. At this stage we have no idea whether a Seaby / Mumford / good-training Currie is going to be as effective as Jolly / White / Pyke / LRT.

And while O'Loughlin was past his best last year, he still played some pretty handy football, and structurally was important.

[707]

Just checked the markets for 2010. On Centerbet, Swans are $51 (10th) for the flag and $3 (9th) to make the eight. That's not unreasonable but not a bad punt for the eight.

I joined Centrebet just recently (in order to bet on AFL games in 2010) and won a $20 betting voucher.

The voucher went straight on us at $41 to win the pe season cup. We're only in front of Tankers in the Cup betting, based I assume on the fact we haven't won a Cup game under Roos. Hopefully I get a good run with my betting voucher.

Also had a decent wager on us making the eight at $3 which seems at this stage to be over the odds. Those odds will tumble if we rumble in the Cup.

[Primmy]

I just added my two cents worth re the article. Not posted yet. Do you think the SMH actually paid the person who wrote this (I refuse to even give him the standing of journalist) because it is singularly unintelligent. That is all I have to say. Poor boy, he is probably there for work experience. Or the boss is away on holls, and he took advantage.

[ShockOfHair]

Did they play as many as 30 between them? I thought Hall played around a dozen, Leo a couple and Crouch just a handful.

The two losses from last season we are going to feel are Jolly and O'Loughlin. At this stage we have no idea whether a Seaby / Mumford / good-training Currie is going to be as effective as Jolly / White / Pyke / LRT.

And while O'Loughlin was past his best last year, he still played some pretty handy football, and structurally was important.


I was guessing Hall played half a season, Crouch half a season, Leo maybe five games??? Anwyay, not enough to be missed.

Fair comments about Jolly and MOL -- the kind of remarks the original story could have made. They'll be the most missed but that said, just having two rucks will go some way to compensating for Jolly, who's played mostly a lone hand the last couple of years.

Up forward we know who the talls are likely to be but the contest for the crumbers will be pretty interesting - between Moore, Bevan, Jack, TDL, maybe Malceski, McGlynn, Paddy V or even Jetta and later in the year Rohan.

[TheHood]

I didn't get the benefit of what sounds like brilliant prose.

I am very excitied about 2010 but I think that needs to be tempered because some of that is really for 2011 and 2012. We can't really be sure that the rookies will shine in year 1. In fact, chances are they won't.

Bradshaw is a definite asset, i.e. he will add value from Round 1.

Kennedy, Mumford, Seaby and McGlynn MIGHT add value. McGlynn and Kennedy are suspect inclusions and it is uncertain they will shine in a new environment. Seaby is yet to convince me until I see his 2010 enthusiasm for the contest in the trials.

Mumford is training the house down but then again, Steven Tingay was a legendary trainer. We need to see more.

I think the media has every right not to take a punt on the Swans.

You better have a good reason for putting your chin out there as an observer. It's better to say at season's end, "gee Mumford surpassed my predictions". Whose predicitons are the same as every other journo, commentator, expert or whatever.

As a hopeful fan, I still think we're capable of making the bottom half of the 8, but it's a secret, don't tell a weekend Herald Journo! ;)

[Bloods05]

I didn't get the benefit of what sounds like brilliant prose.

I am very excitied about 2010 but I think that needs to be tempered because some of that is really for 2011 and 2012. We can't really be sure that the rookies will shine in year 1. In fact, chances are they won't.

Bradshaw is a definite asset, i.e. he will add value from Round 1.

Kennedy, Mumford, Seaby and McGlynn MIGHT add value. McGlynn and Kennedy are suspect inclusions and it is uncertain they will shine in a new environment. Seaby is yet to convince me until I see his 2010 enthusiasm for the contest in the trials.

Mumford is training the house down but then again, Steven Tingay was a legendary trainer. We need to see more.

I think the media has every right not to take a punt on the Swans.

You better have a good reason for putting your chin out there as an observer. It's better to say at season's end, "gee Mumford surpassed my predictions". Whose predicitons are the same as every other journo, commentator, expert or whatever.

As a hopeful fan, I still think we're capable of making the bottom half of the 8, but it's a secret, don't tell a weekend Herald Journo! ;)

You probably should have read it before posting this, because the objection to the article was not that it took a pessimistic view of the Swans' prospects, but rather that it relied on an uninformed perspective to draw that conclusion. It was simply lazy journalism that demonstrated no detailed knowledge of the changes that have been made to the team's structure from early 2009 through to the off-season. You are right to point out that these changes could take time to take effect, but the article showed no awareness that the changes had even happened.

[Bloods05]

Did they play as many as 30 between them? I thought Hall played around a dozen, Leo a couple and Crouch just a handful.

The two losses from last season we are going to feel are Jolly and O'Loughlin. At this stage we have no idea whether a Seaby / Mumford / good-training Currie is going to be as effective as Jolly / White / Pyke / LRT.

And while O'Loughlin was past his best last year, he still played some pretty handy football, and structurally was important.

I'm pretty confident that Jolly's loss will be covered by Mumford, Seaby and Currie, especially as Jolly was clearly tired towards the end of the year. The ruck duties will be able to be shared much more next year.

MOL and Hall is a different story. The combination of Bradshaw and maybe TDL and a different forward structure could cover their loss, but perhaps not immediately. Mick was not great last year except for a few flashes of brilliance. I imagine our forward structure will be more varied, but initially less inspired. That should change over the next couple of years as some of the new acquisitions gain experience and confidence, and as Goodes settles into a forward role.

[Primmy]

You probably should have read it before posting this, because the objection to the article was not that it took a pessimistic view of the Swans' prospects, but rather that it relied on an uninformed perspective to draw that conclusion. It was simply lazy journalism that demonstrated no detailed knowledge of the changes that have been made to the team's structure from early 2009 through to the off-season. You are right to point out that these changes could take time to take effect, but the article showed no awareness that the changes had even happened.

Exactly! That's what I wrote. Unintelligent and uninformed. Written by someone who doesn't know his job. grrrrr. Nephew of Mike Sheehan perhaps?:confused:

[TheHood]

You probably should have read it before posting this, because the objection to the article was not that it took a pessimistic view of the Swans' prospects, but rather that it relied on an uninformed perspective to draw that conclusion. It was simply lazy journalism that demonstrated no detailed knowledge of the changes that have been made to the team's structure from early 2009 through to the off-season. You are right to point out that these changes could take time to take effect, but the article showed no awareness that the changes had even happened.

Cheers