Are we now a genuine Premiership threat?

[HeeneyIsAGun]

I was listening to the "First Crack" podcast earlier today, and there was common consensus that of the current top 8, 7 were "genuine" flag contenders. David King nominated us as the odd one out, and said he didn't believe we could win it this year.

So question to the community (as biased as we can all be!) - are we actually a genuine threat? Or just making up the numbers?

It is important to note that as it stands, we have beaten 3 of the top 4 from last year (and all of them are still considered serious contenders), with only Port to play out of that group.

I personally entered the year hoping we would move up the ladder, finishing just outside the top 8 to demonstrate improvement. Making a final was the absolute pinnacle of hope, with the experience that would bring being seriously valuable.

Right now, I have moved my expectations somewhat - I now think a finals berth from here is a minimum, and a final victory would be an added plus.

But regardless of it all, I am starting to believe that we could still reach the heights of the 2003 team, and possibly even do a "Baby Bombers".

Thoughts?

[Markwebbos]

I think as it stands, we are too young / inexperienced. So if they played finals tomorrow we'd have little chance.

However, its the beginning of May. There is nearly four months football to be played and we stand to gain more than any other side from experience over that time.

I'd like to hope we'll be contenders by then. It's probably a year too early for us.

[i'm-uninformed2]

No.

We've improved faster than I thought too (9-11 pre-season) but we're more likely to contend 2023 or 2024 onwards.

Some of the younger bodies will tire, some of our key position weaknesses will reveal themselves in finals (and need to be dealt with in subsequent trade/recruitment windows - but that's ok) and we're particularly susceptible to injuries to the wrong blokes (again, largely key position related) in our depth.

I reckon we're more like Brisbane, in that we'll climb for a few years - but need to harden and mature to win a flag. I'd love to be wrong though!

[Vonsteinman]

I was listening to the "First Crack" podcast earlier today, and there was common consensus that of the current top 8, 7 were "genuine" flag contenders. David King nominated us as the odd one out, and said he didn't believe we could win it this year.

So question to the community (as biased as we can all be!) - are we actually a genuine threat? Or just making up the numbers?

It is important to note that as it stands, we have beaten 3 of the top 4 from last year (and all of them are still considered serious contenders), with only Port to play out of that group.

I personally entered the year hoping we would move up the ladder, finishing just outside the top 8 to demonstrate improvement. Making a final was the absolute pinnacle of hope, with the experience that would bring being seriously valuable.

Right now, I have moved my expectations somewhat - I now think a finals berth from here is a minimum, and a final victory would be an added plus.

But regardless of it all, I am starting to believe that we could still reach the heights of the 2003 team, and possibly even do a "Baby Bombers".

Thoughts?

When challenged, King lost his nerve and refused to rule the Swans out - having already ruled them in, and then out, this season. Says more about him/his opinions than the team.

A lot would have to go right I believe. The majority of the senior group need to get fit and stay fit.

This week will tell a lot. A team at the top of it’s game, on it’s home deck, where you have to play well to win a flag. The Swans have already knocked off the Premiers there, so another big scalp - in the context of this season - would speak volumes.

[mcs]

I agree with Vonsteinman in that a lot would need to go right - just to get anywhere near going even deep into the finals, let along being a genuine competitor for the flag.

However, from here I'd be a little disappointed if we miss the finals. We have what on paper is a pretty reasonable draw, with a decent pack of double ups potentially (though equally several of those teams we do seem to have trouble against), and have already banked good wins against good sides.

From here 8 more wins would probably be enough to guarantee finals footy, which I think is eminently doable, in particular if we can bank a few more before the bye (after the tough game of the Dees on Saturday night, its a bit kinder looking potentially - Colliwobbles, Dockers, Carlton, St Kilda and the Wees and Poos). I'd be disappointed from here (unless we get a resurgent injury list or form drops off quickly), if we don't reach the bye in Rd 14 at worst at 8-5. A genuine pass mark from here, given how those teams are going is probably 9-4.

All in all, still think we are going along great guns all things considered, but feel our window is probably a couple of years off opening yet. But a really good performance on Saturday night could lay down a marker for higher achivements in the shorter term also.

[Ludwig]

Can we win the premiership? Yes! But only if we play the Bulldogs in the GF and get that umpire who called "play on - not 15, play on - not 15, play on - not 15, play on - not 15!"

[crackedactor 01]

Can we win the premiership? Yes! But only if we play the Bulldogs in the GF and get that umpire who called "play on - not 15, play on - not 15, play on - not 15, play on - not 15!"

Yes a replay on the 2016 GF will be a good reminder of the umpiring nightmare on that day. Still remember the free kick count 20 to 8. Still remember the 10 times the Bulldogs players threw the ball. Not 15 you said?

[Bangalore Swans]

I think we can win the flag if all the following occurs:

1) We play the corridor football of weeks 1-3.

2) Literally no injury list for key players.

3) Most important players in top form.

4) The 1st and 2nd year players are fresh, rested and in form.

This is the best 22 to do the job:

B Cunningham Rampe Dawson
HB Lloyd MaCartin Campbell
C J-Mac Warner Florent
HF Heeney Reid Haywood
F Papley Franklin MacDonald

Foll Hickey Parker Mills

Interchange Kennedy Rowbottom Gulden Blakey

Medical Sub
Stephens

[Markwebbos]

I think we can win the flag if all the following occurs:

1) We play the corridor football of weeks 1-3.

2) Literally no injury list for key players.

3) Most important players in top form.

4) The 1st and 2nd year players are fresh, rested and in form.

This is the best 22 to do the job:

B Cunningham Rampe Dawson
HB Lloyd MaCartin Campbell
C J-Mac Warner Florent
HF Heeney Reid Haywood
F Papley Franklin MacDonald

Foll Hickey Parker Mills

Interchange Kennedy Rowbottom Gulden Blakey

Medical Sub
Stephens

I know you keep calling for us to "play the corridor football of weeks 1-3". It's not as simple as that. You might want to read this

Teams have 'done homework' on fast-starting Sydney Swans

[O'Reilly Boy]

This is the best 22 to do the job:

B Cunningham Rampe Dawson
HB Lloyd MaCartin Campbell
C J-Mac Warner Florent
HF Heeney Reid Haywood
F Papley Franklin MacDonald

Foll Hickey Parker Mills

Interchange Kennedy Rowbottom Gulden Blakey

Medical Sub
Stephens

I'm not sure that that team is right. It feels light in the back half: we need at least one more large-bodied KPD. I'm not convinced that Campbell playing off half-back is right, particularly in a back six which includes Cunningham, Lloyd and Dawson. Three out of those four, yes. This is where Melican is going to be important if he can get past the injuries. O'Riordan at a pinch. Gould was the great hope, but there must be something not clicking. And I'm not convinced by Hewitt as a key defender. The proposed set up here also would mean that Mills is effectively the seventh defender, and I think that he stays in the middle.

So while that team may be best 22 (arguably), it is not the best team.

I think that Blakey and Hayward are the other points of vunerability (although I rate Hayward higher than many on this forum). I think that Stephens needs to be in the team: he and Florent play great inside/out games. I think that the turning point against Geelong came as Florent started attending centre bounces: he has a great capacity to secure clean ball, take a heartbeat of time to stop, allow defenders to pass him, and then to change the angle of attack with great kicks. The usual pattern has been a ball shoveled out of the pack to a shotgun player who then hoofs it forward—think O'Keefe, Kennedy, Parker—a low percentage play.

And I think that Wicks is adding plenty of value.

So, what about

B: Cunningham Rampe Dawson
HB: Lloyd McCartin Melican

C: McInerney Warner Stephens

HF: Heeney Reid Wicks
F: Papley Franklin Gulden

Followers: Hickey Mills Kennedy Rowbottom

I/C Parker Campbell Florent Blakey

med sub?

Unlucky omissions:
McDonald—his time will come, but while Bud and Reid are fit, they offer more: Reid as chop out ruck, down the line target when the corridor is denied, and swing backman in the clutch. I don't think that we can play all three in the same forward line.
Hewitt—I struggle to see how he fits in the best team. I get nervous with him in a KPD role. Earlier in his career he got named forward, moving into a tagging or run with role, and is, at best fit, a hard running mid. but it's hard to see how he squeezes into the on-ball brigade at the moment. Possibly a horses-for-courses selection (eg against Richmond, where he could start forward and pick up and run with Dusty)
McLean—see McDonald, above
Hayward—not nearly as bad as many posters think, but behind Gulden and Wicks for small forward role

By the end of season 22, we will likely see pressure on Lloyd, Cunningham, Kennedy, Parker, Franklin and Reid to hold their places, but they are still first 22 at the moment.

[NeonBible]

I'm not sure that that team is right. It feels light in the back half: we need at least one more large-bodied KPD. I'm not convinced that Campbell playing off half-back is right, particularly in a back six which includes Cunningham, Lloyd and Dawson. Three out of those four, yes. This is where Melican is going to be important if he can get past the injuries. O'Riordan at a pinch. Gould was the great hope, but there must be something not clicking. And I'm not convinced by Hewitt as a key defender. The proposed set up here also would mean that Mills is effectively the seventh defender, and I think that he stays in the middle.

So while that team may be best 22 (arguably), it is not the best team.

I think that Blakey and Hayward are the other points of vunerability (although I rate Hayward higher than many on this forum). I think that Stephens needs to be in the team: he and Florent play great inside/out games. I think that the turning point against Geelong came as Florent started attending centre bounces: he has a great capacity to secure clean ball, take a heartbeat of time to stop, allow defenders to pass him, and then to change the angle of attack with great kicks. The usual pattern has been a ball shoveled out of the pack to a shotgun player who then hoofs it forward—think O'Keefe, Kennedy, Parker—a low percentage play.

And I think that Wicks is adding plenty of value.

So, what about

B: Cunningham Rampe Dawson
HB: Lloyd McCartin Melican

C: McInerney Warner Stephens

HF: Heeney Reid Wicks
F: Papley Franklin Gulden

Followers: Hickey Mills Kennedy Rowbottom

I/C Parker Campbell Florent Blakey

med sub?

Unlucky omissions:
McDonald—his time will come, but while Bud and Reid are fit, they offer more: Reid as chop out ruck, down the line target when the corridor is denied, and swing backman in the clutch. I don't think that we can play all three in the same forward line.
Hewitt—I struggle to see how he fits in the best team. I get nervous with him in a KPD role. Earlier in his career he got named forward, moving into a tagging or run with role, and is, at best fit, a hard running mid. but it's hard to see how he squeezes into the on-ball brigade at the moment. Possibly a horses-for-courses selection (eg against Richmond, where he could start forward and pick up and run with Dusty)
McLean—see McDonald, above
Hayward—not nearly as bad as many posters think, but behind Gulden and Wicks for small forward role

By the end of season 22, we will likely see pressure on Lloyd, Cunningham, Kennedy, Parker, Franklin and Reid to hold their places, but they are still first 22 at the moment.

McLean is averaging 1.8 goals a game. I didnt think we would be saying that at the start of the year! He would have to be in the best 22 - surely! His 4 goals was the most by a Swan this year behind only Buddy's bag of 5 in the derby!! I think he is ahead of the Lizard who you have included.

Hewett too is an interesting dilemma. I confess i dont fully get the hype around George. He is a disciplined, skilful team player, but not a game-changer. That possibly gets him in the team, unless there's a game-changer like Campbell. I wouldn't be removing Campbell for him, but maybe Rowbottom? I wonder whether we will see George as a midfielder again. I think back to the GCS game where Touk Miller ran riot - we could've done with George there. I still think he could maybe offer more than Rowbottom if in a midfield capacity. It is a tricky call, I think both would be favourites of Longmire and he wouldn't want to leave either out, but midfield balance might force his hand!

These are such good problems to have and why i am brimming with confidence about what we can do this season!

[TheBloods]

McLean is averaging 1.8 goals a game. I didnt think we would be saying that at the start of the year! He would have to be in the best 22 - surely! His 4 goals was the most by a Swan this year behind only Buddy's bag of 5 in the derby!! I think he is ahead of the Lizard who you have included.

Hewett too is an interesting dilemma. I confess i dont fully get the hype around George. He is a disciplined, skilful team player, but not a game-changer. That possibly gets him in the team, unless there's a game-changer like Campbell. I wouldn't be removing Campbell for him, but maybe Rowbottom? I wonder whether we will see George as a midfielder again. I think back to the GCS game where Touk Miller ran riot - we could've done with George there. I still think he could maybe offer more than Rowbottom if in a midfield capacity. It is a tricky call, I think both would be favourites of Longmire and he wouldn't want to leave either out, but midfield balance might force his hand!

These are such good problems to have and why i am brimming with confidence about what we can do this season!

Surely you are not suggesting Rowbottom could be out of the 22 after giving me such a hard time for saying the same thing !