2006 Depth

[katie-scarlett]

ok then..
Question!

is that reason to push him for captaincy if he's such a presence?

[SheppSwanFan]

Originally posted by katie-scarlett
ok then..
Question!

is that reason to push him for captaincy if he's such a presence?

Possibly, but I'd doubt he's going to play in 2007, so why only appoint a bloke for a year?

[goswannie14]

Re: Re: Re: 2006 Depth

Originally posted by Jeffers1984
BTW welcome to RWO, good to see some new faces.

You didn't say that to me when I joined here Is that just because I'm an O.F.

[Tuesday]

You're not female, GS14.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by Tuesday
You're not female, GS14.

Yeah, I was going to mention that as well Thanks for reminding me...so did you get a welcome

[katie-scarlett]

haha how funny
hello

[Doctor]

All depends on injuries. We had a good run in the second half of the season. Take a couple of key position players out of any side and they'll struggle. 2006 will be no different.

[Lucky Knickers]

Originally posted by katie-scarlett
is that reason to push him for captaincy if he's such a presence?

Nah! If he was younger but he came to late and you wouldn't pick a new guy over Maxfield.

Question - has Moore leapfrogged Schmidt and Willoughby in the line for positions in the firsts?

[ihamilto]

Originally posted by singaporeswan
Nah! If he was younger but he came to late and you wouldn't pick a new guy over Maxfield.

Question - has Moore leapfrogged Schmidt and Willoughby in the line for positions in the firsts?

In answer to your question no either one of those 3 could become regular players in the firsts in 2006 Willoughby has wonderful skills and in my mind is the best of the 3 however because of his size he tends to get knocked around a bit, Schmidt and Moore are certainly bigger bodied, so it is going to be interesting to see how they develop over the coming months.
cheers Ian

[originalswan]

"Had a lot of friends comment that swans lack depth and will struggle in 2006."

I'd tell your friends that they'll be in the same boat as all the experts at the start of this year that said we couldn't even make the Finals this year!!!!

[Lucky Knickers]

Of course I told THEM that....

I do, however, respect their footballing opinions, which is why I posed the question on RWO.

[graystar]

Everyone thought we were a team full of nevilles last year playing crap footy....we showed them, and will havve to show them again. I like the idea we might already be underdogs even before our defence begins.

[penga]

Re: Re: Re: 2006 Depth

Originally posted by singaporeswan
Re Jolly, our second tier are all unknown/untried/unreliable - if we don't have him playing 60-70% of the game it will expose us significantly.

Before last season, Jolly was an unknown quantity. He'd played a few games for the Dees without making too much of an impact. In the Wizard Cup game he looked way out of sorts. He was put on our list as backup, thankfully he became a key component. If it wasn't for Doyle's injury you may not have seen him too much throughout the season. We were no better off at the beginning of last season than what we are now. One decent ruckman, an injury-prone one and a recently recruited unknown quantity.

If you look at our lineup and make two changes from the Grand Final team, a forced one being Doyle for Ball and Richards for Bevan, it sounds like Richards is destined for our starting 22, it will look similar to this:

B: Bolton Barry Crouch
HB: Mathews LRT Kennelly
C: Goodes Kirk Dempster
HF: Bolton Richards* O'keefe
FF: O'loughlin Hall Davis
Fol: Jolly Williams Buchanan
Int: Doyle Fosdike Ablett Schneider

* - (Often on paper, Goodes would be named at CHF and Hall at FF. The lineup above would push Goodes to the wing. Hall would still play between FF and HF.)

Talls depth: Vogels, Chambers, Grundy, Shaw
Mids depth: Malceski, McVeigh, Moore, Bevan

Once again we have rookie depth. Same as last year. When someone goes down, we just have to cover.

Meanwhile, my preferred and ultimate 22 would be:

B: Crouch Grundy Bolton
HB: Barry LRT Kennelly
C: Goodes Kirk Dempster
HF: Davis Richards O'keefe
FF: O'loughlin Hall Williams
Fol: Jolly Bolton Buchanan
Int from: Doyle Mathews Fosdike Malceski Schneider McVeigh Ablett

Then there is still Chambers and Vogels. This is what people were trying to demonstrate when saying it is hard to fit Mathews into our best 22. Not a slight on him by any means, it is simply hard.

An argument could be made that our defencive KPP are too young and inexperienced. Adelaide had the best defence in the league last year with two relatively young KP backs.

[NMWBloods]

I still think Goodes should play in the centre during bounces - he's very good at reading the ball and getting it to someone.

[penga]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I still think Goodes should play in the centre during bounces - he's very good at reading the ball and getting it to someone.

Sure. Rotation would have Goodes through there but I would suggest that Bolton, Buchanan and Kirk would be our best clearance division.