Can we improve next year ??

[liz]

Originally posted by Gunn

As pleased as I was with the team this season my pleasure is tempered with the knowledge that we have denied ourtselves the chance to get some more quality youngsters onto the list to improve our future.

Not denied surely - just made more of a challenge. After all, we all know that the likes of Goodes, Schneider, Kennelly (as prime examples) have come via a route other than a top 10 draft pick. I reckon it's a myth that you have to stock up on top draft picks to be in a position to challenge. The two teams currently chock-a-bloc with them haven't given the premiership a whimper yet.

[Dpw]

Originally posted by Gunn
The commonly held view at the start of the year was that the Swans would finish in the lower half of the ladder. Roos said he thought we might have to go backwards to go forwards and that he would recruit and play the younger players over a three year period. By finisheing third on the ladder (and no trading) we are denied quality early draft picks. Roos now has to rely on his present list "improving" as we are not being replenished from below or from without. How much the present list can improve over this year is the big unknown. One thing is certain however and that is that if we can't challenge for the flag with the present list we have to drop back to get an influx of new quality young players. It may take a year of three but we must win a flag or drop back.

Don't share that view just look at up and comers and see what no's they were drafted at I think you will be surprised.

It's the qauilty of the recruiting dept from here on in.

Being consistently in the top half or quarter of the ladder but being unable to go all the way is very frustrating. It only takes as injury or two to key position players and your season is shot.

As pleased as I was with the team this season my pleasure is tempered with the knowledge that we have denied ourtselves the chance to get some more quality youngsters onto the list to improve our future.

[Rizzo]

There may be an advantage in keeping the team together. We lost Frosty, Cressa and Stevens. Snapper, Warfe and Nicks will be looking to lift their game to stay employable and the core playing group will benefit from knowing that if they play as a team they can beat anybody.

[gloveski]

their is room for improvement for sure Roosy had the luxury of being able to leave all last years drafts pick in the reserves for a full season. Another preseason under their belts and the likes of dempster and co could do what scneids and LRT did this year.Also can't wait for Powell to be given a real go this year hopefully he can bulk up a little.

[Rob-bloods]

Originally posted by Rizzo
Snapper, Warfe and Nicks will be looking to lift their game to stay employable and the core playing group will benefit from knowing that if they play as a team they can beat anybody.

Can anyone summarise our ' no of players' situation?

i) Current figure (after Stevens & Frosty removed)

ii) Number needed at start of draft

and ii) minimum player numbers for next season full list/ supps?

This will surely dictate whether we cut further.

[liz]

Originally posted by Rob-bloods
Can anyone summarise our ' no of players' situation?

i) Current figure (after Stevens & Frosty removed)

ii) Number needed at start of draft

and ii) minimum player numbers for next season full list/ supps?

This will surely dictate whether we cut further.

Number of senior players on the list at start of 2003=37.

Three departures brings that to 34.

We have to draft at least 3 players in the National Draft and we have to have a minimum of 37 and a maximum of 38 players on the senior list at the start of 2004.

So in theory the club could do nothing in terms of delisting more players. They could take the minimum 3 in the ND and one in the pre-season, or forget about the PS altogether. However, there are rumours around that the club has made an offer to Hall -something that will no doubt thrill Steve and Reggi!

This also assumes that neither James nor Meiklejohn is retained on the senior list and that no-one else is considered for promotion. This is highly unlikely, IMO, so for every player to be promoted to the senior list, another existing player must be cut.

Hope that helps.

[Rob-bloods]

Cheers Lizz, that is exactly what I wanted.

The Ray Hall thing seems to have gone quiet, I think there may still be something happening....I think we have not seen the end of departures though.

[penga]

james is too old this year to be on the RL... therefore he has to be cut or promoted, common sense tells you that he will be promoted, so there is another cut to be done...

please be warfe!!!

[jixygirl]

There is definitely space for improvement next year because we didn't win the flag this year!!!!! I heard in the Herald Sun and on RWO that Warfe and Seymour would be delisted if they weren't traded. One of them will probably make space for James.

[liz]

Originally posted by jixygirl
I heard in the Herald Sun and on RWO that Warfe and Seymour would be delisted if they weren't traded. One of them will probably make space for James.

I reckon we all know that we can't believe anything reported in the media!!!

A lot may depend on the financial situation (cash, not salary cap) - ie whether they can afford to pay players not on the list. It would be a real shame if James (or someone else) were sacrificed purely because the club can't afford to pay Warfe not to play. I'm also really hoping they'll give McGlone a year on the senior list.

Buchanan and even Ablett can't be safe - both out of contract I think and their spots may depend on how the finances pan out.

[chammond]

A lot may depend on the financial situation (cash, not salary cap) - ie whether they can afford to pay players not on the list.

Exactly.

How can the media claim on the one hand that the Swans are under extreme salary cap pressure, and on the other that the Swans intend to delist players with ongoing contracts? The two statements cannot both be true!

If there are genuine salary cap or other financial problems at the Swans, then the players most likely to be delisted must surely be those out of contract. By extension, this means that it may come down to a straight choice of any two of Buchanan, Ablett, James and McGlone - by no means a foregone conclusion!

That aside, why would the Swans delist Seymour to make way for James? How would we be better off?

[Scottee]

Hey folks. We could have won the flag this year with a small amount of luck!! (Magic, Fixter and Ball in the side and some reasonable umpiring against Brisbane and we would have played off against the Collywobbles).Lets not forget that.

Having said that, a few injuries extra could have had us finish lower on the ladder as well.

IMHO it's going to be a matter of luck again, and making the most of the opportunites. We have to make up for the loss of Cresswell, but there appear to be a couple in the side who could fill the gap. We will also be stronger in the ruck which may free Goodes tio a ruck - roving role. A fit magic and there is not a team that we can't beat .

On the whole though there is more upside in the list this year than last with the maturing of a number of players such as MJ, Dempster, Thewliss, Ablett, O'Keefe,Kennelly, Schneider,Fixter,Powell, Hunt, LRT and even Goodes. Also return from injury for Fixter, Doyle, maybe Seymour and Saddington will make a big difference.

The list will have more depth next year than it had this year because of the above.

Much room for optimism.

[Bleed Red Blood]

On injuries did you notice through the year we had barley any injuries though they were all instrumental or KPP that we lost. Glad there were no suspensions to, I hope we can keep that up.

[footyhead]

Originally posted by lizz
I reckon we all know that we can't believe anything reported in the media!!!

A lot may depend on the financial situation (cash, not salary cap) - ie whether they can afford to pay players not on the list. It would be a real shame if James (or someone else) were sacrificed purely because the club can't afford to pay Warfe not to play. I'm also really hoping they'll give McGlone a year on the senior list.

Buchanan and even Ablett can't be safe - both out of contract I think and their spots may depend on how the finances pan out.

God, any club that decided to cut a very young and promising player such as Ablett instead of an old hack like Warfe because they can't affoard to pay out the salary of the still contracted player , really has it's priorities out of whack, and has some-how really mismanged their list terribly.
Warfe has been given many oportunities this year through inclusion in the team, all to no avail. He really contributed hardley a thing to the team.
Ablett on the other hand was given hardley any games this year, but performed extreamly well in the final he played, showing not just his potential, but what he can actually do right now. As opossed to Warfe who constantly shows what he can't do.
Plus ablett is about 5-7 years younger.
Warfe HAS to GO !!! Ablett has to stay !!!

[liz]

Originally posted by footyhead
God, any club that decided to cut a very young and promising player such as Ablett instead of an old hack like Warfe because they can't affoard to pay out the salary of the still contracted player , really has it's priorities out of whack, and has some-how really mismanged their list terribly.

Completely agree in principle, but any club that would put its long term financial security at stake by keeping a player who may be handy but probably never going to be a star also needs to be questioned. As we've been discussing, the salary cap doesn't appear to be the issue - it's more a cash situation. Clearly there have been issues in how this was allowed to get to the position it did, but at least now it seems to be being addressed.