Swans delist Seymour

[Destructive]

Re: Re: Swans delist Seymour

Originally posted by Bart
Not that surprised really. Good luck Brad. A tough nut defender who unfortunately was injured when we needed his toughness.

Its pretty clear that the club did try and get something for him in the trade period to no avail.

My thoughts exactly.

[taurus]

Originally posted by BAM_BAM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I was in a good mood until I read this.

what a very disappointing way to finish with us.

I feel the same way...

Looks like I need to change my sig...

[Glenn]

Seems it was at the request of Seymour himself to help with his wife career and his young family, fair enough...question remains would he be picked up by a club given his injury probs

[Xie Shan]

Now... who has Warfe got incriminating photos of???

I was thinking that too! What is he, a protected species?

My 'conspiracy theory' was slightly different.
It seemed a bit strange to trade Stevens plus a 2nd round pick for a slightly higher 2nd rounder (pick 29?) and a 3rd rounder (45) - but looking at the draft order, that puts us ahead of both Adelaide and Port in the 2nd round, and gives us 45 and 47 in the 4th round. IMO they have their eye on a SA kid that they think won't last to the 3rd round and want to pick him up ahead of Crows and Port.

On the picks 45 and 47, it seems a bit odd to have 2 later-picks so close together, so I reckon they're punting on re-drafting McGlone, which they'll do if there's no-one else of interest left by then, so we'll get 3 new faces in the draft + McGlone or perhaps even Ray Hall. I don't know if any clubs are interested in McGlone though.

I thought Meiklejohn could stay on the rookie list though, given he's only been here a year? Then maybe Buchanan or Hunt would have been spared, or McGlone could have been promoted, as Meiklejohn would most likely play only if Ball/Doyle are out anyway.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by sydfan83


On the picks 45 and 47, it seems a bit odd to have 2 later-picks so close together, so I reckon they're punting on re-drafting McGlone, which they'll do if there's no-one else of interest left by then, so we'll get 3 new faces in the draft + McGlone or perhaps even Ray Hall. I don't know if any clubs are interested in McGlone though.

Problem with that though is that there is no need to mess around like that - we could've simply promoted McGlone straight onto the list. Because of this, I'm almost certain that McGlone does not figure in our plans. Also, it's not Ray Hall because they were negotiating to get him in a trade, but Richmond didn't want to play. He wasn't delisted, so he's not eligible to nominate in the National Draft.

The club has certainly been acting very strangely throughout the delist/trade/draft period. We've had the inexplicable Stevens trade, the bizarre survival skills of Warfe, the surprise delistings of McGlone and Hunt.... they just seem determined to confuse us...

[aflconvert]

Originally posted by Glenn
Seems it was at the request of Seymour himself to help with his wife career and his young family, fair enough...question remains would he be picked up by a club given his injury probs

Delisting a player at his own request doesn't make sense to me or an I missing something

Unless he suddenly decided after the trade period that he wanted to go why not offer him as a trade .. you might get something in return. Delist and you get nothing


If he didnt retire and wasnt delisted against his wishes he obviously feels he has a chance elsewhere so why didnt the club at least try ?


Or is there something in the rules and tactics I have missed

[Xie Shan]

Originally posted by Charlie
Problem with that though is that there is no need to mess around like that - we could've simply promoted McGlone straight onto the list. Because of this, I'm almost certain that McGlone does not figure in our plans. Also, it's not Ray Hall because they were negotiating to get him in a trade, but Richmond didn't want to play. He wasn't delisted, so he's not eligible to nominate in the National Draft.

My theory was that the Swans haven't decided on McGlone, and may or may not re-draft him. Anyhow, i think we'll use four picks.
Wasn't sure whether Hall could enter the national draft though.

The club has certainly been acting very strangely throughout the delist/trade/draft period. We've had the inexplicable Stevens trade, the bizarre survival skills of Warfe, the surprise delistings of McGlone and Hunt.... they just seem determined to confuse us...

I think this just about sums it up - I might as well just assume that Roos and co know what they're doing. Saves time that way

I hate the trade period!

[Bleed Red Blood]

Originally posted by sydfan83
and may or may not re-draft him.

I dont see what else we could do.

[BAM_BAM]

Originally posted by aflconvert
Delisting a player at his own request doesn't make sense to me or an I missing something

Unless he suddenly decided after the trade period that he wanted to go why not offer him as a trade .. you might get something in return. Delist and you get nothing


If he didnt retire and wasnt delisted against his wishes he obviously feels he has a chance elsewhere so why didnt the club at least try ?


Or is there something in the rules and tactics I have missed

It was rumoured he was offered up as a trade and wasn't wanted??

[DST]

Originally posted by BAM_BAM
It was rumoured he was offered up as a trade and wasn't wanted??

He wasn't offered for trade he wanted and asked to be traded. The club agreed with this but could not close a deal.

In the end if Heath James was thought to be fully recovered and obiviously this is the case as they promoted him, then Seymour became obsolete and the club were happy to release him.

Nothing sinister, just player and club coming to the realisation it was time for both to move on.

McGlone is an interesting one and I suspect he was not promoted for a particular reason. The AFL stipulate that all clubs must draft at least three players in the draft, if we had promoted McGlone along with James & Mikeljohn and had managed to secure a couple of players during trading we would have been left with having to delist a semi required player with the hope that he would still be around to get in the draft again.

I think the coaching staff have taken the option of delisting him and picking McGlone up in the draft when they get to our fourth pick, and thus they left open spaces for traded players during the trading period (which in the end were not used).

Always need to have a contigency plan in place just in case something comes up.
DST

[footyhead]

Originally posted by DST



McGlone is an interesting one and I suspect he was not promoted for a particular reason. The AFL stipulate that all clubs must draft at least three players in the draft, if we had promoted McGlone along with James & Mikeljohn and had managed to secure a couple of players during trading we would have been left with having to delist a semi required player with the hope that he would still be around to get in the draft again.


[/B]

This is an interesting and optomistic theory.

I hope you are right, and that we get the scotty back.

[DST]

Originally posted by footyhead
This is an interesting and optomistic theory.

I hope you are right, and that we get the scotty back.

It is optomistic, as we have to hope a) he is still around and b) we actually do want him back.

But in the end my theroy was based on the fact that with rules in place you sometimes need to take some risks in order to be flexible in case something else comes up.

DST

[Bart]

Originally posted by DST
He wasn't offered for trade he wanted and asked to be traded. The club agreed with this but could not close a deal.

Yes he was offered. To Carlton,

[DST]

Originally posted by Bart
Yes he was offered. To Carlton,

Bart, go back and read the thread.

Of cause he was offered to Carlton and everyone else, the point was he asked to be traded and it was not done in an underhanded way by the Swans as suggested in the post I was replying to.

DST

[BAM_BAM]

Originally posted by DST
Bart, go back and read the thread.

Of cause he was offered to Carlton and everyone else, the point was he asked to be traded and it was not done in an underhanded way by the Swans as suggested in the post I was replying to.

DST

I wasn't suggesting it was in an underhanded way. I was just commenting that I had read he had been offered as as a trade with the "?? " asking for verification.