Great game LRT

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Stafford and Scott Stevens come to mind.

Duds here. Duds there.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Schneiderman
Kelly was not "hugely talented" when he arrived.

Neither was Cressa (and he came from another club too).

Kirk? Dunkley? Schauble? Maxfield?

I don't believe Kelly was ever enormously skillful - just couragous and strong, and never gave up. He did some great things, but not in the skill class of many other players. What he did well skill wise really seemed to be natural ability.

Cresswell was not enormously skilled either, but exceptionally clever. Also, he did his early years at Geelong.

Kirk is not fantastically skilled.

Dunkley was a great mark, but not high in overall skills.

Schauble and Maxfield came from other clubs.

But even if we do take your comment as correct, what you are saying is that average players become much better at other clubs? Can you back it up? Is it even an argument that can be argued (ie. its so hard to prove either way)?

Of course it's not really possible to provide a definitive answer, it's simply my view based on observation.

We do not have a lot of highly-skilled players, and we have not been blessed with a lot over the years.

We do not typically have those players who are really nice kicks and can hit targets regularly, and have great decision making.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I don't believe Kelly was ever enormously skillful - just couragous and strong, and never gave up...
Cresswell was not enormously skilled either, but exceptionally clever...Kirk is not fantastically skilled...Dunkley was a great mark, but not high in overall skills.

These are all players who have (had) rare qualities of their own. You can't have it all (at least not very often). Plus, IMHO, Kirk's handling skills in tight contests border on fantastic.

To me it seems we do better at getting the best out of players who've already had some success. Sydney is a place where they can mature without the off-field exposure you get in AFL-mad towns (read Melbourne).

At the same time we don't do so well with younger players with stars in their eyes who don't like it so much here because they WANT the exposure.

[giant]

I think this view of Kelly as not skilled is bollocks, and unfortunately quite wide spread. Just coz he was more fearless than most, people ignore that he could do pretty much everything - not a brilliant kick but better than average, could take a hang, contested mark, very good handballer, very good below the knees etc. One of the best mid-sized footballers I've ever watched & not just becoz of his courage.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by giant
I think this view of Kelly as not skilled is bollocks, and unfortunately quite wide spread. Just coz he was more fearless than most, people ignore that he could do pretty much everything - not a brilliant kick but better than average, could take a hang, contested mark, very good handballer, very good below the knees etc. One of the best mid-sized footballers I've ever watched & not just becoz of his courage.

No one said he was not skilled - just not "enormously skilled".

[giant]

Fair cop - anyway it's travesty to use his name in vain in a thread dedicated to the Bozo the Clown of AFL.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I don't believe Kelly was ever enormously skillful - just couragous and strong, and never gave up. He did some great things, but not in the skill class of many other players. What he did well skill wise really seemed to be natural ability.

Cresswell was not enormously skilled either, but exceptionally clever. Also, he did his early years at Geelong.

Kirk is not fantastically skilled.

Dunkley was a great mark, but not high in overall skills.

Schauble and Maxfield came from other clubs.

Your original point was that other clubs developed players better. Even your answers above show that it was an inaccurate generalisation.

Each one of those players developed into much better players than when they arrived here, and arguably got the very best out of themselves over that time.

[NMWBloods]

My original point was that I believe that other clubs are better at developing the skills of young players than the Swans are.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
My original point was that I believe that other clubs are better at developing the skills of young players than the Swans are.

So i guess your point is that our young players are not going to learn much by running around kicking 30 goals against the Wagga Tigers or the Weston Creek Whatevers?

[barry]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
My original point was that I believe that other clubs are better at developing the skills of young players than the Swans are.

No sure I agree with this. Not sure I disagree either though.

For those that blame the ACTAFL, since we've only been in it 3 years, how do you explain the previous 20 years.

I think we have a high turnover of players. Apart from normal trades. Players get homesick and leave. Player come to escape the limelight.
We also have a salary cap extension which means we usually have the funds to chase any highly skilled player coming on the market.
Through this churning, we keep the skilled trades, and the unskilled ones get dropped off (delisted). Hense it appears as though all our recruits are skilled.

We also probably had a policy of drafting atheletes over footballers for a while, and havent had any fanatastic picks anyway to get the Judd types.

[liz]

Originally posted by barry

I think we have a high turnover of players. Apart from normal trades. Players get homesick and leave. Player come to escape the limelight.

It depends on over what period you are looking, but my guess is that analysis of the facts would suggest the opposite, particularly over the last 4 or 5 years. Recently the Swans have been delisted close to the minimum level of players, to the extent that we've delisted and redrafted two in the past two years just to meet the delisting quota.

We may not have many out and out stars in our team but we do have a very solid, competent core of mid-range players - much more so than those clubs who wibble on about how they have such a young squad. Fact is, if you have lots and lots of younger players it is because you've got rid of a high number who should be in their prime because they turned out to be duds.

Every club discards a number of players who never debut or who play only a handful of games, but I reckon we're at the lower end of the out-and-out dud recruitment scale in recent years.

We also haven't had a player leave us due to homesickness since Cook - and even he was probably seeking more opportunities rather than really wanting to leave. It is almost a decade since we lost Gaspar, Grant, Rocca and O'Farrell in quick succession.

[Agent 86]

Originally posted by liz
We also haven't had a player leave us due to homesickness since Cook - and even he was probably seeking more opportunities rather than really wanting to leave. It is almost a decade since we lost Gaspar, Grant, Rocca and O'Farrell in quick succession.

That's a good point (has it really been THAT long?). I think the club has made a greater effort in recent years to make younger players feel at home & provides them with senior mentors and places emphasis on their development not just as footy players. Over time this will pay off as more and more players will see this club as good career move.

[Ruda Wakening]

Originally posted by ScottH
but I think you'll find he was pretty good.

He was. He oozed class from the first game he played in 91 and also had the added benefit of being taught by one of the best midfields in the comp at the time. He was an exceptional runner, evasive, a hard worker, had perfect balance and a great kick. He was on most teams shopping lists until injury started to take it's toll.

[Ruda Wakening]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
My original point was that I believe that other clubs are better at developing the skills of young players than the Swans are.

Well there has to be a reason why Brisbane can constantly produce good kids despite not having early picks for a good few years.

[Sean]

Originally posted by Ruda Wakening
Well there has to be a reason why Brisbane can constantly produce good kids despite not having early picks for a good few years.

Are they constantly producing good kids? I'm hearing that a lot but I'm not sure how much evidence there actually is. With an injury plagued start to the season they lost 5 games at home and haven't made it back into the 8. They are still reliant on the same players that they have been for the last 5+ years.

Their only kids that have developed into real top class players since '98 are Headland and Brown - one was high draft pick and one was a F/S pickup. Headland has obviously turned out to be a bit of a dud but he did appear to be very good at Brisbane.

I'll admit that lots of their kids do look good but IMHO there's no reason to assume that they are better than ours yet.