Mark McVeigh - Sydney 2004

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Steve
    Regular in the Side
    • Jan 2003
    • 676

    #31
    Stevens has 17 weeks to show something more. It'd be a shame to lose a very talented player, but if he can't convince Roos that he can lift his intensity and workrate, it's hard to see how we can carry him.

    Especially in a forward line that contains:

    Davis
    Nicks
    O'Loughlin

    I can't see the merit in going for a player like Staker personally though - how many tall defenders can you be grooming for a KP role:

    Saddington
    LRT
    Powell
    Hunt
    James

    Staker too?

    We need quality young midfielders more than a 6th back-up key defender.

    Comment

    • robbieando
      The King
      • Jan 2003
      • 2750

      #32
      Steve,

      Some of those want make the grade, so it might be worthwhile having as many as possible. Hunt and LRT could play forward, so I think we could fit them in
      Once was, now elsewhere

      Comment

      • DST
        The voice of reason!
        • Jan 2003
        • 2705

        #33
        Steve,

        I agree with you in principle, but if you take the player for player swap for Stevens/Stacker this leaves our early draft picks for young midfielders.

        I certainly would like to see 6 young talls on the list, if Stacker slots in down back then this releases Hunt & Powell to try as forwards.

        Also lets us use Saddington on a wing or half back as well which I am an advocate on.

        Now if we could offload a Nicks/Mcpherson etc for a McVeigh we would be travelling very well for player management.

        DST
        "Looking forward to a rebuilt, new, fast and exciting Swans model in 2010"

        Comment

        • Newbie
          On the Rookie List
          • Mar 2003
          • 720

          #34
          LRT is groomed to be a key backman. Cant see him playing as a forward. We do lack another strong body backman though. I believe we were looking to draft one last year but none left for our next pick (after McVeigh).

          We simply have no room for Stevens in our forward with Davis, Hall and O'Loughlin. He might prosper in a new environment, a trade for Stevens might be a win for him, personally. If Brent Staker could be that strong body backman, it might be a win-win situation for all involved.

          BTW, did anyone notice in the chat script of Craig Bolton's interview. He mentioned that he might move up forward in the second half of the season. If so, it is clear that Roos is planning to shift out both Nicks and Stevens.

          Comment

          • Newbie
            On the Rookie List
            • Mar 2003
            • 720

            #35
            On Hunt,

            He is groomed to play forward. I dont know what is his playing style. If he could take a pack mark, he might just be the one we need.

            Comment

            • Steve
              Regular in the Side
              • Jan 2003
              • 676

              #36
              Originally posted by robbieando
              Some of those want make the grade, so it might be worthwhile having as many as possible.
              I just think that is a 'nothing' position for the club to take with respect to its list.

              There's comes a point where you just have to back what you've got. But if it is decided what you've got is no good, then replace it. Not keep adding to that department until you eventually get a hit.

              I think it's almost lazy to hoard groups of similar players just b/c you're not confident about any of their credentials. I reckon put some pressure on yourself to recruit and/or develop exactly what you need, not have 6 of each and consider it a bonus if 1 comes through.

              At this rate half our list will be made up of designated key defenders and half-back flankers. If lists were unlimited, then why not be grooming as many key defenders as possible. But with a maximum of 40, the more spots you fill with certain types of players, the more you're taking away from depth in other areas.

              The higher WCE finish this year, the better chance of us doing a package with Stevens for their first pick. There isn't much on their list (that they would be prepared to relinquish) that we need.

              Hopefully all this is academic and Stevens shows the club how much he wants to be a successful player (assuming that is what he wants).

              Comment

              • Jude4eva
                On the Rookie List
                • Jan 2003
                • 107

                #37
                As much as i want mark mcveigh in sydney but a swap for jude is a joke cos mcveigh isnt as good a crummer than jude. if u watch the games on tv jude is in the bottom of nearly every pack. mcveigh os soft he doesnt have the toughness of jude

                mcveigh for jude = bad deal for sydney
                "I feel it in my fingers i feel it in my toes... Sydney Swans are all around me and there everywhere i go. A premiership is there beside me and thats all i know"

                Only $1 for a cornetto that is DAYLIGHT SAVINGS!!!!!

                Comment

                • Red
                  Foreign Correspondent
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 651

                  #38
                  Mark is an excellent kick into the F50. I'm sure Hall would like him as much as Lloyd does now. He also lead the tackle count on Anzac day -- only a couple less than Kirk (from memory) -- against much better opposition.

                  But he is more of a receiver than Jude is. Jude together with Mark (in the Swans) would be great for us. Maybe the Dons would be interested in Fozzie instead? Or a possible 3-way deal with one of the Adelaide teams?
                  To all those people who waited 72 years to see a South Melbourne/Sydney Swans premiership HERE IT IS!!

                  Comment

                  • thommoone
                    On the Rookie List
                    • Jan 2003
                    • 193

                    #39
                    Well if it is true that C Bolton will be playing up forward later in the year, this could be very goo!
                    1) he is a great kick!
                    2)Nicks might be gone, maybe a trade for M McVeigh
                    3)This means that the youngsters MUST be filing in the back line!

                    If this is true, than....
                    Adam Goodes - The great red and white hope.

                    Comment

                    • Charlie
                      On the Rookie List
                      • Jan 2003
                      • 4101

                      #40
                      Err... ah... one question.

                      I've seen the names Seymour, McPherson and Nicks mentioned as possible trade bait... despite these players regularly being derided as not good enough for our list.

                      If they're not good enough for us, why would anybody else think they're good enough???
                      We hate Anthony Rocca
                      We hate Shannon Grant too
                      We hate scumbag Gaspar
                      But Leo WE LOVE YOU!

                      Comment

                      • thommoone
                        On the Rookie List
                        • Jan 2003
                        • 193

                        #41
                        Maybe they need a change of scenery or a new position???
                        Adam Goodes - The great red and white hope.

                        Comment

                        • Ajn
                          Draft Scout
                          • Jan 2003
                          • 711

                          #42
                          McVeigh for our second pick, we've already got the talented brother!
                          Seymour to Brisbane....please!
                          Stevens, only for a good midfielder!
                          Bolton's here to stay
                          Staying ahead of the game...

                          Comment

                          • NMWBloods
                            Taking Refuge!!
                            • Jan 2003
                            • 15819

                            #43
                            Originally posted by Mike_B
                            Yeah, but if we don't have anyone getting the ball, who cares how good anyone's disposal is?!?!?!?
                            Plenty of other players are able to get the ball - look at our last qtr on Friday - Kirk, Williams, Schneider, Crouch, Cresswell, Maxfield... also able to get the ball.
                            Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

                            "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

                            Comment

                            • robbieando
                              The King
                              • Jan 2003
                              • 2750

                              #44
                              Originally posted by NMWBloods
                              Plenty of other players are able to get the ball - look at our last qtr on Friday - Kirk, Williams, Schneider, Crouch, Cresswell, Maxfield... also able to get the ball.
                              Williams, Maxfield and Cresswell are not going to be here in 3 years time are they. Pretty bare lot now isn't it
                              Once was, now elsewhere

                              Comment

                              • omnipotent

                                #45
                                My mail is that if Mal Michael goes anywhere it will be back to Melbourne; he is actually keen to return there and eventually wants to re-settle there.

                                Comment

                                Working...