Finally a Sensible Article

[Schneiderman]

Swans Dismissed Down South as One-Off Wonders

My favourite quotes:

"We've been reasonably honest in saying that we probably haven't got the most talented list in the competition," Roos concedes. "But I still think it's probably a little surprising that people don't really understand how we won it. I still think there's a lot of myths, not just about us but about the way footy's played ? It doesn't disappoint me or worry me, but I still think there is a misunderstanding as to how we've achieved what we have and how we actually play."

"I must admit I got a lot of confidence from [Collingwood coach] Mick Malthouse. I remember him on a number of occasions being asked about Sydney, and he'd say, 'The Swans play finals football every week', and that really stuck in my mind."

"That's my aim, to continue that team-first approach that all our players have, and if by the end of the year I can at least hear people continue to talk about us as a team that has a go and plays to its potential, then I think I'll have achieved what I wanted to for 2006."

Interesting to think that for another year yet, we could slip under everyone's radar. Simply because they think we fluked last year, they may underrate us all over again.... to their own peril

[NMWBloods]

But hang on - this had negative comments in it like the last article too:

"Because a good six months after the team nobody thought could win an AFL premiership did exactly that, not much has changed."

"When Sydney kick off their premiership defence... it will do so once more in its traditional role as an underdog"

"you'll be lucky to find a handful - if any pundits - prepared to predict a second premiership flag hanging in Sydney come September."

"The Swans are at considerably longer odds"

"it's fair to say there ain't a whole heap of critical respect. "

[CureTheSane]

Last year could have gone many ways.
Could have been Geelong, St.Kilda, West Coast etc etc but 2005 went to the Swans.

Remember everyone is still coming off the "Brisbane the dominators" kick, and last season was very even between the top teams.

This year they are simply predicting another even comp.

Maybe there will be a dominant team this year, maybe it will be the Swans.
We have as much of a chance as anyone.

One thing that all these commentators should remember is that Roos came though.
He has the ability to get the best out of out team, and our team has a few 'big names'.
The fact that those 'big names managed to play for the team and not dominate individually probably sunk them out of the limelight a bit.

we should continue to grow as a TEAM, and we definately could go back to back.

Personally I think I will enjoy the games more this year rather than considering each of them a life or death win or loss.
All we need to do is make the top 8, preferrably top 4

[dimelb]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
But hang on - this had negative comments in it like the last article too:

True - and that's part of the reason why it's a more sensible article. It's not one-sidedly stoking the fire or dismissive.
The thing that appealed to me was the absence of the bland smotherspeak (apart from the inevitable 'a bit' and 'probably') Roos often seems to use for the press.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by dimelb
True - and that's part of the reason why it's a more sensible article. It's not one-sidedly stoking the fire or dismissive.

The other article had negative comments and also countered each one of those, so in what way was it dismissive?

People complained about the other article becaue it had negative comments.

[goswannie14]

What is Roos actual record in pre-season games with the Swans, this artcile said 7 wins out of 14, but they are different figures to what I have seen previously on this forum.

[Missy]

I read it as 7 wins 14 losses rather than 7 wins from 14 starts.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by Missy
I read it as 7 wins 14 losses rather than 7 wins from 14 starts.

IIRC the other numbers have been 0 wins from 13 starts or 4 wins from 14 starts. That's why I am confused.

[dimelb]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
The other article had negative comments and also countered each one of those, so in what way was it dismissive?

People complained about the other article becaue it had negative comments.

I think I've missed something - which other article?

[Nico]

Tony Shaw and Rohan Connolly were talking about how teams will fare in 2006 on 3AW this arvo. Both had us 5th.

Tony Shaw though had Barry Hall winning the Coleman Medal.

Reading between the lines though, Rohan Connolly who did an article on Roos today, really was a bit befuddled about our game plan. It sounded like he had a lot of trouble getting around how Roos thinks. Most journos like to think they can read coaches and make "informed" comment but Connolly was very guarded about underselling the Swans, or how to assess them.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by dimelb
I think I've missed something - which other article?

The one in the other thread that everyone had a sook over.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
The one in the other thread that everyone had a sook over.

Not everyone...

[NMWBloods]

I know, but it's a message board so every single post without fail needs hyperbole...

[Lucky Knickers]

Enjoyed that article. My personal favourite:

"I think coming from Mick [Malthouse]...who was actually a current coach of an AFL team, and had a greater grasp of the game than, with all due to respect to them, people like Robert Walls, Gerard Healy, Garry Lyon etc ? "

Surprised Roosy left it so long....

[cruiser]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
The one in the other thread that everyone had a sook over.

You're just niggling for a fight with someone. Give it a rest.
Mod Note: Any personal problems..take it to the PM