Tweet
He was doomed from the start of the year Similar to where Davis is now!
-
cheers -
Here's my two cents worth. At the Swans we very rarely do a wholesale delist. Roosey seems to want to keep as many young players as possible and only delists those he is sure are not going to make it any further...
Recent years....
Willoughby
Vogels
Simpkin
Thewlis
Phillips
Wall (R)
Promising Fullback Rookie (can't recall the name at the moment...was surprised, but then the coaches had seen Faulks, White, Grundy and Murphy so they made a tough call)
Meiklejohn
"Smokey" Davis
Shaw
Eriksen
Chambers
Dempster
Schneider
I can't say that the loss of any of these players is hurting the Swans, so you would have to think that they are doing a pretty good job in choosing the delistings. Also they are nearly always delisting the minimum. From memory I think we have drafted only 3 for the last 4 years or so.
Ergo it is highly unlikely that anyone will be delisted unless the coaches are SURE he won't cut it. And this year there is a compelling case that NO youngsters will be delisted (except maybe some NSW rookies who don't really count as they arehit and hope listings anyway).
Mathews and Crouch are almost certain retirements.
Everitt is a likely retirement
Barry is a likely retirement. Both of those would be near to certain if we win the Flag. So that's four for starters.
Mickey would have had enough with another Flag, you would think...but then he is rejuvenated at the moment.
Baz might have had enough with another flag
Captain Kirk might be ready to save the planet instead of the Swans with another Flag.
Add to that Fosdike will be 29 and not have played for at least 18 months and will have more talented (but less experienced) players competing for a spot. It is difficult to see him getting another contract unless several senior players retire.
None of the rookies absolutely needs to be promoted.
Any which way it is incredibly unlikely that any youngsters will go UNLESS the coaches think that they really are no good.
As far as I can tell (from reserve reports etc) ALL of the youngsters have some or a lot of upside. I mean would you seriously suggest delisting Laidlaw or Brabazon or Daniel O'Keefe (pick 15 in the SUPERDRAW) to replace him with pick 73 from 2008????? Come on.
Brennan is the other on the edge. If he hasn't learned to kick the football by the end of this year it will be "thanks, but we just can't make it work."
I presume that Playfair has a two year contract, but I would apply a similar caveat to him...if he can't kick it straight then we have to say "bye, bye" at the end of next season, and if he doesn't kick it straighter this year he will spend next year playing in Canberra I suggest.
Roosey has more of a track record of delisting players who have a had a taste and not been fantastic than delisting players who have never even cracked a senior game."I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005Comment
-
Well according to the latest Davis article, we can certainly add him to the list.
Year by year contract it seems. Not the rumoured 3 year contract till 2011.Official Driver Of The "Who Gives A @@@@ As The Player Will Get Delisted Anyway" Bandwagon.
Comment
-
Theres not much left to sayComment
-
Schmidt, I feel will ask for a release due to lack of opportunity with the
Swans and seek to return to Sth Aust.
Matthews, Crouch and Spida will give it away as their use by dates having
expired.Comment
-
Even if we won the flag again, Id love to see Mickey O go on and be the first in the red and white to play 300 games. For if anybody deserves that it is him
"You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."Comment
-
Mathews and Crouch will go, Maybe Davis. No way will Micky O go in his current form and nor will Hall. Spida is a bet each way, If he continues too struggle with injury i think that would be it but if he improves in the second half of the season one more year would be a possibility. I think its the same for Leo.If all those guys go the youngsters get another year, if not at least two drop off. So i reckon we will lose at least 4 maybe 5 tops. Probably draft 3 maybe pick up someone in the pre-season draft or bring up someone off the rookie list.The edge is not the limit, It's just the starting point...Comment
-
Pay peanuts get monkeysComment
-
"I'll acknowledge there are more talented teams in the competition but I won't acknowledge that there is a better team in the competition" Paul Roos March 2005Comment
-
Based on the rules as they were at the end of last season, yes they do if the club wants to keep more than 3 of them and doesn't want to risk releasing and redrafting them. It is possible that the rules will be changed for this year - for instance there are rumours that the size of the rookie list might be expanded to 10 ahead of the introduction of the two new clubs. And if this occurs (or has already been confirmed) the AFL may well relax the rules on retaining rookies. But as things have stood in the past, a club could only retain a maximum of 3 players for a second year (including one for a 3rd year, if desired) without doing what they did with O'Dwyer last year. It's why Simpkin was promoted to the senior list a couple of years ago - there were 5 they wanted to retain but only three (Jack, Barlow, Rowe) could be kept as rookies, meaning two had to be elevated (Phillips, Simpkin). I reckon Simpkin's first year form certainly warranted giving him another year but didn't really suggest he was close to AFL ready so if they'd been able to retain him as a rookie, they almost certainly would have done.
Which means that (unless the rules change) if the club wants to retain Murphy, Orreal (both close to certainties) as well as more than one of Smith, O'Dwyer, Bruce (quite likely) or Terlich/Beckmans (less likely at this stage), at least one, maybe more, will need to be found a spot on the senior list.
The list of players at the top of your post doesn't support that assertion. Sure, there are some on that list who played a game or two but it also includes many who didn't really get close (eg Willoughby, Shaw, Davis, Erikson, Simpkin). The way the system is set up, clubs do have to keep turning their list over to a degree. And while I agree with your observation that the Swans haven't turned theirs over much in recent years, that doesn't mean that all the younger players are safe.Roosey has more of a track record of delisting players who have a had a taste and not been fantastic than delisting players who have never even cracked a senior game.
Many clubs seem to give players just a couple of years to show something. The Swans' recent policy seems to have been to try and give them at least 3 (though Phillips and Simpkin didn't get three - maybe they apply different criteria to players who've come up from the rookie list).
Clearly it can't be a black and white time limit - injuries, age when drafted, build (or time required to bulk up given a player's height and build) will all be taken into consideration. But if by the end of a third year, a running midfielder who has had no major injury setbacks still doesn't look like cracking a senior game, chances are they're more likely to get the chop than not. Indeed, who was the last young player to survive into a 4th year having not played a single senior game, even ignoring height/build and injury setbacks?
Smokey Davis did get 4 years in total but only after being delisted and redrafted. And he was as close to bottom aged as you can be when originally drafted AND he had quite significant injury setbacks. He's the only one I can think of who bucks the trend at all. I'll be surprised if Thornton doesn't become another to survive into a 4th year, but clearly his knee injury has been a major factor. It's very likely he'd have already debuted had it not been for that.
So while pretty much every player on the list has shown some promise over this year, history suggests that every single one of them still on the rookie list or who has come up via the rookie list has reason to be slightly nervous with the exception of Jack. (Yes, I think even Barlow is far from assured his spot next year - though he's more likely to be a stayer than a goer.) Brabazon has lots of reasons to be very nervous since he's had no injury interruptions, while even Thornton and Laidlaw can't take anything for granted.Comment
-
I agree with you Liz, and I'm sure you will cop a few complaints about mentioning Barlow.
There will be a total change of strategy in drafting and retaining over the next few years as time counts down to the new Clubs appearing. I imagine that Clubs will cut players who they believe have no hope, rather than retain them for another year.In memory of my little Staffy - Dicey, 17.06.2005 to 1.12.2011- I'll miss you mate.Comment
-
barlow would probably be tradeable, has shown a little and a club looking for a mobile tall might give something? (presuming the swans did want to look at cutting him)Theres not much left to sayComment
Comment