Changing of the Guard

[Bas]

I am betting one definately, two possibly, of the following three will not be with the Swans next year:

1. Buchanan;
2. Moore;
3. Schmidt.

My uneducated guess is:
1. Floundering in 2's when the game last Saturday was critical to season;
2. Reached his potential development and in 2's;
3. Injuries.

[ernie koala]

Time to go...
Ablett
Crouch
Playfair
Malceski

[chammond]

If, as Roos intimates, the Swans are going to adopt a youth policy . . .

When has Roos ever said anything about adopting a youth policy? Bringing in two youngsters who've earned their place surely can't be construed as a "yoof polsy", can it?

By my calculation, if Crouch retires along with Hall, O'Loughlin and Barry, we'll have 36 senior players left on the list, plus 3 rookies. Next season, I suspect we will only be allowed 38 seniors, so we have to shed at least one more player (more if we promote Murphy and/or Orreal).

I also suspect that we will try to trade draft picks for an established player to fill the gaps in the forward 50, which means there won't be much point in having more than the required 3 spots to fill through the draft.

So, my bet is that there will only be one current senior player who is likely to be shown the door, and that will depend largely on when contracts expire. I reckon Playfair, Malceski and Buchanan will be scanning the fine print when we get closer to season's end.

[Bloody Hell]

When has Roos ever said anything about adopting a youth policy? Bringing in two youngsters who've earned their place surely can't be construed as a "yoof polsy", can it?

Changing of the guard

THE SYDNEY Swans will fast-track their younger players for the rest of the season, with coach Paul Roos saying finals football was unlikely after Saturday's 35-point loss to Essendon.

"But it's an opportunity for the club to take over the next six or seven weeks. In a positive sense it could be a good opportunity."

Roos hinted some of the more established members of his senior squad could be forced to make way to give the next generation valuable experience.

[liz]

When has Roos ever said anything about adopting a youth policy? Bringing in two youngsters who've earned their place surely can't be construed as a "yoof polsy", can it?

By my calculation, if Crouch retires along with Hall, O'Loughlin and Barry, we'll have 36 senior players left on the list, plus 3 rookies. Next season, I suspect we will only be allowed 38 seniors, so we have to shed at least one more player (more if we promote Murphy and/or Orreal).

I also suspect that we will try to trade draft picks for an established player to fill the gaps in the forward 50, which means there won't be much point in having more than the required 3 spots to fill through the draft.

So, my bet is that there will only be one current senior player who is likely to be shown the door, and that will depend largely on when contracts expire. I reckon Playfair, Malceski and Buchanan will be scanning the fine print when we get closer to season's end.

Kennelly? Fosdike? Plus of the younger brigade, MOD, Brabazon, maybe Schmidt and Laidlaw (injuries) must be on thin ice.

Playfair's future will depend entirely on the state of his body. If he and they think he can still play senior footy, you'd have to reckon he'll stay, just as insurance in case White/Johnston et al struggle at times next year (as they probably will).

And I reckon there is zero chance that Malceski will be delisted, and only a miniscule chance that he'll be traded.

[ernie koala]

Kennelly? Fosdike? Plus of the younger brigade, MOD, Brabazon, maybe Schmidt and Laidlaw (injuries) must be on thin ice.

Playfair's future will depend entirely on the state of his body. If he and they think he can still play senior footy, you'd have to reckon he'll stay, just as insurance in case White/Johnston et al struggle at times next year (as they probably will).

And I reckon there is zero chance that Malceski will be delisted, and only a miniscule chance that he'll be traded.

I fear you are probably right on the money...
The problem is, Playfair offers little when fit, and given he's been out ALL season with his chronic hamstring issues, I see no point in perservering with him.
Malceski is a shadow or his former self...maybe he can find form, and a willingness to tackle and be tackled, with another preseason under his belt but if anything he seems to have gone backwards the further the season has gone.
I'd like to see Schmidt given one more year, when fit he looks good to me. Not sure about Laidlaw unfortunately, he definitely needs some gametime this year to have any hope.

[Plugger46]

I am betting one definately, two possibly, of the following three will not be with the Swans next year:

1. Buchanan;
2. Moore;
3. Schmidt.

My uneducated guess is:
1. Floundering in 2's when the game last Saturday was critical to season;
2. Reached his potential development and in 2's;
3. Injuries.

I'd be surprised if any of them go with Fosdike, Kennelly, Hall, O'Loughlin, Barry and possibly Crouch all retiring. Don't want to lose any of those three actually.

No way will Malceski be leaving the club. He needs to deliver in 2010 but he deserves another crack at it, as he was fantastic in 2007.

Would be happy to see Playfair go. His body is shot and he's fairly ordinary anyway.

I wouldn't have a problem with Ablett going but I'll be surprised if it happens. Reckon Brabazon and O'Dwyer will be lucky to hold their spots on the list.

[caj23]

I'd be surprised if any of them go with Fosdike, Kennelly, Hall, O'Loughlin, Barry and possibly Crouch all retiring. Don't want to lose any of those three actually.

No way will Malceski be leaving the club. He needs to deliver in 2010 but he deserves another crack at it, as he was fantastic in 2007.

Would be happy to see Playfair go. His body is shot and he's fairly ordinary anyway.

I wouldn't have a problem with Ablett going but I'll be surprised if it happens. Reckon Brabazon and O'Dwyer will be lucky to hold their spots on the list.

I think your on the money there Plugger, although I suspect Crouch won't retire off his own bat and we may end up stuck with him for another season (I will be ropable if this occurs).

If Playfair can get an all clear on medical front, and that's a pretty big if, I'd like to see him hold his place for another season. He's not a star but I think he was pretty solid in the games he played and offered us a bit of structure.

It looks like Brabazon (definitely) and O'Dwyer (possibly) already have their papers marked, I don't have a problem with this, although I'd like to see them both get a few games at senior level before the season is out

[Lohengrin]

I wouldn't have a problem with Ablett going but I'll be surprised if it happens. Reckon Brabazon and O'Dwyer will be lucky to hold their spots on the list.

And yet I think we have more potential benefit keeping Brabazon as opposed to Ablett.

[Primmy]

I think some of you are wrong re DOK. He wasn't all that crash hot but to his immediate credit is the fact that he has worked and worked and he has become a much better player each week. He is far better this week than he was in March. That means he can learn and has done so.

My problem is with MOD, or MattyO as I heard them call this week. He gets the ball with great skill but stuffs up in disposal. The big problem here is he stuffs up all the time. He needs a runwith player to feed off him, take his handballs, remove his kicking game. This would make the most of his contests and smooth out his disposals. Can't see that in the game plan any time soon, and any senior opposition coach would pick that up immediately.

My problem is also with Braba. He is a great organiser, very enthusiastic and loves playing, but in the years I have watched him his growth as a player is in spurts and big flat spots and not always reliable, too easily moved off the ball. Has talent but not enough....oh dear, I hate saying that.

[undy]

And yet I think we have more potential benefit keeping Brabazon as opposed to Ablett.

I think Ablett will stay - if he manages a pre-season without a knee-op and dengue fever this year, he'll hopefully be able to realise his potential and lift himself out of the RWO firing line.

[Wazza]

I am betting one definately, two possibly, of the following three will not be with the Swans next year:

1. Buchanan;
2. Moore;
3. Schmidt.

Agree with ya Bas but would swap Ablett for Buchanan, not saying they will be delisted but may be offerred as trade bait. Moore may be the only one we could expect a resonable trade for - 2nd round?

Cheers

waz

[chammond]

Kennelly? Fosdike? Plus of the younger brigade, MOD, Brabazon, maybe Schmidt and Laidlaw (injuries) must be on thin ice.

Playfair's future will depend entirely on the state of his body. If he and they think he can still play senior footy, you'd have to reckon he'll stay, just as insurance in case White/Johnston et al struggle at times next year (as they probably will).

And I reckon there is zero chance that Malceski will be delisted, and only a miniscule chance that he'll be traded.

Given the extraordinary nature of the draft for the next few years, I'd be very surprised if the Swans start shedding youngsters, even if they aren't showing much at present. They may opt to trade someone like Malceski for a second or third round pick, but otherwise, delisting an existing novice just to take another from the fourth or fifth round of the draft isn't a strategy to get excited about.

The jokers in the pack are Murphy and Orreal . . . I'm not sure whether they have to be promoted, or if they can remain on the rookie list for another year. If they both have to be promoted, then I can see that it might be worth discarding, say, O'Dwyer and Laidlaw to make space.

[chammond]

THE SYDNEY Swans will fast-track their younger players for the rest of the season, with coach Paul Roos saying finals football was unlikely after Saturday's 35-point loss to Essendon.

"But it's an opportunity for the club to take over the next six or seven weeks. In a positive sense it could be a good opportunity."

Roos hinted some of the more established members of his senior squad could be forced to make way to give the next generation valuable experience.

I guess the concept of a "Youth Policy" must have changed in recent times. Playing your youngsters when you've no chance of making the finals used to be just standard coaching practice. A youth policy always referred to an unequivocal strategy to replace mature players en masse with youngsters, refusing to trade except for draft picks, and under no circumstances to recruit any established players, in the expectation that short term failure will lead to long-term success.

But, I guess it's all just semantics.

[Lucky Knickers]

What is Monty's story. Injured or out of form?
re Moore, I can see there is a lot worth persisting with. I wonder if he has been dropped in punishment for some selfish play earlier in the season?