Well, blow me down with a feather (OTC)

[Lohengrin]

The media don't talk about the youth of any team until they have either regularly been playing in the firsts or the team is full of high draft picks. Despite the whinging here, the Swans are not really treated that different and there is little for any impartial observer to hang their hat on with regard to the Swans' future yet.

[Plugger46]

The media don't talk about the youth of any team until they have either regularly been playing in the firsts or the team is full of high draft picks. Despite the whinging here, the Swans are not really treated that different and there is little for any impartial observer to hang their hat on with regard to the Swans' future yet.

Correct but at the same time, saying the list is in 'turmoil' is a fairly ignorant comment if you don't know anything about it.

[Mr Magoo]

Facts are, as a Melbourne based Swans supporter even I don't get a chance to see what standard our youngsters are at. Even thinking that the Melbourne media will know where our list is at is just stupid, so is the Melbourne media making comments as they have not seen it.

DST

Yes but if its my job to know these things and they are put on the run sheet for the show I am just about to host and which puts itself out there as a footy chat and analysis show, I would do some research even if it was looking at what the swans website is saying about the progress of its reserves and who is being named in its best and who is on the injury list. Pretty simple stuff really.

[Lohengrin]

Correct but at the same time, saying the list is in 'turmoil' is a fairly ignorant comment if you don't know anything about it.

True, but that's the sort of description they make of any list (regardless of the team) when the team is sliding down the ladder, is ageing and losing senior players, and has no obvious young talent stepping up.

[Plugger46]

True, but that's the sort of description they make of any list (regardless of the team) when the team is sliding down the ladder, is ageing and losing senior players, and has no obvious young talent stepping up.

Yeah agree with that, we're not treated any differently.

[liz]

The media don't talk about the youth of any team until they have either regularly been playing in the firsts or the team is full of high draft picks. Despite the whinging here, the Swans are not really treated that different and there is little for any impartial observer to hang their hat on with regard to the Swans' future yet.

The media don't often condemn a club to years of being rubbish either, based on a group of younger players of whom they have seen nothing.

What was refreshing about the OTC comments yesterday wasn't that Jimmy and Mikey were gratuitously oozing praise or condemnation for the Swans' younger players. They merely acknowledged that they don't know enough to comment and that the football world needs to wait and see. That in itself is a big step forward from the bashing that has been going on elsewhere.

[Melbournehammer]

well at the risk of taking on the establishment of RWO...I think there is a pretty decent case to say that our list currently is poor. Our 24-26 yo group is thin. Our 18-20 yo are injured.

What have we really got in the club at the moment ?

Our first 7 players are pretty good (B1 B2 Kirk Goodes ROK McV Jolly). Our next 3-4 are decent (Shaw Mattner MOL (as he now is)). Our next 10 are prone to errors regularly (LRT Ted Bevan Grundy Moore Jack Buchanan Barlow Bird etc) but if it wasn't for the fact that there was 10 of them instead of merely 6 we would be OK.

Most successful clubs have 6 or so stars, 6 or so very decent players, 6 or so good players and it is the skill of the bottom 6 that rises when they are playing in successful teams (think McQualter as an example for the saints)

But the rest of the list slides away pretty quick. I have read Liz's posts on the reserves for two years. She has always indicated that the players that have made it just stood out and demanded to be picked. I don't get that same feeling from her posts that there are players in that category now.

Do this with the team. Compare the 2006 side with the current team and say which players have improved and would the current version of the player replace that which was there then. (Don't even worry about the 2005 team)

But go back even further. Compare the 2003 side with the 2009 side. The 2003 at the start of the season.

is it really so inconsistent with what the melbourne media are saying to say that we will have two years down the bottom ?

[ShockOfHair]

I think you'd find OTC and the rest of the Melbourne media are pretty hopeless on all the interstate teams. How many of them watch the Brissie reserves, or young guns running around in the WAFL or SANFL?

The AFL tries to be a national game but it's quite parochial.

[AnnieH]

Everything changes. The game changes. Fitness requirements change. Fitness levels change. Players age (everyone does, except for me). Players retire. Players hit other players. Same old same old. I've said it before on many an occasion. When Kels et al all retired (the 1996 granny team) I thought we'd never, ever recover from such a loss of sheer talent. A few years later we won the granny. If we spend the next few years at the bottom of the ladder whilst our next generation evolves into superstars ... well, I've already been there done that. I can do it again (although I wouldn't be too happy about it). I have every confidence that our youngsters will step up to the plate. They're an energetic bunch who can't wait to have a crack at the top.

[ShockOfHair]

Everything changes. The game changes. Fitness requirements change. Fitness levels change. Players age (everyone does, except for me). Players retire. Players hit other players. Same old same old. I've said it before on many an occasion. When Kels et al all retired (the 1996 granny team) I thought we'd never, ever recover from such a loss of sheer talent. A few years later we won the granny. If we spend the next few years at the bottom of the ladder whilst our next generation evolves into superstars ... well, I've already been there done that. I can do it again (although I wouldn't be too happy about it). I have every confidence that our youngsters will step up to the plate. They're an energetic bunch who can't wait to have a crack at the top.

Agree (except I'm too young to remember 1996. That was, like, a whole different century).

[liz]

is it really so inconsistent with what the melbourne media are saying to say that we will have two years down the bottom ?

We may well have two years down the bottom. There have been numerous threads discussing the state of the list and where the holes are. Don't think anyone would argue there aren't some holes.

Having some time down the bottom isn't the same as the "all the kids are crap" comments that Fox (especially FLT) has been spruiking, based on a zero knowledge base.

I started this thread as a celebration of the fact that the club strongly believes it has 8 or so "real players" amongst its younger crop, which was the message Healy was delivering.

[SwansFan1972]

well at the risk of taking on the establishment of RWO...I think there is a pretty decent case to say that our list currently is poor. Our 24-26 yo group is thin. Our 18-20 yo are injured.

Can't say I speak for the establishment, but will have a go at replying to some of your comments (none of which I hope you interpret as having a go at you - certainly not the intention!)

I think most of us would agree that the list at the moment is poor - every indicator says so (ladder position most obviously), so noting that is a bit like using a crystal ball to predict what happened last week.

What have we really got in the club at the moment ?

Our first 7 players are pretty good (B1 B2 Kirk Goodes ROK McV Jolly). Our next 3-4 are decent (Shaw Mattner MOL (as he now is)). Our next 10 are prone to errors regularly (LRT Ted Bevan Grundy Moore Jack Buchanan Barlow Bird etc) but if it wasn't for the fact that there was 10 of them instead of merely 6 we would be OK.

Most successful clubs have 6 or so stars, 6 or so very decent players, 6 or so good players and it is the skill of the bottom 6 that rises when they are playing in successful teams (think McQualter as an example for the saints)

But the rest of the list slides away pretty quick. I have read Liz's posts on the reserves for two years. She has always indicated that the players that have made it just stood out and demanded to be picked. I don't get that same feeling from her posts that there are players in that category now.

While it is probably true now that the list slides away pretty quick (I have paid little attention to the reserves, along with most others I suspect), it hasn't really been put to the test as much as the club would have liked. This year it seems that any of them considered most likely have met with injury at inopportune times. Perhaps with a bit more luck they would be on the park showing what they can do - and hopefully they can step up eventually.

Conceded - at the moment it doesn't look pretty, but then, the Cats didn't look pretty in 2006 either. No-one was tipping great things for them then and they have subsequently done "ok" (but perhaps not as well as they should have)!

Do this with the team. Compare the 2006 side with the current team and say which players have improved and would the current version of the player replace that which was there then. (Don't even worry about the 2005 team)

But go back even further. Compare the 2003 side with the 2009 side. The 2003 at the start of the season.

is it really so inconsistent with what the melbourne media are saying to say that we will have two years down the bottom ?

The Melbourne media might be right, but then, odds had to eventually swing in their favour by virtue of predicting our demise basically every year. The majority of them have had us at or near the bottom every season since 2003 - Roos was taking over a potential wooden spoon team that year according to their collective "wisdom". Although I generally don't like generalising, their views can be summarised thus (happy to be debated on this, of course):

2003 - probable wooden spooner - evenutally 3rd
2004 - will slide, 2003 was a flash in the pan surprise - eventually 6th (a tick for them there I suppose - we slid, but not too far)
2005 - not going to touch St Kilda, West Coast etc - Premiers
2006 - overachievers, will slide - missed back to back by a squeak (darn it, just two more points ... )
2007 - "up" for a long time with workmanlike list, so due for a big slide down the ladder - made finals
2008 - ditto 2007- made finals
2009 - ditto 2007 & 2008 - finally they've got it about right - finals basically gone, but at least it hasn't been a Freo style implosion.

Overall, they have had a knock on the Swans every year - which just shows they know about as much as any of us in relation to where a footy team will finish each year. Hopefully history can repeat and after a relatively short flat spot (now and part of next year perhaps), the next batch of stars will rise. Even better would be to see them rise next year (like the 02 team did into 03 - following the departures of Kell, Dunks and Schwatta among others). Would like to see that for sure!

[Lohengrin]

One thing about the Melbourne media and the Swans though is that basically since 2005 they have been full of praise for the work ethic and hardness of the Swans team. They always emphasise that the Swans nearly always give a good account of themselves and make it a tough game. I think this is a fair comment that they make about few teams.

[SimonH]

Agree that with the exception of McVeigh and Jolly (and to a limited extent Mattner and Shaw), we lack badly for elite players in the 24-27 yoa bracket. (Although I maintain hopes that Malceski can climb back up the ladder-- as with the 2006-7 McVeigh, that level of class doesn't just disappear.) And if you look at the ages of our players in the 2005 premiership, we were chock full of players at their peak in that age bracket.

As against that, it's not like our 24-27 yoa players are universally incompetent. They're just adequate (albeit in some cases, barely so).

But more importantly for the future, the list of players aged 23 or under who've shown something at some point is a very very long one. Here goes in a random order: Laidlaw, DOK, White, Thornton, Brabazon, Bird, Moore, Murphy, Brabazon, Gilchrist, Johnston, Vespa, Currie, Smith, MOD, Barlow, Grundy, Hannebery, Jack, Meredith, Schmidt, Grundy... and the 'virtual youngster' Pyke. And it seems like Orreal is close to being added to that list as the consensus of 2nds-watchers is he's showing something too. Even though a couple of those can expect to be delisted end '09, and a few others will never 'make it', that's a pretty fair base to work off. The difference between our youth and the general observation, 'hey, all clubs have lots of young players on their list' is that all bar 6 of that 23-man list has played league footy. We have played youth, almost by stealth without anyone noticing.

Also we're tough at the contest, have a plan and don't give up on it-- and when that's the culture of the club it infects inexperienced youth as well. Hence our bad losses are 6 to 7 goals, rather than 16 to 17 goals (a la Richmond, Freo etc).

[SwansFan1972]

One thing about the Melbourne media and the Swans though is that basically since 2005 they have been full of praise for the work ethic and hardness of the Swans team. They always emphasise that the Swans nearly always give a good account of themselves and make it a tough game. I think this is a fair comment that they make about few teams.

Agree. Although that too is an easy observation to make post 2005! Part of it is less true of late however - they still mostly give a good account, but the hardness is definitely down. As a result the trepidation amongst other sides about playing against Sydney these days is down too. Even though a "bad" loss for us is (as SimonH says) still not as bad as some other teams, when there are too many of them, the end result (in ladder terms) is not much different.

We have been spoilt by having very few hidings over the last few years - and hopefully that will continue, even if the team is not quite as successful in the short term as it has been.